Court Opinion

ID: 9847926
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 04:10:01.850005+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:46.685279
License: Public Domain

BOOCHEVER, Chief Justice,
concurring and dissenting in part.
For the reasons ably expressed by Justice Rabinowitz, I believe that AS 29.48.260(e) authorizes the municipal assembly to lease property to a beneficial new industry upon terms and conditions the assembly considers advantageous to the municipality, without being subject to the bidding and ratification provisions of AS 29.48.260(c). I also agree that, in view of those liberal leasing provisions, the definition of “new industry” should be more restrictive than “any newly organized business that is not a mere expansion or continuation of a business that has previously operated in the municipality.” I believe that the term “new industry” refers to a type of industry not presently operating in the particular locality.1 When the lease was entered into with Engstrom Brothers for operation of the cold storage in 1977, there had been no cold storage operation in Dillingham since 1972. The major economic benefits to the community apply here in most respects to the same extent as if there had never previously been a cold storage industry in Dillingham. In my opinion, the establishment of a cold storage facility, when none had been operating for five years, qualified as a new industry.
Under AS 29.48.260(e), the municipality was empowered to lease the facility upon the terms and conditions the assembly considered advantageous. The statute uses the words “may acquire” and “may . lease” and does not mandate any particular procedure. The City of Dillingham has enacted an ordinance requiring sealed bids and ratification by the voters for leases of property valued at $25,000.00 or more. Section VII of the ordinance exempts leases to new industries from the requirement of ratification by the voters. There is, however, no exemption from the requirement of sealed bids.
I therefore would join the majority in remanding the case to the superior court, but would request that court to determine if the city complied with the sealed bid requirements of its ordinance, and, if not, whether noncompliance was excused.

. This definition would not apply when a similar type of industry was temporarily inactive. When, however, a former industry has been abandoned, reestablishment of such an industry constitutes a “new industry.”