Mayor’s actions are out of line

Whether House Bill 77 is a benefit or pox, Mat-Su Borough Mayor Larry DeVilbiss’ efforts to support its passage are concerning because of his overly broad approach to his position of mayor.

The legislation, introduced by Gov. Sean Parnell and passed by the state House last session, awaits action by the state Senate this year. Supporters say the changes proposed in HB 77 are necessary to streamline the state’s permitting process for economic development projects.

But this could have major implications for Valley residents who rely on fish for food, their heritage and for their livelihoods. Critics of the bill say it will stifle public input on projects that affect renewable resources, such as salmon, while fast-tracking mining and other resource extraction initiatives.

Count the borough’s Fish and Wildlife Commission among those opposed to the bill. After hearing public testimony, the commission outlined its opposition to HB 77 in a Dec. 16 letter. Meanwhile, the borough assembly voted to not take an official position on the proposed legislation.

That did not stop DeVilbiss from countering with a letter of his own a week later praising the bill. He wrote his letter on borough letterhead and signed it in his capacity as mayor.

But the nature of borough government does not grant DeVilbiss this authority. The borough mayor is largely a ceremonial position, with duties that include things like presiding over meetings, vetoing ordinances, serving as a community liaison at ceremonies and nominating members to boards and commissions.

This is the second time DeVilbiss has taken it upon himself to reach beyond his authority in an effort to influence state policy. The other questionable letter DeVilbiss sent concerned an ongoing redistricting effort for state House and Senate voting districts.

The assembly voted not to weigh in on that issue as well.

Nonetheless, DeVilbiss sent a letter offering support for the partisan plan. When called to answer for his actions, DeVilbiss argued the letter was sent from his personal email, on his personal time and that he was speaking as a private citizen, not as a representative of the borough.

Considering he appended the title of borough mayor to his signature when he signed the letter, this is a flimsy argument. Never mind that once elected, public officials can’t legitimately claim private citizen status.

This is especially true when weighing in on a politically charged matter like redistricting, which is filled with plenty of partisan gamesmanship and too little sportsmanship.

Whichever side is right regarding HB 77, we look forward to healthy debate about the matter in the coming months. But rather than argue for or against the proposed legislation, we are more concerned at this point about the way DeVilbiss continues to overstep his authority.

We do not quibble with his position on HB 77. The mayor, like everyone, is entitled to his opinion. But he is not entitled to offer his opinion as the official position of the borough and its residents.