Legislature(2021 - 2022)ADAMS 519
01/28/2022 01:30 PM House FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB283 | |
| Overview: Hb 282, Hb 283, Hb 284 Capital Budget by Office of Management and Budget | |
| HB285 | |
| Overview: Hb 285 G.o. Bonds for Infrastructure by Office of Management and Budget | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 283 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 285 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
January 28, 2022
1:34 p.m.
1:34:44 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Foster called the House Finance Committee meeting
to order at 1:34 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Neal Foster, Co-Chair
Representative Kelly Merrick, Co-Chair via teleconference
Representative Dan Ortiz, Vice-Chair
Representative Ben Carpenter
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative DeLena Johnson
Representative Andy Josephson
Representative Bart LeBon
Representative Sara Rasmussen via teleconference
Representative Steve Thompson
Representative Adam Wool
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Neil Steininger, Director, Office of Management and Budget,
Office of the Governor.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Theresa Cross, Administrative Service Director, Department
of Natural Resources, Office of Management and Budget,
Office of the Governor; Bob Ernisse, Administrative Service
Director, Department of Military and Veterans Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, Office of the Governor;
Deven Mitchell, Executive Director, Alaska Municipal Bond
Bank Authority, Department of Revenue.
SUMMARY
HB 283 APPROP: CAP; REAPPROP; SUPP
HB 283 was HEARD and HELD in committee for
further consideration.
HB 285 G.O. BONDS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
HB 285 was HEARD and HELD in committee for
further consideration.
OVERVIEW: HB 282, HB 283, HB 284 CAPITAL BUDGET BY OFFICE
OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
OVERVIEW: HB 285 G.O. BONDS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE BY OFFICE OF
MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
Co-Chair Foster reviewed the agenda for the day.
HOUSE BILL NO. 283
"An Act making appropriations, including capital
appropriations, reappropriations, and other
appropriations; making supplemental appropriations;
and providing for an effective date."
1:35:51 PM
^OVERVIEW: HB 282, HB 283, HB 284 CAPITAL BUDGET BY OFFICE
OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
1:35:55 PM
NEIL STEININGER, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET,
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, introduced the PowerPoint
Presentation: "HB 282, HB 283, HB 284 Capital Budget." He
focused on the FY 2023 Capital Budget request and included
capital projects in the Mental Health Budget, [HB 283]
Supplemental Budget and the [HB 284] Fast Track
Supplemental budget. He turned to Slide 2 titled Capital
Budget History FY 2013 - FY 2023. He pointed to 2013
denoted on the graph and explained that it was the last
year significant capital spending occurred prior to the
decline in oil revenues. He delineated that FY 2016 and FY
2017 experienced very low Unrestricted General Fund (UGF)
spending offset by use of reappropriations, which created
an artificially lower capital budget in terms of investment
into state infrastructure. Between 2016 and the prior
year's capital budget most of the capital spending was for
state matching funds for federal programs like Village Safe
Water (VSW) and the Statewide Transportation Improvement
Program (STIP). A larger capital proposal was introduced in
FY 22. In FY 23, the administration was proposing an even
larger capital budget to help address the built-up backlog.
1:38:37 PM
Mr. Steininger continued to Slide 3 titled Capital Budget
Five Year Overview FY 2018 FY 2022. The bar graph showed
additional fund source detail including COVID relief
funding over a 5 year perspective. He pointed to the grey
box which depicted traditional federal funding versus the
light blue areas depicting federal COVID relief funding,
which was $135.9 million in FY 23. The larger gray bar in
FY 23 represented the proposed use of General Obligation
(GO) bonds for capital projects.
1:39:54 PM
Co-Chair Foster confirmed Co-Chair Merrick was online.
Vice-Chair Ortiz referred to the FY 21 Covid spending. He
wondered if the light blue areas represented all of the
federal phases of Covid funding. Mr. Steininger replied in
the affirmative but added that it represented only the
amount directly applied to capital projects.
1:41:08 PM
Mr. Steininger advanced to slide 4 titled Federal
Infrastructure Bill (IIJA):
? Enacted November 15, 2021 - 5-year authorization of
both established and new federal programs
? No broad discretionary funding not a relief bill
? New program details still pending
? Federal infrastructure spending and priorities
primarily established by federal agencies, not by
Alaska
? Funding is about 60% formula and 40% grants
(competitive and discretionary)
? Congress currently under FFY21 Continuing Resolution
? Some program funding appropriated in the bill,
others pending
Mr. Steininger elaborated that the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) bill had a 5-year
authorization of established and new federal programs. The
state would have to compete for some of the federal funding
that added to uncertainty regarding how much funding the
state would receive.
1:43:50 PM
Representative Edgmon asked how much of the money would
flow through the Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities (DOT). He understood that a significant amount
would go through the one agency. He asked if the influx of
federal funding created a need for additional operating
funding. Mr. Steininger responded that a large portion of
IIJA would go towards surface funding. He would provide
additional information about the federal infrastructure
bill in the future as more information was known. He
confirmed that additional adjustments to DOTs capital
budget would be necessary. Representative Edgmon asked if
additional adjustments to the operating budget for DOT
would be necessary. Mr. Steininger replied that the design
work was paid through the surface transportation program
via interagency receipts that also paid into the operating
budget. Currently, the state's highway maintenance was
being paid with some available discretionary relief
funding. He informed the committee that as the relief
funding was spent down, to expect adjustments in the DOT
operating budget replacing relief funding with UGF.
Representative Edgmon discussed that with the Coronavirus
Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act funding
there was a 60-day window for federal guidelines. He asked
why the guidelines for IIJA were taking so long to be
published. Mr. Steininger deduced that IIJA was a 5-year
program, and the expediency of relief funding did not
apply. He thought that the federal government was being
more thoughtful about the guidelines regarding
infrastructure investment .
1:48:29 PM
Representative Josephson asked what the amount of state
match would be for IIJA projects. Mr. Steininger replied
that the state match would be 10 percent for surface
infrastructure. However, not every program would require a
10 percent match. For some programs the matching amount was
still undisclosed and for items such as VSW the state match
was 25 percent. Representative Josephson asked if the
administration was building the state match into the
budget. Mr. Steininger indicated that the administration
was keeping the state match component in mind. He would
come back to the committee with more information as it was
known.
Representative Carpenter understood that much was still
unknown about IIJA. He asked if there was additional
information for what projects were certain and if Mr.
Steininger could provide a list. Mr. Steininger agreed to
provide the list.
Representative Thompson inquired whether the amount of IIJA
funding the state would receive was known. Mr. Steininger
ascertained that the amount would be in the billions over 5
years. There was a wide range of funding the state might
receive because some of the funding was offered through
competitive grants.
1:52:26 PM
Mr. Steininger moved to Slide 5 titled FY 2023 Capital
Budget and Supplemental Overview. He drew attention to the
UGF total for mental health and regular capital spending of
$154.7 million and $93 million UGF for all supplemental
capital spending. The proposed total between all of the
different funding sources amounted to $2.1 billion. He
furthered that the administration took a more conservative
baseline budgeting approach to the FY 23 Capital Budget and
based on available cash and the Fall Revenue Forecast built
out the budget to make investments in capital
infrastructure. He noted that there was a significant FY 22
surplus. He mentioned that the GO Bond package was
predicated on addressing communities needs and took
advantage of available financing.
1:54:37 PM
Representative Carpenter asked about the asterisk after HB
285 GO Bond column on the chart. Mr. Steininger explained
that it denoted a late addition to the GO Bond package for
the Kodiak Fire Station that was not included in the
capital budget bill but would be added as an amendment. The
item was added to the GO Bond bill prior to its
introduction.
1:55:25 PM
Mr. Steininger advanced to slide 6 titled FY 2023 Capital
Budget Snapshot that broke down capital spending by budget
sources per department. He highlighted that the chart
showed the departments that received the bulk of UGF also
received significant federal funding.
Co-Chair Foster indicated that Representative Rasmussen
joined the meeting.
1:56:34 PM
Mr. Steininger turned Slide 7 titled FY 2023 Projects by
Department:
Commerce, Community & Economic Development
1. Alaska Energy Authority - Electrical
Emergencies Program $200.0 UGF
2. Community Block Grants $6,315.0 ($6,250.0 Fed,
$65.0 GF Match)
3. National Petroleum Reserve - Alaska Impact
Grant Program $13,800.0 Fed
4. Inter-Island Ferry Authority $250.0 UGF
4. Alaska Energy Authority - Bulk Fuel Upgrades
$13,000.0 ($7,500.0 Fed, $5,500.0 GF Match)
5. Alaska Energy Authority - Rural Power Systems
Upgrades $20,000.0 ($10,000 Fed, $10,000.0 PCE)
6. Alaska Energy Authority - Round XIV Renewable
Energy Project Grants (AS 42.45.045) $15,000.0
Renewable Energy Grant Fund
7. Alaska Travel Industry Association $5,000.0 Fed
CSLFRF
8. Alaska Energy Authority - Volkswagen Settlement
$400.0 SDPR
9. Named Recipient Grant - Voice of the Arctic
Inupiat $1,000.0 UGF
Mr. Steininger highlighted that the Power Cost Equalization
(PCE) fund experienced substantial earnings, therefore, the
entirety of the waterfall programs was funded, displayed on
items 6 and 7. He pointed to the $5 million from the
Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (CSLFRF)
for the Alaska Travel Industry Association.
1:58:17 PM
Co-Chair Foster spoke to the Power Cost Equalization
Funding and the waterfall spending. He pointed to the Rural
Power Systems Upgrades and asked if it was part of the
Renewable Energy Grant fund. Mr. Steininger replied that
the waterfall was allowed for Community Assistance and for
deposit into the Renewable Energy Grant and other projects
specifically related to the purpose of PCE for decreasing
power costs. He elucidated that the rural power system
upgrades fell under the statutory framework of the type of
project allowed.
Mr. Steininger turned to slide 8 to continue to discuss
projects for Department of Commerce, Community and Economic
Development (DCCED) and projects for the Department of
Environmental Conservation (DEC).
Commerce, Community & Economic Development
City of Palmer Wastewater Treatment Plant
Improvements -Phase II $6,900.0 Fed CSLFRF
Economic Recovery Mariculture Incentive Grant
Program $25,000.0 Fed CSLFRF
Environmental Conservation
Drinking Water Capitalization Grant Subsidy
$2,900.0 DWF
Clean Water Capitalization Grant Subsidy $1,000.0
CWF
Village Safe Water and Wastewater Infrastructure
Projects: First Time Service Projects$43,350.0
($11,700.0 GF Match, $300.0 SDPR, $31,350.0 Fed)
Village Safe Water and Wastewater Infrastructure
Projects: Expansion, Upgrade, placement of Existing
Service $28,900.0 ($7,800.0 UGF, $200.0 SDPR,
$20,900.0 Fed)
2:01:23 PM
Mr. Steininger continued to slide 9:
Environmental Conservation
Fairbanks PM2.5 Nonattainment Area Voluntary Heating
Device Change Out Program $5,684.8 Fed
EVOS Impaired Beaches Project $658.4 Other EVOSS
Family and Community Services
MH: Deferred Maintenance and Accessibility
Improvements $500.0 ($250.0 GF/MH, $250.0 MHTAAR)
Mr. Steininger advanced to slide 10:
Fish and Game
1. Sport Fish Recreational Boating and Angler Access
$3,000.0 ($2,250.0 Fed, $750.0 Fish & Game Fund)
2. Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund $4,400.0 Fed
3. Facilities, Vessels, and Aircraft Maintenance,
Repair, and Upgrades $500.0 UGF
4. Endangered Species Act $4,000.0 ($1,750 Fed,
$2,000.0 UGF, $250.0 SDPR)
5. Pacific Salmon Treaty Chinook Fishery Mitigation
$6,400.0 Fed
6. EVOS Kenai Peninsula Cost Share $400.0 EVOSS
7. EVOS Prince William Sound Pollock and Herring
Interaction $4,129.3 EVOSS
8. EVOS Mariculture - Marine Mammals $1,660.0 EVOSS
9. Proceeds of Sale of State-owned Vessels and
Aircrafts $150.0 DGF
10. EVOS Gulf Watch Alaska Herring Research and
Monitoring $1,908.3 EVOSS
Mr. Steininger identified item 9 and explained that the
item was a new concept and allowed the department to use
the proceeds from the sale of a vessel or aircraft for
maintenance or replacement costs. He noted that there were
a number of projects using Exxon Valdez Oil Spill funding.
Representative Josephson asked for further detail
concerning item 4. Mr. Steininger explained that the
funding was used to help the state ensure the determination
of an endangered species was done accurately and to help
with a response to a determination. He thought the
commissioner could offer further detail. Representative
Josephson asked if the appropriation would be tied to
funding in the Department of Law (DOL). Mr. Steininger
answered in the negative and reiterated that the money was
being used to research the determination of an endangered
species. The Department of Law could be involved if the
determination was disputed.
2:05:54 PM
Mr. Steininger moved to the Office of the Governor and
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS) on Slide
11.:
Governor
1. Statewide Deferred Maintenance, Renovation, and
Repair $23,880.0 DGF (ACIF)
Health
1. MH: Home Modification and Upgrades to Retain Housing
$1,150.0 ($1,050.0 UGF, $100.0 MHTAAR)
2. MH: Essential Program Equipment $600.0 ($300.0 UGF,
$300.0 MHTAAR)
3.Emergency Medical Services Match for Code Blue
Project $500.0 GF Match
4.MH: Assistive Technology $500.0 UGF
Mr. Steininger reported that the appropriation in the
governor's office budget was to respond to statewide needs
for deferred maintenance.
2:06:58 PM
Mr. Steininger continued to report on projects for DHSS and
projects for Department of Military and Veterans Affairs
(DMVA) on Slide 12:
Health - continued
7. Division of Public Assistance E-forms and
Online Noticing $8,000.0 ($4,000.0 Fed, $4,000.0
CSLFRF)
8. Division of Public Assistance Eligibility
System Replacement $23,500.0 ($18,800.0 Fed,
$4,700.0 CSLFRF)
9. Health Record Infrastructure Improvements -
$30,000.0 Fed - Coronavirus Capital Projects Fund
Military and Veterans Affairs
1. State Homeland Security Grant Programs
$9,000.0 Fed
2. DMVA Deferred Maintenance, Replacement, and
Renewal $12,000.0 Fed
Mr. Steininger discussed item 9. He elaborated that the
total pot of money in the listed Coronavirus fund was $112
million. The appropriation would help to respond to events
and needs that became apparent during the pandemic and to
assist with distance education related to health. The
project was responding to the need for access to medical
records and medical information.
Representative LeBon returned to slide 7 and asked about
item 2 listed as Community Block Grants and wondered what
communities benefited. Mr. Steininger would provide a list
to the committee.
2:10:24 PM
Mr. Steininger continued to slide 13 regarding projects for
Department of Natural Resources (DNR):
Natural Resources
1. National Recreational Trails Federal Grant
Program $1,650.0 ($150.0 UGF, $1,500.0 Fed)
2. Abandoned Mine Lands Reclamation Federal Program
$3,200.0 Fed
3. National Historic Preservation Fund $800.0
($200.0 SDPR, $600.0 Fed)
4. Land and Water Conservation Fund Federal Grant
Program $4,200.0 ($1,600.0 UGF, $2,600.0 Fed)
5. Federal and Local Government Funded Forest
Resource and Fire Program $7,000.0 Fed
6. Geological Mapping for Energy Development (USGS
STATEMAP) $1,200.0 ($600.0 UGF, $600.0 Fed)
7. State Park Electronic Fee Stations $650.0 UGF
8. Arctic Strategic Transportation and Resource
Project $2,500.0 UGF
9. Land Sales - New Subdivision Development $500.0
DGF - State Land Disposal Income
2:11:57 PM
Mr. Steininger moved to slide 14 to continue discussing
projects for DNR and the Department of Public Safety(DPS):
Natural Resources - continued
10. RS2477 Access Development - Advancing State's
Rights in Navigability and Revised Statute 2477
$2,500.0 UGF
11. Potter Marsh Watershed Conservation Project
Phase I $1,000.0 Fed
12.Statewide Park Sanitation Deferred Maintenance
and Facility Upgrades $1,418.0 Fed - CSLFRF
13.Eagle River Fire Crew Facility $13,856.4 Fed -
Coronavirus Capital Projects Fund
14.Big Eddy EVOS Restoration and Improvements
$4,329.6 EVOSS
15.Food Security Agriculture Incentive Grant
Program $25,000.0 CSLFRF
Public Safety
1. Law Enforcement Off Highway Vehicle Replacement
$750.0 UGF
2. Marine Fisheries Patrol Improvements $1,200.0
Fed
2:12:32 PM
Co-Chair Foster cited item 10 and indicated that a related
board was previously moth-balled. He wondered if the board
was being reconstituted.
Mr. Steininger deferred to DNR for the answer.
2:13:08 PM
THERESA CROSS, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT
OF NATURAL RESOURCES, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET,
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR (via teleconference), would provide
the information to the committee in writing.
Co-Chair Foster recalled that the board was the Citizens'
Advisory Commission on Federal Areas (CACFA).
Representative Josephson confirmed the boards name.
2:14:59 PM
Mr. Steininger advanced to slide 15 listing the Capital
projects for the Department of Revenue (DOR):
Revenue
1. AHFC Supplemental Housing Development
Program $2,750.0 UGF - AHFC Div
2. AHFC Housing and Urban Development Capital
Fund Program $3,200.0 Fed
3. AHFC Housing and Urban Development Federal
HOME Grant $4,750.0 ($750.0 UGF AHFC Div,
$4,000.0 Fed)
4. AHFC Federal and Other Competitive Grants
$7,500.0 ($1,500.0 UGF AHFC Div, $6,000.0 Fed)
5. AHFC Competitive Grants for Public Housing
$1,350.0 ($350.0 UGF AHFC Div, $1,000.0 Fed)
6. AHFC Energy Efficiency Research $500.0 UGF
AHFC Div
7. MH: AHFC Beneficiary and Special Needs
Housing $3,450.0 ($1,750.0 GF/MF, $200.0 MHTAAR,
$1,500.0 UGF AHFC Div)
8. MH: AHFC Homeless Assistance Program
$8,100.0 ($850.0 GF/MH, $6,300.0 UGF AHFC Div,
$950.0 MHTAAR)
2:15:42 PM
Mr. Steininger moved to slide 16 showing additional Alaska
Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) projects under DOR and
capital projects for the Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities (DOT):
Revenue - continued
9 AHFC Teacher, Health and Public Safety
Professionals Housing $2,250.0 ($1,750.0 UGF AHFC
Div, $500.0 SDPR)
10 AHFC Energy Programs Weatherization $4,800.0
($3,000.0 Fed, $1,800.0 UGF AHFC Div)
11. AHFC Rental Assistance for Persons Displaced
Due to Domestic Violence - Empowering Choice Housing
Program (ECHP) $1,500.0 UGF AHFC Div
11. MH: AHFC Senior Citizens Housing Predevelopment
Program $500.0 UGF AHFC Div
12.
13. AHFC Senior Citizens Housing Development
Program $1,000.0 UGF AHFC Div
Transportation and Public Facilities
1. Federal-Aid Aviation State Match $17,600.0 UGF
2. Alaska Marine Highway System (AMHS) Vessel
Overhaul, Annual Certification and Shoreside
Facilities Rehabilitation $20,000.0 AMHS Fund
3. State Equipment Fleet Replacement $25,000.0 Other
Highways/Equipment Working Capital Fund
Vice-Chair Ortiz asked if the funding for AMHS was GF
appropriation versus federal infrastructure money. Mr.
Steininger replied that the $20 million was DGF from the
Marine Highway System Fund. He understood that there would
be IIJA federal funding for AMHS, but details were unknown.
2:17:50 PM
Mr. Steininger continued to report on projects for DOT on
slide 17:
Transportation and Public Facilities - continued
1. Federal Transit Administration Grants $26,670.0 Fed
2. MH: Coordinated Transportation and Vehicles $1,300.0
($1,000.0 MH GF, $300.0 MHTAAR)
5. Cooperative Reimbursable Projects $15,000.0
($5,000.0 Fed, $10,000 DGF SDPR)
6. Alaska International Airport System $68,722.1
($722.1 Other International Airport Construction
Fund, $20,800.0 Other Int. Airport Revenue Fund,
$47,200.0 Fed)
7. Surface Transportation Program $669,500.0 Fed
8. Highway Safety Grants Program $8,033.9 ($130.6
UGF, $8,000.0 Fed)
9. Federal Emergency Projects $10,000.0 Fed
10. Other Federal Program Match $1,300.0 GF Match
11. Alaska International Airport System $81,700.3
($9,561.0 Other Int. Airport Revenue Fund, $72,139.2
Fed)
12. Rural Airport Improvement Program $200,000.0 Fed
13. Federal-Aid Highway State Match $70,200.0 UGF
Mr. Steininger highlighted Slide 18 including capital
projects for the University of Alaska (UA) and Judiciary on
Slide 18:
University
1. Student Information Technology Systems
$20,000.0 Fed - Coronavirus Capital Projects Fund
2. Seward Marine Center Research Vessel
Infrastructure $94,400.0 Fed
Courts
1. Court Security Projects $1,130.0 UGF
2. Courts Statewide Deferred Maintenance
$2,300.0 UGF
2:18:26 PM
Mr. Steininger moved to Slide 18 [Title Page] the second
portion of his presentation regarding the FY 2022 Capital
Supplemental, HB 283 Supplemental in FY 2023 Governors
Budget, and HB 284 Fast Track Supplemental capital items.
2:19:23 PM
Co-Chair Merrick asked who made the request for the Eagle
River Fire facility. Mr. Steininger responded that the
request was made through the department. Co-Chair Merrick
reported that a request for a community center was not
something she was aware of and wondered who made the
request for the community center. Mr. Steininger indicated
that it was an idea that was borne out of tailoring the
project to meet the needs of the Coronavirus Capital
Project funds, which required that the facility was more
multi-use.
2:21:44 PM
Mr. Steininger addressed Slide 20 titled FY2022
Supplemental Projects. The chart showed the total
Supplemental Capital spending by department broken down by
funding source.
Mr. Steininger continued to slide 21 Titled FY 2022
Supplemental Projects showing both regular and fast track
supplemental projects:
Administration
1. *Alaska Rural Communications Service (ARCS)
FCC License Surrenders and Renewals Update
$1,650.0 ($,500.0 UGF, $1,130.0 Fed)
2. **Azure Adoption to Assist with Cloud
Migration $23,116.0 UGF
Commerce, Community & Economic Development
1. *Replace Alcohol Licensing Database $750.0
UGF
2. *Alaska Energy Authority - Electrical
Vehicle Infrastructure Plan $1,150.0 UGF
3. *Alaska Energy Authority - Strategic Plan
for Railbelt Assets $2,500.0 UGF
Corrections
1. *Hiland Mountain Intake Administration
Project $4,500.0 UGF
2. *Yukon Kuskokwim Correctional Center
Recreational Area Renovations $3,170.0 UGF
3. *Statewide Backup Power System Evaluation
and Upgrade Program $350.0 UGF
4. **Suicide Prevention Barriers $750.0 UGF
*HB 283 Supplemental in 2023 Governor ** HB 284
Fast Track Supplemental
Mr. Steininger indicated that the fast track supplemental
was introduced to address more urgent needs. Other projects
included would benefit from earlier funding but were not as
urgent and there would be distinct benefits from advanced
funding. The second item was more urgent because of
security issues. The amount would be used for an analysis
of what would need to be done to move data securely into
the internet Cloud.
2:26:50 PM
Representative Josephson had not seen a $750,000 request in
the capital budget. He asked if it was a normal practice.
Mr. Steininger explained that the administration had
identified available revenues to address the backlog of
capital demand. He noted that it was not the first time
replacing an aging licensing database had been discussed
but could not be prioritized in a decade of austere capital
budgets. He reiterated that FY 22 had experienced a
substantial surplus. Representative Josephson asked whether
the $27 million surplus in the Operating Budget was for FY
23. Mr. Steininger replied in the affirmative.
Representative Josephson referred to the cost of Cloud
migration assistance and noted that it was a greater amount
than what was spent on DEC. Mr. Steininger answered that
Cloud migration was complicated, required the involvement
of several entities, and was expensive.
Vice-Chair Ortiz asked about item 2 under DCCED. He asked
what the program entailed. Mr. Steininger replied that the
appropriation was for development of a plan for where to
place the infrastructure and would be used as a roadmap to
build it. He deferred to Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) to
provide further information. Vice-Chair Ortiz did not think
it was necessary.
2:30:49 PM
Representative Carpenter asked whether the wind damage at
the Homer prison needed supplemental funding. Mr.
Steininger understood that insurance would cover the
damages.
2:31:47 PM
Mr. Steininger moved to slide 22 to discuss supplemental
capital projects within the DEED, DHSS, and DFG:
1.**William N. Miller K-12 Memorial School
Replacement, Napakiak $54,895.5 ($22,111.5 UGF,
$32,784 Other REAA)
Family and Community Services
1.*Alaska Psychiatric Institute Wireless
Infrastructure Upgrade $500.0 UGF
Fish and Game
1.*Stock Identification of Salmon Harvested in South
Peninsula Fisheries $2,000.0 UGF
2.*Alaska Marine Salmon Program $1,150.0 UGF
3.*Arctic Fisheries $1,000.0 UGF, $2,000 Fed
4.*Proceeds of Sale of State-owned Vessels and
Aircrafts $150.0 DGF
*HB 283 Supplemental in 2023 Governor ** HB 284 Fast Track
Supplemental
2:33:51 PM
Representative Josephson asked if the Regional Educational
Attendance Area (REAA) fund was not sweepable. Mr.
Steininger replied in the negative and confirmed that it
was not sweepable. He delineated that the REAA fund was
considered a capitalized fund and monies could be spent
without further appropriation by the department. It was
earmarked to show that the entire project was funded.
Representative Josephson asked for verification that no
further appropriation action was necessary. Mr. Steininger
answered in the affirmative; no further action was needed
for the department to spend money out of the specific fund.
Mr. Steininger moved to slide 23 and discussed the FY 22
capital supplemental projects for DHSS and DMVA:
Health
1.*Office of Children's Services Lease Expansion
or Relocation $960.0 ($640.0 UGF, $320.0 Fed
2.**Information Technology Security Program
Assessment $1,900.0 UGF
Military and Veterans Affairs
1.*Construction of a Certified Veterans Cemetery
in Fairbanks area $3,270.0 ($2,270.0 UGF,
$1,000.0 Fed)
2.*Alaska Military Youth Academy (AMYA)
Construction, Contingency, and Planning $750.0
($150.0 UGF, $600 Fed)
*HB 283 Supplemental in 2023 Governor ** HB 284 Fast
Track Supplemental
2:36:12 PM
Representative LeBon asked for more detail about the
veteran's cemetery in Fairbanks. He believed the site
needed environmental cleanup. He asked if the amount was
for purchase and cleanup. Mr. Steininger deferred to the
department for further answer.
BOB ERNISSE, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF
MILITARY AND VETERANS AFFAIRS, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGET, OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR (via teleconference),
answered that the additional funding would cover the cost
of lead abatement, purchase the site, and begin
construction. Representative LeBon asked if the location
was off of the Parks Highway. Mr. Ernisse believed so, but
he would follow up with detail. Representative LeBon stated
Fairbanks had been waiting quite some time for the project.
He asked when the cleanup would begin. Mr. Ernisse replied
that he would follow up with the information.
Co-Chair Merrick asked for the ongoing operational cost of
the cemetery in Fairbanks.
Mr. Steininger deferred to Mr. Ernisse.
Mr. Ernisse replied that the ongoing operational cost was
$1 million GF and 2 full-time positions.
2:39:19 PM
Mr. Steininger advanced to slide 24 and highlighted
increments for the Department of Natural Resources,
Department of Public Safety, and Judiciary:
Natural Resources
1.*Fire Crew Vehicle Replacement $750.0 UGF
Public Safety
1.*Body Worn Camera Initiative $4,524.3
($3,586.3 UGF, $938.0 Fed)
2.*Mobile and Handheld Radio Replacement
$3,728.3 UGF
3.*AWT Medium-Class Vessel Replacement $1,800.0
UGF
4.*VPSO Law Enforcement Program Support $2,980.0
UGF
5.*Aircraft Purchase and Replacement $6,000.0 UGF
6.*AST Unmanned Aerial System $450.0 UGF
Judiciary
1.Justice Technology Upgrades and Courtroom
Modernization $3,917.3 UGF
2.Planning and Design for Court Facilities
Bethel and Palmer $980.0 UGF
*HB 283 Supplemental in 2023 Governor ** HB 284 Fast
Track Supplemental
Co-Chair Foster asked for follow up detail on item 5
regarding the aircraft fleet.
Representative LeBon referenced additional troopers
designated for the Mat-Su area. He asked if additional
vehicles would be necessary. He asked if the dollars for
the sold vehicles would be retained by the department to go
toward the purchase of new vehicles. Mr. Steininger
answered that he would follow up with more detailed
information regarding the vehicles. He detailed that when
the department purchased vehicles it paid into a
depreciation rate to the state equipment fleet and the
credits built up over time. The amount of credit should
cover the cost of the new vehicle when combined with the
sale of the old vehicles. However, if there were not
sufficient credits it would require an appropriation. He
pointed to item 1 under DNR and noted that the department
did not have enough credits to replace all of the vehicles
needed.
2:43:39 PM
Mr. Steininger replied to Co-Chair Foster's question about
the aircrafts. He would follow up with further detail.
However, he knew that 3 were helicopters, 3 were smaller
Cessnas, and he could not recall the one last type of
aircraft.
Representative Edgmon noted that some capital project
details were missing in the law enforcement program in the
capital detail book. Mr. Steininger answered that all of
the projects should be included in the book, but it might
be organized differently than his presentation.
Representative Carpenter noted a specific appropriation for
school replacement for Napakiak in the supplemental budget.
He asked why there were no appropriations listed in the FY
23 capital budget for DEED. Mr. Steininger answered that
REAA funding was spent without further appropriation. He
furthered that the department went through its facility
list each fall there was money in the budget to fund
maintenance through the REAA fund and were not discrete
capital budget appropriations.
2:46:33 PM
Vice-Chair Ortiz asked how non-REAA schools maintenance
was funded. Mr. Steininger cited school bond debt
reimbursement funding and the ability for school districts
to shift K-12 foundation formula funding to school
districts capital improvement accounts for maintenance.
Representative Josephson referenced the previous point. He
highlighted that school districts had not received an
increase to the Base Student Allocation (BSA) in the past
five years. He asked if schools were expected to have extra
funding for maintenance. Mr. Steininger answered that there
was some flexibility in school districts budgets to carry
forward balances. He offered to provide the information.
Representative Carpenter asked if there was a list of the
available money for school districts regarding COVID
funding that was discretionary and may be able to be spent
on maintenance. Mr. Steininger answered in the affirmative.
2:48:38 PM
Co-Chair Foster noted that Representative Johnson had
joined the meeting.
Vice-Chair Ortiz asked where the DEED list of projects fell
into the process. He asked if it was included in an area
previously discussed. Mr. Steininger answered that the
school major maintenance list maintained by DEED informed
distributions for REAA schools and non-REAA schools. Some
years there were deposits to the school major maintenance
fund that could be used without further appropriation. He
offered that it was an objectively ranked list of school
projects within the department. Vice-Chair Ortiz asked for
verification that there was not an appropriation to the
fund in the governor's proposed budgets. Mr. Steininger
answered that the resources had been put toward the school
replacement in Napakiak due to the immense need. The entire
school maintenance fund of $22 million would go toward the
school replacement.
2:51:17 PM
Representative LeBon asked for verification that if a
school was a non-REAA school it was eligible for major
maintenance funding from the state according to the list.
He asked for detail on the list. Mr. Steininger answered
that he would follow up with the DEED list. He reiterated
that there was not a deposit into the school major
maintenance fund in the proposed budget, but monies were
deposited into the REAA fund. The UGF was used for the
largest facility need, Napakiak School, in the state that
also happened to be an REAA school. Representative LeBon
understood that if a school had a major maintenance need it
had to raise the money on its own through a local bond sale
and relying on a state match was not possible because the
program had been discontinued. Mr. Steininger answered that
the program had not been discontinued, but there was no
funding for it in the current budget. Currently, the funds
were going toward Napakiak due to the magnitude of the
schools replacement need.
Co-Chair Foster remarked that when there was a big ticket
item once it was funded it cleared the way for future funds
for other projects on the list.
Mr. Steininger remarked that DFG Commissioner Vincent-Lang
was on the line if there were any questions.
2:54:27 PM
Co-Chair Foster explained the presentation had pertained to
HB 283. He noted that GO bonds had to be approved by a vote
of the citizenry.
HOUSE BILL NO. 285
"An Act providing for and relating to the issuance of
general obligation bonds for the purpose of paying the
cost of state infrastructure projects, including
construction, major maintenance, and port and
transportation projects; and providing for an
effective date."
2:54:57 PM
^OVERVIEW: HB 285 G.O. BONDS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE BY OFFICE
OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
2:55:09 PM
NEIL STEININGER, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET,
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, introduced the PowerPoint
Presentation: "HB 285 G.O. Bonds for Infrastructure." He
began on Slide 2 titled HB 285 GO bond Issuance:
$325.2m for 14 projects spread with statewide impact
Current 20-year interest rate is 2.5% for tax-exempt
bonds
Debt service costs estimated at $20.7 million
The State's debt capacity is $1.3 billion
Mr. Steininger commented that the bond package represented
a responsible level of debt compared to the capacity of
debt the state was able to accrue. He noted that the state
earned more than the 2.5 percent interest rate.
Representative LeBon asked how the state's debt capacity
was calculated.
2:57:22 PM
DEVEN MITCHELL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA MUNICIPAL BOND
BANK AUTHORITY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (via teleconference),
indicated that there was a publication published annually
by DOR called The Debt Affordability Analysis, which
fully described the process to determine the states debt
capacity. He characterized the analysis as simple relative
to the states revenues versus its modest population. He
explained how the debt capacity was calculated, which
determined the percentage of UGF revenue the debt payments
represented. The difference between those percentages and
the percentages for debt service determined the capacity on
a 10-year horizon. The state had a bonding capacity of
approximately $1.3 billion.
2:59:39 PM
Representative Edgmon calculated that 64 percent of the
debt capacity went towards Mat-Susitna (Mat-Su) projects.
He did not see the Anchorage Port. He asked for an
explanation. Mr. Steininger thought he had a
misinterpretation of the project. He offered that the Knik
Arm Port Infrastructure $175,000.0 project was for Port
McKenzie and the Port of Alaska. The project was intended
to serve the region. Representative Edgmon asked whether
some of the $175 million for the Knik Arm Port was intended
for the Port of Alaska. Mr. Steininger responded in the
affirmative. The funding would go towards the two ports,
and it would be up to the ports to determine the percentage
distribution.
3:01:17 PM
Representative Edgmon observed that there was nothing for
his district in the bill. He maintained that the GO Bond
was directed to South Central and there was nothing for
Southwest Alaska. He was determined to include statewide
projects if the bill moves forward.
3:02:22 PM
Representative Josephson had never heard of a Knik Arm
Port. He asked why the administration did not want to
engage in the discussion between the two ports. Mr.
Steininger clarified that the administration wanted to
engage but wanted both ports to look at the project as a
statewide project and view the project through a regional
scope. He indicated that was why it was called the Knik Arm
Port Infrastructure. Representative Josephson pointed to
Slide 3 titled HB285 GO Bond Projects items 9 and 11 of
the presentation:
9.Palmer Municipal Airport Taxiway $6,500.0
10.Wasilla Airport Runway and Terminal $14,100.0
Representative Josephson asked if the Palmer or Wasilla
Airports received any Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic
Security (CARES) Act funding. Mr. Steininger was unsure of
the amount. He could get back to the committee as to how
much each airport received.
3:04:19 PM
Representative Rasmussen noted that the Port of Alaska
supported 90 percent of Alaska providing critical
infrastructure for the entire state. She would appreciate
any additional information from the administration. Mr.
Steininger agreed with her assessment of the port.
3:05:46 PM
Representative Josephson indicated that the project summary
referred to the project as being managed by a shared
regional authority. He asked if it was one that existed
currently. Mr. Steininger replied that the intention was
there would be cooperative between the two entities whether
or not that was borne out of a formal organization not yet
established. Representative Josephson thought the situation
seemed combustible.
Representative Thompson cited Slide 3, item 2 that listed
bond projects for DOT:
2.Northern Access to University Medical District
$22,000.0
Mr. Steininger answered that the project installed an
intersection to connect two main roads.
Representative LeBon asked about the status of the Juneau
Access Road listed as item 1 under DOT projects:
Juneau Access $25,000.0
Mr. Steininger replied that it was for Northern Lynn Canal
access. Representative LeBon asked if the project related
to extending the road system to Skagway and Haines. Mr.
Steininger reported that it was funding to restart the
project. However, additional funding would be needed to
complete the project. Representative LeBon asked for
clarification. Mr. Steininger answered that the project was
put on hold at the federal level and the appropriation
would reactivate the project. He deferred to DOT for
details.
3:09:31 PM
Representative LeBon referred to item 1 on slide 3:
UAF -Bartlett Hall and Moore Hall Modernization and
Renewal $18,650.0
Representative LeBon asked why the project for the
University was not a GF request. He wondered why it was
being included in the bond package. Mr. Steininger replied
that it was included in an attempt to address the backlog
and the project was eligible for bonding. Representative
LeBon asked if the bond package did not pass, would the
administration come forward with a capital request for GF
dollars. He inquired if the bond package would be voted on
in November 2022. Mr. Steininger responded in the
affirmative. The administration was supportive of including
the project in the bond package. Representative LeBon
reminded Mr. Steininger of the importance of the University
project even without bonding.
Representative Edgmon was concerned about hearing that the
administration had reached out to Representative Rasmussen
about the bond package but possibly not all members of the
committee, like himself who represented significant
commercial fishing districts. He asked if he was correct.
Mr. Steininger responded that he was unsure of the
question. He indicated that the administration had reached
out to legislators regarding capital projects.
Representative Edgmon was disappointed that no one from the
administration had contacted him. He offered that he
represented Bristol Bay and the fishery contributed
significantly to the salmon industry. He wondered why the
area was not considered for port and harbor improvements.
He understood Anchorage was seeking more funding for its
port than the amount included in the capital requests, and
he would support additional funding for the Alaska Port in
Anchorage. The term that was used derisively was "Christmas
Treeing" in bond packages. However, he liked the concept of
bond packages and wanted it to be more inclusive. He would
like the opportunity to discuss the possibility to add to
the bond package and would advocate strenuously for his
district. He asked Mr. Steininger for further remarks.
3:15:03 PM
Mr. Steininger offered that the bond package was a starting
point. The administration was willing to discuss the bond
package and would be open to additional conversations.
Representative Rasmussen clarified that she had approached
the administration to discuss the budget and the bond
package. She appreciated that they took the time to meet
with her to answer questions. She hoped the bond package
would encompass the entirety of the state.
3:15:45 PM
Vice-Chair Ortiz asked about the timing of putting together
the G.O. Bond proposal. He asked if it occurred prior to
the passage of the federal infrastructure bill. Mr.
Steininger responded in the affirmative and added that the
administration had prepared a package in the prior year and
the work had continued. He explained that there was synergy
between the infrastructure package and the GO bond package.
However, the prioritizations on infrastructure spending in
IIJA happened on the federal level. The IIJA bill did not
negate the need for some Alaska specific priorities because
of IIJAs project specificity, it lacked flexibility. They
worked together in tandem, but one was not dependent on the
other. Vice-Chair Ortiz discussed the avoidance of debt and
possibility of a direct appropriation of $300 million on
capital projects instead of issuing a GO bond package since
recent reporting suggested that market conditions would
likely not be favorable for a bonding package by the fall
of 2022. Mr. Steininger would defer to Mr. Mitchell
regarding speculation on interest rates. He answered that
in terms of issuing debt through bonds versus using UGF,
the state's money would earn more than the interest paid on
a bond debt. Surplus funds could be saved at a higher
interest rate than the interest rate on debt.
3:20:43 PM
Mr. Mitchell responded that it was difficult to predict the
future. However, the consensus view of various banks he
worked with was that interest rates would likely rise. He
discussed the use of arbitrage and the yield curve. He
explained that when the Federal Reserve increased the
overnight interest rate it did not impact the long end of
the yield curve. The short end of the yield curve was
expected to increase one percent, but the long end was
expected to remain in a low end environment. He concluded
that it appeared that it was reasonable to consider
borrowing that was carefully considered in recognition of
the financial strengths of having a debt program.
3:25:41 PM
Representative Carpenter returned to the Port
infrastructure of $175 million. He wondered who had the
authority of divvying up the money. Mr. Steininger
responded that the authority would be managed by DCCED
through named recipient grants. Representative Carpenter
suggested that the easiest way to get the G.O. Bond was to
divvy up the funding 40 ways. He suggested developing a
prioritization list based on objective criteria. He could
not see that from the current list. He asked whether that
was possible. Mr. Steininger responded that as the list was
developed, regionality and the statewide impact was
considered. The administration was open to discuss with
communities how the prioritization worked and the reasons
for the need for certain projects.
3:29:27 PM
Representative Carpenter suggested that if there was a
priority list, he had not received one. He thought a
deliberate priority process should be done in conjunction
with the legislature; lacking one, the legislature would
establish its own priorities and it would be political. Mr.
Steininger responded that the list in the legislation was
the output of the prioritization that the administration
engaged in.
3:31:08 PM
Co-Chair Merrick thought Representative Carpenter had
brought up a good point about the port projects. She
referenced a letter from Legislative Legal (copy on file)
regarding constitutional issues with the port
appropriations since there was no guarantee how the money
would be spent. Mr. Steininger requested a copy of the
memo to pass on to the Department of Law.
Representative Rasmussen suggested a presentation regarding
the deep ports in the state. She was aware of the Port of
Alaska being in poor condition. She wanted a presentation
in which each project was discussed for 15 minutes. She
discussed issues with the Kodiak Fire Hall.
3:33:51 PM
Representative LeBon cited the discussion about arbitrage
and earning more in savings than paying on debt. He pointed
to the Constitutional Budget Reserve (CBR) and Statutory
Budget Reserve (SBR) and did not view robust investment. He
noted the high earnings of the Permanent Fund and wondered
if the administration intended to use the percent of market
value (POMV) earnings to repay the bond debts. Mr.
Steininger reported the repayment would come from UGF which
was significantly filled by the POMV earnings of the PF.
Representative Josephson agreed that he would like to see
the objective basis for the projects. He commented on the
poor condition of the Port of Anchorage and questioned the
proposal to dividing the funding between two ports.
Vice-Chair Ortiz reviewed the agenda for the following
meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
3:36:46 PM
The meeting was adjourned at 3:36 p.m.