Legislature(2005 - 2006)HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/27/2005 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB67 | |
| HB13 | |
| HB257 | |
| HB53 | |
| HB218 | |
| HB279 | |
| HB243 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | HB 257 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 243 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 103 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 218 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 279 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 67 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 13 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 53 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
April 27, 2005
1:53 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Meyer called the House Finance Committee meeting to
order at 1:53:49 PM.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Mike Chenault, Co-Chair
Representative Kevin Meyer, Co-Chair
Representative Eric Croft
Representative Richard Foster
Representative Mike Hawker
Representative Jim Holm
Representative Reggie Joule
Representative Mike Kelly
Representative Carl Moses
Representative Bruce Weyhrauch
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Bill Stoltze, Vice-Chair
ALSO PRESENT
Senator Ralph Seekins; Lexi Hill, Institute of Social and
Economic Research (ISER); Rynnieva Moss, Staff,
Representative John Coghill; Ian Fisk, Staff, Representative
Bill Thomas; Kevin Brooks, Deputy Commissioner, Department
of Administration; Scott Hawkins, General Manager Material
Services, Alaska Supply Chain Integrators (ASCI); Cody Rice,
Staff, Representative Carl Gatto; Representative Carl Gatto;
Representative Peggy Green; Eddy Jeans, Director, Education
Support Services, Department of Education and Early
Development; Kate Giard, Chair, Regulatory Commission of
Alaska; Russell Cockrum; Grayson Carlyle, Student, DZ Middle
School; William Clifton, British Petroleum; Lynn Johnson,
President, Dowland-Bach Corporation, Anchorage,; Larry Howe,
General Manager, Alliance; John MacKinnon, Deputy Director,
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Margaret Lowe, Anchorage; Jason Wells, Valdez Fisheries
Development Association; Peter Esquiro, NSRAA, Sitka; Cora
Crome, Petersburg Vessel Owners Association, Petersburg
SUMMARY
MENTAL HEALTH TRUST BOARD CONFIRMATION
MARGARET LOWE, ANCHORAGE
CSSB 67(JUD)(efd fld)
"An Act relating to claims for personal injury or
wrongful death against health care providers."
HCSSB 67 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with
a "no recommendation" recommendation and with the
accompanying zero fiscal notes by the Department
of Law and by the Department of Commerce,
Community and Economic Development.
HB 13 "An Act relating to reimbursement of municipal
bonds for school construction; and providing for
an effective date."
CSHB 13 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a
"do pass" recommendation and with a new fiscal
impact by the Department of Education and Early
Development, and with indeterminate fiscal note #1
by the Department of Education and Early
Development, and with a new indeterminate fiscal
note by the Department of Health and Social
Services.
SSHB 53 "An Act relating to child-in-need-of-aid
proceedings; amending the construction of statutes
pertaining to children in need of aid; relating to
a duty and standard of care for services to
children and families, to the confidentiality of
investigations, court hearings, and public agency
records and information in child-in-need-of-aid
matters and certain child protection matters, to
immunity regarding disclosure of information in
child-in- need-of-aid matters and certain child
protection matters, to the retention of certain
privileges of a parent in a relinquishment and
termination of a parent and child relationship
proceeding, to eligibility for permanent fund
dividends for certain children in the custody of
the state, and to juvenile delinquency proceedings
and placements; establishing a right to a trial by
jury in termination of parental rights
proceedings; reestablishing and relating to state
citizens' review panels for certain child
protection and custody matters; amending the duty
to disclose information pertaining to a child in
need of aid; authorizing additional family members
to consent to disclosure of confidential or
privileged information about children and families
involved with children's services within the
Department of Health and Social Services to
officials for review or use in official
capacities; relating to reports of harm and to
adoptions and foster care; mandating reporting of
the medication of children in state custody;
prescribing the rights of grandparents related to
child-in-need-of-aid cases and establishing a
grandparent priority for adoption in certain
child-in-need-of-aid cases; modifying adoption and
placement procedures in certain child-in-need-of-
aid cases; amending treatment service requirements
for parents involved in child-in-need-of-aid
proceedings; amending Rules 9 and 13, Alaska
Adoption Rules; amending Rules 3, 18, and 22,
Alaska Child in Need of Aid Rules of Procedure;
and providing for an effective date."
CSSSHB 53 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with
a "no recommendation" recommendation and with five
new fiscal impact notes: one from the Alaska Court
System, one from the Department of Law, two from
the Department of Health and Social Services, and
two from the Department of Administration.
HB 257 "An Act relating to a procurement and electronic
commerce tools program for state departments and
instrumentalities of the state; and providing for
an effective date."
CSHB 257 (JUD) was REPORTED out of Committee with
a "no recommendation" recommendation and with zero
fiscal impact note #1 by the Alaska Court System,
and with indeterminate note #2 by the Department
of Administration.
HB 243 "An Act relating to the maximum annual regulatory
cost charge collected from certain regulated
public utilities and pipeline carriers; and
providing for an effective date."
HB 243 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
SB 103 "An Act relating to regulation of underground
injection under the federal Safe Drinking Water
Act; and providing for an effective date."
SB 103 was scheduled but not heard.
HB 218 "An Act relating to cost recovery fisheries for
private nonprofit hatchery facilities."
HB 218 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
HB 279 "An Act relating to encroachments in the right-of-
way of a highway."
CSHB 279 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with
a "no recommendation" recommendation and with zero
fiscal impact note #1 by the Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities.
1:56:14 PM
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 67(JUD)(efd fld)
"An Act relating to claims for personal injury or
wrongful death against health care providers."
SENATOR RALPH SEEKINS, sponsor, thanked the committee for
their hard work.
1:57:52 PM
Representative Kelly MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 1:
Page 2, line 7
After "injury"
Delete "or death"
Co-Chair Meyer OBJECTED for discussion purposes.
Senator Seekins voiced support for the technical amendment.
The amendment would add "or death" to paragraph (d)(e) after
"injury."
Co-Chair Meyer WITHDREW his objection.
There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment 1 was adopted.
1:59:17 PM
Representative Foster MOVED to REPORT CSSB 67 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
HCSSB 67 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "no
recommendation" recommendation and with the accompanying
zero fiscal notes by the Department of Law and by the
Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development.
2:00:53 PM
MENTAL HEALTH TRUST BOARD CONFIRMATION
MARGARET LOWE, ANCHORAGE
Representative Weyhrauch asked if Ms. Lowe has any
experience managing trusts.
MARGARET LOWE, ANCHORAGE, testified via teleconference. She
currently serves on the Endowment Committee and Board of the
Anchorage municipal Senior Center. She made functional ARCA,
The Arc of Anchorage Trust for those with disabilities.
2:03:09 PM
Representative Hawker asked about her involvement with the
ARK in Anchorage and the Mental Health Trust. Ms. Lowe
related her experiences with the Mental Health Trust as
Director and Commissioner of Health and Social Services, and
the Executive Director of ARC.
2:05:50 PM
Co-Chair Chenault MOVED that the Committee accept Ms. Lowe's
appointment to the Mental Health Trust Board. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
2:07:47 PM
HOUSE BILL NO. 13
"An Act relating to reimbursement of municipal bonds
for school construction; and providing for an effective
date."
Representative Croft WITHDREW Amendment 1, which had been
moved during .
Representative Croft MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 2:
Page 9, after line 16:
Add new section to read:
" Sec. The uncodified law of the State of Alaska is
amended by adding a new section to read:
CONTINGENT EFFECT. Section 3 of this Act shall only
apply if all school districts receive funding that is
at least the equivalent of the funding they would have
received under a base student allocation of $4919 per
student, in 2005 inflation-adjusted dollars, under the
formula of state aid to public school districts in
effect as of April 1, 2004. Inflation shall be
calculated under this section as reflected by the
United States Department of Labor's Consumer Price
Index for Anchorage, Alaska."
Representative Croft noted the amendment would hold harmless
the major urban areas: Anchorage and Fairbanks. He asserted
that these areas need to be provided for during the
transition period. The amendment would ensure that everyone
would receive some increase.
Co-Chair Meyer WITHDREW his OBJECTION to adopt Amendment 2.
There being further OBJECTION, Amendment 2 was adopted.
2:10:03 PM
Representative Joule MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 3:
Page 1, line 1, following "to":
Insert "the school construction grant fund and to"
Page 1, following line 4:
Insert new bill sections to read:
"* Section 1. AS 14.11.008(a) is amended to read:
(a) In order to receive a grant under this chapter
or an appropriation under AS 37.05.560, a district must
(1) be
(A) a rural educational attendance area;
(B) a municipal school district and, as
of June 30 of the previous fiscal year, have a
population of less than 1,000; or
(C) a municipal school district that
operates schools on a military reservation; and
(2) provide a percentage share of the project
cost, as determined under (b) or (c) of this section; a
[. A] district shall provide the required participating
share within three years after the date that the
appropriation bill funding the grant is passed by the
legislature.
* Sec. 2. AS 14.11.008(a) is repealed and reenacted to
read:
(a) In order to receive a grant under this chapter
or an appropriation under AS 37.05.560, a district must
provide a percentage share of the project cost, as
determined under (b) or (c) of this section. A district
shall provide the required participating share within
three years after the date that the appropriation bill
funding the grant is passed by the legislature.
* Sec. 3. AS 14.11.008 is amended by adding a new
subsection to read:
(g) Grant funds provided to a municipal school
district under (a)(1)(C) of this section may only be
used for the costs of school construction or major
maintenance for a school located on a military
reservation.
* Sec. 4. AS 14.11.011(a) is amended to read:
(a) A municipality that is a school district or a
regional educational attendance area eligible under
AS 14.11.008(a) may submit a request to the department
for a grant under this chapter.
* Sec. 5. AS 14.11.011(a) is repealed and reenacted to
read:
(a) A municipality that is a school district or a
regional educational attendance area may submit a
request to the department for a grant under this
chapter."
Page 1, line 5:
Delete "Section 1"
Insert "Sec. 6"
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 9, line 17:
Delete all material.
Insert new bill sections to read:
"* Sec. 9. AS 14.11.008(g) is repealed.
* Sec. 10. The uncodified law of the State of Alaska
is amended by adding a new section to read:
CONTINGENT EFFECT. Sections 1 - 7 and 9 of this Act
take effect only if, at the first regular session or at
a special session, the Twenty-Fourth Alaska State
Legislature passes a bill appropriating an amount equal
to or more than $100,000,000 to the school construction
grant fund under AS 14.11.008 - 14.11.011, as amended
by secs. 1, 3, and 4 of this Act, and that bill becomes
law not later than October 1, 2005.
* Sec. 11. If, under sec. 10 of this Act, secs. 1, 3, 4,
6, and 7 of this Act take effect, they take effect
July 1, 2005.
* Sec. 12. If, under sec. 10 of this Act, secs. 2, 5,
and 9 of this Act take effect, they take effect July 1,
2006.
* Sec. 13. Section 8 of this Act takes effect July 1,
2005.
* Sec. 14. Section 10 of this Act takes effect
immediately under AS 01.10.070(c)."
Co-Chair Meyer OBJECTED.
Amendment 3 would restore contingency language adopted by
the House HES Committee, which was removed from the
committee Substitute adopted on April 26, 2005.
Representative Hawker asked for more information on the
contingent effect.
2:11:46 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARL GATTO, sponsor, noted that he was not
present in the House Education and Social Services (HES)
Committee when the amendments were made.
CODY RICE, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE CARL GATTO, explained that
the amendment was offered by Representative Cissna. The
amendment would make reauthorization of the bond debt
contingent on a direct appropriation of a minimum of $100
million appropriation for areas without the ability to issue
debt: Regional Education Attendance Area's (REAA) and school
districts under 5,000.
2:13:09 PM
Representative Joule referred to Kasayulie v. State of
Alaska, which questioned if rural areas of the state were
able to get construction projects done at the same rate as
urban schools. He noted that the amendment would be in that
spirit.
Representative Hawker related his reluctance to authorize
additional funding and stressed the need to hold the line on
the budget. He felt that areas with bonding capacity would
be held hostage to a commitment on another appropriation
bill. He noted that there is a school construction bill. He
stated that he would support the amendment if there were an
identifiable fund source and questioned if SB 155 would
satisfy the $100 million requirement [for rural support].
2:15:38 PM
Representative Joule did not know if SB 155 would meet the
requirements. He noted that SB 155 goes down the major
maintenance list, but does not address new school
construction. House Bill 13 would address new school
construction.
Representative Hawker felt that SB 155 would satisfy the
intent [of the amendment]. Representative Joule pointed out
that there is no certainty about SB 155.
Representative Croft referred to Representative Hawker's use
of the word "hostage" and the battle between the two
concepts rural vs. urban.
2:19:52 PM
Representative Gatto spoke in opposition to Amendment 3. He
felt that HB 13 should stand alone and stressed that the
intent is to put new schools in places where there are none.
He spoke against tacking on other construction lists. He
reiterated that there are areas that need schools. He argued
against adoption of the amendment and recommended it be
placed in separate legislation.
2:22:22 PM
Co-Chair Meyer noted that the bill came forth as a
continuation of a match.
Representative Hawker defended his use of the term
"hostage". He pointed out that there is $141 million in
projects on the major maintenance list. He noted that the
issue should be addressed and spoke against Amendment 3.
2:24:00 PM
Representative Croft maintained that statewide need would
not be met without the amendment. He stressed that the
problems of school construction is not that simple. He
asserted that rural Alaska only gets schools built if they
get together with urban projects and pointed out that
Alaskans had voted for similar language. He felt that it
would be inappropriate to proceed with urban school
construction without provisions for rural construction. He
maintained that the legislation, without the amendment,
would be a "slap in the face" of the Kasayulie case. He
spoke in favor of adopting Amendment 3 because it would
provide some new construction in rural Alaska.
2:27:31 PM
Representative Gatto referred to the 70/30 split. He
acknowledged that the only communities that only urban
communities have applied, but stressed that any community
could apply. He felt that the legislation would satisfy the
requirements.
Mr. Rice addressed a legal opinion regarding Kasayulie v.
State of Alaska. He pointed out that the case has not been
decided and noted that any appropriation to urban districts
is contingent on a vote of those districts and legislative
appropriation. He added that a direct appropriation is
always within the purview of the legislature. In addition,
the 2002 provision went before the voters. The current
legislation would not go before the voters. He referred to
SB 155 and noted that the potential implications have not
been addressed.
2:29:59 PM
Representative Joule spoke in support of the amendment and
noted that it would be appropriate to merge the bills. He
stressed that there is an opportunity to fund rural school
construction.
2:31:14 PM
Representative Kelly questioned the rural participation.
2:31:59 PM
EDDY JEANS, DIRECTOR, EDUCATION SUPPORT SERVICES, DEPARTMENT
OF EDUCATION AND EARLY DEVELOPMENT, explained that the
participating share for a REAA is 2 percent.
Representative Foster observed that Nome does not get 2
percent. Mr. Jeans explained that there are REAA's and
municipal school districts. There is a graduated scale for
municipal school district grant programs based on property
wealth per child.
Representative Croft added that the percentage is on a
sliding scale. Mr. Jeans noted that the sliding scale for
municipalities is 5 - 35 percent. Regional Education
Attendance Area's are at 2 percent.
2:33:59 PM
Co-Chair Meyer maintained his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion to adopt Amendment
3.
IN FAVOR: Moses, Weyhrauch, Croft, Foster, Joule
OPPOSED: Hawker, Holm, Kelly, Chenault, Meyer
The MOTION FAILED (5-5).
2:35:34 PM
Representative Hawker MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 4:
Page 7, line 15 through page 9, line 16
Delete all material
Renumber following sections accordingly
Co-Chair Meyer OBJECTED for discussion purposes.
Representative Hawker explained that the amendment would
delete the mechanism for the district cost differential. He
felt that the legislation was an inappropriate vehicle and
spoke in support of keeping a clean bill.
2:36:43 PM
Co-Chair Chenault spoke against Amendment 4. He stated that
the two studies were not conclusive. He acknowledged that
problems remained, but emphasized that delay would only hurt
students. All the studies demonstrated need, even if there
is no agreement over the level of need. The bill is a
compromise, phased in over 4 years, which helps out the
school districts and forces everyone to admit that there is
a problem in order to find a remedy. He spoke passionately
about his school district's efficiency. He opined that short
funding has made them efficient, but they can't go any
farther. Rural Alaska only recently had to make the same
cuts. He said the problem is the cost differential and
stressed that he was trying to do what is best for kids
around the state.
2:41:27 PM
Representative Hawker observed that the legislative drafters
would conform the amendment. He addressed the fiscal notes,
which show a $20 million increase for each of the next four
years. He pointed out that the cost would be $80 million by
FY09. He argued for being judicious.
2:44:06 PM
Co-Chair Meyer WITHDREW his objection. Co-Chair Chenault
maintained his objection.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Hawker, Meyer
OPPOSED: Weyhrauch, Croft, Foster, Holm, Joule, Kelly,
Moses, Chenault
The MOTION FAILED (2-8).
2:45:41 PM
Co-Chair Chenault spoke in support for the bill.
2:46:24 PM
GRAYSON CARLYLE, STUDENT, DZ MIDDLE SCHOOL, spoke in support
of HB 13. He referred to district cost factors and the
Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER) research.
He spoke in support of the new costs factors, which he felt
were better than the current ones. He stressed the need to
take steps forward to improve school systems.
Representative Foster MOVED to report CSHB 13 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CSHB 13 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with a new fiscal impact by the
Department of Education and Early Development, and with
indeterminate fiscal note #1 by the Department of Education
and Early Development, and with a new indeterminate fiscal
note by the Department of Health and Social Services
2:50:42 PM
HOUSE BILL NO. 257
"An Act relating to a procurement and electronic
commerce tools program for state departments and
instrumentalities of the state; and providing for an
effective date."
KEVIN BROOKS, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION, provided a brief overview of the
legislation. House Bill 313, which introduced a procurement
pilot program, was authorized by the legislature several
years previously. The first year was spent to set up the
pilot. A pilot program was set up with the Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities, Southeast Region and a
private contractor (Alaska Supply Chain Integrators). House
Bill 257 would extend the sunset date for the procurement
pilot program to June 30, 2007. Bidder preferences would
also be brought into statute. He pointed out that the
process is in the early stages. There has not been
sufficient time to demonstrate if privatization of
procurement process would result in a savings.
Representative Weyhrauch observed that the contractor,
Alaska Supply Chain Integrators, does not have to follow
state procurement codes and questioned why have procurement
codes if the contractor does not have to follow it. Mr.
Brooks stressed that the intent of the procurement code is
to give entities in competition for state dollars a fair
chance at winning awards. The Administration feels that the
procurement code is a valid and useful tool [for state
government]. He could not address why the procurement code
was not included in the legislation.
Representative Weyhrauch referred to A.S. 36.30.180: The
legislature finds that there exists in the state continuing
high unemployment, underutilization of resident construction
and supply firms, and high costs unfavorable to the welfare
of Alaskans and to the economic health of the state. The
purpose of bidder preference for resident firms when the
state acts as a market participant is to encourage local
industry, strengthen and stabilize the economy, decrease
unemployment, and strengthen the tax and revenue base of the
state. Mr. Brooks noted that the intent of the pilot project
is to analyze the process.
2:56:58 PM
Representative Weyhrauch questioned if the information
should be present before the program is expanded. Mr. Brooks
clarified that the legislation would not expand the program;
the program would only be extended by one year. The bill
does not expand the program beyond original concept.
2:57:31 PM
Representative Joule spoke of a legal review contract by the
employee's review union. He thought the program was found to
be discriminatory. Mr. Brooks did not know. He referred to
Line 10, Page 1, and noted that the statutory cite should be
changed from "A.S. 36.30.100 - 36.30.190" to "A.S. 36.30.100
- 36.30.265." This would include both sealed proposals and
bids.
2:59:29 PM
SCOTT HAWKINS, GENERAL MANAGER MATERIAL SERVICES, ALASKA
SUPPLY CHAIN INTEGRATORS (ASCI), ANCHORAGE, provided a brief
history of the company and its perspective as a program
operator and specialist firm. He emphasized that ASCI has
the tools and specialties to make advantages and achieve
meaningful reductions. He noted that they are operating with
six people, where the state used 10. He addressed cost
savings and pointed out the advantage of consolidating
purchasing for state agencies, which would allow the state
to go to market and achieve better arrangements. The
legislation can accomplish its goals, driven in part by
computer automation, made possible by using computer
automation and contracting out non-core business. The
program shifts funds from overhead functions to direct
program outcomes. The state recently issued its first
Internet order and has begun to order from catalogs. He
acknowledged that change is not easy.
Representative Croft asked if there have been cost savings.
Mr. Hawkins responded that there are start up costs that are
shared. The contract is a fixed price contract and provides
a $160 thousand improvement in the cost of personnel.
3:06:08 PM
Mr. Hawkins noted that the vast majority is for smaller
purchases. Representative Croft questioned where the cost
savings are coming from. Mr. Hawkins responded that initial
cost savings occur through personnel and the use of web
tools. Automation of the order delivery process accounts for
much of the initial savings. He stressed that as orders are
placed through the catalog, better prices can be obtained.
3:08:01 PM
Representative Croft asked if the program had the effect of
shifting purchases to outside suppliers. Mr. Hawkins
responded that the program would not shift to outside
vendors. The program does not change the vendors; it makes
the ordering process quicker and more efficient. The agenda
is to encourage the Alaskan process.
3:09:55 PM
Representative Croft noted that the initial savings are from
the paper system. He noted that the use of market power
would pressure vendors to lower their prices and questioned
if local suppliers will have to lower their prices to
respond to that pressure. Mr. Hawkins did not think that
there was anything inherent in volume accumulation, which
would disadvantage Alaskan vendors.
3:11:37 PM
Representative Holm disagreed. He pointed out that larger
quantities allow vendors to reduce their freight rates. He
expressed concerned that it would be difficult for local
businesses to compete against catalog companies. He referred
to vendor kickbacks. He wanted more assurances and
sideboards.
3:14:19 PM
Mr. Hawkins emphasized that the state of Alaska would
benefit from any "kickbacks". He observed that Alaskan
suppliers are often better off, in that they have experience
in calculating freight costs.
3:16:59 PM
Representative Holm reiterated that freight is a big concern
and is a disadvantage for Alaskan companies. He observed
that Home Depot has the ability to spread freight costs over
all their stores. He maintained that large box stores could
destroy small businesses. He wondered how small businesses
would be affected. He asked why state procurement codes were
not followed.
Mr. Hawkins explained that the legislation exempted them
from the procurement codes. He explained that they follow
the contract terms, which are astringent rules and are
effectively their procurement code. He recalled that the
decision was made to exempt them from the procurement code
because it was too difficult to rewrite [the codes into the
contract] in a way that would apply to current practices.
Representative Holm urged him to not adversely impact small
businesses. Mr. Hawkins noted that their contract requires
them to be pro-Alaskan.
3:21:17 PM
Representative Weyhrauch asked what the start-up costs are.
Mr. Hawkins listed several of their start up costs:
developing a 5,000-item catalog and integrating web tools.
Representative Weyhrauch asked the state's share of the
cost. Mr. Hawkins noted that the total startup costs were
$180 thousand, of which the state paid $60,000.
3:22:18 PM
In response to a question by Representative Kelly, Mr.
Hawkins explained that the original bill allowed the
Administration to extend the program to other agencies, the
current version only extends the program a year. He
emphasized that this type of change is difficult because
there is natural opposition. He clarified that their
contract expires in 14 months. The legislation allows the
Administration to negotiate an extension.
3:23:47 PM
LARRY HOWE, GENERAL MANAGER, ALLIANCE, encouraged support of
the bill. He maintained that the pilot program has
demonstrated efficiencies and that the cost savings can be
achieved in other areas.
Representative Weyhrauch asked if Mr. Howe had reviewed any
reports, which demonstrate the economic benefits seen in the
cost analysis. Mr. Howe replied that he had seen a power
point presentation by ASCI that showed $163 thousand in
savings.
3:25:52 PM
LYNN JOHNSON, PRESIDENT, DOWLAND-BACH CORPORATION,
ANCHORAGE, testified in favor of HB 257. His company
competes daily with outside firms. He emphasized the ability
of e-commerce to lower the state of Alaska's costs.
3:27:37 PM
Representative Foster MOVED to REPORT CSHB 257 (JUD) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CSHB 257 (JUD) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "no
recommendation" recommendation and with zero fiscal impact
note #1 by the Alaska Court System, and with indeterminate
note #2 by the Department of Administration.
3:28:44 PM
At ease.
3:36:35 PM
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 53
"An Act relating to child-in-need-of-aid proceedings;
amending the construction of statutes pertaining to
children in need of aid; relating to a duty and
standard of care for services to children and families,
to the confidentiality of investigations, court
hearings, and public agency records and information in
child-in-need-of-aid matters and certain child
protection matters, to immunity regarding disclosure of
information in child-in- need-of-aid matters and
certain child protection matters, to the retention of
certain privileges of a parent in a relinquishment and
termination of a parent and child relationship
proceeding, to eligibility for permanent fund dividends
for certain children in the custody of the state, and
to juvenile delinquency proceedings and placements;
establishing a right to a trial by jury in termination
of parental rights proceedings; reestablishing and
relating to state citizens' review panels for certain
child protection and custody matters; amending the duty
to disclose information pertaining to a child in need
of aid; authorizing additional family members to
consent to disclosure of confidential or privileged
information about children and families involved with
children's services within the Department of Health and
Social Services to officials for review or use in
official capacities; relating to reports of harm and to
adoptions and foster care; mandating reporting of the
medication of children in state custody; prescribing
the rights of grandparents related to child-in-need-of-
aid cases and establishing a grandparent priority for
adoption in certain child-in-need-of-aid cases;
modifying adoption and placement procedures in certain
child-in-need-of-aid cases; amending treatment service
requirements for parents involved in child-in-need-of-
aid proceedings; amending Rules 9 and 13, Alaska
Adoption Rules; amending Rules 3, 18, and 22, Alaska
Child in Need of Aid Rules of Procedure; and providing
for an effective date."
House Bill 53 was previously heard and amended on April 26,
2005.
Representative Croft MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 15:
Page 7, line 20, after the word "hearings"
Delete: "in the case"
Co-Chair Chenault OBJECTED.
Representative Croft explained that Amendment 15 arose from
discussions during the previous hearing. The amendment would
broaden the bill to exclude persons involved in other cases.
He noted that it might be appropriate to exclude, for
example, a reporter who had disclosed names of children in a
previous case.
3:38:28 PM
RYNNIEVA MOSS, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE JOHN COGHILL, noted
that the sponsor had no objections to adopting Amendment 15.
Co-Chair Chenault WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
OBJECTION, Amendment 15 was adopted.
3:39:05 PM
Representative Croft MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 16:
Page 22, line 15, after the word "Confidentiality."
Delete lines 15 through 19
Insert:
"A person attending a meeting of the state panel or, a
member or staff of the state panel may not make any
disclosure related to information obtained during a
review by the panel unless authorized by AS 47.10.092
or 47.10.093.
Co-Chair Chenault OBJECTED for the purpose of discussion.
Ms. Moss observed that Amendment 16 should contain a
technical amendment:
Delete the comma
Insert "or"
There being NO OBJECTION, the amendment to Amendment 16 was
adopted.
Co-Chair Chenault WITHDREW his objection to adopt Amendment
16. There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment 16, was adopted as
amended.
3:40:04 PM
Representative Hawker MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 17:
Page 22, line 24
Insert:
(c) to read: "the citizen review panel is subject to
the provisions of the Open Meeting Act under AS
44.62.310.
Co-Chair Chenault OBJECTED.
Ms. Moss observed that the review panel would operate under
the Open Meetings Act. The amendment would provide them with
the ability to declare an executive session and close the
meeting. The sponsor supported Amendment 17.
Co-Chair Chenault WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
OBJECTION, Amendment 17 was adopted.
3:41:33 PM
Representative Croft asked about the fiscal notes. Ms. Moss
observed that the total amount is $1,174,200.
3:41:54 PM
Representative Hawker asked if the sponsor concurs with the
nature of the fiscal notes. He asked that they be viewed as
one-time increments.
Co-Chair Chenault agreed with Representative Hawker.
3:43:09 PM
Representative Croft asked if a standard of care was
addressed. Ms. Moss believed that case law provides for a
standard of care.
3:44:29 PM
Representative Foster MOVED to report CSSSHB 53 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and the attached
fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
CSSSHB 53 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "no
recommendation" recommendation and with five new fiscal
impact notes: one from the Alaska Court System, one from the
Department of Law, two from the Department of Health and
Social Services, and two from the Department of
Administration.
3:45:38 PM
HOUSE BILL NO. 218
"An Act relating to cost recovery fisheries for private
nonprofit hatchery facilities."
Co-Chair Meyer MOVED to ADOPT the work draft for HB 218,
labeled 24-LS0544\X, Utermohle, 4/26/05. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
3:46:06 PM
IAN FISK, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE BILL THOMAS, spoke in
support of HB 218. He maintained that the hatchery system is
a great success as an economic development program. He
observed that 25 percent of the salmon value is produced by
hatcheries. Hatchery operators contract with bid processors
through a bid process every spring for product harvest. The
commercial fishing industry would like to see that
hatcheries maximize the amount of fish that return to the
hatchery in the common property fishery. He maintained that
those that are intended to benefit from the hatchery program
should have the most fish possible. The legislation is an
optional bill. He pointed out that the sponsor is a
supporter of hatcheries. The legislation would provide
sufficient revenue by increasing the assessment to 40
percent.
3:50:03 PM
Representative Hawker asked how the bill relates to
corporations organized under the state's Aquaculture Act vs.
the Salmon Farming Act. Mr. Fisk explained that the state
hatchery program has helped the system develop, which is
basically ocean ranching as wild fish are protected from
predation and returned to the ocean. Representative Hawker
noted that it is not salmon farming.
3:51:31 PM
Representative Hawker observed that the legislation is a
complex implementation of a way to pay for the cost of
operating hatcheries. He referred to Page 3, line 20. He
noted that once the Department of Revenue has the funds the
legislature "may" appropriate the funds. He questioned if
the legislature has to appropriate the money in order for
the hatchery to receive operating funds. Mr. Fisk
acknowledged that the legislature would have to make the
decision and stated that he confidence [that the
appropriation would be made] based on other pass through
taxes. He noted that the intent is very clear, though there
are some in the hatchery business who are uncomfortable
about giving up control. Representative Hawker summarized
that the intent is that the hatchery would make the
ultimately decision to pursue the venue for funding. He
wanted to assurance that the interests of the investors were
protected.
3:55:01 PM
Representative Weyhrauch referred to Page 3, line 28, and
questioned if "is" should be changed to "may be". Mr. Fisks
stressed that the intent is that people be held accountable.
A misdemeanor under the section is a step above a regular
class A misdemeanor and could result in the loss of a
vessel, fishing gear or fish on board at the time of
violation. The intent is to maintain a strong penalty.
Representative Weyhrauch asked if there is intent to
interfere with the cost recovery program of private non-
profit hatcheries. Mr. Fisk noted that the issue would come
under subsection (1) on Page 1, which is existing statute.
There is no intent to interfere; the intent is to leave it
up to hatcheries. Representative Weyhrauch emphasized that
cost recovery and management of the fisheries would remain
with the Department of Fish and Game. Mr. Fisk agreed.
3:58:37 PM
Representative Croft observed that currently hatcheries
contract with fishermen for enough to sell for the cost of
operations and close the fisheries to anyone other than the
hatchery authorized contract fisherman. Mr. Fisk agreed and
added that the procedure has been in place for a while and
is part of the genesis of the bill.
Representative Croft observed that if enough fish are not
harvested the opening would be extended. He acknowledged the
difficulty of extending the opening, but asked why someone
might switch to a system where a fish assessment would be
taken on every opening. Mr. Fisk pointed out that there is
variability in every system measuring wild stock and
periodic adjustments are needed. The Southeast Alaska
fishing fleet has shown the most interest in the option.
4:01:53 PM
JASON WELLS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, VALDEZ FISHERIES
DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION (VFDA), testified via teleconference
against HB 218. He maintained that the legislation would
inhibit the hatcheries ability to make processors compete to
purchase salmon. He asserted that the ability of hatcheries
to negotiate price has saved fishermen millions of dollars
over the years. He suggested that if direct sales must be
minimized, as contained in the findings section, that
hatcheries would be open to legal action annually by any
processor that feels they have sold to many fish or should
have sold him the fish. He maintained that if the findings
in the bill are passed, that the hatchery would lose its
ability to set budgets. He observed that hatcheries are the
last vestige of upward pressure on the pink salmon price by
competition. If the ability to bid salmon is lost,
hatcheries would be at the mercy of the processor to set
grounds prices. He expressed concern that the legislation
could be made mandatory, which would result in a loss of the
revenue stream and an inability to repay state loans. He
asked that the findings section be eliminated.
4:05:49 PM
PETER ESQUIRO, NSSRAA, SITKA, testified via teleconference.
He suggested changes to the legislation (version S). The
first suggestion was to add "if not a qualified regional
aquaculture association" on Page 2, line 16 and on Page 3,
line 8". On Page 3, line 9, he suggested elimination of "to
the state", which refers to covered debt service to the
state of Alaska. He added that Page 3, line 11 should
include "operational" and spoke in support of a new line
stating: "a corporation board of directors may create other
funds as deemed appropriate to carrying out its fiduciary
responsibilities". He also asked that "the amount of
existing reserve" be changed "to undesignated reserve" on
Page 3, line 14.
Representative Weyhrauch stated that he would work with Mr.
Esquerro and discuss his suggestions with the sponsor.
4:10:32 PM
CORA CROME, PETERSBURG VESSEL OWNERS ASSOCIATION,
PETERSBURG, Alaska Salmon Fisheries, testified via
teleconference in support of the legislation. She maintained
that the bill would allow another option for operational
cost recovery. She maintained that the legislation is
permissive.
4:11:28 PM
RUSSELL COCKRUM, KETCHIKAN, Salmon Seiner, spoke in support
of HB 218. He maintained that the legislation would increase
the value, quality production timing of the harvest. He
observed that cost recovery fish receive a higher price. He
suggested that the program be mandatory.
4:14:01 PM
Representative Weyhrauch MOVED to ADOPT Conceptual Amendment
1, to remove Section 1, delete the findings section (section
1).
Co-Chair Meyer OBJECTED for discussion purposes.
Mr. Fisk stated that the amendment would be acceptable to
the sponsor.
4:16:10 PM
At ease.
4:20:23 PM
HB 218 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
4:21:17 PM
HOUSE BILL NO. 279
"An Act relating to encroachments in the right-of-way
of a highway."
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER, SPONSOR, spoke in support of the
legislation, which was introduced by the House
Transportation Committee, on behalf of Representative Hawker
and Representative Stoltze. He maintained that the
legislation would clear an inconsistency in the current law
regarding the use of highway right-of-ways. Federal law
requires all that encroachments from project construction be
removed from the right-of-way. He gave examples of how
current law has inconvenienced businesses in his district.
House Bill 279 inserts an exception into statute that will
grandfather current encroachments in the right-of-way. They
may remain until such time as [the state of Alaska] needs to
have the encroachments removed. He mentioned Amendment #1,
which would further clarify the rights of the state. (see
below). The bill does not address billboards or other signs.
4:27:50 PM
Representative Holm mentioned the fiscal note, which
contains no increment.
4:28:24 PM
JOHN MACKINNON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES, stated that the
Department has not refined the fiscal note. There is an
annual economic rent. An application fee would be set
through regulation for encroachment based on appraisal or
$100 dollars per year, which ever is greater. He
acknowledged that there would be an incremental cost in
handling permits.
4:30:05 PM
Representative Holm expressed concern with the legislation.
He observed that the landowner owns the property, yet the
state has the right to charge them for an easement. Mr.
MacKinnon clarified that the process is in current
regulation.
Representative Hawker commented that property is acquired
subject to the easement. The landowner is entitled to fee
simple and subject to the easement rights.
Mr. MacKinnon noted that there are two classes of right or
ways: where the state has an easement and where the state
owns the property. It is difficult to collect payments when
the state only has an easement.
4:32:11 PM
Representative Kelly asked if the legislation would resolve
any federal requirements: maintenance concerns & standards.
He commented on Amendment #1 and questioned if it would
cover maintenance needs. Mr. MacKinnon responded that
encroachments were not close enough to the road to cause
trouble. There is no problem with mailboxes.
4:33:31 PM
Representative Hawker noted that the legislation only
addresses existing encroachments and does not allow any new
ones. The amendment specifically addresses qualifications.
4:34:37 PM
Representative Hawker MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #1 as amended
(see applicant below):
Page 1, line 12, following "remain"
Insert ", subject only to removals required by federal
highway funding requirements imposed on the state by
federal law,"
Page 1, line 15 through page 2, line 13
Delete all material
Insert
"(c) Upon receipt of an application, the department
shall issue an encroachment permit to a private person,
a government agency acting in a business capacity, or
an owner or lessee of land contiguous to the right-of-
way for an encroachment that on the effective date of
this Act is present within the right-of-way of an
interstate, primary, or secondary highway and is not
authorized by a written encroachment permit if the
department finds that:
(1) the encroachment does not pose a risk to the
traveling public and the integrity and safety of the
highway is not compromised;
(2) the applicant [application] has demonstrated the
encroachment was erected in good faith;
3) the denial of the encroachment permit would pose a
hardship on the person, agency, owner, or lessee who
applies for the permit;
(4) the issuance of an encroachment permit will not
cause a break in access control for the highway;
(5) the land will not be necessary for a highway
construction project during the initial term of the
permit; and
(6) issuance of a permit is consistent with federal
requirements regarding encroachments on federal aid
highways.
(d) The department may not remove an encroachment
present within the right-of-way of an interstate,
primary, or secondary highway that is not authorized by
a written encroachment permit on the effective date of
this Act until the department determines that the
encroachment does not qualify for an encroachment
permit issued under this section. The department may
charge an application fee, not to exceed $100, for a
permit issued under this section. An encroachment
permit issued under this section may contain reasonable
conditions to protect the traveling public, the safety
and integrity of a highway's design and the public
interest.
(e) The land area described in an encroachment permit
may not be used to meet minimum requirements for a
contiguous land use under applicable municipal land use
standards or under applicable regulations adopted by
the Department of Environmental Conservation. The use
of land contiguous to the land area described in the
permit must satisfy the applicable municipal land use
standards and applicable regulations adopted by the
Department of Environmental Conservation without regard
to the land area described in the permit.
(f) The issuance of an encroachment permit under AS
19.25.200 - 19.25.250 does not entitle the owner,
occupant, or person in possession of the encroachment,
or any other person to a payment of compensation or of
relocation benefits under AS 34.60, if the encroachment
permit is revoked or not renewed or if the encroachment
must be changed, relocated, or removed under AS
19.25.200 - 19.25.250.
Representative Holm referred to provisions for the
Department of Environmental Conservation to create
applicable regulations for the use of contiguous lands. He
questioned if contiguous lands would be kept under the same
umbrella of use.
4:37:10 PM
Representative Hawker clarified that the intent is that the
issuance of a permit not create, for any land owner, a thing
of value that they do not already exist a thing of value
that they already possess. There is no intention to devalue
any right that the landowner possesses. The contiguous land
concept addresses these concerns.
4:39:17 PM
Representative Holm expressed concern with Section E and
questioned what type of restraints would be put on the
property.
4:40:07 PM
In response to Representative Holm's concerns,
Representative Hawker stated that he would entertain a
separate amendment to remove "applicable regulations adopted
by the Department of Environmental Conservation".
Representative Holm WITHDREW his OBJECTION to Amendment #1.
Representative Kelly referred to liability. Mr. MacKinnon
noted that liability is covered as part of the permit
holder's homeowners' insurance. He stated that he was more
concern with the public coming through and getting injured.
4:41:24 PM
There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment #1 was adopted.
4:41:41 PM
Representative Holm asked for more information on Section E.
Mr. MacKinnon replied that the intent was not to run a foul
of on site wastewater requirements.
Representative Hawker stressed that they are attempting to
walk among existing rights, standards and regulations, while
addressing individual problems.
4:44:19 PM
Mr. MacKinnon spoke in support of the legislation.
4:45:00 PM
Representative Foster MOVED to REPORT CS HB 279 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CSHB 279 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "no
recommendation" recommendation and with zero fiscal note #1
by the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities.
4:46:13 PM
HOUSE BILL NO. 243
"An Act relating to the maximum annual regulatory cost
charge collected from certain regulated public
utilities and pipeline carriers; and providing for an
effective date."
KATE GIARD, CHAIR, REGULATORY COMMISSION OF ALASKA (RCA),
testified via teleconference in support of the legislation.
She gave a brief history of her chairmanship and noted that
she was responding to concerns expressed to her. She
emphasized that the RCA needed to address several concerns
before its renewal comes before the legislature in 2007. She
acknowledged the frustrations the legislature had with the
RCA. As soon as she became chair, she began an outreach
effort to the public utilities and pipelines that it
regulates in order to find out more about their concerns.
She gave examples of her attempts to demonstrate to the
utilities that more can be expected of the Regulatory
Commission of Alaska. She acknowledged that the RCA lacks
systems, management, and normal ongoing processes expected
to track, follow, monitor, and manage data in order to get
its work done in a timely manner. The legislation would
increase [the amount allowed to fund the commission] from .7
to .9 percent for three years. The goal is to bring in
sufficient additional revenues to support the acquisition
and implementation of these systems after which the RCA
would return to its current funding level. Ms. Giard
concluded by noting that she would appreciate the
Committee's support of HB 243.
4:51:44 PM
Representative Kelly asked if the utilities support the
increase. Ms. Giard noted that through a public process the
utilities asked for an advisory group, which occurred in
January. There has been unified support from utilities. Mk
asked for assurance that the increase would be temporary,
which Ms. Giard provided.
4:54:02 PM
Representative Hawker asked if the receipts are ultimately
passed on to the consumers of the utilities. Ms. Giard
acknowledged that utilities pass the cost on to the
ratepayers, but emphasized that she didn't want the money to
sit on the capital side because it's money that ratepayers
have paid. Ratepayers pay approximately 72 cents per year,
per regulated services. The average customer has three
services ($2.16 per year for there years). The funds would
be used as operating expenses to fund the systems and would
not be put into capital. She noted that capital funds could
be used for other projects. The funding would be designated
as operating and would return to the consumers the following
year if it is not spent.
Representative Hawker summarized that that the Regulatory
Commission of Alaska would receive $3.9 million in new
money. He asked what the public would be buying with the
money. Ms. Giard explained that it would enable utilities to
electronically file data and to have a holding place, a data
warehouse, for that data. Representative Hawker noted that
the bill is the A version and has survived Labor and
Commerce.
4:58:04 PM
Co-Chair Chenault referred to the Governor's transmittal
letter of Nov. 30, which asks for money to improve
information systems. He voiced a concern about "to fund the
operation of the commissioner" to reduce regulatory costs.
Ms. Giard said she could understand that concern and pointed
out that the funding is contractual.
5:00:47 PM
Representative Kelly spoke in support of the legislation. He
felt that the Regulatory Commission of Alaska is moving
forward in the right direction.
5:02:28 PM
WILLIAM CLIFTON, BRITISH PETROLEUM, spoke in favor of HB
243. He described his company's services. He noted that the
process in place is extremely expensive for the regulated
parties. He stressed that efficiencies create greater
financial certainty for all parties.
5:06:04 PM
HB 243 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 5:07 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|