By Suzanne Downing 
The Anchorage Assembly is moving forward with an ordinance that would penalize certain landowners who post “no trespassing” signs, install fences, or set up barriers on their land that could block public access to city-owned parks, trails, or other spaces.
The measure, sponsored by Assembly Chair Chris Constant and member Daniel Volland, is described as a response to what they call a pattern of adjacent property owners discouraging public use around popular recreation areas. Some Anchorage residents say the real issue is the growing vagrancy problem that has driven them to protect their land and families from trespassers and campers.
At the heart of the dispute are neighborhoods bordering Chugach State Park and the Tony Knowles Coastal Trail. two of the city’s most visited outdoor areas. As usage has surged, residents are plagued by overflowing parking, litter, and even property damage. Rather than addressing the causes of those conflicts, the Assembly’s proposal would instead fine property owners who try to manage access themselves.
According to Constant and Volland, Anchorage currently lacks effective enforcement procedures to deter or penalize property owners who interfere with access across their properties to public land. The proposed ordinance would prohibit “obstruction or impedance of public access for private benefit” unless the property owner obtains a permit or written authorization from the city.
Violators could face penalties $1 per square foot of land blocked from public use, per day. That means homeowners who post a sign or build a fence across what officials claim is a right-of-way could quickly accrue thousands of dollars in fines.
Be sure to sign up for The Alaska Story newsletter to stay informed on this and other issues shaping Alaska’s future. Find us on Facebook here.
What is it about the concept of “private property” that the marxist Nine on the Los Anchorage ass-embly do not understand?
.
Oh yeah, that’s right — they’re marxists.
.
(PS: My lack of capitalization of the word “marxist” is not a spelling error, it is intentional. Because I do not believe that the word “marxist” deserves capitalization, or any other sort of respect.)
Private land ownership and management in commie-land is a myth and that’s what Anchorage has turned into.
If my land is adjacent to a road, and I put up a fence so access across my land from the road is not possible, that is a legal use of my land. The fact that the muni screws me for $9200.00 a year for me to retain my land is another issue altogether. If my land abuts muni property, I absolutely have the right to make my land inaccessible from the muni property. These friggin socialist carpetbaggers that have taken over governance of our lives has gotten out of hand.
Sounds like a class action lawsuit in the works along with a recall of the assembly. There are not enough words to adequately decribe my disgust with this situation. Rampant arrogant socialism in the heart of our great state simply defies all logic. And Constant and crew won’t understand when the Anchorage “peasants” storm the Bastile.
Unfortunately, in Alaska, they could win this in State Court. It’ll have to go federal if we are to secure any relief from this idiocy. Assuming it actually passes.
The ghost of the Chugach Access Plan circa 2010 and postponed in 2014 is once again rearing its ugly head. Back then the premise was that property owners should not have objections to anyone traipsing across their property to get to the park or the requirement to maintain that access (without any monetary assistance). I remember a meeting where someone demanded that property owners pave the access point to ADA standards. The plan developed a list of “access points”, which looked good on paper, but had nothing to do with reality on the ground. I guess this is round 2!
When is Constant’s final term up? We should have a cake party outside chambers on his last day on the Ass.
They could start with the railroad. There are signs everywhere prohibiting trespassing on railroad property to get to your property.
Special circumstances i guess.
If the muni insists or otherwise coerces a landowner to grant access to his land as a public access point….the muni should expect to be held liable for any property damage or injury that is the result of this forced access….
Another reason why neighbors should be attending the neighborhood councils even on it
You won’t like hearing this. Muni does have a right to protect access of its right always going between two neighbors property lines
Last year my district council had a meeting where a neighborhood of neighbors met to talk about the same thing concerning access to the University trail system
The two wanted to put a fence up however it’ll block the shortcut
This is why I keep on saying neighbors need to be attending and on their councils when they face these disputes because they can’t just take matters in their own hands trampling over Muni rights
There is due process
This another reason more conservative neighbors should be on councils, voting for more conservative assemblies to reorganize the muni’s budget to cut what taxpayers shouldn’t be paying for so we don’t have to to have poorly maintained neighborhood streets or neighbors trampling across neighbors private property because of right of always being poorly maintained and the foot traffic uncertain where to walk and not learning to respect that they are going between private properties
This is a matter to be resolved between who is on the council of the affect neighbors, their assembly members and if needed their House representative and senator
Because it’ll require either the municipal to cut its budget to squeeze in the right of way project and snow maintaince of it, or they double tax the taxpayers by making it a bond or have the Governor make it into a capital works project through the work of the senator and representative of that district
This is not to take in one’s own hands, they’ll get into trouble
Its a leadership and communication issues that needs be resolved during meetings and phone calls or even a change of leadership over the entire municipality so budget money is used for the muni’s right of ways around the city where property owners feel safe and respected
I live not far from the trail and use it regularly. How many of these comments are coming from property owners along the TNCT? Just curious…