Session 06-03 a Regular Meeting of the Homer Economic Development Advisory Commission, (EDC) was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chair Robert Howard in the Homer City Hall Cowles Council Chambers located at 491 E. Pioneer Avenue, Homer, Alaska.

PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: COREY, FAULKNER, HOWARD, MURPHY, NEWBY, RILEY, SCHEER.

STAFF: CITY CLERK CALHOUN

ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT HOLEN

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER: WYTHE

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

The agenda was approved by consensus of the Commission with the following revisions: Add under Visitors: Ed Cowling, Conoco Phillips. Commissioners were notified via email on Thursday, July 6th, however, notice was received too late for the agenda and packet deadline, and Add to the information under New Business Item A. Memorandum 06-06, RE: 2007-2012 CIP Process and FY 2008 Legislative Requests - Resolutions 05-100, 05-101, 05-102 and 05-103, the 2005 CIP/Leg Priority Lists

PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING ITEMS ON THE AGENDA. (3 MINUTE TIME LIMIT)

Public may comment on items on the agenda only, excluding visitor.

Donna Rae Faulkner, resides at 811 Ocean Drive Loop in Homer, thanked the Commission for allowing public comment. She advised that she had received some information that the Commission would be considering having an RV overnight camping at Fred Meyer and inquired if that is an item on the Commission agenda.

Chair Howard confirmed that this is an item that may, possibly, be discussed at this meeting.

Ms. Faulkner stated that, according to what she has read, this is actually something that she would not support having, it is currently not something that the Homer Advisory Planing Commission has recommended and is actually against two of the current Homer City Codes, 21.61.105 and 19.08.03. She told the Commission that she has concerns about what is happening to create that on the agenda now and that she is wondering if the Commission is intending to recommend this to the City Council.

Chair Howard thanked her for her comments and advised that this would be considered later in the meeting.

RECONSIDERATION

None scheduled.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

A. Unapproved meeting minutes of June 13, 2006, Special/Regular Meeting.

NEWBY/RILEY - I MOVE FOR APPROVAL (OF THE MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING AS WRITTEN.)

There was no discussion.

VOTE: YES: NON OBJECTION. UNANIMOUS CONSENT.

Motion carried.

Chair Howard announced that the minutes were approved by consensus. He stated that the minutes were exceptionally well done, that there was a lot of discussion well captured and stated, "compliments on a job well done."

VISITORS (Chair set time limit not to exceed 20 minutes)

A. Approved under agenda approval: Ed Cowling, Conoco-Phillips, Inc

Edgar Cowling, Director of Project Technology for Conoco Phillips, reported that he has been working on the gas pipeline project for Conoco Phillips for the last five years having joined the Conoco Phillips team in 2001. He reported that a joint study was done with BP and Exxon Mobile. At the end of the study, after spending about $125 million, the conclusion was that there were too many project risks at that time to move forward. Since then the risks can be broken down into three main areas: 1)Gas price, 2) The market has helped immensely on that risk item and has given encouragement to help move forward and there are a number of federal issues and federal law passed about three years ago that addressed those and lets them move forward with regard to the federal risk. 3) With state uncertainty of handling the Conoco Phillips project and what changes the state might implement in the future, which, to Conoco Philips, would present a risk.

Based upon the Stranded Gas Development Act, passed during the Knowles Administration, Conoco Phillips engaged in negotiations with the administration, negotiations have been going on for about two and one half to three years and are very intense negotiations on all sides. Many, many issues have been discussed at great depth on both sides. Conoco Phillips has given full attention from its perspective and the state has included a number of internal specialists and some from outside the state, some world class negotiators to support them. Conoco Phillips feels hat the present package, including the gas contract and the petroleum profits tax, being proposed, provides them with a way forward for all concerned, that it is a fair package for companies, and the State of Alaska and its residents. There has been a lot of debate as this contract that has been rolled out in the public forum. The state has been going around the state, Conoco Phillips has provided support, with public information and presentations trying to explain more the details behind the package. Mr. Cowling expressed his hope that this has been informative. He noted that Conoco Phillips has a number of concerns about some of the information that is coming out from other parties, which they see as potentially disrailing the negotiations that have gone on so far. Some people are picking at specific items in the package and trying to use those items to try to cancel the whole negotiations and the efforts that have been done to date. Mr. Cowling relayed that Conoco Phillips feels that the total package, as presented, is one that is very good for all concerned, that this is an excellent time to move forward with this project, that the market is such that it is anticipating this project and if delayed now, runs the risk that other sources, foreign sources, may start to move forward and capture some of the lower 48 gas market, which could jeopardize being able to get gas commitments to sell gas in the lower 48. He advised the Commission that he wanted to bring this forward to their attention and to provide an opportunity for citizens across the state to talk to them and ask questions. He introduced John White, Project Manager with BP, technical team lead for BP's Gas Group, and who was also on the joint team in 2001. Mr. Cowling reported that they had been working over the past five years on a number of gas pipeline issues and that they are present to answer questions as best they can, noted that they are not commercial people that they are both engineers and would prefer talking about building the pipeline than taxes. Taxes are a way of life. He asked for questions from the Commission, including any comments about things heard in the media.

Commission comments, inquiries:

What major dilemmas are there in having this delayed a little bit longer. Some of the sense of pressure about these continuing special sessions and a hammer held over everyone's head, plus the gubernatorial election coming up and a whole variety of other things. Are Conoco Phillips and BP going to walk away from the table if something is not decided eminently or quicky?

Is there something that Mr. Cowling is specifically looking for from the community or this commission that might be of assistance in their campaign?

What are some of the key items of misinformation that are coming out as the contract is being debated.

What would be most helpful would be a summary of sorts, what the positions are so as to understand the whole plan, rather than just key points being brought out tonight. An opinion from the Commission cannot be offered without the information. A written summary of the project details is needed. Put together a packet of information based on key points. Interested in facts not spin.

The manner in which the negotiations have been conducted leaves a lot to be desired from a public understanding, stand point. So right out of the box there is an uphill battle, people really don't know what is going on.

It falls to the Oil Industry to inform the public.

Comment about the gubernatorial candidates lining up with the Conoco Phillips kind of caught in the middle. It is uncertain how this is all going to sort out. Someone needs to put out a lot of information Cannot offer a blind opinion. The Commission/Commissioners need more information.

Product of negotiations does not resemble Governor Knowles' intent, he legislated the act.

Advising Mr. Cowling and Mr. White that this is the EDC's third meeting after being newly reformed and that the Commission has not had an opportunity to flesh this out, nor has it been an agenda topic. The Commission may have seven different opinions at this time and that the Commission is not in a position to discuss this.

Every economic development project the Commission is considering or will be considering in the future is funding related. Like it or not, 80% of the funding of our government comes from the Oil Industry. That does not mean that the Oil Industry should be blindly supported, but it does mean that it is incumbent upon us as citizens, even more so as a Commission, to understand the issues and to not necessarily make it incumbent on the Oil Industry to educate the Commission. These negotiations have been trumped largely by politics not by a wise economic decision. This is a very complex subject. The Commission does have to engage its representatives and hold them to account for their positions on areas of vital economic interest to the Community. This is probably the most vital negotiation on what is the primary source of revenue to our life time, one of the few. What has been available to read has been disgusting from the non disclosure of the contract to the infighting within the legislature on various components of this. Reconciliation and finality to the negotiations needs to be encouraged, because of the vast impact to, virtually, every project that the Commission is going to look at from Municipal Revenue Sharing to grants to donations, of one type of another, from the industry to local communities. May not have enough information or the wherewithal to act tonight, this is a subject wherein the Commission needs to education itself and to, maybe, be prepared to act upon in the future.

The original EDC, three current members having been on that one, had as its top priority getting natural gas to Homer. This issue of energy is taken very seriously, because it is such a key component to Economic Development.

Appreciation was expressed to Mr. Cowling and Mr. White for coming to the Commission Meeting and apology for not being more prepared.

Mr. Cowling/Mr. White responses:

One thing that would be of assistance would be that the representatives in Juneau are discussing these issues right now. Understanding the Commission position and thoughts is key to them proceeding forward. They need to be sure that they are representing the people of Homer. Very important that the people of Homer, the Commission, as representing a key economic driver, present comments that would be very beneficial to the people of Homer and to the State of Alaska.

One of the items of misinformation is on the Petroleum Tax. When negotiating this item with the Governor's Office, came to a 20/20 solution. CEO of Conoco Phillips had a difficult time accepting this, not being satisfied with it, but from the overall picture of moving forward with this contract he thought it very important to keep moving. Recognized as part of the package needed to move the gas pipeline project and contract forward. Mandated dates on completion - a very complicated project, a mega project of tens of billions of dollars. There are a number of federal issues and permits that are needed both in the United States and Canada. Conoco Phillips does not control the time schedule of those and it would be inappropriate to try to drive a project to a mandated date for completion. This project needs to be walked forward in a prudent project management perspective making sure that risks to the owners of the project are addressed, which would include the State of Alaska. The risks need to be addressed so that these can be managed in a way that keeps the project moving forward and does not put Conoco Phillips at economic jeopardy.

One issue of concern that has been mentioned by the public is the thirty year term, locking in rates for thirty years. That is common in the industry world wide. With this project the attempt is to try to compete in capital markets with other projects around the world - believed necessary. Certainly bankers are very conservative and like the terms well understood, they like certainty, and they like the deal to be as well defined as possible. This is a big driver in negotiating this fiscal term, which would last thirty years.

An all Alaska proposal is being driven by some of the communities in the State. This is very disconcerting. The proposal made to Conoco Phillips was very lacking in any quality engineering backup. One that Conoco Phillips finds much risk to, it was driving the gas to go to markets, that gas prices were going to be lower than the central part of the United States, which their proposal goes to. It also puts the risk of having to compete against LNG (Liquid Natural Gas) projects from International markets which have a much lower cost basis than Conoco Phillips would have. Conoco Phillips has looked at LNG for a number of years and never saw it as viable nor does it see, as viable, the present proposal by the All Alaska Group. Another issue of concern.

The way the negotiations were handled was as part of the Stranded Gas Development Act that Governor Knowles signed.

There is a significant amount of information on the Governor's website. It does take time and effort to go through it all. The full contract is there plus supporting information and economic analysis that the Governor's Office has prepared. Conoco Phillips can go back to the Governor's Office and request that he/his office come down, to Homer, for a public information meeting if that would be of interest to the City.

The risk involved, if Conoco Phillips does not take the existing contract, based upon the public current comment period, adjustments can be made to the contract and the Governor can submit that revised contract to the Legislature for approval. Concern is that if it were not approved at this time, it could move forward to the next administration for another two or three year negotiation and starting from scratch.

One of the key components of the contract is gas off take to up to four locations in the State. The Anchorage Bowl is one of the key areas to deliver gas. There are existing gas pipelines that presently flow north that could be turned around to flow south.

There being no further comments, etc, from the Commissioners or guests, Chair Howard thanked Mr. Cowling and Mr. White for their attendance.

STAFF & COUNCIL REPORT/COMMITTEE REPORTS/BOROUGH REPORTS (Chair set time limit not to exceed 5 minutes.)

None provided.

PUBLIC HEARING (3 MINUTE TIME LIMIT)

None scheduled.

PENDING BUSINESS

A. Memorandum EDC 06-05, from Special Projects Coordinator, Re: Mariner Park.

Recommendation: Consider Mariner Park "fishing lagoon" development in relation to other possible economic development projects before endorsing the proposal for immediate action. In addition, take into account recommendations from the Homer Parks and Recreation Commission for any development at Mariner Park.

Fiscal Note: None

Brief comment prior to motion to discuss, points noted under discussion items.

NEWBY/SCHEER - SO MOVED TO DISCUSS.

There was no discussion.

VOTE: (to discuss) YES: NON OBJECTION. UNANIMOUS CONSENT.

Motion carried.

Special Projects Coordinator Holen was commended for her work on the backup information with the comment that this was government work at its finest.

Discussion points:

Recent resolution to the ownership issue. Requested a copy of the plat, showing actual ownership of Mariner Park. Development plan in packet did not show ownership.

Start simply, move forward, not in a specific concept manner at this point and there are multi Commissions that are going to weigh in on this issue. Would it be appropriate to start with a very simple consensus among the Commissions to do something as opposed to leave it as it is?

If much time is spent discussing highest and best uses or potential road blocks to permitting or whatever, it's a waste of time if there is not consensus, at least among the Commissions, that some action/some improvement, as opposed to development, is warranted of that area.

Council accepted the broader overview and at the Council's direction the EDC is moving forward.

Don't see that the Commission needs to go through the send it around to the Commission thing.

Need to look at the highest and best use.

Parks and Recreation Commission will probably want to look at this.

EDC will look at this project from an economic stand point.

The uses and other elements need to be fleshed out relative to, say, parks and recreation uses that need to be taken into consideration as the EDC moves forward with this.

Issue to look at - is there consensus to move forward?

There are a lot of other people to be weighing in, concurrently with EDC, trying to get the answers to the many questions.

There are many key issues.

The Commission should recommend to the Council that there be a highest and best use feasibility study conducted taking in everybody. One of the key things identified is the approach to the Airport, the state needs to buy into any plan, etc.

Corp of Engineers is another entity that is very concerned. Wetlands are very sacred, having become that way over the past ten years and is becoming more sacred.

Some of these other entities' concerns can be real stumbling blocks. Anything out of the scope of the local community to control. The Commission cannot assure the outcome of the state or federal government in this regard.

Hate postponing things for studies, hate feasibility studies, but in this environment there is no choice. Nothing will move forward if elements and contingencies have not been identified.

The issue - is this Commission going to push to move things forward and if so what is the priorities of how the Commission moves it forward. There is always the ability to do nothing, which may or may not be a good idea.

Through the Special Projects Coordinator the Commission has a perfect vehicle for moving forward.

Recommend that there be a feasibility study and that grant money be sought. Hire qualified people to do the study and get it done. Those people would then have the onus on them to check with each Commission and entity for their input for the study. The least painful way to accomplish the task.

Feasibility Study is great, but given the Capital Improvement Budget and other things that are going on, this would be a waste of time to spend $50,000.00 or $100,000.00 on a feasibility study, unless a grant is received.

Staff time was commended.

Western Shorebird Habitat people were emailed about Mariner Park development. Many people feel that there has been a compact already established in terms of not a lot of further development in that particular area.

The issues are so complex such as the ownership.

Is this really a project worth spending time effort on, is it a project that will bog down the Commission?

There may be other issues that the Commission can get its teeth into and really make happen.

What would a feasibility study provide that the Dames and Moore Study did not?

The Dames and Moore Study is out of date, it is history.

People change their minds. Facts remain the same.

No conflict in the Western Fly way and doing something in that area, just have to be sure that what ever is done with the area is compatible. Someone needs to see what is compatible.

Town Square development did not require a $100,000.00 feasibility study and is every bit as complex as this in terms of how the down town core of Homer is going to develop, how it is going to be zoned, what sorts of paths are going to exist, where the public buildings are going to exist in the future. It stated a long time ago and most agree that it has been a very productive process and largely an internal process. This is a baby step in a very long process for a very valuable piece of property or points of consensus with other Commissions and possibly with the public. Without trying to get too far out in front of the public or other Commissions by recommending things, or for that matter recommending against things. Trying to collect basic foundation core goals. Maybe if every Commission came up with their 3 to 5 priorities in a very simplistic statement there might be 80% agreement on those points that would provide a basis for moving forward. In support of this concept some examples:

One Commission might say that 40% open space is needed, or

Improved landscaping or some sort of vegetation, or

A Commission might say that there needs to be produced some sort of revenue stream whether in the form of limited retail or limited RV parking or limited something.

Another Commission might say, "Leave it alone."

The Port Commission might say that the City needs to be looking ahead twenty years and at the future expansion of the Port and Harbor facilities and that the current Fishing Lagoon is going to disappear.

If the EDC can take the initial step to try to form consensus it seems that is what this Commission is all about. Hopeful the Commission can do that.

Chair Howard asked the Commission how they all feel about a letter going out to the various Commissions asking for their input relative to this subject so that it is not just simply left at the EDC's door step to decay, the EDC can gather more information to see how others feel about this as a start, maybe early - late fall have a public hearing and then move forward from that perspective. He stated that he does not think that this is something that the EDC is going to expend all of their energies on, that there are a lot of other things, but this one did hit their desk first, although does not mean it will be the first one that the EDC deals with. The EDC can get this subject into the process and have others contributing to it while the EDC is moving forward with other business.

Commission comments.

Rather EDC have some influence and impact over these issues as they evolve rather than having someone else make economic development decisions that are supposed to be the EDC role.

It is a mistake to let someone else decide what the EDC should be deciding.

More concerned with public view over other Commission's view. All input would be appreciated.

Chair Howard proposed that the EDC draft a letter to the other Commissions, basically laying out what the EDC has before them and asking for their input.

Commission comments.

Include with the letter a copy of the report attached to Memorandum EDC 06-05 and a copy of the City Council request.

Request only the top five whatevers, maybe the Commissions can agree on 1 or 2.

Ask the Commissions regarding their sacred cows, what do they not want to see there, which is almost as important as what they do want to see there.

Identify highest and best use of the Mariner Park Area.

Chair Howard inquired if Special Project Coordinator Holen had direction and she confirmed by stating that she is to draft a letter for the Chair and Commission review and comment. It will be advertised that the Commission will be reviewing this draft letter via email and that the public will have access to the letter for comment as well. Chair Howard proposed that the letter not steer thinking, just that the EDC is after the highest and best use of this valuable real estate.

Commission was advised that the City has the Tidelands Patent including the Mariner Park area and that this information will be provided to EDC by Special Projects Coordinator Holen.

Commission comments.

EDC does not want to see five pages of minutes in response from the other Commissions that reflect the comments, maybe, verbatim that the EDC then has to interpret.

Hope for, almost like the CIP list, that there be a list provided to EDC that is almost that boiled down and concrete.

Nuances will be discussed for the next five years.

Hope that this letter solicits something brief and partially concrete.

This letter does not in any way presuppose or preordain outcomes, it is a fishing expedition and not the intent to plant direction.

This is an exploratory letter soliciting honest input. Collaboration is a much better way to address certain matters.

All of the Commissions do get the CIP so that when the letter alludes to a short list like the CIP all of them will know what the EDC has in mind.

NEW BUSINESS

A. Memorandum EDC 06-06, from Special Projects Coordinator, Re: 2007-2012 Capital Improvement Planning Process and FY 2008 Legislative. 25

Recommendation: Review the current CIP carefully, make recommendations for adding, deleting, or modifying projects, and reach consensus on the "top 5" projects to promote economic development.

Fiscal Note: None

SCHEER/RILEY - SO MOVED TO BRING THIS MATTER TO THE FLOOR.

There was no discussion.

VOTE: YES: NON OBJECTION. UNANIMOUS CONSENT.

Motion carried.

Special Project Coordinator Holen elucidated the CIP plan and annual development process. She emphasized the importance of the CIP document and priorities lists for obtaining state, federal and other entity grants and funding. She also confirmed that she does not need the final list from the EDC until the end of August.

Commission members commented about reading the entire CIP document, yet not being quite ready to set priorities and that more time would be appreciated. $29 million dollars worth of priorities identified for 2006. This is sort of a balancing act on what one thinks is possible and what one wants to be possible.

Chair Howard asked each of the Commissioners to come back to the August 8th, Regular Meeting, with their top five priorities. Historically, $5 to $6 million.

In response to the Commission, Ms Holen advised that the City had received the following this past two years, that Council is not limited to a list of five projects, these are federal and state funds and that last year was a banner year: Last year $4.9 million appropriated in Homer in the CIP and $2 million for a new City Hall. Partial break down: $1.7 million ⁽¹⁾ for Deep Water Dock, and $2 million for its expansion. $130,000.00 for Animal Shelter. $1 million for the Library, $1.06 for Water Treatment Plant. Homer Hockey Association $80,000.00. Homer Senior Center $50,000.00. Not in the CIP, $10,000.00 for smolt for the Nick Dudiak Fishing Lagoon. and $28,000.00 for rescue system upgrades. She added that some of the departments received funding for vehicles. She advised that the page descriptions give the information on the full project including costs and any phases of that project previously accomplished. Some projects are partially funded by the City.

Commission comments/questions.

State road money does not come to the City, these are support items.

Projects included in the current CIP that have been completed will be deleted.

City Hall is a $10 million project.

Commission expressed consensus to bring five priorities to the table next meeting. This will be placed under Pending Business on the August 8, 2006 Regular Meeting Agenda.

B. Memorandum EDC 06-07, for Vice Chair Corey, Re: Discussion of Fred Meyers' parking Availability for Overniter RV's.

Recommendation: Move to discuss and provide recommendation and/or report to the City Council.

Fiscal Note: NA

SCHEER/NEWBY - MOVE TO BRING TO THE FLOOR.

There was no discussion.

VOTE: YES: NON OBJECTION. UNANIMOUS CONSENT.

Motion carried.

There was concurrence of the Commission that RV parking is not recommended or supported at the future Homer Fred Meyer Store, at this time, specifically since this store is being located in the Homer Town Center. There are several areas in the City Code that precludes this nor has the Planning Department or Commission expressed any desire to allow RV overnight parking at the Fred Meyer store. There was comment, not consensus, to support a recommendation to the Council to forbid RV Camping at the Fred Meyer store in the Town Center. It was stated, aesthetics aside, that RV Camping or over night parking it is not an appropriate use of Town Center.

INFORMATIONAL MATERIALS (NO ACTION MAY BE TAKEN ON THESE MATTERS, THEY MAY BE DISCUSSED ONLY.

A. Memorandum 06-112, through City Manager, Re: Proposal for Second Fishing Lagoon in the Vicinity of Mariner Park. Approved June 26, 2006 by City Council.

B. Resolution 06-73, Of the City Council Amending the Homer Economic Development Advisory Commission Bylaws. City Clerk. Adopted June 26, 2006 by City Council.

C. Bradner's Alaska Economic Report, May 31 and June 10, 2006.

D. City Council Approved June 12, 2006 Special and Regular Meeting Minutes and Unapproved June 26, 2006 Regular Meeting Minutes.

COMMENTS OF THE AUDIENCE (3 MINUTE TIME LIMIT)

Audience may comment on any matter.

Geraldine Barling, Ocean View RV Park, thanked the Commission, advising them that many were concerned about the possibility of Fred Meyer allowing RV parking and that there is an ordinance that denies this. She responded to inquiry that she is concerned about the strength of the current ordinance. She stated that she tries to keep her RV park as nice as possible and that they try their best to keep down town very busy by promoting down town. If Fred Meyer were allowed to have RV parking the town square is going to go down. She advised that she has problems at her RV park with dogs, trash, and that they pick up trash every day.

Chair Howard suggested that Ms. Barling contact the City Clerk's Office for a copy of the Ordinance. He advised that the Clerk has done an excellent job of identifying those elements of the Ordinance that apply to this topic.

Ms. Barling relayed that Adrian (last name not provided) and Homer Spit Campground people were unable to be at the Commission meeting at this time and are in concurrence with Ms. Barling and that they are concerned as is the Heritage. She responded to Commission inquiry, that they heard this matter was on the agenda and that it was terrifying. She commented about the competition that Fred Meyer is bringing, that they do not believe that Fred Meyer will be real competitive with the specialty items, but the RV camping was/is a huge concern.

Chair Howard thanked her for her comments and for her time to attend the meeting.

Donna Rae Faulkner, Ocean Drive Loop 811, thanked the Commission so much, advised that she was one of the bell ringers when she saw this ⁽²⁾ on the Commission agenda and wondered if Fred Meyer were trying to go around the Planning Commission. She expressed her great pleasure at hearing the direction of the Commission, the non support, and that this would be an economic harm for Homer. She applauded the Commission and wished them a Happy Third meeting.

COMMENTS OF THE CITY STAFF

City Clerk and/or Special Projects Coordinator.

City Clerk, with the permission of the Chair, introduced Parks and Recreation Commissioner Lou Stewart, who stated that he just came to see what the Commission was all about. In response to EDC question, he stated that he, as a Parks and Recreation Commissioner, did not object to the EDC sending a letter asking for input on Mariner Park. He advised that the Parks and Recreation Commission is going to ask to meet with the EDC regarding increasing the Parks and Rec budget. He also stated that Chair Howard's wife is a great addition to the Parks and Recreation Commission. He thanked the Commission for their work.

COMMENTS OF THE COUNCILMEMBER

Councilmember Wythe not in attendance at this meeting.

COMMENTS OF THE CHAIR

Chair Howard had no comment.

COMMENTS OF THE COMMISSION

Commissioner Riley stated that Ms. Holen did an excellent job on keying everything in and that it makes it more easy to review.

Commissioner Newby stated that she is very excited about the public attendance this evening, which tells EDC that public are really concerned about sound economic development in town and that people are reading the EDC agendas on line. She expressed appreciation for the Conoco Phillips person coming tonight and noted that this is such a complex issue, that the Commission could not take any action, but that it was very positive that Conoco Phillips sought the Commission out as a voice for economic development.

Commissioners Faulkner and Scheer had no comment,

Commissioner Murphy observed that the same Ordinances that prohibit Fred Meyer from having an RV park, had those ordinances been enacted at an earlier point these would have prohibited both the Drift Wood Inn and the Ocean View RV parks. The goal of the Ordinances was not to have RV parking anywhere down town area, any where in the Central Business District area, so because those, Drift Wood Inn and Ocean View RV, are grandfathered entities they have RV parks. Sometimes a Commissioner must balance testimony with reality.

Chair Howard interjected that with time realities change.

Commission Corey commented on the Fred Meyer store in Soldotna allowing RV parking and that she was not at all in favor of that being allowed in Homer.

Commissioner Newby showed the Commission the annual report from the USDA, that talks about their key funding projects from last year and that they are very proud of the Homer Public Library, which is their cover story. She advised that she will be providing this report to the Friends of the Library.

Commissioner Murphy noted that Homer and the Kachemak Bay area is featured in the 6 o'clock and 10 o'clock news and that Homer looked good.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to come before the Commission the Chair adjourned the meeting at 7:19.50 p.m. The next regular meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, August 8, 2006 at 6 p.m. All meetings are scheduled to be held in the Homer City Hall Cowles Council Chambers located at 491 E. Pioneer Avenue, Homer, Alaska.

______________________________________

MARY L. CALHOUN, CMC, CITY CLERK

Approved: __________________________

1. Advised on July 27, 2006 the following: Found out that the $1.7 million IS the federal money ($2 million) minus "administrative costs" which the state keeps.

2. reference to RV parking at Fred Meyer