Legislature(2005 - 2006)SENATE FINANCE 532
04/19/2005 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB142 | |
| SB160 | |
| SB100 | |
| SB70 | |
| SB112 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 142 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 160 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 131 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 70 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 100 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 112 | TELECONFERENCED | |
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."
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
Senator Bunde, the bill's sponsor by request of the Senate Labor
and Commerce Committee, stated that this bill would correct
"conflicting statutes regarding the ownership of land for State
airports". While "the Legislature clearly intended to allow
regional school boards the option of greater control of their
facilities through acquisition of title, there is no record that
the Legislature, however, intended to do so at the cost of federal
liability, significant loss of federal funding, and a degraded
state airport system".
Senator Bunde noted that members' bill packets include a December
11, 2001 Department of Law legal opinion [copy on file] addressed
to then-Commissioner of Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities (DOT), Joe Perkins, that reviewed the intent of the
Legislature in regards "to this issue and the conflicting lands
needs".
Senator Bunde, reading from the Sponsor Statement, stressed that,
"several regional schools are located on state properties, some in
very close proximity to active runways and airport infrastructure.
At various times, regional school boards have requested that DOT&PF
convey full title of the airport land to the schools. This has
caused confusion, staff time in both the Departments of Education
and DOT&PF, as well as attorney costs, to defend DOT&PF's title to
its airport property."
Senator Bunde emphasized that the State receives "a substantial
amount of money to build and maintain runways" from the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA). There was no Legislative intent "to
breach FAA grant agreements". This bill would benefit the public,
the regional school boards, the Department of Education and Early
Development and DOT by clarifying the intent of the conveyance
language to exclude airport properties."
JANE ALBERTS, Staff to Senator Bunde, directed the Committee's
attention to a list of areas on a handout titled "REAAs where
Airport/DOT needs may overlap:" [copy on file], which was provided
by Pamela Lewis of the DOT. The handout identifies areas in which
"there could be possible conflicts between the Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities and the Regional School
Boards". It should be noted however, that there is no indication
that a conflict "might be brewing" in any of these areas at this
time.
Senator Bunde read the list for the record: possible areas of
conflict in the Northern Region would include Anvik, Bettles,
Galena, Noatak, Pilot Station and Unalakleet; areas in the Central
Region would include Aniak, Cold Bay, Illiamna, Lime Village and
Willow.
Senator Hoffman asked the manner through which this legislation
would resolve the conflict.
Senator Bunde responded that the bill would clarify that the State
would "control airport land and that the airport land could not be
absorbed by the school district".
Senator Hoffman asked regarding the situation that prompted a
school district to seek title of the airport property.
NONA WILSON, Legislative Liaison, Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities, expressed that one example of the confusion
caused by the existing State Statute occurred when the Yukon-
Koyukuk Regional School Board made an administrative claim for
school property at the Bettles Airport in the year 2001. The school
in Bettles, which was constructed in the 1970's, "is very close to
the active runway, and is, in fact, partially in front of the
building restriction line (BRL). A BRL limits construction of
improvements near a runway for safety purposes. The school is
actually located in an area identified by DOT and the FAA as being
needed for future aviation purposes".
Ms. Wilson continued that during subsequent discussions with the
school district, DOT "obtained an Attorney General's Opinion,
basically, in order to protect the integrity of the airport". While
some non-conflicting BRL areas were identified, perimeter and
runway safety issues were, in accordance with FAA guidelines, non-
negotiable.
Ms. Wilson informed the Committee that similar Rural Education
Attendance Area (REAA) airport title requests were made by the
Aleutian Regional School District near Cold Bay in 1986 and at the
Lake and Peninsula School District in 1994. Rather than the purpose
of the bill being to challenge school districts, its purpose would
be to "rectify some language that has created some sticky
situations in the past".
Senator Hoffman voiced that, while he understood the position of
DOT, he surmised there must be safety concerns on the part of the
schools. To that point, he asked that an opinion on behalf of "the
school board's interest" be provided; there must be some education
concerns as otherwise there would be no desire to disrupt
transportation in those areas. A solution might be to move the
location of the school.
Ms. Wilson deferred to Ms. Lewis of DOT who was more familiar with
the situations in the Northern communities.
Senator Hoffman asked whether a representative of the Department of
Education and Early Development might be available to provide their
perspective as opposed to someone working for DOT.
Co-Chair Green asked whether a local community city council or
school board member might better provide the schools' position.
Senator Hoffman replied that the Department of Education and Early
Development would be able to provide information regarding the
situation for each of the communities on the aforementioned list.
Senator Bunde, Chair of the Senate Labor & Commerce (L&C)
Committee, conveyed that the Department of Education and Early
Development had raised "no interest or concern" during the L&C
Committee hearings on this bill.
Co-Chair Green asked whether the Regional School Boards, the Alaska
Association of School Boards, or the Alaska Municipal League had
presented testimony to the L&C Committee.
Senator Bunde replied in the negative.
PAMALA LEWIS, Statewide Chief, Aviation Leasing and Airport Land
Development, Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
testified via teleconference from offnet site in Fairbanks to
provide insight to the issues that might have prompted the Regional
School Boards to ask for title to the airport property. The Bettles
request occurred at a time when "the school was fighting" to remain
open due to a decline in student enrollment. "The community
desperately wanted the school to stay open." DOT had leased the
land to the school for several years; however, "at some point" in
the future, the building might have to be relocated behind the BRL.
She speculated that the reason for the title request might have
been an attempt "to secure a place for them to retain the school."
The issues behind the Cold Bay or the Lake and Peninsula School
District requests were unknown to her. However, she noted that a
tremendous amount of DOT time and resources were exerted in the
effort of explaining why the title to that land could not be
""relinquished".
9:23:24 AM
Senator Hoffman clarified that rather than his question being about
the issues relating to the relinquishing of the title, which was
the focus of this bill, his question was in regards to the "bigger
issue" of the safety of the students in the schools. "Students and
airplanes don't mix." Therefore, he questioned whether any of the
school district efforts were an attempt to address that issue by
acquiring the land so that such things as a fence might be erected
to further students' safety. Student safety should be a concern.
9:24:38 AM
Ms. Lewis expressed that she "absolutely agreed" with Senator
Hoffman about the safety issue. However, to her knowledge, none of
the requests were based on the premise of acquiring land to erect
fences or an effort to make the facility safer. To that point, the
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities has taken
responsibility for such things as erecting fences to address the
"serious concerns of runways and students not mixing".
9:25:47 AM
Senator Hoffman asked, therefore, about the "conflict" that had
prompted the school districts to further the airport title
requests.
Senator Bunde speculated that a school district might have desired
to control the airport land, which in many communities might be the
primary means of accessing a community, in speculation of it being
"a potential revenue generator".
Senator Bunde noted that, in addition to the student safety
concern, another safety concern is that walkers and things as four-
wheelers often utilize runways for recreation.
Senator Bunde remarked that the State has two choices in regards to
this bill: either continue its ownership of the airport land or
return the money that the federal government "has provided to
develop that airport". Fencing the airport area to address the
safety issue would be the "cheaper" of the two options.
9:27:09 AM
Co-Chair Green understood that the bill's primary purpose would be
to resolve the conflict that exists between the federal FAA
policies and State Statute regarding the conveyance of airport land
titles.
Senator Bunde concurred. However, the safety issue is a valid
concern. One manner to address that issue would be to control
access to the airport land. DOT might desire to address that
concern by erecting fences. That would be a separate discussion, as
the local community might not desire that.
9:28:13 AM
Co-Chair Green pointed out that it is common for things such as
schools, businesses, the runway, and other major components of a
village to be built in concentrated areas in small communities.
9:28:44 AM
Senator Olson asked whether the BRL specifications have been
altered over time.
9:28:58 AM
Ms. Lewis responded that the BRL was revised in the 1980s as a
result of a new master plan being developed for the Bettles
airport. The FAA approved that master plan and "a grant for further
development" of the airport was also approved shortly thereafter.
She was unsure of the conditions of the original BRL.
Senator Olson understood that the current Bettles' BRL specifies
that the State owns title to land up to 750 feet from the middle of
the runway.
Ms. Lewis concurred.
Senator Olson asked whether different classes of airports had
differing BRL standards. Some airports have the capacity to handle
large aircraft such as jets while others could only accommodate
small aircraft.
Ms. Lewis affirmed that there are different classes of airports.
Senator Olson asked whether this would result in there being
different BRL parameters.
Ms. Lewis was uncertain as to whether the type of airport or its
classification was pertinent to this discussion. This bill is
limited to addressing the title "to the land underlying the school
facilities". She deferred to Kip Knudson, the DOT Deputy
Commissioner of Aviation to address that question.
Senator Olson asked whether the Northwest Arctic Borough School
District, the Lower Yukon School District, and the Bering Strait
School District, which are in his election district, were notified
about this legislation. He also distributed a map [copy on file]
depicting that the community of Noatak's school is adjacent to its
airport.
Ms. Lewis remarked that rather than separate notices being sent to
the school districts, routine notification regarding the
legislation was conducted.
Senator Olson surmised therefore that the three school districts
"have not been notified of this possible action."
Ms. Lewis reiterated that routine notification procedures had been
conducted.
9:32:08 AM
KIP KNUDSON, Deputy Commissioner of Aviation, Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities, voiced concern that safety
issues were being interjected into the bill at hand. Despite the
State's massive land holdings, there is extremely high competition
for buildable land in village areas. The fact that airports have
some of the best land in the villages is part of the reason that
some schools are located on airport property. No other economically
feasible building site might have been available. Such situations
have led to there being "an uneasy relationship" between DOT and
the villages.
Mr. Knudson stated that safety concerns have been an on-going
issue. DOT would request that schools be built elsewhere were other
building sites an option.
Mr. Knudson shared that prior to the introduction of this bill, he
had discussed the issue with Eddy Jeans, Director, School Finance,
Department of Education and Early Development. Mr. Jeans contacted
the affected school districts about the proposed bill; no "negative
feedback" had been received.
Mr. Knudson reiterated that the focus of the bill is limited to the
issue of land title. No request would be made to a school district
to remove a school from the airport land, unless, through the
development of a long-range plan, another feasible site might be
identified. Were that the case, DOT would assist in facilitating
that option in conjunction with any construction project that might
be occurring.
Senator Bunde, referencing the Noatak map provided by Senator
Olson, spoke to the beach erosion issue facing the community. He
noted that relocation of the school was included in the long-range
plan to address the erosion issue.
Senator Olson clarified that a river rather than the ocean was the
cause of the erosion being experienced in Noatak. To that point, he
whether Mr. Knudson needed a copy of the Noatak map for reference
purposes.
9:34:50 AM
Mr. Knudson responded that he was "painfully aware" of the erosion
issue facing the Noatak community. The dilemma was whether to move
the school for $20 or $30 million or to move the airport for $20 or
$30 million.
Senator Olson noted that, as depicted on the map, the erosion was
projected to encroach upon the airport's land by the year 2010. He
asked therefore whether future plans might include moving the
airport.
Mr. Knudson informed the Committee that the Department was
currently developing a master plan. Alternatives, including moving
or retaining the airport, were being evaluated. Nonetheless, "the
school is the most pressing issue at the moment".
Co-Chair Green understood that the State, specifically DOT, had no
intention of transferring title of property to any regional school
board, primarily in order to avoid litigation and the repayment of
FAA funding. Thus, the issue at hand is an attempt to address the
federal and State conflict. While Legislators would like to resolve
the issue to better their own district, "the greater cause of what"
is being addressed in this legislation must prevail.
Senator Olson asked Mr. Knudson how non-support of this legislation
would affect federal funding of the identified Rural airports.
Mr. Knudson assured that "at this point", DOT is "not at risk of
losing federal funds". The issue would be to resolve "the conflict
and confusion that arises between the State Statute allowing
districts to claim title to State land and the federal requirement
that we maintain our airport boundaries". This legislation would
"resolve a nagging bureaucratic problem."
Co-Chair Wilken moved to report the bill from Committee with
individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes.
There being no objection, CS SB 142(L&C) was REPORTED from
Committee with zero Fiscal Note #1, dated March 18, 2005, from the
Department of Education and Early Development and zero Fiscal Note
#2, dated April 4, 2005, from the Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|