We committee members were particularly impressed with the historic values we found here in Sitka. I presume many of you have come to accept them as a matter of course, but to those of us coming from States like Idaho, California, and Colorado, we are thrilled with the old Russian Church, Totem Pole Park, and the other historic sites in the first capital of Alaska. This morning I climbed the steps to the site of the original Baranoff castle. The view from there was breathtaking.

We have had, of course, brought quite forcibly to our attention the problem of the fishing industry, and we certainly hope that out of these hearings may come a solution which will eventually restore it to normal.

We have until 12 o'clock this morning. There are at least seven witnesses, and that means we must adhere to the committee procedure used in Washington, D. C., that of limiting oral testimony, then allowing time for questioning. We of the committee so far have taken more than our share of time, yet there are so many new problems arising we always feel the need for 3 to 4 times the amount of time we find at our disposal.

I have here a letter from Chairman O'Brien, in which he recommends that witnesses limit their oral remarks to not exceed 10 minutes, with the understanding that they shall file their full statements with the committee. Those who are unable to appear personally will have approximately 30 days in which to file their statements.

The first witness this morning will be Mr. William Knight. He will testify on statehood.

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM W. KNIGHT, REPRESENTING THE SITKA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, SITKA, ALASKA

Mr. KNIGHT. Madam Chairman, I don't wish to testify at this time, but I would like to present this brief on behalf of the chamber of commerce as it affects statehood.

Mrs. Prost. Thank you, Mr. Knight. (The statement referred to follows:)

SITKA, ALASKA, October 1, 1955.

To the Members of the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee:

As the duly appointed representative of the Sitka Chamber of Commerce it is my privilege to submit for your consideration this brief on the subject of statehood for Alaska.

With humility, the citizens of this community add their plea to that of many thousands of Alaskans for the privilege of self-government.

With earnest sincerity we urge your committee to support statehood for Alaska in the Congress of the United States.

With pride, we offer the Great North Star, symbol of our vast Territory with her unlimited resources, as the 49th star in the flag of the United States of America.

Respectfully submitted.

WILLIAM W. KNIGHT, (For the Sitka Chamber of Commerce).

To recount in detail the many reasons why we, in Sitka, seek statehood for Alaska would undoubtedly be a useless reiteration of the many arguments already submitted to your committee. As briefly as possible, then, the reasons why we favor statehood for Alaska are as follows:

First, the citizens of Sitka, like those of all Alaskan communities, resent a form of government which, literally, amounts to taxation without representation. We are, we feel, very good citizens of the United States. We pay the same

Federal taxes as do the citizens of the 48 States. In spite of our financial support, our patriotism, and our loyalty, however, we remain second-class citizens of the Nation we support. We are granted no voice in our Government save the muted voice of our Delegate, who may not vote on questions which so vitally concern Alaska and Alaskans.

Second, the two greatest natural resources of the Sitka area are timber and Pacific salmon. At the present time development of our timber is still in the talking stage. Through the years our community has depended to a large extent on fishing. Under Federal control the Pacific salmon is rapidly disappearing from our waters, and the economic stability of all of southeastern Alaska is threatened. We vehemently protest continued long-range control of our resources, as well as the absentee ownership of the canned-salmon industry.

Third, law enforcement under the United States commissioner-deputy marshal system of the Federal Government has been deficient in the Sitka area. Protection of life and property would be delegated to our State government were we granted statehood, and would undoubtedly prove to be a great deal more satisfactory as well as efficient.

Fourth, the development and progress of the Territory is, for physical reasons, necessarily dependent upon transportation. Primarily, our present system of transportation has been the responsibility of the Federal Government. Federal control has resulted in obstacles which impede commerce, increase the cost of living and work untold hardships on the residents of the Territory.

Fifth, statehood would resolve once and for all the problem of native land claims, and our native people would take their rightful place in society on a basis of equality-removed from the wardship of the Federal Government.

Mrs. PFOST. You do not wish to make any remarks?

Mr. KNIGHT. Not at this time, except to say that I am for statehood 100 percent.

Mrs. PFOST. Thank you. I might add that during our entire trip from Fairbanks to Nome, Cordova to Anchorage, Seward, Kodiak, and through that entire area until we arrive in Juneau we had heard only one witness who objected to statehood. But over in Juneau we did find a few people who were against statehood, particularly immediate statehood.

Are there any questions of the committee members?

Mr. BARTLETT. Does this statement which you have submitted, Mr. Knight, endorse eventual statehood or immediate statehood for Alaska?

Mr. KNIGHT. In my opinion, Mr. Bartlett, immediate statehood. Mr. BARTLETT. Thank you very much. That is all.

Mrs. ProST. Mr. Sisk?

Mr. SISK. Mr. Knight, I have not had an opportunity, of course, to read your statement, but do you feel, Mr. Knight, that the Territory of Alaska is financially and economically prepared for statehood? Mr. KNIGHT. Absolutely.

Mr. SISK. Do you feel that the people of the Territory of Alaska are prepared immediately to vote additional taxes above and beyond that of which they are now paying?

Mr. KNIGHT. I do.

Mr. SISK. In view of the fact that this has come up before the Legislature of the Territory of Alaska passed a law taxing property in 1949. Of course, a court procedure followed. But immediately upon learning apparently that was going to be held constitutional, the legislature in 1953 repealed that property tax law before it ever had. an opportunity to work. Why do you think that was done?

Mr. KNIGHT. I cannot answer that. I am not acquainted with that particular legislation.

Mr. SISK. I think that is all, Madam Chairman.

Mrs. ProST. Judge Chenoweth?

Mr. CHENOWETH. No questions.
Mrs. ProST. Mr. Utt?

Mr. UTT. No questions.

Mrs. PFOST. Mr. McFarland?

Mr. MCFARLAND. I have no questions.
Mrs. ProST. Dr. Taylor?

Mr. TAYLOR. Just one question. Mr. Knight, what portion or percentage of the adult voting population in Sitka would join you in this statement?

Mr. KNIGHT. I think the majority here is about 3 to 1 in favor of statehood.

Mr. TAYLOR. Are those who would be opposed to statehood permanent residents of Sitka or are they people who have interests here but live outside a goodly portion of the time?

Mr. KNIGHT. That is true; they live outside.

Mr. BARTLETT. One further question, Madam Chairman.
Mrs. ProST. Mr. Bartlett.

Mr. BARTLETT. You make this statement on behalf of the Sitka Chamber of Commerce?

Mr. KNIGHT. Correct.

Mr. BARTLETT. Are you a businessman in the community?
Mr. KNIGHT. I am.

Mr. BARTLETT. What is your business?

Mr. KNIGHT. Sitka Men's Store, men's clothing.

Mrs. PrOST. Thank you very much, Mr. Knight.
Mr. KNIGHT. Thank you.

Mrs. ProST. Mr. Charles Kidd will testify on schools, I believe.

STATEMENT OF CHARLES W. KIDD, CHAIRMAN, PUBLIC SCHOOLS COMMITTEE, CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, SITKA, ALASKA

Mr. KIDD. I have a short brief here, too, and also I made some copies.

Mrs. ProST. You would like your statement placed in the record in full?

Mr. KIDD. Yes, ma'am.

Mrs. ProST. Is there objection to Mr. Kidd's statement being placed in the record?

Hearing none, it is so ordered.

(The statement referred to follows:)

SITKA, ALASKA, September 27, 1955.

To: Hon. Leo W. O'Brien, Chairman, Subcommittee on Territorial and Insular Affairs, Congress of the United States.

From: Sitka Chamber of Commerce, Sitka, Alaska.

Subject: Sitka Public Schools.

The administrators for the Sitka public schools are faced with two major problems, both of which are of an interest to the Federal Government.

Problem No. 1 involves the impact on the Sitka public schools caused by the students attending the public schools, whose parents are employed by either the United States Public Health Service, the Alaska Native Service or the Civil Aeronautics Administration and who reside at Mount Edgecumbe, Alaska. Of the total enrollment in the Sitka public schools during the school year of 1954-55, 35 percent resided at Mount Edgecumbe, or based on an averaged daily attendance of 598 students, this represented 209 students. The city's portion of the school budget for the same year was $58,677. Of this amount, $17,000, or about

30 percent was received from the Federal Government under Public Law 874. Based on the number of students attending school in Sitka who reside at Mount Edgecumbe, we receive an equitable amount of the public funds available under the above-cited law. However, it is our understanding, under the present law, that Federal funds will be terminated in 1957. If these funds were terminated, it would be impossible, financially, to enroll Mount Edgecumbe students in the public school system, especially since the city already has a 2 percent sales tax which can be used only for health and schools. This tax brings in approximately $60,000 per annum, of which $35,000 is used to help administer the schools and $25,000 the Sitka Community Hospital. Under the circumstances, we are not in a position of being able to increase our revenues through a sales tax, should Federal funds terminate, since this tax is already in existence.

Our second problem is closely related to the first. With the assistance of the Alaska Public Works Administration, we have a fine new grade school building, which is in its last stages of completion. However, our present high school building, which was built in 1942, to accommodate 60 students, now houses 130 students, and on the basis of our present grade school enrollment, we will have an enrollment of 200 students in high school in the fall of 1958. This does not take into consideration the pulp mill development. Our only means of relief of this overcrowding of our high school is the construction of a new building with the assistance of Alaska public works funds. Since the money received from the Territorial tobacco tax is pledged for the next 20 years to offset the cost of the new grade school building, it is impossible for this community to build a new high school building without Federal assistance. Consequently, we are vitally interested that the Alaska public works program be maintained. If this program

were discontinued, it would be financially impossible for Sitka to build a high school building in order to meet its preesnt needs.

Therefore, we earnestly request that neither Public Law No. 874 nor the Alaska public works program be terminated. Without these two, it would be impossible for Sitka to have an adequate public school program.

Respectfully yours,

SITKA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
By C. W. KIDD,

Chairman, Public Schools Committee.

Mrs. PFOST. Mr. Kidd, will you please state your full name and address and occupation?

Mr. KIDD. I am Charles W. Kidd, Sitka, Alaska, vice president of the First Bank of Sitka.

Mrs. PFOST. Do you wish to make an oral statement?

Mr. KIDD. If I may, I would like to make a brief statement. Mrs. ProST. Proceed.

Mr. KIDD. When you have an opportunity to study this brief you will note that our public schools here in Sitka are faced with two tremendous problems.

One is that because of the establishment of the installation at Mount Edgecumbe, the United States Public Health Service, the Civil Aeronautics Association, and the Alaska Native Service, our schools have had a tremendous impact in our student body.

Now, during the school year 1954-55 approximately 30 percent of our total student body came from youngsters or students whose parents reside at Mount Edgecumbe. Of the total figure there were 598 students in our average daily attendance, and of that figure 209 resided at Mount Edgecumbe.

To offset that, under Public Law 874 we have received annuallythe school board or the city has approximately $17,000 to offset this cost due to this Federal impact, which is fair. It is comparable to the percentage of the students who are in our student body.

I happen to be a member of the school board, too, and we are under the impression that this law may possibly terminate within the next 1 to 2 years.

Our school budget as applied to the city last year was approximately $58,000, and of this amount $17,000 was Federal funds, and should these funds terminate, we are going to be financially caught in the bight of the line to carry on our school program, because the city now has a 2-percent sales tax which brings in approximately $60,000 annually, and of that amount roughly $35,000 goes toward the school budget. So we are in a position, should these Federal funds terminate, that we can't fall back on additional taxation through a sales tax regardless of whether it is 1 or 2 percent. So we are vitally interested that this Public Law 874 be maintained.

The second problem that we face has to do with Alaska public works program. We have just completed or it is in the process of being completed, a grade school building, which, I assume, has no superior grade school building to it in the Territory. And that has come through the Alaska public works funds.

We are offsetting our cost of that building by having pledged the money we receive from the Territorial tobacco tax, which is refunded to the city. We have pledged that to the Federal Government to offset the amortization of our share of the cost of the school, which exceeded a million dollars. Also the city pledged itself to issue bonds should the Federal Government call upon it to do so.

If Alaska public works should terminate, not only have we built this grade school building, but we are in position of needing a new high school. Our present building was built to house 60 students. Right now it has twice that number. And based upon present enrollment we anticipate in 2 years we will have 200 in grade schools or approximately 2% times what it was built to handle. If the Alaska public works terminates, it will be impossible to build a high school building to meet our needs.

I want to make this very clear and very strong: This doesn't take into consideration any pulp development, which seems so imminent. So we earnestly ask you to maintain Public Law 874 and also the Alaska public works program be maintained because that is our only possible solution to build any school facilities, because the city of Sitka could not financially build on its own a million dollar building or one that would exceed that amount, or even a lesser amount.

Mr. Paul J. Cole, who is the superintendent of schools, also helped in the preparation of this. If I may, I would like to ask him if he has anything to add to what I have said.

Mr. COLE. I have nothing to add. He did a fine job.

Mrs. PFOST. Thank you.

I might add, Mr. Kidd, your remarks have a very familiar ring to me. Through the 19 counties in my district we hear most everywhere we go that our schools are inadequate. Our problem is how can we build sufficient buildings to reach around.

Judge Chenoweth, do you have any questions?

Mr. CHENOWETH. My opinion would be that Public Law 874 is going to be continued. I say you should have no apprehension over that, because, you see, every State is interested. It is not just an Alaska program, but a general program.

You say it is fairly adequate to meet your needs?

Mr. KIDD. We think we receive an equitable amount from it. Mr. CHENOWETH. You have taken care of the grade school building?