Borough mayor uses veto power to save $100,000

Mat-Su Borough Mayor Talis Colberg has vetoed another action by the borough assembly.

You may recall the first time when he vetoed an ordinance that would put a boroughwide sales tax on the Oct. 6 ballot. That one was overrode by the assembly, but the people defeated the ordinance by a 3-1 count.

This time, Mayor Colberg used his red pen to turn away a resolution that would have spent $100,000 in borough money for a marketing campaign aimed at making people aware of the need to reduce energy consumption. That effort is led by the Renewable Energy Alaska Project. So far, the only other entity that has contributed is the energy project itself, in the amount of $25,000. Nobody else — not even the utility companies — have chipped in, so why should the borough?

Being watchful of taxpayers’ money is just one of the good things about the mayor’s decision. Maybe $100,000 is a drop in the bucket regarding the overall borough budget, but the mayor was correct in saying there are many problems that need correction in the Valley and they all require money. He mentioned a failed school bond package to repair roofs and funding for libraries.

In rejecting the money for the advertising campaign, the mayor wrote:

“It is not the job of the government to tell people how to think. We can and should provide support to libraries so people can have access to ideas and make their own decisions.”

Probably the most important part of his reasoning against the expenditure, though, was that he didn’t think that amount of money should be spent by an assembly action known as a consent agenda. That’s where several items can be voted on with just one motion.

Assembly consent agendas — cities have them as well — require no public hearings.

The mayor should be commended for watching over the assembly and how it spends money. Too many people in the Valley have a real mistrust of governments and how they operate. This kind of governance by Mayor Colberg should be refreshing to skeptics out there who are wary of elected officials, even if it may unnerve some assembly members.

The resolution regarding the $100,000 expenditure is expected to be on the agenda again at the Nov. 3 assembly meeting.