Legislature(2009 - 2010)BARNES 124


Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

Audio Topic
08:04:54 AM Start
08:05:12 AM HB74
09:04:42 AM Adjourn
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
Heard & Held
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
HB  74-COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM                                                                                             
8:05:12 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR HERRON announced  that the only order  of business would                                                               
be HOUSE  BILL NO.  74, "An  Act relating  to the  Alaska coastal                                                               
management program;  and establishing  the Alaska  Coastal Policy                                                               
8:06:02 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE REGGIE  JOULE, Alaska State  Legislature, speaking                                                               
as one  of the joint prime  sponsors, pointed out that  HB 74 has                                                               
garnered interest  across the state.   Since the 2003  changes to                                                               
the  Alaska Coastal  Management Program  (ACMP) those  in coastal                                                               
districts  have   tried  to  work  with   the  existing  program.                                                               
Furthermore, when  similar legislation was introduced  last year,                                                               
the  Department of  Natural Resources  (DNR)  indicated it  would                                                               
introduce legislation  to address the  concerns, but it  has not.                                                               
He emphasized that no one  has been forthcoming with developing a                                                               
system  that will  work, including  DNR.   Therefore,  HB 74  was                                                               
introduced,  and he  said he  will continue  to press  forward on                                                               
this issue because something that  brings those in impacted areas                                                               
to  the table,  the permitting  process, in  a meaningful  way is                                                               
8:10:27 AM                                                                                                                    
TERI  CAMERY, Planner,  Planning  Division,  Office of  Community                                                               
Development, Department of Community  Development, City & Borough                                                               
of  Juneau, related  support for  HB 74.   She  pointed out  that                                                               
coastal  districts have  been  working to  be  involved with  the                                                               
existing coastal  management program, although the  acceptance of                                                               
local policies has been reduced  since 2003.  Therefore, the most                                                               
critical thing that HB 74 does  is to return local involvement to                                                               
the ACMP.  She reminded  the committee that coastal management is                                                               
the  way in  which  local  concerns are  carried  forward in  the                                                               
process.   This fall the state  did go through a  substantial re-                                                               
evaluation process of ACMP, but  unfortunately no legislation has                                                               
been introduced.   In the absence  of [departmental] legislation,                                                               
HB  74 addresses  the concerns  of the  local coastal  districts,                                                               
state agencies,  and industry.  The  aforementioned entities work                                                               
closely  together as  it's not  a matter  of separate  interests.                                                               
Local governments,  she related, have  a very strong  interest in                                                               
promoting healthy economies.   Ideally, the ACMP,  when run well,                                                               
is a  good way to [promote  healthy economies].  In  closing, Ms.                                                               
Camery reiterated support for HB 74.                                                                                            
8:12:45 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT inquired as to  an example of a project or                                                               
development for  which the City  & Borough of Juneau  didn't have                                                               
input  and that  project or  development was  a detriment  to the                                                               
local management plan.                                                                                                          
MS. CAMERY  said she couldn't  identify a specific project.   The                                                               
issue is  that the City  & Borough  of Juneau lost  a significant                                                               
number of  very important  policies with the  2003 change  to the                                                               
coastal  management program,  but the  City &  Borough of  Juneau                                                               
decided to  keep those policies in  the local land use  code.  An                                                               
example of  one such policy  maintained in  the land use  code is                                                               
the  basic stream-side  setback.   Therefore,  such  a policy  is                                                               
reviewed  separately at  the local  level rather  than through  a                                                               
coordinated review with the state.   The aforementioned adds time                                                               
and expense  for the  developer.  Ms.  Camery explained  that the                                                               
issue with the  districts is one of due deference.   Although DNR                                                               
says that districts  can always comment on projects  and that the                                                               
department  will always  listen to  the districts,  the districts                                                               
are placed in a very  different position when commenting on state                                                               
standards versus local  policies.  The districts are  placed in a                                                               
much weaker position to carry forth local concerns, she opined.                                                                 
8:15:50 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR MUNOZ requested explanation of the carve out.                                                                          
MS. CAMERY explained that the carve  out refers to the removal of                                                               
the  Department  of  Environmental Conservation  (DEC)  from  the                                                               
process.  Therefore,  removing the carve out  would restore DEC's                                                               
role in the process.                                                                                                            
8:16:54 AM                                                                                                                    
DAVID  CASE, Attorney,  Northwest  Arctic  Borough, informed  the                                                               
committee that he has been the  borough attorney for in excess of                                                               
15 years.   The borough has worked  under the old ACMP  and is in                                                               
mediation with  DNR under the new  ACMP.  Under the  old ACMP, he                                                               
recalled  only two  projects that  were denied  in the  Northwest                                                               
Arctic Borough.   Those denials were with  the full participation                                                               
and concurrence  of the state.   Of the two denied  projects, one                                                               
project was to dreg the entire  coast of the borough for minerals                                                               
and  the  other  project  was  the  proposed  development  of  an                                                               
archaeological historic  site.  The  ACMP [prior to  2003] worked                                                               
well for the  borough and was viewed as  ensuring development and                                                               
participation  at the  local level.    Mr. Case  opined that  the                                                               
question is  whether development and decisions  about development                                                               
will be made in a  bureaucratically centralized manner within DNR                                                               
or  will that  decision  making be  decentralized throughout  the                                                               
state  and  take into  account  the  geographic, historical,  and                                                               
cultural diversity of the residents of  the state.  He noted that                                                               
it has  been frustrating to  mediate the  borough's participation                                                               
in the  new program.  When  the borough has attempted  to develop                                                               
local  policies that  address its  unique resource,  and cultural                                                               
and  subsistence  practices,  the borough  has  essentially  been                                                               
stonewalled  by the  department.   Furthermore,  the borough  has                                                               
never  been able  to  engage the  department  regarding the  real                                                               
issue,  regarding whether  it's better  for the  state's resource                                                               
development   to  be   centralized   bureaucratically  in   state                                                               
government  or  to  develop resources  in  conjunction  with  the                                                               
concerns of  local jurisdictions.  In  a state as vast  as Alaska                                                               
and  with   a  constitution  that   affords  local   control,  he                                                               
recommended, that these resource  development decisions should be                                                               
decentralized through  the local districts.   The aforementioned,                                                               
he  opined, is  a public  policy matter  that the  legislature is                                                               
qualified to address.                                                                                                           
8:20:55 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR HERRON, upon determining no  one else wished to testify,                                                               
closed public testimony.                                                                                                        
8:21:18 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  JOULE turned  the  committee's  attention to  the                                                               
amendments he has offered for the committee's consideration.                                                                    
8:21:38 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS  moved that  the committee  adopt Amendment                                                               
1, which read [original punctuation provided]:                                                                                  
     Delete at pg 7 (b)(2), lines 20-23.                                                                                        
     Add at pg. 7 line 20 the following:                                                                                        
     (b)(2)(a) are necessary given local conditions, and                                                                        
     (b)(2)(b)   are   supported  by   evidence,   including                                                                    
     contemporary  or traditional  local  knowledge, if  the                                                                    
     policies  are  more  specific  than  state  or  federal                                                                    
     statutes or regulations.                                                                                                   
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT objected for discussion purposes.                                                                        
8:22:03 AM                                                                                                                    
ELIZABETH  HENSLEY, Intern,  Representative Reggie  Joule, Alaska                                                               
State  Legislature,  explained  that Amendment  1  would  clarify                                                               
Section 9 as the former language was unclear.                                                                                   
8:23:38 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  GARDNER  inquired as  to  how  one would  dispute                                                               
contemporary  or local  knowledge  if it's  not  documented in  a                                                               
formal manner.                                                                                                                  
MS.  HENSLEY  explained that  the  enforceable  policies must  be                                                               
supported by  provable evidence, including contemporary  or local                                                               
knowledge.  She  opined that through the approval  process of the                                                               
enforceable  policy there  would  likely be  a  discussion as  to                                                               
whether  the   local  knowledge   justifies  the  need   for  the                                                               
enforceable policy.                                                                                                             
8:25:29 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR HERRON inquired  as to why the term  "stricter" has been                                                               
deleted with Amendment 1.                                                                                                       
MS.  HENSLEY related  that  the term  "stricter"  was of  concern                                                               
because  some   felt  it  allowed  coastal   districts  to  write                                                               
enforceable  policies that  would reach  beyond state  or federal                                                               
law.    The  aforementioned  isn't  the  intent  of  HB  74,  and                                                               
therefore the omission of "stricter" would lessen the concerns.                                                                 
8:26:28 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT maintained her objection.                                                                                
8:26:41 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  HARRIS surmised  that  HB 74  is addressing  that                                                               
those closest to the resource  or impacted areas feel their voice                                                               
isn't  being heard  when it  comes  to development  in the  area.                                                               
Therefore, HB 74  intends to develop a coastal  policy board that                                                               
would provide  local areas more  input in the decision  making of                                                               
the  development of  the coastal  areas.   Representative  Harris                                                               
further  surmised  then  that  the   Amendment  1  describes  the                                                               
parameters of the local jurisdictions.                                                                                          
MS.  HENSLEY  noted  her agreement  with  Representative  Harris'                                                               
8:28:58 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE   MILLETT  expressed   concern   with  the   terms                                                               
"contemporary  and  traditional," which  she  opined  seem to  be                                                               
conflicting terms and rather subjective.                                                                                        
8:30:07 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  JOULE  explained  that traditional  knowledge  is                                                               
referred to  as anecdotal information.   He then related  that he                                                               
has  observed  much  local knowledge  parallel  scientific  data.                                                               
Amendment 1 acknowledges the two systems working parallel.                                                                      
8:31:19 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA  posed a  scenario in  which a  building is                                                               
constructed  in an  inappropriate  area and  the locals  complain                                                               
they weren't listened  to on the matter.  She  asked if Amendment                                                               
1 would address the aforementioned.                                                                                             
MS. HENSLEY  said it  could, depending  upon whether  the coastal                                                               
district had  addressed such in  its enforceable policies.   With                                                               
regard to science and local  knowledge, Ms. Hensley recalled that                                                               
in  the  1980s scientists  decided  there  were too  few  bowhead                                                               
whales in  the Arctic Ocean  to allow  the whale hunt.   However,                                                               
the  whalers disputed  that claim  and charged  that the  bowhead                                                               
whale  population was  thriving.   Eventually the  whalers worked                                                               
with  the  scientists  to  prove that  a  healthy  bowhead  whale                                                               
population existed.                                                                                                             
REPRESENTATIVE JOULE  pointed out that  the term "or" is  used in                                                               
the language  being inserted  by Amendment  1:   "contemporary or                                                               
traditional local knowledge".                                                                                                   
8:35:09 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  HARRIS  acknowledged  the Department  of  Natural                                                               
Resources' (DNR) opposition  to HB 74, but asked  if DNR supports                                                               
Amendment 1 over the legislation.                                                                                               
8:35:41 AM                                                                                                                    
RANDY BATES,  Director, Division  of Coastal &  Ocean Management,                                                               
Department of Natural Resources  (DNR), related his understanding                                                               
that Amendment  1 would expand  the ability of  coastal districts                                                               
to write enforceable policies beyond the original HB 74.                                                                        
8:36:18 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS surmised then  that DNR opposes Amendment 1                                                               
because it's stricter than HB 74.                                                                                               
MR. BATES opined  that Amendment 1 uses subjective  terms such as                                                               
"necessary",  "local conditions",  and  "evidence"  all of  which                                                               
aren't  defined.     The  aforementioned  terms   are  much  less                                                               
stringent  and restrictive  on what  local coastal  districts can                                                               
do.   Therefore, Amendment  1 would expand  the ability  of local                                                               
coastal  districts to  write  enforcement  policies more  broadly                                                               
than what  was allowed in  the original legislation.   In further                                                               
response to  Representative Harris, Mr. Bates  confirmed that DNR                                                               
opposes Amendment 1.                                                                                                            
8:37:31 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  HARRIS  related his  belief  that  HB 74  is  the                                                               
result  of much  frustration.   He asked  if DNR  is prepared  to                                                               
address that frustration and do something about it.                                                                             
MR.  BATES  answered  that  DNR  conducted  a  re-evaluation  and                                                               
continues  to  work  through  what  should  and  could  be  done.                                                               
However,  at   this  point  the  department   isn't  prepared  to                                                               
introduce any  legislation or  changes proposed in  HB 74  or any                                                               
other  changes.   Mr.  Bates relayed  that  although DNR  doesn't                                                               
believe a  statutory revision is  necessary to  accomplish change                                                               
with  the ACMP,  DNR recognizes  it could,  if appropriate,  make                                                               
regulatory  changes  that  would   resolve  some  of  the  issues                                                               
mentioned.     He  emphasized  that   he  isn't   suggesting  nor                                                               
committing that the department will make regulatory changes.                                                                    
8:39:33 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT  inquired as  to whether DNR  could define                                                               
the  terms "contemporary  and local  knowledge", as  specified in                                                               
Amendment 1.                                                                                                                    
MR. BATES responded that "contemporary"  is a new term that isn't                                                               
in  the current  ACMP, and  thus would  require definition.   The                                                               
language "traditional local knowledge" is  in the ACMP and refers                                                               
to knowledge  that is handed  down from generations of  users and                                                               
supported by a local body of some sort.                                                                                         
8:41:28 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  CISSNA opined  that  there appear  to be  serious                                                               
climate  changes  resulting in  a  lack  of  food and  those  who                                                               
experience it the most live in  the community.  She asked if it's                                                               
possible  to  expand  the  thinking  with the  use  of  the  term                                                               
MR.  BATES   confirmed  that  if   HB  74,  including   the  term                                                               
"contemporary," passes,  DNR would implement it  according to the                                                               
law.   However,  the  matter is  one of  local  input, which  has                                                               
always  existed,  versus local  control,  which  HB 74  proposes.                                                               
Fundamentally,  DNR   believes  the   ACMP,  as   it's  currently                                                               
statutorily structured  affords relevant  input from  the coastal                                                               
districts.   However, the ACMP is  a state program, and  thus the                                                               
state  should remain  in  control of  the  decision making  while                                                               
taking into  account input from the  coastal districts, including                                                               
information  relating to  contemporary  and/or traditional  local                                                               
8:44:02 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR  MUNOZ related  her understanding  that  Mr. Bates'  has                                                               
said  that  local control  would  be  a result  of  HB  74.   She                                                               
inquired as to  whether Mr. Bates believes  the coastal districts                                                               
had local control or input prior to 2003.                                                                                       
MR. BATES  explained that when  the ACMP was originally  setup in                                                               
1977,  it  established  a  state coastal  program  with  a  local                                                               
implementation technique, which meant  that the coastal districts                                                               
were a partner in the  program and they had enforceable policies.                                                               
The coastal  districts could apply those  enforceable polices and                                                               
determine  whether a  project would  be  consistent or  compliant                                                               
with the  laws.   Although the coastal  districts never  had veto                                                               
authority,  the  state always  offered  due  deference and  given                                                               
greater weight when  the local coastal district  had expertise or                                                               
responsibility in the  area in which the  district made comments.                                                               
Therefore,  from  DNR's  perspective,  prior to  2003  it  was  a                                                               
situation of local input.                                                                                                       
8:45:28 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS  reminded the  committee of  the litigation                                                               
over the Shell offshore drilling  in which local people felt they                                                               
weren't given due consideration.  He  opined that the lack of due                                                               
consideration was for issues that  would've likely been addressed                                                               
under  the conditions  being discussed  today.   The locals  felt                                                               
their only remedy was litigation  and now the entire operation is                                                               
stopped.   The  9th Circuit  Court of  Appeals, he  noted, is  no                                                               
friend  to Alaska.   He  then questioned,  "If you  don't have  a                                                               
local  remedy done  by  local  people, are  we  not just  setting                                                               
ourselves  up for  a continuous  trek down  to San  Francisco and                                                               
maybe back to Washington, D.C.,  to have this stuff litigated and                                                               
litigated."   He stressed  his desire  for the  administration to                                                               
understand that  local people  have concerns  rather than  turn a                                                               
blind eye to local issues that could get worse.                                                                                 
8:49:02 AM                                                                                                                    
A roll  call vote  was taken.   Representatives  Cissna, Gardner,                                                               
Harris,  Herron,  and  Munoz  voted  in  favor  of  Amendment  1.                                                               
Representatives Keller  and Millet voted against  it.  Therefore,                                                               
Amendment 1 was adopted by a vote of 5-2.                                                                                       
8:49:41 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS  moved that  the committee  adopt Amendment                                                               
2, which read [original punctuation provided]:                                                                                  
     At  pg. 11,  line  13 delete  the  following from  sec.                                                                    
     (B)   are  not   preempted  by   federal  statutes   or                                                                    
     regulations; and                                                                                                           
     Add the following at pg. 11, line 13:                                                                                      
     (B) are not preempted by federal or state law.                                                                             
     At pg. 11, line 20 add:                                                                                                    
     (c)  In  (a)(2)(B)  of  this  section,  an  enforceable                                                                    
     policy  of  the  district coastal  management  plan  is                                                                    
     preempted  by state  statutes or  regulations if  it is                                                                    
     prohibited,  either by  express legislative  direction,                                                                    
     or direct  conflict with  a state  statute, or  where a                                                                    
     local law  or regulation substantially  interferes with                                                                    
     the  effective  functioning  or   a  state  statute  or                                                                    
     regulation or its underlying purpose.                                                                                      
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT objected.                                                                                                
8:49:54 AM                                                                                                                    
MS.  HENSLEY  explained that  Amendment  2  clarifies that  local                                                               
policies can't override  state law or render a state  law moot by                                                               
articulating when  a district policy  oversteps its bounds.   Ms.                                                               
Hensley highlighted that much of  the discontent with the ACMP is                                                               
related to the lack of  consensus as to what enforceable policies                                                               
are approvable.  Amendment 2  clarifies that enforceable policies                                                               
aren't approvable  when they  are preempted  by state  or federal                                                               
8:52:13 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT  inquired  as   to  the  remedy  when  an                                                               
enforceable policy runs afoul of a regulation.                                                                                  
REPRESENTATIVE   JOULE  pointed   out   that  departments   write                                                               
regulations for any law passed.                                                                                                 
8:52:55 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR HERRON characterized Amendment 2 as guidance.                                                                          
MS. HENSLEY  noted her agreement  because Amendment 2  guides the                                                               
[proposed] board regarding  what plans it can  and can't approve.                                                               
The concept  of preemption is  included because it's  well known.                                                               
The  desire is  for  the  public and  all  interested parties  to                                                               
understand the  ceiling of enforceable policies,  and the concept                                                               
of preemption is understood by many, she opined.                                                                                
8:54:27 AM                                                                                                                    
MS.  HENSLEY, in  response  to  Representative Harris,  specified                                                               
that  on page  11,  line  16, subsection  (b)  refers to  federal                                                               
statutes and regulations and [proposed  subsection] (c) refers to                                                               
state statutes and regulations.                                                                                                 
8:54:56 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT  withdrew her  objection.  There  being no                                                               
further objection, Amendment 2 was adopted.                                                                                     
8:55:13 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS  moved that  the committee  adopt Amendment                                                               
3, which read [original punctuation provided]:                                                                                  
     Delete pg. 16, lines 21-28.                                                                                                
     Add at pg. 16, line 21 the following:                                                                                      
     (a) A city within the coastal  area that is not part of                                                                    
     a coastal  resource service area shall  be included for                                                                    
     purposes  of this  chapter within  in adjacent  coastal                                                                    
     resource  service area  unless its  governing body,  by                                                                    
     resolution  adopted by  a majority  of its  membership,                                                                    
     chooses to  exclude the city  from an  adjacent coastal                                                                    
     resource service area  and a copy of  the resolution is                                                                    
     filed  with the  commissioner  of commerce,  community,                                                                    
     and economic development.                                                                                                  
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT objected.                                                                                                
8:55:34 AM                                                                                                                    
MS. HENSLEY explained that Amendment 3 restores the existing                                                                    
law's language.                                                                                                                 
8:56:29 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT related her understanding that Amendment                                                                 
3 specifies that inaction by a bordering city would be included                                                                 
unless they exclude themselves from the coastal plan.                                                                           
MS. HENSLEY replied yes, adding that's the existing law.                                                                        
8:56:52 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT removed her objection, and there being no                                                                
further objection Amendment 3 was adopted.                                                                                      
8:57:05 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS moved that the committee adopt Amendment                                                                  
4, which read [original punctuation provided]:                                                                                  
     Delete at pg. 17, lines 8-23.                                                                                              
     Add at pg. 17 line 8 the following:                                                                                        
     "coastal   resource  district"   means   each  of   the                                                                    
     following that  contains a portion of  the coastal area                                                                    
     of the state:                                                                                                              
          (A) unified municipalities;                                                                                           
          (B) organized boroughs of any class that exercise                                                                     
     planning and zoning authority;                                                                                             
          (C) home rule and first class cities of the                                                                           
     unorganized     borough or within  boroughs that do not                                                                    
     exercise planning and zoning authority;                                                                                    
          (D) second class cities of the unorganized                                                                            
     borough,  or  within  boroughs that  do  note  exercise                                                                    
     planning and zoning authority,  that have established a                                                                    
     planning commission,  and that,  in the opinion  of the                                                                    
     commissioner  of  commerce,   community,  and  economic                                                                    
     development,  have  the  capability  of  preparing  and                                                                    
     implementing a  comprehensive district  management plan                                                                    
     under AS 46.40.030;                                                                                                        
          (E) coastal resource service areas established                                                                        
     and  organized under  AS 29.03.020  and AS  46.60.0110-                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT objected.                                                                                                
8:57:13 AM                                                                                                                    
MS.  HENSLEY explained  that Amendment  4  accomplishes the  same                                                               
thing  as Amendment  3 as  it restores  language in  the existing                                                               
8:57:39 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER inquired as  to why the sponsors initially                                                               
offered the language in HB 74 that [Amendments 3 and 4] delete.                                                                 
MS.  HENSLEY  explained that  when  writing  HB 74,  the  sponsor                                                               
reviewed  DNR's   proposed  November  legislation.     Where  the                                                               
sponsors  felt they  could make  a concession  by adopting  DNR's                                                               
language, the  sponsors did so.   She noted that there  are those                                                               
who otherwise support HB 74  who have expressed concern with this                                                               
[proposed] section, and the sponsors felt it should be removed.                                                                 
8:58:59 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT  withdrew her  objection.  There  being no                                                               
further objection, Amendment 4 was adopted.                                                                                     
8:59:14 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR HERRON  announced that HB  74 would be held  until March                                                               
3, 2008,  and a committee  substitute would be prepared  for that                                                               
9:00:07 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS reiterated that HB  74 is illustrative of a                                                               
larger problem  of which the governor  is aware.  He  opined that                                                               
the people of the impacted areas of  the state need to heard.  He                                                               
then said that  he will vote in favor of  moving this legislation                                                               
out of committee and he  hopes Mr. Bates takes the aforementioned                                                               
sentiments back to his boss.                                                                                                    
9:01:48 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR  HERRON   related  that   after  the  last   hearing  he                                                               
approached Representative  Joule and members of  the industry and                                                               
was pleased that  the sponsor brought forward  amendments to work                                                               
toward  the middle.   However,  he expressed  disappointment that                                                               
industry reported it could do nothing.                                                                                          
9:02:29 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE   JOULE   related   that  DNR,   admittedly,   has                                                               
overreached its  authority, through regulation, per  the original                                                               
charter  of the  ACMP.   Therefore, he  questioned why  one would                                                               
leave the authority  with DNR.  The aforementioned is  one of the                                                               
reasons  for the  introduction of  HB 74.   Representative  Joule                                                               
then  recalled  that  the  Alaska  State  Constitution  says  the                                                               
resources of  the state will be  developed for all the  people of                                                               
the state.   Representative  Joule then  related his  belief that                                                               
there  are three  kinds of  resources:   renewable, nonrenewable,                                                               
and human  resources.  He  opined that  DNR is leaving  out human                                                               
and  renewable resources  when they  reject the  policies by  the                                                               
local communities.                                                                                                              
[HB 74 was held over.]                                                                                                          

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
Committee Packet on HB74 for HCRA.PDF HCRA 2/10/2009 8:00:00 AM
HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
02 10 09 AOGA Testimony on HB74 ACMP.pdf HCRA 2/10/2009 8:00:00 AM
HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
HB74sp1968.jpg HCRA 2/10/2009 8:00:00 AM
HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
HB74sp1977.jpg HCRA 2/10/2009 8:00:00 AM
HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
HB 74_Fiscal_Note_DEC-CO.pdf HCRA 2/10/2009 8:00:00 AM
HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
HB 74_Fiscal_Note_DNR-DCOM.pdf HCRA 2/10/2009 8:00:00 AM
HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
HB74 Pelican support letter.PDF HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
HB74LetterFromUIC.pdf HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
HB 74 AMENDMENT II.doc HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
HB 74AMENDMENT I.doc HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
HB 74AMENDMENT III.doc HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
HB 74AMENDMENT IV.doc HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
HB74sp1989.jpg HCRA 2/10/2009 8:00:00 AM
HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
HB74sp1999.jpg HCRA 2/10/2009 8:00:00 AM
HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
HB74sp2001.jpg HCRA 2/10/2009 8:00:00 AM
HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
LetterFromAleutiansWestCRSA2.10.9(pro).PDF HCRA 2/10/2009 8:00:00 AM
HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
letter from City of Cordova2.9.9 (pro).PDF HCRA 2/10/2009 8:00:00 AM
HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
LetterFromAML2.7.9 (pro).PDF HCRA 2/10/2009 8:00:00 AM
HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
LetterFromCityofValdez2.10.9 (pro).PDF HCRA 2/10/2009 8:00:00 AM
HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
LetterFromConocoPhillips2.10.9 (con).PDF HCRA 2/10/2009 8:00:00 AM
HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74
NVOK support HB 74 Feb 2009.doc.pdf HCRA 2/10/2009 8:00:00 AM
HCRA 2/24/2009 8:00:00 AM
HB 74