Dunleavy proposes land-instead-of-PFD option


Gov. Mike Dunleavy today introduced legislation to establish the PFD Land Voucher program to promote putting more land into Alaskans’ hands.

The bills, HB 270 / SB 217, would allow dividend-eligible Alaskans the option to receive a voucher worth twice the monetary value of the statutory dividend calculation to be applied toward purchase of state land.

The PFD land vouchers would be transferrable, would not expire, could be combined for purchase of a single parcel,  and could be used along with the state veterans’ land sales programs.

“This is an exciting new opportunity for all Alaskans to own a piece of the Last Frontier. While the State Lands Bill I introduced on Wednesday will increase the supply of available land, this bill is a response to the demand by helping individual Alaskans to realize land ownership,” Dunleavy said.

“This will be a win-win for both the individual Alaskan and the state treasury. By the individual voluntarily choosing a land certificate instead of a PFD check, the treasury gets the benefit of that money, and the individual gets the benefit of a land certificate twice the value of the PFD to purchase State land of their choice.”

If enacted, this legislation would help fulfil the Alaska Constitution’s mandate to develop state resources to benefit the public.

State-owned land is routinely offered for sale to Alaskans through several programs administered by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, including the Remote Recreational Cabin Site, land auction, over-the-counter sale, and agricultural land sales programs. The PFD land voucher could be applied to purchase state land through all programs, providing a valuable supplement to already proven and successful programs.

More information on all Alaska State Land Sale programs can be found here.


  1. When you read an “Alaska Land Patent” you will find “The State of Alaska” reserves everything from the “Land Patent” including “removing such soil”. And also reserves all the Resources that should go with the land. At the end of the Land Patent it says, it “reserves all rights whether herein stated or not for the complete enjoyment of the State”. A Squatter has more rights without any Patent. Please just read an “Alaska Land Patent” before you take this option. We did not “enter the Union on equal footing with the several States!! As required by Law. Please read the “Northwest Ordinance of 1787”. Seymour Marvin Mills Jr. sui juris

    • One question I have is. Will there be roads built to these parcels of land or will there owners have to fly walk slide swim boat climb back pack take a train or go by horse to reach their land.

      Do not like the idea of this voucher draw because you would have to pay for it then you would have to developed it or let it lay dormant it would not be convent for a lot of people. And they would have to find money to pay the taxes. Someone is not being truthful about the land idea.

      Also where as the PFD is more convenient and you can use it here in the stores. They are more accessable to all people and everyone will be supporting all Alaskans instead of just the state, which eventually the state will end up getting the monies back through many ways.

      There would be no money to help the charities and those in need. Alaskans seem to be a giving, helping, and loving group of people, they step up when the time is needed.

      There probably are some leaders who were voted in by the people that work at the Capitol who need to do what is right, as the law states instead of trying to find ways to make themselves feel good for taking or stealing the PFD out from under the citizens of Alaska.

      Plus there are leaders whom need to learn to control themselves with the money that belongs to all Alaskans.

      Set a budget that is worth having for the people. Be the first State of the United States that work for the people and set a trend.
      Resist the urge to placate yourselves and do not use the money for your desires, But for the responsibility you were given to do.

      • I don’t understand why you are so against this. It clearly states this is an option. If one like myself is highly interested in a land parcel, and this doubles the value of my buying power it is probably a smart move for me, and it also reduces treasury payments of cold hard cash to me.. possibly for 2-3 years. That seems like a good CHOICE for ME to take. Not any forcing occuring.

      • A section-line easement is a public right-of-way, 33, 50, 66, 83 or 100 feet wide, that runs along a section line of the rectangular survey system. … An R. S. 2477 right-of-way is a type of public easement that the State of Alaska acquired under long-standing federal law.

  2. Excellent idea for Alaskan development by Alaskans.
    Family should be allowed to combine their certificates to acquire a larger parcel to make their development more successful.

  3. The “Alaska Land Patent” also says “they reserve all rights to gas, oil, minerals, fossils, geothermal energy and the right of the lessees, assigns and attorneys to enter upon said land for the forgoing purposes”. So you don’t even have a right to privacy folks. That folks is Communism/Fascism/Nazism. Seymour Marvin Mills Jr. sui juris

  4. It’s been done before….The biggest problem with the land issue, is that the state still has not picked the land owed by statehood and the “swamp” congressman and senators have been too busy with “busy” in Washington DC and not doing the jobs they were sent to Washington to do. Where is that chunk of land? I’ll take the dividend and invest it or spend it but the land deal is no deal at all….Dunleavy is playing the same violin, only in a different decade.

    • The state is “only” owed about 3-5 million acres from the feds. More than anything there are about 30 million acres that are in some state of waiting review or just haven’t been released to the state, so we really only own less than 2/3 of what we were granted in statehood. Even if all the lands granted to the state were actually transferred we would still be largely owned by the feds.

  5. I need to hear more about the State Lands Bill that the Governor put forward, but most of the land the state has for sale is offered above market value. With the doubling of the PFD value to go towards the purchase of overpriced land it makes me wonder how overzealous bureaucrats will be kept in check from inflating land prices even more than they are already. I really like the idea of it, but there needs to be a way to keep the actual price grounded in reality not in bureaucratic wonderland like it currently is. The reason the bureaucrats have already over inflated the price is because they don’t want to allow the common person to own the land so they overprice it to keep us out and keep it in the governments hands.

      • Good point Bill, would you care to expound upon that or are you good saying that my thoughts have been allowed plenty of time to thoroughly stew (as if in a crock) and you have absolutely nothing to add to the conversation? You have such a way with words, quite like any other.

        • In particular is your statement: “The reason the bureaucrats have already over inflated the price is because they don’t want to allow the common person to own the land so they overprice it to keep us out and keep it in the governments hands.”
          You can have such an opinion but can’t back it up IMO. But give it a shot.

          • Thanks for allowing me my opinion Bill, how very gracious on your part. Do you have any information to refute my statement or are you simply opposed to it because I said it?

          • Your opinion is that bureaucrats muddle in whether/not common Alaskans own land here and they do it by inflating prices of State land offers. And when I ask for your proof you ask for me to prove your opinion is false.
            You are a hoot! Like I said you can’t back up your opinion. Tough noogies.

          • So then that’s a no. You cannot disprove that the artificially high prices on state land are to keep land in the hands of government. Why do you think the prices on state land are so out of step with private land valuations?

          • You see Bill, you are the one challenging my statement. If you cannot prove my statement false then it stands. You can always make your own comment on the subject instead of just replying to others comments.

          • Now you’ve made another statement about how prices are out of step with private valuations but show us some of that! You can’t and won’t and may want me to prove you wrong-it’s not worth my time.
            Let’s try something else here and it’s for what reason would crats inflate those prices-You said it’s to keep land in govt. hands but what reason would these crats have for doing so? Do you think they get something for it? Maybe they get a larger PFD for participating in such a government program? Or maybe it’s in your mind that you dreamt of it sometime.
            We’ll accept almost anything except your word-this is not the honor system here. Tough noogies.

          • Bill,

            If it’s not worth your time to try and prove your point, what makes you think it’s worth my time to prove it to you? Do your own homework, it’s easy go to the various sites they sell state land then go to the various sites that sell private land then compare. You will notice a big discrepancy in prices. It won’t take you much more time than it does to read my posts and challenge them without providing any information to back up your opinion on mine. I’m looking forward to your report on the prices of land, good luck Bill.

          • You still seem to think this is the honor system and that all you need to do is post anything you want and the rest of us need to disprove your garbage. That’s not how it works but I can see how you need it to work that way.
            You are in a dream world but do take note that the recall signature booklets are being sent out and the signatures will be coming in. Bet you have some ideas about how that goes-Heheh! Any thoughts on that you don’t need to prove to us?

          • So then you can’t disprove what I’ve said and you will not inform yourself. It’s your choice to remain willfully ignorant Bill. In the future if you want to have a conversation and tell me I’m wrong then please bring facts and information to back up your naysaying. Otherwise feel free to write your opinion about whatever you want, just don’t tell me your opinion about my opinion.
            Thanks again for taking the time reading what I write Bill.

          • Bill,
            Do you even understand how hilariously hypocritical it is for you to tell me how “it” works, while you are doing EXACTLY what you are accusing me of doing? Seriously, do you know how hilarious that is? You think you can tell me I’m wrong in your opinion, but then you want me to provide your proof that you are right, thanks for the laughs Bill, you’re the best! Hilarious

    • here are the key points
      Key points of the State Lands Bill:

      Subjects all state land managed by the Department of Natural Resources to DNR’s platting authority regardless of where the land is situated. This includes Mental Health Trust land, parks and recreation areas, refuges, and habitat areas.
      Increases the Land Disposal Income Fund to $7.5 million, allowing DNR to focus more spending on infrastructure to develop and dispose of state lands.
      Encourages economic growth by creating a new statute for leasing state lands for commercial or industrial development within Qualified Opportunity Zones or other areas nominated and assessed by the state.
      Repeals unenforceable statutes relating to the designation of certain rivers in Southcentral Alaska as recreation rivers in order to allow for more effective management of state land and further increase acreage available for Land Sales program or new commercial development program.
      Clarifies the state land sale bidding process by requiring an earnest money deposit, increasing the term of a contract for sale, and granting the state greater discretion in constructing access roads related to state land sales.

      I do not see the demand for property paying for the state building infrastructure.

  6. Is that before or after the BLM takes it all? And then leases it to China for rare earth mines? Our state land is disappearing by the millions of acres folks.

  7. If you read “The Constitution of the United States” Article 1, Sec. 8, next to last paragraph you will find the only land in any State that the Fed. can hold is for “Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, Dock-Yards and other needful buildings”. Article 6 says “this is the Supreme Law of the Land”. What more is there to argue about?? We The People need to enforce our Constitution before it is to late. Alaska is not a State. It is only a Colony!!! We should still be able to file for a Homestead in Alaska under the Homestead Act of 1862. Seymour Marvin Mills Jr. sui juris

  8. I’m in favor of anything that gives Alaskans more options for THEIR PFD money- which is what this is. It’s not Walker’s, it’s note Giesel’s, it’s not Von Imhoff’s or her family’s, it doesn’t belong to Lynden, or Alaska Air, or GCI, or most important, any of the politicians they have purchased to be their stake in largess- And it doesn’t belong to the committed leftists in this state that take such pleasure in giving other people’s property away to make themselves feel superior…so while I personally may or may not take advantage of the certificates, I’m happy to have more choices for Alaskans and ultimately less land under the thumb of the bureaucracy.

  9. For anyone who still pays federal taxes, the question is how do you put a value on your brand-new acreage when you report it to the IRS, what if IRS disagrees with your valuation?
    How do you put a value on your brand-new acreage when you want to sell it?
    So you pay a hefty chunk of money to have it appraised and get a lowball appraisal, what happens?
    What happens when you find out later your brand-new acreage has trail easements, legal or otherwise, and people who use those easements consider your property as theirs?
    Does your brand-new acreage come with mineral rights, water rights, protection from those who, as Seymour Marvin Mills Jr says: “…reserve all rights to gas, oil, minerals, fossils, geothermal energy and the right of the lessees, assigns and attorneys to enter upon said land for the forgoing purposes”?
    What do you say, Governor D? PFD seems like a better deal, yes?

  10. My advice is be careful what you spend on developing remote property in Alaska (no matter how much you pay for it) cause the market is flooded with cabins that are selling way below what the owners put into them.
    Without the state building infrastructure and with no mineral rights, the best thing you can do with this remote dirt is build a hunting cabin or small lodge.
    Most people “tap out” of their bush property in a few seasons of hard work.

    • I agree Steve, but a property with a cabin is not the same as raw land, which is what the State is selling. Who knows what people are needing when they acquire raw land but building a cabin is certainly high on the list. And the market is certainly flooded with cabins but only in certain places-remember when it comes to real estate it’s always location, location, etc..
      There are many places where the market is still great but these are special places whereby one is able to do certain things without being inundated with neighbors doing the same thing. I think you are speaking of your area but that’s not all of Alaska, remember.

  11. Even with all the comments this is a brilliant compromise Option. I know the original intent of the PFD was good but anyway you phrase it, it’s still public welfare! This is unneeded by most particularly when you are giving a significant amount to the feds in income tax.
    Another compromise solution option should be means testing to show those who truly could use it–maybe something like the justification needed to receive. Medicaid .
    regardless, the state still needs to be making cuts and getting us back into a common sense balanced budget.

    • Another modern Marxist, refreshingly unburdened by anything resembling practical association with passive income like rent, royalty, interest, equity dividends; a revolutionary thinker who’s figured out what’s “unneeded by most”?
      Bernie on the rampage got somebody all fired up. If we’re “means testing” for the PFD, how about “means testing” for the Alaska Municipal League Investment Pool, find a “common-sense” Marxist to decide if the $630M+ they have stashed out of sight is “unneeded by most”?
      Thought not…
      Not sure what the peasantry would do without the illuminati, in and out of government, who presume to decide for most what’s “unneeded by most”…
      Might be fun to find out, yes?

  12. When ever I see an option that makes so much sense coming out of government I feel like I need an oxygen mask so I don’t pass out. My complements on a great idea. Robin Taylor floated the idea of getting state lands in the hands of the people so it would generate state revenue/taxes rather the be in the hands of the state doing nothing.

  13. Yes, Robin Taylor had a plan to continue to bleed the ignorant Feudal masses even more. Most everyone still thinks like a slave working for their Masters. Wake up folks, you are suppose to be free with Allodial ownership of your Land instead of continuing to bow down and kiss their ring and pay your Feudal Property Taxes. Before the Civil War, most people owned their Land Free and Clear, known as Allodial. Look up the definition for Allodial. “Free and Absolute. Not subject to Feudal Duties and Rents”. “Noah Webster’s 1828 Dictionary” said, “Most land in America is Allodial. Unlike in England where all land is beholden of the King”. Seymour Marvin Mills Jr. sui juris

  14. Bottom line….. when they started giving us our dividends, they were not supposed ti be allowed to touch them…. they have already screwed us on that idea, they can do whatever they want apparently….. some people need that money and for the ones that can legally live without it are the ones that vote on us not getting ight sl… is not us that gets to vote if they can havr it or not

  15. In a “Constitutional Republic” all the land and all the resources belong to “We The People” to begin with. Only in a Socialist/Communist/Fascist/Nazi country does all the land and all the resources belong to the State. That makes the Permanent Fund our money and not Welfare. The problem is, what is happening to all the rest of the land and resources?? The State takes it to do anything they choose to do with it. As I have pointed out before, we have no real Constitution but instead only “Corporate By-Laws. Please read Article 12, Section 8 of “The Constitution of the State of Alaska” which is a Corporation, to prove this statement. Just plain “Alaska” still exists but was put in mothballs. As was a “citizen of Alaska” but a few of us re-invented the wheel and made out the paperwork and Recorded in the Recording Office to once again become a “citizen of Alaska” just like it was before the Civil War in every State in the United States. United States Senate Report 93-549 explains how this happened at the end of the Civil War. All our Rights were taken away!! This is because everyone became a “citizen of the United States” and by so doing gave all our Rights away to Congress so now Congress has Absolute power over nearly everyone and can write all the Laws against the Constitution it chooses to. Why else are they attempting to disarm us when the Constitution forbids this with Article 2 of the Bill of Rights?? You are now “Subjects” instead of “citizens”. Just ask your Congressman for U. S. Senate Report 93-549 and you will soon see what I have been saying is the Absolute Proof. Seymour Marvin Mills Jr. sui juris

Comments are closed.