Judge sides with Borough in MEA lawsuit

PALMER — A Palmer judge has ruled against Matanuska Electric Association in its attempt to require Mat-Su Borough land use regulations expire if not explicitly approved by voters.

In a two-page decision issued Monday, Superior Court Judge Kari Kristiansen ruled that former Mat-Su Borough Clerk Michelle McGehee was correct in denying a petition to MEA CEO Wayne Carmony. Reached in Juneau Thursday, MEA spokeswoman Lorali Carter said the utility plans to appeal Kristiansen’s decision.

The request for a petition was made after MEA “saw how quickly they were able to pass that power plant ordinance,” Carter said.

Carter was referring to a Borough ordinance passed last year that regulates power plant construction. The utility has argued the ordinance places onerous costs and time-delays on its plans to build a 100-megawatt natural gas power plant. An MEA-sponsored initiative to repeal the ordinance will appear on the ballot in the next Borough election.

“We were hoping that the voters would have more oversight for the Borough’s actions regarding land use planning and land use regulations,” Carter said.

On the other side, Borough Manager John Duffy applauded Kristiansen’s decision.

“We’re very pleased with the court’s decision,” Duffy says in a statement relayed through Borough spokeswoman Patty Sullivan. “Time after time, Borough residents have supported additional planning for our fast growth. Eighty-one percent of people in a survey wanted the Borough to better manage growth. [MEA’s] proposal was a step backwards.”

The lawsuit originated in July 2007 when Carmony submitted 14 signatures and a request for a petition. The petition sought to place on a Borough election ballot an initiative requiring all land use regulations, platting regulations and land use plans adopted after a July 1 sunset — or expire if not specifically adopted by voters.

McGehee rejected the petition and Carmony sued.

In her ruling dated Monday, Kristiansen sided with nearly every argument made by Borough attorney Nicholas Spiropoulos in defending McGehee.

Spiropoulos argued the initiative was actually a referendum, the mechanism voters use to repeal rather than enact laws, and as such it was invalid since referendums must refer to specific laws, not classes of laws. He also argued the petition added a step to the adoption of regulations and ordinances, something not permitted in the initiative process; that the law conflicts with the state constitution; and that it deprives the Borough of duties it is mandated by state law to perform.

For his part, MEA attorney Jim Walker argued the initiative was not, as Spiropolos contented, a referendum. He argued the initiative process gives voters law-making rights essentially identical to that of legislative bodies like the Borough assembly, and the assembly can enact sunset clauses. He said that Spiropoulos’ assertions that it conflicts with state laws are incorrect.

Jim Sykes, head of Utility Watch, an organization often critical of MEA, was quick to respond to Kristiansen’s decision.

“At least the courts recognize MEA’s nonsense in trying to stick it to the [Borough] when they attempted to put in a petition to gut land use,” Sykes says in a response to the ruling.

Contact Andrew Wellner at andrew.wellner@frontiers-man.com or 352-2270.