Alaska

A smaller, stopgap Sealaska land bill is on the back burner – at least for now.

But the full measure is scheduled for markup during a congressional hearing this week.

Representative Don Young’s main legislation would convey about 70,000 acres of Tongass National Forest timberlands to Sealaska.

His smaller bill would turn over only a 20th of that acreage. But it calls for a faster-than-usual transfer. Sealaska has said it would provide enough timber to keep its logging business going.

Spokesman Michael Anderson says Young wants to focus on the larger legislation.

“We have the smaller bill waiting in the wings in case there’s any sort of hang-up with the larger one as the process goes forward. The region and industry need to be sustained in the short term. So we’re looking at every possible viable option at this point,” Anderson says.

The larger Sealaska measure is one of 14 land bills before the House Committee on Natural Resources, which meets Wednesday.

The shorter measure is not scheduled for that hearing.

The Senate is also expected to mark up its version of the Sealaska lands legislation soon.

Robert Dillon, spokesman for sponsor Lisa Murkowski, says it’s scheduled for June 18th before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

But he says that’s tentative.

“The bill isn’t complete yet. And also there are a number of other bills that other senators on the committee, including Chairman (Ron) Wyden, want to mark up during that session that aren’t ready yet either,” Dillon says.

That measure is cosponsored by Senator Mark Begich.

All the bills are controversial.

Some environmental groups say they would badly damage fish and wildlife habitat. Small Prince of Wales Island-area communities say it would devastate the landscape and threaten hunting and fishing. And several sportsmen’s groups say it would limit access to popular areas.

The smaller House bill is H.R. 1306. The larger one is H.R. 740. The Senate bill is S. 340.

 

Sealaska recently sold its Global Logistics business to 20Cubed, a much-larger firm with offices in about 10 countries.

The subsidiary managed international shipping, warehousing and related services, as does its new owner.

“We didn’t believe that that particular type of logistics would be able to grow to the size of company that we expect,” said Chris McNeil, Sealaska’s president and CEO.

He said the Southeast-based regional Native corporation is reengineering its portfolio and narrowing its variety of companies. That includes those accessing a controversial federal contract-preference provision.

“Some of the smaller companies were set up to take advantage of the section 8(a) opportunities,” he said. “And where the 8(a) opportunities have existed and been strong we’ve expanded our platform. But where we think that perhaps it will not going to be able to meet our goals, then we’re moving in other directions.”

While Sealaska’s shed one subsidiary, it’s looking for another.

Hear iFriendly audio.

McNeil said the board and management are discussing an investment closer to home.

“We’re expecting that we would move forward with an operation that would more strongly reflect our Native values, more particularly capacity building and leadership (and) the possibility of competitive advantage in the sector,” he said.

“We’re very interested in the impact an operation could have on our tribal-member shareholders in the region, as well as possibly in the Pacific Northwest.”

He won’t name the company or its line of business.

But he said this and other changes could reduce revenues in the short term.

“We’re doing it from a position of strength because we have a very strong balance sheet that will support us to be able to move forward in this direction,” he said.

The ultimate goal is to be profitable within three years – without depending on 7(i) payments. Those come from a pool of all regional Native corporations’ resource earnings.

Read details of Sealaska’s business operations in its annual report.

Sealaska’s business decisions and leadership are roundly criticized by some of its 21,000 shareholders.

Mick Beasley is one of 10 independent candidates challenging four incumbents for seats on the corporation’s board of directors. He’s among those frustrated with the corporation.

“So we sacrificed how many year for the last direction. Same leaders, different story now. I kind of think we’re still waiting for our stimulus,” Beasley said.

Beasley has authored resolutions calling for board term limits and an end to board-directed discretionary voting. He’s also run for the board before.

He said he’s frustrated Sealaska hasn’t moved faster on minerals development and other resource-extraction operations.

“Let’s just get new people in there. Let’s get some rotation; let’s get some change. It’s almost like if you just look at our operations, we could have anybody in there. If we didn’t have 7(i) right now, we’d be in a world of hurt,” he said.

Sealaska’s annual report for 2012 shows it made almost $312 million in gross revenues. That’s a 20 percent increase over 2011.

Net revenues, or profits, were $11.3 million during the same period. That’s 40 percent more than the previous year, but less than during 2010 and 2009.

 

Ten Sealaska shareholders are challenging four incumbents for the regional Native corporation’s board of directors. That’s the largest number of independent candidates in five years, although some earlier ballots came close.

Proxy statements, which include ballots, were sent to Sealaska shareholders May 10th. Voting runs through June 20th, just before the corporation’s annual meeting, which is June 22th, in Hoonah.

They can be mailed, faxed or dropped off in person. Ballots can also be cast at the annual meeting.

Corporate Secretary Nicole Hallingstad said online voting has become increasingly popular.

“The first year of online voting, about 11 percent of our shareholders voted online. The second year that rose just a little bit to 13 percent,” she said. “We’re early in the proxy process, so it’s impossible at this point to say where that final percentage will fall. But higher levels than that have already come in through online voting for this year’s proxy season.”

This year’s online voting is done through a new shareholder-information system called “My Sealaska.” The secure site also includes stock information and dividend payment history.

No resolutions are on this year’s ballot. Prior years’ measures addressed term limits, discretionary voting and stock for shareholder descendants. (Hear a report on last year’s issues.)

Tribal members can vote a specific number of shares for up to four candidates they support. Or they can vote “discretionary,” turning their ballots over to the board, which supports its own members.

Most of this year’s 14 board candidates are in their 50s, 60s or 70s. But three are between 30 and 40.

Hallingstad, also vice president of communications, says that includes Ralph Wolfe. He was last year’s appointed youth representative on the Sealaska board.

“This year’s slate does include some of our younger shareholders and it’s great to see that successive generations of shareholders for Sealaska are seeing this as a mechanism to serve the Native community,” Hallingstad said.

Sealaska added several thousand younger shareholder descendants after a 2007 vote.

The regional Native corporation is headquartered in Juneau and has more than 21,000 shareholders. Most are of Tlingit, Haida or Tsimshian descent. Close to half live in Southeast.

Read the proxy and annual meeting notice, which includes candidate statements and biographical information starting on page 10.

This year’s independent candidates are:

• Mick Beasley, Myrna Gardner and Ernestine Hayes of Juneau.
• Frank Jack III of Angoon.
• Angela Michaud of Anchorage.
• Ralph Wolfe of Yakutat.
• Will Micklin of Alpine, California.
• Edward Sarabia Jr. of South Glastonbury, Connecticut.
• Richard “Jack” Strong of Bonney Lake, Washington.
• And Bonnie Jo Borchick of Tucson, Arizona.

This year’s board incumbents are:

• Patrick Anderson of Anchorage
• Jodi Mitchell of Juneau.
• Jackie Johnson Pata of Fairfax, Virginia.
• And Richard Rinehart Jr. of Bellevue, Washington.

Board members serve three-year terms.

 

 

A new, smaller Sealaska land-selection measure faces opposition from the federal government.

The legislation would transfer 3,600 acres of the Tongass National Forest to the Southeast-based regional Native corporation.

Sealaska’s timberlands have been logged of much of their harvestable trees. Officials say the acreage will keep timber operations going.

At a Congressional hearing Thursday, U.S. Forest Service official Jim Peña objected to a requirement to transfer the land within 60 days of passage.

“These two parcels would be conveyed without the carefully negotiated replaced to special use authorizations and public access that many stakeholders view as essential,” Peña said.

One parcel is on the Cleveland Peninsula, between Wrangell and Ketchikan. The other is at Election Creek, on Prince of Wales Island. (Read the measure.) (See maps of the parcels.)

Peña spoke before the House Committee on Indian and Alaska Native Affairs. The bill’s author, Alaska Congressman Don Young, chairs that panel.

The acreage is also part of a much larger measure that would transfer about 70,000 acres to Sealaska. (Scroll down to read earlier reports on both bills.)

That bill was also before the committee.

Young said it’s a compromise. (Read the larger bill.)

“First introduced over six years ago, this bill has undergone an extensive vetting process throughout the region. It has resulted in meaningful changes, such as providing for continued public access to lands, and modified certain lands among them,” he said.

The Forest Service’s Peña said the larger measure is much improved. But he wants further changes before the administration lends its support. 

He said the bill “leaves out key provisions essential to a balanced solution and adds others that make reaching a solution more difficult. Consequently the Department of Agriculture does not support enactment.”

Some environmental groups and towns near areas to be logged oppose the measure.

Southeast hunting guide Jimmie Rosenbruch spoke for sportsmen’s groups against the land transfers.

He said Sealaska’s logging will reduce access, as well as wildlife numbers.

“It’s kind of Sealaska to offer access for guides to utilize these lands for a 10-year period after their Forest Service permit expires. (But) I don’t know there will be much benefit. Having access to clearcut areas wouldn’t be worth anything. There’s no wildlife there. They are D-O-N-E … finished,” Rosenbruch said.

Last year’s version of Young’s bill passed the House, but not the Senate.

And the Senate’s latest version, sponsored by Lisa Murkowski and Mark Begich, has undergone more negotiation and changes.

Sealaska board member Bryon Mallott said that measure is more likely to be the final legislative vehicle.

But he prefers the House version.

“In my personal judgment, there is more equity and justice in the House bill. But I also know from long, long experience, that what the Native community can easily and passionately feel is equity and justice for others is often very hard to ultimately make possible,” Mallott said.

Young’s Sealaska bills now head to the full House Resources Committee. If either passes, it will go to the House floor for a full vote.

It would most likely be packaged with other legislation. That’s what happened last year.

Read earlier reports on the legislation:

• New Sealaska land bills introduced in Congress
• SEACC backs Sealaska bill, 9 towns oppose it
• Congress Looking At Sealaska Lands Bill
• Second bill proposes smaller Sealaska land transfer

 

A second measure transferring Tongass National Forest land to Sealaska is before Congress on Thursday.

It’s stopgap legislation turning 3,600 acres over to the Southeast-based regional Native corporation. Two parcels are proposed, one on the Cleveland Peninsula and the other at Election Creek on Prince of Wales Island.

A much larger bill before Congress would transfer about 70,000 acres.

Sealaska CEO Chris McNeil says it’s needed to keep logging operations going.

“Obviously we’d like the more systemic bill, but it’s important for us to be able to recognize that we have important timing and operational considerations to achieve. And that’s why there’s the second bill, which is really a subset of the first,” McNeil says.

Both measures are sponsored by Alaska Congressman Don Young.

They and four others will go before the House Committee on Natural Resources’ Subcommittee on Indian and Alaska Native Affairs at 10 a.m. Thursday, Alaska time.

Similar legislation is before the Senate.

The House version of the larger measure includes more of what Sealaska asked for. The Senate bill shows more changes resulting from negotiations with environmental groups, small communities, tour operators and other critics.

Young’s measures are House Bill 740 and House Resolution 1306. The main Senate bill, sponsored by Lisa Murkowski and Mark Begich, is Senate Bill 340.

Sealaska is making more money.

Southeast Alaska’s regional Native corporation says it brought in almost $312 million during 2012.

That’s close to 20 percent more than the previous year — and the largest amount from the past five years.

The numbers are for total income, also called gross revenues.

Sealaska’s profits, or net revenue, are $11.3 million for 2012.

That’s 40 percent more than 2011. But it’s lower than the previous two years.

The numbers are in Sealaska’s 2012 annual report, which was released Friday. The Juneau-based corporation has about 21,000 shareholders. Corporate officials were not immediately available for comment.

Link to a copy of the annual report.

More than half Sealaska’s 2012 gross revenues were in the service sector, including environmental contracting and security.

About a quarter came from manufacturing, mainly plastics factories in the Lower 48 and Mexico.

A little less than a fifth of the overall earnings came from natural resources, including timber and gravel operations. The rest was from investments.

The manufacturing, service and investments had higher profits than the previous year. But natural resource profits dropped. We’ll take a closer look at some of those business sectors in a future report.

Read the corporation’s press release describing its annual report and future goals.