The Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly passed a resolution to amend its invocation policy at its meeting on Tuesday, Nov. 7.
The resolution, which passed despite scrutiny from multiple individuals during the public testimony portion of the meeting, would amend the assembly policy by restricting delivery of the invocation to only chaplains with the borough’s fire and emergency service areas. In the event that there is no chaplain available, the Assembly President may authorize an Assembly member or the Mayor to provide the invocation or a moment of silence or reflection.
Initially, the resolution (2023-075) was on the meeting’s consent agenda, however, the resolution was pulled from the consent agenda by President Brent Johnson after multiple dissenting voices spoke out during public testimony.
Soldotna City Council member Chera Wackler was one of those who took the podium to speak out against the resolution.
“Do we have an extra $120,000 to do this? Again, if you cannot in good conscience, tell me and the 60,000 other borough residents that your intent with this resolution to change the invocation policy is not primarily to exclude certain religions from participating in this activity, then go for it,” said Wackler. “But if you know that there are certain members of this body who will use this as a limiting strategy, know that it will end up costing the borough taxpayers money that could be put to much better use.”
The point is fair, considering the cost the borough incurred from the loss of a 2016 lawsuit brought forward by a individuals who, due to their religious beliefs, had been denied the opportunity to deliver the invocation.
Wackler went on to say;
“In short, this is stupid. It’s unnecessary. It will inevitably embroil us in another lawsuit, and is a clear attempt to violate religious freedom, free expression, and the Establishment Clause, despite the assertion that it follows the law. Intent is everything and if we could go back in time and introduce this resolution in 2015, I may have seen merit with these changes. But the fact that we lost over $120,000 fighting to ‘exclude minority faith or beliefs,’ already, and statements have been made that indicate members are uncomfortable letting other faiths participate in the invocation has already lost future court battles on this subject. We will not be able to argue in Superior Court again that the intention was not to limit or exclude. You already said that part out loud and you can’t take it back now.”
The sponsors of the resolution, Borough Mayor Peter Micciche, assembly Vice President Tyson Cox, and assembly member Kelly Cooper all shared why they chose to be sponsors, and why they believed the resolution was important to the efficiency and function of the borough assembly.
“The invocation is about clearing your mind for the business ahead — the business for 60,000 people out there. It’s not about the egos sitting here. It’s about putting all of that aside and focusing on what’s best for all of them. They’ve chosen us to represent them,” said Mayor Micciche. “We’ve seen more and more proselytizing. We’ve seen more and more lectures, more and more politically motivated speeches that seldom ask for any help or support for the Assembly.”
Tyson Cox emphasized the technical purpose of the invocation. “It’s for us to have a time to prepare ourselves for the decisions that we have to make during the day and during this evening.”
According to Kelly Cooper, the resolution provides an equitable compromise on the issue. “I’m a big believer in compromise. I think that this is an option that has the majority of the support of the assembly. I also like that it creates less work for our clerks office. We don’t need to add more to their plate. So, this is an appropriate opportunity, and the majority of this assembly does want an invocation. I like that it is non denominational, and it’s not political, and it’ll be short and sweet, and it’s a good compromise.”
Other members of the assembly took the public hearing time as an opportunity to provide their personal feelings on the purpose of the invocation, and why they support the new resolution.
“I may not stand, but I am involved in the invocation,” said Cindy Ecklund. “The ones that always help me are when somebody says in their invocation, ‘Please help them make good decisions in their decisions tonight and give them a clear mind.’ Those ring in my head and make me then do my own invocation to myself to make sure that’s where I’m at that night.”
“I could forgo having an invocation. On the other hand, it doesn’t offend me at all,” said assembly President Brent Johnson. “And so, because there are many people in our community that feel very strongly for an invocation, I’m certainly willing to have one.”
The topic of the invocation at assembly meetings became one of contention in 2016 when the American Civil Liberties Union stepped in to represent a trio of individuals who believed they were being unlawfully prohibited by the KPB Assembly from delivering its meeting invocations. Lance Hunt, a professed atheist, Iris Fontana of the Satanic Temple, and Elise Boyer of the Jewish faith were all denied the opportunity to offer the traditional meeting opener, and were represented by the ACLU in Alaska Superior Court in the case Hunt V. Kenai Peninsula Borough.
The borough lost the case, and since then invocations have been delivered on behalf of many varying belief systems, including the Satanic Temple, the “Flying Spaghetti Monster” (a well known atheistic satire of theism), Judaism, and other non-Judeo Christian religions.
Despite the previous legal entanglement the borough found itself in over the issue of the invocation, the new resolution does seem to protect itself from legal recourse. Specifically, it cites the Supreme Court cases used in Hunt V. Kenai Peninsula Borough to establish a neutral, non-discriminatory act.
Following all the public testimony, and the assembly’s own hearing, the resolution passed by a unanimous vote.
One additional interesting note: KSRM published an article previewing the assembly’s proposed resolution on Nov. 6. And, as is standard practice for our news stories, the article was also posted to the KSRM Facebook page, where it garnered only a single comment: “Welp, here we go again.”
The comment was posted by Lance Hunt, (Hunt V. Kenai Peninsula Borough).
