Legislature(2019 - 2020)BARNES 124
04/29/2019 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 | |
| SB43 | |
| HB138 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 43 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 138 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 43-EXTEND BIG GAME BOARD; OUTFITTER LICENSE
1:01:27 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR announced the first order of business would be CS
FOR SENATE BILL NO. 43(FIN), "An Act extending the termination
date of the Big Game Commercial Services Board; relating to a
person's eligibility to hold a registered guide-outfitter
license, master guide- outfitter license, class-A assistant
guide license, assistant guide license, or transporter license;
and providing for an effective date."
1:01:49 PM
SENATOR DAVID WILSON, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor, stated
CSSB 43(FIN) would extend the termination of the Big Game
Commercial Services Board until 6/30/24, which is one year less
than the six years recommended by the Division of Legislative
Audit. He explained that the board consists of two licensed
registered guide-outfitters, two licensed transporters, two
private landholders, two public members, and one member from the
Board of Game.
SENATOR WILSON related that an audit of the board conducted by
the Division of Legislative Audit made three recommendations to
improve the board: 1) the Division of Corporations, Business
and Professional Licensing director should improve the
management oversight to procedures to ensure that documentation
is obtained, reviewed, and retained to support licensure; 2) the
division's chief investigator should increase oversight to
improve the timeliness of investigations; and 3) the Office of
the Governor, Boards and Commissions director should work with
the board to identify potential applications in a timely manner.
In regard to the timeliness of investigations, he pointed out
that multiple agencies are involved and only 37 cases are open
as of today, with of those 13 being Alaska Wildlife Trooper
cases over which [the division] has no control for the
timeliness. He stated it was recognized that more supervisory
rapport is needed for more quality control.
SENATOR WILSON said the division has responded to the audit's
recommendations by working to add supervisors in addition to the
examiner, as well as working to improve training procedures.
There is a new chief investigator, he continued, and two new
senior investigators have been added to provide more quality
assurance. He stated the division has heard the message from
Legislative Audit and is working to hold investigations
accountable for the paperwork.
1:04:46 PM
SENATOR WILSON provided a sectional analysis of CSSB 43(FIN).
He said: Section 1, page 1, lines 6-8, would amend AS
08.03.010(c)(9) to extend the Big Game Commercial Services Board
for five years, through June 30, 2024. Section 2, page 1, line
9, through page 2, line 16, would amend AS 08.54.605(a) to allow
the board to immediately suspend a license for violations that
already disqualify a person from receiving or renewing that
license. Section 3, page 2, line 17, through page 3, line 7,
would amend AS 08.54.610(b) to increase the minimum
qualifications for a master guide-outfitter license, including a
requirement to have a clean record for 15 years. Section 4,
page 3, lines 8-17, would add new subsections to AS 08.54.710,
which allow the board to revoke a master guide-outfitter license
if a person's privileges are revoked or if the person is
convicted of a violation. A person whose master guide-outfitter
license is revoked under this provision can still be issued a
registered guide-outfitter license if qualified. Section 5,
page 3, line 18, would add an immediate effective date.
SENATOR WILSON stressed the board plays an important role in
managing the activities of commercial game hunters in the
interest of Alaska's wildlife resources. He reminded members
that the bill addresses whether the board should continue its
work and does not address the function of the board.
1:06:40 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR noted Section 1 is clearly the extension. She
observed Section 2 would add the word "hold" to that section of
statute. She asked whether she is correct in understanding that
Section 2 isn't about the initial receiving or renewing of a
license, but is about putting a restriction on someone who
already holds a license if the person has the problems
identified in [paragraphs (1) and (2) of Section 2].
SENATOR WILSON replied yes.
1:07:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN inquired whether the bill addresses "real
life" situations in which the board was unable to act or the
audit found the board did not act appropriately, or whether the
bill addresses situations that are speculative in nature.
SENATOR WILSON replied that during a hearing before the Senate
Finance Committee it was learned that [a license holder] can
continue to provide guiding services for over two and one-half
years after being found guilty of a violation while going
through the appeals process after a guilty verdict. Thus, he
said, the board requested the authority to put a person's
license on hold during adjudication of the appeals process.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN offered her understanding that there were
real life examples that caused the board to ask for additional
tools to "hold" a license and this provision would do that.
SENATOR WILSON responded yes, there have been several examples.
1:09:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS brought attention to page 2, line 29,
through page 3, line 1, of the bill, which state:
(3) submits a list to the department of at least 45
[25] clients for whom the person has personally
provided guiding or outfitting services and the person
receives a favorable evaluation from 30 [10] of the
clients selected from the list by the department;
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS requested clarification as to what
constitutes a "favorable evaluation."
SENATOR WILSON deferred to [Mr. Henry Tiffany] for an answer.
1:09:58 PM
HENRY TIFFANY IV, Chair, Registered Guide-Outfitter, Big Game
Commercial Services Board (BGCSB), Division of Corporations,
Business and Professional Licensing, Department of Commerce,
Community & Economic Development (DCCED), deferred to Ms. Sara
Chambers since it is the division that reviews the license
applications. He advised that the board extensively deliberated
on the proposed changes within the bill and is in unanimous
support of the proposed increase in the number of favorable
recommendations. He further advised that the proposed increase
in favorable recommendations would be a more standard number.
He also noted that the proposed language in paragraph (4) of 15
years is also standard in other professions.
1:12:20 PM
SARA CHAMBERS, Director, Division of Corporations, Business, and
Professional Licensing, Department of Commerce, Community &
Economic Development (DCCED), explained that the vetting process
for a registered guide who is applying for a master guide-
outfitter license, includes providing a list of clients who are
then contacted by the division for information pertinent to the
applicant's proficiency in the field that would relate to the
scope of what a guide-outfitter is allowed to do. She said
registered and master guides are in charge of people's lives and
thus must be in compliance with all applicable laws and
regulations for hunting as well as land use, and the division
asks clients to review their experience with that guide. She
stated the board had an opportunity to review CSSB 43(FIN) and
supports [the changes proposed in paragraph (3)].
1:14:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS inquired as to a time period over which
those 45 clients would have had to work with that guide.
MS. CHAMBERS answered she is unsure of whether there is a window
of time. She said she and Mr. Tiffany go back and forth because
she has the administrative part and he has the qualitative part.
She said her understanding through working on this bill is that
the timeframe would be during the life of the applicant's
registered guide-outfitter license, so it would be a client who
had contracted with the guide. She explained that the structure
of guiding goes from an assistant guide to class-A assistant
guide to a registered guide to a master guide-outfitter. The
dividing line between the two assistants and the two contracting
guides, she continued, is that [the contracting guide] is the
boss and actually signs the contract with the client. So, she
added, it would need to be within the life of the applicant's
registered guide activity, but she is unsure if there is a
window of time unless otherwise stated in the bill.
1:15:49 PM
MR. TIFFANY clarified that for a client to qualify as a name
submitted for a master guide-outfitter application, the
registered guide (at that point) doesn't necessarily have to
have been a contracting guide for that individual client. He
explained that there are many guides within Alaska, and some
don't ever contract hunts; they work for other registered or
master guides, but they may still choose to obtain a master
guide license and it isn't wanted to hinder that. If the
applicant has physically guided a client in the field, he
continued, then that client's name would be applicable for the
applicant to put on his/her application towards a master guide
license. He offered his belief that there isn't any stipulation
that it needs to be within a certain time limit of a couple of
years because the number of clients divided by the number of
years proposed comes to three clients a year, and most of the
guides that either contract or guide clients for someone else
have about three or more clients per year.
1:17:49 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS offered his understanding that there is
no window for the timeframe of those 45 people to give their
evaluations; it could be any time in the last 40 years if that
person has been a registered guide, but three clients per year
is a logical number.
MR. TIFFANY confirmed there is no limitation. If it took the
applicant 40 years to collect the right number of names, then so
be it, he said, or if it took fewer years that is alright also.
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS asked whether the division contacts all
45 clients. He further asked whether that is standard for the
division providing other types of occupational licenses.
1:18:50 PM
MS. CHAMBERS replied the division solicits that information for
a variety of license types and depends upon how the [related]
statute is written. She said the division has quite a few
license types that require some sort of evaluation. For
example, she continued, for healthcare or mechanical professions
evaluations are solicited from supervisors or others who have
worked closely with the applicant in a similar capacity. So,
she added, it is unusual because it is somewhat subjective, but
it is pertinent and relative to that type of work.
1:19:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN stated that the proposed increases in the
number of clients that must be submitted [from 25 to 45] and
number of favorable evaluations [from 10 to 30] is a huge jump
given the small number of clients per year and the 20-40 year
span of time in the applicant's career. She submitted that
given the length of time, some of those clients are no longer
alive and many are foreign nationals, and therefore it would be
a huge increase in the burden for both the applicant and the
division to contact all those clients and receive 30 favorable
evaluations. She further submitted that this would narrow
things so much that hardly anyone would qualify.
SENATOR WILSON responded that the master guide-outfitter title
is a prestigious and high standard for guides, and the title
carries additional privileges for guides as well as additional
responsibilities to clients. He said it needs to be ensured
that these folks are the top ethical guides who will follow the
guidelines and regulations and therefore setting the bar higher
for obtaining the master guide-outfitter license was wanted.
1:22:22 PM
MS. CHAMBERS agreed and explained that master guide is somewhat
of an honorary title because the registered guide can perform
the same guide/outfitting duties as a master guide. She related
that when reviewing this the division asked the same questions
of whether it seemed reasonable and deferred to the board. She
continued:
It is not prohibiting anyone from gaining a higher
level of economic opportunity because the master and
the registered guides can do the same things. But the
master guide does have that value added, as Senator
Wilson said, that it is a title recognizing that you
are at the very top of your game. It doesn't get, in
the United States, any more exclusive in the guiding
industry than that. But it is not a tier where we
might look at trade issues and restriction of trade by
saying this is really hard to get and it might serve
only an elite few, which is preventing everyone here
from being able to earn the same living. They're on
the same par, at least as far as their economic
opportunities are concerned.
1:23:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN noted that the previous requirement was 10
out of 25 clients over a 12- to 15-year period and that the bill
would increase the look back period from which clients could be
submitted and would triple the number of positive responses.
She questioned whether the fiscal note of $35,000 [Identifier
SB043CS(FIN)-DCCED-CBPL-04-09-19] would be sufficient to fund
the investigation of an additional 20 positive evaluations on
every application. She further questioned whether the guides
who are potentially qualified to apply for this feel that they
can produce those names and have current contact with clients.
Representative Hannan said she wants to ensure that this big
leap in numbers is being done for the right reasons and not just
because there were some people with lower licenses who were bad
actors, which would be a separate issue. She agreed [master
guides] are the best of the best and therefore should not get
poor evaluations. She asked whether the board, the industry,
and the department think the proposed thresholds are manageable.
MS. CHAMBERS answered that the department does not anticipate a
problem with the increase in its administrative workload. She
deferred to Mr. Tiffany to speak to the board's discussion,
which included master guides, in the vetting of those numbers.
1:26:13 PM
MR. TIFFANY concurred that a master guide license is, more than
anything, an honorary title. He said it does not allow, from an
economic standpoint, an individual to necessarily do anything
more than a registered guide can do, except that master guides
can advertise themselves and carry themselves with that title.
In its discussions the board understood this, he related. He
explained that a total of 45 names submitted with 30 favorable
recommendations over a 15-year period is very feasible because
an applicant must have been a registered guide for at least 15
years and that would be guiding 3 clients a year. He added that
many guides take 10-15 clients in one year. He stated the board
doesn't think it is onerous or a burden on applicants who want
to obtain the title because they have proven under these
proposed changes that they have been exemplary in the profession
for a long time with no violations. He pointed out that the
board was in unanimous agreement on that and doesn't feel it is
terribly burdensome. He related that one of the board members
is currently a registered guide and getting close under the
current regulations to being eligible to apply for his master
guide license. He said this board member fully understands that
this would prolong the time it takes him to apply for a master
guide license and yet this board member voted in full support of
these changes.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN said she is fine with the answer.
1:28:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK offered his understanding that under current
law, AS 08.54.720(a), a licensed master guide does not lose
his/her title as a master guide if he/she commits an offense.
SENATOR WILSON confirmed Representative Tuck's understanding.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK stated his support for [CSSB 43(FIN)]
because it would provide conditions under which a master guide
title can be lost. He observed that Section 4, subsection (l),
would provide that a master guide-outfitter who lost his/her
license could still be issued a registered guide-outfitter
license and, he surmised, would have to wait 15 years before
he/she could get back the title of master.
SENATOR WILSON replied yes.
1:30:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ inquired whether the evaluations could
be completed via a written or online survey instead of an
interview.
MS. CHAMBERS responded she will check with staff, but is pretty
sure the clients are contacted in writing. She said it would
make her a little anxious to believe that someone's license
depends upon verbal note taking, so she is certain there is a
written record of that, but she doesn't know specifically what
that looks like.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ offered her understanding that a letter
is sent out to which clients respond in writing, rather than the
clients being called and interviewed.
MS. CHAMBERS answered yes; clients respond in writing.
1:32:26 PM
KRIS CURTIS, CPA, CISA, Legislative Auditor, Division of
Legislative Audit, Alaska State Legislature, directed attention
to the document in the committee packet entitled, "A Sunset
Review of the Department of Commerce, Community and Economic
Development, Big Game Commercial Services Board (board)," dated
9/14/18, Audit Control Number 08-20114-19. She explained that
the purpose of a sunset audit is to determine whether a board or
commission is serving the public's interest in whether it should
be extended. She stated the audit found that this board is
serving the public's interest by conducting meetings in
accordance with applicable laws, by amending regulations to
improve the occupations under its purview, and by supporting
changes made by the Department of Law to improve the timeliness
of the disciplinary process. Additionally, she said, the audit
found that this board had eliminated the deficit of over $1
million that was reported in the 2015 sunset audit. She noted
the audit also concluded that the board licenses were not
consistently supported by adequate documentation, a high number
of investigations had unjustified periods of inactivity, and
three board positions were vacant for an extended period. She
said the audit recommended a six-year extension for this board.
MS. CURTIS turned to page 8 of the audit, Exhibit 2, Licensing
Activity, and reported that as of May 2018 there were a total of
1,219 active licenses, a 20 percent reduction when compared to
the 2015 sunset audit. She related that, according to the board
chair, this decrease is due in part to guides retiring and a
decreased interest in the profession. Additionally, she said,
the chair reported that there were fewer transporters because
many changed operating as air taxis to avoid the transporter's
reporting requirements and fees - there were 151 licensed
transporters as of April 2015 compared to 90 as of May 2018, a
40 percent reduction in the number of transporters.
MS. CURTIS moved to page 10 of the audit, Exhibit 3, Schedule of
Revenues and Expenditures, and said the board had a surplus of
[$132,224] at the end at fiscal year 2018 (FY 18). She noted
this is significant given the board's deficit of [$1,120,051] at
the end of FY 15.
1:34:28 PM
MS. CURTIS stated the audit contains three recommendations for
improvement. She said Recommendation No. l, page 14 of the
audit, is that the director of the Division of Corporations,
Business, and Professional Licensing (DCBPL) should improve
management oversight procedures to ensure required documentation
is obtained, reviewed, and retained to support licensure. She
noted the audit tested 25 new licenses and found errors in 14 of
them. She drew attention to the errors listed on page 14 and
pointed out that the more serious errors were missing background
checks and a lack of adequate investigatory review. She related
that, according to the DCBPL management, turnover in the staff
that supported the board contributed to the errors. She added
the audit also noted a lack of supervisory review.
MS. CURTIS said Recommendation No. 2, page 15 of the audit, is
that DCBPL's chief investigator should increase oversight to
[improve] the timeliness of investigations. She noted the audit
tested 22 investigations that had been open for over 180 days
during the audit period and found periods of unjustified
inactivity for 20 of the 22. She related that, according to the
chief investigator, periods of inactivity were due in part to
inadequate resources to investigate the high caseload and
supervisors not adequately monitoring the cases.
MS. CURTIS said Recommendation No. 3, page 16 of the audit, is
that the Office of the Governor, Boards and Commissions director
should work with the board to identify potential applicants in a
timely manner. She noted that from July 2015 through May 2018,
two board positions were vacant for six months due to a lack of
interested applicants, and the board position occupied by a
member of the Board of Game was vacant for eight months because
the Office of the Governor was not notified of the vacancy. She
related that, according to Boards and Commissions staff, the
transporter and private landholder board positions are difficult
to fill due to a lack of qualified candidates.
MS. CURTIS drew attention to the agency responses found on page
25 of the audit. She related that the DCCED commissioner agrees
with Recommendations No. 1 and 2 and has taken action to resolve
both recommendations. Addressing page 27 of the audit, she
further related that the Office of the Governor has responded to
Recommendation No. 3 and agreed to fill vacancies in a timely
manner. She stated that page 29 provides the BGCSB chair's
response to Recommendation No. 3 in which the chair agreed to
work with the Office of the Governor to fill vacancies in a
timely manner and stated that all the board positions were
filled at that time.
1:37:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK requested the date of the previous audit.
MS. CURTIS replied May 2015.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK inquired whether this current audit found
the same issues that were identified in 2015.
MS. CURTIS turned to page 13 and pointed out the four prior
recommendations from the 2015 audit. She stated [auditors] felt
that most of the 2015 recommendations were addressed, especially
the $1 million deficit [third recommendation]. She said the
first recommendation had to do with support to the board, and
while [auditors] felt the support did improve they identified a
new problem with the license documentation, so that is
considered a reiteration of a prior recommendation. She advised
that the problems with prior applications [identified in the
fourth recommendation] were dealt with. But, she continued, the
problem of timeliness of investigations [second recommendation]
has not been addressed.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK asked who conducts the investigations.
MS. CURTIS responded that DCBPL conducts the investigations.
The board stays out of the investigative process as it performs
a semi-judicial role in ruling on an investigation's results
once the ruling is brought to the board.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK offered his understanding that many
investigation positions from various departments are moving to
the Department of Law (DOL). He asked how this would affect
efforts to resolve the backload that is had.
MS. CURTIS answered:
I don't think we know right now the impact of that.
There has been an Administrative Order [No. 306, dated
2/13/19] to consolidate the investigative process
within the Department of Law. It is my understanding
this board is included in that process. I know that
there has been some discussion to have an audit on
that process, looking at the consolidation, how that
impacts timeliness, efficiency, and I believe there's
work right now to draft an audit request.
1:39:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN inquired about the idea of taking all the
investigators from all of the agencies and consolidating them in
the Department of Law. She asked whether the audit that is
being requested is of the process of the new consolidated
investigations prior to them being done, or if it will be given
some time and then be audited for whether it is a more efficient
way to do it.
MS. CURTIS replied that she suggested "at least three years."
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN offered her understanding that it wouldn't
be known for three years. She expressed her concern that a
prior recommendation from a previous audit is still an ongoing
issue. She continued:
If this board in five more years has an audit that
again raises that there is a problem with the
investigation, but this time we've sort of
structurally shifted and ... we won't know whether
that backlog is created by it being an ongoing
problem, these are complex things to investigate, or
whether it was because we've shifted how we've
investigated them. ... It's not that I'm encouraging
them to be held harmless, but it seems to be an area
of concern for an industry that is profitable but
complex, and seasonal in nature, migratory in
practice, and then we are trying to make sure that
investigations of things that may span legal
boundaries, because again many of the clients who
might be called as a witness in an investigation of
bad actors in the field could be foreign nationals.
So I could certainly see why these are complex
investigations to carry forward and I'm wondering
whether the department has had the opportunity to
share all of those concerns in a global and specific
way as these dialogues about consolidating
investigators to the Department of Law have happened.
MS. CHAMBERS responded that those details would be worked out in
FY 2020. She said the taskforce to implement the Administrative
Order for consolidating all the investigations under the
Department of Law would begin in early 2020 and that questions
would be asked of this particular board, the other 43 licensing
entities managed by [the Division of Legislative Audit], as well
as all the rest around the state. She stated she expects a
discussion to work out safeguards and tracking mechanisms. She
said the administrative order is a plan that will be thorough,
and it is possible that [the Division of Legislative Audit's]
investigators may become Department of Law employees. They will
retain the same knowledge, background, and experience that
benefit from oversight through the Department of Law, she
advised. There are a variety of ways that this could look, but
this is just the beginning of the process, she added.
1:43:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN addressed Ms. Curtis and urged [the
aforementioned problem] be footnoted now because auditors are
probably the best at footnoting something and remembering where
it is and coming back to it. She continued:
This has been in two audits, yet I don't know if you
have any specificity of where the problems and the
timeline to produce those investigations have been
that can be shared with the Department of Law so it
doesn't have to be relearned by a new lawyer trying to
figure out how to investigate a licensure issue that
is in [an] unusual industry. ... Each of our
investigative jurisdictions [is] unique, but I think
this one is not only unique it's quirky. ... I would
just urge that we make sure we've footnoted that so
when we return to this in five years we don't go, "A
third audit where the investigation backlog is
overwhelming," and think that we've somehow been
flawed in it because I think it is one of those places
where it's going to be a weird thing for the
Department of Law. ... The legal violations they're
going to have straight up dialed in ... if they've
been working on fish and game issues and violations.
But I think that the guide industry, it's that
intersect of a lot of different elements of commerce
that are really unique, and I want to make sure we
remember that when we hold someone to task five years
from now about not doing it right.
1:44:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS asked how the board accumulated a $1.1
million deficit in fiscal year 2015.
MS. CURTIS replied that in general terms it may have involved
not raising fees timely, as well as incorrectly allocating
indirect costs over the years. She deferred to Ms. Chambers to
answer further.
MS. CHAMBERS advised that circa 2012 DCCED discovered inadequate
checks and balances in its accounting systems and DCBPL was
allowed to provide incorrect information externally to its
boards and to the public. It was accounted for correctly in the
old state accounting system, she continued, but all the numbers
and reports given to and utilized by the boards were not tied to
the accounting system. When this was discovered, she explained,
DCBPL worked with its administrative services to rectify that
and an exhaustive search through all data was done to find out
where each licensing program actually stood. She said some were
actually doing better than what they were being told and some
were not, and the Big Game Commercial Services Board was in the
"very, very not" category. Much to its credit, she continued,
the board at that time committed to doing whatever it took to
get things done. She explained that the division spent a few
years working hand-in-hand with the board assessing how often
fees were being increased appropriately and whether there were
fees that were not being captured to cover the administrative
workload that the statute requires. Particularly in the time
period between those two audits, she noted, work was done to
calibrate those fees and now they are in a reasonable surplus.
She advised that this program and all the division's licensing
programs are being checked every year with the division's fee
analysis tool. The division is in close contact with the board,
she added, because the board doesn't want to go through that
again and neither does the division.
1:48:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS surmised the increased user fees since
2015 are paying for the new positions talked about by the bill
sponsor to address the backlog of complaints and concerns.
MS. CHAMBERS confirmed that licensing fees pay for all of the
division's costs and noted that those positions are shared with
the other programs as well. She pointed out that the 2018 audit
covered a span of three years, so the information is now four
years old. Since the beginning of the audit, she said, the
division has put in a variety of improvements, safeguards, and
additional resources to address the issues that were raised in
the audit.
MS. CHAMBERS continued and stressed that the audit findings are
against the division and not against the board itself, which is
a body of volunteers appointed to govern. The licensing and
investigative issues are the responsibility of the division, she
pointed out. She said that, to date, the division has:
narrowed down double-checks with the new senior investigators
for all the division's programs; reduced the licensing workload
for this program; closed 22 cases so now only 39 cases are open;
and double-checked every 60 days or so that there is adequate
documentation in the division's case file. She noted the audit
did not find that investigations were performed poorly or that
the board wasn't doing its job. She advised the audit found
that division staff did not document lapses when things were
over with the troopers or with the Office of Special
Prosecutions. The division has taken that very seriously, she
added, because it is a poor reflection on the division when the
audit isn't clean.
1:51:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK stated that the audit's concerns are about
investigations as well as oversight and monitoring of the cases.
He noted that currently DCBPL supervises the cases. He read
aloud from AS [08.01.050(a)(19)], administrative duties of
department, which states, "provide inspection, enforcement, and
investigative services to the boards and for the occupations
listed in AS 08.01.010 regarding all licenses issued by or
through the department". He said the statutes are very specific
on who investigates and who oversees those investigations and
opined that the governor's Administrative Order is really an
Executive Order because it changes statutes. Given this order
to put all investigations under the Department of Law, he asked
who is now responsible for the oversight, supervision, and
monitoring of those investigations.
MS. CHAMBERS responded that the task force would work out these
questions prior to executing the Administrative Order. She said
she has taken note of Representative Tuck's statements.
1:54:01 PM
[CO-CHAIR TARR opened public testimony.]
1:54:37 PM
KURT WHITEHEAD, Master Guide-Outfitter, testified he has been a
guide in Alaska since 1995 and has worked for good outfitters
and bad outfitters. He stressed the importance of the Big Game
Commercial Services Board. He explained that an applicant
applying for a registered guide license is tested before a panel
of master guides and/or registered guides and oral testing
reveals the applicant's competence. He urged the committee to
reauthorize the board because it provides oversight and the
necessary oral testing. Without the board, he said, there would
be no more oral testing and an applicant would only take a
multiple-choice test.
1:57:08 PM
WAYNE KUBAT, Master Guide-Outfitter, Vice President, Alaska
Professional Hunters Association (APHA), testified that the APHA
represents Alaska's important and historic guide industry and
has been in existence for nearly 50 years. He said the APHA
supports state's rights and is working to maintain Alaska's
right to manage game species in accordance with state law. He
stated he is very familiar with CSSHB 43(FIN) and that there is
misleading information circulating about the Big Game Commercial
Services Board (BGCSB). He said the guide industry pays its own
way and is net positive for the state. He pointed out that
guided non-resident effort is less than 3 percent of the total
big game hunting effort, and in 2015 accounted for $55.2 million
new dollars and with multipliers accounted for $87.2 million in
total economic activity, with a lot of it occurring in rural
areas. He advised that guide numbers are decreasing, not
increasing, which was mentioned in the audit.
MR. KUBAT addressed the issue of complaints about the board not
taking action in certain cases. He related that at the meetings
he has attended the board's binder shows the actions it has
taken, and while it may not be all cases, the board is putting a
dent in them. He said the guide industry needs a voice that
knows the truth and can represent guides fairly, and the Big
Game Commercial Services Board is that voice. He further stated
that the board is an important piece of the puzzle toward
maintaining the long-term health and viability of the guide
industry. He urged the passage of CSSB 43(FIN).
1:59:35 PM
MARK RICHARDS, Executive Director, Resident Hunters of Alaska
(RHAK), testified he is representing RHAK's 2,000 members in
asking the committee to reject the [proposed] five-year
extension of the Big Game Commercial Services Board and to
instead extend it for only two years. He noted the board has
been audited every three years since its reinstatement in 2005
and every audit has outlined the same problem regarding the
ability to investigate cases in a timely manner along with an
ongoing backlog of cases, which doesn't provide confidence that
things will change. He opined that a shorter extension period
would give the board incentive to resolve its issues.
MR. RICHARDS stated the other body amended the bill, in part, in
response to RHAK's complaints about guides continuing to hold a
guide license after numerous violations. The amended bill, he
continued, would change parts of the Title 8 statutes to make it
somewhat easier for the board to revoke or suspend a guide
license and RHAK agrees with those changes. He said there might
be parts of the Title 8 statute the committee is unaware of. He
maintained the guide industry has been very successful over the
decades in monopolizing anything to do with making money from
hunters and that this is how "outfitter" got tacked onto guide
and now a guide is known as guide-outfitter. He again urged the
committee to amend the bill to a two-year extension.
2:02:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK observed that RHAK's 4/25/19 letter in the
committee packet states that nothing has changed in terms of the
caseload and that the process has not been streamlined. He
inquired whether RHAK has suggestions on how to streamline the
process. He recalled Ms. Curtis stating there are problems with
being able to investigate and adequately monitor the cases.
MR. RICHARDS answered that only one investigator is attached to
this board and one investigator alone cannot handle all the
cases. He said the board does not have money to hire another
investigator and opined that the way the board resolved its debt
issue is problematic because it moved to consent agreements
rather than taking guides to administrative court hearings that
are costly. So now, he continued, guides with violations are
basically given a slap on the wrist, a minimal probationary
period, and are allowed to continue to hold their guide license.
It is a Catch-22 here, he advised, in that trying to resolve the
investigative issues and the caseloads has resulted in something
that is allowing guides to continue guiding with violations.
2:04:37 PM
NATHAN TURNER, Trapper, Registered Guide-Outfitter, testified he
works primarily as a trapper, has been a hunting guide for 22
years, a registered guide for 19 of those years, and is serving
his ninth year on the Board of Game. He stated he is speaking
today as a hunting guide. He said he supports extending the Big
Game Commercial Services for a full six years and that he also
supports the [bill's proposed changes] to master guide-outfitter
qualifications.
MR. TURNER said the board has clearly acknowledged the financial
problems and investigative backlog and that it continues to work
diligently on the areas that it can through board actions and
authority. But, he added, as has been presented a lot of the
issues are beyond the board. He stated the board takes these
issues very seriously. He related that for most of the years
the board has been operating again, he has sat in the meetings
and the subcommittee meetings and participated in the guide
testing and has been impressed with the sincerity of individual
board members and the tone and tenure of the meetings. He urged
that, regardless of the length of extension that is chosen,
consideration be given at the end of the extension to remove the
sunset provision. He said the administrative problems being
faced today are nothing compared to what would happen if this
board was to sunset, as was evidenced when it was sunset before
and the problems in the field led to the board's re-creation.
MR. TURNER stated he supports the [proposed] changes to master
guide-outfitter qualification. He said he has been qualified
since 2012 but hasn't submitted an application because of his
belief that the bar is [currently] so low it doesn't equate with
his understanding of what a master of any trade should be. As
currently exists, he opined, a guide doesn't need to be
outstanding in any manner; a guide simply needs to be in
business long enough and will qualify to be called a master. He
said his belief that when another guide sees the title "master,"
he/she should be impressed.
2:08:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK recalled Mr. Turner's statement of being a
guide for 22 years and a registered guide for 19. He asked how
a person becomes an unregistered guide.
MR. TURNER explained he was an assistant guide first to earn his
qualification to become a registered guide.
2:08:29 PM
VIRGIL UMPHENOUR, Master Guide-Outfitter, testified he served
three terms on the Board of Fisheries and afterwards served
eight years as chairman of the Fairbanks Fish and Game Advisory
Committee. He said Alaska is well known throughout the country
for its boards of fish and game and its Big Game Commercial
Services Board. He maintained that the other states are jealous
of Alaska's system of public process for how the state's fish,
game, and hunting resources are managed. Allowing this board to
sunset would be a slap in the face to all wild resource users in
Alaska, he said. He pointed out that Alaska is much different
than other states in that regular individuals can put forth
proposals to change the regulations, the proposals are published
through a board process, and at the board's meetings the public
participate in the discussion about changing the regulatory
process. Getting rid of it would be going backwards, he said.
VIRGIL UMPHENOUR noted he is a master guide-outfitter and has
been guiding for 33 years, his son is also a master guide-
outfitter, and his daughter is an assistant guide. Guides pay
their own way, he continued, in that non-residents pay a non-
resident fee in addition to their license and this fee pays 73
percent of the Division of Wildlife Conservation's budget, and
sport fish licenses pay for the majority of the Division of
Sport Fish's budget.
MR. UMPHENOUR pointed out the board doesn't have anything to do
with the investigation process. The investigator works for the
department, he said, so any problems are the department's
problem, not the board's problem. The board does not supervise
the investigator, he continued, and the board has gotten the
investigator to quit so many frivolous investigations that don't
amount to anything.
2:12:25 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR closed public testimony after ascertaining no one
else wished to testify.
CO-CHAIR TARR announced that CSSB 43(FIN) was held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 43 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM |
SB 43 |
| CSSB 43 (SFIN) - Sectional Summary.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM |
SB 43 |
| SB 43, Version A.PDF |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM |
SB 43 |
| CSSB 43, Version B.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM |
SB 43 |
| SB 43 Work Draft v. M - Explanation.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM |
SB 43 |
| SB 43 Letters of Support.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM |
SB 43 |
| SB 43 Letters of Opposition.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM |
SB 43 |
| SB 43 DCPL Letter .pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM |
SB 43 |
| SB 43 Bunch Testimony .pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM |
SB 43 |
| SB 43 Additional Testimony Huttunen.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM |
SB 43 |
| SB 43 BGCSB Letter of Support 4.03.19.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM |
SB 43 |
| SB 43 Big Game Commercial Services Board Sunset Review Audit.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM |
SB 43 |
| HB138 Sponsor Statement version U 4.22.2019.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM |
HB 138 |
| HB138 version A 4.22.2019.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM |
HB 138 |
| HB138 Supporting Material DNR Fact Sheet Legislatively Designated Areas 4.22.2019.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM |
|
| HB138 Supporting Material DEC Tier 3 Water Designation FAQ 4.22.2019.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM |
HB 138 |
| HB138 Supporting Material DEC Tier 3 response 4.22.2019.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM |
HB 138 |
| HB138 Supporting Material DEC Final Tier 3 Guidance 4.22.2019.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/9/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 3/11/2020 1:00:00 PM |
HB 138 |
| HB138 Supporting Material Commissioner Hartig Letter to Senate 4.22.2019.PDF |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/24/2020 1:00:00 PM |
HB 138 |
| HB138 40 CFR Part 131 4.22.2019.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM |
HB 138 |
| HB138 18 AAC 70.016 4.22.2019.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM |
HB 138 |
| HB136 Fiscal Note 4.26.19.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HB 136 |
| HR138 Supporting Document EPA Response to DEC 7.26.18.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HR 138 |
| HB138 Supporting Document - Chilkat Indian Village Letter of Opposition 4.26.19.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM |
HB 138 |
| HB138 Supporting Document - DEC P&P re Tier 3 Nomination 11.21.18.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM |
HB 138 |
| HB138 Supporting Document EPA Response to DEC 7.26.18.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HR 138 |
| HB138 Fiscal Note 4.26.19.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM |
HB 138 |
| HR138 Supporting Document EPA Response to DEC 7.26.18.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM |
HR 138 |
| SB43 Supporting Document - RHAK Letter House Resources 4.25.19.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/3/2019 1:00:00 PM |
SB 43 |
| HB138 Coalition Letter of Support 4.28.19.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM |
HB 138 |
| HB138 Letters of Opposition 4.29.19.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM |
|
| HB138 Additional Letters of Opposition.pdf |
HRES 4/29/2019 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/10/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/14/2020 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/17/2020 1:00:00 PM |
HB 138 |