HB 22-SHARED ANIMAL AND RAW MILK/PRODUCTS  1:01:51 PM CHAIR PATKOTAK announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 22, "An Act relating to shared animal ownership; and relating to the sharing and sale of raw milk and raw milk products." 1:02:27 PM REPRESENTATIVE GERAN TARR, Alaska State Legislature, as prime sponsor, provided introductory remarks on HB 22. She expressed her excitement regarding how much support there is for the bill. She offered to answer any questions on the bill and said the forthcoming amendment by Representative Rauscher will provide further discussion on the bill. 1:03:07 PM REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS stated that he visited a farm and has returned with some tasty cheese for committee members to try. 1:03:36 PM REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1, which read: Page 2, line 6 Delete item (c) Re-letter the rest accordingly 1:03:43 PM CHAIR PATKOTAK objected for purposes of discussion. 1:03:49 PM REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER explained that Conceptual Amendment 1 comes from trying to understand what HB 22 is attempting to do, which, in his opinion, is to ensure that raw milk is available for people to purchase. He said Conceptual Amendment 1 points out that the language on page 2, line 6, "(c) A person may not sell raw milk or a raw milk product", is foreign to what is trying to be accomplished with the bill. Therefore, the amendment would delete (c) and re-letter the rest accordingly. 1:04:43 PM REPRESENTATIVE TARR spoke to what would be the effects of Conceptual Amendment 1. She provided a history to put things into context. She related that in 2017 she learned about a movement called Food Freedom when she met a North Dakota state representative who had introduced a food freedom bill in that state's legislature. In talking with the representative about the bill, she became very interested in bringing this to Alaska. Conceptually it is about shortening the supply chain and making it easier for consumers to get products directly from producers, ranchers, and farmers. She said she filed House Bill 217, which would have expanded the opportunity for raw milk products as well as animal products. However, she continued, at that time the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) expressed concern that this much more expansive option would cause an increase in foodborne illness outbreaks. The original fiscal note provided by DEC for the bill projected about $1 million per year to hire staff to investigate and respond to DEC's anticipated increase in foodborne illnesses. Since then, Representative Tarr specified, multiple states North Dakota, Wyoming, Utah, to name a few have expanded these policies and have more fully adopted this food freedom policy. Those states are not seeing increases in foodborne illnesses, she related, and therefore she believes Alaska could accomplish this safely. REPRESENTATIVE TARR added that in recognition of Alaska's fiscal situation, the bill currently before the committee is much more modest in what it is attempting to accomplish. She explained that when there has been tension between public health and safety and increasing opportunity, she has tried to find ways to move forward and prove the safety. One example is food hubs, which are online sales opportunities for farmers and producers. When food hubs were first proposed [DEC] was very concerned, she said, so only one food hub was allowed in Alaska as a pilot program during the original year. It was successful and proved it could be done safely. The food hub concept has now been expanded and there are multiple food hubs around Alaska, increasing the opportunity for consumers to get these products and using online sales as the platform for making those purchases. So similarly, she pointed out, it was decided to pick a more modest step forward in this bill. 1:08:06 PM REPRESENTATIVE TARR explained that HB 22 would put the existing herd share program into statute. Strengthening this program by moving it from regulation into statute would provide certainty to the farmers that it will exist in perpetuity. Currently the herd share program is limited to fluid milk products, she said, [and HB 22 would provide] expansion to value-added products like cheese, ice cream, butter, kefir, and other products that a [producer] wants to make available. REPRESENTATIVE TARR stated she finds herself in the position of saying she supports what Representative Rauscher is suggesting and thinks it can be accomplished safely in Alaska. She said she wants HB 22 to move forward and be passed by the legislature because it would provide a new business opportunity in Alaska at a time when people are struggling, and the state is recovering economically. The bill would have immediate positive business and consumer impacts for Alaskans, she noted, so she doesn't want to do anything that might slow the bill down. She said she is therefore cautiously opposing the amendment right now with the understanding that the conversation will be continued and that she will continue working with the governor who personally called her last week about the legislation. Representative Tarr related that the governor is interested in this legislation and even in the more expansive opportunity, but she thinks the best option today is to move forward with what is known and make sure there are no unintended consequences. She emphasized that she is very committed to working with anyone who is interested in food freedom more broadly. She said it doesn't have to be her who is working on this, she would be happy to share the legislation that was originally drafted with any other member and support that member in working on it too. 1:10:25 PM REPRESENTATIVE MCKAY requested clarification on whether Representative Tarr is in favor of Conceptual Amendment 1. REPRESENTATIVE TARR replied she is opposing the amendment today because she doesn't want to have any unintended consequences that would slow down HB 22. She said she has talked with the amendment sponsor and has committed to continue working with him. If this is realistic and feasible in this legislature, then, yes, she would take the opportunity to strengthen Alaska's agriculture. It isn't about her idea, she added, but rather about ensuring that [the bill] keeps moving forward. CHAIR PATKOTAK invited the director of DEC's Division of Environmental Health to provide an understanding of what Conceptual Amendment 1 might change as far as the administrative side of things for raw milk and the industry as a whole. 1:11:37 PM CHRISTINA CARPENTER, Director, Division of Environmental Health, Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), stated she would need to look at the bill and revisit the fiscal analysis since it was done a few years ago. She said DEC is committed to working collaboratively on this issue and offered her appreciation for the sponsor's willingness to engage with DEC. 1:12:46 PM REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN said she appreciates Representative Rauscher's attempt to broaden the scope, but as stated by the bill sponsor, this incremental change to what currently exists of herd sharing from the milk's fluid state to cheeses and such, keeps it within herd sharing. She recalled that the committee looked at some legislation last year about a bigger legalization of raw milk products and it quickly got complex financially and statutorily. While she would like to look at things that would support a bigger dairy industry, including raw milk as a part of that, she said she thinks it would derail the proposed bill's passage and she would like to see the bill move forward now. She pointed out that the bill's fiscal note is zero, the bill has no agency opposition or concern, and the bill has very broad support in both bodies. She further recalled that last year when the legislature looked at cutting the dairy inspector in the budget, it was learned that there are many federal regulations about what a state can do to sell milk. She said herd sharing is not a work-around, but is an avenue permitted under the law that the state can expand on and prove up. She said she therefore will oppose Conceptual Amendment 1. 1:15:17 PM REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER offered his appreciation for the discussion but said he doesn't see anywhere in HB 22 that says selling raw milk is acceptable. He continued: So, this is basically saying that now you're confining something that has really nothing to do with the bill at all. It steps outside of what we're talking about, which is herd sharing. So, I'm not saying this changes it to allowing, and nowhere in the bill does it say allows us to sell raw milk to, or ... a raw milk product. All of a sudden, this language appears where it says we can't, nowhere did we say we can, and nowhere are we talking about doing that. But here we just come out of the blue and we say a person may not sell raw milk or raw milk product. And so you see why I don't understand why it fits, why I've drawn the amendment. To what you said and to what I've heard from the maker of the bill, and I have also by the way co-sponsored this bill from its inception when it was first planted into the House, and I did in the years before only because I would like to see the bill move forward also. But I really don't understand why we start ... to make laws against things that have nothing to do with what we're talking about. I'll remove it, but I think that discussion needs to happen because I don't know why you want to make other things illegal when we're just trying to talk about something we'd like to see illegal, which is why I'll withdraw it at this time. But I would like to at least find out a better understanding of why. CHAIR PATKOTAK clarified Representative Rauscher had withdrawn Conceptual Amendment 1 to HB 22. 1:17:48 PM REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS moved to report HB 22 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying [zero] fiscal notes. 1:18:11 PM CHAIR PATKOTAK objected for purposes of discussion. REPRESENTATIVE TARR thanked the committee for its interest and support of HB 22. She restated her commitment to Representative Rauscher to continue discussing the amendment he proposed. 1:18:45 PM CHAIR PATKOTAK removed his objection. There being no further objection, HB 22 was reported out of the House Resources Standing Committee.