Should the Alaska Railroad be exempt from local planning and zoning laws? It thinks so.

But communities along the railbelt aren't so sure, and one that took the fight all the way to the Alaska Supreme Court says its experience is a perfect example of why the little guy needs more of a say.

The railroad owns 36,000 acres of land state wide. It uses about half of that for it's own operations and leases out the remaining half. With a new rail line in the works between Delta Junction and Fort Greely, the debate over just who the railroad needs to check in with before they get to work, both sides agree is critical to clear up.

The issue came to light after a dispute arising out of a granite quarry near the Native Village of Eklutna. There, two small hills have special signifiance to the village, and the activities of the quarry seen as a cultural threat. The name of Eklutna village is 'Idlughet' in Athabascan, and means 'The Place By the Plural Objects.'

"The railroad is quarrying one of the plural objects. The ammunition the tribe had at the moment was the railroad needed permits," said Lee Stephan, the village's C.E.O..

That challenge to the way the railroad has done things for eighteen years -- assuming it was immune from local planning and zoning regulations -- brought the debate all the way to the Alaska Supreme Court.

In March, the railroad lost, and they're now concerned the floodgates are open for what could be a troublesome mess if local communities statewide get too much of a say. Wendy Lindskoog, Director External Affairs for the Alaska Railroad, explained that having to follow various jurisdictions throught the state could impact "when we run our trains, what kind of commodities we can service, when we can blow our whistles or not and different noise concerns. It would set the railroad for an environment where there would be a lot of inconsistenet rules and could very well impact out ability to service freight and passenger customers."

But, Lindskoog emphasizes, it's not that the railroad doesn't want local input. She says public input is already required and often sought out. It's just that they don't want progress bogged down. In light of the recent court decision, the railroad is now looking to state lawmakers for help, with two fast tracked bills that would immunize the railroad from local planing and zoning ordinances.

"We just believe this is inviting a situation where more litigation will occur and at the end of the day that becomes very costly to the railroad, the municipality and the state as we move forward and development or improve the Alaska Railroad system," Lindskoog said.
Stephan disagrees, saying the stakes are just too high to block local communities from having a say. Without local input, he says, "our cultural property and Eklutna will be gone. It's only a one time thing. Eklutna is there [now], and it won't be after [the cultural property] is gone."

The judge in the Supreme Court decision calls for utilizing something called a "balance of interests test." That test is a criteria in which the railroad must follow local rules and regulations as long as it can do so without hardship, and allows the railroad to obtain immunity if necessary for its operations. Bills making thier way through the House and Senate would give the railroad blanket immunity, something the railroad says the law intended all along. But opponents say, the railroad has enough protection as it is.