SENATE BILL NO. 250 "An Act relating to the University of Alaska and to assets of the University of Alaska; authorizing the University of Alaska to select additional state public domain land, designating that land as `university trust land,' and describing the principles applicable to the land's management; and defining the net income from the University of Alaska's endowment trust fund as `university receipts' subject to prior legislative appropriation." SUSAN FLENSBURG, PROGRAM DIRECTOR, BRISTOL BAY COASTAL RESOURCE SERVICE AREA MANAGEMENT PROGRAM expressed concern with the lack of public process in determining lands that are suitable for selection. She stressed that there is not a best interest determination. She observed that the legislation will effect new borough formation. SEAN MCGUIRE, FAIRBANKS testified via the teleconference network. He spoke in opposition to the legislation. He emphasized that the legislation will created conflict. He noted that a diversity of groups object to the legislation. He objected to the opening of the whole State for University selection. He observed that the legislation is not supported by students. He noted that the legislation would represent less than one percent of the University's budget. ERIK HOLLAND, FAIRBANKS testified via the teleconference network. He spoke in opposition to SB 250. He emphasized that the land in question is in public ownership. He maintained that it would be cheaper to fund the University and retain state management of the land. He asserted that it is not the time to weaken the public's control over public land. DAVID LACEY, FAIRBANKS testified via the teleconference network. He spoke in opposition to the legislation. He maintained that the public is being cut out of public land. He acknowledged that public education needs to be properly funded. He suggested that oil fields or part of the Permanent Fund could be transferred to the University. Representative Mulder asked if selections by the Lake and 13 Peninsula Borough would occur prior to selections by the University. JANE ANGVIK, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF LANDS, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES explained that lands selected by boroughs are in line ahead of lands that can be selected by the University. She observed that the Lake and Peninsula Borough has not identified land for selection. She noted that 1.3 million acres of land are committed to municipalities. Only 650 thousand acres have actually been conveyed. Land not identified by a borough are available for selection by the University. Representative Therriault WITHDREW Amendment 1. He provided members with new Amendment 1, 9-LS1394\R.3, 4/15/96 (copy on file). WENDY REDMAN, VICE PRESIDENT, UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA explained that new Amendment 1 clarifies the terms "selected" and "conveyed". The amendment also deals with the issue of over selection. She acknowledged concerns that the University could make over selections. The amendment limits over selection to no more than 20 percent of the total land selection. Representative Navarre referred to page 7, line 28. He questioned if the language is an expansion. Ms. Redman clarified that the University and the State must agree on every acre that comes to the legislature. Then the legislature must agree on the list. (Tape Change, HFC 96-126, Side 2) Representative Navarre referred to section 8(a). He questioned if the land would be approved if the legislature does not take action. Ms. Redman noted that the legislature has to take affirmative action. She pointed out that the legislation authorizations up to 350,000 acres for selection. The legislation does not guarantee the land selection. Representative Navarre maintained that the legislation does not protect traditional and customary use of the land. Ms. Redman replied that the University has an interest in allowing people to hunt and fish on university land. She acknowledged that if the University sells or moves the land to a major lease hold the protections would not apply. She noted that the legislation provides some tort immunity. The University does not currently have tort protection. Ms. Redman stated that the University will allow trees to be cut on university land but is concerned that timber is not 14 harvested for resale under traditional and customary use. Representative Therriault MOVED to adopt new Amendment 1. In response to a question by Representative Navarre, Ms. Redman agreed that the University will develop a priority order for the land selection to be followed by the Department of Natural Resources. Ms. Angvik stressed that the Department of Natural Resources is concerned with the legislation. She emphasized that it will be difficult to find the land. She acknowledged cooperation by the University. She stated that the Department would like time to work out conflicts among user groups. She explained that new Amendment 1 provides clarification in regards to over selection. Representative Navarre asked if the State should prioritize the land for selection. Ms. Redman emphasized that the Department of Natural Resources must approve all the land on the list. Representative Navarre asked if the University supports local government approval of land selections within their jurisdiction. Mr. Redman stated that the University would not support local government approval. She added that all land development projects are submitted to local governments and that they follow the public process required by the boroughs. She maintained that the University works with local governments with every project that is developed. There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment 1 was adopted. Representative Kelly asked if the legislation would protect lease holders from interference in developing their lease land. Representative Navarre noted that the bill provides that the customary and traditional uses are protected until the right is given to someone else through a lease or sale. Once the land is leased the protections are off. Representative Therriault MOVED to report HCS CSSB 250 (FIN) out of Committee with individual recommendations and with the accompanying fiscal note. Representative Navarre OBJECTED. A roll call vote was taken on the MOTION. IN FAVOR: Mulder, Parnell, Therriault, Kelly, Martin, Hanley OPPOSED: Navarre, Foster Representatives Brown, Grussendorf, and Kohring were absent from the vote. The MOTION PASSED (6-2). 15 HCS CSSB 250 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with "no recommendation" and with four fiscal impact notes by the University of Alaska, the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Revenue, and the Department of Fish and Game, all dated 2/15/96.