ALASKA NATIVES COMMISSION
JOINT FEDERAL-STATE COMMISSION
ON
POLICIES AND PROGRAMS AFFECTING
ALASKA NATIVES
4000 Old Seward Highway, Suite 100
Anchorage,
Alaska 99503
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Witness List | Exhibit
List
| PDF Version
Deposition Exhibit #11 - Testimony
of Joeneal R. Hicks
REPORT TO THE ALASKA NATIVE REVIEW COMMISSION
(HOUSING
WITHIN THE AHTNA REGION)
July 18, 1992
Submitted by Joeneal R. Hicks
Commissioner,
Copper River Basin Regional Housing Authority
My report is intended
to give you, the Alaska Native Review Commission, an insight
on problem issues that are a direct result of Housing
Urban Development (HUD) funding within the Ahtna Region. Though
my report is not conclusive, it gives you a general overview
of the situation, whether good or bad, as it exists today. I
strongly point out that this report entails the Ahtna Region
only, however, HUD funded housing problems in the State of Alaska
can be considered the same.
The housing program within the Ahtna
Region began in the late 70's as a result of inadequate and substandard
native homes,
poverty, poor health standards, and the need for better native
living. Kluti-Kaah Corporation, the native village corporation
for the village of Copper Center, was the first applicant for
HUE funded homes. Intended at the time was to provide low income
housing for the native elderly. With assistance from the Copper
River Native Association (CRNA), HUD responded by appointment
of a housing authority, now commonly known as the Copper River
Basin Regional Housing Authority. Kluti-Kaah’s request
was based on the understanding that funds used would come from
Indian Housing monies. Thus, any benefit derived would be theirs
as only natives would be eligible for housing occupancy. Within
six years following this request, five other villages would have
applied for and received housing assistance.
But first, before
HUD monies could be spent, there was need for land. Discussions
and meetings abounded, and in short, the Ahtna
Regional Corporation was held to provide the needed land. This
approach, as was the understanding between the parties involved,
would provide low income housing to Ahtna natives in need.
Basically, providing land was a question of economics, as it
would provide
better living standards and allow the Ahtna native to be self-sufficient.
The agreements reached was that when the home was paid for,
the land and house would revert to the home buyer. Housing was
exclusively
for native use and occupancy as Indian monies were used. It
is this scenario that would later become the biggest problem
factor
regarding housing development in the Ahtna Region.
Because
land was vital to the upsurge in housing re-quests, lands selected
under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act
was but
one solution. Repeatedly, CRBRHA elaborated on section 14(c)(3)
of said Act, as it obligated villages to reconvey lands,
if not incorporated as a city, to the State of Alaska in Trust.
The
avenue of lease, sale, or other mechanisms were discarded
since
section 14(c)(3) was the law, it could be done expeditiously,
it lacked paperwork, meetings, and was less costly. Agreements
were signed and executed to this effect, and the end result
of Ahtna providing 14(c)(3) lands total 79.6 acres, plus.
Today, Ahtna no longer provides the needed lands
for housing due to legal implications that have arisen (i.e.:
each home
is not exclusively for Ahtna native use and occupancy,
and the land
is subject to loss, etc.). It is the result of policies
or lack of, that Ahtna made its decision. I have outlined four
basic
problem areas explaining why this decision was reached.
1. Land Base - Questions regarding whether
the Ahtna native homebuyer will ever receive the lands is uncertain.
Lands
conveyed under
ANCSA section 14(c)(3) are for future city governments
as a source of revenue or otherwise. Given this, the
homebuyer can
never
acquire title to the land, unless a city opts to do so
by
its own stipulations. The question of becoming a city
is far fetched,
has not been thought of, and is entirely out of the picture
at present.
2. Non-Native Occupancy - The CRBRHA asserts
that the
monies used to build the homes are public monies, therefore
by
providing homes to only Ahtna natives is discrimination.
Today there
is approximately 60% occupancy by Ahtna native families,
the other
40% consist of non-native housing, are vacant or in
need or repair. Non-native occupancy of the homes validates
the question
of who
will actually own the land after the home is paid for.
3. Low Income - Within the Ahtna region,
there is a total of 57 HUD funded homes and apartments, Of these,
48 are
situated on lands conveyed under ANCSA to Ahtna,
Inc., with one exception
by lease. Others are built on town site lands or
native allotments. Each home is priced at approximately $100,000
dollars and
depending
on individual income, the monthly payment is derived
at about 50% or higher. It is the responsibility
of
the homebuyer
and apartment renter to report all income, whether
it be from one's
job or a salary increase, winnings in bingo, trapping,
tips,
or selling hand made materials and must be verified.
Each monthly payment is never fixed, it is always
subject to
change and
does not include the cost of electricity. The homebuyer
is charged
for all repairs, improvements, and maintenance including
the cost of travel, purchase, and time. This type
of monthly payment
leaves little if any for other essentials such as
groceries and telephone. Essentially, the native homebuyer is
in no better position than he/she was before, but
worse.
Many Ahtna
homebuyers
resort to welfare and food stamps as a supplement.
Many
do not
seek work, afraid of a cost of living increase.
4.
Other HUD/CRBRHA Requirements - The CRBRHA
imposes on the homebuyer, at their cost, that each
home
be kept in
strict compliance of code. Home inspections are
conducted and if
repairs
are needed,
it is done at the homebuyer expense. Some homes
lack a survey, while others are in a land status conflict
Many
homebuyers
are behind in monthly payments, others are subject
to eviction due
to non-compliance with CRBRHA requirements, while
others are put on notice that penalties can and
will be assessed.
In conclusion, the end result of all the above,
is unhappy homebuyers who are angry and feel
infringed upon. Many
have moved out, others
try to make ends meet, others take it day to
day. Most have approached Ahtna requesting assistance.
Encroachment
by non-natives
in predominately
native villages creates undue hardship, conflicts,
and competition, increasing awareness and dissatisfaction
towards the housing
authority. It is unlikely that 100% native occupancy
can ever be achieved again.
The potential loss
of land is certain to remain an unanswered question. Twenty
years or more
to pay
off a home is a
long time for it to remain in good condition.
Priced at $100,000
dollars
some homes are without electricity and running
water, although they are set up for it. Each
home requires
extra money
for fuel and heat, and are inadequately insulated.
Overall, the
home is
more of a burden than an achievement.
Adequate
housing for the Ahtna native is still a need. But, with current
CRBRHA policy and
procedural requirements,
the
likelihood
of obtaining needed lands from Ahtna remains
a factor.
The possibility of rescinding the Ahtna decision
will not occur
unless changes
are made for the betterment of Ahtna natives.
As is now, the CRBRHA continues to run the
show.
I have recently been appointed to the
CRBRHA board, of who has denied my request to fund
me to give
this report.
My
board appointment
provides a likelihood that changes can
be made. It is my position that a review of
current
procedures, policies,
and guidelines
be accomplished and addressed. I seek changes
for the Ahtna
native people and request that you do too.
Thank you for allowing me
to give this report.
This document was ocr scanned. We have made every attempt to
keep the online document the same as the original, including
the recorder's original misspellings or typos.
