Carmony submitted an Application of Initiative Petition to the Clerk of the Matanuska-Susitna Borough. The proposal would have added a new section to the Borough’s code to subject all land use enactments of the borough to a popular vote. Carmony sought review after the clerk and superior court rejected the petition because the proposed ordinance was not enforceable as a matter of law, it related to administrative rather than legislative matters and it was a referendum that failed to comply with the standards.

The Alaska Supreme Court agreed that the proposed initiative was not enforceable as a matter of law. Relying on the Alaskan Constitution, which reserves to the residents of municipalities the right to enact or change the local ordinances, so long as a referendum is not restricted by statute, includes only a single subject, relates to legislative rather than administrative matters and is enforceable as a matter of law. The referendum presented by Carmony failed to meet these requirements. The Court has previously held that zoning by initiative is invalid because the power of zoning would exceed the power to legislate. Under Alaskan law, boroughs must establish a planning commission that prepares a land use plan. This initiative would bypass the need for a commission and is therefore it is beyond the power of a referendum.  Further, the initiative would subject all land use enactments of the borough to a popular vote, which would divest the borough’s board of its delegated powers.

Carmony v McKechine, 2009 WL 3233699 (AK 10/9/2009).

The opinion may be accessed at: http://courts.alaska.gov/ops/sp-6419.pdf