Mayor vetoes assembly's intervention decision

MAT-SU -- In an action dubbed "game-playing" by one assembly member, Mat-Su Borough Mayor Tim Anderson on Wednesday officially vetoed an action that took place at the previous borough assembly meeting.

At the meeting in question, which took place Sept. 18, assembly member Talis Colberg brought forward a memorandum to allocate $30,000 from assembly reserves to file an amicus brief in a lawsuit against the Alaska Redistricting Board, the group responsible for adopting a plan to divide the state into 40 House districts. The plan is being challenged by, at last count, nine entities.

Colberg's memo was amended by then-assembly member Larry DeVilbiss, who moved that the amicus brief filing be changed to a motion to intervene.

Anderson, at the meeting, ruled DeVilbiss' motion out of order, since it significantly changed the intent of the memo and therefore should have been readvertised to the public. DeVilbiss moved to overrule Anderson's ruling, and, with a 4-3 vote, the motion passed, and the motion to allocate $30,000 to prepare a motion for intervention passed, also by a 4-3 vote.

It is that motion Anderson vetoed, after receiving an opinion that the amended memo should have been advertised again to ensure the borough complied with the Open Meetings Act.

"The public was informed of the proposal to file an amicus brief and nowhere in the summary of the proposed action, not in the Action Memorandum itself, was there a hint that the proposal would expand beyond the limits of filing an amicus brief," Anderson wrote in a release announcing the veto.

Anderson said he would have issued the veto sooner, but a looming deadline for applications on a housing project on which he is working with Wasilla Area Seniors Inc. has eaten much of his time.

Borough clerk Sandra Dillon said Anderson had until the next meeting of the assembly to veto the action and, in her experience, some mayoral vetoes have been issued hours after the meeting and some not until the day of the next assembly meeting. Anderson's was issued one day prior to Tuesday's assembly meeting.

"That's not abnormal," Dillon said.

But assembly member Kelly Lankford Ladere told Anderson she felt his move was political strategy geared at not allowing assembly members a chance to override the veto at Tuesday's meeting.

Ladere attempted to bring forward a motion to override the veto, but Anderson, after hearing the opinion of borough attorney Michael Gatti, said the motion was out of order, since the veto was not on the agenda for that meeting.

Anderson denied that he timed the veto so the assembly would not be able to act on the veto Tuesday.

"To be quite honest with you . . . I didn't even think about that kind of stuff," Anderson said. "I thought all along that they could [act on it] that night."

The issue will be addressed by the assembly in one form or another at the Nov. 6 assembly meeting. Both Colberg and assembly member Sara Jansen requested that a memorandum allocating $30,000 to file an amicus brief come before the assembly at that meeting.

After Anderson asked if the intent of the request was a resolution to allow another public hearing on the process or simply a memorandum, Jansen said a memorandum was all that was needed at this point.

"I don't want to have a public hearing," Jansen said. "We have talked about this ad nauseum. I think we should bring it to the table to see if we can get it passed and be done with it."