Haines’ upcoming borough assembly meeting will address cell phone towers, reinstated FEMA funds and an advisor contract for the Lutak Dock. KHNS reporter Melinda Munson spoke with the Chilkat Valley News’ Will Steinfeld from in preparation for the Jan. 13 meeting.

Munson: “At Tuesday’s assembly meeting, they’re going to be discussing cell phone towers again. This is a conversation that has been ongoing. What has changed?”

Steinfeld: “Yeah, it’s been a lot of months of this … and it’s stretching on and on like this, partly because there’s some new information or new decisions being made. But also just because of the Assembly process, where, when these kinds of ordinances that change borough code are amended, or they go back to committee to get modified, they have to come back for more public hearings. 

So for this particular change to the regulations, we’re going to be in our fourth public hearing at this meeting, and with a fifth public hearing scheduled for Jan. 27. So it’s a lot of opportunity for residents to weigh in on this issue of how should we regulate new cell towers in the borough. 

But it is a big conversation. It’s a region-wide conversation. In Sitka and Wrangell, people are having these same debates about, you know, we have concerns about cell towers. We want to regulate them more stringently, or we need better cell coverage, let’s let these companies build.”

Munson: “A lawyer was present at the last discussion. Will a lawyer be present at this discussion?”

Steinfeld: “That’s a good question. I’m not entirely sure what the answer is, but the lawyer has at least given his input into these regulations as they’re written right now. And it’s gone kind of back and forth based on the legal context here, which is that federal government regulations seem, at least according to what the borough attorney has said, to prohibit the borough from really regulating this stuff, very strongly, at least on the basis of health or an outright ban.   

So, someone from the cell tower industry compared it to the borough trying to regulate drugs like Tylenol, for instance. That the federal government wouldn’t permit the borough to say we’re banning the use of Tylenol  … because that’s outside the borough’s scope of power.”

Munson: “The borough got good news in December that they weren’t going to have to pay back a large chunk of money. Tell us about that.”

Steinfeld: “So, it’s a lot of money. It’s $1.4 million…

And where this comes from is way back, following the Winter 2020 storms. There was damage to Porcupine Road, at least, that’s how the borough has described it in their project narrative. And FEMA approved funding, the first phase of which was the $1.4 million to do work on Porcupine Road. But then in the years following that, as the work got started, FEMA decided, after some reports from community organizations, tribal governments and then FEMA ground visits … that the borough had violated the terms of the funding. Had done things improperly, including allowing Constantine Metals to pay for work on the road that FEMA considered, you know, part of the project, essentially. 

And they pulled the funding back, and the borough has tried to get that funding back twice. They appealed once to FEMA. FEMA denied that appeal, and then one more time, this most recent appeal, which overturned the decision and returned the money back to the borough.

I asked Finance Director Jila Stuart how to think about this sum of money, and what she told me is that the money hasn’t yet been paid out to the contractors who did the work, because it was pending this appeal. So now that the borough has a FEMA reimbursement, they do have to pay the $1.4 million for the work that was completed. So the money is spoken for.”

Munson: “Will, what specifically will they be addressing about these funds?”

Steinfeld: “It doesn’t look like at this specific meeting there’s going to be any final decisions. It’s on the agenda just as a general discussion topic. So the open question, it seems to me, is that this originally was slated to be a three phase project. The $1.4 million that’s in question here, that was only the first phase. And the borough hasn’t said, at least as of the last assembly meeting, what their plans are for phases two and three, which have a lot of money at stake. So that’s a big open question. But what happens next, even though now this money is returned.”

Munson: “Lutak Dock is on the agenda again in terms of a contract. Can you fill in those details?”

Steinfeld: “Yeah, the update here is that the borough, just before the New Year, put out to bid the owner/advisor position for the Lutak Dock build. And what that position is, is it’s an engineering firm that’s going to come in, help the borough develop a concept for the dock and eventually get it out to bid to a builder who can put the thing into action, make it actually exist. 

The borough originally wanted to go with a firm, Moffatt and Nichol, who borough officials described as uniquely qualified. Eventually, they decided it was too complicated to give the job directly to Moffatt and Nichol without a public bidding process. So they put it out for public bid, and lo and behold, Moffatt and Nichol was the only firm to place a bid. So what the assembly has on its plate for this meeting is just approving entering into this relationship with Moffatt and Nichol.” 

Note: The Haines Assembly will also meet as a Committee of the Whole on Jan. 21 and for an annual goal setting meeting on Jan. 24.