Legislature(2003 - 2004)
04/03/2003 08:03 AM House STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 93-REPEAL BOATING SAFETY SUNSET [Contains discussion of HB 49] Number 2428 CHAIR WEYHRAUCH announced that the next order of business was HOUSE BILL NO. 93, "An Act relating to boating safety; repealing secs. 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26, 27, and 30, ch. 28, SLA 2000; and providing for an effective date." [Before the committee was CSHB 93(TRA), Version 23-LS0230\Q.] Number 2400 LINDA SYLVESTER, Staff to Representative Bruce Weyhrauch, Alaska State Legislature, told the committee that the proposed legislation is a continuation of work done in 2001 by then- Representative Bill Hudson, at the request of the United States Coast Guard. She said [that previous work] brought a fine boating safety program to the State of Alaska. The funding for [the program] is provided in large part by Wallop-Breaux trust fund monies, which she explained is federal fund money. By having a boating safety program in Alaska "on the books," the state was able to access a marine motor fuel tax, she said. Ms. Sylvester noted that [the state] has a program that provides boater education, as well as programs like "Kids Don't Float." MS. SYLVESTER noted that one of the legislature's concerns in the year 2000 was that the funding would "dry up" on the federal level, and the state would have an unfunded program. She said that the bill was crafted "with repealers all through it." The proposed legislation would eliminate the repealers, she said, with the exception of an amendment made in the House Transportation Standing Committee. She explained that one of the most problematic portions of the [boating] safety law was that it required non-motor boats 10 feet and over - for example, paddle boats and kayaks - to be registered. That requirement has been eliminated from HB 93, she said. Now, she added, the proposed legislation applies only to the registration of motorboats. In conclusion, she noted that the Coast Guard has been relentless in this issue. Number 2189 MIKE FOLKERTS, Recreational Boating Safety Specialist, District 17, United States Coast Guard, read his testimony as follows: The Coast Guard, through the Secretary of Transportation, is directed to carry out a national Recreational Boating Safety program under Chapter 31 of Title 46, United States Code. The goal of the program is to encourage the states to assume the major role in carrying out the boating safety mission. Federal financial assistance to the states is provided through the boating safety account of the Aquatic Resources Trust Fund, also known as the Wallop-Breaux Trust Fund. Part of that eligibility requirement to receive the funding was achieved when Alaska passed House Bill 108, an Act Relating to Boating Safety, in the year 2000. House Bill 108 was passed with a sunset clause that would allow the legislature to revisit the law, primarily to ensure that consistent and adequate funding was in place. House Bill 93 repeals that sunset, allowing the law to become permanent and helping build a long-term program that will continue to reduce recreational boating fatalities. The United States Coast Guard supports House Bill 93 and will maintain the relationship with the State of Alaska as outlined in a Memorandum of Understanding between the state and the Coast Guard. Number 2157 CAPTAIN JOHN SCHOTT, Chief of Operations, District 17, United States Coast Guard, read his testimony as follows: The Coast Guard enthusiastically supports the State of Alaska's Safe Boating program. This program provides vital boating safety education for Alaskans, reducing the number of accidents, saving lives, and reducing the need for costly search and rescue. The accurate vessel registration information available to us from the state is also essential to our search and rescue efforts. Currently, with the homeland security concerns we all share, it's more important than ever that we educate boaters so they operate safely. This helps the Coast Guard and other public safety agencies maintain an appropriate homeland security posture with our limited surface and air assets. Number 2121 MARTHA MOORE, Injury Surveillance and Prevention Program Manager, Community Health & Emergency Medical Services, Division of Public Health, Department of Health & Social Services (DHSS), told the committee the department enthusiastically supports HB 93. She stated that drowning has been a huge problem in Alaska for many decades. She said that she has been in the state for 24 years and knows approximately half a dozen people who were victims of drowning. Furthermore, she said she is sure that everyone in the room at present knows "a number of people who have drowned in this state." She said that it reaches the point where people start to think, "Well, this is just Alaska, this is the way it has to be." Conversely, Ms. Moore stated that, with her experience in injury prevention, she knows that it doesn't have to be this way. She noted that drowning is one of the most predictable and preventable causes of accidental death. MS. MOORE told the committee that she collaborates with [Mr. Folkerts] and the Boating Safety Office regarding the Kids Don't Float program. She stated that she and [Mr. Folkerts] are also on the board of the Alaska Marine Safety Education Association (AMSEA) organization. Ms. Moore said that the boating safety programs that the federal money supports have been evaluated and proven to be effective. In conclusion, she said that last year there were 16 boating fatalities, the lowest number of fatalities in one year [for the past] decade. She added, "And I think that with these programs in place, it will just continue to go down." Number 2003 CHARLES R. HOSACK, Deputy Director, Director's Office, Division of Motor Vehicles, Department of Administration (DOA), told the committee that he was available to answer questions. In response to a question by Chair Weyhrauch, he stated that the department supports the continuation of the boating registration program. He stated that the department thinks that - as the witnesses from the United States Coast Guard have previously stated - "it is an important safety aspect." He said, "The committee substitute before you does eliminate the need to register the non-powered boats, so there will be a slight decrease in revenue." He said that the non-powered boats require a $10 fee for a three-year registration, as opposed to the $24 fee for the powered boats. [The department] will be submitting a fiscal note that will show that decrease in revenues. [Chair Weyhrauch passed around the complete registration record for his 16-foot Boston Whaler.] Number 1891 REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked if the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) would administer this. Number 1886 JEFF JOHNSON, Boating Law Administrator, Office of Boating Safety, Division of Parks & Outdoor Recreation, Department of Natural Resources (DNR), answered that yes, the Alaska Boating Safety program is currently administered by DNR through the Division of Parks & Outdoor Recreation. MR. HOSACK, in response to a question from Representative Gruenberg, said there is a fiscal note missing from the committee packet. He stated that because [of] "the amendment to eliminate the requirement to register non-powered boats," there would be a decrease in revenue, estimated to drop from the $39,000 currently collected to approximately $35,000 a year. MR. FOLKERTS, in response to a question by Representative Gruenberg, reiterated that the program is federally funded. He added that it is almost exclusively [supported by] federal funding and registration receipts; "there's no money out-of- pocket for the state on this." In response to a follow-up question from Representative Gruenberg, he said that the amount of federal funding varies. He explained that it [involves] a three-part program, which is based on the number of registrations "last year." He stated that he thinks "the federal funding portion of it was slightly in excess of $400,000." REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said, "I gather ... that there was some concern about ... taking this over, because what happens when the federal funding goes away?" MR. FOLKERTS answered yes, there was concern that there would be an unfunded mandate to the state; however, in this case, when there's no state money being applied to the program, "if the law were to go away, so would the program and so would the money." Number 1705 REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that the House Judiciary Standing Committee was faced with a similar question over a bill regarding federal money for DNA identification for criminal justice [HB 49]. He noted that he offered an amendment adopted by [the House Judiciary Standing Committee] that stated, in that case, that "the Commissioner of Public Safety shall notify the president of the Senate and the speaker of the House of Representatives if, at any time after the effective date of the bill, the federal government fails to pay the cost of the DNA identification registration system." He suggested that that amendment could be tailored to fit [HB 93] and may be a way for the legislature to know if the government stops funding [the boating safety program]. Number 1639 CHAIR WEYHRAUCH stated that the bill would have to be held, pending the missing fiscal note. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said, "That was Section 14 of the bill." Number 1621 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ referred to part of Section 2, which read as follows [on page 2, lines 13-20, of the House Transportation Standing Committee CS, original punctuation provided]: (4) a boat that is not equipped with mechanical propulsion [, THAT IS EXCLUSIVELY PADDLED, POLED, ROWED, OR POWERED BY WIND, AND THAT IS (A) UNDER 10 FEET IN LENGTH; OR (B) OPERATED IN THIS STATE FOR A PERIOD NOT EXCEEDING 30 DAYS IN A CALENDAR YEAR BY A PERSON WHO HAS NOT ESTABLISHED RESIDENCY AS DESCRIBED UNDER AS 01.10.055]; REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ, regarding "a boat that is not equipped with mechanical propulsion", said, "It seems to me that you could read that in such a way that you're excluding boats - that might be equipped with outboards, but currently don't actually have the outboards mounted - from registration, which would have an impact on the fiscal note." MR. FOLKERTS replied that if a vessel, such as a rowboat, does not have an outboard motor attached to it, and it is exclusively rowed or pulled, then it would be exempt under "this committee substitute" from the registration process. Number 1555 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ stated his understanding that the CS from the House Transportation Standing Committee amended the section regarding "THAT IS EXCLUSIVELY PADDLED, POLED, ROWED, OR POWERED BY WIND", which he said leaves the following boats that are exempt: "a boat that is not equipped with mechanical propulsion". He explained that a Lund, or a Whaler, for example, without the outboard mounted, is "not equipped with mechanical propulsion"; therefore it would not be subject to registration requirements. MR. FOLKERTS responded that, if [Representative Berkowitz] had a 22- or 24-foot Boston Whaler, without any type of mechanical propulsion, it would be exempt from registration. He added, "And I would love to watch you dock in a wind, sir." CHAIR WEYHRAUCH ask Mr. Folkerts if there will or will not be a fiscal note. Number 1507 MR. FOLKERTS, referring to the previous comments of Mr. Hosack, stated his belief that the original HB 93 would not require a fiscal note because there would be no fiscal impact; however, the CS would reduce the amount of registration monies available to the state by removing the registration requirement for non- powered boats. Number 1480 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked what percentage of the registration applies to non-powered boats. Number 1452 MR. HOSACK answered that, currently, there are 56,900 registered boats. Of those, 7,100 are non-powered boats. He said, "Last year, we had about 17,900 transactions from motorized boats and [3,500] transactions from non-powered boats." In response to a request for clarification from Representative Seaton, Mr. Hosack explained that the registrations are valid for a three-year period. He added, "So, of those total boats, we'll see them once every three years, unless they change ownership." Number 1384 REPRESENTATIVE HOLM asked Mr. Hosack, "If you don't have the $35,000, you have no access to the general fund to get that money back any place. Is that correct?" MR. HOSACK answered that is correct. REPRESENTATIVE HOLM stated, "If that were true ... sir, then there is no negative impact to your operating budget, or to the revenue stream of the State of Alaska. There's only a negative impact to how much money that you have to spend." He asked if that is correct. MR. HOSACK answered, "I don't believe so." He stated that "last year," the total collected was $456,600 in boat registrations, which included both motorized and non-motorized boats. He reiterated that $35,000 of that was from the non-motorized boats and [that money would not be collected if the proposed CS is passed], which decrease the revenue going into the state's general fund. That's what a fiscal note would reflect, he explained. Number 1302 REPRESENTATIVE HOLM asked Mr. Hosack if it was his assessment that, by decreasing the workload, there would be no effect on the cost of the operation. MR. HOSACK answered that there will be associated costs for the tabs and mailing, for example, as well as "about ... half a position," based on the previously stated transaction numbers. REPRESENTATIVE HOLM asked how that would then translate to a positive impact on the cash flow of the department. MR. HOSACK responded that he does not believe that it will be a positive cash flow. He said, "My fiscal note will reflect a reduction in the revenue due to not registering the non- motorized boats; it will reflect a decrease in costs for those 3,500 transactions, which we'll no longer have to do." REPRESENTATIVE HOLM asked if Mr. Hosack was stating to the committee that the cost of those transactions is less than $10 a piece. In response to a comment by Mr. Hosack, Representative Holm clarified that he was asking if the cost to the department of providing those registrations is less than $10 per unit. MR. HOSACK answered yes. He continued as follows: Our total fiscal note for the boating bill, as it was originally passed - in the current fiscal year - is, I believe, $378,000. We took in $456,600 in revenue in fiscal year 2002. Number 1165 CHAIR WEYHRAUCH requested that Mr. Hosack produce the fiscal note by tomorrow. MR. HOSACK agreed to do so. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked that the fiscal note reflect an estimate of the "half position" previously mentioned. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked, "If there's federal money coming in, and there's revenue from the sale of these registrations, isn't there a considerable profit to the state?" Number 1090 MR. FOLKERTS explained that there is a benefit to the state, in that, by law, 75 percent of the monies coming in is designated for education, which he said is "what the state's boating program does." He suggested that Mr. Johnson may have more to add to the answer. In response to a follow-up question by Representative Gruenberg, he said that he believes that the other 25 percent is used administratively, perhaps to help the Department of Public Safety "do the enforcement portion of it," for example. Number 1040 MR. JOHNSON noted that there are several qualifiers that all 56 states and territories must satisfy in order to qualify for federal [funding]. Boat registration is one of those, he said. If [Alaska] fulfills those requirements, the registration receipts that used to be paid to the federal government, and therefore went into the U.S. Treasury, now remain in the State of Alaska. Furthermore, the state qualifies for the federal grant money, which it didn't qualify for before. The net benefit to the state, estimated in FY 03, totals $490,000. CHAIR WEYHRAUCH asked Mr. Johnson and Mr. Hosack to work together to prepare the fiscal note previously requested, so that they are "both on the same page." [HB 93 was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|