Legislature(2007 - 2008)HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/19/2008 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB65 | |
| HB193 | |
| HB267 |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 267 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 193 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HJR 2 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 65 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
February 19, 2008
1:39 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Meyer called the House Finance Committee meeting to
order at 1:39:51 PM.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Mike Chenault, Co-Chair
Representative Kevin Meyer, Co-Chair
Representative Bill Stoltze, Vice-Chair
Representative Harry Crawford
Representative Les Gara
Representative Mike Hawker
Representative Mike Kelly
Representative Mary Nelson
Representative Bill Thomas Jr.
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative John Harris
Representative Reggie Joule
ALSO PRESENT
Lori Davey, President, Motznik Information Services; Megan
Foster, Staff, Representative Les Gara; Kevin Brooks, Deputy
Commissioner, Department of Administration; Representative
Bob Roses, Sponsor; Walt Monegan, Commissioner, Department
of Public Safety; Mark Drygas, Battalion Chief, Fairbanks
Fire Department, Alaska Professional Firefighters
Association; Jeff Landvatter, Alaska State Trooper; Jeanne
Ostnes, Staff, Representative Craig Johnson; Representative
Craig Johnson, Sponsor; Representative Nancy Dahlstrom.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Terry Vrabec, Director, Alaska Police Standards Council; Bob
Claus, Self, Craig; Steve Smith, Deputy Chief, Anchorage
Police Department; Chuck Copp, Chief, Kenai Police
Department; Rod Arno, Executive Director, Alaska Outdoor
Council; Captain Burke Waldron, Operations Director, Alaska
Wildlife Troopers.
SUMMARY
HB 65 "An Act relating to breaches of security involving
personal information, credit report and credit
score security freezes, consumer credit
monitoring, credit accuracy, protection of social
security numbers, care of records, disposal of
records, identity theft, furnishing consumer
credit header information, credit cards, and debit
cards, and to the jurisdiction of the office of
administrative hearings; amending Rule 60, Alaska
Rules of Civil Procedure; and providing for an
effective date."
CS HB 65 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with
"no recommendation" and with new fiscal note by
the Department of Administration and new
indeterminate note by the Office of Management and
Budget.
HB 267 "An Act relating to authorizing the state to join
with other states entering into the Wildlife
Violator Compact and authorizing the compact to
supersede existing statutes by approving
standards, rules, or other action under the terms
of the compact; and directing the initiation of
civil actions to revoke appropriate licenses in
this state based on a resident licensee's
violation of or failure to comply with the terms
of a wildlife resource citation issued in another
state that is a party to the compact."
CS HB 267 (RES) was REPORTED out of Committee with
a "do pass" recommendation and with zero note #1
by the Department of Fish and Game and zero note
#2 by the Department of Public Safety.
HB 193 "An Act relating to the composition of the Alaska
Police Standards Council; and providing for an
effective date."
HB 193 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
HJR 2 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the
State of Alaska requiring an affirmative vote of
the people before any form of gambling for profit
may be authorized in Alaska.
HJR 2 was SCHEDULED but not HEARD.
HOUSE BILL NO. 65
"An Act relating to breaches of security involving
personal information, credit report and credit score
security freezes, consumer credit monitoring, credit
accuracy, protection of social security numbers, care
of records, disposal of records, identity theft,
furnishing consumer credit header information, credit
cards, and debit cards, and to the jurisdiction of the
office of administrative hearings; amending Rule 60,
Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure; and providing for an
effective date."
1:41:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARA, SPONSOR, spoke on behalf of himself and
co-sponsor Representative John Coghill and made two
clarifications regarding HB 65 for the record. He began with
AS.45.48.030, Methods of Notice (page 3). When a company
realizes that they have released financial information to
the public, whether by accident or on purpose, this section
requires that the company tell the people affected.
Notification must take place through a letter sent to the
most recent known address. He said one of the companies had
asked if they would have to keep trying to notify a consumer
if the address was wrong. Representative Gara said that
under the standard in the bill, the company has to write
once. They don't have to keep sending the letter.
Representative Gara clarified the second issue, 45.48.410,
Request and Collection (page 17). This section bans a person
or company from selling, trading or making money from Social
Security Numbers (SSN). However, there are situations in
which the bill allows use of SSNs. He said the most
important exception is in 45.48.410(b)(6). A company can
always use an SSN if they are not making money by using it,
if it has no independent value, or if it is part of a larger
transaction such as a credit check or if the SSN is needed
to verify identity for debt collection or to prevent fraud.
1:43:49 PM
Co-Chair Chenault thought a Social Security card was never
intended to be used as identification. Representative Gara
said the sponsors agreed. They did not want companies
demanding that people use their SSN for identification
purposes; however, there is also no ban on it being used as
identification.
Co-Chair Meyer asked if there were amendments to the bill.
Representative Nelson MOVED to RESCIND previous action taken
on Amendment #3, 25-LS0311\K.2, Bannister, 2/07/08 (Copy on
File). There being NO OBJECTION, the action was rescinded.
Representative Nelson read Amendment #3, which deletes "the
disclosure of permanent fund dividend applicant records" and
all references to the same in the bill. She said the
provision was put in by the Judiciary Committee. The battle
to not allow the Dividend Corporation to give out applicant
information was fought for years and won; she did not want
the issue slipped into a bill that is going the other way in
terms of providing information.
AT EASE 1:47:05 PM
RECONVENE 1:51:36 PM
Co-Chair Meyer called for questions on Amendment #3.
Representative Nelson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #3, 25-
LS0311\K.2, Bannister, 2/07/08 (Copy on File).
Page 1, Line 1, deleting "the disclosure of permanent
fund dividend applicant records,"; Page 2, Line 4
through Page 3, Line 18, deleting all material and then
renumber the following bill sections accordingly: Page
29, Line 17, deleting "sec. 5", inserting "sec. 3";
Page 29, Line 21, deleting "sec. 5", inserting "sec.
3"; Page 29, Line 24, deleting "sec. 5", inserting
"sec. 3"; Page 29, Line 26, deleting "sec. 6",
inserting "sec. 4".
Representative Hawker OBJECTED.
LORI DAVEY, PRESIDENT, MOTZNIK INFORMATION SERVICES, spoke
in opposition to Amendment #3. Her company had access to
Fund Dividend (PFD) information before 2004. She said the
loss of access to PFD information has made it more difficult
for title companies, banks and attorneys to effectively
differentiate people, especially those with the same name.
Motznik is not asking to have the same access to information
as they had before 2004, when anyone could download the PFD
file off the State's website into a database. She said the
amendment introduced into Judiciary gives access only to the
name, mailing address and year of birth, not to SSNs or
information for people under 18 years of age. The
information will be used to effectively differentiate people
and serve due process.
1:54:47 PM
Ms. Davey explained that when Motznik does background
screening for employment or housing, they can get name and
date of birth from a criminal file and other public records.
However, if a person does not vote, own a car, have a
hunting or fishing license or show up anywhere else in the
public record, there is no way to differentiate a person
with a criminal record and no other address information from
someone else with the same name. She does not consider the
PFD information they are asking to be re-disclosed (name,
address and year of birth) to be private information.
Representative Nelson asked how companies in other states
find information when they do not have access to data bases
like the PFD. Ms. Davey assumed in other states companies
had more access to tax records, which are not available in
Alaska.
Representative Crawford referred to a person with his name
and a mix-up that resulted in Representative Crawford's PFD
check being taken away. He understood both the need to have
access to information and to limit it. He wondered how to
keep protecting people if access is re-opened.
1:57:39 PM
Ms. Davey said the information would be managed similar to
how it is managed in the DMV, by limiting the people and
companies who have access to the information. There are
limited reasons why the information can be accessed. A form
must be signed and there must be verification that the
business being done is legitimate. The amendment limits the
access. She described how Motznik's system tracks requests
for information and keeps records indefinitely.
Representative Gara wondered what records would be used in
states that do not have an income tax. Ms. Davey said she
only operates in Alaska and did not know. Representative
Gara wondered if tax records were public in other states.
Representative Gara wondered if the most recent address
information someone could find on someone they were trying
to do harm would be the PFD information. Ms. Davey thought
that potentially DMV would have updated information. There
are other means as well, since voter information is updated
with the PFD. For most people that information is already
available.
2:00:43 PM
Representative Gara voiced concerns about giving out address
information. Ms. Davie answered that in Alaska it is
difficult to do business without access to the PFD
information. Representative Gara reiterated his concerns.
2:02:27 PM
Representative Hawker said he MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
Representative Thomas asked if the Division of Elections had
the authority to use the PFD to update addresses.
MEGAN FOSTER, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE LES GARA said that she
believed they did. Representative Hawker had asked the
Division of Revenue (DOR) the same question recently and the
answer was yes. Co-Chair Meyer noted that DOR people present
were nodding their heads.
Representative Thomas pointed out that even if the amendment
were voted down, Elections would still have access to the
addresses.
Representative Nelson said she was happy to be offering the
amendment to delete the provision. She did not want to slip
major changes into other legislation, especially a bill like
HB 65, which tries to limit access to information. She
thought if there were strong support for the provision,
there should be a stand-alone piece of legislation so that
it could be discussed on its own.
2:05:01 PM
A roll call vote was taken on the MOTION to ADOPT Amendment
#3.
IN FAVOR: Nelson, Stoltze, Thomas, Crawford, Gara
OPPOSED: Kelly, Hawker, Chenault, Meyer
Representative Harris was absent from the vote.
The MOTION PASSED (5/4).
Vice-Chair Stoltze asked if Amendment #4, 25-LS0311\K.1,
Bannister, 1/30/08 (Copy on File), which had passed the
previous day, was superfluous. Co-Chair Meyer said yes.
AT EASE 2:06:34 PM
RECONVENE 2:07:16 PM
Co-Chair Meyer referred to new fiscal note for $2 million by
the Department of Administration, new fiscal note by the
Department of Revenue and new indeterminate fiscal note by
the Office of Budget and Management.
Representative Hawker wanted an explanation of the $2
million fiscal note.
2:08:15 PM
KEVIN BROOKS, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION (DOA), gave information regarding the
Department's fiscal note. He explained that since the State
was the victim of a security breach in 2005, DOA had been
requesting funds to strengthen data security. The Department
replaced switches and routers on the network and took other
measures to secure the hardware and infrastructure. The $2
million requested in the fiscal note would pay for
encryption of data so the various state data bases would be
protected in the event of another breach.
Representative Hawker asked what the $1,765.600 under
"equipment" in the fiscal note was for. Mr. Brooks replied
that the budget was for both hardware and software. Software
is included in equipment when the amount needed is large.
Representative Hawker asked for clarification. Mr. Brooks
replied that the $2 million in the FY 09 budget is a
continuation that would complete and implement a double fire
wall to put around all public facing servers. The $2 million
in the capital budget completes the implementation of that
as well as a network admission control. He added that the
detail is in the Capitol budget, but they are separate and
distinct projects. The only similarity is the amount.
2:11:20 PM
Representative Hawker stated that he believed that the
Legislature is only beginning to see the requested funding
to deal with data security in Alaska. He pointed out
previous funding adding up to approximate $16 million listed
on the second page of the fiscal note. He voiced concerns
regarding long term planning.
Mr. Brooks agreed but wanted to list every dime that has
gone into security. He said there is money in the capital
budget for the proposed project and that the Department did
have a five year plan. The encryption budgeted is in that
plan. He emphasized that the encryption needed to be done as
soon as possible; HB 65 points to the urgency to encrypt
data.
2:14:33 PM
Representative Hawker emphasized that he was not arguing the
merits of encryption. He wondered if HB 65 places a burden
of responsibility on the State. Mr. Brooks answered that
from the Department's perspective, the State is treated like
any other keeper of data. The State is not in the business
of making profit from the data but still keeps enormous
amounts of personal data.
Representative Gara clarified that HB 65 did not require
data encryption, although it is a good, safe practice. Mr.
Brooks agreed that HB 65 did not require encryption, but DOA
believes encryption is a prudent thing to do in light of
penalties in place in the bill.
Representative Hawker asked what penalties HB 65 would
impose upon state employees or the State itself. Mr. Brooks
answered that state employees would be covered under a
public officials bond, so there would be no personal
liability. However, the bill has been amended to include
actual economic damages caused in a breach. There are also
costs to notify. He acknowledged positive amendments that
will enable mass notifications, but thought the State had
vulnerabilities that other companies did not have because of
the amount of personal data the State maintains.
2:17:17 PM
Representative Hawker reiterated concerns about the fiscal
note and the enormity of data security issues.
2:18:11 PM
Mr. Brooks agreed that the State will need to be diligent in
security efforts, as the level of sophistication of hackers
is growing.
Co-Chair Meyer pointed out that the new fiscal note by the
Department of Revenue was deleted because Amendment #3 had
passed.
Vice-Chair Stoltze MOVED to report CSHB 65 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with new
fiscal note by the Department of Administration and new
indeterminate note by the Office of Management and Budget.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
CS HB 65 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with "no
recommendation" and with new fiscal note by the Department
of Administration and new indeterminate note by the Office
of Management and Budget.
HOUSE BILL NO. 193
"An Act relating to the composition of the Alaska
Police Standards Council; and providing for an
effective date."
2:20:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BOB ROSES, SPONSOR, gave an overview of HB
193 which changes the composition of the Alaska Police
Standards Council (APSC). Currently the Council is made of
four chief administrative officers; HB 193 would change that
to three. Included in the three positions would be one
position that could be a correctional administrative
officer. The bill does not change the composition of the
private sector or the rural representation to the Council.
Representative Roses addressed concerns about displacing
people currently serving on the Council. He assured the
Committee that the two officers would never be able to
control the majority vote.
2:23:15 PM
Representative Roses cited other boards that have the
authority to grant, suspend or revoke certification, and
pointed out that all those boards have peer representation.
He thought the issue was an equitability issue and not a
union issue. The Governor would have opportunity to select
from a group of officers whose names would be forwarded by
the Association. The Governor is free to choose from any
group; the list is only a recommendation list. He said six
police chiefs came to his office when he introduced the bill
to try and talk him out of it. The more they talked the more
he was convinced the bill is needed.
2:25:53 PM
Representative Roses addressed concerns that the proposal
would move the disciplinary process to a higher level and
that some police officers would have a tendency to protect
their own personnel. Representative Roses sees the bill as
an opportunity for peer representation on a board that is
currently made up mostly of chiefs and commissioners.
2:27:41 PM
Representative Crawford thought the bill would give a voice
to line officers.
Representative Thomas pointed out that he did not see any
Village Public Safety Officers (VPSO) on the board.
Representative Roses replied that language included in the
bill on the second page, line 4, would give an opportunity
for VPSOs to serve. He thought rural representation was a
very important part of the bill.
2:29:51 PM
WALT MONEGAN, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY,
spoke in opposition to the bill. He said that police operate
under a para-military organizational structure. The Chief or
equivalent head has to be accountable to the community and
needs to have mobility in regards to consistent and fair
standards, usually indicated by the cooperative work
agreements that many of the departments already have. When a
chief wants to take action, there are clear procedures that
labor organizations can respond to.
Mr. Monegan pointed out that the APSC has two main
functions, one of which is training. The lesson plans for
the training section does not come from APSC, but from
individual departments. The subject matter experts are
already line officers.
Mr. Monegan continued with the second function of the APSC:
oversight of a certification process that maintains a high
standard of law enforcement. He emphasized the importance of
objectivity. A chief has to keep a professional distance. He
gave an example of firing three officers for dishonesty
issues and the emotional responses to the firing. The de-
certification process is a difficult and long process.
Police officers are hard to find and to train, and APSC
wants them to succeed. However, the process is necessary to
keep public trust.
2:36:56 PM
Mr. Monegan felt the addition of two officers to the Council
did not make sense because the training does not come from
them, and second, they could not vote if the issue were with
a person from their membership. He urged the Committee to
look at the effectiveness of the two officers that would be
on the Council.
2:37:32 PM
Vice-Chair Stoltze asked for comparisons between APSC and
the Fire Standards Council. Mr. Monegan answered that the
purpose of both councils is to ensure high standards of
qualified personnel. They both want to protect the public.
Vice-Chair Stoltze asked if the two councils make different
personnel decisions. Mr. Monegan reiterated their
similarities, although APSC has the ability to remove an
individual entirely from the profession. There was a
discussion about the grievance process in different unions
and how the proposed changes in the bill would affect that
process.
2:40:53 PM
Vice-Chair Stoltze said he would keep listening to both
sides.
Mr. Monegan addressed Representative Thomas's concerns about
VPSOs. He said the issue was that VPSOs are not certified
police officers. They would not fall under APSC as they are
employees of non-profits.
Representative Kelly asked Mr. Monegan if he had to build
the Fire Standards Council from the ground up, would he have
the representation that is being asked for on the APSC or
would he remove it. Mr. Monegan replied that he would remove
the representation from that council as well.
2:42:39 PM
MARK DRYGAS, BATTALION CHIEF, FAIRBANKS FIRE DEPARTMENT,
ALASKA PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION, spoke in favor
of HB 193. He supported having line personnel on the APSC.
He thought the line personnel would feel represented and
heard. The chiefs do not work the long shifts or face what
the line personnel face. He referred to Brian Davis, line
personnel on the Fire Standards Council. Mr. Drygas feels
heard because of Mr. Davis's representation.
2:45:33 PM
JEFF LANDVATTER, ALASKA STATE TROOPER, spoke in favor of HB
193 (Statement on File). He has served for 23 years. He
thought the bill was about representation and giving peace
officers a voice on a committee that dictates their careers.
He wanted to see rank and file members on the Council, just
as on other similar boards. Two members would not be able to
overturn decisions of the Council. Every patrol officer
wants the best standing next to him and backing him up. A
patrol officer can bring the perspective and insight the
Council needs.
2:48:15 PM
TERRY VRABEC, DIRECTOR, ALASKA POLICE STANDARDS COUNCIL
(TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), spoke in opposition to HB
193. He referred to letters before the Committee from
himself, from Daniel Hoffman, the Chairman of the APSC, and
from Chief Charles Kamai from Kodiak (On File).
2:49:30 PM
BOB CLAUS, SELF, CRAIG (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), spoke
in favor of HB 193. Mr. Clause has been a State Trooper for
approximately twenty years and has trained police officers
around the state. He thought adding two working police
officers to the APSC would give a working officer's
perspective to decision making, especially concerning
training issues. Although he shares many years of experience
with the police administrators that currently decide on
course content, his understanding of face-to-face policing
is based on on-going interactions with Alaskans. He
described one of his work days. He felt a person with such
experience is needed on the APSC.
2:52:27 PM
STEVE SMITH, DEPUTY CHIEF, ANCHORAGE POLICE DEPARTMENT (APD)
(TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), spoke on behalf of the Chief
of APD, in opposition to HB 193. He said APD is opposed to
the change in the APSC proposed in the bill. The Council is
primarily a standard-setting and enforcement body, as well
as being a training advocacy body for law enforcement in
Alaska. The bill would alter the Council's internal
operating environment, moving it more towards that of a
labor management dispute forum. There are currently ample
mechanisms in place to settle labor issues. Alaska law and
collective bargaining agreements in effect within state law
enforcement agencies already have appropriate forums for
those issues. He thought the current system was working well
and thought HB 193 would upset that balance.
2:54:27 PM
Representative Crawford questioned whether there was balance
with eleven management members on the Council. He thought
two line officers wouldn't upset the balance, but would add
a voice.
Mr. Smith replied that the balance he referred to was the
broader system of labor dispute mechanisms. He thought the
Council presently fits well into that broader system. When
someone comes before the Council with a potential
decertification action, they will usually have either legal
or union representation. The actual job action has already
taken place or is in the process of taking place through
their grievance and arbitration procedures with their
department. The decertification action is a separate
activity.
2:56:20 PM
CHUCK KOPP, CHIEF, KENAI POLICE DEPARTMENT (TESTIFIED VIA
TELECONFERENCE), spoke in opposition to HB 193. He said many
chiefs in Alaska also do day-to-day police work and
understand the experiences of line officers. He wanted the
Committee to understand that there has not been a complaint
against the Council about unfairness. The union does not
have a grievance against the Council. He served as chairman
of the APSC for the last two years and felt the body worked
exceptionally well in unison with the four public members,
two of whom are from communities of 2,500 or less. House
Bill 193 represents the removal of the largest public safety
employer in Alaska from having representation, by removing a
correctional administrative officer. He pointed out that
Corrections oversees not only prisons but probation and
parole. The Director of Probation and Parole is the
administrative officer that has historically served on APSC,
along with the Commissioner of Corrections. The removal of
this person, who oversees so many personnel and operational
matters, would be a significant loss and adversely affect
the Council's functioning. He thought four chiefs are
necessary on the Council.
Mr. Kopp appreciated the argument that the issue is
representation, but he feels it is a conflict of interest. A
person serves on the Council because they have been
nominated by a labor organization. Labor organizations have
their proper role in protecting the rights of the accused,
but they already have representation before the Council.
Five of the positions on the Council currently are occupied
by individuals from labor organized agencies.
Mr. Kopp said firefighters are not required to take an oath
of office to protect and serve their community and uphold
the law. They are not required by statute to subscribe to a
code of ethics or to live their private lives in alignment
with that code. He read the code of ethics and said much of
the code does not apply to firefighters, while police
officers are held to the highest standard in public service.
He said the balance on the Council has served well for many
years and felt HB 193 would upset that balance.
3:06:02 PM
Representative Thomas asked if any of the chiefs on the
Council were union employees or former union employees. Mr.
Kopp said that the chairman, Chief Dan Hoffman, was the
former union president for the Fairbanks Police Department.
Representative Thomas asked if he stepped down if there was
a union issue before the Council. Mr. Kopp said he would if
the issue involved one of his officers.
Representative Thomas asked Mr. Kopp about his experience as
a trainer. Mr. Kopp listed his extensive teaching and
training experience. He said the Council is careful in its
deliberations regarding decertification.
3:10:03 PM
Co-Chair Meyer closed public testimony.
HB 193 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
HOUSE BILL NO. 267
"An Act relating to authorizing the state to join with
other states entering into the Wildlife Violator
Compact and authorizing the compact to supersede
existing statutes by approving standards, rules, or
other action under the terms of the compact; and
directing the initiation of civil actions to revoke
appropriate licenses in this state based on a resident
licensee's violation of or failure to comply with the
terms of a wildlife resource citation issued in another
state that is a party to the compact."
3:12:07 PM
JEANNE OSTNES, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG JOHNSON, said HB
267 was patterned after the driver's license compact which
all other states in the nation have entered into. If a
person's driver's license is revoked in one state in the
country, that person cannot get a license in another state.
In 1985, states began making a similar compact in relation
to wildlife violators, and it was quickly recognized as a
valuable tool to deter serious wildlife violators everywhere
in the nation. Twenty-six states are currently compact
members. She referred to a photograph (On File) of a poacher
who had been fined and jailed in Alaska, but was able to
return to his home state and obtain another hunting license.
The biggest reason for the compact is to stop inter-state
travel of serious poachers. Second, the compact provides for
the issuance of citations to nonresidents, which is a big
issue in Alaska; currently the violator must be immediately
taken before a magistrate to prevent them from fleeing
across state lines to avoid citation consequences. Third,
the compact provides a strong deterrent for serious fish and
wildlife crimes.
Ms. Ostnes listed the provisions of the Wildlife Violator
Compact (Copy on File).
3:15:34 PM
Co-Chair Meyer referred to two zero notes.
Representative Thomas wondered if the poacher she had
referred to lost his license in Alaska. Ms. Ostnes said his
Alaska license was revoked.
REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG JOHNSON, SPONSOR, referred to the map
of member states (Copy on File) and pointed out that a
violator in any of those states would either go to Texas or
Alaska to poach. He related Committee testimony about
hunters telephoning the Department of Fish and Game and
asking if Alaska were a member of the compact, an indicator
that people who have violated in their own states are
looking for an open place to hunt.
3:17:09 PM
Vice-Chair Stoltze observed that some of the non-compact
states, including Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Alabama and Texas,
are some of the biggest hunting states. He wondered if
Representative Johnson was aware of why those states are not
part of the compact. Representative Johnson replied that
Texas has many private reserves. Vice-Chair Stoltze
mentioned regulations in California, which is a compact
member, and worried that Californian regulations would
affect Alaskans if Alaska became part of the compact.
Representative Johnson replied that Alaska is still in
control of its own laws; HB 267 does not give up any
sovereignty. The State also has the right to review and
determine whether an individual would lose their license.
Vice-Chair Stoltze characterized HB 267 as preventing Alaska
from being the last refuge of scoundrels.
3:21:16 PM
ROD ARNO, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA OUTDOOR COUNCIL
(TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), spoke in support of HB 267.
He said the bill deals mainly with nonresidents. In his
years of experience, the majority of violators are violators
everywhere. This is a tool that will help the wildlife
troopers in Alaska, especially given the vastness of the
state and the shortage of officers.
CAPTAIN BURKE WALDRON, OPERATIONS DIRECTOR, ALASKA WILDLIFE
TROOPERS (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), spoke in favor of
HB 267 on behalf of the Department of Public Safety. He
thought the compact would deter poachers caught in Alaska
from failing to appear on their citations, and make wildlife
troopers more efficient in the field. Currently time is
wasted processing poachers who are arrested.
3:23:52 PM
Co-Chair Meyer closed public testimony.
Vice-Chair Stoltze MOVED report the CS for HB 267 (RES) out
of Committee with individual recommendations and with
attached zero note #1 by the Department of Fish and Game and
zero note #2 by the Department of Public Safety. There being
NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
CS HB 267 (RES) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with zero note #1 by the Department
of Fish and Game and zero note #2 by the Department of
Public Safety.
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 2
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State
of Alaska requiring an affirmative vote of the people
before any form of gambling for profit may be
authorized in Alaska.
House Joint Resolution No. 2 was SCHEDULED but not HEARD.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 3:25 PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|