House Transportation Committee approves bill clarifying land use in Alaska Railroad easements, adopts amendment on fees

Juneau — On May 8 the Alaska House Transportation Committee voted to advance House Bill 136, the bill that clarifies uses of land within Alaska Railroad easements, after adopting an amendment that codified the railroad’s stated practice on fees and crossings.

The committee passed amendment 1 (H.5) offered by Representative Ivy Mina and then moved House Bill 136 out of committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes. Representative Stutes made the motion to move the bill; committee co-chair Kerrick announced the bill had moved “with no objection.”

Why it matters: HB136 addresses the relationship between private landowners, public projects and the state-owned Alaska Railroad Corporation where the railroad controls an easement. Supporters said the bill restores statutory clarity about when exclusion of property owners is justified; opponents warned it could affect trail projects and utility access without more detail.

What the amendment does: Representative Mina said the amendment was drafted to reflect the railroad’s current practices after testimony and to “ensure property owners that they won't be charged fees on gardens even if the railroad changes their leadership,” and to codify that crossings should be revenue-neutral. The amendment’s sponsor described it as taking “what the railroad is already doing and helps to ensure” those practices are retained.

Key discussion points: Committee members pressed the Alaska Railroad and the Department of Transportation on how crossing and utility fees are set and how much revenue the railroad receives. Megan Clemons, external affairs director for the Alaska Railroad Corporation, told the committee that crossing fees are intended to be revenue neutral and that there are real costs associated with building and maintaining crossings, including diagnostic studies and regulatory compliance. Clemons said, speaking to the committee’s questions, that in 2022 DOT’s annual real-estate permitting fees with the railroad were “just over $82,000” and annual signal maintenance “was just over $250,000.”

Department of Transportation legislative liaison Andy Mills provided a different, broader figure for DOT: he said Northern Region crossings data identified about $1.6 million for a FY21–FY25 period and that signal maintenance runs “short of about half a million, annually.” Representatives noted the discrepancy between the numbers and asked DOT and the railroad to provide more detailed, vetted figures for committee review.

Representative John McCabe proposed a conceptual amendment (withdrawn) that would have prohibited the Alaska Railroad Corporation from charging state agencies or public utilities a fee to use a railway utility corridor. McCabe argued fees charged to utilities and state agencies ultimately come from Alaskans and ratepayers; he withdrew the conceptual amendment after members signaled they were not prepared to adopt it without further information.

Sponsor remarks and legal context: Representative Kopp, identified as the bill sponsor, said the bill seeks balance. He cited historic easement purposes in the Alaska Railroad Act and testified about long-standing private crossings that some families have maintained for decades. The sponsor and others cited the Alaska Railroad Transfer Act and a 2020 Alaska Supreme Court decision (the Godspeed case) during debate as background for statutory interpretation.

Actions taken: Amendment 1 (H.5) was moved by Representative Mina, discussed, and passed. Representative Stutes moved that House Bill 136 (LS 0640H) be reported from the committee as amended, with recommendations and fiscal notes; the motion carried with no objection and the bill will proceed with the committee’s report attached.

What was not decided: The committee did not adopt the conceptual amendment that would bar fees to state agencies and public utilities; members requested additional documentation from DOT, the railroad and utilities to reconcile differing figures before considering that or similar language.

Next steps: House Bill 136 will go forward from the Transportation Committee to the next stage in the legislative process with the committee’s recommendations and fiscal notes. Committee members requested follow-up materials from DOT, Alaska Railroad Corporation and utilities to guide future policy questions about fee structures and revenue neutrality.