Legislature(2005 - 2006)CAPITOL 124
04/28/2005 08:00 AM House COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB142 | |
| HB189 | |
| SB142 | |
| HCR12 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HCR 12 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 189 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 142 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 142-REGIONAL SCHOOL BD LAND OWNERSHIP 8:08:56 AM CO-CHAIR OLSON announced that the first order of business would be CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 142(L&C), "An Act relating to ownership of land by regional school boards; and providing for an effective date." 8:09:13 AM JANE ALBERTS, Staff to Senator Con Bunde, Senate Labor and Commerce Standing Committee, Alaska State Legislature, informed the committee that currently two statutes for state ownership of airports are in conflict. She specified that [AS 02.15.020] requires that Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF) to conform with federal requirements so that the state can receive funding from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The other statute [AS 14.08.151(b)] provides regional school boards the opportunity to receive title to land used in relation to Rural Education Attendance Area (REAAs). Therefore, this legislation addresses the aforementioned statutory conflict. Ms. Alberts said that although the Alaska State Legislature clearly intended to allow REAAs greater control of their facilities through acquisition of title, there is no record that the legislature attended to do so at the cost of federal liability, significant loss of federal funds, and a degraded state airport system. She informed the committee that several regional schools are located on airport property and some are even close to active runways and airport infrastructure. At various times, these regional school boards have requested that DOT&PF convey full title to airport lands. The aforementioned has caused confusion in the Department of Education and Early Development (EED) and DOT&PF, and therefore has cost staff time and attorney costs to defend DOT&PF's title to its airport property. Ms. Alberts stated that this legislation will clarify the intent of the conveyance language to exclude airport properties from that statute [AS 14.08.151(b)]. Under SB 142, no schools will be required to move off airport lands, rather it will merely [prohibit] schools from gaining title to the airport lands in the future. 8:11:56 AM REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX inquired as to why a school would want to own an airport. MS. ALBERTS clarified that schools don't want to own an airport, but rather want to use some of the property belonging to the airport. Some of the smaller communities are limited in regard to where they can build or have school facilities. Therefore, the conflict is in regard to gaining title to land. If an airport needs extra land from the areas in conflict, this legislation will provide DOT&PF with the ability to say it can't let the school have title to the land because it's necessary for FAA purposes. REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked whether the airport could lease property to schools until the land is actually needed by the airport. MS. ALBERTS answered that she didn't believe so, but deferred to DOT&PF representatives. 8:13:38 AM KIP KNUDSON, Deputy Commissioner of Aviation, Office of the Commissioner, Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF), informed the committee that currently approximately 10 schools are leasing land on airport property from DOT&PF. Under state statute, the schools have the right to seek the title of the land. However, that would jeopardize the assurances made to the FAA that the state would retain its title. He noted that several schools are currently leasing land from DOT&PF. REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked whether those school districts could continue to lease the land from DOT&PF. MR. KNUDSON replied yes. 8:14:47 AM REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN asked if there are expansion plans for the airports that would cause the schools, at the time of expansion, to lose the ability to lease those lands. MR. KNUDSON said that if a school district is going to expand or build a new school, DOT&PF would work with EED and the school district to help them find land elsewhere. Usually when an expansion occurs, so long as it is moving away from the runway, DOT&PF continues to lease land to the school. However, DOT&PF generally tries to help the school find land off the airport site when there is a complete rebuild. REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN pointed out that a [March 24, 2005] letter from Commissioner Mike Barton, DOT&PF, states that some school districts have problems with this legislation. He inquired as to the problems that are leading to this legislation. MR. KNUDSON said he would characterize it as a bureaucratic problem for DOT&PF due to the conflict in statute. He informed the committee that there have been three to four instances that have resulted in using a couple years of staff time to determine a reasonable conclusion. 8:17:02 AM REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN inquired as to why these schools were built on airport land. He also inquired as to whether the state or the federal government owns the land. Representative Neuman pointed out that CSSB 142(L&C) only includes the land, not the buildings and structures; he inquired as to how that works. MR. KNUDSON explained that SB 142 included language in which DOT&PF wasn't interested. The current legislation only speaks to land title. He specified that DOT&PF doesn't want any buildings or anything else, the department merely needs to retain title to the land. With regard to why schools are located on airports, in many cases it's due to history and the increased FAA requirements for safety margins. In some areas, airport land is some of the only good land in the area. 8:18:39 AM REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX related her understanding that this legislation applies to REAAs as well as regular school districts. MR. KNUDSON agreed. 8:19:59 AM CO-CHAIR OLSON, upon determining no one else wished to testify, closed public testimony. 8:20:06 AM REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN asked whether this could impact the ability of schools to continue the way they currently operate. MR. KNUDSON answered that he didn't anticipate any problems with future plans for schools because it involves two state agencies working to achieve two fairly high goals. He mentioned that currently there are no conflicts. 8:21:07 AM REPRESENTATIVE SALMON highlighted that many small villages, such as Beaver, don't have access to public lands. He asked if [those present] have any solutions for the future. MR. KNUDSON informed the committee that large portions of the community of Beaver are on airport lands, but it's land that isn't required for future airport needs. In this case, DOT&PF has requested removal of the federal reverter clause in order to return the land to the community. Where the aforementioned is possible, DOT&PF is willing to do so. Mr. Knudson surmised that schools will be located on airport land when that's the only land available. 8:22:42 AM REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX inquired as to how this legislation impacts schools that aren't within REAAs because AS 14.08.151, which is being amended by this legislation, speaks to REAAS. However, the earlier mentioned memorandum from Commissioner Barton specifies an area, Iliamna, which is not an REAA but has been involved in the conflict this legislation attempts to address. MR. KNUDSON related his understanding that the statute addresses REAAs. 8:23:51 AM PAM LEWIS, Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF), confirmed that this legislation addresses only REAAs, not organized school districts. MR. KNUDSON informed the committee that in statute organized school districts don't have the ability to request title from state agencies. MS. LEWIS agreed, noting that was her understanding as well. 8:24:31 AM REPRESENTATIVE SALMON recalled that several years ago there was a lagoon problem in Chalkyitsik, where the school was built on the hill next to the airport. However, later an airport expansion down the middle of the school district resulted in the lagoon being left on DOT&PF property. The lagoon was leaky and ran down the airport, which the community viewed as a safety hazard. No one, the school district or DOT&PF, would take care of the problem. He asked if this legislation would address who is responsible for facilities located on airport, DOT&PF, property. MR. KNUDSON replied no, but he offered to research the aforementioned situation and speak with Representative Salmon about his findings. 8:26:16 AM REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN requested that the committee take a closer look at how [this legislation] will impact the ability of schools to operate in the future. He expressed the need to talk with some of the school boards of the schools directly impacted by this. 8:27:00 AM CO-CHAIR OLSON announced that SB 142 would be held over. MS. ALBERTS related that Eddy Jeans, EED, has contacted all the impacted school districts and has received no negative comments. [The committee returned to SB 142 later in the meeting.] SB 142-REGIONAL SCHOOL BD LAND OWNERSHIP 8:51:34 AM CO-CHAIR OLSON returned the committee's attention to SB 142. 8:51:38 AM EDDY JEANS, Director, School Finance, Department of Education and Early Development (EED), responded to earlier questions by offering the following information. This legislation, SB 142, only applies to Rural Education Attendance Areas (REAAs) school districts. He informed the committee that currently there are about seven schools that have been built on airport land. He related his understanding that this legislation wouldn't kick those schools off that land. When a new school is built in a community, typically the district requests that the old school be transferred to the community for the community's use. However, that wouldn't be allowed under this legislation. Mr. Jeans clarified that the [department] could continue to transfer the building, but the lands on which the building sits couldn't be transferred. Therefore, if the community wanted to use that building, it would have to move it off of the airport land. 8:52:53 AM CO-CHAIR OLSON restated an earlier question regarding whether all of the 10 sites have been contacted. MR. JEANS replied no. 8:53:22 AM REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN suggested that in the future perhaps there should be focus on regional learning centers. He reiterated his desire to talk with the school districts that would be impacted by this legislation. 8:54:01 AM REPRESENTATIVE SALMON asked if Chalkyitsik is included in the areas in which schools have been built on airport land. MR. JEANS replied yes. 8:54:20 AM REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN said that his staff could prepare a report regarding the feeling of other districts. 8:54:40 AM MR. JEANS related his experience that when dealing with construction of new schools, typically it isn't on airport land. The issue that will surface is in regard to the transfer of the surplus building to the community; some communities are adamant that they want those building for other community use. However, the buildings are on airport property and are no longer being used for school purposes. He specified that the aforementioned isn't impacting the educational program within those communities because that's addressed differently. 8:55:35 AM REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN highlighted the community of Galena as an example because the town wants to acquire and utilize some of the unutilized air force base buildings. Therefore, he questioned why such buildings would be torn down. 8:56:29 AM CO-CHAIR OLSON announced that SB 142 would be held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|