The City and Borough of Juneau Finance Committee had a last-minute addition to its agenda Wednesday night, a proposal — eventually narrowly defeated — to allot $250,000 to begin studies for the AJ Mine.
Deputy Mayor Merrill Sanford proposed the idea, while the committee was having its last meeting to approve specific fiscal year 2012 funding requests.
Committee Chairman David Stone moved to sit in the audience and recused himself from discussing the appropriation due to a conflict of interest. Mayor Bruce Botelho also was absent.
Ultimately, the vote came down in a 4-3 vote in favor of allotting the funds, however the committee needs a majority vote of at least five to take action. Assembly members Doll, Mary Becker, Karen Crane and Sanford voted in favor; Jonathan Anderson, Johan Dybdahl and Danner opposed.
“This has come to us at the last minute, Monday night as I reviewed and looked over Appendix ‘F,’ there are a lot of things the committee recommended us doing,” Sanford said. “That’s going to cost a lot of money to do that. That would get us into looking at our water system and pulling together all of the different plans we’ve had in the past. It would also help pay for a half-time employee, the manager would look at who would be doing that.”
That $250,000 would likely have come out of the sales tax reserves.
As far as staffing, engineering department director Rorie Watt, who served as liaison to the AJ Mine Advisory Committee, told City Manager Rod Swope he would be interested in continuing to work on the project. Swope asked him how he’d continue running his department. Watt estimated he would spend half his time doing that and half on the AJ Mine, so the city would need to re-create a deputy engineering director. That would have to come from the Assembly.
Swope said if the Assembly does move in this direction, he would recommend it treat the fund as a Capital Improvement Project so funds remaining at the end of the year would not go back to the general fund automatically.
Anderson asked if the water department could take on the water supply study or if that entire cost had to come externally. Swope believed the water department could handle most of that undertaking, but would likely still need additional help from an outside firm. He also pointed out that time the water department spends on that would normally naturally be paid for out of utility rates. Swope recommended that not happen in this case so people weren’t seeing an increase in their water bill because of it.
“It would be a good thing for CBJ to be looking at its water sources and analyzing what are the potential threats, needs of the future regardless of where the AJ mine project goes,” Anderson said. “I see the vote as setting up a CIP, the Assembly needs to be very conscious, this is saying we will go forward with this project. This is a real decision point and technically we’ve been quibbling over $4-5K and its impact on collective bargaining. Now we want a quarter of a million.”
Dybdahl said they just got the mine report from that committee. He said before they move forward he wants to see a specific plan come out of the manager’s office on what should be done and when.
“I just don’t feel like I can support this for $250,000 right now without seeing a better plan, a long range plan,” Dybdahl said. “I just don’t feel comfortable just throwing $250,000 and hoping for the best.”
Becker said she was initially inclined to agree with Anderson and Dybdahl, but said if they don’t set aside money to begin these studies and plans, they’re not going to get to the point of sending out a request for proposal.
Sanford said he wanted the issue to come to the committee for an open, public discussion.
Anderson later said he didn’t feel it was a very open process because aside from those who showed up for the items already on the agenda, there was no public present and the issue wasn’t on the agenda prior to the meeting.
Anderson said that if they approved spending that $250,000, it essentially would have set a policy to move forward and the city wouldn’t have been obligated to have public hearings on those funds.
“We don’t have public hearings for all these things we have in the budget, they’re already appropriated,” he said. “If this had passed, there would be no public hearing because there is no public ordinance.”
The funding items that were listed in the board’s agenda passed unanimously, including $434,500 for the Alaska Committee and $250,000 in core funding for the Juneau Economic Development Council.
The most contentious point of the discussion centered around the additional requests: $125,000 more for JEDC, $4,550 for the Juneau Human Rights Commission and $25,000 for partial funding of the Juneau Afterschool Coalition.
Swope cautioned Assembly members on approval of the extra items. He said the fiscal forecast for FY13 and FY14 shows about an $11 million deficit between the two years. Swope said that he’s had to tell the police chief he can’t rehire a lieutenant. There’s also a senior planner position that’s being held open.
The tight budgeting outlook comes from an Assembly directive, but it’s also his directive to maintain and grow a budget reserve. A 1990s study showed the city should have $10 million in reserves. With inflation, Sanford pointed out they should likely have between $15 million and $20 million. The city had grown a reserve to $10 million, but because of the last budget shortfall it is now down to about $7 million.
Assemblyman Bob Doll said he wouldn’t suggest taking money from that fund for other things, but he said they shouldn’t necessarily be setting aside every extra dollar to go into reserves just because that’s what they’ve always done. He said the financial climate is such that they do need to look at spending those extra dollars on some of these items, like ones discussed Wednesday night.
Sanford said that would be a more detailed policy discussion they should have another day.
Swope said he designates all unbudgeted revenues to the reserves unless there is a deficit.
Doll said it was a good assumption for Swope to make, but the Assembly can still choose to spend it.
“The money in the reserve, you always retain the right to spend it,” he said. “I don’t. Whether it’s here or there. Whether you want to spend it however you want, as much as you want, that’s your right. That’s not my ability.”
Swope also pointed out if the Assembly ultimately decided to spend funds on extras, it would send a message to other departments and citizens that the city isn’t truly cutting back on spending. He said it would also negatively impact labor negotiations, where the city is aiming to have a zero cost-of-living increase for FY13 and FY14. Employees would still get merit increases.
Assemblywoman Ruth Danner said she planned on approving Swope’s recommendation as presented, but wanted to discuss all sides of the issues. Danner at a previous meeting said it’s time to cut down on government. She said that while they have a balanced budget, it’s not a sustainable budget.
“I believe that there is a certain obligation we have in addition to balancing budget to invest in the future,” she said. “Some money we’ll spend will make money for us as a group. I don’t know how to distinguish between the AJ project proposal and the addition to JEDC. Because I know for a fact that some of the things we would do with the JEDC investment would also increase money to this municipality. I’m not sure how to measure that.”
Ultimately the Finance Committee approved funding for the human rights commission and the after school coalition, but did not pass extra funding for JEDC.
• Contact reporter Sarah Day at 523-2279 or at sarah.day@juneauempire.com.





Comments (28)
Add commentForget it! Pay attention to
Forget it! Pay attention to what's happening to this communities infrastructure and education system!! The incinerator, the situation at the dump and so many other issues! C'mon, really...
Support the mine
I don't see this as anything other than ensuring there is a good process. Flesh it out and take it up again.
Good to see the city engineer wants to stay involved. Good man for a good project.
So it begins
This is the beginning of the process of draining our pockets for this mine. I predict a three step process
Step one: spend millions on feasibility studies and planning
Step two: The mine loses money.
Step three: raise property taxes to subsidize a money pit.
If opened, the mine will lose money because they are making pie in sky claims about mining techniques that have NEVER been done. They claim they can mine in a downtown area without noise because all the processing is to be underground. That has never been done before and it will cost vastly more than they project it will. CBJ projects always cost vastly more than projected and this one is a tax drain we do not need.
They can't protect water quality either even though they claim they can.
Their statements about water quality and their statements about potential profits are pollyanna pipe dreams.
Merrill Sanford: "This has
Merrill Sanford: "This has come to us at the last minute" we have to spend $250,000. to study the AJ Mine. With no public input!
we need a Merrill Sanford RECALL!
To Juneau residents: This is a RED ALERT you need to challenge, up coming actions and decisions on water management issues that pose irreparable harm to the long-term viability of our fish, our wildlife and to our citizens rights to have clean water! Because as you see there are people that will do anything for money.
My thanks go out to those who opposed this underhanded crooked stinking move by Merril Sanford.
KINY news online nailed it
From the Government-Should-Only-Spend-Money-On-Things-I-Like division:
KINY News Online
Thursday, May 19, 2011 3RD EDITION 7 A. M.
Assembly Finance forwards budget plan for next fiscal year:
“The Assembly Finance Committee last night completed its work on revisions to the second year of the two year budget plan.
There were requests for extra funding, including one for $125,000 from the Juneau Economic Development Council, that was not approved, according to City Manager Rod Swope.
It was a unanimous vote. Swope says the reason is that they need to hold the line on the budget.
Deputy Mayor Merrill Sanford says the city should be conserving its dollars and maintaining its rainy day and reserve accounts to a level they should be at.
He points out those accounts have been tapped in the past two years to balance the budget.
So he says his basic belief and philosophy is not to spend extra dollars forward at all.
Although that belief did not prevent Sanford from proposing $250,000 to fund a capital improvement project for the reopening of the A J Mine.”
A-J Mine
So much for open, inclusive public process. Greg Sparks 1,
citizens of Juneau O
MINE
Why should CBJ give any money to a multi million $$$$ company?
Thank you Jonathan Anderson,
Thank you Jonathan Anderson, Johan Dybdahl and Ruth Danner for doing the right thing.
and shame on these individuals they are not to be trusted!
Robert Doll,
Mary Becker,
Karen Crane
and especially shame on you Merrell Sanford, Merrell just who do you think you are?
Thank you for sitting the vote out on this David, you did the right thing.
AJ Mine
Let the Assembly know what you think of this backdoor process at: http://www.juneau.lib.ak.us/tellittcityhall/tellit.php
AJ
It is obvious that the Leftist, "No Private Enterprise Welcome" crowd is well represented here. Had the least of you just dared to develop your own business interests to support yourself, you would have discovered to be successful an investment must first be made.
Silly people, where do you think the money comes from, stopping progress and production? Soon you'll be touting that all we need to do is print more money to solve our problems. Oh I forgot, we already tried that. Now our money is worthless and we have $4.50 per gallon plus gasoline and inflation is on the rise in every aspect of our economy, again! Just like when Jimmy, the peanut farmer, Carter was president.
Get real people... This community could really use a cash producing business. Local property taxes could be lowered, sales tax could be lowered or eliminated and the city government could establish a permanent fund. All good things for our community.
Do not allow the fear mongers and the nah Sayers to cloud the true issues of our great American Exceptional-ism. These same nah Sayers already have theirs and are comfortable enough in life. They too are selfish and do not want future opportunities for our young people. Our children leave our narrow minded town because we have failed to embrace production and harvesting as economic engines and instead have taken the low road to government dependence and entitlement mindedness.
Let's grow up Juneau and take the bull by the horns and give it a shake!
Dead End Road
We've been down this dead end road before. There is not now and never will be any company willing to spend hundreds of millions on a mine that will never become a reality. CBJ is flushing a quarter million down the drain.
Thomas Jefferson??? yikes,
Thomas Jefferson??? yikes, really now, you need to "stop drinking the tea".
Wow. I would hope Merrel
Wow. I would hope Merrel Sanford would step down after this move. How can anyone trust CBJ or the Assembly now.
Maybe Mr. Stone should resign
Talk about a coward's way out. In the legislature, a legislator states his/her conflict. Then the body votes to mandate a vote. What a weasel move by the assembly. It gives Stone political cover and focuses the attack on Sanford.
Maybe Stone ought to resign from something? AEL&P, Lt. Governor's office or the assembly. Any or all would be satisfactory.
man from the creek
well I went to a couple of the meetings when the public was allowed to speak, and almost all the comment I heard was from people bitching about clean water~the city has no other clean water ready in case ours fails,,what the heck?
as for the AJ,,enough studying has already been done, work has been done, this place is ready to go!it just needs somebody to come in and mine it.
all you people out there so oppsed to mining, your just like the peta people, but at times even more hypocritical~~if your using any kind of modern day whatever~ be it a car, phone, house, you have a diamond ring or watch, you watch T.V,, well guess what ???
IT ALL COMES FROM A MINE !
Well said, TJ.
Well said, TJ.
I don't want the mine, but I
I don't want the mine, but I understand those that do. But do any of you want it in this way? Does anyone want the Assembly to be able to approve $ 250,000 for anything without the opportunity for public comment?
An apology is in order
Seems that the Nay Sayers owe Sanford an apology. Will we see it here? Not a chance! because the anti everything crowd represented here does not have the ability to grow beyond the narrow view of the I/Me first and the hell with everyone else mind set. And they have the nerve to accuse those working toward community wide solution to benefit us all of underhandedness. This type of behavior is now common place amongst the leftist and is planned instruction from Sol Alinski's 'Rules For Radicals', a leftist handbook.
Fact is that the Leftists, or more correctly the Statists are losing their grip on the political landscape. People do want a healthier economy and a more financially fruitful future. Can you say with the policies and practices of the last 10, 20 and 30 years that we have been moving in that direction? Are you better off than 10 years ago? How about 5 years ago? How about 2 years ago? My bet is you are not and next year I can promise you that the taxes, cost of living and the entitlement growth are all likely to continue to grow.
As for Sanford suggesting and attempting to request money to continue with the AJ mine study, what is wrong with that? It was done in public and as we do have a representative form of government and as we did elect those people to make decisions for us, I just don't see the problem with what he did. Don't recall the Statists complaining when this same assembly banned smoking in bars. Further, As the City is an owner of the mine, this places the assembly in the position of a 'Board of Directors' so to speak. The board would have the responsibility to us, the share holders, to work in our behalf.
Sanford is moving in the RIGHT direction. Let's get behind him and support him.
A few questions (and answers?) first:
To Thomas Jefferson: I thought I remembered reading that the A.E.L.&P were the major shareholders in the AJ mine, rather than the CBJ. By definition, an elected official (or public servant) is expected to represent the interests of the "general public" - not those of a special interest group. Although there are undoubtedly notable exceptions, too many officials these days appear to be more self-serving than public-serving. To ask accountability of a public-servant should not be considered a mark of disrespect, as much as satisfying a requirement that's inherent within the job itself. Sarah Palin aside, transparency should not be a contradiction within government circles.
It seems to me, that with the price of gold as high as it is (and the generated sky-high profits), a mining company that's interested in re-opening the AJ could finance their own water studies and devise a workable plan to both mine and to protect Juneau's water supply. Once completed, such a plan could be evaluated for feasibility by CBJ officials, or an impartial third party. Why should we do our local version of Trans-Canada?
I come from a mining background, and I assure you - if the minerals (and money) is there, the mining companies will come. A mere $250,000 would be a drop in the bucket for them, although not necessarily to Juneau's budget. To a certain extent, mining can be made to be as environmentally safe as you want to make it - all it takes is enough money. Kind of like building a fast car - "How fast do you want to go?" (I always did like "Smokey & the Bandit".)
Realistically, if the cost of safety gets too expensive, then corners will be cut. I think we've all seen that happen before. I don't think we can afford to see that happen in Juneau. If the AJ mine does reopen, just make sure all the "i's" are dotted.
The mine is coming! Get your
The mine is coming! Get your water out of our way!
TJ couches his greed in political jargon and inapplicable references. If The Assembly chooses to go about this in an open process like they did with the smoking ordinance, then I have no problem. I was here. It took years to fully implement. The mine committee suggested the same pace and same open process, and the following week Deputy Mayor Sanford is already trying to get the ball rolling without public input.
AK-Jase sounds knowledgeable
AK-Jase seems to understand something that struck me right away: Why is the city paying for this study? $250,000 is NOTHING to a company who wants to pull millions of dollars out of AJ Mine. Why would CBJ pay for it?
Even I can see that Sanford's ploy was cheap and transparent... "last minute" blah blah blah. When dealing with something as divisive and controversial as the mine, why would he do that? Stupid and dishonest.
I worry about water, noise, and disruption to our tourism industry; so far, the mine is not something I support. But if another company put its money into a study, I'd see it as something that others really wanted. If we have to pay to get them here, that tells me the project is not as awesome as some think.
Stinking mess
I remember when the community of Sitka lost their pulp mill. The months and years that followed found the same debauchery the Juneau Statist represented here currently practice. Fail not to enjoy the foul odor emanating from your scurrilous deeds.
A Response to TJ (in his style)
@Thomas Jefferson: the laissez-faire noise machine you and similar ne'er-do-wells perpetuate reeks of corruption, misstatement, and a general sense of rank superiority supported by a variety of pseudo-intellectual musings that have no bearing in the real world. Your argument is nothing but an ad hominem attack sprinkled with a few red herrings and perhaps a straw man or two.
Let's examine your points:
1) Fighting the AJ mine is selfish. And yet, it seems to me that beyond basic necessities for life (clean water), no one stands to gain much from keeping the mine closed, except in indirect environmental effects. Looks like this argument is "scurrilous."
2) Inflation is getting serious and gas is expensive because the government has been printing off money. This is patently false. Inflation was flat throughout the recession (which is what happens) and needs to get back up to a healthy level. Inflation is a good thing when it hovers around, I believe, 4% annually or so. The government has also not been printing off money at an above normal rate. What a "scurrilous" statement.
3) The "policies and practices" of the last 30 years have screwed us big time. That I actually largely agree with, though what you failed to mention is that those policies are Reagan policies. The obsession with supply-side economics, the low tax fetishism, the idea that our military should be as large as we can make it without going bankrupt (might have dropped the ball there), etc. So this was a "scurrilous" omission.
It's also worth noting that the real Thomas Jefferson was smart enough to avoid caricaturing his political opponents with empty-headed slurs like "statist" and "leftist," likely because he knew doing such a thing would make him look like a dishonest prig.
"Dishonest Prig" nailed it
Maybe madison/jefferson should just give up and call himself Aaron Burr. 'Twould be more just.
Old Fashion Drubbing
Persnickety Persimmon takes Thomas Jefferson to the mat in one post flat.
Public Involvement
As history shows from the contention over the AJ for the past 20 years this process needs to have public support if it's going to move forward. It's offensive that the Assembly would try to slip a vote past without public discussion after having only decided to "accept" the AJMC's report.
Check out what Jonathan Anderson had to say about the proceedings....
http://assemblydiary.blogspot.com/2011/05/aj-mine-and-public-process.html