Legislature(1997 - 1998)
04/01/1998 10:05 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 263 (TRA)
"An Act relating to secondary roads; and providing for
an effective date."
Co-Chair Sharp noted two proposed amendments to the
Transportation Committee version that the committee had not
yet acted on.
Senator Torgerson moved for adoption of Amendment #1. He
started by speaking to the bill, which would create a new
category, called Secondary Roads. Then the secondary roads
across the state would be in competition with each other for
ranking, he added. In his opinion, the state currently
wasn't upgrading or paving any of them because they came
under the Community Transportation Program and they don't
rank high enough to ever get taken care of. What SB 263
would do, he continued, was set up the additional category.
Amendment #1 would allow the Legislature to appropriate up
to $20 million federal funds into this category, he
concluded.
Senator Parnell asked if Senator Torgerson was trying to
establish a level of funding. Was he trying to set a level
of "up to" $20 million, or did he want "$20 million or
nothing", Senator Parnell wondered. Senator Torgerson
understood the point with regard to possible future
appropriations that could be smaller. He responded that
currently the Administration has the $220 million federal
funds broken down into three categories. The intent of the
amendment was to set up a fourth category and assign the $20
million into that category. To answer the question if it
was all or nothing, he said he'd be happy with a lesser
appropriation so long as the funds went to the secondary
roads. He stressed that he would also like to see the full
$20 million go to the program.
Co-Chair Sharp noted that the $20 million of the current
ICETEA appropriation would amount to less than ten-percent
of the total allocation. There was some discussion agreeing
to this observation.
Senator Adams asked what affect this would have with other
funding such as the National Highway System or the CTP.
Senator Torgerson replied that if there were no other
appropriation to increase the amount of ICETEA, this could
have the affect of ratcheting back those other programs if
the full $20 million was put into this program. He noted
that under the current ICETEA the State Of Alaska was a
winner and would have enough funds to cover this allocation
without reducing the other programs.
Senator Parnell still struggled with the language. He
wanted to understand if Senator Torgerson was trying to not
straightjacket the Legislature into making a choice between
$20 million and nothing. He suggested the amendment be
changed to insert the words "or less" after "$20 million".
Would that still meet the intent, he asked. Senator
Torgerson pointed out that the other programs were not
followed by "or less". If was all subject to
appropriations, but he didn't want the impression to be if
the Legislature didn't appropriate $20 million, there would
be nothing, he stressed. He said he would be happy to be
receiving some higher degree of priority for paving
secondary roads by the Department of Transportation. He
also noted that this bill would sunset in five years, so it
would not continue forever.
Senator Parnell asked if the Legislature appropriated $20
million, what would be the required General Fund match.
Senator Torgerson estimated the match to be roughly 10%, or
about $2 million.
Senator Adams maintained his objection, and spoke to that
objection. He stressed that he still didn't know what would
be the impact on the three existing programs. He didn't
know what the impact would be on the urban and rural
communities.
Senator Donley asked how this would affect secondary
municipal roads that were already paved, but in poor
conditions. He referred to state-owned roads in Anchorage.
Senator Torgerson told him the CS adopted in the Senate
Transportation Committee changed the description from
exclusively gravel roads to include asphaultic roads.
Senator Donley asked how that would apply to Abbott Road in
his district. Senator Torgerson guessed Abbott Road would
not be eligible under this project. There was further
discussion on the condition of Abbott road and other
unimproved gravel roads. Senator Donley said the State
could turn that road over to the City of Anchorage, but that
the city didn't want it because it was in such poor
condition.
Senator Torgerson stated that his intent with this bill was
to take care of the roads that hadn't received any
attention. He spoke of an allocation of around $80 million
that was in the CTP. He said there was another amendment
that would come up later that would take care of some of
Senator Donley's concerns.
Co-Chair Sharp asked if the scope of Senator Donley's
favorite topic was AMATS. Did that cover secondary roads,
he wondered? Senator Donley discussed the state-owned roads
being turned over to the municipality, who didn't want them
due to their poor condition. Senator Torgerson speculated
that the problem was the current ranking system. He
referred to Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities trips to Circle Hot Springs where they set up the
ranking system. He said it was frustrating.
Senator Torgerson said he did not have an objection to
changing his amendment to put a higher ranking on roads to
be transferred to local governments.
Co-Chair Sharp asked for a roll call taken on Amendment #1.
The count was 4-1 (Senator Adams nay.) Co-Chair Sharp
ordered Amendment #1 adopted.
Senator Donley spoke to Amendment #2. He said Section 1 of
the amendment would put into statute a process by which the
department currently developed the STIP. This didn't make
any change he said just lay out what they actually used now
and what categories they used. Section B would also further
identify that. Section C would set out a provision in
determining the priority for the STIP, that at least 40% of
the ranking would be based on the volume of use on the road.
He reminded the committee how during the interim, they
reviewed how DOT&PF set their priority when they developed
the STIP. Currently, the volume of use is only used for the
NHP in urban roads, not for rural roads. In his opinion,
this was very discriminatory. Section D of the amendment
would require at that least 40% of the funds would be going
into the rural and urban road sub-category. The remaining
could be allocated at the department's discretion.
Senator Adams wanted to know if this amendment would follow
along with the federal guidelines for acceptance of federal
funds. Senator Donley responded that, for the first time,
it would set out everything that is done now into statute.
It would then add additional criteria, which he said was not
listed in the federal requirements. He pointed out that all
STIP projects were re-submitted to the federal government
for approval before work was begun. Senator Adams asked if
Senator Donley thought this could jeopardize receipt of
federal funds, which Senator Donley responded that he didn't
think would.
Co-Chair Sharp asked what was the current description of the
CTP category, and if the amendment would change that.
Senator Donley replied that it would have the exact same
description, only the subcategories would change.
Co-Chair Sharp clarified that Sections C And D would give
guidelines to the department on how to rank projects and
determine allocation procedures based on the amount of money
allocated to the total CTP category. Senator Donley
affirmed that.
Senator Torgerson moved to amend Amendment #2. He read his
amendment into the record. "Page 2 Line 17 New Subsection
E, would read, The department shall give priority to
upgrading unimproved or hot asphaltic roads if the
department receives a request for the transfer of that road
or a portion of that road to a municipality under this
section." He said that basically the language to the main
body of the bill on Page 1 Line 14 he word-smithed to add
"hot asphaultic."
Senator Parnell worried that the language "municipalities"
was too limiting. He wanted to know if that would leave out
any local governments. Senator Torgerson responded that he
felt the term was all encompassing and the only entity that
could be left out might be an unorganized government wanting
to take over a road.
There was no objection to the Amendment to Amendment #2 and
Co-Chair Sharp ordered it adopted.
Amended Amendment #2 was now on the table. There was no
objection and it was adopted.
There was discussion on the version of the fiscal note, and
if it applied to the amended bill.
Senator Torgerson moved Senate Finance Committee Substitute
for SB 234, as amended out of committee with accompanying
fiscal notes and individual recommendations. There was no
objection and Co-Chair Sharp so ordered.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|