Legislature(2015 - 2016)CAPITOL 17
03/08/2016 01:00 PM House TRANSPORTATION
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 | |
| HB319 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 319 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 319-SNOWMOBILE REGISTRATION FEES
1:12:31 PM
CO-CHAIR HUGHES announced that the only order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 319 "An Act relating to registration fees for
snowmobiles and off-highway vehicles."
1:13:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CATHY TILTON, Alaska State Legislature, explained
that HB 319 would increase the two-year snowmobile fee from $10
to $20 and provide an option to pay a six-year fee at a
discounted rate of $50. She indicated that in Alaska's current
fiscal climate, it was refreshing for the proposal to have come
from some of the user groups themselves. She relayed that
snowmobile organizations view the proposed legislation as a
means to improve development and maintenance of snowmobile
trails and promote snowmobile safety. She explained that
current snowmobile fees generate up to $250,000 per year for the
snowmobile trail development program Snowmobile Trail Advisory
Council (SnowTRAC), which is managed by the Department of
Natural Resources (DNR), Division of Parks & Outdoor Recreation.
She stated that user groups want to keep the funds available and
are willing to do their part to ensure the continuation of the
program.
REPRESENTATIVE TILTON related that according to a recent report
prepared by legislative research, there are 22 states with
snowmobile registration fees and, of those, Alaska and Oregon
have the lowest fees. She recounted that prior to working for
the legislature, she was involved in the snowmobile industry,
and she offered that there are different types of user groups,
disciplines, and opinions. She indicated that Kevin Hite,
President of the Alaska State Snowmobile Association (ASSA), and
Dan Mayfield of SnowTRAC would provide testimony in support of
HB 319. She said Ben Ellis from DNR would discuss how the fund
is used and Amy Erickson of the Department of Motor Vehicles
(DMV) would explain the fiscal note and fee collection.
1:15:16 PM
CO-CHAIR FOSTER remarked that it had been a while since he had
purchased a snow machine, but that he did not recollect paying a
registration fee. He inquired whether the fee is included in
the purchase of a snow machine and asked for clarification that
the $10 fee is good for two years.
1:16:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TILTON replied affirmatively and explained that
the fee, as currently in statute, is on a two-year renewal
schedule and generally charged at the point of sale at
dealerships. In response to a follow-up question from Co-Chair
Foster, she indicated that renewals are mailed out every two
years, similar to vehicle or trailer registrations.
1:17:15 PM
CO-CHAIR HUGHES requested that Amy Erickson discuss the
registration renewal process and the response rate for renewal
notifications.
AMY ERICKSON, Director, Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV),
Department of Administration (DOA), said she was uncertain as to
the renewal rate, but offered that of the approximately 39,000
registered snow machines, 25,000 have a 2-year registration,
7,500 have a 4-year registration, and 6,500 have a 6-year
registration.
1:20:27 PM
CO-CHAIR FOSTER inquired whether the renewal notifications are
sent to everyone in rural Alaska. He explained that he owns a
snow machine but doesn't remember receiving a renewal
notification in the past.
1:20:49 PM
MS. ERICKSON responded that it is required that snow machine
owners register their snow machines.
CO-CHAIR FOSTER commented that he was unaware of the requirement
to register and offered that most rural Alaskans are likely
unaware of the requirement.
MS. ERICKSON responded that if a snow machine is not currently
registered to its owner then there is no way for the DMV to send
the owner a renewal notification.
1:21:35 PM
CO-CHAIR HUGHES suggested that a private party sale would likely
not involve the registration fee. She asked whether the
registration is completed at the time of the original purchase
from a dealership.
MS ERICKSON replied that is correct, and she stated that if
dealerships register the snow machine, then the DMV would know
about it, but in the case of a personal sale, the DMV would not
necessarily know about it because there is no certificate of
title.
1:22:09 PM
CO-CHAIR FOSTER recounted that he purchased his snow machine
brand new, hasn't sold it, and it has always been registered in
his name. He stated that he purchased it in 2003, and he
suggested that by now he probably should have received six or
seven renewal notifications by mail, yet he has not. He
explained that he was inquiring because he was trying to figure
out the structure of the renewal requirements and how it could
affect rural Alaskans.
1:22:50 PM
CO-CHAIR HUGHES asked how long the renewal requirements have
been in effect and shared that when she lived in Fort Yukon, her
primary mode of transportation was a snow machine.
MS ERICKSON stated that the statute was effected in 1998.
1:23:38 PM
CHRISTOPHER CLARK, Staff, Representative Cathy Tilton, Alaska
State Legislature, drew members' attention to the documents in
the committee packet listing the number of registered snow
machines in each community throughout the state. He pointed out
that in Co-Chair Foster's town there are only 45 registered
machines, and he suggested that he may not be the only person
not receiving a renewal notice.
CO-CHAIR FOSTER speculated that more than 45 snow machines were
sold in Nome in the last year. He offered that it is likely
that the registration paperwork is handled appropriately by the
dealers, but he estimated that there are 2,000 snow machines in
the region. He asked whether any of the revenue acquired from
registrations had been distributed to rural Alaska, as the
trails referenced thus far were generally in South-Central
Alaska or more urban areas.
1:25:10 PM
BEN ELLIS, Director, Division of Parks & Outdoor Recreation,
Department of Natural Resources (DNR), responded that the
majority of Snowmobile Trails Advisory Council (SnowTRAC) funds,
which are registration fees transferred from DMV to the Division
of Parks & Outdoor Recreation, are distributed primarily to the
urban areas to offset costs for trail grooming. He mentioned
that over the last three years he has encouraged grant
recipients from off of the road system to apply for safety and
education grants for the purpose of trail markers between
villages or similar improvements. Three years ago, DNR received
a request for, and provided a $15,000 grant, to a village but
the program was never executed. He explained that it was a
reimbursable grant: a city, community, or club receives a
project go-ahead, receipts for the project are retained, and
upon project completion the receipts are reimbursed. He stated
that for the next two years DNR focused on getting grants for
signage, education, and emergency response to rural Alaska, but
did not have any applicants. Finally last year, after the money
has been sitting idle for three years, the division rolled it
back into the trail grooming pool. He stated that SnowTRAC is
and was designed as a statewide program, and DNR encourages
safety and education grant applications from locales outside the
urban areas, with little or no response.
1:27:48 PM
CO-CHAIR FOSTER stated that his initial inclination is to
support the registration fee increase from $10 to $20 for people
who would be benefitting from groomed trails, and that perhaps a
Bush exemption would be appropriate, if none of the funds are
benefitting rural Alaska. Trail marking and emergency response,
are very important to people who use snow machines in rural
Alaska, and it may be a matter of improving program awareness to
outlying areas.
1:28:54 PM
CO-CHAIR HUGHES mentioned that there had been several recent
tragic events related to avalanches and asked if any funds are
collected specifically for search and rescue.
1:29:23 PM
MR. ELLIS answered that there were no funds specifically for
search and rescue through the DNR snow machine grant program,
although the agency does provide snow machine ranger service at
Hatcher Pass and other locations. The rangers are all qualified
in CPR and have received training in advanced search and rescue
techniques.
1:30:03 PM
CO-CHAIR HUGHES asked how much is spent on search and rescue
related to snow machine users statewide.
MR. ELLIS deferred response, and offered to provide further
information.
1:30:46 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN sought clarification that the revenue
generated by the snow machine fees is directed to the general
fund and, although there are programs that allocate funds for
purposes such as trails, there is no requirement that an
increase in revenue would be distributed to the snow machine
program.
1:31:29 PM
MR. ELLIS replied that Representative Claman was correct in his
understanding. He explained that this bill would increase snow
machine registration fees, but there is not currently, nor would
there be a nexus between increased fees and funding for the
SnowTRAC program. The money collected by DMV would be slated
for the general fund, and subsequently a request must be
submitted to the governor or the legislature for the Division of
Parks & Outdoor Recreation to have receipt authority for a
certain amount of money. He further explained that in the
fiscal year 2016 (FY16) budget, the Division of Parks & Outdoor
Recreation was slated to receive up to $250,000 in snow machine
registration fees [for SnowTRAC]; however, the division has
never received the full amount of the receipt authority and
generally they receive around $200,000 for the program. He
noted that doubling the fee would not necessarily result in a
doubling of the division's receipt authority for the program.
1:33:06 PM
MR. ELLIS, in response to a question from Co-Chair Hughes,
clarified that unless the allocation is written into statute, it
would be the legislature's decision each year whether or not to
support the amount designated in the governor's budget. In the
instance that it was excluded from the governor's budget, as was
the case the previous year, it would be the legislature's
prerogative whether or not to fund it, and at what level.
1:34:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN asked if receipt authority guarantees that
all fee revenue is earmarked for and passed directly to the
program or if the legislature actually appropriates the funds.
MR. ELLIS stated his understanding that the revenue generated
has never exceeded the amount of the program's receipt
authority. He elaborated that the money is transferred into the
general fund and the receipt authority for the program allows
those funds to be transferred to the division's capital fund
where it is "pigeonholed" for the SnowTRAC program.
MR.CLARK added that all funds are subject to appropriation.
Statute provides authorization, but the legislature is charged
with affecting the appropriation. The fiscal note, available in
the committee packet, stipulates that any revenue collected in
excess of current receipt authority is to remain in the general
fund.
1:36:11 PM
CO-CHAIR HUGHES asked about the price range of snow machine fees
imposed by other states, and whether the primary use is for
trail maintenance.
1:36:37 PM
MR. CLARK stated that 22 states and 5 Canadian provinces have
snowmobile fees. Alaska and Oregon have the lowest fee at $10
biennially, and New York has the highest fees at $100 annually.
He declined to speculate on the primary use of the funds.
1:37:20 PM
CO-CHAIR FOSTER noted that SnowTRAC is statewide program and the
rural communities are eligible to apply for a share of the
funds. He said he would inform rural communities of the
opportunity and asked about the level of effort that has been
put into notifying Bush areas about the program.
1:38:04 PM
MR. ELLIS stated that the snow machine trail coordinator has
conducted outreach to Buckland, Kotzebue, Bethel, and other
areas to encourage submission of grant applications; however,
despite interest, applications have not been submitted. He
stated that the division would be interested in working with Co-
Chair Foster's office to disseminate information about the
program throughout rural communities, noting that trail markers
and safety training could save lives in areas that use snow
machine routes as highways.
CO-CHAIR FOSTER stated his appreciation for the efforts made by
the Division of Parks & Outdoor Recreation. He expressed
excitement about the prospect of adding tripod trail markers,
village by village throughout the state, as there are several
accounts of fatalities resulting from getting lost along snow
machine routes during inclement weather. He offered that perhaps
there could be an amendment regarding reporting requirements,
specifically listing the annual distribution amounts for each
community.
1:40:27 PM
MR. ELLIS stated that distribution information is available on
the division's webpage. The information available includes:
allocation amounts, communities receiving allocations, and use
of the allocation. He explained that the division distributes a
press release each year.
MR. ELLIS further explained that the SnowTRAC Advisory Board
reviews the grant requests, which are thoroughly discussed and
vetted, prior to making a recommendation to the director's
office. Mr. Ellis said he usually approves the recommendations.
The only exception in recent history was that no communities
applied for the rural safety program funds, dollars which were
subsequently rolled back into the snow machine grant program; an
action the division would likely take again in the future. He
noted that it is important to get the message out that the funds
are available, and the division would continue to do its part.
1:41:52 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN inquired about other states' fees and what
is the average fee for snow machine registration.
1:42:12 PM
MR. CLARK replied: Maine has a $46 annual fee and New York has
a $100 resident and non-resident fee that is reduced to $45 for
members of the New York Snow Mobile Association; Minnesota has a
$78.50 three-year "trail use" fee; Montana has a one-time fee of
$60.50 and a multi-year rental fee schedule; Nebraska has a $200
manufacturer registration fee; and Washington has a $50 annual
fee for snow machines less than 30 years old and $12 for those
30-plus years old. He added that Newfoundland has a $23
Canadian dollar (CAD) annual fee and Quebec has a $92.90 (CAD)
annual fee. He did not offer an average rate.
1:43:25 PM
CO-CHAIR HUGHES asked how the nine members of the SnowTRAC
Advisory Board are selected and whether rural residents are
represented/seated on the committee.
1:43:52 PM
MR. ELLIS replied that the SnowTRAC Advisory Board is appointed
by the director of the Division of Parks & Outdoor Recreation.
Two of the advisory boards in the division are appointed by the
governor, one is appointed by the commissioner, and the other
seventeen advisory boards are appointed by the director. He
recalled that a Nome resident was seated, but resigned; thus, no
rural resident is currently seated.
CO-CHAIR HUGHES inquired whether there were any regulations
dictating the geographic composition of the SnowTRAC Advisory
Board.
MR. ELLIS replied that the SnowTRAC Advisory Board has bylaws
and operating procedures that discuss diversity on the board,
but there is no statutory requirement. He said the board was
established by the former director of Parks & Outdoor
Recreation, in 1998, in conjunction with the implementation of
the snow machine registration fee.
1:46:17 PM
DAN MAYFIELD, Chair, SnowTRAC Advisory Board, stated that HB 319
was a simple bill that could have a great impact on trail
safety, education, access, development, grooming, signage, and
the economies of communities that depend on winter recreational
visitation from snow machine and other trail users. He said the
aforementioned goals are the subject of the work of SnowTRAC.
He informed the committee that SnowTRAC is the only revenue-
neutral, self-funded, user-based program in Alaska; all funding
is derived from the registration of snow machines. He explained
that available funding has fallen short of the amount necessary
to sustain the goals of the program and SnowTRAC is currently
operating in survival mode. The organization has set aside
goals beyond trail grooming, in hopes that funding opportunities
may be available in the future. He recounted that over the last
three years, funding requests have ranged from a high of
$373,551 to a low of $360,831, while available funding has
ranged from $204,000 to $278,000, far less than necessary to
meet demand.
MR. MAYFIELD offered that HB 319 would restore the
sustainability of the SnowTRAC program and allow it to meet the
demands of trail users at little or no cost to the state. He
posed the question to the committee: "What better investment can
you make in tough financial times than to let users adequately
fund their own program?" He acknowledged that all legislation
receives some opposition; however, it's worth considering that
over 85 percent of all registered users come from communities
that either directly benefit from, or have the potential to
benefit from, the funding of services that the bill would
provide. He clarified that the other 15 percent of users are
important and SnowTRAC will continue to make strong overtures to
inform rural Alaskans of available funding. He emphasized that
SnowTRAC is a statewide program, and it's something that they
want to continue on a statewide basis.
MR. MAYFIELD requested that the committee consider increasing
receipt authority for the SnowTRAC program. He reiterated that
the SnowTRAC is an inclusive group that celebrates the successes
of all snow machine advocates and, accordingly, rural Alaska is
very important to the program. He related that one of
SnowTRAC's original plans was to develop a statewide trail
network, a vision that he said it still embraces. He surmised
that it would ultimately come to fruition, but that it would
take a significant amount of time to build. He disclosed that
he is the president of Big Lake Trails, a 501(c)(3)
organization; President of the Big Lake Chamber of Commerce; and
an assembly member in the Matanuska-Susitna (Mat-Su) Valley.
1:51:17 PM
CO-CHAIR FOSTER stated that he was inclined to agree with the
need to increase receipt authority for the program. He asked
whether anyone on the board could be considered semi-rural, for
example from just outside of Mat-Su.
1:52:15 PM
MR. MAYFIELD replied that there is representation from
Fairbanks, Anchorage, Mat-Su, Juneau, and the Kenai Peninsula.
He noted that although there is no representation from Western
Alaska, it is not for lack of effort.
1:53:21 PM
KEVIN HITE, President, Alaska State Snowmobile Association
(ASSA), recounted that he had the privilege of being a part of
the group that originally developed SnowTRAC and has watched it
progress from its nascent stages to its current form. He noted
that the program was designed with a focus on safety and
infrastructure in the state and offered that a significant
amount of work has been invested by different groups that have
been a part of the SnowTRAC Advisory Board. He recalled that
the board has, in the past, filled seats with residents from
Kotzebue and other areas of Western Alaska.
MR. HITE explained that inflation has eaten away at the
available funding and, as a result, the program has transitioned
away from some of its original intent, which was heavily
weighted toward safety, including avalanche, backcountry travel,
and travel between villages. He explained that SnowTRAC has
evolved into more of a grooming program, and he speculated that
although it was not part of the program's original intent, it
has likely done more good than any previous program initiative.
He related that snow machine users are proud that the program is
self-funded. He acknowledged that there is a communication
issue with people living outside the dealership areas; it has
become much more difficult to distribute the funds in a
meaningful way.
MR. HITE testified in support of HB 319, and related that ASSA
views the increase in registration fees as the first step toward
statewide trail infrastructure; one of the original intents of
SnowTRAC. He stated that the association estimated that
providing a good, comprehensive statewide safety program would
cost approximately $300,000 to $320,000 per year. He asserted
that raising the registration fee and increasing the receipt
authority for the program is a good first step toward
accomplishing the goal. He stated that ASSA is very focused on
revitalizing SnowTRAC with some new funding. He attested that
SnowTRAC is doing a terrific job with a small amount of funding,
which is being spread very thin, and he acknowledged that some
areas are not getting the money they should. He said a lot of
work goes into the programs, and many of the trail groomers have
been completing the work on their own time and money. He
mentioned funding obstacles and said that in order to change the
situation, the proposed fee increase is an absolute necessity.
MR. HITE clarified that in addition to registration fees, New
York and other New England States, impose a trail program
sticker fee for individual counties. In some states, it is
possible to pay an annual cost in registration fees of anywhere
from $250-$450 per year, when using the interconnected trail
systems. He explained that the funds come directly from the
user groups and the applicable agencies work together to
collectively develop statewide programs. He stated that
Alaska's snow machine organizations intend to mimic these models
for future development efforts. He noted that as a result of
fee systems, some states have budgets of $2-$3 million for snow
machine programs. He suggested that Alaska has work to do, not
just on infrastructure, but also on finding ways to fund the
infrastructure without putting any additional financial weight
on the state. He indicated that Alaskan snow machine users have
always stepped forward to do their part and enjoyed a good
relationship with DNR and DMV. He said there has never been an
instance where the DMV collected money that it didn't direct
back into the program and, if anything, the agency has given
more to SnowTRAC over the years than it has received in fees.
He suggested that although a fee increase is a small first step,
it is imperative.
2:00:29 PM
CO-CHAIR HUGHES opened public testimony on HB 319.
2:01:30 PM
JAMES SQUYRES stated opposition to HB 319, and voiced
disagreement with claims in the sponsor's statement that the
bill "enjoys support from users who are willing to pay more for
a service they need and enjoy." He adamantly stated that he is
not willing to pay. The proposed legislation is a revenue
raising measure under which the fee would increase by 100
percent, and he suggested it was a distraction from the
legislative priority of reducing the budget. He pointed out
that the Republican Party platform calls for a limited size and
scope of government.
MR. SQUYRES stated that the issue of snow machine fees should be
examined in its totality. He advised that many Alaskans live in
remote areas and half the state is unorganized. He pointed out
that the sponsor and co-sponsor come from the more organized and
urbanized areas of the state. He mentioned that he had run his
snow machine twice that day, once to bring in seasoned wood to
replenish his cabin and once to haul green wood to split and
stack for future use. He explained that where he lives, snow
machines are used as a tool; there are no groomed trails. If
residents want a groomed trail for cross-country skiing, they
tow a weighed-down section of chain link fence behind their snow
machines; they do it on their own. He related that he was not
aware of anyone in his area that has registered his/her snow
machine. He offered that he was sympathetic to part of Co-Chair
Foster's previous statement, as registration of snow machines is
almost entirely ignored in rural Alaska. He explained that
people are either unaware that there is a requirement to
register their snow machines or choose not to comply with the
requirement, as the revenue from the fees provide no service to
rural Alaska. He offered that no state program would ever groom
a trail near his home, as his nearest neighbor is six miles
away. He pointed out that there are five Alaska State Troopers
assigned to an area that covers thousands of square miles;
therefore, there is very little enforcement.
[Mr. Squyres' testimony ended at this point due to technical
difficulties.]
2:05:35 PM
SCOTT LAPIENE stated support for HB 319, and said that he is
currently on the board of the longest standing multi-modal trail
organization in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough; the organization
has been in place for 27 years. He related that he served on
the SnowTRAC Advisory Board twice, once in 1999 as an appointee
of the governor and a second time under director Ben Ellis. He
stated his support of "pay to play," the principle that people
who enjoy outdoor recreation should contribute to the
maintenance of that infrastructure and the fees paid should be
returned to the user community. He offered that if the
registration fee was increased, then the legislature would also
need to increase receipt authority for the SnowTRAC program.
The development of winter recreation in Alaska is generations
behind the Lower 48, he opined, and reported that during his 20-
plus years of working on trails, he has had several
opportunities to study and discuss other states' systems and
modes of funding. Regarding the previously expressed concern
about rural areas, he recalled that in the 1990s the trail board
had difficulty getting rural communities to participate and
apply for grant money. He offered that the grant process is
more difficult now, as grant applicants must be incorporated,
non-profit organizations, government bodies, or native
corporations. He explained that the "hurdle is high," and it
is difficult even for established organizations to meet. He
explained that past attempts to engage the rural communities
have been thwarted by the aforementioned difficulties.
MR. LAPIENE suggested that there are a couple of options to
address the issue. He said the law could be changed, but held
that this would not be preferable because he would like all
citizens to be treated equally. He opined that it is
unrealistic to think registration fees would ever be enforced in
the Bush, as there is no enforcement of motor vehicle
registration in rural areas, and he recounted having seen motor
vehicles with out-of-state plates and registrations that are 10-
years old. Nevertheless, he said he believes rural communities
should have the opportunity to participate in attracting money
to improve their systems. He mentioned that another option
would be to leverage organizations like Iron Dog, Inc. and the
Iditarod Trail Committee, Inc. to sponsor grants and locate
workers to ensure a more equitable distribution of funds
throughout the state. He said the DMV database also needs
improvements, as it is currently very difficult, if not
impossible, to determine how many snow machine registrations are
renewals and how many are made at the point of sale.
MR. LAPIENNE mentioned as an aside that snowmobile registration
existed long before SnowTRAC was enacted in 1998, which is also
when point-of-sale registration was added to Alaska statute. He
stated that it would be valuable to track information regarding
the source of the funds, whether from point-of-sale
registrations or renewals, because it would indicate the level
of continued voluntary participation. He stated that he has one
significant concern with the proposed legislation. In its
current form, the bill strikes the word "snowmobile" from AS
28.10.421(d)(7) and leaves only "off-highway vehicle" in its
place. He informed the committee that ATVs, off-road jeeps, and
similar vehicles are akin to snowmobiles in that although there
are point-of-sale registrations, there is no enforcement. He
stated his belief that there should be a summer equivalent to
SnowTRAC for off-road motorized recreation, and a compulsory
point-of-sale registration for off-highway vehicles is the
mechanism that would allow that to occur.
2:12:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN asked whether Mr. Lapiene was suggesting
that the off-highway vehicle fee should also be raised to $20.
2:13:02 PM
MR. LAPIENE replied no, not until the legislature is willing to
establish an off-highway vehicle grant program similar to
SnowTRAC.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN requested clarification that Mr. Lapiene's
exception with the removal of the aforementioned language is
that it would highlight the lack of enforcement related to other
off-road vehicle fees and that Mr. Lapiene would prefer that
discussion to be delayed for now.
MR. LAPIENE replied, "That's correct."
CO-CHAIR HUGHES asked whether the $10 fee for off-highway
vehicle registration is levied at the point-of-sale.
MR. LAPIENE replied that there is no compulsory point-of-sale
registration for off-highway vehicles, and estimated that 1-2
percent of owners voluntarily register their off-highway
vehicles.
CO-CHAIR FOSTER asked whether tribes are also eligible to apply
for grants. He noted that tribes are the organizations most
likely to get involved in trail marking in his district.
MR. LAPIENE deferred.
MR. ELLIS stated that tribes do fall into the category of
organizations that are able to apply for the grant, as do non-
profits, cities, municipalities, and boroughs.
2:16:22 PM
MR. SQUYRES suggested that there is a large amount of non-
compliance surrounding the registration requirement in rural
Alaska. There is a nullification for participation in a system
such as [SnowTRAC] when the money is not reinvested in rural
parts of the state. He pointed out that most of the people on
the board of SnowTRAC reside, and the revenue is being spent, in
urban areas. He questioned why people in rural areas would want
to participate when they already cut and groom their own trails.
He restated that he doesn't know anyone whose snow machine is
registered and that there are only 5 troopers for thousands of
square miles. He requested that, since the topic has been
brought before the legislature, he would like members to take
the opportunity to repeal the section of statute entirely and
reduce the size of government. He suggested that if snow
machine program funding is an issue in organized areas, it
should be specifically dealt with in those locales. He posited
that if Representative Foster were to secure SnowTRAC funding
for his constituents, the money would be tied to a requirement
for registration compliance, which residents may not appreciate.
MR. SQUYRES voiced frustration with the comparisons being drawn
between Alaska and other states; he said Alaska is unique. He
opined that Alaska should not be modeling its programs based on
other states, as it would result in a larger government, and
emphasized that the legislature should not be increasing
financial burdens on Alaskans or growing the size of government
during a financial crisis. Rural Alaska is "under attack" by
the proposal to restructure the permanent fund. He restated his
opposition to the bill and urged committee members to repeal the
pertaining statute and get Alaska back to being "the Last
Frontier."
CO-CHAIR HUGHES asked Mr. Squyres how the state should cover the
cost of search and rescue operations conducted in rural Alaska.
MR. SQUYRES replied that there is a responsibility to be fully
prepared that rests on the shoulders of the individual living in
or accessing remote areas. He recounted that the previous fall
he was several miles away from any help and his motorcycle
landed on his ankle. He was injured and it was difficult for
him to get out. He stated that he had taken the initiative to
share his plans with his wife and his neighbor, thus, had he not
been able to get out on his own, he had people prepared to help.
He stated that anyone residing in a remote area has a
responsibility to behave like the previous generations have,
which is to be prepared. He said, "If you are out in bear
country, you carry a sidearm; you carry a means to start a fire;
you do what you need to do to." He offered that in his
experience, many of the instances that require a rescue did not
need to occur in the first place. He acknowledged that
education is important, but suggested that it should come from
parents and peers, rather than the government.
2:21:48 PM
CO-CHAIR HUGHES posed a scenario where all of the precautionary
actions taken by Mr. Squyres had failed and the state still had
to use resources to provide search and rescue. She asked how
those costs should be covered.
MR. SQUYRES responded that there are consequences of making the
decision to lead an alternative lifestyle; it may come to a grim
end. He suggested that there are many people in rural areas who
would rather "live life" than depend on government to come to
their rescue. He said with five Alaska State Troopers for
thousands of square miles, assistance comes after the fact. He
maintained that it is the individual's responsibility to know
what he/she is getting into. He offered an anecdote regarding
an acquaintance who runs 125 miles of trap line by himself, and
has for many years, and suggested that rural residents should
aspire to a similar level of self-reliance, take the wilderness
seriously, and "do what they need to do." He suggested that it
is absurd that money is being spent on grooming in the more
urbanized areas. He offered that there is a natural balance
taking place, wherein people in the urban areas are paying for
grooming and people in rural areas are nullifying [the
registration system]. Mr. Squyres recounted Representative
Foster's statement that he had never received a registration
renewal notice and didn't know anyone who had. He held that the
effect of the natural balance is to turn honest Alaskan citizens
into outlaws or bandits as a result of their noncompliance. He
indicated that the reason that limited government is a platform
plank for the Republican Party is because they appreciate self-
reliance and the responsibility of individuals.
[HB 319 was held over.]