Veto overrides bring democratic process to logical conclusion

Frontiersman editorial board

The democratic process is alive and well in the Mat-Su Borough Assembly chambers, though the group seems to be a bit more polarized than usual. Perhaps it's the contentious coal-bed methane issue that has drawn clearer lines between some members -- as it has between many people in this community. Whatever the reason, the assembly has succeeded in using the processes available to continue moving forward.

Borough Mayor Tim Anderson had recently exercised his right of veto on two issues before the assembly. He had vetoed the assembly's decision to establish a citizen's advisory committee to contribute to the process of rewriting the borough's subdivision code. He later vetoed an assembly decision to nix public comment at assembly work sessions.

This week the assembly chose to override both vetoes, so the advisory committee will move forward, and public comment at work sessions will be blocked. Whether you agree with the decisions or not is immaterial at this point. The most important thing is that the assembly worked within the constraints of the system to achieve results. The borough assembly has long been successful at reaching consensus through salient discussion, cooperation and compromise. Though there were clearer lines drawn on these recent issues, assembly members still proved their mettle, and their commitment to doing the people's business efficiently. Our elected officials in Juneau would do well to take a lesson from our borough assembly.

One concern that was brought up during this recent debate was that Anderson has exercised his veto power excessively, especially, some say, given the close margins by which he won the seat. In truth, the margin of victory is moot. Anderson has been elected to do a job, and he should be expected to do it the way he deems best. It is true that an excessive use of the veto power can send a message that Anderson is attempting to bully the assembly into accepting his point of view, but the assembly has the last word in any case. Anderson should, of course, use the veto power to protect the will of his constituents, and to ensure the process works to the best end. In this case, Anderson's vetoes simply afforded the assembly more time to discuss two controversial, but important, decisions. The process did not become too bogged down, and the decisions seem to be sound ones, based upon good information. Bravo to the mayor and the assembly.