By SHANNON HAUGLAND
Sentinel Staff Writer
The Gary Paxton Industrial Park board of directors decided Monday to focus on developing – at least for now – maritime industries at the park for smaller vessels.
The board has been working since February on selling the old Alaska Pulp Corp. utility dock at the park to Hanson Maritime Company, but city staff and the company ran into snags over language in the sale agreement.
“We haven’t been able to find language acceptable to Lee (Hanson),” said GPIP Director Garry White.
The utility dock is hemmed in by the floating multiuse dock and a solid fill barge ramp that is scheduled for improvement. If the floating dock is improved to accommodate larger vessels, mooring lines would potentially cross the tidelands Hanson wants to buy.
The proposed dock sale contract came before the Assembly at its last meeting, but it was sent back to the GPIP board to work out some of Lee Hanson’s concerns.
White said it comes down to the question of whether the GPIP board, and the city, want to continue to focus on developing infrastructure to accommodate larger ships, which would require an easement across Hanson’s property as well as language in the sale contract related to navigation.
Or, White asked, does the board want to “turn it over to Lee with less restrictions ... and focus on overall marine industries at the park.”
Map showing the utility dock at the Gary Paxton Industrial Park.
Over the years infrastructure has been built at the park to accommodate ocean-going ships, specifically for tankers loading Blue Lake bulk water, but also any larger vessel.
For some of the 16 people at the board meeting, the question boiled down to whether the city wants to help Hanson accomplish his goals for building up his maritime business – or add restrictions that would help the city in its goals for one day serving large vessels, such as freighters and cruise ships.
White and City Attorney Brian Hanson (no relation to Lee Hanson) said they are not just concerned about meeting needs today, but also not limiting the city’s options for the future.
“How it can be done has been challenging,” White said.
He said the direction to the city legal team and outside legal team was to try to “get the best of both worlds.”
“Get (the property) to Lee, and continue to develop our water (business),” White said.
He turned the question back to the GPIP board to decide, since there didn’t seem to be a way to get “the best of both worlds,” and some of the provisions may be “deal killers” for Hanson Maritime.
A few of the GPIP members said they would prefer focusing on Hanson Maritime, which they said made more sense than imposing restrictions on him in favor of businesses that may or may not happen.
“I don’t see a reason to not move forward,” commented Chairman Scott Wagner.
“Hanson Maritime will be a big improvement to what’s going on out there,” said Vaughn Morrison.
Assembly liaison Thor Christianson, who was on the Assembly when the city accepted ownership of the old pulp mill site from Alaska Pulp Corp., said the city’s goal at that time was to dock freighters and bulk water tankers, not cruise ships.
Brian Hanson said some of the issues would go away if the GPIP board and Assembly decided to remove restrictions in the sales contract that are in place to accommodate large ships.
Lee Hanson said he had no desire to restrict the development of the park, and believes he will be part of the solution if larger vessels one day come to the park. He said he believes the current language calls for him to vacate his dock if a larger vessel is docked at the other facility.
In the end, the vote was 4-0 on a motion to recommend to the Assembly that the terms of the sale “shall not be restrictive” to Hanson and the direction of the park “focus on smaller vessels and maritime industries.”
Present were Chairman Scott Wagner, vice chair Vaughn Morrison, Al Stevens and Mike Johnson. Sheila Finkenbinder was absent. The meeting was held at the SEDA office, but for the past year meetings have been held Harrigan Centennial Hall.
In other business, the Board:
– reviewed the phased development plans for a boat haulout facility.
– voted to recommend a code change related to the management of the park. The vote was 4-0 to adjust section 2.38.110 related to GPIP director duties, to make the language consistent with management practices for the past two decades.
