Legislature(2005 - 2006)HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/15/2005 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB155 | |
| HB107 | |
| HB19 | |
| HB67 | |
| HB98 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| HB 19 | |||
| HB 107 | |||
| = | HB 155 | ||
| = | SB 98 | ||
| = | HB 66 | ||
| = | HB 67 | ||
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
March 15, 2005
1:54 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Meyer called the House Finance Committee meeting to
order at 1:54:25 PM.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Mike Chenault, Co-Chair
Representative Kevin Meyer, Co-Chair
Representative Bill Stoltze, Vice-Chair
Representative Eric Croft
Representative Richard Foster
Representative Mike Hawker
Representative Mike Kelly
Representative Carl Moses
Representative Bruce Weyhrauch
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Jim Holm
Representative Reggie Joule
ALSO PRESENT
Representative Ralph Samuels; Sarah Nielson, Staff,
Representative Ralph Samuels; Jim Pound, Staff,
Representative Jay Ramras; Mike Pawlowski, Staff,
Representative Kevin Meyer; Anthony Newman, Division of
Juvenile Justice, Department of Health & Social Services;
Kristin Ryan, Director, Division of Environmental Health,
Department of Environmental Conservation; Senator Ben
Stevens; Representative Ethan Berkowitz; Nancy Slagle,
Director, Division of Administrative Services, Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities; Sharon Kelly, Staff,
Co-Chair Chenault; Cheryl Frasca, Director, Division of
Management & Budget, Office of the Governor; Art Chance,
Labor Relations Director, Division of Labor Relations,
Department of Administration,; Pete Ecklund, Staff,
Representative Kevin Meyer; Joan Brown, Budget Analyst,
Office of Management and Budget (OMB); Chris Christensen,
Staff Counsel, Alaska Court System; Janet Clarke, Assistant
Commissioner, Division of Finance and Management Services,
Department of Health and Social Services; Nico Bus, Acting
Director, Division of Administrative Services, Department of
Natural Resources; Karen Rehfeld, Deputy Commissioner,
Department of Education and Early Development; Kathryn
Daughhetee, Director, Administrative Services Division,
Department of Law.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Jonathon Lack, Attorney, Anchorage Youth Court, Anchorage;
Jennifer Yuhas, Executive Director, Alaska Outdoor Council,
Anchorage; Virginia Espenshade, Director, Kenai Peninsula
Youth Court, Homer; Lisa Albert-Konecky, Program
Coordinator, Matsu Youth Court, Matsu; Dr. Arndt Von Hippel,
Anchorage; Ken Perry, General Manager, Pest Control
Operators, Anchorage; Emily Nenon, American Cancer Society,
Anchorage; Pam Miller, Executive Director, Alaska Community
Action on Toxics, Anchorage; Katie Aspen Gavenus, Homer;
Dylan Weiser, Vice President, Kachemak Bay Conservation,
Homer.
SUMMARY
HB 19 An Act relating to pesticides and broadcast
chemicals; and providing for an effective date.
HB 19 was HEARD and HELD for further consideration
on the fiscal notes.
HB 66 An Act making appropriations for the operating and
capital expenses of the state's integrated
comprehensive mental health program; and providing
for an effective date.
HB 66 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
HB 67 An Act making appropriations for the operating and
loan program expenses of state government, for
certain programs, and to capitalize funds; making
appropriations under art. IX, sec. 17(c),
Constitution of the State of Alaska, from the
constitutional budget reserve fund; and providing
for an effective date.
HB 67 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
HB 107 An Act providing for the award of full actual
attorney fees and costs to a person aggrieved by
unlawful obstruction or hindrance of hunting,
fishing, or viewing of fish or game; amending
Rules 79 and 82, Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure;
and amending Rule 508, Alaska Rules of Appellate
Procedure.
CS HB 107 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with
a "no recommendation" and with zero note #1 by the
Department of Fish & Game and zero note #3 by the
Department of Law.
HB 155 An Act relating to youth courts and to the
recommended use of criminal fines to fund the
activities of youth courts; and relating to
accounting for criminal fines.
CS HB 155 (JUD) was reported out of Committee with
a "do pass" recommendation and with zero note #1
by the Department of Law and a new zero note by
the Department of Health & Social Services.
CS SB 98(FIN) An Act making supplemental appropriations,
capital appropriations, and other appropriations;
amending appropriations; making appropriations to
capitalize funds; making appropriations under art.
IX, sec. 17(c), Constitution of the State of
Alaska, from the constitutional budget reserve
fund; and providing for an effective date.
HCS CSSB 98 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee
with a "do pass" recommendation.
1:54:51 PM
HOUSE BILL NO. 155
An Act relating to youth courts and to the recommended
use of criminal fines to fund the activities of youth
courts; and relating to accounting for criminal fines.
REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SAMUELS, SPONSOR, offered to answer
questions of the Committee.
Vice-Chair Stoltze referenced victim's rights noting that
the only complaint that he has heard about the Youth Courts
is that victims do not always know the dispensation of the
offender. There is no insurance unless there is
restitution. He asked if there was anyway around that.
Representative Samuels deferred the question to Attorney
Lack.
JONATHON LACK, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ATTORNEY,
VOLUNTEER WITH THE ANCHORAGE YOUTH COURT, ANCHORAGE,
explained that because these are juvenile proceedings, they
are confidential even to the victim. If the victims come to
court, they find out what the sentencing is. There is no
formal way to inform them that the sentence has been
completed. However, if the sentence is not completed, the
guilty person is referred back to the juvenile probation
officer, at which point, they return to whatever the normal
process is for any offender not completing the program.
Vice-Chair Stoltze inquired if victims are allowed to attend
the proceedings. Mr. Lack replied that they are.
1:59:51 PM
Vice-Chair Stoltze understood that in the Youth Court, once
guilt has been admitted to, then they proceed with
sentencing. He asked if there could be action from an
adversarial trial. Mr. Lack explained that the juvenile
defenders are not actually able to plead guilty; they have
to plead "no contest" because of the rules in State statute.
In most cases that go to trial, it is an adversarial
proceeding, in which the prosecution has to call witnesses,
often times the victims. He added that State Statute does
allow the Courts to subpoena witnesses.
2:01:35 PM
ANTHONY NEWMAN, DIVISION OF JUVENILE JUSTICE, DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES, offered to answer questions of the
Committee.
VIRGINIA ESPENSHADE, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE),
DIRECTOR, KENAI PENINSULA YOUTH COURT, HOMER, testified in
support of the legislation. She pointed out that many
times, a written apology is required to the victim. Focus
on the victim's involvement is strong and often is mandated.
The perception that victims are left out comes from issues
of confidentiality.
2:03:30 PM
LISA ALBERT-KONECKY, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), PROGRAM
COORDINATOR, MATSU YOUTH COURT, MATSU, testified in support
of the legislation. She explained that in the Matsu area,
there is a victim's justice coordinator who provides a
victim impact statement. She stressed that early
intervention really works.
· There have been over 1100 juvenile referrals since
1996 in the Matsu Valley Youth Court with a 92%
success rate over the last eight years;
· $10,200 dollars in restitution payments for the
victims has been received;
· There have been over 15,000 work service volunteer
hours.
· She mentioned the educational classes offered in
Matsu.
2:06:24 PM
Representative Hawker MOVED to report CS HB 155 (JUD) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CS HB 155 (JUD) was reported out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with zero note #1 by the Department
of Law and a new zero note by the Department of Health &
Social Services.
2:07:55 PM
HOUSE BILL NO. 107
An Act providing for the award of full actual attorney
fees and costs to a person aggrieved by unlawful
obstruction or hindrance of hunting, fishing, or
viewing of fish or game; amending Rules 79 and 82,
Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure; and amending Rule 508,
Alaska Rules of Appellate Procedure.
JIM POUND, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE JAY RAMRAS, reported that
HB 107 is a change to existing statute regarding persons who
hunt, fish, trap, or view wildlife in Alaska. Presently, if
any of those people are obstructed from participating in
that experience, they can seek relief in court. The courts
are permitted to grant damages for most of the expenses
except reasonable actual attorney fees and costs. The
legislation would allow the judge to grant full costs and
reasonable and actual attorney fees.
Mr. Pound continued, pointing out that there is growing
sentiment across the country that disturbing wildlife in any
manner is unacceptable, however, hunting, fishing, trapping,
and viewing wildlife are considered an important way of life
in Alaska. The individuals or groups, who could hinder
wildlife experience, know that most people will not go to
court because of the attorney fees and costs associated with
that type of litigation.
He added that Alaskans and visitors should not be subjected
to pay because of interference, obstruction, or hindrance of
that right. The legislation allows for an opportunity of
the prevailing party to recoup actual costs associated with
hindering that type experience.
Representative Hawker asked the basis used to determine the
90% attorney fee amount. Mr. Pound responded that resulted
from Representative Gruenberg, who was concerned leaving it
at 100%. He thought there could be more of a potential of
false litigation and filing and requested the change.
Representative Hawker asked if there was precedence
elsewhere for the 90% number. Mr. Pound replied there is
not and that in eminent domain cases, it is at 100%. He
reiterated that 90% was unique.
Representative Hawker asked if the sponsor would welcome
changing it back to 100%. Mr. Pound replied that the
sponsor would not object.
2:11:19 PM
Representative Weyhrauch referenced Subsection 3, regarding
a person physically interfering or tampering with equipment.
Mr. Pound commented that language was inserted because there
have been situations where an individual cut another
person's trap line. That person was caught and they entered
into the criminal process. The guilty person was only
charged with criminal mischief.
Representative Weyhrauch thought that was a "narrow" lead
and proposed other hypothetical situations. Mr. Pound noted
that other situations could be addressed under language in
Section 2.
Representative Weyhrauch grilled the point. Mr. Pound
advised that the courts had already interpreted existing
language.
2:14:35 PM
Representative Weyhrauch asked who would be entitled,
outside of the law enforcement officers, to instruct
regarding hunting, fishing, etc. and asked if that could be
a property owner if someone was trespassing. Mr. Pound
noted that AS 16.05.0790(e) explains the lawful hunting,
fishing and trapping practices on private land given consent
of the owner.
Representative Weyhrauch asked if the 90% payment would
require a 2/3 vote because of the direct rule change. Mr.
Pound said yes.
Vice-Chair Stoltze inquired if those types of cases are
difficult to prove. Mr. Pound clarified that the
legislation only deals with being out in the field or on the
water.
2:16:34 PM
Vice-Chair Stoltze pointed out a letter in the file from the
National Rifle Association (NRA). Mr. Pound stated that
there would be testimony from the Alaska Outdoor Council.
Representative Weyhrauch asked if the legislation would only
apply to "wild" fish and game. Mr. Pound said yes.
2:17:16 PM
JENNIFER YUHAS, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, ALASKA OUTDOOR COUNCIL, ANCHORAGE, voiced support
for HB 107. Current statute does not guarantee that a
citizen can be awarded attorney fees for litigating
incidences of obstruction abuse from hunting, fishing or
trapping. The changes in the proposed legislation would
bring necessary corrections to the existing statute.
2:18:32 PM
Representative Weyhrauch asked why commercial fishing had
not been included to Section 3, Page 2. Mr. Pound responded
that in Section 3, Line 18, it had been added to the
previous version of the bill.
2:20:03 PM
Representative Weyhrauch commented that falling under the
exclusion of that sentence, a person would have to be
actively engaged in commercial fishing in order to be
exempt. They could be traveling to, from or be on fishing
grounds to be exempt. Mr. Pound understood that they would
have to be actively fishing.
2:20:56 PM
Representative Hawker MOVED to ADOPT conceptual Amendment
#1, changing the two instances of 90% to full recovery of
legal fees at 100%. That change would be on Page 2, Lines
18 & 19, and Page 2, Line 24, deleting "90% of".
Representative Weyhrauch OBJECTED for the purpose of
discussion. Representative Hawker repeated the proposed
change. Representative Weyrauch understood that there would
continue to be judicial discretion. Representative Hawker
thought so.
Representative Weyhrauch WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
Representative Hawker noted that his staff was distributing
the written version of Amendment #1. (Copy on File).
Representative Weyhrauch thought that the proposed change
would return the legislation back to the House Resource
Committee version. He questioned why the change was needed.
Representative Hawker requested that Mr. Pound respond. Mr.
Pound explained that the indirect court rule change was
still a discussion of argument in the courts and that the
Supreme Court has not yet made a decision.
2:26:01 PM
Representative Hawker WITHDREW conceptual Amendment #1.
Representative Hawker MOVED to ADOPT written Amendment #1.
(Copy on File).
Representative Weyhrauch OBJECTED. He commented on the
proposed language regarding suing for the damages because of
the action. If the case goes to trail, all costs would be
charged plus the reasonable attorney fees. Mr. Pound
acknowledged that was correct. Representative Weyhrauch
commented on "full and actual" attorney fees.
2:28:49 PM
Representative Croft referenced Section D(2) regarding
prosecution. He asked the instance of "lawfully".
Representative Hawker inquired if that was relative to the
Amendment #1. Representative Croft responded it was not.
Representative Weyrauch WITHDREW his OBJECTION to Amendment
#1. There being NO further OBJECTION, Amendment #1 was
adopted.
Mr. Pound responded to the question by Representative Croft.
He noted that "lawful" would address combat fishing on
rivers. Representative Weyhrauch noted an example that
occurred fishing on the Kenai River. Mr. Pound responded
that situation would be classified as "lawfully" interfering
and would be listed as intentional vandalism.
Discussion followed between Representative Weyhrauch and Mr.
Pound regarding the example.
2:32:15 PM
Representative Weyhrauch interjected that with passage of
the bill; both sport and commercial fishermen would have to
take a lawyer into account while fishing.
Representative Foster MOVED to report CS HB 107 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CS HB 107 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with "no
recommendation" and with zero note #1 by the Department of
Fish & Game and zero note #3 by the Department of Law.
2:32:58 PM
HOUSE BILL NO. 19
An Act relating to pesticides and broadcast chemicals;
and providing for an effective date.
MIKE PAWLOWSKI, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE KEVIN MEYER, explained
that there are three parts to the legislation and that he
would address each separately.
The first four sections provide Department of Environmental
Conservation authority to charge a fee to manufacturers who
register pesticides and broadcast chemicals for sale or
distribution in the State. He added that every state in the
nation requires chemical companies to register their
chemicals with the appropriate state agency and that Alaska
is the only state that does not charge a registration fee.
Mr. Pawlowski noted that HB 19 would not establish a
specific fee in statute, but rather sets a ceiling on the
fee that the Department could charge a manufacturer. By
putting the fee in regulation with a limit, allows
flexibility to the Department to ensure that chemicals that
do not have a large enough market in Alaska to support that
annual fee, not to bear it.
Mr. Pawlowski pointed out that Section 6 contains other
important provisions.
· The first portion of Section 6 (Lines 29 through 31)
requires a person applying pesticides or broadcast
chemicals in a public place, be licensed or
authorized by the Department.
· Classes and training required for certification are
free, but the legislation provides a charged fee of
up to $25 for the license. Fees collected through
registration and licensing would support the
regulations and enforcement of the State's pesticide
and broadcast chemicals. At present time, the
programs are supported largely with general funds.
· The final provision in legislation is also found in
Section 6, Line 31, Page 3. That section directs
the Department to promulgate a reasonable public
notice requirement that includes written notice
posted on the application site as to when pesticides
are applied in a public place. He noted that a
large portion of the public is interested in the
chemicals that they are exposed to. Public notice
gives the public an opportunity to make decisions
for themselves about what they expose themselves to.
Mr. Pawlowski summarized that the essential underlying
purpose of HB 19 is to create a pesticide program in Alaska,
which the public can have confidence in and supported by the
sector being regulated.
2:39:01 PM
Co-Chair Meyer advised that Alaska is the only state that
does not have a registration fee to cover those costs. Mr.
Pawlowski acknowledged that was correct. No fee is charged
for the chemical registration and that the costs were bore
by the General Fund.
Mr. Pawlowski asked the Department of Environmental
Conservation to address the fiscal note. He noted that the
fee is based largely on an assumption of how many chemicals
would be registered in the State.
Representative Weyhrauch asked the definition of "broadcast
chemical". Mr. Pawlowski stated that it is defined as any
chemical under a certain class that is broadcast into the
air. It can include chemicals that are used to suppress
fires and/or oil spills. The definition is large.
Representative Weyrauch inquired if roadside herbicides
would be included. Mr. Pawlowski replied they would. In
response to further questions by Representative Weyrauch,
Mr. Pawlowski explained that herbicides would have to be
applied in a public place. He referenced the definition of
public place, Section 6, Page 4, Lines 3-8.
Representative Weyrauch asked about applications to bed and
breakfasts; discussion followed. He asked why hotels,
motels and restaurants would be excluded. Mr. Pawlowski
pointed out that grouping is covered largely by the
Department of Environmental Conservation's food code.
2:42:38 PM
KRISTIN RYAN, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH,
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION, ANCHORAGE,
responded to concerns voiced by Representative Weyhrauch.
She advised that setting the fee rate in statute could be
problematic and that the proposed fee would be sufficient
based on current costs.
Representative Weyhrauch inquired why those fees were
chosen. Ms. Ryan responded that when the Department
determined what it would take to do the work, assuming 40%
decide not to register, the Division would need to charge
about $105 dollars per product to generate the revenue
needed. The $120 dollar number would provide leeway to
change.
Representative Weyhrauch believed that the base of the
fiscal note was $125 dollars.
2:46:10 PM
Representative Weyhrauch asked at what point does the State
make money. Ms. Ryan explained that the fiscal note would
have the general fund contribution eliminated by FY08. At
that time, the State would no longer be paying $119 thousand
dollars to support the program. In response to
Representative Weyrauch, Ms. Ryan indicated that the entire
cost of the program would be $384 thousand dollars. The
costs bore by fees would be $382 thousand dollars and with
the reductions would equal the $119 thousand general fund
dollars currently in the program.
Vice-Chair Stoltze inquired which industries, professions or
"quasi-State" agencies would be impacted the most by the
legislation. Ms. Ryan noted that the fee would be generated
by outside chemical manufacturers. She added that other
impacted would be the outside user. She related which
businesses would be exempt and regulated by other means.
There would no significant changes for farmers.
2:50:09 PM
Co-Chair Meyer referenced the query made by Representative
Weyhrauch regarding bed and breakfasts. Ms. Ryan offered to
check with the Department's attorney regarding inclusion of
that group.
Co-Chair Meyer asked if bars would be included. Ms. Ryan
said that bars would be considered a private area frequented
by the public and would be included. Co-Chair Meyer asked
how they would be notified. Ms. Ryan discussed the
regulations and how the public process and notification
process would be handled with signage posted, etc.
Co-Chair Meyer questioned a person's right-of-way portion of
their yard. Ms. Ryan responded that technically, it belongs
to the municipality. She did not know.
Representative Kelly inquired if "the legislation was
attempting to tax and regulate". He thought that an
attrition rate could happen and if that would be okay. Ms.
Ryan acknowledged that there is public concern and that the
attrition rate is something not intended. She explained
that there is a waiver process for new chemicals.
2:55:19 PM
Representative Kelly asked if any other states had found an
effective way to deal with the issues referred to by
Representative Weyhrauch. Ms. Ryan stated that Alaska is
not using any other state as a model as they tend to be a
bit more extreme than Alaska, however, by exempting hotels,
motels and restaurants, the Department thought that they had
eliminated low exposure areas. The intent was to address
multi-family dwellings.
Representative Kelly commented that unintentional problems
were being created and the costs associated with the
legislation appear high. Ms. Ryan noted that the Department
is very cautious about growth and that since 1992, only one
position has been added to the Department.
2:58:56 PM
Mr. Pawlowski responded to concerns of Representative Kelly
in dealing with the certificated applicators and charging a
fee. He noted discussion with the certified applicators and
the agreement that resulted. Health concerns are out there
and the right to know is important. He addressed fiscal
concerns and the level of service needed. The language on
Page 2, Section 3(a), addresses what can be charged and how
the Department can use those funds.
Representative Hawker added to the discussion, asking if HB
19 was a public interest bill or a revenue generating
measure. He asked if the sponsor had considered the
"elasticity in the market", which could result in a dramatic
loss of revenue. Ms. Ryan acknowledged that there is some
truth in that possibility, noting that some companies do not
want to register in Alaska. She pointed out that the
Department is committed to establishing a waiver process.
It is important that research is not restricted nor hinders
the use of new products. Some new products are safer and
better for the environment. Representative Hawker
acknowledged that he does not know the answer to these
questions and recommended adding language to address such
concerns.
Representative Hawker referred to the fiscal note and the
addition of new personnel. He asked if the new third person
could be a position not budgeted at present time but funded
later as the program develops and the needs the increase.
3:05:40 PM
Co-Chair Meyer supported the idea. Representative Hawker
recommended that the Committee eliminate the third person
from the Department's fiscal note.
3:06:55 PM
DR. ARNDT VON HIPPEL, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE),
RETIRED HEART SURGEON, ANCHORAGE, voiced support for the
bill and spoke to public health issues that it addresses.
He provided a personal situation in which a neighbor sprayed
aphids, which nearly cost Dr. Von Hippel's life. He
reiterated strong support for the legislation.
Dr. Van Hippel advised that outdoor spray of pesticides
violates label warnings. He believed that those who spray
pesticides for non-agricultural purposes should loose their
licenses. He urged every victim sue.
Dr. Van Hippel stressed that he does not want notification
that he must seal or leave his home while a sprayer
contaminates everything. He pointed out that there is a
constitutional right to privacy. Tons of poisons have
already been sprayed in Alaska with no effect on the spruce
beetle problem. Dr. Van Hippel encouraged that soap and
water work well on most concerns and questioned any use of
pesticides. It is not known how long the chemicals last in
the environment.
3:10:59 PM
KEN PERRY, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), GENERAL MANAGER,
PEST CONTROL OPERATORS, ANCHORAGE, testified against the
legislation and urged that the Committee not pass the bill,
by falling victim to the environmental extremists promoting
it. He stated that the proposed charge would be punitive
and dedicated to anti-pesticide regulation. He warned that
an attempt to make law in an area already closely governed
by the federal government is dangerous. Mr. Perry pointed
out that concerns of exposure are addressed on every label.
He reiterated his opposition to the legislation.
3:15:15 PM
EMILY NENON, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ALASKA
GOVERNMENT RELATIONS DIRECTOR, AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY,
ANCHORAGE, pointed out that the legislation addresses an
Alaskan health issue. She commented on what other states
have done regarding the issue. She added that the
education, information and public notice process required
would be a good step to providing reasonable public notice
and that the language in the committee substitute was well
in line with that of other states.
3:16:59 PM
PAM MILLER, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), BIOLOGIST,
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION ON TOXICS,
ANCHORAGE, stated that Alaska Community Action on Toxics
(ACAT) strongly supports HB 19. Enactment of the bill would
be an important first step in assuring the public's right to
know about pesticide applications. Children, elderly
people, and those with chronic illnesses are particularly
susceptible to adverse health effects from pesticide
exposure.
Ms. Miller continued, pesticide use occurs in places
frequented in our daily lives, such as parks, public lands
and buildings and grounds, transportation and utility right
of way, schools, etc. Although there are more than 5,700
pesticides registered in Alaska, there is no reliable system
to track the amounts and locations they are used.
Ms. Miller noted that ACAT has done extensive research on
the health effects of pesticides using peer-reviewed
scientific and medical literature. Support of the bill
stems from research and experience and working with the
Anchorage School District (ASD).
Ms. Miller advised that Alaska is the only state that does
not require a fee for pesticide registration. She stressed
that the provisions of the bill require a modest
registration fee.
Ms. Miller summarized what HB 19 would accomplish:
· Protects public health, especially for children and
those more vulnerable to the harmful effects of
pesticides;
· Promotes good decisions about pest management; and
· Enhances community right to know and transparency
about pesticide use.
3:22:28 PM
KATIE ASPEN GAVENUS, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE),
STUDENT, HOMER, noted that she was a senior at Homer High
School. She testified in support of the legislation. She
thought that teenagers were particularly vulnerable to
pesticides, as they can disrupt hormone balance. She
reiterated her strong support for HB 19.
DYLAN WEISER, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), VICE
PRESIDENT, KACHEMAK BAY CONSERVATION SOCIETY, HOMER, spoke
in support for the legislation and strongly urged passage,
noting that pesticides are highly toxic to fish and
wildlife.
3:23:49 PM
Co-Chair Meyer MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #1, #24-LS0149\I.1,
Bullock, 3/14/05. (Copy on File). Representative Hawker
OBJECTED.
Mr. Pawlowski explained that Amendment #1 was intended to
define reasonable fee in Sections 8-10. The amendment
addresses concerns resulting from discussions with the
agricultural community regarding public notice. The
Department has indicated that they do not intent to take
chemicals "off the table" but rather cover the cost of the
program and not getting in the way of State commerce.
Representative Hawker WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being
NO further OBJECTION, Amendment #1 was adopted.
Co-Chair Meyer MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #2, #24-LS019\I.2,
Bullock, 3/14/05. (Copy on File). Representative Hawker
OBJECTED for purpose of discussion.
Mr. Pawlowski commented that Amendment #2 clarifies the
definition of a multi-family dwelling.
3:26:42 PM
Mr. Pawlowski said the intent is to move more toward broad
public places and that the amendment clarifies the
description of common areas such as public places around
apartment buildings.
Representative Hawker WITHDREW his OBJECTION to Amendment
#2. There being NO further OBJECTION, Amendment #2 was
adopted.
3:27:44 PM
Co-Chair Meyer commented on the importance of the bill and
noted that it would be held for further consideration of the
fiscal impact. He thought that those that profit from
chemicals sold statewide should pay. Co-Chair Meyer added
that there are public health concerns and that the public
has the right to know what chemicals are being used and sold
statewide. He pointed out that many people have severe
allergies to these chemicals.
Ms. Ryan explained that the pesticide program is a four-
person program, which has many statewide responsibilities.
Pesticides are currently permitted for air, water and land.
The process is extensive and that it is not a light matter
regulating pesticide use. The last issued permit took over
a year to conduct. Given the additional requirements of the
bill, the Division believes that three additional staff is
necessary to do that work. Ms. Ryan stressed that the bill
is positive for funding aspects as well as being an
important public health bill.
Co-Chair Meyer asked if there was a specialty chemical used
for agriculture, would the fee vary. Ms. Ryan advised that
the fee could be waived for chemicals not used that much or
that are new to the State and that have never been
distributed. She added that if a large percentage were
paying the fee, the fee could fluctuate.
Vice-Chair Stoltze stated that the bill would be held for
further consideration of the fiscal note.
HB 19 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
RECESS: 3:33:50 PM
RECONVENE: 6:17:56 PM.
6:18:09 PM
HOUSE BILL NO. 66
An Act making appropriations for the operating and
capital expenses of the state's integrated
comprehensive mental health program; and providing for
an effective date.
Co-Chair Chenault provided members with a committee
substitute for HB 66. He noted that the committee substitute
would be available on the Legislative Finance Division
website along with spreadsheets (copy on file).
Co-Chair Meyer MOVED to ADOPT work draft 24-GH1075\G,
Utermohle, 3/15/05, as the version before the Committee.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was adopted.
HB 66 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
6:20:00 PM
HOUSE BILL NO. 67
An Act making appropriations for the operating and loan
program expenses of state government, for certain
programs, and to capitalize funds; making
appropriations under art. IX, sec. 17(c), Constitution
of the State of Alaska, from the constitutional budget
reserve fund; and providing for an effective date.
Co-Chair Chenault provided members with a committee
substitute for HB 67.
Co-Chair Meyer MOVED to ADOPT work draft 24-GH1073\Y,
Utermohle, 3/15/05, as the version of the bill before the
Committee. There being NO OBJECTION, it was adopted.
HB 67 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
6:20:35 PM
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 98(FIN)
An Act making supplemental appropriations, capital
appropriations, and other appropriations; amending
appropriations; making appropriations to capitalize
funds; making appropriations under art. IX, sec. 17(c),
Constitution of the State of Alaska, from the
constitutional budget reserve fund; and providing for
an effective date.
Section 14(a) Marine Vessel Operations
$12,000.0 AMHS Fund
NANCY SLAGLE, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES,
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES observed
that there were no changes to the Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities requests as submitted
by the Governor. She reviewed Section 14 (a). Section 14 (a)
would cover fuel cost increases associated with new vessels
Fairweather and Lituya, training for bringing on the new
vessel Chenega, overhauls for the LeConte and Fairweather,
increased risk management premiums and costs associated with
grounding of the LeConte, which cost $1.2 million.
Section 14 (b) Central Region Highways and Aviation
$44.5 general funds
Ms. Slagle noted that Section 14 (b) would fund King Salmon
air traffic control services.
6:24:42 PM
Section 14(c) Program Development
$85.0 general funds
Ms. Slagle explained that Section 14 (c) would cover legal
costs for defense of SB 260, which changed the membership
make up of the policy board for metropolitan planning
organizations.
6:26:28 PM
Section 15(a) Capital
Airport Improvement Program increase of $14,550.0 in
federal funds
Ms. Slagle observed that the request would cover work at
five rural airports. The funds are either discretionary or
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) funds that came late
in the year. The projects are ready to go forward within the
next two months.
Co-Chair Chenault asked how the projects were chosen. Ms.
Slagle observed that the FAA looked at needs and safety
issues related to the airports for selection and review.
6:28:31 PM
Sections 15 (1)-(11)
Ms. Slagle explained that these Sections relate to federal
highway fund projects and would cover capital requests
specific to safety. They address emergency and safety
issues. Two projects are needed due to timing: Coffman Cove
Terminal and South Mitkof Island Terminal.
6:30:16 PM
Co-Chair Meyer MOVED to ADOPT work draft #24-GS1133\L,
Utermohle, 3/15/05, as the version of the bill before the
Committee. There being NO OBJECTION, it was adopted.
6:32:02 PM
SHARON KELLY, STAFF, CO-CHAIR CHENAULT provided members with
spreadsheet demonstrating the changes made in the committee
substitute (copy on file). She observed that the funding
year is not indicated.
Section 1
Ms. Kelly observed that intent language relating to charge-
backs to agencies for information services capital costs was
added.
6:33:01 PM
Section 2
Ms. Kelly noted that the funding for the Small Energy
Assistance Program remained the same, but the population
cutoff was changed to 2,499, which adds two new communities.
The amount was prorated among the communities.
6:33:23 PM
Section 2 (b)
Ms. Kelly observed that Section 2 (b) contained a technical
change to statutory designated program receipts.
6:33:30 PM
Section 3 (a)
Ms. Kelly observed that $50 thousand for the Department of
Corrections, recruitment effort was removed.
6:33:41 PM
Section (3)(e)
Ms. Kelly noted that the lapse amount of $65 thousand was
changed to a lapse amount of $450 thousand. The Department
of Corrections confirmed that the lapse amount could be as
high as $698 thousand. Some money was left for a transfer to
the Department of Law, Therapeutic Courts.
6:34:00 PM
Section 4 (a) - (g)
Ms. Kelly explained that Section 4 (a) addresses funding for
education. There are three Sections. In Section 4 (f), $400
million from the FY05 windfall was used. Section 4 (d) uses
$440,429,365 from FY06. Section 4 (e) contains $14,145.6
million from FY05. Section 4 (g) was added to take any
surplus FY05 funds into the Public Education Fund.
6:34:50 PM
Section 6 (c)
Ms. Kelly noted that the funding source was changed from the
master lease line of credit to the General Fund. The state
cannot charge interest on a line of credit.
6:35:10 PM
Section 9
Ms. Kelly observed that Section 9 (b) was moved from the
fast track to the regular supplemental. Medicaid services
spend about $10 million a month. The money is needed for
June.
6:35:25 PM
Section 12
Ms. Kelly noted that Section 12 was added to allow the
Fairbanks detoxification unit expansion to be
reappropriated.
6:35:49 PM
Co-Chair Chenault MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #1, #24-
GS1133\L.1, Utermohle, 3/15/05.
Page 8, line 11:
Delete "$400,00"
Insert "$600,00"
Page 9, following line 16:
Insert a new subsection to read:
(h) The unexpended and unobligated balance of the
appropriation made by sec. 52(a), ch. 159, SLA 2004
(Office of the Governor - operating costs), not to
exceed $200,000, is reappropriated to the Department of
Education and Early Development, Mt. Edgecumbe boarding
school, for increased residential operating costs for
the fiscal year ending June 30, 2005.
Co-Chair Meyer OBJECTED for the purpose of discussion.
Co-Chair Chenault explained that Mt. Edgecumb has incurred a
debt of $800 thousand. The other body added in $400
thousand. He observed that $200 thousand would be general
funds and there was an understanding that the other $200
thousand would come from the Office of the Governor.
CHERYL FRASCA, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET,
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, acknowledged that $200 thousand
would come out of the Contingency fund in the Office of the
Governor.
Co-Chair Chenault noted that this would fully fund the
increase in students at Mt. Edgecumbe.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
6:39:53 PM
Co-Chair Meyer MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #2(a):
Sec. 6. FUND TRANSFERS. (a) The sum of $11,522,000 is
appropriated from the general fund to the Alaska marine
highway system fund (AS 19.65.060(a)).
Ms. Kelly explained that the amendment represents an
increase of $1,517,800 for cost of the recently negotiated
collective bargaining unit agreements for International
Organization of Master, Mates and Pilots and the Marine
Engineers Beneficial Association. She noted that the
negotiations were concluded after the Sensate version was
received.
ART CHANCE, LABOR RELATIONS DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF LABOR
RELATIONS, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, observed that the
contracts were concluded March 8, 2005.
6:41:01 PM
PETE ECKLUND, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE KEVIN MEYER, suggested
that Amendments 2(a), (b) and (c) be considered together. He
noted that Amendment 2(a) appropriates money into the
General Fund for Alaska Marine Highway System costs.
Amendment 2(b) and (c) appropriate the money out of the Fund
to pay the cost. Amendment 2 (d) is a technical correction
of $900.
Co-Chair Meyer WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
Representative Chenault MOVED to ADOPT Amendments 2(a), (b)
and (c)
Amendment 2(b):
(f) Contingent upon the ratification of the collective
bargaining agreement described in this subsection, the
sum of $889,300 is appropriated from the Alaska marine
highway system fund (AS 19.65.060(a)) to the Department
of Transportation and Public Facilities, marine vessel
operations, in order to implement the monetary terms of
the collective bargaining agreement for the Marine
Engineers Beneficial Association, representing licensed
engineers employed by the Alaska marine highway system,
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2005.
Amendment 2 (c)
(e) Contingent upon the ratification of the collective
bargaining agreement described in this subsection, the
sum of $628,500 is appropriated from the Alaska marine
highway system fund (AS 19.65.060(a)) to the Department
of Transportation and Public Facilities, marine vessel
operations, in order to implement the monetary terms of
the collective bargaining agreement for the
International Organization of Masters, Mates, and
Pilots, for the masters, mates, and pilots unit, for
the fiscal year ending June 30, 2005.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
6:42:29 PM
Co-Chair Meyer MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #2(d):
(d) Contingent upon the ratification of the collective
bargaining agreement described in this subsection, the
sum of $3,190,900 is appropriated from the Alaska
marine highway system fund (AS 19.65.060(a)) to the
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities,
marine vessel operations, in order to implement the
monetary terms of the collective bargaining agreement
for the Inlandboatmen's Union of the Pacific,
representing the unlicensed marine unit, for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 2005.
Mr. Ecklund explained that Amendment 2 (d) is a technical
correction of $900.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
6:43:04 PM
Co-Chair Chenault MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #3:
The amendment would remove "the Legislative Budget and
Audit Committee for contracts with."
Representative Hawker OBJECTED for the purpose of
discussion.
Ms. Frasca explained that the amendment requests that
appropriations for the natural gas pipeline go to the
departments that have the responsibility and accountability
to do the work. She stressed that the Stranded Gas Act gives
the executive branch tremendous responsibility for
negotiating contracts. She maintained that the Legislature
is involved and is kept informed through the Legislative
Budget and Audit Committee: Senator Therriault, Chair and
Representative Samuels, Vice-Chair. She asserted that the
dollars ought to go to the departments with the
responsibility and accountability so that the Administration
can follow the appropriation.
Representative Croft noted that the request is $28 million.
He felt that the backup was insufficient and questioned what
problems would occur by having a check through the
Legislative Budget and Audit Committee.
Ms. Frasca observed that the Committee has had the
opportunity to ask questions about the appropriations. The
Legislative Budget and Audit Committee Chair have
participated in the negotiations and have been briefed
weekly. She emphasized the separation of powers: the
legislature has the power to appropriate and the executive
branch has the responsibility to manage. She did not feel
that an intermediary was necessary. She acknowledged
concerns, but pointed out that the negotiations are
confidential.
6:47:01 PM
Representative Croft recognized the importance of the gas-
line, but questioned if all $28 million would go to the gas-
line associated work. Ms. Frasca noted that some other work
would be done regarding TAPS and other issues.
Representative Croft spoke in opposition to the amendment
and in support of a legislative check. He maintained that an
appropriation of this size, with little documentation and
importance should have a legislative check.
6:48:26 PM.
Representative Hawker stressed that the Administration has
stated its desire to be guided by the Legislature. He
questioned if failure of the amendment would compromise the
Administration's ability to do the work and move the
pipeline forward. Ms. Frasca recalled that requests from the
Legislature have been in terms of policy guidance and have
centered around statutes on eligibility for formula driven
programs. The Administration has asked for clarification on
how the statutes would be amended or the practice in place
changed, when the Legislature has indicated its desire that
the Administration discontinue the delivery of these
services. She stated that the current Administration has not
been held to this type of surveillance by the Legislature.
She pointed out that the Administration administers about $7
billion dollars in the budget and questioned if the
Legislature wanted to assert itself over $28 million on
"probably the most important project we are going to see in
our lifetime."
Representative Hawker again questioned whether the exercise
of the legislative prerogative would interfere with the
Administration's ability to go forward and conduct the
necessary work needed to move gas pipeline forward.
Ms. Frasca responded that there is a potential [that the
Administration would not have the ability to move the
project forward]. She observed that the Administration does
not know what documentation would be required, what the
process would be for LBA approval, what the repeal process
would be [for rejected requests], the level of
confidentiality in the billings, and to what degree
appropriations would be subject to the Legislative Budget
and Audit Committee or other legislators.
Ms. Frasca stated that she had talked to Senator Therriault
and had been told that the confidentiality under the
Stranded Gas Act would apply to the Legislative Budget and
Audit Committee's review. She reiterated concerns.
6:51:24 PM
Representative Weyhrauch wondered if there was a certain
amount of economy in providing LBA as a conduit for the
funds and instilling the trust through the process, so that
the [Legislature] is not suspect about the end product.
There would be full involvement and participation by at
least some committee of the Legislature that can help ease
any issues, such as mistrust or bad communication. He
pointed out that the Legislature wants the gas pipeline as
much or more than the Administration, and wants to make sure
that it is done as fast as is reasonably possible and in a
prudent manner. He did not anticipate a "bunch" of
loggerheads. He maintained that there would be a rational
basis of appropriations for the type of works contained in
the bill. He did not think the Legislative Budget and Audit
Committee would be an impediment.
Ms. Frasca stated that the dilemma is that it has been
suggestion that the Committee would be involved in the
process. She noted that Senator Therriault, Chair,
Legislative Budget and Audit Committee indicated that it
would just be him and/or Representative Samuels. She
expressed concern that, if it is going to go before the full
committee, that there would be issues of confidentiality of
the documentation. There is concern that the Committee would
have to meet and pointed out that the Committee doesn't meet
frequently, or at least it hasn't to date. She reiterated
that there are four legislators involved in the briefings:
Senator Therriault, Representative Samuels, Senator Stevens
and Speaker Harris. She expressed concern that the
Administration doesn't know how well the process would work
and that they are concerned that participation [of the
Legislative Budget and Audit Committee] might bog things
down. The negotiations are intense and important.
6:54:02 PM
Representative Croft recalled testimony before the Senate
Finance Committee that [the Administration] did not have a
particular problem with the provisions [for LBA approval].
Ms. Frasca didn't recall if she testified on this section of
the bill. She stated that the Administration did not know
what the section would mean at that time. She noted that as
"we've asked questions, we haven't gotten any more answers."
They are therefore concerned with uncertainty surrounding
the process. She stressed that it is a tremendous
responsibility and serious undertaking. She noted that it is
"not like an invoice you get for staples at the end of the
month." She reiterated that the Administration would
answered the questions of the four legislators involved at
any time about anything the Administration does and would
encourage other legislators to speak with them. She
emphasized that the Administration doesn't want to
jeopardize the ability to act as quickly as necessary.
6:55:27 PM
Representative Croft stated that he would not insist on the
language if it were a requisition for staples. He stressed
that the difference in size is the very reason the amendment
should be there.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion to adopt Amendment
3.
IN FAVOR: Kelly, Chenault, Meyer
OPPOSED: Hawker, Moses, Stoltze, Weyrauch, Croft, Foster
Representatives Holm and Joule were absent from the vote.
The MOTION FAILED (3-6).
6:56:45 PM
Representative Croft MOVED to ADOPT New Amendment #4. Co-
Chair Chenault OBJECTED.
Representative Croft explained that the amendment would
remove all permanent fund revenues as a funding source and
another $4 million in general funds to reduce the $28
million proposed appropriation [for the natural gas
pipeline] in the fast track supplemental by $11 million. He
acknowledged that the state would have to write "a big
check", but argued against a "blank check". He pointed out
that there would be appropriate times for the rest of the
money to be brought up. There would still be a $17 million
appropriation. The amendment deletes the $1.2 million for
the AOGCC, which they chose not to do as a charge out. The
intent would be for the work to be done as a charge out to
the appropriate individual companies. The Department of Law
has asked for $9 million dollars. He maintained that the
"fast track" should not contain appropriations for FY06. The
Department of Law needs at least $5 million for FY05. The
rest can be discussed later.
Representative Croft noted that the amendment also removes
the right away permitting for Bullen Point Road. This is a
connection to Point Thompson. He felt that it may eventually
be important, but the primary source of gas would be Prudhoe
Bay at the beginning. He stated that he had not been shown
enough to know if the Bullen Point Road right-away is
appropriate in the "fast track" and whether the amount is
justified.
Representative Croft noted that there were partial
reductions to the allocation to the Department of Revenue to
equal $11 million.
Representative Croft noted that Amendment #4 appropriates
the same amount to the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline
Development Authority (ANGDA). Under the amendment the money
would go directly to ANGDA. He stressed the independence of
the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Development Authority. The
current proposal would spend a total of $28 million: $21
million GF and $7 million in permanent fund receipts.
Amendment #4 would save $11 million. There would be a $17
million in General Fund and no Permanent Fund Corporation
appropriations. He felt the reductions would allow the
departments to finish FY05 without funding FY06 or FY07
appropriations or items without sufficient documentation.
7:01:10 PM
Representative Hawker noted that the legislature maintains
significant control with the rejection of Amendment 3. He
questioned if the concerns remain. Representative Croft
noted that it was appropriate to maintain oversight by the
Legislative Budget and Audit Committee. He noted that the
amendment would reduce the oversight to $17 million. He
questioned whether the appropriation should stay in the fast
track. He noted that oversight does not justify items that
are unnecessary or don't have sufficient documentation. He
noted that some items have five-year capital lapse dates,
which would be more appropriate in a capital or operating
budget. He did not think it was appropriate to spend money
five years in the future in fast track legislation.
7:03:40 PM
Representative Hawker spoke against the amendment. He felt
that the additional oversight is an appropriate arbitration
of the question on amounts and the need for the legislature
to be concerned with how the money is spent. He felt that
the best balance had been reached.
Vice-Chair Stoltze questioned if the amendment could be
divided.
7:04:40 PM
Representative Croft concluded that it would be difficult to
divide the amendment.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion to adopt New
Amendment #4.
IN FAVOR: Croft,
OPPOSED: Kelly, Hawker, Moses, Stoltze, Weyrauch, Foster,
Meyer, Chenault
7:05:55 PM
Representative Croft MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #5. Co-Chair
Chenault OBJECTED.
Delete lines 26 - 28 on page 22.
Representative Croft explained that the amendment would
delete the $85 thousand in legal fees for the Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities. The Municipality of
Anchorage is handling the issue without an increase and
Representative Croft felt that the state could as well. He
maintained that it is not an emergency.
Ms. Slagle spoke to Amendment 5. She explained that the
Department of Law, Civil Section receives all of their
funding from the agencies that receive services. The request
is for Division's program development, which is a federally
funded portion of the agency, with no general funds.
Representative Croft clarified that the agency is being
charged for the amount and there are no general funds to
cover it.
Representative Croft WITHDREW Amendment 5.
7:08:53 PM
Representative Croft MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #6. He noted
that Amendment 6 would appropriate $500 thousand in general
funds for breast and cervical cancer prevention. He stressed
the importance of the appropriation and maintained that it
would save money in the long run. The fund source change
would allow services to 1,600 enrolled women that otherwise
would not be served due to federal funding reductions. Funds
would be required by late March or early April to continue
the program.
7:10:16 PM
Co-Chair Chenault expressed support for the services, but
questioned where the line should be drawn. He stressed
fiscal accountability.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Moses, Weyrauch, Croft
OPPOSED: Stoltze, Foster, Hawker, Kelly, Chenault, Meyer
Representatives Holm and Joule were absent from the vote.
The MOTION FAILED (3-6).
7:12:26 PM
Representative Croft MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #7. The
amendment would add $108,377 for the Yukon Flats School
District. He requested that the leadership address the
amendment before the floor decision.
Representative Croft WITHDREW Amendment #7.
AT EASE: 7:18:07 PM
RECONVENE: 7:22:41 PM
Representative Chenault noted that the committee substitute
as amended was before the Committee.
Representative Kelly spoke against the use of permanent fund
expenditures in items 7 a - f. He indicated that he was
uncomfortable with the use of permanent fund. He maintained
that the use of permanent fund receipts for capital projects
should have a "higher test than it has in this document". He
spoke against the $6 million appropriation for energy grants
to small communities. He noted that he would not hold the
bill.
7:25:31 PM
Co-Chair Meyer spoke in support of the committee substitute.
He explained that the committee substitute would appropriate
$400 million of the $500 million estimated windfall to the
Education Fund. He noted that $854 million, which is a $70
million increase, would go to education. The rest of the
funding needed to fund education would consist of: $440
million FY06 general funds and $14 million in lapsed funds.
The amount could change. He observed that the windfall would
go the number one priority of education. If the surplus were
greater, the additional amount would be swept to the
Education Fund.
7:27:25 PM
Representative Croft spoke on the use of permanent fund
earnings. He noted that the Permanent Fund receives 15
percent of the oil lease funding. He expressed concern with
the use of permanent fund earnings without a vote of the
people. He referred to the 1989 vote [to use permanent fund
earnings].
Representative Croft spoke to education funding, which would
park some of the FY05 money in the Education Fund. He stated
that he supports getting the money to the classrooms and
noted that it needs to move from the sub account to the
schools. He questioned if the bill provides adequate funding
for education.
7:30:44 PM
Co-Chair Chenault acknowledged that education is one of the
biggest issues before the Legislature. The intent is to
early fund and to attempt to fully fund education. He
observed that the legislation is the first step toward those
goals.
7:31:41 PM
Co-Chair Meyer noted that permanent fund earnings have been
used since 1989. The justification has been that they have
only been used for natural resource projects, which is where
the money comes from. He stressed that there is no better
natural resource project than the natural gas pipeline. He
observed that the precedent has been set and that he is
comfortable with the appropriation.
7:32:39 PM
Representative Hawker endorsed the sentiments of Co-Chair
Meyer. He pointed out that the Permanent Fund was created
for a time when oil and gas revenues have declined. He
questioned if there was a more appropriate use than to
reinvest in the development of the resource, which would
continue to perpetuate the fund.
7:33:45 PM
Representative Foster MOVED to report HCS CSSB 98 (FIN) out
of Committee. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:34 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|