Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/21/1999 08:45 AM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
April 21, 1999
8:45 A.M.
TAPE HFC 99 - 92, Side 1.
TAPE HFC 99 - 92, Side 2.
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Therriault called the House Finance Committee
meeting to order at 8:45 A.M.
PRESENT
Co-Chair Therriault Representative Foster
Co-Chair Mulder Representative Grussendorf
Vice Chair Bunde Representative Kohring
Representative Austerman Representative Moses
Representative G. Davis Representative Williams
Representative J. Davies was not present for the meeting.
ALSO PRESENT
Jeff Logan, Staff, Representative Joe Green; Dennis
Poschard, Legislative Liaison, Special Assistant, Office of
the Commissioner, Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities; Geron Bruce, Legislative Liaison, Office of the
Commissioner, Department of Fish and Game; Dick Bishop, Vice
President, Alaska Outdoor Council (AOC), Juneau.
TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE
David McGivern, Anchorage Trail Coalition, Anchorage; Wayne
Pichon, Former Coastal Zone Manager for the Federal
Government, Anchorage; Lorvel Shields, Flat Bay Shore
Community Council, Anchorage; Deanna Essert, Sand Lake
Community Council, Anchorage; R.J. Rhodes, Self, Anchorage;
Ron Crenshaw, President, Anchorage Trails and Green Belt
Coalition, Anchorage; Art Weiner, Biologist, Board Member,
Anchorage Citizen's Coalition, Anchorage; Kevin Keeler,
Anchorage Trails and Greenbelt Coalition, Anchorage; Patrick
Wright, Chairman, Anchorage Fish and Game Advisory
Committee, Anchorage; Randy Hoffbeck, Anchorage Parks and
Recreation Manager, Municipality of Anchorage; Harry Brod,
Self, Anchorage; Vernon Labau, President, Labau Forest
Resources Consultants, Anchorage; Doug Perkins, President,
Bayshore Flats Community Council, Anchorage.
SUMMARY
HB 131 An Act relating to public rights-of-way and
easements for surface transportation across the
Anchorage Coastal Wildlife Refuge.
HB 131 was reported out of Committee with a "no
recommendation" and with zero fiscal notes by the
Department of Natural Resources dated 4/1/99 and
Department of Fish and Game dated 4/1/99 and an
indeterminent note by the Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities dated 4/1/99.
HOUSE BILL NO. 131
An Act relating to public rights-of-way and easements
for surface transportation across the Anchorage Coastal
Wildlife Refuge.
JEFF LOGAN, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN explained that
the Anchorage Coastal Wildlife Refuge (ACWR) was created by
the Legislature in 1988. Most of the refuge had previously
been classified by the Legislature as the Potter Point State
Game refuge.
In establishing ACWR, the Legislature granted the authority
to approve rights of way through the refuge to the
Department of Fish and Game and Department of Natural
Resources. HB 131 would establish additional protection for
the refuge by withholding that grant of authority and
reserving unto the Legislature the right to approve surface
transportation rights of ways and easements.
Co-Chair Therriault questioned why the Legislature would
want to get into this level of management. Mr. Logan
replied that the sponsor is not proposing that the
Legislature manage this land but simply to approve a
management decision. He pointed out that this is a
developing urban area in which 75% of the vacant land in the
Anchorage Bowl rests. There is yet to be seen significant
development and pressures on that refuge which is unique.
Co-Chair Therriault inquired the concern which brought the
legislation forward. Mr. Logan advised that some people
have drawn parallels between HB 131 and a proposed extension
of the Anchorage Coastal Trail. He stated that HB 131 was
much broader than a single project. A route for the bike
trail extension has not yet been proposed. He noted that
there is a possible encroachment on the refuge. Mr. Logan
referenced a map included in Committee members packets which
shows the Potters Marsh area. [Copy on File].
Co-Chair Therriault asked if development would be allowed in
the refuge. Mr. Logan stated it would not, however, with
development comes other proposals.
Representative G. Davis questioned why the Legislature would
want to become involved in the planning process that the
City of Anchorage has already begun. Mr. Logan replied that
the legislation is not proposing to become involved with the
planning process, but rather at the end of that process,
that the Legislature be consulted. He pointed out that this
is State land and that there is a proposed AMAX bike trail.
Co-Chair Therriault referenced Alaska State Statutes,
Subsection (d), which indicates that land owned by the
Municipality of Anchorage and lies within the boundary of
the refuge may be included in the refuge. He questioned how
much land the City owned within the refuge. Mr. Logan
understood from information contained in the management
plan, the State owns all that land.
Representative Bunde voiced concern with the Riffle Creek
range which was established in that area. The potential of
introducing pedestrians to that area could present a safety
concern.
Representative Foster questioned why the bill had been sent
to the Finance Committee accompanied by a zero fiscal note.
Mr. Logan pointed out the indeterminent fiscal note
submitted by Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities. The sponsor considers it unusual that the
agency which manages the refuge has submitted a fiscal note.
The Department of Transportation and Public Facilities has
the Anchorage Coastal Trail extension project in the
planning stage. It would be directly affected by passage of
HB 131. Mr. Logan explained that he knew from a discussion
with the project manager that project would not be in the
planning stage for another year and half.
VERNON LABAU, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), PRESIDENT,
LABAU FOREST RESOURCES CONSULTANTS, ANCHORAGE, noted that he
was a member of the Board of the Alaska Bay Owners
Association in the Bayshore area. Mr. LaBau discussed that
he has been a biker since moving to Alaska and was a strong
proponent of the Anchorage bike trail system. However, Mr.
LaBau strongly opposed having a bike or walking trail being
built through the Anchorage Coastal Wildlife Refuge.
* It would not be good for the natural resource
ecology of the ACWR.
* Any trail built over those highly unstable
soils would be very difficult to maintain,
and would require a considerable annual
budget expense to upgrade.
* The area on the shoreline is in the area
designated on Anchorage hazard map as a wind
hazard area due to the high prevailing winds
coming out of Turnigain Arm.
* Building a bike trail out through the ACWR
would probably mean the Rifle Range would
have to be closed.
HARRY BROD, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ANCHORAGE, spoke
in opposition to the proposed legislation. He suggested
that the legislation was proposed by special interests who
own homes built close to the bluff in consideration.
RANDY HOFFBECK, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ANCHORAGE
PARKS AND RECREATION MANAGER, MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE,
spoke in opposition to the legislation. He stated that the
legislation would eliminate an option of southern extension
to the coastal trail. A management plan was published in
1991. A change to that plan must require public input.
Additionally, there is federal funding secured for the
trail.
PATRICK WRIGHT, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), CHAIRMAN,
ANCHORAGE FISH AND GAME ADVISORY COMMITTEE, ANCHORAGE, spoke
in support of HB 131. Property owners have testified before
the Fish and Game Advisory Committee that regulations are
important and would enhance the property in concern. The
primary concerns of that Committee are habitat and the use
for the area. He reiterated that the bill could provide for
the development and utilization of wildlife resources
embodied in the Constitution.
KEVIN KEELER, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ANCHORAGE
TRAILS AND GREENBELT COALITION, ANCHORAGE, testified in
opposition to HB 131. He suggested that the 95 thousand
people that live in the Tutor Road area need a flat,
continuous, uninterrupted bike trail. The Anchorage Coastal
Trail has been routed carefully to protect habitat. Mr.
Keeler questioned the true intention of the bill. He
believed that Anchorage residents would be the losers with
passage of the legislation. He urged that the bike trail
project go forward in the future.
ART WEINER, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), BIOLOGIST, BOARD
MEMBER, ANCHORAGE CITIZEN'S COALITION, ANCHORAGE, testified
in opposition to the proposed legislation because of
inadequate oversight to guarantee that the area stay
protected. He stressed that this is an environmentally
sensitive area and needs to be protected with long term
planning. He urged that the process remain a professional
and public process, not one addressed by the Legislature.
RON CRENSHAW, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), PRESIDENT,
ANCHORAGE TRAILS AND GREEN BELT COALITION, ANCHORAGE, spoke
against HB 131. Mr. Crenshaw advised that the proposed law
would place the will of the Legislature against public input
in the Anchorage area. The coastal trail is one of
Anchorage's important public accesses. It has been through
the public involvement process; State resource agencies and
the public have created where and how the trail should be
built. No single agency or public interest group should be
able to determine the outcome of the public debate. Mr.
Crenshaw concluded that the proposed law would be a "slap in
the face" to the Municipality of Anchorage. He concluded
that it is an ill-conceived, inappropriate and unnecessary
proposition.
Representative Bunde questioned if the State should have a
role to play in trail decisions anywhere in the State. Mr.
Crenshaw replied that the State has a major role to play in
trails statewide. He stated that the Legislature should not
hold itself above the planning process and be placed in a
position to have veto power over a decision made by the
Municipality.
R.J. RHODES, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ANCHORAGE,
spoke in support of the legislation. He noted that he lived
on the bluff and could not imagine a bike trail through that
area. He suggested that the price would be prohibitive and
would disrupt the wildlife in that area.
DEANNA ESSERT, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), SAND LAKE
COMMUNITY COUNCIL, ANCHORAGE, spoke in support of the
legislation. She stated that the ACWR is a rare and
precious asset deserving preservation in its natural state.
She added that for sound reason. the Department of Fish and
Game is opposed to development of the trail in the refuge.
Additionally, there are incompatible uses already in that
area with the presence of the rifle range. In conclusion,
prevailing severe winds in that area would make it difficult
for bike riding.
(Tape Change HFC 99 - 92, Side 2).
LORVELL SHIELDS, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), FLAT BAY
SHORE COMMUNITY COUNCIL, ANCHORAGE, spoke in support of the
proposed legislation. He advised that the existing system
would be completely altered with a bike trail.
* Any structure built in the refuge would have a
difficult time with-standing the winds in that
area.
* The birds that nest in the refuge, have only two
days to raise their young and are extremely
sensitive to disturbance.
Mr. Shields emphasized that this would be a terrible area to
place a trail and because it is a salt marsh, it would
destroy its' environmental value. There are other places
where a transportation trail could be located, however,
there is only one refuge.
DAVID MCGIVERN, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ANCHORAGE
TRAIL COALITION, ANCHORAGE, testified in opposition to the
legislation. He urged the Committee members to trust the
public process in the Municipality of Anchorage to explore
all the options for a coastal trail.
DOUG PERKINS, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), PRESIDENT,
BAYSHORE FLATS CITY COUNCIL, ANCHORAGE, testified in support
of the legislation and against any type of marsh trail. He
questioned if HB 131 would pose any relevant fiscal
responsibilities that need to be addressed. He believed
that it would not. He emphasized that this is State land
and that it is not a local issue, pointing out that the
Department of Fish and Game has indicated that they will not
issue a permit for the trail on that land.
WAYNE PICHON, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), FORMER COASTAL
ZONE MANAGER FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, ANCHORAGE,
testified in support of HB 131. He voiced concern with the
intent of the Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities. He believed that the referral of the bill to
the House Finance Committee is an attempt to thwart
legislative oversight. Mr. Pichon stated that a surface
intrusion to the refuge would harm the plants that live
there. The vegetation in that area is unique to Anchorage
and is fragile.
DICK BISHOP, VICE PRESIDENT, ALASKA OUTDOOR COUNCIL (AOC),
JUNEAU, noted that AOC strongly supports HB 131. AOC has a
solid record of supporting critical habitats, recreational
rivers, and refuges.
Mr. Bishop commented that AOC is concerned about alternative
uses that may detract from the values of the rifle range.
He noted that the Council has seen many occasions in which
wildlife conservation and traditional uses such as hunting,
viewing and shooting may suffer if not insulated from
rapidly growing competing uses. In conclusion, he suggested
that it was appropriate for the State Legislature to have
the oversight of the area.
DENNIS POSCHARD, LEGISLATIVE LIAISON, OFFICE OF THE
COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC
FACILITIES, stated that the Department is respectful to the
concerns of those who previously testified regarding the
sensitivity of the Anchorage Coastal Wildlife Refuge. The
Department agrees that there are many important concerns and
impacts that will need to be addressed.
The Department of Transportation and Public Facilities in
conjunction with AMATS has a project in the route analysis
and preliminary engineering stage that would be directly
affected by passage of HB 131. The project is the Anchorage
Trail-southern extension, being developed by AMATS. The
project is significant to the Department and to AMATS
because it is the missing link between trails headed north
out of Anchorage on the Glen and Parks Highways and south
out of Anchorage on the Seward Highway.
Mr. Poschard discussed that the potential trail alignments
have not been developed yet. However, the potential for
some of the Coastal Trail extension to be located in ACWR is
noted in the major planning documents that have been
developed during the last 20 years. These planning
documents were developed with significant public, local and
state government involvement.
Mr. Poschard pointed out that federal funding is being used
for the trail extension project. The use of federal funds
requires that the project's environmental process be in
conformance with the National Environmental Protection Act.
That would ensure local, state and federal agency
involvement. The effect of HB 131 would be to add an
additional approval step to the project process if some
portion of the trail is proposed to be located in the
refuge. That would add additional time and expense for
project development. The language of the bill shifts the
ultimate responsibility for land use management of ACWR from
the Department of Fish and Game to the Alaska Legislature.
Mr. Poschard advised that the Department opposes the bill:
* There is already an adequate process in place for
dealing with local concerns regarding the project
and the use of the wetland.
* The Department and AMATS have just begun the
planning process for extending the trail and
should be allowed to proceed without bias for or
against any alignment.
* Should a coastal route be chosen for an extension,
and the Legislature not give approval, the
Department and AMATS will have spent over $1
million dollars for nothing and be forced to start
again.
* The Legislature already has ultimate control over
the project through the budget process.
Mr. Poschard addressed the fiscal note. He stated that the
sponsor is corrected in that the project is actually in the
route analysis stage; however, the fiscal note is still
relevant. There are two costs that will be incurred that
the Department cannot quantify ahead of time.
* The amount of money spent on an environmental
process; and
* The amount of money needed on completion of the
normal process to come and seek approval from the
Legislature.
Representative Bunde asked if there would be $20 million
dollars of AMATS money. Mr. Poschard replied that there
will be a more accurate estimate after the route analysis is
completed. The costs could vary greatly. Representative
Bunde asked if maintenance costs would be the State's
responsibility. Mr. Poschard replied that it would be the
State's position that the Municipality of Anchorage would
maintain that portion of the trail. The Legislature
ultimately has the authority to decide if the project would
be funded. AMATS money is normally allocated as a lump sum.
The Department currently has requested $1.2 million dollars,
with another $1 million dollars requested for the completion
of the EIS permitting and design.
Representative Bunde asked if there would be a negative
impact on the rifle range or to the refuge with building the
trail.
GERON BRUCE, LEGISLATIVE LIASON, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER,
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME, responded that he could not
answer that questions without having some alternative routes
laid out to examine. The Department has signaled concern
and would not be supportive of any route that compromised
either of those two concerns. Those principles would apply
to any route that the Department would consider.
Representative Bunde MOVED to report HB 131 out of Committee
with individual recommendations and with the accompanying
fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
HB 131 was reported out of Committee with "no
recommendation" and with zero fiscal notes by the Department
of Natural Resources dated 4/1/99 and the Department of Fish
and Game dated 4/1/99 and an indeterminent note by
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities dated
4/1/99.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 10:10 A.M.
H.F.C. 9 4/21/99
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|