Legislature(1993 - 1994)
03/26/1993 08:00 AM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
March 26, 1993
8:00 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bill Williams, Chairman
Representative Bill Hudson, Vice Chairman
Representative Con Bunde
Representative Pat Carney
Representative John Davies
Representative Jeannette James
Representative Eldon Mulder
Representative David Finkelstein
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Joe Green
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT
Representative Pete Kott
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
Briefing by Alaska Water Resources Board
HB 213: "An Act prohibiting the commissioner of natural
resources from classifying state land, water, or
land and water so that mining, mineral entry and
location, mineral prospecting, and mineral leasing
are precluded or are designated an incompatible
use without an act of the legislature if the area
involved contains more than 640 acres except in
certain situations; and providing for an effective
date."
ADOPTED CS (RES) AS AMENDED, MOVED FROM COMMITTEE
WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION
HB 140: "An Act relating to the king salmon tag fee."
ADOPTED CS (FSH) AND MOVED FROM COMMITTEE WITH A
DO PASS RECOMMENDATION
HCR 9: Relating to management of the community
development fisheries quota program and fisheries
development by the state.
ADOPTED CS (FSH) AND MOVED FROM COMMITTEE WITH A
DO PASS RECOMMENDATION
WITNESS REGISTER
Mike Niemeyer, Chairman
Alaska Water Resources Board
601 W. Fifth Ave., Suite 200
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Phone: Not available
Position Statement: Presented briefing on Water Resources
Board
Wayne Westberg, Member
Alaska Water Resources Board
P.O. Box 110378
Anchorage, Alaska 99511
Phone: Not available
Position Statement: Responded to questions on water export
issues
Jack Phelps
Legislative Aide
Representative Pete Kott
State Capitol, Room 409
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
Phone: 465-3777
Position Statement: Commented on changes in the draft
CSHB 213
Raga Elim
Special Assistant to the Commissioner
Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
400 Willoughby Ave.
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1724
Phone: 465-2400
Position Statement: Explained the DNR amendments to HB 213
Wendy Mulder
Legislative Liaison
Department of Commerce and Economic Development (DCED)
P.O. Box 110800
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0800
Phone: 465-2500
Position Statement: Described the DCED's involvement in
discussions of amendments to HB 213
Jerry Luckhaupt, Attorney
Legislative Affairs Agency
Division of Legal Services
130 Seward St., Suite 313
Juneau, Alaska 99801-2197
Phone: 465-2450
Position Statement: Explained proposed amendment to CSHB 213
Representative Pete Kott
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol, Room 409
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
Phone: 465-3777
Position Statement: Expressed support of committee
substitute as sponsor of HB 213
Representative Bill Hudson
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol, Room 108
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
Phone: 465-3744
Position Statement: Prime Sponsor of HB 140
Bob Herron
Legislative Aide
Representative Lyman Hoffman
State Capitol, Room 503
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
Phone: 465-4453
Position Statement: Explained HCR 9
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 213
SHORT TITLE: LIMIT ADMINISTRATIVE LAND CLOSURES
BILL VERSION: SCS CSHB 213(RES)(EFD FLD)
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) KOTT,Phillips,Green,Brice,
Mulder,Toohey
TITLE: "An Act prohibiting the commissioner of natural
resources from permanently classifying state land, water, or
land and water so that mining, mineral entry and location,
mineral prospecting, and mineral leasing are precluded or
are designated an incompatible use without an act of the
legislature if the area involved contains more than 640
contiguous acres except in certain situations."
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
03/10/93 590 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
03/10/93 591 (H) RESOURCES, FINANCE
03/10/93 596 (H) COSPONSOR(S): BRICE, MULDER,
TOOHEY
03/22/93 (H) RES AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 124
03/22/93 (H) MINUTE(RES)
03/26/93 (H) RES AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 124
03/26/93 788 (H) RES RPT CS(RES)NEW TITLE 4DP
2DNP 2NR
03/26/93 789 (H) DP: HUDSON, JAMES, WILLIAMS,
MULDER
03/26/93 789 (H) DNP: FINKELSTEIN, DAVIES
03/26/93 789 (H) NR: CARNEY, BUNDE
03/26/93 789 (H) -ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DNR)
3/26/93
03/26/93 806 (H) FIN REFERRAL WAIVED Y22 N11 E2
BILL: HB 140
SHORT TITLE: FEES FOR NONRESIDENT KING SALMON TAG
BILL VERSION: CSHB 140(FSH)
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) HUDSON,Phillips,Mulder
TITLE: "An Act relating to the anadromous king salmon tag;
and providing for a effective date."
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
02/08/93 254 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
02/08/93 254 (H) FISHERIES, RESOURCES, FINANCE
02/22/93 (H) FSH AT 08:30 AM CAPITOL 17
02/22/93 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/03/93 (H) FSH AT 08:30 AM CAPITOL 17
03/03/93 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/05/93 (H) FSH AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 17
03/12/93 615 (H) FSH RPT CS(FSH) NEW TITLE
3DP
03/12/93 615 (H) DP: MOSES, PHILLIPS, OLBERG
03/12/93 615 (H) -FISCAL NOTE (F&G) 3/12/93
03/26/93 784 (H) RES RPT CS(FSH) NEW TITLE 7DP
1DNP
03/26/93 784 (H) DP: HUDSON, JAMES, FINKELSTEIN,
DAVIES
03/26/93 784 (H) DP: MULDER, BUNDE, WILLIAMS
03/26/93 785 (H) DNP: CARNEY
03/26/93 785 (H) -PREVIOUS FN (F&G) 3/12/93
03/26/93 808 (H) COSPONSOR(S): MULDER
BILL: HCR 9
SHORT TITLE: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FISHING QUOTAS
BILL VERSION: CSHCR 9(FSH) AM
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) HOFFMAN,Ulmer,Mulder
TITLE: Relating to state management of the Western Alaska
Community Development Quota Program and state fisheries
development policy.
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
02/22/93 409 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
02/22/93 409 (H) FISHERIES, RESOURCES, FINANCE
03/12/93 (H) FSH AT 08:30 AM CAPITOL 17
03/12/93 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/12/93 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/17/93 682 (H) FSH RPT CS(FSH) NEW TITLE 2DP
1NR
03/17/93 682 (H) DP: MOSES, OLBERG
03/17/93 682 (H) NR: PHILLIPS
03/17/93 682 (H) -ZERO FISCAL NOTE (F&G)
3/17/93
03/26/93 776 (H) RES RPT CS(FSH) NEW TITLE 6DP
2NR
03/26/93 777 (H) DP: HUDSON, JAMES, FINKELSTEIN,
DAVIES
03/26/93 777 (H) DP: MULDER, WILLIAMS
03/26/93 777 (H) NR: BUNDE, CARNEY
03/26/93 777 (H) -PREVIOUS ZERO FN (F&G)
3/17/93
03/26/93 807 (H) COSPONSOR(S): MULDER
03/17/93 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/26/93 (H) RES AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 124
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 93-37, SIDE A
Number 000
The House Resources Committee was called to order by
Chairman Bill Williams at 8:10 a.m. Members present at the
call to order were Representatives Williams, Hudson, Bunde,
Green, James, and Mulder. Members absent at the call were
Representatives Carney, Davies, and Finkelstein.
CHAIRMAN BILL WILLIAMS told the committee that the first
item on the meeting's agenda was a briefing by the Alaska
Water Resources Board, followed by consideration of HB 213,
HB 140, and HCR 9.
Number 092
MIKE NIEMEYER, CHAIRMAN OF THE ALASKA WATER RESOURCES BOARD,
told the committee that in addition to his service on the
board, he was a land manager for Calista Corporation. He
described the composition of the Water Resources Board as
having seven members, all appointed by the governor. He
noted that three of the members were present at the
Resources Committee meeting, including himself. The others
were Wayne Westberg and Dave Norton.
MR. NIEMEYER explained that the mission of the Water
Resources Board was to ensure that there was wise water
management in the state. He noted that for the past year
the board had not been funded and members had served at
their own expense. He referred to legislation pertinent to
the Water Resources Board, including HB 111 and SB 80.
House Bill 111, he said, proposes to repeal the board. This
proposal, he believed, makes little sense because the board
operates at little expense to the state.
MR. NIEMEYER explained that SB 80 combines the Water
Resources Board with the Soil and Water Conservation Board.
In effect, he said, the bill would turn the functions of the
Water Resources Board over to the Soil and Water
Conservation Board. He cautioned that water management
issues would be compromised by the creation of a joint
board.
Number 115
MR. NIEMEYER explained the history of the board, which had
operated for over 20 years. He said the board serves as an
advocate for the state's position on water management, and
is involved in controversial water issues. Most recently,
he said the board was involved in the development of the
Kenai Groundwater Task Force, and has been an advocate for
village safe water programs.
Number 160
MR. NIEMEYER related some of the other activities of the
Water Resources Board, which include working closely
together with user groups to work out problems and creating
programs that will generate revenues. He noted the work of
the Water Division in the Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) in developing a water export program. Although the
idea has not been widely accepted, he said the DNR is
looking seriously at water export as a source of revenue
generation for the state.
Number 240
MR. NIEMEYER described some of the other principal functions
and programs performed by the Water Resources Board or for
which the board serves in an advisory capacity. Among them
were hydrologic surveys, maintenance of stream gauging
records and water studies required for construction of
bridges or roads. He said 11 hydrologists in the DNR
perform those functions and that continuity in their data-
gathering is very important, but is at risk in the face of
budget cuts. The Water Resource Board, he said, is an
active proponent of keeping the hydrologists in the
department to maintain those programs.
Number 310
REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES asked Mr. Niemeyer when the
Water Resources Board was authorized.
MR. NIEMEYER replied that the board was authorized in
statute by AS 46, at about the time of the Water Use Act in
the 1960's.
Number 315
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES asked how members are selected and
appointed.
Number 320
MR. NIEMEYER replied that persons interested in serving on
the board contact the governor's office, and those who are
appointed serve four-year terms. He said the board has
benefitted from continuity in its membership over the years,
except for the higher than usual turnover in the past five
years.
Number 339
REPRESENTATIVE CON BUNDE referred to the Water Resources
Board's fact sheet, dated September, 1992, produced by the
DNR's Division of Water. He asked Mr. Niemeyer to describe
the board's legislative priorities.
MR. NIEMEYER explained that the board's highest priority was
to obtain funding for the Water Division. He said the board
had worked for 20 years to have that division created, and
that with budget cuts, the programs provided by that
division are in jeopardy of being lost.
Number 366
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE commented on the export of Alaska's
water resources, and noted that the environmental impact of
such an action would be very complex. He noted that the
cost of such big projects may not be a wise investment in
light of budget cuts that might eliminate state hydrologists
who provide important field services to the citizens of
Alaska.
Number 390
WAYNE WESTBERG, WATER RESOURCES BOARD MEMBER, explained that
the investigation of water export possibilities has not been
a major expense to the state, in that only one person is
employed on that project in the Division of Water. He said
the water export project does not impact the delivery of
other water-related services. The board initiated DNR's
water rights program, he said. Although it had been in
statutes, Mr. Westberg told the committee that it had not
been implemented until the board pushed for action. If the
DNR loses its hydrologists, he said the water rights program
would be drastically affected.
MR. WESTBERG predicted that a backlog of water rights
applications would result if the hydrologists' budget were
cut too far.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE commented that the hydrologists in the
field should be the highest priority.
Number 422
MR. NIEMEYER distributed a position paper prepared by the
Division of Water on water exports, dated March 17, 1993.
He also distributed an attachment, also prepared by the
Division of Water, relating to the FY 94 budget.
Number 438
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS noted for the record that Representatives
Davies, Finkelstein and Bunde had joined the meeting since
the call to order. He referred to the next item on the
agenda, HB 213, which he explained, had been previously
heard by the Resources Committee on March 22, 1993. He
noted that the amendments suggested at that meeting had led
to a blank committee substitute draft, as well as two
additional amendments, A.8 and A.9.
HB 213: LIMIT ADMINISTRATIVE LAND CLOSURES
Number 464
JACK PHELPS, LEGISLATIVE AIDE TO REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT,
PRIME SPONSOR OF HB 213, told the committee he had worked
with the DNR on the amendments, and that the draft committee
substitute reflected those changes.
Number 474
RAGA ELIM, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE COMMISSIONER OF THE DNR,
related the discussions held between the prime sponsor and
the DNR since the last meeting on the bill. As HB 213 was
originally introduced, he explained, the DNR had wanted some
amendments and hastily drafted language to address the
administration's concerns. Those amendments, he said,
included reference to "contiguous" acres of land, and
provided a mechanism for management flexibility for the DNR
to issue an order for closure effective immediately, subject
to approval from the legislature. Without the legislature's
approval, he explained, the order would lapse.
MR. ELIM explained that the amendments would not result in
any fiscal impact, as reflected in the zero fiscal note from
the DNR.
Number 507
REPRESENTATIVE ELDON MULDER MOVED to adopt the draft
committee substitute as CSHB 213 (RES).
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES asked whether he was referring to the
3/25/93 committee substitute, and whether that CS
incorporated amendments A.1 through A.7.
Number 513
REPRESENTATIVE MULDER explained that only amendments A.8 and
A.9 were incorporated in the CS.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES then asked what would happen with
amendments one through seven.
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS told Representative James that
Representative Kott's office and the administration had
worked together on the CS and settled on the two amendments
to be incorporated into the CS.
Number 527
REPRESENTATIVE DAVID FINKELSTEIN asked whether anyone from
the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) were present
at the meeting to respond to the issues raised previously
regarding anadromous streams, wildlife refuges and critical
habitats.
MR. ELIM replied that as HB 213 was originally drafted, all
mineral closing orders would have to be approved by the
legislature. He explained that the ADF&G wanted to define
certain types of orders for the administration to retain
full authority over. That approach, he said, ran counter to
the intent of the bill. Discussions with the administration
regarding closures in such areas, led to the decision that
closures even in those areas would be subject to legislative
approval. As the CS is written, he said the DNR will be
able to issue an order, effective immediately, subject to
approval by the legislature.
Number 547
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN reiterated his concern that
someone from the ADF&G should be present, and stated that
the concerns expressed by the ADF&G at the previous meeting
are still there. There still existed a potential for a
critical area to be jeopardized if an order lapses due to
the legislature's failure to approve it, he said, and this
potential raises problems of balance of power.
MR. ELIM recognized the vagaries of the committee process in
the legislature, and said the department was comfortable
with the fact that if they made a closure decision with
compelling reasons, the legislature would acknowledge those
reasons also.
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN pointed out there were plenty of
examples of instances where the majority of the legislature
might be in agreement, but a few individuals could hold up
the process.
Number 565
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE said he was comfortable with the DNR
issuing a closure and then coming to the legislature for
approval, but he speculated that if an order was issued on
June 1, then there would be no legislative approval until
the following January and any work that was begun could not
be undone.
MR. ELIM clarified that the converse situation would be the
case; that the order issued by the DNR would stop any use or
development of land until the legislature approved or
disapproved the order.
Number 577
REPRESENTATIVE MULDER also explained that the DNR's
commissioner would have a limited window of opportunity to
address critical issues, but that legislative approval would
still be necessary. He felt the CS adequately made those
provisions. He also felt it was most appropriate for the
legislature to be accountable to the public and have review
of the closure decisions.
Number 590
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN did not believe there had been an
administration prior to the current one that would have
given up the power to protect public lands, especially
critical habitats and wildlife refuges that were
intentionally left open in enabling legislation because the
administration had the power to close the lands as necessary
when and if the need arose. He said that at the time the
state was deciding whether to set up critical habitats and
wildlife refuges and not close them to mineral entry, the
argument was that it was not necessary to close them because
the administration has the power to close them. Now, he
said, the legislature is diminishing the power to close them
and diminishing the protection of those critical habitats.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES commented regarding critical habitats.
She suggested that the whole state could be considered
critical habitat. The only way for the people of the state
to have input into closures, she said, is if they go through
the legislature. She felt the CS for HB 213 addressed that
need by letting the administration make emergency closures.
If the information showed that an area was indeed critical
habitat, she felt confident that the legislature would
recognize the need for closure.
Number 615
MR. ELIM attempted to allay Representative Finkelstein's
concerns regarding critical habitats. In a hypothetical
situation where a closure order is issued by the DNR and
went to the legislature for approval but did not pass, and
the area then became open for mining, he said there were
still authorities and permitting processes to assure
mitigation and protection of the habitat. Title 16 and
Title 38 provided safeguards, he added.
Number 630
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES shared the concern that the ADF&G
should have had a representative at this meeting of the
Resources Committee. He also expressed concern that the
direction for HB 213 discussed at its previous hearing was
very different from the approach in the CS. Specifically,
using a process similar to the executive order process had
been discussed at the last meeting on the bill. He felt the
CS approach shifted the balance too far from what are
properly administrative functions to what are appropriately
legislative policy duties.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES suggested that such a shift seems to
indicate that the executive and administrative functions are
unnecessary and the legislature should just expand its staff
and run the government. He stressed that it is important to
maintain separation of powers and that the proposed CS for
HB 213 goes too far in the direction of the legislature
performing the day to day functions of managing the
government.
Number 663
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS noted that Representative Pete Kott, prime
sponsor of HB 213, had joined the meeting. As far as the
people of the state having a say in administrative
decisions, the chairman said he preferred that approach.
VICE CHAIRMAN BILL HUDSON commented that the committee
members should recognize that the bill does not preclude the
administration from closing any area, but it puts the checks
and balances in the hands of the legislature. He explained
that the result is the administration has to come back to
the legislature to assure that a policy decision is the
correct one. He also noted the exemption in HB 213 for land
disposals and transportation corridors. He felt satisfied
that this is good legislation.
Number 679
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS addressed the motion on the floor to adopt
the committee substitute, and asked if there were any
objections. Hearing none, CSHB 213 (RES) was ADOPTED.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE shared the concerns over the ADF&G's
amendments, and noted that if they still had concerns, they
should be present at the meeting to defend their concerns.
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN hoped that assessment was
correct, and noted that there are at times internal debates
within the administration regarding legislation, and only
one department might be allowed to present its point of
view.
TAPE 93-37, SIDE B
Number 000
MR. ELIM remarked that the ADF&G had been aware of the
discussions regarding HB 213, and he felt all the parties
involved were comfortable with the proposal to make certain
mineral closure orders subject to legislative approval.
WENDY MULDER, LEGISLATIVE LIAISON FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (DCED), commented that the
DCED was also involved in the discussions, and she agreed
with Mr. Elim's assessment.
Number 030
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES MOVED TO AMEND line 15 on page 2 of
the Resources CS, striking the sentence on that line and
replacing it with one that reads: "unless the legislature
disapproves by resolution, an interim classification
contained in an order transmitted under this subsection, by
the 60th day of the legislative session, the order becomes
permanent."
REPRESENTATIVE MULDER OBJECTED to the motion.
Number 064
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked the legislative legal counsel, Jerry
Luckhaupt, to address the language in Representative Davies'
proposed amendment.
JERRY LUCKHAUPT, ATTORNEY, LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS AGENCY,
DIVISION OF LEGAL SERVICES, said there is a problem with
language requiring the disapproval of an action by
legislative resolution or any legislative action by
resolution. He explained that it would be unconstitutional,
and that only a bill can be used. He said a resolution
would present the same problem mentioned in the previous
meeting regarding executive orders. Regulations cannot be
repealed by resolution, only by an act of the legislature,
which would mean by a bill. He noted that there had been a
move to amend the constitution to allow the repeal of
regulations by resolution.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES asked Mr. Luckhaupt whether the
language "disapproved by an act of the legislature" would be
appropriate in his amendment.
MR. LUCKHAUPT replied in the affirmative.
Number 100
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES offered to make that change to his
amendment. The amendment now would pattern the response to
the situation as nearly as possible to the executive order
process while staying within the requirements of the
constitution. He felt the appropriate balance would be
maintained between the administrative and legislative
branches. The legislature would still have the ability and
the obligation to review closing orders issued by the
administration, with the opportunity to disapprove.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES explained that the disapproval
requirement would represent a more balanced view of the will
of the people than the situation in the current version of
HB 213, which would allow one person to stand in the way of
the decision being upheld.
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any further discussion
on the amendment.
Number 150
VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON commented that the policy question is
whether the governor should be able to classify lands to
prevent mineral development, and present those interim
classifications to close mining to the legislature within
ten days, then require legislative approval. In the current
version of HB 213 before the committee, he said the interim
classification would expire or lapse at the end of the 90th
legislative day if not approved. He paraphrased
Representative Davies' proposal, stating that the DNR may do
an interim classification to preclude mining and that
decision would stand unless the legislature takes specific
action disapproving it. He preferred the bill the way it
was.
Number 168
REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT commented that he was satisfied
with the bill as written, and that he had examined the
disapproval approach and had seen it as an opportunity for
filibusters.
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked whether there were objections to
Representative Davies' amendment, as amended. There were
objections and a roll call vote was requested by
Representative Finkelstein. Voting YEA were Representatives
Carney, Davies and Finkelstein. Voting NAY were
Representatives Hudson, Bunde, James, Mulder and Williams.
The MOTION was DEFEATED.
Number 215
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN MOVED amendment A.7, addressing
the issue of retroactivity. He asked Mr. Luckhaupt to
clarify the amendment.
MR. LUCKHAUPT explained that amendment A.7 clarifies for the
courts that the bill's intent was that it not be applied
retroactively. He suggested that in addition to the
reference to 38.05.300 (a)(2), he would add 38.05.300 (c),
added by sections 1 and 2 of CS HB 213 (RES). This would
clarify that the entire bill is not retroactive.
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked whether there were objections to the
motion on the amendment. There were none.
Number 253
MR. ELIM brought an additional item to the committee's
attention, amendment A.1. He said this amendment was also
important in relation to discussions in the previous hearing
regarding land exchanges. He understood that amendment was
amenable to the sponsor.
Number 272
REPRESENTATIVE MULDER MOVED amendment A.1.
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN noted that because of previous
amendments, that amendment would be conceptual and would
need to be drafted to reflect the language changes in the
previous amendments.
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any objections to
adopting amendment A.1. Hearing none, the AMENDMENT was
ADOPTED.
Number 281
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES asked what the purpose was of
amendment A.2.
MR. ELIM noted that its purpose had been accomplished in
amendment A.9, which was incorporated in the Resources CS.
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN OFFERED amendment A.3, making
exceptions for critical habitat, wildlife refuges, and
streambeds.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON OBJECTED.
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS called for a roll call vote on moving
amendment A.3. Voting YEA were Representatives Carney,
Davies and Finkelstein. Voting NAY were Representatives
Hudson, Bunde, James, Mulder, and Williams. The MOTION was
DEFEATED.
VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON MOVED to pass the committee substitute
as adopted and amended from committee and the zero fiscal
note, with individual recommendations. He asked unanimous
consent.
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any objections to the
motion. Hearing none, the MOTION PASSED.
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS announced the next bill before the
committee would be HB 140.
Number 300
HB 140: FEES FOR NONRESIDENT KING SALMON TAG
VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON, PRIME SPONSOR OF HB 140, referred the
members of the committee to the sponsor statement and
sectional analysis in their packets. (A copy of the sponsor
statement and sectional analysis may be found in the House
Resources Committee Room, Capitol Room 124, and after the
adjournment of the second session of the 18th Alaska State
Legislature, in the Legislative Reference Library.) Also
contained in the packets were a series of amendments offered
by the ADF&G. Those amendments, he explained, had been
incorporated into the bill in the Fisheries' CS.
VICE CHAIR HUDSON said that in the fiscal note the increased
cost to effect the bill is $10.9 thousand, while the
revenues generated would be $81.6 thousand. The revenues
would come from fees to non-residents, he said, and would go
toward enhancing sport fishing.
Number 338
VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON also referred to a predicted sales
sheet in the members' packets. (A copy of the predicted
sales sheet may be found in the House Resources Committee
Room, Capitol Room 124, and after the adjournment of the
second session of the 18th Alaska State Legislature, in the
Legislative Reference Library.) That sheet, he explained,
predicted how many non-residents in 1994 would have fishing
licenses for the periods of one year, 6.8 thousand; 14-days,
22.9 thousand; three-days; and one-day. It also showed
estimates for military fishing licenses and sport hunting
licenses and tags.
VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON commented on suggestions made by the
guided charter fishing industry, in response to a $20 non-
resident chinook tag fee initiated last year. That fee did
not take into account the length of time the non-resident
would spend fishing, so that someone off a cruise ship
spending an afternoon fishing a charter would be charged the
same fee as someone spending two weeks fishing every day.
This was on top of the non-resident fishing license and the
amount the non-resident might spend on a chartered fishing
trip. It was seen as unreasonable and hence the graduated
fee schedule proposed in HB 140, he explained.
VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON told the committee that the ADF&G had
worked closely on the legislation, and he stressed that HB
140 carries a positive fiscal impact. He suggested it would
encourage more people to fish in Alaska and generate
increased tourism revenues.
Number 408
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES had no problem with the concept in HB
140. He asked why the word "anadromous" had been added to
the language regarding king salmon.
VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON explained that in many places where
there are planted king salmon, such as Twin Lakes in Juneau,
he did not want to force people to pay the fee as they would
for native salmon stocks.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES asked whether the $70,000 in the
fiscal note was predicated on the $5 or $10 fee. He also
asked why in the Fisheries' CS, the bottom-end fee had been
changed from $5 to $10.
VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON explained the fiscal note was based on
a $10 fee. He said that projections showed that the $5 fee
would be revenue-neutral, and so it was increased to $10 to
generate revenues.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES remarked that he was not comfortable
with establishing the fees in statute. He would prefer
setting the graduated fee concept in statute and having the
actual amount be set by the department.
Number 434
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE referred to his work with the tourism
industry, and noted the concerns he had about adding a $20
fee to the already high cost of a guide. He supported the
bill, and MOVED to adopt CSHB 140 (FSH) and the fiscal note.
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any objections to
adopting CSHB 140 (FSH). There were none and the MOTION
PASSED.
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN reiterated Representative Davies'
concerns about setting the fees in statute.
Number 448
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE MOVED to pass CSHB 140 (FSH) and
accompanying fiscal note from committee with individual
recommendations. He asked unanimous consent.
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any objections.
Hearing none, the MOTION PASSED.
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS referred to the next item for the
committee's consideration, HCR 9.
HCR 9: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FISHING QUOTAS
Number 466
BOB HERRON, LEGISLATIVE AIDE TO REPRESENTATIVE LYMAN
HOFFMAN, PRIME SPONSOR OF HCR 9, told the committee that HCR
9 recognizes the success of the CDQ (Community Development
Quota) program, and pointed out the involvement of three
departments in that program: The ADF&G, Community and
Regional Affairs, and the DCED. The resolution, he
explained, calls for the reauthorization of the CDQ program
and asks that the state draft a comprehensive fisheries
policy that includes CDQs.
Number 480
REPRESENTATIVE MULDER liked the concept, and commented that
the CDQ program was a positive one. He asked why the
section regarding the fisheries policy had been included in
HCR 9.
Number 488
MR. HERRON replied that the state needs such a policy, and
it should be a long-term goal.
VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON added his praise for the CDQ program,
and said he would like to see HCR 9 include language
speaking in opposition to the Individual Fisheries Quota
(IFQ) program.
Number 500
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES referred to section four of HCR 9, and
noted that the state had not established a clear policy and
should start working toward that goal.
REPRESENTATIVE MULDER remarked that development of a
comprehensive fisheries policy could result in a horrendous
fiscal note.
Number 520
VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON made a MOTION to move CSHCR 9 (FSH) and
the accompanying zero fiscal note from committee with
individual recommendations.
Number 526
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any objections to the
motion. Hearing none, the MOTION PASSED.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS announced the Resources Committee would
next meet on March 29 to consider HB 201, HB 76, and HB 132.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES, regarding the Mental Health Lands
Trust issue, HB 201, remarked that she would like to have
her concerns on record. These concerns included the
valuations already paid. She supported repaying the trust
and then having the legislature support the state's mental
health programs.
Number 545
VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON suggested that when HB 201 is heard
again in committee, members' concerns could be included in
the recommendations made at that time.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the House
Resources Committee, Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting
at 9:27 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|