Legislature(2015 - 2016)BARNES 124
03/14/2016 01:00 PM House RESOURCES
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB247 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 247 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 247-TAX;CREDITS;INTEREST;REFUNDS;O & G
1:02:24 PM
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK announced that the only order of business is
HOUSE BILL NO. 247, "An Act relating to confidential information
status and public record status of information in the possession
of the Department of Revenue; relating to interest applicable to
delinquent tax; relating to disclosure of oil and gas production
tax credit information; relating to refunds for the gas storage
facility tax credit, the liquefied natural gas storage facility
tax credit, and the qualified in-state oil refinery
infrastructure expenditures tax credit; relating to the minimum
tax for certain oil and gas production; relating to the minimum
tax calculation for monthly installment payments of estimated
tax; relating to interest on monthly installment payments of
estimated tax; relating to limitations for the application of
tax credits; relating to oil and gas production tax credits for
certain losses and expenditures; relating to limitations for
nontransferable oil and gas production tax credits based on oil
production and the alternative tax credit for oil and gas
exploration; relating to purchase of tax credit certificates
from the oil and gas tax credit fund; relating to a minimum for
gross value at the point of production; relating to lease
expenditures and tax credits for municipal entities; adding a
definition for "qualified capital expenditure"; adding a
definition for "outstanding liability to the state"; repealing
oil and gas exploration incentive credits; repealing the
limitation on the application of credits against tax liability
for lease expenditures incurred before January 1, 2011;
repealing provisions related to the monthly installment payments
for estimated tax for oil and gas produced before January 1,
2014; repealing the oil and gas production tax credit for
qualified capital expenditures and certain well expenditures;
repealing the calculation for certain lease expenditures
applicable before January 1, 2011; making conforming amendments;
and providing for an effective date."
1:03:40 PM
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK opened public testimony on HB 247.
1:04:18 PM
DAVID HANSON stated he is testifying in support of HB 247 on
behalf of himself and his family. He said HB 247 needs to be
passed because the state cannot afford the existing system. As
was pointed out by Gunnar Knapp of the Institute for Social and
Economic Research (ISER), this coming year from oil production
taxes the state may only receive $12 million if the average oil
price is $35 per barrel, versus $1 billion in credit costs
without any changes. This system of credits has done much good,
but it has also gotten a bit out of control. The word on the
street is that some of it is being used to help companies get
out of bankruptcy. However, the real reason it needs to be
changed is that the state cannot afford it. The bill's fiscal
note needs to be reduced to match the legislature's budget
efforts. Large cuts are being made to all programs across the
board, which is necessary given the state's fiscal situation.
Monies required for this credit program transition are
speculative given that most things are confidential. The fiscal
note cost of $1 billion could probably be reduced to maybe $850
million. In his work as a businessman and in government he has
found that the more money set aside for something the more
certain it is that the money will be used. The legislature
never guaranteed the credits would be paid every year since they
were subject to annual appropriation. This program and its
fiscal note need to reflect the state's current budget
situation. Raising the [minimum tax] floor from 4 percent to 5
percent for companies under the program probably makes sense to
help the state's current budget situation. Mr. Hanson noted
that two arguments are used against this. One, many people say
that the oil industry is already paying royalties and [property]
taxes. But, he pointed out, the royalties pay for the use of
the oil and the property taxes pay for the use of the property
for facilities and are unrelated to the production tax. A
second argument he has heard is that the Alaska's oil tax regime
cannot keep being changed all the time because it makes for
instability. In essence, he noted, it should be remembered that
the oil industry itself wanted certain of the tax changes that
have happened in the last six years.
1:08:47 PM
JAKE JACOBSON said he is testifying on behalf of himself and his
family. The information he will be referring to comes primarily
from Alaska newspapers, he noted; unfortunately a lot of oil
company dealings are kept secret and that should change. He
said he finds it strange the Gunnar Knapp's extensive study was
not given time or money to include factoring in effects of oil
taxes and credit regimes. Credits paid to oil companies
sometimes exceed actual expenses and there is no way of knowing
if the credit claims are legitimate. The state is paying up to
65 percent of the cost of some oil projects. Exploration is a
gamble; that the state pays any credits at all seems ridiculous
to him. This is forcing Alaska residents to take the risk while
big oil reaps the profits - new oil is not taxed. Currently
credits to big oil amounts to about $1,000 per Alaska resident.
This is about what the governor wants to take from each resident
by a reduction in the permanent fund dividend (PFD). Stop the
credits and leave the permanent fund dividend alone. The
proposed $100 million in new taxes on oil companies is about
half of what would come from the debated 6 percent of federal
income taxes if Alaska instituted an income tax on residents.
That $100 million is double the amount that would be gained from
an increase in motor fuel taxes. The state needs to tax the oil
companies that $100 million. The state's accounting office is
years behind on checking payments from big oil companies. The
court case of Alaska v. Amerada Hess et al. found that from
1977-1992 companies were guilty of deliberate falsification in
computing the price paid to Alaska for its royalty oil. The
case ended with the judge saying that the state was guilty of
inexcusable trustfulness in dealing with big oil companies.
Contrary to its television ads, ConocoPhillips is not Alaska's
oil company, it is owned by stock holders, most of whom are not
Alaskans. But Alaskans are essentially stockholders of the PFD.
Alaska should look at an ad valorem tax on product left in the
ground since it might enhance state income close to the amount
of the deficit.
1:11:31 PM
JAMES MCMILON, Business Representative, Teamsters Local 959
Union, stated that the Teamsters Local 959 is a union of roughly
7,000 members in a wide variety of industries, including workers
at Usibelli Coal Mine, Inc., on the North Slope, on the Trans-
Alaska Pipeline System, Port of Anchorage, AT&T, United Parcel
Service (UPS), Lynden Transport, Weaver Brothers, Alaska
Frontier Constructors, Nanook, and Doyon associates. He said
the union understands the challenges of the fiscal crisis that
Alaska faces. The union understands that tough decisions need
to be made and the union supports the governor and legislature
in reducing the operating budget, using some of the earnings
from the permanent fund to help balance the budget, and maybe
instituting some new taxes. The union is concerned with the
governor's plan to change the oil and gas tax structure. Since
passage of Senate Bill 21 [in 2013, Twenty-Eighth Alaska State
Legislature], the oil industry has invested more into Alaska
projects, with projects like CD5 and Shark Tooth, that have put
hundreds of Alaskans to work, put more into the pipeline, and
billions of dollars into Alaska's economy. Increasing oil taxes
and reducing credits that encourage investment at a time when
the industry is struggling sends the wrong message. Alaska must
maintain a healthy oil and gas industry to keep oil flowing
through the pipeline and keep alive the prospect of a gasline.
1:14:03 PM
SCOTT HICKS, Alaska West Express, testified that he works for
Alaska West Express, a company that provides transportation to
the North Slope for the oil and gas industry. The company's
drivers deliver freight to customers on Alaska's North Slope.
The company has approximately 140 employees and contractors that
work in Fairbanks and on the North Slope. The company's truck
drivers, mechanics, and office employees rely on a healthy oil
and gas industry. Alaska's fiscal challenge and stability of
the oil and gas industry will shape the future of [Alaska's
residents]. He said he is opposed to a major revision to
Alaska's oil and gas tax policy at this time. The bill would
dramatically change the tax system by raising the minimum
production tax by 25 percent. It is just not a good idea to
raise taxes on businesses that are already losing money. Many
oil and gas companies are cutting costs and making choices about
where to invest their money to ensure Alaska stays competitive
with the rest of the world's oil and gas opportunities. The
governor's proposal would be the sixth change in the last eleven
years. How is that a stable investment climate? Oil still
provides the majority of Alaska's revenue and supports one-third
of the state's economy. The last place that should be looked at
for new revenue is to unfairly tax industries that drive the
state's economy. He offered his appreciation for the efforts of
the governor and the legislature during this challenging time.
1:16:00 PM
KAREN LANE expressed her opposition to HB 247. She said the oil
industry is a major revenue producer for the state; it is the
largest producer of revenue for the North Slope Borough, City of
Valdez, and the Kenai Peninsula Borough. Higher industry taxes
in this low price commodity environment could lead to lower
state revenues and a weaker private sector over the long term.
The private sector is the foundation of Alaska's economy and its
underlying health is the key to sustaining jobs, state
government, and the overall economy. The governor's tax
proposal does not encourage the private sector; instead it takes
the state in the opposite direction, jeopardizing future
investments, jobs, and production. The Alaska economy, new
investment, jobs, and production need to be encouraged by
maintaining a stable, competitive tax structure. The more the
state taxes companies to produce the commodity, the less it will
produce here and the more it will produce elsewhere. Increasing
taxes discourages investment. Why is the state taxing an
industry that is already struggling with bottom-of-the-barrel
prices? She urged that HB 247 be discouraged, not encouraged.
1:17:40 PM
SARAH HETEMI testified she is a sophomore at the University of
Alaska Anchorage and is working her way towards a political
science degree. She holds one part-time job now and is
considering a second job in order to make ends meet. Being in
Alaska by herself has made it difficult trying to make rent, pay
tuition, and still hold an active role in the community. When
she moved to Anchorage about three and one-half years ago she
was not necessarily in a much better position, however she had
so much hope for the future as she saw opportunities within her
reach as long as she worked hard. She was motivated to do well
at school, work as hard as she could, and still get involved in
the community. With no guarantee, hope, or opportunity, what is
the point if all of her hard work and daily stress is going
forth to potentially nothing and why? Alaska is the place in
which she wishes to build a future, but if she cannot make it
work by doing her very best she fears it is an idea she will
have to let go of. In the last 10 years Alaska's oil and gas
tax regime has significantly changed five times. If HB 247
passes it will be the sixth time that investments, jobs, and
more production are absolutely killed. With this kind of
instability there is no wondering why Alaska is heading the way
it is. Since every oil industry job creates nine other jobs in
the private sector it is baffling to her that taxes would be
increased under any circumstance on the state's primary
industry. She asked that the committee members keep in mind
students like herself and urged members to oppose HB 247.
1:20:20 PM
KELSI PULCZNSKI voiced her strong opposition to HB 247. She
said she is a full-time student at the University of Alaska
Anchorage. She works full-time to support herself and pay for
her education to maintain her independence, not from her family
but from the State of Alaska. She does so because her education
is an investment in her future and the future of Alaska. She
works hard so she can have the opportunities to be successful.
She is involved on her campus and in her community because she
is passionate about creating a better and brighter future for
the state. Because she plans to live and work in Alaska for the
remainder of her life it is incredibly important for her to know
that the stress and money she puts into her education today will
be a worthwhile investment, to know that the place she calls
home has a prosperous future ahead of it. Oil and gas is a
critical industry for Alaska and has faced instability often in
the last decade. If HB 247 passes it will be the sixth time in
ten years that there has been significant changes to the oil and
gas tax regime. It is no surprise to her that the industry is
laying off workers in the face of this poor policy. It is hard
to plan for the future when being met by instability. For every
one oil and gas job in Alaska, nine other jobs are produced or
reduced in the private sector. Knowing this she looks to her
future and asks what it holds for her. Two or three years from
now when she is looking for her post-college job, what will the
market look like? She knows for sure that she will not be
heading into the oil and gas industry, but what about the nine
other jobs from every one oil and gas job? What will that mean
for her and her peers? Will she have wasted four years
interning, networking, and studying only for the market to not
be able to support her and her future? The state budget is
bloated. She urged that this not be pushed onto the private
sector, which would cause further job loss and recession. The
state cannot be taxed into prosperity. The state should be
focused on allowing the free market to work, not increasing the
tax burden on businesses that are so vital to the state's
economy. When it comes time to move this bill forward, she
hopes committee members will think of her and the thousands of
others like her who are facing an uncertain future. She urged
that members oppose HB 247.
1:23:06 PM
RYAN MCKEE testified in opposition to HB 247. He said the state
is already in a financial crisis and he agrees action should be
taken to balance the budget, but going after an industry that
pays most of the state's budget already is not the way to do it.
These companies are already being hit hard with the low cost of
oil. Many Alaskans know a friend or family member who has been
laid off or have been laid off themselves due to these tough
times in the industry. Drilling for oil in Alaska costs
significantly more than other parts of the U.S., so why would
more tax burdens be added to an industry that is already
struggling to stay alive in the state? Allowing HB 247 to pass
is essentially telling the world that Alaska is not a safe place
for these companies to do business; that despite passage of
Senate Bill 21 and defeat of the Senate Bill 21 referendum,
there is going to always be an unreliable policy that could
change at any moment. Alaska needs to remain competitive with
the rest of the world or risk losing business, which has already
begun to happen. Repsol has restructured its investments which
led to many people losing their jobs and Apache Corporation
recently decided to pull out of Alaska altogether. BP
Exploration Alaska and ConocoPhillips Alaska, Inc., have also
announced huge layoffs. Burdening the remaining companies still
trying to drill for oil with more taxes on top of the massive
amounts that they have already paid will only lead to more
companies closing and moving to a more business friendly part of
the world. Alaska is in a time of financial uncertainty,
however ways should be looked at to reduce government spending
first. While new revenue certainly needs to be explored, the
very industry that drives the Alaska economy and pays 90 percent
of the budget should not be looked to. He urged committee
members to oppose HB 247.
1:25:10 PM
BRAD FAULKNER offered his support for HB 247, saying he has
watched Alaska's oil taxes and the evolution of well taxes
throughout the last 30 years. He recounted that when Senate
Bill 21 came out and he saw the Gross Value Reduction (GVR), he
immediately called both his legislators to say that this cannot
be done because there cannot be a tax on the net and then a
rebate of the tax on the gross. However, today's hearing is not
about the Gross Value Reduction, it is really about 1 percent -
going from 4 percent to 5 percent. When Senate Bill 21 was
passed [and $15 million was spent in advertising] to keep it
going, the people of the state were sold a bill of goods, which
was taxing the oil at 35 percent. But now when trying to raise
the gross tax on oil from 4 percent to 5 percent, [the oil
lobbyists and people who are going to make hundreds of millions
of dollars off of this] are saying that it is 20 percent. But
it will be clipped from the people of the state - for the first
time the legislature is going to tax him in order to give the
rebates on the gross when the tax is on the net. It is
structurally incorrect and his hat is off to the oil company guy
who slid that through and the legislators voted for it, and then
the majority of the people in the state voted for it after the
industry's $15 million ad campaign. The reality is that nobody
looked at $50 oil and now there is about $30 oil. However, the
budget is based on $55 oil. If an interest rate of 6 percent is
put on it, it can be seen that 30 years in the future the Gross
Value Reduction does not work. He requested committee members
to not listen to those people who are urging that the taxes not
be raised by 20 percent, because the tax raise is 1 percent.
What legislators guaranteed Alaska residents when Senate Bill 21
was given to them was 35 percent on the net value.
1:28:41 PM
CARL PORTMAN stated he is very concerned about Alaska's fiscal
situation. The state's economic lifeblood, the Trans-Alaska
Pipeline System (TAPS), is now running at three-quarters empty.
The current oil tax policy has encouraged new industry
investment, which has stabilized a long, steep slide in
production. He said he does not support increasing taxes on the
oil industry as HB 247 would do. Alaska cannot increase oil
product by raising taxes, especially considering that North
Slope oil now sells for less than it costs to produce. The
industry is losing billions of dollars annually in this downturn
and is being forced to cut jobs and expenses. Any tax increase
will have a direct impact on future investment in Alaska and
therefore future production. Even at today's low oil prices, 67
percent of Alaska's revenues come from the oil industry through
various industry taxes and royalties. Clearly the industry
continues to pay the vast majority of Alaska's bills. The
legislature needs to continue to cut state spending to a more
affordable level. Despite cuts in recent years the state's
operating budget is still on an unsustainable path.
Unrestricted general fund spending has increased 230 percent in
10 years while revenues have fallen sharply. In addition the
legislature and the administration need to come to terms on
using permanent fund earnings to help fill the fiscal gap. The
permanent fund earnings need to be part of the long-term
solution; it is the biggest and best tool in the box to help
solve the state's fiscal crisis. Even the bond rating agencies
have recognized the need for Alaska to begin using permanent
fund earnings in a sustainable manner. He recalled that
Governor Jay Hammond's vision for the permanent fund included
the eventual use of the permanent fund earnings to help pay for
essential government services. Given low oil prices, low
throughput in TAPS, and the need for new industry investment, he
said he does not support HB 247. Higher taxes on the industry
will make matters worse for both the public and private sector.
1:32:05 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 1:32 p.m. to 1:47 p.m.
1:47:43 PM
JOHN STURGEON expressed his opposition to HB 247. He said he
opposes the bill because it sends the wrong message to the oil
industry and anybody else in Alaska who is trying to invest.
The number one priority of the legislature should be trying to
create jobs, not stifling them through additional taxes on
industry. He said he works in the timber industry and he cannot
imagine how the timber industry would survive if it had a tax
structure like that of the oil industry. With markets, oil
prices, and fuel costs going up and down, not having a stable
tax base would make it extremely difficult for him to conduct
his business in the timber industry.
1:49:13 PM
ARLENE RONDA offered her support for HB 247. She said revenues
absolutely must be raised because if the cuts are too deep it
does a disservice to the people of the state. She offered her
appreciation to Representative Seaton for his thoughtful
research and efforts in this regard. She said HB 247 is another
way to plug some of the gaps that have been had over the last
several years.
1:50:15 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 1:50 p.m. to 2:05 p.m.
2:05:28 PM
JOE MATHIS, Vice President of External Affairs, NANA Development
Corporation, NANA Regional Corporation (NANA), said he will
provide NANA Development Corporation's perspective on HB 247
overall as it relates to NANA's oilfield businesses. He said
NANA has many companies directly involved in the oil industry,
such as NANA Management Services, NANA Oilfield Services, NANA
Worley Parsons, WHPacific, and GIS Oilfield Contractors. The
NANA companies have been meeting the needs of the oil and gas
sector for four decades and have employed 5,000 Alaskans and
more than 1,600 NANA shareholders. Through its business
operations NANA generates income that enables it to deliver
valuable benefits to its shareholders and to the state as a
whole. Shareholders of NANA have made significant investments
in the oil industry over the past 40 years. For over two
decades NANA held a small ownership in the Endicott Oilfield.
Recently NANA invested in new facilities and equipment at
Deadhorse for NANA Oil Field Services, and constructed a state-
of-the-art fabrication facility in the Matanuska-Susitna Valley
specifically designed for oilfield modules. Through those
business activities NANA's shareholders and all Alaskans have
been afforded the opportunity to hold thousands of good paying
jobs as well as the opportunity to receive extensive job
training. He expressed his corporation's concern with the
direction that HB 247 would take in times when caution is needed
in instituting substantial tax changes. The corporation
supports a stable and predictable tax structure; NANA has been
significantly impacted by this turn of events. Oil industry
investments fuel contracts for NANA companies and the jobs those
contracts create. But Alaska's current investment climate is at
a standstill due to the low oil prices and NANA has lost
hundreds of good paying jobs. It is essential that there be a
stable economic climate to serve Alaska's citizens today and
well into the future. The downturn will not last forever.
However, HB 247 sets the stage for diminished development when
the oil economy does recover. He urged that as members
deliberate HB 247 they consider that Alaska's future for decades
to come depends on the decisions the committee will make. In
its current form the bill has too much impact on today's
transitional situation. The bill does not strike the balance
between Alaska's short-term wants and its long-term needs. He
urged that members consider the impacts HB 247 will have upon
the industry without further changes to the bill. The proposed
changes in the tax structure will have unintended consequences
of delaying expansion projects and production of new oil. The
catastrophic downturn in oil prices has shaken the industry,
including NANA and the state government. Alaskans must pull
together to ensure a stable economic climate that serves
citizens today and into the future. Thoughtful work by the
committee can produce a viable and fair tax policy for the
state, Alaskans, and the industry.
2:10:46 PM
JEREMY PRICE, State Director, Americans for Prosperity - Alaska,
testified in opposition to HB 247. He said the saying, "When
you tax something more, you get less of it, and when you tax
something less, you get more of it," is appropriate here. The
private sector faces uncertainty during these tumultuous times
of record low oil prices. The private sector cannot control
these fluctuations in the market and neither can the state's
elected officials. The private sector can plan for the short
and long term knowing these volatile times can and will occur.
However, the private sector cannot plan for constant changes in
public policy. Fortunately this is an area that is in the
control of the state's elected officials. Legislators control
the state's future with [HB] 247. The private sector needs a
predictable and stable regulatory environment where the
government will not keep changing the rules in the middle of the
game, especially when the home team is losing. This issue is
being considered because state government wants more money.
Should an overhaul to the oil and gas industry's tax structure
be passed simply because the state wants more revenue from a
particular industry? Like it or not, Alaska's future lies with
the failure or success of the oil and gas industry. This issue
will make or break Alaska's future. Expert witnesses have
called this bill one big tax increase on the industry. This is
not the time to raise taxes on an industry that is currently
cash flow negative. This is the sixth major change to oil and
gas tax policy in the last eleven years. When will it stop?
[The committee's] leadership is needed now more than ever. The
pipeline is flowing at a half million barrels a day compared to
2 million in the early 1990s. On federal lands the regulatory
environment makes it extremely difficult to economically produce
oil and gas, especially in this state. Alaska's most prolific
deposits of hydrocarbons are off limits. Alaska has more
federal regulatory blocks than any other state. He urged that
the economic environment not be made worse with state-level
roadblocks. He said his family has been in Alaska since the
1950s when his grandfather homesteaded in the Interior. He has
two children and another on the way and he wants Alaska's
elected officials to think of his family when voting on this
bill. What will his family's future be if the committee helps
to drive the industry out of the state through constant changes
in tax policies? He urged the committee to oppose HB 247.
2:13:44 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 2:13 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.
2:30:55 PM
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK recessed the meeting to a call of the chair.
2:50:03 PM
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK called the meeting back to order.
FAITH MARTINEAU, Caelus Energy Alaska, LLC, said she has worked
in Alaska's oil industry for a year now and opposes HB 247
because it is a real threat to Alaska's oil industry and affects
her, her family, the people she works with, and many of her
neighbors. She urged the committee to consider the strides that
have been made already under Senate Bill 21, a system that
better benefits Alaska's primary industry as well as Alaska's
economy in the long run by making the state more attractive to
investment. The company she works for came to Alaska because of
the benefits offered by Senate Bill 21, benefits that would be
retroactively revoked in some cases under HB 247. Allowing the
system that is currently in place to work is essential to
showing that Alaska can have a stable fiscal regime. She said
she agrees with the legislature's consultant, enalytica, in
concluding that stability is the most important element in any
legal system. Alaska's Arctic is one of the most expensive and
challenging places in the world to operate in, but it also has
world-class resources that can still attract investment with the
correct incentives. She asked the committee to consider what is
truly best for Alaska in the long term and to oppose HB 247.
2:52:32 PM
RAYMOND WARD stated that now is not the time for HB 247 and
increasing taxes on the oil industry in light of current
dwindling oil and gas prices. Recently many major oil companies
in Alaska have ceased their operations and the remaining major
players are scaling down tremendously on their operation and
production. Increasing taxes on the oil industry at this time
would be more of an incentive for oil companies doing business
in Alaska to cease their operations, close shop, and move out of
state, which is not a good idea particularly with the pending
state deficit. It would be an impingement on the generation of
revenues of the state's operating budget.
2:54:36 PM
JON COOK, Chief Financial Officer, Airport Equipment Rental,
Inc., testified that his company is opposed to HB 247. These
credits over the past three years have given his company
tremendous opportunities in the exploratory side of the
business. His company owns one of the largest exploration
packages for a lease on the North Slope and that package of
equipment has worked steadily for the past two years and is
working this winter. In this low price environment his company
thought it would be a challenge to put this package and the
company's employees to work, but the credits offered under the
current statutes are one of the reasons that this package is
being deployed and out working on the North Slope right now,
literally putting hundreds of Alaskans to work. There is a time
to tinker with things, but right now when there is a lot of
uncertainty amongst private employers and companies it is bad
timing to make changes to a system that is working and putting
Alaskans to work. He urged the committee to do due diligence in
looking at things, but said his company would not have people
working on the North Slope right now were it not for the system
that is currently in place.
2:56:43 PM
CRYSTAL NYGARD, Matanuska-Susitna Business Alliance (MSBA),
explained that her organization was founded seven years ago to
provide a voice to small businesses in the Matanuska-Susitna
Valley. She said her organization urges all committee members
to vote no on HB 247. The bill is a job killer. She related
that recently Neal Fried provided a presentation at the college
in which he referenced that 10 percent of the current residents
in the Matanuska-Susitna Valley work on the North Slope and 1
percent work on the Kenai Peninsula. People are able to live in
the Matanuska-Susitna Valley and work around the state because
of the rotational schedules that the oil and gas industry has
provided. The government needs to stop competing with the
private sector and let the private sector create jobs in a
friendly environment. She noted she has three sons, one of whom
is studying in Montana and who does not see an opportunity to
come back to the state he was raised in because of the message
being sent to investors and students. Another son in school is
asking where are the jobs? Government needs to get out of the
way and needs to incentivize the private sector to create jobs.
She thanked those legislators willing to vote against HB 247.
2:58:34 PM
CO-CHAIR NAGEAK closed public testimony for the time being and
said further testimony will be taken at the committee's next
hearing on HB 247 which will be held this evening.
[HB 247 was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HSE RES HB 247 - Neutral - Tammie Stoops.docx |
HRES 3/14/2016 1:00:00 PM |
HB 247 |
| HSE RES HB 247 - LOS Communications.pdf |
HRES 3/14/2016 1:00:00 PM |
HB 247 |
| HSE RES HB 247 - Oppose Communications.pdf |
HRES 3/14/2016 1:00:00 PM |
HB 247 |
| HSE RES HB 247 answers from DNR Rep Tarr Ltr.doc |
HRES 3/14/2016 1:00:00 PM |
HB 247 |