Legislature(2021 - 2022)SENATE FINANCE 532
05/17/2021 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
Note: the audio
and video
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
Audio | Topic |
---|---|
Start | |
HB41 | |
HB117 | |
SB50 | |
Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ | TELECONFERENCED | ||
+= | HB 41 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+= | HB 117 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+= | SB 50 | TELECONFERENCED | |
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 41(FIN) "An Act relating to management of enhanced stocks of shellfish; authorizing certain nonprofit organizations to engage in shellfish enhancement projects; relating to application fees for salmon hatchery permits and shellfish enhancement project permits; relating to the marketing of aquatic farm products by the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute; and providing for an effective date." 9:10:14 AM Co-Chair Bishop relayed that it was the first hearing of HB 41, however the committee had already heard public testimony on, and passed, the companion legislation, SB 64. Senator Hoffman MOVED to ADOPT proposed committee substitute for CSHB 41(FIN), Work Draft 32-LS0291\G (Bullard, 5/13/21). 9:11:04 AM AT EASE 9:11:30 AM RECONVENED Senator Hoffman MOVED to ADOPT proposed committee substitute for CSHB 41(FIN), Work Draft 32-LS0291\G (Bullard, 5/13/21). Co-Chair Bishop OBJECTED for discussion. 9:12:05 AM ERIN SHINE, STAFF, SENATOR CLICK BISHOP, spoke to the proposed Committee Substitute (CS). She spoke to the changes from version I to version G: Deletes Sections 7-12 from Version I Removes the promotion of aquatic farm products from the purview of the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute. Ms. Shine added that the bill also made technical and conforming changes pertaining to the effective date section. She added that version I had previously provided additional powers to the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute (ASMI) board to market aquatic farm product, in addition to commercially harvested seafood from Alaska. She stated that ASMIs current seafood marketing activities were funded from the Seafood Marketing Assessment under AS 16.51.120, which was not collected from aquatic farms. She furthered that it was therefore appropriate for the aquatic farmers of fisheries such as kelp, crab, and oysters to first be a stable market and overtime be able to establish a self- assessment to contribute towards marking of their products via ASMI before the removed provisions of the previous bill version became law. 9:13:24 AM Co-Chair Bishop asked whether the sponsor agreed with the proposed changes to the legislation. 9:13:37 AM REPRESENTATIVE DAN ORTIZ, SPONSOR, commented that HB 41 had the ASMI provision as a part of the bill. He shared that ASMI was currently charged with marketing wild-caught Alaskan seafood and was currently prohibited from marketing aquatic farm products. He said that without a change in the statute, ASMI could not market farm products such as oysters and kelp. He noted that the bill included sunset language that limited how long ASMI could market aquatic farm products, which incentivized the industry, the Department of Revenue, and ASMI to determine a feasible way for the industry to buy in to the marking. He thought it was a key point that the bill would allow for mariculture industry to seek grants and other non-state funds that could be used to cover marketing costs. Representative Ortiz relayed that when he had spoken to a representative from ASMI and had been assured that ASMI had no intention of using money donated by people or groups to market traditional products. He stressed that the intent for ASMI was to gain access to federal resources that were specifically for the marketing of mariculture products. 9:16:51 AM Senator Hoffman requested information about which parts of the state contributed to the ASMI budget. He did not believe the testifier had answered as to whether he supported the CS. Representative Ortiz asserted that he would like to see the passage of HB 41. 9:17:44 AM Senator Olson commented on the multi-management of the industry. He aske whether the commercial crab industry would be solely managed by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (DF&G). Representative Ortiz was not sure he understood Senator Olson's question. Senator Olson asked who would be managing the crab industry in the Bering Sea. Representative Ortiz stated that he did not have an answer to the question. 9:19:03 AM Senator Olson restated his question. He thought, looking at the current bill version, it appeared there had been consolidation of shellfish management in his district to DF&G. SAM RABUNG, DIRECTOR, COMMERCIAL FISHERIES, JUNEAU (via teleconference), did not think that the bill referenced fisheries management. He relayed that the bill pertained to the permitting of the shellfish enhancement projects, which would be managed as shellfish were currently managed. Senator Olson understood that there was no change in the management system within the crab industry. Mr. Rabung said that was correct. Senator Olson asked the sponsor whether enhancement of shellfish farming included crab. Representative Ortiz replied in the affirmative. 9:20:43 AM Senator Wielechowski asked whether the department had a preference between the proposed CS and the original version that came to the senate from the other body. Mr. Rabung replied that the CS did not affect the work of DF&G. He revealed that he was a member of the governor's Mariculture Taskforce, and one of the goals had been to find a way to allow ASMI to market all seafood and not only commercially harvested seafood. 9:21:56 AM Senator Olson asked the sponsor whether he had been in contact with any of the participants of the Community Development Quota (CDQ) program in the affected areas. Representative Ortiz had not specifically been in contact with those groups. He noted that United Fishermen of Alaska, who represented those groups, were in support of the bill. 9:22:40 AM Senator Wilson supported the legislation. He wondered whether there was additional language that could be added to allow for federal receipt authority or additional grants. 9:23:25 AM Senator Hoffman thought there was a way to do what Senator Wilson suggested. He thought while the bill wanted to use ASMI as a marketing agent, the bill did not allow for collection of taxes from aquatic farms. He thought there might be a way to include a tax that would fund the ASMI marketing activity. Co-Chair Bishop WITHDREW his objection. There being NO further OBJECTION, it was so ordered. CSHB 41(FIN) was HEARD and HELD in committee for further consideration.
Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
---|---|---|
SB 50 06 - Supp ProjectDetailByAgency.pdf |
SFIN 5/17/2021 9:00:00 AM |
SB 50 |
SB 50 05 - SCS1 ProjectDetailByHD.pdf |
SFIN 5/17/2021 9:00:00 AM |
SB 50 |
SB 50 03 - SCS1 Cap AgencySummary UGF.pdf |
SFIN 5/17/2021 9:00:00 AM |
SB 50 |
SB 50 02 - SCS1 Cap AgencySummary All Funds.pdf |
SFIN 5/17/2021 9:00:00 AM |
SB 50 |
SB 50 04 - SCS1 ProjectDetailByAgency.pdf |
SFIN 5/17/2021 9:00:00 AM |
SB 50 |
SB 50 01- SB 50 Version N, 16 May 2021.pdf |
SFIN 5/17/2021 9:00:00 AM |
SB 50 |
HB 41 Explanation of Changes ver I to G 5.13.2021.pdf |
SFIN 5/17/2021 9:00:00 AM SFIN 1/31/2022 1:00:00 PM |
HB 41 |
HB 41 Work Draft ver. G 5.13.2021.pdf |
SFIN 5/17/2021 9:00:00 AM SFIN 1/31/2022 1:00:00 PM |
HB 41 |