OPINION: Eklutna power plan does a disservice to Anchorage residents

The ADN editorial board recently asked if the Eklutna power plan is a “perfect compromise” or “failure by committee.” Its conclusion was the former, but in reality, it is the latter for the very flaws the editorial board pointed out in the lack of public process utilized by Chugach Electric and Matanuska Electric. Unfortunately, the editorial board fell victim to the same circumspect rationale as the utilities in advancing the portal valve option, assuming what the public wants without looking at the direct input they have provided.

If you live in Southcentral Alaska, you have a stake in the Eklutna River. Your cost of living, your drinking water and your quality of life are all tied together at Eklutna. Decisions made about the Eklutna River in the next few months will affect all of us for the next 35 years.

As leaders in our community, we take seriously our responsibility to make informed decisions that reflect the will of the people. In that spirit, we have hosted public meetings, where we heard loudly and clearly that residents overwhelmingly support restoring the Eklutna River. Likewise, during Chugach Electric and Matanuska Electric’s public campaign in support of the Portal Valve option, four out of five public comments supported river restoration.

The Municipality of Anchorage is the majority owner of the Eklutna Hydropower Project. The Anchorage Assembly will continue to assert and defend the interests of our residents on any decision at Eklutna that affects your property taxes, your electric rates, and your drinking water. Good governance requires a balance between private and public interests; the power companies protect their interests and we protect the Municipality and its residents.

The plan put forward by the power companies is flawed and unacceptable. They propose to use our drinking water infrastructure to divert water to the Eklutna River downstream of Eklutna Lake, leaving a mile of dry riverbed. In addition to jeopardizing our drinking water, this scheme would block sockeye salmon from reaching their spawning ground. The cost of this bad idea keeps ballooning uncontrollably, from $54 million in March to $72 million now — costs that the power companies intend to make you pay through higher electric rates and higher property taxes. We will not tie Anchorage taxpayers and ratepayers to an open-ended plan that does not serve the interests of our community or the explicit goals of the 1991 Fish and Wildlife Agreement.

The power companies dismissed other potential solutions that merit consideration. The first of these would route water around the Eklutna Lake Dam, allowing water to flow the full length of the Eklutna River without jeopardizing our drinking water system. The second concept would capture water at the outfall of the Eklutna Generating Station and pump the water back up to Eklutna Lake using surplus wind and solar power, among others.

More ideas need and deserve additional and transparent investigation. The legal agreements for the restoration of the Eklutna River allow us three years to identify and refine the best technical solution. We intend to use that time to review all of our options.

The Eklutna River is not a “political football” requiring a choice between cheap power, water protection or salmon. The complex issues of the Eklutna River challenge us in a good way to bring the best ideas forward for careful consideration. We sincerely believe that a better balance can be found that will enhance our community for decades to come — and it appears from the public comments that’s what the public desires as well.

Christopher Constant, the chair of the Anchorage Assembly, represents District 1, North Anchorage.

Meg Zaletel, vice chair of the Anchorage Assembly, represents District 4, Midtown.

The views expressed here are the writer’s and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.