Legislature(1995 - 1996)
1996-10-16 Senate Journal
Full Journal pdf1996-10-16 Senate Journal Page 4375 SB 162 Message of May 30 was received, stating: Dear President Pearce: Under the authority of art. II, sec. 15 of the Alaska Constitution, I have vetoed the following bill: 1996-10-16 Senate Journal Page 4376 SB 162 CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 162(FIN) "An Act relating to land used for agricultural purposes and to state land classified for agricultural purposes or subject to the restriction of use for agricultural purposes only; and annulling certain program regulations of the Department of Natural Resources that are inconsistent with the amendments made by this Act" This bill would dramatically change the way in which the state conveys and protects its interests in agricultural development on state lands. In my view, the changes made by the bill are not improvements in state law to help ensure that Alaska has a viable agricultural industry now and in the future. Under the bill, a current owner of an agricultural interest in state land could receive title in fee simple subject to a covenant by complying with certain requirements specified in the bill. The bill though does not require the purchaser to pay any additional compensation to the state for the extra interests in the land. We need to consider carefully whether this is an appropriate use of state resources. While I am sympathetic to claims by some farmers that their financing options are restricted by the current land interests, I am convinced that the state's best interests are not best served by this bill. Under current law, the state is able to ensure the retention of land for agricultural purposes by its right to terminate a purchasers interest in the land if the land is used for non-agricultural purposes. This bill would remove that possibility. Under the bill, the state would assume the substantial burden of proving non-compliance with the restrictive covenant on the land and would be limited to costly and possibly ineffective means of preventing a purchaser from using the land for non-agricultural purposes. The specific remedies available to the state are unclear under the bill. 1996-10-16 Senate Journal Page 4377 SB 162 I am aware that other states have experienced the problems that this bill would likely create. Some other states and the federal government are now buying back development rights in land held by farmers that was purchased under government programs. It would be against the State of Alaskas interest to put itself in such a position. I support finding ways to help farmers finance legitimate, productive agricultural endeavors. This bill, however, opens the door to problems and costs that do not serve the public interest. In the long run this bill likely will hurt the agricultural industry and therefore those very people that the legislature intended it to help. Sincerely, /s/ Tony Knowles Governor Governor's veto overriden on June 6 (page 4323).