Legislature(2023 - 2024)ADAMS 519
05/02/2023 01:30 PM House 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 | |
| HB3 | |
| HB83 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 3 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 83 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
May 2, 2023
1:35 p.m.
1:35:48 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Foster called the House Finance Committee meeting
to order at 1:35 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bryce Edgmon, Co-Chair
Representative Neal Foster, Co-Chair
Representative DeLena Johnson, Co-Chair
Representative Julie Coulombe
Representative Mike Cronk
Representative Alyse Galvin
Representative Sara Hannan
Representative Andy Josephson
Representative Dan Ortiz
Representative Will Stapp
Representative Frank Tomaszewski
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Representative Kevin McCabe, Sponsor; Buddy Whitt, Chief of
Staff, Representative Kevin McCabe; Ryan McKee, Staff,
Representative George Rauscher; Kris Curtis, Legislative
Auditor, Alaska Division of Legislative Audit.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Pam Leary, Director, Treasury Division, Department of
Revenue; Robert Pearson, State/Federal Programs Manager,
Department of Community and Regional Affairs; George
Hightower, Self, Wasilla; Hans Zigmend, Director, Division
of Finance, Department of Administration; Cori Mills,
Deputy Attorney General, Department of Law; Ashlee Adoko,
Office of Project Management and Permits, Department of
Natural Resources; Charlie Lean, Last Acting Chair,
Citizens Advisory Council, Nome; Louis Cusack, Executive
Director, Safari Club International Alaska Chapter, Alaska,
Chugach; Richard Bishop, Self, Fairbanks; Benjamin Mallott,
Vice President, Alaska Federation of Natives, Anchorage.
SUMMARY
HB 3 GOLD AND SILVER SPECIE AS LEGAL TENDER
HB 3 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
HB 83 CITIZEN ADVISORY COMM ON FEDERAL AREAS
HB 83 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
Co-Chair Foster reviewed the meeting agenda.
HOUSE BILL NO. 3
"An Act relating to specie as legal tender in the
state; and relating to borough and city sales and use
taxes on specie."
1:37:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KEVIN MCCABE, SPONSOR, provided a brief
recap of the legislation. He read from a prepared
statement:
The purpose of HB 3 was to recognize Alaska's
constitutional duty, power and right under Section 10,
Article I, of the United States Constitution, and the
Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution to
make gold and silver legal tender in the payment of
debt. The legislation would secure the rights of
citizens of this state under the Ninth and Tenth
Amendments of the United States Constitution to tender
gold and silver in the payment of a debt should the
merchant or payee agree to accept it. The bill took
the first step in protecting specie from the borough
city use or exchange tax. He added that 12 other
states adopted laws to accept gold and silver coins as
legal tender. As of 2022, 42 states had removed some
or all taxes from the purchase of gold and silver.
The bill would preserve, protect, and promote the
state and its economic security, safety, health, and
welfare of the people of this state; and protect the
state and its citizens in the acquisition and
possession of gold and silver and their use as legal
tender in the payment of debt.
1:38:54 PM
Co-Chair Foster asked for a review of the sectional
analysis.
BUDDY WHITT, CHIEF OF STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE KEVIN MCCABE,
reviewed the sectional analysis (copy on file):
Section 1 amends A.S. 29.45.650(a) to include a new
subsection (l) outlined under Section 2 below.
Section 2 amends AS 29.45.650 to add a new subsection
to protect "specie" from a borough sales or use tax on
the sale or exchange of specie.
Section 3 amends AS 29.45.700(a) to include a new
subsection (h) outlined under Section 4 below.
Section 4 amends AS 29.45.700 to add a new subsection
to protect "specie" from a city sales or use tax on
the sale or exchange of specie.
Section 5 amends AS 44.12 to add Article 5. Legal
Tender which defines "legal tender" in the state to
include gold and silver tender including "specie."
This section also states that person is not required
to accept gold or silver specie as tender and defines
"specie" and "legal tender."
Section 5 is further amended by adding a new section
to read: "The House Finance committee shall study the
possibility of establishing additional forms of legal
tender for the payment of debts, including public
charges, taxes, and other money owed to the state. If
the committee determines that additional forms of
tender are practical and beneficial, the committee
shall prepare legislation establishing an additional
form of legal tender for introduction."
Section 6. Section 4, ch. 100, SLA 2002, as repealed
and reenacted by sec. 9, ch. 117, SLA 2003 and sec. 2,
ch 30, SLA 2005 is repealed, reenacted, and amended to
read as outlined in Section 1 above.
Mr. Whitt noted Section 5 regarding the House Finance
Committee making the determination regarding additional
forms of legal tender and informed the committee that the
sponsor was agreeable to amending the provision.
Representative Galvin shared that she had taken some time
to read up on the constitution. She pondered what
implementation of HB 3 would look like. She wondered if
passage of the bill would send a message to Alaskans that
they could pull their gold bars out of storage and pay for
debt in that way. Representative McCabe responded in the
negative. The tender would have to be in the form of a coin
with a stamp stating its purity and value in ounces. If a
merchant accepted the specie, the merchant and buyer would
come to an agreement on the value of the coin and the
merchant would provide change in whatever method of his or
her choosing (specie or money). He stressed that the
transaction was purely voluntary. Representative Galvin
asked for verification that the exchange between an Alaskan
and any vendor was voluntary. Representative McCabe
responded in the affirmative. Representative Galvin cited
page 2, line 21 of the bill as follows:
The House Finance Committee shall study the
possibility of establishing additional forms of legal
tender for the payment of debts
Representative Galvin did not know it was within the scope
of the Finance Committee and questioned how that would
work. Representative McCabe replied that Representative
Hannan had brought the issue up the previous year. He
recently spoke with Co-Chair Foster's office about changing
the committee to the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee
(LBA). He explained that the provision left the door open
for the legislature to further consider the issue.
1:45:03 PM
In response to a question by, Representative Galvin,
Representative McCabe answered that the transaction was not
on paper, it was actually a gold coin called specie. It
was not a gold certificate; the specie was stamped by
weight based on a troy ounce. Representative Galvin
questioned whether whatever was exchanged or agreed upon,
may be worth something else the next day because gold was a
commodity. She understood there were things like inflation,
but it was not exactly the same with specie, there was some
risk. She asked what the sponsor would say if gold was used
one day, and its value tanked the next day. There might be
merchants that fault the state for legalizing the tender
and putting them at risk.
1:46:58 PM
Representative McCabe related a historical story about
using a gold eagle worth $20 as currency. He reported
that today a gold eagle was worth $2,200 and believed that
gold had tracked with the rest of commodities, but money
had not because of inflation. He thought that gold held a
higher value and was not subject to inflation like the
dollar.
Representative Hannan observed that the bill protected gold
and silver specie. She wondered what the differentiation
was from just using a gold nugget. Representative McCabe
responded that the gold had to be coined as money in order
to be recognized by the bill. He ascertained that what she
had described was bartering. Representative Hannan asked
who was backing the currency. She remarked that the state
was not backing the specie. She asked if it was a private
currency exchanged between two people. She was trying to
determine how it was a currency versus a private agreement
between two people over a valued asset. Representative
McCabe answered that it needed no backing because it was
gold. He furthered that each certificate had a serial
number and believed that it was safer than dollars in terms
of counterfeiting.
1:51:22 PM
Representative Cronk asked if the sponsor had reached out
to communities about sales tax loss. Representative McCabe
answered in the affirmative. He had discussed the issue
with the Alaska Municipal League (AML) who thought it could
cost communities $5 million in taxes. He deduced that a $5
million loss at the lowest tax rate of 3 percent would
equate to selling $167 million in specie per year. He noted
another statement by AML that calculated a loss of $3000 in
tax revenue in Wasilla. He spoke to the municipality who
informed Representative McCabe that there was only one gold
and silver buyer licensed in Wasilla who only purchased
gold but did not sell it. He indicated that Juneau had
informed him that they tracked sales tax by vendor in
broader categories and did not know what impact the bill
would have. He shared data from Arkansas with a population
of over 3 million with a tax rate between 6.5 percent and
11.5 percent. Arkansas had lost $255,000 in sales tax due
to its bill legalizing specie. The state of Tennessee lost
$117,000 and Maine had lost $27,000 in sales taxes. He
believed the benefit of the bill outweighed the losses.
Co-Chair Foster asked why stores could not continue to
charge sales tax and keep track, similar to regular
currency. Representative McCabe answered that if a person
used specie to buy something, the sales tax on the purchase
would still apply. However, there would be no sales tax on
the transaction when exchanging a gold specie for money.
The one exception would be on collectible coins or dollars,
which were taxed when purchased.
1:56:49 PM
Representative Tomaszewski asked what the value of 1 troy
ounce would be. Representative McCabe stated the biggest
coin he had seen was valued at $50 and weighed one-fiftieth
of a troy ounce.
Co-Chair Foster moved to the fiscal note discussion.
PAM LEARY, DIRECTOR, TREASURY DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF
REVENUE (via teleconference), relayed that the department
did not have a fiscal note. She did not have additional
comments on the bill.
Representative Galvin referenced Representative McCabe's
statement that another department might study other forms
of tender instead of the House Finance Committee. She
assumed the Department of Revenue (DOR) was not part of the
bill, but if that were the case, she asked if it would take
some resources to carry out the study. Representative
McCabe answered that they had decided a better entity to
address the issue was the Legislative Budget and Audit
Committee. Representative Galvin asked for verification
LB&A would implement the bill and determine the costs.
Representative McCabe answered in the affirmative.
Representative Hannan asked how the department felt about
the bill.
2:00:23 PM
Ms. Leary answered that the department was neutral on the
current version of the bill. She had testified in a
previous committee [House State Affairs Committee] on
Section 5 that authorized a study that included the state
accepting payment in gold or another legal tender. She
informed the committee that the state did not have any
expertise in precious metal within the treasury. She
discovered that there were not many if any states accepting
specie as a payment for taxes. She indicated that if the
state accepted gold, it would be difficult to value the
gold and the state would bear the risk of the valuation.
She understood that there were ways of establishing usage
outside of the treasury, but it was not something the
department could currently handle.
2:01:54 PM
ROBERT PEARSON, STATE/FEDERAL PROGRAMS MANAGER, DEPARTMENT
OF COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS (via teleconference),
spoke to the Department of Commerce, Community and Economic
Development's zero fiscal note FN2 (CED). The bill would
not impact the Department of Commerce, Community and
Economic Developments (DCCED) operations.
2:03:21 PM
Co-Chair Foster OPENED public testimony.
2:04:07 PM
GEORGE HIGHTOWER, SELF, WASILLA (via teleconference), spoke
in support of the bill. He shared that he was 66 years old
and recalled when people carried gold and silver coins in
everyones pockets. He referenced Article 1 and Article 2
of the United States (US) Constitution naming gold and
silver as legal tender in the payment of debt. He recalled
as a child in the early 60s paying for goods and receiving
change in silver quarters and dimes and half dollars coined
by the US Mint. He offered that today the same quarter
coined by the U.S. Mint would purchase more than one gallon
of gas today because the silver quarter would now be worth
$5.00. He believed that proved the stability of using of
silver and gold as the foundation of the monetary system.
He thought that it spoke to the question of taxation and
inflation. The value of silver and gold had kept up and
surpassed inflation over time. He spoke to the effects of
inflation on the dollar. He believed that money was lost
through inflation by not utilizing gold and silver as
money. He believed that the bill was reestablishing
something that was already proven to be a sound system.
He added that other nations were also moving back to
accepting gold and silver as money.
2:11:38 PM
Co-Chair Foster CLOSED public testimony.
Representative Hannan stated that the Alaska Municipal
League had answered some questions that were included in
the bill packet (copy on file). She asked about capital
gains taxes and noted that AML stated species was still
subject to capital gains taxes. She asked for the sponsor's
thoughts on the topic. She asked about the problem the
sponsor was aiming to solve through the bill.
Representative McCabe responded in the affirmative and
stated that specie was still subject to capital gains tax,
and it was a federal requirement. He shared that a
constituent brought the idea of the bill to him who wanted
to store gold specie instead of saving cash. He discovered
that it was possible to pay taxes in Texas with gold.
Representative Hannan stated it was her understanding that
four states had gold specie: Utah, Nevada, Wyoming, and New
Hampshire. She wondered why Alaska needed its own specie if
others existed. Representative McCabe answered that the
state did not need to produce its own specie since other
states specie would be valid. He thought it would be
amazing if Alaska produced its own with images of Denali
and other Alaskan symbols. He added that specie could be
currently purchased but it could not be used in cities that
had sales tax unless tax was paid on the specie.
2:17:07 PM
Representative Stapp thanked the sponsor for bringing the
bill forward. He favored the state to producing its own
specie.
Co-Chair Foster asked the Department of Administration to
review its fiscal note.
HANS ZIGMEND, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION (via teleconference), reviewed the
department's zero fiscal note. He voiced that there would
be minimal impact on the Division of Finance and the State
of Alaska's accounting system, which could be absorbed with
existing resources.
Co-Chair Foster set an amendment deadline of Friday, May 5
at 5:00 p.m.
Representative McCabe appreciated the committee hearing the
bill.
HB 3 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
2:19:46 PM
AT EASE
2:26:23 PM
RECONVENED
HOUSE BILL NO. 83
"An Act reestablishing the Citizens' Advisory
Commission on Federal Management Areas in Alaska; and
providing for an effective date."
2:26:53 PM
RYAN MCKEE, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE RAUSCHER, provided
a brief recap of the bill. He read excerpts from the
sponsor statement:
The Citizens' Advisory Commission on Federal Areas
(CACFA) was CACFA was first established in 1981,
shortly after Congress passed the Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA)comprehensive
legislation governing all federal public lands in the
state. Under the balanced compromise Congress crafted
in ANILCA, 104+ million acres (on top of the ~100
million acres already set aside) were set-aside in
permanent federal ownership as conservation system
units (e.g., parks, preserves, wildlife refuges,
wilderness areas) while at the same time enabling
Alaskan's to maintain their traditions, accommodate
the social and economic needs of the state, provide a
range of land-use and land access rights, safeguard
opportunities for responsible resource development,
and facilitate continued improvements in
transportation and utility infrastructure. The
provisions of ANILCA plus those of the Alaska
Statehood Act and the Alaska Native Claims Settlement
Act (ANCSA) mean that most Alaskans are regulated
under a unique and extremely complex regulatory web.
For the decades that CACFA operated, it was an
independent and impartial source of information and
center for advocacy on Statehood, ANCSA, and ANILCA
issues that impact all Alaskans. CACFA helps Alaskans
navigate complex regulations and works with federal
agencies to ensure Congressional intent is implemented
with respect to Alaska's interests. Among many things,
the Commission holds hearings to collect public
comment on decisions that affect them; disseminates
information about historical and new regulations to
the public, the Executive branch, and the Legislature;
monitors the Federal Register and regularly submits
written comment in response to actions that affect
Alaska; and helps Alaskans navigate federal permitting
processes. While the State's ANILCA program and CACFA
both monitor federal actions, CACFA is the only entity
that represents the views of Alaskan citizens
concerning federal land management plans within the
state.
The last state audit conducted in 2020 concluded that
"there is a continuing public need for the
commission."
2:29:30 PM
Co-Chair Foster asked to hear from the legislative auditor.
KRIS CURTIS, LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR, ALASKA DIVISION OF
LEGISLATIVE AUDIT, reviewed the findings of the legislative
audit [A Sunset Review of the Department of Natural
Resources, Citizens' Advisory Commission on Federal Areas
(CACFA) April 8, 2020, Audit Control Number 10-20121-20]
(copy on file) conducted in 2020. She relayed that the
commission operated effectively and did not significantly
duplicate the efforts of other state entities. The audit
also concluded that there is a continuing public need for
the commission. The audit had recommended the legislature
extend the commission's termination date eight years. No
recommendations had been made for improvements and the
audit found that the commission and its staff were highly
productive and impactful. She pointed to page 21 of the
audit that contained the commissioner of the Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) response in full support of the
eight year extension.
Representative Hannan related that CACFA was last housed in
DNR in the Division of Mining Land and Water and had two
positions: a natural resource manager and a natural
resource specialist. The new DNR fiscal note housed CACFA
in the department's Office of Project Management and
Permitting (OPMP). She asked whether the prior two
positions were able to address public issues. Ms. Curtis
responded that the structure that had been in place was
extremely effective.
Co-Chair Foster asked for a review of the fiscal notes.
CORI MILLS, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF LAW (via
teleconference), reviewed the department's new fiscal
impact fiscal note that included one position. She
explained that in the past, a full time attorney position
had been dedicated to supporting the commission due to the
additional workload it generated for the department.
Currently, it was determined that an additional position
would be warranted again due to the department's high
workloads. The position would be funded through the
Department of Law (DOL) as it was previously.
2:33:49 PM
Representative Josephson asked whether reinstating CACFA
was redundant of things like statehood defense efforts
promoted by the administration and the PAD Unit under DNR.
Ms. Mills deferred to DNR to answer from a policy
perspective and to the sponsor for comment. She shared that
looking back historically at the work DOL accomplished for
CACFA, it consisted of research and legal review DNR was
not providing. Representative Josephson stated that the
sponsor referred to the diversity of users and uses of
federal land. He asked whether Ms. Mills had any
recollection of non-consumptive users being represented by
CACFA. Ms. Mills answered that her knowledge on the issue
was not that specific. She deferred to DNR. Representative
Josephson asked when DOL had been involved, he assumed it
was when the state was in an adversarial role to federal
policy. He asked if CACFA had ever asked the federal
government for more regulations. Ms. Mills answered that
she did not recall comments being submitted or issues
related to more regulation. She remembered that the issues
revolved around tracking federal regulations and asserting
when the interest of Alaskans came into play.
Representative Tomaszewski asked what happened to the
attorney that previously worked on the commission's issues.
Ms. Mills answered that the department had experienced
budget cuts over several years, therefore it was a matter
of attrition over time. She did not see any capacity within
the existing Natural Resources section that could absorb
the extra work. The budget cuts and attrition left the
section unable to take the extra workload on with existing
positions. Representative Tomaszewski surmised that the
position was defunded.
2:38:57 PM
Co-Chair Foster asked DNR to review its fiscal note.
ASHLEE ADOKO, OFFICE OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND PERMITS,
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (via teleconference),
explained the new DNR fiscal impact fiscal note. She
relayed that the fiscal not included one position that
would be necessary to carry out the needs of the program.
The source of the funds was Undesignated General Funds
(UGF). In addition, some funding was necessary for travel,
services, and supplies. Representative Tomaszewski
recounted that the commission had sunset in 2021 and asked
what happened to the prior position. Ms. Adoko responded
that there had been a prior position in DNR according to
the audit report. She was uncertain what happened to the
employee in the position, but it did not exist any longer.
Co-Chair Foster asked if the position was an executive
director position. Ms. Adoko answered in the affirmative.
Co-Chair Foster noted that the position was very
specialized and required the candidate know a lot about the
history of ANILCA and other very technical information. He
deduced that there were not a lot of candidates with the
specific type of knowledge required. He asked if there
would be problems trying to fill the position. Ms. Adoko
confirmed it was a highly specialized area. The department
would reach out to known experts and work closely to build
up the knowledge.
2:43:32 PM
Representative Hannan reiterated that when the commission
was operating, CACFA was last housed in DNR in the Division
of Mining Land and Water and utilized two positions: a
natural resource manager and a natural resource specialist.
She observed that the new fiscal note relocated the
commission to OPMP with one employee designated as a Large
Project Coordinator. The prior positions were described as
specialists in federal permitting of large complex
development projects. She asked why DNR was choosing to
restructure and place the position under OPMP with a large
project coordinator. Ms. Adoko replied that she would need
to verify and follow-up. She understood that the position
had been formerly under OPMP, and the department currently
had a number of staff with the large project coordinator
title. She added that they served various functions
including coordinating the states review and comments on
federal actions and regulations. The role varied in terms
of duties. She would provide follow-up information.
Representative Hannan was supportive of the need, but the
description from statute and concerned citizens suggested
that the position warranted different support duties other
than those carried out by a large project manager. She
deduced that a specialist that dealt with a variety of
agencies on a regular basis was needed. She observed that
the statute was not changing. She wanted to ensure that DNR
was not missing the mark.
2:46:44 PM
Ms. Adoko stated her understanding that it had been housed
under OPMP. She reiterated that large project coordinators
served varying roles and any federal action that needed to
be coordinated required a number of individuals with
different areas of expertise. She indicated that other
staff along with the large project coordinator were
involved in the process.
Co-Chair Edgmon recalled that the commission was reinstated
in 2007 and sunset in 2015 or 2016. The fiscal note in 2015
or 2016 was around $180,000 and there had not been an
additional position under the Department of Law. He noted
that the DNR position was housed differently. He wondered
if the mission of the commission had changed.
Ms. Mills explained that the department had looked back at
the work that had been previously done for the commission.
She was unsure of the specific years. She was not
anticipating more work than what had occurred under the
commission in the past, but it was an addition to the
current workload. She reiterated that DOL previously had an
attorney dedicated to the commission. She recalled three
attorneys helping with the commission at one point. The
fiscal note was based on recent experience.
2:50:17 PM
Co-Chair Edgmon was confident of his memory that the most
recent iteration of the commission did not have a DOL
attorney. He would do the research on his own.
Co-Chair Foster commented that he had the same
recollection.
2:51:08 PM
Co-Chair Foster OPENED public testimony.
CHARLIE LEAN, LAST ACTING CHAIR, CITIZENS ADVISORY COUNCIL,
NOME (via teleconference), shared that he was the last
acting chair of CACFA. The commission had been a 12 person
board with six members appointed by the governor, three
members appointed by the Speaker of the House and three
members appointed by the President of the Senate. He
indicated that the prior executive director would help
Alaskan citizens with permitting issues with the federal
government. The commissioners would review and comment on
materials regarding projects and issues from various
federal agencies submitted as land claims. The
commissioners would hear public comments on primarily
federal and some state land policies. The commissioners had
a varying mix of expertise and would review the directors
work. He recalled that DOL had a part time lawyer devoted
to the commission. He found the position very helpful, and
the person was different from year to year. The attorney
had conducted work on land use issues at the commissions
request. He related that the commission worked on several
major projects in consultation with experts in the field.
2:56:07 PM
[Secretary Note: Some of Mr. Leans final comments were
garbled and inaudible.]
Mr. Lean stated that he had bandwidth problems in Nome. He
informed the committee that there was an electronic library
of all the 20 years' worth of work by the commission. He
felt that the commission provided a lasting service to the
state.
Co-Chair Foster liked the ability to have the commission
work on issues where the public may want to use old
historic trails that may not be able to be used today when
going into a national park in regard to public land. One
concern that he shared was about the commission working on
public access to private land: tribal land or native
corporation land. He asked if there had been any efforts by
the commission to work on access or force access by the
public on private lands. Mr. Lean answered that in the
commission's view they worked on access to public lands
that sometimes accessed across private lands. He recalled
particular issues regarding the Iditarod Trail in the
Susitna area, forest service land in Southeast crossing
corporation land denying public access. He recounted issues
concerning RS 2477 routes that were transferred at
statehood but retracted by the Park Service, navigable
waters, and many other issues. He noted that trails and
access routes often crossed multiple land users and a
balance had to be struck.
3:00:31 PM
LOUIS CUSACK, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SAFARI CLUB INTERNATIONAL
(SCI) ALASKA CHAPTER, ALASKA, CHUGACH (via teleconference),
supported the legislation. He stated that it was a key
legislative priority for SCI. The commission had protected
peoples traditional use on federal public land. He offered
that when a federal agency told hunters they could not
access federal land CACFA helped them understand the
closure or could file an appeal and inform the Alaska
congressional delegation. He exemplified that ANILCA
allowed residents to make a living trapping using new or
existing cabins, but for over 20 years it was prohibited.
When CACFA was informed of the situation, the executive
director elevated the issue to the congressional delegation
and trappers were permitted to use cabins again. He
reported that after CACFA was disbanded, the agency created
many hurtles and no cabin permits were issued for a decade.
In addition, several years ago a federal agency began
restricting access to areas without any basis and federal
land managers were requiring permits for a fee,
disregarding the regulatory process authorized under
ANILCA. He believed that without CACFA the federal agencies
were expanding their authority to restrict use in other
areas. He asked for support of the bill and the
reinstatement of CACFA.
3:03:19 PM
RICHARD BISHOP, SELF, FAIRBANKS (via teleconference),
shared information about his work background related to
ANILCA. He strongly supported HB 83. He reported that he
had followed CACFAs work and testified on issues before
the commission. He believed that the commission was
diligent.
3:05:06 PM
BENJAMIN MALLOTT, VICE PRESIDENT, ALASKA FEDERATION OF
NATIVES (AFN), ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), spoke in
opposition to the bill. He reviewed information about AFN.
He shared that AFN was governed by a 38-member board of
directors who serve as tribal, corporate, and regional non-
profit leaders in Alaska. AFN membership included 209
federally recognized tribes, 185 village corporations, 9
regional corporations, and 12 regional nonprofit and tribal
consortiums that contract and compact to run federal and
state programs. He communicated that after researching HB
83 and past efforts of the commission, AFN decided to
oppose the legislation because many of their prior
positions were in opposition to AFN priorities. One example
was CACFA's support of the State of Alaska to assert title
to RS 2477 right-of-ways (ROW) throughout the state,
including Alaska Native Corporation (ANC) lands. The
federation passed an AFN Resolution 22-14 opposing
additional right-of-ways taken by the state for RS 2477,
which CACFA had supported. In addition, CACFA had supported
other positions that were antithetical to supporting the
property rights of Alaska Native people.
Co-Chair Foster shared AFNs concerns regarding creating
access over tribal land. He cited old historical native
trails or RS 2477s that CACFA was charged to open up access
to that were deeded over to the Alaska Native Corporations,
which became private lands. He would not want public access
through the back yard of his house, and he would share the
same concern if it was tribal or Native corporation land.
He asked if an amendment changed the bill and stated that
the commission would not pursue public access over private
land whether it changed AFN's position.
Mr. Mallott responded that he could not answer the question
at the time. He mentioned that the organization sent a
letter regarding the bill (copy on file) and recommended
the governor and legislature convene a meeting of the major
stakeholders to discuss the history and experiences we have
had with the act and formulate priorities for further
action and dialogue. He indicated that the previous
membership of CACFA lacked a strong advocate for native
communities. He offered to bring an amendment back to the
federation for consideration. Co-Chair Foster informed Mr.
Mallott that he would set an amendment deadline and would
reach out to him regarding drafting an amendment that would
be more workable for AFN.
Co-Chair Foster CLOSED public testimony.
Co-Chair Edgmon stated the commission was comprised of 12
members: 6 appointed by the governor, 6 appointed by the
Speaker of the House, and 6 appointed by the President of
the Senate. He noted the $10,000 increment for travel in
the DNR fiscal note. He wondered whether the meetings would
take place via Zoom or some other virtual means. He deduced
that $10,000 was for the executive director to travel
around the state. He thought it seemed an insignificant
amount regarding the cost of travel especially in bush
Alaska. He asked for comment from the sponsor.
Mr. McKee deferred to the maker of the fiscal note. He
would follow up with additional information.
3:12:14 PM
Ms. Adoko agreed with Co-Chair Edgmons deductions and
shared that the travel cost was anticipated to support the
executive director. The hope was that the commission could
do most things virtually. She had done her best to
approximate travel costs. Co-Chair Edgmon stated that he
was no student of ANILCA or ANCSA and believed that an
individual had to be immersed in it to understand it. He
thought it seemed that it necessitated a more active board
other than meeting virtually. He commented that there was a
lot going on with the RS 2477 issue, etc. He emphasized
that if CACFA was going to be reconstituted it should be
done sufficiently. He compared the cost of an additional
DOL attorney versus the amount for travel for the
commission. He felt that they should be more empowered.
In addition, he disclosed that the number of individuals
that understood ANILCA were dwindling and there might be
only a handful remaining. He stressed the complexity of
ANILCA. He suggested DNR consider increasing the fiscal
note amount.
Representative Hannan found the 2007 fiscal note for CACFA
that included a travel budget of $30,000 for 12 commission
members for one annual meeting in Fairbanks, Anchorage, and
in Juneau to ensure people across the state had an
opportunity to interact with the board. She could not
imagine that travel was cheaper today. She ascertained that
the current fiscal note would not reconstitute the board to
include community outreach and engagement that helped with
the success of the program.
Representative Josephson asked Representative Hannan if the
fiscal note had referred to the position in DOL.
Representative Hannan replied in the negative and added
that she only had the DNR fiscal note. She was looking
specifically at commission prior staffing.
3:16:35 PM
Co-Chair Foster referred to AFN's letter from Julie Kitka,
President of AFN. He noted that it requested two things, he
read the following:
1) Suggest the Governor convene the major stakeholders
to discuss the history and experiences we have had
with the act and formulate priori.notdefes for further
action and dialogue, and 2) request the Alaska
Congressional Delegation to reauthorize the Alaska
Land Use Council and obtain an appropriation for
expert staffing.
Co-Chair Foster voiced that he was very sensitive to the
issues around granting access to private land. However, he
was supportive of the public having access to public land.
He mentioned the Bering Strait Landbridge National Park. He
would love to see individuals be able to visit Serpentine
without having to fly in.
Co-Chair Foster set an amendment deadline of Friday, May 5
at 5:00 p.m.
HB 83 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
3:19:32 PM
The meeting was adjourned at 3:19 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 83 NEW FN LAW 042823.pdf |
HFIN 5/2/2023 1:30:00 PM |
HB 83 |
| HB3 - Municipal Impact Statement 050123.pdf |
HFIN 5/2/2023 1:30:00 PM |
HB 3 |
| HB 83 Public Testimony Rec'd by 050223.pdf |
HFIN 5/2/2023 1:30:00 PM |
HB 83 |
| HB 83 Public Testimony Rec'd by 050223 Pkt. 2.pdf |
HFIN 5/2/2023 1:30:00 PM |
HB 83 |
| HJR2 HB38 Response OpCap Split graph. 050323pdf.pdf |
HFIN 5/2/2023 1:30:00 PM |
HB 38 HJR 2 |
| HB 83 Public Testimony Rec'd by 050923.pdf |
HFIN 5/2/2023 1:30:00 PM |
HB 83 |
| HB 83 Public Testimony Rec'd by 050923 Pkt 2.pdf |
HFIN 5/2/2023 1:30:00 PM |
HB 83 |
| HB 83 Public Testimony 09-13-23 .pdf |
HFIN 5/2/2023 1:30:00 PM |
HB 83 |