Legislature(1995 - 1996)

03/26/1996 08:10 AM Senate FIN

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
txt
                                                                               
  SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 20                                    
                                                                               
                                                                               
       An  Act establishing  the  Alaska municipal  basic                      
       services program, relating  to certain programs of                      
       state aid to municipalities and recipients in  the                      
       unorganized   borough;   and   providing  for   an                      
       effective date.                                                         
                                                                               
  Co-chairman Halford directed that SSSB 20 be brought  on for                 
  discussion.  KEVIN  RITCHIE came before committee  on behalf                 
  of the Alaska  Municipal League and the Alaska Conference of                 
  Mayors.    He voiced  support  for  the bill  and  described                 
  efforts that led to development of the  legislation over the                 
  past two years.                                                              
                                                                               
  END:      SFC-96, #51, Side 2                                                
  BEGIN:    SFC-96, #52, Side 1                                                
                                                                               
  SENATOR  TORGERSON, sponsor  of  the legislation,  next came                 
  before committee.   He explained that  the bill renames  the                 
  "municipal  assistance" portion to "revenue sharing for safe                 
  communities." Provisions  require moneys received  from safe                 
  communities to be spent on  certain public purposes, require                 
  municipalities to  list notice to taxpayers of the amount of                 
  money received  from safe  communities, and  allow the  base                 
  amount to be  prorated.   Since establishment  in 1978,  the                 
  base amount was  held harmless from  cuts.  This funding  is                 
  the former  business license  tax.   The legislation  "takes                 
  money  from  all  the  communities  and raises  the  minimum                 
  entitlement  to smaller  communities  to  $40.0."    Funding                 
  required for the transition totals  $238.9.  That amount  is                 
  prorated  from each  community.  The  bill also  changes the                 
  date of the payment to coincide  with the earlier payment so                 
  that both sections are paid on July 31.  That results in one                 
  payment for both revenue sharing and  safe communities.  The                 
  remainder of the bill involves housekeeping measures.                        
                                                                               
  The  sponsor  further  described  past  efforts  to  rewrite                 
  municipal assistance and revenue sharing  programs.  He said                 
  he had been  involved in attempts  to change the formula  so                 
  that "We wouldn't have many winners and losers when we tweak                 
  the formula."   The approach proposed within CSSSSB 20 (CRA)                 
  is overwhelmingly supported by the Conference of Mayors, the                 
  Alaska  Municipal  League,  and  communities  that  are  not                 
  members of either of the foregoing organizations.                            
                                                                               
  Senator  Torgerson attested  to  past controversy  over  the                 
  fiscal note.   The  fiscal note  from the  Dept. of  Revenue                 
  derives from moving the $29.4  million payment from February                 
  to July 31.   Senator Torgerson said he  did not agree  with                 
  the resulting ($874.0) fiscal note.  He advised that part of                 
  the reason for advancing  the payment date is the  fact that                 
  July is one  of the  only months  in which the  state has  a                 
  surplus.  The proposed bill would entail expenditure of part                 
  of  the  surplus and  would  not involve  the constitutional                 
                                                                               
                                                                               
  budget reserve.                                                              
                                                                               
  In response to a question  from Co-chairman Halford, Senator                 
  Torgerson directed attention to a  tabulation (copy on file)                 
  listing funding to be received  under the existing municipal                 
  assistance program  versus that  in the  proposed bill.   He                 
  then spoke to impact on specific communities.                                
                                                                               
  Responding  to a question  from Co-chairman Halford, Senator                 
  Torgerson explained that  the idea behind the  $40.0 minimum                 
  entitlement is to transform every community below that level                 
  up to that mark.  That would take care of this  fiscal year.                 
  In future years,  if there  is a reduction  in the  program,                 
  each community will take the same  amount of reduction.  The                 
  $40.0 is  not held  harmless forever.   Co-chairman  Halford                 
  asked  if  the  one-third,  two-third  split   between  safe                 
  communities and  state revenue sharing,  respectively, would                 
  remain in place.  Senator Torgerson responded affirmatively.                 
  He added that state revenue sharing  is distributed on a per                 
  capita basis while the one-third  split is distributed "into                 
  the safe communities  portion."  Co-chairman Halford  voiced                 
  his understanding that the  appropriation goes through  that                 
  separation and  is prorated  for each  community.   He  then                 
  asked if  separation and proration  apply to both  total and                 
  minimum  entitlements.    Senator  Torgerson  said  that the                 
  minimum entitlement is not subject  to "the safe communities                 
  portion."  Minimum entitlement "comes out up front."                         
                                                                               
  BILL ROLFZEN, State Revenue  Sharing, Division of  Municipal                 
  and Regional  Assistance,  Dept. of  Community and  Regional                 
  Affairs,  came  before  committee.   Speaking  to  the  one-                 
  third/two-third split, he  explained that the intent  was to                 
  allow the base  amount to be subject to cuts  in the future.                 
  For  the  FY 96  appropriation  to the  municipal assistance                 
  program, one-third went  to the  base amount and  two-thirds                 
  went  to   the  per   capita  account.     If  the   overall                 
  appropriation is reduced,  each account would be  subject to                 
  the same amount of cuts.                                                     
                                                                               
  In response to  a question  from Co-chairman Halford  asking                 
  how the minimum  entitlement would be impacted,  Mr. Rolfzen                 
  responded,                                                                   
                                                                               
       Okay,  we go through  the revenue sharing program.                      
       We go through the municipal assistance (now called                      
       the safe  communities formula).   If  after we  go                      
       through  the   entire  formula,  there   are  some                      
       municipalities that don't  have a total  of $40.0,                      
       going  to  that  municipality, we  go  to  the per                      
       capita account under the safe communities fund and                      
       grab enough money to bring  everybody up to $40.0.                      
                                                                               
                                                                               
  Mr. Rolfzen  further added,  "But, no one  gets an  absolute                 
                                                                               
                                                                               
  $40.0.   The  intent was  that all  municipalities  share in                 
  bringing up the smaller communities to  $40.0."  If there is                 
  a cut, they are also to share in that cut.  He then directed                 
  attention to the  distributed tabulation and noted  that for                 
  the first  year some municipalities at the $40.0 level would                 
  actually be receiving $39.9.                                                 
                                                                               
  In  response  to a  question  from Co-chairman  Halford, Mr.                 
  Rolfzen acknowledged that under existing revenue sharing the                 
  minimum  is  $25.0  times  the cost-of-living  differential.                 
  There is no minimum entitlement under municipal  assistance.                 
  The proposed bill  would set  a minimum of  $40.0 and  bring                 
  approximately  41  of  the "very  small  communities"  up to                 
  $40.0.    It  would  cost  approximately  $238.0  statewide.                 
  Smaller communities would also share in bringing communities                 
  to the $40.0 threshold.                                                      
                                                                               
  PAT  POLAND, Director,  Division  of Municipal  and Regional                 
  Assistance, Dept.  of Community  and Regional  Affairs, next                 
  spoke via  teleconference  from  Anchorage.    He  expressed                 
  support  for  the   bill  and   advised  that  it   contains                 
  improvements  to  municipal assistance  and  revenue sharing                 
  programs.   It  effects  changes in  a  fair and  "generally                 
  balanced manner."   It is  important that the  state protect                 
  its  investment  in   public  infrastructure  made   through                 
  municipal governments.   Establishment of a  minimum funding                 
  level is an  important step in  that direction.  Removal  of                 
  the holdharmless provision  will provide for better  program                 
  equity.   Moving the date  for the safe  communities payment                 
  forward  will  enable   larger  municipalities  to  minimize                 
  impacts from cuts.   In his  concluding remarks, Mr.  Poland                 
  acknowledged  a  difference  between  departments  over  the                 
  fiscal impact of  the date change.   He then voiced  support                 
  for a date that "basically gives us the fiscal impact at the                 
  lower  end  of the  fiscal note  submitted  by the  Dept. of                 
  Revenue."                                                                    
                                                                               
  Senator Rieger referenced a proposed amendment and explained                 
  that when the legislature passed legislation relating to the                 
  ranking of  school projects, the listing of  a priority list                 
  in statutes  produced an awkward  result in which  the first                 
  item  on  the list  was  required  to be  exhausted,  in its                 
  entirety, before proceeding to the next  item.  That was not                 
  the  intent.    To  clarify   the  situation,  the  proposed                 
  amendment contains the following language:                                   
                                                                               
       Subsection  (c)   of  this  section  may   not  be                      
       construed  to require  a municipality to  fund all                      
       requests it receives  for services  in a  category                      
       with a higher ranking  of priority before  funding                      
       services in  a category  with a  lower ranking  of                      
       priority.                                                               
                                                                               
  The  Senator  then  MOVED  for  adoption of  the  amendment.                 
                                                                               
                                                                               
  Senator Torgerson  acknowledged that the amendment clears up                 
  problems within the bill.   No objection having been raised,                 
  Senator Rieger's amendment was ADOPTED.                                      
                                                                               
  To an inquiry  from Co-chairman Frank concerning  the repeal                 
  within Sec.  13, Senator  Rieger explained  that the  clause                 
  required  a  municipality  to reduce  taxes  in  response to                 
  revenue sharing and municipal assistance increases.                          
                                                                               
  Co-chairman Frank asked  if the bill deals with both revenue                 
  sharing  and   municipal  assistance.     Senator  Torgerson                 
  responded, "basically  just municipal assistance."   The Co-                 
  chairman  then  voiced his  understanding  that the  primary                 
  thrust  is  to increase  the  minimum entitlement  to $40.0.                 
  Senator Torgerson  added that  it also removes  holdharmless                 
  provisions.    Discussion  followed  regarding  the  current                 
  workings of  holdharmless language.   Additional  discussion                 
  followed regarding  minimum entitlements under  the proposed                 
  bill.    Co-chairman Frank  asked  if the  legislation would                 
  cover  unincorporated areas.    Senator Torgerson  responded                 
  negatively.                                                                  
                                                                               
  In  response to inquiries  from Co-chairman Frank concerning                 
  municipal  support, Senator  Torgerson  said  that both  the                 
  mayor of the Fairbanks Borough and the mayor of the City  of                 
  Fairbanks worked with the mayor of Anchorage in  putting the                 
  proposed plan together.                                                      
                                                                               
  VERN  VOSS,   Cash  Manager,  Treasury  Division,  Dept.  of                 
  Revenue, came  before  committee in  response  to  questions                 
  regarding cash  flow and  the  department fiscal  note.   He                 
  explained  that  if  funds  are  paid to  municipalities  in                 
  February versus July,  the state must borrow  money from the                 
  constitutional budget  reserve or  another source.   In  the                 
  alternative, if excess  funds are  available, early  payment                 
  would effect a reduction in interest income.                                 
                                                                               
  JOHN STEIN  next testified via teleconference  from Wasilla.                 
  He  voiced  support  for the  legislation,  saying  that the                 
  Alaska Municipal  League and the legislature  have developed                 
  "something  that  sort  of  makes  sense  out  of  municipal                 
  funding."    He  voiced  further   support  for  the  public                 
  relations campaign to explain to voters that "This is really                 
  a sloughing . . . a  pushing down of costs to the  municipal                 
  governments."   That should be  understood.  Mr. Stein urged                 
  support for the bill and local governments.                                  
                                                                               
  Co-chairman Frank MOVED for passage of CSSSSB  20 (Fin) with                 
  individual  recommendations  and accompanying  fiscal notes.                 
  CSSSSB 20 (Fin)  was REPORTED OUT  of committee with a  zero                 
  fiscal note from the Dept. of Community and Regional Affairs                 
  and a note  from the Dept.  of Revenue projecting a  revenue                 
  reductions of $(874.0).   Co-chairmen Frank and  Halford and                 
  Senators Sharp and Zharoff signed  the committee report with                 
                                                                               
                                                                               
  a "do pass" recommendation.   Senators Donley, Phillips, and                 
  Rieger signed "no recommendation."                                           
                                                                               

Document Name Date/Time Subjects