Government

The Parnell Administration is looking to fill the void left by the closure of the Alaska Coastal Management Program in June.

The program helped coordinate the local, state, and federal permitting process for development projects in coastal areas of the state. Last session, the administration and House Republicans fought proposed changes designed to make it more accountable to local communities, and the legislature failed to reauthorize the program.

State Division of Oil and Gas Director Bill Barron told the House Resources Committee this week (Tuesday) that the Department of Natural Resources has established a special task force to help developers navigate permitting issues. He says the administration has no plans to re-establish the old Coastal Management system. Instead, the task force is looking at modifying the Office of Project Management and Permitting – or O-Pump.

“What we’re trying to structure, recognizing that OPMP has worked very well, is there a way we could have – for lack of a better term – O-PUMP lite,” said Barron. “Something that a smaller company can use to help coordinate that. Is that a twist on ACMP? Maybe. It depends on how you slice the words.”

Bethel Democrat Bob Herron – who attempted to negotiate reauthorization of Coastal Management last session – asked Barron about the practical side of the administration’s work.

“Is O-PUMP lite going to be recognized by your federal counterparts?” asked Herron.

“That’s yet to be seen,” Barron said. “I believe part of that is how we structure it and present it. But we’ll find out.”

A citizens’ initiative co-sponsored by Juneau Mayor Bruce Botelho that would re-establish an Alaska Coastal Management Program is currently under review by Lieutenant Governor Mead Treadwell’s office. Botelho says the program gave local communities input into projects proposed in their backyards, but it also helped developers.

“One of the great features of coastal zone management is the opportunity for basically one-stop permitting – the idea that all agencies would work together in terms of a streamlined permitting process and coordination, which now is lacking,” said Botelho. “And of course the second element which I think is of particular importance is that the federal government would be required to submit its plans for review.”

The proposed initiative was submitted to the Lt. Governor’s office October 7th. Treadwell will rule by December 6th on whether sponsors can begin gathering nearly 26-thousand signatures to put it on next November’s ballot.

The Department of Natural Resources will be back before lawmakers during the upcoming session.

The Juneau Assembly has set its top ten goals and priorities for the next year.

The list includes gaining support for a new State Library Archives and Museum building in the Capital City. The state recently broke ground on the 124.5-million dollar project in the Willoughby District, though it’s not yet fully funded. Assemblywoman Karen Crane – a former state library director – says it’s important to keep pushing for the so-called SLAM building, which could spark public and private investment in Juneau.

“There now looks like there might be some support for it within the administration,” Crane says. “And if it doesn’t get funded within the next year or two, the project is not going to go forward.”

Deputy Mayor David Stone pushed for a financial transition plan to help the city adjust to an expected decline in state and federal assistance.

“I think we have a responsibility to future assemblies, as well as our citizens to have a good financial plan for how we’re going to weather this storm,” says Stone.

Perhaps the most controversial item on the list is a review of whether or not to promote development of the AJ Mine. Because the mine is so divisive, Crane says it’s important to decide how the matter will be resolved, and when.

“There’s a significant number of people in the community who are very nervous about this, and I think it would be helpful if we could lay out for them in some more detail how the process is going to go,” Crane says. “And for ourselves: What are going to be the issues that make this project either a project that moves forward or that we decide is not moving forward?”

The assembly goals list is finalized annually after the fall municipal election. This year’s version was narrowed down from about 60 goals discussed at an assembly retreat last month.

CBJ Assembly Top 10 Goals for 2011

• Support new state library, archives and museum (SLAM)
• Find ways to reach out not only to our neighboring Southeast communities, but all Alaska communities to enhance Juneau as the Capital City and an important regional economic and transportation hub
• Actively promote Juneau as a World Class Climate Research center
• Develop a CBJ financial transition plan for the potential future decline of state and federal assistance
• Continue to support fisheries development in Juneau through infrastructure development
• Complete review of the potential development of the AJ Mine for initial go/no go decision
• Successfully recruit and hire a new city manager
• Ensure that Juneau has a functioning local solid waste disposal option into the future
• Implement a long term solution for Juneau’s sewage solids
• Identify a route and begin permitting the extension of North Douglas Highway

How will Eaglecrest look 20 years from now? Will the city-owned ski area be bigger? Will there be cabins and condominiums, restaurants and bars?

Will summer cruise ship tourists put it on their agenda during their few hours in port?

A host of “what if’s” are under consideration in a long-range master plan being prepared to guide area development over the next 20 years.

Jim Calvin of Juneau’s McDowell Group is heading up the research. He says the master plan will look at the opportunities now available to Eaglecrest that would get more people enjoying the mountain.

“”It also will develop a set of criteria the board can use in 5, 10, or 15 years to evaluate proposals in light of what the community considers to be compatible uses of Eaglecrest that are consistent with how the community values Eaglecrest today,” Calvin says.

The study has been underway since August, beginning with a random telephone survey of 450 Juneau households and an assessment of the Juneau market, inclulding demographics, Calvin says.

“What are the demographics in terms of age and income? And what do other analysts and what do we see in terms of future population growth?”

In the last three years, Eaglecrest has added one new lift and replaced the platter pull with a chairlift. A gravel road winds to the top of the mountain, a major improvement for the summer hiking and biking crowd. Calvin says much of the master plan work is studying the potential summer visitor market.

“How non-residents spend their time when they’re here and how much they spend for the various excursions they enjoy while they’re in Juneau,” Calvin explains.

McDowell Group is working with the international ski area planning firm SE Group. The organization has worked with ski areas all over the country and has seen what works and doesn’t work, especially summertime development.

The Eaglecrest study team will present what they’ve learned so far at a public meeting on Wednesday, from 7 to 9:30 p.m., at Centennial Hall.

Calvin says people will want to hear SE Group’s presentation on summer and winter developments that have been successful at other ski areas. 

SE Group also is putting together displays on potential activities to expand resident and visitor use at Eaglecrest, such as new hiking and mountain biking trails.

Jan Caulfield is facilitating tomorrow’s public meeting, the first of two on the master plan.

“We’re really hoping the evening will get people thinking and coming in with written comments at a later date,” Caulfield says. “We’re asking people to submit comments by the end of November that we can work with during the planning process.”

The information gleaned so far by the study group will be presented tomorrow (Wednesday) at 7 p.m., followed by questions and the displays. Another public meeting will be held in February.

Caulfield says Juneau residents also should take an online survey asking what types of development Juneau residents would like to see at their mountain. It can be found at http://skijuneau.com.

The City and Borough of Juneau will file an annexation petition with the state’s Local Boundary Commission tomorrow (Wednesday), seeking to incorporate roughly 1,952 square miles of unorganized land south of the current CBJ boundary.

The assembly voted 7 to 1 last night (Monday) in favor of an ordinance authorizing the petition. The dissenting vote was cast by new member Jesse Kiehl, who questioned the timing of the move.

Juneau is filing its annexation petition in response to the City of Petersburg, which wants to form a borough that includes the area in question. CBJ officials say the land most appropriately belongs with Juneau, pointing to model borough boundaries developed by the state more than 20 years ago that identified it for annexation to the Capital City.

During discussion on the matter, Kiehl asked City Attorney John Hartle why the sudden rush to annex it now.

“I suppose it was the manager’s and the mayor’s political judgment that if Juneau didn’t do something, then the Local Boundary Commission would near by default place those lands into the proposed Petersburg borough,” said Hartle.

Kiehl also questioned City Manager Rod Swope about what affect annexing the largely undeveloped and unpopulated area would have on Juneau’s budget. Swope said right now it would be negligible.

“At this point in time costs are minimal to virtually nonexistent,” Swope said. “And until which time there is actually any kind of significant development in that area, there would not be costs to us.”

Kiehl said he voted no on the ordinance because he didn’t think Petersburg’s move to incorporate the land was sufficient reason to trigger annexation by Juneau.

“If we had a very strong interest in these lands, we would have done better to be the first to file for them before the boundary commission, rather than to do so in response to one of our neighbors,” said Kiehl.

Last week Juneau filed a responsive brief to Petersburg’s petition to form a borough with the Local Boundary Commission. The brief doesn’t argue against the proposed borough, but says the disputed area has more administrative ties to Juneau than Petersburg.

Both communities will be able to make more arguments before that matter is settled, both in writing and at hearings before the boundary commission.

Assemblyman Randy Wanamaker was recused from last night’s discussion and vote on the annexation petition due to a conflict of interest.

Wanamaker is on the board of directors for Juneau Native Corporation Goldbelt. The company owns 30-thousand acres at Hobart Bay, in the area being contested by Juneau and Petersburg.

Goldbelt Vice President Derek Duncan reiterated the company’s desire to have the land remain unincorporated for now. But he said it could make its borough preference known soon.

“We will take into consideration how a borough government will affect the development of our economic opportunities at Hobart Bay. We will also continue to weigh what borough option is best politically for Goldbelt in the future,” said Duncan.

Sealaska, the regional Native Corporation for Southeast Alaska, owns about 20-thousand acres of subsurface mining rights in the same area as Goldbelt’s Hobart Bay land. But Sealaska officials say they’ll follow Goldbelt’s lead on expressing a borough preference.

The entire contested area consists of everything from the southern CBJ boundary, as far south as Cape Fanshaw and east to the Canadian border.

The Juneau Assembly will undertake an expedited search for a new city manager to replace the retiring Rod Swope.

At its Committee of the Whole meeting last night (Monday), the assembly decided to only advertise the position in Alaska, and set the deadline for applications for December 1st – one month from today. The assembly will then take two weeks to narrow the list of applicants down to a top five. Interviews will take place in January, with the goal of offering the job to the chosen candidate on January 30th.

Mayor Bruce Botelho said the timeline should be manageable.

“I don’t think we’re going to be overwhelmed if we keep to our decision to recruit only within the state,” Botelho said.

The assembly also decided on a salary range of 135-thousand to 150-thousand dollars. That’s at the low end of what municipal managers typically make in Alaska.

Swope first retired almost three years ago. But when the initial search fizzled, the assembly asked him to come back on a two-year contract, which was due to end yesterday. Last month, Swope agreed to stay on through March 31st, when he says he’ll retire for good.

Deputy Manager Kim Kiefer has expressed interest in the position. She was interim manager during Swope’s sabbatical.

City Manager and City Attorney are the only positions hired by the assembly.

Southeast tribal officials are welcoming a decision by a state judge that’s based on their inherent right of self-governance. The latest opinion specifies that their jurisdiction includes the issuance of child support orders that the State of Alaska has, so far, refused to honor.

“I was just delighted,” said attorney Holly Handler who argued the case for the Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska. CCTHITA is the sovereign tribal government for over 27,000 Tlingit and Haida Indians worldwide.

“The Tribe has been waiting for sometime to get a decision in this case,” said Handler.

Tribal court orders specifying the garnishment of income tax refunds, unemployment benefits, and Permanent Fund Dividends were ignored by the State of Alaska. Tribal courts had issued the orders for either child support, or for reimbursement of benefits paid out by the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program, the tribe’s version of the Alaska Temporary Assistance Program.

CCTHITA filed the suit in January 2010. Oral arguments were held last April. Superior Court Judge Philip Pallenberg of Juneau issued the 16-page opinion on Tuesday, October 25 which referred to the recent State v. Native Village of Tanana opinion and the pivotal John v. Baker opinion issued by the Alaska Supreme Court in 1999. Justices ruled then that tribes had the sovereign authority to adjudicate custody of tribal children in their own courts, but they did not specifically touch on the issue of child support. Judge Pallenberg, however, writes that child custody and support are naturally intertwined. In State courts, for example, both issues are considered at the same time. Pallenberg considers monetary support as an integral part of any custody determination and a paramount duty that any parent has to their children.

“It’s not charting any strange and bizarre territory,” said Handler. “It’s really a direct application of John v. Baker to child support cases.”

David Voluck, chief judge for the Sitka Tribe of Alaska and family law magistrate for the CCTHITA, calls it a strong and solid opinion that’s based on centuries of precedent, principles, and legal reasoning of federal Indian law.

“Every other facet of family law that impacts a child — it is agreed — can fall under the inherent sovereighty of a tribal court,” said Voluck. “So it really makes no sense to argue that the financial support (or) the child support, that’s different.”

Voluck says he hears as many as thirty cases a month. He says he can recall at least ten cases that he’s heard where a poor working relationship between the tribe and the State has affected support for the family.

Attorneys who defended the State did not respond to inquiries seeking comment. But — among their claims outlined in briefing documents — the Central Council has no jurisdiction under Alaska’s version of the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, the law that allows recognition of support orders from different states.

Judge Pallenberg’s opinion notes an amendment by the Legislature two years ago that stemmed from federal welfare reform legislation; the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act included a ‘tribe’ as part of the definition of a ‘state.’

Jessie Archibald, a staff attorney for the Tribal Child Support Unit, says the tribe’s child support order should be processed just as any state child support case is processed. The Tribal Child Support Unit has handled about 500 cases since its inception four years ago.

“Initially, there was just a small number of cases,” said Archibald. “As we’ve grown, there are more and more cases.”

State of Alaska Child Support Division Director John Mallonee says they are still reviewing the opinion. He declined to immediately comment on it or any potential impacts on his division’s operations. He referred further questions to the State Department of Revenue’s Commissioner’s office.

Additional related claims still must be decided in the case before a final judgment is issued. Since state attorneys did not respond for comment, it’s unknown whether they plan to eventually appeal.