Chancy Croft Panel (Fragment)

Past democratic republic has been planning the planning authority. We're going to create a region that represent organized brands and part of that. One of the reasons that I think I'm response has tried to do that is possible. There are plenty

of corp community I think better government along those lines I think. I don't think it's to expect that the legislature has an organized. I think you can spin the best they can. Work hours a day during the whole session. But it's just very hard to try to do that. That's a part of the Constitution that I guess was a noble experiment but I just don't think it's going to work particularly well so that the solution to the problem is to provide for the maximum control the maximum local

determination and I think that we've been proceeding in that direction in the past few years we've been doing it with our with what I mentioned with a minute or two ago where the communities took over the actual planning and construction of state public works contracts I think is another example of what we talked about earlier the regionalization as far subsistence as a third 77 there was thirty one million dollars in federal funds coming into the election that you expect coming off of that. Coming through election year there is far to gether. There is no understand where

to get a handle represented. That

was capital. We have another question from you can track down better. Cause the health services programs in the past have done that and I do it in the future.

But your point I'm not familiar with from time to time. You haven't any standards

for structures housing projects concerning building a couple down the road. And the spill still continues to build and structures. You see it all the time in fact growing up in America right now in the funding system is just totally not for the area. I'd like to know what you plan on doing in establishing an energy policy in that respect with family structures and also getting some better structures out there was this a step we should go with it seems to me.

The project that has really demonstrated the desirability of construction and the way in which it's really adaptable to climate should be like and that's a direct result of the fact that it has gotten the attention that it recently created an office appropriate technology that was a legislature that passed. I think that's a great idea and I'm glad that he did it. On the other hand the funding that was only a part time position and I don't think that that.

You're going to get anything out of doing it that way. You really need to have it with with the research that's been going on and so that you would pick up on projects like what are here in Bethel so that that can be incorporated in the design of new buildings that the state is going to be constructing has done an adequate job of constructing projects in the urban areas. The history of construction in the rural areas has been pretty bad and it's because there hasn't been a local making there hadn't been local involvement in the in the planning of those projects. And if there was a pick up on ideas like the one here five process would eliminate some of that but I think the plan level. Prime

sponsor fifty three point four. I think somebody's

going to get half a billion dollars a year out of everybody would have said that's tremendous. And it may turn out 10 years from now your figures or figures are actually lower but the fact of the matter is a tremendous that is worth somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 billion dollars. And what's happened in the past have been that taken out has been a very small or timber or whatever that was Alaska was taken. And we were left with with the problems that resulted and we are in the process of repeating that they were going to take it out on the

North American and that in the past not only possible. On a temporary basis rather than 100 million dollars worth of construction over the life of Alaskans get a fair price for a product that we can only last a long time. Last a very long time. But it won't last forever. And the purpose of that is to make sure that oil construction. That's a positive.

The discussion in the most important was the school construction because one of the most important things at stake in Alaska and our cost of living in the car that I was particularly in the last session was a license tax that had been a point for Alaska business of Alaska businesses that particularly the small businessman in Alaska. Ever since he has been on the books and we finally repeal that and that goes into effect in January of one thing we reduce the personal income tax

by about $100 a person and up to $300 a person within the next year. And then there was also an amendment added which reduced property taxes depends on the local communities tax structure. But that could mean it anywhere between a 50 and $150 a year tax reduction. The fact of the legislation. Provide money for long overdue and constructive taxes taxes concern tax rates and actually reduce the taxes. Another question

I think that for example possible for local communities to do. I don't agree with whether it's on education. Whatever I think it's a great idea but the notion that I think it's something that they're totally unacceptable and I would actively oppose senator and Senator home a

little bit earlier to the point where inflation and financial planning were back to double digit inflation right now of course this is going to affect our capital outlay fund for instance on a permanent fund to protect capital from inflation. Control over. There are things that the state can do that affects inflation in Alaska and such things as I have discussed what we do with our land policy and the like will make a big difference. But but inflation is a national problem as well. And so the question is how our state money can be invested so that we don't in effect wind up five years from now with less money because inflation how we can make sure that we get the most for the

dollars we're going to spend. And that means that we have to use such things as the capital outlay camp instead of the language X and finding that they cost that much more. So I think the two things that the governor can do. I don't want to promise any Americal because as long as there's a national inflation right like we've seen in the past few years it's going to continue to be a substantial problem. Do you think the answer answer is there was as Time think when I suggested to to pay cash for capital improvements. We are going to be doing that. The state has to consider from time to time some projects you're going to be able to invest the money to hire right and pay off bonds at a lower interest rate. So the state should always have that as an option. But in the past session of the legislature we appropriated a ten hundred ten million dollars because we recognize that those projects are ready to go and that in this it would cost more

by the way as well as the fact that it was just long overdue that the state made its obligation to real school construction. We set up the capital outlay account so that options are available if the national rate of inflation drops to zero. That that you might not want to do that. But as long as there's a substantial rate of inflation like there is now I think the major effort is going to be through paying cash. I see and we hear from you. Project resources area they had supported renewable resource seven industry in the herring industry hard for immediate return for jobs and a cash crop as governor. How would you approach renewable resources industry to Alaska. We have to have an effective

program with regard to such things as the limit simply for things to get better and when you can't you can't continue to do that. It's just not going to happen that way. We're going to have to have a program that provides funding when necessary brings together the information that is available and the research necessary when that information is not available and to provide the support facilities such as harbors or docks or roads or airfields or whatever to make it possible. I think that some of the time. There are about a much shorter duration then. Resources

is infinite. But the fact of the matter is development as well as you do anything else you'll find that as well. And that happened in Alaska where we haven't done the planning and we haven't been and we didn't know what we were doing. We found that the fish didn't last that long. So your notion is that you're going to reject development. You're going to have renewable resource development. It's not something that just magically happens. You have to be able to handle it and that means that the state has to know a tremendous amount about it. Second part of the

record I think you get back to the fact that one of the reasons we're going to be a better mention in that regard and I think it's important as well for example

in the in the next few years is going to have the same effect. I think it's important that for example the governor. Not just to the municipal but have an annual meeting with the governors. I mean with the mayors of all of the communities in the state that Anchorage has one also has one person with them to make sure that the smaller communities have better representation. You have to have at least before there was a proportional representation of resources. Think about the representation already mentioned

that the problem with proportional representation on the board is that if you're going to come out with a small number. And that's why that alone is not going to you're going to have to have a regionalized proportional to population. Smaller communities are not going to be adequately represented. However there in the program I thought the program provided not only drinking water but the

money would be the best way of addressing that construct in a particular area. There you can provide an adequate system in conjunction with that are stated another way. That is because of the fact that it's going to have on existing programs save water and what the construction of projects in the particular system should be and I'm not sure I understand the problem. We have to have with regard

to because allowing the companies that are developing here or extracting the resources to set the terms and the problem with it is for example with regard to oil is that trying to get the oil out as quickly as possible. They try to recover as much of their investment and make as much of their profit as quickly as they can find them in this day. Is that an economic effect to last as long as possible so that they want to get as much oil as they can out and much preferred that it lasts for 30 or 40 years so that we have a more long lasting effect. And the problem we have now is were simply letting them tell us what theyre going to do and we cant have that or we're going to have the same cycle repeat

itself that has has happened before in Alaska. And I think that would be a real tragedy is one thing to have had it happen once because we didn't know that it was likely to occur. But to simply step there and say the same thing happened with oil and gas development that we know was already happened. With regard to development. Would you have questions. Your question comes from you talk about culture. Your

concept for the surplus wealth is going to have a profound effect. It's an opportunity to do what has been a historic Alaskas that is a shortage of investment capital and one of the higher cost of living here is simply because we haven't had the sources of capital that other states have here and there that we're going to have an investment of the permit for such things as

home loans home improvement loan or for business loans. An economy I think it will affect opportunity but somewhat historic. Something about it. We have another question from your program. Right now the

foundation program in every school district pretty well. It doesn't very much far smaller and it doesn't much for the large urban district but it only kind of handles average the middle sized district tried in the past that all that's happened is instead of changing the basic formula so that all districts are treated well the amount that was available. And that's better than doing nothing. It doesn't have a problem which is that the formula no longer distributes the money adequately. And I would like to say that it's not a particular thing to do. That doesn't mean that it can't be done or even that it shouldn't be done it just means that you're going to have to work hard at doing it.

And the foundation program that we passed was a substantial improvement over what we had. It's now time in light of what has happened. The fact that we have now that weren't even really being considered at the time the present Foundation program was enacted. Some of the urban areas that you just have to look at that foundation program all over again. It's no longer adequate for Alaska in terms of the operational funds in the capital expanding capital fun things especially in bilingual education which really weren't being considered at the time. We have to look at the whole formula again. Senator one of the other controversial planks in the Republican platform in the opening of the newest despite opposition from environmentalists and from groups that could have repercussions in this area as well is concerning local

control. How do you stand on you know. One of the campers from my passing legislation that would have opened up the whole road on a year round basis I don't think there's the money or the revenue to justify it and I don't think that the concerns of the local communities have been met. We might be able to do that in the future but that hasn't been done right now and until it is done I don't think it should be open you know to get ourselves in in a contradictory situation when we tell the federal government that we don't want them to do this or that in the state of Alaska. And then the state of Alaska tells our local communities what's going to happen and we don't care what your ideas on there. And it's really strange that some of the people that are the most insistent that we tell the federal government to alone and don't try to tell us how to

do things in Alaska are also the ones that are so insistent that that they should override the wishes of the people in on the the route of that North Slope. I see. Thank you. I'm sad to say that we're out of time for additional questions. I'd like to thank you Senator Carter and thank our panelists for being with us this evening.