DeVilbiss urged to quit MEA board

PALMER — New Mat-Su Borough Mayor Larry DeVilbiss doesn’t see a problem with his continued service on the Matanuska Electric Association Board of Directors, despite the borough having control over various items that could affect MEA’s bottom line.

At least one vocal Valley resident disagrees. Former Friends of Mat-Su President Kathy Wells believes DeVilbiss should have stepped down from the MEA board as soon as he was elected mayor last month.

“Mr. DeVilbiss stated during a mayoral forum at the Alaska Club that he would insert a new agenda item if elected — repeal,” Wells said during the public comment period at Monday’s MEA Board of Directors meeting. “This would be an opportunity to repeal any ordinance already in code. Repeal of adopted legislation such as the Power Plant Ordinance or the Coalbed Methane Conditional Use Permit ordinance are two examples of legislation that would directly benefit MEA if they were repealed.”

MEA’s battle against the borough’s efforts to regulate power plants goes back a few years.

In summer 2007, the Mat-Su Borough Assembly adopted a power plant ordinance regulating the building of power plants within the borough. This affected plans for two 100-megawatt plants — one coal-fired and the other natural gas — proposed by MEA for outside Palmer.

The ordinance requires a permit be obtained from the borough before locating, building or operating a power plant. The application requirements address issues such as location, construction, land use, air and water quality, human health, noise, hazardous materials handling, geological hazards, traffic and transportation.

“I hope it will insure our air continues to be clean, our water won’t be impacted and we can still eat the fish,” then-deputy mayor Lynne Woods said at that time.

The following year, MEA launched a campaign against the ordinance and successfully collected nearly 3,200 signatures on petitions to support a repeal of the borough’s ordinance. This meant voters would have a chance to decide on the repeal issue in that October’s borough election.

The proposition failed at the voting booths and the ordinance still stands.

During Wells’ statement Monday, she said that even the perception of a conflict of interest around DeVilbiss should be taken seriously. She pointed out that MEA Manager Joe Griffith had made two donations to DeVilbiss’ campaign for mayor.

“Of course, Mr. Griffith as a citizen has every right to donate or support candidates,” Wells told the board. “However, in some roles in our work life, if donations are made it gives a perception of conflict or a potential ethical dilemma. Therefore, it is wise to not participate in that type of support.”

Even in DeVilbiss’ blog on MEA business he kept last spring, DeVilbiss seems to agree with Wells’ philosophy. He said in a post dated April 13, 2010, that he didn’t apologize for suggesting that there was an appearance of a conflict of interest on the part of fellow MEA board candidates Bill Tull and Katie Hurley, who were voting to directly benefit a group that had endorsed them and assisted in their board campaigns.

He pointed out that the MEA Ratepayers Alliance contributed nearly $10,000 to those campaigns.

“At a minimum, those potential conflicts should be acknowledged and ruled on in due process,” DeVilbiss stated in his blog.

In his April 1, 2010, blog post called “costly decisions,” DeVilbiss used an example of a past board motion to make his point.

“There was a motion at a board meeting Sept. 8, 2008, to stop supporting the advertising to repeal the borough ordinance that imposed California-style permitting restrictions on all power generation in the borough that exceed 20 megawatts,” he blogged. “Two independent reviews of that study indicated that the cost of that single ordinance alone would be $9 million over the 30 years life of a generation plant. Director Katie Hurley put it on the agenda and director Janet Kincaid made the motion. With almost no debate and without answering my question, ‘How is this motion in the interest of MEA?’ the motion passed with only David Glines and David Dahms and myself dissenting. Subsequently, after skillful manipulation of the language on the ballot by the borough attorney, and tens of thousands of dollars spent by out-of-state environmental agencies in alignment with Friends of Mat-Su, the borough vote to repeal failed.”

DeVilbiss didn’t address in his blog contributions made to his mayoral campaign by the coal industry that could be perceived as doing exactly what he says he’s against in his blog.

In her concluding comments to the board, Wells said that although the board has received an opinion from its attorney that DeVilbiss’ presence on the board doesn’t represent a conflict of interest, she suggested the board either seek the opinion of an independent lawyer or ask DeVilbiss to resign from the board “so he can go forward with integrity and serve all of the borough residents as mayor.”

During a discussion among the directors later in the meeting, MEA board member Kit Jones agreed with Wells that the board should get the opinion of an outside attorney.

Director Janet Kincaid expressed frustration that she’s never seen the attorney’s written opinion on the matter.

“Countless people have come up to me about the potential conflict of interest and all I can tell them is our attorney has given his opinion, but I’ve never seen it,” Kincaid said.

There also appeared to be some discrepancy on the matter between the board attorney and the in-house MEA attorney, but the differences weren’t clear during Monday’s meeting.

The board voted 3 to 2 to postpone until the March meeting the discussion of whether to seek another legal opinion on the matter.

DeVilbiss said after the meeting that he doesn’t think there’s a conflict as long as he removes himself from any discussions or votes involving borough matters that would directly affect MEA.

“I want to thank Miss Wells for suggesting that repealing the power plant ordinance would be in MEA’s best interest,” DeVilbiss said. “If that’s true, why would the board vote against the repeal?”

DeVilbiss said he believes Wells is simply going after him because her mayoral candidate, Brian Sullivan, did not win the election.

“It’s just sour grapes on her part,” he said.

Wells responded later that she’s not surprised by that comment.

“That has nothing to do with it,” Wells said. “He doesn’t understand. I would have said the same thing if Mr. Sullivan was serving on a board. You can’t have that sort of cross-pollination.”

Contact K.T. McKee at kate.mckee@frontiersman.com or 352-2252.