Legislature(1995 - 1996)
1996-03-13 House Journal
Full Journal pdf1996-03-13 House Journal Page 3115 HB 428 The following was read the second time: HOUSE BILL NO. 428 An Act giving notice of and approving a lease-purchase agreement for construction and operation of a correctional facility in the Third Judicial District, and setting conditions and limitations on the facility's construction and operation. with the: Journal Page JUD RPT CS(JUD) NT 3DP 2DNP 1NR 2625 3 FISCAL NOTES (DOT, COR, ADM) 2626 ZERO FISCAL NOTE (REV) 2626 FIN RPT CS(FIN) NT 4DP 3DNP 2NR 2958 FISCAL NOTE (COR) 2959 ZERO FISCAL NOTE (REV) 2/5/96 2959 **The presence of Representatives Finkelstein and Hanley was noted. Representative Vezey moved and asked unanimous consent that the following committee substitute be adopted in lieu of the original bill: CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 428(FIN) An Act relating to the authority of the Department of Corrections to contract for facilities for the confinement and care of prisoners, and annulling a regulation of the Department of Corrections that limits the purposes for which an agreement with a private agency may be entered into; and giving notice of and approving a lease- purchase agreement for the design, construction, and operation of a correctional facility in the Third Judicial District, and setting conditions and limitations on the facility's design, construction, and operation. There being no objection, it was so ordered. 1996-03-13 House Journal Page 3116 HB 428 Amendment No. 1 was offered by Representative Therriault: Page 1, line 6 (title amendment): Delete "in the Third Judicial District" Page 3, line 5: Delete "in the Third Judicial District" Representative Therriault moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 1 be adopted. There being no objection, it was so ordered, and the new title appears below: CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 428(FIN) am An Act relating to the authority of the Department of Corrections to contract for facilities for the confinement and care of prisoners, and annulling a regulation of the Department of Corrections that limits the purposes for which an agreement with a private agency may be entered into; and giving notice of and approving a lease- purchase agreement for the design, construction, and operation of a correctional facility, and setting conditions and limitations on the facilitys design, construction, and operation. Amendment No. 2 was offered by Representative Mulder: Page 3, lines 3 - 4: Delete "with a private third-party contractor" Page 3, line 7, following "(b)": Insert "and (c)" Page 3, following line 27: Insert a new subsection to read: "(c) The lease-purchase agreement entered into under this section shall provide for (1) an agreement under which the correctional facility is designed, constructed, and, except for services to prisoners described in (2) of this subsection, operated by a private third-party contractor; the agreement described in this subsection is made for the purpose of 1996-03-13 House Journal Page 3117 HB 428 acquiring, improving, and maintaining the correctional facility structure under AS36.30.085(b), and is exclusive of one or more contracts for the custody, care, and discipline of prisoners housed in the facility as may be authorized by AS33.30.031(a)(1) and (3); (2) an agreement, separate from the agreement described in (1) of this subsection, under which a private third-party contractor or agency operates the facility by providing for custody, care, and discipline services for persons held by the commissioner of corrections under authority of state law; the operating agreement described in this paragraph shall (A) for its initial period, not to exceed five years, be entered into with a private third-party contractor that is the same person as the third-party contractor described in (1) of this subsection; and (B) for the duration of the period of the lease-purchase agreement, be rebid or reoffered at intervals of not more than five years and may be entered into with a contractor or agency other than the person described in (A) of this paragraph." Reletter the following subsections accordingly. Representative Mulder moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 2 be adopted. Representative Brown objected. Amendment to Amendment No. 2 was offered by Representative Brown: Under Page 3, following line 27 of the amendment: Delete "(c) The lease-purchase agreement entered into under this section shall provide for (1) an agreement under which the correctional facility is designed, constructed, and, except for services to prisoners described in (2) of this subsection, operated by a private third-party contractor; the agreement described in this subsection is made for the purpose of acquiring, improving, and maintaining the correctional facility structure 1996-03-13 House Journal Page 3118 HB 428 under AS36.30.085(b), and is exclusive of one or more contracts for the custody, care, and discipline of prisoners housed in the facility as may be authorized by AS33.30.031(a)(1) and (3); (2) an agreement, separate from the agreement described in (1) of this subsection, under which a private third-party contractor or agency operates the facility by providing for custody, care, and discipline services for persons held by the commissioner of corrections under authority of state law; the operating agreement described in this paragraph shall (A) for its initial period, not to exceed five years, be entered into with a private third-party contractor that is the same person as the third-party contractor described in (1) of this subsection; and (B) for the duration of the period of the lease-purchase agreement, be rebid or reoffered at intervals of not more than five years and may be entered into with a contractor or agency other than the person described in (A) of this paragraph." Insert "(c) The lease-purchase agreement entered into under this section must provide for (1) an agreement under which the correctional facility is designed and constructed by a private third-party contractor; the agreement described in this subsection is made for the purpose of acquiring the correctional facility within the meaning of AS36.30.085(b), and is exclusive of one or more contracts for the custody, care, and discipline of prisoners housed in the facility as may be authorized by AS33.30.031(a)(1) and (3); (2) an agreement, separate from the agreement described in (1) of this subsection, under which a private third-party contractor or agency operates the facility by providing for the custody, care, and disciplinary services for persons held by the commissioner under authority of state law, and maintains the correctional facility; the operating agreement described in this paragraph shall be rebid or reoffered at intervals of not more than five years." Representative Brown moved and asked unanimous consent that the amendment to Amendment No. 2 be adopted. Representative Mulder objected. 1996-03-13 House Journal Page 3119 HB 428 The question being: Shall the amendment to Amendment No. 2 be adopted? The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 428(FIN) am Second Reading Amendment to Amendment No. 2 YEAS: 12 NAYS: 24 EXCUSED: 2 ABSENT: 2 Yeas: Brice, Brown, Davies, Elton, Finkelstein, Grussendorf, Kubina, Long, Mackie, Navarre, Robinson, Willis Nays: Austerman, Barnes, Bunde, G.Davis, Foster, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Kott, Martin, Moses, Mulder, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey, Williams Excused: B.Davis, Nicholia Absent: Masek, Ogan And so, the amendment to Amendment No. 2 was not adopted. Representative Toohey placed a call of the House. The call was satisfied. Objection to Amendment No. 2 was withdrawn. There being no further objection, Amendment No. 2 was adopted. Amendment No. 3 was offered by Representative Mulder: Page 3, line 22, following "capacity;": Insert a new paragraph to read: "(3) may not be constructed for operation by a third-party contractor under the authority given in this Act unless, before commencing construction planning, the commissioner of corrections first evaluates the proposed facility and the evaluation demonstrates that operation of the correctional facility described in (a) of this section will achieve a saving to the state of at least 10 percent when compared 1996-03-13 House Journal Page 3120 HB 428 to the estimated average cost per day to operate all state correctional facilities by the Department of Corrections; for purposes of this paragraph, the estimated average cost per day to operate all state correctional facilities is the amount determined under the formula in use on the effective date of this Act by which the Department of Corrections computes and determines the average daily rate at which to invoice the United States government for the care and custody of a federal prisoner held in a state correctional facility;" Renumber the following paragraph accordingly. Representative Mulder moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 3 be adopted. Representative Brown objected. Amendment to Amendment No. 3 was offered by Representative Brown: Under paragraph (3) of the amendment, following operation by: Delete "a third-party contractor under the authority given in this Act unless, before commencing construction planning, the commissioner of corrections first evaluates the proposed facility and the evaluation demonstrates that operation of the correctional facility described in (a) of this section will achieve a saving to the state of at least 10 percent when compared to the estimated average cost per day to operate all state correctional facilities by the Department of Corrections; for purposes of this paragraph, the estimated average cost per day to operate all state correctional facilities is the amount determined under the formula in use on the effective date of this Act by which the Department of Corrections computes and determines the average daily rate at which to invoice the United States government for the care and custody of a federal prisoner held in a state correctional facility;" Insert "a contractor under the authority given in this Act unless, before the commissioner of administration enters into a contract for operation of a facility under the authority given in this section, the contractor convincingly demonstrates to the commissioner of corrections that the contractor can (A) operate the facility and provide the services required by this section and in the proposed contract; and 1996-03-13 House Journal Page 3121 HB 428 (B) realize at least a five percent savings over the projected cost to the state if the state were to operate the facility and provide the service." Representative Brown moved and asked unanimous consent that the amendment to Amendment No. 3 be adopted. Representative Mulder objected. The Speaker invoked Section 102 of Masons Manual. The question being: Shall the amendment to Amendment No. 3 be adopted? The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 428(FIN) am Second Reading Amendment to Amendment No. 3 YEAS: 15 NAYS: 23 EXCUSED: 2 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Brice, Brown, Bunde, Davies, Elton, Finkelstein, Grussendorf, Kott, Kubina, Long, Mackie, Masek, Navarre, Robinson, Willis Nays: Austerman, Barnes, G.Davis, Foster, Green, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kohring, Martin, Moses, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey, Williams Excused: B.Davis, Nicholia Masek changed from "Nay" to "Yea". And so, the amendment to Amendment No. 3 was not adopted. Representative Mulder moved and asked unanimous consent to withdraw Amendment No. 3. There being no objection, it was so ordered. Representative Brown placed a call of the House and lifted the call. 1996-03-13 House Journal Page 3122 HB 428 Amendment No. 4 was offered by Representative Brice: Page 3, line 7, after "of (b)": Insert "and (c)" Page 3, following line 27: Insert a new subsection to read: "(c) In the evaluation of a bid submitted to construct and operate the correctional facility described in this section, the Department of Administration may give preference to a bid that pledges to employ only state residents." Reletter the following subsections accordingly. Representative Brice moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 4 be adopted. Representative Barnes objected. Amendment to Amendment No. 4 was offered by Representative Davies: Under subsection (c) of the amendment, following Administration may: Delete give preference to Insert provide incentive to the maker of and following to employ: Delete only and following residents: Insert as far as practicable Representative Davies moved and asked unanimous consent that the amendment to Amendment No. 4 be adopted. Representative Martin objected. 1996-03-13 House Journal Page 3123 HB 428 The question being: Shall the amendment to Amendment No. 4 be adopted? The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 428(FIN) am Second Reading Amendment to Amendment No. 4 YEAS: 33 NAYS: 5 EXCUSED: 2 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Austerman, Barnes, Brice, Brown, Bunde, Davies, G.Davis, Elton, Finkelstein, Foster, Green, Grussendorf, Hanley, Ivan, James, Kelly, Kott, Kubina, Long, Mackie, Masek, Moses, Navarre, Parnell, Phillips, Robinson, Rokeberg, Sanders, Therriault, Toohey, Vezey, Williams, Willis Nays: Kohring, Martin, Mulder, Ogan, Porter Excused: B.Davis, Nicholia Barnes changed from "Nay" to "Yea". Toohey changed from "Nay" to "Yea". Ivan changed from "Nay" to "Yea". Therriault changed from "Nay" to "Yea". Parnell changed from "Nay" to "Yea". Bunde changed from "Nay" to "Yea". Kott changed from "Nay" to "Yea". And so, the amendment to Amendment No. 4 was adopted. The question being: Shall Amendment No. 4 as amended be adopted? The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 428(FIN) am Second Reading Amendment No. 4 as amended YEAS: 23 NAYS: 15 EXCUSED: 2 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Austerman, Brice, Brown, Davies, Elton, Finkelstein, Green, Grussendorf, James, Kelly, Kott, Kubina, Long, Mackie, Masek, Moses, Navarre, Robinson, Sanders, Therriault, Vezey, Williams, Willis 1996-03-13 House Journal Page 3124 HB 428 Nays: Barnes, Bunde, G.Davis, Foster, Hanley, Ivan, Kohring, Martin, Mulder, Ogan, Parnell, Phillips, Porter, Rokeberg, Toohey Excused: B.Davis, Nicholia Ivan changed from "Yea" to "Nay". And so, Amendment No. 4 as amended was adopted. Amendment No. 5 was offered by Representative Finkelstein: Page 1, line 1 to page 4, line 24: Delete all material Insert "An Act providing for the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $148,500,000 for the purpose of paying the cost of design and construction of state correctional facilities; and providing for an effective date. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF ALASKA: * Section 1. For the purpose of paying the cost of design and construction of correctional facilities of the state, general obligation bonds of the state in the principal amount of not more than $148,500,000 shall be issued and sold. The full faith, credit, and resources of the state are pledged to the payment of the principal of and interest and redemption premium, if any, on the bonds. The bonds shall be issued under the provisions of AS37.15 as those provisions read at the time of issuance. * Sec. 2. If the issuance of the bonds is authorized by the qualified voters of the state, a special fund of the state to be known as the State Correctional Facility Construction Fund shall be established, to which shall be credited the proceeds of the sale of the bonds described in sec.1 of this Act except for the accrued interest and premiums. * Sec. 3. The amount of $148,500,000 is appropriated from the "State Correctional Facility Construction Fund" to the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities to be allocated among the 1996-03-13 House Journal Page 3125 HB 428 following projects in the amounts listed, which include the cost of issuance of the bonds, subject to reallocation between projects in accordance with AS37.07.080(e): (1)Palmer Correctional Center $ 13,050,000 (2)Hiland Mountain (Eagle River) Correctional Center 1,000,000 (3)Yukon-Kuskokwim (Bethel) Correctional Center 5,000,000 (4)Mat-Su Pretrial (Palmer) Correctional Center 6,000,000 (5)Fairbanks Correctional Facility 10,250,000 (6)Anchorage Criminal Justice Facility 60,000,000 (7)North Slope Borough (Barrow) Correctional Facility 15,000,000 (8)Lemon Creek (Juneau) Correctional Center 9,000,000 (9) Wildwood (Kenai) Correctional Center 29,200,000 * Sec. 4. If the issuance of the bonds is authorized by the qualified voters of the state, the cost of issuance of the bonds, included in the amount appropropriated by sec. 3 of this Act, may be paid by means of a net transaction by which the trustee of the bonds shall retain a part of the bond proceeds for this purpose. * Sec. 5. The amount withdrawn from the public facility planning fund for the purpose of advance planning for the improvements financed under this Act shall be reimbursed to the fund from the proceeds of the sale of bonds authorized by this Act. * Sec. 6. The unexpended and unobligated balance of the appropriation made in sec. 3 of this Act lapses under AS37.25.020 and is appropriated to the state bond committee to redeem bonds sold under the Act or to pay rebatable arbitrage if necessary. The amounts expended from the general fund to pay the principal, interest, and redemption premium on bonds issued under this Act shall be reimbursed to the general fund from the appropriation made under this section to the extent that the money is not needed to redeem the bonds. * Sec. 7. The question whether the bonds authorized in this Act are to be issued shall be submitted to the qualified voters of the state at the next general election and shall read substantially as follows: