Council rejects fee increases on harbor properties, maintains $5 parking fees
Posted on: February 9, 2010 | musiclover | 3 Comments | Print Article | Rate Post:
By Heidi Zemach for Seward City News
At Monday’s regular meeting the Seward City Council discussed, but rejected for the time being a proposal instituting a two-percent increase in fees on the city’s rental properties. The city’s 37 property leases along the harbor are due for their mandatory five-year reappraisal, where a Fair Market Value is determined for each. For the past two decades, city rental leases have been set at eight-percent of their appraised amount. This means that for a property worth $100,000, the annual lease fee is $8,000. City Manger Phil Oates asked for council guidance on whether the council wanted to have the appraiser increase that fee to 10-percent.
“Council and Administration continue to evaluate ways to increase revenue into the General and Harbor Funds to pay for critical City services,” the city said in a background and justification statement to the council. The statement then listed a number of private and private sector land lease rates ranging from 8-10-percent as examples: Cordova charges 9-percent on its leases; Valdez and the city and borough of Juneau charge 10-percent; the Alaska Railroad Corporation, Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of Land Management charge 8-10-percent. “The City mindfully strives to fulfill our duty to insure the citizens of Seward are receiving the highest and best return on the property we manage for their benefit,” the city stated. It added that the proposed increase would bring in 2-percent additional revenue to pay for critical city services.
Tom Tougas, who manages Four Seasons Marine Services/ Alaska Coach Tours, and Ron Willie, operations manager of Kenai Fjords Tours, harbor businessmen who rent leases at the harbor, objected to the proposed increase. They said a 2-percent fee increase on their properties would actually mean a 25-percent increase in rental revenues to the city. That’s because a property worth $100,000 would now have a $10,000 fee assessed, rather than $8,000—a $2,000 increase for that business. An increase on their rents would be another blow to harbor businesses already suffering a 35-percent decline in business last year, Tougas said. The idea comes at a time when the city also recently increased fees for water, sewer, electric and moorage in the 2010/2011 budget, and would be a particular hardship for Seward Fish, which is located on a particularly large city lot. The proposed fee increase also does not take into account the results of the upcoming Fair Market Value re-appraisals, which could mean increased—or decreased property values. At their last appraisal five years ago, Kenai Fjord’s rental property was re-appraised at 145 percent of what it had been previously, Willie said.
While appearing confused by issue, or why the proposed increase had even come up, the council members that spoke mostly questioned whether or not the decision to could be made administratively, as city solicitor Cheryl Brooking claimed, or should be made by them, after soliciting public input. According to her reading of city code, it should be a council decision, said Councilmember Marianna Kiel. Dunham suggested they allow the appraisals to take place without suggesting an automatic fee increase—and then, once they see how the appraisals go—leave open the option to revisit the proposed fee increase at that time. That idea stuck, but Oates warned that to change fees after properties had been appraised would be an onerous task, as the lease agreements all have different terms, and would need to be renegotiated on a case-by-case basis if property owners objected to them.
Monday night the council also grudgingly agreed to lower summer daily parking fees in the harbor area lots from $10 to $5 for another year. Mayor Willard Dunham and Councilman Bob Valdatta voted against the resolution however, making the vote 4-2. (Councilmember Linda Amberg was absent from the meeting.) Dunham called the council “penny wise and pound foolish” for doing so. The mayor and councilman argued that parking fees in Anchorage and elsewhere are frequently higher. If visitors can afford fancy boats, they can surely also afford $10 parking fees, Valdatta said. But the other council members say they had already had given the city guidance during FY 2010/2011 budget discussions to allow the fees to remain at the lower rate in order to encourage people to choose Seward as their recreation or business destination. The harbor budget that passed earlier was based on the lower parking fees.

- (Photo: Dan Seavey with Iditarod proclamation)
On another matter, the council approved a letter to the Kenai Peninsula Borough, strongly objecting to changes to a proposed ordinance that would allow area board members to be appointed by the borough mayor, and confirmed by the borough assembly when vacancies occur outside an election cycle. All of the Seward area boards, including the Lowell Point Emergency Service Area Board, the Seward/Bear Creek Flood Service Area Board and the Bear Creek Fire Service Area Board have unanimously opposed he proposed change, one that would take away their own (local) power to appoint their own members, and give it to the mayor and assembly in Soldotna. Dunham insisted the letter include the fact that Seward is home-rule. Seward Assembly representative Sue McClure told the council she was confident that the proposed change would fail at the next assembly meeting, as it has encountered such widespread opposition.
Finally, the Council presented a proclamation designating February 20 and 21, 2010 Juriro Wada and Alfred Lowell Days. Wada and Lowell were hired by Seward Commercial Club in 1909 to demonstrate the feasibility of a trail from Seward to the Iditarod country, which would make Seward a major outfitting and departure point for those bound for the Iditarod. They later blazed and marked the trail. Seward musher Dan Seavey who heads three generations of Alaska mushers, and has long worked on behalf of the Seward Iditarod Trail Blazers, accepted the proclamation. He said his group has worked for 28 years to develop and improve the trail, and that it still hopes to put Seward back on the map as the southern terminus of the National Historic Trail.
Betty Casey Skinner also spoke out against fluoridating the city water, asking the council to slow down and consider its economic cost as well as its effects on older people, and those without teeth.
Finally, the council went into Executive (closed) Session to discuss the city’s possible role in pending litigation commitments in regards to a lawsuit brought against the Alaska Railroad Corporation and Aurora Energy Services LLC by Alaska Community Action On Toxics, and the Alaska Chapter of the Sierra Club. No word was released on their decision.
Comments
3 Responses to “Council rejects fee increases on harbor properties, maintains $5 parking fees”






(6 votes, average: 3.67 out of 5)

February 10th, 2010 @ 10:17 am
At what point did we decide that the basic economic laws of supply and demand do not apply to Seward. We need to let the invisible hand of the market do its job. There are a very limited number of leasable properties owned by the city and many businesses (both local and not) interested in paying the city for the privilege of a lease.
If someone is willing to lease a city property for more money than someone else is, then the property should be leased to the business willing to pay more. That is basic economics.
I’m not advocating that we rent out a visitor industry-type shop at the harbor to a chemical manufacturer or other incompatible business, but if someone wants to open a t-shirt or cruise booking business and pay more than one of the current stores, then that person should get the lease.
In National Parks, concessionaires with exclusive permits (like the limited permits for buildings at the harbor) are selected based on a closed bid auction – whoever agrees to pay the NPS the highest percentage of income gets the permit. Perhaps we can do this with harbor leases – Maybe there is a business out there willing to pay 15 or 20% of the assessed value for one of the lots to open up a new business. We won’t know unless we ask business people if they are interested.
If the city establishes this sort of system, it can have bid incentives for local hire, building improvements, sale of locally made goods, job creation, being open in the winter months, and so on. Maybe it would be worth accepting an even lower rental rate than 8% if a company were willing to come to town and create new jobs that would be year round and higher pay on average than other positions in the visitor industry.
I’m just saying that our community is fortunate enough to have a commodity that is in high demand. We’d be foolish to let it be used for less than it is worth. If you owned one of these lots, wouldn’t you only lease it to the person willing to pay you the most money? Why would the city do anything different?
February 10th, 2010 @ 12:29 pm
Unfortunately there is a misunderstanding on the lease rate issue. About 12 years ago (1997) the City of Seward did put out a RFP for the 7 small boardwalk sites in the Harbor. As part of the City RFP the responders were required to agree to the assessment to pay to have sewer lines built and a separate additional assessment to pay for the construction of the boardwalk (Where people stand to watch the Polar Bear jump) and 8% of the fair market value of the land which the city would have reappraised every 5 years and the rate increased (or decreased) based on these appraisals. The City manager at the time told us in the pre bid conference that they expected to get 50 to 100 responses. The City took out Ads in Seattle, the Wall Street Journal, Anchorage Newspapers etc. When the bids were opened they got 8 responses, 7 of them were from locals and 1 was from a person in Homer. The Homer bid was determined to be unresponsive because it was only one paragraph and did not address the details of the RFP. The City Manager and Harbor Master met with the 7 local bidders and we agreed on a plan to install and pay for the water and sewer lines. Each bidder was required at tear down the “Shacks” that were on the sites and build new buildings that were built to code within a year. (the chamber was given extra time to rebuild the salmon derby booth) We all went to our banks and borrowed $$ to build our buildings and the buildings were built consistent with the requirements of the RFP. Since then our Rent per month has more than doubled based on the reappraisals. We are also still paying for the assessments for the Water and Boardwalk improvements.
The issue at Mondays meeting was a plan by the administration to change the original agreement in the RFP where all land lease tenants would pay 10% of Fair Market Value per year in stead of 8% This would increase the tenants cost by 25% per month. In most leases if they are asking 10% they are including some additional services such as utilities. The city is also in the process of having appraisals done so what I heard the council conclude was that we should all wait until the appraisals are done before we change the commitments that were made to the locals who have invested in these properties.
My point was that at a time when the City has just raised everyones Electric, Water and Moorage rates and they know that our businesses are down by 23% and many businesses will not survive would they try to increase rents by 25%. Its not a lot of $$ but its the idea that the City is not understanding that they need to work with the local businesses to help them survive. At the time the RFP was put out the city administration was focused on the fact that if we work together we will all thrive but if we work against each other the community is the looser.
February 11th, 2010 @ 5:00 pm
Good decision from our council members to lower parking fees to $5. For many of us, $5 is worth something especially tourist travelling from far distances to enjoy what Seward has to offer. That extra $5 will be spent in local stores and restaurants.
Mr. Paperman,
Not everyone is cruel and heartless. There are plenty of good folks in Seward who own lots and property who do not demand the markets asking price. I am one of those recipients. I want to thank the owner for giving me a good deal on the lot and property.
Anyone,
I have a question to anyone working for local, state and federal institutions and agencies. Who would I contact to file a complaint regarding local, state and ferderal govt. employees commenting on politically charged articles using govt. property and on tax payers expense.