HOUSE BILL NO. 218 "An Act relating to cost recovery fisheries for private nonprofit hatchery facilities." STEVEN DAUGHERTY, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, NATURAL RESOURCE SECTION, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, (via teleconference) noted problems with subsection(d) of Section 1 in the bill. There are potential taxing authority issues. The Department of Law has been working to try to develop clearer criteria so that it is the legislature that is imposing the tax, not the hatchery operator. He noted concerns with some of the potential amendments. 9:09:54 AM Co-Chair Chenault took up Conceptual Amendment 1, which was moved and objected to during the meeting on April 27, 2005. [Amendment 1 deleted Section 1 of the Version X Committee Substitute to HB 218.] Co-Chair Chenault asked if there were any objections to the motion to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. Representative Hawker MOVED to ADOPT the new CS for HB 218, labeled 24-LS0544\P, Utermohle, 4/27/05. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. IAN FISK, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE BILL THOMAS, explained a change in the new CS. In Version P, on page 1, language was eliminated about the commissioner consulting with other interested parties. Language about affected commercial fishermen and "organizations of affected commercial fishermen" was added. Other suggestions of Mr. Esquiro from an earlier meeting were not incorporated. 9:13:22 AM Mr. Daugherty commented on the changes in the new CS and said there are no problems with the new language in subsection (d). He explained that the legislature would apply a formula that would be defensible regarding the amounts that have to be collected each year. 9:14:24 AM Representative Hawker clarified that the legislature sets taxes and fees in the context of this bill only. Representative Kelly said he assumes that subsection (d) is corrected. Mr. Fisk replied that it was discussed with the Attorney General's office. 9:15:43 AM Representative Foster MOVED to report CSHB 218 out of Committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. CSHB 218 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "no recommendation" recommendation and with the following fiscal impact notes: zero note #1 by the Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development, zero note #2 by the Department of Fish and Game, zero note #3 by the Department of Public Safety, and with indeterminate note #4 by the Department of Revenue.