SENATE BILL NO. 6 "An Act relating to the disposal of state land." DARWIN PETERSON, Finance Committee Aide, Co-Chair Torgerson reviewed the adopted committee substitute, 1-LS0071\H and the proposed committee substitute, Version "M." He noted that everywhere in Version "H" where the state is required to dispose of land, the word "offer" was included, and he added that the new language would read, "the state shall offer for disposal." He continued that the number of acreage to be offered was changed from 250,000 acres to 100,00 acres. He offered that the "creation of the Land Disposal Advisory Board," was deleted from Version "H" and replaced by public nominations that are sent to the State Land Commission. He continued that all the sections in the bill that address lapse dates are changed to June 30, 2009, which is the sunset date of the new Land Commission. He noted that the previous sunset date was also deleted, so the Land Commission would exist in perpetuity. He added that Section 7, Section 9, Section 11, that address the powers of the Commissioner, were given to the Commission in order to submit reports to the Legislature for analysis and assessment of market demand. Mr. Peterson concluded that Version "M" of this bill was much shorter in length than the previous. He noted that a fiscal note had not yet been requested yet for Version "M." Co-Chair Torgerson suspected that this legislation would have a $10 million dollar fiscal note attached. He noted that the state currently has 50,000 acres of land to be re- offered that was included in this legislation. He continued that 150,000 acres would be added to this legislation and the fiscal note would reflect the necessary zoning costs, mapping costs, etceteras. Senator Adams referred to and asked for an explanation of Section Two, which creates the Land Sale Commission, and then to Section 10, which solves disputes between the Commissioner and the State Land Commission when there are problems deciding what lands should be offered in the first place. Co-Chair Torgerson explained how the land would be considered for distribution. Senator Phillips referred to page four and asked what the difference was between permanent fund eligibility and living in Alaska for a year. SENATOR TAYLOR responded that the primary reason for inserting this section was that a lot of public comment and concern was expressed about how Alaska land-holdings were being offered for sale. The Department of Natural Resources was posting available land on the Internet. He noted one example, where some groups of wealthy doctors were outbidding local Juneau residents who had tried obtaining these same offerings for years. He outlined the legislation that was passed as a result of this situation, with allowances for residents who qualify for the permanent fund dividend. Senator Phillips questioned the current law and its residency requirements that allows for at least one year prior to date of application and pointed out that this new committee substitute proposes something else. He asked what the differences were between the two. He generally noted conflicts of using the Permanent Fund Dividend status as a determinant for this program qualification. Senator Taylor responded that they would work on this aspect. Senator Taylor added that included in the first "blush" of this bill, was a requirement that the purchaser would pay for the appraisal and land survey, which would help diminish the attached fiscal note. He noted that this clause had been taken out of the latest Version. Co-Chair Torgerson responded that this issue would be considered again, but pointed out that the state as property owner is the only entity that can bring action before local planning commissions. He noted that this did not mean that the Committee could include some type of stipulation to pay costs up front. He pointed out that if the State were going to sell land, somehow, they would have to come up with the necessary money and establish a solid program to transfer this property. DAVID SNEED, testified via teleconference from Wrangell. He stated that he had been a resident of Alaska for eleven years. He noted that he has tried saving money in order to buy land, but added that the he was unable to keep up with rising appraisals. He recommended that the Committee encourage development of remote sites, while making these areas less dependent upon publicly supplied services. He added that the Department of Natural Resources makes too much land available for recreation rather than for private residential status. He outlined his ideas about making land available for agricultural pursuits. He stated his concern about two real estate members being placed on the Commission. Tape 31, Side A, 11:05 AM. Senator Phillips asked Mr. Sneed if he thought applicants under this legislation should pay for the land survey and appraisal. Mr. Sneed did not respond. The bill was HELD in Committee.