Opponents of a rock crusher at a Montana Creek Road gravel pit have appealed a Conditional Use Permit issued to Coogan General, LLC last month by the Juneau Planning Commission.
The appeal was filed Wednesday by Peggy and Richard Mattson, who live in the Montana Creek subdivision. Peggy Mattson says they’re concerned about how the rock crusher could affect health, safety, traffic, and neighborhood aesthetics.
“Over the past twenty years they’ve increased the residential density of the neighborhood. We have over 300 homes, with the Community Garden, recreation area all in this area, the gun club,” says Mattson. “And putting basically an open pit mine in the residential area doesn’t fit into the scheme of things.”
The Mattsons live next to Juneau Assembly member Ruth Danner, whose comments to the Planning Commission about the issue last month drew a threat of censure from Mayor Bruce Botelho. Danner is among more than 40 Juneau residents listed as a concerned parties on the appeal.
The Assembly is typically the appeal board for Planning Commission decisions, and the matter has been scheduled for the May 14th Assembly meeting. But City Attorney John Hartle has recommended a hearing officer decide the case. Hartle says Danner’s comments on the issue to the Planning Commission and during Assembly meetings hurt the Assembly’s chances of hearing the matter fairly and impartially. The attorney estimates a hearing officer could cost the city up to $20,000.
The permit approved by the Planning Commission put more than 20 conditions on Coogan’s proposed operations. They include locating the rock crusher at the far north end of the gravel pit, limiting its hours of operation to weekdays between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m., and noise restrictions.
Wayne Coogan of Coogan General declined an interview request at this time.
Local longshoremen have raised concerns about cruise ship crewmembers tying up tender boats like the orange one seen in this photo from last summer. (Photo by Casey Kelly/KTOO)
The City and Borough of Juneau will seek input from the U.S. Attorney’s office on whether the practice of having cruise ship crewmembers tie up tender boats to CBJ docks exposes the city to potential lawsuits.
Tender boats are the small vessels that shuttle passengers between a cruise ship, anchored off shore, and the city’s lightering dock downtown.
In March, local members of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union came to the Assembly Human Resources Committee with concerns about allowing cruise ships workers to tie the boats up. The longshoremen argue the practice is unsafe and may violate U.S. labor laws.
Assemblyman Jesse Kiehl sits on the Human Resources Committee.
“The question it raised, which we discussed at the Human Resources Committee, was whether the city is satisfied from a risk management standpoint that the employment laws are being followed,” Kiehl said.
The committee asked CBJ Port Director Carl Uchytil to look into the issue. He consulted with two cruise industry groups and determined the practice is safe. But he felt unqualified to comment on whether it violates labor laws. The industry maintains the practice is legal.
At this week’s Assembly Committee of the Whole meeting, City Attorney John Hartle suggested asking Juneau-based Assistant U.S. Attorney Jack Schmidt to investigate.
“It’s within Mr. Schmidt’s U.S. Attorney’s jurisdiction to do so,” said Hartle. “We have various factual allegations, which I have no idea what’s correct and what’s not correct. And that’s my suggestion.”
The assembly agreed with the recommendation, though Hartle warned that Schmidt could choose not to answer the request.
Schmidt told KTOO Tuesday that he would have to see the request before deciding how to respond.
Greens Creek owner Hecla Mining Company is seeking federal approval to expand the tailings disposal facility at the silver, gold, lead and zinc mine on Admiralty Island. A draft Environmental Impact Statement for the project is out for public review through August. The project timeline calls for a final EIS and Record of Decision in November.
Also tonight, Assembly members will hear from Port Director Carl Uchytil on the methods used by some cruise lines to tie up shuttle boats to the city’s lightering dock when transporting passengers back and forth to ships. Some assembly members asked Uchytil to look into it after local longshoremen raised safety concerns. In a memo to the Assembly Uchytil says cruise line officials have agreed to use two mooring lines and minimal power for all lightering operations in Juneau.
Tonight’s CBJ Assembly Committee of the Whole meeting starts at 6 o’ clock in City Hall Assembly Chambers.
The Juneau Assembly received no comments on the city and borough’s proposed operating and capital projects budgets last night (Monday).
The $319-million Fiscal Year 2013 budget ordinance was up for a public hearing, along with an ordinance appropriating funds for Juneau School District operations next year. The Assembly adopted a motion setting the city’s local contribution to schools at $23-million. But both ordinances were referred to the Finance Committee for further review.
The Assembly also sent an ordinance setting the FY 13 mill levy at 10.89 mills back the assembly. That measure also received no public comment.
The city charter requires a public hearing on the budget proposal by May 1st. The Assembly will likely hold more hearings later in the budget process. The mill levy must be adopted before the Assembly can approve the spending plan. The charter requires approval of the budget by June 15th.
The Assembly last night also approved renaming the Douglas Boat Harbor as the “Mike Pusich Douglas Harbor,” after the long-time island resident who served the community in many different capacities.
Mayor Bruce Botelho explains the Planning Commission appeals process to Assembly member Ruth Danner. (Photo by Casey Kelly/KTOO)
Juneau Assembly Member Ruth Danner last night (Monday) continued to argue for a full vetting of a Planning Commission decision allowing Coogan General, LLC to operate a rock crusher at a gravel pit along Montana Creek Road.
But her protests may have backfired, and if the decision is appealed, the Assembly likely won’t be deciding the matter.
The Assembly typically is the board of appeal for Planning Commission decisions. But Mayor Bruce Botelho says Danner, through her actions as an Assembly member and as a private citizen, has killed any chance the body might have had at considering the matter impartially.
“I think where we are today – given the extent to which we have now been given lots of information and an advocacy of one part – I think it would difficult for us to say that we could render a decision, which is fair to all parties,” Botelho said. “And has the appearance of fairness to all parties, which is as important I think in terms of securing the integrity of the system that we have in place.”
Botelho last week proposed censuring Danner for a comment she made at the Planning Commission meeting where the rock crusher was approved. According to a transcript of the meeting Danner said the city’s Law Department had “misled” commissioners in the past. She narrowly escaped censure by apologizing to City Attorney John Hartle and City Manager Kim Kiefer.
But last night, in a rambling, 12-minute prepared statement – in which she waxed at length about Watergate, Richard Nixon and the Open Meetings Act – Danner seemed to backtrack a bit.
“The 60s are over. Backroom deals are no longer allowed. There are new rules to the game, and the public process that must be followed,” she said.
Danner alleges the Law Department found a loophole in city code that allowed the rock crusher to be permitted in the residential neighborhood. She cites an email from City Planner Beth McKibben last November, where McKibben said a rock crusher was not allowed.
“The Planning Commission diligently scrubs through the facts of an application and the related code and makes their ruling based on the law,” said Danner. “But when they receive word that the Law Department has re-interpreted code to suddenly allow for something that staff has already ruled is not permissible, what are they supposed to believe?”
Danner pleaded with her fellow assembly members to join her in demanding that the Law Department reveal its interpretation of the code allowing the rock crusher.
When none of the other members offered her a lifeline, Mayor Botelho stated his opinion that the public record had been significantly compromised. The former state Attorney General said Danner should have waited until the matter was appealed to the assembly to start asking questions.
“To the extent that the Planning Commission makes decisions with which a member of the public disagrees, there’s a specific process and that process is the process of appeal,” said Botelho. “And that is the opportunity for the Assembly to determine whether a mistake has been made.”
City Attorney Hartle agreed with Botelho, and said if the matter were appealed to the Assembly, he would recommend that it be decided by a hearing officer. In the past, Hartle said the city had paid between $10,000 and $20,000 dollars for the services of a hearing officer.
Danner continued to argue her case until Assembly Member Karen Crane asked that the meeting be declared over.
“I just think at this point, the discussion is really inappropriate, because Ms. Danner is referring to other hearings and issues and making comments about situations of which some of us have no knowledge,” Crane said. “The mayor has laid out that there is a process, there’s a process to go through. You may not be happy with that process. But it is in place, and I think that’s the way we’re going to proceed. We’re not going to change the decisions or the process with this discussion.”
In her final protest, Danner said other Assembly members seemed to want to get home before 11 o’ clock rather than fully explore and analyze the issue. Botelho stopped her, called the remark inappropriate and ended the meeting.
In an interview later, Danner said she didn’t think her neighbors would appeal the rock crusher permit, because of the money, time and resources it would require. If the appeal does happen, she said she’d have no problem with it being heard by a hearing officer, rather than the Assembly.
“I haven’t seen a whole lot of free thinking amongst my fellow assembly members,” said Danner.
The neighbors who oppose the rock crusher must file an appeal by May 2nd. Peggy Matson, who lives in the area and asked the Assembly last night (Monday) to release the Law Department’s advice to the Planning Commission, said the neighbors haven’t decided what they are going to do.
