I am not the neighbor Ms. Chetney wrote about, but I could have been. As a neighbor of the Chetneys, I have been publicly shamed by them for reporting violations of their CUP for a vacation rental.
Ms. Chetney misrepresents the facts, stating complaints against their violation of their CUP are unreasonable. In fact, all our complaints have dealt with borough code violations in the Mud Bay Planning/Zoning area. The Haines Borough is complicit as there is no enforcement of a CUP unless neighbors complain. The planning commission inequitably evaluates and issues CUPs, negating the intent of code, in this case, to accommodate ventures that generate money at the expense of the quality of life that residents invested months of research and effort in developing the MBRR zone. For example, PC has stated that weddings are allowed under the Chetney CUP, which changes the allowed number of guests from 20 to 250 without a public hearing. The PC rationalizes by stating only 20 “overnight” guests are allowed and others must vacate the premises by midnight. Nowhere in its conditions is there a distinction between overnight and day use. The PC nor Chetneys cannot change the conditions of their CUP without going through the proper channels.
PC members should be impartial (not representing one resident’s interest over another) in issuing CUPs and evaluating violations, and be respectful when addressing citizens.
The Chetneys should have researched the planning/zoning code in the MBPZ area before buying property and followed the conditions of their CUP.
Patty Kermoian