Legislature(2005 - 2006)HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/09/2005 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB46 | |
| HB76 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 76 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| HB 61 | |||
| = | HB 46 | ||
HOUSE FINANCE
February 9, 2005
1:41 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Meyer called the House Finance Committee meeting to
order at 1:41:12 PM.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Mike Chenault, Co-Chair
Representative Kevin Meyer, Co-Chair
Representative Bill Stoltze, Vice-Chair
Representative Richard Foster
Representative Mike Hawker
Representative Jim Holm
Representative Reggie Joule
Representative Mike Kelly
Representative Carl Moses
Representative Bruce Weyhrauch
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Eric Croft (Teleconferenced)
ALSO PRESENT
Representative Ralph Samuels; Pat Davidson, Legislative
Auditor, Legislative Audit Division; Matt Robus, Director,
Division of Wildlife Conservation, Department of Fish &
Game; Paul Johnson, Guide, Alaska Professional Hunters
Association; Tom Wright, Staff, Speaker John Harris; Dan
Easton, Director, Division of Water, Department of
Environmental Conservation; Rick Urion, Director,
Occupational Licensing, Department of Community and Economic
Development
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Rick Thompson, Director, Division of Mining, Land and Water,
Department of Natural Resources, Anchorage; Jim Strandberg,
Commissioner, Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA),
Anchorage; Kim Franklin, Northwest Arctic Borough Planning
Department, Kotzebue; Joe Klutsch, President, Alaska
Professional Hunters Association, King Salmon; Bob Fithian,
Executive Director, Alaska Professional Hunters Association,
Lower Tonsina; Pete Schaeffer, Kotzebue Fish and Game
Advisory Committee, Kotzebue; Robert Hardy, Mat-Su; Cynthia
Hora, Attorney for the Northwest Arctic Borough, Anchorage;
Major Howard Starbard, Administrative Commander, Alaska
State Troopers, Anchorage
SUMMARY
HB 46 An Act permitting grants to certain regulated
public utilities for water quality enhancement
projects and water supply and wastewater systems.
CS HB 46 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with
a "do pass" recommendation and with zero note #1
by the Department of Community & Economic
Development and a new zero note by the House
Finance Committee for the Department of
Environmental Conservation.
HB 76 An Act relating to the Big Game Commercial
Services Board and to the regulation of big game
hunting services and transportation services; and
providing for an effective date.
HB 76 was HEARD and HELD.
HOUSE BILL NO. 46
An Act permitting grants to certain regulated public
utilities for water quality enhancement projects and
water supply and wastewater systems.
Representative Foster MOVED to ADOPT work draft 24-LS0313\Y,
Craver, 2/8/05, as the version of the bill before the
Committee. There being NO OBJECTION, it was adopted.
Co-Chair Meyer pointed out that two amendments had been
incorporated into the draft. The first clarifies that
utilities are owned and operated by a political subdivision
of the State. That language was amended in the Senate
Resource Committee. He noted that Representative Croft
presented Amendment #2, which addresses privately, owned
utilities not receiving capital gains.
TOM WRIGHT, STAFF, SPEAKER JOHN HARRIS, stated that the
Speaker has no objections to either amendment or the new
language in the version currently before Committee members.
Vice-Chair Stoltze inquired if language on Page 2, Lines 26-
28 was new. Mr. Wright advised that language resulted from
Representative Croft's amendment, however, was slightly
modified.
Representative Hawker understood that the intent was to
regulate a State or public investment in a utility,
regulated by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA).
The language implies that a public utility sold within ten
years of receiving a grant, ceases to be regulated and then
that grant has to be repaid. He thought that 10-years would
be too long of a window, understanding the number was not an
issue point. Representative Hawker recommended that the
number be changed to 5-years.
Representative Kelly agreed and supported the change. He
thought it would benefit the public by using matching
grants.
Representative Hawker MOVED a change to the committee
substitute, Page 2, Line 24, deleting "10" and replacing it
with "5" years. Co-Chair Meyer OBJECTED for discussion
purposes.
Representative Croft, (Testifying via Teleconference), asked
for an explanation of the proposed change. Representative
Hawker repeated that the language provides assurance that
public money benefiting a public utility is subject to
regulated rates. He questioned if 10-years provides an
appropriate restriction, assuming that the grants are to
benefit the public. He recommended 5-years.
Representative Croft agreed. The number was not determined
through any type of study. He commented that there could be
practical difficulty keeping it on the books too long. He
added that he did not want to see it become a State grant
that moved quickly for individual or private gain.
Representative Weyhrauch asked what would happen if the
public utility was sold to a non-regulated utility within
the 5 years. Representative Hawker explained that it would
only be affected if a non-regulated utility were sold.
Representative Weyhrauch inquired historic precedence for
that.
JIM STRANDBERG, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE),
COMMISSIONER, REGULATORY COMMISSION OF ALASKA, ANCHORAGE,
responded to the question. He indicated that in the six
years that he had been with RCA, they had processed many
ownership changes, however, he could not provide specific
data. Mr. Strandberg stated that certificate transfers
almost always come before the RCA if it is a public utility.
The RCA regulation is a separate concern and they do monitor
the current ownership of certificated utilities.
1:55:44 PM
Representative Weyhrauch spoke to the transferee and RCA's
payment involvement. Mr. Strandberg advised that RCA wants
to maintain ownership that is "fit, willing and able", which
is the statute definition. For utilities not regulated by
the RCA, the rates are not set. He summarized that an
acquisition adjustment could only be assured under the
utilities economically regulated by the RCA.
Representative Croft voiced concern that State grants might
end up being solely for private benefit. He addressed RCA's
current restrictions, which could prevent that from
happening. A private buyer will only pay so much because of
regulations by RCA. He questioned if the amendment language
would assure that. Mr. Strandberg believed it could be
accomplished incorporating that language.
Representative Croft suggested that it could affect
economics in a limited situation. Mr. Strandberg reflected
that the amendment prevents private enrichment as a result
of that grant.
Vice-Chair Stoltze asked if there is any interest in
limiting the utility to State owned rather than foreign
owned businesses. Mr. Strandberg replied that he would
check the statute for that information. He did not believe
that there are utilities foreign owned. Mr. Wright advised
that all of the utilities receiving the grants are under the
RCA regulations whether they are foreign or not.
2:04:23 PM
Mr. Strandberg commented that any private owned investor
utility would be subject to current regulations. Unless the
Legislature changes that, the likelihood of an investor
owned utility going into an unregulated status is unlikely.
Vice-Chair Stoltze pointed out that last year, there was
legislation that would have removed the utility regulation.
He asked the protections in place. Mr. Strandberg explained
that bill was a deregulation of a municipality owned utility
and was a special case of a large, municipally owned
utility. He knew of no other actions to deregulate.
Mr. Wright interjected that it was not the intent of Speaker
Harris to get HB 46 involved in that legislation and would
object to it. Vice-Chair Stoltze appreciated that.
Representative Holm thought that the payback provision could
have unintended consequences. He offered that the benefits
incurred could bail out a municipality. Resulting from
that, if the pay back provisions were huge, there could be
unintended consequences. He believed that if a municipality
were getting money through a program, everyone in the
municipality would be benefiting.
2:07:53 PM
Co-Chair Meyer WITHDREW his OBJECTION to Amendment #1.
There being NO further OBJECTION, the change from "10" to
"5" years was adopted.
Co-Chair Meyer pointed out that the fiscal note for the
Department of Environmental Conservation had been zeroed
out. He asked for comments regarding that change.
2:08:53 PM
DAN EASTON, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF WATER, DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION, explained that there had been an
increased workload in developing a small number of grants to
the larger amount and that was the base for the fiscal note.
The Department of Environmental Conservation anticipates a
workload impact and will attempt to do the work with a zero
note.
Co-Chair Chenault commented on the fiscal note. He pointed
out that in the FY03 budget, the Department had 33 matching
grants; in FY04, 12 matching grants; and in FY05, 7 matching
grants. He pointed out that the number of employees in the
Division staffing those projects had not changed. He
supported the fiscal note being zeroed out.
Representative Foster MOVED to report CS HB 46 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the zero
fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
CS HB 46 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with zero note #1 by the Department
of Community & Economic Development and a new zero note by
the House Finance Committee for the Department of
Environmental Conservation.
2:12:26 PM
AT EASE: 2:12 P.M.
RECONVENE: 2:18 P.M.
2:18:21 PM
HOUSE BILL NO. 76
An Act relating to the Big Game Commercial Services
Board and to the regulation of big game hunting
services and transportation services; and providing for
an effective date.
REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SAMUELS, SPONSOR, noted that HB 76
would re-establish the Big Game Commercial Services Board to
oversee an important industry that exists largely on the
basis of a healthy wildlife population. The board sunset a
decade ago, and in the following years, professional
hunters, wildlife biologists, public and private land
managers and the hunting public themselves have discovered
the problems associated with a decentralized, uncoordinated
system of licensing and regulating guides and transporters.
Representative Samuels discussed that an audit commissioned
rd
by the 23 Alaska Legislature and released in December 2003,
recommended that the Legislature consider re-establishing
the board. Auditors concluded after extensive interviews
with affected agencies, land owners and hunters that
wildlife populations would benefit from more coordinated
enforcement of existing laws, and that consumer protection
and hunter-client safety could be improved. The Alaska
Board of Game has also asked repeatedly that a guide
licensing board be re-established.
Representative Samuels summarized that the bill would create
a seven-member board within the Department of Community and
Economic Development. Two members would represent active
registered guide-outfitters, two members would be licensed
transporters, the Board of Game would assign one member, one
member would represent private landholders, and one member
would represent the public. The bill would also increase
from $1,000 to $5,000 dollars, the maximum civil penalty for
disciplinary purposes.
2:20:57 PM
PAT DAVIDSON, LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR, LEGISLATIVE AUDIT
DIVISION, advised that the purpose of the audit was to
determine:
· The impact that the absence of a professional licensing
board for guides and transporters has had on the
enforcement of guiding statutes;
· The appropriateness of the fines and other enforcement
mechanism; and
· The adequacy of the current reporting requirements for
transporters.
Ms. Davidson noted with the termination of the Big Game
Commercial Services Board, there has been no professional
oversight of licensed guides and transporters. She listed
the various land managers in the State who do the
monitoring:
1. National Park Service
2. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
3. U.S. Forest Service
4. Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
5. Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Division of
Mining Land and Water
Ms. Davidson noted that agencies have indicated that they
would welcome a more vigorous, centralized licensing and
regulatory board to oversee transporters and to a lesser
extent, guides. When the Big Game Commercial Services Board
sunset, many of the consumer protection and/or best business
practice statutes and regulations were also eliminated.
Ms. Davidson continued, guiding activity contributes
conservatively $40 million a year to the State's economy.
While most of the client surveys indicate a positive hunting
experience, many that did report dissatisfaction, the key
concerns were consumer protection issues. Based on the
Division's review, it was concluded that statutory changes
should include "best business practices" to be warranted.
That type of change provides important consumer protection
and hunter safety elements. While the re-establishment of a
guide board is not essential to making statutory
improvements, a reestablished board is likely to provide a
more dynamic regulatory regimen. Allowing the revision of
regulations on a regular basis intended to enhance
professionalism by guides, maintains consumer protection and
provides for hunter safety.
Ms. Davidson said if the Legislature considers
reestablishing the board, the Division recommends:
· The board be limited to setting the minimum competency
requirement for licensure; and
· The board works with the Division of Occupational
Licensing to enforce statutory and regulatory
requirement for licensees.
Vice-Chair Stoltze asked if the Division of Occupational
Licensing had made a good faith effort because he did not
want to award bad behavior. Ms. Davidson explained that her
comments resulted from providing sunset audits for various
boards and commissions over the last 15 years. One of the
things that the Division realized was that boards are more
active in updating regulations and responding to changes in
the profession, which typically does not happen when there
is not a board. She concluded that there is no one to
screen.
2:25:53 PM
In response to Vice-Chair Stoltze, Ms. Davidson reported
that they did not attempt to analyze what that Division did
or did not do. There is nothing in statute or regulations
to address best practices. One of the keys to best
practices is to have a written contract. When there is no
contract between the client and the guide, then the Division
can ask investigators to visit the compliant, however, there
will be no written criteria.
2:28:02 PM
MATT ROBUS, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF WILDLIFE CONSERVATION,
DEPARTMENT OF FISH & GAME, testified in support of the
legislation. The Board of Game and the Department of Fish &
Game both support the bill, as it would be an aid for proper
management. The State needs to have some control over
commercial use of wildlife. A board would allow all the
industry to come together to form new regulations and change
industry standards. When the control resides within a
department, there is access but not in an open and
centralized format.
Mr. Robus added that the Department of Fish & Game provides
expertise to the Board of Game. The Board of Game makes
most of the wildlife regulations in the State. He spoke to
measures and restrictions. He pointed out that there have
been convoluted attempts to write regulations in the State,
which address conflict.
Mr. Robus noted that the Department acknowledges that a
board would be a good starting compromise. Over time,
regulations will address the problems that have surfaced.
The Board of Game will manage the biological "side of
things" and both guiding and transport will be addressed
through legislation.
Vice-Chair Stoltze referenced Section 6, the violations of a
State or federal law or regulations that are inconsistent
with State law. He stated that he did not want to endorse
anything that was in violation of federal law. Mr. Robus
responded that the federal government has jurisdiction
within some of the conservation system units. There is
guiding allowed in certain parts of refuges and reserves,
with rules imposed by the federal government, not by the
State. He pointed out that there are federal wildlife
regulations even on State managed lands. A layering of
State and federal wildlife law is in place, which varies
depending on the piece of land.
2:34:41 PM
RICK THOMPSON, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), REGIONAL
MANAGER, DIVISION OF MINING LAND AND WATER, DEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL RESOURCES, ANCHORAGE, voiced support for the
legislation, which should help the Division do their work
more efficiently.
2:35:25 PM
JOE KLUTSCH, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), PRESIDENT,
ALASKA PROFESSIONAL HUNTERS ASSOCIATION, KING SALMON,
testified in support of the legislation. He emphasized that
the guiding component facilitates up to $2 million in
private funds, going to tag administration. He observed
that guides are subject to multiple regulations by various
agencies. Mr. Klutsch stressed that there is a basic
disconnect between mission assignments, jurisdiction and
something comprehensive that works for all. The Board would
allow discussion among the key players and he urged passage
of the bill.
2:42:06 PM
BOB FITHIAN, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, ALASKA PROFESSIONAL HUNTERS ASSOCIATION, LOWER
TONSINA, testified in support of the legislation and urged
that it be moved from Committee.
2:42:58 PM
KIM FRANKLIN, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), NORTHWEST
ARCTIC BOROUGH PLANNING DEPARTMENT, KOTZEBUE, testified in
support of the legislation, which would strengthen the
oversight of guides and transporters. Such legislation
should ensure that it has significant public participation
from private landowners, municipal and borough governments,
where guides and transporters go to hunt big game. She
recommended that regulations be adopted only after
significant input by affected villages, boroughs and
municipalities.
Ms. Franklin noted that the Borough is concerned about the
impact that the current unregulated hunts would have on the
resources within the Northwest Arctic Borough. She
suggested that the current trend would lead to a huge
negative impact on resources and ability for local residents
to obtain food in the future.
2:46:07 PM
PETE SCHAEFFER, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), KOTZEBUE
FISH AND GAME ADVISORY COMMITTEE, KOTZEBUE, testified in
support of the legislation. He stated that the legislation
includes a methodology for adequate resource management. He
noted the current lack of enforcement options, which adds to
the significant transporting issues. He pointed out a
concern with transporters in the delicate watershed areas.
Mr. Schaeffer advised that the title lacked any mention of
transporters, and questioned if there was an implied
inclusion.
2:50:11 PM
ROBERT HARDY, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), MAT-SU, warned
that boards could move from one extreme to another and that
members of the public would then become disenfranchised as
the board becomes more politicized. He pointed out that the
proposed board appeared to be weighted toward industry with
insignificant public participation. Mr. Hardy thought that
the ability to redraft guide areas could become divisive and
that predatory control could also be controversial.
Mr. Hardy thought that the reporting requirement for
suspected violations is too lenient and that he would like
to see a tighter timeframe. He added that as written, the
legislation doesn't decrease or restrict expansion of the
industry, nor does it enhance opportunities. He stressed
that the industry is highly competitive and that he would
like to see industry contribute more to the development of
resources. He recommended "trophy fees" for individual
guides.
2:56:03 PM
CYNTHIA HORA, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ATTORNEY
REPRESENTING THE NORTHWEST ARCTIC BOROUGH, ANCHORAGE, noted
that she would make suggested changes to the text of the
bill. She spoke to the board's composition. The Borough
supports the concept of limited industry representation.
Ms. Hora understood that there would be an amendment
proposed that would require 4 members from the industry and
5 members not representing the industry; the Borough would
support that amendment. The Borough would recommend that
the 2 public members not hold a license under this chapter.
Ms. Hora recommended that a member should have resided in
Alaska for at least ten years, requirements of the original
board.
Ms. Hora referenced Section 5, which involves the board's
authority to adopt regulations. She recommended
incorporating language from Pages 17 & 19, which refers to
the board's ability to amend. Additionally, Section 30,
Subsection G, language be moved to the board's authority to
adopt regulations. She addressed Section 6, noting
Legislative Audit's concern with game management and
consumer protection. Ms. Hora added that the Borough is
also concerned with environmental aspects, and offered
suggested language in Section 6 to address environmental
violations. Section 8, #2, adds language "in Alaska".
Section 25, Subsection 4, adds language "borough land" and
in Section 35, which addresses requiring permission, the
Borough would like to be included. In addition to requiring
permission, Ms. Hora recommended that the statute require
proof in the initial application phase. In Section 31, the
Borough supports adding language a "political subdivision".
Ms. Hora summarized concerns that the Northwest Borough has
voiced and that the term guide/outfitter has not been
defined. She offered to work directly with Representative
Samuels and Representative Joule's staff.
3:04:05 PM
Representative Weyhrauch asked if amendments would be
incorporated. Co-Chair Meyer replied that there are
presently two amendments before the Committee.
Vice-Chair Stoltze requested that someone from the industry
be present to address the regulatory amendments.
3:05:06 PM
PAUL JOHNSON, ALASKA PROFESSIONAL HUNTERS ASSOCIATION,
GUIDE, JUNEAU, stated that he has been an Alaskan guide for
over 30-years. He acknowledged that there is no perfect
legislation but urged that the bill move forward. It has
been 10 years since there was a board and during that time,
there have been many problems. He mentioned the private
landholders who have been responsive and involved in the
industry.
Mr. Johnson recommended that the board be kept at 7 members
for cost reasons, eliminating public members. He urged that
the legislation quickly pass from Committee.
Vice-Chair Stoltze clarified that the board intends to pay
for itself. Mr. Johnson acknowledged that was correct; the
guides will pick up most of the costs. He added that this
is "one stop shopping" for the Department and boards. When
every business promotes regulations, the result is that it
becomes very scattered. He guaranteed that the legislation
would save the State administrative costs. In response to
Vice-Chair Stoltze, Mr. Johnson reiterated that he supported
a 7-member board, which would be more efficient and cost
effective.
3:10:14 PM
Vice-Chair Stoltze asked about enforcement fines and
penalties associated with the bill.
Representative Foster mentioned faxed testimony received
from a member of his district and asked that it be included
in member's packets.
Representative Samuels commented that the biggest concern he
heard voiced was reference to exclusive use areas. He
stressed that HB 76 has nothing to do with that. HB 76
takes only the licensing duties and moves them to a board
with some expertise. He acknowledged that there is inherent
conflict between the guides and the transporters. The board
would simply creates a forum to address problems that come
up.
Representative Samuels indicated that the exact wording of
the bill passed the Senate last year. A lot of work has
already gone into the bill. He offered to work with members
of the Committee to address their concerns. He reiterated
intent to establish only a framework.
Vice-Chair Stoltze referenced language in Section 6, Line
23, "fined more than $1,000 dollars in the previous 12
months". He asked if it would be considered a serious
offense and thought the language might be too strict.
MAJOR HOWARD STARBARD, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE),
ADMINISTRATIVE COMMANDER, ALASKA STATE TROOPERS, ANCHORAGE,
responded to Section 6, indicating that the federal section
was added and was not limited to Alaska as there are many
guides who come from the lower 48, who have extensive
records. The State has no authority to keep them from
guiding in Alaska. It is not restricted.
Major Starbard addressed the tiered system penalty. If a
person is convicted of a violation of the law and they are
fined more than $1,000 dollars and/or imprisoned for 5-days
or more, they could not renew their licenses for 5-years.
The tiered system has made that more reasonable so if during
that 5-year sentence, instead it would be changed to 1-year.
He noted that the point system would be similar to that used
for a driver's license.
3:18:42 PM
Major Starbard continued that the proposed system would be
much more reasonable. He pointed out that in many cases,
guides are fined just under the $1,000 dollars simply
because their livelihood would be lost for 5-years at the
$1,000 level.
Vice-Chair Stoltze asked Representative Samuels to address
his intent. Representative Samuels replied that the penalty
would be spread out. Vice-Chair Stoltze asked if it would
have to be a hunting violation. Representative Samuels
replied that it would have to be a State or federal hunting
violation. He emphasized that the language had not been
changed.
Vice-Chair Stoltze was concerned how the decisions and
penalties would affect "real people and real lives". He
stated that the $1,000 fine was a lot. Representative
Samuels reiterated that none of the definitions have been
changed, however, the fine structure was changed slightly.
Vice-Chair Stoltze requested that someone from the industry
testify.
3:23:18 PM
Mr. Johnson pointed out that the courts have been holding
the fines at $999 dollars so that the license would not be
revoked. He acknowledged that situations do happen but
urged that the bill not be held up.
Vice-Chair Stoltze maintained his concern with the
possibilities, which could be fined.
Representative Joule asked about the fiscal note submitted
from the Department of Community & Economic Development. He
elaborated that most hunting activities come from areas not
represented in the note.
RICK URION, DIRECTOR, OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING, DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, replied that the staff
that prepares the notes has had years of experience in
government. Representative Joule indicated that he wanted
to be guaranteed that the "rest" of Alaska does not get
"lost" and that the Board represents interests in all parts
of Alaska.
Mr. Urion assured members that the person that wrote the
note did not intend to slight any portion of the State.
Representative Joule reiterated his concern. Representative
Samuels commented that the distances were similar as between
Ketchikan and Juneau to Anchorage and Barrow and Kotzebue to
Anchorage for scheduled meetings. Representative Joule
hoped that was the case.
Mr. Urion clarified for the record that the Department and
the Division have aggressively attempted to change the
current situation. He pointed out that only his Division
had submitted amendments last year.
3:29:07 PM
Representative Weyhrauch inquired if board members would be
able to make decisions. Mr. Urion understood that was the
intent.
Representative Weyhrauch asked if language should be
included that specifies that members deliberate and vote.
Representative Samuels replied that it would be the same
noting the inherent conflict between the transporters and
the guides. He acknowledged that there are other concerns
that Representative Joule's amendments would address.
3:31:45 PM
Co-Chair Meyer stated that the bill would be heard on the
February 10, 2005 meeting and he anticipated that it would
move from Committee at that time.
Representative Foster asked about fines for littering.
Representative Samuels did not think those would be
included, as they are not hunting violations.
Representative Foster discussed hunters leaving messes and
if they would be fined for that. Representative Samuels
acknowledged the conflict between transporters and guides is
a major issue. He emphasized that the legislation does not
change the definition of a transporter and the exclusions
included in that category guarantee that the 135 operators
are not included in the bill's language.
3:35:13 PM
HB 76 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 3:35 P.M.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|