Legislature(2025 - 2026)BARNES 124
02/28/2025 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 | |
| Presentation(s): Managing Mining Projects Using State Highways, Dalton Highway Update | |
| HB33 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | HB 33 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 33-CONFLICT OF INTEREST: BD FISHERIES/GAME
2:10:15 PM
CO-CHAIR BURKE announced the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 33, "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."
2:10:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LOUISE STUTES, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor, introduced HB 33 and read the sponsor statement to the
committee [hard copy included in the committee packet]. The
sponsor statement read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
HB 33 SPONSOR STATEMENT
"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."
This legislation changes the way the Board of
Fisheries and Board of Game function by allowing
members to deliberate on subjects for which they have
a declared personal or financial interest according to
AS 39.52, the Executive Branch Ethics Act.
Members are selected based on their "knowledge and
ability in the field of action by the board, and with
a view to providing diversity of interests and points
of view in membership" however, Title 39 prohibits a
member from "taking or withholding official action in
order to affect a matter in which the member has a
personal or financial interest." (AS 39.52.120(b)(4)).
"Official action" is defined as "advice,
participation, or assistance, including for example, a
recommendation, decision, approval, disapproval, vote,
or other similar action, including inaction by a
public officer." (AS 39.52.960(14)).
Currently, board members are required to divulge a
conflict of interest if they, or their immediate
family members, are involved in the subject matter
being deliberated. The conflicted member can then no
longer offer their input and expertise on the process
and cannot vote on the matter at hand. Often in the
fishing world, a financial or personal interest
corresponds with someone's knowledge of a particular
fishery.
The passage of this bill will allow the conflicted
board member to offer remarks and input on
deliberations, but still precludes them from voting on
the issue if they have a conflict of interest.
Allowing members with expertise in particular fields
to deliberate will assist the boards in making more
informed decisions, lead to stronger resource
management statewide, and align process with intent as
far as the boards benefiting from members' knowledge
and diverse views.
Thank you for support of this legislation.
2:14:01 PM
JANE PEARSON, Staff, Representative Louise Stutes, Alaska State
Legislature, directed the committee's attention to documents
prepared by the Alaska Boards of Game and Fisheries [hard copies
included in the committee packets], titled "Background
Information on the Alaska Boards of Game and Fisheries Ethics
Act Process" and "Alaska Board of Fisheries Policy on Board
Member Actions at Meetings when Recused from Participating on
Proposals." She explained that the documents set forth how
members must conduct their business when they have declared a
conflict of interest. She read several paragraphs dealing with
recusals.
2:15:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES added that members who declare a conflict
must get up from their seat at the table and sit in the
audience.
2:15:45 PM
MS. PEARSON explained that a member could participate as a
member of the public but would not be allowed to add their
expertise to the board's deliberative process, even if they are
the only one who understands the nuances of a particular
subject. She pointed out that the documents detailed the number
of times the board members had to declare a conflict of
interest. She posited that the recusal policy discouraged
people from applying to the board. However, allowing board
members with expertise to deliberate, the boards could make
fully informed decisions. Any member who declared a conflict
would be recused when there was a vote.
2:18:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES responded to a question from
Representative Rauscher regarding why this bill did not get
farther in previous legislative sessions. She said the primary
pushback in the past came from Kenai River Sports Association.
She posited that a person who has a conflict should be excluded
from the vote but not from the conversation. She pointed out
letters on the subject were provided to the committee, but only
one was in opposition.
2:20:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES addressed several questions posed by
Representative Saddler regarding HB 33's definition of
"supervisor" and "designated ethics supervisor." She specified
who would deal with possible conflict of interest situations,
stating that questions could be referred to the ethics
supervisor for the Board of Game or the Board of Fish who would
determine whether there is an ethics violation or not. The
ruling would then go to the chair and the board.
2:22:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES, in response to several questions from
Representative Coulombe, explained that the issue addressed by
HB 33 was an unforeseen consequence from the initial setting of
board policies. She acknowledged that a board member could
testify as a member of the public, but she emphasized that the
person could not engage in discussions with the board. She
pointed out that board members were chosen for their expertise
and knowledge of the subject but were potentially precluded from
sharing that expertise.
2:26:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES responded to questions from Representative
Saddler by clarifying several sections in HB 33 regarding
conflicts of interest. She reminded the committee that members
of the Board of Fish were appointed because they had relevant
areas of expertise.
2:32:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES answered several questions posed by
Representative Elam and Representative Saddler regarding
conflicts of interest and off the record conversations that have
hypothetically taken place at board meetings.
2:34:51 PM
CO-CHAIR BURKE opened public testimony on HB 33.
2:35:00 PM
RICHIE DAVIS, Member, Seafood Producers Cooperative, testified
in support of HB 33. He described how members of the Board of
Fish were required to recuse themselves from discussions of the
board due to conflicts of interest. He stated that the process
had a stifling effect and discouraged people with knowledge and
experience from becoming board members.
2:38:28 PM
CO-CHAIR BURKE closed public testimony on HB 33.
2:38:33 PM
CO-CHAIR BURKE held over HB 33.