HCR 3-JOINT COMMITTEE ON FEDERAL OVERREACH  8:36:02 AM CHAIR LYNN announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 3, Establishing the Joint Committee on Federal Overreach. The committee took an at-ease from 8:36 a.m. to 8:38 a.m. 8:38:27 AM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HCR 3, Version 28-LS0440\N, Gardner, 3/27/13 as a work draft. There being no objection, Version N was before the committee. 8:38:37 AM REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT, as sponsor, introduced HCR 3, Version N. She explained that she amended the original resolution after discussions with the administration, organizations, and members. She characterized it as a clearinghouse so the legislature can decide which issues to focus on and can communicate in a streamlined fashion with all legislators when federal action is being taken on Alaska's land. She said the legislature can decide whether to encourage the attorney general to take legal action or start a letter writing campaign, which sometimes is effective. 8:40:13 AM VASILIOS GIALOPSOS, Staff, Representative Charisse Millett, Alaska State Legislature, presented HCR 3 on behalf of Representative Millett, sponsor. He referred to a list of changes to HCR 3 incorporated into Version N, as per the handout in members' packets, which were: A new "WHEREAS" clause at: a. Page 1, line 8; b. Page 2, line 13; c. Page 2, line 19; d. Page 2, line 25; e. Page 2, line 28; f. Page 2, line 31; g. Page 3, line 3; h. Page 3, line 5; i. Page 3, line 12; MR. GIALOPSOS said the language aligns with presentations made by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) earlier in the legislative session with respect to federal overreach, relating not only to R.S. 2477s, but also to the state compact. He explained that these changes give the resolution more substantive language that pertains to access, rights-of-way, and easements that affect residents of this state at the local level and at the statewide level. He referred to concerns members raised earlier with respect to the deluge of information and how to vet exigent concerns and legitimate concerns. The sponsor, in conjunction with the governor's office, decided what is pressing about R.S. 2477, with respect to federal overreach, is that the sources of knowledge are dying out. He explained that in order to validate the claims, individuals must be able to verify they used specific trails for subsistence or commercial use predating statehood. However, the state does not have the biological advantage at this point so it must use technological advantages. Therefore to be able to form a cohesive clearinghouse at a time when state resources need to be consolidated is important from an internal component. Still, the second part of the "whereas" clause, is that it is a stated policy under the current administration that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) will contest "every" R.S. 2477 application as an institutional policy. He clarified that this is not a judgment call on whether it is a valid position on the part of the administration, but is simply a statement of fact. He said whereas previous administrations had more of a collaborative working environment between states with R.S. 2477 applications and the BLM, "this particular" [administration] is taking a harder stance. Thus, he emphasized the importance of the need to "incorporate this into a body" that can take action now. 8:44:14 AM MR. GIALOPSOS referred additional changes were to the "RESOLVED" clause. New clauses were added, as follows: a. Page 3, line 26; b. Page 3, line 31; c. Page 4, line 4; d. Page 4, line 11; e. Page 4, line 14; f. Page 4, line 19; MR. GIALOPSOS said two factors were used. First, language was utilized from HB 83, which recognizes that the legislative and administrative branches of state government need to have ways to share information in a direct way that doesn't impede the process. He emphasized the importance to hear from all parties and receive all perspectives to help ensure that there are not any unintended consequences. This language was meant to ensure that a committee was not overreaching, but at same time using all the resources at its disposal and institutional capacity available to do so. Finally, the language addresses the need for a forum that the public can participate in, which was a concern raised by Representative Kreiss-Tomkins at the last hearing on the resource. He characterized this as being a means by which residents of, for example, Hoonah, Tok, or Kotzebue, can directly impact the process of how an R.S. 2477 right-of-way village access is determined. This could provide a good balance between the various stakeholders since they want their local input valued while maintaining the balance between the national and state level. Mr. Gialopsos relayed that after collaborating with the governor's office and the committee, the sponsor believes the changes have substantially improved HCR 3. REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT said she has no ownership on this but would like it to be the best it can be. 8:48:10 AM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said he is very excited about the resolution. He stated the reason he would like to offer an amendment is to acknowledged the number of people who are working on this issue in the administration and the private sector, for example, the Alaska Outdoor Council, who is concerned about subsistence issues; or the Alaska Health Commission, which has been working on the effects of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). He turned to the "be it resolved" section, which asks the governor to put together a working group to act as a clearinghouse. REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT said she supports Conceptual Amendment 1. 8:50:46 AM CHAIR LYNN, after first determining no one else wished to testify, closed public testimony on HCR 3. 8:51:17 AM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1, labeled 28-LS0440\U.N, Keller, 03/18/2013, which read [original punctuation provided, with handwritten changes]: Whereas, the legislature recognizes the numerous private sector Alaskans who are being forced to respond to federal overreach in the context of business, industry, subsistence, and recreation; and Whereas, the legislature recognizes the various public sector entities engaged in responding to federal overreach, including but not limited to; CACFA, PAAD, and the ANILCA team in DNR, litigators in the Department of Law, the Alaska Health Commission in HSS, and Page 3, Line 10 insert (1) request the Governor to use existing resources to form a working group to formulate recommendations for the makeup, role, name, and organizational location of a permanent State sovereignty preservation authority to increase the effectiveness of the numerous semi- independent efforts, to coordinate with the legislature, to enhance information exchange and collaborative responses to federal overreach. This working group should consist of leaders in the before- mentioned private and public sectors already engaged, two legislators appointed by the speaker of the House and the President of the Senate. This working group should be tasked with providing recommendations that can be implemented in the next gubernatorial budget proposal for consideration in the 2014 legislative session. REPRESENTATIVE KELLER explained that the handwritten change to Conceptual Amendment 1 was in the label: "U.A" was crossed out and replaced with "U.N" to align the proposed amendment with Version N. He further noted that he had used acronyms within Conceptual Amendment 1, and said he expected the Legislative Legal and Research Services drafters to clean up the language. REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON objected for the purpose of discussion. He noted that Conceptual Amendment 1 proposes language to be inserted at page 3, line 10, of a previous version of HCR 3, and he asked where the language would be inserted in HCR 3. REPRESENTATIVE KELLER answered that he was unsure of where the bill drafter would insert the language. REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON asked whether the intent is to have the governor form a working group to take the place of the proposed legislative Joint Committee on Access and Federal Overreach. REPRESENTATIVE KELLER answered no. He said HCR 3 proposes the formation of a standing committee and also requests that the governor respond with an administrative clearinghouse. He clarified that the two entities would not be in competition. REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON surmised that the two legislators appointed to the working group proposed under Conceptual Amendment 1 would likely serve on the proposed Joint Committee on Access and Federal Overreach. REPRESENTATIVE KELLER replied that is not a preconceived plan. REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON asked how the governor's working group and the joint committee would effectively communicate if there were no shared members. REPRESENTATIVE KELLER explained that he didn't spell that out because he presumed the normal action between the legislature and the executive branch, wherein the legislature would make rules and the administration would create an office with regulations [related to those rules]. REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON encouraged an amendment to Conceptual Amendment 1 to insist that the working group legislators also serve on the proposed Joint Committee on Access and Federal Overreach. He expressed concern that the legislature has no ability to predict the future. He cautioned against assuming effective communication would occur, because the past has shown that without direct communication, the legislature or the administration can sometimes "pencil whip procedures without true evaluation." He said he hopes the members on the proposed Joint Committee on Access and Federal Overreach would passionately serve as watchdogs, whereas someone on the executive side may act without any passion, depending on who may be serving as the governor at the time. 8:56:53 AM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER remarked that he does not resist the proposed amendment to Conceptual Amendment 1. He said that as chair of the Citizens Advisory Council of Federal Areas (CACFA), he has worked closely with the administration and know "they have passion." He said that his intent by including members of both houses was to ensure that the passion and engagement is present since he is interested in a collaborative effort. Notwithstanding that, he said he understood Representative Isaacson's intent. REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT offered her belief that the legislature cannot tell the governor how to make up a committee, but could just ask that he/she do so. She suggested that the committee be as broad as possible. She further suggested the resolution's vague language would allow the governor the latitude to decide who would serve in this high-level working group; perhaps the governor would decide the members should be the Speaker of the House and the Senate President. She surmised that legislators are pretty passionate about federal overreach, but said she feels uncomfortable "spelling out" who the governor's selections would be. 8:59:58 AM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said it occurred to him that he did not spell out the purpose of the working group, which would be to get ahead of the budget cycle for next fall. He expressed his hope that this working group would make recommendations to the governor with respect to the administration's efforts, and that any legislation required would be put in place by 2014, which would make this a very short-lived, interim working group. He advised members that he has worked with the following people on HCR 3: Randy Ruaro, the deputy chief of staff for Governor Sean Parnell; the executive director of CACFA; and Ed Fogels of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). 9:01:39 AM REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON said that he would no longer consider an Amendment to Conceptual Amendment 1. He said he understood how the components of the working group would work with respect to the next budget cycle. 9:02:40 AM REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES said she liked the bill and Conceptual Amendment 1. She asked for clarification on CACFA and whether it would be appropriate for the working group to provide recommendations to the proposed Joint Committee on Access and Federal Overreach. REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said he had been thinking that the standing committee would not exist unless the proposed concurrent resolution passes. He remarked that the possibility certainly exists that the resolution may have an impact even if it doesn't pass, simply because it will raise the concepts. He stated his assumption, with respect to HCR 3, that the information would go through the normal budget process and the communications would be worked out. REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES responded that other than for a fiscal matter, about which the two groups would communicate in the normal process, she was unsure how the entities would communicate. REPRESENTATIVE KELLER, in response to Representative Hughes, again referred to the Citizens Advisory Commission on Federal Areas (CACFA). He explained that CACFA meets three or four times a year and tracks various federal issues and entities in the state. He mentioned that 60 percent of Alaska's land is federal land. Additionally, what CACFA does is work to ensure that Alaska's rights are adhered to, in part, by checking the federal register and monitor instances in which Alaska's rights of access are imposed upon. He said it happens regularly, sometimes blatantly. Furthermore, CACFA follows the attorney general's actions on federal legislation. Representative Keller opined that there is more to be done than can be performed by one group. He said the executive director estimated 14,000 pages of compendiums. He remarked that many personnel are acting in good faith, but they simply don't know how unique Alaska's rights are. For example, Alaska has hunting and fishing rights on federal land granted under Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA). 9:10:13 AM REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES surmised that Alaska is more assertive than many other states. She asked whether Alaska is "ahead of the game" or if there is something else it could be doing. REPRESENTATIVE KELLER answered that Utah ahead of Alaska, because it is doing wonderful things, especially in the area of R.S. 2477s. He said Alaska is strong, since many people are concerned, but it lacks the collective effort, which he explained is why he brought forth HCR 3. 9:11:12 AM REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT pointed out that some of the organizations previously mentioned have been collaborating on not only what will help Alaska, but also what will help other states get what they need. She reported that the U.S. Senate "Western States Coalition" and the [U.S.] House Energy Action Team also assist, but said the resolution would provide an entity that can recognize those groups, which could give the legislature the power to get information. She envisioned the proposed joint committee would meet regularly to conduct overviews on many topics, including land use issues. REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON removed his objection to Conceptual Amendment 1. 9:13:20 AM CHAIR LYNN, after first determining no one else wished to testify, closed public testimony on HCR 3. CHAIR LYNN announced that Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted. 9:13:50 AM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to report the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HCR 3, Version 29-LS0440\N, Gardner, 3/27/13, as amended, out of committee. There being no objection, CSHCR 3(STA) was reported out of the House State Affairs Standing Committee.