HB 26-CONFLICT OF INTEREST: BD FISHERIES/GAME  1:06:48 PM CHAIR PATKOTAK announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 26, "An Act relating to participation in matters before the Board of Fisheries and the Board of Game by the members of the respective boards; and providing for an effective date." 1:07:33 PM REPRESENTATIVE GERAN TARR, Alaska State Legislature, noted that the HB 26 allows conflicted board members to deliberate, but not vote, on issues in the interest of transparency of the board process. 1:08:01 PM REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS said that in considering this potential legislation he reflected on the role of legislative committee members. He said that he believes that it's important to have informed input on issues as a matter of public record. 1:09:53 PM REPRESENTATIVE CRONK said that he remains confused by HB 26. He related an experience of hearing testimony against someone who had a perceived conflict of interest, and opined that HB 26 "actually favors a member testifying," characterizing it as a "mixed message." 1:10:52 PM REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER referred to Amendment 1, which failed to be adopted by the committee, and stated his belief that Resident Hunters of Alaska (RHAK) "didn't really care one way or the other about the amendment." He then opined that there is varying support for HB 26 and expressed his belief that HB 26 is a Board of Fisheries bill and should not include the Board of Game. He stated that he cannot support the proposed legislation. 1:12:51 PM CHAIR PATKOTAK discussed referencing the official record of actions by a board when considering actions in the future. 1:14:08 PM GLENN HAIGHT, Executive Director II, Board of Fisheries, Boards Support Section, Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), explained that, while boards will typically engage in deliberations and pass proposals or regulations which are very clear and with specific language, there are occasions during which deliberations are viewed as litigation. He expressed that it was unclear to him how HB 26 would impact consideration of previous deliberations. CHAIR PATKOTAK asked, "The benefit of having those discussions and the ability for somebody who might be conceived as having a conflict to have that discussion and provide that input on the record isn't going to necessarily affect the outcome of the vote?" MR. HAIGHT responded, "It's hard to speculate what a board member might glean from an informal conversation with a member who's been recused." He noted that the information would be more clearly on the record if the conflicted individual was present to deliberate. 1:16:38 PM REPRESENTATIVE CRONK opined that there is nothing wrong with the system currently in place. 1:17:22 PM REPRESENTATIVE TARR expressed her belief that the benefit of HB 26 would be improved transparency by having deliberations on the record. She said that she understands the differing perspectives affecting the Board of Game versus the Board of Fisheries, but those boards are allocating a common property resource, and having the same administration is the reason why they are both included in this proposed legislation. 1:18:53 PM REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS moved to report HB 26 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. 1:19:04 PM REPRESENTATIVES CRONK and RAUSCHER objected. 1:19:06 PM CHAIR PATKOTAK invited either Representative Cronk or Rauscher to speak to their objection. 1:19:10 PM REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER reiterated his earlier remarks. 1:19:53 PM A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Fields, Hopkins, Hannan, Schrage, and Patkotak voted in favor of HB 26. Representatives McKay, Cronk, Rauscher, and Gillham voted against it. Therefore, HB 26 was reported out of the House Resources Standing Committee by a vote of 5-4.