HOUSE BILL NO. 83 "An Act reestablishing the Citizens' Advisory Commission on Federal Management Areas in Alaska; and providing for an effective date." 8:38:43 AM Co-Chair Foster noted the bill had last been heard in May 2023. He asked the sponsor to provide a review of the legislation. REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE RAUSCHER, SPONSOR, thanked the committee for hearing the bill. He relayed that the bill would reestablish the Citizens' Advisory Commission on Federal Areas (CACFA) in Alaska, which sunset in 2021. The bill set a new sunset date of June 30, 2031. The commission was comprised of ten public members, one senator, and one representative who reflected the diversity of users of federal land in Alaska and were appointed by the governor and legislature. He stated that CACFA had operated for decades as an independent and impartial source for information and a center for advocacy on statehood, Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA), and Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) issues impacting all Alaskans. He stated that CACFA helped Alaskans navigate through complex regulations and worked with federal agencies to ensure congressional intent was implemented with respect to Alaska's interests. He asked his staff to review changes to the bill resulting from work that took place over the interim. 8:41:00 AM RYAN MCKEE, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE RAUSCHER, shared that Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN) and Native Peoples Action (NPA) had shared their concerns over the summer with the bill sponsor. In response to the concerns, the sponsor was proposing several changes. The first change clarified that the establishment of CACFA within the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) was for administrative purposes only. The sponsor's office had received concern that by housing the commission within DNR it was viewed as another branch of the department. The intent was for CACFA to operate autonomously with its own decision making power. The second change would add language clarifying that CACFA would determine which matters it would hear and consider. The goal was to clarify that the commission acted on its own behalf and not on behalf of the department. The third change would require that the public members of the commission represent all four Alaska judicial districts, with no more than three members from each of the districts. The goal was to ensure fair representation throughout Alaska. The fourth change would require at least one member of the commission to be enrolled in a federally recognized tribe and another member to be a shareholder in an ANCSA corporation. The goal was to ensure representation from rural Alaska. The fifth change would move the bill's effective date from July 1, 2023, to July 1, 2024. Co-Chair Foster listed individuals available to testify. He invited members to ask questions. Representative Galvin referenced a letter from Native Peoples Action in the bill packets (copy on file). She thought it sounded like the proposed changes specifically addressed the questions in the letter. She asked if the organization had reassessed and was now comfortable with the change. Mr. McKee replied that the sponsor's office had not officially received a response. Representative Hannan asked if there was a draft committee substitute (CS) incorporating the changes reviewed by Mr. McKee. Mr. McKee replied that there was not a CS for HB 83 that incorporated the changes; however, the Senate had adopted all of the changes in its version of the bill [SB 34], which had reported out of the Senate Finance Committee earlier in the week. Representative Hannan remarked that without an updated CS an amendment deadline would be a struggle. In addition to an updated CS, she was interested in updated letters from the parties that had previously expressed concerns. 8:45:44 AM AT EASE 8:46:42 AM RECONVENED Representative Hannan stated there had been some clearly articulated concerns the past May. She wanted to resolve the issue and clarified she was not doubting the sponsor's office. She wanted to see updated letters from the organizations [that had previously expressed concerns over aspects of the legislation]. Ms. McKee replied that the sponsor's office would contact the organizations to request updated letters. He would provide any responses to the committee. Co-Chair Foster asked Mr. McKee to put the changes in writing and provide them to the committee. He noted the changes were included in the Senate version of the bill that was coming the committee's way. He remarked that there was uncertainty about whether the committee would get to amendments prior to receiving the Senate version of the bill. Representative Hannan stated that if the intention was to wait for the Senate version, she did not need the sponsor's office to chase its tail if the information was expected to come. Co-Chair Foster explained the intent to get the committee up to speed in anticipation of potentially receiving the Senate version of the bill. Representative Josephson referenced an AFN letter in members' packets that he believed to be from the previous year (copy on file). He asked how a reader could hear dissenting views in CACFA reports. He remarked that including a member of a federally recognized tribe and an ANCSA member on the commission was to give voice to potentially dissenting views. He cited a Klutina Lake dispute and RS 2477s as an example and stated there would be Alaskans who viewed the issue differently. He did not think an echo chamber kind of report had great value for the reader. He asked if it would be considered not terribly threatening for the reports to include information on the dissenting views of commission members. 8:50:41 AM Mr. McKee asked for clarification on the question. He asked if Representative Josephson was asking whether the views of dissenting commission members would be published. Representative Josephson answered that the information would be part of the online version of the report with an occasional hard copy. Mr. McKee answered that it would be something the commission would have to discuss. He did not believe the language would be included in the bill. Co-Chair Foster asked for verification that the bill added two seats including one tribal seat. He asked what the second seat would be. Mr. McKee replied that the additional seats would include one tribal member and one ANCSA corporation shareholder. Co-Chair Foster remarked that when he saw the inclusion of the two groups, typically it did not involve a tribal member, but a person representing a tribal organization and someone representing Native corporations as opposed to an ANCSA shareholder. He asked if there was a reason why the legislation specified a tribal member and shareholder. Mr. McKee answered that they had worked on a couple of different options. He relayed that the language in the bill was based off the language used by the Senate Finance Committee. The sponsor's office was open to hearing concerns and was trying to address as many of them as possible. Co-Chair Foster stated he may reach out to organizations in his district about the proposal. He cited Kawerak as an example and explained the tribal consortium may be interested in including someone from its organization versus an individual tribal member who was not necessarily representing the region. He discussed why he believed the bill had merit. He stated that former CACFA chair Charlie Lean was from his district. He explained that the only people who could go to the Serpentine Hot Springs within the national park [in his district] were people with airplanes or helicopters during the summer months. He noted the area was accessible by snow machine during the winter. He stated that only affluent people could visit the area because four wheelers were not permitted. He relayed the distance was only about six miles. He saw CACFA as an organization to help spearhead the possibility for individuals who want to use old trails that had been established as far back as 100 years ago. He understood that each of the trails had to be treated differently, which was where the value of the commission came in. 8:55:18 AM Co-Chair Foster asked the department to review the fiscal note. ASHLEE ADOKO, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND PERMITTING, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (via teleconference), reviewed the fiscal note from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Office of Project Management and Permitting (OPMP), OMB Component Number 2733. The request for $145,000 in personal services and $15,000 in services and commodities beginning in FY 25 was for the CACFA executive director housed in OPMP to carry out the intent of the bill. The position would report to the commission and was needed for administrative purposes including standing up and administering the program, coordinating commission feedback, and response to citizen inquiries and concerns about actions on federal lands. The note included an additional $30,000 in services starting in FY 27 for legal support, which would be accomplished through a reimbursable services agreement (RSA) from DNR to the Department of Law (DOL). Additionally, the note included an annual request of $10,000 for travel to hold meetings commensurate with the intent of the bill and its administrative purposes. Representative Hannan remarked that the fiscal note and bill showed the CACFA executive director as reporting to the commission. She asked who had the human resources responsibility for hiring and firing the executive director position. She asked if the responsibility would reside with the commission or OPMP. Ms. Adoko answered that she would need to follow up in writing. She believed it would be a combination. Representative Hannan requested the information in writing. She wondered if the position would be a state employee with state protections and hiring/firing practices or whether it was equally shared and up to the commission. 8:58:35 AM Co-Chair Johnson referenced letters in the packet requesting an additional board seat reflective of tribes and [Native] corporations. She asked if it was prompted by something that had happened on the board in the past or if it was an additional request for a board seat because it pertained to federal lands. Representative Rauscher responded that it was his understanding the additional seats were to make the board have better representation when looking at things as a whole. He stated it was not really directed at anything from the past. Co-Chair Johnson wanted to make sure it was not in response to something that had taken place in the past. Co-Chair Foster noted that one of the amendments he had come up with the past year was to address AFN's concern. He thought the concern was about making sure the public would not have free reign to trespass on their private lands. He remarked that Alaska Native corporations had a substantial amount of land, and they could not monitor it all. He detailed that one of his amendments was to clearly enunciate that CACFA would not try to open up old trails that may cross private lands for the same reason he would not want people driving through his back yard. Representative Rauscher appreciated the explanation. Representative Josephson recalled looking at the online version of the [CACFA] report ten years earlier, which he found very professional. He noted that one year ago the supreme court rejected a state attempt to overrule a federal ban on bear baiting on the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge. He elaborated that the issue had gone to the ninth circuit and the supreme court said that the federal government could ban some bear baiting. He explained that the supreme court refused to take the issue up, making it binding. He asked for verification that CACFA would be designed to be informative and not to have a call to arms or express bombast or outrage. He did not want to create a state document that was designed to fire up the masses in a tone that was inappropriate. Representative Rauscher answered, "No, I do not believe so." He elaborated that the commission was for information gathering for being able to understand all points of view in an argument including ANCSA, ANILCA, or advocacy for a question under debate at a given time. He stated it was not to be used in the way referenced by Representative Josephson. 9:03:38 AM Representative Josephson recalled that he had voted to reauthorize the commission in 2013 or 2014. Representative Tomaszewski asked for an example of a success resulting from the commission in the past. Representative Rauscher deferred the question to a former member of the board. ROD ARNO, POLICY DIRECTOR, ALASKA OUTDOOR COUNCIL AND FORMER MEMBER, CACFA, shared that he had served on CACFA until it had lost its funding. He believed one of CACFA's biggest successes pertained to local hire. He elaborated that when the [U.S.] Department of Interior was hiring individuals to work on the conservation system throughout the state, CACFA had worked to ensure the department had the ability to hire individuals living in those rural areas. He stated it was contested and had gone through the courts. The idea had been that if there were more individuals working for the department who lived on the land next to the federal lands, better decisions would be made than were taking place from directors of the department residing in Washington D.C. Representative Stapp asked about the role CACFA played in helping Alaskans navigate through the federal permitting process. He considered the time and effort spent at a state and individual level on permits that ultimately failed because of missed details. He asked how the commission had assisted with the process. Mr. Arno replied that the public had the opportunity to bring issues to CACFA if they were having problems with permitting or access. He elaborated that CACFA had been able to work with DNR and DOL to try to simplify the DNR permitting process as much as possible. The idea was for the public to come to CACFA and not for CACFA to be sitting there coming up with things that were inconsistent with the federal law governing the conservation system unit areas. Representative Stapp asked if it was fair to say there were plenty of regular Alaskans who came to talk to CACFA on permitting issues that DNR may not have ever known about. Mr. Arno responded affirmatively. He cited trapper cabins on federal lands as an example. He expounded that CACFA had been able to try to work through a policy change to establish that trappers with traplines could have winter cabins for safety reasons. 9:08:28 AM Co-Chair Foster set an amendment deadline of March 4 at 5:00 p.m. HB 83 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further consideration.