Legislature(2015 - 2016)
03/09/2016 12:01 AM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB256 || HB257 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
March 9, 2016
12:01 a.m.
[Note: Continuation of 3/8/16 1:30 p.m. meeting]
12:00:01 AM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Neuman called the House Finance Committee meeting
to order at 11:57 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Mark Neuman, Co-Chair
Representative Steve Thompson, Co-Chair
Representative Dan Saddler, Vice-Chair
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative Les Gara
Representative Lynn Gattis
Representative David Guttenberg
Representative Scott Kawasaki
Representative Cathy Munoz
Representative Lance Pruitt
Representative Tammie Wilson
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Pete Ecklund, Staff, Representative Mark Neuman; Joan
Brown, Staff, Representative Mark Neuman; David Teal,
Director, Legislative Finance Division; Representative Lora
Reinbold; Representative Cathy Tilton; Representative Neal
Foster; Representative Kurt Olson.
SUMMARY
HB 256 APPROP: OPERATING BUDGET/LOANS/FUNDS
HB 256 was HEARD and HELD in committee for
further consideration.
HB 257 APPROP: MENTAL HEALTH BUDGET
HB 257 was HEARD and HELD in committee for
further consideration.
HOUSE BILL NO. 256
"An Act making appropriations for the operating and
loan program expenses of state government and for
certain programs, capitalizing funds, making
reappropriations, making supplemental appropriations,
and 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."
HOUSE BILL NO. 257
"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."
12:00:01 AM
Representative Wilson continued to address Amendment 43
(copy on file). She suggested that the legislature may need
to be more careful about how often it used the Department
of Labor and Workforce Development (DLWD) and perhaps do
some of its own research. She shared that the department
had communicated that sometimes providing answers to
questions asked by the legislature may take a bit longer to
respond to due to the [$300,000] reduction. She reminded
the committee that there were currently 34 positions under
the allocation. She relayed that the budget subcommittee
had spoken with the department about the cut and what the
consequences would be. She believed the department would
still have plenty of people to continue its work. She
reiterated that it may take longer for the department to
provide answers to legislators' requests.
Representative Guttenberg provided wrap up on the
amendment. He did not care if DLWD was slow in giving the
legislature information. He reasoned that the legislators
should have asked for the information earlier. He stated
that the state's entire economic landscape relied on the
reports. He reasoned that cutting the positions [economist
III, research analyst III, and research analyst II] slowed
reports that provided Alaskans with valuable information
including economic trends. He reasoned that perhaps the
legislature was anticipating a slowing down of the economy
and believed that no one needed to have the information. He
stressed that each of the positions contributed to the
reports in some way. He underscored that DLWD economists
were recognized for their skills and abilities to
accurately produce the reports. He emphasized that the
state's business community relied on the analysis in its
decision making process. He stated that if the department
did not provide the reports the information would not be
provided. He reasoned that the state would suffer the
consequences.
Co-Chair Thompson MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis, Munoz, Pruitt,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 43 FAILED (3/8).
12:03:01 AM
Representative Guttenberg MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 44 (copy
on file):
DEPARTMENT: Department of Fish and Game
APPROPRIATION: Wildlife Conservation
ADD WORDAGE: No funding in this appropriation may be
used to fund Intensive Management or Predator Control
programs.
ALLOCATION: Wildlife Conservation
DELETE: $100.6 Fish and Game Funding (Other) 1024
DELETE: $301.7 Fed Receipts 1002
EXPLANATION: This amendment deletes funding for
Intensive Management/Predator Control programs. The
amount of $402.3 is based on FYI 5 expenditures
(combined Fish and Game Fund and Federal Receipts) for
Intensive Management/Predator Control (FY16
expenditures are not yet available). It is the intent
of this amendment that no funding (Federal, GF, or
Other) be expended on Intensive Management/Predator
Control, and that instead those Federal/Other funds be
used to promote and maintain healthy habitats and
wildlife populations through means other than
predation control.
Co-Chair Thompson OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Guttenberg explained that the amendment
sought to bring in all of the funds used for Intensive
Management/Predator Control programs, estimated at
approximately $400,000 between Department of Fish and Game
(DFG) funding and federal receipts. He believed that
whether or not a person supported intensive game
management, the results had always been dubious. He stated
that the program was not meant for sustainable yield, but
sustainable harvest. He believed the program needed to be
pulled back.
Co-Chair Neuman spoke in opposition to the amendment. He
stated the Intensive Game Management Program had been very
successful in Alaska, which meant that more Alaskans had
food. He elaborated that the purpose was to maintain
predator control programs in order to allow for the maximum
sustainable yield in order for Alaskans to enjoy the
bounties of the state. He believed that most importantly
the predator control program enabled rural Alaskans - with
very high grocery costs - to feed their families. He
continued that the moose calf survival rate in Unit 16B had
been below 7 percent, which did not bode well to keep the
population strong. He elaborated that predators like wolves
and bear had a tremendous ability to smell. He stated that
frequently the moose calves were picked out as soon as they
were born or before. He referred to a schematic compiled by
Craig Fleener related to the number of moose a moose cow
produced in her lifetime. He elaborated that the number was
well over 500 by the time the offspring moved on. He stated
that the moose helped feed Alaskans and helped to maintain
vibrant hunting in communities throughout the state for in-
state and out-of-state hunters. He emphasized that he was
very passionate about the sport. He reiterated that the
program was extremely important in rural Alaska where there
were game populations under stress. He discussed that
Unimak Island in the Aleutian Chain had a caribou
population, which had been down to 2 or 3 bulls per 100
cows due to a large wolf population. He stated that
unfortunately the federal government managed half of the
island - its sustainable yield ranged from zero to 1,000.
He did not classify the range as sustainable. He believed
the programs were very important to Alaskans and he
adamantly opposed the amendment.
12:09:21 AM
Representative Guttenberg wanted to ensure that people
understood that he recognized how important it was for
Alaskans to bring in moose and caribou into their freezers.
He remarked that it was a significant part of the Alaskan
culture, which he wanted to strengthen. He had seen excuses
made about why people needed to take wolves that had
nothing to do moose populations; it was simply an excuse to
take wolves. He believed there were other ways to maintain
strong herds rather than predator control. He had seen
excuses made for predator control in places that had
terrible habitat. He stressed that the state's landscape
was not all equal for predator control. He continued that
locations had their own unique habitat, and bear, moose,
wolves, and caribou all adjusted differently to the areas.
There were ways to deal with the issues by making limits as
high as the state could, but he believed predator control
had become an excuse. He wanted to ensure that Alaskans had
an opportunity to hunt moose and caribou, but he reasoned
that the program was not without controversy. He had heard
from numerous scientists over the years that there were
better ways [to maintain strong herds]. He did not believe
predator control was done well. He stated that "in the face
of the controversy whether it's done well or not, whether
it actually does what is supposed to do - that's one of the
reasons why I offer this, in the face of everything else
we're doing."
Co-Chair Thompson MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis, Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 44 FAILED (3/8).
12:12:33 AM
Representative Guttenberg MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 45 (copy
on file):
DEPARTMENT: Department of Natural Resources
APPROPRIATION: Parks and Outdoor Recreation
ALLOCATION: Parks Management & Access
ADD: $241,200 General Fund (UGF) 1004
$87,200 General Fund/Program Receipts (DGF) 1005
EXPLANATION: This amendment restores the Governor's
FY17 proposed funding levels. Cuts to this division
negatively impact the department's ability to provide
access and collect user fees for Alaska State parks
and recreation areas.
Co-Chair Thompson OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Guttenberg spoke to the amendment that would
restore funding to the Division of Parks and Outdoor
Recreation. He believed everyone should be concerned about
the issue. He explained that the Interior had experienced
the problems that would be created by the cut. He believed
the decrement would create passive management of some state
parks. Hopefully the division would be able to maintain and
do a better job of raising funds from more successful
parks. He stated that clearly many of the state's park were
more successful - they were in better locations, had higher
usage, and people did not mind paying usage fees. However,
he cited a specific situation at Olnes Pond in Fairbanks
where the park had gone wild. He elaborated that there was
no chain or lock that bolt cutters could not break. He
continued that people saw old parks and disregard a chain
barricading the entrance. He stressed that the park had
become wild and people had been living in the outhouses. He
expounded that families would no longer use the area and
the troopers did not want to go out to the area because
there was always trouble. He stressed that families had
been afraid for their children to go near the area. He was
concerned that without continued funding for parks the
situation could occur in other locations. He stressed that
parks could become a dangerous place. The police blotters
were never long enough to list all of the negative things
that went on at Olnes Pond. He relayed that the cost to fix
the park was significant. He did not believe committee
members would want to see a park in their neighborhoods
become a place where people went to do bad things. He
reasoned that it was better to have minimal maintenance
than nothing. He stated that he had been troubled by the
way parks were managed many times. He did not believe the
legislature wanted passive management over parks that
resulted in places becoming a "Mecca for bad behavior."
12:16:17 AM
Co-Chair Thompson communicated that he had been a champion
of having parks as places for people to go to fish and
camp, but under the circumstances it was necessary to cut
back. He would do his best to be one of the people to
maintain the area himself. He shared that he had helped to
clean up Olnes and Chatanika camps when it had been a
problem. He relayed that he had to vote against the
amendment because the state was out of money.
Co-Chair Thompson MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Edgmon, Gattis, Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 45 FAILED (3/8).
12:18:02 AM
AT EASE
12:29:22 AM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Thompson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 9 (copy on
file):
Page 71, lines 11-15:
Delete all material and insert:
"(h) The sum of $1,018,984,500 is appropriated from
the general fund to the public education fund (AS
14.17.300)."
Page 7l, line l6:
Delete "$78,989,800"
Insert "$78,969,800"
EXPLANATION: This amendment accomplishes the
following:
1. Relative to the Governor's amended request this
amendment reduces the FY17 UGF capitalization of the
public education fund by $145 million. This action
does not reduce the amount that will be distributed
to school districts via the foundation formula. It
allows the FY16 deposit of $435 million UGF that is
currently in the bill to he distributed over three
years.
2. Corrects a typographical error in the appropriation
for pupil transportation.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Mr. Ecklund explained that the amendment corrected an error
that appropriated $1,018,984,500 from the General Fund to
K-12. Additionally, it corrected a typo in the pupil
transportation number. He detailed that with the FY 17
undesignated general fund (UGF) capitalization to the
Public Education Fund, $145 million was used out of the
$435 million transferred to the Public Education Fund in FY
16, in order to fully fund the Base Student Allocation
(BSA) amount in FY 17.
Representative Gara pointed to page 71 of the bill that
included the following language: "the full amount as
required by the Base Student Allocation will be funded." He
observed that the same funding number was included, but the
language had been removed. He asked about the reason for
the change.
Mr. Ecklund replied that the BSA would still be fully
funded; it would use $145 million that had been transferred
to the Public Education Fund in FY 16. Additionally, the FY
17 amount would be $1,018,984,500. The combination of the
two appropriations would equal the full funding of the
statutory BSA for FY 17.
Representative Gara did not understand what was wrong with
the existing language which specified that the BSA would be
fully funded. He did not know what the purpose of the
amendment was on page 71, line 11, subsection (h) of the
bill.
Mr. Ecklund explained that the amendment would use $145
million of the $435 million in the Public Education Fund in
FY 17. The intent was to use $145 million in FY 18 and FY
19 as well (from the Public Education Fund). He reiterated
that the amendment would fully fund the statutory BSA in FY
17.
Representative Gara did not see the language in the bill
specifying that the $145 million would come out of the
Public Education Fund.
12:33:14 AM
Mr. Ecklund answered that the amendment appropriated an
exact dollar amount of $1,018,984,500. When the figure was
added to existing money in the Public Education Fund it
would be more than adequate to fully fund the BSA in FY 17
and would leave a remaining balance of $290 million in the
Public Education Fund. He explained that the Public
Education Fund was designed to have dollars flow out of it
per the statutory BSA.
Representative Gara did not understand the amendment. He
deferred to another member to ask questions.
Representative Kawasaki referred to the existing language
in subsection (h) of the bill, which showed the estimated
appropriation. He asked about the effect of appropriating a
specific amount to the fund.
Mr. Ecklund replied that the effect was as he had
described. There would be $435 million in the Public
Education Fund from FY 16. He explained that money flowed
out of the fund at the statutory BSA level; no further
appropriation was required. Between the $1,018,984,500
[general fund appropriation] and the money in the fund,
there would be more money than needed to fund the statutory
BSA in FY 17. He furthered that the FY 17 BSA would be
fully funded and there would be a remaining balance in the
Public Education Fund in FY 18 of $290 million.
Representative Kawasaki asked whether the $290 million was
available for appropriation.
Mr. Ecklund replied that the Public Education Fund was not
a dedicated fund; therefore, money could be appropriated
from the fund. He explained that it did not require an
appropriation to fund the BSA. The fund had been set up in
a way that did not require a further appropriation for the
dollars to flow out to fund the BSA.
Representative Kawasaki asked if the $290 million from the
Public Education Fund would be available to fund items
other than the BSA. Mr. Ecklund replied in the affirmative;
it was not a dedicated fund; therefore, there could be an
appropriation out of the fund.
Representative Kawasaki asked if the $290 million could be
used for multiple years (i.e. FY 16, FY 17, or FY 18).
12:37:39 AM
Mr. Ecklund answered that under the amendment, the
statutory BSA would be fully funded in FY 17. There would
then be a remaining balance within the Public Education
Fund of $290 million that would be available in FY 18 for
public education.
Representative Kawasaki asked if the funding would be
available only for education. Mr. Ecklund replied that the
purpose of the fund was to pay for public education; it
could be used for another purpose, but had not been in the
past.
Representative Gara expressed that he was still having
trouble with the amendment. He stated that the amount of
money that went to schools was in part based on student
counts, which were not known for the next school year.
Currently the bill specified that enough money to fund the
foundation formula would be appropriated and was estimated
to be $1.018 billion; however, he reasoned that the precise
number was not known at present. He remarked that the
amendment included an exact dollar amount despite the fact
that the student count was not known. He wondered why the
current language was not better.
12:39:42 AM
Mr. Ecklund stated that the way the amendment was written
there would be a total of $435 million in the Public
Education Fund plus $1.018 million; there would be above
$1.4 billion in the fund. The required BSA funding was
around $1.2 billion; therefore, there would be more than
enough money in the fund after the amendment to pay for the
BSA in FY 17.
Representative Gara remarked that the bill specified that
$1 billion-plus would come from the Public School Trust
Fund. The amendment addressed $435 million in the Public
Education Fund. The items were causing him confusion.
Representative Guttenberg stated that subsection (h) in the
bill referred to the fiscal year ending June 30, 2017. He
observed that the date was removed in the amendment. He
wondered about the impact and asked if it allowed the 2016
deposit of $435 million to be spread over a period of three
years.
Mr. Ecklund answered that the way the Public Education Fund
worked was that the money flowed out to fund the K-12
formula without further appropriation. He detailed that
$435 million deposited had been deposited into the Public
Education Fund in FY 16 and the amendment appropriated over
$1 billion more; there would be approximately $1.45 billion
in the fund. The amount required to fund the BSA out of the
Public Education Fund was estimated at $1.163 billion. He
emphasized that there was more than enough money in the
Public Education Fund after the amendment to pay for the
statutory BSA in FY 17. There would be a remainder of
approximately $290 million at the start of FY 18.
12:43:25 AM
Representative Gara requested to hear from Mr. Teal on the
impact of Amendment 9.
DAVID TEAL, DIRECTOR, LEGISLATIVE FINANCE DIVISION, relayed
that the current language in the bill stated that the
amount necessary to fund is appropriated to the Public
Education Fund. He explained that the estimated number [in
the bill] was wrong. He detailed that with $435 million in
the Public Education Fund, the amount necessary to fund
education in FY 17 would be reduced by $435 million from
the governor's request. The bill already reduced the amount
by $145 million. He elucidated that the amendment made the
amount certain. He expounded that if the amendment was not
adopted, the entire $435 million deposited in FY 16 would
be spent in FY 17. The amendment would enable the funds to
be spent over a three-year period instead of just one year
under the current language.
Representative Gara asked if the amendment impacted the
legislature's ability to increase the BSA in the following
year.
Mr. Teal replied that the amendment would not impact the
legislature's ability to do anything. He reminded the
committee that in the past couple of years there had been a
balance of as much as $1 billion in the Public Education
Fund. A large balance in the fund did not help the
legislature fund education, nor did it hurt. Statutorily,
money flowed out of the Public Education Fund without
appropriation to fully fund the BSA. He explained that
excess funds could not flow out of the fund; funds flowed
out until the BSA was fully funded. He explained that if
the legislature increased the BSA the following year, the
higher dollar amount would flow from the account.
12:47:04 AM
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
There being NO further OBJECTION, Amendment 9 was ADOPTED.
Co-Chair Thompson MOVED to authorize the Division of
Legislative Finance and Legislative Legal Services to make
technical and conforming amendments to incorporate the
amendments adopted by the committee into a CS.
HB 256 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
HB 257 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
Co-Chair Thompson discussed the schedule for the following
day.
ADJOURNMENT
12:48:07 AM
The meeting was adjourned at 12:48 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|