Although the Haines Borough Assembly approved it two weeks ago, the controversial minor offenses ordinance is still creating a buzz around town, with opponents collecting more than 400 signatures as of Tuesday on a petition asking the assembly to reconsider its vote.
Assembly members and residents also are concerned about the administration’s failure to provide important information to the assembly before it made a decision on the ordinance. They say committee recommendations favoring postponement did not make it into the hands of assembly members, despite being submitted to clerk Julie Cozzi weeks before the vote.
Questions have also been raised about whether Mayor Jan Hill was allowed to break the tie vote, as she was not physically at the meeting and attended via teleconference.
On Aug. 28, Public Safety Commission member Bob Duis sent the commission’s recommended changes on the minor offenses ordinance to Cozzi, manager David Sosa and interim police chief Griffiths. Cozzi didn’t “locate” them until Oct. 2, 10 days after the assembly decision.
On Sept. 12, Planning Commission chair Rob Goldberg sent the commission’s recommendations on the ordinance, specifically regarding Title 18. The email was sent to Cozzi, Sosa and Mayor Hill.
“The Planning Commission worked very hard on this section, and we would like to see it remain as is. We think the fines and the letter of warning are fair and promote compliance and good relations between the community and the government that serves it,” Goldberg wrote.
Neither of the communications were included in assembly packets.
When asked by a member of the public for Goldberg’s recommendation, Cozzi responded that Goldberg didn’t ask her to forward the recommendation to the assembly. Cozzi said she makes a strong effort to forward all such communication to the assembly, and apologized for missing it.
“The assembly email addresses are readily available on the borough’s website, so it is not necessary for a person to rely on the borough clerk to forward everything to the assembly. However, I do try my best to help facilitate the flow of communication. Unfortunately, it appears I missed one. I may be crucified for missing that email, but because I am human, I do occasionally make mistakes,” she wrote.
The lack of information available when the assembly considered passage of the ordinance on Sept. 8 – and ultimately passed it on Sept. 22 – is what led assembly member George Campbell to refuse to vote, he said in a letter to fellow assembly members this week.
Campbell said he felt assembly action on the matter was in direct violation of borough charter, code and state statute.
“My ultimate refusal to vote was not premeditated, but a response to our body approaching a final decision without receiving all of the information that our administration knowingly had in their possession,” Campbell wrote.
Campbell cited sections of code related to the packet and duties of the clerk, as well as Alaska statute regarding public records.
“The assembly’s decision to vote on this issue happened with full knowledge that a list of recommendations existed from each the Planning and Public Safety Commissions… The failure of our process to include these public meeting documents in our packets and discussion is a serious breach in the public process,” he wrote.
Assembly member Ron Jackson said in an interview Tuesday he is concerned about the materials not making it into assembly packets.
“I think we really have to ask where it went, and how it did fall through the cracks,” Jackson said. “Was it this went in the junk box or the wrong folder, or was it (someone saying) ‘This isn’t worth going to the assembly,’ a conscious choice to withhold it? That wouldn’t be good.”
Resident Mike Denker said he has been following the minor offenses ordinance not because he is attached to its substance but because it epitomizes a larger problem regarding the flow of information between the assembly, the administration and the public.
“Information, for whatever reason, has not been finding its way into assembly meeting packets as per the code,” Denker said. “The minor offenses ordinance is kind of exposing it because of the contentiousness of the issue, but there is very good reason to believe that this goes deeper than this one issue.”
“The best you can say about it is it is extremely sloppy,” he said.
Denker said he is also concerned about Mayor Hill’s vote to break the tie in favor of the ordinance’s passage, as she wasn’t present at the meeting but attended via teleconference. According to code, “Attendance at regular and special assembly meetings by long-distance teleconferencing may be utilized to establish a quorum for voting.” The section of code immediately following that section states, “The Mayor is not an assembly member.”
Denker said he interprets this to mean the Mayor can’t vote via teleconference, even though it is not explicitly stated. “Just because it doesn’t say someone can’t do something doesn’t mean they can,” he said.
Resident and former assistant attorney general Deborah Vogt said she also questioned deputy Mayor Diana Lapham’s decision to interpret assembly member Campbell’s refusal to vote as a “no” vote.
“I don’t see anything in our code that speaks to this issue. Code says that a member must vote unless excused. The presiding officer can excuse a member. But it doesn’t say anything about what happens when a member who has not been excused refuses to vote,” Vogt said.
Code establishes that whenever there is a gap in code, Robert’s Rules of Order (a document outlining parliamentary procedure) should be followed. According to Robert’s Rules, Vogt said, abstentions do not count either way.
“I think that construing George’s vote as a ‘nay’ was improper. He didn’t vote. Vote was 3-2. It fails,” Vogt said.
The petition to reconsider was posted at various businesses and bulletin boards around town. Brenda Josephson submitted the petition to the Mayor, clerk and assembly members asking the assembly to reconsider passage of the ordinance and vote “no” at the group’s upcoming meeting on Tuesday.
Josephson said more signatures are still being collected and will be submitted prior to the meeting.