The Petersburg Borough Assembly has voted to write a letter opposing federal legislation that would transfer federal land to new Native corporations proposed for Petersburg, Wrangell, Haines, Ketchikan and Tenakee Springs.
The assembly action was prompted by a request from Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski for a Senate committee hearing on legislation to create the corporations as an amendment to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.
The bill would allow the so-called “landless Native communities” to form corporations and receive 23,040 acres of land each, similar to the 200 village corporations created by the 1971 federal law. The five Southeast communities did not meet certain requirements for corporation status under the law, though Native residents of the towns have long challenged that decision.
Alaska’s congressional delegation has repeatedly and unsuccessfully introduced legislation to create the five corporations.
The Wrangell Borough Assembly in 2016 came out in support of the landless Natives effort, and though members have discussed the issue over the past six years the assembly has not adopted any measure changing or contradicting its 2016 position.
The Tongass National Forest land that would be conveyed to a Petersburg corporation could include parcels at Portage Bay, Point Agassiz Peninsula, Mitkof Island and along Wrangell Narrows on Kupreanof Island.
Petersburg Vice Mayor Jeigh Stanton Gregor made a motion at the assembly’s May 2 meeting to write a letter of opposition to the legislation, seconded by Bob Lynn. The assembly voted 4-3 to send a letter opposing the bill. Members Chelsea Tremblay, Thomas Fine-Walsh and Jeff Meucci opposed the motion.
Stanton Gregor said he was against the bill because he had “a real heartache with taking, for any reason, lots and lots of public land and giving it to private business with the sole goal of for-profit use.”
Member Dave Kensinger spoke in support of helping landless constituents but said he was against the disjointed land selections proposed in the bill and said the transfer would make it impossible for the U.S. Forest Service to have future timber sales.
“I’d have a lot easier time supporting this if it was one block of land, but it makes your head crazy if you look at all the selections they've made,” Kensinger said.
Lynn said he was against the bill because he did not support giving away the federal land.
Meucci said he believed the community should be given more time to speak on the bill and felt that the questions the assembly had sent out on the issue had not been answered.
“It’s a real emotional issue in Petersburg and I get that and I want to make sure before I vote one way or the other on it that I’ve had the opportunity to listen to the folks in town and some of the folks who are involved with it who don't live in Petersburg, but just hear what they have to say and see what we can do,” Meucci said.
Mayor Mark Jensen said members of the community have had enough time to make comments and said he did not agree with giving land to private owners.
Supporters say the legislation would return a tiny fraction of territory taken from Alaska Natives. Future shareholders say the new corporations would spur economic development with possibilities for tourism or other uses such as food or cultural activities. The subsurface rights would go to Sealaska, the regional Native corporation, while the five corporations would hold the surface rights to the land.
Reader Comments(0)