Six candidates, Caitie Kirby, Helen Alten, Jerry Lapp, Cheryl Stickler, Brenda Josephson and Carol Tuynman are running for two three-year seats and two one-year seats in the general election. The polls open at 7 a.m. on Oct. 6 and will close at 8 p.m. on the same day. Voting is available in precinct one at the ANB/ANS Hall and in precinct two at the Klehini Valley Fire Department Building on Mosquito Lake road.
What is the largest issue that divides Haines residents? What is oversimplified about this issue? What do you want the other side to understand about you in regard to this issue? Where do you feel torn on this issue? Is there any part of the other side’s position that makes sense to you? What do you want to understand about the other side?
Kirby: I think we, as a divided community, are. We’ve turned into this us-versus-them community. It’s hard to pinpoint one specific issue that the whole town is polarized on. I try to stop the divisiveness by asking questions when I don’t understand a point of view. If I have a strong reaction to something, I ask myself, “Why do I think that? My Facebook feed is telling me this, where else do I need to look to have an informed thought on the subject?” I think creating an awareness that social media isn’t always the most accurate source and encouraging people to seek information outside their social group is important.
Alten: What should be cut from the budget, what’s considered essential. I’ve worked with the budget. This past year, I advocated for the museum, a service that’s considered essential, but not as essential as some others. I tried to talk to people, to help them understand what they get from the theater, the museum, the pool. Lack of money is really frightening, and I do understand people feeling like an institution doesn’t have merit or isn’t pertinent to them, but I think we’re a community and part of being a community is investing in things that draw new residents, keeps old residents and enriches the lives of all residents. People need to understand that the impulse to cut, cut, cut, it’s a fear-based response. People say we have limited funds, but I feel like there are creative options that people don’t always explore. I believe that planning and looking toward the future helps offset some of the downturns that you become reactive to.
Lapp: A lot of people are scared of changes to their lifestyle. A lot of people like the small-town atmosphere that we have and if they see something like a mining company come in, then the community starts to divide itself for or against. Having good discussions is the best way to ease the tension. I’ve had conversations with people and tried to explain to them, this is how it will help the community, it won’t really affect your lifestyle. When it does reach the assembly level, you try to have discussions with as much of the community as you can. You try to give attention and representation to both sides. I’m pro development. I want people to have work and be able to support their families. We have fewer stress-related issues in Haines when the economy is good. But I don’t want to see us overrun with development or to become a metropolitan area. I value the small-town lifestyle.
Stickler: How much are we willing to make use of natural resources, renewable and non-renewable in order to foster, generate a thriving economy so our young people can afford to live and work here with us. I think that’s the biggest issue. There’s a wrong way and a right way to go about natural resource harvesting. I don’t ever want to see the pillaging of natural resources. At some point we have to take our feet off the brakes and move forward, but move forward with wisdom and science and a willingness to say we can go this far but that’s where the limit is.
I want to understand where we can meet in the middle. I want to be able to understand: Where is that land of compromise where everybody can get their needs met in a responsible, respectful manner. How do we get there?
Josephson: The largest issue is the perspectives people hold on an economy and jobs. I love Haines for all the reasons we live here. I like the wide-open spaces. I like the rural environment. I like the fact that we’re small. At the same time, I’m sensitized to the struggles our young families have.
I’m disappointed about the call to action from Lynn Canal Conservation (opposed to possible AIEDA funding for Lutak Dock). They promoted imaging of blasting and some kind of large truck with dust all around it that was from some kind of mine site implying that these large industrial mining trucks would be driving down the Haines Highway. It felt disingenuous when I read it. It was hyperbole. It was accusations. It set a difficult stage for the conversations. They wanted to invoke an emotional response.
I want to understand their concerns and gather as many facts as I can so we can all come to the table with some dialogue that’s fact based not fear based as well as sensitizing the whole community to the idea that we’re all in this together. I would like us to embrace our diversity more effectively without hyperbole, accusations and the anger that happens.
Tuynman: It’s not an issue, it’s a process. Everything’s a conflict because we don’t use the same process, which is what the committee system is meant to do, to bring the players to the table. If you decide to fight, that’s a decision. If you try to work things out, that’s a decision. How to stop fighting? You have to be impeccable with your word. You have to not take anything personally ever. You can’t make assumptions. That’s what causes conflicts, making assumptions. When something happens and there’s a potential problem, you have to deal with the person immediately. We never do that. We talk about them (behind their back). We have to be direct.
Do you believe masks help slow the spread of COVID-19? If cases in the community rise, the EOC could ask the assembly to consider a mask mandate. Would you support a community wide mask mandate at that time?
Kirby: Yes, I believe masks help slow the spread of COVID-19. I think a mandate is a huge deal. I’m not in support of a mandate at this time due to difficulty of enforcement and trust in the public to follow safety guidelines, but I would support a mandate if we get to a high-risk situation, nine or more active cases, as defined by the Emergency Operations Center. I trust their assessment that this constitutes a high risk, and their understanding that these measures would be effective, and I’ve confirmed it with my own research.
Alten: Yes and yes. It’s like a seatbelt. If you wear seatbelts, you have fewer deaths from car crashes. It’s the same with masks. So many people are asymptomatic. You have to assume you have the virus and that it’s active in the community. I don’t think the enforcement piece is really a big issue. If it’s a rule or law, most people follow the rule or law.
Lapp: I’m still up in the air about that. You read reports from different doctors, one will say, “Yes,” one will say, “No.” Dr. Fauci made different statements at different times about the effectiveness of masks. I look at news sources on both sides and try to fact check, but it seems like they all lean one way or another. I think it’s up to each person to weigh the facts and make a choice. If it’s icy and you’re heading into town, you’re putting yourself in a precarious situation by going out on the highway with your vehicle. That’s your choice. You could stay home because it’s too dangerous. It’s the same with a mask. You can stay home if you feel vulnerable. You have resources for picking up groceries without entering stores. Even if we reach a high-risk level in Haines, I probably wouldn’t support a mask mandate. I don’t think it’s really the government’s job to do that. They can help you out. They can warn you, but it’s your own prerogative to keep your own health good.
Stickler: The whole idea of the effectiveness of masks, wear a mask it’s a patriotic duty, well, I think that’s a stretch. I think it’s important to wear a mask if it’s important to you personally. People resist mandates. They don’t like to be told what to do, especially in Alaska and especially in our town, so mandating it isn’t the right approach. If we were to get to the “high alert level,” I would expect a mask mandate to be issued. At that point, COVID-19 would be more widespread and we would have to seriously entertain a mask mandate. How such a mandate could be enforced is a topic that would have to be addressed.
Josephson: What I have heard, from mainly Dr. Anne Zink, is that if you have the virus, a mask would prevent it from going on other people. We want to prevent the spread and keep people safe. The approach the community has taken has been effective. I’m not someone who’s big about mandates. If we need to change the messaging or deal differently in the future, we need to look at that in the future given those circumstances. I do not support a mask mandate.
Tuynman: They may be very effective. I don’t know. I’m not a scientist. Everybody’s information is different. I don’t feel like it’s the place of government, in our context, to take on mandating something like that. In New York City, I could see it in a heartbeat. We have plenty of room. I think the main reason I’m against a mandate is seeing what’s going on in the rest of the country, how there are people who are very independent minded and when you ask them to wear a mask, they are getting violent. We don’t need that here.
What distinguishes you from the other candidates?
Kirby: I’m 33. I have the interests of a future generation at heart instead of the past. We can learn from the past, but I think I’m more capable of seeing a direction to take us in the future and more willing to try to come up with new ideas. I don’t have some of the old baggage, some of the things that come from living somewhere your whole life-you have a spat with one person or you’re really good friends with someone else-it inadvertently can influence the way you make decisions.
Alten: I think outside the box and am solution driven. When the current assembly was talking about cutting the museum’s budget in half, I knew there was no way that funded all our people, so I went out and found a way to keep people employed by bringing in grant money. I believe fiscal cuts shouldn’t be made in a way that eliminates a job. We have a responsibility to employ people.
Lapp: I’m a pretty moderate conservative. I listen and then act on what I hear. I’m a good listener. My actions speak louder than my words do because I’m not a great talker. Being on the assembly, you have to work together if you’re going to get anything done. You can’t just sit there and squabble. You need to learn to give and take if you’re going to make things better for the community, and I’ve learned this skill.
Stickler: One is my level of experience in serving on boards and in areas of leadership in our community. I also bring experience about the educational needs of our valley and how that budgetary process works and where we are in our school district as far as its budgetary restraints and restrictions and areas of concern and how to build up safeguards to protect it.
Josephson: I’ve been involved. I started at the school board. My time on the planning commission was very good for me to understand how the different land use issues affected neighbors and neighborhoods. And my experience on the assembly. One of the things I was promoting was improvement of our processes, and I’m proud of how we worked on the committee process.
Tuynman: I don’t fall on either side completely. I try to bring things to the center. I want to find realistic, doable solutions to challenges and ways of approaching things. You can’t be a pragmatic person if you don’t see the whole picture. If you’re conservative or liberal, you’re stuck in that mode and you see everything through that lens.
Do you lean toward cuts or increased taxes when balancing the budget? Which of these would you support using and under what circumstances? Is there a situation where you would support additional taxes?
Kirby: Right now, with the state we’re in, taxing people more isn’t the solution to creating revenue. We need to take a look at what we’re currently spending and how can we trim that back a little bit. We need to look at getting more volunteers to keep services open like the library and museum, which, in my book, are essential, especially during a pandemic. I feel like we’ve done a good job cutting things to the absolute minimum. I really hope that will be good enough. If it comes down to it, we have a rainy day fund. Spending some of the permanent fund principal to cover something as epic as getting us out of the pandemic without closing essential services is a viable option, short term. Long term, we should look to diversify revenue sources and find new, renewable sources of revenue like tourism.
Alten: Our budget has been cut, cut, cut, cut for the entire time I’ve been working for the borough. I do not believe we have a fat borough. As a community, we have to say what are our baseline requirements. If people need a theater, then it’s a baseline requirement. The next step is to say, “How do we keep it? Is it acceptable to pay another hundred dollars a year to keep baseline things?” I would never say, “Definitely not taxes.” I would much rather pay more in sales and property tax if it meant I got to keep my job. But we can also look at other places for revenue. I’m pushing people to vote for Proposition 1 on the state ballot. Hopefully more oil tax revenue for the state will translate to more support from the state like school bond debt reimbursement. We can also put more effort into applying for grants.
Lapp: I’m definitely opposed to increasing taxes. I think people have enough burden on them already. The borough needs to budget within our means. I think next year’s going to be tougher than this year. When you cut, you try to spread the cuts around. We might have to cut back on hours for some institutions like the library. You go over the budget with a fine-toothed comb. Maybe we use some of our reserves, but not the permanent fund, to get us through the tough times.
Stickler: That is almost the last thing I ever want to see, more taxes. For me to move on that we would have to have a very compelling reason. I don’t believe that our current economic situation is compelling enough to raise taxes. If we have opportunities to generate revenue (outside of taxes), let’s exhaust those possibilities before we can even entertain the idea of raising taxes.
Josephson: We have cut so much in the last year. We do have a little bit of fund balance we can bring down, but we have to come up with a plan that’s sustainable. I don’t support additional taxes for 2021 with the COVID situation. We’ve got a severe economic problem. Individuals cannot support tax increases at this time. I’m hoping we can break through the positional perspectives during the budget process and get everyone together and come up with good, creative ideas.
Tuynman: We end up spending a lot of money to prove a point or fight a battle or do things that probably wouldn’t cause as many problems if we worked harder just knowing what needed to get done in a strategic planning kind of way. That’s what staff is paid to do and what the borough assembly is tasked to do, to worry through these questions, move through them and think about how to make things more efficient without raising taxes.
There was discussion during this year’s budget hearings to divest from the Chilkat Center. Would you support such a divestment?
Kirby: My initial response is no because the Chilkat Center is an integral part of our community. But I don’t have as much information as I would like to make that decision responsibly. I would like to know how else would the center be able to exist? What are the costs and what are the benefits it provides?
Alten: No. A community needs a large meeting area for public events, for the theater, for holiday shows, for musical events at the school. There’s no easy way for individuals or private entities to support it in a community of our size, and we don’t have another comparable space we could use.
Lapp: No. This question comes up every budget cycle. I want to redo the contract with Alaska Indian Arts to take the option off the table, so the center belongs to us entirely and can’t revert back to them. I’m for funding it, but it’s going to be one of the institutions where we say, “Here’s how much you have to work with, and you have to work within that.”
Stickler: I believe that in the community’s best interest you can and you should support a center like the Chilkat Center. This is the hard part about managing a budget, we don’t always get everything we want. Can we get everything we need? That leads to a conversation: do we need it? Yes, I believe we need the Chilkat Center. These tough times require tough decisions. I support divesting from the Chilkat Center only if it’s absolutely necessary to get the budget balanced.
Josephson: I’d like to further the conversation about how we could more effectively leverage nonprofit status (for the Chilkat Center).
Tuynman: It’s really important to find ways to keep (cultural) institutions funded at some level.
What is the biggest issue facing borough government? Why do you think so?
Kirby: From what I’m hearing, there isn’t the trust in local government that there should be because people think that it isn’t as efficient or effective as it should be. Since May, we’ve been without a borough manager. Alekka’s doing a great job, but she has two jobs. We are requiring an awful lot of one person while not actively seeking to define the role of and find applicants for the manager position. It gives the public more faith seeing the proper procedures clearly outlined and followed in a timely, impartial manner.
Alten: Lack of a manager. You need a visionary. You need a leader. You need someone who’s the point person. Right now, everybody’s doing what they can do. Alekka’s trying not to rock the boat. Her role is to keep it status quo. We need someone people can talk to, someone to come up with new ideas.
Lapp: How to get caught up on our infrastructure like the public safety building. How do we get the Lutak Dock rebuilt so we can move stuff over the dock like we used to with logging. We made quite a bit of money doing things like that. I would like to start doing that again. It helps create a steady economy and business opportunities.
Stickler: I think there are two issues. The easy answer is economic recovery. It’s a huge issue that takes positive, proactive action. The other issue is not unique to Haines. It’s prevalent in every government and that is trust. That one is not as quantitatively easy to wrap our arms around. How do you show that you’re making progress on it? The way to do that is through having many conversations and leaning toward one another and stopping with the us and them.
Josephson: It’s going to be a challenging winter and spring for the public. My biggest concern is the sense of hopefulness that people have. The social distancing, it has other challenges to it as well. I’m concerned about people just getting by, paying their rent and just getting food. I certainly would hope to look for people who are capable, to donate to charities, for charities to step up, with our government leading the message: We’re a community working together for bringing our economy back.
Tuynman: I think it’s going to be around our economy and economic development. Everything fits under that: the quality of life, the kinds of direction we push the economy as a community, that’s the big issue and how can we have the kind of infrastructure we need to grow.
What’s a question nobody’s asking?
Kirby: If we want business growth and we want more young people to move here and we want people to stay here, why aren’t they doing that? What are we lacking or what can we make better that will promote that?
Alten: Nobody’s asking about ethics. There’s no oversight. There’s been a lot of these backroom deals, even more so with COVID-19. Take the AIDEA conversation as an example. How do people know about what’s going on? Whether it’s unethical or not, the perception of it being unethical is a problem.
Lapp: People ask about the budget, but nobody’s asked about how you plan to deal with budget shortfalls in the coming year. Another question nobody’s really asked is “What would you do to improve transportation between here and Juneau?” No one’s asked the question, “Do you support a road because the ferries aren’t doing their job?” I just support a better system, whether that’s a road or running bigger boats in the winter that can withstand the weather.
Stickler: I think a question that nobody is asking is: How are you choosing, today, to live in such a way that brings your community together? What are you doing today to support your community, your immediate neighbors but also your neighbors who live across the bay, your neighbors who live on the other end of town? How are you living today to be responsive and respectful of their views and their needs?
Josephson: We need to be sensitized to the fact that our budget was declining even before this pandemic happened. It’s like we’ve forgotten about the State of Alaska’s financial issues and how it’s affecting us. The question is ongoing for the long term. How are we going to deal with the long term challenges that we have?
Tuynman: What is each citizen’s role in government aside from being critical of what the government is doing?
Would you support funding the Haines Economic Development Corporation again? Why or why not?
Kirby: Yes, because their job is to promote economic development, which is what everyone says we need. I would also try to work with them to create some sort of way for the public to see what they’re doing. As a society, we love instant gratification. Unfortunately, economic development isn’t a right now thing if it’s done sustainably.
Alten: Yes, HEDC has done a good job this year bringing in creative revenue solutions and creating more jobs. It’s part of our mandate to support economic development, and we shouldn’t reinvent the wheel if we’re doing it well.
Lapp: They’re a nonprofit. For right now, they will need to function like other nonprofits. They were funded at $90,000 a year by the borough. That’s a lot to give a nonprofit, especially if we’re still hurting next year. HEDC can ask the borough for money and seek funding through outside grants. If we have more money coming in, I have no problem funding them, but when you don’t, you have to pick your essentials.
Stickler: We’re in an economic climate where it’s important to support economic development. Is HEDC the vehicle for doing that? I don’t have enough experience with it to say yes or no. When I was looking for (its) deliverables, I questioned whether or not it warranted the funding the borough was giving.
Josephson: Twice I voted to provide funding for HEDC. We had economic development funds available. I wanted to give them a chance. I resisted the criticism of the program and resisted the controversy because I wanted to give them a chance to work, to perform. I did not support them this year primarily because we have an estimated 50 percent reduction in sales tax revenue. I also was not seeing the results that I felt would justify us continuing to spend down our fund balance.
Tuynman: I thought it was wonderful to have three years of support for HEDC. They did a phenomenal amount of groundwork. I don’t think HEDC needs borough funding at this point.
I’ve heard politicians on multiple sides describe opposing voices as a “vocal minority.” What does that phrase mean to you and how will you guard against bias toward your group?
Kirby: I try to avoid using phrases like that because it really perpetuates the us-versus-them thinking that I really want to avoid being a thing. I guard against bias by trying to inform my opinions outside my own circle. If I have an urge to speak up about something, I’m not going to speak up if I’m not informed.
Alten: There are a few people that show up at almost all the borough meetings and give an opinion. I have respect for their commitment as citizens of a democracy. Those vocal people do represent a certain portion of the population, but I’d much prefer to know what people are thinking. At the same time, there are people with really strong opinions, and we shouldn’t give them more weight because they’re louder and more vocal. This is where finding other vehicles for communicating is important. I’d like to do a regular newsletter that goes out to people and provides a vehicle for people’s comments. It’s also important to acknowledge the comments you do receive, even if it’s just a quick note. I know people who never got a response to letters they wrote to the current assembly.
Lapp: Haines is pretty much half and half, so I’m not sure if there’s a minority or not. I guess I’ve never really thought about that. A vocal minority would exist in a place where you have a lot of folks in favor of something and very few against it. At meetings, I listen to everyone and make a decision based on what I’ve heard there, whether or not they’re the vocal minority. You go off the facts and what people have to say, you base your decisions off that.
Stickler: I fell into that. I spoke to an assembly that’s different than the one we have now and I felt like I wasn’t being heard. I felt like I was part of the vocal minority. But then I had to stop and I had to say, “Cheryl do you feel like this because you didn’t get your way? You had your voice. You had the opportunity to speak. You spoke. They made their decision. That’s how the world works.” If you feel like your voice isn’t being heard you not only have an invitation, you have a duty to speak up. If it still feels like you’re not being heard, you have an opportunity and a duty to become involved.
Josephson: To me the vocal minority is that group of people that are actively involved not as elected officials. It means there’s a handful of people that are very present with expressing opinions. The names are known. They’re people who frequently will write. They’re people who will frequently show up. They’re speaking during public comment. They’re writing letters. They’re sending in comments. Frequently you’ll see the same names.
I’ve been promoting sending issues to committees. The way that you guard against bias is you don’t become reactionary. You respond with the facts. Slow the process. Good government is not necessarily efficient. Good government takes time.
Tuynman: It’s a special interest. Every interest is special. Ask people questions and get deep into what makes their interest so powerful for them. You need to listen to them because they have good information. It doesn’t mean they’re trying to control the whole agenda. That’s what happens when people don’t communicate well and not just turn off because the other person doesn’t agree with it.
Do you think the firing of former manager Debra Schnabel‘s firing was handled well? Why or why not?
Kirby: No, I’m a big believer in process, especially when it comes to something as extreme as when you fire someone. It’s important to say, “Hey, I don’t like the job you’re doing. Here’s how we want you to fix it, and if you don’t, then we’re going to fire you.” Whether or not there should have been a probationary period, with or without pay, I don’t have all the information that the Mayor and assembly had. But the way they did it, it wasn’t fair.
Alten: No. You don’t fire your manager at the start of a pandemic, and she didn’t have regular performance reviews. The assembly members didn’t do their job, and if there were issues with how she did her job, then they should have managed her. I’m not saying that Debra is perfect, but I don’t believe you treat a human being that way.
Lapp: I’ve been on the assembly in the past when we abruptly fired a manager. I didn’t like it then, and I don’t really like it now. I think everybody deserves a second chance. I wanted at least a two-month probationary period, but there were others who didn’t want to wait that long. That’s why I voted “no” on dismissal.
Stickler: Because of the way it happened, it speaks to this need for a very clear-cut policy and procedure. Not everything that happens with an employee is subject to public fodder nor should it be, ever. It shouldn’t catch the manager off guard. It shouldn’t catch other assembly members off guard. I do not believe that backroom conversations were happening, but it avoids even the appearance of those kinds of conversations happening because you’re following the policy. That process does need to be addressed. It’s also how you conduct yourself. You should conduct yourself with respect to the people you work with. I feel very strongly about that.
Josephson: I would have preferred that in January the personnel committee, which I was not a member of, would have taken the issue seriously. My preference would have been for the personnel committee to have taken the task that they were given seriously in December. The assembly referred to the committee development of evaluation criteria so that we could address the challenges that were occurring.
Tuynman: It was a disaster. It wasn’t done in a way that was fair. To hear Brenda (Josephson) say they were wrong not to do their committee work, that doesn’t cut it with me. She repeatedly pinned the blame on the personnel committee not completing an evaluation. At one point she even said that she was not on that committee, making it very clear that if she had been on the committee or the chair of that committee the evaluation would have taken place. It’s another breach of process. An assembly member who sees a problem with a committee meeting must do something about getting that committee to meet before wrestling the situation away from the appropriate process. It doesn’t create a sense of good government. We need to have leadership that practices good governance. Good governance doesn’t undermine people or undermine a sense of community.