Legislature(2003 - 2004)
05/09/2004 11:13 AM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE BILL NO. 562
An Act relating to the establishment of the Interior
Rivers Port Authority; and providing for an effective
date.
Co-Chair Harris MOVED to ADOPT work draft version #23-
LS1951\Q, Utermohle, 5/6/04, as the version of the bill
before the Committee. (Copy on File). There being NO
OBJECTION, it was adopted.
CARL MORGAN, SPONSOR, explained that the legislation would
create an Interior Rivers Port Authority, which would
regionalize planning for the small, unorganized communities
in rural Alaska. The Port Authority would include 25
communities. He added that landowners of the region with an
eleven-member board would represent the Authority with six
living physically in the areas and then three public members
including the commissioners of the Department of
Transportation & Public Facilities and the Department of
Community & Economic Development.
Representative Morgan explained that the Port Authority
would have power to accept private, municipal, State, and
federal funds, issue tax exempt revenue bonds and enter into
non-lease acquisitions. It is not intended that the
Authority will create a financial obligation to the State.
Representative Morgan acknowledged skepticism with the new
legislation. He listed the many supporters and pointed out
the main opposition comes from concerns of eminent domain.
Native tribes in Alaska do not own land, whether or not, the
Native and Village Corporations own the land.
Representative Morgan commented that Native Corporations in
the proposed areas support the bill.
Representative Fate noted support for the concept. He
questioned the eminent power domain and safeguards
associated with other allotment areas.
PAUL FUHS, LOBBYIST & TECHNICAL EXPERT TO SENATOR MORGAN,
ANCHORAGE, explained that the only property that could be
taken would have to be within the boundaries of the
authority itself. The language would be like that of the
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities, indicating
that it is for a public purpose. Native corporations are
primarily the private landowners and they have accepted the
proposal. On a regional level, they would be giving up a
portion of autoimmunity. He commented that it has been
specifically noted that it could only be within the port
authority boundaries.
Responding to Representative Fate, Mr. Fuhs explained that
he did not believe it could be within the pipeline corridor.
Regardless, there is no way they could use those properties
for any public purpose.
Representative Hawker MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #1, as
requested by Senator Morgan. (Copy on File). Co-Chair
Williams OBJECTED.
Mr. Fuhs advised that Amendment #1 would bring the bonding
authority in-line with Alaska Development Export Authority
(ADEA) and Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) in the amount of
ten million dollars.
Co-Chair Harris inquired if it would affect other natural
gas projects along the coast. Mr. Fuhs stated that the
"energy is contemplated for that area only" and other than
that, it would be a different issue.
Representative Fate reminded members that the new gas
pipeline would come across the Yukon area, and questioned if
$10 million would be sufficient. Mr. Fuhs admitted that it
probably would not be enough and that they would likely have
to come for further authorization.
Representative Foster MOVED to report CS HB 562 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CS HB 562 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with a new indeterminate note by
the Department of Community & Economic Development.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|