Common criticisms of assembly meetings are that discussions tend to be lengthy, repetitive and inefficient. Do you agree? If so, how will you participate in discussions?
Gray: Unfortunately, yes. I will not bring personal tirades and unnecessary things to the meetings and I will be the most studied, most well-read person on the packet that we’re voting on that night. I’m going to show up knowing how I intend to vote. I’m open obviously to the discussion and public comment, but I’m going to show up knowing what the hell we’re talking about.
Josephson: I think that the best way that we can improve the efficiency of the assembly meetings is by doing work through committees that are held in public, and public meetings through committees and commissions. If there’s an issue that comes up it should be pushed to committees, especially if there’s a lot of discussions on it. I’m a proponent of a robust public process and I would not be supportive of cutting out the public’s voice from any issue.
Lapham: I do agree they’re too lengthy. They’re too repetitive. I can see the assembly wanting transparency but I don’t believe talking right down to the gnat’s butt for clarity is productive. I think coming to the assembly meetings well prepared and researched and listening to public comment and then having short discussions amongst the assembly would be a lot more productive.
Maidy: I can agree to a point. I can see how they could be more efficient, that doesn’t mean that they’re inefficient. There’s always room for more efficiency. The best way I can contribute to the conversation is to come to the table with as much knowledge as possible. I do a lot of research.
Fullerton: I agree. I think we need to have defined meeting lengths. The few times I’ve seen the assembly meetings it would appear as though assembly members are just then cracking their packet and bringing themselves up to speed. That’s a waste of everyone’s time and I think that’s disrespectful. My goal would be to bring a little bit of Mike Case to the table and every opportunity I get would be to define the meeting.
Scott: To moderate discussions the assembly members have to come having studied each topic and be prepared to make an amendment or not, and discuss that, defend it and move on. That’s how the meetings are supposed to work. They’re business meetings not concept development meetings, those are the meetings that are committee of the whole meetings or other subcommittee meetings. I do try to keep it focused. People have been working all day and they’re not in the position of doing a lot prospecting and planning.
What is the single biggest issue facing Haines?
Gray: It’s a tie between the Lutak Dock and the budget. Both of those need dealt with soon. As far as a time priority, the Lutak Dock is probably a little more time sensitive. If we could hit 95 percent design plans this year, that would be great.
Josephson: We have two big issues facing Haines. One is our budget deficit. We cannot just use optimism as a hope that it will go away. We truly need to address it head on. The other biggest issue is Lutak Dock. This is something that needs to be in the forefront of all of our conversations.
Lapham: Lutak Dock. That is our bread and butter that I see as our economic base. We’re in serious issues with that dock.
Maidy: Sustainability. It’s important because it reaches every aspect of what we’re doing. We’re talking about redoing basic infrastructure on the museum and on the public safety building and they’re asking us to accept bids on redoing what’s there and not thinking of any way to improve it or make it sustainable.
Fullerton: The biggest structural issue facing Haines is the attention of Lutak Dock. We need to get that fixed. We need to have a plan in place. So much flows from that. What we as a community, have to provide our business owners is stability.
Scott: I think the single biggest issue facing Haines is the Lutak Dock; if that falls into the water. It’s particularly compelling to me, since it was on the agenda when I was Mayor six years ago and we thought it was going to collapse then. Thank God it hasn’t, but I think we have other similar situations like the sewer treatment plant, the water treatment plant, the public safety building. We have a reluctance to put the money into maintenance of public structures. We want to see new things and it’s not always a good strategy.
What specific cuts or taxes do you support to address the borough’s $413,000 projected budget deficit?
Gray: I’m open to slowly and steadily creeping up the cruise ship tax. We just need to grow and have more people that live here year-round to make revenue increase, to help support what we have. I don’t think we should have extended pool and library hours. Those are things that are nonessential. Even slow down the pace of some capital projects and sticking to maintenance, rather than capital improvements.
Josephson: The best way and the most legitimate way to increase taxes is improving the economy. I would support increasing our taxes by increasing our economy in Haines. As far as spending cuts, I support a zero-based budgeting system. Each department head starts at zero and justifies each expenditure for the department directly. What happened in the past is something that’s called historical budgeting, where they take the budget and either do an addition by percentage or subtraction, and I don’t think that’s efficient. I think that all the travel expenditures and attending meeting outside of Haines should be looked at.
Lapham: I don’t support taxes. Cuts, yes. There’s going to have to be cuts. I’m a strong believer in priority based budgeting, because you take care of what the tax payers are paying taxes to pay for.
Maidy: I don’t want to make promises on what could be cut because I honestly feel we’re not there. I think that the deficit is an issue because it’s draining our reserve funds. If we continue cutting unintelligently, instead of building responsibly, while we have that extra revenue, we’re going to be in trouble and we’re going to have to cut things.
Fullerton: The budget is something I would have to bring myself up to speed on. That being said, cuts are never popular. The best way to deal with cuts is to be even handed and let people know we’re all feeling this pinch together and so to try and be as equitable as possible in the way we deal with cuts. See revenues generated through other opportunities that are facing us and don’t lose that opportunity. Once that opportunity has come and gone I think it’s hard to recapture. I’m specifically referring to the pot initiative or the potential of having revenue flow from marijuana.
Scott: I think we have to carefully analyze our staffing quota because really that’s one of our most expensive costs to the borough, so that has to be considered. The taxes that I support, I believe we’re going to have some money coming in from an excise tax on marijuana, and that’s ok with me.
What sectors of the local economy should the Haines Economic Development Corporation focus?
Gray: Year-round businesses, things that keep people in Haines long-term and more than seasonal jobs. We need a longer, steadier burn. And I do think resource extraction is one of those sectors, probably one of the biggest ones that could start quickly; providing construction, engineering and better paying jobs that make it worth staying all year.
Josephson: I think the Haines Economic Development Corporation should be focusing on being a facilitator to the businesses that are here currently operating and individuals that would like to have a start-up. I think that they could serve a critical role in bringing information on marketing, distribution, accounting and administrative tasks to help with the burden, as well as to help with training people on how to set up a company.
Lapham: I don’t believe the borough should micromanage the Haines economic corporation. They will have oversight. They’re going to have to report back, but as far as the assembly or borough micromanaging this corporation, I don’t think that’s warranted.
Maidy: Small business, agriculture and renewability. I want to start to adopt the idea of Kodiak, of the Haines Economic Development Council working outside of government, being another check and balance to provide another check and balance by making a separate utility company based solely off renewables.
Fullerton: I would like to see the Haines Economic Development Corporation market to any company that’s got a vision that would fit within the structure of our town. I don’t think it’s that difficult. I just think you need to open the door and make people feel welcome.
Scott: They should focus on the arts. They should focus on the mining. They should focus on fisheries. Those are three potentials. Mining is a potential, but arts is established as a meaningful engagement. Fisheries is clearly a historic and solid economic activity of the borough. Before we had a harbor master we had a port and harbor committee that outlined a place where boats would be taken out, worked on and everything else and somehow that disappeared and I hope that comes back. And, of course, tourism.
When the community considers police response outside the townsite, what’s more fair; allowing individuals in geographical regions to vote on whether they want police service, or allowing the borough to vote as a whole? Why?
Gray: The borough as a whole to vote. I could perpetrate, or be the victim of, a major crime whether I’m from within the townsite or outside the townsite. I think we do have a moral responsibility to emergencies and major crimes outside the townsite.
Josephson: The individuals in the expanded areas should be allowed to vote directly without it being a boroughwide vote. We need to have government systems and procedures that protect the voice of the minority, and by doing a boroughwide vote it does not protect their interests.
Lapham: I think we may have to bite the bullet and do a patrol up there. I’d like to see an advisory vote. I think an advisory vote would be very helpful, good information to have as things progress.
Maidy: Individual service areas instead of as a whole. People are right now feeling that the borough voting on any one matter outside the townsite as a whole is not right. I don’t think it’s a matter of fairness. It’s a matter of what’s right. I don’t think the townsite should have a say in what happens outside of the townsite if the people outside of the townsite don’t have a say on what their sales taxes and property taxes go toward.
Fullerton: We have a responsibility to every citizen of Haines, regardless of where they are to be serviced by the police. That means when I go out of town, being a townsite resident, when I go out the road I want to be able to, if I need help, call for help.
Scott: That’s a hard one. Pardon my criticism but it’s not a good question. No matter what, if we’re going to alter the service area for the borough, it has to be voted on. But if the people in the individual areas are going to establish service areas just for a specific purpose, that will be voted on by them. My own preference, what I have asked people to consider, is to create their own service area. I don’t think they can do it because it’s too expensive. Police service is too expensive. I’m not sure I can answer that, “more fair.” I think we have a legal responsibility because of the way our charter is designed, too, which only allows for police services in service areas.
How long should the borough pursue the preferred $37 million Lutak Dock design before considering a scaled back plan?
Gray: Until about 60 seconds before the thing falls into the water. It’s on borrowed time but unless something catastrophic happens… We’re still in the phase of fighting hard for the best option for the next 70 years.
Josephson: They should continue to pursue it. I believe that we should have public conversation on the design, and while this conversation is going on our borough needs to be pursuing funding for that design. It’s interesting to me how this was an issue that we had, we knew we had it, for years and nothing was done on it. We finally get the design, we go through the public process and there’s a quick knee-jerk reaction to say we need to scale down. One grant application denied doesn’t mean there’s no funds available.
Lapham: Until all avenues have been exhausted. Grant writing, federal funding, state funding is going to be non-existent but I think there is a lot of avenues for federal funding and this write a grant, wait until your turned down, write another one is not productive. They need to get 10 to 15 grants out there all going at the same time. That’s how it’s usually done. Anything less than what the assembly had approved and the public process had approved, I think we’re selling Haines short on, because that’s not looking forward to the future.
Maidy: I don’t think it’s wrong to consider a scaled back plan now. It doesn’t have to be as scaled back as the lowest model, but negotiations have started. We started the negotiations with a large number, they said now we should start thinking smaller. It’s not unrealistic to realize we are small potatoes in the eyes of the state.
Fullerton: They need to pursue that until the very bitter end. It’s important to our economy, to our business people, that we have the capacity to grow. That dock provides that opportunity. That being said, I think we need to shift to Plan B now, because we have to assume that we’re not going to get what we want. And that’s just good planning because this is critical.
Scott: I think they should pursue it with great vigor and attention and possibly access our rainy day permanent fund which was established, which we lost a lot of money in this year. How long? I don’t know. Certainly until we can establish it. I think if we use the permanent fund we’ll be more well positioned for accessing grants because we’re obviously committed to the project. And I think life without that dock would be quite intolerable, even economically. Think about people shipping logs, people shipping mining things, it would be terrible not to have it.
Haines is commonly described as “divisive.” At what point do differences in political values or ideas become too “divisive?” How would you curb divisiveness?
Gray: I don’t see it as a problem that people are polarized necessarily for how they feel on an issue. Divisiveness only becomes a problem when it comes to how we hash out these differences, and that is fighting about unnecessary things, or doing it in such a way that we stop being good neighbors to each other. I still don’t think we’ve hit that phase in this town.
Josephson: I think that the reason why people feel that we’re such a divided community is because we don’t get together and communicate and talk effectively about the issues. People immediately come up with sides on issues and they believe people are either for or against their perspective. The way that we curb the divisions in our community is by having honest conversations and concentrating on those things that we do agree on.
Lapham: I’ve been to so many meetings. The first thing I see walking through the door is a lack of trust on both parties. Without that, we’re going to constantly be spinning our wheels. I think everyone is going to have to come in for the good of the community, pull up their bootstraps, sit down and get some collaborative energy going there and start learning how to trust.
Maidy: People are allowed to do whatever they want as long as it doesn’t negatively affect how others do whatever they want. I don’t care how you come to your belief system as long as we agree that what we’re doing is good, how you’re doing it, that’s your problem. I don’t have a clique. I don’t have a side. I don’t even have a real solid core group of friends. I have my family. I have a lot of time to research the facts and I have the availability to get the opinion of everybody and weigh it equally.
Fullerton: It’s a mistake to consider an involved electorate as being necessarily divisive. I think the question is really listening actively to people. If you listen actively to someone, they recognize that. If you engage them with really thoughtful questions about their position, it makes them understand that you’re listening and contemplating what they’re bringing to the table. If you’re able to articulate why you disagree with them and put it in terms that are understandable on a number of levels, that makes it easier for them to understand and accept. We get hung up on my way to solve a problem is the right way. There are many ways to solve a problem.
Scott: By smiling. People can have major differences of opinion, but you don’t have to hate the person who differs from your opinion. You can listen and you can enjoy that relationship. We all know each other, we don’t have to be that way and say nasty things about each other. It’s altering human behavior, helping people learn how to deal with alternate points of view and how to express themselves in a way that’s not regarded as offensive of defensive. When I was Mayor, the thing I did was hire a person to train the assembly on how to speak to one another, and to the community, in a formal meeting, and it was great. It helped. And I think you always need training and retraining in that kind of thing.
What would you like to add?
Gray: I am newer to this town and I am not embedded in some of the divisiveness things that people do associate with being divisive or bad or polarizing in this town. I will make strong decisions and be educated, but I will always have an open ear. I belong to nobody’s camp at this point.
Josephson: I believe that we need to start restoring common sense to local government. We spend a lot of time on a lot of issues that don’t make a lot of sense. Really, our issues can be solved with common sense, but common sense seems to not be applied in a lot of cases.
Lapham: Whether people realize it or not, we’re a democratic republic and what that means is the voters have control. They want to change their government? They are the ones that control that. They need to get out and vote.
Maidy: I’m not a politician. I am open for the rest of the month to any meetings anyone would like to have. I have no problem having an engagement. If someone wants to have 20 people somewhere and they’d like me to come and meet some people I am for that. If you would like to talk with me about the issues, call me.
Fullerton: I’m getting quite a bit of pushback on (my support of) Tier 3. If I’m mistaken, if I don’t have a clear understanding of what Tier 3 is, I won’t support it. I want people to continue using the river just as they are using it today. What I don’t want to have is a multinational corporation come in at some point in the future, whether that be a mine or some other unimagined thing, and they come in and change the way we’re able to use that river because they’re not responsible.
Scott: I am concerned that people might be concerned that I have cancer. They might feel that they’re taking a risk in investing in a person with a major illness. But the good news is that I had an MRI on Friday, and my tumor is shrinking. I’m interested in serving again in this kind of position for the community because I enjoy it so much and it makes me happy. A very good healing strategy for people with serious illness it to be happy.