Legislature(2003 - 2004)
03/18/2003 01:37 PM House TRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 170-MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEES CO-CHAIR MASEK announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 170, "An Act increasing certain motor vehicle registration fees; and providing for an effective date." Number 2192 RONALD JORDAN said that he had no real objection to the HB 170. However, he expressed concern with Section 4, subsection (i), and the lack of an annual fee increase for tractor-trailers and semi-trailers that are pulled behind a tractor, which do just as much road damage as studded tires or any other vehicle on the road. There should be a equitable balance between the consumer and the State of Alaska, he said. Many states do charge an annual fee for these trailers. If there was a $100 or $200 annual fee, Mr. Jordan said he would feel more comfortable with any fee increases for automobiles. CO-CHAIR HOLM related his understanding of Mr. Jordan's concern because he has driven trucks with trailers and seen asphalt peel up behind the trailer when it's warm outside. He asked if Mr. Jordan knew what folks have been charged for that. MR. JORDAN directed attention to Section 3, Subsection (h)(4), which he interpreted to refer to a delivery van. He said that an increase in the fee for trailers and semi-trailers would offset some of the estimated $60 million of road maintenance. He reiterated the need for equality in this matter. CO-CHAIR HOLM pointed out that the fee under Section 1, Subsection (b)(6), raises the fee for a trailer not used or maintained for the transportation of persons or property for hire or for other commercial use from $10 to $30. He acknowledged the disparity and related that [Mr. Jordan's concern] will probably have to be reviewed. Number 1967 DUANE BANNOCK, Director, Division of Motor Vehicles, Department of Administration, turned to Mr. Jordan's concern. Mr. Bannock explained that the division's dramatically different treatment of commercial trailers occurred in 1999. That change was part of a national effort to not have states do annual registration on commercial trailers. Mr. Bannock explained that the International Registration Plan (IRP) is a program that Alaska is prepared to join, although it has not done so yet. In 1999 Alaska, for all practical purposes, eliminated the annual registration fee. The legislation doing the aforementioned was revenue-neutral and shifted approximately $1.6 million over all commercial vehicles. Commercial vehicles already pay a much greater cost than a noncommercial vehicle because the $1.6 million was divided amongst them. Therefore, it's fair to say that the commercial trailers aren't paying an annual registration fee, but it's also fair to say that the truck towing the commercial trailer is paying what used to be the fee for the trailer. CO-CHAIR HOLM replied that he appreciated what Mr. Bannock said, although he said he wasn't sure he believed it because there was no documentation to that effect. MR. BANNOCK offered to provide a detailed report. He pointed out that in 1998, HB 73 officially changed the way in which accounting is done for commercial trailers. With regard to the reference to "biennial", Mr. Bannock noted that the legislation is drafted in a biennial form but that commercial vehicles are allowed to choose an annual registration fee. CO-CHAIR HOLM requested the historical data that shows the shift and specifies the fee the commercial vehicles pay. The problem here is to receive the maintenance dollars that are related [to the damage caused by] commercial transportation. Furthermore, he didn't know whether Alaska's membership or nonmembership in IRP was germane to the question unless [the state] is receiving compensation from the IRP that's relative to the damage caused to Alaska's highways. Number 1782 REPRESENTATIVE FATE turned to Mr. Bannock's mention that the cost has been shifted from the trailer to the tractor. He asked if the commercial trailers are no longer licensed and thus no longer have a license fee. MR. BANNOCK answered that commercial trailers have a one-time registration or permanent registration. Unlike the truck, the tractor requires an annual or biennial registration. In further response to Representative Fate, Mr. Bannock specified that the one-time fee is $10 and HB 170 proposes raising that to $20. REPRESENTATIVE FATE surmised then that his little trash trailer that he hauls behind his 50-horsepower car that he registers biennially at $10 costs more than a commercial trailer. MR. BANNOCK explained that the aforementioned isn't a good analogy because the 50-horsepower car is registered biennially, whereas the semi-truck towing the trailer is now paying $321 per year. REPRESENTATIVE FATE remarked that his vehicle isn't a 50- horsepower vehicle but rather it's a F-250 truck for which he pays quite a bit biennially. MR. BANNOCK said that for a pick-up truck the [registration fee] would be $78 biennially. The $321 fee refers to what is commonly referred to as a semi-truck, a tractor-truck, or a fifth-wheel trailer-truck. Number 1663 CO-CHAIR HOLM requested that HB 170 be held until more information is available with regard to the changes made [in 1998] by HB 73 and how it relates to the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities' maintenance. CO-CHAIR MASEK announced that HB 170 would held and taken up at the committee's next meeting. MR. BANNOCK said that he has requested department staff to provide a calendar history of all commercial vehicle revenue rates beginning in 1998, which was the last year that an annual registration was collected on trailers. He related his belief that the aforementioned will illustrate that the decrease of approximately $1.6 million in 1999 was absorbed by the remaining commercial categories. [HB 170 was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|