Legislature(2013 - 2014)BARNES 124
02/19/2013 08:00 AM House COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation: "how Local Government Works" | |
| Presentation: "relocation of Newtok to Mertarvik" | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
February 19, 2013
8:00 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux, Co-Chair
Representative Benjamin Nageak, Co-Chair
Representative Neal Foster
Representative Bob Herron
Representative Lora Reinbold
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Kurt Olson
Representative Harriet Drummond
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT
Representative Bryce Edgmon
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION: "HOW LOCAL GOVERNMENT WORKS"
- HEARD
PRESENTATION: "RELOCATION OF NEWTOK TO MERTARVIK"
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
KATHIE WASSERMAN, Executive Director
Alaska Municipal League (AML)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided a presentation regarding how local
government works.
REPRESENTATIVE BRYCE EDGMON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an introduction to the
presentation regarding the relocation of Newtok to Mertarvik.
STANLEY TOM, Tribal Administrator
Newtok Traditional Council
Newtok, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided a presentation entitled "A Unique
Partnership The Native Village of Newtok and the Newtok Planning
Group."
GEORGE OWLETUCK, CEO
Mertarvik Community Development Council
Newtok Traditional Council
Chugiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Assisted with the presentation regarding
the relocation of Newtok to Mertarvik.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:00:40 AM
CO-CHAIR GABRIELLE LEDOUX called the House Community and
Regional Affairs Standing Committee meeting to order at 8:00
a.m. Representatives Herron, Reinbold, Nageak, and LeDoux were
present at the call to order. Representative Foster arrived as
the meeting was in progress. Representative Edgmon was also in
attendance.
^Presentation: "How Local Government Works"
Presentation: "How Local Government Works"
8:01:37 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX announced that the first order of business would
be a presentation regarding how local government works.
8:01:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON requested that Ms. Wasserman inform the
committee as to what the legislature is not doing and can do for
the Alaska Municipal League.
8:02:19 AM
KATHIE WASSERMAN, Executive Director, Alaska Municipal League
(AML), began by highlighting AML's publication entitled "Local
Government 101," which was mailed to all candidates running for
a legislative seat in order to educate them with regard to how
local government works. Ms. Wasserman informed the committee
that AML represents all 162 cities and boroughs in the state.
In Alaska a city and a borough are both municipalities.
Although AML does not represent the unorganized communities, at
times it does try to help them. She pointed out that AML has a
three-fold mission: represent the unified voice of all
municipalities before the legislature and Congress, which means
that AML does not lobby for capital projects; build consensus;
and provide training by working closely with the Division of
Community & Regional Affairs (DCRA) and producing the municipal
officials directory. She further pointed out that AML
represents affiliate groups that are affiliated with cities,
including the Alaska Conference of Mayors, the [Association of
Municipal Clerks], the [Alaska Municipal Management
Association], the [Alaska Government Finance Officers
Association], the [Alaska Association of Assessing Officers],
the municipal attorneys, the municipal planners, and fire
chiefs. Ms. Wasserman directed attention to pages 4-5 of "Local
Government 101," which describes the differences between the
cities and their powers as specified in Title 29. Page 6 lists
all 19 boroughs in the state and specifies their location on a
map of the state, and specifies that the remainder of the state
is part of an unorganized borough. Although the legislature is
the assembly of the unorganized borough, in 15 years the
legislature has never convened as such.
8:08:09 AM
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK inquired as to the [plight] of the villages in
the unorganized borough.
MS. WASSERMAN said that villages in the unorganized borough are
on their own unless they are a city and thus would fall under
the city government. She reiterated that the legislature is the
assembly for the unorganized borough, although the legislature
has never convened as such.
8:09:32 AM
MS. WASSERMAN, returning to her review, informed the committee
that AML estimates that 97 percent of Alaska's population lives
in an organized area. She then directed attention to the tables
on pages 8-9, which specifies the details of the various types
of boroughs. A home rule borough can choose its powers so long
as those powers don't go beyond the state's powers in Title 29.
Page 10 details the senior citizen's property tax exemption,
which cost Anchorage $26 million this year. Even with the
municipal revenue sharing of $15 million, Anchorage is $11
million in debt. Ms. Wasserman explained that many years ago
the state required that all cities and boroughs that levied a
property tax exempt the first $150,000 of any senior citizen's
or veteran's property tax from their primary residence and the
state would reimburse the cities and boroughs. After a couple
of years, the state decided it didn't have enough funds to
reimburse the cities and boroughs for these exemptions and left
it to the municipalities to fund as the mandate was maintained.
The cities and boroughs are still required to exempt the first
$150,000 of senior's and veteran's property tax, but they aren't
reimbursed. Ms. Wasserman opined that most cities and boroughs
would do what they could for seniors and veterans, but would
likely do so in another fashion, such as through means testing
based on income. The aforementioned, she opined, should be left
up to the cities and boroughs if there is no reimbursement from
the state. Currently, the total value of the senior citizen
property tax exemption is $53 million, while the total of
revenue sharing is $60 million. The $53 million is from 24
cities and boroughs, whereas the revenue sharing is shared
amongst all 162 cities and boroughs and the unorganized
communities. Therefore, it's a losing game, she charged,
particularly since the Baby Boomer demographic grows and the
state's population in general grows older. The senior citizen
property tax exemption is becoming a huge detriment to
municipalities, as illustrated by the 7 percent growth in the
amount of people applying for the senior citizen property tax
exemption Anchorage. Ms. Wasserman then directed attention to
the last page of AML's publication that details the history of
revenue sharing, which is AML's main priority every year. The
revenue sharing in 1985 amounted to $141 million and the
percentage of revenue sharing in comparison to the budget was
quite large. In 2012, revenue sharing, for the fifth year in a
row, amounts to $60 million while the state's budget has grown.
Therefore, the ratio between revenue sharing and the budget is
much smaller. She then reminded the committee that during the
Murkowski Administration revenue sharing was zeroed out, which
resulted in some municipal offices not being able to even turn
on the heat in the offices. In fact, she recalled the city
clerk who would have to wait until 11:00 a.m. to work as that
was when her fountain pen had thawed. The situation has
improved over the past few years with the $60 million in annual
revenue sharing. Further relief has occurred in the last two
years with a supplemental revenue sharing increment two years
ago in the amount of $20 million and last year in the amount of
$25 million. The supplemental revenue sharing increments were
based on the high price of energy. Ms. Wasserman noted that
once again AML is asking for a $25 million supplement as energy
costs have continued to increase, especially in Representative
Herron's district where residents are experiencing the highest
gas and heating fuel prices the region has ever experienced.
She then pointed to a graph AML prepared based on the Division
of Community and Regional Affairs (DCRA) fuel watch, which
illustrates that fuel prices are almost back to the level of the
2008 spike and the forecast is for continued increases. Ms.
Wasserman explained that revenue sharing is not earmarked for
anything in particular and although it can be used for anything,
it's primarily used to keep property taxes down in the larger
communities or for basic infrastructure in smaller communities.
Most of the state's smaller municipalities don't have a tax
base, and thus don't have a way to get funds to the local
government. Although there may be a small sales tax, the
smaller stores don't do much business because it has become
easier for residents to have their food stuffs flown in from
large stores in hub communities. Ms. Wasserman then highlighted
the table entitled "Table 14(B) Senior Citizen and Disabled
Veteran Property Tax Exemption," which relates the property tax
exemption amounts for each municipality that collects property
tax. The aforementioned table illustrates that the total tax
exempt amount is growing considerably. In conclusion, Ms.
Wasserman encouraged any member with legislation that may impact
a municipality to feel free to call AML.
8:18:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER inquired as what small communities did
prior to the $25 million supplemental revenue sharing increment.
MS. WASSERMAN answered that there aren't many ways to make up
for the lack of funds, besides laying off employees. However,
[cities and municipalities] have to be careful of that because
the state is levying termination studies on municipalities that
layoff groups or classifications of people. Therefore, the only
other option is to stop services even though small communities
do not provide many services beyond the basics. She recalled
being the mayor of a small community when revenue sharing
stopped, which resulted in the boardwalk not being plowed unless
there was a foot or more of snow.
8:20:47 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX inquired as to what Ms. Wasserman meant
regarding the state charging municipalities for terminating
employees.
MS. WASSERMAN explained that language in Senate Bill 125
specified that if any Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS)
employers other than the State of Alaska terminate a group or
classification of people, they will be charged a termination
study and the cost of letting that employee go for the next 25
years. In further response to Co-Chair LeDoux, Ms. Wasserman
clarified that a termination study is a study by an actuarial
company to determine the impact of having an employee removed
from the retirement system. While Ms. Wasserman said she
understood the reasoning behind [the termination study], the
impact to smaller communities is more [severe than to urban
communities] because a smaller community may only have one
employee in a classification group. Many municipalities have
tried to trim their [spending] through termination of employees
and have faced high bills.
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX surmised that this [termination study
requirement] addresses the gap in the PERS and Teachers'
Retirement System (TRS) funding.
MS. WASSERMAN confirmed that to be the case.
8:22:50 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked whether there are any federal or
state regulations that are negatively impacting municipalities,
impeding business in any way, or impeding [municipalities']
ability to thrive.
MS. WASSERMAN replied yes, noting that every year a number of
property tax exemptions pass despite AML arguing against them.
Although there are many laws that impact municipalities in some
way, there is not a fiscal note relating how the legislation
impacts them.
8:24:06 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD surmised then that it would be helpful
for AML to know how regulations impact municipalities.
MS. WASSERMAN answered that it would be helpful to AML as well
as the legislature.
8:24:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD related her understanding that currently
there are about 20 bills requesting various exemptions. In
fact, a farm land tax exemption that would cost the Matanuska-
Susitna Borough $3.5 million just passed the House. She noted
that the Matanuska-Susitna Borough will have the decision to
make as to whether to implement such an exemption.
Representative Reinbold then surmised that in general AML
wouldn't be in favor of the various tax exemptions.
MS. WASSERMAN opined that since property tax is a local
authority, local municipalities should determine when to grant
exemptions, to whom to grant exemptions, and how to regulate
grant exemptions. Such decisions should not be made at the
state level.
8:25:30 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX related her understanding that Ms. Wasserman has
no objection to property tax exemptions that are purely
permissive as opposed to mandatory.
MS. WASSERMAN responded that is not quite the case. As a rule,
AML has also been opposed to optional property tax exemptions
because they usually pit the legislature against the
municipality. Even the purely permissive property tax
exemptions turn up the heat from the public as they want to know
why the local government is not implementing the optional
property tax exemption.
8:26:32 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX expressed confusion as she recalled that Ms.
Wasserman testified to AML's preference to have property tax
exemption decisions made at the local level, which would be the
case with most of the permissive proposals in the last few
years.
MS. WASSERMAN clarified that AML believes that these property
tax decisions should only be based at the city and borough level
not at the state level.
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX related her understanding that currently
property tax laws, in many cases, don't allow municipalities to
exempt certain classes of people or individuals. Therefore, the
[permissive] exemptions are left for local level to decide,
which she thought AML wants.
MS. WASSERMAN reiterated AML's view that property tax as a local
authority should be governed totally at the local level and not
require approaching the state for permission.
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX surmised then that AML wants a structural change
in which the state does not mandate anything with respect to
property taxes.
MS. WASSERMAN answered that is a close characterization of what
AML wants.
8:29:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON surmised that Ms. Wasserman is saying
there is state overreach with these property tax exemptions.
MS. WASSERMAN indicated that is basically the case.
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON inquired as to how AML could advise the
legislature to change the very popular senior citizen/disabled
veteran property tax exemption to benefit the municipalities and
boroughs. He recalled that any attempts to change the
aforementioned property tax exemptions weren't welcomed.
MS. WASSERMAN highlighted that existing state statute says the
state "shall reimburse", and therefore she suggested that the
state reimburse the cities and boroughs for the senior
citizen/disabled veteran property tax exemptions. In further
response to Representative Herron, Ms. Wasserman confirmed that
she would recommend the state either fully fund the
aforementioned exemptions or remove the law.
8:31:53 AM
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK surmised then that were the state to live up to
the law and reimburse the cities and boroughs for the senior
citizen/disabled veteran property tax exemptions, the state
would face an over $53 million liability.
MS. WASSERMAN replied yes.
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK asked whether the state owes the municipalities
for those years when it didn't reimburse them for the senior
citizen/disabled veteran property tax exemptions.
MS. WASSERMAN stated that AML would not ask for reimbursement
for all those years the state didn't reimburse the
municipalities.
8:33:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER, referring to the revenue sharing history
on page 11, remarked that it would be interesting to have a
graph illustrating the energy costs through the years.
MS. WASSERMAN said she could provide the members with the graph
that relates the energy costs from 2005 for gasoline and home
heating fuel.
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER emphasized that often energy costs can't
be reduced because the heat in a building with water pipes can't
be turned off unless the water pipes are drained. Therefore,
the [cost of the energy] has to be spread throughout the
residents of the community. He then inquired as to whether
there have been studies regarding the cost the average homeowner
would face per home to [pay for that energy cost] in terms of
maybe an increase in the mill rate.
MS. WASSERMAN said that would be an interesting study that
perhaps her small staff could consider how to accomplish.
Representative Foster's comments are what municipalities discuss
often, which is the big picture that committees don't often get
to consider. The bigger picture, she explained, is that
offering a property tax exemption means fewer people are paying
property tax and revenue sharing is being consumed by higher
fuel costs while at the same time people are facing higher fuel
costs; these are the same folks that have to pay higher property
tax because of the property tax exemptions. Meanwhile, the
state bases a certain percentage of the municipality's mill rate
for its schools by assessing all the property in the
municipality, even that property that is exempted.
8:37:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD inquired as to the statute that
specifies the state "shall reimburse" municipalities for the
senior citizen/disabled veteran property tax exemptions.
MS. WASSERMAN said she would provide the specific statute.
8:38:27 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX asked if Ms. Wasserman is advocating changing
the senior/disabled veteran property tax exemption from
mandatory to optional.
MS. WASSERMAN emphasized that in the 20 years she has worked
with AML, the senior/disabled veteran property tax exemptions
have been an issue. Although there has not been discussion
regarding what is desired, she surmised that almost every mayor
from a city and borough that collects a property tax feels [the
senior/disabled veteran property tax exemptions] should be
addressed. In further response to Co-Chair LeDoux, Ms.
Wasserman confirmed that she could work on discussing the
exemptions and bringing the requests to the legislature.
8:39:42 AM
MS. WASSERMAN, in conclusion, related AML's appreciation for
what the legislature does for local government.
8:40:14 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 8:40 a.m. to 8:42 a.m.
^Presentation: "Relocation of Newtok to Mertarvik"
Presentation: "Relocation of Newtok to Mertarvik"
8:42:27 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX announced that the final order of business would
be a presentation regarding the relocation of Newtok to
Mertarvik.
8:42:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BRYCE EDGMON, Alaska State Legislature, began by
informing the committee that due to redistricting he inherited
Newtok, which he visited this fall. He then informed the
committee of his experience on the Northern Waters Task Force
and the exposure to the changing Arctic environment that creates
erosion conditions and permafrost changes. Some 31 communities
have been identified as possible sites of concern in the future,
of which Newtok is at the leading edge. He recalled his visit
to Newtok, which he characterized as a community in flux with
many needs including a school and a power plant in need of
replacing. He then highlighted the enormity of moving an entire
community, which is illustrated by the large matrix and timeline
of events displayed in Mr. Tom's office. In closing,
Representative Edgmon related that he was impressed with the
local leadership in Newtok as they undertake this unprecedented
community relocation effort that involves a myriad of state
agencies, of which none are taking the lead.
8:46:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON clarified that this isn't the first time a
village has moved. In the late 1970s there was a dispute in the
community of Nunapitchuk, which resulted in those in south
Nunapitchuk moving to a new community site, Atmautluak. Turning
to the Newtok situation, Representative Herron characterized the
galvanizing of the federal and state governments for the move to
Mertarvik as remarkable and is almost a singular accomplishment
of Mr. Tom.
8:48:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER related his appreciation for this issue
being brought forward as it's important for Newtok and a
situation from which others can learn.
8:49:46 AM
STANLEY TOM, Tribal Administrator, Newtok Traditional Council,
informed the committee that he has worked for the tribe since
1999. He directed attention to the slide entitled "The Village
of Newtok," which is a photo of Newtok and the permafrost upon
which it sits. Newtok is the location the Bureau of Indian
Affairs (BIA) chose to move the village of Kealavik in 1954 as
it was a barge accessible location to bring in materials to
build the school.
8:52:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD inquired as to the distance from the
village site of Kealavik to Newtok.
MR. TOM said it is about five miles [from Newtok] and remains a
flood prone area. In response to Co-Chair Nageak, Mr. Tom
confirmed that [the residents of Newtok] were originally from an
area on Nelson Island north of Tununak about five miles. He
noted that villagers moved every spring.
8:53:41 AM
MR. TOM, returning to his presentation, informed the committee
that Newtok is approximately 490 miles west of Anchorage and is
only accessible by air or water. The residents of the area are
The Qaluyaarmiut, which means People of the Dip Net as that is
what they use to catch fish. All the communities in the area
share the [resources]. He pointed out that Newtok residents are
moving nine miles south to Nelson Island. Ancestors of Newtok
residents once moved along the Bering Sea coast following
subsistence resources. He then shared photographs of his family
moving to Tununak in the spring, when seals were caught and
celebrated. He also shared photographs of residents of the
current village of Newtok, noting that there is no heavy
equipment/automobiles present due to the boardwalk that is
necessitated by the permafrost. Sharing photos of the erosion
in the area, Mr. Tom informed the committee that due to erosion,
up to 152 feet per year is being lost. The erosion is happening
fast and can't be stopped, as illustrated on the slide entitled
"Historical and Projected Erosion in Newtok." In fact, since
1954 about 2,800 feet was lost due to erosion. In 2004 and 2005
there was a federal disaster declaration due to flooding, which
is illustrated in the photographs on the slide entitled
"Depiction of flooding from the September 22, 2005 fall storm."
He then shared photographs of the flooding and the effects of
storms, such as four to five-foot waves that are a product of
the south wind and contribute to erosion as well. Referring to
the aerial photo of river flooding, he explained that when there
is flooding it is not just flooding via the river. He
highlighted the slide entitled "Leakage from school sewage
lagoon" and related that due to the inability to prevent the
leakage, the school had to discontinue using the lagoon because
it impacted the subsistence fish racks and in fact, people had
to move from that area due to the leakage.
8:59:02 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX pointed out that the slide entitled "Leakage
from school sewage lagoon" says, "Study of public health
conditions in Newtok linked conditions to "lack of
infrastructure development and failure to properly maintain
existing infrastructure." Therefore, she inquired as to the
plans for developing and maintaining the infrastructure after
the community moves in order to avoid similar problems.
MR. TOM said the new village site is promising land in that it's
high ground. Furthermore, the community is working with Village
Safe Water [within DNR] and Department of Transportation &
Public Facilities (DOT&PF) on the sewer system. In order to
save costs, the community is considering a gravity underwater
sewer system at Mertarvik. Mr. Tom emphasized that the
community is suspended in that it cannot obtain funding from the
agencies for development at the current site due to the
relocation effort. Still, the boardwalks are 30-plus years old
and have exceeded their lifespan as has the 30-year old
generator the community still uses and maintains. Moreover,
Newtok's electrical lines are obsolete to the point that fuses
can't be found for the transformers. Mr. Tom expressed alarm
with Newtok's health assessment that the children of Newtok are
hospitalized for respiratory problems more than the 56 villages.
In further response to Co-Chair LeDoux, Mr. Tom estimated that
there are about 360-400 residents and increasing.
9:01:31 AM
MR. TOM, continuing his presentation, directed attention to the
slide entitled "Ninglick River Erosion Assessment." The
assessment by Woodward-Clyde Consultants found that it would be
prohibitively expensive to provide erosion protection for Newtok
as it sits on unpreventable permafrost, and therefore
recommended relocating the community. Following the [1984]
assessment six potential sites for relocation were analyzed for
30 years. Ultimately, only the options of either staying at
Newtok or moving to Mertarvik were left. Referring to the slide
entitled "Selecting a village relocation site:", Mr. Tom related
that the Newtok Native Corporation [encouraged] the village [to
vote] as a block in the selection of the new site, saying it
would solve the issue because the agency doesn't want to see a
divided community. Therefore, the [Newtok Native Corporation
and the Village of Newtok] voted together that Mertarvik, as the
site with the highest ground in the Nelson Island area, is the
[chosen] site. The further interior sites were not barge
accessible and had permafrost, and thus weren't good for the
future of Newtok residents. He informed the committee that the
name "Mertarvik" means "getting water from the spring" and
related that every time Newtok has run out of water, residents
have obtained water from Mertarvik. Newtok's water source is
deteriorating and findings from the state have recommended the
water be tested three to four times per month due to the
contamination in the water source. Newtok's water source is
near the airport site, and therefore he suspected airplanes are
dripping oil and contaminating the site. The water sources at
the other considered sites are contaminated by the high water.
Village Safe Water, Department of Natural Resources (DNR),
installed 5 20,000-gallon tanks. He predicted that Newtok's
water will be impacted this summer, and therefore he questioned
what residents will do then. He then directed attention to the
slide entitled "The 2003 Land Exchange: An Act of Congress,"
which has two photographs of the act from which the Newtok
Native Corporation obtained surface and subsurface rights at the
Mertarvik site. He highlighted the photograph of the high
ground of Mertarvik in comparison to the slide entitled
"Deterioration of Critical Infrastructure," which has
photographs of the erosion at Newtok that resulted in the loss
of the Newtok barge landing in 2005. The lack of a barge
landing means that Newtok can't obtain any materials through the
barge companies because they can't offload.
9:06:14 AM
MR. TOM, continuing, informed the committee that the river is
drying. In fact, the fuel barge was stuck for three days. In
the past, there were two deliveries a year; one in the spring
and one in the fall. However, now it's a one-time delivery,
which has resulted in the community running out of unleaded gas
and heating fuel every year. The local school has had enough
heating fuel to sell to the Native corporation. He noted that
the first time Newtok ran out of heating fuel, the Native
corporation ordered it via air at a cost of $30 per gallon,
which is cost prohibitive. He then referred to the slide with
photographs of Newtok's aging and deteriorating fuel tanks.
Although pieces fell off the fuel tank when attempts were made
to move the tanks and the tanks are tilting, they are still
being used as no new tanks can be obtained at this time. Moving
on to the slide entitled "2006 Assessment of Public Health
Conditions in Newtok," Mr. Tom expressed distress with the
findings of that public health assessment. He then directed
attention to the slide entitled "The Newtok Planning Group,"
which meets every year with regard to how the relocation effort
is progressing. As the slide entitled "Alaska Administrative
Orders 231 and 239" relates, the Department of Commerce,
Community & Economic Development (DCCED) is very helpful in
terms of coordinating the federal and state agencies. In fact,
monthly meetings are held to update the agencies with which
Newtok works. He then mentioned that the strategic planning
documents are complete. He informed the committee that Newtok
did use Economic Development Administration (EDA) funds to build
the barge landing, which is complete. Currently, the Newtok
Native Corporation is working with the BIA on roads. The U.S.
Marines and the U.S. Navy helped with construction of the barge
landing road and the rock quarry at Mertarvik. Mr. Tom pointed
out the community layout as related on various slides, including
the area of lower ground that is accessible. He then
highlighted the slide entitled "Mertarvik Access Road," which
specifies the location of the Innovative Readiness Training
(IRT) base camp, the barge ramp and staging area, and the access
road to the emergency evacuation shelter. The Mertarvik
Evacuation Center (MEC) will be built this summer by local
labor. He noted that he trained 17 students in carpentry,
electrical, and plumbing, which affords the community the
ability to be built by local residents.
9:11:58 AM
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK inquired as to whether there will be dual
purposes for the evacuation center.
MR. TOM specified that the emergency evacuation center will be
used when flooding occurs. Ultimately, it will become a
community hall with a post office and tribal office. In further
response to Co-Chair Nageak, Mr. Tom confirmed that the
Mertarvik Evacuation Center will be built first. In fact, the
foundation is already complete and the exterior will be
constructed this summer with local hire.
9:12:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD inquired as to who is paying for the
Mertarvik Evacuation Center.
MR. TOM answered that the legislature is funding it. In further
response to Representative Reinbold, Mr. Tom explained that the
building will cost about $6.2 million [under the control of the
Newtok Traditional Council]; whereas when the project was under
DOT&PF the building cost was estimated at $11 million.
9:14:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD surmised that since Newtok is part of
the unregulated borough no property taxes are collected in the
area. Therefore, she inquired as to whether there are any
resources in the area that could be developed. She further
inquired as to the village's opinion of natural resource
development, excluding wildlife.
MR. TOM related that the elders in Newtok are conservative. He
said that there is no natural resource development in place at
this time, except a fishery.
9:15:57 AM
GEORGE OWLETUCK, CEO, Mertarvik Community Development Council,
Newtok Traditional Council, returned to the construction costs
of the Mertarvik Evacuation Center. He explained that
originally, DOT&PF was planning to build a nonstandard
construction, nonstandard design evacuation center at an
estimated cost of $11.3 million. When the Newtok Traditional
Council took over the project, it issued a request for proposals
(RFP) using structural insulated panels, which effectively cut
the cost of construction by 50 percent. The aforementioned
would bear out similarly for residential construction, he said.
In fact, the Association of Village Council Presidents (AVCP)
Regional Housing Authority provided an estimate of $300,000 per
home. However, the [Newtok Traditional Council] delivered the
same footprint in Mertarvik for two homes at a cost of $273,000.
With regard to resource development, Mr. Owletuck informed the
committee that there is a rock quarry on site and 100,000 cubic
yards of material has been demolished. The missing piece is the
equipment to sort out the material, which is for what last
year's appropriation was used. He stated that he has not heard
the Newtok Traditional Council's position on resource
development, although it's definitely needed to accomplish the
project.
9:18:37 AM
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK asked whether there are any commercial value
mineral resources in the area.
MR. TOM said that they have not discussed that yet.
9:19:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER related his understanding that it's likely
there are no resources [in the Mertarvik] area if it's similar
to areas on the lower Yukon in that there is a lot of tundra and
wildlife, such that the subsistence lifestyle is first and
foremost. He suspected that the closest mines [to Mertarvik]
are the potential mines of Donlin and Pebble, and thus there is
no real tax base. He then asked whether any [Newtok residents]
are working at the Donlin mine.
MR. TOM replied, "Not really." However, he noted that some
people from Nelson Island are working at Donlin Creek Mine.
9:20:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER pointed out that on the one hand climate
change has resulted in erosion that has forced the relocation of
the community. On the other hand, there has been an opening of
the Arctic waters that has resulted in increased shipping and
search for oil and gas. He acknowledged that there are various
opinions regarding how to approach the aforementioned. One must
take care with oil and gas mining because of the difficulty of
dealing with a spill in the area. He proposed training
residents along the coast to respond to a spill, whether it's
industry supported or not. He then inquired as to Mr. Tom's
feeling with regard to opportunities that may increase shipping
as it will impact the area in terms of subsistence.
MR. TOM acknowledged that Newtok residents are subsistence
gatherers as there is abundant wildlife in the area. Due to the
village's concentration on the relocation effort, it has not
discussed the shipping route.
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER encouraged Mr. Tom [and the residents of
Newtok] to keep in mind what benefits might be available with
the increased traffic as Newtok relocates and searches for
opportunities to bring prosperity to the community.
MR. TOM relayed that Newtok has a lot of people trained in
Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER).
9:25:15 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX asked whether Newtok would be in such a
difficult situation now if the BIA had not made the community
move in 1954.
MR. TOM said that they did not think of climate change and the
BIA didn't do an erosion assessment.
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX asked whether the old village site is
experiencing the same problems as Newtok.
MR. TOM replied yes.
9:26:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD expressed the need to focus on shipping
possibilities as it may provide an opportunity for Newtok. With
dwindling oil production, decisions regarding funding have to be
made. She expressed interest in opportunities that allow
communities to thrive on their own. Therefore, she inquired as
to whether there is tourism in the area, and if not, whether the
community would be open to tourism.
MR. TOM said that the Newtok Traditional Council hasn't
discussed tourism. However, he suggested that the new village
site would be a nice place to have tourism as there is a lot of
wildlife, including fishing.
9:28:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD surmised then that ecotourism or tourism
involving the Alaska Native culture would be something Newtok
would be interested in exploring as an economic base for the
community.
MR. TOM replied yes.
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK recalled prior to statehood and early statehood
the federal government had impunity to do what it wished and
moved his childhood village three times.
9:30:20 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX specified that she is trying to understand
whether some of these situations are the result of the BIA
requiring the moves.
MR. OWLETUCK said that economic development would also be in
relation to the amount of funding Newtok receives from the
Alaska State Legislature. By virtue of the fact that Newtok is
building at half the cost of what outside agencies are building,
Newtok was approached by several philanthropists who've stepped
forward and offered to assist the community to develop a family
of five businesses. One of the five businesses will be some
sort of ecotourism such that local residents will use their
skills as artisans to create traditional artwork. One project
Newtok is reviewing is to produce and manufacture the structural
insulated panels that presumably will be used to build the homes
in the community. With regard to the budget, there's an annual
appropriation of the BIA Indian Reservation Roads funds of at
least $1.2 million, which will be leveraged with federal
appropriations or grant proposals. The Indian Housing Block
grant is being used to build homes; AVCP Regional Housing
Authority offered $280,000 for fiscal year 2011 to build a home.
Therefore, Newtok is leveraging state appropriations with
federal appropriations and grant proposals, Newtok's efforts
have caught the attention of international philanthropists who
wish to engage their expertise and services through private
business development investment.
9:33:28 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX inquired as to the total cost of the move.
MR. OWLETUCK explained that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers'
report three to four years ago estimated that the move would
cost $84-$130 million. However, under local management the move
is expected to cost less. The majority of the funding thus far,
about $12.6 million, has come from the legislature. Since
federal funding is declining, the hope is to increase private
investment that is currently at zero. In response to questions,
he clarified that the private investment would be philanthropic
that is a loan proposal with the council's review and approval
that would, for example, produce structural insulated panels
that would generate sales to hire local people and repay the
loan. He noted that it has already been demonstrated that there
is a cost benefit to use polyurethane structural insulated
panels that cut heating costs by 46 percent per a Canadian study
that was conducted over multiple years. The polyurethane
structural insulated panels have an R-value of 42-44 in
comparison to an R-value of 19 for typical stick frame
construction. Furthermore, use of these precut panels reduces
the cost of materials and labor in comparison to using raw
lumber. These costs savings have caught the attention of
several private philanthropists who have come forward, as
mentioned earlier.
9:37:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER expressed concern with the declining
federal revenues to the state. He then inquired as to whether
there is an estimate of how much more funding will be needed
[for the move to Mertarvik].
MR. OWLETUCK informed the committee that this year's
appropriation request involves a pioneer airport. The DOT&PF
concluded a six-year study that estimates the airport will cost
$20.6 million. Therefore, Newtok's appropriation this year
proposes to appropriate $6.65 million to create/build a pioneer
airstrip. The aforementioned will provide for air
transportation to the new site and also reduce the final cost of
the final airport. The FAA regional director has already been
sent a letter and email to the congressional delegation, the FAA
national director, and the FAA Alaska regional director
highlighting the appropriation for the pioneer airport. The
hope is that the FAA regional director will allocate some of its
budget and prioritize the Newtok project; it's an attempt to
leverage an additional $14 million in federal appropriations
with the airport project.
MR. OWLETUCK then related that the Mertarvik Evacuation Center
is estimated to cost about $6.55 million in comparison to the
state estimated $11.2 million. Thus far, Newtok has secured
$2.5 million and is attempting to secure another $2.5 million.
Newtok is submitting appropriation requests to the U.S. Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) Indian Community Development Block
Grant, $600,000. It's an attempt to leverage existing and
proposed state appropriations with federal agencies such as HUD
to help complete the building.
9:41:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked what the total cost will be for
the airport and the total cost for the Mertarvik Evacuation
Center.
MR. OWLETUCK specified that the evacuation center received bids
for $6.55 million. The airport, per the earlier mentioned
DOT&PF study, is estimated to be $20.6 million.
9:42:36 AM
MR. TOM, returning to his presentation, directed attention to
the slide entitled "The Strategic Management Plan will clearly
communicate:" that provides a timeline of the relocation. In
the first year, the barge landing would be constructed. He
emphasized that the housing is the primary obstacle being faced,
although four BIA houses and two AVCP houses have been built.
Furthermore, AVCP just provided another $280,000 to build at the
Mertarvik site. He then related that the Mertarvik waterfront
project is complete as the preliminary survey is complete, and
therefore funding for the future boat harbor needs to be
secured. Although there is no barge landing, the community has
delivered the building [materials] to Mertarvik for construction
there. He shared photographs on the slide entitled "Building of
Skilled Local Workforce," which show community members in
vocational training. These community members constructed super
insulated panels, which were used to construct two houses at a
cost of $273,000.
9:45:20 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Community and Regional Affairs Standing Committee meeting was
adjourned at 9:45 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Mertarvik_Relocation_Report.pdf |
HCRA 2/19/2013 8:00:00 AM |
|
| BIA Providers Conference.pdf |
HCRA 2/19/2013 8:00:00 AM |
Relocation of Newtok to Mertarvik |
| Local Government 101 Alaska Municipal League.pdf |
HCRA 2/19/2013 8:00:00 AM |
Alaska Municipal League Overview |