Legislature(2001 - 2002)
02/21/2002 08:08 AM House CRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HJR 18-CONST.AMENDMENT:MUNICIPAL ANNEXATIONS CO-CHAIR MEYER announced that the final order of business before the committee would be HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 18, Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of Alaska relating to certain municipal annexations." Number 2759 ABIGAIL FULLER testified via teleconference. Although Ms. Fuller remarked that HJR 18 is a step in the right direction, she still had some concerns. She pointed out that in an annexation the rights of the people effected are important. The Homer annexation illustrates that the Local Boundary Commission (LBC) is capable of trimming a too large annexation down to a reasonable size. However, the Homer annexation also demonstrates that the LBC has a complete disregard for the citizens and thus this area [of the annexation process] needs amending. Ms. Fuller said, "I feel any annexation of a settled area requires a vote. Anything less violates the basic founding principles or our country." She pointed out that placing a 10 percent limit on who is allowed to vote would be problematic because it would violate the equal protection clause. Therefore, Ms. Fuller suggested that HJR 18 be redrafted in order to mesh with HB 13 of last year. She suggested: It should say that any city annexation that effects a borough service area would require a vote. What this would do is prohibit legislative review annexations for cases where the people outside the city are already getting the services they want through a borough government. In this situation there is no need to force anyone into the city regardless of what a certain state commission thinks. Annexation can wait until the city can offer the outsiders a good enough deal that they will vote for it. Therefore, forced annexations in the more settled areas would be restricted while perhaps encouraging borough formation in the remainder. She viewed this as a step toward eventually doing away with the legislative review method entirely. Number 2672 PETE ROBERTS testified via teleconference. Although Mr. Roberts urged review of [HJR 18], he felt that the entire process misses the point. This is a discussion about people, Mr. Roberts emphasized. Although this constitutional amendment is a step in the right direction, he, too, felt that the 10 percent was problematic. He pointed out that when one lives in an adjoining city, one has voting rights, but those in an adjoining borough or unorganized territory have no voting rights. "There's something wrong with this," he said. This resolution doesn't really address this matter either. He urged the committee to look at this from the citizen's point of view. Number 2587 LINDA RIENHART testified via teleconference. She began by saying that she agreed with the prior two comments. She said, "I believe the basic issue is not percentages -- how many people it's fair to disenfranchise. I believe it's not fair to disenfranchise a single person." JIM RIENHART testified via teleconference. Mr. Rienhart said, "What I heard this morning was you people saying that you recognize that slavery is wrong, but those who have slaves can keep them." Number 2537 DORIS CABANA, Alaskans Opposed to Annexation, testified via teleconference in opposition to the 10 percent or anything similar because she viewed it as rewarding the city. She noted that she would be one of the 900 that won't have a voice. Ms. Cabana provided remarks in reference to the Homer annexation. She informed the committee that Robert Erwin, Attorney, Alaskans Opposed to Annexation, notes in his petition for reconsideration [of the Homer annexation] that "Alaska Statute 29.35.450(e) requires a vote of the people effected in eliminating a substantial portion of borough service area established for roads, fire protection, parks, and recreation. It is presumed that whenever the legislature enacts a provision it has in mind previous statutes relating in the same manner and should be construed together." She indicated that the aforementioned quotation was from Haughlin (ph) v. Inlandboatmen's Union of the Pacific. Ms. Cabana charged that the City [of Homer] has been forgotten and the 900 citizens have been forgotten as well. Number 2382 DR. VI JERREL, Ph.D., Alaskans Opposed to Annexation, testified via teleconference. Dr. Jerrel announced that she opposed HJR 18 because the 10 percent isn't constitutional. She expressed the need for the people in the area proposed for annexation to be allowed to vote. She charged that [HJR 18] violates the constitutional right to due process, as well as equal protection under the law. Furthermore, [HJR 18] violates civil rights [under the U.S. Constitution], as well as the Ninth Amendment. Dr. Jerrel, Ph.D., announced opposition to "this entire thing" as well as the proposed annex petition by the City of Homer. In conclusion, Dr. Jerrel, Ph.D. expressed the need to have the entire annexation process changed. Number 2244 ALEX FLYUM testified via teleconference. He mentioned that he has four businesses in Homer where he also owns seven or eight parcels of property. Mr. Flyum spoke in opposition to HJR 18. Mr. Flyum related his belief that "we are in the process of trying to cut state expenses, not add more ... by hiring more people to do this." He said that he believes that the process with the LBC takes [already addresses] everything. MICHAEL KENNEDY testified via teleconference. Although Mr. Kennedy agreed that [HJR 18] is a start in the right direction, he failed to see the logic in the 10 percent. He said, "I just heard your committee approve an annexation that covers 25 percent in population and area. And so, if you're going to approve something at 25 percent, I fail to see the logic of putting forward a resolution when you're going to require a vote of the people by 10 percent." He maintained that if HJR 18 is to be supported, then the committee would have to deny the City of Homer's annexation petition and allow Homer to start over and put the petition to a vote. Number 2074 REPRESENTATIVE SCALZI informed everyone that HJR 18 was drafted by he and Senator Torgerson as a means to [start discussion] and indicate to the LBC that there are some inadequacies in the petition process. He noted that the 10 percent is a starting point. In regard to why [the committee] would approve the current Homer annexation if [the committee] feels that 10 percent is adequate, Representative Scalzi pointed out that [the committee] is playing by the current rules under which there is no percentage. CO-CHAIR MEYER announced that the public hearing on HJR 18 would be closed. He also announced that HJR 18 would held. REPRESENTATIVE SCALZI agreed.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|