03/03/1993 08:00 AM House RES

  Number 326                                                                   
                                                                               
  VICE CHAIR HUDSON, who chaired the subcommittee, reported                    
  that he had worked with Representatives James, Davies and                    
  Carney, as well as others who were not members of the                        
  subcommittee.  It was the subcommittee's recommendation that                 
  the House Resources Committee sponsor and introduce a bill                   
  identical to SB 67 with one exception.  He said the                          
  subcommittee was unable to identify the justification for                    
  the six percent revenue stream called for in SB 67, and                      
  instead recommended a three percent amount.                                  
                                                                               
  VICE CHAIR HUDSON said the subcommittee recognized the                       
  percentage would be open to debate among all concerned                       
  groups. He referred to the report of the subcommittee in                     
  members' files, which identified various alternatives,                       
  including a lease-back program.  He said the problem with                    
  that alternative was the same as the state faced with the                    
  land exchange solution.  Another option was a cash pay-off,                  
  which was not recommended because of the cost.                               
                                                                               
  Number 360                                                                   
                                                                               
  VICE CHAIR HUDSON noted since SB 67 was a known commodity,                   
  the various parties who wanted to see the issue settled                      
  might find this proposed legislation to be a possible                        
  solution.  He noted while SB 67 has not won the enthusiastic                 
  support of the Attorney General, it has not been rejected                    
  either.  Regarding the anticipated revenues based on the six                 
  percent versus three percent figures, Vice Chair Hudson said                 
  that based on FY 94 unrestricted revenues, six percent would                 
  equal approximately $140 million and three percent would be                  
  $70 million.                                                                 
                                                                               
  Number 412                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES commented on the concerns the                           
  subcommittee faced.  First was the issue of the courts.                      
  Even if the legislature passed a bill, she said there would                  
  be no guarantee that the courts would accept it as a                         
  settlement.  She preferred a document more closely related                   
  to the court order already in existence.  The problem has                    
  been on the failure of the parties to agree on how much to                   
  pay, she stated.  Regarding the reconstitution of the trust,                 
  she does not believe the land exchanges would ever come to                   
  fruition.                                                                    
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES said she would like to see an actual                    
  dollar amount in capital and operating expenditures that the                 
  state has paid for its mental health programs since 1978                     
  until 1992.  She said this amount should be incorporated                     
  into the purchase price for the lands that could not be                      
  given to the parties to the settlement.                                      
                                                                               
  Number 437                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES referred to SB 67, and said it was her                  
  understanding that in order to guarantee the revenue stream,                 
  the state has to give the plaintiffs a secured interest in                   
  the Legislatively Designated Areas (LDAs).  If the                           
  plaintiffs did not want the LDAs, then giving them those                     
  lands would not work.  She suggested giving them those lands                 
  now and paying rent on them.                                                 
                                                                               
  Number 452                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE PAT CARNEY commented that there would be                      
  plenty of opportunity once a house bill was introduced for                   
  Representative James' concerns to be addressed and debated.                  
                                                                               
  Number 458                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE GREEN concurred, adding that he has heard at                  
  least one of the attorneys of the non-settling plaintiffs                    
  indicated he was amenable to the solution posed by the                       
  proposed legislation.  He stressed a settlement should be                    
  reached quickly, because potential users of the land were                    
  being lost as long as the land was tied up in litigation.                    
                                                                               
  Number 476                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES was not opposed to getting some piece                   
  of legislation on the table.                                                 
                                                                               
  Number 478                                                                   
                                                                               
  VICE CHAIR HUDSON noted the lease-back situation had been                    
  discussed in subcommittee, and the option could be discussed                 
  and public testimony taken once a bill was before the                        
  committee.  He recommended the committee submit for                          
  introduction the February 26, 1993 Chenoweth draft, with the                 
  House Resources Committee as sponsor.                                        
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS noted there should be a motion on the                      
  table for the committee to sponsor the draft legislation.                    
                                                                               
  Number 495                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES MOVED that the House Resources                          
  Committee sponsor the draft legislation as a house bill.                     
                                                                               
  Number 500                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any objection to the                   
  motion,  Without objection, the MOTION PASSED.                               
                                                                               
  ANNOUNCEMENTS                                                                
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS announced the House Resources Committee                    
  would next meet on Monday, March 8, and Wednesday, March 10,                 
  1993, at 8:00 a.m., to hear testimony on the confirmation of                 
  appointees to the Board of Fisheries and the Board of Game.                  
  He noted there was a legal question pending on the                           
  nomination of one game board member, and requested committee                 
  members read the legal opinion on the issue that was                         
  distributed to them.                                                         
                                                                               
  ADJOURNMENT                                                                  
                                                                               
  There being no further business to come before the House                     
  Resources Committee, Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting                 
  at 9:21 a.m.