Legislature(1995 - 1996)
05/01/1996 11:13 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
MINUTES
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
May 1, 1996
11:13 a.m.
TAPES
SFC-96, #106, Side 1 (000-575)
SFC-96, #106, Side 2 (575-230)
CALL TO ORDER
Senator Rick Halford, Co-chairman, convened the meeting at
approximately 11:13 a.m.
PRESENT
All committee members (Co-chairmen Halford and Frank and
Senators
Donley, Rieger, Phillips, Sharp, and Zharoff) were present.
ALSO ATTENDING: Former Senator Glenn Hackney; Senator Tim
Kelly; Senator Johnny Ellis; Representative Finkelstein;
Geron Bruce, Legislative Liaison, Dept. of Fish and Game;
Glen Ray, Division of Public Health, Health Promotion
Program Manager, Dept. of Health and Social Services; Bob
Bartholomew, Deputy Director, Income and Excise Tax, Dept.
of Revenue; Brooke Miles, Juneau Branch Administrator,
Alaska Public Offices Commission; Don Dapcevich, Director,
Advisory Board on Alcohol and Drug Abuse; Ruth Parriott,
American Cancer Society; Anne Marie Holen, Citizens to
Protect Kids from Tobacco; Ben Ellis, Executive Director,
Kenai Sport Fishing Association; Jack Chenoweth, Legislative
Attorney, Legislative Affairs Agency; Bill Miles,
contractual staff to the Senate Majority; Kelly Huber, aide
to Co-chairman Halford; and aides to committee members and
other members of the legislature.
PARTICIPATING VIA TELECONFERENCE: Mike Frank, Chairman,
Campaign Finance Reform--Now!, Anchorage, Alaska.
SUMMARY INFORMATION
SB 191 - ELECTION CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM
Discussion was had with Senator Kelly,
Representative Finkelstein, Brook Miles, Jack
Chenoweth, and via teleconference with Mike Frank
in Anchorage. CSSB 191 (Fin) was ADOPTED and
REPORTED OUT of committee with a $98.7 fiscal note
from the Dept. of Administration (APOC), a $47.5
note from the Dept. of Law, and zero notes from
the Dept. of Community and Regional Affairs,
Governor's Office (Elections), and Legislative
Affairs Agency.
SB 210 - INCREASE TOBACCO TAXES
Discussion was had with former Senator Glenn
Hackney, Senator Ellis, Don Dapcevich, and Anne
Marie Holen. CSSB 210 (STA) was then REPORTED OUT
of committee with a fiscal note from the Dept. of
Revenue showing costs of $63.3 and revenue of
$33,426.8.
SB 216 - OMNIBUS STATE FEES & COST ASSESSMENTS
A draft CSSB 216 (Fin) (version "K," dated 5/1/96)
was distributed for review by members.
SB 285 - DISCRETE SALMON STOCK MANAGEMENT AND ASSESSMENT
Discussion was had with Kelly Huber, Geron Bruce,
and Ben Ellis. Amendments 1 and 2 were ADOPTED
for incorporation within a Senate Finance
Committee bill. CSSB 285 (Fin) was then REPORTED
OUT of committee with fiscal note from the Dept.
of Fish and Game (CFMD) showing revenues of
$604.0, a Dept. of Fish and Game (Sport Fish) note
showing revenue of $118.3, and a zero note from
the Dept. of Revenue.
HB 436 - MOBILE HOME DEALERS & TITLES
Senator Phillips MOVED for passage of CSHB 436
(TRA). The bill was held in committee with the
motion pending due to need to attend the Senate
floor session.
SENATE BILL NO. 210
An Act relating to taxes on cigarettes and tobacco
products; and providing for an effective date.
Co-chairman Halford directed that SB 210 be brought on for
discussion. SENATOR JOHNNY ELLIS came before committee
advising that the bill has broad public support which spans
the political and philosophical spectrum. It even enjoys
majority support among nicotine users in Alaska. The
legislation also has "enormous health implications" and
fiscal ramifications for the state in terms of revenues and
health care costs. Senator Ellis advised that he sponsored
the bill as a major health issue, especially as it relates
to young people. He referenced backup materials and urged
passage of the bill.
Senator Randy Phillips referenced CSSB 210 (STA) and noted
inclusion of intent language calling for allocation of new
revenues from the tax as follows:
1. 10 percent for an anti-tobacco campaign targeting
children.
2. 10 percent for prosecution of those who sell or
supply tobacco to children.
3. 80 percent for state support of elementary and
secondary education.
and asked if the sponsor agreed with the foregoing. Senator
Ellis responded affirmatively. He noted, however, that as
intent, the language would not be binding on future
legislatures.
FORMER SENATOR GLENN HACKNEY next came before committee and
voiced support for the bill. He asked that it be viewed as
a health issue rather than a revenue measure. Mr. Hackney
next attested to the variety of methods utilized by those
attempting to stop smoking. One of the most effective means
of discouraging young people from smoking is the price of
the product. Cost discourages children from starting and
encourages active smokers to quit.
The American Heart Association, the American Cancer Society,
and the American Lung Association support the bill. The
agenda for all three organizations is health and the saving
of lives. Seventy-one out of one hundred Alaskan
constituents support the legislation. Mr. Hackney urged
support and passage.
DON DAPCEVICH, Director, Advisory Board on Alcohol and Drug
Abuse, next came before committee in support of the bill.
He concurred in comments by former Senator Hackney that the
legislation should be viewed as a prevention effort rather
than a revenue issue. Lessons can be learned from
statistics evidencing what happened when the cost of tobacco
was increased in Canada. Cost increases reduce use,
especially among young people. Mr. Dapcevich further
attested to the correlation between tobacco use and other
drug use. He urged passage of the proposed bill,
reiterating that it represents a strong prevention effort.
In his closing remarks, he voiced support for intent
language within CSSB 210 (STA) and praised dedication of
moneys for both prevention and intervention efforts through
the Dept. of Public Safety.
ANNE MARIE HOLEN, Citizens to Protect Kids from Tobacco,
next came before committee in support of the bill. She
explained that the group she represents is a coalition that
includes the American Cancer Society of Alaska, the American
Lung Association, the American Heart Association, Alaska
State Medical Association, Nurses Association, Association
of Alaska School Boards, and many other groups. She
referenced correspondence to Senate President Pearce and
House Speaker Gail Phillips from former surgeon general C.
Everett Koop. Dr. Koop is so busy and in such demand that
he rarely responds to requests for assistance such as that
from Alaska. He made an exception in this case because he
feels what is attempting to be done is important for both
the state and the nation. Tobacco control experts are in
agreement that the federal government should raise its
cigarette tax to $2.00 per pack or higher, and every state
should raise its tax to at least $1.00 per pack. Alaska
would be the first to do that and would set a positive
example for other states to follow. Dr. Koop noted that the
foregoing could ultimately save millions of lives.
Ms. Holen next quoted from an article written by Dr. Koop
during the campaign for a 75-cent increase in the federal
cigarette tax from the current 24-cents:
Senators and Congressmen should be happy to find a tax
that is actually popular. Polls show that almost 80
percent of Americans (Republicans and Democrats, young
and old, men and women) support a large cigarette tax.
So those members of Congress elected on a no new taxes
pledge can go along with this one. Cigarette taxes are
indeed different.
Constituents do not understand why any legislator would balk
at imposition of this tax. This tax is different.
Ms. Holen asked that members recognize the serious nature of
tobacco--the leading cause of death in Alaska. It has
tremendous economic impact, draining hundreds of millions
from the economy each year. She urged that members become
part of the solution to the problem by supporting passage of
SB 210. In her closing remarks, she asked how often members
have the opportunity to enact legislation that saves
thousands of lives, raises revenue, and enjoys support from
a vast majority of constituents.
Senator Sharp MOVED for passage of CSSB 210 (STA) with
individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes. No
objection having been raised, CSSB 210 (STA) was REPORTED
OUT of committee with a fiscal note from the Dept. of
Revenue showing a cost of $63.6 and projected revenue of
$33,426.8. Co-chairman Frank and Senators Rieger and Sharp
signed the committee report with a "do pass" recommendation.
Co-chairman Halford and Senators Donley, Phillips, and
Zharoff signed "no recommendation."
SENATE BILL NO. 191
An Act relating to election campaigns, election
campaign financing, the oversight and regulation of
election campaigns by the Alaska Public Offices
Commission, the activities of lobbyists that relate to
election campaigns, and the definitions of offenses of
campaign misconduct; and providing for an effective
date.
Co-chairman Halford directed that SB 191 be brought on for
discussion. SENATOR TIM KELLY came before committee in
support of the bill. He explained that utilizing CSSB 191
(Jud) as the base, work draft CSSB 191 (9-LS1260\H,
Chenoweth, 4/30/96) attempts to strike an agreement on key
provisions and clean up and conform initiative provisions to
statutory language.
Senator Kelly directed attention to correspondence from the
chairman of Campaign Finance Reform--Now! The group
collected over 33,000 signatures for placement of a campaign
finance reform initiative on the November ballot. The
correspondence indicates that version "H" is an acceptable
approach which addresses the goals of the initiative.
Senator Kelly highlighted the following areas:
1. Initiative provisions prohibit non-resident campaign
contributions. The work draft CSSB 191 allows limited
non-resident campaign contributions.
2. The initiative prohibits personal use, office use, and
most other uses of campaign funds. The draft permits
some transfer of campaign funds to office use.
3. The initiative prohibits all carryforwards of campaign
funds. The draft allows some carryforward.
The Senator referenced need for the legislation to meet a
standard deeming it "substantially the same" as the
initiative and noted strict adherence to the following
important provisions that represent the spirit of the
initiative:
1. Lobbyists are prohibited from making campaign
contributions outside their districts. (Senator Kelly
acknowledged that this issue is likely to end
up in court.)
2. Candidate-groups-to-candidate-groups transfer of
campaign funds are prohibited.
3. Corporations, companies, partnerships, unions and the
like are prohibited from making contributions.
The proposed draft is an attempt to maintain the essence of
campaign finance reform and is substantially similar to the
initiative. Senator Kelly acknowledged that it does not
resolve all the constitutional questions that have been
raised. Provisions of either the initiative or the proposed
bill are likely to be taken to court, regardless of which
passes. It will take several years for campaign reform to
settle out in the court system.
Co-chairman Halford asked if the chairman of Campaign
Finance Reform--Now! would encourage the governor to sign
the proposed draft should it pass the legislature. MIKE
FRANK, Chairman, Campaign Reform--Now!, responded
affirmatively via teleconference from Anchorage. The Co-
chairman then asked if the proposed bill is substantially
similar to the goals of the initiative. He further asked if
belief that it is would be communicated to the Lt. Governor.
Mr. Frank said he could not speak for all petitioners. He
voiced his belief that lawyers could make reasonable
arguments on "both sides of the bill" because the state of
the law is undeveloped. The few pertinent court decisions
are 20 years old, and the main decision was 3 to 2. Of
greater importance is the time and effort that has gone into
the draft. That has significant advantages. Mr. Frank said
he was "very supportive" of version "H" and advised that if
it is signed into law, he would not become involved in "any
revolution to keep the initiative on the ballot." He
acknowledged that he could not guarantee there would not be
objections. Mr. Frank remarked that while certain
provisions of the bill diminish those in the initiative, he
understands why the changes were made and that they were
made in good faith. They do not do such violence to the
initiative that it would serve the long-term interest of the
campaign reform group to raise a challenge, if passed.
In response to a further question from Co-chairman Halford,
Mr. Frank advised that reasonable arguments could be made
that it is substantially similar. The political advantages
of passage of law are important to a long-term solution
accepted by the legislature.
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN next came before committee. Co-
chairman Halford asked if the Representative would encourage
both the Governor and Lt. Governor to act on the bill if it
was passed. Representative Finkelstein said he would vote
for the bill and encourage signature by the Governor. He
said he could not determine whether the bill would meet the
legal requirement of being "substantially the same" as
initiative provisions. Representative Finkelstein voiced
his belief that the bill would be good for the state, good
public policy, and that it reflects the general goals of the
initiative.
Co-chairman Halford expressed unwillingness to replace the
initiative with the proposed legislation unless the
leadership of the 30,000 petitioners is in accord with
legislative action. Representative Finkelstein reiterated
support for the current draft.
Senator Rieger referenced language at Page 20, line 8, and
inquired concerning the effect of use of "shall" rather than
"may" in discretion relating to penalties associated with a
complaint. JACK CHENOWETH, Legislative Counsel, Legal
Services, Legislative Affairs Agency, noted the requirement
that the commission "shall" assess civil penalties. In
subsection (e), commencing at line 17, the commission is
given the opportunity to suspend or set aside penalties if
it finds the violation was inadvertent, quickly corrected,
had no adverse impact, and was not repeated or part of a
series or pattern of violations. There is thus a
presumption the penalty will be levied, with the exception
of conditions cited in subsection (e).
Further discussion followed concerning the consequences of
changing "shall" to "may." Mr. Chenoweth explained that
subsection (b) would become discretionary, and there would
be no need for subsection (e). He noted that, as presently
drafted, provisions are consistent with the initiative and a
bit more structured in directions to the commission
regarding how matters will be handled. Representative
Finkelstein noted a different standard in the initiative.
It contains both a minimum and a maximum. Use of "shall"
makes a difference in the initiative. In the bill it makes
no difference because all penalties are maximums. There are
no minimums. Removal of minimums gives the commission and
the court discretion to "go to zero" even when the
conditions of (e) are not met.
Senator Rieger next questioned language at Page 9, line 24.
Representative Finkelstein noted that the initiative
contains a $25 cap for cash donations. Senate State Affairs
Committee returned the total to existing law ($100) with the
concurrence of the sponsors. Senator Randy Phillips
inquired concerning the rationale behind the $25 cap.
Representative Finkelstein said that testimony from the
commission and members of the legislature indicated that
current law does not pose a significant problem. Campaigns
in rural areas would be negatively impacted by the $25
maximum. The initiative committee concurred in the return
to $100 as the maximum. The original intent was to avoid
contributions that cannot be tracked.
Senator Rieger questioned language within Section 14, Pages
13 and 14. Representative Finkelstein explained that it
stems from a request from the Alaska Public Offices
Commission. It recognizes a court decision that allows
individuals to "do essentially anonymous, no disclaimer,
kinds of things for relatively small expenditures in
expressing their view through signs and handouts." Without
the language, existing "paid for by" standards in Alaska
could be challenged and struck down. Senator Rieger voiced
his understanding that provisions relate more to the
disclaimer than the amount of money spent. Representative
Finkelstein concurred.
Senator Kelly advised that in developing the bill, several
APOC recommendations were adopted.
BROOKE MILES, Juneau Branch Administrator, Alaska Public
Offices Commission, came before committee and voiced support
for version "H." She then explained that the $98.7 fiscal
note provides for "some additional provisions." The new
investigator would handle complex civil penalties, inquiries
from the public, and the complaint caseload. The position
would also produce a training program concerning new rules.
The administrative clerk would assist in paper processing
and provide support functions for the investigator. A
regulation specialist would work for two years, only, to
write regulations to implement the new rules. In additional
to the positions, the fiscal note contains funding for
travel for training so that new and incumbent candidates are
knowledgeable of rule changes.
Co-chairman Halford referenced a proposed amendment. Mr.
Chenoweth explained that it would fit within Section 2
language which amends existing law prohibiting use of
charitable gaming proceeds to support candidates for public
office, a political party, or an organization affiliated
with a political party. In drafting the present version,
Mr. Chenoweth said he neglected to make reference to AS
15.60 which defines "political group." The amendment
extends the definition to bar campaign contributions to
"political groups" as defined in the election code. These
are small associations and entities that did not qualify at
the 3 percent threshold level in the last gubernatorial
election. Senator Kelly said the language was brought to
light by Senate President Pearce.
Mr. Frank advised, via teleconference, that the initiative
did not contain provisions relating to the use of charitable
gaming proceeds. He voiced his belief that those supporting
the initiative would have no problems with the more
restrictive language in the proposed amendment. It does not
appear to impact initiative provisions relating to group
contributions. Representative Finkelstein voiced support
for the technical amendment.
Senator Randy Phillips MOVED for adoption of CSSB 191 (Fin)
(version "H") as the mark-up document. No objection having
been raised, CSSB 191 (Fin) was ADOPTED. Senator Phillips
then MOVED for adoption of Amendment No. 1. No objection
having been raised, Amendment No. 1 was ADOPTED. Senator
Phillips next MOVED for passage of CSSB 191 (Fin) with
individual recommendations. No objection having been
raised, CSSB 191 (Fin) was REPORTED OUT of committee with a
$98.7 fiscal note from the Dept. of Administration (APOC), a
$47.5 note from the Dept. of Law, and zero notes from the
Dept. of Community and Regional Affairs, Governor's Office
(Elections), and Legislative Affairs Agency. Co-chairman
Frank and Senators Donley, Phillips, Rieger, and Sharp
signed the committee report with a "do pass" recommendation.
Co-chairman Halford signed "do pass unless amended."
Senator Zharoff signed "no recommendation."
SENATE BILL NO. 285
An Act relating to management of discrete salmon
stocks and to a salmon management assessment; and
providing for an effective date.
Co-chairman Halford directed that SB 285 be brought on for
discussion. KELLY HUBER, aide to Co-chairman Halford, came
before committee. She explained that current salmon
management centers on heavy exploitation of mixed stock
fisheries and disregards the negative impact of that
approach on discrete stocks of all salmon species. She
stressed need to fulfill the constitutional obligation to
preserve a sustained yield of all stocks. The proposed bill
requires the board of fisheries to adopt and implement a
discrete salmon stock management policy consistent with a
sustained yield of wild stocks. It also provides a means to
offset costs incurred by implementing the policy.
END: SFC-96, #106, Side 1
BEGIN: SFC-96, #106, Side 2
Mrs. Huber provided a sectional analysis of a draft CSSB 285
(Fin) (9-LS1527\F, Utermohle, 4/26/96):
Section 2 directs the board of fisheries to implement
management of discrete salmon stocks and sets time
lines for gathering of data necessary for
implementation.
Section 3 provides for establishment and collection of
a $1 salmon management surcharge on all sport fish
licenses.
Section 4 provides for a $20 management surcharge on
crewmembers' fishing licenses.
Section 5 provides for a $20 management surcharge on
limited entry permit licenses.
Senator Rieger referenced language at Page 4, line 7, noted
that it speaks to deposit of the surcharge into the fish and
game fund, and questioned lack of expenditure from the fund
on the fiscal note. Mrs. Huber referenced the $1.7 million
note from the Dept. of Fish and Game and advised that
surcharges within the bill would cover that amount. Co-
chairman Halford directed that the department submit a new
fiscal note for CSSB 285 (Fin), showing revenue and
expenditure.
In response to questions from Senator Zharoff, Mrs. Huber
advised of 450,000 sport fishing licenses; 35,000 crewmember
licenses; and 15,000 limited entry permits. The $20-dollars
increase would be in addition to existing $30 resident and
$90 non-resident crewmember licenses.
Senator Zharoff asked what the state would realize from the
proposed study. Co-chairman Halford responded, "What you
get is a guarantee that you don't destroy the weaker stocks
as you harvest the stronger stocks in a mixed stock
fishery." Compliance with the constitutional mandate for
sustained yield for all segments of the stock would be
achieved.
Senator Donley MOVED for adoption of the draft CSSB 285
(Fin), version "F" dated 4/26/96, for purposes of
discussion. No objection having been raised, CSSB 285 (Fin)
was ADOPTED.
BEN ELLIS, Executive Director, Kenai River Sport Fishing,
next came before committee in support of the bill. He noted
that the developing problem giving rise to the legislation
was documented in the most recent National Academy of
Science publication in December, 1995. It lays the
foundation for the concern addressed by the proposed bill.
He cited difficulty associated with attempting to manage a
resources on a sustained yield basis without data to ensure
that discrete (weak, smaller) stocks are protected as well.
Mr. Ellis advised that the board of fisheries has
consistently asked for more data upon which to base
management decisions. The proposed bill will provide that
data. It should help protect both sport and commercial
fisheries throughout the state. Mr. Ellis urged support for
the bill which he termed of "paramount importance."
Senator Randy Phillips asked if Mr. Ellis also supported the
fee increases. Mr. Ellis responded affirmatively. He
voiced his understanding that "every major sport fishing
organization in the state has supported this bill."
Discussion of licensing of fishing guides followed among Mr.
Ellis, Senator Zharoff, and Co-chairman Halford. Senator
Zharoff took exception to the $20 increase for commercial
fishermen, saying that "They're usually the last ones to get
a shot at the resource under our management system."
GERON BRUCE, Legislative Liaison, Dept. of Fish and Game,
next came before committee and highlighted three elements
within the legislation:
1. The discrete management policy and the social or
economic benefits the board and legislature would want
to see served by that policy. On this issue
the department is neutral.
2. Additional funding and direction to conduct more
research,data collection, and analysis on various
salmon stocks as they contribute to mixed stock
fisheries and escapement of those stocks. This
effort is supported by the department.
3. Funding mechanism. The department is neutral on
this issue.
Mr. Bruce told members of new research techniques and
focused upon genetic stock identification which, he
explained, has the potential to offer "a whole new level of
stock identification in fisheries." This technology has
been applied on an experimental basis. Without additional
funding, the department will not be able to extend new
technologies to fisheries management in general. To that
extent, the legislation would be helpful. Mr. Bruce
directed attention to Section 5 on Page 4 and noted that the
funding mechanism would be limited by language which says
that funds collected from permit holders could only be spent
within the administrative area in which the fisherman
operates. That will fragment the funding source into small
and large pots of money which cannot be accumulated and used
to support an entire program. That is of concern. The
department would thus recommend removal of that language.
Mr. Bruce further recommended removal of pink salmon stock
from the bill. Genetic stock identification technology has
not demonstrated its effectiveness with pink salmon. Mr.
Bruce advised that the fiscal note was prepared "by taking
two particular fisheries (the Cook Inlet sockeye fishery and
the Alaska Peninsula sockeye/chum fishery and its
relationship to the Western Alaska fishery) and applying
bill provisions. Since the note applies only to several of
the fisheries, sufficient revenues will not be generated to
add additional fisheries per the bill's proposed schedule.
It should be recognized that moneys identified on the fiscal
note reflect start-up funding based on two fisheries. Mr.
Bruce further attested to costs associated with monitoring
escapement in remote areas. He reiterated that revenue to
be generated would not cover the range of fisheries set
forth in the legislation.
Senator Rieger reiterated his previous question concerning
fiscal note information which shows revenues flowing to both
the general fund and fish and game fund but expenditures
from only the general fund. Mr. Bruce explained that the
original funding mechanism for the legislation did not
contemplate revenue from recreational users. The current
draft incorporates those users. He further advised that
recreational moneys could flow either to the fish and game
fund or the general fund. Senator Rieger voiced his
understanding that the department would submit a revised
fiscal note with the correct allocation from the fish and
game fund. Mr. Bruce concurred.
Senator Sharp referenced Section 5 and spoke to difficulty
associated with allocation to administrative areas. Co-
chairman Halford advised that it was not his intent to
include allocation language. He suggested that the
concluding sentence from Sections 3 and 4 be added to
Section 5 and that Section 5 language relating to
administrative areas be deleted.
Mr. Bruce voiced need for flexibility in allowing the
department and board of fisheries to identify priorities
when applying the proposed program. That would draw on
board expertise in determining critical conservation and
allocation needs and which areas and species should be the
focus of intensive work. Co-chairman Halford referenced
staging provisions within the bill providing for certain
sections to become effective in 2006 and 2011. He
acknowledged that a fiscal note could not be written in 1996
that would cover the cost of discrete stock identification
in 2011, with any degree of certainty. Areas scheduled for
earlier enaction are those where concern is greatest. There
is adequate time, in the future, to change or amend
provisions.
Mr. Bruce further commented on need for flexibility to
adjust to priority needs.
Senator Sharp MOVED to delete language within Section 5,
commencing with "A" at the end of line 23 through line 29,
and replace it with the last sentence of Sections 3 and 4.
No objection having been raised, the amendment was ADOPTED.
Senator Zharoff cited fiscal note information referencing 5
permanent and 20 seasonal people and asked how the program
would be operated within the current department structure.
Mr. Bruce acknowledged that the program could not be
implemented without new staff. Senator Zharoff questioned
the benefit of the program to localized fisheries such as
Atka. Fishermen in that area will be assessed for studies
to be done elsewhere. He suggested that assessments should
be conducted on stocks connected to particular fisheries.
Mr. Bruce acknowledged that some stocks would not be the
subject of assessment because they are localized and there
is no competition among various users. He suggested,
however, that the state's salmon resource as a whole would
benefit.
Senator Sharp directed attention to Page 2, line 4, and
MOVED to add the Copper River to the Cook Inlet and Kodiak
fisheries listed within subsection (B). Mr. Bruce said the
amendment would involve additional costs. He acknowledged
that the department would be reworking the fiscal note based
on the Senate Finance Committee version of the bill. He
further acknowledged that the department has "fairly good
information" on the Copper River fishery so the effort would
not be starting from scratch. No objection having been
raised, the foregoing amendment was ADOPTED.
Senator Donley MOVED for passage of CSSB 285 (Fin) with
individual recommendations. Senator Zharoff OBJECTED. He
voiced his belief that current department assessment and
management of fisheries is more than adequate. He spoke
specifically to Section 4 and said the $20 management
surcharge was not equitable, particularly for fishermen in
areas that will not benefit from data acquisition. It is
also inequitable for fishermen who must obtain a commercial
license but are not fishing for salmon. Senator Zharoff
said that while he agreed with the intent, the proposed
procedure is wrong. Co-chairman Halford called for a show
of hands. The motion CARRIED on a vote of 4 to 1 (Co-
chairman Frank and Senator Rieger had left the meeting.).
CSSB 285 (Fin) was REPORTED OUT of committee with a fiscal
note from the Dept. of Fish and Game (Sport Fish) showing
revenues of $118.3, a Dept. of Fish and Game (CFMD) note
showing revenues of $604.0, and a zero note from the Dept.
of Revenue. Co-chairman Halford and Senators Donley,
Phillips, and Sharp signed the committee report with a "do
pass" recommendation. Senator Zharoff signed "do not pass."
SENATE BILL NO. 216
An Act relating to fees or assessment of costs for
certain services provided by state government,
including hearing costs related to the real estate
surety fund; fees for authorization to operate a
postsecondary educational institution or for an agent's
permit to perform services for a postsecondary
educational institution; administrative fees for
self-insurers in workers' compensation; business
license fees; fees for activities related to coastal
zone management, training relating to emergency
management response, regulation of pesticides and
broadcast chemicals, and subdivision plans for sewage
waste disposal or treatment; and providing for an
effective date.
Co-chairman Halford directed that a draft CSSB 216 (Fin)
(version "K", dated 5/5/96) be distributed for review by
members and consideration at a subsequent meeting.
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 436(TRA)
An Act relating to purchase and sale of mobile homes by
mobile home dealers; to mobile home titles; and
providing for an effective date.
Senator Randy Phillips MOVED for passage of CSHB 436 (TRA).
Senator Donley noted need to attend the Senate Floor session
at 1:00 p.m. and asked that the meeting be adjourned.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was recessed at approximately 12:55 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|