Legislature(2001 - 2002)
05/08/2002 03:50 PM Senate RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE RESOURCES COMMITTEE
May 8, 2002
3:50 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator John Torgerson, Chair
Senator Gary Wilken, Vice Chair
Senator Ben Stevens
Senator Kim Elton
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Rick Halford
Senator Robin Taylor
Senator Georgianna Lincoln
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 366
"An Act relating to the fee for the Chitina dipnet fishing
permit; and providing for an effective date."
MOVED CSSB 366(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 287(FIN)
"An Act relating to the exemption of commercial fishing entry
permits from claims of creditors and execution on an interest in
a limited entry permit; and providing for an effective date."
MOVED CSHB 287(FIN) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 447
"An Act relating to the interest rates that may be charged on
loans by the Commercial Fishing and Agriculture Bank."
MOVED HB 447 OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION
SB 366 - No previous action to consider.
HB 287 - No previous action to consider.
HB 447 - See Resources minutes dated 4/19/02.
WITNESS REGISTER
Mr. Gordy Williams, Legislative Liaison
Department of Fish & Game
PO Box 25526
Juneau, AK 99802-5226
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 366.
Mr. Kelly Hepler, Director
Division of Sport Fish
Department of Fish & Game
PO Box 25526
Juneau, AK 99802-5226
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 366.
Mr. Ralph D. Swarthout, Regional Director
Northern Region
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
2301 Peger Rd
Fairbanks AK 99519-6900
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 366.
Mr. John Bennett
Right-of-way Chief
Northern Region
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
2301 Peger Rd.
Fairbanks AK 99709
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 366.
Ms. Sue Aspelund, Executive Director
Cordova District Fishermen United
POB 1715
Cordova AK 99574
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 366 and HB 287.
Mr. Bruce Cain, Executive Director
Native Village of Eyak
POB 1225
Cordova AK 99574
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 366.
Mr. Joseph Heart
Resource Manager, Ahtna Corporation,
Chairman, Land Committee, Chitina Corporation
Vice President, Chitina Corporation
No address provided
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 366.
Mr. Tom Talby
Glennallen Office
Department of Fish and Game
POB 47
Glennallen AK 99588-0047
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on SB 366.
Mr. Mike Tinker
Fish and Game Advisory Committee
POB 289
Ester AK 99775
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 366.
Mr. Stan Bloom, President
Chitina Dipnetters Association
303 Bentley Dr.
Fairbanks AK 99701
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 366.
Ms. Lisa Harbo
820 Capricorn St.
Fairbanks AK 99709
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 366.
Mr. Herb Simone
Nelchina AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 366.
Mr. Dick Bishop, President
Alaska Outdoor Council
POB 73902
Fairbanks AK 99707
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 366.
Ms. Mary McDowell, Commissioner
Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission
Department of Fish and Game
8800 Glacier Hwy, Ste 109
Juneau AK 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 287.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 02-28, SIDE A
Number 001
SB 366-CHITINA DIP NET FISHERY PERMIT FEE
CHAIRMAN JOHN TORGERSON called the Senate Resources Committee
meeting to order at 3:50 p.m. and announced SB 366 to be up for
consideration.
SENATOR WILKEN explained that three years ago, the legislature
enacted legislation that requires a $25 fee per family to fish
the Chitina dipnet fishery of which $18 went to the Ahtna and
Chitina Corporations and $7 went to the Alaska Department of Fish
and Game (ADF&G) for maintenance. There has also been some
discussion, after a survey was completed, that perhaps no
trespass fees are required anymore. This bill addresses changing
the fee to a certain amount that doesn't pay the trespass fees.
MR. GORDY WILLIAMS, legislative liaison, ADF&G, said the Chitina
dipnet fishery is the largest fishery in the state and varies
from year to year. Last year over 8,000 household permits were
issued. A fee has been in place since 1992; it was initially $10
but was increased to $25 in 2000 by SB 301. That bill also
changed language to reflect that the Board of Fisheries had
changed the fishery from personal use to subsistence and it
contained intent language directing the Administration to do
several things. The Administration was to enter into an agreement
by February 1, 2001 that would last for at least three years and
ADF&G was to work with other state and federal agencies on long-
term solutions. It also required the state to work with private
owners to identify and survey the right-of-way.
ADF&G was unable to enter into a three-year contract with the
Chitina and Ahtna Corporations, but it has entered into two
successive one-year contracts, the last of which expired in
December. Those contracts continue to provide guaranteed access
for dipnetters across the Chitina-Ahtna lands that lie between
the boundary of the public right-of-way and the ordinary high
water line of the Copper River. The fee has provided $10 to
Chitina Native Corporation, $8 to Ahtna for guaranteed access, $5
to ADF&G for maintenance contracts for solid waste and garbage,
and a $2 administrative fee for the department. He explained:
A survey was undertaken using funds appropriated by the
legislature last year and that survey is not totally
final yet. There are still drafts going back and forth
between DOT and the contractor. But the preliminary
estimates are that about 60% of the dip net use area is
accessible from the right-of-way. Money for that
appropriation is also, as is spelled out in language
last year, to publish a brochure and for DOT to go out
and put some on-ground marking in to try to indicate
where the public right-of-way does access the river and
where the private lands are.
MR. WILLIAMS said the survey has provided important new
information on the land status and confirms a real patchwork of
public and private land ownership along the river. People use
several very key areas for fishing, camping, parking, and
ancillary activities, such as the mouths of O'Brien Creek and
Haley Creek, that are private lands or they ask ADF&G questions
about the ordinary watermark. He added:
So, while we recognize that there are policy issues
which [indisc.] in light of this new survey, we believe
the best option for 2002 is to retain the fee at $25
and to enter into one-year agreements again with the
Chitina and Ahtna Corporations and we've had
discussions with them along those lines. We believe
that will result in a more orderly fishery and provide
both the atmosphere for further discussions on long-
term solutions as directed by SB 301 - possible land
trades. Those discussions can use the new information
from the survey and be able to sit down, hopefully,
with private landowners and talk about the various
options.
Also, the fishery has been impacted by a landslide,
which is south of O'Brien Creek, which currently blocks
the road. DOT is looking at options for removing that
landslide but it's a difficult area. The original
landslide was in the last year and then there's been a
couple of smaller ones since. It's a very unstable
area. They need to get in and do some assessment work.
Part of that would be on Ahtna lands and they look
forward to working cooperatively with the landowners on
those kinds of issues.
In summary, we recognize that there's important new
information on land status in the area that came with
the survey. It is, however, very new information and
with the final survey not in yet. The 2002 season is
likely to start in mid-June and people will be looking
to buy the permits here in the next few weeks.
Certainly, by the first of June, people will start to
look to buy their permits. We think keeping the fee at
$25, having access contracts in place will provide an
orderly fishery and will allow us to go forward in a
hopefully productive manner this year working towards
long-term solutions that would benefit both the state
and the local landowners.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON asked if the state is paying the Ahtna
Corporation for access to state land.
MR. WILLIAMS replied, "It was always recognized that there was
some private land. It just wasn't known how much of it is and now
the estimate is about 60%, but some of that 40% is pretty
important key land."
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON asked why ADF&G couldn't configure this to pay
the 40% and not 60%.
MR. WILLIAMS replied that the discussion has centered around the
policy issue of going to the area and access to the fishery, but
because of the patchwork ownership pattern, it would be difficult
for people to stay off of the private land. With 30,000 to 40,000
people using the fishery, private landowners think people will
trespass either knowingly or unknowingly. It's more of a policy
call about should there be a fee, not about how much. ADF&G is
saying that given the status this year - the need to work on
long-term solutions and DOTPF needing time to work on the
landslide problem, ADF&G believes the fee should be maintained
this year. That would allow everyone to have guaranteed access
all along the river.
SENATOR ELTON asked whether ADF&G or the Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) has been negotiating the access agreement with
the corporations.
MR. WILLIAMS replied that ADF&G has been negotiating the
contracts.
SENATOR ELTON asked what his sense is of what will happen to
those negotiations if the fee is lowered from $25 to $10.
MR. WILLIAMS said the negotiations have been very difficult at
the $25 level, which is why ADF&G has not been able to enter into
a three-year contract. ADF&G doesn't believe that a $10 fee
access agreement would be part of the equation; $10 would be
within the maintenance arena.
SENATOR ELTON asked what the consequence of having no agreement
would be to the people trying to access the fishing spots.
MR. WILLIAMS replied that a brochure would be produced and roads
would be marked. People would be told they are not allowed to go
on to private land, but that they could access the fishery
through public land. The fishing takes place below the mean
ordinary high water mark, but access to the other activities,
such as camping, is through private land. The private lands would
be off limits unless the Native corporations came up with some
permitting system of their own.
SENATOR ELTON asked if the chances that such a change would be
chaotic are very high.
MR. WILLIAMS replied that he couldn't predict, but it is
possible.
SENATOR ELTON said he was trying to figure out a way this could
work for everybody and asked the department's reaction to an
effective date of January 1, 2003.
MR. KELLY HEPLER, Director, Division of Sport Fish, ADF&G, said
that is an interesting question because ADF&G and DOTPF certainly
want to work with the two corporations on long-term solutions. It
then becomes a question of whether they realize the state is
serious about this and would come to the table with greater faith
than they plan to now. He didn't know, but he thought it would
ease some of the concerns Mr. Williams voiced earlier. A final
date by the legislature to resolve the issue would send a strong
message.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON asked why the Native corporations wouldn't
charge their own fees and manage it themselves. He noted the
problem of access across private land is not unique to Chitina.
He said he didn't understand why there is a big problem and why
the state is collecting fees.
MR. HEPLER said that access to the fishery is through a patchwork
of public and private land ownership. He said the area they are
talking about is a fairly small area but a large number of people
want to use it at one time.
SENATOR WILKEN said it's a mish-mash of ownership. He explained
the topography is such that one might have to go across private
land in order to get down to the cliffs or the bluffs in order to
access some of the state land. He asked Mr. Hepler to point out
the landslide area.
MR. HEPLER replied that it is about a mile below O'Brien Creek.
SENATOR WILKEN asked if Rand Creek and Haley Creek are private or
public.
MR. HEPLER replied that a lot of it is private and that it's
harder to determine the high water mark on a river delta than in
other places.
SENATOR WILKEN asked if boat access to the river would be
available if the O'Brien Creek and Haley Creek boat launches were
closed.
MR. HEPLER replied if they shut down the Haley Creek boat launch,
people would probably have to go to where the bridge crosses. It
would be a longer run.
SENATOR WILKEN asked if options are available for both parties to
look at during the negotiations to start to come to some
conclusion or whether they are so far apart that there hasn't
been a real discussion.
MR. HEPLER replied that discussions have been two-fold. One
discussion has been about what an agreement would look like if
they come to an agreement this year. The corporations want to
have the same agreements they had in previous years. At the same
time they have been talking about long-term solutions. The energy
is there to come up with something.
SENATOR WILKEN asked when the preliminary survey was completed
and when the final would be available.
MR. WILLIAMS replied that Mr. Swarthout and Mr. Bennett, with
ADF&G in Fairbanks, could answer that.
SENATOR WILKEN said his intent in this fishery is to have an
accessible, productive, safe fishery and he could support a
continuation of the $25 fee knowing that this is the end and that
next year there will be some agreement between the state and the
corporations. He would also consider an effective date. He didn't
want to be talking about $18 or $25 and having an inaccessible,
unproductive, unsafe fishery for Fairbanks people.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON said he didn't see why they couldn't continue
to pay $25 for access across private land and leave the state
lands at $10, "and you do that basically by grouping the two and
dividing it by the total."
MR. WILLIAMS said, "It's one fee that's $25. Out of that, $5 goes
to maintenance, $2 to us, $18 to the corporations."
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON asked, "Are we maintaining their land, too?"
MR. WILLIAMS replied that they pick up trash.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON said he didn't mind paying for access to that
land, but he didn't see why the state was paying for the use of
its own land. He stated, "According to this, you're paying $18
for use on 60% of the state's land and we're paying an entity
that has no control over that. It's our land - if your survey is
right."
MR. WILLIAMS replied they could assume $15. The $5 service fee is
for trash pick up and porta-potties, leaving $10.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON said, according to their figures, 3,800 users
don't use the private land, but the state is paying $18 per head
for them as if they were.
SENATOR ELTON said his understanding is that the $25 fee is per
family.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON said that 40% is Native land. He thought it
was fair to reimburse them for what the public is using.
MR. WILLIAMS said that the 40% and 60% figures don't apply to the
number of permits; they apply to the land status.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON asked if the $100,000 survey only shows who
owns the land.
MR. WILLIAMS replied yes.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON asked if they know how many people go over the
private land.
SENATOR WILKEN asked Mr. Ralph Swarthout, Northern Regional
Director, DOTPF, to go over the survey process. Mr. Swarthout
indicated that Mr. John Bennett would go over it.
MR. JOHN BENNETT, Right-of-way Chief, DOTPF, said he was the
contract manager and took the task from ADF&G. He did a
professional services agreement with a survey company out of
Anchorage called Crazy Mountain Joint Venture. The company was
tasked with mapping the location of the Copper River Highway
right-of-way because DOTPF had no information on that. He
explained:
They prepared an as-built survey of the centerline
geometry from the Copper River Bridge on McCarthy Road
through Chitina down to Haley Creek. The next task was
to determine as best they could the ordinary high water
line on the Copper River along that stretch - basically
so we could determine the relationship between the edge
of the right-of-way, which is 150 feet on each side of
the center line of the Copper River Highway and the
ordinary high water line, therefore, being able to
determine in what areas you could actually go from the
road right-of-way to the state owned lands below the
high water lines without getting into a trespass
situation.
The survey was commenced sometime in the fall of last
year. I don't have the dates with me. The mapping was
done over the course of the winter. We have one task
left to perform, but we had deferred it after the
annual Chitina Dipnetters meeting when we found out
that it's our understanding that we're going ahead with
the status quo on the permit fee….
With the milepost markers and the map we intend to
publish in a brochure and give to each dipnet
permittee, they will be able to walk or drive down the
road, look at the milepost markers and determine if
they're at a location where they can go directly to the
water without being in a trespass situation.
SENATOR WILKEN asked him when the survey was completed.
MR. BENNETT said the fieldwork was completed late last fall. He
explained:
The milepost markers will either be completed this fall
or, if this bill passes, we're going to have to
scramble out there and do it this week.
SENATOR WILKEN asked if he had a preliminary report on what the
survey shows as far as what is public and what is private.
MR. BENNETT replied that he had a map that was just delivered by
the survey contractor yesterday and he didn't know if Mr.
Williams had received copies of what he plotted out.
MS. SUE ASPELUND, Executive Director, Cordova District Fishermen
United (CDFU), opposed the reduction of the fee this year because
the timing is inappropriate given the lateness, relative to how
soon the fishery should commence for the prosecution of an
orderly fishery. In addition, because resource management can be
costly, CDFU encourages future discussion of using a fee similar
to this one to reimplement much needed in-season reporting
requirements in the future for the Chitina dip net fishery.
MR. BRUCE CAIN, Executive Director, Native village of Eyak, said
the original Copper River railroad right-of-way was 100 ft., not
300 ft. as is proposed, and it was only valid as long as it was
used as a railroad.
MR. JOSEPH HEART, resource manager, Ahtna Incorporated, said he
is also the Chairman of the Land Committee for Chitina Native
Corporation as well as the Vice President of the Corporation. He
is one of the main negotiators on behalf of the Native
corporations with ADF&G. He stated, "Ahtna and Chitina, both, do
not support the passing of SB 366."
He said that both corporations have been cooperative. However,
they feel strongly that when the state invites people to use the
resource and invites them to come near or across their property,
the land rights need to be protected or an agreement needs to be
worked out to compensate for the impacts, like trash collection,
tree cutting, fire rings, etc. He said hardly anyone lives in
Chitina and the only time large negative impacts occur is when
the fishery is operating. He has been working with Commissioner
Rue and others and believes the fee should be left in place this
year so they can address a lot of the issues, like the right-of-
way the state has on 60 % of the land for access to the river and
the intent of that.
SENATOR ELTON said the previous testifier suggested that the
right-of-way ought to be 50 ft. from the centerline and the
department has testified that it is using 150 ft. in each
direction from the centerline. He asked Mr. Heart what their
stance is on that.
MR. HEART replied that the original right-of-way was in place for
the railroad and it was 100 ft. In the 1980s, when Chitina
Corporation started charging people to cross its land, DOTPF
realigned the highway access and that's how this agreement came
into being. At that time, everyone knew the right-of-way was 100
ft. The state courts decided the right-of-way was 150 ft. Their
paperwork still shows it as a 100 ft. right-of-way. Native
allotments on that same road show a 100 ft. right-of-way on their
titles. They feel it should still be a 100 ft. right-of-way.
SENATOR ELTON asked his opinion of an amendment that would
provide an effective date some time after this summer instead of
immediately.
MR. HEART said for this year a later effective date would be okay
if the state is willing to work out some of the issues.
MR. TOM TALBY, ADF&G, Glennallen, said he was available to answer
questions.
MR. MIKE TINKER, Fish and Game Advisory Committee, said:
There are about 5,000 netters in the Dip Netters
Association that live in the Fairbanks-Delta Junction-
Nenana area. There are 5,001 in the Mat-Su area. So, to
talk about this as a Fairbanks issue is not correct.
About a year and a half ago, the Board of Fisheries
found that the Chitina dipnet fishery was a subsistence
fishery. This fee makes it the only subsistence fishery
in the State of Alaska that we charge for. Fifty miles
up the road from Chitina, Ahtna maintains a fee
schedule for access to the Gulkana and other waters and
both collect the fee themselves for trespass over their
property and maintains a protection force or an
advisory force for people who want to find out where to
get a permit or that might be trespassing. The fact
that the state should continue to do this for them at
Chitina is just ludicrous. Discussions that they're
talking about now and they're worried about having for
the next year, and the next year, have been had for the
last five or six years with the fee going up. It's time
to end it. Our constituents on the Advisory Committee
and our constituents here in Fairbanks really don't
feel there should be any fee at all unless you are
going to start to require subsistence fishermen
statewide to buy a simple general fishing permit as
they would a hunting permit to go hunting. Going to $10
is certainly a jump in the right direction and allows
the services that could be there. You might ask Mr.
Hepler how we got to this point. My letters to some of
you and to him started in late February and that was
after a month of discussions here in Fairbanks. Before
that he was all for doing away with the fee schedule
until the commissioner got a letter from Ahtna in mid-
March, which he and the other fishery guys didn't get
until April and now all of a sudden it's a crisis.
MR. TINKER said the issue is whether or not we're going to
charge a fee for the subsistence fisheries.
TAPE 02-28, SIDE B
MR. STAN BLOOM, President, Chitina Dip Netters Association, said
last year they supported raising the fee to $25 but the survey
now shows that 60% of the land is on one side of the river. This
fee does not cover anybody who goes on the other side of the
river or in a boat. He pointed out:
So, you should do away with the fee that pays the
Native corporations for trespass. If they want to put
up posted signs and they want to charge a fee, let them
do it. It's hard enough paying for our services. We're
the only group that pays for our own services in the
state. When you go to the Kenai you don't pay $10 so
you can use a toilet or have someone pick up the trash.
The state does that. The state should do that in this
case…
He said that all subsistence users are required to have a state
hunting license.
No subsistence user is required to have a state fishing
license. It's ludicrous to let all of us people fish
free when you must manage the fishery. I say drop the
word 'sport' out of paragraph 1, charge everybody $15
for a fishing license, use that money to provide the
services and put it in DNR. Let me tell you, Fish and
Game doesn't have to make a contract for toilets and
for trash pick up. I took pictures of the toilets last
year that would gag a maggot. The trash was piled up so
high that when I pulled up with my truck that says
"Chitina Dipnetters" on it, three guys went out and
started piling trash bags into a pick up truck to haul
them away before I took a picture of it. Fish and Game
is not the person to handle services. Put it in DNR or
DOT or somebody that's got some kind of expertise in
that kind of stuff and let Fish and Game go out there
and count little fishies and do what biologists do. I
say do away with the permit fee period, make everybody
have a fishing license and the state provide services
just like they do on the Kenai or any other place they
hold a fishery…
MS. LISA HARBO said she fished the Chitina Dipnet fishery with
her family since she was a kid and opposes the permit fee that
they pay for several reasons. One is that no other subsistence
fishery in the state requires a fee. In the federal fishery for
the Chitina sub district in the same area, people are paying no
fee and have higher limits. She also didn't think they should
have to pay a trespass fee when they can cross a public easement
path and didn't think their legal rights to dipnet should be tied
to the trespass fee payments.
MR. HERB SIMON said he is testifying as a private individual from
Nelchina whose family has been there since after World War II. He
agreed with the gentleman from Fairbanks who suggested requiring
a state license instead of fooling with the dipnet fee.
He would like to believe that the negotiations have been in good
faith, but apparently that isn't the case. He thought they should
get a kick-back because they have been paying this fee for years
and there is public access and the same fees are not being
charged for access in other places.
MR. DICK BISHOP, Alaska Outdoor Council, supported SB 366 and
suggested attaching a sunset provision to the $10 fee so it could
eventually be removed. People have noted that it is the only fee
on a subsistence fishery in the state and they feel that is not
appropriate. He added:
We agree with the rationale that the fee should be
reduced at this time. The whole point of the several-
year dialogue here has been to identify and provide the
public access, relieve the public of the problem of
trespassing and relieve the state of the obligations of
negotiating contracts to cover potential trespass and
make it possible for people to access that fishery on
the public lands that are available to access it…We
would like to see if there needs to be a fee to cover
the cost of services there such as trash and waste
disposal. Then it should be under a different guise and
not as a subsistence fishing permit fee. It should
perhaps be a service fee and normally those things are
handled through a general fund appropriation to another
department…
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON said the committee was working on amendments
as they talked, but a quorum of the committee wasn't present, so
he would hold the bill.
CSHB 287(FIN)-EXEMPT ENTRY PERMITS FROM CREDITOR CLAIMS
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON announced CSHB 287(FIN) to be up for
consideration.
REPRESENTATIVE DREW SCALZI, sponsor of HB 287, explained this
very simple bill exempts limited entry permits from claims of
creditors, except the Commercial Fisheries and Agriculture Bank
(CFAB) and the Child Support Enforcement Division (CSED). This
bill will give added protection to the state's position that it
is in the best interest of the state that permits be non-lienable
to other entities so the state can retain its fishing harvest
privileges.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON asked if it will stop the IRS from taking
permits.
REPRESENTATIVE SCALZI replied yes.
MS. MARY MCDOWELL, Commissioner, Commercial Fisheries Entry
Commission (CFEC), indicated support of the bill.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON announced an at-ease until members could
return.
TAPE 02-29, SIDE A
SB 366-CHITINA DIP NET FISHERY PERMIT FEE
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON announced that the committee would take up SB
366 again, as a quorum was now present.
SENATOR WILKEN moved to adopt Amendment 1 to replace $25 with $0
in Section 1, to change the effective date to 1/1/2003 in Section
2, and to add a new Section 3 that says, conceptually, the
Department of Fish and Game will report to the legislature the
final results of the Chitina fishery access negotiations by
February 1, 2003.
There were no objections and Amendment 1 was adopted.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON asked if there was any objection to moving the
bill.
SENATOR WILKEN reiterated that it is important to have a safe,
productive and accessible fishery at Chitina this year and that,
"By this time next year, we'll have this problem fixed."
There were no objections and CSSB 366(RES) moved from committee.
CSHB 287(FIN)-EXEMPT ENTRY PERMITS FROM CREDITOR CLAIMS
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON announced CSHB 287(FIN) to be back before the
committee.
MS. SUE ASPELUND said that the Cordova District Fishermen United
does not support the House Finance CS to HB 287 and urged members
to consider reinstating the CS that came out of the House
Fisheries committee. She surmised, "If the intent of the
legislation really is to protect fishermen from the claims of
creditors, it seems foolhardy to support the gutted version that
came out of House Finance."
SENATOR WILKEN moved to pass CSHB 287(FIN) from committee with
individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes. There were
no objections and it was so ordered.
HB 447-COM FISH & AGRICULTURE BANK INTEREST RATE
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON announced HB 447 to be up for consideration.
He reminded members they had already taken testimony on HB 447
and had received conflicting legal opinions from different folks.
He suggested the bill should probably go to the Senate Judiciary
Committee for review, but it did not have a referral.
SENATOR WILKEN moved to pass HB 447 from committee with
individual recommendations and attached fiscal note. There were
no objections and it was so ordered.
There being no further business to come before the committee,
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON adjourned the meeting at 5:03 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|