“Recently (the borough planning commission) has become the object of scorn, derision and angry letters to the paper and a movement to abolish the appointed board and replace it with an elected one. What has happened here? I think this has happened because the planning commission has not followed borough code.”
— Former planning commission chairman Rob Goldberg, who was removed from the commission by Mayor Doug Olerud on Dec. 29, 2022, speaking at the Jan. 10, 2023 Haines Borough Assembly meeting
“I will say that some of the conversations I’ve had as far as seating people on board and commissions have been one of the toughest parts of this. Not only trying to decide who is going to be serving and trying to figure out the balance for these different boards and commissions, but also calling somebody like Mr. Goldberg and telling him I’m going to appoint someone different after (he was) serving 20 years on that commission. Those are extremely difficult phone calls to have and it was not something that I enjoyed.”
— Mayor Doug Olerud, on the difficult nature of the mayor’s duty to appoint members to the borough’s boards and commissions, at the Jan. 10, 2023 Haines Borough Assembly meeting
“There’s nothing more political than the way we use land and envision our community.”
— Assembly member Tyler Huling, on the politics of the planning commission, at the Jan. 10, 2023 Haines Borough Assembly meeting.
The fact that planning commission controversies consumed most of last week’s Haines Borough Assembly meeting tells you that the commission has gone seriously awry.
Besides former commission chair Rob Goldberg’s statement that the commission hasn’t follow borough law, there was prolonged discussion of whether the commission’s action on a December heliport was procedurally legal, then a long discussion of what to do concerning Don Turner Jr., a commission who wrote disparagingly of a Haines Borough Assembly member, then, rather surprisingly, submitted his broadside to the borough.
The commission is in a bad way, and it will get worse for the borough’s bumbling of commission business. Next up is the government’s attempt to explain a letter to Bill Chetney from borough manager Annette Kreitzer, allowing Chetney to continue holding weddings at his Mud Bay property, a contradiction of a borough assembly action last May that prohibited that activity.
The Mud Bay mess started when the planning commission permitted an activity that was not allowed in zoning code, a blunder that is not in dispute. Kreitzer’s letter asserts that the blunder is now grandfathered in, despite the assembly’s action. Further, it appears Kreitzer’s letter was sent without consultation with the borough assembly, her bosses.
It would be reassuring to say that the planning commission just hit a rough spot, that due to some poor apppointments by the mayor and some other special circumstances, it has jumped the tracks.
That’s just not so.
The commission has been foundering for years.
When I was on the Haines Borough Assembly in 2017, the assembly had to hold a two-day meeting to sort out a mess that resulted from the commission’s approval of a conditional use permit to haul gravel out of two residential subdivisions – Skyline Estates and Highlands Estates.
Not only had the commission failed to put conditions on that permit, it had overlooked an entire section of its own planning code that required consideration of eight conditions when weighing an application for a conditional use permit for resource extraction.
That mistake was discovered not by the borough attorney, the borough clerk or by any of the experts on the planning commission but by a schoolteacher who lived in Highlands Estates and happened to read the planning code.
There are other examples that the code just isn’t that important to members of the commission.
In granting a conditional use permit, which is essentially an exception to planning and zoning regulations, borough law requires the commission to meet eight criteria, such as “the value of the adjoining property will not be significantly impaired,” “the granting of the conditional use will not be harmful to the public safety, health or welfare,” and “comments received from property owners impacted by the proposed development have been considered and given their due weight.”
When Don Turner Jr. argued in favor of granting the private heliport at 25 Mile in December, he didn’t address these. Instead, he said the heliport would be good for business.
About a dozen years ago, two planning commissioners reading a section of code that prohibited commercial trailers downtown convinced a majority of the commission’s members that trailers were, in fact, allowed just as long as the wheels were removed and the trailer was jacked up and put on cinder blocks.
Ask any longtime owner of a brick-and-mortar restaurant in this town if that decision – leading eventually in the approval not only of jacked-up trailers but also commercial food vans – isn’t one of the reasons they can’t afford to stay open in winter. There’s now a permanent, trailer on our waterfront, next to an RV Park.
Yes, the decisions of the planning commission have long and real repercussions not only on neighborhoods but on the operation of Haines as a town.
There are many other examples of commission blunders in the past 20 years I’ll address in upcoming posts, but there are questions here that need immediate answering before you’re likely to give this issue much consideration.
Here are some questions raised so far, along with responses.
Q: Why is it so important to make this change?
A: The Haines Borough Planning Commission is one of only two borough bodies – other than the borough assembly – that is “empowered.” (The other is the Public Library Board.) As an “empowered” board, the commission does more than make recommendations to the assembly. It has power to make decisions and its decisions are final unless appealed to the assembly or to state courts. The commission makes decisions that permanently affect landowners, neighborhoods and businesses. Electing commissioners would give residents affected by commission decisions a direct say on who serves on the commission. It would make the commission more representative of the community at large.
Q: Why is the Planning Commission even involved in politics?
A: Despite its boring-sounding name, the Planning Commission is responsible for zoning decisions, that is, deciding what activities and developments are allowed in the borough, where they will occur and under what conditions. The investment or expenditure of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or even millions of dollars can be at stake in a planning commission decision, making its decisions as consequential — sometimes more consequential — than borough assembly decisions. Although there are rules and guidelines established for the consideration of those decisions, the gravity of what’s at stake in those decisions, the personal politics of commission members and other factors make those decisions inherently political.
Q: If this change is made, will there be enough people willing to run for the commission?
A: Certainly. Commission decisions often involve development, homes and other matters of great financial interest. Large landowners and developers have always sought to be on the commission. There’s no reason to believe that either they – or their representatives – would not be willing to serve under an elected system of representation. Previous to 2002, our community had two local governments – the City of Haines and the Haines Borough. There were two mayors and two elected bodies (the Haines City Council and the Haines Borough Assembly), even multiple planning boards, and finding enough candidates to stand for election was not a serious problem.
Q: Why and how will the election of commissioners make for a better planning commission that we have now?
A: The quick answer is that election may not make the commission “better” but it will make the commission directly accountable to residents affected by commission decisions. Every eligible voter will get a say on who serves on the planning commission. If you believe a commissioner is biased, lazy, has a conflict of interest or is otherwise unfit to make planning and zoning decisions, you get a vote every three years on whether that person should continue on the commission. If you believe a certain candidate would do a great job, you would have a vote to help them gain membership on the commission.
Q: Isn’t there accountability now, insomuch as the borough mayor, who appoints commissioners, can remove them?
A: There is limited accountability, but only through the mayor. If the mayor has a personal relationship with a commissioner or sides with the politics of a certain commissioner, the chances of the mayor calling a commissioner into account or removing that commissioner from office grow slim. Moreover, current Mayor Doug Olerud has said that the appointment/removal process is “painful” and one of the worst parts of the mayor’s job. Electing commissioners removes that obligation from the mayor and moves it to ballot box, where the public speaks through the private ballot, removing the need for the painful appointment/removal process.
Q: Is there precedent for electing planning commissioners?
A: Planning commissioners are elected in municipalities across the nation and in Alaska, including Petersburg.
Q: Is there a local precedent for changing how board members and commissions are chosen?
A: Not precisely, but there have been two comparable changes to borough law in the past 30 years.
At one time, the borough’s property tax appeals board (Board of Equalization) was comprised of citizens appointed by the mayor. That board, not unlike our current planning commission, liked to be friendly to people who appeared before it, in this case residents seeking a lower tax bill. The citizen-led Board of Equalization, in fact, became so friendly that the borough chose to eliminate its citizen membership. Today, the Haines Borough Assembly serves as the Board of Equalization, resulting in many fewer tax abatements.
Also, a few years ago, the Haines Borough Assembly was comprised of separate “seats,” such as “Seat A,” “Seat B” and so on. Candidates for assembly had to declare which “seat” they were seeking. Voters decided the seat system was confusing and unnecessary and voted to have all assembly members run for office at large, with open seats going to candidates who get the top numbers of votes.
Q: Shouldn’t planning commissioners be experts with knowledge of engineering, development and other issues?
A: Ideally, our planning commission would have its share of members specifically knowledgeable about planning and zoning issues and procedures, as well as familiarity with construction, utilities and other issues. These valuable individuals would certainly seem to have an advantage under a system where commissioners stand for election. If planning commission candidates choose to campaign for a seat on the commission, these would be strong points they could make to voters.
Q: Why does the Haines Borough charter stipulate that planning commissioners be appointed rather than elected?
A: Our current government was “created” in 2002, when voters approved consolidating the City of Haines with the third-class Haines Borough. The question of authority for deciding who would serve on the borough’s committees and commissions was raised when consolidation was being planned. A former City of Haines mayor was concerned that under our new government – which transferred power for appointing department heads from the mayor to a city manager – mayors would be giving up too much power. The consolidation planners offered appointments to boards to the list of mayor powers, mostly as a concession to this concern. Under the proposed change to electing planning commissioners, the mayor still would retain authority for appointing members to all the borough’s other boards and commissions.
Q: Didn’t we vote on something similar to this a few years ago?
A: In 2018, borough voters were asked if they supported a charter change for election of members to several boards, including the planning commission, Ports and Harbors Advisory Committee, the Public Safety Commission, and Tourism Advisory Board. That initiative failed. This initiative is limited to members of the planning commission.
Q: What happens if I sign the petition to place this question on the ballot?
A: If more than about 250 signatures in favor of this change are collected, the question of electing planning commissioners instead of having the mayor appoint them will go to all Haines Borough voters in a special or regular election. If voters approve it in that election, Haines Borough charter will be changed to implement election of planning commissioners.
Q: Aren’t there other ways to improve the commission membership or make the commission accountable? For example, why not require all commissioners to submit their resignations when a new mayor is elected? The mayor could then decide who is doing a good job and who isn’t. That would provide accountability.
A: Yes, there may be other changes that could be considered. The resignation requirement, outlined above, would tend to make the commission both more political as it would place more power in the hands of the mayor, and it could cause rapid, unnecessary and damaging changes to the effectiveness of the board. Under a system of elected commissioners, voters would be inclined to keep electing commissioners who serve in a responsible and responsive manner. A change allowing every new mayor to “clear” the commission would have the potential effect of changing the entire membership of the commission every three years. Because the commission deals with complex matters, it’s important for commissioners to have longevity and institutional knowledge and to be accountable directly to voters. An elected system of commission membership achieves both these goals.
Q: What’s wrong with the current system of mayoral appointment to the Planning Commission? Under the current system, the assembly must approve the mayor’s choices, so that’s a form of accountability, isn’t it?
A. The Planning Commission’s most consequential decisions are political in nature. Typically, political decisions in Haines are immediately accountable to citizens through the elections process — we, the citizens, elect the assembly and mayor who have authority over decisions. If the mayor — instead of citizens — appoints planning commissioners, accountability is one step removed from the voters. Also, mayoral appointments can be fraught with politics, as well as contests. In 2017, four members of the Haines Borough Assembly rejected Mayor Jan Hill’s appointment of Diana Lapham to the Ports and Harbors Committee. Lapham filed a criminal complaint with the Haines Borough, claiming that four assembly members — Heather Lende, Ron Jackson, Margaret Friedenauer and Tresham Gragg — had violated her constitutional right to free speech by denying her the appointment. Haines police chief Heath Scott forwarded that complaint to the state’s district attorney, subjecting the assembly to the taint of criminal action, before the district attorney ended the matter in a dismissive letter to Scott. Electing planning commissioners eliminates an unnecessary level of potential mischief that can result from the current mayoral appointment process.