Legislature(1999 - 2000)
12/06/2000 01:15 PM House BUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
JOINT COMMITTEE
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET AND AUDIT
December 6, 2000
1:15 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Gail Phillips, Chair
Representative Con Bunde
Representative Eric Croft
Representative Gary Davis (via teleconference)
Representative Gene Therriault (via teleconfernece)
Representative Eldon Mulder (alternate-via teleconfernece)
Senator Randy Phillips, Vice Chair
Senator Sean Parnell (via teleconfernece)
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Al Adams
Senator Rick Halford
Senator Gary Wilken
Senator Drue Pearce (alternate)
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
th
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - October 27, 2000
REVISED PROGRAM RECEIPTS
EXECUTIVE SESSION
AUDIT REPORTS
WITNESS REGISTER
PAT HARTLEY, Legislative Assistant
to Representative Gail Phillips
345 W. Sterling Highway, Suite #102 B
Homer, Alaska 99603
Telephone: (907) 235-2921
DAVID TEAL, Director (Testified via Teleconference)
Division of Legislative Finance
State Office Building, Sixth Floor
Juneau, Alaska 99811
Telephone: (907) 465-3002
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced the RPL's
PAT DAVIDSON, Director
Division of Legislative Audit
State Office Building, Sixth Floor
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-3830
POSITION STATEMENT: Addressed the Audit Reports
YVONNE CHASE, Deputy Commissioner
Early Development (Testified via Teleconference)
Department of Education and Early Development
th
333 W. 4 Avenue, Suite #220
Anchorage, Alaska 99501-2341
Telephone: (907) 269-4635
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on RPL 05-1-0618
MARY STOVALL, Administrative Manager
Early Development
Department of Education and Early Development
th
333 W. 4 Avenue, Suite #220
Anchorage, Alaska 99501-2341
Telephone: (907) 269-44512
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on RPL 05-1-0618
NICO BUS, Budget Manager
Department of Military and Veterans Affairs
400 Willoughby Ave, Suite 500
Juneau, Alaska 99811
Telephone: (907) 465-2406
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on RPL #09-1-0036
and RPL #09-1-0037
TIM JONES, Executive Director
Alaska Military Youth Academy
Alaska National Guard Youth Corps
Department of Military and Veterans Affairs
P.O. Box 5800
Ft. Richardson, Alaska 99505-0800
Telephone: (907) 428-6067
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on RPL #09-1-0036
and RPL #09-1-0037
RICHARD LASHER, Administrative Manager
Department of Military and Veterans Affairs
Alaska Military Youth Academy (AMYA)
P.O. Box 5727
Ft. Richardson, Alaska 99501-0727
Telephone: (907) 384-6013
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on RPL #09-1-0036
and RPL #09-1-0037
KENNETH BISCHOFF, Director (Testified via Teleconference)
Division of Administrative Services
Department of Public Safety
P.O. Box 11120
Juneau, Alaska 99811-1200
Telephone: (907) 465-4336
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on RPL #12-1-0106
KURT PARKAN, Deputy Commissioner
(Testified via Teleconference)
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
3132 Channel Drive
Juneau, Alaska 99801-7898
Telephone: (907) 465-6977
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on RPL #25-1-2064
and RPL #25-1-2063
JAMES FIORENZI, Assistant Airport Manager
Fairbanks Airport
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
6450 Airport Way, Suite #1
Fairbanks, Alaska 99702
Telephone: (907) 474-2505
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on RPL #25-1-2064
and RPL #25-1-2063
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 00-10, Side A
CHAIR GAIL PHILLIPS called the Joint Committee on
Legislative Budget and Audit meeting to order at 1:15 P.M.
on December 6, 2000. Members present at the call to order
were Representatives Gail Phillips, Con Bunde, Eric Croft,
Gary Davis, Eldon Mulder and Gene Therriault and Senators
Randy Phillips and Sean Parnell.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
CHAIR PHILLIPS noted that the first order of business would
be the approval of the minutes from the Legislative Budget
th
and Audit Committee meeting held October 27, 2000.
SENATOR R. PHILLIPS MOVED to approve the minutes and asked
for unanimous consent. There being NO OBJECTION, the
minutes were approved and adopted.
REVISED PROGRAMS (RPL's)
DAVID TEAL, Director, Division of Legislative Finance,
explained the RPL's before the Committee.
RPL Number: 05-1-0618
Department of Education & Early Development
Child Care Development Funds
$5,590,473 Federal Funds
DAVID TEAL explained that the request was for additional
authority to receive and expend the FY2000 Child Care
Development Funds (CCDF) carry forward and to record the
CCDF grant to be received during the State fiscal year 2001.
SENATOR R. PHILLIPS asked if the RPL would increase the
general fund match in the FY2002 budget.
MR. TEAL pointed out that the more funding received from the
federal government, that more money that would be matched.
He did not know if the Department would be asking for more
funding in that budget.
YVONNE CHASE, Deputy Commissioner of Early Development,
Department of Education and Early Development, clarified the
amount of the required match.
MARY STOVALL, Administrative Manager, Early Development,
Department of Education and Early Development, explained
that there are two types of match for that fund.
Maintenance of effort would be a one to one match, whereas,
the other would be calculated and not a one to one as the
maintenance of effort was.
SENATOR R. PHILLIPS questioned how much money would be
increased to the general fund.
MARY STOVALL replied that the requested increase would
require $437 thousand general fund dollars for FY2002.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT pointed out that the amount would be an
increase in federal authority and that enough exists to
cover the cost for this year. He added, next year, there
would be more required to leverage the federal funds.
REPRESENTATIVE MULDER asked where this year's match came
from.
YVONNE CHASE advised that it was general funds, currently
existing in the Department's budget.
REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT questioned why the current year
match would not be available in the next fiscal year. He
asked the "time sensitivity" of the request.
YVONNE CHASE explained that these were one-time State
general fund monies and that they would not all be available
next fiscal year. It is anticipated that there will be a
small increase in the federal budget. She added that the
new federal fiscal year starts at a different time than the
State fiscal year, thus, bringing the request to the
Committee at this time.
REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT asked if the legislation could
wait until the full Legislature was back in session.
YVONNE CHASE explained that the Department would not have
the funds needed to move forward and that part of the
funding has resulted from an increase written into the
budget. The additional portion brings the Division up to
the level of expenditure based on the funds available from
the past year in the federal budget. With the transfer,
clean-up issues resulted and the Division then got caught
into a lapsing situation with the Department not having the
funding, which resulted in the Division not having the
authority to put it in the budget.
DAVID TEAL advised that the Department has a different way
in which they record their money. That it is an internal
policy. The Department does this through issuing grants.
They have chosen not to record the money until the entire
amount of the grant is awarded. Other Departments record
the money as it occurs and then their funding is handled by
appropriation. He acknowledged that he did not understand
why the Department of Education records their money in a
different manner. Mr. Teal pointed out that Karen Rehfeld
was not present to explain the process.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT asked which programs the allocation
would fund.
YVONNE CHASE reported that the funding would go to the Child
Care Subsidy program, which would go to childcare providers
based on the eligibility of each family. Funds from the
program are used for the childcare grant program out of the
federal money. Also, funds are used for the licensing
functions of the facilities. By not approving the request,
the State will not be able to post the federal money. Any
expenditure from October until the Legislature meets to
approve it, would be held from the grantees.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT summarized the purpose of the request.
He stressed that there would be no general fund impact. He
MOVED to approve RPL #05-1-0618.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE OBJECTED. He stated that the full
Finance Committees would benefit from these discussions.
A roll call vote was taken on the MOTION.
IN FAVOR: Representatives G. Davis, Therriault, Croft,
Chair Phillips
OPPOSED: Representative Bunde
Senator R. Phillips
Representative Mulder and Senators Parnell, Wilken, Adams,
Halford and Pearce were not present for the vote.
The MOTION FAILED (4-2).
RPL Number: 09-1-0036
Department of Military and Veterans Affairs
Cook Inlet Tribal Council - Youth Opportunities
$83,000.00 SDPR/Operating
DAVID TEAL advised that the purpose of the request was that
the Cook Inlet Tribal Council (CITC), Inc. wants to contract
with the Alaska Military Youth Academy (AMYA) to serve
Native American Youth who are from eligible communities and
are recruited to attend AMYA. The effort is part of a five-
year U.S. Department of Labor Youth Opportunity Grant. The
funding would support a counselor working at AMYA, provide
for travel of the eligible students and provide for the
clothing, equipment, supplies, services and allowances for
each eligible student enrolled at AMYA from designated CITC
villages. He noted that the Finance Committees have not
considered the subject. The item is not incorporated into
the AMYA component budget. There would be no impact to the
general fund and no risk involved.
CHAIR GAIL PHILLIPS clarified that the Finance Committees
had considered only the Cook Inlet Tribal Council grant
proposal and not the entire issue of the AMYA.
DAVID TEAL agreed.
SENATOR R. PHILLIPS recommended the following RPL #09-1-0037
be considered also at the same time with the RPL #09-1-0036.
CHAIR GAIL PHILLIPS agreed.
RPL Number: 09-0037
Department of Military and Veterans Affairs
Municipality of Anchorage-Workforce Investment Act Grant
$127,400 SDPR/Operating
DAVID TEAL spoke to the request. He noted that the program
was a continuation of the Job Training Partnership Act
(JTPA) under a new Congressional law, Workforce Investment
Act (WIA), Out-of-School Youth Programs. Grant funds are
through the Municipality of Anchorage, Department of
Community Planning and Development. The AMYA would be
providing job-skills training, resume writing, interview
skill, vocational assessment, placement counseling and
assistance to "at risk" youth enrolled in the program.
Grant funding would permit the expansion of other services
and provide new services in education/vocational counseling
and increase the rate in placement of students into the
workforce.
SENATOR R. PHILLIPS questioned the practical effect of these
types of programs.
NICO BUS, Budget Manager, Department of Military and
Veterans Affairs, spoke to the effect of the two RPL's and
noted that both projects would help to pay for expenses in
related to the programs.
SENATOR R. PHILLIPS understood that the program had been
fully funded. He assumed that there would be extra kids
taken and asked the impact of that action.
TIM JONES, Executive Direction, Alaska Military Youth
Academy, Alaska National Guard Youth Corps, Department of
Military and Veterans Affairs, noted that the lst RPL deals
with the Cook Inlet Tribal Council. He stated that the
biggest impact on that program is that there currently is a
full time Native drug and alcohol counselor that works on
staff but is not paid by the State of Alaska, however, paid
through this grant. Over the years, there may be more
students from the targeted village areas, and would receive
priority for admission.
Mr. Jones continued, the funding in Municipality of
Anchorage money was meant to replace services received from
the JTPA program. That money would be used in lieu of
services so that they can continue. He noted that there are
104 students in Phase II, the residential phase. There are
175 students in the non-residential phase. Approximately 85
cases are being processed. The target goal number has
always been 100 per class, two classes per year. There has
never been enough funding to meet that target.
REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT asked if there had been a request
placed last year by the Municipality of Anchorage for the
funding.
NICO BUS responded that there had been a budget amendment
for a JTPA program. The total grant was for $300 thousand
dollars.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE pointed out that 50% of the Cook Inlet
Tribal Council grant would be used to cover overhead
associated costs, whereas, the grant from the Municipality
of Anchorage would only use $1,000 dollars for those costs.
He asked why the difference.
NICO BUS explained that $16,000 dollars would be used for
travel for the accountant to go to the villages to recruit
students. The amount received would be based on the number
of students.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT inquired if the funds were reserved for
Native students living in the village area.
TIM JONES stated that the funds were strictly designated for
Native students.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE inquired about the timing issues
associated with recruitment.
TIM JONES explained that AMYA recruits up to the time of the
week prior to filling of the class. He indicated that at
present time, there are 85 applications on file and none
have yet been accepted. He added that there is presently no
money in the budget for out-reach and recruiting.
NICO BUS added that the contract with the Cook Inlet Tribal
Council runs October through March. The next class begins
th
March 8. By the time the fast track supplemental occurs,
the next class would have already been started.
SENATOR R. PHILLIPS asked about the status of non-Native
kids.
CHAIR GAIL PHILLIPS advised that the enrollment for the
program was for children from all over Alaska. Only funding
from the Cook Inlet grant would be for Native kids only.
RICHARD LASHER, Administrative Manager, Alaska Military
Youth Academy (AMYA), Department of Military and Veterans
Affairs, stated that the grant would allow counselors to go
out and recruit potential applicants and then they would be
screened. In response to Senator Phillip's concern, he
explained that the grant does target a specific group,
allowing for a counselor to go out and recruit within that
group. Additionally, the funding would provide for
reimbursement for amenities.
SENATOR R. PHILLIPS emphasized that the program was
basically federally funded and that the State could not
discriminate against the non-Native students.
TIM JONES commented that the services would be provided to
all students and the program would not be reimbursed for
someone other than specified in the grant. He emphasized
that services would be provided to non-Native students.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE MOVED to approve RPL #09-1-0036. There
being NO OBJECTION, the RPL was approved.
CHAIR GAIL PHILLIPS MOVED to approve RPL #09-1-0037.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE OBJECTED for a point of clarification.
He asked about the timing issue and if the funds would be
spent for the current class.
NICO BUS explained that a class would be started in March
and that for staffing commitments, an understanding of what
is available is needed.
REPRESENATATIVE BUNDE WITHDREW his objection. There being
NO further OBJECTION, RPL #09-1-0037 was approved.
(Tape Change, LBA 00-10, Side 2).
RPL Number: 12-1-0106
Department of Public Safety
th
Violence Against Women Act - 6 Year
$427,000 Federal Grants
DAVID TEAL explained that the request would enable the
Council on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault (CDVSA) to
allocate FY2001 funding to those projects funded by the
th
Violence Against Women S*T*O*P Formula Grants, 6 Year. The
Act was originally authorized in 1994 and was to provide
five years funding to all the states. The Act was put
forward for reauthorization to Congress in 1999, however, it
was not authorized until October 2000. Due to the delay, an
additional year of funding was added to the original Act.
The sixth year of funding allowed states to maintain the on-
going projects funded by the grant while waiting for
reauthorization. The states were notified in August that
there would be some support provided for the continuation of
on-going projects. The amount of the grant and the actual
award were not distributed until September 2000.
He pointed out that the request indicates $375,000 dollars,
however, working with the Department, the number should be
revised to indicate $427,000 dollars.
KENNETH BISCHOFF, Director, Division of Administrative
Services, Department of Public Safety, offered to answer any
questions of the Committee.
SEANTOR R. PHILLIPS foresaw an increase to the State's
general fund budget.
KEN BISCHOFF stated that these are all federal funds. There
is no match requirement and there will be no State impact.
DAVID TEAL noted that the reason that the request is going
to the budget process is that the program has been
authorized for an additional five years. This request is
the first of those five years.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE suggested that the entire Finance
Committees would benefit from the discussion regarding the
proposal. He asked why this timing was critical.
KEN BISCHOFF explained the issue is that Congress
appropriated funds for which it has not passed an
authorization bill. The authorization had expired and they
appropriated a sixth year of funding unexpectedly. The
Council has programs in place, particularly with the
Department of Law, that have been in place for approximately
five years. To maintain continuity in those programs, the
Department is seeking concurrence with the Legislative
Budget and Audit Committee (LBA) to receive and expend the
allocation to keep the programs in place.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT pointed out the supportive testimony
received from the Legislative Finance Division. He
emphasized that the women being assisted would be able to
get out of abusive relationships and that this would be
federal money being for a good purpose.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE noted that his questions did not relate
to the funding of the program, but instead, the timing of
the request. He reiterated his question if this timing was
critical for immediate funding.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT emphasized that it is time critical as
indicated by the Legislative Finance Division.
SENATOR R. PHILLIPS MOVED to approve RPL #12-1-0106 with the
amended amount of $427,000 dollars. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was approved.
RPL Number: 25-1-2063
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities-CIP
Fairbanks International Airport Maintenance Facility
$905,000 SDPR/Capital
and
RPL Number: 25-1-2064
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities-CIP
Fairbanks International Airport Equipment Purchase
$1,065,000 SDPR/Capital
CHAIR G. PHILLIPS requested Mr. Teal to address both RPL
#25-1-2063 and RPL #25-1-2064 at the same time.
DAVE TEAL explained that the two requests were similar in
that both of them request statutory designated program
receipts for airport capital projects in Fairbanks. He
noted that before discussing the merits of the projects, the
Committee should determine if they want to discuss the
projects at all. He stipulated the issues:
· There was a Legislative Budget and Audit Task
Force formed in 1996. That task force recommended
that the authority to expend revenue generated
from the "head tax" in place in most major
airports should be made by the entire Alaska
Legislature; and that
· The source of funds may be inappropriate and may
have no legal authority to increase authorization
for the project.
Mr. Teal pointed out that Representative Bunde had been the
Chair of that Committee.
Mr. Teal noted that the Committee could increase
authorization of federal receipts and statutory designated
program receipts. The passenger facility charges (PFC's)
are the funds from that issuance and are restricted by the
federal foundation. They can be used only for airport
capital projects. The PFC's are not federal project
receipts; the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) noted
that this money is clearly State money. The Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities has requested use of
the statutory designated program receipts.
He commented that the position of the Legislative Finance
Division is that fund source is an inappropriate
classification of the funds. An October 1996 RPL prompted
that task force. That RPL requested authority to expend
international airport revenue funds, which are State funds
derived from the Permanent Fund Dividends (PFD). He
suggested that could be the proper funding source for the
proposed request and that classification would make the RPL
ineligible for LBA's consideration.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE commented that the task force provided
a very clear recommendation where LBA's authority lies in
regard to that concern. He proposed that through the PFC
programs, all Alaska airports should benefit.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT questioned if the Committee had the
active authority to delegate the statutory designated
program receipts. The argument is that this is a collection
by an airport that is to be used and limited to capital
construction purposes. He asked where the definition would
deviate from that of statutory designated program receipts.
DAVID TEAL stated that the problem was that this money was
not provided in a clear fashion. The money comes from the
passengers and the passengers do not have a contract with
the State which indicates authority of how to use it.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT disagreed with that reasoning. He
believed that the money had been collected with the intent
to be used for capital projects.
DAVID TEAL stated that the statutory definition of the
receipts indicates that the funds must be restricted by the
terms of a gift/grant contract. The question becomes, does
the State have a contract between the air carriers, the
airport and the passengers.
He suggested that it could be argued that there is an
implied contract because the FAA has a process of approving
these capitol projects and the PFC's cannot be spent on just
anything not approved by the FAA. Therefore, by merely
collecting them, implies some sort of consent. He agreed
that the definition could be "stretched" and that had
happened in the past.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT understood that the airports were State
owned. The airports make decisions on what projects they
want approved and then get them funded through the FAA.
DAVID TEAL agreed. He noted that the passenger fees could
be collected only for certain projects. In theory, when the
FAA approves a specified amount for a specific project and
it is done, there would be no more fees. The FAA imposes
restrictions and simply "allows" the air carriers to be the
collectors.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT pointed out that the Legislature does
not have any specific power in determining what the airport
projects will be. He suggested that the airports have a
type of independent power and questioned if they should be
the independent agency contracting with the Legislature.
DAVID TEAL commented that the Division did not use that
approach as the Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities owns the airport.
REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT interjected that the Legislature
does have the power to determine in this circumstance. The
airport goes to the FAA to get approval and the Legislature
must authorize that project. He noted that the projects
have been authorized and the funding provided for them was
inadequate and that the Department would like to increase
the authorization and switch the funding source.
He asked if the recommendations of the task force were
specifically about going through the normal legislative
process. He suggested by if these projects must wait for
that process, the new fund source would not take place until
June or July 2001, which would create a "time" crunch.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE responded that the main concern of the
task force was if there should be PFC's at all. He
reiterated that the LBA Committee does not have the
authority to change the funding source.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT asked if the decision made by the LBA
Committee affects whether PFC's are collected.
KURT PARKAN, Deputy Commissioner, Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities, explained that the PFC
authorization was given to the Department by the FAA to
begin collection in October 2000. Currently, the Department
is collecting those funds. If authorization to spend those
funds for a particular project is not granted, there will be
a two-year period of time for taking action on a capitol
project. If no action is taken on a project within that
period of time, the FAA can take that money from the PFC's
and make a corresponding reduction to the settlement funds.
The effect would be the loss of federal funds as an offset
to the PFC's.
CHAIR GAIL PHILLIPS asked if there had been discussion
regarding reimbursement of the PFC funds to the individual
ticket holders reducing the amount of federal
appropriations.
KURT PARKAN replied that was not an option from the
viewpoint of the FAA. Instead, it is part of the
Congressional authorization for PFC's.
REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT suggested that repaying a $3
dollar check to all the ticket holders that paid would be a
difficult task. The federal law was written so that there
would be a dollar for dollar decrement in the normal airport
funds if the projects had not been followed through with.
The fund cannot be built up and then spent any way the
Legislature wants. In fact, if it is not spent the way it
was stipulated to be, there is a dollar for dollar deduct
and penalty.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE reiterated that LBA does not have the
legal authority to designate these funds.
CHAIR GAIL PHILLIPS requested that Representative Bunde put
that in the form of a motion for the Committee to vote upon.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE MOVED that the LBA Committee forward
the question of the PFC's to the Legislature for the next
session.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT OBJECTED for the purpose of a question.
He believed that the outcome would be that PFC's continue
everywhere that they currently are in place and that the
money would be collected for possible use later.
KURT PARKAN responded that the money would be collected and
held until the State reached that period of time that the
trigger takes place. Then there would be deductions for the
federal entitlement.
He provided a history of how the State got to the place that
they are today. The initial application was submitted to
the FAA in June 1999. After the 1999 Legislative session,
there was a resolution by the House Transportation Committee
requesting that the Department apply for PFC's. In June,
the application was made and in October 2000, the FAA said
that the State could have the PFC but would not allow the
exemptions that were requested.
The exemptions were not allowed under the FAA regulations
because Congressional action had not taken place yet on the
reauthorization of the AIP program to place them. The
following year in Congress, the exemptions passed and there
were concerns about them being in place. The collections
began in October and because the FAA had originally given
the State authorization for the PFC's in October 1999, that
was the date that the two year clock began to tick for going
to grant on a project.
CHAIR GAIL PHILLIPS inquired if the exemption included
concerns regarding the size of the aircraft or the number of
seats. She asked if the concerns were specifically rural
versus municipalities.
KURT PARKAN clarified that the Department requested an
exemption for those communities that are not connected to
the road system. In addition to that, there was a request
to exempt aircraft with sixty or less seats. He clarified
that addressed the problem with the Kenai run. Congress
placed an exclusion for the sixty seats or less aircraft,
making it mandatory. The exemption was approved and made
optional. He advised that both now are in place.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT inquired if the Department planned to
buy the snow blower, sand trucks and the rescue truck for
this winter's operations.
JAMES FIORENZI, Assistant Airport Manager, Fairbanks
Airport, Department of Transportation and Public Facilities,
stated that there are sand trucks on order. He did not
believe that those trucks would be available for this
winter's operation. He added that these are all replacement
pieces of equipment.
REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT pointed out that the way the
motion had been phrased would only allow the consideration
to be carried forward to consideration by the Legislature.
He did not know what that would mean. Representative
Therriault reiterated his concern with the wording of the
motion.
CHAIR GAIL PHILLIPS interjected that the main concern was
whether the LBA Committee has authority to make the
determination at this time. She stated that had been the
purpose of the motion.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE noted for the record that he does not
want to preclude further discussion of the issue by the LBA
Committee; however, he strongly would recommend that since
the concern is a taxing issue that the entire Legislature
should consider it. He believed that there would be a broad
base of support.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT stated that the appropriate way to deal
with the concern would be to move it, thus, providing the
approval or rejection. That would be the cleanest way to
address the concern. He reiterated his objection to the
motion as moved.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE spoke to the original motion. He noted
that the intent of the motion was to bring the issue to the
Legislature.
REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT asked if Representative Bunde
could amend the motion or restate it as a "regular" motion
that could be passed or failed.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE WITHDREW his MOTION.
REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT MOVED to approve RPL #2-1-2063.
SENATOR R. PHILLIPS OBJECTED.
A roll call vote was taken on the MOTION.
IN FAVOR: Representatives G. Davis, Therriault
OPPOSED: Representatives Bunde, Croft & Chair Phillips
Senator R. Phillips
Representative Mulder and Senators Parnell, Wilken, Adams,
Halford and Pearce were not present for the vote.
The MOTION FAILED (2-4).
REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT MOVED to approve RPL #25-1-2064.
SENATOR R. PHILLIPS OBJECTED.
A roll call vote was taken on the MOTION.
IN FAVOR: Representatives G. Davis, Therriault, Croft
OPPOSED: Representatives Bunde, Chair Phillips
Senator R. Phillips
Representative Mulder and Senators Parnell, Wilken, Adams,
Halford and Pearce were not present for the vote.
The MOTION FAILED (3-3).
CHAIR GAIL PHILLIPS indicated that with failing both
motions, it was understood that the request would go forward
either to the Legislative Finance Committees or back to the
LBA Committee.
RPL Number: 25-1-3308
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
Sitka Airport Extended Hours of Operation
$54,500 SDPR/Operating
DAVID TEAL stated that the Legislative Finance Division had
no concerns with the proposed request for funding.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE MOVED to approve RPL #25-1-3308. There
being NO OBJECTION, it was approved.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
SENATOR R. PHILLIPS made a motion, in accordance with Title
24 and 44, to move to Executive Session for the purpose of
discussing audit reports, which are held confidential by
law. There being NO OBJECTION, the Committee went into
Executive Session at 2:30 P.M.
The Committee resumed Open Session at 2:55 P.M.
(Tape Change, LBA 00-11, Side A - Tape malfunction)
AUDIT REPORTS
SENATOR R. PHILLIPS MOVED that the final audits on the
agenda be released to the public:
· DOR/AHFC-Spruce Park Housing
· DOR/AHFC-Housing Assistance Loan Fund
· DCED/Board of Public Accountancy
· DCED/Board of State Physical Therapy
& Occupational Therapy Board
· DCED/Board of Barbers and Hairdressers
· DCED/Board of Registration for Architects &
Engineers, and Land Surveyors
· DOC/Alaska Correctional Industries
· DEC/Board of Storage Tank Assistance
· DNR/For Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2000
· DOTPF/Alaska Marine Highway System Fund Schedule
of Unrestricted Revenues
There being NO OBJECTION, the final audits were released to
their respective Departments for public view.
SENATOR R. PHILLIPS MOVED that the following preliminary
audits be released for agency response:
· DOR/Child Support Enforcement Division
· DHSS/Divisions of Medical Assistance & Mental
Health & Developmental Disabilities
· DCED/Board of Dental Examiners
· DFG/Natural Resources, Office of the Governor,
Division of Governmental Coordination Mari culture
Development and Aquatic Farm Act
There being NO OBJECTION, the preliminary audits were
released to the respective agencies for further work.
ADJOURNMENT
REPRESENATIVE BUNDE MOVED to adjourn the meeting at 2:58
P.M.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|