Campbell heliport review proceeds after bid to postpone fails, neighbors cite noise study and missing court records

The Haines Borough Planning Commission voted down a motion to postpone the public hearing on the Campbell family’s heliport conditional use permit (CUP 2322), allowing testimony and staff presentations to proceed despite objections from some commissioners and residents.

Commissioner Erica made the motion to postpone item 9b “to accommodate public process” and to give the borough attorney and staff more time to assemble case materials; Derek seconded the motion. Borough staff and the manager said the packet includes a court order and findings that required the hearing to proceed. After a lengthy procedural debate and a warning from the Campbells’ attorney that two commissioners could have disqualifying conflicts under Hainesborough code 2.060.03B3, the motion failed on a 4–2 vote. The chair called the result and the commission began the scheduled hearing.

“The findings of fact are in your packet,” the manager told commissioners during the discussion. Scott Brad Erickson, the Campbells’ attorney, told the commission the code section bars a commissioner from deciding an adjudicative matter when they or an immediate family member live or own land within 500 feet of the subject property; he urged the record to reflect potential conflicts for two commissioners and said the court decisions relevant to the remand were available and should be in the record.

Residents who testified after the failed postponement criticized the packet and public notice. One resident said many neighbors did not receive mailed notice cards and that the packet contains the wrong court case. “The court case in the packet is the wrong court case. It doesn’t have a judge’s order in it,” a resident said during public comment. Nick, a neighborhood resident who read condition 7 from the original 2023 permit during public comment, argued the condition requires a hearing on “the experience of the residents of the area,” and said the packet did not clearly include the court order he believed obligates today’s hearing.

Multiple public speakers cited a borough-commissioned noise study they said cost $42,000 and showed helicopter operations produced peak sound levels higher than background levels at nearby homes. A resident told the commission the study’s Lmax results showed noise events that, in their view, violated CUP criteria about undue noise and off-site impacts.

Scott Brad Erickson, representing the Campbells, argued the planning commission must apply the CUP standards in the borough code but cannot regulate aircraft flight paths or aircraft noise where federal authority applies; he urged the commission to focus on the specific question the remand requires — the 12‑month review the original permit contemplated — and to use the manager’s recommendations as the baseline for deliberations.

Manager and staff told the commission they would provide any missing court decisions and supporting documents to clarify the record. The hearing continued into public testimony and evidence gathering; the commission did not reach a final decision on CUP 2322 during the session excerpted in the record.

Next procedural steps: staff and the clerk indicated they would make additional case documents available to commissioners and the public and the commission will hear evidence and public testimony before deliberating on whether to amend, extend, revoke or otherwise act on the Campbell permit.