Mr. MACKINNON. That would be rather hard to answer. Mr. O'BRIEN. In other words, do you have a shortage of office space in Juneau? Mr. MACKINNON. At present there is and there isn't. There is a shortage of desirable office space. In connection with this committee of which I am a member, we have made a survey to try and find out how much space is available in town for Federal offices that we could interest in coming to Juneau. We have one location, the old Alaska Juneau Mine Office Building which could provide around 2,000 square feet of space. But the owners of the building are not interested in fixing it up, making it habitable for office space. It would have to be taken as it is. It is a similar situation as that throughout the town. I do not think that if the Federal offices were to move out of all of the non-Federal space that they would be occupied immediately, but I do think that within a very short time they would become occupied again by possibly Federal agencies. I do not know. I think they would be filled up. Mr. O'BRIEN. I think you are probably right. We have a problem a great deal like that in my city with the State. A number of buildings have been constructed by private contractors and with the State signing a long-term contract. The State seems to grow faster than the available space. Mr. MACKINNON. There is a great deal of hesitancy here among private individuals to construct office space because of the rather temporary nature of a Federal lease agreement. They can terminate on 30 or 60 days' notice, I believe. If a man were to spend a considerable amount of money to put up a building or to renovate an existing structure, it very well could be that the Government would come along and say, "I am sorry, we cannot occupy it." Mr. O'BRIEN. Do you think if the Government were to sign longterm leases in advance for buildings to be constructed that it would spur such construction? Mr. MACKINNON. I believe it would spur private construction, yes. Mrs. ProST. Would my chairman yield for a question? Mr. O'BRIEN. Yes. Mrs. Prost. How much per year are you paying in rent for Federal office space? Mr. MACKINNON. I cannot tell you on the total. I can tell you in a few instances what they are paying. There is one occupying roughly 200 square feet of space that is paying somewhat over $10,000 per annum rent exclusive of utilities. They are paying their own lights, garbage, and janitor service over and above that. Mrs. PrOST. How many such units would there be? You say one unit. Mr. MACKINNON. That is, one agency is occupying that amount of space for that much money. Mrs. Prost. Approximately how many agencies are there renting space? Mr. MACKINNON. The total of the agencies that are renting space outside is 11 that I have contacted. I am sure there are possibly others. But on the rather short notice we had to appear before this committee, that is all I could dig up right at the moment. The maximum, the largest renter is occupying 17,119 square feet of space.. They, in addition, are leasing out 4,668 feet of space to another Government agency. It is a lease within a lease agreement between two Federal agencies. There has been some talk of putting an additional wing on this building. I know it has been proposed for 10 to 20 years by taking the plans and looking them over. That would partially solve the problem, but it would not be a final solution. What the solution is, I do not know. I am not in any position to solve the problem or even suggest solutions other than a wing. But what I would like to do is to ask you ladies and gentlemen what steps we should take to go about procuring additional Federal office space. Mr. O'BRIEN. Do you think the Federal Government would save money and give better administration if it had a Federal office building here of its own or a series of buildings? Mr. MACKINNON. I think it would. There are several offices that are occupying locations in 2 and 3 different spots throughout town. Naturally that hinders any administration of those facilities. Mr. O'BRIEN. The size of the Federal agencies here, is that growing? Mr. MACKINNON. It is to a great degree, yes. As one example, I do not know whether I am speaking out of turn or not, but one of the agencies, the Forest Service, with the increased timber activity in this area and the sale of large tracts of timber, says they can perceive within the next 5 years they will have at least 15 additional employees to administer these large tracts of timber. That is one that is growing. The United States Geological Survey is in the same boat. The increase in mineral activity in the area is going to cause them to expand their facilities. Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Utt? Mr. UTT. I have no questions. Mr. PrOST. No, thank you. Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Sisk? Mr. SISK. The General Services Administration handles all these rentals, do they not? Mr. MACKINNON. That is correct. Mr. SISK. Do I understand they use a different rental agreement up here than what they use in the States? Do you have any information on it? Mr. MACKINNON. I am not familiar with that; no, sir. Mr. SISK. You say they only allow a 30 to 60 days' termination. Mr. MCKINNON. From what I understand, yes, sir. They can terminate on 60 days' notice. Mr. SISK. Actually, you have no particular recommendation then, other than more or less just giving a picture of the situation. Mr. MACKINNON. I wish to present the case for the Juneau Chamber of Commerce that the office space is needed. We would like to ask due consideration be given it, and if you have any advice to our committee on what steps we can take to go about securing additional space in Juneau. Mr. SISK. Let me ask you this: Do you think it would be more practical to advocate the construction of an additional Federal building owned by the Federal Government, or do you think it would be more practical to induce the GSA to give more stable or longer-term leases that would induce the private capital to build and construct these offices? I mean, do you have an opinion? Mr. MACKINNON. I have personal opinion definitely in favor of private enterprise over the Federal Government's participation in any form of business. That is my own personal opinion now, and not the opinion of the chamber. Mr. O'BRIEN. Well, Federal construction of a building to house Federal agencies would hardly be an invasion of rights of private enterprise. Our offices are located in federally constructed buildings in Washington, and I do not believe there has been any protest from the people in Washington. Mr. MACKINNON. We would probably get the protests from some of the property owners at Juneau for advocating the construction of a Federal building which might remove some of their tenants, but I think on the whole in the long run it would benefit them, rather. Mr. O'BRIEN. If that were not feasible, you would undoubtedly favor better leases than you have now. Mr. MACKINNON. That is right. Mr. O'BRIEN. Certainly, 60-day termination is not likely to persuade anyone to improve or construct new buildings. Mr. MACKINNON. That is right. Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Sisk? Mr. SISK. I think that pretty well concludes it. The only thing I wanted to comment on actually is, this is the situation you will find throughout the States. I know in my home district there are far more buildings being leased by the General Services Administration, that is, many times as many square feet of floor space being leased than there is actually in the Federal building. As far as the Government constructing a new Federal building here, I would say it probably would be a pretty tough situation. I believe that is all. Mr. O'BRIEN. Everyone else has led into this question of statehood. Perhaps this would be a new approach. Do you suppose the Government is granting these short-term leases because the Government is anticipating early statehood? [Laughter.] Mr. SISK. Mr. Chairman? Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Sisk? Mr. SISK. I do not want to overlook this gentleman with the $64 question before we get through. Are you in favor of immediate statehood for Alaska? Mr. MACKINNON. Well, as my previous colleagues have said, that is a loaded question. But I will have to stand by the same arguments that Mr. Banfield presented, that I am not in favor of immediate statehood for Alaska. it. Mr. SISK. Are you in favor of it ever becoming a State? Mr. MACKINNON. Yes, sir; when the time comes that we can afford Mr. SISK. What will you use as a measure? Mr. MACKINNON. Well, the present tax burden that we are subjected to is, I believe, greater-I cannot quote figures but I believe it is greater than any burden on similar people in the States, and when the basis of population and industry in here will alleviate somewhat 71196-56-pt. 4 -5 the burden on us-well, when we feel we can afford it. That is about what it will amount to. Mr. O'BRIEN. Is it not also true that the cost of your pork chops, milk, and eggs is greater here than in the States? Mr. MACKINNON. Quite true, sir. Mr. SISK. Let me ask a couple of questions. And you are not on the spot as to answering these particular questions because you might consider them personal. Getting back to the tax, do you own your home, Mr. MacKinnon? Mr. MACKINNON. I am buying it; yes, sir. Is Mr. SISK. That is about like myself and a lot of the rest of us. it a fair question, would you give an approximate value of your home? Mr. MACKINNON. I will tell you what I paid for it, what I am paying for it. I paid $18,750 for it. Mr. SISK. How much taxes are you paying a year in property tax, Mr. McKinnon? Mr. MACKINNON. It is somewhat-my wife takes care of those. things. [Laughter.] It is around $206, I believe. Mrs. PrOST. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. SISK. Yes. Mrs. Prost. How many bedrooms does your home contain? Mrs. Prost. Do you know the square footage of floor space? Mr. SISK. Actually, Mr. MacKinnon, I am just trying to compare a little bit here the actual tax burden because that has been discussed to some considerable extent and I am interested in getting a comparison of the tax burden being borne by the people in the Territory as compared to that in the States. Of course, sometimes we formulate opinions on it and that was the point in asking the question, and not to inquire into your personal affairs. Mr. MACKINNON. That is all right Mr. SISK. You figure then you approximately are paying a little over $200 a year on your property? Mr. MCKINNON. Yes. Mr. SISK. Do you know what the assessed valuation of that is at present? Mr. MCKINNON. With this new evaluation they have just come up with this year I believe it is very close to what I paid for it. Mr. SISK. Very close to the $18,000? Mr. MCKINNON. It seems to me that the house is valued at something over 16,000 and the land at $2,000. Mr. SISK. This $200 that you are paying, I believe you said $206, where does that tax money go? Does it go to schools? Do they get a percentage of that? Mr. MCKINNON. It goes to the city, within the incorporated city limits the property tax goes to the city, which in turn doles it back to the school district on a proportionate basis. It amounts to-I am on the school board here too, so that kind of hits the spot-the school district is now Juneau-Douglas Joint School District-it is paying on roughly 8 mills of the assessed valuation. But due to the difference in the kinds of taxation or assessment, the school tax is applied on last year's city property tax for property evaluation because we have to evaluate as of June 1, and I believe the city does it as of August 1 or September 1. I am not sure which. But we apply our tax as of last year's city evaluation. So this year it is very difficult to make a true estimate. Mr. SISK. If you lived outside of the incorporated city limits of Juneau but in a school district, could you give me the approximate figure, what would be your tax? Mr. MCKINNON. It would be 8 mills, whatever that is. Mr. SISK. That would be all the tax you would pay. In other words, people who live in this area but outside of the incorporated city limits of Juneau are actually paying an 8-mill tax. Mr. MCKINNON. Outside of the incorporated limits but within the Juneau-Douglas Independent School District, pay 8 mills property tax. Mr. SISK. That is the total property tax they pay; they pay no other property tax at all? Mr. MCKINNON. No, sir. Mr. SISK. Do you feel that is particularly burdensome? How do you feel, in comparison with what we pay in the States? Mr. MCKINNON. I am not too familiar with the tax you do pay in the States. That 8 mills that the people outside of the incorporated city limits but within the school district pay is solely for the school. It does not give them police protection, fire protection, sewage, water, or anything else. They provide all of that themselves. But the 8 mills goes solely to the school district. Mr. SISK. If I have this figured right here, I would assume that they would pay Mrs. PFOST. $144 tax at 8 mills. Mr. SISK. Your city tax is less than that then. Mr. MCKINNON. The figure that I gave you for the evaluation of my property was the current valuation in the city. Previously it was figured at about 60 percent of that figure, on the previous valuation of the city. You see this is the new one. That is the follow-up there. Mr. SISK. I see. That is right. We could not get a true picture due to the difference in assessed valuation on the breakdown. That is right. Mrs. Prost. How old is your home, approximately? Mr. MCKINNON. About 18 years old. Mrs. PFOST. And what is the size of your lot? Mr. MCKINNON. It is 40 by 70, I believe, or 50 by 70. No, 40 by 70. Mr. O'BRIEN. Will the lady yield? Mrs. Prost. Yes. Mr. O'BRIEN. I think it is very difficult to get a realistic comparison. I was interested. And I appreciate the witness being so frank. We are probing into your personal affairs. If someone asked what would be the tax in the States, well, my house in Albany is assessed for $14,600. I would assume I could sell it for about $23,000. My lot is 50 by 200. I have four bedrooms. It is an older house than yours, perhaps 25 years old, but I pay $600 a year in taxes, city taxes. That covers school and practically everything else. On the basis of that it would seem that you are getting away very lightly up here. But I |