The Assembly must repeal Ordinance 2011-12. The Ordinance was passed by Assembly Members congratulating themselves about a passing a sweeping environmental measure. that will have a profound affect on anadromous fish habitats within the borough. In other words, Ordinance 2011-12 is legislation filled with good intentions. However, we are now finding there is wide spread inequity in this ordinance. Already, the Assembly has addressed a element of Ordinance 2011-12 which Seldovia believed had serious adverse affects on their community. Seldovia had complained that the ordinance applied to the Seldovia Slough and Channel which was not practical. Of course, the Assembly did not realize in passing Ordinance 2011-12 they would affect Seldovia in such a way. In another 'unintended consequence', the public found that the ordinance applied to the various "anadromous" lakes within the borough. A local mayor, who is pretty savvy about local issues, was totally surprised that Ordinance 2011-12 applies to the lakes and believes it is a serious over-reach. The rest of the people are now catching on.
Ordinance 2011-12 is an example of a far-reaching law that we now have the privilege of "finding out what's in it". It adds another layer of regulatory over-sight to property owners who already have to deal with numerous state and federal requirements. This would come in the form of a onerous permit system with many delays and expenses. The borough appears to have committed the cardinal sin of trying to regulate in an area they have no expertise or resources to enforce. No detailed analysis of the man-power, cost or means required to provide enforcement was done prior to passage. . This leads to regulatory chaos- all to be borne by properly owners. Very little was done to truly inform the public on how much the ordinance would restrict their use of their property. After receiving their mailings from the borough, property owners are now realizing they will not have the full use of their property while paying full assessed value. Another troubling aspect of the ordinance is that the list of anadromous water bodies which the law regulates is linked to a catalog which is maintained by the State.This will eliminate due process of public notification of property owners and approval by the Assembly.
Ordinance 2011-12 is filled with good intentions but devoid of any effort to balance the rights property owners with conservation measures. We live in Alaska, not California where prescriptive regulations are a way of life. We must have more faith in our people's commitment to good stewardship of land. We have over-reached with Ordinance 2011-12. It must be repealed.
I agree. The Assembly must repeal Ordinance 2011-12, or we voters must repeal it.
I was in California when the Coastal Commission was formed and it was AWFUL! I can tell a whole bunch of horror stories about the red tape and impossible situations it created. It was expensive for everyone; it made a bunch of new government jobs at several levels, it kept a sea of attorneys busy haggling with each other; and it took away people's rights to use and enjoy their own properties. Ordinance 2011-12 is the same kind of big-brother legislation! It's an unnecessary governmental "taking" of private property rights without just compensation or even a mire dime of property tax reduction. And the Assembly really wants to do this to the good citizens of the Kenai Peninsula in Alaska????? Go figure. It feels like California all over again. I have heard a lot people talking about over-reach, unintended consequences and other fancy terms when they talk about Ordinance 2011-12. That's all true and I totally agree. But, how about boiling it down to just a dose of good old-fashion common sense. This ordinance does have a lick of that! Repeal it now.
By creating this ordinance without including THE PEOPLE , the Assembly has shown how arrogant they have become.
If they had taken the trouble to tell us what problems existed, to NEED this ordinance, and had some public meetings wherein THE PEOPLE who own properties that will be affected, could have had some input, this would not have become such a divisive issue.
Instead, they took the 'Might is Right' stance, which is offensive to most of us peons who evidently are not smart enough to even discuss such a far-reaching edict.
Have there been any serious problems in the past? Are there any existing problems? Were the affected property owners notified? Were the residents of the Borough given any opportunity to discuss this? Is there any factual reason this could not have been addressed any other way?
This poorly-conceived and dictatorial ordinance lacks any responsible guidelines as to what will now require permits, how much they will cost, who will enforce these regulations, how many more people will have to be hired to implement it, and so on..... yet another layer of bureaucracy that will continue to grow and cost more, forever.
If the Assembly wants to represent THE PEOPLE rather than continued to be viewed as hostile and dictatorial to those who elected them, they will gracefully hear the voices of THE PEOPLE and trash this thing and start over- HOPEFULLY with the inclusion of THE PEOPLE this time.
Skip to News
Peninsula Clarion ©2013. All Rights Reserved.