All right.

I'm gonna call this meeting of the Assembly Public Works and Facilities Committee to Order.

Um Mr.

Brooks, could you lead us in the land acknowledgement?

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

We would like to acknowledge that the city and borough of Juneau is on Clinkett Land and wish to honor the indigenous people of this land.

For more than 10,000 years, Alaska Native people have been and continue to be integral to the well-being of our community.

We are grateful to be in this place, a part of this community, and to honor the culture, culture, traditions, and resilience of the Klingit people.

Gunish cheesh.

Thank you, Chair Steininger.

Uh Ms.

Gandhi's here.

Mr.

Brooks.

Here.

Chair Ecketson.

Absent.

And you have quorum.

Thank you.

All right.

Are there any changes to the agenda?

Ms.

Kutch.

If it pleases the chair, um, before we got into uh the agenda topics, I wanted to give a really quick update on recycle works.

It'll take two minutes.

All right.

Sounds good.

Um other changes to the agenda.

All right.

So uh I guess the agenda is approved as amended.

Um changes to the minutes of the February 23rd, 2026 meeting.

All right, seeing none, those are approved as written.

Um so we'll move to our agenda topics, but first an update on recycle works.

Ms.

Koch.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I just want to, I'm very pleased to announce that we are uh this week back to full recycling.

So full hours, accepting all the materials, including uh aluminum and plastic, and it's been uh a long time coming.

We know that those uh those those services are important to the public.

We appreciate the public's uh patience on that.

And uh once again, just want to specifically credit uh Stuart Ashton has been really instrumental in getting the bailer working and then also finding some efficiencies uh in recycle work so that the space is used better and uh we had hoped to get to get back to aluminum a little bit earlier, but we had to move uh a container and the snow just never lets up, and we finally got that container unburied and moved it before it gets buried again under the snow.

All right.

Well, the giant pile of recycling in my living room says thank you.

Um questions on that topic.

All right, moving to um item one CIP fund transfer for Crow Hill.

Ms.

Kutch.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Uh this is you know part of our uh routine work where we wind up having one project that uh we think it doesn't need you know we'll complete that work for a little less than anticipated, but then there's always another project that sort of pops up, I think to some extent with the aging infrastructure that we have in our utility.

We're playing a little bit of whack-a-mole uh sometimes.

And this uh electric infrastructure, it was installed in the early 90s.

Uh and we want to uh uh take the time to do kind of a more comprehensive fix starting in FY 2027, and we wanted to move some money from the Crow Hill Reservoir Inspection and Rehabilitation Project.

We think there will still be money uh in that project to bring it to successful completion, and then want to be able to address another uh electrical issue that uh impacts our our drinking water system in Crow Hill.

Any questions from the committee on that item?

Uh Mr.

Brooks.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair, and thank you for being with us here, Director.

Um in the memo is talking about just the difficulties finding the the failures and the wiring.

Uh could you just speak to that a little bit?

Through the chair to Mr.

Brooks.

I think I might do the find a friend.

We do have our utility engineer here.

I'm not sure if Mr.

Stefford or Mr.

Bohan would like to get into the details.

Mr.

Stefford, I'm gonna pick on you.

Mr.

Bohan gets plenty of time in the sun.

We we've connected uh a number of vaults running along Douglas Streets uh the wiring the uh we discovered has faults periodically uh very hard to locate and we don't really need the wiring as it is anymore, given that we have the ability to do drops now from ALMP Power direct to the vaults.

Uh we're also introducing wireless communications rather than cable communications between all our vaults now too.

So the wiring as it exists is a combination of communications and electrical, and we think we can negate that.

Anything else?

All right, uh anything from you, Miss Hugh Scandis.

Well, I guess I'll look to I'll look to the committee for a motion.

Mr.

Brooks.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I move that we uh forward uh forward this uh request for transfer to the full assembly or to the committee of the whole full assembly and ask for unanimous consent.

Any objection?

Uh without objection, so moved.

All right.

Item two, the uh HESCOs.

Ms.

Kutch.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Uh want to take a little bit of time on on this one.

Uh it relates, of course, to the glacial lake outburst flooding or Glof.

Specifically, it relates to uh HESCO barriers.

Um I wanted before I talk about even uh what's in this memo, just remind uh the the public and the assembly that uh we already have uh DEC SRF loan that assisted us with uh with phase one of HESCOs.

Uh that was originally a $7.8 million loan, and then we got an amendment for another million dollars.

So we've got an $8.8 million loan there for HESCO phase one.

We have uh, as the group probably remembers, we have not closed out the lid because there are some um potentially outstanding uh litigation costs associated with the lid that would that we're waiting to kind of close out the full full project.

Um it's just to give a broader sense of uh we've already taken one SRF loan out, and that really want to also take a moment to give a heartfelt thank you to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation.

I mean, these loans are really advantageous for this community.

They are I think of them as uh a loan grant hybrid.

They're officially a loan, but they're 50% uh subsidized functionally.

We don't have to pay 50% back.

Um and then even the loan portion is uh very low interest, lower than uh what's commercially available.

It's very advantageous.

Uh as we know, of course, um after uh CBJ installed HESCO phase one with assistance from the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers, providing both uh the materials, the HESCO barriers themselves, as well as technical support.

Uh we were very grateful that uh in October 30th of 2025, the Army Corps of Engineers committed to uh doing phase two of HESCO barriers that they will be installing.

That is uh a really valuable uh really really valuable uh project that the Army Corps is providing for CBJ at their expense.

It's uh it's largely federally funded.

The reason I only say largely have a little bit of wiggle room in there is that as you might imagine, uh there's CBJ staff time associated with coordination, both for uh communications for phase two, on permitting for phase two, on coordinating between the phase one and the phase two construction projects that will happen this this season, but it is by and large almost completely a uh US Army Corps project, which is a fantastic win for this community.

Um so when I think about this next memo uh that is before you, I see this memo as in some ways uh and the actions recommended in this memo as preserving options for uh for this assembly.

We anticipate based on the past that we'll have another uh severe Gloff in August of 2026.

We anticipate it'll likely be larger than the 2025.

I mean, we've seen this the last few years to continue to get uh bigger, but nobody knows for sure.

We have seen in 2025 that we had a tree strike at Diamond Park.

We had that was kind of the most dramatic um bit of damage to phase one, but there's other damage along all of uh not all of phase one, multiple portions of of phase one.

Uh so we are assuming that we'll have this a glaw, a severe glov in August of 2026.

We'll have uh phase one largely reconstructed, we'll have new phase two, and the GLOF will damage that.

Uh and then we'll be in this other position where the flood fighting is the short-term HESCO piece uh that we're just kind of continuing to kind of buy some time until we get to either midterm or long-term uh solutions.

But what this is is we have um put in uh and and DEC is uh seeing seeing this favorably, they are willing to loan us this approximately 17 million dollars for what we anticipate after August of 2026.

We're gonna have another HESCO reconstruction project that's gonna have to happen, and that's gonna have to be that's gonna have to be funded.

Um so in taking the recommended motion today, this uh this resolution forwarded to the full assembly.

It authorizes the city manager to apply for this loan.

Uh it's there's a separate action where we actually have to execute the loan agreement, and then there's a separate action to actually request a disbursement.

And in terms of when uh CBJ would be on the hook to repay the 50% loan would be after a decision is made.

You know, we're kind of like three steps away.

The assembly would first have to uh allow the manager to apply, then the assembly would have to uh allow us to execute the loan agreement, and then we would have to ask for a disbursement.

And then a year after that disbursement is when CBJ would actually have to pay back that 50%, yeah, the 50%.

So this doesn't bind us.

This action of this moment is not actually what I'm asking for is not uh binding you to a particular expense.

That's why I frame it as kind of keeping our options open.

Um just I think it's I think it's a really positive uh opportunity for us.

And I think it's one way that the state has been really supportive.

DEC has been supporting us through these SRF loans, and then also the state at DOT has been very supportive in terms of providing things like uh drone footage, um, drone monitoring actually during the uh emergency operations center while we're actually in a GLOF.

So it's just uh wanted to acknowledge the state's assistance to our community.

Thank you.

Are there any questions from the committee on this item?

Mr.

Brooks.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

And this is just kind of for my understanding and maybe those who are tuning in, but you said that there was uh SRF loan that was secured for the first phase.

Was that secured uh before or after the lid was enacted?

And if it was after, is the lid in order to cover the 50% uh repayment.

Through the chair to Mr.

Brooks, uh I can confirm, but my recollection is that we did get the loan.

Oh, trying to remember was around the time.

Was it after?

Okay, it was after the lid.

I mean, what we had been doing is pursuing any potential funding source that we can to lower the burden uh of that lid to uh property owners, which as you know, property owners have not made a single payment on that lid at this moment in time.

Um part of that is that we don't have all the final costs associated with with phase one, including some of those potential litigation-related costs.

It's ultimately from HUD, but through Clinken and Hida Regional Housing Authority, uh, we also got funding, I believe it was about 750,000 that went towards uh phase one as well.

So we're trying to get every grant and non-local dollar that we can and apply that towards uh phase one, and that comes so that's all sub, you know, we subtract that off the total cost, and at some point that's when we'll have a figure that the 6040 uh ratio will be applied to.

Um Ms.

Hughes Candies.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Uh thanks for that contact setting, Director Gotch.

I am just uh looking at the dollar amount for the loan.

I it's tickling in my brain when I think you said in August, but when the Army Corps um uh committed to helping with phase two uh at their federal expense, with of course the knowledge that there are some CBJ expenses involved in that.

Did we have a dollar amount that we that was part of that?

Because I guess I'll stop there and then depending on your answer.

Through the chair to Ms.

Hughes Scandi's, uh your recollection is correct.

Uh we're always doing this, like trying to get ahead of like what is we're racing for this year's GLOF, and then also trying to think about next year's GLOF and trying to also find a solution that you know, an enduring solution, so we're operating on multiple time frames.

Uh, but we started this process of uh essentially you're not really formally applying for the loan, but you're more like expressing interest in the SRF.

That was prior to the Army Corps committing to do the installation for phase two.

And with that in mind, since we didn't have a commit from commitment from the Army Corps to uh install phase two, we were starting to think about what it would look like and what it would cost for CBJ to install phase two.

And we thought at the time it was around a 17 million dollar project, and therefore when we expressed interest, that that was the dollar value that we used to expressed interest in the loan.

Okay, thank you.

So quick follow-up.

Okay, that's that makes me feel um that's reassuring.

Because I seeing the 17, I thought, isn't this what we did?

So are do we place then a sort of soft 17 million dollar value at the work that the Army Corps is doing?

Or I guess just for me, this all makes sense.

I appreciate, like I said, I get that we're keeping our options open, but I'm just trying to figure out this piece of it if we sort of value what the Army Corps is doing for phase two at 17 million.

And then of course, yes, we're gonna have to do repair work, or we anticipate that uh and you know, um reinforcement work.

But would is that correct that we're in our mind that's kind of like 17 million, and then this is we're doing this other 17 million to have that option.

Is that the right way to think about it?

So through the chair to Miss Hughes Scandi's.

Uh 17 million dollars was the CBJ estimate for what CBJ thought it would cost to install phase two.

Um while we are very thrilled that the Army Corps uh has committed to install phase two, for them it is almost a $30 million project.

Uh they already have a contract in place.

Um their main their prime is C Alaska and they have a number of of subs.

Um since we are always kind of having to do things in advance, and we we expressed our interest in this SRF at a time period where we thought CBJ might have to install phase two.

Um we one thing what while we're thrilled that the Army Corps is installing phase two, at this moment in time, the agreement that we have with them is that once they install it, uh CBJ has to maintain it.

So we would anticipate that uh both phase one and phase two will be damaged in August of 2026.

And there's some flexibility um in this in this language about uh that would enable us to uh return uh back potentially you know as early as the fall and start those repairs on both phase two, which is you know, more about twice as long as phase one, as well as phase one.

And there's some flexibility in this in this language about uh that would enable us to uh return uh back potentially you know as early as the fall and start those repairs on both phase two which is you know more about twice as long as phase one as well as phase one and just to give some context for now that we have an example of uh we we CBJ constructed uh phase one HESCO barriers prior to 2025 and now we're thinking about the reconstruction of those phase one HESCO barriers um that we need to complete before 2026 and initially we thought that we were going to do maintenance and I've been trying to reframe this as a reconstruction project we have to uh we have to repair areas that have been uh that have been damaged but we also have to go higher in some locations and just to give people a sense of if future experiences are like the August of 2025 experience it's not just the it's not just minor repairs it's it's pretty major you know and that's why I'm reframing it as reconstruction which is why we wanted to keep that that 17 million dollars in terms of preserving our options.

That's great that makes it make good sense to me thank you.

I'm ready with that motion when you are chair all right uh Mr.

Brooks thank you Mr.

Chair I uh so uh I was wondering if you could give us like a more um accurate idea of what the damage costs from phase were phase one were because the number like one million dollars has been thrown out a couple times and just knowing like having a better idea of what it is in a full amount and then seeing you know if there's any relation between phase two because I'd I see like the 17 million and your explanation of that's what was the need at the time but if this is just to give approval to go seek the application can we go larger than that if we see that there's a need or possibly to try and give some relief to people who are subject to the lid or just anything like that.

I I guess there's two questions like one is one was uh what are the current damage estimates for phase one and then two is uh can we request to apply for more than just the 17 million so I'm gonna start with the the first one and then I'll pass the baton to deputy director Rumsey.

I know you had mentioned the uh one million dollars and that was uh that's an accurate recollection because at the time that uh that transfer was being made from the five million dollar transfer from the Capital Civic Center uh to finding a source for Hesco barriers we were uh thinking that oh the repairs would be in the million dollar that was our best estimate at the time but as we have gotten closer to really evaluating what it's gonna look like once again it's not a minor repairs to this actually thinking about it like a a reconstruction project going higher in some locations uh the uh the project is gonna be really challenging in many ways in some areas you're gonna have to take the Hesco take the HES goes down and put the HESCOs back up it's gonna be even uh more challenging than we had anticipated so we don't have uh a final dollar amount but we are pretty confident that it will be more significantly more than a million dollars and we had that five million dollars in that particular um in that particular uh CIP with that transfer I think the ratio is gonna be such that we're gonna need more of that money for phase one and then a smaller uh proportion of that money for for phase two whereas at the time we were initially thinking we might need more for phase two than phase one so the the ratios have shifted a little bit and then I'll see if Deputy Director Ramsey has anything to add.

Thank you, Director Koch and through the chair I still think the $1 million would have been an accurate number if we were just performing repair work.

But through our discussion with Army Corps of engineers about what this flood may look like in the future we've had to modify our approach to what HESCO phase one needs to be in order to continue to provide protection.

And so unfortunately what that does is it turns some of the areas that we're going to maybe just need repair work into a much larger undertaking in addition to that as we've planned out what it would require for us to perform reinforcement and raising activities it becomes a different type of constructibility challenge as it relates to things like even just accessing and getting certain types of equipment in in those locations.

So uh to Director Kotch's point, it has shifted some of uh the cost that we thought may have been born for phase two support or others in realistically into phase one, just to make sure that that can continue to work.

Um and Mr.

Brooks, you had a second question related to the DEC loan amounts.

And I'm just want to state again that we're very thankful for DEC and their support.

They've been very transparent with us as we've made those types of asks.

And uh when we identify the 17 million dollar number in the fall, um we were having those discussions.

How much money can we get that's forgivable?

And we've continued to talk with them, and at least as it relates to this ask, this application, it appears as though that's about as high as we can go and still get the 50 50% reimbursement.

Uh I guess I'd call it guarantee or um, but we'll continue to look to DEC in the future because they've been such an excellent partner, uh, whether it's uh for uh future GLOF related events.

Um but that's the reason why we think right now 17 million dollars is the best both the best we can get and an appropriate number uh based on the amount of work that we we are likely going to have to uh execute over the next you know couple years at least of PESCO flood fighting.

Thank you.

Any other questions from the committee?

All right, uh to you, Miss Hugh Scandy's for a motion.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Sorry.

Uh minimize the screen and then you can't unmute yourself.

I would move uh that we uh direct a resolution be forwarded to the full assembly for adoption, which would authorize the manager to apply for the ADEC loan for uh an amount not to exceed 17 million fifteen thousand for the short the SRF for June O barrier phase two.

And uh also authorize executing the loan agreement.

And I ask for unanimous consent.

Any objection?

Seeing none, so moved to item three, the draft 27 six-year capital improvement program.

Ms.

Koch.

All right, thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um I'll just get us started and then I will hand it off to Deputy Director uh Rumsey, who is going to provide the the presentation.

Um just uh kick us off by saying this is part of our standard process and timing in terms of we always come to PWFC in January.

We give you uh the one year uh CIP, we just introduce it.

Um and then with the six-year CIP, we know that you are not um you're not funding the out years, you're not funding all the way out to six to the six years, but um we find that it's helpful for everybody to have a broader vision of what's probably uh what's probably coming, and then um this then we we ask for you to um after Mr.

Ramsey provides the presentation uh to see if you want to make any any modifications or not, and then forward it to the full assembly for keeping it moving in the in the CIP process.

And with that, I will hand it over to Mr.

Remsey.

Thank you, Director Koch, and through the chair.

Book actually, can we get the presentation up on the screen if possible?

Just sorry.

So while we're doing that, uh I did just want to reiterate we will be back in front of the assembly finance committee on April 1st.

I will go through this presentation reasonably quickly today to make sure that we can stay on schedule.

And really the goal of the presentation today is just to provide a high-level overview of the process, and there will be numbers uh associated with each of the different funding sources, but really it's to help navigate the CIP book itself, the draft book, which hopefully you all have a copy of at this point.

But it's a 50-page document and there's a lot of content in there.

And so if you need to chew on it a little more before certain questions can be answered, there will be many more opportunities for us to um to discuss it and answer those questions.

Okay.

Thank you.

Can we move on to the second slide?

Oh, yeah, that's the I'm sorry, the presentation.

There we go.

That one.

And then just the next page.

There we go.

So as mentioned, then this is also referenced in the memo.

The development of the CIP is a deliberate and choreographed process with input and direction from departmental from departments, usually operational departments, finance, the manager's office, and the assembly over an eight-month period.

It's a lengthy process.

Next slide, please.

So as you're aware, the funding sources for CIP come from four primary sources, the voter approved 3% sales tax, and I'll go into a little bit more detail on subsequent slides.

The voter approved special 1% sales tax, the passenger fees, and then also from departmental enterprise funds as appropriate.

Next slide, please.

So breaking these funding sources down, the voter approved 3% sales tax was allocated as shown on the slide.

Per revenue projections from finance and direction provided in the memo, which is on page three of the CIP book.

$9.6 million has been identified for allocation to street projects, and an additional $2.4 million from general sales tax for other CIP priorities and improvements.

Next slide, please.

For the general sales tax CIP funds typically help fund projects and operations that don't have other clear funding sources.

For the FY27 CIP, this includes funding for Eagle Crest projects and operations, parks and rec projects, and then also as you can see, uh, to start providing some money for a future transfer station project.

Next slide, please.

The area street sales tax is intended to fund streets-related projects.

Note that this year, similar to last year, some streets funding is allocated towards water and wastewater components of these projects.

This reflects both the need for these projects to be well coordinated.

If we're going to get in and dig up a street to do a utility project, we may as well try to identify those where both uh needs are present.

But it also reflects that water and wastewater funds are insufficient to cover the entirety of these project costs.

Next slide, please.

The voter approved 1% sales tax initiative included a list of projects approved by voters, which has been updated for FY27.

And that's on the next slide after this, which we'll get to, and then also on page 22 of your CIP book.

This reflects the availability of funding from the October 2025 revenue reductions.

Next slide, please.

And then as you can see, what we tried to do was just update the column specifically for FY27, which reflects changing priorities, removal of funds set aside for the North uh North State Office Building parking, and also for the uh yeah, sorry, the museum.

And then with some funding set aside for the uh restricted uh budget reserve.

Next slide, please.

The passenger fee budget process is ongoing.

Uh, but as you can see here, we do have nominated identified projects as shown for marine passenger fees, port development fees, and the state marine passenger fees.

Next slide, please.

So departments that generate their own funds uh then contribute their own funds toward CIPs with priorities typically being vetted by an associated board.

So this includes Bartlett, Dox and Harbors, Lands and Resources, Water, Wastewater Uities, and the Airport is separate because of the way that they typically fund their projects.

Next slide, please.

And as mentioned, with an unscheduled funding, these are identified primarily for trend uh for transparency and planning purposes.

We need to have an idea of what projects may be happening in the future.

But these are usually usually speculative funding or projects that uh we're seeking grant funding for and would otherwise require appropriation once funding was secured.

This is the primary funding source for airport CIP projects, but also if we know that we need to get an FTA grant for uh to execute a capital transit project.

Uh we want to identify that here so that we can also identify needed uh match funding and harbors uh also is a primary recipient of uh grant funding opportunities for CIP projects.

Next slide, please.

So although EPW does coordinate, consolidate and assemble the CIP book, we do not establish the project priorities themselves.

As there are more needs than available funds, EPW works with departments to match priorities with the available funding sources.

If you start at page 10, you can see a more detailed list of the projects that were recommended for funding in FY27.

And then on page 24, uh, and I'm gonna give a shout out to Mr.

Steininger.

Uh, we've included a new column this year which identifies of the departmental priorities, which of those we are identifying for FY2027 funding uh to make it as clear as possible that uh what was asked and and what it looks like we can match up for funding for FY27.

Next slide, please.

Uh lastly, I just wanted to do a quick kind of by the numbers for our CIP program for FY27.

Uh as you can see of the 23.2 million dollars in tax-funded CIP projects.

We do have some projects that are not your traditional, you know, maintenance or repair types of efforts.

But even with that, about 76% of our projects are for maintenance and repair.

And if you remove the restricted budget reserve, that number goes up to about 87%, which is a really good number from a municipal perspective, being able to take those projects and return them back into maintenance and repair efforts.

Next slide, please.

So that's the presentation for today.

I do want to remind you that we've got the April 1st presentation as well, but I would be happy to answer any questions that that you may have.

Thank you.

Any committee questions.

Not at this time.

Thank you, Chair.

All right.

Thank you.

I don't see any of you're getting off easy, Mr.

Rumsey.

But stay tuned for April 1st.

Yes.

Yeah, we'll sync about it and then April 1st.

We'll have a ton of questions.

Exactly.

Mr.

Burland.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Steinager.

Um, just one quick reminder.

The CIP book for you guys.

Um, the one that was bound and printed, I believe.

You got copies of them in your packet.

Um, keep these with you.

These will be not be reproduced for each of the budget packets.

So this is your working copy.

Mark it up, make all the notes, make all find all the questions you want to ask us at finance committee.

Um, but keep this copy with you.

You'll see the resolution continue to go through in the budget, but this book is the only one you'll get.

I mean, we can get you another copy if you want, but it won't be reproduced at each of the meetings.

So just to keep that in mind.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So don't lose it.

We do have a few extra copies in the meantime.

Ready with a motion if you like, Chair.

Ms.

Hughes Candies.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I would move at the public works and facilities committee for the FY27 CIP to the full assembly, as is for introduction and inclusion in the FY27 budget review process, and ask for unanimous consent.

Any objection?

Seeing none, so moved.

I think that brings us back to you, Ms.

Kouch.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

So I'm now on page 28 of your packet.

This is an informational item.

This is the drinking water utility.

We want the assembly to be aware of a major construction project that's happening by AELNP.

It does have uh impact on our secondary uh drinking water supply for the city.

As you saw in this uh memo, the Salmon Creek uh provides approximately a third of uh the drinking water for our community.

Uh one thing to keep in mind is that uh we have in general, we have plenty of water supply in Juneau.

Uh last chance basin produces enough water for the community.

Uh it's really helpful to have that secondary source though for the challenges sometimes that we have is like in distributing the water uh and pushing the water from we've got this long linear community and we've got our primary drinking water source downtown, you gotta push it all the way out in into the valley, and that's uh where it's helpful to have a secondary supply for both um supply but also for uh for pressure.

Um and there's a lot of work that's been that's being done and uh preparation, both in coordination with AELNP and uh uniquely by the CBJ drinking water uh utility just in terms of planning and prevention and to some extent for any public works project, we are successful if you know we might like grind our teeth a little bit, but we're successful if nobody knows that anything ever happened, right?

Like that's that's success.

Um and that's what we're planning for in this case as well.

Uh but there are communications that uh CBJ utilities doing it as part of that planning.

Uh for example, uh the cruise ships are aware that they are a fully interruptible customer, and if we need to uh they we don't have to sell them water if we need that water for our own purposes.

We like to sell them water because we make money selling them water.

Um, and we will sell them water if we have water.

But that's just sort of thinking about some of this contingency planning.

Uh we've also had conversations with uh both the CBJ streets and DOT crews to to say, okay, even if you get a if you need to uh get water for watering roads, and even if that work is gonna happen in the valley, we'd like for you to fill up downtown versus filling up in the valley.

We want you to fill up closer to the source.

Um human needs always always come first.

Um so we'll be in close coordination.

For example, if uh if we did um have some some challenges and you know, maybe we're not gonna do uh dust suppression if we have if we have concerns about having enough water.

Um we have in the past, it's it is rare, but is not unprecedented that we have been in very short duration situations where we get this beautiful burst of weather.

Uh you can imagine maybe after a long cold snowy winter.

Uh this construction that's happening, and it's just happening from April 1st to June 30th.

That's the time period, but it's gonna happen over four consecutive years.

Uh but you can imagine there's a day in June there or a few days in June that are just beautiful, and this is everybody's chance to like water their lawn, power wash their house, while also washing their car and filling up the kitty pool, right?

And we have like this max uh usage of of water.

There have been these uh there have been precedents in the past where we have issued uh press release to the community and we have asked, we have just been transparent with them, just like we're being transparent now and say uh that we would we're asking for you know voluntary, you know, use your water for drinking, cooking, bathing, you know, those sorts of things, but please ref refrain from power washing and washing your cars and those sorts of things.

In general, the the public has been uh very responsive when we've had to do that, and uh they've they've just responded to those things, and then you know, Juno being June at some point, uh, the sunshine doesn't last for that long.

It starts to rain again, and you know, people's opportunities to fill up those kiddie pools or uh wash those cars, they that that water demand tends to go back down again.

So uh that we have our utility crew in short working really hard so that while this construction happens, hopefully success is uh no one in the public knows that this even happened because they just turned on their water all the time and not uh everything was was status quo.

But we didn't want to surprise the assembly or the public if we did have to say stop selling water to cruise ships or uh ask the public to do some voluntary restrictions and wanted you have it have a sense of why that was was happening and where that was coming from.

Thank you.

Are there any questions from the committee?

Mr.

Brooks.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

On the uh, you know, methods of uh compensating for the loss, the number three discretionary reduction of water services for industrial customers, which you know that kind of falls in line with the same as the cruise ships.

But I was just wondering if like is there a plan to just send a notice out to all commercial account holders and be like, hey, you might be able to expect this.

Um because otherwise my question would be like under whose discretion who's gonna get reduced.

Yeah, it's a great question.

This might be my phone of friend moment for Mr.

McGuire, who is our utility superintendent.

Okay, through the chair to Mr.

Brooks.

Uh that that's a good question.

We have been reaching out to uh select users, and uh another thing to know is is uh most of the big users are behind meters.

So we'll we should be able to see those and start conversations as needed.

All right.

Any other questions from the committee?

See none, this doesn't require action, does it, Ms.

Kotch?

All right.

Um so just a quick time check.

We've got eight minutes until one o'clock, and we have uh one more item on the agenda, a informational item on microtransit.

Um thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Uh this was an item that, as you might recall, was bumped.

Uh we didn't have time to get to it at the uh last PWFC meeting.

And this was a continuation, I think, of some of the periodic conversation that PWFC has about uh transit more generally.

Uh typically we're talking about the fixed rate transit.

Sometimes we talk about paratransit and microtransit would be something different.

So just to be clear, we run a fixed rate uh fixed route system, and we also run a paratransit system.

Microtransit would be a third element of that.

But there was a question and a desire to learn more about microtransit.

And um microtransit in general.

Um there are several different uh mechanisms or models for microtransit.

Uh some communities use it as uh what they call a first mile, last mile.

So uh if for example North Douglas, because we had suspended service uh to North Douglas, or you know, people periodically say they'd like they'd be interested in having root uh service out to the ferry terminal, or that's beyond our fixed uh fixed route system.

That that's kind of a first mile, last mile uh model.

Uh there are models where microtransit just takes people from their uh uh from their location to like the Valley Transit Center or the downtown transit center, and they're really just getting you into the fixed route system.

Uh there are systems where they take you door to door.

To me, that looks very taxi-ish.

Um so there's there are a lot of different models for for microtransit.

Uh one of the uh questions that was also asked was about funding, because if the assembly wanted to have a microtransit system, this would be an expansion.

It would be a new service.

So there was questions about the funding sources.

And uh capital transit does receive what are ultimately federal dollars, but they flow through the state.

They're federal dollars that move to the state, and then the state flows those dollars to CBJ.

And we have uh generally been taking out, you know, received the max that we are eligible for for uh our existing fixed route and paratransit service.

So I think it is unlikely if the public and assembly uh chose to add a new service.

I think it's unlikely that we would get additional uh federal dollars via the uh flowing through the state.

Um trying to think about uh some other points.

Um I just also just for myself went back to our January PWFC packet uh to look at some costs.

And uh we had looked at some some costs for our existing system.

So we don't have any costs for what microtransit would look like in Juneau because that's a theoretical system.

But we do have uh some costs for our our system.

So this is all in the January packet, so it's already been uh published.

Uh but for our overall system on average, we have about 17 riders per hour, and it costs about um I'm rounding $10.

It's $9.77.

It costs about uh seven dollars that $10 uh per ride.

Um and then when you have even on our fixed route system, if you have a route that has low ridership, and we had used the North Douglas route well before it was suspended as uh an example where you have about two riders an hour, then your costs wind up to be closer to $80 an hour.

So those are um, you know, the more people that you have, of course, on the very popular fixed route services that tends to be the Route One, the Route Three, the Route Four.

Uh they are lower cost per rider.

And then as you uh try and offer you know service if for whatever the the reasons are, maybe you want geographic uh diversity or there are particularly important locations, uh providing that service with a fixed route uh model gets uh more expensive per rider.

Any questions from the committee um, Mr.

Chair?

I'll I'll uh just say thank you, Director Koch, for this information and you know, for the committee.

I don't, you know, I don't know if this is in just naturally at a stopping point, but I'll say for myself, you know, we have the CIP to dig into the when we spell these things out and then break them out for those areas where we have extremely low ridership, you know, the ferry terminal gets used, but I think perhaps the genesis of looking into some of this information on microtransit more had to do with areas like North Douglas or the airport that had experienced fixed route service before and then were cut off, where yes, we know it's low ridership, but we also know that um or I guess not we, but maybe some members of the committee didn't feel great about having just no transit options for you know a whole section of town.

Um I don't know that we do anything with this now, but I will say like just for me, I remain dissatisfied.

So just this is helpful as far as digging in for additional information because I don't know that the timing is now, but I would be interested at some point maybe in seeing, you know, what a pilot would cost, but I think it would require us to be a little bit creative because I think when we price things out the way we're typically price out our fixed ridership, you know, I think on paper, of course, is not going to make sense.

So I will say this is helpful and thanks to staff, and then just tell the committee I'm still I'm still dissatisfied.

So it's uh it's still gonna be a be in my bonnet and something that I'll probably continue to spin my wheels on as we have time.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

No.

Um seeing none.

Uh thank you, Director Koch.

Um looks like our next meeting is April 13th, 2026 at noon.

Um else committee from any members or is there anything we've missed, Director Koch?

All right.

Well, with that, we are adjourned.

Thank you.

Thanks, guys.