Sponsor Statement for HB 28

"An Act repealing the Alaska Coastal Management Program and the Alaska Coastal Policy Council, and making conforming amendments because of those repeals."

SPONSOR: Representative Gene Therriault

Alaska chose to participate in the federal voluntary Coastal Zone Management program by creating the Alaska Coastal Management Program (ACMP) approved by the Legislature in 1977. The ACMP is supported by federal and state matching funds and is designed as a "voice" for state and local interests to be addressed in decisions affecting the coastal areas.

Since 1977, there have been many state and federal laws such as the clean water act, spill prevention laws, and wetlands legislation affecting coastal districts diminishing the need for the ACMP. After 20 years of existence it is time for the Alaska State Legislature to determine whether the Coastal Zone Management program warrants Alaska's continued participation.

Concerns leading to the introduction of HB 28 include:

• The ACMP allows state agencies to require stipulations on permitted activities beyond the agencies' statutory authority.

• Some Coastal districts are not organized governments. They participate in the ACMP by forming Coastal Resource Service Areas(CRSA's). These quasi-governmental entities have no planning and zoning authority making them dependent upon state agencies to enforce the local plans.

• A purported benefit of the ACMP is the requirement of cooperation among those involved in the development of Alaska's coastal resources. However, the ACMP standards are vague and open to differing interpretations by the state agencies and local districts eventually leading to expensive elevation hearings and appeals.

For the past four years, as the Finance subcommittee chairman of two resource agencies' budgets, I have heard from administration officials, business representatives and constituents that in the effort to continue to reduce budgets, we must also limit the agencies' statutory responsibilities. The ACMP has been criticized for being a cumbersome, duplicative review process that, in theory, may have some benefits however, in practice, does not work as intended.

The ACMP deserves a thorough review by this Legislature to determine if the purported benefits outweigh the expensive and time-consuming process that evolved from Alaska's participation in this program.

revised 2/6/97