14.0°

In 1950 there were 21 people living in Soldotna. I was a four-year old, happy to have the woods as my playground. The young settlers who came to this lovely land of salmon-filled rivers and moose and berry-filled woods followed in the footsteps of the area's ancient people. As they began to build a community, no one foresaw the eventual need for a cemetery. Here we are, at this late date, with many of the early settlers buried in Kasilof, trying to settle on the best possible location for a town cemetery.

If elected, I hope to work with others to keep the Kenai River healthy, build regional alliances for mutually beneficial projects, and add my support to the city's efforts to become more energy efficient. Right now, I want to use the Clarion's generous offer of a public forum to address the most important issue of our day, finding the best location for a Memorial Park cemetery. How did we stray so far from the people's consistent first choice, a piece of beautiful public land off of West Redoubt Avenue? Here are some questions that were answered during the location debate:

Would access to the cemetery be through the River Watch neighborhood? We found no one in an official capacity who thinks there would be a street connection. Three borough mayors and Soldotna's city engineer expect a driveway entrance off West Redoubt, the primary feeder street.

Would my nearby property lose value? Anchorage's assessor says it is 'not even an issue'. Juneau's assessor reports that it may even be an asset, as the two most prestigious subdivisions border cemeteries, and people enjoy the green space. In addition, experts have testified that there would be no problem with water quality.

What else might go on that property? The ten acres are city-owned land, three acres of which are low and wet and used for storm water filtration. The remaining acreage is high and dry and has long been desired by developers. Two incumbent council members in this race would like to see this public land subdivided. The adjacent landowner, who is now running for city council, believes nothing should change. (I hope he will come to understand that his only lifetime guarantee of an undisturbed viewshed and no access from his street is having a lovely community cemetery as a neighbor.)

Sixty-three percent of voters in the last election want to see the Redoubt property used for a beautiful, quiet Memorial Park Cemetery. We propose a garden/park setting with a large natural wood buffer between any neighborhoods. There is no cost for land acquisition at this location.

We were shocked after the election when the mayor convened a new 'unified' cemetery task force and told them Redoubt would 'not be on the table' for discussion because of council opposition. He also stated that the recommendation must be unanimous. Without Redoubt in the mix, the group fell back on trying to purchase Knight Drive property, always everyone's second choice for location. This was not a fair process, and many residents have lost faith in their local government because of it. (The two people on the task force who were originally proponents of Redoubt basically had to 'go along to get along' with the rest of the committee, but later declared their first preference to be the same as the public's continuing favorite, the Redoubt site).

The following members of the mayor's task force, all of whom opposed the Redoubt site, are now running for office. Mr. Rohloff, the adjacent landowner, and incumbent councilmen Stogsdill and Fowler. Mr. McLane, author of the rather odd "500-yards-from-a-school" rule, is also running for reelection.

We need four new votes on the city council to turn the city around on this issue. If you want a more responsive city council, I urge you to vote for Nels Anderson, Dale Bagley, Brenda Hartman and me. This is our clearly our last chance to create a beautiful, respectful resting place for our loved ones.

Please call me at 260-7722 if you have additional questions.