Legislature(2013 - 2014)CAPITOL 106
03/28/2013 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SJR10 | |
| HCR3 | |
| HB59 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HCR 3 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SJR 10 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 59 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HCR 3-JOINT COMMITTEE ON FEDERAL OVERREACH
8:36:02 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 3, Establishing the Joint
Committee on Federal Overreach.
The committee took an at-ease from 8:36 a.m. to 8:38 a.m.
8:38:27 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HCR 3, Version 28-LS0440\N, Gardner, 3/27/13
as a work draft. There being no objection, Version N was before
the committee.
8:38:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT, as sponsor, introduced HCR 3, Version N.
She explained that she amended the original resolution after
discussions with the administration, organizations, and members.
She characterized it as a clearinghouse so the legislature can
decide which issues to focus on and can communicate in a
streamlined fashion with all legislators when federal action is
being taken on Alaska's land. She said the legislature can
decide whether to encourage the attorney general to take legal
action or start a letter writing campaign, which sometimes is
effective.
8:40:13 AM
VASILIOS GIALOPSOS, Staff, Representative Charisse Millett,
Alaska State Legislature, presented HCR 3 on behalf of
Representative Millett, sponsor. He referred to a list of
changes to HCR 3 incorporated into Version N, as per the handout
in members' packets, which were:
A new "WHEREAS" clause at:
a. Page 1, line 8;
b. Page 2, line 13;
c. Page 2, line 19;
d. Page 2, line 25;
e. Page 2, line 28;
f. Page 2, line 31;
g. Page 3, line 3;
h. Page 3, line 5;
i. Page 3, line 12;
MR. GIALOPSOS said the language aligns with presentations made
by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) earlier in the
legislative session with respect to federal overreach, relating
not only to R.S. 2477s, but also to the state compact. He
explained that these changes give the resolution more
substantive language that pertains to access, rights-of-way, and
easements that affect residents of this state at the local level
and at the statewide level. He referred to concerns members
raised earlier with respect to the deluge of information and how
to vet exigent concerns and legitimate concerns. The sponsor,
in conjunction with the governor's office, decided what is
pressing about R.S. 2477, with respect to federal overreach, is
that the sources of knowledge are dying out. He explained that
in order to validate the claims, individuals must be able to
verify they used specific trails for subsistence or commercial
use predating statehood. However, the state does not have the
biological advantage at this point so it must use technological
advantages. Therefore to be able to form a cohesive
clearinghouse at a time when state resources need to be
consolidated is important from an internal component. Still,
the second part of the "whereas" clause, is that it is a stated
policy under the current administration that the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) will contest "every" R.S. 2477 application as
an institutional policy. He clarified that this is not a
judgment call on whether it is a valid position on the part of
the administration, but is simply a statement of fact. He said
whereas previous administrations had more of a collaborative
working environment between states with R.S. 2477 applications
and the BLM, "this particular" [administration] is taking a
harder stance. Thus, he emphasized the importance of the need
to "incorporate this into a body" that can take action now.
8:44:14 AM
MR. GIALOPSOS referred additional changes were to the "RESOLVED"
clause. New clauses were added, as follows:
a. Page 3, line 26;
b. Page 3, line 31;
c. Page 4, line 4;
d. Page 4, line 11;
e. Page 4, line 14;
f. Page 4, line 19;
MR. GIALOPSOS said two factors were used. First, language was
utilized from HB 83, which recognizes that the legislative and
administrative branches of state government need to have ways to
share information in a direct way that doesn't impede the
process. He emphasized the importance to hear from all parties
and receive all perspectives to help ensure that there are not
any unintended consequences. This language was meant to ensure
that a committee was not overreaching, but at same time using
all the resources at its disposal and institutional capacity
available to do so. Finally, the language addresses the need
for a forum that the public can participate in, which was a
concern raised by Representative Kreiss-Tomkins at the last
hearing on the resource. He characterized this as being a means
by which residents of, for example, Hoonah, Tok, or Kotzebue,
can directly impact the process of how an R.S. 2477 right-of-way
village access is determined. This could provide a good balance
between the various stakeholders since they want their local
input valued while maintaining the balance between the national
and state level. Mr. Gialopsos relayed that after collaborating
with the governor's office and the committee, the sponsor
believes the changes have substantially improved HCR 3.
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT said she has no ownership on this but
would like it to be the best it can be.
8:48:10 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said he is very excited about the
resolution. He stated the reason he would like to offer an
amendment is to acknowledged the number of people who are
working on this issue in the administration and the private
sector, for example, the Alaska Outdoor Council, who is
concerned about subsistence issues; or the Alaska Health
Commission, which has been working on the effects of the
Affordable Care Act (ACA). He turned to the "be it resolved"
section, which asks the governor to put together a working group
to act as a clearinghouse.
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT said she supports Conceptual Amendment 1.
8:50:46 AM
CHAIR LYNN, after first determining no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on HCR 3.
8:51:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1,
labeled 28-LS0440\U.N, Keller, 03/18/2013, which read [original
punctuation provided, with handwritten changes]:
Whereas, the legislature recognizes the numerous
private sector Alaskans who are being forced to
respond to federal overreach in the context of
business, industry, subsistence, and recreation; and
Whereas, the legislature recognizes the various public
sector entities engaged in responding to federal
overreach, including but not limited to; CACFA, PAAD,
and the ANILCA team in DNR, litigators in the
Department of Law, the Alaska Health Commission in
HSS, and
Page 3, Line 10 insert
(1) request the Governor to use existing resources to
form a working group to formulate recommendations for
the makeup, role, name, and organizational location of
a permanent State sovereignty preservation authority
to increase the effectiveness of the numerous semi-
independent efforts, to coordinate with the
legislature, to enhance information exchange and
collaborative responses to federal overreach. This
working group should consist of leaders in the before-
mentioned private and public sectors already engaged,
two legislators appointed by the speaker of the House
and the President of the Senate. This working group
should be tasked with providing recommendations that
can be implemented in the next gubernatorial budget
proposal for consideration in the 2014 legislative
session.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER explained that the handwritten change to
Conceptual Amendment 1 was in the label: "U.A" was crossed out
and replaced with "U.N" to align the proposed amendment with
Version N. He further noted that he had used acronyms within
Conceptual Amendment 1, and said he expected the Legislative
Legal and Research Services drafters to clean up the language.
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON objected for the purpose of discussion.
He noted that Conceptual Amendment 1 proposes language to be
inserted at page 3, line 10, of a previous version of HCR 3, and
he asked where the language would be inserted in HCR 3.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER answered that he was unsure of where the
bill drafter would insert the language.
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON asked whether the intent is to have the
governor form a working group to take the place of the proposed
legislative Joint Committee on Access and Federal Overreach.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER answered no. He said HCR 3 proposes the
formation of a standing committee and also requests that the
governor respond with an administrative clearinghouse. He
clarified that the two entities would not be in competition.
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON surmised that the two legislators
appointed to the working group proposed under Conceptual
Amendment 1 would likely serve on the proposed Joint Committee
on Access and Federal Overreach.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER replied that is not a preconceived plan.
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON asked how the governor's working group
and the joint committee would effectively communicate if there
were no shared members.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER explained that he didn't spell that out
because he presumed the normal action between the legislature
and the executive branch, wherein the legislature would make
rules and the administration would create an office with
regulations [related to those rules].
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON encouraged an amendment to Conceptual
Amendment 1 to insist that the working group legislators also
serve on the proposed Joint Committee on Access and Federal
Overreach. He expressed concern that the legislature has no
ability to predict the future. He cautioned against assuming
effective communication would occur, because the past has shown
that without direct communication, the legislature or the
administration can sometimes "pencil whip procedures without
true evaluation." He said he hopes the members on the proposed
Joint Committee on Access and Federal Overreach would
passionately serve as watchdogs, whereas someone on the
executive side may act without any passion, depending on who may
be serving as the governor at the time.
8:56:53 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER remarked that he does not resist the
proposed amendment to Conceptual Amendment 1. He said that as
chair of the Citizens Advisory Council of Federal Areas (CACFA),
he has worked closely with the administration and know "they
have passion." He said that his intent by including members of
both houses was to ensure that the passion and engagement is
present since he is interested in a collaborative effort.
Notwithstanding that, he said he understood Representative
Isaacson's intent.
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT offered her belief that the legislature
cannot tell the governor how to make up a committee, but could
just ask that he/she do so. She suggested that the committee be
as broad as possible. She further suggested the resolution's
vague language would allow the governor the latitude to decide
who would serve in this high-level working group; perhaps the
governor would decide the members should be the Speaker of the
House and the Senate President. She surmised that legislators
are pretty passionate about federal overreach, but said she
feels uncomfortable "spelling out" who the governor's selections
would be.
8:59:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said it occurred to him that he did not
spell out the purpose of the working group, which would be to
get ahead of the budget cycle for next fall. He expressed his
hope that this working group would make recommendations to the
governor with respect to the administration's efforts, and that
any legislation required would be put in place by 2014, which
would make this a very short-lived, interim working group. He
advised members that he has worked with the following people on
HCR 3: Randy Ruaro, the deputy chief of staff for Governor Sean
Parnell; the executive director of CACFA; and Ed Fogels of the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
9:01:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON said that he would no longer consider an
Amendment to Conceptual Amendment 1. He said he understood how
the components of the working group would work with respect to
the next budget cycle.
9:02:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES said she liked the bill and Conceptual
Amendment 1. She asked for clarification on CACFA and whether
it would be appropriate for the working group to provide
recommendations to the proposed Joint Committee on Access and
Federal Overreach.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said he had been thinking that the
standing committee would not exist unless the proposed
concurrent resolution passes. He remarked that the possibility
certainly exists that the resolution may have an impact even if
it doesn't pass, simply because it will raise the concepts. He
stated his assumption, with respect to HCR 3, that the
information would go through the normal budget process and the
communications would be worked out.
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES responded that other than for a fiscal
matter, about which the two groups would communicate in the
normal process, she was unsure how the entities would
communicate.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER, in response to Representative Hughes,
again referred to the Citizens Advisory Commission on Federal
Areas (CACFA). He explained that CACFA meets three or four
times a year and tracks various federal issues and entities in
the state. He mentioned that 60 percent of Alaska's land is
federal land. Additionally, what CACFA does is work to ensure
that Alaska's rights are adhered to, in part, by checking the
federal register and monitor instances in which Alaska's rights
of access are imposed upon. He said it happens regularly,
sometimes blatantly. Furthermore, CACFA follows the attorney
general's actions on federal legislation. Representative Keller
opined that there is more to be done than can be performed by
one group. He said the executive director estimated 14,000
pages of compendiums. He remarked that many personnel are
acting in good faith, but they simply don't know how unique
Alaska's rights are. For example, Alaska has hunting and
fishing rights on federal land granted under Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA).
9:10:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES surmised that Alaska is more assertive
than many other states. She asked whether Alaska is "ahead of
the game" or if there is something else it could be doing.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER answered that Utah ahead of Alaska,
because it is doing wonderful things, especially in the area of
R.S. 2477s. He said Alaska is strong, since many people are
concerned, but it lacks the collective effort, which he
explained is why he brought forth HCR 3.
9:11:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT pointed out that some of the
organizations previously mentioned have been collaborating on
not only what will help Alaska, but also what will help other
states get what they need. She reported that the U.S. Senate
"Western States Coalition" and the [U.S.] House Energy Action
Team also assist, but said the resolution would provide an
entity that can recognize those groups, which could give the
legislature the power to get information. She envisioned the
proposed joint committee would meet regularly to conduct
overviews on many topics, including land use issues.
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON removed his objection to Conceptual
Amendment 1.
9:13:20 AM
CHAIR LYNN, after first determining no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on HCR 3.
CHAIR LYNN announced that Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted.
9:13:50 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to report the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HCR 3, Version 29-LS0440\N, Gardner,
3/27/13, as amended, out of committee. There being no
objection, CSHCR 3(STA) was reported out of the House State
Affairs Standing Committee.