04/04/2024 01:30 PM Senate COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation(s): Local Boundary Commission Overview | |
| SB174 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HCR 8 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 252 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 174 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
April 4, 2024
2:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Forrest Dunbar, Chair
Senator Elvi Gray-Jackson (via teleconference)
Senator Jesse Bjorkman
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Donald Olson, Vice Chair
Senator Cathy Giessel
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION(S): LOCAL BOUNDARY COMMISSION OVERVIEW
- HEARD
SENATE BILL NO. 174
"An Act relating to the Honor and Remember Flag and the Honor
and Sacrifice Flag."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 8
Honoring United States military veterans exposed to Agent Orange
during the Vietnam War; and expressing gratitude for the
courageous service of those veterans to the United States.
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
SENATE BILL NO. 252
Honoring United States military veterans exposed to Agent Orange
during the Vietnam War; and expressing gratitude for the
courageous service of those veterans to the United States.
- REMOVED FROM AGENDA
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 174
SHORT TITLE: HONOR & REMEMBER/HONOR & SACRIFICE FLAGS
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) BJORKMAN
01/16/24 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/12/24
01/16/24 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/16/24 (S) CRA
04/02/24 (S) CRA WAIVED PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE,RULE
23
04/04/24 (S) CRA AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
WITNESS REGISTER
SANDRA MOLLER, Director
Division of Community and Regional Affairs (DCRA)
Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Delivered a Local Boundary Commission
Overview.
JEDIDIAH SMITH, Staff
Local Boundary Commission
Division of Community and Regional Affairs
Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the Local Boundary
Commission Overview.
LAURA ACHEE, Staff
Senator Jesse Bjorkman
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the sectional analysis on SB 174.
DAVID CASWELL, Director
Honor and Remember Alaska Chapter
Sterling, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave invited testimony in support of SB 174.
ACTION NARRATIVE
2:00:26 PM
CHAIR FORREST DUNBAR called the Senate Community and Regional
Affairs Standing Committee meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. Present
at the call to order were Senators Gray-Jackson (via
teleconference), Bjorkman, and Chair Dunbar.
^PRESENTATION(S): LOCAL BOUNDARY COMMISSION OVERVIEW
PRESENTATION(S): LOCAL BOUNDARY COMMISSION OVERVIEW
2:01:29 PM
CHAIR DUNBAR announced a Local Boundary Commission overview. He
invited Director Moller to put herself on the record and begin
the presentation.
2:02:31 PM
SANDRA MOLLER, Director, Division of Community and Regional
Affairs (DCRA), Department of Commerce, Community and Economic
Development, Anchorage, Alaska, delivered an overview on the
Local Boundary Commission.
2:03:41 PM
MS. MOLLER moved to slide 2 and said the Local Boundary
Commission (LBC) was directed to be established by Alaska's
Constitution:
Article X, Sec. 12 Alaska's Constitution
"A local boundary commission or board shall be
established by law in the executive branch of state
government. The commission or board may consider any
proposed local government boundary change. It may
present proposed changes to the legislature during
the first ten days of any regular session. The
change shall become effective forty-five days after
presentation or at the end of the session, whichever
is earlier, unless disapproved by a resolution
concurred in by a majority of the members of each
house. The commission or board, subject to law, may
establish procedures whereby boundaries may be
adjusted by local action."
MS. MOLLER stated that historical research and review of
discussions from the Constitutional Convention revealed a strong
belief in local governance at the local level, and that the
state have broad interest. She explained that the Local Boundary
Commission (LBC) was created to advance broad public interest in
establishing and altering municipal governments. The Alaska
Supreme Court, in an early piece of case law, affirmed the LBC's
role in deciding matters of statewide interest. She said the
advantage of this method lies in placing the process at a level
where area wide or statewide needs can be taken into account.
Arguments for and against boundary change can be analyzed
objectively by placing authority in a third party. She opined
that this is a key thread of the LBC on a statewide basis.
2:05:15 PM
MS. MOLLER moved to slide 3 which showed the following
appointees, each selected from their respective judicial
district, and the chair who is selected at-large from anywhere
within Alaska:
• John Harrington, First Judicial District, Ketchikan
• Ely Cyrus, Second Judicial District, Kiana
• Richard "Clayton" Trotter, Third Judicial District, Eagle River
• Clay Walker, Fourth Judicial District, Fairbanks
• Larry Wood, Chair, At Large, Eagle River
She noted that each commissioner represents the entire state,
not just the Judicial District they are from. This is done for
geographical diversity and to form an independent, objective
board that can consider both local and statewide interests and
needs. She said that for 12 of the last 37 years, two LBC seats
were filled by members from the unorganized borough. In 27 of
the last 37 years, at least one seat on the LBC has been filled
by a resident of the unorganized borough. She mentioned that
while not a prerequisite, it is helpful if the five volunteers
have a working knowledge or experience with municipal
government.
2:06:47 PM
MS. MOLLER moved to slide 4 and said the following are the types
of local governments in Alaska:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Local Government in Alaska
Types of Local Government Example
Cities
First Class City City of Dillingham
Second Class City City of Bethel
Home Rule City City of Cordova
Boroughs
Unified Home Rule Municipality of Borough
Anchorage
Non-Unified Home Rule Northwest Arctic Borough
Borough
First Class Borough Municipality of Skagway
Second Class Borough Matanuska-Susitna Borough
2:07:16 PM
MS. MOLLER noted that Alaska has 11 Home Rule cities, three of
which are in the unorganized borough: Cordova, Valdez, and
Nenana. There are also 18 first-class cities, 13 of which are in
the unorganized borough, and first-class cities in the
unorganized borough are required to operate school districts.
Alaska has 211 second-class cities, and those in the unorganized
borough are prohibited by law from operating school in the
school district.
2:07:57 PM
MS. MOLLER moved to slide 5 and spoke to the power of boroughs:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Mandatory Areawide Powers
All boroughs have three mandatory area-wide
powers:
• AS 29.35.160Each borough constitutes a borough
school district and establishes, maintains, and
operates a system of public schools on an
areawide basis
• AS 29.35.170 A borough shall assess and
collect property, sales, and use taxes that are
levied in its boundaries
• AS 29.25.180 shall provide for planning,
platting, and land use regulation
2:08:31 PM
MS. MOLLER moved to slide 6 and provided a summary of borough
formation in Alaska. She mentioned the LBC is currently drafting
a preliminary report for a potential borough in the Hoonah
district:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Borough Formation in Alaska
1961- Bristol Bay Borough
1963- Mandatory Boroughs Act (Ketchikan Gateway, City
and Borough of Juneau, City and Borough of
Sitka, Kodiak Island Borough, Kenai Peninsula
Borough, Municipality of Anchorage, Matanuska-
Susitna Borough, Fairbanks North Star Borough)*
1968- Haines Borough
1971- North Slope Borough
1986- Northwest Arctic Borough
1987- Aleutians East Borough
1989- Lake and Peninsula Borough
1990- Denali Borough
1992- City and Borough of Yakutat
2007- Municipality of Skagway
2010- City and Borough of Wrangell
2013- Petersburg Borough
* Legislatively mandated
2:09:33 PM
MS. MOLLER moved to slide 7 and said the map illustrates the
breadth and depth of the unorganized borough, which covers 60
percent of Alaska's landmass but contains about 10 percent of
its population. She referenced a quote "land does not vote,"
highlighting that voting is done by people, not land. This
underscores the concern that having a member of the LBC from the
unorganized borough does reduce the potential pool to 10 percent
of the population.
2:10:41 PM
MS. MOLLER moved to slide 8, a map of Regional Education
Attendance Areas (REAAs), and stated that Alaska does not have
counties, but federal programs and agencies like to categorize
land areas. REAAs, like counties, work with federal agencies.
She explained that programs like Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT)
and forest receipts are mechanisms for allocating federal funds
across regional areas. She noted that there are 19 REAAs in
Alaska. The map displays school districts in the unorganized
borough. Each REAA has its own administration and school board
elected from the communities within its boundaries. All REAAs
are funded entirely by the legislature since second class cities
are prohibited from operating a school district.
2:11:52 PM
MS. MOLLER moved to slide 9, Changing Local Government, Types of
Boundary Changes, and said she would discuss the types of
actions the LBC can take, provide examples, and explain how
boundaries are changed. She noted that the LBC is currently
considering the Hoonah Borough and Corporation petition, a
process that typically takes a year. She highlighted that the
LBC recently approved the City of Tanana's request to reclassify
as a second-class city. This action followed a new process
signed into law last session, which streamlines the procedure
but removes the consideration of the state's best interest from
the process.
[Original punctuation provided.]
Changing Local Government
Types of Boundary Changes
Incorporation Annexation Detachment
Dissolution Reclassification Deunification
Merger Consolidation Unification
2:12:39 PM
MS. MOLLER moved to slide 10, Boundary Changes: Incorporation
and said the first type of boundary change, similar to what
Hoonah is pursuing, is basic incorporation. This occurs when an
unincorporated community seeks to become a municipality by
establishing city boundaries, rules, and a charter for
governance. She noted that the most recent city incorporation
approved by the Local Boundary Commission (LBC) was Whale Pass
in 2017.
2:13:17 PM
MS. MOLLER moved to slide 11, Boundary Changes: Annexation and
explained that annexation occurs when a municipality adds
additional land to its boundaries. The most recent annexation
considered by the LBC was from the City of Soldotna in 2020.
That action is currently under review by the Alaska Supreme
Court following an appeal of the LBC's decision on the petition.
She noted that the Soldotna annexation petition initially
followed the legislative review method, but during
deliberations, the LBC converted it to a local action method. A
Supreme Court decision on the matter is expected this year.
2:14:03 PM
MS. MOLLER moved to slide 12, Boundary Changes: Detachment, and
said this occurs when part of a municipality seeks to separate
from itself, a process that is fairly rare. She noted that in
1985, part of the North Slope Borough was detached to form the
Northwest Arctic Borough. Additionally, in 2015, the City of
Fairbanks detached a 48.5-acre parcel. While uncommon, she
emphasized that detachment has occurred.
2:14:47 PM
CHAIR DUNBAR stated his belief that Eaglexit is seeking a
detachment of the Eagle River-Chugiak area. He asked what step
in the process Eaglexit is currently in.
MS. MOLLER replied the petition has not been received. However,
the department is working with Eaglexit and has received a
document for technical review.
2:15:35 PM
JEDIDIAH SMITH, Staff, Local Boundary Commission, Division of
Community and Regional Affairs, Department of Commerce,
Community and Economic Development (DCCED), Anchorage, Alaska,
stated that regular discussions have been held with Eaglexit,
and they have submitted some draft information. However, nothing
has been officially filed with the Local Boundary Commission
(LBC).
2:16:04 PM
CHAIR DUNBAR raised questions about municipal assets within the
land proposed for detachment by Eaglexit, noting that
significant investment has been made in these assets over the
years. He cited examples such as the Anchorage Water Utility
(AWU), including its reservoir, purification facility, and
associated pipelines running through the proposed area. He also
mentioned the Anchorage landfill. He asked how the LBC and the
department address the fate of these assets during a detachment
process.
2:16:59 PM
MR. SMITH acknowledged that the detachment and incorporation
proposed by Eaglexit is highly complex. He stated that there is
no clear answer at this point, as the process requires
consultation with the Municipality of Anchorage. As part of
their petition, Eaglexit must submit a transition plan detailing
how municipal assets would be handled. He emphasized that the
level of detail required is significant, and he has not yet seen
that information or those details from Eaglexit. He assured that
the LBC will consider all of these factors as part of the
process.
2:18:25 PM
MS. MOLLER slide 13, Boundary Changes: Dissolution, which states
dissolution is when a municipality ceases to exist, and a
community may remain in its place. She said dissolutions are
very rare but have recently occurred when forming a new borough
government. She cited Skagway, Wrangell, and Petersburg as the
most recent examples of dissolution in favor of either a unified
or non-unified Home Rule borough. In the 1990s, the state
initiated the dissolutions of several cities that had become
ineffective due to years of inactivity, not just a few months.
She explained that the department is required to conduct a
thorough investigation before recommending dissolution to the
LBC. She noted that, in some cases, a city is formed but later
decides it no longer wants to be a municipality, leading to its
dissolution.
2:19:33 PM
MS. MOLLER moved to slide 14, Boundary Changes:
Reclassification, and stated Tanana is an example of a first
class city changing to a second class city. She noted it is rare
to have a city downgraded. She said a first class city adopting
a Home Rule charter is not an LBC process. A city can do this
through a vote of its residents.
2:20:10 PM
MS. MOLLER moved to slide 15, Boundary Changes: Unification and
stated that the Municipality of Anchorage, the City and Borough
of Sitka, the City and Borough of Juneau, and the City and
Borough of Wrangell are the only unified Home Rule boroughs in
Alaska.
2:20:37 PM
MS. MOLLER moved to slide 16: LBC Process, and stated that
boundary changes, incorporation, and municipal governance are
serious matters that follow a lengthy process outlined in
statute and regulations. She explained that the process
typically includes three main opportunities for public comment.
The first occurs when a petition is accepted for filing. The
second happens after the preliminary report is issued, which is
the current stage for Hoonah. The department has accepted
Hoonah's petition, and staff are working on the preliminary
report. The third opportunity for public comment occurs during a
public hearing held in a community within the proposed boundary,
where public testimony is received before the LBC.
2:22:04 PM
MS. MOLLER moved to slide 17: LBC Staff Role and said that
answering questions for Eaglexit is an example of the staff's
role. She noted that LBC staff also respond to questions from
commissioners.
[Original punctuation provided.]
LBC Staff Role
(3 AAC 110.425)
• LBC Staff serves as an advisor to the LBC. May
not act in an advocacy capacity as a petitioner.
• Provides technical assistance, information, and
forms to petitioners, respondents, and interested
persons with procedural questions.
• Ensures the commission is fully and accurately
informed by providing new or additional
information that supplements questions or refutes
information provided by a petitioner, respondent,
or other person.
2:22:31 PM
MS. MOLLER moved to slide to slide 18: What LBC Staff Can Do for
You and said more important to know is what LBC staff do not do.
In addition to handling inquiries, the staff produce an annual
report for the legislature. Staff do not keep ordinances for
municipalities, amended charts, or track land surveyors.
Questions on these topics are referred to the local
municipality, which has the most up-to-date information on their
boundaries.
[Original punctuation provided.]
What LBC Staff Can Do For You
Certificates
• Municipal certificates
• Records of official municipal boundaries and
classifications
Historical information
• Petition information and materials
• Boundary change information since territorial
days
• Constitutional and legal historical information
• Some maps
Other information
• Municipal boundaries
• LBC publications
• REAA boundaries
• Original Village Corporation Charters
What we do not keep
• Ordinances
• Amended Charters
• Land Surveys
2:23:48 PM
CHAIR DUNBAR suggested that a piece of legislation before the
committee is partly driven by concerns about a recent petition
or plebiscite. He requested more information about what took
place in that context.
2:24:17 PM
MS. MOLLER said she was unsure if she understood the question
and asked if it referred to the last LBC meeting where additions
were made to the agenda.
2:24:31 PM
CHAIR DUNBAR said he was unsure but recalled there was another
action in addition to the Hoonah Borough petition, though the
details were escaping him. He suggested that this action may
have influenced the introduction of the bill to change the
composition of the Local Boundary Commission (LBC). He asked if
there had been any controversial LBC actions in the past year.
2:25:02 PM
MS. MOLLER stated that the term "controversial" would need to be
defined, as people can have differing perspectives for,
against, or neutral on various issues. She explained that this
is why she began the presentation with the origins of the LBC,
emphasizing the founders' intent and the constitutional
framework for addressing governance as the state grows and
evolves.
MS. MOLLER noted that under current statute, LBC membership
includes representatives from the four judicial districts and
one at-large member. She suggested that the proposed change
might be related to specifying the location from which the fifth
member must be selected. While she could not speak to the
sponsor's motivation, she emphasized that each LBC commissioner
represents the entire state, not just their judicial district.
She pointed out that if the bill is passed as proposed, it would
significantly reduce the pool of eligible volunteers from the
entire state population to about 60,000 people.
2:27:13 PM
CHAIR DUNBAR thanked Ms. Moller for the presentation.
2:27:15 PM
At ease.
SB 174-HONOR & REMEMBER/HONOR & SACRIFICE FLAGS
2:28:44 PM
CHAIR DUNBAR reconvened the meeting and announced the
consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 174 "An Act relating to the
Honor and Remember Flag and the Honor and Sacrifice Flag."
The intention is to hear a brief introduction, the sectional
analysis, invited testimony, and public testimony on SB 174.
2:29:15 PM
SENATOR BJORKMAN speaking as the sponsor of SB 174, explained
that the bill seeks to recognize the "Honor and Remember" and
"Honor and Sacrifice" flags as state symbols. These flags honor
the service of members of the armed forces and first responders
who serve their communities. He paraphrased the following
sponsor statement:
[Original punctuation provided.]
The loss of a family member is difficult, made even
more difficult when that person was lost in the line
of duty. Senate Bill 174, "An Act relating to the
Honor and Remember Flag and the Honor and Sacrifice
Flag," would create state symbols that can be
displayed to recognize the sacrifice of those lost in
the line of duty while serving in the U.S. armed
forces, or as a police officer or firefighter, and
their families.
While monuments and memorials have been built to
recognize those who lost their lives in service to
their country or community, fewer than five percent of
Americans will ever see them. Creating the Honor and
Remember and Honor and Sacrifice Flags will provide an
official emblem that recognizes with dignity and
respect those that have offered the greatest
sacrifice, as well as the ongoing loss that their
families must endure. Twenty-seven states have adopted
the Honor and Remember Flag as their states' symbol of
recognition for military service members that have
died in the line of duty, protecting, and defending
our liberties.
SB 174 designates in state law the forms these flags
must take, as well as where and when they may be
flown. Implementation of the bill would not create
additional costs for the State of Alaska, as it
designates when and where the flags may be displayed
but does not require State offices to do so.
2:31:29 PM
LAURA ACHEE, staff, Senator Jesse Bjorkman, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, presented the sectional analysis on
SB 174, paraphrased as follows:
{Original punctuation provided.]
SB 174 Honor & Remember/Honor & Sacrifice Flags
Ver. B Sectional Analysis
Section 1 Adds a new section AS 44.09.097 to
designate the Honor and Remember Flag as an official
symbol of the state to recognize and honor members of
the armed forces of the United States who have died in
the line of duty and their families, designate the
design of the flag, and designate when and where the
flag may be flown. This section includes direction
that an employee may not be required to report to work
solely for the purpose of displaying the flag and
gives the Commissioner of Administration authority to
adopt any necessary regulations.
Section 2 Adds a new section AS 44.09.099 to
designate the Honor and Sacrifice Flag as an official
symbol of the state to recognize and honor police
officers and firefighters that have died in the line
of duty and their families, designate the design of
the flag, and designate when and where the flag may be
flown. This section includes direction that an
employee may not be required to report to work solely
for the purpose of displaying the flag and gives the
Commissioner of Administration authority to adopt any
necessary regulations.
2:32:54 PM
CHAIR DUNBAR announced invited testimony on SB 174.
2:33:03 PM
DAVID CASWELL, Director, Honor and Remember Alaska Chapter,
Sterling, Alaska, gave invited testimony in support of SB 174.
provided a brief work history including 13 years as director and
ambassador of the Alaska chapter of Honor and Remember. He said
he supports adopting the Honor and Remember flags as a state
symbol. He noted that in the 247-year history of the United
States, 1.3 million military personnel have died in the line of
duty.
MR. CASWELL explained that Honor and Remember was established on
Memorial Day 2008 as a national organization dedicated to
honoring the memory of fallen military service members. The
Honor and Sacrifice flag was first presented on the 15th
anniversary of 9/11 to honor fallen first responders, including
firefighters, law enforcement, and EMTs. Nationally, more than
5,000 personalized Honor and Remember flags have been presented
to Gold Star families, and he has personally presented 21 of
these flags to Alaska families.
MR. CASWELL stated that through his efforts, five Veteran
Service Organizations, three fraternal organizations, two civic
organizations, two boroughs, and six cities in Alaska and Texas
have adopted the Honor and Remember flag. He noted that
nationally, 36 organizations, including NASCAR, Goodyear,
Spartan, Sargento, Norwegian Cruise Line, GEICO Insurance, and
USAA, support Honor and Remember through ongoing sponsorship.
2:35:49 PM
MR. CASWELL shared the story of Tony Lutz, who died in December
2005. His father, George Lutz, visited other military families
who had lost loved ones and identified two common concerns: that
the sacrifice of their loved ones would not be in vain and that
their sacrifice would not be forgotten. Seeing no national
symbol to honor this sacrifice, George Lutz conceived the Honor
and Remember flag. MR. C emphasized that while the United States
is a "nation of flags" with flags for states, military
branches, and various organizations no single symbol exists to
recognize the sacrifice of military service members.
MR. CASWELL urged the State of Alaska to adopt the Honor and
Remember flag as a state symbol, aligning with House Joint
Resolution 53 passed in 2010, which called for national adoption
of the flag. He stressed that adopting this flag as a symbol
would show the families of fallen service members that their
loved ones are not forgotten and that their sacrifice is honored
as part of the freedoms Americans enjoy daily.
2:38:43 PM
CHAIR DUNBAR opened public testimony on SB 174; finding none, he
closed public testimony.
2:39:53 PM
MR. CASWELL stated the flags are personalized by adding a
person's rank, name, date and place of death.
2:40:13 PM
CHAIR DUNBAR noted that SB 174 lists specific times, places, and
days for displaying the Honor and Remember and Honor and
Sacrifice flags. He asked whether this implies that the state is
limited to displaying the flags only on those specified days. He
acknowledged that private citizens can display the flags at any
time under First Amendment rights but questioned if the state
would be bound to follow the listed display schedule.
MR. CASWELL explained that the word "may" was included to
highlight significant dates for displaying the Honor and
Remember and Honor and Sacrifice flags. He clarified that the
flags can be flown every day, but the listed dates are preferred
for greater recognition and significance.
2:41:13 PM
CHAIR DUNBAR stated that it was good to have on the legislative
record that the list of dates is not a prohibition or an
exhaustive list of when the flags can be flown. He suggested
discussing offline whether to clarify this in the SB 174. He
also mentioned that he had a specific day in mind that he would
like to add to the list. He asked if the list of display dates
follows a national standard used by all states or if individual
states add dates that hold significance within their
communities.
MR. CASWELL replied that the dates listed in SB 174 are of
national importance. He noted that there is no limitation on
adding specific dates for the State of Alaska.
2:42:07 PM
CHAIR DUNBAR invited last remarks.
2:42:25 PM
SENATOR BJORKMAN thanked the committee for hearing SB 174 and
considering the adoption of the Honor and Remember and Honor and
Sacrifice flags as official state symbols. He emphasized that
the flags honor the service men and women who have made the
ultimate sacrifice while serving the country and their
communities.
2:42:58 PM
CHAIR DUNBAR held SB 174 in committee.
2:43:09 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Dunbar adjourned the Senate Community and Regional Affairs
Standing Committee meeting at [2:43 p.m.].
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| DCCED-DCRA Local Boundary Comission Presentation to SCRA 4.4.24.pdf |
SCRA 4/4/2024 1:30:00 PM |
Local Boundary Commisions |
| SB 174.pdf |
SCRA 4/4/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 174 |
| SB 174 Sponsor Statement Ver B.pdf |
SCRA 4/4/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 174 |
| SB 174 Support Document HJR 53 from 2010.pdf |
SCRA 4/4/2024 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 53 SB 174 |
| SB 174 Sectional Analysis Ver B.pdf |
SCRA 4/4/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 174 |
| SB 174 Support Document TAPS Magazine H&R Article.pdf |
SCRA 4/4/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 174 |
| SB 174 Support Document Resolutions of Support.pdf |
SCRA 4/4/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 174 |
| SB 174 Letters of Support Rcvd by 032824.pdf |
SCRA 4/4/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 174 |
| SB 174 Support Document Endorsements and Corporate Sponsors.pdf |
SCRA 4/4/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 174 |