Legislature(2017 - 2018)BUTROVICH 205
03/27/2018 03:30 PM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
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 | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s): Alaska Police Standards Council, Alaska Public Office Commission | |
| HB44 | |
| SB186 | |
| HB138 | |
| SB210 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | HB 138 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 210 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 44 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 186 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 210-SEAFOOD MISREPRESENTATION ON MENUS
5:02:35 PM
CHAIR MEYER called the committee back to order and announced the
consideration of Senate Bill 210 (SB 210).
5:03:09 PM
SENATOR BILL WIELECHOWSKI, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau,
Alaska, sponsor of SB 210, provided an overview as follows:
This bill adds a civil penalty for misrepresentation
of seafood at a retail food establishment. There has
been quite a bit of research across the country about
seafood mislabeling.
In 2105, Oceana, which is a nonprofit organization,
collected 82 salmon samples from restaurants and
grocery stores and DNA sampling found that 43 percent
was mislabeled, and diners were 5 times more likely to
be mislead in restaurants than grocer stores.
In 2013 another Oceana study of 1,200 samples across
the U.S. found that 52 percent of the samples in
certain parts of the country were mislabeled, of 120
samples of fish claimed to be red snapper, only 7 were
red snapper.
In 2011 the Boston Globe tested fish at 123
Massachusetts restaurants, nearly half were
mislabeled.
In 2016 Oceana tested 25,000 seafood samples across
the world and found the 1 in 5 were mislabeled, and
that 58 percent of the substitute species carried
health risks, often parasites and toxins.
The University of California-Los Angeles (UCLA)
conducted a study of 26 Los Angeles sushi restaurants
from 2012 to 2015 and found that 47 percent of the
sushi was mislabeled.
We don't have Alaska-specific data, but I can relate a
personal experience of being wrongly served at a
restaurant mislabeled seafood and they knowingly told
me it was something wrong.
We have a letter of support from the United Fishermen
of Alaska. This bill is aimed at protecting consumers
and the state's seafood industry, an industry that
employs tens of thousands of people and has an
economic output of around $5 billion.
5:05:31 PM
CHAIR MEYER opined that the most common mislabeling occurrence
happens in restaurants both in Alaska and outside of the state
where they say, "this is Alaska wild salmon," and you don't
agree, the same goes for king crab, etcetera. He remarked that
mislabeling can have a serious detrimental effect on the state's
economy and the fishing industry.
SENATOR WILSON asked Senator Wielechowski to address the
enforcement piece in the bill. He asked if the bill is for
people to file a complaint before fines are enacted or will the
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) go around
doing random testing.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI replied that he does not believe DEC will
be enforcing outside of what they normally do because the
department does not have the resources to sample; however, a
provision was included in the bill that allows employees of
retail establishments to report anonymously without retaliation.
He opined that employees are in the best position to report
mislabeling and then DEC can decide whether to act.
CHAIR MEYER noted that a representative from DEC was available
to answer committee members' questions.
5:07:28 PM
NATE GRAHAM, Staff, Senator Wielechowski, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, provided the following sectional
analysis of SB 210:
Section 1(a):
States that a retail food establishment, which a
restaurant or sushi bar, may not misrepresent a menu
item or the identity or the origin of the seafood or
seafood ingredient.
Section 1(b) and 1(c):
Allow an employee to report a violation as well as
protects the employee from retaliation.
Section 1(d):
Provides an exception if a retail food establishment
informs a consumer that they are substituting
something on the menu that they are not violating
this. It also allows if a customer does complain and
there's been a misrepresentation that the restaurant
or industry could provide the customer with a full
refund and that would prevent DEC from needing to take
action on this.
Section 1(e):
Establishes a fine of up to $500 for each fine, but
not to exceed $50,000 in total fines.
Section 1(f):
Defines "menu" and "seafood."
Sections 2 and 3:
Section 2 takes two definitions that were previously
under AS 17.20.049 (b)(3) and (b)(4) and moves them to
AS 17.20.075; it says in the bill that they are
repealed but they are just being moved.
CHAIR MEYER addressed employer retaliation in Section 1(c) where
an employer cannot directly or indirectly dismiss, layoff,
suspend, etcetera. He asked what would happen if someone laid
off or fired an employee.
5:10:07 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI replied that an employee potentially could
have other claims, but they would be completely independent of
the statutes. He said all that would statutorily exist for
dismissing an employee would be the $500 fine.
SENATOR COGHILL asked him to address "verbal warning," noted on
top of page 2. He noted that he has read menus where a
restaurant puts on the menu, "May be substituted by." He asked
if the bill allows for the substitution admission on menus.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI explained that "verbally warns customer" is
noted in the bill so the substitutions noted on a menu would be
prohibited. He said he was open to discussion to change what
Senator Coghill addressed.
SENATOR COGHILL replied that he was just wondering because he
has seen the substitution admission and avoids the noted items
in restaurants
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI reiterated that the bill does say
"verbally."
SENATOR COGHILL responded that he would watch that provision.
5:12:01 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL addressed Senator Coghill's point and opined
that misrepresentation might be taken care of in Section 1(a),
"A retail food establishment may not misrepresent on a menu the
identity or origin of a seafood or seafood ingredient in a
prepared food product."
SENATOR COGHILL clarified that he intended to say would there
still be a requirement for a verbal warning. He noted that he
would address Section 1(e) regarding violations and fines with
Senator Wielechowski in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI replied that there is another section that
deals with misleading labeling or advertisement that is within
the section that Senator Coghill referenced.
5:13:52 PM
CHAIR MEYER opened and closed public testimony.
5:14:07 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL moved to report SB 210, version 30-LS1413\D from
committee with individual recommendations and attached zero
fiscal note.
5:14:37 PM
CHAIR MEYER announced that there being no objection, the motion
carried.