Legislature(2009 - 2010)SENATE FINANCE 532
04/13/2009 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB10 | |
| SB110 | |
| SB133 | |
| SB171 | |
| SB177 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 10 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| = | SB 110 | ||
| += | SB 133 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 171 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 177 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
April 13, 2009
9:27 a.m.
9:27:55 AM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Stedman called the Senate Finance Committee meeting
to order at 9:27 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Lyman Hoffman, Co-Chair
Senator Bert Stedman, Co-Chair
Senator Charlie Huggins, Vice-Chair
Senator Johnny Ellis
Senator Donny Olson
Senator Joe Thomas
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Senator Hollis French; Sue Stancliff, Special Assistant,
Department of Public Safety; Anne Carpeneti, Assistant
Attorney General, Legal Services Section-Juneau, Criminal
Division, Department of Law; William Streur, Deputy
Commissioner, Medicaid & Health Care Policy, Department of
Health and Social Services; Senator Kevin Meyer; Deborah
Bitney, Director, Permanent Fund Division; Christine
Marasigan, Staff, Senator Kevin Meyer; Darwin Peterson,
Staff, Co-Chair Stedman; Charles Swanton, Director, Division
of Sport Fish, Department of Fish and Game; Andy Szczesny,
Owner Alaska Fish and Float, Kenai; Reuben Hanke, Self,
Soldotna; Steve McClure, self, Kenai; David Goggia, self;
Ricky Gease, Executive Director, Kenai River Sport Fishing
Association.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Orin Dym, Forensic Lab Supervisor, Crime Lab Supervisor,
Department of Public Safety; Bill Oberly, Alaska Innocence
Project; John Lucking, Police Chief Soldotna; Gary Turner,
chair, Kenai College; Beverly Minn, Self; Melvin Grove,
Matsu, Self.
SUMMARY
SB 10 "An Act requiring health care insurers to provide
insurance coverage for medical care received by a
patient during certain approved clinical trials
designed to test and improve prevention,
diagnosis, treatment, or palliation of cancer;
directing the Department of Health and Social
Services to provide Medicaid services to persons
who participate in those clinical trials; relating
to experimental procedures under a state plan
offered by the Comprehensive Health Insurance
Association; and providing for an effective date."
SB 10 was SCHEDULED but not HEARD
SB 110 "An Act relating to the preservation of evidence."
SB 110 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
SB 133 "An Act creating a statewide electronic health
information exchange system; and providing for an
effective date."
SB 133 was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and a new fiscal impact note
from the Department of Health and Social Services.
SB 171 "An Act relating to the permanent fund dividend of
an otherwise qualified individual who dies during
the qualifying year; and providing for an
effective date."
SB 171 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
SB 177 "An Act repealing the termination of licensing and
regulation of sport fishing operators and sport
fishing guides and licensing and registration of
sport fishing vessels; and providing for an
effective date."
SB 177 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
SENATE BILL NO. 10
"An Act requiring health care insurers to provide
insurance coverage for medical care received by a
patient during certain approved clinical trials
designed to test and improve prevention, diagnosis,
treatment, or palliation of cancer; directing the
Department of Health and Social Services to provide
Medicaid services to persons who participate in those
clinical trials; relating to experimental procedures
under a state plan offered by the Comprehensive Health
Insurance Association; and providing for an effective
date."
SB 10 was SCHEDULED but not HEARD
9:28:08 AM
SENATE BILL NO. 110
"An Act relating to the preservation of evidence."
9:29:13 AM
SENATOR HOLLIS FRENCH,
The American system of justice is founded on balancing
the twin protections of the rights of those harmed by
crimes, and the rights of the accused. Criminal
convictions are guided by evidence of innocence or
guilt, and no one in the criminal justice system wants
innocent people to be convicted of crimes they did not
commit. The availability and use of physical evidence
at trials and during appeals is a critical piece of a
meaningful justice system.
Modern DNA technology, coupled with today's
comprehensive information and communications
technologies, has exponentially increased the power of
preserved evidence. Preserved evidence can solve cold
cases and prove or disprove claims of innocence in ways
unimaginable just a few years ago. The problem is,
however, that evidence collection and preservation
policies have not always kept pace with these new
technologies.
Senate Bill 110 begins to address this issue by
requiring that biological evidence in murder and sexual
assault cases is properly retained while cases are
unsolved and during the period after conviction that an
offender is imprisoned or required to register as a sex
offender. The bill still provides for police
departments to return or dispose of evidence too large
to keep after portions of the material likely to
contain biological evidence have been removed and
preserved. The bill provides for a notice process in
cases where evidence will be destroyed, and it
establishes a temporary task force to look at other
issues involved in this emerging field of technology
and make recommendations on standards and practices in
cataloging and handling evidence.
Senator French shared a story about a boy in Denver Colorado
convicted of murder at age 15 that spent 10 years
incarcerated. Following the boy's release the
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) evidence, retrieved and
preserved from the crime scene revealed that he was in fact
innocent. He informed that cases such as the one mentioned
led him to sponsor the bill. He continued that this bill
requires police officers to retain evidence in two
categories, physical and DNA. Once a person is convicted of
a crime and incarcerated, the small bits of biological
evidence remain preserved in a crime laboratory. The bulky
material is retained until the time of the trial. The bill
only applies to the most serious of crimes. The idea is to
retain evidence and ensure that incarcerated citizens are
indeed guilty.
Chair Stedman asked for a sectional analysis. Senator French
complied. He referred to Section 1, which creates a new
provision in the criminal code for the preservation of
evidence requiring state agencies and municipal law
enforcement agencies to preserve all evidence that relates
to unsolved cases of murder in the first degree, sexual
assault, and first degree sexual assault of a minor. The
section further requires that biological evidence in these
crimes be retained while a person is incarcerated in the
custody of the Department of Corrections (DOC).
9:33:30 AM
Senator French continued that if a piece of evidence is
physically large, the portions likely to contain relevant
evidence remain preserved. A notice procedure found on Page
2, Subsection D of the bill outlines the proper destruction
of evidence. The Section further provides the method for
court ordered remedies if evidence is destroyed in violation
of the Section.
9:34:48 AM
Senator French continued with the Sectional analysis.
Section 2, Page 4 and Section 3, Page 4 refer to the codas
sections that the Department of Law (DOL) requested. The
codas give DOL the ability to remove DNA data taken from a
suspect found innocent. This allows prosecution of a person
whose DNA is retained on the data base in the event of a
subsequent crime. He provided an example.
9:35:21 AM
Senator French explained that the DOL has the ability to
remove DNA data taken from a suspect who is later found
innocent. The state is allowed to prosecute if the evidence
is still on the database when a person is arrested for a
subsequent crime. He continued that Section 5 establishes a
task force for the preservation of evidence.
9:37:10 AM
Senator French expressed that the legislation will prove
effective throughout all areas of the state. He mentioned a
letter from Angela Long, chief of the police association
opposing the bill. He stated that since changes were made in
the judiciary committee, Ms. Long has withdrawn her
opposition. He informed of the close contact between DOL and
the Department of Public Safety. He opined that the
collaboration provides a good piece of legislation.
9:38:45 AM
Co-Chair Stedman asked about the current process of DNA
storage. Senator French answered that the DNA evidence is
retained until a person is released from prison and removed
from the registry. He mentioned that the state complies with
the established legislation. He shared a story about a
murder case during his time as district attorney. The police
departments recognize the importance of retaining evidence
and essentially perform already that which this bill
mandates.
9:40:43 AM
SUE STANCLIFF, SPECIAL ASSISTANT, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
SAFETY, testified about data storage and use of DNA samples.
ORIN DYM, FORENSIC LAB SUPERVISOR, CRIME LAB SUPERVISOR,
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY (testified via teleconference).
He spoke in reference to the question about DNA sampling and
the current status of retaining samples of biological
evidence indefinitely. He informed that this bill has an
impact on the crime laboratory in the retention of
biological evidence and the number of samples identified. He
recognized that in order for an agency to dispose of
evidence, they must sample it prior to disposal. Depending
on the case, clothing and bedding might not be analyzed.
With this legislation, all items are identified for
biological importance in the crime laboratory. The change
induces a dramatic increase in the number of samples
retained and evidence submitted. He mentioned the additional
funds required for storage space and an employee responsible
for sample collection and additional workload associated
with the bill.
9:43:54 AM
Co-Chair Stedman requested information regarding the
attached fiscal note. He asked about integration of the
crime laboratory. Mr. Dym responded that additional storage
space is necessary regardless of when the new crime
laboratory is constructed. He explained the need for
additional personnel to aid in sampling the evidence prior
to disposal. He opined that the provided fiscal note offers
the best estimate with the best vision of the future.
Co-Chair Hoffman asked for justification of the travel
request. Mr. Dym explained the travel request was for agency
training regarding proper storage of evidence. The
requirements for an accredited laboratory include the proper
storage and handling of evidence. He stressed the importance
of sharing the knowledge with the state's user base, which
requires travel.
9:46:22 AM
Co-Chair Stedman asked if a task force was necessary to the
process of the legislation. Mr. Dym explained that he was
not responsible for the requisition of a task force. Senator
French stated the necessity of the task force because the
obligation is new for both the crime labs and police
departments across the state. He suggested a careful,
considerate, and collaborative process for a beneficial
beginning. Co-Chair Stedman asked if the task force was
suggested at the request of the department or through the
creation of the bill. Senator French answered that the
creation of a task force existed in the initial language of
the bill.
Senator Olson asked about private laboratories that might
store and process the samples without the cost of a new
facility. Senator French answered that state prosecution
evidence must be housed in a state facility. He suggested
that expanding the existing crime laboratory without
building a new $100 million facility may suffice.
9:48:27 AM
Senator Olson asked about the American Civil Liberties
Union's (ACLU) standpoint regarding the proposed
legislation. Senator French stated that the Department of
Law (DOL) was in support of the bill because this process
offers the ability to prove guilt versus innocence.
Co-Chair Stedman asked if the department supports the bill.
Ms. Stancliff answered that yes the Departments of Law and
Public Safety support the bill. Senator French clarified
that ACLU also supports the bill.
9:50:01 AM
Senator Huggins asked about the detractors of the bill.
Senator French responded that resistance, rather than
outright detraction existed from agencies commanded to
retain evidence. He stated that concerns of police chiefs
across the state were since alleviated.
Senator Huggins asked about prisoners and the bill. He asked
if prisoner's DNA was obtained. Senator French stated that
the bill does not address prisoners. He understood that
previous legislation addressed DNA obtained from prisoners.
Senator Huggins asked about Page 3, Line 21 and the term
"unintentional." He asked why not substitute the term
"intentional." Senator French understood the concern
initially. He explained the meaning of the word
"unintentional", as "only intentional destruction of
evidence can result in civil liability." Anything short of
intentional destruction of evidence can result in civil
liability.
9:52:26 AM
Senator Thomas asked why the DNA retained in the record is
retained while the paper record is destroyed.
Senator French explained that Senator Thomas is referring to
the data base. He explained that a swab is obtained from a
prisoner and analyzed in the laboratory which then takes the
sequence of DNA genes for entry into a database where the
information sits as a method of generating evidence. The
data is then purged if the person is found innocent. He
stated that the DNA is retained because it is personal and
valuable information.
9:54:16 AM
ANNE CARPENETI, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, LEGAL SERVICES
SECTION-JUNEAU, CRIMINAL DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LAW,
explained that the adoption of the obligations for the state
police required much work. She stated that the bill does not
change the reasons for the DNA collection. She explained
that the legislature adopted a provision that allowed police
to obtain samples from those persons arrested for a felony.
The legislature also adopted a procedure for people arrested
for a felony not resulting in the collection of DNA. The
legislature neglected to provide removal from the DNA
database people who were arrested for a felony, charged with
it and acquitted after trial. This bill adopts that
procedure. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has
recommended the adoption of the procedure for people
acquitted of a crime for removal their DNA from the
database.
Co-Chair Stedman asked if the criminal division is in
support of the bill. Ms. Carpeneti answered yes.
9:56:28 AM
BILL OBERLY, ALASKA INNOCENCE PROJECT (testified via
teleconference), spoke in support of the legislation. He
stated that the support of strong evidence management helps
to solve cases. Regarding the task force, the data and
information gathered by the task force will allow for
necessary changes and improvements.
JOHN LUCKING, POLICE CHIEF SOLDOTNA (testified via
teleconference), in support of SB 110. He spoke of an
opposition letter, now null because Senator French and staff
have worked with the Department of Public Safety to overcome
initial concerns regarding liability of personnel and the
maintenance of bulky evidence. He voiced support for the
task force as an important component of the bill.
9:59:20 AM
Senator French concluded that he appreciated support for the
legislation.
SB 110 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
SENATE BILL NO. 133
"An Act creating a statewide electronic health
information exchange system; and providing for an
effective date."
10:00:16 AM
Senator Thomas MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 1.
Co-Chair Stedman OBJECTED for discussion purposes.
Senator Thomas explained that Amendment 1 deleted references
to the state as the one that heads up the operation of the
Health Information Exchange (HIE). Amendment 1 deletes the
designation of the state as an option for fully implementing
and operating the HIE system. He stated that it is not
necessary to have a big government operation when private
sector options exist, with the state acting in an oversight
role. The amendment puts in statute the expectations that
the designated entity must become self sustaining through a
combination of user fees and other private and public
funding sources.
Senator Paskvan stated that he supports Amendment 1. He
explained that the fiscal note does reflect the change from
the state as a potential operator of the program. He stated
that once the federal stimulus dollars are gone this entity
will be self sustaining operated through user fees. The
state's involvement would then be as another supplier of
user fees. He opined that the solution was modern and in
response to Alaska's growth in healthcare needs. He
expressed full support of the Amendment.
Co-Chair Stedman explained the fiscal note reduced operating
costs by $389.4 million as a result of four fewer full time
employees.
Senator Paskvan clarified that the plan reduced six full
time employees to two full time employees. He understood
that the fiscal note is a worst case scenario. The actual
expenditures are less.
Co-Chair Stedman removed his objection. Amendment 1 was
ADOPTED.
10:04:24 AM
Senator Huggins asked for further clarification of the
administration's position on this bill as it pertains to the
federal stimulus funds.
Co-Chair Stedman asked for representation from the
administration to address Senator Huggins' question.
Senator Paskvan understood that the administration remained
neutral regarding the bill.
WILLIAM STREUR, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MEDICAID & HEALTH CARE
POLICY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES, introduced
himself.
Senator Huggins asked about available stimulus funds and the
intended use.
Mr. Streur answered that the total money available through
the federal stimulus was $19.2 billion. Each state must
submit their particular needs. He stated that $17.2 billion
of the $19.2 billion is for the providers submitting for
assistance for electronic health record deeds and related
efforts as part of a health information exchange system.
This includes 100 percent funding for the next two years
with the future ratio yet unstated.
Senator Huggins asked for an estimate of one hundred percent
funding for two years. Mr. Streur answered $17.2 billion for
two years. For Alaska, the amount is yet unknown and depends
on what the state submits.
Senator Huggins asked for an estimate of the cost to operate
under this provision. Mr. Streur answered that the costs are
anticipated at $27 million about $25 million of which will
be federally funded. The cost for ongoing operation is
lessened considerably after the first two years.
10:07:25 AM
Senator Huggins asked about the continuing operating costs?
He understood that a user fee existed to defray a majority
of the operating costs. Mr. Streur responded that following
the first five years, the projection is for the collection
of user fees. The process prohibits the collection of user
fees at the onset of the program. The state must absorb the
cost provided by user fees until the program is up and
running with enough depth and spread across Alaska to deem
the program usable.
Co-Chair Stedman informed that the fiscal note has $24.8
million in federal receipts for FY10 and $2.7 million in a
General Fund match from the state. He continued that $26
million in general fund match is also required in 2011. In
2012 $1,760,000 is the anticipated general fund match. He
stated that $1,080,000 is the approximate general fund
impact on the treasury.
10:09:16 AM
Senator Huggins intended to pass the legislation. The year
the change takes place is the only question. He understood
that alterations to the state's health information system
are inevitable and mandatory. The efficiency of delivering
medical maintenance is beneficial for the patient. Mr.
Streur agreed with Senator Huggins. Medicare providers are
required to have electronic health records by 2015.
Senator Huggins stated that his constituents communicated
that he ought to vote affirmative for funds available
through the federal government for the cost of transitioning
to electronic health records by 2015. Mr. Streur agreed with
Senator Huggins.
10:11:16 AM
Senator Olson discussed the rapid advancement of technology
for electronic communication. He asked if the state
subscribes now with possible advancement prior to 2015.
Mr. Streur explained that much of the new technology comes
with built in updates. Updates for the state are provided as
part of the core system for the next ten years. Health
information exchange technology contains built in updates.
Co-Chair Stedman asked the bill sponsor to testify.
10:13:01 AM
Senator Paskvan thanked the committee for hearing the bill.
Co-Chair Hoffman MOVED that the committee report out SB 133,
as amended with attached fiscal note.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
SB 133 was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and a new fiscal impact note from the
Department of Health and Social Services.
SENATE BILL NO. 171
"An Act relating to the permanent fund dividend of an
otherwise qualified individual who dies during the
qualifying year; and providing for an effective date."
10:14:36 AM
SENATOR KEVIN MEYER informed that SB 171 would provide the
issuance of a Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) check to a
personal representative of the estate or successor of the
deceased during the qualifying year. He noted that SB 171
treats deceased Alaskans as living in terms of applying for
their final PFD. in fulfilling all eligibility requirements
as other Alaskan citizens under the current statute.
Exceptions are that an individual cannot apply if deceased.
The bill itself includes the application process. He noted
that the director of the PFD division was present in the
hearing for questions.
Co-Chair Stedman requested a chronological time span
illustrating how a citizen may or may not qualify if the
bill was enacted.
Senator Meyer answered that the issue was brought to his
attention by long term constituents whose loved ones had
lived to fulfill the requirements, yet had not received a
PFD. The deceased has to meet the same requirements as any
other Alaskan meaning that the deceased must live 180 days
of the year for eligibility. Co-Chair Stedman clarified that
the applicant must apply as required by statute, live in the
state, but "just happen to pass away in July or later."
10:17:29 AM
Senator Olson asked if there was a difference if the
applicant is buried in the state of Alaska. Senator Meyer
answered that the place of burial makes no difference.
Co-Chair Stedman asked if the bill in question affects
citizens in 2008 and 2009. He asked to know the bill's
timeframe.
DEBORAH BITNEY, DIRECTOR, PERMANENT FUND DIVISION,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, answered Co-Chair Stedman's question.
She stated that the legislation begins the qualifying year
of 2009 and applies to Alaskans who pass away in the second
half of 2009.
Senator Huggins asked what precludes the deceased from
receiving the benefit currently. Ms. Bitney answered that
current regulations allow for applicants who pass away
during the application period only. The statute amended with
this legislation states that a citizen must be a resident
for the entire qualifying year. She stated that a resident
was defined as someone living.
Co-Chair Stedman asked about proper notification to the
department that the deceased "passed on."
10:20:37 AM
Ms. Bitney stated that the death certificate allows
administration of the check.
Senator Thomas clarified that if a person had all
qualifications from January to June of 2009 they qualify for
a PFD. Ms. Bitney agreed.
Co-Chair Hoffman MOVED to ADOPT work draft for SB 171
LS0804\S.
Co-Chair Stedman OBJECTED for the purpose of discussion.
CHRISTINE MARASIGAN, STAFF, SENATOR KEVIN MEYER, explained
the work draft. She explained that the work draft contained
three major changes. One change ensured that individual
applicants received a dividend at least one year prior. She
stated that another change limits the dividend to residents
of Alaska. The final change allows a person to be present
for 180 days versus the entire year as was stated in the
bill.
Co-Chair Stedman removed his OBJECTION. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Co-Chair Stedman addressed the fiscal note, which is reduced
by $50,000 in interagency receipts as a result of one less
required position.
10:24:51 AM
SB 171 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
10:25:28 AM AT EASE
10:26:03 AM RECONVENED
10:26:22 AM RECESSED
1:42:23 PM RECONVENED
SENATE BILL NO. 177
"An Act repealing the termination of licensing and
regulation of sport fishing operators and sport fishing
guides and licensing and registration of sport fishing
vessels; and providing for an effective date."
1:42:43 PM
Senator Meyer introduced SB 177. This legislation addresses
the licensing and regulation of sport fishing for operators
and guides. The bill provides oversight of sport fishing
operators and guides. For the protection of guides and
clients, some minimum standards are necessary. The licensing
and reporting program is beneficial to both the sport
fishing industry and its resource managers. Legislation
authorizing this program passed in 2004 with the intent of
giving the Department of Fish and Game more comprehensive
and credible information on the guide and the guiding
activities. A need to create a basic standard existed for
sport fish business operators and guides including liability
insurance, first aid, Cardio Pulmonary Resuscitation (CPR),
and in some cases, United State's Coast Guard licensing. The
program increased the level of professionalism for the sport
fishing industry across the state.
1:44:52 PM
Co-Chair Hoffman MOVED to adopt work draft LS0832\E, Kane,
4/13/09.
Co-Chair Stedman OBJECTED.
DARWIN PETERSON, STAFF, CO-CHAIR STEDMAN, gave an
explanation of the Committee Substitute (CS). The CS
addresses the need for in-season replacement of a fishing
guide within the Kenai River special management area.
Currently, in order to guide on the Kenai River a guide must
have current first aid certification, a coast guard license,
current Alaska sport fishing license, proof of enrollment in
an approved drug testing program, park use permit, and must
pass the Kenai River Guide Academy. This guide academy is
administered by the Department of Natural Resources and is
offered through the Kenai Peninsula College. The guide
academy was created to educate fishing guides in the areas
of habitat protection, state and federal fishing laws, river
etiquette, etc. The CS addresses the problem of a sport
fishing business losing an employee midseason. The guide
academy is not offered during the summer, as most
instructors are professional guides themselves. The problem
arises when a guide is terminated for misconduct, or is
unable to finish the sport fishing season due to a major
medical situation. A business cannot hire a replacement
guide unless the person passes the academy, which can result
in tremendous economic hardship to the business. The CS
allows the State Division of Parks a replacement waiver for
a business that loses a guide in season, allowing the hire
of another guide on an emergency basis without meeting the
guide academy requirement. The intent is that the
replacement guide enroll in the guide academy at first
available opportunity, otherwise the guide may not work in
the subsequent season as the waiver only applies to the
sport fishing season in which it was issued.
1:47:48 PM
Senator Huggins asked if a guide was qualified but had a
medical problem that put him out of work for one year, would
the waiver pertain to the remainder of the year. Mr.
Peterson answered that the replacement guide must graduate
from the academy if he or she wished to guide the following
year.
Senator Thomas asked a question regarding the requirements
of the waiver. Mr. Peterson answered that requirements apply
only to the academy. The requirements other than that of
attending the academy such as CPR, coast guard license,
first aid, park permit, etc still stand as requirements. The
potential guide may only obtain employment midseason without
graduation from the guide academy.
Senator Thomas clarified the graduation from the guide
academy is the single issue. Mr. Peterson answered yes,
because all other requirements are available to the employee
through the various divisions or departments except the
academy because the course is not offered during the summer.
1:50:09 PM
Co-Chair Hoffman asked about the fiscal note and the $344
thousand allocated for personnel services. He asked to know
which positions are listed. Mr. Peterson deferred the
question to the sponsor.
Co-Chair Stedman removed his OBJECTION
Version E of the work draft was ADOPTED
CHARLES SWANTON, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF SPORT FISH,
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME, answered the question about the
fiscal note. He stated that there was no reference to the
number of positions for personal services. He believed that
eight or nine positions are required for data entry and
program managers.
Senator Thomas asked for the current fees for fish guide
licensing as compared to hunting guides. Mr. Swanton
answered that he was not aware of the current fees for
hunting guides. The fee for owner operator guide among sport
fishing is $100 and for guides only $50. Approximately $10
dollars of the $100 of the guide owner/operator fee is
collected for licensing, while the remainder is utilized for
the log book or data collection program. For the guides,
$4.50 is allocated toward licensing fees and the remainder
toward logbook and data recording.
Senator Huggins asked about the logbooks and whether or not
the department uses the data for better fisheries
management.
Mr. Swanton stated that he required a more precise
definition of "better fisheries management."
1:53:58 PM
Senator Huggins clarified his interest in enhancing the fish
population. Mr. Swanton responded that previous venues
listed the methods to utilize data. The information needed
has not been collected by the department for this period of
time. This remains the only means by which the harvest
information is collected.
Senator Huggins asked when enough data is anticipated. Mr.
Swanton answered that the anticipation is difficult because
a wide array of applications for the information exist from
stocks that may or may not be heavily exploited. He admitted
reticence about answering the question of an exact amount of
necessary data required to make good decisions in managing
fisheries. He opined that increased data enriches the
fisheries management decision making process.
Co-Chair Stedman asked if the department supports the bill.
Mr. Swanton answered yes.
1:56:49 PM
GARY TURNER, CHAIR, KENAI COLLEGE (testified via
teleconference). He explained that there is unanimous
support for the change among the Kenai River Academy board
members.
BEVERLY MINN, SELF (testified via teleconference), in
opposition to SB 177. She stated that she would like to see
the fees sunset or reduced considerably.
MELVIN GROVE, MATSU, SELF (testified via teleconference), in
support of SB 177. He stated that he was in support of the
legislation. He asked for data regarding restocks to reduce
long lining near shore water. Data is not available. He
opined that the fees must come from the fishing licenses as
opposed to the captain's pocket.
2:02:34 PM
ANDY SZCZESNY, OWNER ALASKA FISH AND FLOAT, KENAI, testified
in support of SB 177. He informed that he worked as a guide
on the upper Kenai River. He noted the importance of data
collection. He expected the agencies to employ the collected
data.
REUBEN HANKE, SELF, SOLDOTNA, testified in support of SB
177. He spoke about the CS and the original task force by
the Commissioner of DNR. He worked as a charter fishing
guide. He thought that the information gathered would
provide a spring board for decision making processes. He
understood that there were difficulties with the original
collection process. He believed that the data was helpful to
the Board of Fisheries. He spoke in favor of the CS and SB
177.
2:05:52 PM
STEVE MCCLURE, SELF, KENAI, testified in support of SB 177.
He thought it beneficial to gather more data. He stated that
the board of directors for the guide academy were surprised
to learn that the absent guide issue was not covered. He
stated that the guide academy board taught him the
importance of the academy's classes, but if a position
remains vacant the business suffers.
DAVID GOGGIA, SELF, testified in support of SB 177. He
stated that there are many hazards present in the sport
fishing job, occasionally necessitating replacement guides.
He spoke in support of the CS and SB 177.
2:08:51 PM
RICKY GEASE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, KENAI RIVER SPORT FISHING
ASSOCIATION, testified in support of the legislation. He
stated that the guiding profession is risky. Emergencies are
possible and substitute guides are occasionally required.
The current law book program exempts Alaska from the new
salt water angler registry. He stated the importance of the
emergency language. He spoke in favor of extending the
sunset. He believed in insurance, licensing and
certification standards.
2:10:53 PM
Senator Huggins asked about the cost of a sport fishing
license. He understood that the cost of business licenses
was reduced.
Mr. Gease answered that the price reductions applied to
general business licenses. A portion of the license cost is
used for electronic data entry. He understood that the
backlog a result of data input in paper fashion versus
electronic data entry. He stated the frustration addressed
was that the format was not user friendly. The log books can
limit people's collection so that it is real time data. An
efficient method of data collection and input is necessary.
Senator Huggins commented that he liked the data and the
process, but "state government can always find a reason that
they need local citizen's money to manage their
bureaucracy."
2:13:47 PM
Co-Chair Stedman commented on the fiscal note for $462.2
thousand, which exists in the Governor's FY10 budget.
Senator Meyer noted support of the CS.
Co-Chair Stedman commented that the committee was in the
process of creating with the Department of Fish and Game a
recording mechanism allowing the guiding industry to provide
timely and usable data. He suggested that Alaska may end up
like Oregon and Washington without the accurate reporting of
data. He stated that the committee did not want to burden
the populous with undue charges, but without the data
regarding the fish caught in Alaska, the state may encounter
an irreversible problem.
SB 177 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
2:15:35 PM
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 2:15 PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Articles.pdf |
SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM SFIN 3/12/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 110 |
| Amendment_Explanation_CSSB 133(HSS).doc |
SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 133 |
| SB 171 Supt email Palmer.pdf |
HFIN 2/12/2010 1:30:00 PM SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 171 |
| CSSB 171 Memo on changes 04072009.pdf |
HFIN 2/12/2010 1:30:00 PM SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 171 |
| SB 171 Supt email Kajikawa.pdf |
HFIN 2/12/2010 1:30:00 PM SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 171 |
| SB 171 Support Article JNU Empire.pdf |
HFIN 2/12/2010 1:30:00 PM SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 171 |
| CSSB 171 Memo on changes 04092009.pdf |
SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 171 |
| CSSB171(STA)-DOR-PFD-04-09-09.pdf |
SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 171 |
| CSSB 171 CS Draft for Senate Finance.pdf |
SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 171 |
| CSSB 133(HSS) - Amendment - 26-LS0489-P.2.pdf |
SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 133 |
| SB 133 - Revised Fiscal Note - 4-10-09.pdf |
SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 133 |
| CS SB 177 Version E.pdf |
SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 177 |
| SB 171 Supt email Smith.pdf |
HFIN 2/12/2010 1:30:00 PM SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 171 |
| SB 171 Supt Ltr Mason.pdf |
HFIN 2/12/2010 1:30:00 PM SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 171 |
| SB 171 Supt Ltr Neher.pdf |
HFIN 2/12/2010 1:30:00 PM SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 171 |
| SB 177 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 177 |
| SB 177 Supt Ltr KRSA.pdf |
SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 177 |
| SB 177 Supt Ltr PCBA.pdf |
SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 177 |
| SB 177 Supt Ltr SEAGO.pdf |
SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 177 |
| SB110 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM SFIN 3/12/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 110 |
| SB110 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM SFIN 3/12/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 110 |
| SB177 Support Resolution.pdf |
SFIN 4/13/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 177 |