Palmer growth plan nixed

March 9, 2007

By SHARON McBRIDE

Frontiersman

PALMER - Palmer's plan to expand city's limits by nearly 6 square miles died kicking Tuesday night after city council members heard overwhelming public opposition.

The special meeting was scheduled to start at 7 p.m., and by 6:45 p.m., the Palmer Depot was packed to capacity with many left standing.

Despite more than three hours of public testimony, all against annexation, the petition failed by a 2-3 vote.

Voting in favor of submitting the annexation petition to the state was Mayor John Combs and Council Member Ken Erbey. Voting against annexation were Council Members Richard Best, Brad Hanson and Jim Wood. Council Member Tony Pippel excused himself from the process citing a conflict of interest, and Council Member Katherine Vanover was absent.

If the petition for annexation had passed, it then would have been up to the state Local Boundary Commission to decide whether the new city boundaries would include land west to Equestrian Acres subdivision off the Palmer-Wasilla Highway, south to Crimson View subdivision off the Glenn Highway, east to Outer Springer Loop Road, and north to Marsh Road and the Bailey Hill enclave that was left out of the city's last expansion.

It seemed that everyone affected by the proposed annexation boundaries was present Tuesday, and despite Comb's request to keep clapping and cheering to a minimum, no one listened and at times, people shouted at the council members out of turn.

No one in the audience had anything good to say about annexation.

&#8220No to annexation,” said Tom Sojka, a Palmer resident who testified. &#8220It's too big, too fast. Please re-think this, and bring it back to the table. It's OK to pause, because it shows good accountability and consideration toward us - those that you are supposed to represent.”

Sojka said he had collected more than 700 signatures against annexation, and had plans to submit his petition to the Legislature. He also said that he had plans to collect more signatures by the end of the night.

Going straight to the Legislature was a plan that was echoed several times during the public testimony.

&#8220If this thing goes any further, I would urge everyone here to hand write individual letters to send to the Legislature,” said Jack Didrickson, another resident who spoke against annexation. &#8220If the council won't listen, they will do something about it.”

After the Local Boundary Commission, the Legislature has final say on annexation

petitions.

Didrickson's testimony was followed by about three hours of people essentially saying the same thing: &#8220no” to annexation.

&#8220Annexation is a bad idea. All this public opposition should be proof enough,” said Monty Hotchkiss, a resident who has spoken against annexation on many occasions. &#8220But you know, the most distressing thing about this is that you never involved the public. If you had, this kind of meeting might have never been necessary. You keep telling us that everything will stay the same, that we shouldn't be

worried. Yeah right, except we get to pay more taxes.”

Many who spoke said they felt the city council was not sympathetic.

&#8220You need to slow down and start listening to the people,” said Jim Descenty.

&#8220Maybe you'll get to keep your seats (on the city council) a little longer.”

A lot of people who spoke threatened to not vote for the council members when they were up for re-election.

&#8220If you proceed with this, you will find that the people will eventually get to exercise their right to vote,” said Matt Black, another concerned citizen. &#8220You will get voted right off this board.”

Threats and opposition were not enough to sway the votes of Combs or Erbey. Both have been consistent proponents of annexation since the process started back in 2006.

&#8220We need to look at the future of our community,” Erby said after public comment was over. &#8220Palmer is growing, and I see zoning as a way to control and preserve an area. The bottom line is, we need to control the growth of Palmer. We would be able to keep stuff out that people don't want in their back yards.”

Erby cited the new prison as an example.

Combs echoed the same sentiments.

&#8220My promise as mayor is to keep Palmer looking like Palmer,” Combs said.

More than 1,000 people moved to the Palmer area last year, he said.

&#8220The question is, do we want to have a say on how our land is developed? Do we want it to look like the rest of Palmer? Or do we want to take a chance that whoever buys land here will slap up whatever they want?”

At the end of the long night, the petition failed.

&#8220Annexation is important to the city's future,” said Hanson, who voted against the annexation plan. &#8220We do need to annex, but not at the present time. Right now it's not the appropriate thing to do.”

Contact Sharon G. McBride at 352-2250 or sharon.mcbride

@frontiersman.com.