Legislature(2005 - 2006)BUTROVICH 205
04/27/2006 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB57 | |
| HB419 | |
| HB307 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 57 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 307 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 415 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 419 | TELECONFERENCED | |
CSSSHB 57(FIN)-SALE OF STATE LAND TO ADJACENT LANDOWNERS CHAIR THOMAS WAGONER announced HB 57 to be up for consideration. 3:40:17 PM TERRY HARVEY, staff to Representative Bruce Weyhrauch, explained that HB 57 would allow the Department of Natural Resources to negotiate a fair market sale of less than 20 acres of state land to an adjacent property owner. Such a sale could be negotiated provided that the state property is landlocked by an adjacent landowner's property. MR. HARVEY noted that this situation occurs around the state. Notably in Haines a small state mining claim is surrounded on all sides by Mr. Schnabel's property. There is no public access to the state property and Mr. Schnabel would like to negotiate a sale. 3:42:06 PM SENATOR FRED DYSON questioned why the fiscal note isn't positive. MR. HARVEY replied the fiscal note reflects that a negotiated sale wouldn't cost the state money. He deferred to Mr. Mylius to give a more complete answer. 3:43:02 PM BEN STEVENS arrived. 3:43:08 PM SENATOR BERT STEDMAN asked how this might work for isolated parcels in Southeast that front on the coast. 3:43:44 PM SARAH GILBERTSON, Special Assistant to the Commissioner, Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) explained that the department's concern is that the public have access to land and water and that there is a best interest finding. The sponsor moved language from paragraph (11) to paragraph (7)(B) so that there would be a best interest finding. She said she would defer to Mr. Mylius, but she didn't believe that property that fronts on the water would be considered to be completely surrounded. 3:44:52 PM CHAIR WAGONER restated that to be eligible under HB 57 it would have to be a total in holding. By definition it must be totally surrounded and have no access. MR. HARVEY agreed. 3:45:40 PM SENATOR ELTON asked if the state has mining claims. MR. HARVEY replied the mining claim he referenced was established during Territorial days and became state property at Statehood. 3:46:34 PM SENATOR STEDMAN elaborated some of the properties are pre Tongass National Forest and technically reside outside the forest even though they reside inside its boundaries. When the state sells those properties they don't transfer the sub-surface rights, submerged land, or tidelands and a 50-foot waterfront public access easement is taken. DICK MYLIUS, Director, Division of Mining, Land and Water, Department of Natural Resources (DNR) said he would respond to questions after he gave DNR's perspective. He referenced SB 55 and noted that both bills have a similar motivation. Under existing state law small parcels of state land cannot be sold and when state land is sold, it is done through a competitive process that is open to all Alaskans. HB 57 proposes to amend the statutes that are referred to as preference right sales, which allows DNR to sell land exclusively to one person who has a specific interest in the land. In this case a parcel is totally surrounded by private land that is owned by one individual so it isn't usable or accessible to anyone else, but it is very usable to the one individual. Although this could apply to other parcels in the state, the motivation for the bill is so that Mr. Schnabel can negotiate a sale. This parcel wouldn't qualify for preference right because it is too large. Under the statute remnants or unmanageable land may be sold, but the size must be less than the minimum lot size in the particular municipality. This parcel is larger than the minimum lot size in the Haines Borough so it could not be sold under that statute as it is currently written. Similarly, the parcel cannot be sold competitively because there is no legal public access and it isn't of value to the public or state for the same reason. There is no access. He noted that the parcel does have mineral value. MR. MILIUS said this is a good solution. It could apply in other situations, but the safeguards are adequate to ensure that lands that are important for public access would not be sold. Responding to previous questions he explained that the revenue part of the fiscal note is indeterminate because the state will receive an undetermined amount of revenue from the sale, which will be based on a fair market appraisal. A parcel of land that is surrounded by National Forest land wouldn't qualify for this preference right, he said, but the state has transferred some isolated parcels in Southeast to the University of Alaska. 3:51:22 PM With regard to Senator Elton's question, he said people do stake mining claims on state land and Mr. Schnabel does have a state mining claim on the parcel under discussion. Initially it was a federal mining claim but the state acquired it through foreclosure in 1959 because the claim wasn't registered. 3:52:00 PM SENATOR STEDMAN asked if the state acquired mining claims around the state because miners failed to pay the annual filing fee. MR. MYLIUS said that may have been a Territorial law that has since been repealed, but the state did acquire all sorts of former federal mining claims through that legislation. SENATOR STEDMAN asked if this is a single property owner issue or had an inventory had been done on state in holdings to determine the potential scope of the bill. MR. MYLIUS said he is sure there are other properties such as this, but an inventory was not done. 3:54:27 PM JOHN SCHNABEL, Haines, explained that he owns 84 acres of land that completely surrounds 13 acres of state land. He would like to purchase the state land on a negotiated basis rather than an outcry auction. He has spent over $1 million developing his property as a wilderness destination for tourists and this bill would provide security. 3:55:54 PM SENATOR RALPH SEEKINS asked if he brought the issue to the attention of Representative Thomas. MR. SCHNABEL replied yes, he's been trying to resolve the issue for 20 years. CHAIR WAGONER closed public testimony. SENATOR ELTON moved to report CSSSHB 57(FIN) from committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal note(s). There being no objection, it was so ordered.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|