Opinion ID: 2450415
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Plain Meaning And In Pari Materia

Text: Gillis argues that AS 38.05.035(f)'s plain meaning does not require an applicant to enter land while it is under federal ownership to qualify for the preference right. According to Gillis subsection .035(f) fails to stat[e] that entry under federal tenure is required whereas [it] does say that entry under a state use permit or lease is required. He asserts that subsection .035(f) deals with federal permitting only and does not address the underlying land status. Gillis maintains that because he entered state land and otherwise met the conditions of subsection .035(f), he is eligible for the preference right. We disagree. The plain language of AS 38.05.035(f) requires an applicant to have entered land while it was under federal ownership to qualify for the preference right. Subsection.035(f)'s crucial language is: erected a building on the land and used the land ... under a federal permit or without the need for a permit and, after selection by the state, under a state use permit or lease. Because the federal government owned and administered all land available for state selection, land remained under federal ownership until selected by the state. [7] The legislature's use of the conjunction and, combined with the phrase after selection by the state, indicates that the subsection applies to an applicant who, along with obtaining the necessary federal permits, erected a building on and used what was then federal land and continued using that land after state selection. Gillis's interpretation ignores the subsection's conjunction before the temporal requirement; his interpretation would be more appropriate if the statute said  or, after selection by the state instead of  and, after selection by the state. Gillis next argues that AS 38.05.035(f) should be interpreted in pari materia with the Alaska Land Act's other preference-right provisions. [8] Gillis asserts the legislature knew how to require federal tenure as an element for a preference right when it used the phrase federal land subsequently acquired by the state in AS 38.05.035(b)(3) [9] and provided for entry onto land before January 3, 1959, the date of Alaska statehood, in AS 38.05.035(b)(5), [10] both enacted before subsection .035(f). [11] Gillis argues this language's absence from subsection .035(f) favors his interpretation. Assuming these preference rights should be read in pari materia, we find Gillis's argument unpersuasive. The legislature employed inconsistent terminology to convey preference right conditions and temporal requirements, such as when it required actions on or to land before statehood or state selection. [12] We also distinguish subsection .035(f) from subsection .035(b)(3), which grant[s] a preference right to a claimant who shows bona fide improvement of state land or of federal land subsequently acquired by the state. Subsection .035(b)(3) does not require the applicant to act before the state acquires federal land and uses the conjunction or before the temporal requirement. In comparison, subsection .035(f) does require an applicant to act prior to state selection and uses the conjunction and before the temporal requirement. [13] We conclude that evaluating AS 38.05.035(f) in light of the abovementioned preference rights supports interpreting the statute according to its plain meaningan applicant must have entered the land while it was under federal ownership to qualify for the preference right.