Palmer City Council won’t spend to fight Borough Prop. 1

PALMER — After receiving an earful from local residents supporting and opposing Proposition 1 on the Oct. 2 ballot, Palmer City Council has decided not to spend up to $5,000 of city money to fight the measure.

Prop. 1, if passed, allows private property owners to receive compensation from the Mat-Su Borough or municipalities within the Borough if the entities enact land zoning policies that could negatively impact the value of their land.

Called the Private Property Act, the ballot question was debated Tuesday at Palmer City Hall and the council’s consideration of spending city money to put out information about the act.

Public comment varied at the special meeting, but it was clear Penny Nixon, co-sponsor of Prop. 1, objected to the city spending taxpayer money to fund a campaign against his ballot proposal.

“This is indeed the purest anti-Americanism, my friends, in its best Orwellian form,” Nixon said.

Although most of the Palmer council expressed concern over Prop. 1, agreed spending city money to fight it was not appropriate. Palmer City Council Member Jim Wood believes the council, and government as a whole, shouldn’t take sides on such issues.

“We were not elected to decide for the citizens what they can decide for themselves,” he said.

The council voted unanimously to discard the campaign proposal, but council member Tony Pippel still believes there is a need to provide voters with information about Prop. 1.

“The main goal is to educate the public,” Pippel said. “But I don’t think there was any real intention to spend the money.”

Even though the proposal to fight Prop. 1 failed, Tuesday’s meeting was a success because the council received useful public input, Pippel said.

While the main issue was addressed and dismissed, talk of Prop. 1 revealed many thoughts and opinions about the controversial act. One of the most controversial issues pertaining to the act is the potential costs of voting “yes” on Prop. 1.

“One of the big fallacies of their position is that it’s going to bankrupt the city,” Nixon said about those who oppose the measure.

A similar law passed in 2004 in Oregon has resulted in thousands of claims being filed against government entities, but there has been no effort to compensate the property owners, Nixon said.

While some believe a similar measure here would not lead to bankruptcy for Palmer, Wasilla or the Borough, opponents of the proposition believe there would be plenty of associated costs.

“It’s a misconception that this won’t cost money because claims will be waved,” Palmer Mayor John Combs said.

Combs explained that even if the claims were waved, public entities would still have to pay for legal fees and the time spent dealing with the claims.

Contact Chris Gillow at 352-2284 or chris.gillow@frontiersman.com.