Legislature(2011 - 2012)HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/14/2012 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HCR24 | |
| HB170 | |
| HB250 | |
| HCR23 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HCR 23 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 170 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HCR 24 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 250 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE BILL NO. 170
"An Act relating to municipal property tax exemptions
on residences of certain volunteer emergency services
personnel and the widows and widowers of volunteer
emergency services personnel; and providing for an
effective date."
1:45:57 PM
Vice-chair Fairclough MOVED to ADOPT proposed committee
substitute for HB 170, Work Draft 27-LS0562\T (Bullard,
3/12/12). There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
MICHAEL PASCHALL, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE ERIC FEIGE,
disclosed the Representative Feige was the Chief of the
Chickaloon Fire Department, and that Mr. Paschall was
Assistant Chief of the Rural Deltana Fire Department. He
discussed HB 170. He stated that the bill provided
incentives for recruitment and retention of volunteer
firefighters and emergency services volunteers.
Co-Chair Stoltze asked Mr. Paschall to discuss his
interaction with Representative Wilson.
Mr. Paschall explained that there were two significant
issues that were addressed in the last hearing on the bill.
He looked at page 1, lines 12 and 13. There was an
exemption added for taxes for service areas. Also, it was
unclear whether or not the exemption, if it was enacted by
a municipality, could be for less than $150,000. Therefore,
the language "up to $150,000" was added.
Co-Chair Stoltze noted there had been questions about
policy, but that significant technical issues were
addressed in the work draft.
Representative Gara wondered where the municipal option was
located in the work draft. Mr. Paschall pointed to page 1,
line 12, "may by ordinance be exempted."
1:49:10 PM
Representative Gara wondered why the municipalities were
not given the opportunity grant exemptions to firefighters
who were not volunteers. Mr. Paschall responded that the
purpose of the bill was to provide an incentive that might
entice someone to become a volunteer firefighter, emergency
services worker, or to retain an individual in either one
of those positions.
Representative Gara wondered whether there was a shortage
of volunteer firefighters. Mr. Paschall responded in the
affirmative. He elaborated that almost any fire chief in
the state would agree with him. He stated that there may be
situations and locations where there was not a shortage of
volunteer emergency workers. He pointed out that his
department's volunteer membership was at the highest it had
ever been, but when his department responds to a large
fire, they were short-handed.
Representative Gara felt that municipalities should also be
given the opportunity to incentivize paid firefighters. Mr.
Paschall replied that the intention of the bill was to
recruit volunteer firefighters, and did not object to the
option of including paid firefighters. Although, many paid
departments utilized a recall system in order to recall
paid firefighters in the event of a large fire.
1:53:53 PM
Vice-chair Fairclough noted that she had two sons that were
volunteer firefighters. She queried the estimated number of
volunteer firefighters in the state. Mr. Paschall responded
that the total number of volunteer firefighters in the
state was 4,000, which included volunteer emergency medical
services (EMS) providers that were part of a fire
department. He stressed that the records that were kept for
the fire departments included EMS volunteers. There were
approximately 250 fire departments, and 78 of those
departments were in municipalities that levy a property
tax.
Vice-chair Fairclough asked how many departments were in
the municipalities. Mr. Paschall answered that there were
78 municipal departments.
Vice-chair Fairclough queried the cost that would be
subtracted from the tax rolls. Mr. Paschall replied that
that information was not calculated for every department in
the state, because of the time associated with that
research. He stated that Legislative Research was contacted
for some information. However, the process to determine the
cost subtracted from the tax rolls would require examining
membership of each department and then digging through the
tax rolls for each municipality for every individual. Even
with that kind of research, the accuracy was not trusted
because of the name that the property ownership is often
listed under is often a spouse or other family member. He
stated that there was an analysis run in Girdwood, and
offered to provide that information.
1:56:50 PM
AT EASE
1:59:43 PM
RECONVENED
Vice-chair Fairclough queried the tax consequence of the
bill. She remarked that many middle class and middle aged
people were caught in the "crossfire" related to tax
exemptions, because that set of people were often dealt a
new tax burden of tax exemptions. She pointed out that
300,000 people in Anchorage may pick up the tax burden of
this proposed property tax exemption. She agreed that there
needed to be more volunteer firefighters in the state, but
remarked that the tax burden placed on municipalities
seemed heavy.
Representative Neuman looked at page 3, line 8. He
expressed concern regarding the payment of the fire
response pertaining to a fire that may take place over
multiple municipalities or boroughs. He specifically
wondered if the cost would be covered by the municipality
at a local controlled level. Mr. Paschall asked for a
restating of Representative Neuman's question.
Co-Chair Stoltze clarified that the question was related to
where the fire would be assessed: the fire service area,
the road service area, or the general taxation.
Mr. Paschall responded that the assessment would be on the
general taxation of the municipality.
Co-Chair Stoltze remarked that a municipality could, if it
had a fire service area, make it a policy that a volunteer
firefighter not be assessed up to $20,000 of the evaluation
of the fire service cost.
2:06:32 PM
Representative Wilson communicated that Fairbanks had a
$10,000 exemption for volunteer firefighters. That
definition of "volunteer firefighter" was provided by the
department fire chief. The fire chief that she spoke to
expressed discomfort, because he was made to determine the
difference between a "true volunteer" and "just volunteer."
Mr. Paschall responded that one standard across the state
might make it more difficult for rural areas to meet the
same standards as urban areas.
Representative Gara surmised, from Representative Wilson's
comments, that there must be an allowance in state law that
already granted an exemption. He wondered how the bill
changed the current law.
Vice-chair Fairclough read from state statute 18.15.250
"volunteer means that a person is an active volunteer of a
first responder service, a rescue service, an ambulance
service of a fire department that provides emergency
medical or rescue services as part of its duties." There
was no time requirement or additional requirement; the
person only had to be an active member.
Mr. Paschall responded to a question from Representative
Gara. He stated that there was a provision to allow
municipalities to exempt property tax up to either $10,000
or $20,000 under certain broad criteria.
2:10:20 PM
Vice-chair Fairclough remarked that the proposal was
"stackable" on other exemptions.
Representative Doogan felt that the problem with the bill
was the disallowance of inclusion of paid firefighters. He
remarked that once certain people were given financial
exemptions, the question was skewed regarding who would be
considered "volunteer." He stressed that once one person
applied for the exemption; everyone would want to apply for
the exemption. He felt that a determination of the full
cost of the proposal should be made. He was uncomfortable
with the bill as it was currently written.
Co-Chair Stoltze did not believe the cost could be
determined, because of the unknown pertaining to options of
the local governments.
Representative Wilson moved to amend the bill, page 1, line
13 insert the word "road" before the words "service areas."
Co-Chair Stoltze OBJECTED for the purpose discussion. He
explained that there were some areas in the state that were
considered unified road service areas.
Co-chair Stoltze removed his objection. There being NO
further OBJECTION, it was so ordered. Conceptual amendment
1 was ADOPTED.
Co-Chair Thomas told a personal story. He stated that he
spent four years on the borough assembly at a time when the
state was not paying the unfunded mandate. The borough
assemble sued the State of Alaska for not funding the
mandate. He furthered that during his first year in the
legislature, he proposed a bill that allowed the
municipalities to opt out in five years. He liked the idea
of exempting volunteers. He wondered if the volunteers
received any workers compensation if they were injured
during an emergency response.
2:17:31 PM
Mr. Paschall explained that workman's compensation in most
cases was provided by the volunteer departments.
Co-Chair Thomas had spoken to people from Unalaska, who
expressed concern regarding the tax burden placed on them.
Representative Neuman discussed complaints related to lack
of insurance. He hoped that the bill included the ability
for local control related to how benefits were dispersed.
He believed that the term "volunteer" was too broad. He
supported the legislation, but hoped for some expansion
regarding insurance and how a volunteer was defined.
Vice-chair Fairclough clarified that one of her boys was in
college and one was a volunteer firefighter. She pointed
out that volunteers were currently part of the training
ground for joining the firefighter's union setting. She
wondered if there would be less benefit by becoming a
unionized firefighter.
Co-Chair Stoltze WITHDREW objection to. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Work Draft 27-LS0562\T was ADOPTED as
amended.
Co-Chair Stoltze discussed the zero fiscal note from the
Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development.
Co-Chair Thomas MOVED to report CSHB 170(FIN) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CSHB 170(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with "no
recommendation" and with a new zero impact fiscal note from
the Department of Commerce, Community and Economic
Development.
2:24:03 PM
AT EASE
2:26:38 PM
RECONVENED
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Letters of Support HCR23.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HCR 23 |
| HCR23 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HCR 23 |
| HCR23 National Security Arctic Directive.PDF |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HCR 23 |
| HCR23 CAFP_brochure_PECA-eng.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HCR 23 |
| HCR23 ASRC, NANA Letter.PDF |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HCR 23 |
| HCR 23 LINKS to Backup Documents.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HCR 23 |
| Letter of Support Re State of Alaska HCR 23.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HCR 23 |
| HB250 DCCED-AEA- 031412-NEW Fiscal Note.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HB 250 |
| Letter to Rep.Doogan.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
SB 171 |