Legislature(2005 - 2006)CAPITOL 124
03/21/2006 08:00 AM House COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB429 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 429 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
March 21, 2006
8:04 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Kurt Olson, Co-Chair
Representative Bill Thomas, Co-Chair
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux
Representative Mark Neuman
Representative Sharon Cissna
Representative Woodie Salmon
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Pete Kott
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 429
"An Act reestablishing the Department of Community and Regional
Affairs; relating to the Department of Commerce, Community, and
Economic Development and to the membership of various boards and
commissions; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 429
SHORT TITLE: RESTORE DCRA AND DCED
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) CROFT
02/06/06 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/06/06 (H) CRA, L&C, FIN
03/21/06 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 124
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE ERIC CROFT
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke as the sponsor of HB 429.
JOHN GLIVA
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Speaking as a former employee of DCRA and
DCCED, testified that the former DCRA doesn't fit well in DCCED.
ROY ECKERT, Manager
Ketchikan Gateway Borough
Ketchikan, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 429, testified that he
would like DCCED [and DCRA] to separate.
DAVID HOFFMAN, President
Alaska Growth Capital
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Urged the passage of HB 429
ROSS SCHAFFER, Mayor
Northwest Arctic Borough
Kotzebue, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 429, urged the
committee to reinstate DCRA.
PERCY FRISBY
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 429, testified in
support of the re-creation of DCRA.
JULIE KITKA, President
Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 429, related AFN's
support of the re-creation of DCRA.
MIKE IRWIN, Executive Vice President
Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 429.
KATHIE WASSERMAN
Alaska Municipal League (AML)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Advocated for HB 429.
GORDAN JACKSON, Director of Business and Economic Development
Tlingit and Haida Central Council
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 429.
SALLY SADDLER, Legislative Liaison
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Commerce, Community, & Economic Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Relayed that DCCED believes that the state
and its communities are best served by putting the money [for
seven new staff positions, as necessitated under HB 429] into
direct provision of services to communities.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CO-CHAIR BILL THOMAS called the House Community and Regional
Affairs Standing Committee meeting to order at 8:04:29 AM.
Representatives Thomas, Olson, LeDoux, and Neuman were present
at the call to order. Representatives Cissna and Salmon arrived
as the meeting was in progress.
HB 429-RESTORE DCRA AND DCED
8:05:16 AM
CO-CHAIR THOMAS announced that the only order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 429, "An Act reestablishing the Department of
Community and Regional Affairs; relating to the Department of
Commerce, Community, and Economic Development and to the
membership of various boards and commissions; and providing for
an effective date."
8:05:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ERIC CROFT, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor,
recalled when the Department of Commerce & Economic Development
(DCED) and the Department of Community and Regional Affairs
(DCRA) were combined. The original justification, he recalled,
was cost savings in the amount of $1 million from combining the
upper level administrators. He further recalled that at the
time it was a difficult choice because there were specific
duties of each department, and the hope was that the combination
would work well. However, he opined that the merger didn't work
well and now more than ever it is important for there to be a
specific agency dedicated to the communities across the state.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT highlighted that an agency dedicated to
helping city governments is the only agency specifically
mentioned in the Alaska State Constitution in Article X, Section
14. He related his belief that the constitution intended for
there to be a separate and distinct agency for rural and local
governments to seek assistance. Therefore, he expressed concern
regarding whether the current combined structure complies with
the constitution. Aside from the constitution, Representative
Croft opined that now more than ever it's very important that
rural governments of all kinds have a specific, identifiable,
and comfortable agency from which to seek assistance. He
attributed the need for a separate agency for communities to be
supported by the following: the tremendous impacts on
communities, the increasing complexity of requirements, and the
recent emphasis on areas to incorporate. In conclusion,
Representative Croft urged the committee to have a fair hearing
and pass out HB 429.
8:11:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN questioned why it's necessary to have one
department that works specifically with rural or "regional"
Alaska. He opined that there is already a rural/urban divide.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT explained that larger communities can, to
some extent, defend themselves. Although the proposed
Department of Community & Regional Affairs would serve all
communities, the impact of losing such a department is felt most
by smaller communities with few resources.
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN related his understanding that there's a
division or agency within the current DCCED that addresses the
aforementioned.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT answered that for many communities, they
know that there is a place somewhere in state government that is
supposed to help them. However, prior to the consolidation of
the departments, it was an identifiable location. He
highlighted that the constitution specifies that such "an agency
shall be established". The constitution further highlights the
importance of having such an agency at the department level.
Representative Croft opined that it's difficult for any
community, but particularly smaller communities, to face state
government. Therefore, there should be a department with
community-level staff who recognize and understand the
communities' problems.
8:15:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX said that she agreed with Representative
Croft in regard to the need for there to be a comfortable place
for cities and villages to go. However, she opined that would
be the function of the staff. She questioned the need to re-
create an entire department versus having a large advertising
campaign to educate the public as to where the services for
communities exist.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT said that he agreed that the staff does
matter the most. However, he maintained that a department is
necessary in this case because it acknowledges the importance
[of community issues] and allows the handling of the issues in a
more standard and uniform manner rather than a fragmented
fashion. With regard to Co-Chair Thomas' legislation to
encourage local governments, Representative Croft said that's a
good course. He reiterated the need for a cabinet-level post
dedicated to [community and regional].
8:19:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX inquired as to the number of positions
this proposed department would require.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT recalled the $1 million in savings when the
departments were merged in 1999, and the fiscal notes "here are
about $1.8 [million] so it's somewhere between those." He added
that the legislation would establish the office and people to
refer, help, and guide [communities].
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX opined that rather than creating another
department with a high paid commissioner, it would be more
appropriate to "beef up" the division in which the work
currently occurs.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT explained that commissioners are important
in regard to defending the mission. He suggested that if there
had been a commissioner, an advocate, when revenue sharing began
to decline, [the legislature] wouldn't have eliminated municipal
assistance and revenue sharing.
8:21:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA recalled 1999 when the merger occurred and
the rural communities related that they felt best with the
separate department. She characterized the merger as a
demonstration project, and inquired as to how rural Alaska was
changed and made better under that structure.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT said that as an experiment, the
departmental merger was a failure with some fairly dramatic
negative impacts to rural Alaska, such as lack of incorporation.
Although he said that he didn't know how significant the
elimination of DCRA is to the negative impacts in rural Alaska,
he said that there have been negative impacts that need to be
addressed with the funds available today.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA related her belief that there must be a
way to obtain an analysis of the effects of the 1999
departmental merger. She related the [increase] in camps in the
Chesterfield area in Anchorage and the serious problems with
[increases] in homeless populations. She related her belief
that urban Alaska is being impacted by the aforementioned
problems.
8:28:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SALMON opined that HB 429 would probably help
with the urban/rural divide that currently exists. There has to
be a connection between the cities that are created and the
appropriate state agency. He noted that many of the village
government officials aren't familiar with the entire
governmental process, and some assistance [from departmental
staff] is necessary to continue the village government.
8:29:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN noted his agreement with Representative
Salmon, but related that there is a division that provides such
services already within DCCED. He questioned whether it's
appropriate to create a separate department to accomplish the
same purpose.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT opined that making the former DCRA a
division within a larger department places the only
constitutionally mandated department in a subsidiary role. The
aforementioned, he further opined, results in the division never
getting the attention it deserves.
8:30:54 AM
CO-CHAIR THOMAS referred to the Articles included in the
legislation and asked if those are services that DCRA provided
in the past.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT said that the legislation proposes a fairly
small and bare bones DCRA and the Articles specified were
provided under the former DCRA. Other programs, such as
Headstart and Rural Energy, haven't been included. Therefore,
he characterized his proposal as a fairly limited reconstitution
of DCRA. In further response to Co-Chair Thomas, Representative
Croft clarified that the legislation doesn't create any new
programs as those programs are in the current division and the
former DCRA.
8:33:04 AM
JOHN GLIVA, speaking as a former employee of DCRA and DCCED,
related that DCRA served as a clearing house for information for
rural local governments and individuals. The entire staff of
DCRA had a good working knowledge of the issues in the
communities, rural or urban. He opined that DCRA did a good
job. However, some of the interest in contacting people has
been lost due to the way the programs and the issues have
evolved, he further opined. Mr. Gliva related his belief that
the former DCRA doesn't fit well in DCCED with its commissioner
that would likely have more of a worldwide and national focus of
promoting commerce within the state. With such a focus, he
opined that [DCRA] isn't receiving the attention it should, even
as a division within DCCED. Due to the merger of 1999, the
state lost the place where rural communities could go for
attention, which seemed to attribute to the rural/urban divide.
He reminded the committee that DCRA was the smallest department,
which meant that budget cuts by the state were strongly felt.
Therefore, he suggested that if the legislation passes, then a
department that can sustain itself and compete with other
departments within the state should be built. He recalled that
when revenue sharing was disappearing and the departments
merged, tribal governments seemed to step to the forefront. The
aforementioned has created conflict in some communities in
relation to which form of government is best for the
communities.
8:39:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SALMON asked if tribal governments are stronger
throughout the state.
MR. GLIVA said he wasn't sure whether the tribal government
presence is present throughout the state, although he recalled
that it was the case in the Yukon Kuskokwim Delta. He related
that there were three influencing factors [that led to tribal
governments stepping to the forefront], as follows: the loss of
revenue sharing; the loss of DCRA; and an increase in federal
funds for tribal entities. The largest difficulty for rural
communities was the loss of revenue sharing, he opined.
8:40:11 AM
MR. GLIVA, in response to Representative Cissna, recalled that
after the transition of DCRA to the Department of Commerce there
was also an internal transition with regard to the focus of the
remaining staff providing daily local government assistance.
The aforementioned staff were transferred to the Rural Utility
Business Assistance (RUBA) and they continue to provide day-to-
day government operation support, although it's a lower
priority. The main focus of RUBA, which receives a lot of
federal money, is to help communities better handle utilities
that are put in the cities. Moreover, the planning arm of DCRA
was redirected into other activities and the staff decreased.
8:43:24 AM
ROY ECKERT, Manager, Ketchikan Gateway Borough, said that he
found the discussion regarding the urban/rural divide as
interesting because as compared to [the Lower 48] all of Alaska
is considered to be rural. Mr. Eckert, drawing upon his 28
years of municipal management experience, said that he would
like DCCED to separate. He likened the combined department to
merging the police and fire departments under one entity, which
usually doesn't work due to the entirely different criteria and
standards. He said it's critical for areas to be classified as
rural because of the ability to have lower interest rates for
homes, which becomes a critical piece to consider when cities
and boroughs contemplate consolidation.
MR. ECKERT commented that [DCCED] doesn't care about rural
issues and it shouldn't because it deals with providing jobs and
bringing commerce and industry to a community, while DCRA deals
with the political side. He recalled his three years working
with the University of Tennessee in the Municipal Technical
Advisory Service (MTAS), which was a streamlined department that
provided municipal technical assistance to all 400 or so cities
in Tennessee. The MTAS was successful because it didn't address
personnel issues, although it did planning, zoning, water, and
sewer. The program was funded from a portion of a state sales
tax. The point was to help those cities without a full-time
manager, engineer, certified public accountant, sewer and water
manager, et cetera by providing technical expertise rather than
revenue sharing.
MR. ECKERT opined that he doesn't like a large combined
department because it quickly losses its vision and purpose.
Often, such a large department hires unqualified or less
qualified people over time and devolves into a faceless
government the sole purpose of which is to keep people employed
while the service aspect falls to the wayside. Therefore, he
suggested that Alaska needs to provide true economic development
and commerce services in [one department] and community and
regional affairs matters, such as planning and incorporations
[in another department]. With regard to staff, he acknowledged
that staff may be helpful or they may be rude. However, when
speaking with staff in a combined department, one may not be
knowledgeable or have expertise with regard to a political
issue. In conclusion, Mr. Eckert said that he would like [for
HB 429 to pass] because rural Alaska is hard hit economically
and has political and economic issues that are addressed by
entirely separate groups of people.
8:51:39 AM
DAVID HOFFMAN, President, Alaska Growth Capital, informed the
committee that prior to running Alaska Growth Capital he was the
chief operating officer of UIC, the chief executive officer of
Sitnasuak Native Corporation in Nome, and the commissioner of
DCRA from 1987-1990. He explained that Alaska Growth Capital is
a company that provides business loans and consulting services
to businesses that don't typically have access to bank
financing. The company is budgeted to do about $50 million
worth of loans this year and the primary target is rural Alaska.
He urged the passage of HB 429 because since Alaska achieved
statehood, local government and rural development have been
critical issues for the state. The need today is even greater,
especially since the long-term funding for rural communities is
probably decreasing, which means the problems will increase.
Traditionally, DCRA was a problem solving agency that addressed
the problems in local communities.
MR. HOFFMAN identified the following issues that could be
addressed more successfully by a separate department:
development and promotion of a private sector in rural Alaska;
local governance and organization of boroughs; and coordination
of federal and state services. He then expressed the importance
of the state finding local level mechanisms to promote the
coordination of tribal and municipal governments. He
highlighted that expertise is necessary to solve those problems.
He then recalled his time as the commissioner of DCRA, which he
likened to the office of the ombudsman in that there was an on-
the-ground problem solving. He opined that when DCRA was merged
with the Department of Commerce, the aforementioned problem
solving was diminished. The DCRA, he further opined, was very
successful with the coordination of programs. Again, what's
been lost is the entrepreneurial problem-solving approach of
DCRA. Mr. Hoffman related his belief that having two separate
departments provides a greater value because services are more
effective when an organization has a singular focus.
8:57:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA inquired as to what might make it
reasonable to have a separate and new administrative expense.
She inquired as to the financial advantage for the state that
would compensate for the administrative expenses of a separate
department.
MR. HOFFMAN, as a business person, suggested that one should
review the value for the services. He recalled his past
experience and his belief in the development of the private
sector, which is difficult in the smaller communities. He
recalled a conversation with a Galena resident who sold his
smoked fish for years and needed a way to work legally with a
loan. The aforementioned was accomplished and the agreement was
that the intellectual property was available for those
interested. The aforementioned was valuable and could've been
replicated had the salmon run not crashed. However, the problem
is that it's difficult for a department to focus on such
projects when it's also charged with the larger, global
projects.
9:03:23 AM
ROSS SCHAFFER, Mayor, Northwest Arctic Borough, opined that the
villages are broke and many don't have an adequate tax base due
to low population. He cited Kobuk and Ambler as examples. He
related that Kotzebue does the paperwork for communities that
can't afford to hire someone to do so. He further opined that
rural communities don't have any voice in the government, as far
as at the cabinet level. He then turned attention to global
warming and the lack of an agency to review this and its impacts
on rural communities. The current focus of DCCED is resource
and international trade development, while rural issues have
taken a back seat. Although he said he respected the governor's
intent to save money through the single department of DCCED, he
said that a healthy urban Alaska has to have a healthy rural
Alaska. Therefore, he urged the committee to reinstate DCRA.
9:08:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN focused on the charge that rural
communities don't have a voice in state government, and inquired
as to who isn't doing his/her job in representing rural
communities. With regard to the charge that DCCED is focusing
mainly on economic development, Representative Neuman
highlighted the importance of the Red Dog Mine and development,
in general.
MAYOR SCHAFFER said that DCCED doesn't have the time to spend on
rural issues when the focus is on resource development and
international development. Mayor Schaffer acknowledged that the
Red Dog Mine was developed such that the Northwest Arctic
Borough was formed. He further acknowledged that the borough
receives quite a bit of funding from the Red Dog Mine. However,
he echoed earlier testimony that the rural communities,
particularly the smaller communities, have very little voice in
the governor's cabinet.
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN surmised then that DCCED is doing what it
can with what it has.
MR. SCHAFFER explained that without a commissioner for DCRA, the
rural communities don't have a voice [in the governor's
cabinet].
9:11:31 AM
PERCY FRISBY, speaking as the 1994-2000 director of energy of
DCRA, pointed out that DCCED has very little to do with energy
issues because those issues were placed under the Alaska
Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA), which is a
lending institute under DCCED. However, under DCRA energy was
addressed and was a large portion of the focus. With regard to
the comment that tribal governments are becoming more of an
influence, he opined that when DCRA was eliminated, the tribal
governments began working with federal agencies to address the
losses experienced after losing DCRA. He echoed earlier
comments that rural Alaska doesn't have an agency or department
to advocate on its behalf. He pointed out that today more small
communities face bankruptcy than ever. He concluded by noting
his support of the re-creation of DCRA.
9:15:39 AM
JULIE KITKA, President, Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN),
related AFN's support of the re-creation of DCRA. She
highlighted the geographic issues and diverse communities in
Alaska that require different models to appropriately and
successfully address the needs of the communities. She
expressed the need to take the best of what is in communities,
build on it, share the successes, and replicate them. Ms. Kitka
acknowledged that the economic development is of vital
importance to the state and an important mission of DCCED, but
governance in small communities is not a mission of DCCED.
Furthermore, the rural governance commission report of a few
years ago characterizes DCCED as a significant step back in
state government models in regard to the inclusion of people all
over the state. In conclusion, Ms. Kitka urged the committee to
look at re-creating DCRA and focusing it on successful models
for small communities and implementing good governance because
without it economic development can't occur.
9:20:23 AM
MIKE IRWIN, Executive Vice President, Alaska Federation of
Natives (AFN), began by reminding the committee that he was the
last commissioner of DCRA. He highlighted the advocacy
component of DCRA and its commissioner, who provided a comfort
level for people from rural Alaska looking for [help] from state
government. Recalling his time sitting in the cabinet room, he
related that there is limited time for 15 commissioners to get
the attention of the entire body, let alone the governor.
Therefore, the commissioners have to choose what issues to bring
forward. With regard to Representative Neuman's earlier query
regarding who isn't doing their job, Mr. Irwin said that it's
not a matter of who isn't doing their job but rather the mission
of DCRA has been lost within DCCED. Furthermore, the single
commissioner for DCCED with a limited amount of time and
resources has to determine the real issues, mission, and
objective of the department. Although Mr. Irwin acknowledged
the importance of the macro economic and commerce function
within state government, it has come to be the dominant mission
of DCCED. Therefore, it's not surprising that the commerce and
macro economic side is the choice to present. Regarding whether
it's discriminatory to have an agency focused on the specific
needs and requirements of rural Alaska, he said he hoped people
would not view it that way because DCRA served every
municipality in the state based on the varying needs of each.
Mr. Irwin concluded by emphasizing that nothing can substitute
for having a seat at the cabinet table.
9:25:29 AM
MR. IRWIN, in response to Co-Chair Thomas, related that Edgar
Blatchford served as the commissioner of DCRA and the
commissioner of DCCED during its first years.
9:25:58 AM
KATHIE WASSERMAN, Alaska Municipal League (AML), thanked the
sponsor and the staff of the Division of Community Advocacy
within DCCED who have picked up what an entire department once
did and have done a good job doing so. However, as the problems
of the communities have grown, the amount of people and
resources to help have decreased. She recalled attending two
committee hearings in which the commissioner or deputy
commissioner testified in support of commerce issues, which was
actually in conflict with what's good for communities.
Furthermore, a couple of weeks of ago a legislative staffer
inquired as to who in the state would help with communities in
need. As a former mayor, Ms. Wasserman recalled the ties with
those in DCRA and pointed out that now there are fewer local
government specialists and it's difficult to find out where they
are and if they have the time. Furthermore, the DCRA staff
served as the staff that local governments couldn't hire, such
as attorneys. Ms. Wasserman advocated for HB 429 and noted that
there seems to be a direct relation between high oil prices and
difficulties in rural communities.
9:29:26 AM
GORDAN JACKSON, Director of Business and Economic Development,
Tlingit and Haida Central Council, informed the committee that
he was one of the original staff of DCRA in 1973. He recalled
that DCRA was a small department, but a committed group. He
reviewed the various divisions in DCRA and the services they
provided. He then echoed Ms. Wasserman's comments regarding the
high oil prices and the difficulties in rural communities. Mr.
Jackson recalled references to DCRA as a problem-solving
division, with which he agreed. Therefore, when DCRA was
eliminated, many looked to the federal government for answers.
The aforementioned has led to the current situation in which
communities are going directly to the federal government to
solve their problems and bypassing the state government
altogether. Therefore, re-establishing DCRA is important in
providing an opportunity to shrink the urban/rural divide, he
opined. He wholeheartedly endorsed re-creation of DCRA.
9:33:55 AM
SALLY SADDLER, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Commerce, Community, & Economic Development,
assured the committee that she is taking the concerns to the
department to address. She then reviewed DCCED's mission, which
is to promote healthy economies and strong communities.
Furthermore, [the department] believes the integration of
economic development and community development is inextricably
linked, logical, and economical. From today's comments she
surmised that the department is busy in the trenches providing
the services and doing the work, but not getting the message
out. Therefore, she assured the committee that the department
would work on getting the message out to the people. There are
several programs, such as the fisheries revitalization program,
on which the department has been working. The hope is that
DCCED is providing communities with the skills and abilities
they need to be successful in maximum self governance. In fact,
the administration has introduced the community dividend
legislation. In closing, Ms. Saddler related that the
department has conservatively estimated that seven new staff
positions would be necessary if HB 429 were to pass.
Essentially, an administrative services office and a
commissioner's office would be created around the Division of
Community Advocacy. Ms. Saddler relayed that DCCED believes
that the state and the communities are best served by putting
the money [necessary for seven new staff positions] into direct
provision of services to communities.
9:36:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN recalled the witnesses who expressed
concerns, and said they need to be contacted. He also recalled
the testimony expressing that [rural communities] don't feel
they have a voice "at the table."
MS. SADDLER opined that the department does a good job working
with the entities and organizations to leverage expertise,
talent, and resources. In fact, when the commissioner meets
with the governor, he often presents community issues. To the
extent to which that can be improved, Ms. Saddler said the
department looks forward to doing so.
9:38:23 AM
CO-CHAIR THOMAS closed public testimony.
9:38:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA commented that she has been impressed with
the staff of all the departments, including those of DCCED.
However, there is a crisis and HB 429 is one way to address it.
9:39:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SALMON commented that Alaska has a bridge to
build in relation to the rural/urban divide and DCRA is one
portion of it. He expressed the need to balance money and
services, which he said can't be achieved when there is only
interest in money. In rural communities, the governments are
small and have limited expertise. This legislation would be a
good instrument for the state and the rural areas to come
together.
9:41:28 AM
CO-CHAIR THOMAS announced that HB 429 would be held over. He
also noted that there have been no complaints from the 48
communities he represents. He also noted that if HB 429 moves
forward, the tribal organizations will have to scale back and
work with the state.
9:42:20 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Community and Regional Affairs Standing Committee meeting was
adjourned at 9:42 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|