SJR 16-OPPOSE FEDERAL AID TO CERTAIN NONPROFITS  11:03:46 AM CHAIR GIESSEL, announced SJR 16 to be up for consideration. She said this issue was brought to her attention by constituents who noted the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as a major donor to environmentally based nonprofits that are working against resource development in our state. The purpose of the resolution is to highlight this and ask the federal government to stop using tax funds to work against Alaskans. JANE CONWAY, staff to Senator Giessel, sponsor of SJR 16, explained it asks that environmental nonprofit organizations not receive federal funds to use in campaigns against resource development in Alaska. This is an abuse of federal funds and runs afoul of the Alaska Statehood Act and the Alaska Constitution. At statehood, she said, Congress recognized that Alaska's small population would not be able to pay for government services with taxes alone and promised the state 90 percent of revenues earned from resource development on Alaska federal lands, although that percentage has been reduced to around 40 percent. MS. CONWAY said the U.S. Department of Justice, Environment and Natural Resource Division, has the responsibility for the conduct and oversight of litigation conducted directly and indirectly on behalf of the USFWS. In 1982, an MOU was signed by USFWS and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), which allows the department to have primary responsibility to manage fish and wildlife in the State of Alaska. Despite the promises in the Statehood Compact the USFWS awards a variety of natural resource assistance grants and contracts to nongovernmental organizations, some of which aggressively oppose the express promise to Alaskans at statehood and oppose the intent behind Section 101(D) of ANILCA known as "the no more clause." Thus Congress believes that the need for future legislation designating new conservation system units, new national conservation areas, or new national recreation areas has been obviated. 11:07:19 AM She listed some of the organizations receiving federal money to oppose development of the state's resources: 1. $10-50,000 to the Alaska Conservation Foundation in 2010 and 2011 2. Advocacy groups such as the Chuitna Citizen's Coalition whose sole purpose is opposing proposed Chuitna coal mine. 3. Bristol Bay Protection Campaign and Cook Inlet Keeper, groups opposed to the Pebble Mine project. MS. CONWAY said the Alaska Conservation Foundation had provided numerous grants to the Trustees for Alaska that provides advocacy and legal representation to groups that oppose a variety of resource development projects around the state including filing lawsuits against the State of Alaska and the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The Trustees' website says that Alaska is poised to make an outsized and self-destructive contribution to global warming in the form of massive coal developments. It also says that Alaska's environment has intrinsic value that defies measurement in economic terms. She said the Alaska Conservation Foundation funded 111 grants in 2012; 50 percent of them were grants for oppositional campaigns. It has awarded over $3 million annually to over 200 Alaskan nongovernmental organizations and other entities that advocate against resource development. It has solicited support for their efforts to "Keep Alaska's Coal in the Ground," and has made a total of $1,000,371 in numerous grants to organizations opposing responsible development of coal related projects throughout the state. 11:10:27 AM MS. CONWAY said she also noticed the website says the Alaska Center for the Environment, the Alaska Conservation Alliance, and the Alaska Youth for Environmental Action are merging, and one of their mission statements is to have a direct lobbying impact in Juneau. This resolution shines a light on these types of activities. It suggests that perhaps the Office of Management and Budget pay closer attention to the activities of its agency's grant program considering that Alaska is a resource state. The Alaska Mental Health Trust Lands Program receives substantial benefits from Fort Knox and it stands to receive royalties and payments from the Chuitna Coal and the Wishbone Hill mines; that money is used solely to provide services to the mentally ill, disabled, those with brain trauma, substance abuse, dementia and more. 11:11:43 AM SENATOR DYSON asked on page 5, line 15, if there is anything in federal law or regulations that talks about public funds being used for litigation in these situations. MS. CONWAY didn't know specifically, but the U.S. Department of Justice's website says a substantial portion of the division's work includes litigation under a plethora of statutes related to the management of public lands such as the nation's most significant subtropical wetlands, the Everglades, and the nation's largest rain forest, the Tongass, to individual range lands or wildlife refuges. It specifically represents all land management agencies in the U.S., and the USFWS is among the listings. SENATOR DYSON suggested inserting language urging the USFWS to not finance any litigation. 11:15:18 AM SENATOR DYSON moved conceptual Amendment 1 to insert the words "environmentally responsible development" where appropriate. There were no objections and it was so ordered. SENATOR BISHOP said he made the distinction that there might be some good use of these dollars in the conservation funding efforts. MS. CONWAY said the 2011/12 grants were listed in their packets and not all of them looked like they all had that type of anti- campaign activity. SENATOR BISHOP said he keyed in on one of the Alaska Native Fund awards because it was to the Yukon Fisheries Association to study the Chum salmon and King salmon decline on the Yukon River. SENATOR DYSON said many citizens' groups do good work and he was impressed with what the Matsu group is doing on analyzing game/sport fish issues. A grand example is the Prince William Sound Advisory Group that came out of the Exxon Valdez settlement that has become a model for many similar groups. 11:19:54 AM SENATOR MICCICHE said three groups are contributed to by the Alaska Conservation Foundation and asked if she had been able to track funding for litigation related activities by these groups or had most of funding been related to data collection. MS. CONWAY answered that much of the litigation dollars would go to the Trustees of Alaska, which is the advocacy legal group, but she couldn't link it to any project. SENATOR MICCICHE said typically federal funding has a very specific purpose and he hated to paint them all with a broad brush. Some of it is used for pro-development projects and sport/commercial fishing related processes, one being Cook Inlet Keeper that monitors in-stream water flows and temperatures on ADF&G professional sport fishing projects. The Kachemak Conservation Society, Cook Inlet Keepers, the Center for Alaska Coastal Studies were listed and he valued their opinion on different things although he didn't agree with all of them. He would have pulled the names below the Alaska Conservation Commission out of the resolution, because they do have mixed roles. They don't want to eliminate Alaskans' right to comment on things, and he hoped the resolution would stay tied to litigation-related dollars, because he agreed with the chair that public funding should not go to litigation against Alaska projects. 11:23:05 AM CHAIR GIESSEL said the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment is freedom of speech, but this resolution doesn't have anything to do with that. This resolution brings out the fact that federal money is being distributed through grants to these organizations that turn around and use them to oppose development in Alaska. These are transparent funds they can see, but a letter from Mr. Leaphart would talk about the funding that is not seen and that is the issue the resolution addresses. 11:24:23 AM CHAIR GIESSEL opened public testimony. 11:24:30 AM STAN LEAPHART, Executive Director, Citizens Advisory Commission on Federal Areas (CACFA), Fairbanks, Alaska, supported SJR 16. He offered that the USFWS supports the 220 friends groups (volunteers around the country) that do bird banding, habitat conservation, and things like that. A group in Alaska is called Friends of the Alaska Wildlife Refuges; they do great work, but his concern lies with a policy that was proposed several years ago and hadn't been finalized that deals with how the agency interacts with these volunteer groups. He explained that federal agencies cannot use appropriated funds to lobby Congress, state or local governments, but friends groups are able to do that. The policy didn't provide enough guidance for the agency on how they would interact with these groups. They provide training, office space and allow use of office equipment, they provide transport out to do the volunteer work, but sometimes they have lobbied Congress in opposition to the land exchange in Izembek and the road, testified at Mineral Management Service hearings against possible oil and gas leases offshore of Alaska, and lobbied against the proposed land exchange in the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge between Doyon and the USFWS. It's unclear where the line is drawn for the volunteer group and the responsibilities of the staff for these agencies. It's not a direct grant, but it is still support that probably comes very close to violating federal law, which does not allow the use of appropriated funds for lobbying or advocacy. 11:28:20 AM MIKE COONS, representing himself, Palmer, Alaska, supported SJR 16. He wondered if USFWS could be sued for spending U.S. dollars in violation of their charter. It sounds like they are picking and choosing their attacks on conservative groups like the IRS is doing. He agreed with Senator Dyson that environmental groups generally use bad science and emotions where conservation groups have a long history of using good science and facts and getting the education out. Lastly, he asked if Congress acts on resolutions or just ignore them. 11:30:03 AM MARLEANNA HALL, Project Coordinator, Resource Development Council (RDC), Anchorage, Alaska, supported SJR 16. Their concern is that the federal government is discouraging investment in Alaska by donating funding through federal agencies to nongovernment organizations (NGOs) to opposed development of Alaska's natural resources. The funding of these groups contradicts RDC's mission to grow Alaska through responsible resource development. She said in recent years lawsuits by NGOs have caused delays and other issues for projects in Alaska, often with little or no added benefits to the environment. Many lawsuits have threatened Alaskan jobs, businesses, and communities, for example exploration and development on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). Lawsuits can cost the state hundreds of thousands of dollars and even when these projects are not ultimately stopped the uncertainty of the litigation can effectively stop progress on them. Additionally, NGOs involved in litigation often collect large attorney fees from the federal government in lawsuits that are aimed at systematically stopping development in mining, oil, timber, and other industries. She said Alaska's Constitution says to develop our natural resources for the benefit of all Alaskans and the state has the responsibility to achieve fiscal certainty. That can't be done if the projects continue to be halted by outside interests. 11:32:04 AM LISA WEISSLER, representing herself, Juneau, Alaska, described herself as an attorney with expertise in natural resource law. She did not support SJR 16. She related that language on page 2, line 4, says it's the policy of the state "to encourage settlement of its lands and development of its resources by making them available for maximum use consistent with the public interest." In this case, "public interest" means what everyone benefits from: the land, the air, the water, community social structures, cultural values and its economic interests. And language on page 2, line 22, talks about how the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) have comprehensive and stringent regulations to ensure the responsible development of the state's resource. However, there is no statutory requirement for a coordination function that will account for the public interest relative to the agencies, and without that, sometimes public interest groups have to step in. MS. WEISSLER said it's hard for the public to participate in the review process, because they have to go from agency to agency and figure out what is happening and how to effectively comment on it. NGOs also step in to deal with general public interest issues that the state is not fully addressing right now. MS. WEISSLER said it would be better to have comprehensive legislation that would provide for the coordinated review of projects as a whole in which the state's and the public's interests are identified. 11:35:23 AM SENATOR DYSON said he appreciated her testimony and that he had seen similar problems with other state statutes and asked if she knew of other states that had done this successfully. MS. WEISSLER said Alaska's Coastal Zone Management Program had done exactly what she had just described: it coordinated state permitting and identified state and local interests, and it had the added advantage of the federal government having to listen, something we won't get back any time soon. "The Coastal Zone Management Program was our public interest statutes." That is why the reviews are so fragmented and the public interest is not being fully accounted for. CHAIR GIESSEL, finding no further questions or comments, thanked Ms. Weissler and closed public testimony. She clarified that they are referring to federal funds being used in the grant programs to folks that are working in the opposite direction to the benefit of Alaska. She stated that comments were made that our permitting agencies lack coordination and the consideration of the total impact of development, and she wanted to raise the committee's awareness that Alaska had been including a health impact assessment (HIA) in all project applications for 15 or 20 years and was the first state to do that. Alaska has lead the way in permitting processes; we also lead the way in agency coordination: Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), and the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) get together weekly to deliberate, express concerns, and get further data on large project applications. As the Resources Committee, she said, they need to know how these applications are processed and that is not relevant to this resolution, which only addresses the use of federal funds against our resource development opportunities. 11:39:41 AM SENATOR MICCICHE agreed with her on the litigation piece but added that some of the contracts are unbiased and just collect data. They are all about science and some of these folks are the lowest bidding contractor to provide that data and the resolution seemed to say that they shouldn't support those contracts. He struggled with that and asked her to help him. MS. CONWAY asked him to be more specific. CHAIR GIESSEL said she thought he was looking at the Further resolved clause on page 5, line 10-13 that says: the Alaska State Legislature urge the U.S. Office of Management and Budget to investigate those expenditures and perform a comprehensive audit of all grants and contracts that may have been issued from taxpayer funds through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. It doesn't prohibit grants or contracts; it requests an audit. SENATOR MICCICHE said he was looking at "to hire unbiased independent firms of credible scientists to collect data and compile peer-reviewed scientific reports and documents;" on page 5, lines 3-5. He assumed the state's goal was not to go with the lowest qualified bidder among firms doing data collection. CHAIR GIESSEL said it doesn't do that. 11:42:37 AM SENATOR DYSON moved to report SJR 16, version 28-LS1211\N, as amended from committee with attached zero fiscal note and individual recommendations. There were no objections and it was so ordered; therefore CSSJR 16(RES) moved from the Senate Resources Standing Committee.