Moving the capital, it has been discussed since statehood was granted 49 years ago.
With the recent corruption trials and convictions of three legislators in the last year, maybe it's time to make the move from Juneau to somewhere more accessible to average citizens.
Rep. Bill Stoltze voiced his support of the idea of at least moving the Alaska State Legislature to somewhere on the road system during a town hall meeting at the Chugiak Senior Center, Jan. 5.
“I'm in favor of moving the legislative body,” he said. “As long as it's not in Chugiak-Eagle River. I'd hate to mess up our beautiful community.”
While I agree moving the Legislature is a good idea, this is one of the rare occasions when I find myself disagreeing with Stoltze.
Why not bring the Legislature to the Chugiak-Eagle River area? It seems to be the perfect compromise to me.
One of the major objections to bringing the Legislature to Anchorage is that it is Anchorage. The people from Fairbanks, Juneau and rural Alaska are in agreement that there is more to the state than Anchorage. So moving the Legislature to Anchorage would be difficult.
But moving it to the Chugiak-Eagle River area might be a pill that is easier to swallow.
And yes, I know the Chugiak-Eagle River is part of Anchorage, but is it really?
How many of you have friends and co-workers who live in Anchorage that have no clue the Municipality of Anchorage extends beyond Muldoon Road? Who think we live in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough? Or that we are part of the City of Palmer?
Having been born and raised in the area, I've heard it for the better part of 41 years. With separate postal designations, unlike the rest of Anchorage, letters are actually addressed Chugiak and Eagle River. When was the last time you got a letter from a friend whose address is Spenard or even South Anchorage?
While we're part of Anchorage, we're still separate in how people think about us, which makes us a great choice for becoming the new home for the state Legislature. We're still close enough to town to get support from the Anchorage legislators, but we're far enough away that the folks in Fairbanks and Nome shouldn't object.
As for Stoltze's concern that being the legislative home for the state would mess up the beauty of the area, I also disagree.
Some land would have to be developed to construct proper legislative offices and a legislative chamber that would allow residents to observe the session from a comfortable gallery.
Perhaps Eklutna Inc. could enter into a long-term lease with the state for some property in the Powder Reserve area to be the new legislative home for Alaska. Being right off the Glenn Highway would provide easy access to everyone, even the citizens, who currently have to either fly or take a boat to get to Juneau.
Bringing the Legislature to town would be a beautiful thing for the local economy.
That is if you believe what the people of Juneau say about the devastating economic effects of moving the capital.
Earlier this month, Anchorage Rep. Kevin Meyer pre-filed a bill seeking to move the legislative session from Juneau to Anchorage (House Bill 293), leading State Sen. Kim Elton of Juneau to point out how the move would devastate the economy of Juneau and possibly Southeast.
So if the Legislature has that much economic clout, why not bring it to town. Local restaurants would benefit from the influx of legislators and staffers when in session. The hotel and apartment industry would receive a boost.
The sales of gas, groceries and other items would increase, helping make the Chugiak-Eagle River area a major force in the state's economic picture.
While the local economy would receive a nice boost, the state would also save a lot of money, as the largest portion of the Legislature would be able to sleep in their homes and would thus no longer need the housing stipend they receive when in Juneau.
More than half the members of the Legislature live in the Anchorage or the Matanuska Valley. That is 31 of the 60 legislators who will not need a housing stipend, and they can go home to be with their families every night if we bring the Legislature to town. Add to that the staffers for each legislator who will also be able stay home and not move to Juneau for three months.
Legislators from Fairbanks and Kenai can drive on two of Alaska's beautiful highways, instead of spending hours on an airplane flying south. Then on the weekends, they can drive home.
The only people who I see being impacted by moving the Legislature to the Chugiak-Eagle River area is the handful of delegates who represent Southeast Alaska.
Doing the math, the state would not only save money by not paying the housing stipend to 31 Anchorage and Mat-Su legislators, it would also save on travel. The current price for a round trip ticket to Juneau from Anchorage is $469.50, figuring a legislator will make at least three trips back and forth during a typical legislative session, that equals at least $1,400 in saved travel costs per person.
Yes, the state would likely reimburse legislators for driving to and from the new legislative center, but it will cost far less than $1,400 per legislator.
So let's review the advantages of locating at least the state Legislature in the Chugiak-Eagle River area.
First, it will boost the economy. Second, it will provide access to a greater number of the average Alaskans. Third, it will save the state some money. And finally, it will be located in Chugiak-Eagle River and not in Anchorage.
Do we really want all those politicians, staffers and lobbyists hanging out in town for three months each year? It makes me think that maybe Stoltze was right, having more than our local legislators and staff in town could mess up our beautiful community.
Reach the reporter at darrell.breese@alaskastar.com.
