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 BRUCE GERAGHTY, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY 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. SHIRLEY ARMSTRONG, LEGISLATIVE AIDE TO SENATOR RANDY 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 Annexation. REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE confirmed there was currently no legislation drafted regarding the proposed Cordova annexation. 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. ADJOURNMENT Number 640 CHAIRMAN OLBERG adjourned the meeting at 1:49 p.m.