Mat-Su weighs a council district for a group staff say does not meet the code

Landowners along Greater Oilwell Road could gain the borough's recognized voice on subdivisions, rezones and eligibility to apply for grant money in their area, under a resolution the Matanuska-Susitna Borough Planning Commission takes up Monday, September 14. The borough's own staff memorandum says the group seeking that role does not meet the code definition of a community council. Staff recommend approval.

The proposal would have the assembly establish a Greater Oilwell Road Community Council District, a geographic boundary. The district is not the council. The Greater Oilwell Road Community Association would then operate inside it.

Information Memorandum No. 26-187, dated September 4, records that the association adopted bylaws defining membership as "each landowner within the prescribed boundaries who is 18 years of age or older and has paid the annual membership dues." The memorandum then states: "Because membership is based on landownership rather than residency, GORCA does not meet the community council definition in MSB 2.76.030(A)(1)."

A renter in the area would fall outside that membership. So would a landowner who does not pay dues.

The draft assembly resolution says the association's bylaws are "similar to the Louise Susitna Tyone Community Association, which, though not an officially recognized community council, serves as a representative organization for the Louise, Susitna & Tyone Lakes Community Council District." The staff memorandum states the Greater Oilwell Road group seeks to represent the community "in a manner similar to the Louise Susitna Tyone Community Association, where property owners also significantly outnumber residents."

Borough resolutions have recognized community councils since 1982, and have twice recognized an existing local organization, a civic club and a community organization, as the council for its area.

Community councils "provide a recognized forum through which residents may participate in local planning efforts, communicate community concerns, and provide recommendations to the Borough on matters affecting their neighborhoods." Districts are "defined by the Assembly to group residents within natural communities."

The resolution records that to be eligible for Community Assistance Program grants, a community council or association must operate within a designated community council district. The memorandum notes that once the district exists, the association "may be eligible to apply for Community Assistance Grants." No grant has been awarded, and the resolution's stated fiscal impact is none.

On the remaining requirements, the association has done what borough code asks. It has held at least two advertised meetings inside the proposed boundaries. Community members drafted the boundaries, and borough mapping staff refined them. The area sits inside no existing community council district. Staff cite the area's "distinct access routes, landownership patterns, development context, and local planning concerns" as grounds for a separate forum.

The borough's September 9 agenda for abbreviated plats, the short-form review for minor subdivisions, identifies its single case, a three-lot subdivision near Wasilla Creek, as sitting "in the Fishhook Community Council and in Assembly District #1." That is how the borough marks whose voice is the local one on a subdivision.

Several facts are not in the packet. The map of the proposed boundary is listed as an attachment and was not included. Neither was the association's own resolution asking for the district, nor its full bylaws. The borough does not state how many people live in the proposed district, how many own land there, or how many belong to the association. The comparison to a district where property owners outnumber residents is asserted without figures.

No resident of the area appears in the records reviewed. No officer of the association is named. The account of the association's request comes entirely from the borough's summary of it. Paul Clark, long range planner, staffs the item. Alex Strawn is planning and land use director.

The public hearing is scheduled for October 5. Written comment is due by noon on the Friday before the hearing. The assembly vote is calendared for October 20.