Legislature(2019 - 2020)BARNES 124
03/27/2019 01:00 PM House RESOURCES
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 | |
| Presentation(s): Alaska Minerals Commission | |
| HB35 | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s):|| Big Game Commercial Services Board | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | HB 35 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
March 27, 2019
1:02 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative John Lincoln, Co-Chair
Representative Geran Tarr, Co-Chair
Representative Grier Hopkins, Vice Chair
Representative Sara Hannan
Representative Ivy Spohnholz
Representative Chris Tuck
Representative Dave Talerico
Representative George Rauscher
Representative Sara Rasmussen
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION(S): ALASKA MINERALS COMMISSION
- HEARD
HOUSE BILL NO. 35
"An Act relating to participation in matters before the Board of
Fisheries and the Board of Game by the members of the respective
boards; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
Big Game Commercial Services Board
Cash Joyce - Wasilla
CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 35
SHORT TITLE: CONFLICT OF INTEREST: BD FISHERIES/GAME
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) STUTES
02/20/19 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/20/19 (H) FSH, RES
03/07/19 (H) FSH AT 10:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
03/07/19 (H) Heard & Held
03/07/19 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/12/19 (H) FSH AT 11:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
03/12/19 (H) Moved CSHB 35(FSH) Out of Committee
03/12/19 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/13/19 (H) FSH RPT CS(FSH) 6DP 1NR
03/13/19 (H) DP: VANCE, TARR, KOPP, EDGMON, KREISS-
TOMKINS, STUTES
03/13/19 (H) NR: PRUITT
03/27/19 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
LANCE MILLER, PhD, Chair
Alaska Minerals Commission
Division of Economic Development
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-provided a PowerPoint presentation
entitled, "2019 Alaska Mineral Commission report and Social,
Economic and Future demand perspectives on the mining industry,"
dated 3/27/19, and answered questions.
ROB RETHERFORD, Member
Alaska Minerals Commission
Division of Economic Development
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-provided a PowerPoint presentation
entitled, "2019 Alaska Mineral Commission report and Social,
Economic and Future demand perspectives on the mining industry,"
dated 3/27/19, and answered questions.
MATT GRUENING, Staff
Representative Louise Stutes
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: On behalf of Representative Stutes, Chair,
House Special Committee on Fisheries, sponsor of CSHB 35(FSH),
introduced the bill and answered questions.
FRANCES LEACH, Executive Director
United Fishermen of Alaska
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support during the hearing of
HB 35.
JERRY MCCUNE, President
Board of Directors
Cordova District Fishermen United
Cordova, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support during the hearing of
HB 35.
BENJAMIN MOHR, Executive Director
Kenai River Sportfishing Association
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition during the hearing
of HB 35.
GLEN HAIGHT, Executive Director
Board of Fisheries
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing of HB
35.
CASH JOYCE, Appointee
Big Game Commercial Services Board
Division of Corporations, Business and Professional Licensing
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the Big Game
Commercial Services Board.
MARK RICHARDS, Executive Director
Resident Hunters of Alaska
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition during the
confirmation hearing of Cash Joyce.
THOR STACEY, Director
Government Affairs
Alaska Professional Hunters Association
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support during the
confirmation hearing of Cash Joyce.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:02:39 PM
CO-CHAIR JOHN LINCOLN called the House Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:02 p.m. Representatives Tuck,
Hannan, Talerico, Spohnholz, Rauscher, Tarr, and Lincoln were
present at the call to order. Representatives Hopkins and
Rasmussen arrived as the meeting was in progress.
^PRESENTATION(S): ALASKA MINERALS COMMISSION
PRESENTATION(S): ALASKA MINERALS COMMISSION
1:03:06 PM
CO-CHAIR LINCOLN announced the first order of business would be
a presentation by the Alaska Minerals Commission.
1:03:35 PM
LANCE MILLER, PhD, Chair, Alaska Minerals Commission (AMC),
Division of Economic Development, Department of Commerce,
Community and Economic Development, informed the committee AMC
is composed of 11 volunteers who are appointed by the governor
and the presiding officers of the Senate and the House of
Representatives. The commission was created in 1986 and its
goal is to identify barriers of entry - or mitigate constraints
- to mineral development at state and federal levels (slide 2).
Dr. Miller said although Alaska is "an attractive place" for the
mining industry, to make improvements, AMC's first state
priority is to support the Division of Geological and
Geophysical Surveys (DGGS), Department of Natural Resources
(DNR), in order to support basic science, research, and data
gathering for records available for public use. Another state
priority is to address key state regulations governing water
use, such as proposed legislation related to Tier 3 waterways.
Dr. Miller explained [the Environmental Protection Agency's
antidegradation regulation policy] is a program the state must
assume from the federal government thus state policies and
procedures must be in place; the proposed legislation states
approval of Tier 3 waterways should be by the legislature with
vetting by DNR, the Department of Environmental Conservation
(DEC), and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (slide 3).
1:08:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ asked for a description of Tier 3
waterways.
DR. MILLER explained Tier 3 is a national designation of the
highest level of water quality in that there cannot be any
degradation unless temporary. For example, a wastewater plant
or two-cycle engines can degrade a Tier 3 waterway thus
subsistence or community use of the waterway may be affected.
In further response to Representative Spohnholz, he said Tier 1
would be a multiple-use, urban waterway.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK asked whether the tiers are set by the
federal government.
DR. MILLER restated the tiers are determined by the state thus
the proposed legislation directs that the legislature would
approve the standards with direction from state agencies. In
further response to Representative Tuck, he said there currently
are no [Alaska state] regulations in this regard.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN related the federal [Clean Water Act as
amended in 1972 and through EPA regulations] mandated that each
state have a process to determine waterway status; however,
until two to three years ago there had not been an application
to designate a Tier 3 waterway filed in Alaska, so the process
was not established.
1:11:34 PM
ROB RETHERFORD, Member, AMC, Division of Economic Development,
DCCED, directed attention to AMC's federal priorities, the first
of which is to maintain Alaska's right related to navigable
waters and access corridors. He related the recent U.S. Supreme
Court decision in favor of John Sturgeon will help ensure Alaska
has access along navigable rivers for multiple use. The Public
Access Assertion and Defense (PAAD) program, Division of Mining,
Land and Water, DNR, is a watchdog for many federal programs
with regard to water and land access and he urged for its
support. The second item AMC seeks to address are public land
orders (PLOs) which have closed areas to mineral exploration and
other activities; the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S.
Department of the Interior, has begun to lift some PLOs and the
state should encourage BLM to ensure more are lifted. Mr.
Retherford suggested the legislature recommend to Alaska's
congressional delegation to maintain the mandate of multiple use
as directed within the original intent of the Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) (slide 4).
1:15:23 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR asked for an explanation of the proposed mining
statute change indicated on slide 3.
DR. MILLER explained [item number 4 on slide 3] addresses an
issue of [mining] claims that have been declared null and void
due to clerical errors on recording affidavits for labor.
DR. MILLER turned to slide 5 which illustrated the social and
economic factor on health as identified by a study by the
National Academy of Medicine. He pointed out one's physical
environment is only 10 percent of the health factor; however,
social and economic factors are 40 percent. Further, slide 6
illustrated a change in life expectancy in Alaska may be linked
to jobs, income, and access to health care. Slide 7 pictured
children from Northwest Alaska who may live longer [because of
social and economic factors].
1:20:46 PM
MR. RETHERFORD gave brief background information on the miners
pictured on slides 8 and 9 and discussed the opportunities
mining provides to residents in rural areas.
DR. MILLER presented slide 10, which was a map of mining
activity in Alaska that illustrated mines, advanced exploration
projects and communities with mining industry employees. He
noted two of the mines have been operating for 30 years; in
fact, there has been mining in Juneau and Fairbanks for over 140
years. Dr. Miller stressed that mining operations in the state
must be good operations in order to be economic in Alaska.
Slide 11 listed economic statistics of mining: 4,000 direct
jobs and 9,000 indirect jobs related to mining; wages average
over $107,000 per year; mines are large taxpayers in Juneau, the
Northwest Arctic Borough, and the Fairbanks North Star Borough;
$1.2 billion has been distributed to Alaska Native Corporations
from Red Dog mine. A perception study by the Fraser Institute
Global Ranking Survey placed Alaska 5/83 overall in the world of
mining (slide 11).
1:26:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ asked how many of the 4,000 direct jobs
in the mining industry are held by Alaskans.
DR. MILLER estimated 75 percent overall. He added that
exploration projects support local, entry-level jobs.
CO-CHAIR TARR recalled mining taxes have not been changed since
before statehood and questioned the basis of the Fraser
Institute policy perception ranking of Alaska.
DR. MILLER agreed mining taxation has not changed. The
perception is related to regulatory issues about [the proposed
Pebble Partnership project] and state fiscal issues.
MR. RETHERFORD opined the mining industry has uncertainty with
regard to the permitting process.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN asked Mr. Retherford to identify the
uncertainty within Alaska's permitting process.
MR. RETHERFORD stated usurpation of the permitting process
through litigation or other means creates hurdles and increases
the timeframe of development.
DR. MILLER referred to a "big push" for an environmental
assessment (EA) prior to exploration/drilling permitting, and
recalled that a recent Alaska ballot initiative was noted by the
minerals industry.
1:31:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN pointed out Alaska cannot stop citizens
from exercising their civil rights and in every state
[development projects] may face potential lawsuits. She
observed Alaska has been governed by pro-development executive
branches that continue to have consistent permitting processes;
in fact, the attempt to require an EA prior to
exploration/drilling was a protocol to preempt litigation. She
questioned whether global markets would respond to one ballot
initiative.
DR. MILLER agreed litigation should not be limited; however,
there are frivolous lawsuits. He opined many drill holes are
needed during exploration to find a deposit thus completion of
an EA at exploration "would be a leap." Dr. Miller acknowledged
"the state has some good things in play ... [and could] do a
little bit better job of publicizing the things the state is
doing."
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN asked whether the state has made major
changes in its permitting process in the last decade.
DR. MILLER said no; however, AMC's past top priority has been to
ensure there is staff funding for DNR and DEC, so the agencies
have technical competency to issue permits within an acceptable
timeline.
1:36:03 PM
MR. RETHERFORD gave an example of an appeal process and related
there was a lack of support from "the commissioner's office" to
pursue appeals, resulting in long delays to projects.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN urged industry to recognize that the
state's resource agencies that have legal oversight should be
adequately funded and staffed; cuts to staffing may slow a
project and restrict a project's momentum, not from opposition
or changing laws, but from the state's lack of investment in its
resource agencies, which is perceived by industry incorrectly.
DR. MILLER agreed with the need for funding of state agencies
and gave an example of an appeal process. He then directed
attention to slide 12 which illustrated mineral development
timelines and investment for two projects that failed, four
projects in development, and five operating metal mines. The
average timeline was 16 years and $300 million was spent to
reach a final feasibility decision. Slide 13 illustrated the
detailed technical work necessary for a typical project.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER questioned the meaning of the unknown
timeline for permitting/design [illustrated on slide 13].
DR. MILLER explained the timeline for permitting/design can be
affected by many factors and is unknown. In further response to
Representative Rauscher, he said the federal [government] is
harder to work with than the state.
MR. RETHERFORD added exploration on state land is easier and
less expensive; however, industry has a perception that it is
harder to work in Alaska.
1:43:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked whether projects are deterred.
DR. MILLER opined industry reviews the progress of other
projects, although Alaska is having "a little bit of resurgence
right now ...."
REPRESENTATIVE RASMUSSEN asked whether state and federal
permitting overlap.
DR. MILLER said no. He related it is incumbent on the project
to provide good baseline data to all; often local government
processes are similar to that of the state. He turned to the
topic of demographics and stated with the growth of the world
population there will be increased demand for natural resources
(slide 14). Global organizations are recognizing the importance
of metals and mining to renewable [energy], climate change, and
lower carbon (slide 15). A forecast for the world demand for
copper assumed 7 pounds of copper per capita and 4 pounds of
zinc per capita (slide 16). Dr. Miller said the challenge for
mining is the volatility of commodity prices and observed when
prices decrease, investment in Alaska decreases. Slide 17 was a
chart illustrating spikes in the price of zinc since 1970, which
can affect the success of a new mine, and he gave examples.
1:50:16 PM
MR. RETHERFORD stressed the importance of long-term goals and
consistency from state agencies.
DR. MILLER summarized: mining is important; projects take a
long time; metals will be needed; Alaska has human and natural
resources (slide 18).
CO-CHAIR TARR returned attention to slide 10 and reviewed the
products mined from the five metal mines in Alaska.
DR. MILLER confirmed Greens Creek also mines lead, zinc, copper,
and gold; Red Dog mines 80 percent zinc and also lead and
germanium.
CO-CHAIR TARR recalled past interest in rare earth minerals.
DR. MILLER advised there is interest in rare earth elements from
Bokan Mountain and elsewhere in Alaska; the challenge of rare
earth elements is that they are industrial minerals and are not
on the spot market. Limited amounts of rare earth elements are
important, but China has flooded the market.
CO-CHAIR TARR asked about other minerals that are currently
produced or may be produced by potential mines in Alaska.
DR. MILLER said Alaska does not have the geology for lithium;
the Upper Kobuk Mineral Project has cobalt.
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO requested a map locating significant
potential deposits.
DR. MILLER offered to provide the requested map.
HB 35-CONFLICT OF INTEREST: BD FISHERIES/GAME
1:56:20 PM
CO-CHAIR LINCOLN announced the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 35, "An Act relating to participation in matters
before the Board of Fisheries and the Board of Game by the
members of the respective boards; and providing for an effective
date."
[Before the committee was the committee substitute (CS) for HB
35(FSH), reported out of the House Special Committee on
Fisheries on 3/13/19.]
1:56:49 PM
MATT GRUENING, Staff, Representative Louise Stutes, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Stutes, sponsor,
introduced HB 35. He read from the following written sponsor
statement [original punctuation provided]:
This legislation changes the manner in which the Board
of Fisheries and Board of Game function by allowing
members to deliberate on subjects for which they have
a declared personal or financial interest according to
AS 39.52, the Executive Branch Ethics Act. Members are
selected based on their "knowledge and ability in the
field of action of the board, and with a view to
providing diversity of interest and points of view in
membership"; however, Title 39 prohibits a member from
"taking or withholding official action in order to
affect a matter in which the member has a personal or
financial interest." (AS 39.52.120(b)(4)). "Official
action" is defined as "advice, participation, or
assistance, including for example, a recommendation,
decision, approval, disapproval, vote, or other
similar action, including inaction by a public
officer." (AS 39.52.960(14)). Currently, board members
are required to divulge a conflict of interest if
they, or their immediate family members, are involved
in the subject being deliberated on. The conflicted
member can then no longer offer their input on the
process and cannot vote on the matter at hand. Often
in the fishing world, a financial or personal interest
corresponds with someone's knowledge of that
particular fishery. This bill allows the conflicted
member to offer remarks and input, but still precludes
them from voting on the issue at hand or on whether
they have a conflict of interest. Allowing members
with expertise in particular fields to deliberate will
help the boards make more informed decisions, lead to
stronger resource management statewide, and align
process with intent as far as the boards benefiting
from members' knowledge and diversity of viewpoints.
Thank you for your support of this legislation.
1:58:44 PM
MR. GRUENING advised sound resource management should be based
on all available information. However, in the fishing industry,
financial or personal interests may be tied to the knowledge of
a fishery; for example, a board member with a close relative who
owns a certain permit may be the only board member with an
understanding of a proposal. Similarly, guides or lodge owners
may be the only board member with an understanding of a hunt.
Especially in rural Alaska, an entire family may be engaged in
one manner of work such as commercial fishing, guiding, or
hunting, thus the current policy discourages qualified
applicants because a board member would be unable to speak on
many proposals. Mr. Gruening described how members are excluded
from board discussions and provided examples. He explained
another concern with the current conflict of interest policy is
one of transparency and trust in the public process; board
members who disclose a conflict sometimes share their opinions
off the record and outside of the public view, which is
discouraged by the aforementioned ethics act. He pointed out
the bill would allow a board member who has disclosed a conflict
"to impart their knowledge before they recuse themselves from
the vote." Mr. Gruening restated the importance for Board of
Game (BOG) and Board of Fisheries (BOF) members to have all
available information on hand, and on the record, prior to
making a decision. He cautioned the selection process for BOG
and BOF members is contentious in order to populate boards that
are balanced and acceptable to the public, the legislature and
the governor; therefore, silencing voices during deliberations
erodes the integrity of the public process. Mr. Gruening
closed, pointing out 11 letters and 19 emailed messages of
support included in the committee packet, and noting no letters
of opposition were received. He urged for the committee to
review a document entitled, "Background Information on the
Alaska Boards of Game and Fisheries Ethics Act Process," also
included in the committee packet.
2:03:49 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked whether there are differences
between the bill and a similar bill that was proposed last year.
MR. GRUENING explained the only difference with the bill
proposed last year is that the redefinition of an immediate
family member - that affected voting and thereby the ethics
disclosure process - was removed.
2:05:30 PM
FRANCES LEACH, Executive Director, United Fishermen of Alaska
(UFA), informed the committee UFA represents 35 commercial
fishing organizations and hundreds of commercial fisherman and
crewmembers, throughout the state, fishing in state and federal
waters. Ms. Leach said UFA has supported this important
legislation for some time because BOG and BOF members are chosen
for their expertise, within their region or fishery, or for
their local hunting and game knowledge; however, at this time,
board members who have expertise in a certain subject are not
allowed to participate in deliberations. She gave her personal
experience with BOF under these circumstances and advised
allowing knowledgeable board members to fully participate in
deliberations will result in a better record to assist board
members, and all of the information will be established on the
record. Although members with expertise are encouraged to serve
on the boards, the current policy discourages some. Ms. Leach
urged the committee to pass the bill.
2:08:07 PM
JERRY MCCUNE, President, Board of Directors, Cordova District
Fishermen United (CDFU), informed the committee CDFU represents
about 1,000 fishermen. He provided examples of board members
who were unable to deliberate under various circumstances. Mr.
McCune opined the statute is unfair and creates frustration.
Further, a familial relationship does not always equate to
financial gain, and board members rely on each other for advice.
2:10:34 PM
CO-CHAIR LINCOLN opened public testimony on HB 35.
2:11:13 PM
BENJAMIN MOHR, Executive Director, Kenai River Sportfishing
Association (KRSA), expressed KRSA's opposition to HB 35. Mr.
Mohr informed the committee there is no need to modify the
ethical guidelines that now apply to BOF. Current conflict of
interest procedure provides four opportunities for "conflicted"
board members to participate in the public process to a greater
degree than the general public: public comment, committee of
the whole, board deliberations, and voting. During committee of
the whole procedures board members, including conflicted
members, interact with the public, the Department of Law (DOL),
and the Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADFG), and board
members can interact with state agencies, proponents and
opponents of proposals, and others, which is an advantage the
public does not have. Following its committee work, conflicted
board members are recused, and BOF begins formal deliberations.
Mr. Mohr opined HB 35 expands the influence of board members who
have a direct financial interest in a matter under
consideration, even though conflicted board members already have
an opportunity in formal and informal settings to ensure their
opinion and expertise is known. He advised current "conflict
procedures" are not unknown, or untested, and have been
reasonably effective; KRSA believes loosening the ethical
guidelines for BOF and BOG is not in the public interest.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ asked for clarification on the
opportunities conflicted board members have to participate in
addition to the committee of the whole discussion.
MR. MOHR said conflicted board members participate as members of
the public during public comment. In further response to
Representative Spohnholz, he said there are currently
sportfishing interests serving on BOF.
2:14:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN asked whether a board member who holds a
sportfishing license would be "conflicted out" of making
allocative decisions about sportfishing.
MR. MOHR expressed his understanding the chairman of BOF or BOG
is the ethics officer who would make a final decision about a
conflict; however, there must be a direct financial interest,
and holding a sportfishing license would not establish a direct
financial interest in the management of the sportfishing
fishery.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN observed the BOF ethics disclosure
statement does not define a threshold for a direct financial
interest. She asked for the point at which one has a financial
interest in the sportfishing fishery.
MR. MOHR restated the decision on an unethical conflict is up to
the chairman of BOF and BOG, and DOL.
2:16:55 PM
GLEN HAIGHT, Executive Director, BOF, ADFG, explained matters of
subsistence, personal use, and sportfish affect everyone equally
thus there is no effort to assess personal financial benefit to
those matters; a board member who holds a sportfish license or
who engages in a subsistence fishery is not conflicted out.
However, a guide operator may be affected; according to DOL, the
threshold is $5,000, and a conflict may arise at that point.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN questioned whether the guide's threshold
of economic return is based on the value of the sportfishing day
trip or on the value of the fish [caught].
MR. HAIGHT said, "It's to the operator, the commercial operator,
it doesn't apply to their client."
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN asked whether sportfishing lodge operators
would be conflicted out of all sportfishing decisions.
MR. HAIGHT gave the example of a lodge owner whose lodge
operates in an affected area and who would benefit from a board
action; this would be a specific instance.
2:19:54 PM
CO-CHAIR LINCOLN, after ascertaining no one further wished to
testify, closed public testimony on HB 35.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN returned attention to the BOF ethics
disclosure and observed the definition of family differs from
that of the legislature's ethics law.
MR. GRUENING explained in the executive branch ethics act
immediate family member is defined in AS 39.52.960 (11) as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
(11) "immediate family member" means
(A) the spouse of the person;
(B) another person cohabiting with the person in a conjugal
relationship that is not a legal marriage;
(C) a child, including a stepchild and an adoptive child,
of the person;
(D) a parent, sibling, grandparent, aunt, or uncle of the
person; and
(E) a parent or sibling of the person's spouse;
MR. GRUENING pointed out the aforementioned differs from the
legislative branch definition found in AS 24.60.990 (6)
[original punctuation provided]:
6) "immediate family" means
(A) the spouse or domestic partner of the person; or
(B) a parent, child, including a stepchild and an adoptive
child, and sibling of a person if the parent, child, or
sibling resides with the person, is financially dependent
on the person, or shares a substantial financial interest
with the person;
MR. GRUENING said, "That was pretty close to the definition that
was in the bill before it was removed ...."
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN surmised the BOF ethics disclosure states
not just the immediate family, but a member of the family, and
the bills narrows the definition to immediate family.
2:23:41 PM
MR. GRUENING clarified the bill makes no change to the
definition of immediate family; for BOF and BOG, the statutes
are AS 39.52.960 (9) and (18) [original punctuation provided]:
(9) "financial interest" means
(A) an interest held by a public officer or an immediate
family member, which includes an involvement or ownership
of an interest in a business, including a property
ownership, or a professional or private relationship, that
is a source of income, or from which, or as a result of
which, a person has received or expects to receive a
financial benefit;
(18) "personal interest" means an interest held or
involvement by a public officer, or the officer's immediate
family member or parent, including membership, in any
organization, whether fraternal, nonprofit, for profit,
charitable, or political, from which, or as a result of
which, a person or organization receives a benefit;
[HB 35 was held over.]
^CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
^Big Game Commercial Services Board
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S)
Big Game Commercial Services Board
2:25:23 PM
CO-CHAIR LINCOLN announced the final order of business would be
a confirmation hearing of Cash Joyce, appointee to the Big Game
Commercial Services Board.
2:25:35 PM
CASH JOYCE, Appointee, Big Game Commercial Services Board
(BGCSB), Division of Corporations, Business and Professional
Licensing, Department of Commerce, Community & Economic
Development, informed the committee he is currently seated in
the transporter position on BGCSB. Mr. Joyce is a lifelong
Alaskan and he and his wife co-own an air taxi service and an
outfitting business.
CO-CHAIR TARR asked whether Mr. Joyce has a potential conflict
of interest if his small business is engaged in business related
to BGCSB licensing and regulation of providers of commercial
services to big game hunters.
MR. JOYCE said his is not a designated seat such as one held on
BOG.
CO-CHAIR TARR stated the membership of BGCSB is composed of the
following: two members are licensed registered guide
outfitters; two members are licensed transporters; one member of
BOG; private landholder members; two public members.
MR. JOYCE restated he is seated in the designated transporter
position and is also a big game guide.
CO-CHAIR TARR inquired as to whether a board member in the
industry would recuse oneself from certain board decisions.
MR. JOYCE said he has never recused himself from a decision. He
remarked:
... I didn't really read into it as a conflict of
interest, I am a transporter, I'm an air taxi, so,
that has a lot to do with transportation. I'm also a
registered guide, and that might have some insight on
how things work, which maybe some of the private
landholders or some of the public people don't quite
understand. I get it, from the get-go, and I have a
lot invested in my air taxi, my wife and I do, and so
that's pretty much the foundation of why I'm in the
... transporter position.
2:29:28 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR surmised Mr. Joyce filled out a term and is now
being reappointed to a full term.
MR. JOYCE said that's correct.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN asked about Mr. Joyce's goals for the next
term.
MR. JOYCE said he seeks to be a valuable member of the board.
The board has made progress toward its fiscal goal to be self-
sufficient, has written a new test, is solving problems, and
strives to provide continuity.
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO asked how long Mr. Joyce has been a
transporter.
MR. JOYCE stated being a transporter requires a state license
that is not required of an air taxi. He and his wife have held
a single pilot operation certificate since 2015 and hope to
expand to a multi-pilot multi-aircraft operation in the near
future.
CO-CHAIR LINCOLN questioned what role BGCSB holds related to
guide concessions.
MR. JOYCE restated he is a big game guide. In further response
to Co-Chair Lincoln, he explained if air taxi concessions are
opened to all there would be conflicts that would detract from a
tourist's experience. In big game guiding, there is a need to
limit the number of clients in one area so as not to degrade the
experience for a client. Also, regulation of concessions is
good for the game.
2:36:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN asked for the location of Mr. Joyce's
primary guiding operation and air taxi and whether he transports
his and other guide's clients.
MR. JOYCE said his principal air taxi operation is based in
Wasilla. In addition, he works in Southcentral; the principal
base of operations for big game guiding is in Wasilla, and hunts
are conducted on the Alaska Peninsula and in the Chugach range.
His air taxi service carries all passengers and cargo for lodges
and a variety of other services. Transporting hunters is a
small portion of the air taxi service.
2:38:52 PM
CO-CHAIR LINCOLN opened public testimony.
2:39:00 PM
MARK RICHARDS, Executive Director, Resident Hunters of Alaska
(RHAK), informed the committee RHAK represents over 2,000
members who support a resident hunting priority. Mr. Richards
spoke in opposition to Mr. Joyce's reappointment to BGCSB due to
the conflict of interest under [AS 08.545.591] between the
guiding industry and the transporter industry. He referred to
the BGCSB transporter subcommittee, noting guides want to limit
transporters because they believe transporters fly in too many
clients. The big issue with the guide concession program is
that guides with individual concessions may be the only air taxi
licensed to fly to a certain area and will not fly in resident
hunters. Mr. Richards stated the statute creating the
membership of BGCSB did not intend for a guide to also hold a
transporter license and serve in the transporter seat; in fact,
this sets a poor precedent for BGCSB.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN asked how many registered guides also hold
air transporter licenses.
MR. RICHARDS was unsure, although most of the air taxis
commercially authorized by the park service to fly in hunters to
Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve are also guides
thus it is difficult for a resident to get air transportation in
to hunt.
REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN recalled it is not unusual for a
transporter to also be a guide and questioned whether RHAK's
concern about conflict of interest is isolated to Mr. Cash.
MR. RICHARDS clarified the statute states [the membership of
BGCSB includes] two members who are licensed guides and two
members who are licensed transporters. Although the Department
of Law (DOL) does not see illegality in a guide member holding a
transporter license, DOL has stated public members cannot hold
either a guide or a transporter license. He remarked:
We're just saying that we believe it really sets a bad
precedent because there's this really huge tension
between the guide and transporter industry ... we want
the transporter to fight for the transporter and the
guide to fight for the guide.
2:45:04 PM
THOR STACEY, Director, Government Affairs, Alaska Professional
Hunters Association (APHA), expressed APHA's support of Mr.
Joyce's appointment to BGCSB. He said in the last three years
BGCSB has faced significant challenges and has retired its
deficit of over $1 million. In addition, BGCSB has reduced its
outstanding investigations, which he attributed to the efforts
of the volunteer board members. Mr. Stacey pointed out a
transporter or guide license allows one to sell access to
Alaska's wildlife; therefore, there are important issues of
wildlife, professional conduct, and obligations to the resource
that BGCSB will address. He said APHA does not see an extreme
amount of tension between hunting guides and transporters.
2:47:41 PM
CO-CHAIR LINCOLN, after ascertaining no one further wished to
testify, closed public testimony.
CO-CHAIR TARR paraphrased from the following written statement:
The House Resources Standing Committee has reviewed
the qualifications of the governor's appointee, Cash
Joyce, to the Big Game Commercial Services Board and
recommends that the name be forwarded to a joint
session for consideration. This does not reflect
intent by any of the members to vote for or against
this individual during any further sessions for the
purposes of confirmation.
2:48:51 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Resources Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:49 p.m.