Haines Borough assembly reviews state land entitlement inventory, plans parcel reselection and follow-up research

Chen Wu presented the Haines Borough Assembly Committee of the Whole with the borough’s municipal‑entitlement inventory and a recommended strategy for deselecting low‑priority parcels and reselecting others from the state.

Chen Wu, the meeting presenter, told the assembly the borough is assigned about 5,967 acres under the municipal‑entitlement statute, with roughly 2,500 acres already conveyed and about 2,400 acres approved but not yet transferred. He said approximately 1,600–1,700 acres remain in the borough’s selection pocket but that some of those parcels are unlikely to convey because federal priorities or private allotments take precedence.

“we have, 5,900 acres land that's under our municipal entitlement quota,” Chen said, summarizing the packet material and maps provided to members. He explained that the borough can select parcels designated by the state as transferable (designation examples in the packet include GU for General Use, PR for Preserve and AS for Settlement) and that statutory rules and surveying can change acre totals after initial selection.

Assembly members pressed Chen on two related goals: first, to deselect parcels that occupy quota but have low prospect of conveyance so the borough can free quota space; and second, to pursue additional entitlement allocation from the state through administrative appeals or legislative support. One member noted the borough is oversubscribed by about 736 acres and asked how to reduce that figure; Chen said relinquishing parcels that have low chance of approval would release acreage back into the borough’s quota and allow selection of other parcels up to the statutory maximum (about 956 acres currently selectable).

Members singled out particular parcels for follow‑up. H12, a parcel behind Delta Western and near a light industrial area, was questioned because it appears designated PR (preserve) despite local familiarity with surrounding uses; Chen said parcel designations are appealable and recommended the assembly consider petitioning the state to change designations where appropriate. Members also discussed several tideland parcels (H T 13, H T 14 and others) around the western peninsula and town‑site upland parcels near the Lutak Road and Chilkat River beaches that Chen marked as potentially useful for public recreation or residential sale.

Don Turner described historical survey baselines and glacial rebound, noting that accretion and changing shorelines complicate tideland claims and that private upland owners often retain rights to accreted land. Assembly members acknowledged legal complexity—some tideland claims may require appeals or litigation—and asked staff to document ownership and liability risks before the borough pursues transfers.

Members also discussed H28 (Williams Bay), a flat area previously rejected by the state; Chen said a past borough appeal was denied but suggested reselection because the reason for rejection was not clear in the packet. Several members encouraged selecting parcels contiguous with existing borough land where feasible to improve access and reduce future management costs.

No formal motions or votes were recorded during the meeting. The assembly agreed to ask Chen and borough staff to research the parcels discussed—confirm current state designations, check for federal or private priority claims, estimate surveying needs and costs—and return a prioritized list and proposed resolutions at a future regular meeting.

The meeting packet cited the municipal‑entitlement provisions of Alaska statute and referenced the state Department of Natural Resources (DLNR) processes for designation, appeal and conveyance; assembly members discussed possible outreach to state legislators mentioned in the packet (a state senator was referenced by members during the meeting).

Next steps: Chen will compile the assembly’s parcel interests into a recommended list with clarifying details (designations, known encumbrances, likely survey costs) and present it at a regular Assembly meeting for formal direction or resolution.