Voter bonds for $16M in school projects, $9.4M in utility upgrades near final Assembly consideration

Mark Sabbatini
4 hours ago
3 min read

Finance Committee on Wednesday sends both measures to full Assembly, but some members express concerns due sales tax measures that may also be on ballot

By Mark Sabbatini

Juneau Independent

Asking voters to approve a bond for up to $16 million for renovating public school buildings and another bond for up to $9.4 million for city water/wastewater utility upgrades got an initial vote of approval from Juneau Assembly members on Wednesday.

The Assembly Finance Committee approved the education bond by a unanimous vote. But two members voted against the utility bond due to concerns about other items that may also be on the ballot, including a renewal of Juneau’s 3% sales tax and two citizen initiatives that seek to raise local taxes.

Deputy Mayor Greg Smith, one of the opposing voters, also noted voters approved a $10 million utility infrastructure bond in 2024.

"I'm not at a place where I think this is the time to make another $10 million bond for water and wastewater in this year's election," he said. "I know that the utility needs it. I could wait a year, I guess. Whereas I'm much more supportive of trying to put something before the voters for schools, and I'm not sure if I'm supportive of putting $25 million of bond questions in front of the voters, along with the 3% (sales tax) and possibly other ballot measures."

Ordinances for both bond measures are scheduled to be introduced at the Assembly meeting on Monday. The Assembly would have until its July 27 meeting to approve the ordinances for the Oct. 6 municipal election.

The ordinance for the school bond measure features a list of projects submitted to the Assembly by Juneau School District leaders. Among the projects are heating and ventilation improvements at seven schools, reroofing Glacier Valley Elementary School and partially reroofing two other schools; and security and safety upgrades districtwide.

The utility bond ordinance states the funding will be used for "work at the Mendenhall Wastewater Treatment Plant: FOG/grit removal, outfall maintenance/rehabilitation, site improvements (lighting, security, HVAC and access); sequential batch reactor influent valve replacement and other wastewater utility infrastructure projects."

Among the Assembly members voting to advance the utility bond was Nano Brooks, who said that while residents last year voted in favor of tax cuts, "it's not that people aren't willing to spend money if it's something that they can agree that is of a great benefit to the community."

The second vote against the utility bond was cast by Assembly Finance Committee Chair Christine Woll, who said she doesn’t want it on the ballot if either of the citizen petitions circulating are approved for the fall election.

The issue of local utility costs and paying for them is complex, "so when you mix it in with all of the other tax conversations we're having I think it just muddies the water a bit," she said. "So I would prefer we not move forward with this one this year, but if it does then I'll fight harder to keep it off in July, depending on what happens with the citizens initiatives."

The 3% sales tax expected to be on the fall ballot is a temporary tax voters have renewed every five years as part of the total 5% local sales tax, and thus a key component of the city government’s revenue. The two citizen initiatives — one imposing a 1% seasonal sales tax increase between April 1 and Sept. 30, the other raising the property tax cap to 12 mills instead of nine, are facing deadlines during the coming days to turn in their signatures.

Similar school and utility bonds were considered by the Assembly last year, but rejected — in part due to three tax-related propositions on the ballot with major implications for the city’s finances. Voters ultimately approved two tax-cut measures that are expected to cost the city more than $10 million during the coming fiscal year, and rejected a seasonal sales tax favored by the Assembly that would have more than offset the losses of the first two measures.

• Contact Mark Sabbatini at editor@juneauindependent.com or (907) 957-2306.