Legislature(2015 - 2016)SENATE FINANCE 532
04/09/2016 10:00 AM Senate FINANCE
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 | |
| SB201 | |
| SB200 | |
| SJR12 | |
| SB8 | |
| SB163 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 201 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 200 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SJR 12 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 163 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 8 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SENATE BILL NO. 8
"An Act relating to the regulation and production of
industrial hemp."
11:00:10 AM
SENATOR JOHNNY ELLIS, SPONSOR, voiced that the bill had
growing support and no known opposition. He contended that
the bill would give Alaskans the freedom to farm industrial
hemp. He asserted that the state should not be hindered by
the federal government in producing industrialized hemp, as
it was not related to marijuana. He felt that the bill
would help out Alaska farmers and take a stand against the
federal government. He offered a brief history of
industrialized hemp in the United States. He dubbed the
bill a "freedom to farm" bill, which would unite lawmakers
in bipartisan support. He revealed that it was not certain
where in the state the product would grow, but insisted
that Alaskan farmers wanted to make the attempt. He shared
that the uses for industrialized hemp were numerous. He
referred to support letters in member packets (copy on
file).
11:04:32 AM
SARAH EVANS, STAFF, SENATOR JOHNNY ELLIS, discussed the
sectional analysis of the bill (copy on file):
Section 1 establishes a license procedure in the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) for production
of industrial hemp, including planting, growing,
harvesting, processing, possessing, selling, or buying
industrial hemp. This section also requires the
Commissioner of DNR to adopt regulations relating to
industrial hemp.
Section 2 creates an affirmative defense to a
prosecution under AS 11.71.030 - 11.71.060 for the
manufacture, delivery, possession, possession with
intent to manufacture or deliver, or display of a
schedule VI controlled substance if the person was
licensed to produce industrial hemp and in compliance
with the term of license.
Section 3 authorizes the Department of Public Safety
to conduct a national criminal history record check
for licensure as an industrial hemp producer in AS
12.62.400.
Section 4 states that a person who is licensed under
sec.1 of the bill to produce industrial hemp is not
required to be licensed as a marijuana establishment
under AS 17.38.100.
11:06:45 AM
Co-Chair MacKinnon queried the difference between the
intent of the bill, and that of the citizens' initiative,
which would require a license for industrial operations
related to cannabis.
Senator Ellis responded that there was an understood
difference between the two crops. The cannabis crop had a
much greater THC level than that of industrial hemp.
11:07:49 AM
Co-Chair MacKinnon OPENED public testimony.
11:08:18 AM
ROB CARTER, DIVISION OF AGRICULTURE (via teleconference),
testified in support of the bill. He clarified that the CS
would not have fiscal impact for the division.
Co-Chair MacKinnon rebutted that the fiscal not had been
for $160,000 the previous day. She whether the industrial
hemp would need to be tested for THC levels.
Mr. Carter explained that as the CS was written, there were
no requirements for the division to provide testing
services.
Co-Chair MacKinnon wondered whether public safety or state
troopers would be able to identify visually the difference
between industrial hemp and marijuana.
Mr. Carter responded in the negative. He believed that the
difference between marijuana and hemp would have to be left
to the good faith of the producer.
11:10:18 AM
RONDA MARCY, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ALASKA HEMP
INDUSTRIES (via teleconference), testified in support of
the bill. She clarified that affirmative defense would
shift the burden of testing onto the field producer. She
relayed that the hemp would be tested numerous times, and
that certified seeds, verified to be less than 3 percent
THC, would be used. She offered an anecdote about
industrialized hemp in Kentucky, and the benefits the plant
had offered the state. She said that her company was ready
to help farmers to produce products that ranged from
insulation and concrete, to fish food. She expressed
excitement about bringing the industry to Alaska.
11:12:40 AM
Senator Bishop asked about the use of hemp in concrete.
Ms. Marcy shared that there was a substance known as
"hempcrete," which had been used to build the Roman
aqueducts. She discussed the high value of hemp insulation.
She explained that the hempcrete had a bit of a "give" to
it, making it optimal for use in buildings in Alaska. She
added that the high insulation factor of hemp would help to
lower energy costs in the state.
11:14:24 AM
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked whether the recent initiative
would legalize the opening hemp retail establishments.
Ms. Marcy replied that she had submitted an application for
a license, but added that hemp sales and marijuana sales
were separate issues. She had been legally advised that
growing hemp was legal, provided the producer could prove
that the product contained less than three percent THC. She
asserted that she would strive to be in compliance with all
regulations. She offered that the nutritional content of
hemp was higher than alfalfa.
11:16:34 AM
DON HART, SELF, WASILLA (via teleconference), testified in
support of the bill. He pointed out that the previous
testifier was a bastion of information related to hemp and
marijuana. He discussed the legalization of industrial hemp
in Canada. He explained that at the present time, hemp was
generating funds for Canada, which he thought would be good
for Alaska. He discussed the hemp seed, which had nine
grams of protein in three tablespoons; higher than salmon.
He believed that industrialized hemp could bolster the
Alaskan economy.
11:19:17 AM
JACK BENNETT, SELF, HOMER (via teleconference), testified
in support of the bill. He discussed sustainable building,
and had worked on building a tiny home model utilizing hemp
products. He discussed heating in rural areas of the state,
and highlighted the importance of energy efficiency and
sustainability that could be provided with green building
materials such as hemp products. He lauded the high
geothermal mass of hempcrete. He discussed the waste
produced with concrete production. He relayed that Mercedes
Benz and BMW used hemp plastics in their car doors. He
expounded on the many useful qualities of industrialized
hemp.
11:23:02 AM
LACEY ESHLEMAN, SELF, WASILLA (via teleconference),
testified in support of the bill. She had an extensive
farming background, and acknowledged that challenges of
farming in Alaska. She thought there would be benefits to
farming hemp. She discussed her personal farming experience
and history. She expressed excitement about the industrial
applications of hemp. She possessed currently unused
farmland and was interested in growing hemp. She thought
industrialized hemp would help to stimulate the economy.
11:25:26 AM
CASEY ESHLEMAN, SELF, WASILLA (via teleconference),
testified in support of the bill. He was interested in
industrialized hemp for the health and industrial benefits
the plant would provide. He shared that agricultural
benefits of the hemp plant included the rejuvenation of
depleted soils. He relayed that, as a contractor, he was
excited to use industrial hemp in his construction. He
encouraged the passage of the legislation.
11:27:21 AM
FRANK TURNEY, SELF, FAIRBANKS (via teleconference),
testified in support of the bill. He shared that he had
been trying to educate his community on the benefits of
industrial hemp, and the difference between it and
smokeable cannabis, for two decades. He mentioned the
Fairbanks Northstar Borough's resolution in support of the
bill. He stated that hemp biomass was the fastest growing
biomass on the planet. He discussed the products that could
be made using hemp. He offered a brief explanation of
cannabis and hemp. He directed the committee's attention to
the website www.hemp.com as a source of information.
11:30:46 AM
Co-Chair MacKinnon CLOSED public testimony.
11:31:04 AM
Vice-Chair Micciche discussed the fiscal note.
Vice-Chair Micciche thought that the zero fiscal note would
be defensible if the cost were shifted to the producer. He
wondered why the sponsor had not considered the shift.
Senator Ellis explained that any hemp production in Alaska
would require the importation of hemp seeds from elsewhere.
He believed that the affirmative defense written into the
bill that related to the producer using less than 3 percent
THC seeds would be enough legal coverage for the farmer and
the state. He said that he would accept any suggestions
that the committee had to offer.
Vice-Chair Micciche thought that the bill could be more
prescriptive.
SB 8 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 8 Public Testimony Packet 1.pdf |
SFIN 4/9/2016 10:00:00 AM |
SB 8 |