Business adviser says a small Wasilla project faces $100,000 in permit requirements

John Clapper asked the Wasilla City Council on Monday to help a small business that he said is being required to get a full commercial use permit for a small construction project, at a cost he put at about $100,000 and a year.

Clapper, who said he has been in business or counseled businesses inside city limits for more than 40 years, said the business is across the street from City Hall and has paid sales tax for 30 years. It wanted a small construction project to increase sales, he said. He did not name the business.

At first, he said, city staff told him to fill out the application and pay the fee, and two city officials, including one from public works, told him they had no problem with the project. Then a report came back listing the requirements of a complete commercial use permit for more than 10,000 square feet: licensed construction and engineers, surveyors and architects who would "completely start from scratch," he said.

He asked for reconsideration and was turned down, he said. He then applied for a change of use, which he said staff had described as simple. "Comes back, same thing," Clapper said.

"We feel like you're just a small business in Wasilla, you're insignificant," he told the council. He asked members to "just tell us you don't care or give us an option of what we can do to move forward."

Clapper said recent studies show more locally owned small businesses are breaking even or losing money than at any time in 40 years, including 1986, when oil sold for $9 a barrel. He pointed to Chimo Guns and the Grape Tap, which he said are gone.

Wasilla repealed and re-enacted its land use code, Title 16, effective Sept. 26, 2025, according to the city's planning page, which offers a free pre-application conference by appointment. The city's administrative permits page has separate application instructions for commercial projects under 10,000 square feet.

The mayor said at the start of the comment period that it was not a question-and-answer period and that items raised may be referred to administration or taken under advisement. The council took no action Monday. Later in the same period, Stu Graham told the council that "as you can hear some public testimony, we've always been looking at rewriting more of Title 16, and you can see that there's a real need there."