Bond package barely survives for public hearing

MAT-SU -- Members of the Mat-Su Borough Assembly agreed -- barely -- to allow the public to speak their concerns or support for a $6.2 million parks and outdoor recreation bond proposal put forward by assembly member Jim Colver.

The bond proposal Colver hopes to put on the October ballot was on the agenda to be introduced at Tuesday's assembly meeting, but nearly did not make it to an Aug. 6 public hearing. The proposal was separated out from the many other items set for public hearing at that time, and assembly members debated whether it should be halted at that point or move forward.

"I believe, regrettably, that this item is premature," said assembly member Jody Simpson, after requesting that the item be separated out for discussion.

Simpson, like several other assembly members, had questions about the proposal. She expressed concern that the three projects involved in the bond -- $4 million for infrastructure funds at Hatcher Pass, $1 million to help the Palmer ice arena get off the ground and $1 million to help set aside right of way for trails in the Willow, Houston and Big Lake area -- were randomly selected and not yet ready for funding.

"It pits community against community," Simpson said. "I don't think the city of Wasilla is going to be happy about the fact that we're supporting money for a project in the Palmer area when we didn't step up and support [their facility]."

Colver defended his proposal and asked that assembly members save the debate until the Aug. 6 public hearing.

"It may not be perfect … but we've got to get it to a hearing first," Colver said.

Assembly member Sara Jansen said she, too, believed the idea was too preliminary for a public hearing. She noted that, although a study is on the table indicating that infrastructure must be spent at Hatcher Pass, it has not yet been determined what that money should be spent on. The city of Palmer, she added, has only recently begun formal discussions about the ice rink proposed to be included in the bond package.

"It would be preliminary to put it out to the people until we know what we're doing," Jansen said.

Assembly member Talis Colberg asked Colver what the rush on the package was -- why it should be on the October ballot and not next year's.

Colver said he believed it was time to move forward on Hatcher Pass -- and the bond would provide money when it was needed, not necessarily beforehand.

"Where's the commitment on the part of the borough to come forward with a chunk of money," Colver asked, "and where's that money going to come from? I just want to move it along -- I'm a doer. I like to have things happen."

But some assembly members said, when spending public money, it's better to be prudent. Other assembly members indicated the proposal appeared to be a political matter.

"I think Mr. Colver had really good intentions -- I think that [it's before us] because maybe it's an election year," said assembly member Bruce Bush. "I think it's not very good legislation, and we should stop it here."

Colver disagreed.

"I think that it's unfortunate that you've made this into a political football. It's just an introduction," Colver said. "It doesn't even give a person time to go out and sell the project."

Although assembly members voted down the ordinance's introduction -- with Colver and assembly members Colver, Kelly and Ladere in support, the issue was not over. Later in the meeting, Jansen moved that the matter be reconsidered.

"I'm just going to make everybody mad tonight," Jansen said. "I really do believe that it's bad public policy to pull things from introduction. I do think that Mr. Colver, as much as I respectfully disagree with him, has a right to bring this forward."

Jansen wasn't the only assembly member who changed position on the proposal. The reconsidered motion to introduce the bond package at the Aug. 6 public hearing passed, with Colberg and Simpson opposed.