02/11/2010 08:00 AM House COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB273 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 273 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 281 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
February 11, 2010
8:14 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Cathy Engstrom Munoz, Co-Chair
Representative Wes Keller
Representative Sharon Cissna
Representative Berta Gardner
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Bob Herron, Co-Chair
Representative John Harris
Representative Charisse Millett
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 273
"An Act relating to general grant land entitlements for the City
and Borough of Wrangell; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 281
"An act relating to the duties of the commissioner of fish and
game and to the interest of the board of game in public safety
as it relates to game."
- HEARING POSTPONED TO 2/16/10
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 273
SHORT TITLE: MUNICIPAL GENERAL GRANT LAND
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) P.WILSON
01/08/10 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/8/10
01/19/10 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/19/10 (H) CRA, FIN
02/11/10 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE PEGGY WILSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke as the sponsor of HB 273.
REED HARRIS, Staff
Representative P. Wilson
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 273 on behalf of the sponsor,
Representative P. Wilson.
BARBARA SHIENBERG, Community & Strategic Planning Consultant
Sheinberg Associates
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 273, related her work
with the City and Borough of Wrangell.
DICK MYLIUS, Director
Division of Mining, Land, and Water
Department of Natural Resources
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Expressed concerns with HB 273.
DONALD MCCONACHIE, Mayor
City & Borough of Wrangell
Wrangell, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HB 273, testified
that Wrangell intends to utilize the selected lands.
TIMOTHY ROONEY, Manager
City & Borough of Wrangell
Wrangell, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HB 273, testified
that without an increase in the formula-based entitlement
acreage, Wrangell has difficulty protecting the interests of its
residents.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:14:46 AM
CO-CHAIR CATHY ENGSTROM MUNOZ called the House Community and
Regional Affairs Standing Committee meeting to order at 8:14
a.m. Representatives Munoz, Keller, Cissna, and Gardner were
present at the call to order.
HB 273-MUNICIPAL GENERAL GRANT LAND
8:14:58 AM
CO-CHAIR MUNOZ announced that the only order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 273, "An Act relating to general grant land
entitlements for the City and Borough of Wrangell; and providing
for an effective date."
8:15:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PEGGY WILSON, Alaska State Legislature, speaking
as the sponsor of HB 273, explained that HB 273 would correct a
deficit in the formation process that resulted in a small land
entitlement for the City & Borough of Wrangell (CBW). The state
has an established policy to assist formation and operation of
new boroughs, which is done via state land grants that will
benefit the long-term stability and address the economic,
cultural, and resource-based goals of the residents. According
to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), the City & Borough
of Wrangell's land grant would be 1,952.5 acres, which is less
than any other borough created in the state. Therefore, this
legislation proposes a solution to the situation.
8:16:36 AM
REED HARRIS, Staff, Representative P. Wilson, Alaska State
Legislature, first directed the committee's attention to a
document entitled "Borough Entitlement Statistics" drafted by
CBW's consultant Barbara Sheinberg. He pointed out that
information for CBW is incorrect because when the city was
formed DNR gave Wrangell about 500 acres. Therefore, the
entitlement for Wrangell is 1,952.5 acres, which lowers the
percentage of total land in the borough that was received as an
entitlement to 0.12 percent. This entitlement is obviously the
smallest percentage of any borough in the state. In fact, other
boroughs received, on average, 1.13 percent of the total state
land within the borough. Were Wrangell to receive 1.13 percent
of the total state land within the borough, it would amount to
18,673 acres, which is what HB 273 seeks to entitle to CBW. Mr.
Harris explained that upon borough formation, new municipalities
receive a land grant from the state that is 10 percent of the
vacant, unappropriated, unreserved (VUU) lands within the
borough. However, CBW is currently comprised of 97.28 percent
federal lands and 2.48 state lands, which is why the land
entitlement from DNR would be so small.
8:19:36 AM
CO-CHAIR MUNOZ asked if the 10 percent is established in
statute.
MR. HARRIS replied yes, specifying that statute includes a
formula such that 10 percent of the VUU land within the borough
is entitled to the borough. This formula didn't work well for
Wrangell because the area consists of about 98 percent federal
land, mainly the Tongass National Forest.
8:20:05 AM
MR. HARRIS, continuing his presentation, informed the committee
that there is precedence for a proposal such as in HB 273. In
1998, former Senator Jerry Mackie introduced Senate Bill 281,
which addressed land grant entitlements for the City of Yakutat.
When Yakutat was formed it was granted 138 acres of state land,
which was determined by the aforementioned VUU lands formula.
Senate Bill 281 was passed and resulted in Yakutat receiving
8,500 total acres. The CBW has approximately 44,000 acres of
state land, including Alaska Mental Health Trust and University
of Alaska lands. The increased entitlement would provide land
for Wrangell residences while leaving significant state land
remaining within the borough. The additional acreage is
important to provide for the needs of the borough and its
citizens. Furthermore, in the current borough comprehensive
planning process Wrangell residents have identified future
energy and port development to enhance economic opportunities
within Wrangell. However, the aforementioned development can't
be accomplished with only 1,952 acres. Additionally, CBW is
underfunded in terms of land, he noted. In conclusion, Mr.
Harris requested that CBW receive a similar land grant amount as
other boroughs, 1.13 percent of state lands within the borough
or 18,673 acres.
8:21:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA asked if there are any residences in the
new area that is being added.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON replied that there are some residences
in the additional acreage, albeit the residences are sprinkled
throughout the additional acreage. In further response to
Representative Cissna, Representative P. Wilson clarified that
the additional acreage would be within the borough boundaries.
8:24:23 AM
CO-CHAIR MUNOZ recalled working on the university lands
legislation, in which the date was altered to provide Wrangell
additional time to make its land selections. She asked if HB
273 would comply with the date change in the university lands
legislation.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON replied yes.
8:25:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER surmised that there would be tax
ramifications on those residences in the additional acreage
being requested.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON clarified that these residences are
already part of the borough, and therefore there won't be any
new tax ramifications. She further clarified that in Wrangell
the city and borough are one, not separate. The additional
acreage will help with economic development and the ability to
use the land existing within the borough boundaries. In further
response to Representative Keller, she nodded her head that this
additional acreage isn't of concern for private citizens.
8:26:12 AM
BARBARA SHIENBERG, Community & Strategic Planning Consultant,
Sheinberg Associates, informed the committee that over the past
year she has been working with CBW to help it perform its
comprehensive plan, which was required after formation of the
borough. Over the last year, about 10 work public sessions were
held in Wrangell, 2 town meetings, and a community opinion
survey. She noted that after the borough formation a property
tax was instituted. The property tax role specifies that there
are about 433 privately owned parcels scattered throughout four
to five communities in the additional acreage. As part of the
process, Ms. Sheinberg visited all of the communities within the
proposed expanded area. At each locale, residents were asked
about their current situation and future with regard to the land
necessary to sustain themselves and their children in the
future. The information from the aforementioned meetings led to
the identification of land Wrangell wanted to select from the
borough to support itself and its residents. She also created
future growth maps for the entire borough.
MS. SHEINBERG said that the land selection process was done in a
fashion that was blind to the numbers in order to have real
justification for the land selected. At first blush, the
process resulted in the selection of about 10,000 acres. After
comparing the 10,000 acres with the 2,500 to which CBW was
originally entitled, there was review of whether [the 10,000
acres] was reasonable. Upon review, it was apparent that CBW's
entitlement was smaller than any other borough had received.
The group then reviewed what other boroughs have received versus
the land in the borough. The request, she opined, is based on
the real need to satisfy economic development, recreation, and
other needs. Although she acknowledged that the requested land
is a large portion of the state's land base in the CBW, about 75
percent of VUU land in the area, it's the amount of land CBW
needs to sustain itself. She questioned whether it mattered if
the state or the borough owns the land as the land will likely
be used in the same manner. In closing, Ms. Sheinberg asked if
because there is so little state land in the borough Wrangell
should be penalized and not opportunities, such as a regional
solid waste disposal, an industrial port, protection of
fisheries to generate income for itself and its residents. She
opined that Wrangell should be able to select more land than the
statutory formula specifies. She then directed the committee's
attention to the Earl West Cove Future Growth Map, which
illustrates the large portion of VUU land, about 3,500 acres,
from which CBW can select. The aforementioned parcel is just 1
of 20 places CBW has selected. She pointed out that the portion
highlighted in orange is part of what CBW is interested in as
part of its entitlement. This land is also part of CBW's future
growth maps, which it would like to use for remote residential
development. She pointed out another selection that CBW would
like as it's part of a timber harvest area. The borough would
like to contribute to an upcoming timber sale in the area. She
then directed attention to the map of Thoms Place, which is
located within CBW. She pointed out the two areas of VUU land
that are owned by the state and are eligible for selection.
Outlined in orange are the two small areas CBW would like to
select. This is the area, she related, where CBW wants to place
a residential disposal in order to make more land available to
residents. There is also a portion that includes high quality
timber in which CBW is interested. Ms. Sheinberg opined that
Wrangell has systematically moved through this process and
identified between 10-18,000 acres that they would like in order
to support itself.
8:37:10 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA expressed interest in whether those in the
selected land want to be part of the community [borough].
MS. SHEINBERG characterized this as a great planning job. She
related that Meyers Chuck was very much supportive of being
within CBW. She explained that she traveled throughout the CBW
with Wrangell's economic development director, police chief, and
a key firefighter. The main livelihood of these remote
locations is commercial fishing or light tourism, which the
residents want to be able to continue. Therefore, these
residents wanted good communication ability. After carefully
listening to the requests of the residents, these municipal
entitlement selections were chosen.
8:40:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA asked if the interview process Ms.
Sheinberg performed is being built into the future planning of
the area.
MS. SHEINBERG replied yes. In fact, the public hearing draft is
almost ready to be issued. She noted that within the plan a
chapter is dedicated to each of the remote areas as well as for
the overall borough itself.
8:41:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA asked if anyone was opposed to HB 273.
MS. SHEINBERG replied no, which she attributed to the planning
honoring the wishes of the residents, especially the remote
residents, in the entitlement selections.
8:42:01 AM
CO-CHAIR MUNOZ highlighted that the remote residents are already
part of the borough, and this legislation requests selection of
land outside [the borough].
MS. SHEINBERG replied yes, adding that the remote residential
opportunities were selected away from existing residents with a
buffer and near where timber harvests are already occurring on
federal lands.
8:43:44 AM
DICK MYLIUS, Director, Division of Mining, Land, and Water,
Department of Natural Resources, reminded the committee that the
division administers the municipal entitlement program that
transfers state land to municipalities. This legislation amends
AS 29.65.010(a) to increase the City & Borough of Wrangell's
entitlement from approximately 1,952 acres to 18,675 acres. He
explained that new municipalities receive a land grant based
upon the amount of state land within the municipality's
boundary, specifically 10 percent of VUU state land within the
municipality's boundary. The VUU is based on land
classifications and excludes any land that the legislature has
set aside, such as state parks and game refuges. Under existing
statute and using the 10 percent formula, CBW's entitlement
would've been 1,952 acres. However, based on the averaging of
the 13 boroughs listed in AS 29.65.010(a), the borough believes
it deserves an entitlement that is significantly larger than the
10 percent of VUU land prescribed in statute. In fact, HB 273
would increase CBW's entitlement to 75 percent of VUU land
within the corporate boundaries or 50 percent of all state land
within the borough. Mr. Mylius stated that the aforementioned
is a far higher percentage than received by other boroughs and
is a significant deviation from the formula that has been in
place since 1978. The existing law was implemented to establish
a consistent policy with regard to how entitlements are
determined. In fact, prior to the existing law there was
significant litigation between the state and municipalities
regarding how to calculate municipal entitlements. The existing
formula has been applied to practically all municipalities
formed since 1978, save Yakutat. Mr. Mylius acknowledged that
CBW's formula driven entitlement is small because the state
doesn't own a lot of land in the borough. He related that DNR
suggests that the acreage being requested be reduced
significantly and that the borough not be allowed to acquire the
majority of state-owned land in the borough. This legislation,
he opined, will have significant negative impacts on state
forestry management, future state land sales, and potentially
public recreational use of state lands. However, the exact
impacts are difficult to assess because DNR isn't aware of what
specific lands the borough would select. He predicted that CBW
will likely select land proposed for inclusion in the Southern
Southeast State Forest that was approved by the House last
session and will be considered in the Senate. Furthermore,
passage of this legislation will significantly reduce the amount
of land available for transfer to the University of Alaska
should University of Alaska lands legislation pass. Moreover,
the department is concerned about deviation from the
aforementioned long-standing state policy. The proposal in HB
273 is based on the total amount of land within the borough
regardless that most of the land isn't state owned. The
aforementioned establishes a precedent that future
municipalities may attempt to follow and would significantly
diminish the state's land base. Mr. Mylius clarified that DNR
isn't necessarily opposed to an increased entitlement, but the
18,675 acres request that takes away 75 percent of the VUU land
and 57 percent of all state land is too much.
8:48:21 AM
MR. MYLIUS turned to the topic of timber harvest. He explained
that the amount of timber that can be harvested from state land
in southern Southeast Alaska is based on the sustained yield
calculation based on the amount of state land within the state's
timber base. By removing the two proposals proposed in CBW's
land selection, the land would likely go to the borough and be
removed from the state's timber base. Therefore, the state
would be able to harvest less timber from those state lands. He
noted that although CBW is saying that it can perform timber
harvests and land sales, often that has not been the experience
of DNR. The aforementioned then places more pressure on DNR to
perform timber harvests and land sales on less suitable lands.
The department has transferred much land to municipalities, but
very few have aggressive land sale programs, which results in
pressure from the public and legislature to continue to sell
state land even when DNR has given away the best state lands for
land sales to municipalities. Similarly, municipalities have
had great difficulty harvesting timber from their lands. For
example, in the Mat-Su Borough timber harvests on borough lands
is far more controversial than when on state lands.
Furthermore, the state's timber program is designed to support
local, small scale mills. Although the state has been fairly
successful with the aforementioned, municipalities haven't been.
Again, DNR would like to review the specific parcels being
selected and would request that CBW reduce the amount of land
for its entitlement.
8:50:27 AM
MR. MYLIUS said that most boroughs have followed the 10 percent
formula. In fact, the boroughs that have formed since 1978 that
aren't listed in statute all used the formula-driven
entitlement. However, when Yakutat Borough initially formed it
contained little state land, and thus had a small entitlement.
Subsequently, the Yakutat Borough annexed a very large portion
of state land in the Cape Yagataga area, over 200,000 acres of
state land. The Yakutat Borough asked the legislature to give
it a percentage of that large parcel of state land acquired
through annexation. He noted that under existing statute a
municipality that annexes a large piece of state land doesn't
result in an increase in that municipality's entitlement. The
legislature agreed to the aforementioned because Yakutat
originally requested that portion of state land be included in
the borough, but the Local Boundary Commission (LBC) rejected
that request. Therefore, the Yakutat Borough decided to go
through the annexation process, through which it succeeded
because it had a large land base from which it could draw its
increased entitlement. Similarly, the Lake and Peninsula
Borough sought a legislative fix. In the Lake and Peninsula
Borough's case although there was a large amount of state land
within the borough, because of the planning very little of it
was in VUU land. Therefore, there was an exception made. Mr.
Mylius highlighted that the exceptions were based on the fact
that there was a large amount of state land. He reiterated
DNR's concerns that CBW's 18,675 acre entitlement request would
take a significant amount of state land within the borough and
limit the state's ability for timber harvests and land sales in
the future as well as sets a precedent.
8:52:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked if Mr. Mylius considered it a
credible argument that without adequate land to support the
needs of CBW, it would discourage the formation of boroughs in
other regions.
MR. MYLIUS replied no, explaining that in most areas where
boroughs would form there is a significant amount of state land,
especially in the unorganized borough areas. The reality, he
related, is that boroughs don't receive a significant amount of
revenue from land management activities. However, the boroughs
do have interest in those state lands for providing public
services, community development. Still, the land isn't a great
revenue source for most of the municipalities, which can
partially be attributed to the fact that the state retains the
oil and gas rights.
8:54:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER then asked if Mr. Mylius would consider
the fact that a newly formed borough doesn't have enough land to
meet its needs a reasonable argument.
MR. MYLIUS characterized it as a concern. However, he
maintained the need to see CBW's map and associated needs. He
reminded the committee that Ms. Sheinberg said CBW, through its
planning effort, determined a need for about 10,000 acres.
However, this request is for 18,675. He further reminded the
committee that DNR is open to an increased entitlement, but it
should be based on need.
8:55:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA inquired as to whether the process
requires the borough request specific parcels of land or can the
borough request a total amount of acreage and then select
specific parcels.
MR. MYLIUS explained that DNR determines the calculation based
on the 10 percent of VUU land without knowing the specific
lands, the borough then submits applications for specific
parcels. The statute specifies timelines. The department
doesn't certify until the borough has been in existence for two
years, then there's a six-month period in which to certify the
acreage. From that point, the borough has a year to file its
selections. Therefore, the department doesn't have any
knowledge as to what lands will be selected until after the
acreage is determined. Mr. Mylius echoed his concern that HB
273 essentially eliminates the existing formula and creates a
new formula that's applied to CBW. If that new formula is
applied for future municipalities or existing municipalities, it
would be of great concern to the department, he remarked.
8:57:53 AM
CO-CHAIR MUNOZ noted that the committee packet includes a letter
from DNR in response to a request for an expedited entitlement
certification. The letter specifies that the decision would be
in effect January 11, 2010, if no appeal is filed. She inquired
as to the definition of an expedited entitlement certification
as well as how it pertains to the process the borough is
pursuing.
MR. MYLIUS reminded the committee that DNR certifies the
entitlement three years after the borough is formed. However,
there is also a provision that allows the borough to request an
expedited certification prior to the two years and six months
specified in statute. The aforementioned is what CBW is doing
and to which the letter refers. The CBW has administratively
appealed the decision, which he attributed to the low acreage
and the borough's concern with regard to crediting the acreage
the state had previously given to the City of Wrangell. He
explained that originally Wrangell's entitlement was around
2,500 acres, but the City of Wrangell had already been given
land from the state. Therefore, when the borough was formed,
all the interests of the city transferred to the borough. That
land given to the city was then taken by the department as a
credit to the total 2,500 acre borough entitlement. The
aforementioned is under administrative appeal to the
commissioner. In further response to Co-Chair Munoz, Mr. Mylius
deferred to the attorneys regarding the impact of the appeal on
the city's deadlines. However, he pointed out that HB 273 does
include a provision that extends the selection deadline, to
which DNR has no opposition.
9:00:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER recalled that Ms. Sheinberg testified
that the lands Wrangell has identified include lands that would
support a landfill with a deep water port, a possible harbor to
support timber harvest, and home sites for residential and
recreational uses. Representative Gardner asked if DNR contends
that if CBW was held to lower acreage, it would have adequate
land to meet needs laid out in its planning document.
MR. MYLIUS reiterated that DNR believes that it's likely
appropriate for CBW to receive a larger entitlement than that
specified using the existing statutory formula. However, the
concern is that the entitlement shouldn't be the 18,675 acres
and the acreage shouldn't be based on a formula that isn't in
statute. If CBW desires ownership of specific tracts of land
that it has identified for specific purposes, the department is
open to reviewing those and basing the entitlement on actual
need as opposed to the proposal in HB 273. In further response
to Representative Gardner, Mr. Mylius confirmed that in the
department's experience those boroughs that have been given
timber lands haven't followed through with development and
adversely impacted the state timber harvest. As mentioned
earlier, the Mat-Su Borough is a good example of the
aforementioned. Furthermore, the amount of timber the state can
cut is based on the total timber base and the take is based on
the sustained yield. Whatever amount of the timber base that is
taken out of state ownership proportionally reduces the amount
of timber the state can offer for sale.
9:04:14 AM
MR. MYLIUS, in response to Representative Keller, explained that
the 18,675 acres Wrangell is requesting is 75 percent of the VUU
lands, which is land that is identified for land sales,
recreation, and general use. However, the 18,675 acres is 57
percent of all state lands. Therefore, the lands that aren't
VUU lands are mainly lands that have been identified for
wildlife habitat. He clarified that the VUU lands don't include
Mental Health Trust lands because it's not managed by DNR and
not considered state land in terms of determining municipal
entitlements and selections.
9:06:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA asked if the state listens to communities
when performing timber selections in order to ensure that the
visual assets of the community, from which they could make
money, are protected.
MR. MYLIUS replied yes, but noted that the department also has
to listen to residents statewide because the state land is
managed in terms of the best interest of all Alaskans.
Therefore, there are times in which the statewide interest may
be greater and perhaps override the local interest. In
Wrangell, two areas have been indentified within the borough for
timber harvest through the public process and those are proposed
for inclusion in the state forest, which has also gone through a
fair amount of public discussion and approval by the
legislature. This legislation would likely result in some of
those lands transferring to borough ownership. The department
recognized that possibility when the State Forest legislation
was put together. However, the amount of land the borough might
receive wasn't recognized because it was envisioned that the
borough's entitlement would be somewhere closer to 2,500 acres.
9:09:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA asked if this legislation deals with
changes beyond the formula. He asked if the department foresees
changes in the selection choices the community is making.
MR. MYLIUS said that the legislation only changes the formula
for Wrangell and the concern is that it would be precedent for
future municipalities. However, the legislation doesn't change
what lands the borough can select as the borough would remain
limited to VUU lands. There is a provision in the State Forest
legislation that would allow CBW to select lands outside of the
state forest if the legislature sets it aside.
9:11:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA asked if Mr. Mylius has any suggestion to
change the legislation such that [the formula] isn't changed
enough to establish a precedent, while providing enough acreage
to meet the hopes of Wrangell in terms of development.
MR. MYLIUS reiterated that the department doesn't have the maps
specifying the selections to determine how they would impact
state land management. He indicated that having the maps could
help the department enter a dialogue with CBW to develop a more
acceptable acreage figure. However, he didn't believe the
legislature needed to approve the specific parcels.
9:12:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked if, in broad terms, it's fair to
say that CBW is in a unique position in comparison to other
boroughs because of the small proportion of VUU lands.
MR. MYLIUS replied no, adding that it's the same issue in most
areas in Southeast Alaska. He attributed the aforementioned to
the nature of the state land selections under the Statehood Act,
which placed significant restraint on how much land the state
could acquire from the Tongass National Forest. Therefore, any
community located in the Tongass or Chugach National Forest will
have a relatively small land entitlement. The communities of
Juneau, Ketchikan, and Sitka have the larger land entitlements
because there was a fairly large exclusion from the National
Forest around those communities. Therefore, the state was able
to select more land. He mentioned that the problem of a small
land entitlement would be the case for communities such as
Petersburg and Prince of Whales Island, and other communities in
the National Forest.
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER surmised then that it's necessary to
develop a solution for CBW if the desire is to encourage borough
formation in other communities within the National Forest lands.
MR. MYLIUS opined that the lands haven't been the impediment to
borough formation. He reiterated his supposition that [were HB
273 to become law] boroughs such as Wrangell that decide to
organize will likely desire the same fix as Wrangell.
9:16:40 AM
DONALD MCCONACHIE, Mayor, City & Borough of Wrangell, informed
the committee that Wrangell has a history of developing its
timber resources. In fact, in the last few years Wrangell
developed two recent timber sales in order to support the local
mill and keep it operational, one of which was through the
Alaska Mental Health Trust lands. Moreover, in the last few
months Wrangell has reviewed developing a regional waste
authority. Wrangell, he opined, intends to use the selected
lands. He related that there was little opposition to borough
formation in Wrangell.
9:19:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA inquired as to where the mayor stands with
regard to working [with the department] toward less of a rewrite
of the formula and meeting both the borough's and the state's
needs.
MAYOR MCCONACHIE said he didn't want to set a precedent.
However, he opined that there's a unique situation in Southeast
Alaska and the National Forest lands, which needs to be
addressed in an equitable manner for those communities and DNR.
9:21:10 AM
TIMOTHY ROONEY, Manager, City & Borough of Wrangell, suggested
that the formula has worked well in those areas with an
abundance of state lands. However, that's not the case for
Wrangell. Without an increase in the formula-based entitlement
acreage, Wrangell has difficulty protecting the interests of the
residents of those within the remote areas of the borough.
While the 18,675 acre request may be more than DNR feels
appropriate, CBW is willing to develop a figure that allows for
the necessary protection for some of the remote areas. He
stated that the amount necessary for protection would amount to
at least 10-12,000 acres.
9:22:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER inquired as to Mr. Rooney's opinion
regarding testimony that land transferred to CBW wouldn't be
developed and sold.
MR. ROONEY said that rural residents want to protect their
interests while the borough moves forward with development
strategies. There are some unique residential settings in the
borough, which it would like to expand upon while keeping in
mind the desires of the residents of the area.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER remarked that if he had nice beachfront
property, he may not be excited about surrounding development.
9:24:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA requested that the committee be kept
abreast of the process with CBW.
9:25:50 AM
CO-CHAIR MUNOZ announced that HB 273 will be held over. During
that time, she encouraged the manager and mayor of Wrangell to
meet with Mr. Mylius regarding specific proposals within the
land selections in order to develop a compromise.
9:26:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER related her understanding that the
university has said it doesn't care if specific parcels in the
Wrangell area are taken out of the university land grants list.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON confirmed that to be the case, and
added that the university land grant legislation includes a
section regarding borough formation.
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER then asked if there are other within the
university land grant legislation slated for the university in
which CBW might be interested.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said that although she wasn't sure, the
University of Alaska was made aware of lands [in which CBW is
interested] some time ago and agreed to those. She confirmed
that the University of Alaska is not particularly concerned with
the parcels CBW desires.
9:28:23 AM
MR. MYLIUS, in response to Co-Chair Munoz, said that he or his
planning staff would be available to work with CBW regarding
specific land proposals. He noted that he would be in Juneau
next week and could meet with Ms. Sheinberg. In further
response to Co-Chair Munoz, Mr. Mylius agreed to meet [with CBW]
in order to come to some agreement in the coming weeks.
9:29:24 AM
CO-CHAIR MUNOZ announced that public testimony on HB 273 would
be left open.
9:29:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON, in closing, related that Wrangell is
an independent town, which has struggled in the last 10 years
with economic development. Traditionally, Wrangell is a timber
and fishing town, and therefore the residents are accustomed to
those industries. Furthermore, she emphasized that the land CBW
receives will be used in a way to further economic development
for the borough. Representative P. Wilson expressed the need to
avoid penalizing Wrangell for the lack of state lands in the
area.
[HB 273 was held over.]
9:31:36 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Community and Regional Affairs Standing Committee meeting was
adjourned at 9:32 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 273 - Borough Entitlement Statistics.PDF |
HCRA 2/11/2010 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/25/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 273 |
| HB 273 - Cert. of Entitlement LTR.PDF |
HCRA 2/11/2010 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/25/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 273 |
| HB 273 - Municipal Selection Eligible Map.pdf |
HCRA 2/11/2010 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/25/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 273 |
| HB 273 - Municipal Selection Land Status Map.pdf |
HCRA 2/11/2010 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/25/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 273 |
| HB 273 - Sponsor Statement.PDF |
HCRA 2/11/2010 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/25/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 273 |
| HB 273 - Yakatat Borough Acreage Press Release.PDF |
HCRA 2/11/2010 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/25/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 273 |
| HB 273-DNR-TAD-02-08-2010.pdf |
HCRA 2/11/2010 8:00:00 AM HCRA 2/25/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 273 |