Luke Hopkins, Tammie Wilson in runoff for Fairbanks borough mayor

By Christopher Eshleman

Published Wednesday, October 7

 

FAIRBANKS — Luke Hopkins and Tammie Wilson, both incumbents on the Borough Assembly, collected enough votes Tuesday to put them on track for an early November runoff in the contest to become the next borough mayor.

Hopkins earned 32.4 percent of the vote in the six-candidate race. Wilson took 31.5 percent.

No candidate for the mayor’s post, which will change hands this fall when incumbent Fairbanks North Star Borough Mayor Jim Whitaker steps down, was close to reaching the 40 percent threshold needed to win outright Tuesday’s round of voting.

Initial returns early Tuesday night showed Wilson with a strong lead. Hopkins gained ground as the returns grew and eventually pulled ahead. Hundreds of absentee and questioned ballots still remain to be counted, but with the third-place finisher more than 10 percentage points back, a Hopkins-Wilson runoff is all but certain.

Wilson emerged from a field that included several conservatives in what is technically a nonpartisan race. She called for reining in government spending. She ran a door-to-door campaign on less money than most candidates and said she’d stick with that approach, one she sensed has resonated with voters.

Hopkins said he thinks voters supported his pledge to try and cut energy costs and hold government spending in check. He said he’d stick to the same message as he tries to pick up votes in the weeks before the Nov. 3 runoff.

Voters across the borough last saw a runoff for mayor in 1997, when Hank Hove beat then-state Rep. Pete Kelly by a vote of 8,069 to 7,298.

Hopkins, a retired university carpenter and building maintenance superintendent, is two years into his second term on the assembly. He is a board director for the municipally led Alaska Gasline Port Authority, which recently announced plans to expand trucked natural gas delivery into Fairbanks. He said he was surprised this fall to hear some opponents give only lackluster support to the authority.

“The idea is to keep getting my message out there,” Hopkins said, adding that policy differences between he and Wilson mean “there’s going to be a clear choice” for voters next month. Wilson has criticized the borough’s “capitulation” to federal air quality regulators while Hopkins has backed the borough’s effort to produce a pollution-prevention plan.

Wilson, a property manager and private property rights advocate, has served for the past year on the Borough Assembly. She said she’d spend the weeks ahead continuing to collect residents’ input, as she has since announcing her race.

“It’s about hearing from them, first and foremost,” Wilson said of public service. She said she took Tuesday’s support as as sign that “People appreciate it when you come to them instead of them having to come to you.”

Garry Hutchison, a former assembly member who as of last week had drawn more campaign donations than anyone but Hopkins, finished third with just more than 20 percent.

Hank Bartos, another former assemblyman, landed fourth with just less than 10 percent.

Retired Usibelli Coal Mine executive Charlie Boddy earned 5 percent and retired construction worker Bill Stodden received less than 1 percent.

A final count of this round’s votes will come Tuesday, when an election board tallies absentee and questioned ballots.

The borough already held, as of Tuesday afternoon, more than 500 ballots cast through absentee voting, said Mona Drexler, the borough’s clerk. More could arrive through the mail.

1. 10/7/2009, 7:35 a.m.
2. Suggest removal
3. Great, it's like Palin vs. Obama, all over again. Boy, I hope Tammie's not a hockey mom. I can't go through all that again. .
   

Engleside 10/7/2009, 7:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

Oh, I don't know, PathFinder. Luke isn't the knee-jerk liberal you make him out to be. He has demonstrated--not just TALKED about--a number of old fashioned conservative values. He led the assembly in bringing in budgets millions below the cap. He was cutting and splitting firewood in this area decades before Ms. Wilson ever considered Alaska. He had a long career working with his hands, a skilled carpenter and mechanic. As one who has known him for a few decades, I can tell you that whenever one of us needed an engine pulled or a boiler brought back to life at 50 below, Luke was the guy you called, and Luke was the guy who came.
And I think that slogan of his, "Luke Listens," is fair. He is not a person with a huge ego. If you tell him you think he is wrong, he doesn't brush you off. If you convince him, he'll change course, even if it costs him pot shots from the sidelines.


AK_Sam_Whiskey


10/7/2009, 7:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

Obama's minion will again be on a ballot. Depressing.


 

1. 10/7/2009, 9:03 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   I also reject this idea that Luke is a bleeding-heart liberal as well; he is a hard-working guy who has climbed the ladder, starting as a carpenter. Everyone touts his 'UAF Career' as if he was a professor, but that simply isn't true. He built his own home, (and burns wood!) and works tirelessly for the community. Yes, he supports our schools. Is that such a bad thing? Should we be scrimping on our kids education? He does support spending less, but in the right places. He's a lot more moderate, and comes from a more moderate background that people imagine. Check out his website before slinging labels, maybe?

   Voters give Fairbanks borough authority to tackle air quality

   By Christopher Eshleman Published Wednesday, October 7, 2009  FAIRBANKS — Borough officials gambled this summer that voters would support steps to start reducing air pollution from offices in Fairbanks. They look to have bet right, although the results might have been closer than they expected.
   An advisory ballot measure, asking if the Fairbanks North Star Borough should establish a local pollution-prevention program, drew 53.4 percent of the vote Tuesday.
   Tuesday’s question was not legally binding, so it falls to the incoming mayor and assembly to decide how, or whether, to take that result as a signal to begin building and approving pollution-prevention plans.
   Luke Hopkins and Tammie Wilson, two incumbent assembly members now facing a runoff for mayor, have taken different approaches to toward the air quality issue. Hopkins said he was pleased with Tuesday night’s results, which he said should be a signal to start working now on pollution-prevention plans.
   “Time’s a-wasting,” Hopkins said.
   Wilson said the vote was too close, particularly with a runoff ahead, to take steps toward developing a locally led air-quality program. She said she was upset the measure’s sponsors had pushed a question that “divided the community” and noted it only passed by a small margin.
   “I look at it as (evidence) that people don’t trust government,” Wilson said.
   Local levels of airborne soot, or “fine particulate matter,” violate federal standards. Doctors say the soot buries itself deep in the lungs and exacerbates health issues.
   The federal Environmental Protection Agency tested Fairbanks’ wintertime air earlier this decade and found unhealthy concentrations of particulate pollution. Subsequent testing by the borough has aimed to identify sources. The recent tests have to a degree been inconclusive, but air quality specialists say they are certain much of Fairbanks’ pollution problem comes from wood-fed home heating systems.
   The assembly late this summer agreed to pass the advisory question on to voters following sharp public debate over the borough government’s actions to date. Many called one likely pollution-prevention path, a proposed exchange program for wood stoves, unacceptable for a community with high energy costs and thousands of homes with wood-fed heating systems. Others supported the borough’s running efforts to work with state and national environmental agencies to start cutting pollution levels.
   The ballot question Tuesday asked whether the borough government should amend a 34-year-old, pollution-focused working agreement with the state. The move would be needed to one day administer a pollution-prevention program from offices in Fairbanks.
   The borough and other Alaska communities could face federal sanctions — such as a loss of federal transportation aid — unless some sort of pollution-prevention plan is in place in the next few years. State air-quality officials said this summer they’re unlikely to let that happen and would step in if the assembly or voters in Fairbanks decline to take steps to reduce pollution here.
   Talk of particulate pollution coincides with the impending end of another pollution-prevention program, the vehicle inspection-and-maintenance program, which cut carbon monoxide levels. The I/M program is set to end on New Year’s Day.
   

    

   Community Discussion
   

   Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
    
   

   rationalcitizen

   10/7/2009, 8:08 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   Point is folks, you can whine all you want. The pollution is real, we all know it. Stop whining about the EPA, they are simply here to tell you what you don't want to hear, and don't want to do. And it didn't matter whether people voted yes or no on this. The EPA was still going to force Fairbanks to address this issue. It all comes down to whether you want the Borough to do it, or somebody in Washington. The majority said they wanted us to analyze and deal with it locally.

   10/7/2009, 8:18 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   Sisu,
   The EPA has been collecting data for a decade, if not longer. I just love this myth floating around that there is no data, and no research that's been done. Oh and that we need a special study done, because we have unique conditions. Every community has "unique" conditions. Fact remains no matter what unique conditions exist that cause the pollution to form, or to stick around, pollution at particular levels still hurts people.
   And we don't need a scientist to tell us what's causing the pollution, we all know what they are, cars, power plants, and furnaces (wood, oil,etc). And there is always going to be someone howling if the borough tries to regulate any of them.
   

   SkeeterDeeter

   10/7/2009, 8:21 a.m.

   Suggest removal

   I'd sure like to see the air cleaned up. It's a good thing you anti-government types are in the vocal minority. Every time I descend into that dirty stew of brown air to go to work I want to hold my breath.

   Editors's Note: The question for voters is whether the local Fairbanks government is ready to enforce the wood stove pollution law.  Karl Monetti argues that the borough is ready to do so.  If you treasure clean air, you won't agree with Justin Powell's article (2nd one here) that more delay is needed, which he thinks will happen if the State of Alaska is primarily in charge of enforcement.

    

   Community Perspective

   Air quality must be improved

   By KARL MONETTI

   Published Sunday, October 4, 2009

   A hot issue on the upcoming ballot concerns the looming fine particulate air quality problem. The draft ordinance — introduced by the mayor’s office last month but shelved by the Borough Assembly in response to public outcry over strict wood smoke regulations — is not on the ballot. Neither is any option of complying with the Environmental Protection Agency’s standards for particulate matter smaller than 2.5 microns. This is federal law and non-negotiable. The question then, is not if we will have PM2.5 regulations, or how they will be determined, but who will take the lead role in developing those regulations; the borough or the state Department of Environmental Conservation.
   So, let’s put aside the issues of whether our wood stoves will be taken away, and focus on who we want to making the decisions about them. A recent ad hoc committee comprised of various members of the community, including Interior Wood Burners Association, the Northern Alaska Environmental Center, Cold Climate Housing Research Center, energy experts, wood stove and pellet vendors and the borough air quality department, convened to discuss the merits of state versus local control. Interestingly, of the 13 people in the group, 12 heated their homes entirely or in part with wood. The committee’s report, which compares arguments for state versus local control, is available on the Web sites of the above named organizations, and as a handout at CCHRC and the Northern Center.
   Having been part of that committee, I would like to make a case for local control of this process.
   First, the borough is under a time constraint; we must have an EPA-approved plan in place by 2012, and be in compliance with its regulations by 2014. Currently, the borough has staff already dedicated to the PM2.5 problem, it has the equipment and manpower to measure and monitor PM2.5 and it has funds available for monitoring, voluntary change-out programs and tax credits. Because all this is in place, the borough could begin work immediately to develop measures to come into compliance. On the other hand, DEC has no funds appropriated and no staff for any such programs. It would most likely require a year in which to get ramped up to tackle the job.
   Second, DEC has been very pleased with the borough’s vehicle inspection and maintenance program addressing carbon monoxide, a locally run program so successful over the years that it has eliminated the need for itself. In a letter to the mayor, the DEC air quality director indicated she expected the borough would prefer to take the lead role on this matter.
   Third, DEC can set regulations without going through review by the Legislature, leaving few options for public input. With a limited staff competing against all other areas of the state for funds, DEC will very likely make regulations that are mandatory and easy to enforce (such as prohibiting all wood burning during the coldest months), with very little regard to our local situation. If the borough maintains control over the process, residents will have much greater access to assembly members and other policy makers to influence the outcome in a manner more suited to our local needs and desires.
   Fourth, DEC is concerned with statewide policies, whereas the borough has a much narrower focus, receptive and responsible to its residents. Our assembly members all live here, many are wood-burners themselves. They understand our local problems and concerns, they are always accessible and three are elected each year. For example, after several years of joint discussions about a wood stove change-out rebate program, DEC had come up with $100,000 (which has since been withdrawn from the table) for the program, whereas the borough has procured twelve times that amount, and secured permission from the state the ability to provide municipal tax credits of $2 million per year for participants.
   Fifth, by having a local program we leverage other local involvement by the University of Alaska Fairbanks and CCHRC, for example, that would not likely happen were it not for grants brought in by the borough. CCHRC gets grants to study these issues. If the borough is out of the loop, CCHRC has no incentive to get grant money, and the local research does not get done.
   Finally, it is our health problem and we ought to take the lead in solving it. Local control is most likely to result in a program that fits this community, that works effectively at the least cost and inconvenience to our borough residents.
   I urge you to vote “yes” on the borough’s ballot Proposition B.
   Karl Monetti, a Fairbanks area resident for 38 years, is a retired veterinarian from North Pole who burns wood for heat.
   

    

   Editor's Note: The Editor disagrees strongly with the following article by Justin Powell but includes it to show his purpose for State of Alaska  control: delay, delay, delay of wood stove pollution regulation.

   Community Perspective

   Air quality is the state’s job

   By JUSTIN POWELL

   Published Sunday, October 4, 2009

   This Tuesday borough voters will be faced with a choice that was too difficult for our Borough Assembly to make — the choice of whether or not our borough government should take on the responsibility of researching, analyzing, modeling and controlling air quality as it relates to fine particulates under 2.5 microns in size. As one air quality program comes to an end after 36 years, do we really want to be starting a new air quality program that could last for another 30 years? Does the borough have the authority and, more importantly, the resources to undertake this responsibility?
   Article 7, section 4, of the Alaska Constitution requires the state Legislature to promote and protect the public health. It is the state Legislature that has both the statutory authority and funding to effect the needed changes that will truly improve our air quality and protect public health. The state agency that would bear this responsibility is the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. A few of the responsibilities that fall under the jurisdiction of the Alaska DEC are to ensure that our drinking water is safe, that restaurants meet health standards and that waste products are disposed of properly. It seems only logical that a health issue such as fine particulate pollution would fall under the authority of the Alaska DEC air quality division rather than the borough transportation department.
   With one of the highest property tax rates in the state, the cost to the borough if it assumes this added responsibility should be of utmost concern. I have to applaud the borough Transportation Department for securing grants to pay for a large portion of the research costs to date. The reality, however, is that sooner or later these funding sources will dry up and the grants will end. Borough residents will then be left paying for a borough run program either through increased property taxes or registration and permit fees on our wood stoves.
   After four years of data collection and research the consensus from the panel of scientists and experts at the recent air quality symposium was that there are more questions than answers and that more research needs to be done. The borough administration seemed to ignore this recommendation and instead chose to move forward with plans to implement a draconian wood stove enforcement plan the very next day.
   The Alaska DEC on the other hand has realized that they do not have enough information to be creating public policy and is already planning on funding additional studies this winter to get a better picture of where the particulates are coming from. One big question that needs to be answered is where the high levels of sulfur and zinc particles are coming from. Probable sources include high-sulfur heating oil, coal-fired power plants and the widespread burning of waste oil.
   With state control we will not have to worry about the assembly passing new laws at 1 a.m. in the morning as we recently witnessed. This is from the Alaska DEC explaining their planning process:
   “There are several aspects to the planning process. The department would continue efforts to develop the necessary technical information for the plan and evaluate the various sources of PM2.5 in the community. DEC would outline a range of control options to consider including in the plan and these control programs would be evaluated for costs, benefits, and other local considerations. DEC would provide opportunities for local input to the development and selection of control programs. Given our role in air quality permitting, DEC already plans to evaluate the power plants and industrial facilities to assist in determining if any additional controls are warranted to address PM2.5. If needed, DEC would develop regulations for implementing control programs in the plan. Ultimately the implementation plan would be drafted to meet federal requirements including all the relevant technical information, control programs, and the analytical demonstration of attainment.”
   For anyone who burns wood, the choice is clear: “Let the state do it!”
   Justin Powell recently formed the Interior Wood Burners Association.

   Fairbanks' air pollution is an issue that won’t blow away

   By Christopher Eshleman

   Published Tuesday, September 29, 2009

   FAIRBANKS — Conversation about air pollution in Fairbanks has caused quite a stir.
   Three decades ago, it was unhealthy levels of carbon monoxide. This time, 3-year-old changes to the federal Clean Air Act have left Fairbanks violating health-based standards for airborne soot, commonly called particulate air pollution. Debate about how to respond to the situation has focused on wood-fed home heating systems, which heat thousands of homes but could represent a big part of the pollution problem.
   The Fairbanks North Star Borough Assembly has forwarded an advisory question to voters for the Oct. 6 election. The measure asks whether the borough government should enter into an agreement with the state so the borough can administer a pollution-prevention program. The question is not legally binding.
   The borough, which has limited power to govern health issues, has worked with the state since the mid-1970s to address winter air pollution issues. But Mayor Jim Whitaker’s attempt this summer to guide that relationship toward dealing with particulate pollution met with complaints from many residents who burn wood to heat their homes. Some sensed the borough would single out wood-fed home heating as a way to solve the problem.
   The issue leaves Fairbanks in a bit of a Catch-22. Wood-fired heaters are popular in Fairbanks, where extreme temperatures and long winters combine for a winter energy bill that includes some of the highest fuel and natural gas prices in the country. Early signals that a pollution-prevention plan could penalize residents who fail to upgrade to more efficient wood heaters has faded in the face of public criticism, replaced by recommendations of an education- and incentive-based program.
   The borough and other Alaska communities could face federal sanctions — such as a loss of federal transportation aid — unless some sort of pollution-prevention plan is in place in the next few years. The state is unlikely to let that happen, meaning Fairbanks will have some sort of program even if local voters say no on the advisory ballot measure.
   The air we breathe
   The Environmental Protection Agency and local air-quality specialists agree Fairbanks has a problem with fine particulate (“PM 2.5”) air pollution, a nondescript classification for the soup of tiny airborne bits of solid mass, generated by combustion. Fairbanks last winter joined roughly 200 other communities in 25 states with chronic high pollution readings.
   Why do researchers think Fairbanks’ air — specifically, wintertime air — is dirty to the point of being unhealthy?
   The EPA’s conclusions stemmed from three years of tests on air collected from a monitoring station at the state of Alaska’s main downtown office building. The agency counted the days with the worst pollution and averaged them, excluding as anomalies a few days with extremely high readings. The EPA’s rules state that if a community’s average daily air pollution concentrations meet or exceed the level deemed unhealthy — 35 micrograms within a cubic meter of airspace — the community is considered in violation of the Clean Air Act’s particulate standards. Fairbanks’ air was 11 percent worse than the health standards.
   The borough’s air quality office was, by the time that data emerged, well into its own round of testing. While the EPA’s tests simply measured the pollution, the borough’s testing was designed to discover where it came from. Researchers used a trio of scientific models to try to identify the biggest sources — cars and trucks, industry or wood-based home heating systems.
   The work had only limited success, and air quality specialists said more study needs to be done. But one leg of the borough’s second round of tests — carbon and levoglucosan testing performed this year at a Montana lab — has succeeded in providing indications wintertime wood smoke is a big part of the problem, said Jim Conner, the borough’s air quality specialist.
   Conner, who holds a doctorate in physics, said the tests provided “extremely reliable” indications that roughly half, and possibly up to 70 percent, of Fairbanks’ wintertime air pollution consists of smoke from woodburning. That estimate excludes smoke from summer wildfires, he said. The data came from three months of pollution samples taken last winter, Conner said.
   Conner acknowledged that local testing has largely failed to account for Fairbanks’ weather conditions. Hills to the city’s east and north create a wind shield that exacerbates temperature inversions, that trap cold, stagnant air close to the ground for a number of days each winter. The EPA and the University of Alaska Fairbanks are working to create a scientific model that would account for weather and atmospheric conditions and better predict which weather conditions produce poor pollution days.
   Conner said researchers tried a similar approach three decades ago when carbon monoxide concentrations drew attention from federal environmental regulators, leading to a CO-monitoring program that will expire this winter.
   “They’ve tried before. They’re trying again,” Conner said. If this attempt works, he said, it could go far toward refining the information his office already has.
   Lung problems
   But the model is not finished. In the meantime, the borough government, a “second-class” municipality with limited power to regulate or enforce issues of health and social services, reports facing a three-year deadline to help the state submit pollution prevention plans to the EPA.
   The state and borough governments updated their working agreement — a three-decade-old memorandum of understanding — in 2003 to address fine particulate pollution. The borough later voted to expand a particulate monitoring program.
   Conner’s office then started to prepare for heightened air testing — “special purpose monitoring” — to better understand the blend of compounds in the air. By the time the EPA tightened pollution standards in 2006, the borough was one year into the tests that indicate wood smoke is likely a major pollution source — the only one Conner said his office can confidently attach to estimates. Cars and trucks also present a major possible source, although ongoing research has yet to accurately estimate the percentage, Conner said.
   Based on those results, Whitaker began drafting a program for indoor and outdoor wood heaters. Drafts of the program circulated this summer showed it would use tax breaks, penalties and a heater registration program to entice or push residents with older or less-efficient stoves to upgrade.
   The idea was to cut pollution enough to bring Fairbanks into compliance with the federal standards. But the Borough Assembly balked when Whitaker asked it to revise the 34-year-old borough-state memorandum, and a number of residents protested what they sensed was an emerging ban on wood-based home heating. They asked the borough to step back and assess more options.
   Justin Powell, who created the Interior Wood Burners Association Web site to mobilize those with wood-fed heaters, noted Fairbanks has far higher electric and heating costs while also experiencing colder days, leaving residents and businesses here spending much more of their income on energy. That means the borough, he said, should tread lightly and minimize harm to those who heat with wood.
   “The cost to not burn wood is so much greater (here) than elsewhere,” said Powell, who estimates his wood heater saves him $3,000 or more per year. Powell said the three months of air samples that point to high wood-smoke content could be a poor indicator of the pollution problem as a whole.
   The question
   Whitaker and the assembly’s presiding officer, Nadine Winters, asked the assembly to forward an advisory ballot measure to voters: “Shall the Fairbanks North Star Borough enter into an agreement with the state of Alaska that allows the borough to locally administer the (fine particulate pollution) air quality program?”
   The assembly voted by a narrow margin to send the question to the ballot.
   State environmental regulators said they’ll create and enforce a pollution-prevention program if Fairbanks declines to do so locally. But Fairbanks’ advisory Air Pollution Control Commission early this month recommended Fairbanks take steps to clean its air. The commission suggested the borough rely on public education and a voluntary, incentive-led wood stove change-out program.
   The measure is not without critics. Powell’s Web site has drawn more than 400 supporters. The site’s message asks the borough to refocus on broad pollution measures that, while they might deal with home wood burning, also allow for more investigation into transportation and other sources.
   Proponents of the ballot measure say a locally drafted and administered plan would provide a less onerous solution than one drafted by the state. Karl Monetti, a board director at the Northern Alaska Environmental Center, said a recent roundtable organized by the center discussed a carbon monoxide-reduction program (the I/M Program) as an example of a locally drafted pollution plan that worked well.
   “Under local control, we can discuss these issues for as long as it takes to get it right, and change any ordinances we might enact if they prove ineffective or onerous,” reads a comment taken from a list of pros and cons following the roundtable. “The Borough Assembly is very accessible.”
   Health
   A number of scientific journal articles link fine particulates to short- and long-term health problems.
   One often-cited project tracked more than 8,000 people in six cities from 1974 to 1991. It also collected data on outdoor air pollution at a central site in each city.
   Subjects in the project, dubbed the “Harvard Six Cities Study,” were 25 to 74 years old when work began.
   The researchers found signs that high levels of particulate air pollution increase death rates from lung cancer and heart disease. The report’s conclusions stated fine particulate matter posed “a particularly great risk” to human health because the airborne particles are so small that they can become lodged deep in the lungs and make their way into the bloodstream. They’re so small, as the EPA puts it, that “several thousand of them could fit on the period at the end of this sentence.”
   A separate study published in 1997 pinned household wood burning to particulate pollution and short-term lung problems. The project focused on two winters in Santa Clara County, Calif., near San Francisco, where the use of fireplaces and wood-burning stoves is high. Researchers collected data on daily emergency room visits for asthma. They also tracked daily samples of air pollution and found a relationship between spikes in pollution and increases in asthma-related hospital visits.
   The work focused on a broad category of particulate air pollution — PM 10, a classification that accounts for particles up to four times the size of PM 2.5. But one of the project’s authors, Bart Ostro, said the group believed that smaller bits of pollution, the same size of air pollution causing headaches in Fairbanks, were the big problem.
   “It is believed that a lot of the (particulate matter) from wood smoke is PM 2.5,” said Ostro, now an air-pollution epidemiologist with California’s state Environmental Health Hazard Assessment office. “So the results of the analysis using PM 10 are probably primarily due to PM 2.5.”
   Community divide
   Some critics of the borough’s approach to the air pollution problem have argued leaders here should have challenged the EPA’s mandate that Fairbanks clean up its air. The borough administration balked, suggesting such a fight likely would mean an unsuccessful challenge to the 1970 Clean Air Act.
   There is, in fact, a history of legal challenges to the Clean Air Act and its 12-year-old standards covering fine particulate pollution. A group of companies and state governments sued the EPA a decade ago, arguing in federal court that the process used to develop the standards was unconstitutional. The suit made its way to the Supreme Court, which cleared the EPA in 2001 and found the Clean Air Act required the government to set maximum allowable levels of air pollution to protect the public health.
   A federal appeals court one year later backed that decision and found the EPA had taken a “reasoned” and measured approach when setting those health-based standards, according to the EPA’s online synopsis of the case.
   Those standards require the borough to submit an air quality control plan to environmental regulators within three years.
   Conner’s office said it was uncertain what sanctions Fairbanks or the state might face without a pollution-prevention plan in place within the next few years. A lawyer on contract for the borough said two weeks ago that the federal government could penalize Fairbanks and the state — through a loss of federal transportation funding, a slowdown in military investment and complications with natural resource extraction — if it doesn’t take steps to cut air pollution.
   “These sanctions could extend beyond highway construction funds and potentially impede other major priorities for (Fairbanks) as well,” states the letter from the firm Birch, Horton, Bittner and Cherot.

   Three political newcomers run for Fairbanks North Star Borough Assembly Seat A

   By Rebecca George

   Published Saturday, September 26, 2009

   FAIRBANKS — A local business owner, an engineer and the senior vice president of Doyon Ltd. are vying for Seat A on the Fairbanks North Star Borough Assembly. Seat A is one of three positions on the nine-member assembly that is up for grabs in October.

   The seat is currently held by outgoing Assemblyman Bill Stringer, who ran last year to fill a one-year vacancy. Stringer, a longtime assemblyman, has opted to retire from local politics and not run as an incumbent candidate.

   The Borough Assembly is the largest governing body in Fairbanks and works with an annual budget of about $132 million to oversee parks and recreational facilities, a public library, public transportation, public schools and local road and fire service commissions. The assembly also has the final say in cases involving business and residential property zoning. All three candidates are newcomers to the political scene but are longtime residents of the borough.

   Matthew Want

   Matthew Want, 37, was born and raised in Fairbanks. He manages Mobil 1 Lube Express and is the owner of two watering holes along the Steese Expressway and Richardson Highway. Want has two daughters who attend Monroe Catholic High School and comes from a large family, he said.

   This is his first venture in local politics. Want said he’s decided to run for a seat on the assembly because he’d like to vest more in the community.

   “I live here, I work here and I plan on staying here for the rest of my life,” Want said. “I want more of a local voice in our government and want to have an influence on the direction this community takes itself.”

   Want said serving on the assembly is a balancing act.

   “The borough must constantly balance between improving quality of life through services and being able to adequately and fairly fund them. And of course, there are always debates on whether or not we actually need these services.”

   Want said he thinks one of the biggest issues facing the borough is local air quality. “I think it’s something the state should take the lead in,” Want said. “While I think the borough should have a seat at the table of that debate, I think the state is better equipped to address the issue and has more resources.”

   Want considers himself a good choice for Seat A because he understands the local community.

   “As a self-made small-business owner, I understand what it’s like to make hard economic decisions that impact employees’ lives,” he said. “I also understand the operations of a business and think it would transfer well into serving on the assembly. I’m a lifelong Alaskan, and I want to be closer to that process.”

   Eric Grabber

   Eric Grabber, 51, has been an engineer since the 1980s. He arrived in Fairbanks from the Midwest in 1976 in search of an education and work. When he arrived, he chose to study petroleum engineering at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. He has worked in the engineering field since his move to Fairbanks. Grabber owns his own engineering consulting firm and in the past has worked for major companies like BP.

   “I have a lot of experience handling multimillion dollar projects and big budgets,” Grabber said. “I’m here to help represent the people. I have a good background in business and accounting, and I’ve been through many budgeting cycles in the engineering industry.”

   As a member of the community, Grabber has built handicap ramps for seniors and developed coursework for the Tanana Valley Campus Process Technology program, serving as an adjunct teacher for several years and training students in petroleum engineering basics. Grabber served as a borough road commissioner from 1985-1989. “The assembly is there to meet the community’s needs,” he said. “As a community member, I should be able to walk up to an assembly member, make a request and have the assembly take action, so long as it follows borough law.” Grabber said he thinks the assembly needs to be more responsive to the public’s needs, particularly when dealing with issues like energy and taxation.

   “We have to address the air quality issue because that impacts economic development and individual families,” he said. Grabber said he is supportive of re-examining the scientific data that measures local air quality and coming up with an alternative solution to banning outdoor wood boilers.

   “I think we need to focus more on educating people what’s appropriate to burn and what’s not rather than putting a ban on stoves,” he said. “I also do not support having wood stoves inspected and registered.”

   Grabber said he also opposes additional taxation and the controversial plastic bag tax.

   “We need to take time and really look at these issues from the perspective of everyday people,” he said. “And with my background here in Fairbanks, I think I’d do a good job at listening to our residents.” In his spare time, Grabber collects antique tractors and is a class two licensed gun manufacturer, one of four in the Interior.

   Toby Osborn

   Toby Osborn, 55, has raised six children and been married for 33 years. He is the senior vice president and chief financial officer for Doyon Ltd. This is his first time running for public office. He serves on the Borough Economic Development Commission. His decision to run, Osborn said, was partly personal and partly motivated by his training in business. He has not been endorsed by Doyon Ltd. or its affiliates.

   Osborn said he’s running for two reasons.

   “The first is personal,” he said. “I’m at a stage in my life where I’m looking back on all that I’ve done and I don’t think I’ve had enough involvement in the community. I’d like to do more.”

   The second reason, Osborn said, is that he thinks he could bring a valuable skill set to the assembly that is missing.

   “I think I really have a way of looking at life issues and solving problems efficiently and with sophistication.”

   Osborn has a background in business and accounting that spans 31 years. He arrived in Alaska in 1981 with his family after working in Los Angeles where he was responsible for controlling the financial operations of two firms in real estate, property management and construction.

   For the past 25 years, he has volunteered with the Boy Scouts of America and his local church.

   “Neither of which make me necessarily smarter than anyone else — it’s just that both of those fields have trained me in a way of critically thinking, analyzing problems and resolving complex issues that require negotiation and compromise.”

   Osborn views the assembly’s role as an important one because he said, it has a more direct and intimate impact on local families than the state or federal government.

   “The Borough Assembly has a very direct impact on our daily lives,” he said. Osborn gave the example of the recent plastic bag tax legislation.

   “By acting wisely or acting foolishly, the assembly can have a real impact on us personally in our everyday lives,” he said.

   Addressing air quality issues in the borough is one of the planks of Osborn’s platform he said.

   “I personally think this issue will resolve itself reasonably as we cooler heads prevail,” he said. “I think there is a reasonable solution out there that isn’t draconian in nature. I think there are ways to improve our air quality without changing the culture of Fairbanks or imposing on the populous of the borough.”

   Borough Assembly holds off on air quality measures until fall vote

   By Christopher Eshleman

   Published Wednesday, August 26, 2009

   

   Photo by Sam Harrel

   FAIRBANKS — The Borough Assembly likely will hold off on debate about potential air pollution-prevention measures until after a public advisory vote this fall, air-quality specialists told the borough’s Air Pollution Control Commission on Tuesday.
   That wait would leave months for public discussion about how — or whether — Fairbanks should take steps to address pollution problems.
   A draft of potential pollution-prevention measures has been circulating Fairbanks in recent weeks. Roughly 70 people attended the pollution-control commission’s regular meeting Tuesday with many asking the panel to recommend more scientific study before the assembly takes any action next year.
   Air-quality specialists point to older, less-efficient wood-burning home heating systems and outdoor wood- and coal-fed boilers as contributors to Fairbanks’ fine particulate pollution problem. Outgoing borough Mayor Jim Whitaker has looked to enact locally drafted pollution controls that revolve around a trade-out program for older or inefficient wood-fed heaters.
   Some on the pollution control commission said such a trade-out program could be the best first step toward reducing pollution.
   “We know (addressing wood-burning) will help solve the problem,” Commissioner Cathy Cahill said. “It makes sense to start the motion now.”
   But resident Laura Sliney, owner of an indoor wood stove, doubted she could afford to replace her system even with financial help through a proposed trade-out program.
   “Most of us can’t,” she said.
   Whitaker has included the program in a broad set of pollution-prevention measures aimed at helping to cut particulate levels before 2015.
   It would require residents with wood heaters to register the system with the borough, outlines tax breaks for people who replace older heaters and fines for those who fail to meet those registration requirements or install systems that fall outside an approved list of models.
   The plan also would prohibit people from installing outdoor boilers close to their neighbors’ homes and would set up a required permit process, through the pollution control commission, for anyone looking to install outdoor boilers on properties smaller than 2 acres. No one with a solid-fuel heating system could burn drenched or excessively dirty wood, tires or other fuel from a list.
   The Borough Assembly decided, through a 5-4 vote last week, to ask voters in October.
   The advisory ballot question will ask whether Fairbanks governments should take the lead, through an agreement with state agencies, in drafting and enforcing pollution-prevention regulations.
   Glenn Miller, the borough’s air-quality director, said the borough will have three years from November to submit a pollution-prevention plan to the state.

   Voters will get final word on wood stove measures

   By Christopher Eshleman

   Published Friday, August 21, 2009

   • “I’m in favor of local control. I really support cleaning up the air in Fairbanks.” — Carl Roland

   • “Placing this measure on the ballot gives the Fairbanks community some input, some control.” — Suzie Fenner

   • “The health issue is very real. ... There’s a very strong foundation that says we need to do something here.” — Larry Landry

   FAIRBANKS — Voters will have a big say in how Fairbanks responds to chronic air pollution problem.

   A measure approved 5-4 by the Borough Assembly on Thursday asks voters to weigh in on how coming air pollution-prevention programs in Fairbanks should be run — by the state or the borough. A ballot measure during the Oct. 6 borough election will give voters a direct say in the issue.

   The state’s air-quality office and the borough have tentatively struck a deal where Fairbanks would take a lead role in steps to cut pollution. The state’s air-quality office has said it will regulate fine-particulate air pollution in Fairbanks if local officials don’t take the reins.

   Joe Blanchard, Tim Beck, Tammie Wilson and Guy Sattley voted no. Voting yes were Luke Hopkins, Nadine Winters, Kelly Brown, Bill Stringer and Mike Musick.

   Air-quality specialists point to older wood-burning home-heating systems and outdoor wood- and coal-fed systems as a major cause of that pollution. Mayor Jim Whitaker has penciled, but not yet formally proposed, measures that could include tax breaks, fines, a registration process and other steps to start phasing out wood- and coal-fed heating systems.

   Air-quality specialists have said Fairbanks can’t meet national health standards without addressing emissions from wood-fed heating systems.

   “Wood smoke is the only source we have positively identified as a significant contributor of wintertime (pollution),” an informational sheet from the borough reads, “and preliminary results now indicate that it is the most significant contributor.”

   Borough administrators are looking to wade into a particulate pollution-prevention program as they simultaneously end a separate, long-running vehicle inspection-and-maintenance (I/M) program to reduce carbon monoxide emissions. The Borough Assembly voted Thursday to formally repeal the vehicle inspection program on Jan. 1.

   The ballot measure will read: “Shall the Fairbanks North Star Borough enter into an agreement with the state of Alaska that allows the borough to locally administer the PM2.5 (fine particulate matter) air quality program?”