Legislature(2005 - 2006)BELTZ 211
03/29/2006 01:30 PM Senate COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB248 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 248 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 248-ADMINISTRATIVE BOROUGHS/BOROUGH GRANTS/
1:33:57 PM
CHAIR BERT STEDMAN announced SB 248 to be up for consideration.
He noted that this was the second hearing on the bill and he
asked the sponsor to recap the bill.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS, Sponsor, explained that SB 248 establishes
a new, administrative, class of borough and removes several of
the disincentives for areas to organize. He described the bill
as a stepping-stone in the overall goal of helping areas
organize into second-class, first-class, home-rule, or unified
boroughs. He advised that this provides unorganized areas with
another option and that no area would be forced to form an
administrative borough.
CHAIR STEDMAN added that administrative boroughs would have an
elective body with powers of planning and land use. They could
levy sales or user tax, but not property tax and they would not
have the power to provide education funds.
1:35:28 PM
SCOTT BRANDT-ERICHSEN, Member of the Alaska Advisory Commission
on Local Government and Borough Attorney for the Ketchikan
Gateway Borough, described the bill as a reasonable compromise
and a viable means to transition unorganized areas into
organized boroughs. He urged the committee to move the bill.
CHAIR STEDMAN noted that Mr. Brandt-Erichsen spent numerous
hours working on the legislation. He asked for public testimony.
1:36:48 PM
Mike Black, Director, Division of Community Advocacy, Department
of Commerce, Community & Economic Development (DCCED), testified
that the department supports the bill because it provides strong
incentives for borough formation to areas that might otherwise
not find organizing attractive.
He noted that the department had questions about Section 19
relating to the organizational grant amounts.
1:38:34 PM
CHAIR STEDMAN said the financial aspects of the bill would be
thoroughly scrutinized in the Senate Finance Committee.
MR. BLACK expressed agreement with the explanation and added
that DCCED had several other housekeeping amendments and he
would provide those to the committee.
LISA VON BARGEN, Member of the Alaska Advisory Commission of
Local Government and Director of Community and Economic
Development for the City of Valdez, stated that the legislation
moves in the direction of encouraging the development of
regional government, but that she, the City of Valdez, and other
municipalities are concerned that the language in Section 14(c)
is suggestive of having to use model borough boundaries. She
urged the committee to consider changing that language because
as currently worded it places the onus on the people that are
applying for consideration for borough incorporation to prove
otherwise.
1:41:38 PM
FORMER SENATOR ARLISS STURGULEWSKI, Anchorage, advised that she
had followed the work of the advisory committee closely and she
would urge the committee to move the bill paying particular
attention that the grant section remains in the bill. She stated
the view that in many parts of unorganized borough self-
government and participation is lacking, coordination is absent,
and delivery of public services and regional planning is
inadequate. Because the state isn't coordinating its services on
a regional basis many people have turned to Washington D.C. for
community needs, but the atmosphere in Washington DC has changed
and the state isn't going to see grants coming in.
She applauded the work that has been done but said she would
prefer to see this in law because it's long overdue.
1:45:16 PM
ALAN LeMASTER, Gakona Junction Village Owner, testified that he
lives in the Copper Valley, an area that is a potential borough.
Historically the area has been against organizing into a
borough, but many of the key arguments against organizing have
been addressed in SB 248. Now people are asking about the
state's motive because in the past the argument was to get rural
areas to organize so they would contribute to education.
1:47:23 PM
SENATOR GARY STEVENS responded there is no hidden agenda and no
"gotcha" at the end of the process. The notion is to assist
areas to become an administrative borough because few areas have
volunteered to organize and efforts to force organization
haven't been very successful. He acknowledged that it's a
different approach to offer areas of encouragement or "carrots"
to take a first step. Administrative borough will have an
assembly to provide focus and make it easier to deal with land
issues. In time, as the economy develops, it's almost inevitable
that those areas will move on and become full-fledged boroughs.
1:49:10 PM
MR. LeMASTER replied he would describe this as a "baby step"
into borough formation and an area could remain in that status
forever or, once it became more financially stable, it could
move on and become a full-fledged borough.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS said the term "baby step" seemed
appropriate. He added that the grant is for just three years and
although some areas wouldn't be suited for administrative
boroughs it would make sense for others.
1:52:10 PM
DAVE TRANTHAM, Bethel, said in his area he has been unsuccessful
in finding support for the bill for two primary reasons. First,
Section 14 relating to borough boundaries is objectionable
because the Local Boundary Commission has set a model borough
boundary that is the same as the Lower Kuskokwim School
District, which would include Bethel and twenty-five other
communities. The other problem relates to finding a way to
sustain borough government because there is no state land within
50 miles.
CHAIR STEDMAN recessed the meeting to the call of the chair at
1:55:22 PM.
CHAIR STEDMAN reconvened the meeting at 3:07:38 PM.
Chair Stedman announced that Senator Wagoner had joined the
meeting and a quorum was present. He asked for a motion.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS motioned to report SB 248, \F version, and
attached fiscal note(s) from committee with individual
recommendations. There being no objection, it was so ordered.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|