Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120
02/09/2017 10:00 AM House FISHERIES
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB87 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 87 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 87-CONFLICT OF INTEREST: BD FISHERIES/GAME
10:04:59 AM
CHAIR STUTES announced that the only order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 87, "An Act relating to participation in matters
before the Board of Fisheries and the Board of Game by the
members of the respective boards; and providing for an effective
date."
10:05:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT moved to adopt the committee substitute
(CS), labeled 30-LS0376\U, Bruce/Bullard, 2/9/17, as the working
document.
10:06:03 AM
CHAIR STUTES objected for discussion.
10:06:18 AM
REID HARRIS, Staff, Representative Louise Stutes, Alaska State
Legislature, presented the proposed committee substitute (CS)
for HB 87, Version U, directing attention to the handout issued
from the chair's office labeled, "Summary of Changes - Version A
to Version U," and paraphrasing from the prepared language,
which read [original punctuation provided]:
Section 1. (g)
Eliminates reference to AS 16.05 (Fish and Game Code),
AS 16.40.261 (Salt water sport fishing operator
license), AS 16.40.271 (Salt water sport fishing guide
license, combined guide/operator license), AS 16.43
(Regulation of Entry into Alaska Commercial Fisheries)
and 08.54 (Big Game Guides and Related Occupations).
Changes the word "conflict" to "personal or financial
interest" (as defined in AS 39.52.960).
Defines, for the purposes of this act, what an
immediate family member is. This definition differs
from the definition in 39.52.960, which also includes
grandparents, aunts/uncles, parents or siblings of a
person's spouse.
Sec. 2 is deleted
Sec. 3 is deleted
Sec. 4 Is deleted
MR. HARRIS pointed out that the statutory definition for family
members is broad and overly inclusive for the purpose of serving
on the board. The conflicts cause recusals that may affect the
process. The sponsor seeks to redefine family members for
purposes of board participation.
10:08:20 AM
CHAIR STUTES withdrew her objection. Without further objection,
Version U was before the committee.
10:08:29 AM
MR. HARRIS explained that Version U allows a conflicted member
to deliberate but refrain from voting. He provided a succinct
outline of the proposed legislation, paraphrasing from the
sponsor statement, which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
House Bill 87 changes the manner that the Board of
Fisheries and Board of Game function. It allows
members to deliberate on subjects for which they have
a declared personal or financial interest according to
AS 39.52, the Ethics Act.
Title 39 prohibits a member from "taking or
withholding official action in order to affect a
matter in which the member has a personal or financial
interest." (AS 39.52.120(b)(4)). "Official action" is
defined under the Act to mean "advice, participation,
or assistance, including for example, a
recommendation, decision, approval, disapproval, vote,
or other similar action, including inaction by a
public officer." (AS 39.52.960(14)).
Currently, Board members are required to divulge a
conflict of interest if they or their families are
involved in the subject being deliberated on. The
conflicted member can then no longer offer their input
on the process and cannot vote on the matter at hand.
This bill allows the conflicted member to offer
remarks and input, but the member still cannot vote on
the issue. The member is also precluded from voting on
whether they have a conflict of interest. Allowing
members with expertise in particular fields to
deliberate will help the Board make more informed
decisions and lead to stronger fisheries management
statewide.
10:09:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN noted the concern regarding the broad
definition for family members, and asked if this is in response
to an existing problem or a proactive consideration.
MR. HARRIS offered that expertise is lost when members are
required to recuse themselves from deliberation and voting. The
bill changes that scenario by narrowing the scope of the
definition for family members that could be ethically invoked
for reasons of personal or financial interests. He deferred
further comment to Glenn Haight.
10:10:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR noted that the proposed change in the
definition of family members will only apply to this bill and
not affect other areas of statute.
MR. HARRIS referred to the CS, page 1, line 12, to point out the
language provided to define "immediate family member" for
purposes of HB 87 and persons serving on the Board of Fish (BOF)
or the Board of Game (BOG), without altering the ethics act
language found in AS 39.52.960.
MR. HARRIS pointed out that the BOF also manages personal use
fisheries.
10:12:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN restated his interest in knowing why the
bill is necessary.
GLENN HAIGHT, Executive Director, Board of Fish (BOF), Boards
Support Section, Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), said
there have been seven bills introduced, since 1995, seeking to
amend the ethics act specifically for the BOF. He offered to
make available a record of the ethics recusals that the BOF has
experienced over the last nine years, and the impacts; produced
by Jim Marcotte, former Executive Director of the BOF.
CHAIR STUTES interjected that there is precedent for this need
as happened recently at a BOF meeting, when a member recused and
the outcome of the issue at hand was affected.
MR. HAIGHT described what occurred at the most recent finfish
BOF meeting, held in Kodiak. A member who did not fish or
benefit directly from the fishery being discussed, had to recuse
because of the participation of her ex-husband, from whom she
receives money. Because of the recusal, the proposal did not
pass.
CHAIR STUTES added that the vote ended three to three, and could
have gone either way had the seventh member been allowed to
vote.
10:14:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS clarified that under the proposed
bill, the board member would not have had to recuse.
MR. HAIGHT concurred, and said HB 87 narrows the definition of
family member significantly; designating immediate family
members as a spouse or direct dependent. He said the recused
member would have been able to participate, if HB 87 had been
the governing statute.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS asked how this relates to the
Board of Game (BOG), and whether the concern is comparable
between the two boards.
MR. HAIGHT responded that conflict doesn't occur with the same
frequency at BOG meetings. He suggested that it only happens
occasionally, such as when a member is also an active game guide
and must recuse on an issue.
10:17:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT asked for further information regarding
the Kodiak recusal situation.
MR. HAIGHT deferred comment to the Department of Law (DOL).
10:18:40 AM
SETH BEAUSANG, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law
(DOL), offered that the member had disclosed a financial
interest with a participant of the fishery being considered.
10:19:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN inquired about a family member
participating in a personal use fishery, and how the definition
would apply to that scenario.
MR. HAIGHT said personal use/subsistence fisheries don't cause
conflict, as no financial gain is involved.
10:20:49 AM
CHAIR STUTES said that the BOF and BOG are governed under the
same statutes, thus, both entities are addressed in the bill.
10:21:24 AM
SAM COTTEN, Commissioner, Alaska Department of Fish & Game
(ADF&G), stated official support for the proposed CS to HB 87,
and said it addresses an important issue and serves to improve
the current system, which probably, unnecessarily results in
recusals by board members.
10:22:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked if, under a circumstance as mentioned
today when a proposal failed due to a tie vote, are there
opportunities to bring the same proposal back before the board.
COMMISSIONER COTTEN responded yes, and deferred further comment
on regarding procedures for proposal reconsideration.
10:23:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS noted that similar bills have been
proposed by other legislatures, and asked why none have passed.
COMMISSIONER COTTEN said it's an inviting subject but it would
be difficult to know why legislation doesn't get passed.
CHAIR STUTES added that it would be difficult to comment on
bills that aren't available for comparison.
10:25:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked what conflicting out situations arise
at BOG meetings, other than the recusal of an active guide, as
previously mentioned. She asked specifically about remote lodge
operators.
KRISTY TIBBLES, Executive Director, Board of Game (BOG) reported
that financial conflicts haven't occurred but spousal conflicts
have arisen. She recounted an instance of a board member's
spouse, who served on an advisory committee which had taken a
vote on an active proposal that was coming before the board; the
member recused. Due to the potential for financial conflict, if
a proposal was before the BOG that impacted an owner of a remote
lodge, it would represent a conflict.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR inquired whether there is a conflict if a
BOG member is also a member of a hunting organization.
MS. TIBBLES replied that a conflict wouldn't exist if the board
member is in the general membership of an organization, but if
they are an officer in the organization and sit on its board, it
would represent a conflict.
10:28:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked how many board members are seated
on the BOG.
MS. TIBBLES answered seven.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN queried what the downside would be for
observing similar rules as the legislative committee, where a
member discloses the conflict but is not prevented from voting.
MS. TIBBLES answered, "There's a potential that something
carries or fails that wouldn't have otherwise had that action."
CHAIR STUTES opened public testimony.
10:30:06 AM
CLAY KOPLIN, Mayor, City of Cordova, stated support for HB 87
and said Cordova depends largely on the fishing industry, which
is extremely active and productive for a brief, three month
period. It is difficult to find someone to serve on the board
due to the time commitment involved and concerns that
participation would be restricted due to possible conflicts. It
is a problem for ensuring that the voice of experience and those
who work in the industry are heard. The bill could rectify the
situation and bring voices to the table that otherwise aren't
heard, he said; voices that are close to what is actually
happening.
10:33:36 AM
MATT ALWARD, Fisherman stated support for HB 87 and echoed the
concern that well vetted, appointed people, committing a month
of their time, must sit out of deliberations and voting. He
predicted that the bill will enrich the board process and bring
better regulation overall.
10:34:48 AM
MALCOLM MILNE, President, North Pacific Fisheries Association
(NPFA), stated official support for HB 87 and said finding
qualified members to serve on the board can be challenging and
allowing conflicted members to deliberate on issues will add
expertise, and make for more robust discussions that lead to
better decisions.
10:36:21 AM
JOHN MCCOMBS stated support for HB 87 and said it's a good
start. Members who have attended the Kenai Classic have
received gifts, which should be disclosed to ensure ethics
compliance, he opined. The board has not met in Soldotna for
seventeen years, and it needs to be included in the meeting
locale rotation. Other improvements could also be made to
improve the public, board process, he finished.
10:37:39 AM
STEVE VANEK stated support for HB 87 and said as a layman board
it's necessary to allow participation, at least in the
deliberation process. The non-commercial fishermen that sit on
the board don't get conflicted out, only the commercial
operator. He stressed the need to allow all the members to
deliberate equally on issues.
10:40:10 AM
GERRY MCCUNE, Representative, United Fishermen Alaska (UFA),
Cordova District Fishermen United, stated official support for
HB 87 and offered that if he were serving on the BOF today he
would be conflicted out and end up sitting in the audience. The
fifty years of experience and expertise that he could share
would be of no benefit at the meeting. He described incidents
of past members who were recused due to situations that might
have been considered minimal. Changing the definition, as
proposed, will correct a long standing problem, he finished.
10:41:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR confirmed that, even with the passage of HB
87, if a board member was being unethical, other statute could
be applied.
MR. MCCUNE responded that any board member could bring an
ethical challenge for consideration. Disclosures are usually
provided beforehand but challenges are also brought up during
proceedings.
10:43:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT noted the legal services memorandum in
the committee packet, and asked who makes the determination that
a conflict exists.
CHAIR STUTES responded that it is the purview of the BOF
chairman.
10:44:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER recalled that there is also a bill
seeking to expand the board from seven to nine members, and
asked, if adopted, would that influence UFA support for HB 87.
MR. MCCUNE answered that UFA does not support expanding the
board until the conflict issue is solved. The financial
disclosure requirement and being conflicted out prohibits many
possible members from seeking appointment. There would be no
need to expand the board size if conflict was still a problem.
10:47:25 AM
ROD ARNO, Executive Director, Alaska Outdoor Council, stated
opposition to HB 87 and said he has not attended a meeting where
the person conflicted out hasn't had an opportunity to express
their opinion and had their input be part of the process. The
bill is not necessary, nor is it beneficial to the resource, he
opined.
10:49:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS asked to what extent a conflicted
member is able to testify at the table, and are they restricted
to three minutes the same as a member of the public.
MR. ARNO answered that on the BOG there is no limitation, but
the BOF follows a different committee process.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS queried whether applying the bill
only to the BOF would change Mr. Arno's stance of opposition.
MR. ARNO answered that the concern remains the same and
suggested that the public would be leery to that type of action.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS recalled the previously described
scenario with the ex-spouse situation, causing the member to
recuse, and asked whether allowing that member to participate,
under the described circumstances, would have clouded the
process or impair the public's faith.
MR. ARNO opined that it would have clouded the process.
10:52:45 AM
RICHARD DAVIS, Representative, Seafood Producers Cooperative,
stated support for HB 87 and said the producers cooperative has
sought this type of legislation for three decades. Whenever the
BOF meets, cooperative members always attend to provide
testimony. The existing protocol makes it difficult to find
qualified, dedicated people willing to serve on the BOF and this
bill provides hope to change that scenario. It is an essential
component for continuing to responsibly manage the fisheries of
the state, he finished.
CHAIR STUTES closed public testimony.
10:54:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS commented that the bill appears to
be a common sense improvement to the current procedures. He
opined that the testimony is compelling, regarding the faint and
indirect relationships that impair a member's participation on
the BOF in a way that harms the overall dialogue.
10:55:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to the portion of the bill that
mentions a personal or financial interest, and asked whether a
member, or family member, who actively participates or advocates
for a personal use fishery, "be caught up in this new language."
MR. BEAUSANG responded that the terms "personal interest" and
"financial interest" are defined under the ethics act.
Participation in a personal use fishery would not involve
financial interest, he opined, and pointed out that there is no
history of a member disclosing participation in a personal use
fishery and being found in conflict.
10:57:29 AM
CHAIR STUTES thanked the participants and announced HB 87 as
held.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB087 Sponsor Statement 2.7.17.pdf |
HFSH 2/9/2017 10:00:00 AM HRES 3/14/2017 3:00:00 PM HRES 3/20/2017 7:00:00 PM |
HB 87 |
| HB087 ver U.pdf |
HFSH 2/9/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 87 |
| HB087 ver A.PDF |
HFSH 2/9/2017 10:00:00 AM HRES 3/20/2017 7:00:00 PM |
HB 87 |
| HB087 Summary of Changes A to U 2.9.17.pdf |
HFSH 2/9/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 87 |
| HB087 Fiscal Note DFG-BBS-01-31-2017.pdf |
HFSH 2/9/2017 10:00:00 AM HRES 3/13/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/20/2017 7:00:00 PM |
HB 87 |
| HB087 Supporting Document BOF BOG Information.pdf |
HFSH 2/9/2017 10:00:00 AM HRES 3/13/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 87 |
| HB087 Supporting Document Historic Bills.pdf |
HFSH 2/9/2017 10:00:00 AM HRES 3/13/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/20/2017 7:00:00 PM |
HB 87 |
| HB087 Support ATA.pdf |
HFSH 2/9/2017 10:00:00 AM HRES 3/13/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/14/2017 3:00:00 PM HRES 3/20/2017 7:00:00 PM |
HB 87 |
| HB087 Support SEAFA.pdf |
HFSH 2/9/2017 10:00:00 AM HRES 3/14/2017 3:00:00 PM HRES 3/20/2017 7:00:00 PM |
HB 87 |
| HB087 ver U Legal Memo.pdf |
HFSH 2/9/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 87 |