[House Report 106-763]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
106th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 106-763
======================================================================
CRAIG MUNICIPAL EQUITY ACT OF 1999
_______
July 19, 2000.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 3182]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 3182) to provide for a land conveyance to the city of
Craig, Alaska, and for other purposes, having considered the
same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend
that the bill do pass.
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
The purposes of H.R. 3182 are to provide for a land
conveyance to the city of Craig, Alaska, and for other
purposes.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION
H.R. 3182 requires the Secretary of Agriculture to convey
4532 acres of land in the Tongass National Forest to the City
of Craig, Alaska. Put in perspective, this bill affects less
than three one- hundredths of one percent of the 17 million-
acre Tongass National Forest. The City will use the land to
produce revenues to fund vital municipal services.
The City of Craig is located in Southeast Alaska on Prince
of Wales Island, the third largest island in the country. The
community has grown from a mostly Native population of 250 in
1971 to over 2500 residents, most of whom are not Alaska
Natives. Craig reports it has no land base upon which to
maintain its local services and no ability to utilize many
federal programs which are dependent upon a large Alaska Native
population for eligibility. Thirty years ago, streets were
unpaved, water and sewer services were available for only a
lucky few, and the City government provided almost no services.
After years of growth, Craig's local government is now
responsible for a range of services including police, fire, and
emergency medical services, education, zoning, water and sewer,
garbage disposal, harbor facilities and others.
The City's problem is that it has no opportunity to expand
its land base to support these municipal services. Despite the
change in demographics over the years, 93 percent of the land
within the Craig city limits is owned by two Alaska Native
Village corporations. Under federal law passed in 1987, none of
the Native land is subject to taxation so long as the land is
not developed. Craig has approximately 300 acres of land owned
privately by individuals within its city limits to serve as its
municipal tax base. It can annex no other land because the
entire land base outside its municipal boundaries is owned by
the federal government as part of the Tongass National Forest
or by another Alaska Native corporation.
Didn't the Alaska Statehood Act of 1958 reserve a quantity
of national forest land for the expansion and development of
Alaska communities, including Craig? Yes, but in the 1960s and
1970s the United States Forest Service rebuffed almost every
selection made by the State on behalf of Craig. By the end of
1970, the federal government commenced a long string of land
freezes to settle Native claims and later to create and expand
over 100 million acres of new conservation areas Statewide.
The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 allowed two
Native village corporations to acquire 93 percent of the lands
within Craig's municipal limits. According to the Mayor, ``the
City of Craig is the only community in Southeast Alaska which
requested the State to select land near it for which no
selection has been made.'' Craig's fortunes were dealt another
blow when the Clinton Administration shut down logging in the
Tongass National Forest, the City's most valuable economic
resource.
In summary, Craig has almost no taxable land base, and as a
result of federal actions, no means of raising revenue
sufficient to meet its responsibilities. Financially speaking,
Craig is nearing the brink of crisis. It is only right and fair
that Congress grant land the City was due 40 years ago.
H.R. 3182 identifies and describes the parcel to be
conveyed. It is the nearest tract of land to the municipality
not owned by Alaska Native Corporations. It is on the local
road system, and is not in any wilderness or special status.
The land has timber resources that if developed, may create an
endowment to fund municipal services.
COMMITTEE ACTION
H.R. 3182 was introduced on October 28, 1999 by Congressman
Don Young (R-AK). The bill was referred to the Committee on
Resources. On February 9, 2000, the Committee held a hearing on
the bill. On April 5, 2000, the Full Resources Committee met to
consider the bill. No amendments were offered and the bill was
ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives by
voice vote.
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of
rule XIII of the rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Resources' oversight findings and recommendations
are reflected in the body of this report.
CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT
Article I, section 8, and Article IV, section 3 of the
Constitution of the United States grant Congress the authority
to enact this bill.
COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII
1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the
Rules of the House of Representatives requires an estimate and
a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be
incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B)
of that rule provides that this requirement does not apply when
the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted
cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2)
of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this
bill does not contain any new budget authority, spending
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in
revenues or tax expenditures.
3. Government Reform Oversight Findings. Under clause
3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, the Committee has received no report of
oversight findings and recommendations from the Committee on
Government Reform on this bill.
4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause
3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives and section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate
for this bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, April 19, 2000.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3182, the Craig
Municipal Equity Act of 1999.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Megan
Carroll.
Sincerely,
Barry B. Anderson
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
H.R. 3182--Craig Municipal Equity Act of 1999
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 3182 would not
significantly affect the federal budget. The bill would not
affect direct spending or receipts; thus, pay-as-you-go
procedures would not apply. H.R. 3182 contains no
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. The bill would benefit the city
of Craig, Alaska, by providing land from which the city may
generate new revenues to pay for city services. The budgets of
other state, local, and tribal governments would not be
affected by this bill.
H.R. 3182 would direct the Secretary of Agriculture to
convey approximately 4,500 acres of land within the Tongass
National Forest to the city of Craig, Alaska. The Secretary
would have to complete the conveyance within 90 days of the
bill's enactment. According to the Forest Service, the lands
that would be conveyed to the city do not currently generate
any significant receipts, and the agency does not expect them
to generate any significant receipts in the foreseeable future.
The lands that would be conveyed are part of a larger area
where the timber was offered for sale in 1999. No bids were
received for this timber and the agency does not plan to
reoffer it for sale in the near future.
On April 12, 2000, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for S.
1797, similar legislation that was ordered reported by the
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on April 5,
2000. The lands that would be conveyed under each bill are the
same, and our estimates of each bill's impact on direct
spending are identical. Differences between the two estimates
reflect a provision in the Senate version that would increase
discretionary spending, assuming appropriation of the necessary
amounts.
The CBO staff contact is Megan Carroll. This estimate was
approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for
Budget Analysis.
compliance with public law 104-4
This bill contains no unfunded mandates.
preemption of state, local or tribal law
This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or
tribal law.
changes in existing law
If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing
law.
DISSENTING VIEWS
H.R. 3182 would give away over 4,500 acres of Tongass
National Forest lands without compensation. These lands are
located over twenty miles away from the community of Craig. The
purpose of the transfer would not be for municipal expansion,
but rather for the old-growth rain forest lands to be logged to
generate municipal revenues. The Forest Service opposes the
bill on the grounds that Craig has no legal entitlement to
receive these national forest lands and because the United
States would not receive anything in return.
Craig's rationale for this land conveyance is that the
community is surrounded by lands which have been conveyed to
Native village corporations under the Alaska Native Claims
Settlement Act of 1971. Three decades later, they are asking
for a land handout from Congress.
Craig's real need is for additional revenue, not land. The
paradox in Alaska is that, despite tremendous wealth generated
by the North Slope oil fields, state funding for municipal
services and other government programs has been decreasing.
Craig, for example, needs additional funds to operate a
recently built $13 million high school.
But even if Congress were obligated to give something to
Craig, this bill provides for a very inefficient and
controversial method to fund municipal services. In recent
years, the market for Tongass timber has been depressed and
Forest Service sales often have no bidders. It is dubious how
much net revenue from logging would get to the Craig Municipal
treasury.
Congress has provided the state of Alaska with a generous
entitlement to 105 million acres of land, in part to provide
for municipal needs. There is no compelling justification for
using the Tongass National Forest as a land bank when the state
has ample land and fiscal resources to take care of its own
municipal problems. We urge the House to oppose H.R. 3182.
George Miller.