Joint discussion on marijuana by Palmer Council, Board of Economic Development

PALMER — The Palmer City Council held a joint meeting with the Palmer Board of Economic Development (BED) to exchange information concerning economic impacts of various topics within the city of Palmer.

BED chair Dusty Silva briefly brought up the topics of itinerant vendors (that was later discussed during the regular council meeting), exploring annexation, a central business district, tourism, a highway commercial district and what do to with railroad tracks in downtown that remain unused. However, a previous discussion by the BED on the economic impacts of marijuana as directed during a previous council meeting dominated discussion during the meeting. After direction by council members to examine the economic impacts of allowing marijuana dispensaries within the city of Palmer, the BED struggled with the philosophical impetus of the discussion. As Silva moved into discussion about marijuana, the joint meeting erupted in laughter.

“The council said you should talk about this. Oh, we talked about this,” said Silva. “ We decided that really we would wait for an official request rather than a discussion in the joint meeting from the council.”

Councilwoman Sabrena Combs was confused, noting that the direction was to bring information and asked about how the discussion unfolded. Silva concluded that the BED felt that the entire council had not given official direction, but that was possible. BED member Barb Hunt summed up the atmosphere of the previous conversation around the economic impact of marijuana.

“It’s one of those topics that has so much emotion caught up in it that it seems to like divide people immediately,” said Hunt. “It’s a logical discussion to have regardless of where it fits on the voters timelines. It doesn’t mean we’re going to go forward with this but having those discussions and having facts is so important.”

Palmer City Manager Nathan Wallace noted that in 2015, Palmer voters rejected a ballot measure to allow marijuana businesses within city limits, but that the discussion on economic impact was a separate piece, concluding that the philosophical discussion would ultimately be decided at the council level.

“Because the board that we have is appointed for economic development and it’s not the moral compass for the city, that’s kind of what happened in that discussion. It became less and less about economics and more and more about just marijuana in Palmer which I think derailed the whole discussion,” ‘said Wallace. “It should be about that, just the economic piece and not the good, the bad, the ugly of marijuana but what is the economic value of doing that and then it’s up to the council to have the discussion on the philosophy of whether or not marijuana is something that the city should have.”

Mayor Edna DeVries countered in assuming that the social impacts of possible marijuana businesses is part of economic considerations and said that she did not believe the council could direct the BED to examine marijuana from a tax perspective without the social changes.

Community Development Director Brad Hanson was called on to recall the staff research that had been produced, noting that marijuana is an $18 million business within the Mat-Su Borough and that the city of Palmer could add up to $1.5 million in additional sales tax revenue.

“I think then you’re missing the whole point on the economic development. You have to look at not only revenue but the expenses. If you’re not doing that then you are not presenting to us a very objective picture I think,” said DeVries.

While council members remained focused on the ballot measure from 2015 and previous testimony from Janet Kincaid and former police chief Lance Ketterling about, Silva noted that the information gathered was only six months old. Members of the BED objected to even entertaining the discussion of possible marijuana tax revenue.

“Until city council wants to go against the voters or change it, I don’t think you should be asking the board to do things that aren’t in that area yet. So I think its the city council’s responsibility to either negate what the voters asked you to do or take the initiative and go against your voters and say we’re going to do it anyway,” said BED Vice Chair Lorie Koppenberg.

Councilwoman Julie Berberich noted that five years have passed since the voters denied the ballot initiative and said that she believed that providing information is not going against the wishes of the voters. Deputy Mayor Linda Combs said that there is no one that is not looking for additional revenue at any level of government.

“Lucky for us we don’t have to go all the way to Colorado to find that information anymore, we can look right here in the Mat-Su Valley and in Anchorage that have a much more reasonable Alaskan idea of the expenditures and the revenues,” said Berberich. “There is a lot more now than there was in 2015 so people’s feelings about that may have vastly changed since then. It’s just some information so that we can have a little bit more of an idea of what it could be economically to the city of Palmer and I for one would like to see that information.”

Members of the council continued to point to the vote in 2015, including Councilman Richard Best who proposed that the council should wait until a voter initiative passes before entertaining the idea.

“I think the totality of the impact otot he community needs to be looked at,” said Best. “The voters made the choice and it’s the council’s place to continue to implement that until the voters have spoken again.”

During the brief discussion on other topics, Silva noted that she and Hanson had attended a conference from Confluence Alaska on gateway communities, noting that it was personally enlightening for her to focus on the economic impact of the outdoors on gateway communities. Koppenberg was opposed to the city of Palmer’s advertisement of an exercise area at the MTA Events Center at a lower cost than competing gyms in the city. Sabrena Combs had also said that previous council discussion on grant applications from organizations operating outside the city falls on the BED, noting that the BED is obligated to review the portion of code every two years, which had not happened recently. Best called back on his previous council experience in helping to write the legislation. Best noted the strict limit on one mile outside of city boundaries for grant awards.

“Council has blurred those lines by giving monies to entities outside of that one mile. That was an oversight I believe per the rules that we currently have,” said Best.

The discussion around the Hatcher Pass Avalanche Center and Mat-Su Search and Rescue in January had called into question the compliance to the code with recent grants awarded by the council.

“I think it behooves us to actually think outside of these lines a little bit,” said Councilwoman Jill Valerius. “There are certain things that are not happening within one mile of the city of Palmer that definitely positively impact our community.”