« AnteriorContinuar »
hundreds of homes on the tide flats now and I would certainly like to give them title.
Mrs. GREEN. That has been one of the battles in the Oregon Legislature. The tidelands in Oregon, of course, are reserved for schools and there has been pressure by various commercial interests and private individuals to get title to them. I think that the people who prefer the long-term leases have won out, at least for the time being. I wondered if you had given consideration to that.
Governor HEINTZLEMAN. Yes, I have; and as I say, I think there are some cases in which you would surely want to give title. In many cases I think it would be a matter of leading. For example, take a waterpower site. I am very much interested in waterpower myself. If you have a firm who had a lease from the Federal Power Commission for a 50-year development of a waterpower site, of course, if part of that plant was going to stand on the tideflats, as it very well could, a generating plant, we could grant a 50-year lease too. Certainly in the case of things which might not be permanent, let us take a salmon cannery, I do not know whether it might be now or 15 years from now. I think in that case we ought to give a lease and the same thing would apply to a mining processing plant too, because mines play out. I do not see any particular reason why they should get a fee simple title unless they were going to put up something enormous that was going to require heavy financing which could only be had if they owned the property outright.
Mrs. GREEN. That is all, Mr. Chairman,
Mr. BARTLETT. Mrs. Green opened the subject of mental health, so I would like to ask you a question or two regarding that, Governor, because action on this bill before it was reported out of this committee was taken after you had returned to Alaska. And as you are aware, an amendment was offered and rejected but is likely to be proposed on the floor of the House of Representatives when the bill comes up, which would require the Territory to match dollars for dollars in respect to construction funds. Would you care to give the committee your opinion on that proposal ?
Governor HEINTZŁEMAN. I would have to study that more, Delegate Bartlett. But I did not like that so well at the time.
Mr. BARTLETT. I did not either.
Governor HEINTZLEMAN. I thought that this was an obligation that should be taken on by the Federal Government, that we were doing just about all we could be expected to do in picking up more and more of the check every year to take care of these people.
Mr. BARTLETT. Governor, you mentioned, I believe, in your written statement, that Alaska has a year-around population of 160,000._I had thought the Bureau of Census figures and the Resources Development Board figures gave a somewhat higher population.
Governor HEINTZLEMAN. I think not, Delegate Bartlett. I checked that a couple of days ago because I had been seeing in the paper larger figures too. And this estimate of the Bureau of the Census and I looked up the pamphlet or bulletin said 160,000, year-around. Now, of course, you know we have a great many more people than that
during the summer months but I am talking about the year-around population who have voting residence here, so to speak. The total population is something better than 200,000, I think 208,000, which include the military people.
Mr. BARTLETT. I think that beginning about 2 years ago they ceased recording the number of military in the Territory.
Governor HEINTZLEMAN. This thing I saw did not call them military, but it gave the total population and the residence population.
Mr. BARTLETT. Do you know the date of the Bureau of Census estimate? Governor HEINTZLEMAN. This is 1953 or 1954, a late bulletin. Mr. BARTLETT. Of course, I do not doubt your word, but I am just sort of astounded.
Governor HEINTZLEMAN. I will check on it again, since you raise the question.
Mr. O'BRIEN. If you accept 160,000, is that not larger than the population of some of our present States when they became States? Mr. BARTLETT. About 20, yes.
Governor, you spoke this morning about lands withdrawn by the Federal Government and I believe the committee would like to know that Mr. Puckett just recently informed me that the final 135,000 acres reserved under Public Land Order 487 several years ago in anticipation of legislation which was never legislated has now been restored. That land is on the Kenai Peninsula, a 135,000-acre tract, and will now be opened to normal homestead and other entries. So progress is being made.
Governor HEINTZLEMAN. I am glad to know that. Some of us, as you know, have been working on that very hard, including you, Delegate Bartlett.
Mr. BARTLETT. Some of us did not believe it should ever have been withdrawn.
Governor HEINTZLEMAN. That is right.
Mr. O'BRIEN. I would like to ask one final question on this mental
, H. R. 6376 is a bill by Mrs. Green, reported by the committee and pending before the House when they reconvene in January, setting out as we were advised by departmental witnesses the programing of this approximately $6 million which would go to the integrated health program apart from the construction fund grant. And for each of the
years ending June 30, 1957, June 30, 1958, $1 million; for each
year ending 1959 and 1960, $800,000, and so on down to 1965 and 1966, when the sum would be $200,000. Is it your considered judgment, and on the advice of those people in the Territory upon whom you must rely, that you could program those funds without finding the particular breakdown of funds restrictive or unduly limiting? Can you program those funds on the approximate basis they would be made available?
Governor HEINTZLEMAN. I think so.
Mr. ABBOTT. With respect to the construction fund which would be granted by this bill-I think Delegate Bartlett has touched on the dollar matching question-if it were the consensus of congressional opinion that it should be dollar matching, if you received the grant with respect to the program proper which would be six-plus million dollars, would you believe at this time the Territory would be unable to match dollars on the construction program itself?
Governor HEINTZLEMAN. I do.
Mr. O'BRIEN. I would like to make an explanation at this point if I may. We know there was some opposition to the mental-health bill in our committee, but I would like to explain to the people of Alaska that the reason for no vote at the last session of Congress, the session just completed, was my responsibility. As chairman of the subcommittee in consultation with the chairman of the full committee we did not ask for a rule because the bill would have come up in a rather heated climate toward the end of the session, and I felt it was better with such an important matter that it come up early in the next session, especially after the members or some members of the committee had an opportunity to come up here and find out exactly what the situation was. So I think in all fairness I should make that statement. I certainly
I am not in opposition to the bill because I had a bill almost identical to the one Mrs. Green has.
Governor HEINTZLEMAN. I believe that is quite well understood in the Territory, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. ABBOTT. One further point. Mr. Chairman.
Governor, an amendment was adopted in committee and, of course, appears in the Union Calendar print which will be that bill considered by the House, which gives to a proposed patient or his counsel or any member of his immediate family the right to a jury trial by a petit jury. Are you in a position to state your own personal opinion or that of any of your advisers?
Governor HEINTZLEMAN. No, I am not. I am not well enough acquainted with those procedures to say whether that is good or not.
Mr. BARTLETT. One further question, since we did get on the mental-health bill. What if an amendment were offered requiring us to match dollar for dollar for construction purposes and what if a further amendment were offered and accepted striking entirely the grant-in-aid program? Would you agree with me, Governor, that that would leave Alaska in a very precarious situation financially?
Governor HEINTZLEMAN. Very much so.
Thank you very much, Governor, and I am sorry to bring you back again this afternoon. Governor HEINTZLEMAN. Thank you.
Mr. ABBOTT. I believe that completes, Mr. Chairman, the presentation by the officers of the Territory, the Federal agencies, that it was our intention to hear here, and the presentation by the Governor's office. At this point I have been advised we may hear the presentation by four spokesmen for the Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce, beginning with Mr. Kenneth Gillanders, I believe-is that correct, Mr. Gillanders?
Mr. Dawson. Might I inquire how many witnesses do we have now this afternoon, and is there a limitation on time or a limitation on interrogation?
Mr. Abbott. We suggested, Congressman Dawson, that all witnesses limit themselves to a 5- to 10-minute oral statement and be prepared either at the time of presentation to supplement that with a written statement which they might brief, or that they request the committee chairman's and the committee's permission to subsequently file a written statement. Mr. Dawson. How many witnesses do you have? Mr. ABBOTT. As we have them set up in immediate order there are a total of 16 or 18 people who would like to appear. That is not this afternoon. A total of four people have asked to appear tomorrow morning. There may be additional people whose names have not been handed to me.
But within that time limitation up to noon tomorrow, there would be sufficient time, even allowing for some committee interrogation on the various points.
Mr. Dawson. So it is your intention then, to limit them to a maximum of 10 minutes, possibly 5 to 10 minutes? Mr. ABBOTT. Yes, sir. Mr. O'BRIEN. That would be including the questions. Mr. ABBOTT. Yes, sir.
State your full name, please. STATEMENT OF KENNETH D. GILLANDERS, MEMBER, BOARD OF
DIRECTORS, FAIRBANKS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Mr. GILLANDERS. My name is Kenneth D. Gillanders. I am a local CPA, and I am speaking now on behalf of the Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce, being a member of the board of directors. My particular phase of it is in connection with roads or transportation in general in Alaska.
Historically we can say that the development of transportation in Alaska is certainly unique in that we have good air transportation and that our good air transportation has preceded the building, of roads by quite some years; in fact, our roads have lagged way behind the air transportation. That gives us good air transportation into centers of population but where we are lacking is the surface transportation into the outlying areas to feed into our centers of population.
We started out with the Richardson Highway from Fairbanks to Valdez, and, as you are familiar, with the Alaska Highway which connected with the Richardson to the Canadian border and then later the Glenn Highway which connected Anchorage to the Richardson Highway. Now we need to branch out from these main arteries into the outlying areas to open up mineral resources and farm areas and to in general give the Territory a chance to expand.
I think it goes without question that we cannot, that Alaska cannot develop, that Alaska cannot grow without good surface transportation, and it follows we cannot have good surface transportation or a good bighway system without a plan of development of these highways. And we cannot have a plan of development and carry it through without & sustained source of revenue.
Now in the past we have had congressional allocations to the Alaska Road Commission, but they have been very unpredictable.
They got to a high of around 27 to 28 million dollars immediately after the war and have now dwindled down to about $64 million last year, which is barely enough to maintain roads already constructed. So you can see it leaves us in a very critical position in an attempt to have a unified plan of developing new roads into the new areas that need them. We feel that we should have at least some sort of a guaranty of a minimum of $10 million a year so that we can plan an orderly development of roads.
Now this, as you know-to make any planning you have to have some basis. So we would suggest a $10 million minimum instead of the high and low allocations that have been forthcoming for the Alaska Roads Commission.
Another question or point in this line is this recent Federal highway bill which did not pass, but as you recall, one plan was for increased taxes on motor fuels, tires, and so forth to pay for this 10-year plan. You also no doubt recall Alaska was not included in that plan. However, we would have been included in the tax to pay for the roads. We feel we are hardly in a position to pay taxes for increased roads stateside when we need them so badly ourselves and that any increased taxation for roads, we should certainly at least participate in the benefits and get some roads ourselves for that money.
Our need for roads is a development very badly needed, of farm and access roads. Needless to say we have to increase our own farming up here to attempt to reduce the cost of living and eliminate shipping in so many of those products. To do this we must have roads into the farming areas or the potential areas for farming.
The Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce has had a list of immediate projects for the past few years that we feel for this area are the most important and they are included in this report from the Fairbanks chamber. I believe the members have all been furnished with this. Mr. O'BRIEN. Yes, we have it. May I suggest at this point that
Ι that part of the folder labeled the "Report of the Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce" to the committee, be made a part of the record. (The document referred to follows:) REPORT OF THE FAIRBANKS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
FAIRBANKS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
Fairbanks, Alaska, September 14, 1955. HONORABLE MEMBER, Territorial and Insular Affairs Committee,
House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR Sir: The Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce takes this opportunity to thank you and the members of your committee for their interest in the Territory of Alaska,
We especially appreciate the opportunity of meeting you personally, being able to present our views locally, and, in written form, by means of this brochure.
May you and your committee members find an avenue of agreement with our factual and studied plans for the advancement of Fairbanks, the great Territory of Alaska, and our wonderful country—the United States of America. Respectfully submitted.
AL SEELIGER, President. I. REPORT, ROADS COMMITTEE
HISTORICAL Limited and expensive transportation has been both the cause and effect of Alaska's inadequate development. Distance-more properly, the time required