Legislature(1997 - 1998)

02/18/1998 01:35 PM Senate CRA

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
txt
                                                                               
        SB 191 - EXCHANGE OF STATE TIDE AND SUBMERGED LAND                     
                                                                               
CHAIRMAN MACKIE brought SB 191 before the committee as the final               
order of business.  He turned the gavel over to Senator Phillips               
while he made a presentation on his bill.                                      
                                                                               
SENATOR MACKIE, prime sponsor of SB 191, said it was introduced as             
a companion bill to SB 190 to deal with some of these land issues.             
He explained that if a municipality needs an area for a watershed              
to the protect the community's water supply, or for a ferry                    
terminal, or for an airport, etc., the legislation gives DNR the               
option of exchanging tide and submerged lands for privately owned              
lands needed by a municipality.  He said it is another option that             
would allow DNR to have a little more flexibility to work with the             
private landowners to accomplish a public good.                                
                                                                               
Number 508                                                                     
                                                                               
RICK HARRIS, Senior Vice President, Sealaska Corporation, said                 
approximately 10 percent of the land in Southeast Alaska is in                 
private ownership, but most of that land is disproportionately                 
located in and around the state's municipalities.  Frequently,                 
these lands needed by the municipalities for essential municipal               
services  are held in private ownership.  Sealaska supports                    
creating a new mechanism that would allow the state to acquire                 
those essential municipal lands and at the same time allow the                 
private landowners to receive some other value that would serve                
their purposes and needs.                                                      
                                                                               
Mr. Harris said that under current law, DNR is already authorized              
to negotiate land exchanges, but these general land exchange                   
statutes are quite discretionary, and there is no vehicle through              
which either a municipality or another state agency can compel DNR             
to commit state-owned lands to improve public purposes.  Also,  the            
existing law lacks a clear statement of legislative priorities to              
guide DNR in the types of exchanges which the agency should focus.             
                                                                               
Concluding, Mr. Harris said Sealaska thinks SB 191 will provide an             
excellent opportunity to resolve some of the issues dealt with on              
a daily basis throughout the state.                                            
                                                                               
Number 475                                                                     
                                                                               
Responding to SENATOR PHILLIPS, MR. HARRIS explained Sealaska                  
Corporation owns municipal watersheds in Hydaburg, has selection               
rights in the municipal watershed of Craig,  and owns municipal                
watersheds in Kake and Hoonah.  On three different occasions,                  
Sealaska has attempted to find vehicles to create land exchanges               
that would allow them to move away from those watersheds and get               
them back into public ownership,  and in all cases, those efforts              
have been thwarted for a variety of reasons.                                   
                                                                               
Number 440                                                                     
                                                                               
JANE ANGVIK, Division of Land, Department of Natural Resources,                
testifying via teleconference from Anchorage, said DNR has some                
significant concerns about SB 191 in general, particularly with the            
prospect of transferring tidelands to private ownership.  The state            
has a legal responsibility under the public trust doctrine to                  
retain most tidelands and submerged lands.  This is because DNR is             
required, through the public trust doctrine, to manage the                     
shoreline lands for the use and enjoyment of all Alaskans.  She                
pointed out that most other states do not allow private individuals            
to acquire shore lands, and in the past, many that did so have                 
spent millions of dollars to reacquire these public lands.                     
                                                                               
Ms. Angvik said that while existing statutes allow DNR to transfer             
tidelands to municipalities, the Legislature specifically                      
prohibited municipalities from selling these lands.  She  pointed              
out that in the areas Mr. Harris made reference to, Hydaburg,                  
Craig, Kake, Hoonah, the state has very little land so that the                
possibility for land exchanges is very slim simply because they                
don't have anything to exchange.                                               
                                                                               
Ms. Angvik said the notion of public trust requires that access to             
the water, water allocation, and marine activities are protected in            
perpetuity in order to provide for the common use of the land.                 
                                                                               
Ms. Angvik also expressed concern with the issue of valuing                    
tidelands and trying to ascertain the value of tidelands relative              
to the value of uplands.  This is a challenge because there aren't             
very many tidelands that have actually been conveyed.                          
                                                                               
Ms. Angvik pointed out that Section 14(c)(3) of Alaska Native                  
Claims Settlement Act provided for local governments to have up to             
1,280 acres to use for municipal purposes, so while DNR is very                
supportive of providing some surety for municipal governments,                 
particularly in Southeast Alaska, to controlling their watersheds              
for example, they do not believe that conveying the tidelands is               
the methodology to pursue.                                                     
                                                                               
Number 364                                                                     
                                                                               
CHAIRMAN MACKIE pointed out that Section 14(c)(3) applies to                   
village corporations, not regional corporations like Sealaska.  The            
fact is that Sealaska Corporation physically owns the land and the             
watersheds of those other communities.  He questioned how Sealaska             
is supposed to be compensated or treated fairly in giving up those             
lands for a public purpose if DNR doesn't have any land to exchange            
and they are not able to do a land exchange with them.   He added              
that the purpose of SB 191 is to give DNR an option to deal with               
this issue, an option that they would have available to them in                
cases that make sense for absolute public need for essential public            
services.  MS. ANGVIK responded that the capacity of DNR to be able            
to evaluate the public interest and the long-term interests of the             
state is removed by the legislation and it is a mandatory                      
requirement.  While she understands the difficulty associated with             
community development, in particular Southeast Alaska where the                
vast majority of the land is owned by the federal government, she              
doesn't have alternative ways of compensating a private landowner              
if what they owned is the watershed.                                           
                                                                               
DICK MYLIUS, Division of Land, Department of Natural Resources ,               
also pointed out that if DNR transferred title it is no longer land            
managed by the department, and even though the landowner may                   
currently allow public use or access by the public, once it is                 
their land they can change that policy in the future.  In other                
states the courts have actually gone back and reacquired public                
trust lands where the public has lost access to the shoreline.                 
                                                                               
Number 301                                                                     
                                                                               
JOHN JENSEN, Department of Transportation & Public Facilities, said            
eminent domain proceedings are a tool DOT uses that provides the               
least cost to the public, and it is most often the most expedient              
way to acquire lands.                                                          
                                                                               
CHAIRMAN MACKIE asked Mr. Jensen if he saw this legislation as                 
something positive where DOT wouldn't have to come up with the                 
cash; that by working with the municipality and DNR they exchange              
some tidelands adjacent to an upland ownership which is all private            
anyway.  MR. JENSEN responded that it may be appropriate in some               
instances, but he agrees with Ms. Angvik that if the agency is                 
required to do that then it becomes somewhat of an obstacle to                 
development of that particular project.  He suggested it should be             
voluntary between both parties.                                                
                                                                               
Number 205                                                                     
                                                                               
LISA BLACHER, representing the Alaska Conservation Voice, stated               
their support for the protections in current law that ensure public            
access to navigable and public waters of the state.  They are                  
concerned that the proposed changes in SB 191 will weaken those                
protections by allowing state tide and submerged lands to become               
privately owned through land exchanges.                                        
                                                                               
Ms. Blacher stated that the Alaska Conservation Voice's concern  is            
with access because right now Alaska does have public access to all            
of these state tide and submerged lands.  At the very least, they              
would like the bill to limit the transfer of state tide and                    
submerged lands within municipal boundaries so as to not open up               
the entire state for that type of transfer opportunity.                        
                                                                               
There being no further testimony on SB 191, CHAIRMAN MACKIE said it            
was his intention to move the bill on to the Resources Committee.              
                                                                               
SENATOR DONLEY moved SB 191 and the accompanying fiscal note be                
passed out of committee with individual recommendations.  Hearing              
no objection, it was so ordered.                                               

Document Name Date/Time Subjects