Retiring teacher, coach urges Colony grads to ‘find their 68’
By Jeremiah Bartz Frontiersman.com A football coach using a hockey reference as the centerpiece for his keynote address may
You want change? Consider the following points.
Have you ever wondered why so few people attend Mat-Su Borough Assembly, Planning Commission, Platting Board, and all the other boards, commissions and committee meetings? Could it be because they are all held in downtown Palmer, far removed from the center of the population? Government was created to serve the people, but when people have to travel as far as 50 miles one way to reach the seat of government to conduct daily business or attend public meetings, government no longer serves its constituency.
When the Borough was created in 1964, the intent was to place the Borough seat in Palmer for the first five years, with the provision to have the people decide where it should be sited permanently by calling for a referendum vote. However, the adopted Resolution 2-64 did not include “for the first five years.” That was 44 years ago. This location has served the Borough residents well until a few years ago when population growth shifted to the north.
The 1960 U.S. Census for Palmer lists 1,181 residents (628 males and 553 females), while the total Borough population was reported as just over 5,000 people. In 2007, the official population for Palmer was 5,506, while in 2008, Department of Labor figures estimate 77,074 throughout the Borough with a population projection of more than 100,000 within the next 10 years. Are you getting the picture of the growth pattern?
Instead of wasting taxpayers’ dollars trying to restore a 70-year-old former school-turned-Borough-building, why not move the seat to a site that will best serve the public now and in the future? Construct a new building with the funds intended for restoration, as well as the proceeds from the sale of the current building. All Borough departments should be housed in one building, which would result in lower operating costs and provide greater efficiency and performance. The residents deserve the right to get all their business transacted in one building without having to run all over town.
There will, of course, be some who may resist and strongly oppose moving the seat for many reasons, such as not being practical nor financially feasible. But in reality, it is because change is never easily accepted. If so, leave it in Palmer to continue serving the Matanuska portion of the Borough. The core area of Palmer and its adjacent surroundings command an entirely different lifestyle than the residents of the Susitna portion of the Borough.
During the last several years, the assembly concentrated heavily on changes to Borough code placing regulations and restrictions on an area-wide basis that places a heavy burden on residents living in the rural portion of the Borough. The newly enacted Title 27 especially places regulations and restrictions on private property owners that should not, and probably will not, be adhered to in the more remote areas — not because they intentionally defy the code, but rather because they just cannot afford it. Whether one wants to believe it or not, we are definitely two different communities (urban and rural) functioning under one Borough, controlled by urban officials.
When a Borough is as large as an entire state, the size of its budget, along with all the power it yields, becomes a huge temptation for conflicts of interest — and yes, also sets the stage for potential corruption. With two Boroughs, rural and urban, the odds of this happening are cut in half, but even more importantly the Susitna Borough would provide only the services the resident voters request to maintain the lifestyle they desire and at a much lower tax rate. Why should the rural areas pay the same rate as those living in the core area without receiving the same benefits? And why should the residents of a rural area be compelled to abide by the restrictions adopted mainly for the core area?
If not now, later may place us in the same position we now face with trying to move the capitol from Juneau. What say you, fellow resident?
Jay Nolfi is a former Mat-Su Borough Assembly member and a resident of Big Lake.