September 09, 2022 1:30 PM - 3:30 PM
Yeah. That, that would be helpful if I'm looking at the, you know, the February plan and, and again, it goes back to the reason that we've been asking for it in this, I'm sorry, in this manner is because it's not, it's not a graph, it's not a chart. It's not something you have to connect. It's very simple white paper that explains some assumptions and financial changes. And, and there's just some major things that we looked at in February that are just not occurring anymore. So that was gonna be just really helpful for us to look at. Okay.
Yeah. I just have a comment. The I've read through all of these remarks and then I've kind of tried to best I can to take the two pieces of paper and correlate them together. What leads me to is that the white paper pretty much covers what was in the original modernization plan. I think that that before we can actually start making real strong suggestions in recommendations, in reference to the short term plan, we're gonna have to get to that, the meeting where we come up with our own criteria that we're talking about doing at the, in, in person meeting. So I appreciate fact the spreadsheet, which leads me between the two documents that helps a lot. Thanks.
Yeah. Thank you. And that's an excellent comment. Cause I think that highlights where these documents do differ in that some of the things that are in the modernization plan do require that stated analysis. And they're, they're more complex such as retiring vessels or what the, how the operating budget or service levels maybe. And those are things which we are addressing and you'll be a part of those conversations in the long range plans. But a lot of these things are definitely perfect for the short range plan, which is what we have pulled out. And some of those things include capital projects that are being that are in the step. And so you can look at, in assumptions for this analysis on the left hand side, there's a number four and five are good. Examples. Number four is crew quarters would be added to both last class varies.
And then number five is that the Aurora would be retired and it would eliminate the need for a 25 million engine repower federal project. So what we've done in the short range plan is take that and we already know that the Hubbard is, you know, nearing its eventual completion and has wena has been added into the step. And so if you look at the short range plan in the, the spreadsheet, I, I kind of just referenced the page that it's on, but you can go here and find information about this project as we know it today. So this will have the step ID, if it's in the steps, the scope for the project, the costs for design, the costs for construction, the schedule design and schedule for construction. So it gives you this up to date information about where the project is, and in a short range plan, this is information that's really helpful to us as an agency with what we have to be planning for and, and what we, what we need to do on the Aurora and the Conti retiring.
Okay. Are folks ready to move on to the last item today? Starting heads? Yeah. Long range plan framework. And this is something we've talked about multiple times, and it sounds, you know, as if it's the board would really prefer to sit together as much as possible in person meeting with a white board to, for these elements. But my question for the board members are Paul has supplied some elements. He thinks are important for a long range plan. And he also showed how some short term strategies might fit under those. I did that just, just to show how that could work, how to connect them, but I haven't received anything else from any other board members on objectives, priorities and objectives for a long range plan that this board is going to be looking for. As we go through this, this much longer planning process that a OTPs is doing.
I think I also would've liked to ask, to get some input back on mission and vision. Alan had put in a vision that he thought was good. I used the Southeast conference corn plan from 2017 on a mission, pulled some values, put safety at the top customers and staff reliability and service and high customer satisfaction, support, and respect for employees, accountability in our business decisions and actions, sustainable and strategic financial planning and continuous system improvement and innovation. So board, you need to tell me, what do you wanna, what, what would you like to do with this agenda item one at,
I would just encourage all board members to reflect on these proposed statements and bring those to our in person meeting. I think it's gonna be difficult to finalize this in this, in this form, this kind of format, but I appreciate the work you guys have done to bring that together and hopefully we can finalize it at our in-person meeting. That's my recommendation. Thank you.
We're gonna do that. Then we should, you know, again, have the whiteboards and get 'em listed up there and everybody can come to a decision on what is the priorities for this board and what the long term plan should look like. And I think it could go under headings. You started with the long LRP modernized downsized fleet. I think it, when we're in, in our, per in the meeting, we can come up with a heading there, for example, modern, efficient fleet. And then from underneath that we base where we want, see that go, same thing with support served. We could, you know, have a, a realistic number of sailings and come up with those numbers that are the range of the numbers anyway, so that we can have that kind of a conversation. When we get down to things like the fair box revenues, we need to have a conversation about what we would like to see in the long term plan and the short term plan as to where we want to go with those. We can't just take what it is currently today and say, okay, well this is our baseline. We've gotta come up with something that has more realistic numbers back from when, from the high to the low, and then try to come to where we want to be in the long term, rather than just because the state resources. So I think those are the kind of things that we could sit down and have the in person conversation and start marking this up on a board, come up with with our goals. Thank you.
It gets complicated. More different types of vessels have clearly the Toya makes sense. It's a one off it's purpose built vessel for a particular port and round, but the, some, the lesser vessel has a lot of flexibility, I think. And maybe another type that maybe a smaller type vessel deals with passengers only, but those are things I think we can look at that haven't been really looked at way. I look at the LRPs and SRPs, a lot of mechanics about equipment stuff and replacement and servicing, et cetera, but maybe these other areas aren't being looked at, I haven't seen much discussion on that, made that thing, that we comparably contribute to something, a different eyeballs, different glasses, and looked at these aspects of it for us where the current, but what are the future needs of these communities and how, and how do we make sure we can fulfill those needs with what kind of transportation piece of equipment that we have to use for them. And with some flexibility, as far as, you know, a couple classes of vessels that can fit different needs, but not a 12 different types of vessels, which I think we had at one point almost each one unique to itself. But, but I mean the vision statements, all they're very, they're fine. The mother and apple pie, you can't argue with them. They all make good sense. It's just the mechanics of it. You drill down. Okay. What does that really look like? That's my 2 cents on it.
Thanks. Do any board members have any I ideas of anything specific that they'd like to see at their in person meeting and, or do we wanna just start with, with basically what we have and just work from there? And like Allen said, we, we pick the headers and kind of start to fill them in utilizing what we have been given on the short term plan that has been put together and go from there. I think that sounds like what we're going to be doing. And Juana has her hand up
Shirley. I am, I'm hopeful that I know we might be spending some money for the travel budget, but I'm hopeful that we could have a third party neutral facilitator for this process. It wouldn't have to, to cost very, very much, but I just feel that for all of us to fully participate and to have a, a good process that having a third party neutral facilitator would be really advisable for, for this meeting.
No, I'm just talking about somebody who will take the day and the agenda and walk us through it and control the flow of things so that we get to the work that we plan to do, and that, you know, they'll work with you and, and, and Catherine to, to make sure you're, you know, hitting out we're hitting on all of the points, but they'll also then be re responsible for some documentation and follow through on the meeting. That that would be my hope of a relatively narrow scope of work. But somebody that I think will help all of us be able as board members to on the questions, take hopefully a little bit of pressure off of you and Catherine during the flow of these meetings, but bring, bring the conversation and the, the, the input to a productive work product at the, at the end of the process.
Well, it definitely sounds like it would be, need to be somebody who has a background in strategic planning so that they can stay separated from the issue and just help walk the board through how you, how you create this framework, how you put these ideas down and how they match, you know, what is your goal and how do you intend to get to that goal? I know four acre does that. I know bill Dan, does that other folks do that? I don't think they're generally inexpensive per day, but probably doable. Does the rest of the board want to do something of that? Or do you want to work through this ourselves? What do you wanna do? Thumbs up.
I, I think the reason was that, and maybe Tara could jump in here, but I'm not sure we're very clear yet on where the board would like to have the meeting hosted. So perhaps that's a topic of the conversation and then on secondly. Yeah, absolutely. We can start processing the paperwork. Would it would for a facilitator for that meeting. Thank you.
Right now? I'm up in the air on that, as you know, I, I got hit with COVID earlier this summer and I seem to be having some issues with long, long COVID fatigue and temporary headaches through the day. So I'm not so sure a lot of travel would be a good idea at this time. Plus the idea of flying in and out of Pelican in October is also an issue I'd kinda like to re I'd be a definite maybe, but is that the fair?
Here. Okay. And we'll just wait to hear from captain Hillard, he should be off, off the ship. He should, maybe he'll be able to make it there. Will we be able to have, it'd be really helpful to have a couple people from AMHS like we did in our first in person meeting to talk to us. So I'd like, I'd like for staff to think about, to look at possibility of bringing maybe not captain FK. I know, I know he's, he's got travel. What, you know, concerns, self concerns. But if Matt McLaren, the business manager and possibly Carrie felt because they can answer a lot of the really in depth, old hanging around questions we've had for a long time in terms of long range planning. Cause they've been looking at this for about 10 years. So I would to ask if they could do that.
Okay. I will take you your suggestion. Thank you captain. Sure. So as we close up here, CA oh, Cynthia says she can check the availability at their boardroom for the meeting. That would be, that would be great. Cynthia. That's a great boardroom. That would be helpful. And that
Yeah, I just wanted to say that I was monitoring Facebook live while we were meeting as well. And there's been some healthy commenting there. I just want folks to know that we are watching that and seeing that and D O T folks will be responding to it. And you know, some of it pertinent to this meeting today, but a lot of it just general operating issues
Yeah. Thank you. My, my comment that deals with the public comments, I'm when we have a meeting like this, we have a lot of conversations back and forth and we come close to decisions and the people have an opportunity to listen to us, but they don't have time to, or they don't have the opportunity to comment on our comments because they're doing it in the beginning of the meeting. Hopefully we'll get a system or change the system a little bit on public comments that we can get better participation, but I'm interested in having them comment on our comments during the meeting so we can get a better feedback.
Yeah, I agree. Yeah. I would agree. That's that's frustrating. And, and I do get texts and emails during the meetings and I try to pay attention to 'em, but I have to pay attention at the meeting too. And they're all just saying, I can't hear, I can't hear them 10 minutes later, they say, oh, I can hear. We'll see. But, and, and we'll make that a priority for the in-person meeting on October 14th that we have a good system and a good set of microphones around so people can hear. Thank you. Thanks, Ellen. Okay. Without further ado, thank you everybody for participating. And can I have a motion to adjourn our meeting? Hello,
Questions, and if board members have questions, I'll give you each a follow-up or two, if nobody else's hand is up, if somebody else's hand is up, you'll get two follow-ups that I'm gonna go to another board member. And I can always come back to you when all this is said and done, but let's let captains get through each update, and then we can ask questions.
You know what I was thinking I would do is, of course, you know, you've got the report well, and it might take me a while to get through every single one of them. But what I tried to do is pick out some of the high points and maybe I could just discuss and review those. I'll go down through those. I know there's a couple, you know, bigger ones that you got questions on, and I think I know what they are. We can get to that. And then if there's, you know, other questions besides, you know, some of the higher, you know, you know, level type things that I've got laid out here, then, you know, I'd be happy to talk about that. So, you know, let me just start in its, and it's at the beginning of the list is our crewing situation.
It's a struggle and it's a worldwide problem. It's a nationwide problem, but we are gaining ground we're right at, since we started the program a year ago, June. So we're into it for about about 15 months now we're right at we're at, at about a hundred new entry-level, you know, passenger services positions and from, from there, and we've probably lost about 20 of those, we think. So we're probably net plus 80, which is, which is good. We've got another audio 50 in the queue that will work into onboarding. Of course, it's a process we got to get them hired and onboarded. We have to get them trained as best we can. It's very challenging when we're trying to bring one or two or three out at a time, as opposed to like we used to do in the old days, get a hundred of them and have them trained in a month, all in one big class.
we are gaining ground, within the last probably eight weeks or so we brought on four new abs, which is huge. It's very difficult to find abs oils and wipers. That's really what the head hunters are going after, but we've gotten, we've got four. And so we're being hopeful. We can, we, we can grab some more, we're working very closely, and continue to work with UAS and AEC. The head hunters are actually going to AEC within the next week to talk to AEC and to physically meet with two classes that graduate in November with classes of abs and oils. And we're gonna try to see if we can get some of those. So they're very good at that. They, they, they know what our sales pitch is and they're physically gonna go there and, and represent us. And of course, that's what we're paying them to do.
Can you hear me now? I'll try to talk a little louder. My speaker's up full speed here and it's coming out of a laptop, so that's better. Is that better? Okay. That's right. Yeah. So, so I don't, you know, so yeah. I don't know if you know when that heard, but, but we have outsourced in the fast pet and that's always, and that may something, we just hold back on a little bit and see if that's maybe a way we want to go, but we've got to concentrate on Pelican and Cordova. I can't get an ACF in the wintertime in prince William sound until we get some more mooring, and dolphin arrangements change made in Cordova. We have, we just know it's not safe. So, you know, there's a lot of things going on with, with, with, with, with the terminals we've got, we've still got work in bay, we're finishing up, we're gonna finish up, you know, a project at birth three.
We're gonna need that birth to be totally clear. So I'm working through agreements with our unions, cause our union's gonna have to handle the ifa boat at the main birth. And we're gonna work with the ifa to come to an agreement as to how we're gonna, how we're gonna arrange that. Well, we'll also have the Letoya operate out of south birth, the birth closest to the shipyard. So there's a lot of, a lot of stuff in, out in the terms, but there's a lot of deferred maintenance stuff that maintenance work just in general, that I'm working with other engineers, they, to be sure that we get pushing ahead in that direction, over the next, over the next year or so. The next one is the Columbia CCP. I know it was one of the big ones.
It's an estimated norm. Now, normally we don't know vigor is trying very hard to cut down considerably on that timeframe. So I'll know more in the next few weeks because we're gonna have to work through some sort of a, an extension-type request. So it's, that was just a very 30,000 foot, you know, type figure that got put out a few months ago. And they're trying to find some way to speed that up as far as potentially other parts and pieces that would suffice for what was maybe gonna go into the vote. We're just not true. I should know more in a few weeks' form and we want to get that boat done as soon as possible. It will be very complete within the next few weeks. It's just, it's just, it's just the HC system
we've actually, for months now, quite a few months have been long, you know, then pre-ordering parts for the upcoming shipyard, this winter parts that we, that we know are gonna be tough to get. We've been, we, we we've had these parts and pieces that we know we're gonna need on order to months. So we don't lose any time this winter we're struggling right now with the finish stabilization system replacement parts on the Kennecott, very long lead on most parts. We, it may be to a point where when Abel fixes the fins this winter, it may be the following winter because we just can't get the parts. So supply chain is still coming off of, COVID a very tough situation, but we've been advanced ordering a lot of shipyard, parts, and pieces that we know we're gonna need months and months and months ago. So, but yeah, the Tazlina, we would address that at the time and would have enough time through the, you know, to a 10 or 11 month construction period too, you know, get those parts ordered, to make sure they don't know. So. Yep.
Yeah, we we're, we're, we're racing now to get our winter schedule out, you know, by the middle of next week. And the direction from my bosses is we're going to get right on summer and work on that. So yeah, that would be that, that would be a possibility it's, it's a, it's a numbers game, you know, I, you know, we're trying hard to get more crew and if we got the team, there's, there's a lot more we can do cause we can afford to run nine chips, We're going to try, you know, hopefully, to run the Lina for a little bit, this winter too, it's all, it's a numbers game pro. And you know, as I say, as soon as we get this winter schedule out, my audit's already to get summer out as quickly as possible. So, and it's a numbers game, but yeah, that ship would be ready, and she ca n run between waiting to go to that shipyard to get that new system. Yes.
Sure. So the next one, I might as well, that was one of the big ones, and I know the Matanuska. And, I know that and I, and I, I, I see the questions, I hear the questions and, and I, I, you know, we've got thoughts on that. Austin has thoughts on that. I know you guys have ideas, Paul and captain Hillard have ideas, and what I think. And I've talked that length within the last day with, with our Marine engineering manager. I I'm, I'm, I'm wondering if I might suggest that Paul and, and captain Hilliard meet with him, you know, we can, I believe you have up to three people meeting aside to talk about, you know, down into the, you know, deck plates of engineering diagrams or drawings and, and the wise and where fors of what we're thinking about doing, and maybe try to talk it out and see where that goes and then go from there.
I don't know whether it's something that would be good for us to be debating, you know, down into engineering, to sign and, and, and philosophy. And, and, you know, we've got a, I mean, we, we, we put a lot of our stock in Boston and, and they've just written a paper again. I mean, in June, they, they wrote an article, and they've got their thoughts on it and, you know, they're pretty educated, but, you know, we're willing, we we're ready to, you know, and, and I, I understand Paul's questions, but I do Paul as an engineer, I, I get it. And our engineering manager is more than willing to sit down and spend some time with them. And then we go from there; that's what I'd recommend.
Thanks, captain. And, and I think it's more, you know, I know that they have both asked specific questions about that. Yep. And I think it comes down to how the decision was made. Cause you know, when we were first talking about this back in spring, there were a lot of questions about what, what Matt Luka, you know, really needed to provide and where we're going to be in prince Rupert, and, you know, one of the assumptions being that well, it was an assumption, a big concern is that the direction from the coast guard still, isn't apparent on what we have to do and what we need to do to keep her running in. Sure. If we have to do that, keep her serving until 20, or 27th in the prune area. So I think it, I feel really it comes down to, just, you know, the board doesn't see the process, the analysis and review process that got everything thrown into the cattle to switch and, and come up with this, you know, with this option. And I think that that's what's missing. And I think that's what would be just truly helpful to know.
Redesigning more time, more money and no guarantee of success. So I mean, it's, as I just told them, Adam chair, it's, it's all risky. It's it's and I get it. It it's risky, you know, and our goal, our goal with what, what we know and what, you know, Glo just wrote about in June was to get beyond 20, 27, they recommend this is the way we should go. You know, so, I mean, this is just a tough
Oh yeah. Thanks. I was on that point. I mean, to Paul. Yeah. I was just gonna pile on with the captain, says, you know, we have design money for the new, the next main liners is that's part of the grant package as well. That was in the legislature's capital budget lab. So that would, that, that will theoretically be placing either the Manuka or the Columbia. But again, we're talking, even if we got it start designed now how many years away is that? And we need that shift to span that window. So to me, a small investment, I use that, you know, it's not small, but it is relatively to these new ship costs is worth it. And that's kind of the decision point. It just given the lead time of getting anything constructive. We need these.
Thanks. You deputy to cover it. You, you just started to short out just a little bit at the, at the end, but I think we, I think we got you. I mean, obviously this particular project, this vessel, there's no per there's no good answer. None of 'em are, you know, there's 6 0 1 half a dozen together. And the question that we have met, I think you're, you all I've tried to do is make sure that that service continues to be provided until it can be replaced or long term decision can be made. And this is the safest less riskiest way to do it.
Sure. That's what, that's what we think. And we we've given this a lot of thought. We really have parent engineer, we've lost engineers, a lot of thought. And as they say, what's the timeline for the replacement? That that's, that's the big question like deputy commissioner just said, and my goal is try to keep this boat running to rub it.
Question? Yeah. I wouldn't mind meeting with the engineer manager, but I, I still think we'd be safe to just consult with Glosson and see, knowing we're going to have a we're planning to replace the ship. Would that change their recommendation? And it would, if we could make the time period of out of service less, we should try.
We plan to get 'em back. We're making ground our, our staffing inside this building is actually in, in, in pretty good shape where we we've just hired another Newport captain. So our operations department is pretty well staffed. Matt's missing one office assistant type in his group. We're trying to make a rehire there. We've just found another dispatcher and unlicensed dispatcher gonna bring that person on where we're struggling as an engineering. And just to, just to kind of put it in context, we've got a, about a 50% vacancy rate of professional engineers. Okay. We have PCNs for 10 engineers and I've got five, and that includes the manager and the assistant manager. So, you know, it's making engineering a challenge, you know, because I mean, we've got the day to day, you know, you know, maintenance on the shifts to keep the ships running. These engineers are also doing, you know, all the work that is necessary for federal C I P projects.
And we're heading into a full, a full winter of maintenance where we're gonna try to get a lot of these SRSS knocked out. So a lot of it's money and it's not just the Marine high commission to said D O T is experiencing shortages everywhere. A lot of it is money. You know, it's very hard for the professional engineers for five, we're missing to, you know, to moneywise to compete against those with the same qualifications in the outside world. So engineering wise, just bear with us a little bit, because we're very shorthanded there. We're very, very shorthanded and we're trying to outsource where we can, but, but it's, it's, it's very, it's very challenging. Otherwise we're doing really well. The, you know, the terminals we've, we held up pretty well, terminal staffing throughout the summer. The season long calls are always a challenge, but we, but we've kind of held ground there.
We've got our call center staffed up. So, you know, we're, we're, we're, we're slowly getting back to a better staffing picture, even in this building. And we're not gonna let up, we get nine ships running out on, out on, out on the water. Other than that, we've got, I don't know if I've mentioned it, but we've now got drug and bound dogs operating out of Bellingham. These dogs can stiff for drugs and bombs, and we've got a contract with be and M PDD and that's that's going along really well. So anyways, that those are the high points is any other questions.
Thank you, captain Toby. I wanna ask both Cynthia and captain Hillard since they're on the phone and I can't see hand or anything. I'll start with Cynthia. If she's still there. She's she's on mom duty letting kids today, but some, did you have any follow up questions for captain cavi?
Okay. You're we heard you sorted there. I'll check back later. Okay. Thank you. I don't see any other hands raised, but I know there was a question on the TRV and kind of the rewrite of the RFP and Katherine, let me know that Greg Jennings was online too. And might wanna speak to that or unless you wanna do that, captain Sal, there's just, just some questions on, on how it's being written, what the timeline looks like now, what the, how the state is going about pursuing an RFP, realizing that we're now almost another year behind,
Hey, Madam chair, you know, maybe I'll defer that to Greg. I mean, we did, you know, put a write up on which I'm sure you guys have read as to, you know, how we're gonna make a little change in the CMTC process, but maybe Greg, if you are there, are, are you online or, or I can say something, but maybe Greg might be better.
It'll be three primary contracts. So it will be a vessel constructor, which will be the shipyard. And then the propulsion system integrator will be providing the propulsion system and helping the shipyard integrated into the, the vessel. That'll be a separate contract. And then there'll be a separate contract for the manufacturer and delivery and installation support for the vehicle elevator turntable system. Talking to the shipyards, there was a lot of identified risk for them, particularly around the elevator. And then some because of the way procurement is going and schedules are going some risk for them around the propulsion systems. Especially as we get more advanced, they were uncomfortable with that and it was causing them to step back away. And again, I had two yards that specifically said, if we've gotta take on that elevator, we don't wanna be involved. So it is the state taking on more responsibility in areas, but it's balanced against us. Being able to ensure that we get competitive offers. We have interested parties that will build the boat and we get high level control over a very critical set of systems.
Compulsion system will be one of the areas of challenge. That is one of the things we are specifically putting into the RFP statement of services or statement of work for the contractor is that they are going to be responsible for identifying machinery and equipment to procure and using materials to avoid by America conflicts, wherever possible, and helping us identify extremely early and working with us, if there is an unavoidable Byer conflict. At this point, we see very, there is a good potential that we may be able to avoid Byer problems with propulsion altogether. I'm not gonna say that's a hundred percent, but we've done a lot of work towards that. And talking to the propulsion integrators, they believe there is a path forward as we work through the equipment selection. So there's one reason we wanna bring them on board as, or as the first contractor, so we can start working down that path.
Yeah. Thank you. I have the same question. You had admin chair in reference to the turntable in the elevator American made, is it it's a brand new system from what I understand that we're gonna integrate into Alaska fairies that probably not done anywhere else, that I'm concerned that we end up with a foreign system. That's not, it's not true. True.
So I, I, I can talk to that. The elevator system that is currently in design is specifically the way it is because there are regulations that require us to design an elevator differently than what we've done in the past. In fact, if you look at the elevator systems that we installed in the past, the tus amino was something brand new when it was done. I mean, it really was a new thing and we operate the only versions of these in the world. So it's, you know, it's our system. So moving forward, if we do need to make a design change to something that will make regulatory approval, we'll be blazing a path forward on that. Now, as far as it being foreign sourced, we are actually looking for a manufacturer that will do the heavy mechanical engineering design development and production. And we were only targeting us companies. We're looking at like Oregon iron works, par Jared LLC, and American company, several outfits out in Wisconsin that do like heavy platform lifts. So there we are targeting American companies that will be using American steel and producing things here in America. And then as far as the mechanical electrical components, those may be sourced as needed from other places. But those won't run a foul of any kind of Byer, you know, if it's controllers and PLCs. So it'll be an American made system a hundred percent.
And it is again using a very robust mechanical system. That is a very simple technology. It's a screw that moves up and down. The elevator goes up and down as the screws do with motors that are coordinated in sync through electronic means it is being designed with an eye towards robustness in keeping it protected from the weather as much as possible to avoid those impacts. What else can I say about it? It's being designed with maintenance in, in mind, you know, how do we maintain this thing? And we are already thinking about what spares and pieces of, we would need a board that, Hey, if there is a problem with the screws, I guess we're gonna need some screw sections. So let's make sure we get those in this spec. And we know how to replace those, that we have a process for that. And that's where we'll be relying heavily on that manufacturer saying, okay guys, you're building this system for us.
Based upon this design that we've all looked at and we agreed to, and abs is approved. Now let's build it. And let's talk about how often do we maintain it? When do we grease it? What do we use to do that on an annual basis? What are we going to be doing? So that's gonna be part of the scope of services in construction for that particular outfit will be build it, provide a maintenance plan, provide all the operational training and documentation. So we, it's not gonna be like this weird one off. We build it in the shipyard, kind of figuring out as we go, it's gonna be a fully developed program program system with all of the things you would expect from a mature system. And we're gonna, we're gonna ask that manufacturer to develop a mature as possible system for us. If that all makes sense.
It does. And, and I think the last question I have Greg, is this, is this a newer design than the, the original design? Or maybe it is the original, that's my question for the elevator on the test that I know that a lot of the test captain chief and, and Bozeman folks, they had a lot of input into,
They did. We've actually taken quite a bit of constructive criticism from the crew. As we moved through the design iterations on this, the, the old fashioned wire and drum setup, everybody knows it now knows how to work on it, but as has been mentioned, it, it does have reliability issues. So we are looking to avoid that with this newer design that we're being driven towards by regulation. And then we've just recently looked at, Hey, we just made the boat wider for regulatory reasons we had to. So there was a complex integrated door ramp system that nobody likes, not even the designers liked, but we didn't have a lot of ways around it. But now that we have more beam, Hey, we don't need to do that anymore. So we've just recently started looking at moving that door and that ramp into separate components. So if the ramp ever gets damaged, it's not affecting our water tight envelope and we can sail and still dock with the other side of the ship or make repairs while we're sailing to the ramp that we remove. And we put on the car deck and we have these options that we wouldn't have had for the previous design, even in 2016. So it's, it's a continually evolving design and the goal is to make it as robust and usable as possible.
We're pushing our training programs hard, really hard. We have a lot of training sometimes. I think maybe the crews don't fully understand what's available for them. We really increased, you know, the notifications and, you know, you know, trying to help them to get, you know, they get into these training classes. So, so, so we've got that going on, just stocks. There's a lot of stuff going on with the docks and the terminals. We've got a lot of deferred maintenance stuff coming up, but we're pushing hard, you know, Pelican Cordova, the, and Genega bay to get those docks as, as quickly as we can upgrade it so they can accommodate an ACF hall. You know, the cost ferry haul the hub, she's moving along. The hub was supposed to be done contractually by the 23rd of this month. We've known for, oh, probably six to eight weeks. Now that there's, there's been a delay, there's a supply chain issue with electronic parts for the HVAC system. That's the air conditioning heating system. So we'll be working with vigor over the next week or two, as we approach the contract end date to discuss how we're gonna go forward with some, you know, most likely some sort of extension.
Can we break there real quick and see if anybody has questions, we ran to, and I don't know if the other board members are looking at the update that we got on, the 30th from captain F that basically we're going to, but there was a lot of information on job placement and crew development. Does anyone have any questions follow-up questions for captain F there, right hearing then I just have one question on the shin again, primarily to it. One of the things that that has been looked at in possibly in the future is outsourcing to when you look at the members and the ridership extremely low and that's, and it's a lot of money and, and I know that's still looking forward. So is there a plan to just, you know, continue onward with the design portion of that, but, but not make a final decision on actual construction until
That we've got time, I've got Southeast conference expressing Pelican and Cordova. Okay. Those are, those are the two big ones and they're going off to them first. And yeah, we have outsourced the other two and that's possible. And it, it might be costly. So, you know, Don wanna rebuild them. So it, it right now, the, the engineers are trying to, you know, get, you know, Cordova and, and, and Pelican, you know, you don't wanna control the sign lies. And those are the two S because we can't
Yeah. If you could hear me, so it, in the short-term plan, it shows 40 about 47 million of mad, incorrect, excuses me, 74 million of repairs to the terminals throughout the Alaska Marine highway system. Do we have an idea what a portion of that is already funded in this dip and a priority of getting the terminals kind of back up into, a well-functioning state?
I mean is basically 1 pot of money that, you know, somebody Craig me if I'm wrong, but that, that can be used to, to fund this, you know, these, these projects and that's, you know, that's allocated accordingly. So, you know, we're gonna do our best to get done what we can get done with, you know, the money we can, you know, get ahold of course, you know, the rest of DOT is, you know, need to do work too. So, I mean, it's a balancing act. I think we know the things that we really do need to do. And, you know, as far as we're concerned, the stuff that we have, you know, initially right in front of us, you know, that's able to be designed and done over the next year or two that would have the funding for yeah.
Yeah. Thank, thank you, Madam chair. I was just gonna add to, you know, what captain was saying there, you know, we have just about everything we're trying to do in the near future, in the step at the moment and, and in step amendment four. And a lot of that has to do with the grant opportunities that we're pursuing. Cause, they need to be itemized in the step. So we're what gets funded. How though, I guess again, depends on these grant awards. We're hopeful. Like, like I just, mentioned earlier, we applied for over $200 million, in particular grants for that rural ferry service program. A lot of that was for shoreside infrastructure and a lot of it was for, the vessels and et cetera. So depending on how those awards play out will depend a lot on how it's funded. But again, it's all in the step and we do have plans to aggressively pursue these improvements, especially for the ACS to be able to reach all these ports, which we'll need very soon. So that's all. Thank you.
Yeah. Madam Sherwin again, that was the Tazlina crew ports was one of the grants we submitted three days ago. And it, it was, I don't recall the exact amount it's on our it's on am ho website, all the details. And we're hopeful that the grant comes through. And if not, we will work, you know, other federal angles with the fed highway money to make sure it happens. That's our plan.
Thank you. And I had one quick follow-up to that. Does the legislature need to get involved to approve this funding or to allow AMHS funds to be used deputy commissioner or, and this grant, is there any sort of an idea of the timeline that we would have where we would know if this grant was going to possibly be approved and is there a match from the state would that have to go past the legislature? How does that work?
Yeah. Great, great questions. Madam chair. So, you know, it's interesting too, because our capital budget now is reverted to a kind of a line item allocation where we list out each project; if these grant awards were to be awarded; we might need to amend our capital request to get those allocations included. So there could be some legislative action in that regard. The match, in theory, is covered. We have a pretty broad match appropriation. We get every year for the federal highway and FTA grants package. But that's not to say, you know, if we get a large chunk, this, this 200 million, there could be another match we have to go and ask for, for sure. So that's all being evaluated. As these grants pile in and as this budget development season progresses, we'll have more clarity on, you know, where we're at. I guess stage one was to go after the entire grant bore and then figure out, you know, what we get awarded and then hopefully all of it because that's our, our goal. And then we can play it out from there. Thank you.
The right button. Yeah. Back to please. In the maintenance construction, we talked about the Columbia CCP. You refer to the state as close to being able to owner purchase. Is that part of, tying to get ahead of the problems with deadlines on getting parts in and stuff like that?
So Alan, as I've said a few times, Columbia has a future; both are in good shape. We've been working on that boat for quite some time. Now it's been in somewhat of a very comprehensive state overhaul. We've done a lot of work with finishing up some major steel work discovered in the bar and the bow thruster area. The shafts are going to be getting installed here shortly. We're going to get the boat back in the water. We're going to get the life RAFs off it in service. And once we get to that point, we've got a COI. So those that are Operating it can, you know, you know, use that time for their licenses and whatnot.
And we're gonna take it out on a trial. We're gonna, we're gonna run it a little bit. We do have some vibration testing, but we can't do that unless the boat is fully loaded. So that may be something we'd have to wait until we put it back into revenue service. But technically speaking, within the next month to six weeks, that boat will be ready to run if we need it. Should we have some casualties this winter? You know, we, we, we can run that boat. And as far as the CCP, we need to replace that system. That system is old. We already had a significant failure with that system a few years ago. It took almost a year to physically build parts that weren't, you know, available. And we don't, we don't want to go down that trail. Illa, now the manufacturer is steel parts and systems for that, that entire system in this country.
So we don't have any bio America issues. And what we've done is, you know, we had put that, that, that, that project out to bid and got no betters. And there are a lot of reasons for that. I don't, I don't want to get into that, but we then went myself and a contracting officer. We went to vigor to see if there was some way we could source to live, and we've done that. And we've such a source to vigor industries; vigor owns a lot of shipyards. Okay. So we're at the point where we're very close to determining and agreeing on shipyard the work's going to be done. As part of that agreement, we volunteered to own a furnish, the equipment, probably a little less risk of the shipyard. And that's a process to do that and work through our, you know, you know, my contracting bosses to get to that point.
And the only thing holding us back from doing that now is identifying the shipyard where all these parts will get sent. And we're very close to doing that. So it's about 6.1 million worth of parts, and we're going to do that. We're going to pay for that. And we figure you about eight or eight months to get the parts. And once we get the details, you have another eight months to install them. So, you know, you add that together and probably be, you know, somewhere early to mid-2024, when that boat is completely wholly done with a brand new, you know, control system, which, which we need, because if what we have in there fails we're in trouble because the parts are no longer available. So well, that's no; it doesn't have to do with long lead ordering. It has to do with, you know, how we have so sourced this project with more giant industries.
Thank you. So with all these timelines being stretched out, just because of quiet an availability and, and supply chain, et cetera, is the, is the hope that the Columbia and the Matanuska will be providing for the Columbia and the Columbia and the mat news could be providing summer service next summer until the Columbia parts get there. And she needs to go into construction mode, allowing the Kennecott to do more cross golf, which is a good acre.
Time-wise, The thought process was if we went down that trail, you know, that you, that would, that would get us to about 20, 24, and 2027 domestically, but not sous wise. And that, that was, that was the thought process. And that's what kind of got us switching from lights, bells, alarms, and whistles to the cabin deck.
Its not just dead-end corridors but fire protection. lot more rebuilding to accommodate those things. And what, what I, what I guess maybe concerns me is, you know, reopening this with the coast guard. We're seeing that every year, these rules between what we call CFR domestic boats and solars boats are getting tighter and tighter and tighter. And I would worry that we revisit it. They may tell us you have to do even more now than we agreed. So, I mean, there's a risk. Yeah. We've got a deal, we've got something they've agreed to. I don't know, you open it up and they might say, no, now it's, now you have to do this, this and this because the rules are getting tighter and tighter between the two types of shifts. That's just our thought. I mean, we don't know that, but that's, that's a thought, you know. Okay. And I don't know. I mean, I, I just, I mean, would it, would it be something that would be acceptable for Paul and captain to talk to our manager to, to to see, or no,
So, you know, and maybe, I know Paul has his hand up, so I'll let him ask a couple of questions. Sure. And see that can't be clarified, but, you know, we do, you know, also understanding that prince roofer in the extended range plan for the left lane highway system is not set in stone, but for at least the next several years, a handful of years, it very well may be, and you can't just stop. So, I understand where you're coming from this and, and just the analysis and of it and, and, and how it came to that. That's, that's, that's just really very helpful. So I'm going to go to Paul.
Yeah. Thanks. I guess I do think it needs to be reevaluated a little bit. The recommendation from Glosson at the very end of that letter. It states that these recommendations are based on the that there is not, and there is currently no program to replace the wrong new scope. I believe that since we have been planning to replace the inaccurate content, this makes all the difference in how much work we will do. And my main objection to the plan is that it is ten months out of service. If we could reduce that, I think we'd be better off for service to Alaska.
Just is, is, okay. So, so there's really two questions if a replacement coming, does that, that, does that change the thought process? And I guess the question is, is there a less expensive when you do it, you know, by not completely rebuilding the cabin deck? I, I, I think that's what Paul was getting at.
Yeah. I think there there's, there's less work that could be done based on, you know, replacing a cabin deck. Doesn't doesn't make any more reliability and maybe we can meet the coast guard, all their safety demands without having to replace everything and then do it in shorter period of time.
Yeah. I know Paul it's sous. I mean, you, you understand all that. It it's sous it's, it's, it's different than CFR type requirements and that's where it just gets a little bit more dicey, but, you know, look, we can, we can go to Boston and ask those questions and, you know, we can do that and again, get back to you. Yep. Thanks. Yep. You bet. So, okay. So I'm using a lot of time. So moving ahead, the, you know, one of the other
Replacing the two diesel generators about the Kennecott. This is something we're having to do to satisfy a C O B C, which we have with ADC regarding excess emissions. Chip's got some huge generators. They were built back in tier zero emission rules, and we need new generators. So we're working through that. You know, another thing that came up, I think Catherine had mentioned wifi and internet. We are, we are still pushing ahead on that for the ships we've we've, we've recently started experiencing some communications problems in general, with the satellite systems and associated shoreside connected systems. And it, in general, on the boats, we are now working very closely with D O T O it information technology. And that crew, that group is in the process of attempting to hire for new it specialist type persons that will be in essence, dedicated to the ships to look after ships, coms, ships, communication it stuff.
And we've appointed a staff inside this building here as a sort of technology liaison to work with these, hopefully four new it people that are gonna basically concentrate on the ships. I mean, we've got communications, we've got reservation systems, we've got point of sales, we've got maintenance management systems aboard, and it's all tied into computers and satellites and everything in between. So we are, we are also really concentrating on Chip's communications and trying to drive home, you know, the wifi and, and so, so we're working on that and they could make us some pretty good strides there, staffing staffing wise, I'll just probably just finish with staffing, you know, we're we're, and, and I've, I've, I've talked about the ships, we're still a few hundred shy of what we need across the board, and that that's all three unions to get nine ships going. But, you know, we, we plan to do that.
So the current status of the TRV procurement RFP documents is that we are producing. I'm sure you read this multipart CMGC procurement package, which is targeting a propulsion system integrator to help Glosson in the state, come up with what we wanna do for propulsion, for the vessel and how best to do that, to meet all of our current regulations and, and modern technologies. We are developing that RFP language right now. A scope of surfaces has been put out for draft review by, you know, the internal team developed. And now it's out to Catherine and, and the, the decision making group to see if that's language we wanna work with going through contracting and department of law is heavily invested right now with honing in our general provisions for CMGC preconstruction services. As we got into looking at breaking the contract apart, we found that we really needed to Polish those GPS to make sure the state's best interests were being served. And we weren't leaving anything on the table or opening up for difficulties later. So the department of law has been assisting us along with contracting on ensuring that that's a robust document and we'll provide enough information for bidders to provide successful bids.
Okay. I mean, you've been doing this for a very long time. I guess my question is in terms of making these changes, are, do you have confidence that these changes are going to result in interest? I think I saw that six shipyards now may be interested, but going, you know, going about it a little bit different way.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, yeah. I mean, I do Shirley. I, I, I think what we did was when we had no bidders, we, we regrouped and went back and talked to these shipyards, you know what, what's what, you know, what's, what's making you nervous. What's, what's the problem. And after a whole lot of dialogue, we regrouped into what you see here now, you know, and I mean, I mean, it's not just me, you know, there is another contracting officer that, you know, you know, one of the D OT contracting officers. I also agrees with it. I agree with it. And the department of law is okay with it. So, yeah.
Thanks, Shirley. Having worked at the fair dock in Kodiak for a number of years and been reliant on ferry transportation in Southwest Alaska for a number of years, the elevator system on the current test has been problematic and has been one that has caused significant service interruptions. And so while I recognize that the TRB needs to have the elevator system, given some of these challenges, I think that this board and the Southwest communities and other communities that will be served by the tus would want to see and know that there is a maintenance program and servicing and the capacity within the AMHS to address service interruptions because of elevator service in the future. So I'm just, I'm not looking for an answer for that. Now I'm just saying that I really feel that if, if we are seeking to develop a Marine highway system that doesn't have unplanned service interruptions, we need to anticipate and have the capacity to maintain an elevator system and to respond to any operational challenges that that elevator system presents. Thank you.
So the elevator system is being developed to utilize existing known mechanical technologies to allow us to get abs approval. So our elevator would be abs approved and it would be reviewed annually for safety and operat ability by abs our primary regulatory body here in Alaska. They, they already do all of this. So we're trying to consolidate under one set of rules and that's important because there really is no set of rules for an elevator like this carrying people. So abs has offered a path forward. So we wanna design to that. So the outfall of this ball and screw mechanism that everybody knows is very different than what we have now is fully contingent or fully developed to meet abs rule making requirements. We cannot meet the abs rules with a drum and wire setup like we've used in the past. Cuz as we talk to these companies, we're talking to for the elevator, they go back to it. Well, this would be notionally, simpler and better.
What's the right word. I'm thinking of off the top of my head here, more traditional in a way, but we can't do it because abs will not allow us to do it. So the ball and screw works ball and screw design has a precedence in military applications. So very large elevators on military ships. Some of them have cables like we have and some of them use this screw mechanism. So there are companies that have developed this par has developed several of these systems in the past. So it's not completely unknown. It's unknown in the commercial sector, but it,
Thanks. And I'll just say, when I wrote touch here just a few weeks ago, Adam Kodiak, there were a lot of the vessels. There were a lot of folks in there delivering and tendering and the tus had no issues whatsoever getting off the dock. Things are tight, but they're tight along that whole channel. And try to fleet has been growing and growing by multiple temps, twenties, thirties, the vessels. So they might need to look at a little bit of a little bit of growth changes as well. So Greg, thank you very much for, for responding to all that. And if you could please share that the concerns from Trident and the response. I think that board would appreciate that.
Yeah. And that's, that's my understanding. That's what I've heard from the crew. Well, so thank you, Greg. Okay. I think that we may be here at the end of the, the updates. Again, we had asked for this because I, I, there were just a lot of questions and just need for clarity and understanding of process that the board has. And, and I think that that was, this was very, very helpful and greatly appreciated captain FK and Greg that you were on board and also for your help, Rob. So I'm gonna go ahead and call that good and move on to item a eight, which is modernization components of the short term plan and turn that over to Catherine.
Great. Thank you everybody. So up on the screen, you'll just see the table that we had provided out by email. And, you know, really at this point, I just wanted to mention a little bit about what we did and what this is, and then understanding this might be a conversation that we'll have in person that that could take longer than we have with our remaining time today. But if you can use this table, perhaps as you kind of go over materials that you have, this is broken out by section from the February modernization plan, which is like executive summary assumptions, financial analysis. And then it goes through the item by item things that were mentioned in the modern modernization plan. And then it points to where in the current short range plan that I almost carried forward, or if it's something that will be better considered as part of the long range plan, because it has a bigger strategy or analysis component required, or it's something that is a long enough in the future over a number of years, that is better in a long range plan versus what is outlined in the short range plan.
And so if it's the board's wish we can go through this item by item, or I can just, you know, leave it at that and you can take the table, go through it and then perhaps collect some questions that we can dig into with in greater length. Either through email responses were at the next meeting. What would you like to do? Madam chair?
You know, we've had a lot of conversations about this and there has been information brought to light that Aurora can operate for eight more years without a repower. So that is a, a discussion item that we would like to be adding the long range plan as part of what, what happens, take picture moving forward. It's not something that we need to act on in the short range within zero to two years at this time. And the number of projects in the assumptions have to do with capital projects and their costs. For example, the Columbia CTP projects, the control over controllable pitch, propeller system replacement. If you wanted to get information on this project, you could, oops, you go here and you'll find the federal ID. You can find the ID to scope. And then the, the, the costs that have been estimated for this project to date, we have the same amount of information on the doc.
So you ask a lot of good questions about where our doc projects are. And so you can go to that section. And, and for example, in the back to the modernization plan, there's number 11, that talks about doc modifications and that they're needed in Tanga bay, Pelican Cordova, and to ti like to accommodate the ACX again, if contracting isn't preferred, so that that's really helpful information. And then to take it to the next step, though, those do need to get into the stick and have the, the scope schedules and estimates laid out more specifically. And so that is here. You can find these specific projects and their, their state of repair. If you want a reference as to what's going on in any of those areas like TGA bay or cord over that information is here for you to help with decision making. So it takes that and then just moves it to the, the next, the next level of information for decision making, beyond that.
Some things you know, that are not included in the short range plan include things related to like union contract agreements, such as eliminating cold. That's a pretty big comprehensive and complex statewide system. So it's not in the short range plan, but something that I think the board can take up with the planners at the, of the long range plan. So again, it's just trying to clear up where things reside large, a part of this and the financial analysis that you mentioned, our financial models are being updated currently. There's just a lot of numbers that have changed in recent years. And so that's largely what will be done to provide future projections. And, and again, that works really well as you into the, the long range plan too. So I think that's just a few examples and I'm happy to go through some more of these I'll stop there and answer any questions,
And the last thing I'd like to mention on this is that we, you know, really look forward to having the updated goals and performance measures that this board ha determines to be useful. And those will be immediately included in this, but in Ava, without having that, we are finding things that we find to be useful in terms of a short range plan. So it's, we're not doing this to override anything that the board is gonna be providing to us with guidance, but in absence of that, we are identifying some things to help us get closer towards having a performance based system.
Agreed. And, and I think as a reminder, real quick to the board, the HB 63 requires that the long term plan does have to consist of priorities angles for AMHS and a proposed strategic maintenance and vessel replacement plan, which, which, which we're looking at. And I also wanna go back. I don't know if y'all remember, long time ago when we first started this, we had a pre formation survey and that survey asked what were important short term goals. And the number one goal, 75% of view of the board said to determine vessel maintenance and a preservation program. The second one was planned for fleet modernization, your third choice resolved critical staffing staffing levels. And then it went to create financial stability and sustainability tied with defined optimal governance followed at, by evaluation up to optimal levels of service and improve the liability. So that's just, just kind of a reminder of where we were back in February as we move into this, hopefully this on, I think October 14th, if I remember correctly in person meeting, and I'm assuming that's gonna be an Anchorage, didn't see a place. So Alan, your hand is stopped. You have a follow through or captain page.
Yeah. Yeah. I think, you know, the statements of the mission and mission and vision and et cetera are good. It's really just the specifics that we get down there. So, I mean, I've listened to these briefings on the, you know, be placement ship and all the, the contracting things. And I've been in the meriting business over 50 years, not 54 years be specific in shipyards and, and ships and around the world for that matter. And I'm, I can't any value there quite honestly. I think they're doing a really good job of determining, you know, the contracting process. It's incredibly complex process. So I'm trying to think what's within my metal bandwidth, maybe one else metal bandwidth is greater than mine, but, but I'm thinking along more along the lines of, you know, when you talk about the vision new shifts or new types of fits and delivery and the needs of the, the customers that I think we, the ports so much is oriented toward the, the ships and fixing things and replacing things and shipyards and timing.
And I think AMHS has got a very good handle on that. Quite honestly. I mean, there's lot of delays, but there's so many things for supply chain, et cetera. But I think our board can, you know, can look at other other aspects that maybe they're not looking as hard at and such as what are each community really need. And we fulfill the needs for the community. That's to me is a metric as far as the transportation needs and then what types of vessels. And I think you should, and I saw the long range plan talks about going down to six vessels. I'm not sure six vessels, the right answer, I think less different types of vessels, a good idea to get more flexibility. So you don't have a whole people like 10 different CLA different vessels everyone's unique in itself. So you don't have that flexibility in parts or, or stone things or replacing vessels or crewing, et cetera.
I originally, I was not that an Amber that idea, but I actually were involved with one just a week ago where there's a facilitator, which I thought was a difficult subject for someone to just step in and understand, but actually it really does help allows everybody participate without anyone being in the group set with kind of keeping minutes or thinking other things that, or having me totally engaged. So I actually think it's a pretty good process. Pretty good idea. When as far as bringing someone else out to help us kind of corral these things and it, it frees up everybody else to really freethinking participate. So, and they do a great job capturing it's little spending, but if you got a good facilitator, they do an awesome job as I've, as I've seen. And, and actually I was not really inclined the meeting that I was going to, like, I didn't think we needed one. I turned out thought was a really good idea. So I'm, I'm in that camp at this point. Okay. I'll my hand down. Somehow.
Okay. Thank you, captain Hillard. I think we lost captain Hillard. Okay. And IMEs. And I think the next step then is to ask Katherine to send out some proposals. I think most of us have. I mean, there's, and I'm assuming again, this meeting is in Anchorage. I saw the date, but I didn't see the place.
Well, can I just comment on location? I, I think that's a great offer. I haven't seen the boardroom, but one thing to consider is that the public may want to observe this meeting. And so the state does have meeting rooms in the Atwood building and we can check the availability there. I think that would be large enough to accommodate both the board and a area for the general public. And as far as facilitators there's yeah, there's, there's a flu of them, but I, I do think folks that have some familiarity with the system would be helpful and I'll, I'll, I'll jot down some ideas. There's a few folks that I can think of. It, it is a relatively short timeframe there, you know, having somebody that can, can pick this up and be helpful, but not interested is, is essential. I think, in this
Role. Right. Okay. Catherine, is there anything you need from us before we end here? No, I don't believe so. Thank you. Okay. If you, if you come up with any questions or ideas or if you want some names, Juan, and I will send folks that we've, we've worked with over the years here in Alaska, that I've done that exactly what y'all are looking for, do what we can do. Okay. Okay. We will wait to be updated by Catherine, just basically the wears and the wins and travel information will come from Tara. And I would encourage everybody to fill out your information as soon as possible. And as our Netta said, we'll do our homework and, and be ready to come to this meeting. And I, and I say that because I'm gonna question whether we should have a zoom meeting in between this meeting and, and the in-person meeting. And I think I'm leaning towards not doing that, but continuing to collect information that that is relevant for our discussion, that's gonna happen, you know, on the 14th of October so that we can really be prepared before we sit down and start talking about it. And that, that would give staff a good three weeks to get this out to us. So it would be a week in advance for us. So that, that would be a recommendation. And if some board members would do not like that recommendation, let me know what you would do.
And I do not believe that there is, I see a thumbs up and hence nodding. So we will go ahead and we will just meet. It sounds like for one full day on the 14th at a place to be determined. Thanks again, Cynthia, I'll let you and Catherine send your information Catherine, to see, see what we could do there. And I think that's it. So very briefly, it's 3 31. Can we go back to public input and see if there's any way we can get anyone on for public input? You may have waited to the meeting.
Yes, definitely. Standby. One moment please. Anyone that's on the phone that would like to leave a comment, please press star three on your phone. Okay. This time I don't see any hands raised, so I believe it's okay. And anyone that was leave a comment, please leave them in writing. And, and the board does have access to see's comments. So be wonderful to submit it in writing. Thank you. Especially if you go to do ot@alaska.gov, charting the course, go to your service area and please leave a very targeted comment there.
This is hidden text that lets us know when google translate runs.