Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Governance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Kenai Peninsula Borough introduces ordinance to clarify use of public funds on ballot propositions

3005667 · April 15, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The assembly introduced Ordinance 2025-7 to amend KPB 4.10.1 so the borough can appropriate funds for informational materials on ballot propositions under a specific ordinance, aligning borough practice with state law and removing the recurring need for exceptions to the code. A hearing is scheduled for May 20, 2025.

The Kenai Peninsula Borough Policies and Procedures Committee introduced Ordinance 2025-7 on May 6 to amend KPB 4.10.1 relating to the use of public funds on ballot propositions. The ordinance, sponsored by Chair Cox, is intended to mirror state law and allow the borough to appropriate funds for informational materials when a specific ordinance authorizes that spending. A public hearing is scheduled for May 20, 2025.

Chair Cox said the change grew from questions following last year’s South Peninsula bond question and would avoid repeatedly creating an exception to borough code. Chair Cox said the proposed amendment would mean the borough “still would be required to have an ordinance just as before. But this time it doesn't have to say an exception.”

Mr. Kelly, legal counsel, said the proposed approach would make the process clearer. “Currently, our code says it's prohibited to use money of the municipality for, influencing a bond proposition,” he said, noting that state law allows municipal funds to be used for informational purposes when a specific ordinance appropriates the money. He added, “it just will require a specific ordinance appropriating money for that purpose.”

Mr. Johnson asked whether the change would allow the borough to run advocacy-style ads. Mr. Kelly replied that the borough could run such material if a specific ordinance appropriated funds for that purpose and noted that in the prior hospital bond situation “it was the SPH, was using operating funds to run that campaign.” Ms. Turner, a borough staff member, said the proposed change would not alter how staff would process an appropriation: “If the assembly approves the appropriation for informational materials, we move and help with that informational package.”

The transcript records the ordinance introduction and sets a hearing date but does not record a final vote or adoption.