Legislature(2019 - 2020)BARNES 124
04/12/2019 01:00 PM House RESOURCES
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB3 | |
| Confirmation Hearings(s):|| Board of Game | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 3 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
April 12, 2019
1:02 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Geran Tarr, Co-Chair
Representative Grier Hopkins, Vice Chair
Representative Sara Hannan
Representative Ivy Spohnholz
Representative Chris Tuck
Representative Dave Talerico
Representative George Rauscher
Representative Sara Rasmussen
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative John Lincoln, Co-Chair
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 3
"An Act relating to the purchase and sale of state land;
relating to discounts for veterans on state land purchases; and
relating to the assignment of permanent fund dividends to
purchase state land."
- MOVED CSSSHB 3(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
CONFIRMATION HEARINGS(S):
Board of Game
Al Barrette - Fairbanks
Orville Huntington - Huslia
CONFIRMATION(S): ADVANCED
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 3
SHORT TITLE: STATE LAND SALE; PFD VOUCHER AND ASSIGN.
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) RAUSCHER
02/20/19 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/7/19
02/20/19 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/20/19 (H) MLV, RES, FIN
03/13/19 (H) SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE INTRODUCED
03/13/19 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/13/19 (H) MLV, RES, FIN
03/14/19 (H) MLV AT 2:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/14/19 (H) Heard & Held
03/14/19 (H) MINUTE(MLV)
03/26/19 (H) MLV AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/26/19 (H) Moved SSHB 3 Out of Committee
03/26/19 (H) MINUTE(MLV)
03/27/19 (H) MLV RPT 4DP 2NR
03/27/19 (H) DP: THOMPSON, JACKSON, TARR, RAUSCHER
03/27/19 (H) NR: TUCK, LEDOUX
04/03/19 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
04/03/19 (H) Heard & Held
04/03/19 (H) MINUTE(RES)
04/05/19 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
04/05/19 (H) Heard & Held
04/05/19 (H) MINUTE(RES)
04/12/19 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
DARRELL BREESE, Staff
Representative George Rauscher
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: On behalf of Representative Rauscher,
sponsor, answered questions regarding SSHB 3.
MARTY PARSONS, Director
Central Office
Division of Mining, Land and Water
Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding SSHB 3.
ORVILLE HUNTINGTON
Huslia, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the Board of
Game.
AL BARRETTE
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the Board of
Game.
RON SOMERVILLE, Spokesperson
Territorial Sportsmen
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of the appointments of
Al Barrette and Orville Huntington to the Board of Game.
LIN DAVIS
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointment
of Al Barrette to the Board of Game.
MIKE TINKER, Spokesperson
Alaska Wildlife Conservation Association
Ester, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of the appointments of
Al Barrette and Orville Huntington to the Board of Game.
VIRGIL UMPHENOUR, Spokesperson
Fairbanks Fish and Game Advisory Committee
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
North Pole, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of the appointments of
Al Barrette and Orville Huntington to the Board of Game.
MARK RICHARDS, Executive Director
Resident Hunters of Alaska
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of the appointments of
Al Barrette and Orville Huntington to the Board of Game.
JOE KLUTSCH
King Salmon, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of the appointments of
Al Barrette and Orville Huntington to the Board of Game.
WAYNE KUBAT, Vice President
Alaska Professional Hunters Association
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of the appointments of
Al Barrette and Orville Huntington to the Board of Game.
MARY MATTHIAS, Director
Natural Resources
Orutsararmiut Traditional Native Council
Bethel, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointment
of Al Barrette to the Board of Game.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:02:47 PM
CO-CHAIR GERAN TARR called the House Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:02 p.m. Representatives Tuck,
Talerico, Spohnholz, Rauscher, Hopkins, and Tarr were present at
the call to order. Representatives Hannan and Rasmussen arrived
as the meeting was in progress.
HB 3-STATE LAND SALE; PFD VOUCHER AND ASSIGN.
1:03:20 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR announced that the first order of business would
be SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 3, "An Act relating to
the purchase and sale of state land; relating to discounts for
veterans on state land purchases; and relating to the assignment
of permanent fund dividends to purchase state land."
1:04:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER, sponsor, specified SSHB 3 would provide
for [Alaska residents] to utilize their permanent fund dividend
(PFD) for the purchase of [state] land. Additionally, he said,
SSHB 3 would provide a 33 percent [discount] to veterans who are
bidding for land in state land disposal sales. He said he would
be proposing an amendment that addresses some of the questions
brought up during prior hearings of the bill.
1:04:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK offered his understanding that [SSHB 3]
would provide for a veteran to receive a 25 percent discount on
his/her first purchase of land and a 33 percent discount on a
second purchase. He asked whether [SSHB 3] would also provide a
33 percent discount on any additional land purchases beyond the
second purchase.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER offered his belief that after looking
over the original bill it was decided that "the first purchase
was still going to be 25 or vice versa and the second purchase
could have been 33 percent." The problem, he said, was that use
of the 33 percent [by a veteran] was tied to [assigning his/her]
PFD. "But they both were in existence," he continued, "giving a
veteran two chances with a big percentage advantage on each one
of the parcels he was bidding on instead of once in a lifetime,
which is where each program tried to be to begin with."
1:06:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK offered his understanding that it would be
two purchases at discounts. He said he supports the forthcoming
amendment as a great fix, but suggested the committee discuss
whether there should be a limit of two purchases or an
indefinite number of purchases for the 33 percent discount.
CO-CHAIR TARR directed attention to Section 3, which states, "A
veteran is entitled to [ONLY] one discount under (a) of this
section and one discount under (f) of this section during the
veteran's lifetime." She said she therefore thought the part
about being able to use it once had been addressed.
1:07:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER deferred to Mr. Darrell Breese to answer
the question.
CO-CHAIR TARR offered her understanding that the interest is in
ensuring that the language be clear that [a veteran] only gets
to use either the 25 percent or the 33 percent, and that both
can be used but [a veteran] only gets to use each of them once.
DARRELL BREESE, Staff, Representative George Rauscher, Alaska
State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Rauscher,
sponsor, responded that under the bill as currently written
without the amendment [SSHB 3], an individual can get the 25
percent discount on purchases before August 1, 2019, only one
time. If the bill were passed, he explained, then [a veteran]
could get the 33 percent discount after August 1 only one time.
A third purchase is not available with the discount, he
continued, the third sale would be at the full price of the
property.
1:08:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK offered his understanding of what he heard:
"From this day forward you get a one chance at 33 percent, but,
however, if you had been able to take advantage of the 25
percent before August 1, 2019, then you get a second stab with
the 33 percent."
MR. BREESE answered that [SSHB 3] would allow [a veteran] to get
both: 25 percent on land purchased beforehand and then 33
percent on land purchased after August 1. However, he noted,
the [forthcoming] amendment would change things a bit and he
doesn't want members to confuse the two.
1:09:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER moved to adopt Amendment 1, labeled 31-
LS0028\M.1, Fisher, 4/6/19, which read:
Page 1, line 2:
Delete "and"
Page 1, line 3, following "land":
Insert "; and providing for an effective date"
Page 1, line 6:
Delete "25 percent on"
Insert "one-third of [25 PERCENT ON]"
Page 2, lines 9 - 11:
Delete all material.
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 2, line 12:
Delete "new subsections"
Insert "a new subsection"
Page 2, lines 13 - 19:
Delete all material.
Page 2, line 20:
Delete "(g)"
Insert "(f)"
Following "another":
Insert "veterans'"
Page 3, following line 12:
Insert new bill sections to read:
"* Sec. 6. The uncodified law of the State of
Alaska is amended by adding a new section to read:
VETERANS' DISCOUNT; APPLICABILITY.
Notwithstanding the amendment of AS 38.05.940(a) by
sec. 1 of this Act, AS 38.05.940(a), as it read on
July 31, 2019, applies to discounted land sales to
eligible veterans under AS 38.05 that occurred on or
before July 31, 2019.
* Sec. 7. This Act takes effect August 1, 2019."
1:10:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RASMUSSEN objected for discussion purposes.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER explained Amendment 1 would provide that
going forward there would be only one choice. From listening to
Representative Tuck at the last hearing, he continued, [SSHB 3]
is too confusing. He offered his belief that Representative
Tuck was "looking for one option here and getting rid of the 25
and increasing the only option now and letting it be 33
percent," which is what Amendment 1 is chasing.
CO-CHAIR TARR offered her understanding that if Amendment 1 were
incorporated into the bill, the 25 percent [discount] would be
eliminated after August 1, and after August 1 the only option
would be the 33 percent discount and [the veteran] could assign
his/her PFD to make the payment.
MR. BREESE replied correct. First in Amendment 1, he explained,
the 25 percent would be changed to 33 percent and later in the
amendment the 33 percent section would be deleted from the bill
totally so that only a 33 percent discount is offered. He
further explained that Amendment 1 would add a new section to
the bill, Section 6, which would provide that if a veteran had
taken the 25 percent discount before the bill's effective date,
August 1, 2019, the veteran would be ineligible for the 33
percent discount. A veteran would be eligible for only one
discount, he added, the 25 percent if it has already been taken
or the 33 percent moving forward.
1:12:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ observed Amendment 1 would delete all
material on page 2, lines 9-11, of the bill, which is Section 3.
She noted Section 3 is the limit on the number of times that a
veteran is eligible to use these discounts. She requested the
section of law be pointed out that allows any limitation on the
number of times this can be used.
MR. BREESE drew attention to the language that is underlined and
bold within Section 3 of the bill, and explained that that is
what the bill is proposing to add to existing statute. By not
adding that language to existing statute, he continued, it is
basically deleting this [proposed new language] from the bill.
He said Section 3 looks at AS 38.05.940(c), which states: "A
veteran is entitled to only one discount under this section
during the veteran's lifetime."
CO-CHAIR TARR observed Amendment 1 would eliminate Section 4 as
well, because the amendment would delete [page 2] lines 13-19,
in the bill that add the 33 percent discount, thereby making the
existing Section 1 the default discount section that gets
updated to 33 percent.
MR. BREESE answered correct and noted Amendment 1 would not
delete all of Section 4, only subsection (f). He explained
Section 4 is the establishment of the 33 percent discount if
[the veteran] uses his/her PFD, and under Amendment 1 this would
go away. Subsection (g) of Section 4, he further explained,
would remain under Amendment 1 and would be re-lettered to
subsection (f), so Section 4 would state, "A discount under this
section may not be combined with another discount under this
section." He said this provision would prevent three veterans
from getting together and purchasing a parcel of land for free.
1:14:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RASMUSSEN removed her objection to Amendment 1.
There being no further objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
CO-CHAIR TARR noted the bill, as amended, was now before the
committee for discussion.
1:14:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN inquired about the length of residency for
a veteran to qualify. She posed a scenario in which [a veteran]
comes to Alaska for one year, gets the discount, buys the land,
and then doesn't remain an Alaska resident.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER replied that, constitutionally, he
doesn't think this could be stopped. He deferred to Mr. Breese
or Mr. Marty Parsons to answer further.
MARTY PARSONS, Director, Central Office, Division of Mining,
Land and Water, Department of Natural Resources (DNR), confirmed
Representative Rauscher is correct. He said, constitutionally,
[a veteran] must be a resident to qualify to purchase the land.
If [the veteran] then left the state, he continued, it would be
no different than someone purchasing land through the regular
auction which requires that the person be a resident of the
state, and if that person left Alaska the next year, he/she
would still have the land. The bill doesn't change that, he
said.
1:16:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RASMUSSEN asked whether there is a clause in
statute or regulation that if a person chooses to purchase the
land with his/her PFD, and then leaves the state and no longer
qualifies for the PFD, that a payment arrangement would be made
when the person no longer qualifies for a PFD.
MR. BREESE replied that the bill, as restructured with the
adoption of Amendment 1, now says a person can assign his/her
PFD to make the payments. If the person leaves the state and is
no longer eligible for the PFD, the person would have to make
the payments out-of-pocket separately from any PFD funds that
would have been received had the person remained in the state.
REPRESENTATIVE RASMUSSEN asked whether it says that in the bill.
MR. BREESE responded that the way the bill is now amended, the
PFD is the only thing assigned to making the payment. While not
addressed in the bill anywhere, he said, a purchaser loses the
eligibility for PFD payment if he/she is no longer eligible for
the PFD. The purchaser, he continued, is still on the hook for
payment to fulfill his/her contractual obligations with DNR for
the land purchase.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER added that [assignment of] the PFD is no
longer tied to [a veteran receiving the 33 percent discount] for
the land purchase. An Alaska resident, he said, would be able
to purchase land regardless of whether he/she is a veteran and
if the purchaser wants to put his/her PFD toward the purchase of
this land, it can now be done at any time, even for [previously
purchased land].
1:19:24 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR asked whether it would be a difficulty for DNR to
have a purchaser switch from assignment of his/her PFD to
another form of payment.
MR. PARSONS answered that under DNR's reading of the bill it
wouldn't be any more of a burden. He said the purchaser would
need to notify DNR that he/she is no longer pledging his/her PFD
to make a payment and DNR would continue to process the
purchaser's contractual payments as the department normally
would. If the purchaser failed to notify DNR and payment didn't
come through, he stated, the purchaser would become in arrears
and DNR would have to potentially start default proceedings.
1:20:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK inquired where in the bill [the discount] is
limited to a one-time use, given Section 3 is now eliminated.
MR. BREESE replied it is in the current statute, AS 38.05940(c),
which states, "A veteran is entitled to only one discount under
this section during the veteran's lifetime.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER stated he hopes he took everyone's
concerns into account. He offered his belief that Amendment 1
fixed everyone's concerns, that everyone thought it was a good
bill, and that the bill has been smoothed out for DNR. He asked
for the committee's support of the bill.
1:22:52 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS moved to report SSHB 3, as amended, out
of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSSSHB
3(RES) was reported out of the House Resources Standing
Committee.
1:23:29 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
^CONFIRMATION HEARINGS(S):
^Board of Game
CONFIRMATION HEARINGS(S):
Board of Game
1:27:31 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR announced that the final order of business would
be confirmation hearings for Orville Huntington and Al Barrette,
appointees to the Board of Game.
1:28:09 PM
ORVILLE HUNTINGTON, Appointee, Board of Game, testified he is
originally from Huslia and is now working in Fairbanks as the
Wildlife and Parks Director for the Tanana Chiefs Conference
(TCC). He said neither he nor his immediate family members hunt
or trap commercially, but they do subsistence hunting, fishing,
and trapping.
1:29:17 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR inquired whether Mr. Huntington previously served
on another board.
MR. HUNTINGTON replied he served on the Board of Fisheries for
seven years.
1:29:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN requested Mr. Huntington to describe why
his interest has changed from the Board of Fisheries to the
Board of Game and how that experience will help him serve on the
Board of Game.
MR. HUNTINGTON responded that while on the Board of Fisheries he
made regulations that helped the fisheries throughout the state,
and he heard all sides of complicated issues. He said he needed
more time to be at home with his family and to work. He offered
his belief that the Board of Fisheries process is in good hands.
He stated he would do a good job representing the interests of
all Alaskans on the Board of Game because of his experience as a
subsistence user, as a hunter and trapper, and as an assistant
to guides. Additionally, he continued, he has an extensive fish
and wildlife background and he is doing a lot of work in climate
change. He noted he would be able to work on the shortfalls in
fisheries and wildlife that are occurring in Alaska.
1:31:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RASMUSSEN inquired whether Mr. Huntington feels
he has any conflicts of interest.
MR. HUNTINGTON answered no and referred members to his ethics
statement. He said usually if he has a conflict, he states
right out that he does. He added that he used to hunt a lot and
gets along with the guides. With the agencies fighting amongst
themselves, he said, it's hard to get the regulations to be fair
- for example, fisheries in state waters and it will be the
same for the Board of Game in looking out for all the people.
REPRESENTATIVE RASMUSSEN asked what Mr. Huntington sees as the
biggest issue or topic for the board over the next year or two.
MR. HUNTINGTON replied it is the migration northward of many
species and other species, like caribou, are being threatened
with extinction. He added that a lot of predator management is
being done from other places and not by Alaskans, and he thinks
Alaskans can manage them just fine if laws are kept on the book
and made stronger.
1:33:23 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR inquired about Mr. Huntington's thoughts on what
the Board of Game can do to look into some of these threatened
populations as well as the controversial issue of predator
control in relation to threatened populations.
MR. HUNTINGTON responded that it is difficult to look at any
population unbiased. He said there are many users of these
resources that put pressures on them, but a lot of it has to do
with climate change and not because of any user group or
government; it is just happening over time. The more flexible
the management that is had the better, he continued. If all the
users and agencies work together, the better off in the long it
will be to protect the rights of people to keep hunting and
fishing into the future. He stated he doesn't think about
controversy too much - if it can be defended in court and if it
is a proposal that is worthy of considering for all the people,
then it is fine. He added he doesn't think it's worth going in
to fight just to fight.
CO-CHAIR TARR remarked that this would be a great person to have
on the board because some of the issues are so difficult to work
through.
1:35:49 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease. [CO-CHAIR TARR turned over
the gavel to Vice Chair Hopkins.]
1:36:11 PM
VICE CHAIR HOPKINS called the meeting back to order.
1:36:33 PM
AL BARRETTE, Appointee, Board of Game, began his testimony with
a short family history. He said he learned to responsibly hunt,
trap, and fish as a youth with his father. He served in the
military as a mechanic, he related, and during his service he
was transferred to Fairbanks where he had wanted to be for a
long time. When discharged in 1992, he stated, he started his
fur tannery business in Fairbanks, and through his business he
began interacting with the public and hearing about the
complexity of regulations and why things existed as they did.
MR. BARRETTE said he found niches in the community to supplement
his business, such as the shipping of meat and antlers for
nonresident hunters, and the manufacture of traps, a business he
sold about five years ago. In 1995 he began getting involved
with the Board of Game process, he continued. In 2005 he was
elected to the Fairbanks Fish and Game Advisory Committee, where
he has served as chair of the trapping subcommittee, chair of
the game subcommittee, and sat on several working groups. He
stated this is his foundational basis to understanding process,
public involvement, management, learning laws and regulations,
biology, subsistence, sustained yield principles, and providing
wild resources for future generations in Alaska.
MR. BARRETTE stated that in 2007 he received his Class A guide's
license so he could temporarily fill in whenever a guide needed
an assistant guide or registered guide. He said he continues to
subsistence trap to supplement his income and he teaches fur
handling and trapping methods. He also educates people about
the advisory committee process and the Board of Game, he added.
MR. BARRETTE stated he applied to the Board of Game at the
urging of others who said he had good knowledge of wildlife
management around the state. He said he would be a good board
member because he understands sustained yield principles,
protecting subsistence opportunities, the complexity of
statutory law, and the importance of advisory committee
participation in the board process, and the importance of public
knowledge.
1:42:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RASMUSSEN related that according to public
testimony received by the committee, Mr. Barrette is perceived
to support the perspectives of nonresident hunters. She
requested Mr. Barrette's thoughts in regard to nonresident
versus resident hunters. She further requested Mr. Barrette's
thoughts on how non-consumptive users play into his view of how
the Board of Game should be regulating Alaska's resources.
MR. BARRETTE replied he believes harvestable surpluses above and
beyond the state's harvest objectives allow for nonresident
opportunity, and in these situations, he supports nonresidents
being able to participate in this state. In regard to non-
consumptive users, he said he thinks the Board of Game has the
obligation to manage wildlife on a sustained yield basis.
Having healthy populations of ungulates and predators benefits
all users in Alaska, he stated, because people get to watch,
use, and consume them.
1:44:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ noted there has been some concern about
Mr. Barrette's commitment to supporting a subsistence priority.
She requested Mr. Barrette to address that.
MR. BARRETTE responded he supports and upholds the statutory law
that gives preference to subsistence users, the highest level
the state has, and therefore he doesn't understand why someone
would think he doesn't support subsistence. He added that he is
a person who promotes subsistence in the state.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ offered her understanding that Mr.
Barrette authored and supported joint proposals in 2013 that
would have created non-subsistence areas around Bethel and
Kodiak.
MR. BARRETTE confirmed he authored three proposals for the joint
board in 2013. He said two proposals asked the joint boards to
review the credentials for establishing a non-subsistence area
in Kodiak and Bethel, and one proposal asked to reduce the size
of the Fairbanks non-subsistence area.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ said authoring a proposal that would
create a non-subsistence area around Bethel is probably core to
the concern about Mr. Barrette's commitment to subsistence,
given the people of the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta Region have been
hunting and fishing in that area for over 10,000 years. She
stated that the creation of a non-subsistence area surrounding
the hub community of this region is deeply concerning to the
people of the community, and she is not surprised that lots of
concern is being raised about Mr. Barrette's commitment to
subsistence. She asked Mr. Barrette to address that.
MR. BARRETTE answered it was only to bring discussion to the
joint board that they go through the criteria of establishing or
not establishing a non-subsistence area. He maintained that in
no way and in no manner does a non-subsistence area preclude
anybody who lives within that area from participating in
subsistence.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ stated it is confusing because when
talking about managing Alaska's resources for maximum sustained
yield, increasing competition in an area could be perceived as
reducing the available resource to subsistence users by
introducing additional hunters who are not relying on that food
for their living. Noting that in October 2013 the community of
Bethel unanimously opposed Mr. Barrette's proposal, she asked
whether Mr. Barrette had consulted the community when drafting
the proposal.
MR. BARRETTE replied he did not consult; it was something he was
reading, and he was looking at the criteria for establishing a
non-subsistence area. He said the proposal stated that it may
appear the Bethel area could be designated as a non-subsistence
area. The joint boards discussed it at full length at that
meeting, he continued, and the proposal failed.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ said that when talking about changing
the use of limited resource in a community, it strikes her that
wise policy would be to start by communicating with people in
that region, particularly when someone from another community is
proposing something that would impact that community. She asked
Mr. Barrette to provide an example of how he would uphold the
state's current statutes requiring a subsistence priority.
MR. BARRETTE responded by using himself as an example. He said
he resides in a Fairbanks non-subsistence area and for the last
several years he has received a Tier II moose hunting permit,
which is the subsistence permit for the Yukon Flats area that is
limited to only a handful of permits. He stated he qualifies
even though he lives in a non-subsistence area and he is able to
provide for his family and to practice and participate in
subsistence.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ stated Mr. Barrette's response doesn't
answer her question.
1:49:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN noted that during previous presentations
before the Board of Game, Mr. Barrette has been engaged in
discussions about predator control. She asked Mr. Barrette to
discuss what actions he might see and propose before the board
for predator control in Interior Alaska and in buffer zones
around Denali National Park and Preserve.
MR. BARRETTE answered that as a board member his position is
spelled out in statute and his vote would be based on
information provided by professional biologists in the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G).
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN requested Mr. Barrette to share his past
advocacy positions before the board. She further inquired how
Mr. Barrette would separate his personal advocacy of the past
and his position as a Board of Game member on that issue.
MR. BARRETTE replied that when he testifies and makes comments
dealing with intensive management (IM) he is usually reflecting
back onto the statute that directs the board, ADF&G, or advisory
committees to make viable comments on.
1:51:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK recalled that Mr. Barrette served on the
board in the past and talked about predator control. He asked
what the best time period, or season, is for doing predator
control on wolves.
MR. BARRETTE responded that predator control is most effective
when snow is on the ground, so [the best time would be] November
until the end of March or maybe April, depending on when breakup
occurs.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK inquired why snow on the ground helps.
MR. BARRETTE answered that the existing predator control program
uses aircraft to locate wolves, so the wolves aren't camouflaged
against the snow like they would be when there is leafy
vegetation or bare ground. Additionally, he said, recovering
the wolves that have been harvested is more accessible with an
airplane with skis than an airplane with rubber wheels.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK said he has seen reports by state biologists
that spring is the best time of year because if harvested too
early in the season the wolves will come back too soon to have
effective predator control. He noted there has been debate and
politics around trying to harvest wolves in the fall when their
coats are much fluffier. But that is not the intention of
predator control, he continued, and so he would think that in
the spring sometime after March would provide enough snow cover
for airplanes as well as the wolves not being camouflaged.
1:53:45 PM
VICE CHAIR HOPKINS related that some letters say Mr. Barrette is
eligible to be hired as an aerial gunner for aerial predator
control. He asked whether Mr. Barrette is still eligible to be
hired to do that job.
MR. BARRETTE replied he does not hold a permit. If it is being
insinuated that eligibility requires a permit, he continued, he
hasn't had a permit to be an aerial gunner for about five years,
but that he could apply as could any other Alaskan.
VICE CHAIR HOPKINS stated there was no insinuation; rather, he
was trying to clarify the conflict of interest issues. He asked
whether Mr. Barrette, as a member of the Board of Game, would
sign up to be an aerial gunner or would see that as a conflict
of interest, given he would be voting on those issues.
MR. BARRETTE responded no, he wouldn't sign up, and hasn't for
the last five years due to his commitment to work and family.
1:54:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ recalled Mr. Barrette describing his
subsistence hunting as a supplement to his income. She offered
her understanding that it is illegal to sell meat or furs that
are procured through subsistence. She requested Mr. Barrette to
clarify his description.
MR. BARRETTE answered that if he said hunting, he misspoke, as
it is subsistence trapping that he does to supplement his
income.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ requested Mr. Barrette to describe what
subsistence trapping entails.
MR. BARRETTE replied that the furbearers in the area where he
traps are classified as customary and traditional uses and he
uses those furs and sells those furs either at auctions or to
private individuals to supplement his lifestyle.
1:56:20 PM
VICE CHAIR HOPKINS noted there were some conflict of interest
questions when Mr. Barrette was up for confirmation to the Board
of Game in 2010. He asked whether Mr. Barrette has addressed
those questions since then.
MR. BARRETTE responded that one thing of controversy was that he
was manufacturing and producing traps. However, he said, he
sold that business about five years ago and doesn't intend to
start it again. He stated he doesn't see where there is a
conflict as far as his fur tannery, guiding operations, and
subsistence trapping. But, he continued, if there is a unit or
a species that is particularly close to him, he will ensure he
makes comments in his ethics statement at the beginning of the
meeting and allow the Board of Game chairman and the Department
of Law to determine whether he should be recused.
1:57:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK recalled Mr. Barrette's proposal to allow
the baiting of bears in the state and that the proposal gave
preference to commercial guides and nonresidents by allowing
them ten bait stations and residents only two. He requested Mr.
Barrette to explain why he made that proposal.
MR. BARRETTE offered his belief that that was not his proposal
and that it was a proposal generated through a town hall
gathering after a meeting to hash out bear baiting issues with
baits and that there were also several other things. He said
[the proposal] is what came out of a subcommittee after a
meeting with new draft language.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK stated that Mr. Barrette definitely endorsed
the proposal even if he didn't make it. He asked Mr. Barrette
to explain why he endorsed and advocated for the proposal.
MR. BARRETTE answered:
There was a town hall meeting, I'll call it that ... a
subcommittee meeting after ... the board chairman
produces and all stakeholders show up and sit around a
table and then negotiate and compromise what would
satisfy the most user groups and still allow all the
opportunity that we can, and so I voted for it. I
didn't promote it, but I respected the committee
substitute language that came out of that.
1:59:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ asked whether in the past Mr. Barrette
has opposed traditional use tags for funeral potlatches and to
explain why if he has.
MR. BARRETTE replied no, he has not.
1:59:50 PM
VICE CHAIR HOPKINS opened public testimony for the two
appointees to the Board of Game.
2:00:12 PM
RON SOMERVILLE, Spokesperson, Territorial Sportsmen, testified
he is delivering a letter from his organization in support of
all the nominees to the Board of Game and the Board of
Fisheries. The reason for this support, he said, is that the
nominations provide a balance on the board and provide a broad
spectrum throughout the state.
MR. SOMERVILLE pointed out there is a law requiring intensive
management and - unless [legislators] change the law - someone
shouldn't be [criticized] for following this law. He stated he
served four years on [former governor] Jay Hammond's "D-2 task
force" and worked for ADF&G for 24 years. He was responsible
for the boundaries and almost all the mapping that was done, he
said, and the boundaries finalized in the [1980] Alaska National
Interest Conservation Act (ANILCA) were accepted by all the
conservation organizations. The core of Denali National Park
was expanded by preserve and that was the buffer, he added.
MR. SOMERVILLE related that he was sitting on the [Board of
Game] when it rejected expanding the buffer to cover wolf packs.
Later the board adopted it, he continued, and then apparently
rejected it when Mr. Barrette was on the board. He said his
point is that "you can't keep going back and modifying these
boundaries." The approximately 120 million acres of federal
land in Alaska take away the state's management, he said. The
Denali "wolf pack thing" is an anomaly and is important for the
purposes of enhancing the park, he added, but wolves are going
to move in and out of these boundaries. He maintained that
asking for more buffers is unreasonable and that Mr. Barrette is
being penalized because he stuck with these original boundaries.
He stated his organization supports Mr. Barrette.
2:03:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK requested Mr. Somerville to explain the
buffer zone and his concerns with it.
MR. SOMERVILLE replied that a good part of the opposition to Mr.
Barrette has to do with the trapping of wolves from the Denali
pack when they wandered outside [the boundaries]; but, he
reiterated, all the environmental groups accepted those
boundaries when [ANILCA] was passed. He stated that the buffer
environmentalists wanted, and agreed to, for [the Denali] packs,
some of the Interior packs, and some of the caribou and moose,
was in the preserve and it happens to be near the park and the
road system. He said he always tells the Board of Game to not
modify these boundaries because doing that penalizes Alaskans
because "we bought a compromise back in 1980."
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK inquired whether expanding and contracting
buffers could be considered a part of the role of predator
control/intensive management or is just off the table.
MR. SOMERVILLE allowed it could be a part of it, but said that
in most cases it is not. He noted he was serving on the Board
of Game when the state's predator control program was started
again, and said the areas were carefully selected, had local
support, and had a good chance of success. The state had money
to follow up and monitor the program, he added. He maintained
that there isn't that much predator control throughout the state
and that the conflicts are mostly with the federal agencies that
refuse to provide predator control to benefit subsistence users.
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO stated he lives less than a mile from
the previous buffer zone and lives inside the last proposed
buffer zone. He offered to provide information and maps to any
committee members who might be interested.
2:06:09 PM
LIN DAVIS testified she has followed the Board of Game and its
decisions over the years, and except for one two-year period she
has been concerned that no board has represented her non-
consumptive wildlife appreciator point of view. She stated that
nothing said by Mr. Barrette today convinced her he would be
looking out for Alaskans who do not wish to kill, and in many
cases egregiously kill, these animals or eat them. She added
that Mr. Barrette didn't say anything very specific or viable
that would help her feel he would represent her. She expressed
her concern that Mr. Barrette has a history of unusual behavior
and comments. She urged the committee to not approve Mr.
Barrette's appointment and that someone more ethical and more
responsive to the public be found.
REPRESENTATIVE RASMUSSEN requested Ms. Davis to elaborate on her
statement about Mr. Barrette's unusual behavior and comments.
MS. DAVIS responded there is a video of Mr. Barrett skinning a
wolf. She said some things are too hard to even talk about.
There is the statement that he would love to take a snow machine
and drive along the border and harvest wolves. She stated she
feels that people don't need to sport those kinds of comments
when they are doing professional work for the state's wildlife
and for the people of Alaska.
REPRESENTATIVE RASMUSSEN offered her understanding that Mr.
Barrette makes his living as a tanner and therefore her question
is how that would be considered unusual behavior for him to
video himself doing his work of skinning a wolf.
MS. DAVIS answered it was what Mr. Barrette said and the tone.
There is a way of alienating people with his sporting doing it,
she said, because he knows many people in Alaska really prize
the wolves and it's a lifetime best to travel to Alaska and see
a wolf in the wild. It seemed immature and inappropriate and it
seems there have been a number of those things, she continued.
She urged selecting someone more professional.
2:10:51 PM
MIKE TINKER, Spokesperson, Alaska Wildlife Conservation
Association, testified that his organization drafted the
intensive management statute to help the Alaska Department of
Fish and Game focus on managing game resources for Alaskans'
uses. He stated that a more abundant wildlife resource is a
much more productive job to manage and to allocate, as is the
job and authority of the Board of Game. He said his
organization supports appointing Alaskans who are experienced
hunters, trappers, and wildlife users, and who have been
involved in management of the regulatory system, such as
advisory committee members and participants in organizations
that support wildlife. He maintained that those opposed to
hunting and trapping are always critical of skinning an animal
to get the value out of the fur.
MR. TINKER said Mr. Barrette is the best qualified appointee to
the Board of Game that he has seen in his three decades of
involvement. It is a political process, he continued, but Mr.
Barrette is the least political person he knows. He noted Mr.
Barrette has served on the Fairbanks Fish and Game Advisory
Committee, has participated on teams in complex matters, and
volunteers to help trappers and hunters at the fur auctions.
MR. TINKER stated that regulations are on the book in regard to
communities meeting the criteria for non-subsistence areas.
Looking at the [regulations] doesn't mean a person is advocating
for non-subsistence areas, he said; it is merely asking to
follow the criteria to look at them and Mr. Barrette was not
pushing for non-subsistence areas. He refuted that Mr. Barrette
ever said anything about driving along on a snow machine.
MR. TINKER addressed the appointment of Mr. Huntington and said
he is an experienced board member from having served on the
Board of Fisheries. He expressed appreciation for Mr.
Huntington agreeing to continue his service on the Board of
Game. He stated Mr. Huntington is an appointee who understands
the values of subsistence and the needs of other Alaskans to
participate in the harvest, whether it is with a camera or some
fatal means. He urged the committee's support of both
appointees and noted that Alaska statute directs appointments be
made and confirmed without regard to political affiliation.
2:15:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER surmised Board of Game applicants would
have some experience in the field of taking or harvesting or
some sort of connection with game, and unless a person was doing
that, he/she wouldn't know much about what is going on in the
board and how it all interrelates. He asked Mr. Tinker whether
this is a fair statement.
MR. TINKER replied it is a fair statement. He cited his own
years of experience as an advisory committee member and attendee
at Board of Game and Board of Fisheries meetings, and said he is
a hunter and trapper.
2:17:54 PM
VIRGIL UMPHENOUR, Spokesperson, Fairbanks Fish and Game Advisory
Committee, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, testified that
the advisory committee unanimously supports all of the
governor's appointees to both the Board of Game and the Board of
Fisheries. He said Mr. Barrette has been a member of the
Fairbanks advisory committee for about 15 years. He added that
Mr. Barrette has a copy of the codified regulations, knows how
to use them, and educates the public about hunting and fishing
regulations and the regulatory process.
MR. UMPHENOUR stated he has known Mr. Huntington and his family
for many years. He noted that Mr. Huntington's uncle, Sydney,
served on the boards and worked on the salmon treaty with Canada
for the Yukon River. He stated his support for Mr. Huntington.
MR. UMPHENOUR related that he served on the committee that the
Board of Game chairman called to come up with a solution on bear
baiting issues. He said the committee worked in the evening at
that meeting with members of the public and hunting guides. He
said he is a master hunting guide and stated it was at this
meeting that the committee came up with 10 bait stations for
registered guides and their clients, rather than trying to get
clients to come into the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and
register. He said the department participated and it was the
department, the public, and the board that came up with this
solution for bear baiting stations.
2:22:18 PM
MARK RICHARDS, Executive Director, Resident Hunters of Alaska
(RHAK), testified in support of Mr. Barrette and Mr. Huntington,
appointees to the Board of Game. He stated he knows Mr.
Huntington from the Board of Fisheries and was always impressed
by Mr. Huntington's conduct, reasoning, and rational approach
during deliberations on controversial issues. He added that Mr.
Huntington's time on the Board of Fisheries means he can step
right into a Board of Game seat. He said Mr. Huntington brings
a wealth of knowledge about hunting practices and subsistence
issues to the table.
MR. RICHARDS addressed Representative Rasmussen's question about
how Mr. Barrette treats residents versus nonresidents. He
recalled Mr. Barrette's answer as being that as long as there is
a surplus everyone should be able to participate. Mr. Richards
said his organization disagrees with the allowance for
nonresidents to take 80 percent of the sheep in Interior Alaska.
He noted that RHAK doesn't only support appointees who agree
with the organization; rather the support is based on an
appointee's knowledge and experience in hunting and wildlife
management issues. He related that he serves with Mr. Barrette
on the Fairbanks Fish and Game Advisory Committee and said Mr.
Barrette is known for his knowledge of fish and game issues and
regulations, and stated he cannot think of anyone better
qualified to serve on the Board of Game.
2:24:59 PM
JOE KLUTSCH testified he has been an active hunting and fishing
guide since 1976 and has served nearly 40 years on the
Naknek/Kvichak Fish and Game Advisory Committee. He said he has
attended countless Board of Game, Board of Fisheries, and
regional council subsistence meetings and is therefore familiar
with board process, as well as wildlife management in Alaska,
particularly in his region of the state. He offered his support
for the appointments of Mr. Huntington and Mr. Barrette to the
Board of Game.
MR. KLUTSCH stated Mr. Huntington has a family heritage that is
amazing in its years of dedication, understanding of Alaska's
wildlife, and service by family members to the Board of Game and
the Board of Fisheries. He said Mr. Huntington is particularly
knowledgeable and sensitive to the needs and lifestyles of rural
residents and offers a tremendous balance to the board. He
expressed his wholehearted support of Mr. Huntington.
MR. KLUTSCH said Mr. Barrette is an unquestionably accomplished
outdoorsman who is knowledgeable on subjects of game management
and the codified regulations and process. It isn't just about
what a person feels about things, he continued; a person must
know about the process to be effective. He added that Mr.
Barrette would serve the state and all user groups very well.
He offered his opinion that both appointees would put wildlife
conservation and hunting opportunities for all Alaska residents
first and that they have the time and willingness to do this.
MR. KLUTSCH commented on the points made by Mr. Somerville about
the history of ANILCA and how the withdrawals were made. He
said as ANILCA was finalized in 1980, the preserves were
considered as a compromise and were substantial extensions to
all the parks. Many new refuges and monuments were created and
they themselves are buffers, he stated.
MR. KLUTSCH addressed non-consumptive users and opined there is
no such thing as non-consumptive use. Just because an area is
closed to hunting and trapping, he said, doesn't mean visitors
are not consumptive. It is to the contrary, he argued, because
more infrastructure is required - buses, roads, bridges, ranger
stations, and Princess tours. That isn't non-consumptive, he
continued, it takes space, infrastructure, water, energy, and
more. He said he makes these comments with all due respect as
he understands fully that many people don't appreciate hunting
and trapping and think hunting is incompatible with wildlife
viewing. But, he asserted, they are quite compatible. He
further argued that hunting is a wildlife watching exercise.
2:31:12 PM
WAYNE KUBAT, Vice President, Alaska Professional Hunters
Association (APHA), testified that his organization supports the
appointments of Mr. Huntington and Mr. Barrette to the Board of
Game and that their appointments will provide balance on the
board. He cited Mr. Barrette's membership on the Fairbanks Fish
and Game Advisory Committee and said Mr. Barrette is
hardworking, fair, knowledgeable on wildlife issues, and cares
about the process. He added that Mr. Barrette is a lifelong
hunter and fisherman and is committed to ensuring that all
Alaskans continue to have access to fish and game resources. He
said APHA is confident that Mr. Barrette will be an asset to the
board and will make the personal sacrifice of time and energy
that serving on the board requires.
MR. KUBAT expressed APHA's belief that it is important to have a
mix of different voices and viewpoints on the Board of Game.
Decisions made by the board affect all Alaskans, he continued,
but often have the greatest impact on rural areas. For this
reason, APHA feels it is particularly critical to have a strong
rural voice, he said, and Mr. Huntington will bring that voice
to board deliberations. He noted it is challenging to find
qualified people willing to serve on the board and said APHA
appreciates Mr. Huntington's willingness to serve and looks
forward to getting to know him through the process.
2:33:22 PM
MARY MATTHIAS, Director, Natural Resources, Orutsararmiut
Traditional Native Council, testified in opposition to Mr.
Barrette's appointment to the Board of Game. She cited Proposal
41, made by Mr. Barrette in 2013, and that would have designated
Bethel as a non-subsistence area. She pointed out that the
people of this area have practiced subsistence for millennia
[and the proposal would have] impacted the people's subsistence
use, culture, and economic culture. She said [the council] does
not want to have officials who are openly hostile to Alaska
Native hunting and subsistence in general, or who don't have the
best intentions in recognizing subsistence values. She
recommended that if Mr. Barrette does get confirmed that he
reach out to Bethel and other southwest communities that rely on
subsistence for their food before passing a proposal. These are
traditional hunting and fishing values, she added. Subsistence
is the priority in this area, she continued, and [the council]
would like to have officials who are there to serve with best
intentions and not overrule or ignore the rights of Alaska
Natives as subsistence users. She related that many people from
her area travel to attend Board of Fisheries and Board of Game
meetings, and [board members should] listen when these people
testify about their needs and why they want their subsistence
rights protected and recognized. Going back to the 2013
proposal, she said [these subsistence rights and needs] should
not be ignored or disregarded.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER thanked Ms. Matthias for her testimony.
2:38:54 PM
VICE CHAIR HOPKINS invited the appointees to make closing
comments.
2:39:15 PM
MR. HUNTINGTON stated he would do his utmost to carry out the
duties of being on the Board of Game, as he has an obligation to
do so. He said the last testimony really hit home in that there
is a lot of cultural significance in all that rural Alaskans do
and he really understands those issues since he was born and
raised in it. But he is also a scientist, he continued, and he
understands the issues of the Alaska Department of Fish and
Game, works closely with ADF&G, and looks forward to helping as
much as he can.
MR. BARRETTE thanked committee members for their questions.
2:40:40 PM
VICE CHAIR closed public testimony after ascertaining no one
else wished to testify.
2:40:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ paraphrased from the following
statement:
The House Resources Standing Committee has reviewed
the qualifications for the governor's appointees,
Orville Huntington and Al Barrette, to the Board of
Game and recommends that the names be forwarded to a
joint session for consideration. This does not
reflect intent by any member present to vote for or
against these individuals during any further sessions
for the purpose of confirmation.
2:41:40 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Resources Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:42 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Allen Francis Barrette Resume.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmation |
| Orville Huntington Biographical Sketch.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| BoG Appointees Letters of Support.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| Barrette Letters of Opposition Combined 4.11.19.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| HB03 ver M amendment M.1.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 3 |
| HB 3 Sponsor Statement 3.12.2019.pdf |
HMLV 3/14/2019 2:00:00 PM HMLV 3/26/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/5/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 3 |
| HB 3 Ver A 3.12.2019.pdf |
HMLV 3/14/2019 2:00:00 PM HMLV 3/26/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/5/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 3 |
| HB 3 Ver M 3.12.2019.pdf |
HMLV 3/14/2019 2:00:00 PM HMLV 3/26/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/5/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 3 |
| HB 3 Explanation of Changes 3.12.2019.pdf |
HMLV 3/14/2019 2:00:00 PM HMLV 3/26/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/5/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 3 |
| HB 3 DOR Fiscal Note.pdf |
HMLV 3/26/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/5/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 3 |
| HB3 DNR Fiscal Note.pdf |
HMLV 3/26/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/5/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 3 |
| Board of Game Supporting Document - RHAK Letter of Support Barrette & Huntington 4.12.19.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game |
| Barrette Supporting Document - Cummings Letter of Opposition 4.12.19.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| Barrette Supporting Document - Banks Letter of Opposition 4.12.19.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| Barrette Supporting Document - Faust Letter of Opposition 4.11.19.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| Barrette Supporting Document - Kowalsky Letter of Opposition 4.12.19.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| Barrette Supporting Document - Lindsey Letter of Opposition 4.11.19.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| Barrette Supporting Document - Nicole Schmitt Letter of Opposition 4.12.19.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| Barrette Supporting Document - Sarns Letter of Opposition 4.11.19.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| Barrette Supporting Document - Schmitt Letter of Opposition 4.12.19.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| Barrette Supporting Document - Strickland Letter of Opposition 4.11.19.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| BoG Appointees Letter of Support - Grove 4.12.19.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| BoG Appointees Letter of Support - KRSA 4.11.19.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| BoG Letter of Support - Van Saun 4.11.19.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| Barrettee Supporting Document - Eckstein Letter of Opposition 4.12.19_Redacted.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Appointments |
| Barrette Supporting Document - Bontempi Letter of Opposition 4.12.19.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| Barrettee Supporting Document - Taylor Letter of Opposition 4.12.19_Redacted.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| Barrette Supporting Document - Warwick Letter of Opposition 4.12.19_Redacted.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |
| Barrette Supporting Document - Maiellaro Letter of Opposition 4.12.19.pdf |
HRES 4/12/2019 1:00:00 PM |
Board of Game Confirmations |