03/11/2024 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB164 | |
| SB199 | |
| SB210 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 199 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 210 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 164 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
March 11, 2024
3:31 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Click Bishop, Co-Chair
Senator Cathy Giessel, Co-Chair
Senator Bill Wielechowski, Vice Chair
Senator Scott Kawasaki
Senator James Kaufman
Senator Forrest Dunbar
Senator Matt Claman
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 164
"An Act making certain veterans eligible for a lifetime permit
to access state park campsites and facilities without charge;
and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 199
"An Act relating to access roads; relating to state land;
relating to contracts for the sale of state land; relating to
the authority of the Department of Education and Early
Development to dispose of state land; relating to the authority
of the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities to
dispose of state land; relating to the authority of the
Department of Natural Resources over certain state land;
relating to the state land disposal income fund; relating to the
sale and lease of state land; relating to covenants and
restrictions on agricultural land; and providing for an
effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 210
"An Act relating to salmon hatchery permits; and authorizing the
sale of salmon to permitted persons for stocking lakes."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 164
SHORT TITLE: STATE PARK PERMITS FOR DISABLED VETERANS
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) BJORKMAN
01/16/24 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/8/24
01/16/24 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/16/24 (S) RES, FIN
03/11/24 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: SB 199
SHORT TITLE: STATE LAND: DISPOSAL/SALE/LEASE/RESTRICT
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
01/22/24 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/22/24 (S) TRA, RES, FIN
02/13/24 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/13/24 (S) Heard & Held
02/13/24 (S) MINUTE(TRA)
02/20/24 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/20/24 (S) Moved CSSB 199(TRA) Out of Committee
02/20/24 (S) MINUTE(TRA)
02/21/24 (S) TRA RPT CS 1DP 4NR NEW TITLE
02/21/24 (S) DP: KAUFMAN
02/21/24 (S) NR: KIEHL, WILSON, MYERS, TOBIN
02/21/24 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/21/24 (S) Heard & Held
02/21/24 (S) MINUTE(RES)
03/01/24 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/01/24 (S) Heard & Held
03/01/24 (S) MINUTE(RES)
03/11/24 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: SB 210
SHORT TITLE: SALMON HATCHERY PERMITS
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
01/26/24 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/26/24 (S) RES
02/21/24 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/21/24 (S) Scheduled but Not Heard
03/01/24 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/01/24 (S) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
03/11/24 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR JESSE BJORKMAN, District D
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 164.
RAYMIE MATIASHOWSKI, Staff
Senator Jesse Bjorkman
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the sectional analysis for SB 164.
RICKY GEASE, Director
Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation
Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions related to SB 164.
CHRISTY COLLES, Director
Division of Mining, Land and Water (DMLW)
Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions related to SB 199.
DOUG VINCENT-LANG, Commissioner
Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented SB 210 on behalf of the
administration.
SAM RABUNG, Director
Division of Commercial Fisheries
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions related to SB 210.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:31:36 PM
CO-CHAIR CLICK BISHOP called the Senate Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 3:31 p.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Wielechowski, Kawasaki, Dunbar, Claman, and
Co-Chair Giessel and Co-Chair Bishop. Senator Kaufman arrived
thereafter.
SB 164-STATE PARK PERMITS FOR DISABLED VETERANS
3:32:12 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO.
164 "An Act making certain veterans eligible for a lifetime
permit to access state park campsites and facilities without
charge; and providing for an effective date."
3:32:36 PM
SENATOR JESSE BJORKMAN, District D, Alaska State Legislature,
Juneau, Alaska, sponsor of SB 164.
[Original punctuation provided.]
SENATE BILL 164
SPONSOR STATEMENT
State Park Permits for Disabled Veterans
I am excited to introduce Senate Bill 164, which will
allow disabled veterans who have honorably served our
country to have a lifetime of access to our state
parks free of charge. This bill will allow them to
apply for a lifetime pass to Alaska State Parks and
waive the fees. They will have access to developed
campsites and parking. I believe that those who have
served their nation in the military deserve the utmost
respect and have earned the right to enjoy the beauty
of our great state that they have defended and
sacrificed for. As it currently stands, disabled
veterans do qualify for a free pass, however it is set
in statute as an annual pass system. By moving it to a
lifetime pass, it will be a simpler system for our
veterans to take advantage of the opportunities
presented to them. In addition, there is currently no
provision for them to be able to park during the day
if they simply want to enjoy the beautiful sights
around our great state. This bill will provide for
greater access to our parks if they simply want to sit
and enjoy the view or take a hike through some
beautiful country. I respectfully ask for your support
of this legislation for the benefit of our disabled
veterans. They deserve our respect and access to the
beauty of our great State.
SENATOR BJORKMAN stated that SB 164 aims to provide permanent
access for disabled veterans to state parks, campgrounds, and
parking areas on a permanent basis. He noted confusion regarding
the permit renewal frequency, with varying reports of renewals
every other year, every three years, or every five years as
described in the fiscal note. He expressed a desire for disabled
veterans, who have sacrificed significantly in service to the
country, to receive permanent, free access to state parks,
including free parking and camping. He emphasized that SB 164
seeks to offer a permanent pass that would not require renewal
and includes both camping and parking privileges.
3:35:02 PM
RAYMIE MATIASHOWSKI, Staff, Senator Jesse Bjorkman, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, presented the sectional analysis
for SB 164:
[Original punctuation provided.]
SB 164 Version S
Sectional Analysis
"State Park Permits for Disabled Veterans"
Section 1: Amends AS 41.21.026(d), to move from giving
disabled veterans an annual state park developed
campsite permit to a lifetime permit with access to
developed campsites, restroom facilities, and parking.
Section 2 Provides for an effective date of July 1,
2024.
3:35:46 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if residency is required for a disabled
veteran being considered for a state park permit.
3:35:52 PM
MR. MATIASHOWSKI replied no.
3:36:01 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if there are different permit
requirements for residents and non-residents to enter state
parks.
3:36:21 PM
MR. MATIASHOWSKI replied that there is no difference; statute
specifies a disabled veteran of the country.
3:36:38 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN asked him to explain why the state has not yet
implemented the provision to include state park permits for
disabled veterans.
3:36:56 PM
RICKY GEASE, Director, Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation,
Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Anchorage, Alaska,
answered questions related to SB 164. He stated that the
provision has not been implemented because it needs to be
established in statute. While the camping pass has already been
implemented, parking access has not yet been established.
3:37:20 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN asked for confirmation of his understanding that
the state currently offers a lifetime camping pass for disabled
veterans but does not provide a lifetime parking pass.
3:37:32 PM
MR. GEASE confirmed that the state has a lifetime camping permit
for disabled veterans. For data tracking purposes, the permit is
renewed every five years to maintain an accurate count of people
who use it.
3:37:56 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN asked if lifetime passes for state parks are
provided to any other groups.
3:38:06 PM
MR. GEASE replied no. He said that the lifetime camping permit
for disabled veterans is the only pass of its kind provided by
the state.
3:38:18 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP asked how many veteran campsite permits are
currently being utilized.
3:38:35 PM
MR. GEASE explained that currently, the state issues five-year
permits for disabled veterans, with permits for 2023 through
2027 being the latest period. New applicants will apply for
permits, and existing permit holders will be asked to renew,
receiving new stickers for the next period (2028 through 2032).
As of December 31, 2023, 1,781 people signed up for the five-
year permit.
3:39:19 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP asked him to repeat the number of people who
have signed up for the current five-year permit.
3:39:20 PM
MR. GEASE reiterated that 1,781 people signed up.
3:40:07 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked how many non-residents currently take
advantage of or are expected to take advantage of the permit.
3:40:24 PM
MR. GEASE acknowledged that he does not currently have the
detailed information but can obtain it. He mentioned that while
the permanent home address is requested, all verification
details are handled through Veterans Affairs (VA). He noted that
the permit is not based on residency status and committed to
tracking down and providing the information to the committee.
3:40:58 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN asked Senator Bjorkman if SB 164 would revoke the
five-year renewal period.
3:41:33 PM
SENATOR BJORKMAN explained that SB 164, as drafted, would
eliminate the need for permit renewals. He expressed interest in
creating a system akin to the permanent hunting and fishing
licenses available to senior citizens, which do not require
renewal. He asked how state parks use data on the number and
value of permits in circulation and suggested that data could be
collected through campsite inspections or other methods,
especially with the transition to electronic payment for camping
and parking. A lifetime pass could simplify tracking usage as
electronic payment systems become more prevalent.
3:41:39 PM
SENATOR KAUFMAN joined the meeting.
3:42:43 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR asked Mr. Gease about the fiscal note indicating
a potential loss of 4,000 annual parking permits compared to
1,750 active passes. He inquired about how the disabled veteran
parking permit system operates, whether it involves a hangtag or
a license plate, and how it is monitored to prevent misuse. He
expressed concern about the possibility of a veteran obtaining
multiple permits for vehicles in their extended family and
requested clarification on measures to ensure the parking pass
is used appropriately by the veteran it was issued to.
3:43:59 PM
MR. GEASE replied explained that currently, campground passes
are issued on a first-come, first-served basis. Campgrounds have
a host who provides the pass, which can be shown to the host and
then attached to the vehicle as a coupon or receipt indicating
zero fees. Reservations are handled informally, and data
tracking is not precise, relying on estimates. For a potential
annual parking pass, he suggested that it could be displayed on
the vehicle's window, similar to existing annual passes. This
approach would allow for accurate tracking of usage. The pass
could either be kept separate or combined with the campground
pass, with the combined pass being affixed to the vehicle.
3:45:27 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR asked for confirmation of his understanding that
the plan is to have one parking pass issued per permanent park
pass.
3:45:42 PM
MR. GEASE explained that the two systems are currently tracked
separately. DNR could issue a permanent annual parking pass that
affixes to the windshield and provide a separate card for
disabled veterans to show to the campground host, or they could
combine them into a single pass. He suggested that a parking
pass should ideally be a sticker affixed to the windshield, as
this would make compliance checks easier and better align with
how parking is accounted for.
3:46:36 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR stated that as someone who will be a veteran in
the future, he is aware of potential abuse of benefits afforded
to veterans. He expressed support for the bill and appreciation
for Senator Bjorkman's efforts but emphasized the need to ensure
that the system does not become susceptible to fraudulent use.
He referenced past issues with property tax exemptions in
Anchorage, where benefits continued to be claimed after the
eligible person passed away or moved away, until audits were
conducted. He urged Mr. Gease to remain vigilant and recommended
the creation of a system that prevents abuse.
3:47:37 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN requested clarification from Mr. Gease. He noted
that currently, annual parking passes are displayed in the car
window and change in color each year. He asked whether, if SB
164 passes, a different pass would be issued specifically for
disabled veterans or if a mechanism will be created to provide
disabled veterans with the same annual pass used by others. He
expressed uncertainty about how this would be approached.
3:48:25 PM
MR. GEASE explained that if a system were created requiring the
annual mailing of passes to an estimated 4,000 people, it could
be managed. He anticipated more interest in the parking pass
than camping pass. However, he said he prefers maintaining the
five-year permit system. Under this system, a batch of camping
permits would be printed and remain valid for five years, with
renewals only required once every five years. This approach
would reduce administrative effort and align with statewide
comprehensive outdoor recreation planning efforts, allowing data
collection every five years. He envisioned that adopting a five-
year system under SB 164 would reduce 80 percent of the effort
required to manage parking passes.
3:50:11 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked for confirmation of his understanding
that the proposed system involves a disabled veteran applying
for a pass, receiving a sticker to place on their car, and using
it for the next five years, with reapplication only required
after the five-year period.
3:50:34 PM
MR. GEASE confirmed that under the proposed system, veterans
would receive a new five-year sticker every five years. If a
veteran has an older sticker in 2028, the new sticker could be
issued on the spot, mailed to them, or picked up by the veteran.
3:51:05 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if only one sticker is provided for
each disabled veteran.
3:51:29 PM
MR. GEASE replied that currently, one annual pass is issued per
vehicle regardless of the number of people within the vehicle.
3:51:53 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if one pass is issued per vehicle or
per disabled veteran.
3:52:03 PM
MR. GEASE replied that the proposed system would issue one
annual parking pass per disabled veteran. However, if the
program were expanded to allow multiple vehicles per veteran,
such as three, the system could accommodate that by issuing
three passes. He noted that current annual passes are funded
through general fund program receipts, and the number of permits
issued would be tracked to calculate the cost of reimbursement
from the state to cover lost revenue in the general fund program
receipts as noted in the fiscal note.
3:53:13 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked how the system would handle
situations where a veteran passes away after receiving the pass
and whether the family would be responsible for returning the
pass or removing it from the vehicle.
3:53:35 PM
MR. GEASE replied that DNR would rely on the good intentions of
the family to remove the sticker from the vehicle.
3:53:50 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI described a situation in Fairbanks where each
vehicle needs its own permit for the Salcha River boat takeout,
which led him to receive a question from a caller about whether
multiple permits were required for multiple vehicles. He asked
whether this situation was impacting disabled Alaska veterans,
noting that the fiscal note seemed to suggest this but lacking
the full context of the statute. He sought confirmation on
whether the proposed system would apply to any disabled veteran,
regardless of residency.
3:54:44 PM
SENATOR BJORKMAN replied with his understanding that current
statute applies to any disabled veteran regardless of residency
status.
3:55:05 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if the proposed system for disabled
veterans would differ from the eligibility criteria for
permanent senior resident licenses for hunting and fishing,
where residency is a requirement.
3:55:15 PM
SENATOR BJORKMAN replied that is correct.
3:55:24 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR urged maintaining a one-to-one ratio for parking
passes per disabled veteran to avoid potential misuse. He
referenced instances where similar provisions have been
exploited by individuals who were not considered disabled
veterans. He inquired whether there would be penalties or
enforcement mechanisms if a vehicle with a disabled veteran's
pass is sold and the pass is misused, essentially constituting
low-level fraud.
3:56:38 PM
MR. GEASE explained that the disabled veterans' camping pass is
non-transferable. If the qualifying veteran's vehicle is sold,
the pass must be removed. If the windshield is damaged or
replaced, the pass needs to be scraped off and sent in for a
replacement. The proposed system applies to all veterans,
regardless of residency status.
3:57:18 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR reiterated his question about enforcement
measures. He asked whether there would be penalties for
fraudulently displaying a disabled veteran's parking sticker if
someone who is not a disabled veteran uses it after purchasing a
vehicle.
3:57:35 PM
MR. GEASE stated that he would follow up on what triggers
enforcement actions for fraudulent use of a disabled veteran's
parking sticker. Park rangers do scan vehicles, but because
disabilities can vary and may not always be obvious, law
enforcement would follow up if fraud is discovered. However, he
expressed uncertainty about the priority level of such
enforcement and suggested that tightening up the system could be
more effective than relying solely on law enforcement.
3:58:22 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR agreed and reiterated his support for a one-to-
one pass per disabled veteran ratio.
3:58:35 PM
CO-CHAIR GIESSEL redirected committee members to language under
SB 164, noting that the original language of the statute
specifies that the department shall issue, free of charge, an
annual state park pass to disabled veterans of this country.
3:58:56 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if proposed usage of the pass would
also include cabin access.
3:59:16 PM
MR. GEASE clarified that, as he reads proposed language under SB
164, it does not apply to public use cabins. The pass is limited
to camping and parking.
3:59:38 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked for a general sense of revenue
generated from parking fees in state parks on state lands.
4:00:01 PM
MR. GEASE explained that the general fund program receipts range
between $4 million to $5 million, coming from various sources
such as public use cabins, daily and annual parking, and
campground fees. Most campground fees are around $20, annual
passes are $60, and parking fees range between $5 to $7.
Currently, annual passes account for about $1 million, which is
over 20 percent of the total revenue. Parking revenue,
generating between $500 to $700, contributes a significant
portion. If 4,000 people signed up for the parking pass, it
would generate approximately $240,000, equating to about five
percent of the general fund program receipts. These funds along
with vehicle rental taxes (VRT) are used primarily for field
operations, and payroll.
4:01:30 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP asked for confirmation of his understanding that
VRT is defined as 'vehicle rental taxes.'
4:01:37 PM
MR. GEASE replied that is correct.
4:01:45 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR acknowledged that Senator Wielechowski has worked
to ensure Hmong veterans receive similar benefits. He noted that
while the language of the bill specifies veterans of this
country, Hmong veterans also fought for the country but may lack
formal federal acknowledgments. Given the large Hmong community
in Anchorage and their interest in parks, he inquired whether
they would be able to access the same benefits.
4:02:36 PM
MR. GEASE stated that, currently, verification of disability
determination documents comes through the VA, which handles the
verification for veterans who served in the United States.
4:03:02 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN expressed concerns about the current limitation
of one sticker per veteran, noting that it might discourage
proper use. He mentioned that some veterans use larger vehicles
like motor homes or trailers for camping, which are not suitable
for day-use parking spots. He suggested considering the issuance
of a different sticker or allowing two stickers per veteran to
better accommodate their needs and ensure appropriate use of
parking spaces.
4:04:16 PM
SENATOR BJORKMAN noted that the bill will not include rental
facilities, boat launch access, or other services beyond camping
and parking spaces. He emphasized that, given the limited access
to boat launches, it's important to keep those separate from the
bill to avoid overwhelming demand. He noted that while there's
interest from constituents for boat launch access, maintaining
separate fees for those services is preferable to ensure
adequate access and space.
4:05:26 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP held SB 164 in committee.
SB 199-STATE LAND: DISPOSAL/SALE/LEASE/RESTRICT
4:05:45 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP announced the consideration of CS FOR SENATE
BILL NO. 199(TRA) "An Act relating to access roads; relating to
state land; relating to contracts for the sale of state land;
relating to the authority of the Department of Education and
Early Development to dispose of state land; relating to the
authority of the Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities to dispose of state land; relating to the acceptance
of gifts, donations, and grants by the Department of Natural
Resources; relating to accounting for certain program receipts;
relating to the authority of the Department of Natural Resources
over certain state land; relating to the state land disposal
income fund; relating to the sale and lease of state land;
relating to covenants and restrictions on agricultural land; and
providing for an effective date."
4:06:21 PM
CHRISTY COLLES, Director, Division of Mining, Land and Water
(DMLW), Department of Natural Resources (DNR), answered
questions related to SB 199. She addressed concerns expressed
about SB 199 and clarified bill provisions. Section 17 of SB 199
outlines a new program for leasing and selling state land for
collection development. The Alaska State Constitution and
statutes require the department to manage state lands for
multiple uses, including retaining land for habitat and
recreational opportunities, while balancing this with the
mandate to develop state land resources. She noted that she
provided committee members with a flow chart to illustrate the
components of Section 17, which proposes the creation of a new
statute, AS 30.05.086. This statute identifies eligible lands
for commercial leases and sales within a qualified opportunity
zone, either by nomination or identification by the
commissioner.
4:08:18 PM
At ease
4:08:26 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP reconvened the meeting.
4:08:31 PM
MS. COLLES spoke to step two of the flow chart. She explained
the next steps following the identification of lands. She noted
that step two involves determining the suitability of these
lands for lease and sale for commercial purposes. A "best
interest finding" would be drafted to assess whether the
identified lands serve the state's interests. This process,
governed by AS 38.05.035, includes public notice as required
under AS 38.05.945. The process also involves considering the
reclassification of lands to settlement, with the DNR
Commissioner having the authority to classify and reclassify
lands under AS 38.04.065 and AS 38.05.300 that requires a robust
decision making public process. For current land sale projects,
classification actions occur approximately 40 percent of the
time, and reclassification actions occur around 25 percent of
the time. Lands within legislatively designated areas, such as
park systems, state forests, and special use areas, are not
eligible for reclassification for sale as part of the best
interest finding process. During this process, DNR seeks
comments from agencies and the public on the proposed action.
These comments are considered and may lead to modifications or
disapproval of the lease or sale due to issues such as third-
party interests, mining activity, critical habitat, recreation,
water resources, cultural resources, or other values identified.
The reasons for any modification or disapproval are discussed in
the best interest finding. Public notice is required under AS
38.05.945, mandating a minimum 30-day public comment period.
Notices are posted on the online public notice system and may
also be published in statewide and local newspapers, announced
via public service announcements, posted in conspicuous
locations near the proposed action, or sent to potentially
affected parties. Additionally, notifications are sent to
relevant municipalities, ANCSA regional and village corporations
within 25 miles, postmasters of communities outside of a borough
within 25 miles, and nonprofit community organizations. The
comments received are summarized and addressed in the final best
interest finding.
4:11:33 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP asked for confirmation of his understanding that
there are two best interest findings.
4:11:38 PM
MS. COLLES clarified that step two involves a decision for
suitability through a best interest finding and a potential
classification action. These processes can occur simultaneously,
resulting in one or two decision documents being prepared.
Public notice is issued at the same time to ensure that people
understand these processes go hand in hand. This approach helps
the public stay informed and provides transparency in the
decision-making process.
4:12:07 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked when dealing with state land adjacent to
municipalities, what considerations are necessary regarding
municipal boundaries.
4:12:24 PM
MS. COLLES responded that DNR would collaborate with the
municipality in a similar manner to the public process. They
would provide public notice of the project to the municipality
and adhere to any zoning requirements set by the municipality
for any development on the property.
4:12:49 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the best interest finding is
appealable.
4:12:53 PM
MS. COLLES replied yes.
4:12:58 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked which section of the statute AS
38.05.035 is located in.
4:13:07 PM
MS. COLLES asked him to clarify his question.
4:13:14 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked her to specify which section under
references the best interest finding.
4:13:09 PM
MS. COLLES replied that it is located under AS 38.05.035(e).
4:13:38 .PM
MS. COLLES described the third step as the request for proposals
(RFP). After completing the agency and public process and
issuing a final best interest finding that deems nominated or
commissioner-identified lands eligible and best suited for
proposed commercial activities, the Commissioner will issue a
public notice of the RFP for at least 30 days. Proposals must
include a development plan detailing the type of development,
location, description of activities, size of the parcel, and
other requirements determined by regulation, including how the
proposed activities would stimulate economic development in the
area. Proposals will be vetted to ensure they meet program
requirements, and any that do not will be rejected. If two or
more suitable proposals exist for the same land, a public
auction will be held, limited to those who submitted proposals.
4:14:33 PM
MS. COLLES outlined that step four involves a second decision
point for the department. The proposed statute requires
completing a second best interest finding under AS 38.05.035(e)
and issuing public notice under AS 38.05.945. This process
mirrors the rigorous steps previously described to assess
whether the proposals received for lease and sale are in the
best interest of the state.
4:15:04 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked whether a best interest finding made
under AS 38.05.035(e), even if deemed in the best interest of
the state, would still be subject to appeal by a local
government or local government body.
4:15:22 PM
MS. COLLES replied yes. She said anyone who participates in the
public notice process, including agencies that comment or are
affected by the decision, has the right to appeal the decision.
4:15:37 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked where the final authority lies if the
commissioner determines that a proposal is in the best interest
of the state, but a nearby local municipality disagrees. He
inquired whether the matter would ultimately be resolved in
court.
4:15:57 PM
MS. COLLES replied yes, the matter would need to go through the
court system at that point, which would stay the decision. Any
disposal of state land remains on hold if it is appealed,
meaning the department cannot proceed with the action until the
court has made a final determination.
4:16:14 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI noted that he was considering situations where
a municipality seeks to expand its borough or boundaries,
mentioning that similar issues have occurred in the North Star
Borough and with the city. He pointed out that there have been
disagreements between the borough and city sides in such cases.
4:16:43 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR inquired about the process regarding the second
proposal that triggers an auction. He asked at what point a
second proposal could be submitted, specifically whether it
could come in after the public notice for the first proposal.
4:17:01 PM
MS. COLLES explained that DNR envisions having a set timeframe
for submitting all proposals. Similar to programs like aquatic
farming, where applications are accepted within a specific
period and then reviewed collectively, DNR would close the
submission period once it ends. This approach ensures that all
applications are considered at once, allowing DNR to address any
competing interests.
4:17:30 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR asked why, from the state's perspective of
maximizing value, the process doesn't involve taking the first
proposal, setting it as a floor price, and then conducting a
public auction for every parcel. He noted that people might miss
the initial proposal window but could be willing to offer more
through an auction. He inquired about the downside of setting
the proposal price as the floor and then holding a public
auction.
4:17:59 PM
MS. COLLES replied that the current process involves receiving a
lease application and then soliciting additional interest if
necessary. She noted that some companies have concerns about
this approach, as they may develop a great idea and then face
the risk of someone else coming in, outbidding them, and taking
the opportunity. To address this, DNR aims to provide applicants
the chance to propose their ideas without immediately exposing
them to competitive bids, allowing them to present their plans
and potentially stimulate the economy without the fear of losing
their proposal to others who might simply outbid them.
4:18:42 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR expressed concern about the potential for
sweetheart deals or reduced value for the state if decisions are
made quietly and swiftly, despite public notice. They argued
that, while addressing immediate concerns, it is crucial to
consider the long-term impact on maximizing value for the state
and ensuring transparency.
4:19:13 PM
MS. COLLES that the requirement to pay fair market value for the
parcel prevents sweetheart deals. They explained that appraisals
are conducted and reviewed by a certified licensed appraiser on
staff to ensure accuracy and compliance with market standards.
4:19:42 PM
MS. COLLES spoke to step four on the flow chart. She outlined
the lease process for land development, stating that if a
proposal is deemed in the state's best interest, the lessee may
begin development in line with lease restrictions and
regulations. At a minimum, the lease must include an annual fee
for an initial five-year term, with an optional five-year
renewal. The department will assess the lessee's performance and
may terminate the lease for breach of terms or if renewal is not
in the state's best interest. During the lease, lessees in good
standing may apply to purchase all or part of the leased land,
with the parcel surveyed and appraised at the lessee's expense.
The purchase price will be the appraised fair market value minus
lease payments. Leases may be assigned only at the director's
discretion and can be terminated for breaches, including
improper land use. Additionally, the bill mandates the
reservation of easements and rights of way for established
trails used for commerce, recreation, transportation, or
traditional outdoor activities. All departmental decisions are
appealable to the commissioner under AS 44.37.011 and 11 AAC 02,
including classification actions and government authority
expansions.
4:21:37 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP asked for a definition of commercial use.
4:21:51 PM
MS. COLLES described the ideal lessee as someone with a
development plan that includes creating jobs, contributing to
the local economy, and offering services, tourism, or industry
that benefits the community. They emphasized that the
development should ideally impact the local tax base if situated
within a borough or municipality. The focus is on lessees with
substantive plans that contribute goods or services, rather than
those seeking the land for recreational use.
4:22:33 PM
MS. COLLES continued speaking to the fourth step. She addressed
concerns about expanding government authority to dispose of
public lands. SB 199 proposes removing the Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) from certain lease and disposal processes,
thereby granting the Department of Education and Early
Development (DEED) the authority to sell land to private
parties, beyond just government agencies. This includes
decommissioned BIA school sites, which pose safety risks as they
deteriorate. With this authority, DEED could transfer these
properties to native village corporations, allowing the land to
be used productively before it becomes hazardous. Currently,
DEED can only dispose of land to state entities or remove
facilities, leaving remaining land dormant. Additionally, CSSB
199 allows the Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities (DOT&PF) to dispose of excess land or land rights
after first offering it to DNR for disposal.
4:23:55 PM
MS. COLLES addressed concerns about the impact of increasing
lease terms to 10 years and its effect on revenue. She said the
bill extends the maximum term for land sale contracts, which is
separate from leasing, from 20 to 30 years, allowing purchasers
of high-value land to spread out payments and reduce monthly
costs. This change applies to land sale contracts, not leases,
and does not affect how purchase prices or interest rates are
determined. While a longer contract term might result in higher
total interest paid to the state, purchasers are not required to
use the full term and can pay off their contract early without
penalty. Additionally, under existing AS 30.05.05, the director
of lands can reduce the purchase price to 70 percent of fair
market value, a provision unchanged by the bill, which has
historically been used for unsold parcels after a significant
period of time. SB 199 does not alter the current authority for
DNR to issue leases for up to 55 years.
4:25:37 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP said he believes the intent of SB 199 is good.
4:26:02 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP held SB 199 in committee.
SB 210-SALMON HATCHERY PERMITS
4:26:18 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO.
210 "An Act relating to salmon hatchery permits; and authorizing
the sale of salmon to permitted persons for stocking lakes."
4:26:53 PM
DOUG VINCENT-LANG, Commissioner, Alaska Department of Fish and
Game (ADFG), Anchorage, Alaska, presented SB 210 on behalf of
the administration. He explained that state hatchery facilities
currently lack the surplus to meet the demand for stocking
public lakes, as these facilities are funded by sport angler
dollars and federal Dingell-Johnson funds, which restrict their
use to the most beneficial lakes for sport fishing. SB 210 would
create additional recreational and economic opportunities by
enabling private nonprofit hatchery operators to sell fish under
the existing Department of Fish and Game permitting structure.
This process would ensure that all fish sales and stocking are
regulated to prevent negative impacts on wild fish populations.
Operators would need to obtain a fish transport permit, and the
species, life stage, and stocking locations would be evaluated
and approved to minimize risks. ADFG employs sterile stocking
methods when possible and typically approves the use of
reproductively viable fish only in landlocked lakes or those
where fish cannot escape. The bill does not mandate the sale of
fish but provides an option for hatchery operators and could
enhance food security by allowing communities to stock their
lakes, particularly highlighted during the COVID-19 crisis when
rural communities faced food security challenges. The department
can manage the additional workload for processing applications
with minimal fiscal impact, as the fish transport permit process
is already in place. This change is expected to offer new
revenue opportunities for hatchery operators and increase access
to fishing resources for Alaskans.
4:30:26 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP inquired about the process for stocking a 10-
acre, landlocked lake. He asked for a detailed explanation of
the steps involved, including how to initiate contact with ADFG,
the timeline for application review, any necessary inspections,
and the overall duration of the process from application to
stocking.
4:30:41 PM
SAM RABUNG, Director, Division of Commercial Fisheries, Alaska
Department of Fish and Game (ADFG), Anchorage, Alaska, answered
questions related to SB 210. He explained that the process for
stocking a 10-acre, landlocked lake involves several key steps.
First, an individual would need to contact ADFG or submit an
application online for a fish transport permit. The department
evaluates the application based on the lake's type, its capacity
to support fish, and the species to be stocked. This review and
permit issuance typically take one to two months. Once the
permit is granted, the individual would then need to work with a
nonprofit hatchery to produce and stock the fish. It's important
to note that fish cannot be obtained by simply picking them up
at a hatchery; the entire process requires pre-approval and
proper permits. The individual would contract with the hatchery
to carry out the stocking, following the same procedures as if
the state were managing the program.
4:32:18 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP asked if there is any follow-up with the
landowner after receiving approval and arranging for a private
nonprofit hatchery to stock the lake. Specifically, he inquired
whether ADFG conducts any further inspections or evaluations one
year later or if there are additional follow-up procedures.
4:32:43 PM
MR. RABUNG responded that there is an annual reporting
requirement for activities involving stocked lakes. The
Department of Fish and Game would review these reports at the
end of each year. However, aside from this reporting, there is
generally no additional follow-up. The projects are typically
"put and take" operations, meaning the fish are introduced with
the intent of being harvested rather than reproducing. In
landlocked lakes, the habitat is usually not conducive to fish
reproduction. If the fish are harvested and the landowner wishes
to restock, they would need to repeat the application process.
4:33:39 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if there are any locations in Alaska that
currently do that.
4:33:47 PM
MR. RABUNG explained that the state currently handles lake
stocking, primarily in the Railbelt region, due to the need for
public access and the limited fish production capacity of state
facilities. Stocking is prioritized based on public access and
use, so remote areas are less likely to be stocked. He added
that while there is no private nonprofit hatchery (PNP) in
Southeast Alaska dedicated to lake stocking, fish are supplied
to the state under contract, and the state uses its fish
transport permit for distribution. The proposed change would
enable individuals to purchase these fish directly for stocking,
rather than relying on the state to manage the process.
4:34:25 PM
MR. VINCENT-LANG added that currently, no private nonprofit
hatchery (PNP) is producing fish in Southeast Alaska
specifically for lake stocking programs. Instead, fish are
provided to the state of Alaska under contract, and the state
uses its fish transport permit to distribute them. The proposed
change would allow individuals to purchase these fish directly
for stocking, rather than relying on the state to handle the
process.
4:34:45 PM
MR. RABUNG explained that the state contracts with private
nonprofit hatcheries to handle some of the lake stocking work,
particularly in areas where there are no state hatcheries. He
noted that this practice is employed in both Southeast Alaska
and Kodiak, where state facilities are not available.
4:35:07 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI pointed out that the Ruth Burnett Fish
Hatchery, located in the heart of downtown Fairbanks, is a key
facility. He raised a question about the proposed changes,
noting that it represents a significant shift from a public
process to a more private one. He expressed a concern regarding
whether this new approach aligns with the current fin fish
farming legislation under Title 16, which governs fish farming
practices.
4:36:00 PM
MR. RABUNG clarified that the proposed change is not related to
fish farming but rather pertains to lake stocking for sports
fishing. He explained that the process of issuing fish transport
permits for stocking lakes would remain the same as it currently
is. The key difference is that the Department of Fish and Game
(DFG) does not have the capacity to stock all the lakes that
people request. The new approach would provide an additional
option for stocking more lakes if the proposal is passed.
4:36:31 PM
MR. VINCENT-LANG acknowledged that remote and less accessible
lakes may not rank high for state-sponsored stocking due to
limited public access and the need to prioritize sport fishing
opportunities. However, if individuals wish to stock such lakes
with rainbow trout for events or to provide a local food source,
they would have the option to purchase fish from a nonprofit
hatchery. This approach supports food security and offers
opportunities for local fishing, even if these lakes may not
otherwise receive state-funded stocking efforts.
4:37:15 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI inquired about the challenges of stocking
public lakes, particularly in cases where there is a shortage of
fish. He noted that certain species, such as grayling, have been
difficult to produce, leading to discontinuation of their
stocking. He asked what happens if a private entity requests to
stock a personal lake with fish that might otherwise be
allocated to public lakes, given the limited supply.
4:37:49 PM
MR. VINCENT-LANG replied that ADFG would not stock a private
lake with the existing Fairbanks or anchorage hatcheries,
because they were paid for with sport dollars, and they were and
they have Dingle Johnson money going to it, so they have to have
some reasonable access for everybody else. This would allow an
individual, for instance, maybe own some gravel pits in the
Thermax area in your district that wants to stock some of those
gravel pits for running their clients some opportunity to catch
fish in those gravel pits. They could buy those from a PMP
hatchery, where ADFG would not sell them to them, because,
again, there's no public access for the general public.
4:38:25 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP asked if the state uses aircraft to propagate
lakes.
4:38:38 PM
MR. VINCENT-LANG replied that some lakes are stocked by aircraft
and gave an example of a lake stocked by aircraft in the
Anchorage area.
4:38:48 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI expressed concern about the opposition and
concerns raised by biologists regarding similar bills, including
those related to geoducks and the transfer of wild salmon. He
sought clarification on whether all the fish being transferred
under this proposal are sterile and incapable of reproducing.
4:39:22 PM
MR. VINCENT-LANG replied that ensuring fish are sterile and
unable to reproduce would be a requirement under the fish
transport permit (FTP) process. He explained that the Department
of Fish and Game (ADFG) would stipulate this condition to
prevent non-sterile fish from escaping in a flood event or other
circumstances. This stipulation would be part of the permit
requirements for stocking a lake.
4:39:36 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI wondered if the sterilization requirement
should be put in statute.
4:39:45 PM
MR. RABUNG explained that the lake stocking policy, which is
available online and possibly on the board's website,
categorizes lakes into five categories based on their
characteristics, such as being landlocked or having an open
outlet. For landlocked lakes where there is no risk of fish
escaping, the policy allows for stocking with viable fish.
However, for lakes where there is a chance of fish escaping, the
policy requires the use of sterile fish to mitigate any
potential impact.
4:40:22 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if there have been any concerns
expressed by biologists or scientists at ADFG.
4:40:30 PM
MR. VINCENT-LANG replied he has not heard any concerns expressed
by the department.
4:40:46 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked whether "Atlantic salmon" should be
defined as "Alaskan salmon."
4:41:07 PM
MR. VINCENT-LANG commented that he would not be opposed to that
suggestion.
4:41:12 PM
MR. RABUNG replied that it is not illegal to have Atlantic
salmon in Alaska.
4:41:25 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked for confirmation of his understanding
that the prohibition of salmon sales is prohibited by Alaskan
hatcheries.
4:41:39 PM
MR. RABUNG replied that there is a prohibition of the
importation of live fish to Alaska, so it must occur within
Alaska.
4:41:49 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked whether any attorneys have been
consulted regarding potential constitutional issues with the
bill, specifically concerning the sustained yield provision or
any other provisions of the Alaska Constitution.
4:42:01 PM
MR. VINCENT-LANG replied that Alaska Department of Law (DOL) has
not raised any concerns.
4:42:16 PM
SENATOR KAUFMAN asked if SB 210 would have any implications for
micro-aquaculture projects, such as those involving small-scale
hydroponic systems where fish like rainbow trout are grown in
refrigerated tanks. He noted that these systems create a self-
regenerating nitrogen cycle, providing high yields from both the
fish and the hydroponic plants with minimal inputs. Senator
Kaufman inquired whether this bill would facilitate or hinder
such innovative practices in Alaska and sought more information
on how it might affect these types of projects.
4:43:42 PM
MR. RABUNG replied that the type of micro-aquaculture described
would be considered fish farming, which is prohibited in Alaska.
Therefore, this bill would not provide an opportunity to support
or that practice.
4:43:53 PM
SENATOR KAUFMAN expressed agreement with his statement.
4:44:02 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR asked whether the bill refers to the colloquial
term "salmon," which typically includes the five species of
salmon, or if it encompasses the broader family of salmonids,
which includes other types of freshwater fish.
4:44:37 PM
MR. RABUNG explained that internally, the Department of Fish and
Game (ADFG) has discussed the taxonomy, and trout are included
in the broader family of salmonids. Since most of the stocking
under the bill will involve rainbow trout, referring to them as
"salmon" is considered adequate. However, clarifying the
terminology to specifically include trout would not cause any
issues.
4:45:01 PM
MR. VINCENT-LANG added that if a private nonprofit hatchery
(PNP) were to pursue this route, they would likely adopt the
technologies and innovations already established by the state of
Alaska's hatchery programs. He suggested that it would be more
practical for them to focus on species that have already been
successfully managed in the state, rather than starting entirely
new programs with species that have not been as successful.
4:45:22 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR said the law may be difficult to interpret. There
could be clarifying language.
4:45:53 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI acknowledged that while hatcheries are
sophisticated, the average person might not realize that
"salmon" in the bill includes trout, given common perceptions.
He suggested that there might be a need for clarifying language
to ensure that the bill's terminology is clear and
understandable to the public, although he stated that did not
feel strongly about this issue.
4:46:26 PM
MR. VINCENT-LANG clarified that the department would not issue a
permit for stocking fish in a lake with an inflow or outflow due
to the associated issues. Therefore, he suggested that the term
"enclosed" might not be necessary in the context of the bill, as
these situations are already covered under the existing fish
transport permit process.
4:46:49 PM
MR. RABUNG explained that private nonprofit hatcheries are
currently limited to working with salmon, which includes trout
due to their classification within the same genus. Although
trout and salmon were not always classified together, this
changed in the 1990s. If there is interest in including other
species, statutory revisions would be required.
4:47:24 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP inquired about the fish size for sales.
4:47:30 PM
MR. VINCENT-LANG replied that it depends upon the lake.
CHAIR BISHOP asked about fish that weigh two pounds.
4:47:47 PM
MR. RABUNG said it could take a while depending on water
temperature and the food supply.
4:47:57 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP acknowledged that it takes a long time for
species like pike, sheefish, and whitefish to reach adult size.
He emphasized the need for alternative protein sources,
especially if wild stocks do not recover to their necessary
levels. He noted that these conversations explore ways to
address this issue and provide additional protein sources.
4:48:28 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP held SB 210 in committee.
4:49:00 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Co-Chair Bishop adjourned the Senate Resources Standing
Committee meeting at 4:49 p.m.