Legislature(2013 - 2014)BUTROVICH 205
02/08/2014 09:00 AM Senate RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB146 | |
| SB109 | |
| SJR15 | |
| SJR16 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 146 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 109 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SJR 15 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SJR 16 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SJR 16-OPPOSE FEDERAL AID TO CERTAIN NONPROFITS
11:03:46 AM
CHAIR GIESSEL, announced SJR 16 to be up for consideration. She
said this issue was brought to her attention by constituents who
noted the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as a major
donor to environmentally based nonprofits that are working
against resource development in our state. The purpose of the
resolution is to highlight this and ask the federal government
to stop using tax funds to work against Alaskans.
JANE CONWAY, staff to Senator Giessel, sponsor of SJR 16,
explained it asks that environmental nonprofit organizations not
receive federal funds to use in campaigns against resource
development in Alaska. This is an abuse of federal funds and
runs afoul of the Alaska Statehood Act and the Alaska
Constitution.
At statehood, she said, Congress recognized that Alaska's small
population would not be able to pay for government services with
taxes alone and promised the state 90 percent of revenues earned
from resource development on Alaska federal lands, although that
percentage has been reduced to around 40 percent.
MS. CONWAY said the U.S. Department of Justice, Environment and
Natural Resource Division, has the responsibility for the
conduct and oversight of litigation conducted directly and
indirectly on behalf of the USFWS. In 1982, an MOU was signed by
USFWS and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), which
allows the department to have primary responsibility to manage
fish and wildlife in the State of Alaska. Despite the promises
in the Statehood Compact the USFWS awards a variety of natural
resource assistance grants and contracts to nongovernmental
organizations, some of which aggressively oppose the express
promise to Alaskans at statehood and oppose the intent behind
Section 101(D) of ANILCA known as "the no more clause."
Thus Congress believes that the need for future legislation
designating new conservation system units, new national
conservation areas, or new national recreation areas has been
obviated.
11:07:19 AM
She listed some of the organizations receiving federal money to
oppose development of the state's resources:
1. $10-50,000 to the Alaska Conservation Foundation in 2010 and
2011
2. Advocacy groups such as the Chuitna Citizen's Coalition whose
sole purpose is opposing proposed Chuitna coal mine.
3. Bristol Bay Protection Campaign and Cook Inlet Keeper, groups
opposed to the Pebble Mine project.
MS. CONWAY said the Alaska Conservation Foundation had provided
numerous grants to the Trustees for Alaska that provides
advocacy and legal representation to groups that oppose a
variety of resource development projects around the state
including filing lawsuits against the State of Alaska and the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
The Trustees' website says that Alaska is poised to make an
outsized and self-destructive contribution to global warming in
the form of massive coal developments. It also says that
Alaska's environment has intrinsic value that defies measurement
in economic terms.
She said the Alaska Conservation Foundation funded 111 grants in
2012; 50 percent of them were grants for oppositional campaigns.
It has awarded over $3 million annually to over 200 Alaskan
nongovernmental organizations and other entities that advocate
against resource development. It has solicited support for their
efforts to "Keep Alaska's Coal in the Ground," and has made a
total of $1,000,371 in numerous grants to organizations opposing
responsible development of coal related projects throughout the
state.
11:10:27 AM
MS. CONWAY said she also noticed the website says the Alaska
Center for the Environment, the Alaska Conservation Alliance,
and the Alaska Youth for Environmental Action are merging, and
one of their mission statements is to have a direct lobbying
impact in Juneau.
This resolution shines a light on these types of activities. It
suggests that perhaps the Office of Management and Budget pay
closer attention to the activities of its agency's grant program
considering that Alaska is a resource state.
The Alaska Mental Health Trust Lands Program receives
substantial benefits from Fort Knox and it stands to receive
royalties and payments from the Chuitna Coal and the Wishbone
Hill mines; that money is used solely to provide services to the
mentally ill, disabled, those with brain trauma, substance
abuse, dementia and more.
11:11:43 AM
SENATOR DYSON asked on page 5, line 15, if there is anything in
federal law or regulations that talks about public funds being
used for litigation in these situations.
MS. CONWAY didn't know specifically, but the U.S. Department of
Justice's website says a substantial portion of the division's
work includes litigation under a plethora of statutes related to
the management of public lands such as the nation's most
significant subtropical wetlands, the Everglades, and the
nation's largest rain forest, the Tongass, to individual range
lands or wildlife refuges. It specifically represents all land
management agencies in the U.S., and the USFWS is among the
listings.
SENATOR DYSON suggested inserting language urging the USFWS to
not finance any litigation.
11:15:18 AM
SENATOR DYSON moved conceptual Amendment 1 to insert the words
"environmentally responsible development" where appropriate.
There were no objections and it was so ordered.
SENATOR BISHOP said he made the distinction that there might be
some good use of these dollars in the conservation funding
efforts.
MS. CONWAY said the 2011/12 grants were listed in their packets
and not all of them looked like they all had that type of anti-
campaign activity.
SENATOR BISHOP said he keyed in on one of the Alaska Native Fund
awards because it was to the Yukon Fisheries Association to
study the Chum salmon and King salmon decline on the Yukon
River.
SENATOR DYSON said many citizens' groups do good work and he was
impressed with what the Matsu group is doing on analyzing
game/sport fish issues. A grand example is the Prince William
Sound Advisory Group that came out of the Exxon Valdez
settlement that has become a model for many similar groups.
11:19:54 AM
SENATOR MICCICHE said three groups are contributed to by the
Alaska Conservation Foundation and asked if she had been able to
track funding for litigation related activities by these groups
or had most of funding been related to data collection.
MS. CONWAY answered that much of the litigation dollars would go
to the Trustees of Alaska, which is the advocacy legal group,
but she couldn't link it to any project.
SENATOR MICCICHE said typically federal funding has a very
specific purpose and he hated to paint them all with a broad
brush. Some of it is used for pro-development projects and
sport/commercial fishing related processes, one being Cook Inlet
Keeper that monitors in-stream water flows and temperatures on
ADF&G professional sport fishing projects. The Kachemak
Conservation Society, Cook Inlet Keepers, the Center for Alaska
Coastal Studies were listed and he valued their opinion on
different things although he didn't agree with all of them. He
would have pulled the names below the Alaska Conservation
Commission out of the resolution, because they do have mixed
roles. They don't want to eliminate Alaskans' right to comment
on things, and he hoped the resolution would stay tied to
litigation-related dollars, because he agreed with the chair
that public funding should not go to litigation against Alaska
projects.
11:23:05 AM
CHAIR GIESSEL said the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment is
freedom of speech, but this resolution doesn't have anything to
do with that. This resolution brings out the fact that federal
money is being distributed through grants to these organizations
that turn around and use them to oppose development in Alaska.
These are transparent funds they can see, but a letter from Mr.
Leaphart would talk about the funding that is not seen and that
is the issue the resolution addresses.
11:24:23 AM
CHAIR GIESSEL opened public testimony.
11:24:30 AM
STAN LEAPHART, Executive Director, Citizens Advisory Commission
on Federal Areas (CACFA), Fairbanks, Alaska, supported SJR 16.
He offered that the USFWS supports the 220 friends groups
(volunteers around the country) that do bird banding, habitat
conservation, and things like that. A group in Alaska is called
Friends of the Alaska Wildlife Refuges; they do great work, but
his concern lies with a policy that was proposed several years
ago and hadn't been finalized that deals with how the agency
interacts with these volunteer groups.
He explained that federal agencies cannot use appropriated funds
to lobby Congress, state or local governments, but friends
groups are able to do that. The policy didn't provide enough
guidance for the agency on how they would interact with these
groups. They provide training, office space and allow use of
office equipment, they provide transport out to do the volunteer
work, but sometimes they have lobbied Congress in opposition to
the land exchange in Izembek and the road, testified at Mineral
Management Service hearings against possible oil and gas leases
offshore of Alaska, and lobbied against the proposed land
exchange in the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge between
Doyon and the USFWS. It's unclear where the line is drawn for
the volunteer group and the responsibilities of the staff for
these agencies. It's not a direct grant, but it is still support
that probably comes very close to violating federal law, which
does not allow the use of appropriated funds for lobbying or
advocacy.
11:28:20 AM
MIKE COONS, representing himself, Palmer, Alaska, supported SJR
16. He wondered if USFWS could be sued for spending U.S. dollars
in violation of their charter. It sounds like they are picking
and choosing their attacks on conservative groups like the IRS
is doing. He agreed with Senator Dyson that environmental groups
generally use bad science and emotions where conservation groups
have a long history of using good science and facts and getting
the education out. Lastly, he asked if Congress acts on
resolutions or just ignore them.
11:30:03 AM
MARLEANNA HALL, Project Coordinator, Resource Development
Council (RDC), Anchorage, Alaska, supported SJR 16. Their
concern is that the federal government is discouraging
investment in Alaska by donating funding through federal
agencies to nongovernment organizations (NGOs) to opposed
development of Alaska's natural resources. The funding of these
groups contradicts RDC's mission to grow Alaska through
responsible resource development.
She said in recent years lawsuits by NGOs have caused delays and
other issues for projects in Alaska, often with little or no
added benefits to the environment. Many lawsuits have threatened
Alaskan jobs, businesses, and communities, for example
exploration and development on the Outer Continental Shelf
(OCS). Lawsuits can cost the state hundreds of thousands of
dollars and even when these projects are not ultimately stopped
the uncertainty of the litigation can effectively stop progress
on them.
Additionally, NGOs involved in litigation often collect large
attorney fees from the federal government in lawsuits that are
aimed at systematically stopping development in mining, oil,
timber, and other industries. She said Alaska's Constitution
says to develop our natural resources for the benefit of all
Alaskans and the state has the responsibility to achieve fiscal
certainty. That can't be done if the projects continue to be
halted by outside interests.
11:32:04 AM
LISA WEISSLER, representing herself, Juneau, Alaska, described
herself as an attorney with expertise in natural resource law.
She did not support SJR 16. She related that language on page 2,
line 4, says it's the policy of the state "to encourage
settlement of its lands and development of its resources by
making them available for maximum use consistent with the public
interest." In this case, "public interest" means what everyone
benefits from: the land, the air, the water, community social
structures, cultural values and its economic interests. And
language on page 2, line 22, talks about how the Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) and Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC) have comprehensive and stringent regulations
to ensure the responsible development of the state's resource.
However, there is no statutory requirement for a coordination
function that will account for the public interest relative to
the agencies, and without that, sometimes public interest groups
have to step in.
MS. WEISSLER said it's hard for the public to participate in the
review process, because they have to go from agency to agency
and figure out what is happening and how to effectively comment
on it. NGOs also step in to deal with general public interest
issues that the state is not fully addressing right now.
MS. WEISSLER said it would be better to have comprehensive
legislation that would provide for the coordinated review of
projects as a whole in which the state's and the public's
interests are identified.
11:35:23 AM
SENATOR DYSON said he appreciated her testimony and that he had
seen similar problems with other state statutes and asked if she
knew of other states that had done this successfully.
MS. WEISSLER said Alaska's Coastal Zone Management Program had
done exactly what she had just described: it coordinated state
permitting and identified state and local interests, and it had
the added advantage of the federal government having to listen,
something we won't get back any time soon. "The Coastal Zone
Management Program was our public interest statutes." That is
why the reviews are so fragmented and the public interest is not
being fully accounted for.
CHAIR GIESSEL, finding no further questions or comments, thanked
Ms. Weissler and closed public testimony. She clarified that
they are referring to federal funds being used in the grant
programs to folks that are working in the opposite direction to
the benefit of Alaska. She stated that comments were made that
our permitting agencies lack coordination and the consideration
of the total impact of development, and she wanted to raise the
committee's awareness that Alaska had been including a health
impact assessment (HIA) in all project applications for 15 or 20
years and was the first state to do that. Alaska has lead the
way in permitting processes; we also lead the way in agency
coordination: Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G),
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), and the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) get together weekly to
deliberate, express concerns, and get further data on large
project applications.
As the Resources Committee, she said, they need to know how
these applications are processed and that is not relevant to
this resolution, which only addresses the use of federal funds
against our resource development opportunities.
11:39:41 AM
SENATOR MICCICHE agreed with her on the litigation piece but
added that some of the contracts are unbiased and just collect
data. They are all about science and some of these folks are the
lowest bidding contractor to provide that data and the
resolution seemed to say that they shouldn't support those
contracts. He struggled with that and asked her to help him.
MS. CONWAY asked him to be more specific.
CHAIR GIESSEL said she thought he was looking at the Further
resolved clause on page 5, line 10-13 that says: the Alaska
State Legislature urge the U.S. Office of Management and Budget
to investigate those expenditures and perform a comprehensive
audit of all grants and contracts that may have been issued from
taxpayer funds through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. It
doesn't prohibit grants or contracts; it requests an audit.
SENATOR MICCICHE said he was looking at "to hire unbiased
independent firms of credible scientists to collect data and
compile peer-reviewed scientific reports and documents;" on page
5, lines 3-5. He assumed the state's goal was not to go with the
lowest qualified bidder among firms doing data collection.
CHAIR GIESSEL said it doesn't do that.
11:42:37 AM
SENATOR DYSON moved to report SJR 16, version 28-LS1211\N, as
amended from committee with attached zero fiscal note and
individual recommendations. There were no objections and it was
so ordered; therefore CSSJR 16(RES) moved from the Senate
Resources Standing Committee.