Legislature(2003 - 2004)
01/16/2003 09:20 AM House BUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
TWENTY-SECOND
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
JOINT COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE BUDGET AND AUDIT
January 16, 2003
9:20 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Gene Therriault, Chair
Senator Dave Donley
Senator Randy Phillips (via teleconference)
Representative Hugh Fate, Vice Chair (via teleconference)
Representative John Harris
Representative Reggie Joule
Representative Ken Lancaster (via teleconference)
Representative John Davies, alternate (via teleconference)
Representative Bill Williams, alternate (via teleconference)
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Lyman Hoffman
Senator Jerry Ward
Senator Gary Wilken, alternate
Representative Eldon Mulder
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SCHOOL DISTRICT COST STUDY
OTHER COMMITTEE BUSINESS
WITNESS REGISTER
No witnesses to record
ACTION NARRATIVE
[NOTE: This meeting, although held in 2003, is part of the
Twenty-Second Alaska State Legislature.]
TAPE 02-15, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR GENE THERRIAULT reconvened the Joint Committee on
Legislative Budget and Audit meeting [recessed the day before]
at 9:20 a.m. Members present at the call to order were Senators
Therriault and Donley, and Representatives Fate (via
teleconference), Harris, Lancaster (via teleconference),
Williams (via teleconference), and Davies (via teleconference).
Representative Joule and Senator Phillips (via teleconference)
joined the meeting while it was in progress.
SCHOOL DISTRICT COST STUDY
Number 0123
CHAIR THERRIAULT announced that the committee would again take
up the issue of the School District Cost Study, which is now
finished, ready to be accepted by the Joint Committee on
Legislative Budget and Audit, and then presented to the
legislature. He noted that the issues regarding the methodology
of the study and the drafting of the RFP (request for
proposals), in addition to being discussed on 1/15/03, have also
been discussed several times by the oversight committee. He
ventured that all members of the committee have had access to
the directives that were given to the contractor. The
contractor has performed the work, he stated, adding that the
study was originally due on December 15, 2002, but due to a
little bit of concern regarding differences in data, the
steering committee asked the contractor to get together with
members of the Alaska Association of School Business Officials
(ALASBO) just to make sure that all data coming in from school
districts was reported consistently. Therefore, he explained,
the consultant was given a little bit of extra time to
incorporate that work, that work was completed, and now the
study is before the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS mentioned that one of the concerns
expressed [the day before] was that the technical section,
Volume 2, had not yet been seen by any of the members; Volume 2
is now available, he added.
CHAIR THERRIAULT noted that at the steering-committee level, the
issue of how the study would look in its final form was
discussed, resulting in the development of two separate volumes:
Volume 1, which contains the narrative, and Volume 2, which just
contains the technical data.
REPRESENTATIVE FATE mentioned that at the prior meeting, there
was also some confusion expressed regarding the criteria used in
the RFP that directed the study. He relayed that Senator
Hoffman had expressed some concern that "needs" were not
included in the RFP and, thus, the study did not address that
issue.
CHAIR THERRIAULT confirmed that the consultant was specifically
told that the study was not to address either "adequacy of
education funding" or "needs out in different districts." "This
was specifically a study to look at our 'area cost differential
numbers,' and come up with new suggested numbers for area cost
differential," he explained. He said that he looks at the
overall K-12 funding issue and the "student dollar amount" as a
policy call for the legislature [to make]. He added:
We all hear from our individual districts ... for
additional money. This study specifically looked at,
"If you have a dollar to spend on education in
Anchorage Alaska" - if Anchorage is to be considered
the base - "what number must you multiply that by to
get the same 'education purchasing power' in Nulato or
in Fairbanks?" That is specifically what the ...
contractor ... was told to look at.
Number 0711
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES observed that there are three different
areas of concern:
I think the first kind of technical concern that
mostly was represented by [Senator] Phillips's
problems was that ... most of us received this report
late yesterday, and I would suggest that most people
haven't had a chance to read it. Nobody, I think, has
received Volume 2, so I think that [Senator Phillips]
has concerns - and I still have concerns - about
voting to release it to the public without the
committee actually having a chance to ... digest it
and ... have an informed discussion on it. So I think
that's one general area of concern.
With respect to the technical issue of whether the
committee should accept the report for payment of the
contractor, I think that ... could be viewed as a
separate issue. And I wouldn't have any problem, ...
in the amount of time that I've had to review it, in
saying, "Yeah, I believe the contractor did the job
that the RFP requested of them." So on that narrow
question, I wouldn't have any problem saying, "Yeah,
the committee should accept the report for purposes of
payment of the contractor." So ..., that's the second
issue, I think.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES continued:
The third, larger issue, though, I think, was the area
that Senator Hoffman had concerns about, and that was
the narrow interpretation of what the contractor was
actually doing. And I think that that's still going
to be an issue that the legislature's going to have to
debate - I agree with you on that ...; SB 36 [from the
20th legislature], one of the provisions there, called
for an adequacy study, [and] this, as you've said, is
clearly not an adequacy study.
It does what you've said it does, it narrowly looks at
what (indisc. - teleconference line interference) to
provide a certain restricted educational service; it
doesn't look at other special services, for example.
And so (indisc. - teleconference line interference)
said that for the services that are studied -
specifically, the cost of personnel, the cost of
energy services, the cost of supplies, and the cost of
travel - I think it does a good job of identifying
what those differences are around the state of Alaska.
Number 0978
But the larger question is, "If you spend a dollar in
Anchorage, what is the amount that you have to spend
in other districts to get the same educational value?"
That's a completely different question than (indisc. -
teleconference line interference). And so I think
that that's where the legislative debate is going to
remain, and I guess there's a question in my mind
about ... what this study represents when we release
it to the public. And so I think it ... needs to be
made very clear that ... it answers a fairly narrow
question and that there's a much larger question left
to be discussed.
CHAIR THERRIAULT remarked that the study would certainly be
debated during the committee [process] of the legislature; it's
the policy call of the next legislature to determine what they
will do with the information provided by the study. He offered
his opinion that the consultant has done the work as directed by
the RFP.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES said that he does not disagree that the
contractor has done the work, and that he is willing to vote to
pay the contractor. He pointed out, however, that clearly,
committee members have not had enough time to read the report in
enough detail that they could ask pertinent questions of the
contractor. He observed that there hasn't yet been [a Joint
Committee on Legislative Budget and Audit] meeting in which
members have read the report and were prepared to ask questions
of the contractor, followed by a subsequent committee
discussion.
Number 1256
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS made a motion that "the committee accept
the School District Cost Study as a final product and make it
available to the public."
Number 1307
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES objected.
Number 1352
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Harris, Lancaster,
and Fate, and Senators Phillips, Donley, and Therriault voted in
favor of accepting the School District Cost Study as a final
product and making it available to the public. Representative
Davies voted against it. Therefore, the motion to accept the
School District Cost Study as a final product and make it
available to the public passed by a vote of 6-1.
CHAIR THERRIAULT noted that both volumes of the study are now
available to the public, and that copies of Volume 2 would soon
be sent on to the members that participated via teleconference.
OTHER COMMITTEE BUSINESS
Number 1448
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS made a motion to "authorize you [Chair
Therriault] to review the final legal billings of Volland &
Taylor and make that payment as you determine reasonable."
CHAIR THERRIAULT noted that in reviewing Volland & Taylor's
previous billings, in one area there was a very small billing
that appeared to be duplicative: "a person chose to attend the
supreme court hearing, and billed us for that when they should
not have." He relayed that that [item] was turned down. He
also noted that there was a dispute over some archiving fees,
and relayed his opinion that when any law office performs work
for a client, that client should expect, at the end of the case,
to be able to get a copy of his/her file without bearing the
expense of that file being maintained in reasonable order. He
said that he intends to look at that amount - $1,300 to $1,500 -
using "the same methodology."
Number 1635
SENATOR PHILLIPS objected to the motion.
Number 1730
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Harris, Lancaster,
Joule, Davies, and Fate, and Senators Donley and Therriault
voted in favor of the motion. Senator Phillips voted against
it. Therefore, the motion to grant Chair Therriault
authorization regarding the Volland & Taylor billings passed by
a vote of 7-1.
CHAIR THERRIAULT, on the issue of "the Veterans' Home Study,"
noted that the steering committee is about to make a decision
between the two RFP proposals, adding that the current Joint
Committee on Legislative Budget and Audit would be accepting one
of those proposals before the new Joint Committee on Legislative
Budget and Audit takes over.
ADJOURNMENT
Number 1907
There being no further business before the committee, the Joint
Committee on Legislative Budget and Audit meeting was adjourned
at 9:40 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|