Legislature(2011 - 2012)HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/09/2012 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB283 | |
| HB286 | |
| HB285 | |
| HB307 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 283 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 285 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 307 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 286 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL NO. 283
"An Act making and amending appropriations, including
capital appropriations and other appropriations;
making appropriations to capitalize funds; and
providing for an effective date."
1:38:56 PM
KAREN REHFELD, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
(OMB), OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, explained that she would
provide a high level overview of the legislation.
Co-Chair Stoltze agreed that a broad and general approach
would be the most helpful.
Ms. Rehfeld informed the committee that the governor's
proposed FY 13 capital budget totaled $1.8 billion, which
excluded duplicated funds. She referred line 24 of the OMB
December 2011 fiscal summary, which included the mental
health capital budget. The total number included $882
million in unrestricted general funds, $81 million of
designated general funds, $20 million of other funds, and
$820.5 million of federal funds. The bill contained 14
sections. The first section was the largest and totaled
$1,766,800,000; it was organized by department and projects
were listed in priority order. Deferred maintenance
appeared at the end of each department's list with the
exception of Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities (DOT) because it had been organized within the
different appropriation levels. Individual project review
listing and backup for each project was included in the
member's capital budget books. She highlighted priority
projects in the Resource and Development (R&D) area
including, Roads to Resources, permitting, strategic
minerals assessments, digital mapping, and responsible
development of natural resources. The budget also included
education funding for two schools off of the Department of
Education and Early Development (DEED) school construction
list that totaled $61 million.
1:42:54 PM
Representative Gara queried the fund source for bulk fuel
upgrades listed on page 4 of the bill. Ms. Rehfeld directed
attention to the appropriation level on page 3, line 24.
She explained that a portion of the $7 million was paid for
with general funds. She would follow up with detail at a
later time.
Ms. Rehfeld continued to highlight the education components
including $24 million for the first 14 projects on DEED's
school major maintenance list. Other items included
disaster preparedness and a search and rescue helicopter
for the Interior under the Department of Public Safety
(DPS); transportation infrastructure such as highways,
aviation, municipal, water, sewer, village safe water, and
other.
Co-Chair Stoltze asked to hear a list of litigation and
settlements items later in the meeting.
Representative Joule discussed a $14 million appropriation
that had been vetoed the prior year related to a school in
Kivalina. He believed that the state did not want to build
the school at the existing location, which was one of the
reasons the appropriation had been vetoed. He wondered
whether the administration had been working with the
community to find a transportation route to the mainland
where a school could be built.
Ms. Rehfeld responded the state had been working with
Kivalina on a relocation site. Work was underway to include
the project on the DEED priority list for the following
fiscal year. She noted that improvements were needed on the
existing building, but a relocation of the school would
represent significantly different costs; therefore steps to
determine the best approach and timing were in progress.
1:46:58 PM
Representative Joule noted that road access to the school
fell under the purview of DOT; therefore, he wondered
whether the department would work with the community on the
issue. Ms. Rehfeld deferred the question to DOT for follow
up at a later time.
Representative Joule communicated that there was a $10
million road to resources in Umiat that people did not
want; the people in Kivalina would be happy to use the road
to find an alternative location for the school site.
Ms. Rehfeld outlined the various sections in the bill:
· Sections 2 and 3 summarized the funding sources in the
numbers section of the bill by department and for all
fund sources respectively.
· Sections 4 through 6 were included for informational
purposes and related to the proposed Government
Obligation (G.O.) Bond package in HB 286.
· Section 7 gave Legislative Budget and Audit the
authority to consider federal and other program
receipts that came in when the legislature was not in
session.
· Section 8 related to fund capitalization and included
$60 million for proposed Alaska Gasline Inducement Act
(AGIA) reimbursements and $1.7 million in federal
funds for the Emerging Energy Technology Fund.
· Section 9 included a $25 million fund transfer to the
Renewable Energy Grant Fund and a $35.5 million fund
transfer to the Regional Educational Attendance Area
School Fund.
1:49:26 PM
Ms. Rehfeld continued to detail the bill sections:
· Section 10 related to the State Insurance Catastrophic
Reserve Fund that allowed insurance claims to be
appropriated to state agencies in order to mitigate
loss.
· Section 11 included an appropriation for National
Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPRA) grants estimated at
approximately $5.4 million. A list developed annually
by the Department of Commerce, Community and Economic
Development (DCCED) would be brought to the committee
to include in the budget.
· Section 12 encompassed three pieces for Department of
Fish and Game (DFG) related to amending a previous
appropriation for the Sport Fish hatchery in Anchorage
to include operations. There was a subsection to
reappropriate $5 million from the hatchery to the Fish
and Game Fund that would allow DFG to apply any sale
proceeds from the resolution sale towards the purchase
of equipment for a new vessel.
Ms. Rehfeld detailed several ongoing operating funding
questions related to the Sport Fish Division. She explained
that the division's budget had Fish and Game Fund authority
and that the administration had concerns about the cash in
the fund and future revenue projections. The
reappropriation of the $5 million into the fund would help
ease concerns in the short-term. She furthered that there
were several ways to address the issue and that related
conversations would be continued.
Co-Chair Stoltze wondered whether the surplus of proceeds
was related to bond sales that had occurred in 2007. Ms.
Rehfeld deferred the question to the department.
Co-Chair Stoltze was concerned about ambiguity on the
issue. He welcomed any opportunity to pay off the bonds and
to shorten the commitment the life of the $9 surcharge on
sport fishing licenses. Ms. Rehfeld asked the DFG to follow
up with a response.
Co-Chair Stoltze stressed that the department should
prioritize the retirement of the debt. He believed the
funds should be used for capital and not operating
expenses.
1:53:32 PM
Representative Neuman wondered whether DCCED could choose
how to delegate the proposed $5.4 million in capital
project grants (Section 11, page 52).
Ms. Rehfeld replied that funding for NPRA grants came from
the Bureau of Land Management under the U.S. Department of
the Interior (proceeds were derived from sales, rentals,
bonuses, and royalties on leases issued within the NPRA).
Local entities applied for grants within communities that
were directly impacted by the leases or development of oil
and gas within the NPRA. She elaborated that a certain
number of communities were eligible to apply for grants and
the funds could be used for planning, construction,
maintenance and operation of public facilities, and other
necessary public services.
Representative Neuman asked for verification that the
grants only applied to communities impacted by development
within the NPRA. Ms. Rehfeld responded in the affirmative.
Co-Chair Thomas referred to Section 12(d) related to the
transfer of general funds to sport fish construction and
operations. He discussed the ability to absorb operation
costs within the department. He asked Ms. Rehfeld to
provide an explanation of the change during the operating
budget portion of the meeting.
Ms. Rehfeld replied that DFG would be available to answer
questions. She cited concerns that the cash flow into and
out of the Fish and Game Fund had been low; she did not
believe the issue had been contemplated in the past.
Co-Chair Thomas explained that the operating budgets had
gone up and down for years. He remembered being told that
DFG costs could be absorbed and he wondered why the comment
had been made.
Co-Chair Stoltze noted that the item had been a revenue
bond, but he believed that the obligation to voters was no
less implicit. He believed that letting the public know
that the House Finance Committee was not playing games with
funds would send a positive message. He voiced his tendency
to be critical of revenue bonds.
1:57:31 PM
Representative Gara asked whether sport fishery facility
upgrades had been completed. Ms. Rehfeld believed that the
Anchorage hatchery had been completed.
Representative Gara surmised that the designation of left
over sport fish money to operating expenses meant that
money remained. Ms. Rehfeld responded that there was
approximately $5 million available.
Representative Gara referred to earlier testimony from Co-
Chair Stoltze related fishing license fees.
Co-Chair Stoltze clarified that there was a proposal to
forego an opportunity to shorten the obligation of license
payers.
Ms. Rehfeld continued to explain the bill sections:
· Section 13 provided for lapsed provisions of various
sections. For sections that were identified as capital
projects, appropriations were made for the valid life
of the projects and carried forward from one year to
the next.
· Section 14 included the effective date of the bill:
July 1, 2012.
Representative Doogan wondered whether funds were
transferred from the general fund to a discrete fund for
expenditure (under the fund transfers section of the bill).
Ms. Rehfeld replied in the affirmative.
Representative Doogan asked what happened when the money
was not spent in its entirety. Ms. Rehfeld responded that
the money would remain in the particular fund for use at
another time. The legislature could appropriate as much as
it wanted into a fund and could then choose to make
appropriations when it saw fit.
Representative Doogan wondered whether the legislature was
"banking" a fund for the next year if it was not fully
expended. Ms. Rehfeld answered in the affirmative. She
explained that designated funds were usually expended from
the Renewable Energy Grant Fund on an annual basis. Fiscal
Year 13 was the first year of the formula that required
funds based on the amount paid in municipal debt service
for school projects to go into the Regional Education
Attendance Area School Fund; the proposed budget allocated
the funds to two school projects included in the capital
budget.
Representative Gara referred to the organization Arctic
Power and wondered whether the administration had
considered something similar to advertise that Alaska's
clean natural gas was not harsh on the environment. He
discussed that part of the state's future was related to a
gas pipeline. He noted that one of the impediments was
shale gas in the Lower 48 and forecasts had shown that the
price of shale gas would increase as communities became
more concerned about its impacts.
Ms. Rehfeld believed that Commissioner Sullivan at
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) had been involved in
education and outreach to educate people in the Lower 48 on
Alaska's potential. She added that Arctic Power had
broadened its scope to help with education and outreach in
the Lower 48.
Representative Gara was interested in an ad campaign that
highlighted the cleanliness of Alaska's natural gas
compared to shale gas in the Lower 48. He believed the
campaign would help increase Alaska's chances of finding a
market for its gas.
2:03:31 PM
Representative Edgmon emphasized the need to make Congress
aware of Alaska's broad support for opening the Alaska
National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) and that the state's
pipeline was only one-third full. He discussed funding for
Arctic Power and the potential need to double or triple the
state's effort in D.C.
Vice-chair Fairclough believed that leg work could be
beneficial and hoped the state would continue working to
open the petroleum reserve. She was hopeful that Congress
would pass an ANWR resolution; the National Conference of
State Legislatures supported the opening of the petroleum
reserve by a three-quarters vote. The legislature would
continue to encourage the U.S. Senate to support the issue
as well.
Co-Chair Stoltze thought the current makeup of the U.S.
Senate and the president could prevent a bill on the issue
from passing.
Representative Costello wondered how many runways in the
state were not up to Federal Aviation Administration
standards. Ms. Rehfeld would have DOT follow up with a
response.
HB 283 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 307-Supplemental_Spreadsheet_1-31-12.pdf |
HFIN 2/9/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HB 307 |
| HB286-DOR-TRS-NEW FN 01-31-12.pdf |
HFIN 2/9/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HB 286 |
| HB 286 Testimony.pdf |
HFIN 2/9/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HB 286 |
| HB 283-Response to HFC Questions Capital Budget letter dated 2.21.2012.pdf |
HFIN 2/9/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HB 283 |