Assembly, in surprise vote, opts to revisit demolition plans for Telephone Hill
- Mark Sabbatini
- 2 days ago
- 4 min read
6-2 vote on motion by newcomer Nano Brooks ‘to discuss actions that could affect Telephone Hill development or the timeline’ follows months of pleas by locals to preserve neighborhood
By Mark Sabbatini
Juneau Independent
People who spent months pleading for the preservation of Telephone Hill got the Juneau Assembly to take a step toward reexamining demolition plans for the neighborhood in an unscheduled vote late Monday night.
Assembly members approved by a 6-2 vote a motion by Nano Brooks "to discuss actions that could affect Telephone Hill development or the timeline" at a future Committee of the Whole meeting. Brooks was elected last October to the Assembly with support from people opposing the demolition.
He emphasized the motion — made as members were offering final comments just before the public portion of Monday’s meeting ended — isn’t seeking to halt all future development. But he said he wants to explore a further range of what the possibilities might be.
"I've said multiple times there definitely will be some type of development," Brooks said. At the same time, he said he’d like more input from companies about their potential rebuilding costs and demands before proceeding with the demolition of existing homes.
Among those supporting the motion who previously rejected revisiting demolition plans was Mayor Beth Weldon.
"While it kills me to do this, I would support the motion because I have an idea I need to run by everybody anyway," she told the other Assembly members during the vote.
Weldon declined during a break afterward to explain her idea, stating the specifics are still being thought out.
Brooks’ motion came two days after the City and Borough of Juneau officially began the bidding process for demolition of seven residential dwellings and two detached garages in the downtown area where some of the city’s oldest homes are located.
City leaders last June approved the first stage of demolition, evicted residents from the city-owned homes they were renting in a multimonth process that ended Feb. 28, and the official bid request seeks to have demolition completed by July 31.
Assembly members by a 5-2 vote in late Feburary reaffirmed their demolition plans, with city officials noting having a developer-ready site was vital to redevelopment companies wanting a clear picture of what work would be involved in the project they were bidding for.
But residents wanting to halt — or at least slow – the project have shown up by the dozen at virtually every Assembly meeting where public testimony has been allowed during the past several months. Among those testifying on Monday night was Maureen Conerton, who along with her husband Jeff Brown and a caretaker were the last people to vacate their home on Telephone Hill at the end of February.
"You've heard testimony from many constituents opposing this project for many different reasons — just even tonight, you've heard many different reasons," she said. "And you still continue to ignore the constituents' opposition."
"I am hoping that at least you will be responsive to the people that you've heard over the years, to at least pause the demolition until you have a solid plan and a solid developer, not just a wish list," Conerton added.
Another person who has frequently opposed the redevelopment plans, Kimberly Metcalfe, told Assembly members "there's no shame in admitting that the idea was a mistake."
"I think we need to do a new search to see how much housing we actually need because I've seen a lot of building around town, so I'm thinking that we might not need that much housing, and especially on Telephone Hill," she said. "It's historic, as everybody else has pointed out. There's also been a petition signed by 1,052 of your constituents asking you not to destroy the hill. We've testified, sent emails, signed petitions, written letters to the editor and demonstrated."
Those efforts were referenced by some Assembly members Monday.
"My concern is since we last touched on it there's even more public outcry," said Maureen Hall, who was among those in February opting against a change in plans. She asked "could we modify the bid for partial demolition? This is really hard, but I don’t know that we’re ready to go full speed ahead."
City Attorney Emily Wright told Hall that if the specifications of the bid change then the process now underway needs to be halted and restarted.
Deputy Mayor Greg Smith said he was willing to support the motion to see "if there's five votes for any different way forward" when the Committee of the Whole discussion occurs.
Voting against the motion were Ella Adkison and Christine Woll. Alicia Hughes-Skandijs was absent from the vote.
"I do feel that we have voted on this very similar issue many times at this point, and at this point no new information has come forward that would change my calculation," Adkison said.
The Assembly’s next scheduled Committee of the Whole meeting is April 13. Because the meetings are classified as work sessions, public testimony is not a standard part of such meetings.
• Contact Mark Sabbatini at editor@juneauindependent.com or (907) 957-2306.
