Legislature(1993 - 1994)

02/23/1993 01:00 PM CRA

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
  SJR 20:  DISAPPROVE PALMER BOUNDARY CHANGES                                  
  CHAIRMAN OLBERG reconvened the meeting at 1:30 p.m. and                      
  brought forth SJR 20.  He pointed out that no action could                   
  be taken on the resolution since it had not been "read                       
  across the floor" yet as had been anticipated.                               
  Number 392                                                                   
  AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS, testified on SJR 20 saying, "This                      
  resolution has raised some very interesting issues for us,                   
  ...the reason it is before you is that the population of the                 
  area being annexed is so small that the individual there                     
  would be overwhelmed if it was done through the other                        
  process which is the local election.  ...The Commission's                    
  work is probably going to be looking at more annexations                     
  across the state and it's going to be generated because of                   
  the decline in state revenues.  The gentleman in this case                   
  is receiving some city services already."                                    
  CHAIRMAN OLBERG reminded the committee any action on SJR 20                  
  would have to wait until next week when it was properly                      
  before committee.                                                            
  REPRESENTATIVE TOOHEY asked the specific mil rate and how                    
  much the property taxes would increase if the Palmer                         
  annexation proceeded.                                                        
  LEE WYATT, EYAK CORPORATION, introduced himself as a former                  
  manager of the Mat-Su Borough and explained that if this                     
  property was annexed, there would be a city mil rate added                   
  to the existing borough mil rate.                                            
  Number 475                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE TOOHEY reiterated her question.                               
  MR. WYATT was unsure but thought the mil rate was probably                   
  around 14.                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE TOOHEY asked how large the proposed Palmer                    
  annexation was.                                                              
  PHILLIPS, PRIME SPONSOR OF SJR 20, testified that there were                 
  five property owners that held 7.5 acres of land in the                      
  proposed Palmer annexation.  She described the interests and                 
  testimony of the property owners in the Senate Community and                 
  Regional Affairs meeting of February 9, 1993.  She said,                     
  "Basically, it's sort of a controversy between the neighbors                 
  there, the people across the street from that particular                     
  piece of property."                                                          
  Number 514                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES requested a more thorough background                   
  presentation from Senator Phillips at the next hearing of                    
  SJR 20.                                                                      
  CHAIRMAN OLBERG introduced Mr. Wyatt as a representative                     
  from the Cordova Residents Against the Cordova Proposed                      
  REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE confirmed there was currently no                        
  legislation drafted regarding the proposed Cordova                           
  MR. WYATT introduced himself as a representative of "the                     
  land interest of the Eyak Corporation" and also "to                          
  represent the inhabitants of the area outside the                            
  jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Cordova."                           
  MR. WYATT testified, "We are late for one reason, because we                 
  tried to follow the procedures of DCRA in regards to the                     
  time frames in which this annexation petition came forward.                  
  Originally the deadline for the petition to be submitted was                 
  waived so that the City of Cordova could submit it at a                      
  later date than what they like, which was the first of                       
  March.  July 1, the annexation rules changed and it seemed                   
  like the DCRA staff and the Local Boundary Commission                        
  fluctuated between the two sets of rules, the old ones and                   
  the new ones.  So we were somewhat confused as to what exact                 
  standards and regulations we were actually operating under.                  
  Prime example being that in order to get this petition to                    
  the legislature within the first ten days, they actually                     
  held a reconsideration meeting on the day before and got it                  
  in on the tenth day, but yet there's a 30-day                                
  reconsideration period that runs past that point.  There                     
  were three reconsiderations that were presented.  They were                  
  not acknowledged..."                                                         
  MR. WYATT continued, "We're in favor of the annexation                       
  basically, but we're not in favor of the procedures that                     
  were followed.  What we would like to see is the possibility                 
  of delay in the annexation so that the city and the folks                    
  that are involved could get together and work out a plan."                   
  MR. WYATT added, "So we see it not only as a chance to get                   
  some revenues from outside the city but also an opportunity                  
  to possibly lock up some economic development on the part of                 
  the Native community as well.  Originally, the Eyak                          
  Corporation was not allowed to select lands within a two                     
  mile limit of the city boundary, which is now seven and a                    
  half square miles, and they are hoping to annex out to an                    
  area that's 68 square miles.  ...It's a land grab under the                  
  guise of future planning.  We're just hopeful that maybe                     
  perhaps another resolution could come forward for the                        
  disapproval of this annexation so that it could come back                    
  next year with a really workable plan.".                                     
  Number 622                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN OLBERG asked, "Is your lawsuit asking for a stay of                 
  the proceedings or a delay of the imposition or is it asking                 
  to have it overturned?"                                                      
  MR. WYATT replied, "All three."                                              
  MR. GERAGHTY said, "Anytime we go about drawing lines on a                   
  map, we start getting into controversy."                                     
  REPRESENTATIVE TOOHEY asked about the property's location in                 
  relation to the Copper River Highway.                                        
  CHAIRMAN OLBERG described the location.                                      
  Number 640                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN OLBERG adjourned the meeting at 1:49 p.m.                           

Document Name Date/Time Subjects