Legislature(2007 - 2008)CAPITOL 124
01/31/2007 01:00 PM House RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB40 | |
| HB87 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 87 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 40 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 87 - CITIZEN ADVISORY COMM ON FEDERAL AREAS 1:54:11 PM CO-CHAIR JOHNSON announced that the last order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 87, "An Act reestablishing the Citizens' Advisory Commission on Federal Management Areas in Alaska; and providing for an effective date." 1:55:35 PM REPRESENTATIVE WILSON moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 87, Version 25-LS0306\L, Bullard, 1/31/07, as the working document. There being no objection, Version L was before the committee. 1:55:45 PM SUE STANCLIFF, Staff to Representative Mike Kelly, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor, on behalf of Representative Kelly, summarized the 1/25/07 legal opinion prepared by Legislative Legal and Research Services. The opinion clearly states, she said, that since the Citizens' Advisory Commission on Federal Management Areas in Alaska acts only in an advisory capacity and makes no final decisions affecting anyone's rights; the opinion does not envision the state being held liable because of the commission's actions. MS. STANCLIFF, on the issue of the prior commission's funding history, said that Legislative Legal and Research Services prepared a history which shows the commission began in 1987 with two staff [and an annual budget of $209,800] and ended in 1999 with a staff of one and a budget of $86,300. She further noted the committee's packets include letters of support from the Alaska Outdoor Council and the Kenai River Sportfishing Association. 1:58:11 PM REPRESENTATIVE MIKE KELLY, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor, detailed the changes encompassed in Version L. The number of commission members, as outlined in proposed AS 41.37.170, has been reduced from 16 members to 12 and this reduction could have a positive impact on the fiscal note, he commented. He then directed attention to page 2, proposed AS 41.37.190, and noted that all terms are now four years. He also pointed out that the transitional language on page 4 provides for staggering of the terms in order to preserve the commission's historical perspective. Version L also establishes a sunset date of June 30, 2014, which is intended to give the commission sufficient time to get up and running, he advised. 2:00:46 PM CO-CHAIR JOHNSON asked whether Version L addresses the committee's concerns about the commission's regional make-up. REPRESENTATIVE KELLY responded that both he and Tina Cunning believe the original language is adequate and allows for a commission that is responsive to and reflective of the different users and uses. Also, the original language helps ensure diversity because of its reference to the four judicial districts. He expressed concern about getting tied up by being too specific. 2:02:32 PM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON pointed out that on other commissions the seats are designated so that when re-appointments are made and the people change, the diversity remains. He opined that given the seven year timeline, it is especially important to ensure diversity. 2:03:54 PM CO-CHAIR JOHNSON said he is unsure whether the committee understands the users and uses that would be dealt with by the commission. 2:04:26 PM REPRESENTATIVE WILSON inquired whether the users would be trappers, hunters, fishermen, and/or other users. REPRESENTATIVE KELLY noted that in addition to the aforementioned, there are miners and many others, so trying to be specific will result in missing some. Additionally, he pointed out, it is unknown today what changes in uses might occur in the future. 2:06:45 PM REPRESENTATIVE KELLY, in response to a question, said that commission members appointed by the legislature will be appointed by the speaker of the House and the Senate president. 2:08:52 PM CO-CHAIR GATTO moved adoption of [Conceptual Amendment 1], to delete from page 2, line 24, after "by", the words, "a member of". There being no objection, Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted. REPRESENTATIVE KELLY, in response to comments, reiterated his belief that it would not be a good idea to make the bill too specific with regard to membership make-up. 2:11:23 PM ROD ARNO, Executive Director, Alaska Outdoor Council (AOC), stated the AOC's support for reestablishing the Citizens' Advisory Commission on Federal Areas in Alaska. He described his participation on behalf of the AOC in a number of federal public processes dealing with access, the [U.S.] Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and resource management plans around the state for federal refuges, parks, and wild and scenic rivers. He noted the AOC was an intervener in a lawsuit blocking recreational access in the Nabesna Road area. The AOC is also an intervener with the state on navigable waters issues. Mr. Arno said he has participated in game management issues, and has provided public comment on hunting closures of the Kenai's Skilak Lake Loop area, as well as bear hunting in the McNeil River area. Additionally, the AOC has participated before the Federal Subsistence Board on the "rural/non-rural determination." In all of these cases, he stressed, it would have been nice to have had this commission to help the citizens of Alaska. 2:13:45 PM RICKY GEASE, Executive Director, Kenai River Sportfishing Association (KRSA), presented his organization's support of HB 87. He explained that the KRSA interacts with the federal government regarding fishery conservation concerns and access issues on the Kenai Peninsula. 2:14:14 PM REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked Mr. Arno whether he felt comfortable with how the bill is worded regarding the diversity of users and uses. MR. ARNO stated that based on his experience with the prior commission, it seemed that the different users of public land were represented. Responding further to Representative Wilson, he said he believes the language is identical to that of the original authorizing legislation. 2:15:02 PM CO-CHAIR GATTO asked Mr. Arno whether he thought the state could really have any influence over federal management of federal lands. He also asked for Mr. Arno's opinion regarding a hypothetical situation in which the federal government were the one with an advisory commission before the state. MR. ARNO cited a case on navigable waters as an example that the only way to get the attention of federal land managers is in court. The commission could tell the legislature and the administration when it will be necessary to file suit in court. Another example he cited involved environmental organizations suing to block access in the Nebesna Road area of Wrangell-St. Elias National Park & Preserve. It would have been nice to have the state intervene in that suit, he remarked; unfortunately, litigation [seems to be] the only way to get the attention of federal land managers. Additionally, he said, it would be fine with him if the shoe were on the other foot and the federal government had an advisory committee before the state. 2:17:59 PM CO-CHAIR GATTO expressed his belief that a commission assembling information would be much more credible than an individual person. 2:18:35 PM CO-CHAIR JOHNSON asked about the issue of the commission's make- up and the need for designating specific user groups as opposed to the language currently in the bill. 2:18:54 PM TINA CUNNING, Special Assistant, State/Federal Issues, Office of the Commissioner, Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), noted that she has been involved in the implementation of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) since its passage in 1980. DICK MYLIUS, Acting Director, Central Office, Division of Mining, Land and Water, Department of Natural Resources (DNR), said there are both pros and cons to having specific language regarding the commission's makeup. He indicated that some of the various advisory committees advising the DNR, primarily those for parks, do have very specific requirements for make-up. For example, the Wood-Tikchik State Park Management Council requires that specific villages be represented on the [council]. In those areas where it is for a specific area like a park, he said he thought it had worked very well. Since some commissions have general guidelines like [HB 87] and some have very specific ones, he said he finds it hard to say whether one way works better than the other. But, he said, he felt that if the language were too specific it could create problems. 2:21:15 PM MS. CUNNING added that the appointments are made by the governor, the Senate president, and the speaker of the House. In her opinion, she relayed, that alone ensures that there will be a wide variety of representation. The four judicial districts will also be looking at it to make sure the user groups are represented. 2:21:49 PM CO-CHAIR JOHNSON closed public testimony on HB 87. 2:22:06 PM CO-CHAIR GATTO asked Representative Kelly whether he is aware of any lawsuits brought against the federal government as a result of action taken by the commission. REPRESENTATIVE KELLY said he is unaware of any such lawsuits. He went on to explain that the beauty of the commission is that it resolves problems without having to file suits. A commission composed of Alaskans, ensures that the state's residents are treated fairly according to the law. It may well prevent lawsuits, he emphasized, rather than triggering them. 2:23:32 PM REPRESENTATIVE ROSES said he appreciated the opinion from Legislative Legal and Research Services, but remains concerned about creating a disparity, and the position it could put the state in if the commission advises the attorney general to file a suit in one case but not in another. In this regard, he added, the testimony from [the AOC and the KRSA] that "it would have been nice to have help" on the two lawsuits makes him feel worse rather than better. He supports the concept, he explained, but still has difficulty with the lawsuit provision of [Section 41.37.250]. 2:24:34 PM REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI asked whether the sponsor would object to removing the suit provision of [Section 41.37.250], since it seems obvious that commissions have an opportunity to recommend a course of action to any department. He noted he had never seen "that word" in any statute pertaining to any other commission. REPRESENTATIVE KELLY responded that he would have a problem removing [Section 41.37.250]. He said that specifically stating in the bill that the commission has the power to recommend legal action to the attorney general puts more teeth into it. 2:25:57 PM REPRESENTATIVE WILSON surmised that the commission would be able to recommend suit regardless of whether the language pertaining to suits is included in the bill. REPRESENTATIVE KELLY acknowledged that since the bill does not prevent suits, it could be construed to mean that the commission could recommend suits. However, he pointed out that the commission is strictly advisory because it cannot bring or file a lawsuit it can only make the recommendation. 2:26:43 PM REPRESENTATIVE WILSON noted that the aforementioned legal opinion does not say anything about lawsuits. REPRESENTATIVE KELLY concurred that the opinion illustrates that the commission is strictly advisory, that it cannot bring or file an action. 2:27:11 PM CO-CHAIR JOHNSON agreed that the ability to recommend a lawsuit gives the commission some teeth and brings people to the table. He said he felt it would be unwise to take that provision out of the bill. 2:27:58 PM CO-CHAIR GATTO asked if the fiscal note is still indeterminate. REPRESENTATIVE KELLY said it is. MS. STANCLIFF informed the committee that there would be a new fiscal note based on Version L which reduces the number of commission members. She also noted, however, that the decision regarding the number and location of commission staff has not yet been made and so the fiscal note remains indeterminate. REPRESENTATIVE KELLY said he did not know whether a solid number for the fiscal note could be determined at this time, but remarked that parameters have now been set for arriving at a more solid number. 2:29:21 PM CO-CHAIR JOHNSON suggested that a fiscal note could be extrapolated by reviewing the history of the previous commission. 2:29:36 PM REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI questioned whether there really is no other commission, no other department, and no other person in the Department of Law or the ADF&G, that actually reacts to federal issues within the state. He has a problem, he stressed, with establishing more commissions when there are already commissions for too many things that could be dealt with in- house. MS. STANCLIFF responded that there are currently no other departments, agencies, divisions, or entities that are representing the public on federal issues. There are ANILCA coordinators in the DNR and the ADF&G, but they are there for the state, not the general public. She explained that citizens are not familiar enough with the ANILCA to be able to interpret federal regulations. She said she believes Alaska's citizens are being harassed [by federal land managers] and that is why reestablishing the commission is important. 2:31:45 PM REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI asked if this meant that had he been a user with questions or comments over the past several years without the commission, would he not have had a way to talk to someone in the commissioners' offices. MS. STANCLIFF said no. The public has had to call the legislature, but legislative staff does not have the expertise to interpret federal regulations. She cited a case that she dealt with in her office that took over two years to resolve, but that a commission could have resolved the case in a month because of its expertise. 2:32:56 PM REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON observed that the real question is not whether the commission serves a valid purpose, but whether the state can afford another commission while departments are being asked to make budget cuts. 2:33:48 PM CO-CHAIR JOHNSON disagreed. He suggested the committee deal only with the bill's resource aspect and let the House Finance Committee deal with the financial aspect. 2:34:18 PM REPRESENTATIVE WILSON moved to report the proposed CS for HB 87, Version 25-LS0306\L, Bullard, 1/31/07, as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB 87(RES) was reported from the House Resources Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|