By KLAS STOLPE
Sentinel Staff Writer
The Sitka Assembly, which voted against the hiring of a new city planner on April 11, rejected a modified contract Tuesday night when the same four-vote majority thought the cost to the city was still too high.
The salary in both proposals was $93,724.80, but the $15,000 limit in moving expenses in the first proposal was reduced to $10,000 and a vacation bonus was removed in a renegotiation with the applicant, Bruce Wall of Soldotna.
“I was looking for someone with experience,” said City Administrator Keith Brady, who headed the hiring committee. “Specifically someone with experience and an AICP certificate, which is a planning certificate and the one that is nationally recognized. After the interview with Bruce Wall and discussions with the interviewers we actually felt excited for the first time.”
Others on the hiring committee were the city’s new human resources director, Matthew Ione, building official Pat Swedeen, and interim planning director Scott Brylinsky.
Brady and Brylinsky defended the proposed contract Tuesday night, and urged the Assembly to approve it.
Brady noted Wall was from Alaska, has 22 years of experience, has the AICP certificate, and was looking forward to coming to Stka.
“A planning director is supposed to help with land use permits, conditional use permits, variances, and economic development through land use,” Brady said. “He is excited to come to Sitka and get to work on the No Name/Granite Creek master plan, code revisions that we desperately need to help economic development, and really anything that comes up through our community planning. I ask that you do approve this offer. I have not offered it to him yet. I am waiting for the Assembly’s approval to do so.”
Brylinsky stated that one thing all could agree on was that Sitka needs robust economic activity.
“In my two stints as interim planning director over the last four years I have been impressed by just how much economic activity goes through the planning department,” he said, citing leases, subdivisions, easements, variances, and zoning updates to promote business and affordable housing.
“I understand that several small communities in Alaska are looking for a planning director as it’s not an easy position to fill,” he said. “I believe the job as offered is not over-paid compared to other similar professional positions both outside and inside City Hall. I believe Sitka needs a fully staffed planning department. As this is my last day of work, I urge you to approve this hire.”
Kevin Knox also spoke in favor, citing concerns about economic development and the need to plan around the No Name/Granite Creek project.
“If we don’t get somebody in here or if, in particular, we get somebody in that isn’t quite experienced and has the background to do this, it’s going to take an incredibly long time to bring that opportunity on line,” he said.
The original hiring motion had failed at the Assembly’s April 11 meeting with Valorie Nelson, Aaron Bean, Kevin Mosher, and Richard Wein voicing objections to the salary of $93,724.80, moving expenses of $15,000, an opening balance of 40 hours annual leave and an accrual at 12.67 hours per month.
In the Tuesday discussion Bean said he believed the city may be able to fill the position internally, and also that the Assembly had given Brady too much leeway in negotiating an agreement with Wall.
Eisenbeisz noted that even if the motion were approved he would be surprised Wall would come.
“We definitely have not welcomed him with open arms,” he said. “If it were me I would be reconsidering a second job offer that would have come.”
He said the Assembly had to work to keep costs in check, but “the economic opportunities that we have lost not having a fulltime planning director, I feel, far outweighs any increase in salary this person might have... I feel we need to get this economic engine moving and we need to approve Mr. Bruce Wall coming here if he chooses to do so.”
Nelson said $93,724.80 per year was not acceptable.
“When we hire somebody at this grade level, this salary, because they might be a rocket scientist planner, I mean did our previous planner have the AICP certificate?” she asked. “And do we really as a community need that? Yes, he might be the best person… this is nothing against him. This is about what we are doing for our community to try and make it sustainable for everybody else.”
Asked by Paxton what salary she would suggest Nelson said “Maybe in the $90K range.”
Mosher, who has been critical of Brady’s performance in office, said that if he were administrator he would have asked members why they voted no the first time, and that was not done.
Wein said a high salary might be acceptable with an exceptional person, but he believed the city had other alternatives that could do the job. Like Bean, he suggested an executive session be held to talk about reasons he didn’t want to bring up in public.
Brady also asked for a possible executive session to find out what issues he was unaware of.
“I understand from the last Assembly meeting that we had that salary was an issue,” he said. “I got the message. But that was one thing I wasn’t willing to renegotiate with him because I already had. I’m afraid he won’t come here with less of a salary. I was able to reduce the moving expenses, remove the accrual and leave... and yes, they are small things, but with his experience I believe he’s worth the cost of $93K a year. I had Jay Sweeney look at what it would cost with benefits. It will be 138K.”
Bean made a motion to stop debating and Wein seconded it. The motion passed 5-2 with Paxton and Knox voting no.
Knox, Paxton, and Eieseinbeisz voted yes while Wein, Mosher, Nelson and Bean voted no, failing the motion 3-4.
Paxton inquired if it were appropriate to make a motion to offer $90,000.
When told no he responded, “Let’s not do anything that makes sense at this table,” and used his gavel to signal a break.
In other actions Tuesday night the Assembly held three executive sessions, one to get an update on litigation related to 2015 landslides, another on having an investigation of the police department and the third to talk about issues related to the Baranof Brewing Company.
Subsequently, Assembly members voted 7-0 to approve a liquor license renewal for the brewing company, on condition that back sales taxes are paid by April 30.
They also agreed after the session on the police department investigation, to take up the issue again at the Aug. 13 meeting.
Also, under old business, the Assembly:
– voted 7-0 to reappoint Victor Weaver to a three-year term on the Planning Commission and Scott Saline to a three-year term on the Historic Preservation Commission. However, just before the meeting ended, Eisenbeisz gave notice of reconsideration at the May 14 Assembly meeting.
– approved 4-3 (Eisenbeisz, Bean, Nelson, no) an additional $200,200 for the fiscal year 2020 Visit Sitka contract.
– approved 5-2 on second and final reading (Eiseinbeisz, Wein, no) supplemental appropriations for FY2019 concerning legal defense fees for the Shepard vs. Sitka lawsuit.
– approved 7-0 on second and final reading a FY2019 supplemental appropriation for the city datacenter storage upgrade.
– approved 7-0 on second and final reading amending Title 22 “Zoning” of the Sitka General Code by modifying chapters 22.08 “Definitions,” chapter 22.12 “Zoning Maps and Boundaries,” chapter 22.16 “District Regulations,” chapter 22.20 “Supplemental District Regulations and Development Standards” and adding new Section 22.16180 “C Cemetery District.”
In new business the Assembly:
– approved 7-0 on first reading amending Title 22 “Zoning” of Sitka General Code by modifying chapter 22.20 ”Supplemental District Regulations and Development Standards.”
– approved 6-0 (Nelson recused) a motion supporting the Sitka Ranger District grant application to the Alaska Federal Lands Access Program for Harbor Mountain/Gavin Hill Trail reconstruction and reroute.
– approved 7-0 a memorandum of agreement between the Sitka School District, the City, and Alaska Arts Southeast Inc. for professional management and custodial service of the Performing Arts Center.
– approved 6-1 (Eisenbeisz no) a motion to leave the plans unchanged for the Cross Trail Phase 6 project as funded and permitted.
