CBJ?, Assembly?, Juneau Empire? anybody have any answers for this post? JE- just a thought but maybe you could do some investigative reporting on this!

A well written piece encouraging a needed debate. Will anyone engage?

We need to thank Mr. Kahklen and others who bring this severe funding imbalance to our attention even as few pay attention. Juneau has an addiction to government, and city government reflects that. Municipal general obligation debt needs to be part of the concern and the arithmetic. State government is already quietly anticipating cutting the larger municipal governments loose on state reimbursement of city debt sold for school construction. Debt and the past service liability for the defined benefit city retirement plans must be planned and budgeted.

CBJ government needs to look at its dependence upon state revenues and the projected decline in oil production. State government will cut direct payments to municipalities before it will cut its own bureaucracy. Enterprise funds like buses and handicapped transportation need to come up with a plan to become funded by sources other than the city. Capital projects need have inflation-proofed maintenance reserve funds. Rather than asking for more state funding for CBJ capital projects such as highway lighting the city lobbyists need to ask for a quick paydown of liabilities such as the PERS/TRS unfunded liability so there is less of it to foist on to municipal government. Above all, Juneau needs to keep the legislative sessions and the capital here, and that will become difficult when state spending comes to reflect much lower oil production.

It would take more leadership to do so than we have seen in CBJ government up to now but it makes more sense to begin cutting city government now than to wait until state government is also in crisis. State government cutbacks will reduce state employment in Juneau; why wait until then to cut city government employment so that the hard economic landing is all that more severe?

CBJ also has to plan for reduced federal employment. One way or another federal spending on everything but maintaining some level of military strength and health care for old people has to be severely reduced. The borrowing has to end either by economic dislocation or an ordered paydown, but either way the government will be cut. Younger workers may come to understand how they are being required to pay for huge social spending that will not be available when their generation needs those programs. I hope city government tries to get ahead of the curve.

Thanks again to Joe Kahklen.

Mr. Kahlkens asks some fair questions, though obviously he's pushing the First Thing First agenda with his letter. Remember them? They were the guys who brought the global warming denier speaker to Juneau a few years ago. Just so you know who we're talking about.

He must have missed the recent Empire article on Juneau, and Southeast's, significant population growth: http://juneauempire.com/local/2013-01-18/southeast-region-has-highest-po... If the region's population continues to grow like this, many of the issues he's citing resolve themselves. And in fact, the more pertinent question might be: How are we going to manage our growing population? We're already struggling with that question with our housing shortage.

Kahlken is cherry picking to an extent. I believe that Keifer's statement a couple years ago about the sustainability of our budget stemmed in part from the decreased tax revenues brought on by the nationwide recession. As the recession eases and cruise traffic increases, tourism sales tax revenues continue to rise.

Juneau is a very, very unique city. We're a state capitol, with its attendant responsibilities and benefits, so that puts us in an elite group in itself. We are in a geographically isolated location, with high transportation, energy, and basic commodities costs. Our population mix is atypical. Our economy is unique. Even the fact that we have a combined City/Borough is different than the typical Lower-48 separated City/County structure.

It would be easy to point at a similarly-sized city in Idaho or Iowa and say; "See, they're much more efficient than we are!" But that would be comparing apples to oranges.

We should always be looking into the future the best we can. We should always be trying to benchmark ourselves. And of course we want to be efficient with our tax dollars. But we shouldn't allow ourselves to be panicked into stampeding over a cliff. And that's what the First Things First group is hoping for.

BTW - where was Mr. Kahlken's letter when the bond and sales tax measures were on the previous municipal ballot that will buy us new libraries and off-road vehicle parks? Where was his letter when Cathy Munoz used her position to pipeline a skating rink into the Valley? He would like to imply that it's the big, bad CBJ and their employees who are to blame for the cost of government here...but he fails to point out that it's been we the voters who have demanded all of these goodies.

So, fair questions...but I sense an agenda here.

Start this year off right. Begin by denying every new little project and upgrade local folks want. Require that every move that impacts the budget carries a funding source with it or no approval.
Try to get ALL people and organizations that benefit from being in the Capitol City to participate in revenue generation for facilities that benefit ALL residents.
Quit pumping out money for every lay-about bum that gets off the ferries this summer.
You're welcome.

Juneau is a state capital. The Capitol Building is located in Juneau.

I didn't know the FTF people were still around. However, I saw their global warming presentation and I still believe every word that I heard. Now, many more people do not believe in global warming, climate change and the Great Pumpkin. We could use some global warming right now!

Where was the Valley skating rink that you blame on Rep. Munoz built? I haven't seen it and might like to use it. A study instead of a rink was funded by the Legislature at the request of Juneau residents rather than the request of Rep. Munoz. Your facts are upside down.

I have no understanding whatsoever of your analysis. Mr. Kahklen cited economic facts and used dollars as a unit of measure. You cited the difference between having a city name that begins with J compared with states with names beginning with I as somehow important. Mr. Kahklen is talking over your head, and you are talking around him.

You missed the point of the article. How are our economic circumstances modified by Alaska having boroughs instead of counties? How does that meet our indebtedness or cure the persistent decline in state oil production (not to mention how much CBJ government depends upon that production and how many year-round jobs here are paid directly from that oil production)?

is a bright red carbuncle on the tip of Parnell's nose! He simply refuses to pay down the state's share... the man is fiscally incompetent.

Our Reps should work to bring back the 300+ state jobs to SE (millions in revenue) that Sean Parnell & Palin moved up north out of spite.

No, climate change in Alaska will help the poor because heating costs will be less.

The loss of the forest products industry meant the loss of political power in Southeast. If those 6,000 private sector, year-round jobs could be replaced then the political power and the lost state government jobs would soon follow. On the other hand, the state is running out of oil.

I don't see how, considering the downturn in oil revenues that to a large extent power our economy. At least, not at the level we're accustomed to. Too bad you're associated with a global warming denial group but I thank you, Mr. Kahklen, for giving us food for thought.

Yes indeed folks there is something headed our way and it is called a State Income Tax. As the demand for services increase and the funds that support those services diminish, you better have a plan. Since the State and CBJ have no means of firing up the money printing presses like the good people in DC it makes me believe that a state income tax looms on the horizon. Let the screaming begin!

If in fact 90% of the CBJ budget is slated for personnel costs, then we really have a problem. Time to trim some fat I'd say. It has always appeared to me that most of the CBJ employees are grossly over compensated compared to others performing similar functions in other locations.