Legislature(1993 - 1994)
03/26/1993 08:00 AM House RES
* first hearing in first committee of referral
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE March 26, 1993 8:00 a.m. MEMBERS PRESENT Representative Bill Williams, Chairman Representative Bill Hudson, Vice Chairman Representative Con Bunde Representative Pat Carney Representative John Davies Representative Jeannette James Representative Eldon Mulder Representative David Finkelstein MEMBERS ABSENT Representative Joe Green OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT Representative Pete Kott COMMITTEE CALENDAR Briefing by Alaska Water Resources Board HB 213: "An Act prohibiting the commissioner of natural resources from classifying state land, water, or land and water so that mining, mineral entry and location, mineral prospecting, and mineral leasing are precluded or are designated an incompatible use without an act of the legislature if the area involved contains more than 640 acres except in certain situations; and providing for an effective date." ADOPTED CS (RES) AS AMENDED, MOVED FROM COMMITTEE WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION HB 140: "An Act relating to the king salmon tag fee." ADOPTED CS (FSH) AND MOVED FROM COMMITTEE WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION HCR 9: Relating to management of the community development fisheries quota program and fisheries development by the state. ADOPTED CS (FSH) AND MOVED FROM COMMITTEE WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION WITNESS REGISTER Mike Niemeyer, Chairman Alaska Water Resources Board 601 W. Fifth Ave., Suite 200 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Phone: Not available Position Statement: Presented briefing on Water Resources Board Wayne Westberg, Member Alaska Water Resources Board P.O. Box 110378 Anchorage, Alaska 99511 Phone: Not available Position Statement: Responded to questions on water export issues Jack Phelps Legislative Aide Representative Pete Kott State Capitol, Room 409 Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182 Phone: 465-3777 Position Statement: Commented on changes in the draft CSHB 213 Raga Elim Special Assistant to the Commissioner Department of Natural Resources (DNR) 400 Willoughby Ave. Juneau, Alaska 99801-1724 Phone: 465-2400 Position Statement: Explained the DNR amendments to HB 213 Wendy Mulder Legislative Liaison Department of Commerce and Economic Development (DCED) P.O. Box 110800 Juneau, Alaska 99811-0800 Phone: 465-2500 Position Statement: Described the DCED's involvement in discussions of amendments to HB 213 Jerry Luckhaupt, Attorney Legislative Affairs Agency Division of Legal Services 130 Seward St., Suite 313 Juneau, Alaska 99801-2197 Phone: 465-2450 Position Statement: Explained proposed amendment to CSHB 213 Representative Pete Kott Alaska State Legislature State Capitol, Room 409 Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182 Phone: 465-3777 Position Statement: Expressed support of committee substitute as sponsor of HB 213 Representative Bill Hudson Alaska State Legislature State Capitol, Room 108 Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182 Phone: 465-3744 Position Statement: Prime Sponsor of HB 140 Bob Herron Legislative Aide Representative Lyman Hoffman State Capitol, Room 503 Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182 Phone: 465-4453 Position Statement: Explained HCR 9 PREVIOUS ACTION BILL: HB 213 SHORT TITLE: LIMIT ADMINISTRATIVE LAND CLOSURES BILL VERSION: SCS CSHB 213(RES)(EFD FLD) SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) KOTT,Phillips,Green,Brice, Mulder,Toohey TITLE: "An Act prohibiting the commissioner of natural resources from permanently classifying state land, water, or land and water so that mining, mineral entry and location, mineral prospecting, and mineral leasing are precluded or are designated an incompatible use without an act of the legislature if the area involved contains more than 640 contiguous acres except in certain situations." JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 03/10/93 590 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 03/10/93 591 (H) RESOURCES, FINANCE 03/10/93 596 (H) COSPONSOR(S): BRICE, MULDER, TOOHEY 03/22/93 (H) RES AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 124 03/22/93 (H) MINUTE(RES) 03/26/93 (H) RES AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 124 03/26/93 788 (H) RES RPT CS(RES)NEW TITLE 4DP 2DNP 2NR 03/26/93 789 (H) DP: HUDSON, JAMES, WILLIAMS, MULDER 03/26/93 789 (H) DNP: FINKELSTEIN, DAVIES 03/26/93 789 (H) NR: CARNEY, BUNDE 03/26/93 789 (H) -ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DNR) 3/26/93 03/26/93 806 (H) FIN REFERRAL WAIVED Y22 N11 E2 BILL: HB 140 SHORT TITLE: FEES FOR NONRESIDENT KING SALMON TAG BILL VERSION: CSHB 140(FSH) SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) HUDSON,Phillips,Mulder TITLE: "An Act relating to the anadromous king salmon tag; and providing for a effective date." JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 02/08/93 254 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 02/08/93 254 (H) FISHERIES, RESOURCES, FINANCE 02/22/93 (H) FSH AT 08:30 AM CAPITOL 17 02/22/93 (H) MINUTE(FSH) 03/03/93 (H) FSH AT 08:30 AM CAPITOL 17 03/03/93 (H) MINUTE(FSH) 03/05/93 (H) FSH AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 17 03/12/93 615 (H) FSH RPT CS(FSH) NEW TITLE 3DP 03/12/93 615 (H) DP: MOSES, PHILLIPS, OLBERG 03/12/93 615 (H) -FISCAL NOTE (F&G) 3/12/93 03/26/93 784 (H) RES RPT CS(FSH) NEW TITLE 7DP 1DNP 03/26/93 784 (H) DP: HUDSON, JAMES, FINKELSTEIN, DAVIES 03/26/93 784 (H) DP: MULDER, BUNDE, WILLIAMS 03/26/93 785 (H) DNP: CARNEY 03/26/93 785 (H) -PREVIOUS FN (F&G) 3/12/93 03/26/93 808 (H) COSPONSOR(S): MULDER BILL: HCR 9 SHORT TITLE: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FISHING QUOTAS BILL VERSION: CSHCR 9(FSH) AM SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) HOFFMAN,Ulmer,Mulder TITLE: Relating to state management of the Western Alaska Community Development Quota Program and state fisheries development policy. JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 02/22/93 409 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 02/22/93 409 (H) FISHERIES, RESOURCES, FINANCE 03/12/93 (H) FSH AT 08:30 AM CAPITOL 17 03/12/93 (H) MINUTE(FSH) 03/12/93 (H) MINUTE(FSH) 03/17/93 682 (H) FSH RPT CS(FSH) NEW TITLE 2DP 1NR 03/17/93 682 (H) DP: MOSES, OLBERG 03/17/93 682 (H) NR: PHILLIPS 03/17/93 682 (H) -ZERO FISCAL NOTE (F&G) 3/17/93 03/26/93 776 (H) RES RPT CS(FSH) NEW TITLE 6DP 2NR 03/26/93 777 (H) DP: HUDSON, JAMES, FINKELSTEIN, DAVIES 03/26/93 777 (H) DP: MULDER, WILLIAMS 03/26/93 777 (H) NR: BUNDE, CARNEY 03/26/93 777 (H) -PREVIOUS ZERO FN (F&G) 3/17/93 03/26/93 807 (H) COSPONSOR(S): MULDER 03/17/93 (H) MINUTE(FSH) 03/26/93 (H) RES AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 124 ACTION NARRATIVE TAPE 93-37, SIDE A Number 000 The House Resources Committee was called to order by Chairman Bill Williams at 8:10 a.m. Members present at the call to order were Representatives Williams, Hudson, Bunde, Green, James, and Mulder. Members absent at the call were Representatives Carney, Davies, and Finkelstein. CHAIRMAN BILL WILLIAMS told the committee that the first item on the meeting's agenda was a briefing by the Alaska Water Resources Board, followed by consideration of HB 213, HB 140, and HCR 9. Number 092 MIKE NIEMEYER, CHAIRMAN OF THE ALASKA WATER RESOURCES BOARD, told the committee that in addition to his service on the board, he was a land manager for Calista Corporation. He described the composition of the Water Resources Board as having seven members, all appointed by the governor. He noted that three of the members were present at the Resources Committee meeting, including himself. The others were Wayne Westberg and Dave Norton. MR. NIEMEYER explained that the mission of the Water Resources Board was to ensure that there was wise water management in the state. He noted that for the past year the board had not been funded and members had served at their own expense. He referred to legislation pertinent to the Water Resources Board, including HB 111 and SB 80. House Bill 111, he said, proposes to repeal the board. This proposal, he believed, makes little sense because the board operates at little expense to the state. MR. NIEMEYER explained that SB 80 combines the Water Resources Board with the Soil and Water Conservation Board. In effect, he said, the bill would turn the functions of the Water Resources Board over to the Soil and Water Conservation Board. He cautioned that water management issues would be compromised by the creation of a joint board. Number 115 MR. NIEMEYER explained the history of the board, which had operated for over 20 years. He said the board serves as an advocate for the state's position on water management, and is involved in controversial water issues. Most recently, he said the board was involved in the development of the Kenai Groundwater Task Force, and has been an advocate for village safe water programs. Number 160 MR. NIEMEYER related some of the other activities of the Water Resources Board, which include working closely together with user groups to work out problems and creating programs that will generate revenues. He noted the work of the Water Division in the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) in developing a water export program. Although the idea has not been widely accepted, he said the DNR is looking seriously at water export as a source of revenue generation for the state. Number 240 MR. NIEMEYER described some of the other principal functions and programs performed by the Water Resources Board or for which the board serves in an advisory capacity. Among them were hydrologic surveys, maintenance of stream gauging records and water studies required for construction of bridges or roads. He said 11 hydrologists in the DNR perform those functions and that continuity in their data- gathering is very important, but is at risk in the face of budget cuts. The Water Resource Board, he said, is an active proponent of keeping the hydrologists in the department to maintain those programs. Number 310 REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES asked Mr. Niemeyer when the Water Resources Board was authorized. MR. NIEMEYER replied that the board was authorized in statute by AS 46, at about the time of the Water Use Act in the 1960's. Number 315 REPRESENTATIVE JAMES asked how members are selected and appointed. Number 320 MR. NIEMEYER replied that persons interested in serving on the board contact the governor's office, and those who are appointed serve four-year terms. He said the board has benefitted from continuity in its membership over the years, except for the higher than usual turnover in the past five years. Number 339 REPRESENTATIVE CON BUNDE referred to the Water Resources Board's fact sheet, dated September, 1992, produced by the DNR's Division of Water. He asked Mr. Niemeyer to describe the board's legislative priorities. MR. NIEMEYER explained that the board's highest priority was to obtain funding for the Water Division. He said the board had worked for 20 years to have that division created, and that with budget cuts, the programs provided by that division are in jeopardy of being lost. Number 366 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE commented on the export of Alaska's water resources, and noted that the environmental impact of such an action would be very complex. He noted that the cost of such big projects may not be a wise investment in light of budget cuts that might eliminate state hydrologists who provide important field services to the citizens of Alaska. Number 390 WAYNE WESTBERG, WATER RESOURCES BOARD MEMBER, explained that the investigation of water export possibilities has not been a major expense to the state, in that only one person is employed on that project in the Division of Water. He said the water export project does not impact the delivery of other water-related services. The board initiated DNR's water rights program, he said. Although it had been in statutes, Mr. Westberg told the committee that it had not been implemented until the board pushed for action. If the DNR loses its hydrologists, he said the water rights program would be drastically affected. MR. WESTBERG predicted that a backlog of water rights applications would result if the hydrologists' budget were cut too far. REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE commented that the hydrologists in the field should be the highest priority. Number 422 MR. NIEMEYER distributed a position paper prepared by the Division of Water on water exports, dated March 17, 1993. He also distributed an attachment, also prepared by the Division of Water, relating to the FY 94 budget. Number 438 CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS noted for the record that Representatives Davies, Finkelstein and Bunde had joined the meeting since the call to order. He referred to the next item on the agenda, HB 213, which he explained, had been previously heard by the Resources Committee on March 22, 1993. He noted that the amendments suggested at that meeting had led to a blank committee substitute draft, as well as two additional amendments, A.8 and A.9. HB 213: LIMIT ADMINISTRATIVE LAND CLOSURES Number 464 JACK PHELPS, LEGISLATIVE AIDE TO REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT, PRIME SPONSOR OF HB 213, told the committee he had worked with the DNR on the amendments, and that the draft committee substitute reflected those changes. Number 474 RAGA ELIM, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE COMMISSIONER OF THE DNR, related the discussions held between the prime sponsor and the DNR since the last meeting on the bill. As HB 213 was originally introduced, he explained, the DNR had wanted some amendments and hastily drafted language to address the administration's concerns. Those amendments, he said, included reference to "contiguous" acres of land, and provided a mechanism for management flexibility for the DNR to issue an order for closure effective immediately, subject to approval from the legislature. Without the legislature's approval, he explained, the order would lapse. MR. ELIM explained that the amendments would not result in any fiscal impact, as reflected in the zero fiscal note from the DNR. Number 507 REPRESENTATIVE ELDON MULDER MOVED to adopt the draft committee substitute as CSHB 213 (RES). REPRESENTATIVE JAMES asked whether he was referring to the 3/25/93 committee substitute, and whether that CS incorporated amendments A.1 through A.7. Number 513 REPRESENTATIVE MULDER explained that only amendments A.8 and A.9 were incorporated in the CS. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES then asked what would happen with amendments one through seven. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS told Representative James that Representative Kott's office and the administration had worked together on the CS and settled on the two amendments to be incorporated into the CS. Number 527 REPRESENTATIVE DAVID FINKELSTEIN asked whether anyone from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) were present at the meeting to respond to the issues raised previously regarding anadromous streams, wildlife refuges and critical habitats. MR. ELIM replied that as HB 213 was originally drafted, all mineral closing orders would have to be approved by the legislature. He explained that the ADF&G wanted to define certain types of orders for the administration to retain full authority over. That approach, he said, ran counter to the intent of the bill. Discussions with the administration regarding closures in such areas, led to the decision that closures even in those areas would be subject to legislative approval. As the CS is written, he said the DNR will be able to issue an order, effective immediately, subject to approval by the legislature. Number 547 REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN reiterated his concern that someone from the ADF&G should be present, and stated that the concerns expressed by the ADF&G at the previous meeting are still there. There still existed a potential for a critical area to be jeopardized if an order lapses due to the legislature's failure to approve it, he said, and this potential raises problems of balance of power. MR. ELIM recognized the vagaries of the committee process in the legislature, and said the department was comfortable with the fact that if they made a closure decision with compelling reasons, the legislature would acknowledge those reasons also. REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN pointed out there were plenty of examples of instances where the majority of the legislature might be in agreement, but a few individuals could hold up the process. Number 565 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE said he was comfortable with the DNR issuing a closure and then coming to the legislature for approval, but he speculated that if an order was issued on June 1, then there would be no legislative approval until the following January and any work that was begun could not be undone. MR. ELIM clarified that the converse situation would be the case; that the order issued by the DNR would stop any use or development of land until the legislature approved or disapproved the order. Number 577 REPRESENTATIVE MULDER also explained that the DNR's commissioner would have a limited window of opportunity to address critical issues, but that legislative approval would still be necessary. He felt the CS adequately made those provisions. He also felt it was most appropriate for the legislature to be accountable to the public and have review of the closure decisions. Number 590 REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN did not believe there had been an administration prior to the current one that would have given up the power to protect public lands, especially critical habitats and wildlife refuges that were intentionally left open in enabling legislation because the administration had the power to close the lands as necessary when and if the need arose. He said that at the time the state was deciding whether to set up critical habitats and wildlife refuges and not close them to mineral entry, the argument was that it was not necessary to close them because the administration has the power to close them. Now, he said, the legislature is diminishing the power to close them and diminishing the protection of those critical habitats. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES commented regarding critical habitats. She suggested that the whole state could be considered critical habitat. The only way for the people of the state to have input into closures, she said, is if they go through the legislature. She felt the CS for HB 213 addressed that need by letting the administration make emergency closures. If the information showed that an area was indeed critical habitat, she felt confident that the legislature would recognize the need for closure. Number 615 MR. ELIM attempted to allay Representative Finkelstein's concerns regarding critical habitats. In a hypothetical situation where a closure order is issued by the DNR and went to the legislature for approval but did not pass, and the area then became open for mining, he said there were still authorities and permitting processes to assure mitigation and protection of the habitat. Title 16 and Title 38 provided safeguards, he added. Number 630 REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES shared the concern that the ADF&G should have had a representative at this meeting of the Resources Committee. He also expressed concern that the direction for HB 213 discussed at its previous hearing was very different from the approach in the CS. Specifically, using a process similar to the executive order process had been discussed at the last meeting on the bill. He felt the CS approach shifted the balance too far from what are properly administrative functions to what are appropriately legislative policy duties. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES suggested that such a shift seems to indicate that the executive and administrative functions are unnecessary and the legislature should just expand its staff and run the government. He stressed that it is important to maintain separation of powers and that the proposed CS for HB 213 goes too far in the direction of the legislature performing the day to day functions of managing the government. Number 663 CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS noted that Representative Pete Kott, prime sponsor of HB 213, had joined the meeting. As far as the people of the state having a say in administrative decisions, the chairman said he preferred that approach. VICE CHAIRMAN BILL HUDSON commented that the committee members should recognize that the bill does not preclude the administration from closing any area, but it puts the checks and balances in the hands of the legislature. He explained that the result is the administration has to come back to the legislature to assure that a policy decision is the correct one. He also noted the exemption in HB 213 for land disposals and transportation corridors. He felt satisfied that this is good legislation. Number 679 CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS addressed the motion on the floor to adopt the committee substitute, and asked if there were any objections. Hearing none, CSHB 213 (RES) was ADOPTED. REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE shared the concerns over the ADF&G's amendments, and noted that if they still had concerns, they should be present at the meeting to defend their concerns. REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN hoped that assessment was correct, and noted that there are at times internal debates within the administration regarding legislation, and only one department might be allowed to present its point of view. TAPE 93-37, SIDE B Number 000 MR. ELIM remarked that the ADF&G had been aware of the discussions regarding HB 213, and he felt all the parties involved were comfortable with the proposal to make certain mineral closure orders subject to legislative approval. WENDY MULDER, LEGISLATIVE LIAISON FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (DCED), commented that the DCED was also involved in the discussions, and she agreed with Mr. Elim's assessment. Number 030 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES MOVED TO AMEND line 15 on page 2 of the Resources CS, striking the sentence on that line and replacing it with one that reads: "unless the legislature disapproves by resolution, an interim classification contained in an order transmitted under this subsection, by the 60th day of the legislative session, the order becomes permanent." REPRESENTATIVE MULDER OBJECTED to the motion. Number 064 CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked the legislative legal counsel, Jerry Luckhaupt, to address the language in Representative Davies' proposed amendment. JERRY LUCKHAUPT, ATTORNEY, LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS AGENCY, DIVISION OF LEGAL SERVICES, said there is a problem with language requiring the disapproval of an action by legislative resolution or any legislative action by resolution. He explained that it would be unconstitutional, and that only a bill can be used. He said a resolution would present the same problem mentioned in the previous meeting regarding executive orders. Regulations cannot be repealed by resolution, only by an act of the legislature, which would mean by a bill. He noted that there had been a move to amend the constitution to allow the repeal of regulations by resolution. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES asked Mr. Luckhaupt whether the language "disapproved by an act of the legislature" would be appropriate in his amendment. MR. LUCKHAUPT replied in the affirmative. Number 100 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES offered to make that change to his amendment. The amendment now would pattern the response to the situation as nearly as possible to the executive order process while staying within the requirements of the constitution. He felt the appropriate balance would be maintained between the administrative and legislative branches. The legislature would still have the ability and the obligation to review closing orders issued by the administration, with the opportunity to disapprove. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES explained that the disapproval requirement would represent a more balanced view of the will of the people than the situation in the current version of HB 213, which would allow one person to stand in the way of the decision being upheld. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any further discussion on the amendment. Number 150 VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON commented that the policy question is whether the governor should be able to classify lands to prevent mineral development, and present those interim classifications to close mining to the legislature within ten days, then require legislative approval. In the current version of HB 213 before the committee, he said the interim classification would expire or lapse at the end of the 90th legislative day if not approved. He paraphrased Representative Davies' proposal, stating that the DNR may do an interim classification to preclude mining and that decision would stand unless the legislature takes specific action disapproving it. He preferred the bill the way it was. Number 168 REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT commented that he was satisfied with the bill as written, and that he had examined the disapproval approach and had seen it as an opportunity for filibusters. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked whether there were objections to Representative Davies' amendment, as amended. There were objections and a roll call vote was requested by Representative Finkelstein. Voting YEA were Representatives Carney, Davies and Finkelstein. Voting NAY were Representatives Hudson, Bunde, James, Mulder and Williams. The MOTION was DEFEATED. Number 215 REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN MOVED amendment A.7, addressing the issue of retroactivity. He asked Mr. Luckhaupt to clarify the amendment. MR. LUCKHAUPT explained that amendment A.7 clarifies for the courts that the bill's intent was that it not be applied retroactively. He suggested that in addition to the reference to 38.05.300 (a)(2), he would add 38.05.300 (c), added by sections 1 and 2 of CS HB 213 (RES). This would clarify that the entire bill is not retroactive. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked whether there were objections to the motion on the amendment. There were none. Number 253 MR. ELIM brought an additional item to the committee's attention, amendment A.1. He said this amendment was also important in relation to discussions in the previous hearing regarding land exchanges. He understood that amendment was amenable to the sponsor. Number 272 REPRESENTATIVE MULDER MOVED amendment A.1. REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN noted that because of previous amendments, that amendment would be conceptual and would need to be drafted to reflect the language changes in the previous amendments. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any objections to adopting amendment A.1. Hearing none, the AMENDMENT was ADOPTED. Number 281 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES asked what the purpose was of amendment A.2. MR. ELIM noted that its purpose had been accomplished in amendment A.9, which was incorporated in the Resources CS. REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN OFFERED amendment A.3, making exceptions for critical habitat, wildlife refuges, and streambeds. REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON OBJECTED. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS called for a roll call vote on moving amendment A.3. Voting YEA were Representatives Carney, Davies and Finkelstein. Voting NAY were Representatives Hudson, Bunde, James, Mulder, and Williams. The MOTION was DEFEATED. VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON MOVED to pass the committee substitute as adopted and amended from committee and the zero fiscal note, with individual recommendations. He asked unanimous consent. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any objections to the motion. Hearing none, the MOTION PASSED. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS announced the next bill before the committee would be HB 140. Number 300 HB 140: FEES FOR NONRESIDENT KING SALMON TAG VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON, PRIME SPONSOR OF HB 140, referred the members of the committee to the sponsor statement and sectional analysis in their packets. (A copy of the sponsor statement and sectional analysis may be found in the House Resources Committee Room, Capitol Room 124, and after the adjournment of the second session of the 18th Alaska State Legislature, in the Legislative Reference Library.) Also contained in the packets were a series of amendments offered by the ADF&G. Those amendments, he explained, had been incorporated into the bill in the Fisheries' CS. VICE CHAIR HUDSON said that in the fiscal note the increased cost to effect the bill is $10.9 thousand, while the revenues generated would be $81.6 thousand. The revenues would come from fees to non-residents, he said, and would go toward enhancing sport fishing. Number 338 VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON also referred to a predicted sales sheet in the members' packets. (A copy of the predicted sales sheet may be found in the House Resources Committee Room, Capitol Room 124, and after the adjournment of the second session of the 18th Alaska State Legislature, in the Legislative Reference Library.) That sheet, he explained, predicted how many non-residents in 1994 would have fishing licenses for the periods of one year, 6.8 thousand; 14-days, 22.9 thousand; three-days; and one-day. It also showed estimates for military fishing licenses and sport hunting licenses and tags. VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON commented on suggestions made by the guided charter fishing industry, in response to a $20 non- resident chinook tag fee initiated last year. That fee did not take into account the length of time the non-resident would spend fishing, so that someone off a cruise ship spending an afternoon fishing a charter would be charged the same fee as someone spending two weeks fishing every day. This was on top of the non-resident fishing license and the amount the non-resident might spend on a chartered fishing trip. It was seen as unreasonable and hence the graduated fee schedule proposed in HB 140, he explained. VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON told the committee that the ADF&G had worked closely on the legislation, and he stressed that HB 140 carries a positive fiscal impact. He suggested it would encourage more people to fish in Alaska and generate increased tourism revenues. Number 408 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES had no problem with the concept in HB 140. He asked why the word "anadromous" had been added to the language regarding king salmon. VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON explained that in many places where there are planted king salmon, such as Twin Lakes in Juneau, he did not want to force people to pay the fee as they would for native salmon stocks. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES asked whether the $70,000 in the fiscal note was predicated on the $5 or $10 fee. He also asked why in the Fisheries' CS, the bottom-end fee had been changed from $5 to $10. VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON explained the fiscal note was based on a $10 fee. He said that projections showed that the $5 fee would be revenue-neutral, and so it was increased to $10 to generate revenues. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES remarked that he was not comfortable with establishing the fees in statute. He would prefer setting the graduated fee concept in statute and having the actual amount be set by the department. Number 434 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE referred to his work with the tourism industry, and noted the concerns he had about adding a $20 fee to the already high cost of a guide. He supported the bill, and MOVED to adopt CSHB 140 (FSH) and the fiscal note. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any objections to adopting CSHB 140 (FSH). There were none and the MOTION PASSED. REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN reiterated Representative Davies' concerns about setting the fees in statute. Number 448 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE MOVED to pass CSHB 140 (FSH) and accompanying fiscal note from committee with individual recommendations. He asked unanimous consent. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any objections. Hearing none, the MOTION PASSED. CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS referred to the next item for the committee's consideration, HCR 9. HCR 9: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FISHING QUOTAS Number 466 BOB HERRON, LEGISLATIVE AIDE TO REPRESENTATIVE LYMAN HOFFMAN, PRIME SPONSOR OF HCR 9, told the committee that HCR 9 recognizes the success of the CDQ (Community Development Quota) program, and pointed out the involvement of three departments in that program: The ADF&G, Community and Regional Affairs, and the DCED. The resolution, he explained, calls for the reauthorization of the CDQ program and asks that the state draft a comprehensive fisheries policy that includes CDQs. Number 480 REPRESENTATIVE MULDER liked the concept, and commented that the CDQ program was a positive one. He asked why the section regarding the fisheries policy had been included in HCR 9. Number 488 MR. HERRON replied that the state needs such a policy, and it should be a long-term goal. VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON added his praise for the CDQ program, and said he would like to see HCR 9 include language speaking in opposition to the Individual Fisheries Quota (IFQ) program. Number 500 REPRESENTATIVE JAMES referred to section four of HCR 9, and noted that the state had not established a clear policy and should start working toward that goal. REPRESENTATIVE MULDER remarked that development of a comprehensive fisheries policy could result in a horrendous fiscal note. Number 520 VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON made a MOTION to move CSHCR 9 (FSH) and the accompanying zero fiscal note from committee with individual recommendations. Number 526 CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any objections to the motion. Hearing none, the MOTION PASSED. ANNOUNCEMENTS CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS announced the Resources Committee would next meet on March 29 to consider HB 201, HB 76, and HB 132. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES, regarding the Mental Health Lands Trust issue, HB 201, remarked that she would like to have her concerns on record. These concerns included the valuations already paid. She supported repaying the trust and then having the legislature support the state's mental health programs. Number 545 VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON suggested that when HB 201 is heard again in committee, members' concerns could be included in the recommendations made at that time. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the House Resources Committee, Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 9:27 a.m.