Assembly postpones decision on demoting Eaglecrest board to advisory role
- Mark Sabbatini
- 15 hours ago
- 6 min read
City and ski area leaders scheduled to discuss next year’s budget — and possibly a gondola decision — in early March; future of board set to be revisited after that meeting
By Mark Sabbatini
Juneau Independent
The outcome was merely to postpone a big decision about Eaglecrest Ski Area for seven weeks, but city leaders showed a range of strong opinions about the resort’s management and future plans during a Juneau Assembly Committee of the Whole meeting Monday night.
Division arose about demoting Eaglecrest’s board of directors to an advisory role and giving the city more direct control — and how long the Assembly should wait before making that decision. One member’s suggestion to wait a year until major leadership and operations questions are resolved was countered by another member questioning if the ski area can survive that long under the status quo.
Ultimately members voted unanimously to consider the matter again after a joint meeting of Assembly and Eaglecrest board members tentatively set for March 4, with the reconsideration meeting set for March 16. By then other information affecting the ski area’s future — most notably the projected cost of installing a gondola, and whether Assembly members feel it's worth proceeding with that project — may be known.
The decision to wait until further discussions with Eaglecrest officials occur was welcomed by Erin Lupro, named the ski area’s acting general manager after Craig Cimmons announced his resignation Jan. 8. She said in an interview after the meeting "I think there’s a lot of conversations to be had" and she’s undecided about the proposal changing the board’s status.
"I've been here when the board does work (and) when it doesn't work as well as one would hope," she said. "I’m not sure where the path is forward, so I’m kind of on the fence about which way we should go."
Mayor Beth Weldon introduced the proposal to demote Eaglecrest’s board to an advisory rather than empowered role, which means the city manager and Assembly would directly control operational decisions and policy. She said the resignation of Cimmons, as well as Hannah Shively announcing that same night she was stepping down as the board’s president, motivated the effort.
The Assembly currently gives final approval to Eaglecrest’s budget that is submitted annually by the board, but the ski area’s administration and board determine matters such as ticket prices and what facilities to maintain/discontinue.
Weldon, arguing her case during Monday’s meeting, said "Eaglecrest cannot continue how it is right now" because it is stuck in a status quo of money-losing operations despite both good and bad management from the ski area’s staff and board over many years.
"Eaglecrest has more year-round staff, but despite this they still have struggled with basic ski operations this season, amplified by long-term neglect and deferred maintenance of the equipment," she said. As a result, "if we are investing large amounts of money on things such as chairlifts, or maybe even the gondola, we want to have more of a say in how that money is spent and currently we don't."
The change would be enacted through an ordinance the full Assembly would have to approve at a regular meeting after taking public testimony. Eaglecrest’s board early this month expressed strong opposition to giving up control — arguing knowledgeable and focused management is critical during a time of major transitions at the ski area — and several people offering public testimony at that meeting supported keeping the board’s empowered status.
Opposing quick action on the proposed change in the board’s status was expressed by Christine Woll, chair of the Assembly Finance Committee. She said she agrees with Weldon that Eaglecrest has ignored many long-term needs, but "I don't have any reason to believe that changing the structure would solve that problem."
"Maybe we go down a path where summer tourism will change that situation," she said. "Maybe we divest from Eaglecrest. Maybe Eaglecrest is smaller in the future. All those things are on the table right now as far as I'm concerned. And I would choose a different structure for each of those paths for how we move forward. And so I think that we have to focus our energy — Assembly, Eaglecrest staff, Eaglecrest community, Eaglecrest board on answering those questions first, and then think about what the governance structure makes sense for that new reality."
Woll also asked what tasks and responsibilities city officials would be taking on if Eaglecrest’s board is reduced to an advisory role. City Manager Katie Koester noted the Assembly already is involved in approving certain major decisions — such as the gondola as part of a plan to expand Eaglecrest into large-scale, year-round operations — but the scope of smaller routine matters isn’t yet known.
"I will say that under the (former) general manager's leadership he definitely has brought, from his ski industry experience, some things to our attention and has been working through," Koester said. "The risk of snowmaking, the risk of opening up certain routes, and has definitely shared a lot of things just in working with him and supporting Eaglecrest that we need to be thinking of."
Koester, in a memo presented to the Assembly at the meeting, also noted the management of the ski area by the city means it would operate under more conservative fiduciary guidelines, meaning officials would be more likely to raise user fees (such as ticket prices) to cover costs rather than requesting money from the city’s general fund.
Neil Steininger, the Assembly’s liaison to the Eaglecrest board, noted both the city and ski area are facing difficult financial decisions after voters approved significant tax cuts in last October’s municipal election.
"The financial reality the city is in is going to very much impact what we can and can't do for Eaglecrest, and we need to make sure that we're all in alignment," he said.
Furthermore, Eaglecrest is facing a series of large-scale, expensive decisions about future operations that will affect the entire community, Steininger said.
"I really worry that if we continue to be as hands-off on the operation side as we have been that we're going to walk ourselves down a road where it fails," he said. "And it won't be that we can say, ‘Well, it was an empowered board. They made it fail,’ and blame our dedicated volunteer board members who are trying their hardest."
"It will be our fault as the Assembly because at the end of the day we're the ones who have the actual tools to make it possible. It's painful that we may have to make a government change to do that, but I’ve had so many conversations about this and I can't figure out a way that we can get the tools to get there if we don't make some kind of change."
Among the other concerns expressed by Assembly members is how the proposed board change would affect the search for a new general manager at Eaglecrest — in terms of how it would affect the interest of applications and how the hiring process would be conducted. Lupro said she isn’t interested in the job permanently and that qualified candidates are likely already working at other resorts until the end of the current ski season.
Mixed opinions about the proposed board change were expressed by some Assembly members, who agreed that more direct involvement in some of Eaglecrest’s problems is warranted, but want more discussion before deciding if that includes demoting the ski board’s authority.
"I don't necessarily see this yet as the right way to go, but I think that Assembly is going to have to get more involved because of where we are right now," Assembly Member Alicia Hughes-Skadis said, adding "definitely, for me, I think the next step is absolutely need to be able to have a really blunt, honest conversation with the board."
A proposal by Woll to table discussion on the proposed ordinance for one year was defeated by a 2-7 vote, with Nano Brooks casting the other vote in favor. Other Assembly members generally said they felt revisiting the issue is worthwhile after the joint meeting with Eaglecrest’s board in March, and Weldon said "I think a year is way too long. I don't think Eaglecrest will survive a year without figuring out a path forward."
Cimmons, who attended the meeting with Lurpo and is remaining at Eaglecrest for 30 days after his resignation to help with the transition, said in an interview afterward he’s encouraged that city leaders are for the time being willing to hear more from ski area officials before moving forward on any decisions.
"I think the most important thing is that the conversation's happening," he said.
• Contact Mark Sabbatini at editor@juneauindependent.com or (907) 957-2306.
