Mid Hillside Community Council

Minutes 15 April 2004

 

In John Weddleton’s absence, Tom O’Grady, Secretary, convened the meeting at 7:10 pm.  Attendees included 4 MHCC, 3 HECC, and 2 others.

Assembly Report

Janice Schamberg gave the Assembly Report, concentrating on items due to come before the assembly soon:

  • The Wildfire Mitigation Program, which is primarily funded by the federal government will be restructured to put more emphasis on fuel reduction and less on fancy hardware.
  • The consulting firm working on the Title 21 rewrite is beginning Module 3
  • Contract extensions has been approved for the Teamsters, the Operating Engineers, and the police.
  • The assembly is working the 1st quarter budget revision and formally setting the mill rate and the taxes.
  • The Solid Waste Services operation is up for review and is likely to result in higher rates.
  • An ordinance is proposed that would limit where  School District employees with a past drug conviction would be allowed to work.
  • The Hillside District Plan is being kicked off as a volunteer effort, with Assemblypersons Dick Tremaine and Janice Schamberg personally contributing.

Legislative Call-in

The legislative Call-in featured Lorali Carter, representing Kevin Meyer.  She reported that the operating budget had passed the House and was sent to the Senate and that they were now at work on the capital budget.  She asked if anyone had anything they wanted in the budget and there were no items requested.  The only question asked was with regards to Sen. Ben Stevens’ recent moved on AMATS composition and local elections.  She reported that Rep. Meyers felt that localities should be left to decide their own election rules.

Old Business

Jeanie McQueary returned , representing the Anchorage Roads Coalition and Context Sensitive Design, which focuses on fitting roads to their environment,  rather than modifying the environment to fit the road.  Their contention is that smaller, slower, more scenic roads can get the job done, with less intrusion into the neighborhoods they are meant to serve.  To that end, they proposed the following resolution:

Resolved that: Whereas the citizens of the Municipality/State have found their ability to participate in and influence the planning functions of the Municipality and the State to be inadequate we request that the Mayor/Governor adopt the following policy and require that MOA/State planning organizations adhere to it:

New Executive Order for Context Sensitive Solutions

• This new Executive Order directs MOA /SOA employees to implement Context Sensitive Solutions tools on all department projects.

Context Sensitive Solutions

Context Sensitive Solutions is a model for transportation project development that has recently received much discussion and broad acceptance. Its essence is that a proposed transportation project must be planned not only for its physical aspects as a facility serving specific transportation objectives, but also for its effects on the aesthetic, social, economic and environmental values, needs, constraints and opportunities in a larger community setting. MOA/SOA endorses the Context Sensitive Solutions approach for all projects, large and small, from early planning through construction and eventual operation.

This means that MOA/SOA employees working on projects and facilities should:

 • Engage from the project's inception with representatives of affected communities, including elected and appointed officials and a widely representative array of interested citizens.

 • Assure that transportation objectives of projects are clearly described and discussed with local communities in a process that encourages reciprocal communication about local views and needs in the overall project setting.

 • Pay attention to and address community and citizen concerns.

 • Ensure the project is a safe facility for both the user and the community.

• Context Sensitive Solutions is a process that places a high value on seeking and, if possible, achieving consensus. MOA's belief is that consensus is highly advantageous to all parties and may help avoid delay and other costly obstacles to project implementation.

A motion to support their proposed resolution was made and seconded after some discussion over the accuracy of the data presented.   MHCC passed the motion, as presented, with 3 in favor and 1 opposed, while Hillside East passed it with 2 in favor and 1 opposed.

Title 21 had no comments, but Linda Perkins reported substantial progress on the Large Animal issues.  Anyone who has comments on the Title 21 rewrite,  should send those comments to John Weddleton.

New Business

A questionnaire from the Municipality on ranking capital projects in the district was distributed.  Only one sheet was returned by the end of the meeting.  The remainder will be filled out by the May meeting.

The question was raised with regards to the sale of the Grandview center to Out North:  How can the Municipality sell a $500,000 building to a private organization for $1, without any vote of the public, or even a real opportunity for public comment, but could not lease a section of Ruth Arcand park to an organization that would actually make improvements and return cash to the city?  The only response appears to be that they had done it before, so precedence exists.

The meeting was adjourned at 8:21 P.M.