TO: Mayor and Assembly

DATE: April 1, 1996

FROM: David R. Palmer, City and Borough Manager

SUBJECT: Manager's Report - Regular Mtg. No. 96-11


Go to the end of this document

SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS:

1. Mrs. Juneau International - Debby Hulegaard

Debby Hulegaard, Mrs. Juneau International for 1996, has requested a formal presentation of her crown and banner, as there is no local presentation provided for this ceremony. She is now qualified and will compete in the Mrs. Alaska International title in April.

The Mrs. International Pageant system recognizes married women for their accomplishments in family, professional and community stewardship, emphasizing the virtues of elegance, confidence and intelligence.

Mayor Egan will present the official crown and banner at Monday’s meeting.

CONSENT AGENDA:

A. Ordinances for Introduction:

1. Ordinance No. 96-12

Ordinance No. 96-12 makes minor changes to Title 19, Building Regulations. Several of the changes are at the suggestion of the Alaska Committee's subcommittee dealing with housing availability and the Juneau Homebuilders' Association. All the changes are in the spirit of making the permitting process less burdensome for the applicant. These changes include:

require building permit applicants to declare whether they are an ownerbuilder or to provide the name of a licensed contractor who will be doing the work. This is intended to help discourage unlicensed contractors.

allow the building official to waive some of the requirements for early start permit authorizations when there is good cause to do so.

extend the length of time that a permit may be inactive, from 180 days to one year.

allow a reduced plan review fee for duplicate designs of identical buildings and for projects which have been reviewed at the applicant's expense by a private plan reviewer.

I recommend that this ordinance be introduced and set for public hearing at the next regular meeting.

2. Ordinance No. 96-14

This ordinance authorizes the execution of the lease of approximately 23,925 square feet of CBJ tidelands adjacent to the Seadrome Building to Cultural Preservation Inc. It is added to an existing lease to make one lease encompassing a total of approximately 27,123 square feet.

The purpose of the proposed lease is to accommodate the construction of a float to moor Goldbelt's tour vessels. The first phase of development will include rehabilitation of the Seadrome Building for tour use, creating a motor coach pulloff area, landscaping and construction of the dock. Future plans could include replacement of the Seadrome Building with a hotel. A description of the project is included in your packets.

As owner of the uplands, Goldbelt has certain rights of access across CBJ tidelands. However, in order to construct improvements on the tidelands, Cultural Preservation Inc. must first obtain a lease from the CBJ. The Attorney has advised that he will inquire into any Public Trust Doctrine implications of this lease, and will report to the Assembly at the public hearing.

I recommend that this ordinance be introduced and set for public hearing at the next regular meeting.

3. Ordinance No. 96-15

The senior citizen rebate program concept was originally approved by the Assembly Finance Committee in the spring of 1994. This proposal was put on hold pending the outcome of a ballot proposition in October 1994. The issue was brought back up in the spring of 1995 as part of the FY96 budget process. The direction from the Assembly Finance Committee was to develop a program which would rebate to seniors an amount equivalent to the sales taxes paid on necessities, plus an amount for income taxes which would be incurred on the distribution. The rebate payment would be in lieu of the current senior sales tax exemption. In addition, the rebate would only apply to residents living in the community. Thus, the rebate program would narrow the current exemption, which is available to all state residents. As proposed, the senior citizen exemption card would no longer be valid after June 30, 1996. Starting July 1, 1996, qualifying senior citizens would receive a rebate equivalent to the amount of sales taxes paid on necessities plus income tax impacts. The rebates would be paid annually starting in January. The filing and payment dates were chosen as the best logistical periods for the sales tax office. In addition, the payment date of January was chosen as a halfway point in the year to balance the senior sales tax collections with remittances.

During FY95, merchants reported exempting a total of $591,700 in seniors citizens sales taxes. In addition, the CBJ exempted another $24,000 in services provided directly to seniors (wastewater, water, harbors, etc). We estimate that there are between 1,700 and 1,900 local senior citizens using the exemption cards. This amount excludes an estimated 100 senior citizens who are not residents of the CBJ also holding and using the exemption cards.

The senior citizen sales tax exemption process continues to be a significant workload and operational issue for merchants. Merchants are required to obtain the exemption information from the senior at the point of sale, summarize the data and report it on their quarterly filings. Last year we estimated that there were 500,000 to 600,000 senior citizen exemption transactions each year. In addition, we continue to receive comments and questions regarding the use and what appears to be misuse of the exemption card. There is no question that some merchants monitor the application of the exemption closer than others.

We have calculated the rebate on necessities and recommend an amount of $230 plus an additional $40 to compensate for the federal income tax impacts. Depending on the number of seniors who apply for the program, we estimate the amount necessary to fully fund the rebate program is between $459,000 and $513,000.

The Human Resources Committee at its meeting of March 21 reviewed this resolution and recommended that it be adopted by the Assembly.

The Assembly Finance Committee approved this ordinance and recommended that it be introduced at tonight’s meeting. I recommend that this ordinance be introduced and set for public hearing at the next regular meeting.

4. Ordinance No. 95-11 (AM)

This ordinance appropriates $125,000 to the Senior Citizen Support Services Inc. to meet necessary expenses in the construction of the Fireweed Place Senior Housing Project. The monies supplement a $620,000 grant made in November, 1992 for construction of the project.

The Assembly Committee of the Whole directed staff to negotiate an additional grant agreement with SCSSI, Inc. at its July 31, 1995 meeting, with funding to come from the Lands Fund.

The amendment acknowledges that the cost of land acquisition and the removal of existing structures (the Russell and Knight apartments) cost more than initially anticipated by either party. Additionally, the grant amendment will settle all outstanding disputes between the parties. Your packet also contains information about expected occupancy rates.

After this ordinance is adopted, the Land Fund Balance will be $669,393.

I recommend that this ordinance be introduced and set for public hearing at the next regular meeting.

5. Ordinance No. 95-11 (AN)

This ordinance will appropriate $40,000 from the State to the CBJ for a revegetation project at Twin Lakes. The State Department of Transportation & Public Facilities has offered to underwrite a Parks & Recreation Department attempt to get the plants to grow. No additional expenditure of CBJ funds is needed. A breakdown of the work to be done is included in your packet.

I recommend that this ordinance be introduced and set for public hearing at the next regular meeting.

6. Ordinance No. 95-11 (AO)

This ordinance will appropriate $3,200 to provide for Columbia Lot parking enforcement; to be recovered from parking citation fees. 19 spaces will be available for 30-minute parking for commercial and non-commercial vehicle. Longer term parking will be available 1/10th of a mile away on the lot provide by the Mt. Roberts Development Corporation. Enforcement of the time restriction will be provided at times when a ship is at the Cruiseship Terminal or litering at the Intermediate Vessel Float. The cost of enforcement will be included in the FY97 budget through October; it is anticipated that this area will be under the management of the Docks & Harbors Department beginning in November, 1996.

I recommend that this ordinance be introduced and set for public hearing at the next regular meeting.

7. Ordinance No. 95-11 (AP)

This appropriation request of $2,200 is to support a fee increase for admission to the City Museum. The increase is from $1.00 to $2.00 per person, effective May 1, 1996. The additional revenues will extend current hours at the museum, to match the State museum hours. The new hours would be 9:00am-6:00pm, Monday through Friday, and 10:00am to 6:00pm on Saturday and Sunday (hours were 9:00am to 5:00pm last year, Monday through Friday, and 10:00am to 5:00pm Saturday and Sunday). This change has been incorporated into the FY97 budget; this request is to increase the FY96 budget so that fees charged and staff support provided are consistent through the tour season. Revenues are expected to increase by $2,200 between May 1 and June 30, 1996 through this appropriation, with offsetting costs for staff support.

I recommend that this ordinance be introduced and set for public hearing at the next regular meeting.

8. Ordinance No. 95-11 (AQ)

This ordinance would appropriate $39,500 to provide increased support to CDD staff during the building season. This increase will: extend a seasonal inspector through the end of this fiscal year; add one additional intern; increase contractual services for consulting engineers/inspectors, and offer code training to allow private individuals to review plans. The funding source is permit revenues.

I recommend that this ordinance be introduced and set for public hearing at the next regular meeting.

9. Ordinance No. 95-11 (AR)

This appropriation would increase the FY96 Mental Health Division budget by $60,000 to provide services to seriously emotionally disturbed youth. Funding for this increase will be provided from State Medicaid revenues; no City general funds are requested. The increase will be used for contracts with foster care homes, summer RALLY costs, individualized assistance workers, and other summer activities.

These summer activities will be an extension of the ACCESS program which provided services to youth during the school year. The school district, teachers, and parents supported this program as it provided support to seriously emotionally disturbed youth in the school and after school settings. This increase will allow services to continue beyond the end of the school year in June.

I recommend that this ordinance be introduced and set for public hearing at the next regular meeting.

10. Ordinance No. 95-11 (AS)

This ordinance would appropriate $310,000 in grants from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT/PF) for acquisition of a replacement urea truck and mixing and holding tanks.

The total project cost is $320,000. FAA is funding the project at $300,000 (93.75% of total project cost); DOT/PF is funding the project at $10,000 (3.125% of total project cost); and the CBJ is providing a match of $10,000 (3.125% of total project cost). This ordinance appropriates the FAA and DOT/PF funds.

The CBJ match is Alaska Department of Administration (DOA) Grant No. 8/94-014. A transfer request will be prepared for the meeting of April 15, 1996 to transfer the DOA funds into the project.

I recommend that this ordinance is introduced and set for public hearing at the next regular meeting.

B. Resolutions:

1. Resolution No. 1809 This resolution expresses the Assembly’s support for state legislation that would increase taxes on alcohol and tobacco. The Social Services Advisory Board supports this legislation because the increased taxation would raise revenue and discourage use.

The Human Resources Committee at its meeting of March 21 reviewed this resolution and recommended that it be adopted by the Assembly.

I recommend that this resolution be adopted.

2. Resolution No. 1810

This resolution expresses the Assembly's support for Senate Bill 282, the "Managed Care Bill of Rights" presently pending before the Alaska Legislature. This resolution was recommended by the Social Services Advisory Board at its meeting of November 2, and the Assembly Human Resources Committee at its meeting of March 21.

The Human Resources Committee at its meeting of March 21 reviewed this resolution and recommended that it be adopted by the Assembly.

I recommend that this resolution be adopted.

3. Resolution No. 1812

This resolution establishes a port dues rate of 20¢ per registered net ton, and repeals past port and harbor fee resolutions which are inconsistent with the new Docks and Harbors Board fee authority.

CBJ 85.02.105 provides that the Docks and Harbors Board may change the port dues base rate provided that the change does not become effective until confirmed by resolution by the Assembly. The Docks & Harbors Board at its meeting of February 1, 1996, proposed that the port dues be established at a base rate of 21¢ per registered net ton. The Assembly Finance Committee at its meeting of March 20, 1996, reviewed the Board's proposal and recommended to the Assembly that the port dues be established at a base rate of 20¢ per registered net ton.

The Docks and Harbors Board at its meeting of March 28 established fees and charges for a variety of other port and harbor services. It is not necessary for the Assembly to review these actions. However, Resolutions 1753 and 1754, which are products of the old system for setting port and harbor fees, should be repealed to make room for the new method of setting fees through the Board.

I recommend that this resolution be adopted.

C. Bid Awards:

1. Bid No. E96-314: Seawalk Improvements - Tram to IVF

Bids were opened on the subject project on March 26, 1996. The bid protest period expired at 4:30pm on March 27, 1996. Results of the bid opening are as follows:

	             RESPONSIVE			       TOTAL BID
                        Alaska Stone & Concrete	        $96,975.00

			Glacier State Contractors, Inc.	$103,855.00

			Arete Construction Corporation	$118,300.00

			Channel Construction, Inc.	$121,122.20

			Duran Construction Company	$201,247.50



			Engineer’s Estimate	       $126,240.00

The project involves saw-cutting and removing existing temporary asphalt pavement sidewalk; excavation of existing frost-susceptible material; preparation of subbase, import and compaction of non-frost-susceptible fill; bedding and base course material; construction of approximately 880 square yards of concrete sidewalk/plaza paving; approximately 420 linear feet of vertical concrete curbing planters; reinstallation of timber and steel pipe handrails; minor storm drain piping; electrical and telephone conduits for future power and telephone use; import and placement of topsoil and coordination and scheduling of the WORK under this Contract with the site improvements being done by private utilities and the Mt. Roberts Development Corporation. The funding source for this project is 1990-1991 General Obligation (Port) Bonds.

I recommend award of this project to Alaska Stone & Concrete in the amount bid, for a total award of $96,975.00.

2. Contract No. SD96-281: Juneau Douglas High School Roof Repair

Bids were opened on the subject project on March 6, 1996. The bid protest period expired at 4:30pm on March 8, 1996. Results of that bid opening are as follows:

                      RESPONSIVE	TOTAL BID
                        PEDCO, Inc.	        $87,000 

			Coogan Construction	103,971

			Silverbow Construction	103,517

			Industrial Roofing	 92,280

			Access Roofing	138,900

			A & A Roofing Co.	116,110



			Engineer’s Estimate       $117,000

This project consists of replacement of approximately 6,500 square feet of existing roof on the Juneau Douglas High School over the lower area between the auditorium and the two gymnasiums, including miscellaneous related work. The funding sources for this project include: 1989 School Bond; DOE Tora #46-94; 1994 GO Bonds.

On March 14, 1996 the Juneau School District Facilities recommended award of this project to Pedco, Inc. in the amount bid; the School Board approved the Facilities Committee recommendation on March 19, 1996.

I recommend that this bid be awarded to Pedco, Inc. in the amount bid, for a total award of $87,000.

3. Contract No. SD96-282: Juneau Douglas High School Wall Repair

Bids were opened on the subject project on March 6, 1996. The bid protest period expired at 4:30pm on March 8, 1996. Results of that bid opening are as follows:

                       RESPONSIVE	TOTAL BID


			PIONEER Masonry	       $146,000 

			RMC, Inc.	        162,000

			Martin Construction	154,295

			

			Engineer’s Estimate	$131,000



This project consists of replacement and repair to portions of the exterior wall assembly with an existing exterior insulation and finish system, including partial demolition, reconstruction, patching, refinishing, and miscellaneous related work. The funding sources for this project include: DOE Tora #2-94; 1994 GO Bonds.

On March 14, 1996 the Juneau School District Facilities recommended award of this project to Pioneer Masonry in the amount bid; the School Board approved the Facilities Committee recommendation on March 19, 1996. I recommend that this bid be awarded to Pioneer Masonry in the amount bid, for a total award of $146,000.

D. Transfer Request:

1. Transfer No. T-594

This transfer of $84,000 will permit the reconstruction of a bin wall on upper Evergreen Avenue as a part of the Nelson/5th Street project now out to bid. The upper Evergreen bin wall is in a state of catastrophic failure and must be replaced as soon as possible to avoid collapse, the failure of the roadway and damage to private property.

CIP R412-34 Nowell Avenue will be closed after encumbrance liquidation and administrative charges are posted to the project. After the transfer is approved the funds available balances, budgets, and status for the projects will be as follows:



Transfer Status/      Unobligated	Unobligated	Total Project

Project Number/      Funds Available	Funds Available Budget

Project Name	      Prior to Transfer	After Transfer	After Transfer      Status

Transferred from:


R412-34/

Nowell Avenue

Reconstruction	     $ 34,028		$  4,028	 $800,000         closing after 

                                                                        encumbrance 

                                                                        liquidation    



R412-47/

Retaining Wall

Reconstruction	      $ 54,360		$    360	 $   22,800         on-going



Transferred to:

R412-41/

Nelson/5th St.

Reconstruction	       $670,755		$754,754	$834,000          on-going 

I recommend that this transfer be approved.

ORDINANCES FOR PUBLIC HEARING:

1. Ordinance No. 95-11 (AK)

This action will appropriate $600,000 from the Unappropriated Water Fund to replace water lines on Aspen Avenue and Pinewood Drive. This appropriation was approved by the Public Works & Facilities Committee at its March 13 meeting.

This water line serves approximately 75 residences. It is cement-asbestos pipe installed by the subdivision developer in 1960. The line is only buried 3 to 5 feet deep. This winter 40% of the customers on this line had frozen water pipes and several fire hydrants were frozen. Replacement of this line is included in the Water/Sewer Master Plan.

I recommend that this ordinance be adopted.

2. Ordinance No. 95-11 (AL)

The Assembly Strategic Policy Committee (ASPC) is moving ahead with the CBJ’s community visioning project. In a meeting on March 7, 1996 the Committee reviewed a number of contract and funding options. The Committee approved a plan to move ahead with a recommendation to fund the project at $70,000. This was previously reviewed and approved at this amount by the Assembly Finance Committee. The Mayor’s and Assembly Budget currently contains $30,000 for this project. The Committee approved a motion to present to the Assembly a $40,000 appropriation which would bring the approved budget up to the required $70,000. The Committee also recommended the unappropriated General Areawide Fund Balance as the source of funding for the appropriation.

I recommend that this ordinance be adopted.

3. Ordinance No. 96-10

This ordinance authorized the issuance of $300,000 of the $4,300,000 Riverbend School General Obligation (GO) Bond issue approved by voters in the October 1994 election. The issuance of these bonds have been timed to meet the DOE matching requirements and the cash flow needs of the project. This issue will be the CBJ’s first over the counter bond issue (OTC).

To date we have received about 400 individual responses from residents indicating they might be interested in purchasing over-the-counter bonds.

We will be offering these bonds for sale at City Hall to local residents in $1,000 increments. The bonds will be issued in serial with maturities of 1 to 10 years. Orders for the bonds will be taken by Finance staff and forwarded on to our bond registrar for final management.

There are some caveats regarding this issuance. First, it is important that all of the bonds are sold to properly meet the match funding requirements. Since we do not know the amount of bonds which could be sold locally, we are taking a conservative position by electing to issue a fairly small amount of OTC bonds. Second, there is no secondary market for these bonds, investors may find it cumbersome to sell their bonds, if the need arises.

Using this week’s market rates as an example, we would issue these tax exempt bonds from a low of 4.5% for the 1 year maturities to a high of 5.5% for the 10 year maturities. The actual bond interest rate will be set by our financial advisor, Seattle Northwest Securities, the day before the bond sale. The interest earned from these bonds is exempt from federal income tax.

This ordinance will have economic impacts as indicated in the Economic Impact Note included in your packet. I recommend that this ordinance be adopted.

4. Ordinance No. 96-11

This ordinance authorized the issuance of $4,000,000 of the $4,300,000 Riverbend School General Obligation (GO) Bond issue approved by voters in the October 1994 election. The issuance of these bonds have been timed to meet the DOE matching requirements and the cash flow needs of the project. This issue will include refunding of $11,655,000 of existing callable debt.

This ordinance would allow a negotiated sale for both the $4,000,000 initial issue and the refunding bonds with Prudential Securities. The refunding issue, depending on the market at the time of issuance, is projected to reduce future debt service (in current dollars) by more than $300,000. In addition by combining the new issue with the refunding issue, our financial advisor, Seattle Northwest Securities, is projecting a net benefit of approximately $40,000.

It should be noted that the final determination to proceed with the issuance of the refunding bonds will be dependent on the market conditions at the time of the sale.

I recommend that this ordinance be adopted.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

1. Ordinance No. 96-07

This ordinance creates LID No. 82 for constructing a sewer system serving Mendenhall Loop Road, from Jo Anne Way to Lee Street, and serving Windfall Avenue, Auke Street, Lake Shore Drive, Auke Lane, Auke Kwaan Way and Jo Anne Way.

Since the introduction of this ordinance on February 12, 1996, notices were published in the newspaper and sent to residents in the LID area so that they would be aware that they now have the opportunity to make their views known to the Assembly.

Engineering Director Joe Buck has provided a memo in y our packets addressing concerns raised at the previous Assembly meeting. Staff recommendation is to make no changes in the LID boundary. We will continue to negotiate with the affected property owners and if property owners are willing to pay for improvements that benefit their properties, we can adjust the assessment accordingly.

I recommend that the Assembly adopt Ordinance No. 9607.

NEW BUSINESS:

1. Appeal of the Manager’s Denial of a Protest to the Award of Bid No. 96-213 for Medical and Non-Medical Gases This matter comes to the Assembly as an appeal of the Manager’s denial of a protest to the proposed award of Bid 96213 for Medical and NonMedical Gases. T&S Welding protested the proposed award of this contract to the apparent low bidder, Simpco, Inc. The Manager denied the protest on December 28, 1995, and directed the purchasing division to award the contract to Simpco. On January 18, 1996, T&S filed an appeal of that decision with the City Clerk. The Manager, with the concurrence of the City Attorney has determined that this appeal is without factual basis, and thus it should proceed directly to the Assembly without a hearing by the Bidding Review Board, as provided in CBJ 53.50.062(h):

Appeal of Action by Manager. A protestor aggrieved by the manager’s decision pursuant to subsection (g) of this section, may appeal. The appeal protest shall be heard by the bidding review board unless the manager, with the concurrence of the city attorney, finds that the appeal is frivolous, interposed for the sole purpose of delay, or without factual or legal basis, in which case the matter shall be heard by the assembly pursuant to CBJ 01.50.

Your packet includes a copy of the Notice of Appeal and the Statement of Facts and Law and the Manager’s March 28 Findings that the protest is without a factual basis.

The Assembly is the appeal agency for this appeal, and its actions throughout the appeal process are governed by CBJ 01.50, the Appellate Code. The Code requires that upon receiving an appeal, the Assembly, must first decide whether to accept or reject it. The standards applicable to this decision are set out at CBJ 01.50.030(e):

(e) Action by Appeal Agency Upon Receipt of a Notice of Appeal.

(l) Within thirty days of receipt of a notice of appeal by the appeal agency, the appeal agency shall notify the appellant of the acceptance or rejection of the appeal and, if rejected, the reasons for the rejection.

(2) The notice of appeal shall be liberally construed in order to preserve the rights of the appellant. The appeal agency may reject the appeal for failure to comply with these rules or if the notice of appeal does not state grounds upon which any of the relief requested may be granted.

You will note that the Assembly may reject the appeal if it does not state grounds upon which relief may be granted. This is not the same standard applied by the Manager in his March 28 findings: the Manager was free to make a judgment about the weight of the evidence supporting the allegations of the protestor. At this point in the appeal process, the Assembly must assume the protestor’s allegations to be true, and may reject the appeal only if those assumptions would not support the relief requested by the protestor.

In this case, the protestor has alleged that the apparent low bidder is not qualified to perform the work, and its bid should be rejected. The request for bids specified that, “Each bidder shall be skilled and regularly engaged in the general class or type of work called for under the contract.” The Assembly should consider these factors in making its decision on whether to accept the appeal, keeping in mind the Appellate Code requirement that “The notice of appeal shall be liberally construed in order to preserve the rights of the appellant.”

T&S Welding and Simpco have been advised that this matter is before the Assembly. The Manager does not object to Assembly consideration of the appeal, but preserves his right to object to consideration of particular issues at a hearing, should the Assembly accept the appeal.

Assistant City and Borough Attorney Barbara Craver has advised the Manager regarding this matter, and may appear in the appeal. The City and Borough Attorney can act as the Assembly’s legal advisor but will not participate in deliberations.

The following procedural issues should be decided:

1. Will the Assembly accept the appeal?

2. Will the Assembly hear the appeals itself or assign to a hearing officer? 3. If the Assembly hears the appeal itself, will the Mayor preside, or will he designate a member as presiding officer?

This matter is before the Assembly sitting in its quasi-judicial capacity. Accordingly, members should avoid discussing the case outside the hearing process. With respect to this issue, the Appellate Code provides as follows:

CBJ 01.50.230 IMPARTIALITY. The functions of hearing officers and those appeal agency members participating in decisions shall be conducted in an impartial manner with due regard for the rights of all parties and the facts and the law, and consistent with the orderly and prompt dispatch of proceedings. Hearing officers and appeal agency members, except to the extent required for the disposition of ex parte matters authorized by law, shall not engage in interviews concerning the appeal with, or receive evidence or argument on the appeal from, a party, directly or indirectly, except upon opportunity for all other parties to be present. Copies of all communications with a hearing officer or appeal agency member concerning the appeal shall be served upon all parties.

Because this is an appeal, I have no recommendation on whether or how the Assembly should hear the appeal. After the Assembly has made its decisions on these issues, the Clerk will contact the parties and the presiding or hearing officer to notify them of the Assembly’s decision and to arrange for a pre-hearing conference or other proceedings.

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS:

A. Manager's Report - Action Item:

B. Manager's Report - Information Item:

C. Attorney's Report:

DRP:dmh Manager’s Report - Regular Mtg. No. 96-11 April 1, 1996


Return to List of Agendas
Return to the Capital City Home Page

Our URL is www.juneau.lib.ak.us

Last revised on 1/3/97 - tlo