Legislature(2003 - 2004)

04/23/2003 01:05 PM RES

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 191-COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
Number 1565                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FATE  announced that the  final order of business  would be                                                               
HOUSE  BILL NO.  191,  "An  Act relating  to  the Alaska  coastal                                                               
management   program  and   to   policies   and  procedures   for                                                               
consistency   reviews   and    the   rendering   of   consistency                                                               
determinations under  that program; relating to  the functions of                                                               
coastal  resource  service  areas;  creating  an  Alaska  Coastal                                                               
Program  Evaluation  Council;   eliminating  the  Alaska  Coastal                                                               
Policy  Council; annulling  certain regulations  relating to  the                                                               
Alaska coastal  management program; relating to  actions based on                                                               
private  nuisance;  relating  to  zoning  within  a  third  class                                                               
borough  covered by  the Alaska  coastal management  program; and                                                               
providing for effective  dates."  [The bill was  sponsored by the                                                               
House Rules Standing Committee by request of the governor.]                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FATE indicated  the committee aide was  obtaining copies of                                                               
a  new   proposed  committee  substitute  (CS)   labeled  03-0069                                                               
bil2.doc, 4/22/2003, 1:30  pm., which he said tries  to meet some                                                               
of the problems articulated by  committee members, the Alaska Oil                                                               
and Gas Association  (AOGA), and the governor's staff.   He asked                                                               
Marty Rutherford to  explain the changes that  resulted from this                                                               
cooperative effort.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Number 1475                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MARTY  RUTHERFORD, Consultant  to the  Administration and  to the                                                               
Department  of Natural  Resources (DNR),  informed the  committee                                                               
that   the  Senate   Resources   Standing   Committee  would   be                                                               
considering the  companion bill that  afternoon.  She  noted that                                                               
available  to  answer  questions   were  Breck  Tostevin  of  the                                                               
Department of Law; Patrick Galvin,  currently with DNR's Division                                                               
of  Oil &  Gas,  but formerly  the director  of  the Division  of                                                               
Governmental Coordination  (DGC), which used to  house the Alaska                                                               
Coastal  Management Program  (ACMP); and  Randy Bates,  the newly                                                               
appointed coastal program coordinator in the ACMP.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
The committee took an at-ease from 2:28 p.m. to 2:29 p.m.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Number 1324                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS.  RUTHERFORD  drew  attention  to a  one-page  synopsis  dated                                                               
April 21, 2003,  which she said  is generic in nature  and little                                                               
different from the one members  saw the previous week; an updated                                                               
timeline dated April 21, 2003, which  reflects changes in the new                                                               
proposed CS; an  updated chart that compares the  new proposed CS                                                               
with  the   existing  coastal  management  program;   an  updated                                                               
sectional analysis  [dated April  23, 2003];  and one  sheet that                                                               
discusses  changes   between  last  week's  proposed   CS  [dated                                                               
4/12/2003] and the new one [dated 4/22/2003].                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Number 1240                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. RUTHERFORD highlighted  changes in the new proposed  CS.  She                                                               
told members:                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     Section 3  adds the  word "maintenance" of  an improved                                                                    
     district  plan  as  eligible  for  funding  assistance.                                                                    
     This  change  was  requested by  the  Alaska  Municipal                                                                    
     League and the coastal districts. ...                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Section 11 includes  very specific statutory references                                                                    
     to  what  was  intended  as DEC's  [the  Department  of                                                                    
     Environmental  Conservation's]  air,  land,  and  water                                                                    
     quality  requirements.   This change  was requested  by                                                                    
     Doug Mertz on  behalf of the Prince  William Sound RCAC                                                                    
     [Regional  Citizens'   Advisory  Council];   they  were                                                                    
     indicating they  were concerned about the  broadness of                                                                    
     the air, land, and water quality references.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     Section  12,  which is  also  on  page 8,  extends  the                                                                    
     required renewal period of district  plans from five to                                                                    
     ten  years.   Also, this  change was  requested by  the                                                                    
     Alaska Municipal League and the ... coastal districts.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Section  13,  which  is  on ...  page  9,  removes  the                                                                    
     addition  of   the  term  "unduly"   in  the   type  of                                                                    
     restrictions a  district plan  can impose  on a  use of                                                                    
     state concern.   This was  requested by  Chairman Fate,                                                                    
     and   I  believe   Representative  [Seaton]   had  some                                                                    
     concerns about that word as well, earlier.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     Section 14,  which is  on page 10:   there  are several                                                                    
     changes  to  this section.    It  amends AS  46.40.070,                                                                    
     which  sets up  the requirement  for department  review                                                                    
     and approval  of district  plans.   It ...  changes the                                                                    
     introduction from  "The department may  approve", which                                                                    
     is  a  discretionary  action,  [for]  a  district  plan                                                                    
     meeting  the requirements  of (a)(1)  and (2),  to "The                                                                    
     department  shall  approve"  a  district  plan  if  the                                                                    
     commissioner ... finds that  it meets the requirements.                                                                    
     This  change  was  requested by  the  Alaska  Municipal                                                                    
     League and the coastal districts.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     It also removes ... (a)(2)(B)  as duplicative.  I think                                                                    
     several  members   on  the  committee   requested  that                                                                    
     change, and we heard it  also from the Alaska Municipal                                                                    
     League  and   the  coastal   districts.     It  changes                                                                    
     "geographic area within the  coastal zone" in (a)(2)(D)                                                                    
     to "a  defined portion  of a district's  coastal zone".                                                                    
     And it  changes "identified"  - and  this change  is in                                                                    
     [(a)(2)(C)(i)] - ... to  "demonstrated" as sensitive to                                                                    
     development. ...                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Number 0981                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. RUTHERFORD continued with changes in the new proposed CS:                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     [Section 14 also] deletes  the phrase "or contemplated"                                                                    
     from (a)(2)(C)(ii) as redundant.   We heard the concern                                                                    
     about  that from  various  parties as  well.   Also  in                                                                    
     Section 14,  ... line 28,  ... (a)(2)(C)(iii),  it adds                                                                    
     "local" [before]  "usage" to  clarify that a  matter of                                                                    
     local concern  must, among other  requirements, involve                                                                    
     local usage  or scientific  evidence.  This  change was                                                                    
     requested by ... Chairman Fate.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     There is one  error on your sheet.   The next reference                                                                    
     to Section 19 should say  Section 20. ... Section 20 is                                                                    
     on  page  12.    It  changes  "interested  parties"  to                                                                    
     "affected parties"  in [the] list of  persons from whom                                                                    
     DNR requests consistency review  comments.  This change                                                                    
     was requested by Chairman Fate.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     In  Section 21,  which is  on page  13, it  revises the                                                                    
     lead-ins to (1)(A) and (B)  and revised (B), to reflect                                                                    
     the  listing of  statutes  instead of  the simple  term                                                                    
     "air,  land, and  water  quality"  in AS  46.40.040(b).                                                                    
     And,  again,   the  intent  is   to  ensure   that  the                                                                    
     definition of  "air, land, and water  quality" is quite                                                                    
     specific.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Number 0810                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. RUTHERFORD continued with changes:                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Section 22 amends new subsection  (k), which is on page                                                                    
     13, governing the scope of  a consistency review to add                                                                    
     "that are  located".   The administration  thought that                                                                    
     there was ... lack of  clarity there, so we added those                                                                    
     words [ourselves].   New subsection  (m), ...  page 14,                                                                    
     adds the  requirement that DNR establish  in regulation                                                                    
     the state  resource agency permits and  federal permits                                                                    
     that trigger  a consistency review.   It also  adds new                                                                    
     subsections  (n) and  (o), which  [establish] a  90-day                                                                    
     deadline for  completing consistency  reviews.   And it                                                                    
     adds  a new  ...  subsection (p),  ... which  expressly                                                                    
     states that  a final consistency determination  may not                                                                    
     be  held up  by a  DEC or  other permit  excluded under                                                                    
     AS 46.40.096(g).                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Section  43,  ... on  page  21,  adds a  definition  of                                                                    
     "project" from  6 AAC 50,  which are  newly promulgated                                                                    
     regulations dealing  with consistency reviews,  so it's                                                                    
     consistent with the current regulations.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     Section  46(b),   which  is   on  page  22,   ...  adds                                                                    
     clarifying  language  that   the  ...  former  [Alaska]                                                                    
     Coastal Policy  Council's regulations  implementing the                                                                    
     coastal management  program remain in effect  until DNR                                                                    
     adopts  new  regulations  or they  are  annulled  under                                                                    
     Section 45, whichever  occurs first.  This  was done in                                                                    
     order  to   provide  [assurance]   that  Representative                                                                    
     Kerttula and her office requested.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
     And Section 47, which is  on page 23, is a transitional                                                                    
     provision  requiring   revised  ...   district  coastal                                                                    
     management plans; [it] now  gives all coastal districts                                                                    
     one  year  after DNR  adopts  new  regulations for  the                                                                    
     statewide standards  or until  July 1,  2005, whichever                                                                    
     is  later,  to submit  revised  district  plans.   And,                                                                    
     again,  this  was  requested by  the  Alaska  Municipal                                                                    
     League, the coastal districts, and Chairman Fate.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Number 0565                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  FATE   reopened  public  testimony.     He  announced  his                                                               
intention to move the bill from committee at the next hearing.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Number 0464                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
DANA  OLSON testified  that she  lives  in the  Matanuska-Susitna                                                               
coastal  district.   She indicated  she'd  asked the  Legislative                                                               
Information  Office  (LIO)  to fax  an  article  titled  "Chicago                                                               
Biosphere Reserve Considered by  Steering Committee," dated April                                                               
2, 2003, from the  Paragon Foundation's The Powerhouse, reprinted                                                             
with  permission of  the Property  Rights Foundation  of America.                                                               
She  told members  this legislation  fails to  consider that  the                                                               
U.S. Man  and [Biosphere]  Program under  the U.S.  Department of                                                               
State  reviews  and  approves nominations  for  the  U.S.  before                                                               
forwarding  them  to  the  UNESCO  [United  Nations  Educational,                                                               
Scientific and  Cultural Organization] headquarters in  Paris for                                                               
formal consideration;  it also fails to  consider that curtailing                                                               
the existing political processes in  Alaska will result in having                                                               
no access for submitting nominations for this.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MS. OLSON  said this establishes  "criteria of  urban interface";                                                               
she cited the lawsuit over the  Miller's Reach fire as an example                                                               
of  intergovernmental  agreements  and policy  relating  to  that                                                               
interface issue.   Suggesting members  need to address  that, she                                                               
explained, "This  1970 Act does give  us legal standing to  go in                                                               
and  create nominations,  whether or  not you  feel that  you can                                                               
curtail our political process or  not."  She said AS 46.03.040 is                                                               
the requirement  for an  environmental plan  that never  has been                                                               
implemented.    She  added,  "Negotiated  rule  making  does  not                                                               
provide  for  nominations.   And  it's  anticipated that  I  will                                                               
probably  make  recommendations  for  nominations.   And  it  may                                                               
impact your rule  making, your permitting, while  that process is                                                               
ongoing."                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Number 0179                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. OLSON  observed that people  often think only  wilderness can                                                               
be put  under such a designation,  but she said that  isn't true.                                                               
She told members:                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     Where  there's  been  no  consideration  whatsoever  on                                                                    
     shallow  gas,   natural  gas,  impacts  to   the  local                                                                    
     communities,  I asked  ... my  local coastal  district,                                                                    
     the Mat-Su Borough,  to provide me, under  a Freedom of                                                                    
     Information Act,  the impact of that  type of activity,                                                                    
     and they've not yet provided it  to me.  And, two, I've                                                                    
     asked that the Mat-Su Borough  also respond when I made                                                                    
     a  request for  a permit  standard that  would allow  a                                                                    
     citizen group  to determine whether  or not  the notice                                                                    
     requirement   that  is   required   under  the   Alaska                                                                    
     constitution  is being  met,  and that  be a  permanent                                                                    
     part  of  ...  their administrative  process  or  their                                                                    
     coastal  district  program,  and   they  have  not  yet                                                                    
     responded on that.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MS.  OLSON concluded  by saying  she didn't  feel this  issue had                                                               
been looked at in its entirety, and asked that members do so.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Number 0040                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MIKE MILLIGAN  told members  his comments would  be of  a general                                                               
nature.   He noted that  he'd served  on the borough  assembly in                                                               
Kodiak.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
TAPE 03-34, SIDE A                                                                                                            
Number 0001                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR.  MILLIGAN recalled  that through  working  with coastal  zone                                                               
management,  [the assembly]  was able  to craft  a solution  that                                                               
enabled  them  to express  how  they  wanted to  see  oil-related                                                               
development occur in the borough.  He said:                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     From that, we were able  to set various parameters, not                                                                    
     the least  of which was how  we wanted to tax  oil.  We                                                                    
     were able  to work with  industry, and our  ... borough                                                                    
     mayor  at   the  time  eventually  got   on  the  outer                                                                    
     continental  shelf council  and became  a chairman  for                                                                    
     Arctic  Power.   So I  think ...  there seems  to be  a                                                                    
     predilection that there is  some development that's not                                                                    
     occurring  because of  regulations.   My  view is  that                                                                    
     development occurs  when the  regulations are  good and                                                                    
     adhered to.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     I  see   no  advantage  for  resource   development  in                                                                    
     decreasing   the   power   of  local   governments   to                                                                    
     participate in  this process.   If you were to  look at                                                                    
     an  area  that's  overregulated,   ...  that  would  be                                                                    
     Europe.   And if you go  look at Europe right  now, you                                                                    
     look at the  environmental regulations, particularly in                                                                    
     regards  to timber,  and  you will  see  a much  higher                                                                    
     level of  regulation.  We  are not timbering  right now                                                                    
     because of markets.  If you  go to Fairbanks, you go to                                                                    
     Anchorage, and  even probably  Juneau -  certainly here                                                                    
     in Kodiak, you can go to  Spenard's, you can go to Home                                                                    
     Depot - you  can buy European forest  products in those                                                                    
     stores right  here in  Alaska.   You can't  buy Alaskan                                                                    
     products.   And it's  not because of  regulations; it's                                                                    
     because of markets.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     If you  want this  resource development to  occur, then                                                                    
     you need  to look at  ways to develop  those resources,                                                                    
     ways  that are  happening through  the [Alaska  Science                                                                    
     and Technology Foundation].  Do  not circumvent ... the                                                                    
     role of local government;  ... I strongly encourage you                                                                    
     to keep local government involved in this matrix.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Number 0248                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BOB  SHAVELSON,  Executive  Director, Cook  Inlet  Keeper,  who'd                                                               
testified  at  the  previous hearing,  added  that  the  timeline                                                               
provided  in  the  materials  circulated  by  the  administration                                                               
doesn't  appear to  provide any  conditions for  an environmental                                                               
impact statement (EIS), which likely  would be required under the                                                               
National  Environmental  Policy  Act  (NEPA)  for  such  sweeping                                                               
changes  to the  state's program.   He  said this  implicates not                                                               
only the zero fiscal note  attached to this legislation, but also                                                               
the timeline for implementation.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR.  SHAVELSON noted  that  his organization  has  more than  500                                                               
members  throughout Southcentral  Alaska.   He expressed  concern                                                               
that the bill  will deal a significant blow  to local communities                                                               
that seek  to have some  type of  local oversight with  regard to                                                               
local-resource decisions.   Section 14  of the bill will  make it                                                               
virtually  impossible for  a local  coastal district  to have  in                                                               
place  an enforceable  policy that  doesn't  conflict with  state                                                               
criteria  or  law;  thus  it   will  disenfranchise  those  local                                                               
communities from regulating their resources.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  SHAVELSON expressed  hope  that  in order  to  truly get  an                                                               
understanding  of  the  effects of  this  legislation,  committee                                                               
members will ask the administration  to come forward with a dozen                                                               
or so examples  of enforceable policies, based  on specific facts                                                               
and  related to  coastal districts,  that would  "sustain through                                                               
the very  convoluted and legalistic  criteria that's laid  out in                                                               
Section 14."                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Number 0438                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BRECK   TOSTEVIN,  Assistant   Attorney  General,   Environmental                                                               
Section,   Civil  Division   (Anchorage),   Department  of   Law,                                                               
responded to  Mr. Shavelson with  regard to the necessity  for an                                                               
EIS.  He stated:                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     It's our  understanding on  this legislation  that that                                                                    
     would not be required, that  ... these changes would be                                                                    
     done  incrementally  as  routine plan  changes.    They                                                                    
     would  be reviewed  by ...  the federal  NOAA [National                                                                    
     Oceanic  and Atmospheric  Administration] agency,  OCRM                                                                    
     [Office of Ocean and  Coastal Resource Management], and                                                                    
     that it would not require that kind of delay.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS. RUTHERFORD added:                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     I  would  note  that  in   the  third  year  after  the                                                                    
     Department of  Natural Resources does  the promulgation                                                                    
     of  new statewide  standards  and  the following  year,                                                                    
     during which the local plans  are updated, ... there is                                                                    
     a third  year identified  for working the  OCRM process                                                                    
     as well.   And we  will be proceeding  incrementally on                                                                    
     those  sort of  mundane changes  that are  already laid                                                                    
     out and  effective immediately, with OCRM,  during that                                                                    
     time as well.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Number 0534                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KERTTULA asked  whether OCRM  has stated  that it                                                               
will be  a routine plan change  and that there won't  be anything                                                               
more onerous required for the state.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR. TOSTEVIN replied:                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     We've had  discussions with OCRM.   They ...  can't, at                                                                    
     this point, ... guarantee that  ... it's a routine plan                                                                    
     change  or   a  minor  amendment.     But  they're  not                                                                    
     indicating  that  this  is  the  kind  of,  quote,  new                                                                    
     program  -  a  wholesale   revision  -  that  would  be                                                                    
     triggered  under the  prior version.   So  ... I  think                                                                    
     that the  [word] that we're  getting from them  is that                                                                    
     this is going to be much  more of [an] amendment of the                                                                    
     current program  or routine plan change,  as opposed to                                                                    
     a wholesale reapproval of a new plan.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KERTTULA asked,  however,  whether  OCRM in  fact                                                               
won't be able  to give that kind of guarantee  until it sees what                                                               
the legislature  does with this.   She said she'd barely  made it                                                               
through  [the new  proposed CS],  and surmised  that it  had only                                                               
reached Washington, D.C., the previous night.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MS. RUTHERFORD responded:                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     That  is  correct. ...  We  really  don't know.    And,                                                                    
     frankly,  what my  expectation is,  is  that ...  since                                                                    
     we're not changing the structure  of the program - that                                                                    
     fundamentally the  districts will continue and  ... the                                                                    
     basic shape  of the  program will  continue -  that ...                                                                    
     that  will be  routine program  changes. ...  But I  do                                                                    
     think that  as the  department and the  districts begin                                                                    
     to  rewrite the  standards, ...  there will  be a  more                                                                    
     substantive review  by OCRM. ... And  whether that ends                                                                    
     up  being routine  or  not will  be  determined by  the                                                                    
     federal OCRM.   But  we have built  in time  to address                                                                    
     that as well, as part of the process.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Number 0703                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  PAUL SEATON,  Alaska State  Legislature, referred                                                               
to Section 14  and said he is hard-pressed to  figure out whether                                                               
any  local  enforceable  policies  can   be  written.    He  also                                                               
expressed concern  that local ordinances  that are  adopted won't                                                               
be able to be  enforced.  He said it seems  there will be [major]                                                               
structural impacts upon the coastal zone.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR. TOSTEVIN suggested  looking at the big picture as  far as the                                                               
ordinances and said:                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     This  legislation   does  not  affect  the   powers  of                                                                    
     municipalities  to enact  zoning ...  within their  own                                                                    
     boundaries.    They have  that  right  now, the  zoning                                                                    
     authority.   There's actually a  savings clause  in the                                                                    
     CS that says  this doesn't affect ...  the zoning power                                                                    
     of Title 29, municipalities or boroughs. ...                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     With respect  to the coastal program,  what the coastal                                                                    
     program does  is allow  municipalities or  boroughs ...                                                                    
     and [Coastal  Resource Service Areas  (CRSAs)], coastal                                                                    
     districts, to  enact ... enforceable policies  to apply                                                                    
     to the state where  they wouldn't ordinarily apply, ...                                                                    
     and also to the  federal government where they wouldn't                                                                    
     ordinarily apply.  So the  legislation ... is requiring                                                                    
     that  to impose  those additional  enforceable policies                                                                    
     that meet ... those tests in ... Section 14.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Number 0860                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked whether  it's the case, however, that                                                               
the  requirements  in  Section   14  preclude  almost  any  local                                                               
enforceable policies.  He requested  that the administration come                                                               
forward  before   the  next  hearing   with  perhaps   six  local                                                               
enforceable policies  from any coastal  district that  would meet                                                               
the criteria in the bill.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS. RUTHERFORD replied:                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
     We'll be glad  to do that.  And I  know that there have                                                                    
     been other  districts that have suggested  that ... one                                                                    
     of  the  most  helpful   exercises  ...  might  be  for                                                                    
     Department  of Natural  Resources  to identify  problem                                                                    
     enforceable  policies within  ... the  various district                                                                    
     plans.   And I think  that that  might be a  useful ...                                                                    
     exercise,  and I  think that  the department's  looking                                                                    
     seriously  at that.    We'll be  glad  to develop  some                                                                    
     examples.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     I   might  note,   though,  ...   it's   a  matter   of                                                                    
     perspective. ... I  still get a lot of  comments from a                                                                    
     lot  of   the  development  community  that   they  are                                                                    
     concerned  about how  broad this  is. ...  The language                                                                    
     here, in  their opinion, is  too broad.   And literally                                                                    
     they've said  that it's large  enough to drive  a truck                                                                    
     through, whereas the districts  are saying it's smaller                                                                    
     than  a breadbox  and nothing  can be  approved through                                                                    
     it.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     The reality  is that I think  ... it is in  balance.  I                                                                    
     think  that it  does  limit a  duplication of  existing                                                                    
     standards  ...  and  it  does   require  ...  that  the                                                                    
     drafting of  the new enforceable policies  be done with                                                                    
     an eye  towards more  prescriptive and more  precise --                                                                    
     and be  more substantiated.   But I think  it certainly                                                                    
     does  allow for  them, and  we'll try  to show  that to                                                                    
     you.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Number 1002                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
JACK CUSHING, Mayor, City of  Homer, informed members that he has                                                               
been  on the  Alaska  Coastal Policy  Council representing  lower                                                               
Cook Inlet  since about  1996.   A civil  engineer, he  said he'd                                                               
worked  on  the  Alyeska  pipeline   and  the  Northwest  Alaskan                                                               
pipeline during the planning phases.  He told members:                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     I'm afraid  what's happening here is  you're opening up                                                                    
     a bigger can  of worms than what you  might be solving.                                                                    
     I  think that  the program  ...  was up  and going  and                                                                    
     smooth after  years of work on  it, and I think  by the                                                                    
     time  you get  thing  rewritten, you're  going to  find                                                                    
     that you've ... opened up a  whole lot of new doors and                                                                    
     it's   going  to   be   ready   almost  for   immediate                                                                    
     modification just about  the time it takes  to get this                                                                    
     to where we are right now.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     I  think  we're  going   to  possibly  be  jeopardizing                                                                    
     funding during  this interim time,  just in  the manner                                                                    
     we're talking about.  If  nothing else, the elimination                                                                    
     of  the  Alaska  Coastal  Policy  Council:    that  was                                                                    
     perceived   by  the   people  of   the   state  as   an                                                                    
     intermediary  board  to  go  to,  during  the  petition                                                                    
     process, that  had elected  citizens on  it as  well as                                                                    
     the administrative folks.  And  I think a lot of people                                                                    
     held  off  going into  court  just  because they  felt,                                                                    
     well, ...  if they  had a  chance to  go by  these nine                                                                    
     elected  officials and  they  heard  what the  comments                                                                    
     were, they  got their input,  that ... they  could live                                                                    
     with the determination that was made.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     When I looked  at the number of  projects that actually                                                                    
     got   stopped,  that   got   turned   down,  ...   it's                                                                    
     pathetically few.   And the  few that did get  input at                                                                    
     the  coastal policy  council level,  I think,  came out                                                                    
     better for it.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Number 1155                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
LISA  VON  BARGEN,  Community &  Economic  Development,  City  of                                                               
Valdez,  thanked   [Ms.  Rutherford]   and  others  at   DNR  for                                                               
considering comments in reworking the  proposed CS.  However, she                                                               
expressed concern  with Section  39, page 19,  subsection (2)(C),                                                               
"home rule and  first class cities of the  unorganized borough or                                                               
within  boroughs  that  do  not   exercise  planning  and  zoning                                                               
authority".  She  suggested it is vague as to  whether that means                                                               
"home rule  and first  class cities  that do  not or  do exercise                                                               
planning and  zoning authority".   Thus she asked that  after the                                                               
words "unorganized  borough" there be  a comma added and  that it                                                               
then read:   "or within home  rule and first class  cities within                                                               
boroughs  that do  not exercise  planning and  zoning authority".                                                               
She thanked participants for their hard work.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
[Chair Fate called  upon Lawrence Widmark and  June Kegnan, who'd                                                               
signed  up  to  testify  at  the Sitka  LIO,  but  there  was  no                                                               
response.]                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Number 1287                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
NANCY HILLSTRAND, Pioneer Alaskan  Fisheries, spoke in opposition                                                               
to HB 191.  She told members:                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     I think that it's time  that we stopped being afraid of                                                                    
     regulations that  give us  some structure  in planning.                                                                    
     We're in  business.   We've been  a corporation  for 40                                                                    
     years here  in Alaska.   And  the structure  and delays                                                                    
     and all the different stopgaps  that allow us to run as                                                                    
     a business  have saved us from  making extremely costly                                                                    
     mistakes.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     And  HB  191  takes  the  crucial  oversight  of  local                                                                    
     communities out of the democratic  process.  And I just                                                                    
     wonder why  this administration is afraid  of a healthy                                                                    
     tension of democracy.   It just seems  as though that's                                                                    
     what we're looking at here. ...                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     Our   corporation  relies   on  policy   that  sustains                                                                    
     fisheries.   Habitat sustains fish.   And the community                                                                    
     and  most   other  coastal  communities  rely   on  the                                                                    
     oversight needed from this policy  to create a level of                                                                    
     planning to  minimize "oops."   "Oops" is when  we make                                                                    
     costly mistakes  because of lack of  ... conscientious,                                                                    
     meaningful debate.   "Oops" causes  extremely expensive                                                                    
     restoration.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     And I wonder:  are we  willing to be responsible to pay                                                                    
     this price  in the future?   Thank heavens  for delays,                                                                    
     because  it's  really important  for  us  to have  good                                                                    
     debate and good,  conscientious oversight, because that                                                                    
     way, we  won't have to  pay in the  future.  And  so, I                                                                    
     thank you very kindly, and I'm against [HB] 191.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Number 1380                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MARV SMITH,  Coastal Zone Coordinator, Lake  & Peninsula Borough,                                                               
thanked Ms.  Rutherford and  the DNR staff  for listening  to and                                                               
incorporating  earlier testimony.   However,  he voiced  concerns                                                               
with Section  14, specifically, the  ability for  local districts                                                               
to have  some control  over how they  implement changes  in their                                                               
plans.  He said it seems DNR  still has too much control over how                                                               
that  can  happen  effectively.   Referring  to  sub-subparagraph                                                               
(2)(C)(i),  he  therefore   suggested  "demonstrated"  should  be                                                               
changed back to "identified".                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR. SMITH turned  attention to Section 22 and the  90 days to get                                                               
a coastal consistency review completed.  He asked:                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     If we  ... do not have  all the information we  need to                                                                    
     effectively do  a consistency review, is  that 90 days'                                                                    
     clock  still  [ticking]?   Will  ...  the  clock  stop?                                                                    
     Because if  that's the  case, then  we'll be  forced to                                                                    
     [be]  inconsistent with  the  consistency  review.   We                                                                    
     just need to  know:  the 90-day rule, is  it from start                                                                    
     to finish or whatever?   It's vague in how it's worded;                                                                    
     I think it should be  clarified a little better in that                                                                    
     category because it could make  ... far more ability of                                                                    
     us to do a better job.   If we've got a good product to                                                                    
     begin with and we can  do a good consistency review, we                                                                    
     like to do those.  And we  want to do them on time, and                                                                    
     we agree with the  administration's policies on getting                                                                    
     them  done timely  in  all manner,  and  we try,  every                                                                    
     effort we can, to do that.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     Also, another concern  ... is that if we do  have to do                                                                    
     all  these plans  and go  through the  public hearings,                                                                    
     ... the  recent budget cuts [are]  going to drastically                                                                    
     affect  our ability  to  do them  in  a timely  manner.                                                                    
     Just  going  to  places  like Chignik,  ...  from  King                                                                    
     Salmon  it's  a  $500  plane  ticket  for  one  person;                                                                    
     additionally, if  you go to  the northern parts  of our                                                                    
     borough where  you [have] to charter  an airplane, it's                                                                    
     almost a thousand  dollars. ... You can fly  to ... the                                                                    
     Lower 48 cheaper than you  can fly ... to some portions                                                                    
     of our borough  to make these meetings.   So it's going                                                                    
     to be very costly [for] us to do that.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Number 1547                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR.  SMITH referred  to discussion  in  a previous  hearing.   He                                                               
asked that instead  of [districts] having to  rewrite their plans                                                               
completely, time  should be taken  to help them identify  what is                                                               
needed to  make the plans  meet the needs of  the administration.                                                               
He suggested this would be much more effective.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Number 1576                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
JOHN  OSCAR,  Program  Director,  Ceñaliulriit  Coastal  Resource                                                               
Service  Area Board,  who'd testified  at  the previous  hearing,                                                               
referred to  Section 29  and questioned  the relationship  of the                                                               
state constitution to these bills.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     Where the  federal government requires  equal treatment                                                                    
     in   the    coastal   zone   communities,    only   the                                                                    
     municipalities  in these  bills can  be represented  in                                                                    
     the  makeup of  [the proposed]  Alaska Coastal  Program                                                                    
     Evaluation  Council.     If  the  traditional,  primary                                                                    
     governments  are to  be included  in these  bills, does                                                                    
     this  also  provide  the  state's  recognition  in  the                                                                    
     existence of these traditional governments?                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     Two,  would  these   traditional  governments  be  also                                                                    
     considered  as  affected  parties?    And,  third,  ...                                                                    
     there's no fiscal  note attached with these  bills.  It                                                                    
     will  also  cost the  state  hundreds  of thousands  of                                                                    
     dollars to  provide for the  rewrite of all  33 coastal                                                                    
     districts' [plans]  in Alaska.  We  are already [short]                                                                    
     of funds.   But  how is the  state going  to adequately                                                                    
     provide for these public hearings?                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Number 1674                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
DANIEL BEVINGTON, Coastal District Coordinator, Kenai Peninsula                                                                 
Borough, told members:                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     The  borough has  a  long history  of  support for  its                                                                    
     coastal program;  it goes back  more than  two decades.                                                                    
     We've found  that the coordinated review  of permitting                                                                    
     under the ACMP  has helped us manage  our resources and                                                                    
     expedite  development,  which benefits  the  applicant,                                                                    
     our  communities,  ... and  the  environment.   A  good                                                                    
     example of this  is the Kenai gas  pipeline that's well                                                                    
     underway.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     The  legislation  asserts  that  the  local  government                                                                    
     should  exert   its  own  coastal   management  control                                                                    
     through planning and  zoning powers.  At  this time, it                                                                    
     is our view that this  would add an unneeded complexity                                                                    
     and  duplication,  and  ultimately slow  down  valuable                                                                    
     economic   development  opportunities   throughout  the                                                                    
     borough.  We also concur  with the comments made by ...                                                                    
     Lake & Peninsula Borough.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     One  crucial  aspect  of  the   bill  proposal  is  the                                                                    
     elimination  of  local  district  review  of  oil-spill                                                                    
     prevention  and  contingency  plans.   Also,  the  bill                                                                    
     removes  the district  from  reviews  of federal  outer                                                                    
     continental shelf  [OCS] plans.   On this  first point,                                                                    
     the lower Cook Inlet has  ... [a] significant amount of                                                                    
     activity requiring oil-spill ...  plans.  And presently                                                                    
     the district  reviews all those plans  and participates                                                                    
     when it's appropriate.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     On the  second point,  a great  area of  federal waters                                                                    
     occurs  within the  boundaries of  the Kenai  Peninsula                                                                    
     Borough  in lower  Cook Inlet,  and  the activities  in                                                                    
     that  area could  very  well  affect and  significantly                                                                    
     impact   the   resources   and   ...   ultimately   the                                                                    
     [socioeconomic] well-being of our communities.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     So the  issue of  promoting economic  development while                                                                    
     balancing  development  interests  with  our  long-term                                                                    
     community  interests is  a  complex  ... subject  which                                                                    
     demands  meaningful  involvement   of  our  communities                                                                    
     across  the  state  of   Alaska,  including  the  local                                                                    
     districts. ...                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Number 1786                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. BEVINGTON continued:                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     At a  minimum, the  bill should  assure that  the local                                                                    
     district  has  a  seat  at   the  table  for  oil-spill                                                                    
     contingency plans  and federal outer  continental shelf                                                                    
     plans.  ...   Also,  we're  very  concerned   with  the                                                                    
     elimination  of   the  structure  under   the  [Alaska]                                                                    
     Coastal Policy Council structure,  and believe that ...                                                                    
     DNR should  adopt some representative body  which would                                                                    
     allow that  type of involvement  of our  communities in                                                                    
     the planning for the Alaska Coastal Management Plan.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Number 1825                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF asked that Mr. Bevington call his office to                                                                 
talk about this.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Number 1845                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FATE closed public testimony.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Number 1865                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. RUTHERFORD referred to concern about the DNR process and                                                                    
said:                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     First  of all,  I want  to assure  people that  DNR has                                                                    
     probably the most expansive  public process imbedded in                                                                    
     statute, in  regulation, and  the [resultant]  case law                                                                    
     of   any   other   agency.     It   exceeds   the   APA                                                                    
     [Administrative  Procedure Act]  that is  in place  for                                                                    
     most other  agencies.   And I might  note that  ... the                                                                    
     commissioner   of   DNR  regularly   balances   various                                                                    
     interests  as  part  of  all  their  areawide  planning                                                                    
     exercises that they do.   And that is something that is                                                                    
     inherent in DNR's function. ...  It's imbedded in their                                                                    
     area-planning    exercises,   in    their   special-use                                                                    
     designation  development;  it's   imbedded  in  forest-                                                                    
     timber sales, land sales, and  oil and gas lease sales.                                                                    
     So  this  balancing  of  interests  that  involves  the                                                                    
     public process  will be part  of what DNR does  as they                                                                    
     proceed [under] the new legislation.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     Another  thing  that I  want  to  note is,  this  bill,                                                                    
     again, does  not eliminate the districts'  place at the                                                                    
     table.  They will be at  the table.  They will have due                                                                    
     deference on  their enforceable  policies.   And that's                                                                    
     something  that  the  districts  need  to  hear  again,                                                                    
     because it's important to them and we recognize that.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Number 1938                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. RUTHERFORD continued:                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     The   other   thing   that  I   think   is   important:                                                                    
     Mr. Shavelson  made a  reference  to  the EIS  process.                                                                    
     One of  the things  that I  think will  bring a  lot of                                                                    
     comfort to  the Office of [Ocean  and] Coastal Resource                                                                    
     Management ... is  the fact that under  this revised CS                                                                    
     that   replaced  the   original  [HB]   191,  statewide                                                                    
     standards   and   local   enforceable   policies   will                                                                    
     continue.     And  those  statewide  standards   are  a                                                                    
     comprehensive body  of standards.  Under  the old bill,                                                                    
     they were  ... eliminated, and  that would have  been a                                                                    
     major concern to OCRM. ...                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     On the  funding:  the  reason there's not  fiscal notes                                                                    
     associated with this bill is  there are special project                                                                    
     monies  that are  available to  the coastal  management                                                                    
     program,  and they  will simply  be  refocused to  help                                                                    
     support the  districts as they  rewrite their  plans or                                                                    
     review their plans and  rewrite their local enforceable                                                                    
     policies.   Again,  hopefully, the  department will  be                                                                    
     helping  them  to   identify  those  truly  problematic                                                                    
     enforceable policies,  instead of  just having  to sort                                                                    
     of  pick up  the rock  and see  whether it's  the right                                                                    
     one.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Number 1998                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. RUTHERFORD continued:                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     Regarding the  90-day clock, someone asked  whether ...                                                                    
     there  was some  additional  opportunity. ...  It is  a                                                                    
     comprehensive   timeframe,  except   if  there   is  an                                                                    
     elevation. ... It does provide  for a 45-day elevation.                                                                    
     However, this has  been an issue that  has been focused                                                                    
     on by Alaska Municipal League,  and we're trying to see                                                                    
     whether  or not  there is  a way  to provide  them some                                                                    
     comfort.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     I  would note  something, however,  that under  ... the                                                                    
     federal law there are already  timeframes in place that                                                                    
     very closely mimic  what was in this bill,  now, in the                                                                    
     new sections,  that for federal  activities there  is a                                                                    
     60-day  clock:   if,  in fact,  the  state doesn't  act                                                                    
     within that ...  60-day ... clock, then  an activity is                                                                    
     presumed  consistent.   ...  For   federally  regulated                                                                    
     activities, it's  a six-month clock.   And, frankly, 80                                                                    
     percent  of all  projects that  are reviewed  under the                                                                    
     coastal  management  consistency   review  program  are                                                                    
     subject  to one  of these  ...  federal clocks.   So  I                                                                    
     think that's ... another important piece to it.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     And, finally,  ... I want  to assure Dan  Bevington and                                                                    
     the  Kenai Peninsula  Borough that  ... the  program as                                                                    
     it's currently  laid out  in this  bill does  allow for                                                                    
     OCS  enforceable policies.    It's one  of the  primary                                                                    
     concerns of  this administration, and it  is protected.                                                                    
     And we  want to  assure you that  ... those  [kinds] of                                                                    
     enforceable policies are allowed.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Number 2082                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA  expressed concern that although  the OCS                                                               
may be included,  there is a definite change with  regard to "how                                                               
we're  dealing with  DEC  standards"; that  the  program is  only                                                               
continued for a  couple of years while everything else  is put in                                                               
place;  and about  the language  that says  "we continue  only if                                                               
it's not inconsistent with the  Act."  She highlighted the number                                                               
of issues remaining.  [HB 191 was held over.]                                                                                   

Document Name Date/Time Subjects