Legislature(2001 - 2002)

04/23/2001 01:50 PM FIN

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
                  HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE                                                                                       
                       April 23, 2001                                                                                           
                          1:50 PM                                                                                               
TAPE HFC 01 - 92, Side A                                                                                                        
TAPE HFC 01 - 92, Side B                                                                                                        
CALL TO ORDER                                                                                                                 
Co-Chair Williams called the House  Finance Committee meeting                                                                   
to order at 1:50 PM.                                                                                                            
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
Representative Bill Williams, Co-Chair                                                                                          
Representative Con Bunde, Vice-Chair                                                                                            
Representative Eric Croft                                                                                                       
Representative John Davies                                                                                                      
Representative Richard Foster                                                                                                   
Representative John Harris                                                                                                      
Representative Bill Hudson                                                                                                      
Representative Ken Lancaster                                                                                                    
Representative Carl Moses                                                                                                       
Representative Jim Whitaker                                                                                                     
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
Representative Eldon Mulder, Co-Chair                                                                                           
ALSO PRESENT                                                                                                                  
Janice  Adair, Director,  Division  of Environmental  Health,                                                                   
Department  of Environmental  Conservation;  Devon  Mitchell,                                                                   
Executive  Director, Alaska  Municipal  Bond Bank  Authority,                                                                   
Department  of Revenue;  Representative  Pete Kott,  Sponsor;                                                                   
Alison    Elgee,   Deputy    Commissioner,   Department    of                                                                   
Administration;  Kathy   Lea,  Division  of   Retirement  and                                                                   
Benefits,  Department of  Administration;  Del Smith,  Deputy                                                                   
Commissioner,  Department of  Public  Safety; Bruce  Johnson,                                                                   
Deputy Commissioner,  Education, Department of  Education and                                                                   
Early  Development;  Kevin  Brooks,   Director,  Division  of                                                                   
Administrative  Services, Department  of Fish  and Game;  Tim                                                                   
Rogers,  Legislative  Program  Coordinator,  Municipality  of                                                                   
Anchorage; Veron Marshall, NEA-Alaska, Juneau.                                                                                  
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE                                                                                                    
HB 51     "An Act giving notice of and approving the entry                                                                      
          into,   and  the   issuance   of  certificates   of                                                                   
          participation  for, a lease-purchase  agreement for                                                                   
          a seafood and food safety  laboratory facility; and                                                                   
          providing for an effective date."                                                                                     
          HB 51 was heard and HELD in Committee for further                                                                     
HB 242    "An  Act relating  to reemployment  of and  medical                                                                   
          benefits for retired members of the teachers'                                                                         
          retirement system and public employees' retirement                                                                    
          system; relating to the inclusion of cost-of-                                                                         
          living differentials on compensation and benefits                                                                     
          under the public employees' retirement system; and                                                                    
          providing for an effective date."                                                                                     
          CSHB 242 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with                                                                     
          a "do pass" recommendation and with previously                                                                        
          published fiscal impact note (#1) by the                                                                              
          Department of Administration.                                                                                         
HOUSE BILL NO. 51                                                                                                             
     "An Act giving  notice of and approving  the entry into,                                                                   
     and the  issuance of certificates of  participation for,                                                                   
     a  lease-purchase  agreement  for  a  seafood  and  food                                                                   
     safety  laboratory   facility;  and  providing   for  an                                                                   
     effective date."                                                                                                           
JANICE  ADAIR, DIRECTOR,  DIVISION  OF ENVIRONMENTAL  HEALTH,                                                                   
DEPARTMENT   OF  ENVIRONMENTAL   CONSERVATION  testified   in                                                                   
support  of  HB 51.  She  noted  that the  legislation  would                                                                   
authorize  certificates  of  participation   to  replace  the                                                                   
Palmer  seafood  and  food  safety   laboratory  with  a  new                                                                   
facility  in Anchorage.  She  responded  to questions  raised                                                                   
during the previous  committee hearing (see  memorandum dated                                                                   
4/3/01, copy on  file). She explained that she  was unable to                                                                   
obtain a  letter from the  current building owner  indicating                                                                   
that  they  were  not  interested   in  a  15  percent  lease                                                                   
reduction, which would allow the  laboratory to remain in the                                                                   
current  location.  However, the  landowner  did  communicate                                                                   
this  information  verbally  to   Ms.  Adair.  The  landowner                                                                   
indicated  that a  15 percent  reduction would  be below  the                                                                   
cost she would be willing to rent  the building. She provided                                                                   
members  with  a copy  of  an  email  from the  Federal  Drug                                                                   
Administration (FDA)  explaining that they no  longer certify                                                                   
private  laboratories   to  test   for  paralytic   shellfish                                                                   
poisoning. She answered the questioned  of why the department                                                                   
could not use  the building that currently houses  the Alaska                                                                   
Seafood  International  Seafood  (ASI) processing  center  in                                                                   
Anchorage. She contacted Bob Poe,  Executive Director, Alaska                                                                   
Industrial  Development  and Export  Authority  (AIDEA),  who                                                                   
confirmed  that  the  facility  is  not  available.  The  ASI                                                                   
facility is expected to be in  full production by the summer.                                                                   
She was asked why a RFP was not  issued to see if the private                                                                   
sector  could  build  a facility  cheaper.  General  Services                                                                   
advised  her that  they could  not go  out for  a RFP  unless                                                                   
there  is  an  intent to  issue  a  contract.  The  estimated                                                                   
development  cost for  a RFP would  be just  over $1  million                                                                   
dollars. Since  there was  no funding  available for  the RFP                                                                   
development and no  way to solicit bids a  private consultant                                                                   
was  hired  to  provide professional  judgment  on  the  cost                                                                   
differences  between  building  and leasing.  The  consultant                                                                   
concluded  that  leasing would  be  far more  expensive  than                                                                   
building a  state owned  laboratory. The  per square  cost of                                                                   
the  entire  20  year bond  repayment  term  would  be  $4.87                                                                   
dollars a square  foot. The building would be  paid for after                                                                   
the 20-year term.  The state chemistry laboratory  located in                                                                   
Juneau  and  managed  by  the   Department  of  Environmental                                                                   
Conservation  costs  $4.26  dollars  a  square  foot  and  is                                                                   
expected  to increase.  Laboratories are  sized according  to                                                                   
the  type  of analysis  that  takes  place  and the  type  of                                                                   
equipment  needed.  Air  handling  systems  must  be  located                                                                   
internally. Laboratories  require counter tops,  space hoods,                                                                   
fuel  hoods,  walk-in  coolers  and freezers  and  other  big                                                                   
pieces  of equipment  that  take up  room.  She compared  the                                                                   
20,500  square  foot  proposed  laboratory  to  the  existing                                                                   
laboratory. She noted that of  20,500 square feet only 11,890                                                                   
would be available for use by  employees. There would be over                                                                   
9,000  square feet  for ventilation,  mechanicals, walls  and                                                                   
hallways.  She addressed  the question  of what  part of  the                                                                   
proposed laboratory could be deleted  if the bond package was                                                                   
reduced.  She noted  that  reduced administrative  space  was                                                                   
identified for  a savings reduction of $200  thousand dollars                                                                   
[840 square feet]. A conference  room and one office would be                                                                   
eliminated, and the  waiting area would be reduced.  The non-                                                                   
bondable costs would  be covered by general  funds because it                                                                   
is  not  qualified  for  federal  funds  and  Alaska  Housing                                                                   
Finance Corporation  (AHFC) funds were already  obligated. If                                                                   
the legislation is  not passed, the laboratory  can only stay                                                                   
in their  current location as  on emergency extension  basis.                                                                   
There is an obligation not to  go into emergency procurement.                                                                   
They would be asked by General  Services to go out with a RFP                                                                   
this summer for  a lease facility to have a  facility on-line                                                                   
before  their current  lease expires.  The estimated  cost to                                                                   
develop  a  RFP  exceeds a  million  dollars.  The  increased                                                                   
rental  costs  would have  to  come  out of  their  operating                                                                   
budget. The  department does not  have funds for  either item                                                                   
and would be "in a world of hurt if the bill doesn't pass."                                                                     
Representative   Harris   referred   to   a   memorandum   by                                                                   
Representative Ogan,  dated 3/23/01 (copy on  file.) He noted                                                                   
that the  memorandum stated that  the department  was willing                                                                   
to  work  toward  achieving three  goals:  move  the  seafood                                                                   
testing portion of the laboratory  closer to tidewater, leave                                                                   
functions other  than seafood  in the valley [Matanuska]  and                                                                   
find  a way  to obtain  a  more affordable  reasonable  sized                                                                   
facility  with a acceptable  square foot  cost in  Anchorage.                                                                   
Ms. Adair noted  that she met with staff  from Representative                                                                   
Ogan's  office and  responded  to questions  in a  memorandum                                                                   
dated 4/11/01 (copy  on file.) She noted that  the laboratory                                                                   
does  about  85  percent seafood  work.  She  reviewed  other                                                                   
activities   of   the   laboratory.  The   same   staff   and                                                                   
laboratories are  used to do  other activities such  as dairy                                                                   
product  testing. She  explained that  it would  not be  cost                                                                   
affective   to  split   functions  and   only  move   seafood                                                                   
activities. The  state would have  to build two  laboratories                                                                   
in order to  leave the other activities in  the valley. There                                                                   
would not be enough work to operate  a valley laboratory full                                                                   
time  and hire  a full  time microbiologist.  Functions  that                                                                   
have  a  historical  connection  to the  valley  will  remain                                                                   
there, such  as the pesticide  program. The dairy  sanitarian                                                                   
(the person  that inspects  the dairy  farms and  processors)                                                                   
and the state veterinarian will remain.                                                                                         
Representative  Harris noted  that he  is concerned  with the                                                                   
removal of the facility from the  valley without consultation                                                                   
with the district's members.                                                                                                    
In  response to  a  question  by Representative  Hudson,  Ms.                                                                   
Adiar  noted that  seafood  samples come  from  all over  the                                                                   
state.  There are  federal requirements  for  smoked fish.  A                                                                   
certain amount  of each  lot of smoked  fish must  be tested.                                                                   
Shellfish and other seafood are  also tested. A greater focus                                                                   
is  being  given  to after  testing  the  processed  product.                                                                   
Smoked fish  samples from Southeast  [and other areas  of the                                                                   
state] are  shipped to Palmar  for testing. Shellfish  cannot                                                                   
be  sold until  they  have  been  tested. The  shellfish  and                                                                   
growing waters are tested. The  growing waters must be tested                                                                   
within 30 hours from the time the sample was taken.                                                                             
Representative Lancaster  stressed that the issue  is whether                                                                   
the laboratory is  moved. He stated that it  would make sense                                                                   
to move the  laboratory to Anchorage and emphasized  the time                                                                   
sensitivity  of the  lease. He  acknowledged  that there  are                                                                   
still questions that need to be answered.                                                                                       
Representative   Hudson   asked  if   Ms.   Adair  had   made                                                                   
arrangements to meet with Representative  Ogan to look at the                                                                   
possibility of retaining some aspects in Palmer.                                                                                
Ms. Adair  reiterated that  it does not  make sense  to split                                                                   
the laboratory.  Splitting the function would  not reduce the                                                                   
seafood  aspect  of the  laboratory.  Splitting  the  aspects                                                                   
would  create  an additional  need  in  Palmer for  the  non-                                                                   
seafood aspect. She stressed that  the impact to Palmer would                                                                   
be  minimal.  She  noted  that  informal  conversations  have                                                                   
indicated  that the  Palmer employees  plan  to commute  into                                                                   
In response  to a  question by  Co-Chair Williams,  Ms. Adair                                                                   
acknowledged the necessarily of  reducing the project's cost.                                                                   
Some  equipment   purchases  could  be  deferred   until  the                                                                   
laboratory  is ready  to open  and purchased  in the  capital                                                                   
budget. She estimated that this  could reduce the price by $1                                                                   
million dollars to $11.2 -$11.6 million dollars.                                                                                
Representative Carl Moses stressed  the importance of serving                                                                   
the  needs of  the industry  and  pointed out  that the  time                                                                   
delay in shipping can be critical.                                                                                              
Representative  Harris questioned how  long it would  take to                                                                   
build the facility.                                                                                                             
DEVON  MITCHELL, EXECUTIVE  DIRECTOR,  ALASKA MUNICIPAL  BOND                                                                   
BANK AUTHORITY,  DEPARTMENT OF  REVENUE explained  that there                                                                   
are restrictions on the time of  the bond issuance. There has                                                                   
to  be  a  reasonable  expectation  that  proceeds  would  be                                                                   
expended  within 3  years. The  Department of  Transportation                                                                   
and Public  Facilities has  done an  initial analysis  on the                                                                   
project that showed a final 5  percent of the piece occurring                                                                   
in year four. This would have  to be shifted into year three.                                                                   
He acknowledged  that reasonable  expectations do  not always                                                                   
play out in reality.                                                                                                            
Co-Chair Williams  questioned options for  reducing financing                                                                   
costs. Mr. Devon  observed that net funding could  be used to                                                                   
decrease  the  bond  size.  Assumptions   on  cash  flow  and                                                                   
investment earnings  are made during the  construction period                                                                   
to reduce the bond sizing.                                                                                                      
HB  51   was  heard  and   HELD  in  Committee   for  further                                                                   
HOUSE BILL NO. 242                                                                                                            
     "An  Act   relating  to  reemployment  of   and  medical                                                                   
     benefits   for   retired   members  of   the   teachers'                                                                   
     retirement  system  and   public  employees'  retirement                                                                   
     system;  relating  to the  inclusion  of  cost-of-living                                                                   
     differentials  on compensation  and  benefits under  the                                                                   
     public employees'  retirement system; and  providing for                                                                   
     an effective date."                                                                                                        
242.  He noted  that the  workforce  is reduced  as the  baby                                                                   
boomer generation  retires. By the  year 2008 - 2009  a brain                                                                   
drain is  expected. The legislation  would provide a  tool to                                                                   
bring  retired   employees  back   into  the  workforce   and                                                                   
encourage employees to remain.                                                                                                  
Section 1 adds  an incentive for a retired  teacher to return                                                                   
to full time  teaching for a Teacher Retirement  System (TRS)                                                                   
employer.  With  this  change,  a retired  teacher  who  took                                                                   
normal  retirement may  elect a new  option when  reemployed.                                                                   
The new  option allows the  teacher to elect  continuation of                                                                   
retirement benefit  payments during reemployment;  would stop                                                                   
additional  retirement  benefit  accrual;  must  be  selected                                                                   
within 30 days  of reemployment; and is not  available to RIP                                                                   
participants.  If  the  retired  teacher does  not  make  the                                                                   
election, the  current method would  apply. Sections 4  and 5                                                                   
provide the  same provisions of Public  Employees' Retirement                                                                   
System (PERS) employees.                                                                                                        
Section  3 adds an  incentive  for teachers  to stay in  TRS.                                                                   
Currently Tier II  retirees are not eligible  for the medical                                                                   
coverage until  age 60, at  which time the retirement  system                                                                   
pays 1/2 the  medical premium and the retiree  is responsible                                                                   
for the other half, regardless  of how many years the teacher                                                                   
taught in TRS.                                                                                                                  
With  this change  a  teacher who  stays  an additional  five                                                                   
years  beyond the  normal retirement  service requirement  of                                                                   
twenty years  will be eligible  for full system  paid medical                                                                   
coverage. In addition, all retired  teachers will be provided                                                                   
full system paid medical coverage at age 60.                                                                                    
Section 6 adds  an incentive for public employees  to stay in                                                                   
PERS  through  30  years  of service.  Currently  a  Tier  II                                                                   
retiree is not eligible for system  provided medical coverage                                                                   
until age  60, at which time  the retirement system  pays 1/2                                                                   
the medical  premium and the  retiree is responsible  for the                                                                   
other  1/2, regardless  of how  many years  the person  is in                                                                   
With  this  change  a  public  employee  who  stays  in  PERS                                                                   
employment  a total  of 30 years  will be  eligible for  full                                                                   
system  paid  medical  coverage.  In  addition,  all  retired                                                                   
public employees  will be provided  full system  paid medical                                                                   
coverage at age 60.                                                                                                             
Section  7   addresses  the  geographic   differential.  This                                                                   
section  attempts  to  clarify   language  that  has  created                                                                   
problems for the Division of Retirement and Benefits.                                                                           
Representative Kott maintained  that the cost to the state of                                                                   
Alaska is  minimal: $96 thousand  dollars the first  year and                                                                   
$66  thousand dollars  for  subsequent  years. He  reiterated                                                                   
that  the legislation  will  help  attract and  retain  state                                                                   
workers and teachers.                                                                                                           
In   response   to   a   question    by   Vice-Chair   Bunde,                                                                   
Representative  Kott  noted  that the  legislation  does  not                                                                   
include  RIP employees.  Representative  John Davies  pointed                                                                   
out that the  RIP employees would not want  to take advantage                                                                   
of  the bill  because  they would  have  to repay  retirement                                                                   
ALISON    ELGEE,   DEPUTY    COMMISSIONER,   DEPARTMENT    OF                                                                   
ADMINISTRATION  spoke  in  support of  the  legislation.  The                                                                   
Teachers  Retirement System  Board and  the Public  Employees                                                                   
System  Board  have reviewed  the  legislation.  Both  Boards                                                                   
support elements contained in the legislation.                                                                                  
Vice-Chair   Bunde   observed   that   teachers   and   other                                                                   
administrators requested early  retirement bills because they                                                                   
could  not   afford  [the   salaries]  of  "old-timers".   He                                                                   
questioned if there  is an inconsistency in  the principle of                                                                   
the legislation.                                                                                                                
Ms. Elgee acknowledged  the questioned and noted  that "times                                                                   
change".  She stressed  that the  problem  is to  be able  to                                                                   
staff jobs in the public environment.  Persons who have taken                                                                   
an early-retirement are not eligible.                                                                                           
Representative Whitaker  asked the rate of  reemployment. Ms.                                                                   
Elgee noted that there is no quota  of returned retirees. The                                                                   
retirees would return without  accruing additional retirement                                                                   
services, which would provide  some reduced employer and out-                                                                   
of-pocket  employee   costs.  The  employer  would   have  to                                                                   
indicate  the need. She  emphasized the  benefit on  projects                                                                   
with a limited duration.                                                                                                        
Representative   Whitaker  summarized   that   there  is   no                                                                   
proscribed  reentry level.  Representative Davies  questioned                                                                   
if bargaining  units would be  involved. Ms. Elgee  clarified                                                                   
that  retirement is  not  subject to  collective  bargaining.                                                                   
Hiring terms would be subject to collective bargaining.                                                                         
Representative  Hudson noted  that persons  over 65  years of                                                                   
age  can receive  social security  and continue  to work.  He                                                                   
stressed  that  it  is  a  powerful  incentive  to  continued                                                                   
working. He asked how many retirees would be affected.                                                                          
Ms. Elgee  responded that there  is no way to  anticipate how                                                                   
many retirees would elect to return to work.                                                                                    
TAPE HFC 01 - 92, Side B                                                                                                      
Ms. Elgee  observed that teachers  often reach  retirement in                                                                   
their  mid 40's.  The  department anticipates  2,660  retired                                                                   
teachers  between the  age of  50 and  54 in  the year  2005.                                                                   
There  would be  another  5,600 teachers  between  55 and  60                                                                   
years of  age. This  pool of teachers  could be utilized  for                                                                   
the workforce.                                                                                                                  
Vice-Chair Bunde referred to the fiscal note.                                                                                   
Ms.  Elgee  noted  that  there  would be  no  impact  to  the                                                                   
retirement section. No additional  retirement credit would be                                                                   
accrued. The fiscal note would  request one additional person                                                                   
for  counseling and  some data  processing. Enhanced  medical                                                                   
benefits would result in a slight  increase of .17 percent in                                                                   
both  the   TRS  and   PERS  systems.   The  change   to  the                                                                   
geographical differential has no impact.                                                                                        
Representative  Whitaker asked if  thought had been  given on                                                                   
the affect  on the entry-level  workforce. He noted  that new                                                                   
graduates  could  lose  in  the  choice  between  experience-                                                                   
retired teachers.                                                                                                               
Representative John Davies echoed  concerns of Representative                                                                   
Whitaker and noted  that he would propose a  3-year sunset to                                                                   
allow assessment of unintended consequences (copy on file).                                                                     
Representative  Hudson asked why  the additional cost  to the                                                                   
employer  was  necessary when  PERS  and TRS  funds  generate                                                                   
through  investment in  excess of  a hundred  percent of  the                                                                   
actual  cost.  He noted  that  these  funds  are two  of  the                                                                   
healthiest funds in the nation.  He observed that the medical                                                                   
benefits were reduced in Tier II due to costs.                                                                                  
Ms.  Elgee  acknowledged  that  the funds  are  healthy.  She                                                                   
clarified  that the actuary  looks at  changes in  isolation.                                                                   
There would  not necessarily  be an increase  as a  result of                                                                   
the change  due to  a variety of  offsetting factors  such as                                                                   
the  investment  rate  of  return,  which  would  negate  any                                                                   
increased  cost as  a result  of the  legislature. She  added                                                                   
that none of  the effects would be immediate.  Changes in the                                                                   
rates would  not be reflected  until 2005. The  department is                                                                   
not requesting funding for the  change, but is estimating the                                                                   
DEL SMITH, DEPUTY  COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF  PUBLIC SAFETY                                                                   
spoke in support. He noted that  it is difficult to get young                                                                   
people  to go  to remote  areas  of the  state  and spoke  in                                                                   
support of  the change to  the geographical differential.  He                                                                   
noted there  are talented individuals  that could add  to law                                                                   
enforcement  that are  precluded from  doing so because  they                                                                   
can go on to other careers and still draw their retirement.                                                                     
BRUCE JOHNSON, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,  EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF                                                                   
EDUCATION  AND  EARLY DEVELOPMENT  spoke  in  support of  the                                                                   
legislation.  The legislation  adds  to the  capacity of  the                                                                   
school districts in terms of encouraging  individuals to stay                                                                   
within  the system.  Reemployment  of retired  teachers is  a                                                                   
good tool.  He pointed  out that there  is no guarantee  that                                                                   
they  would  be  rehired  in   the  same  or  another  school                                                                   
district. He stressed  that Alaska is only producing  20 - 30                                                                   
percent  of  the   teachers  needed  to  fill   its  teaching                                                                   
positions. He  maintained that  the questioned is  whether it                                                                   
would be  better to  employ someone  from out  of state  or a                                                                   
retired  teacher. Districts  currently  compete against  each                                                                   
other. He stressed that the systems  are better off with some                                                                   
new and  some old blood. He  pointed out that  recruiters out                                                                   
numbered  applicants at  the recent Anchorage  job fair  (150                                                                   
Vice-Chair Bunde  observed that teaching is  a stressful job.                                                                   
He asked if there had been discussion  with retired teachers.                                                                   
Mr.  Johnson  noted  that  there have  not  been  any  formal                                                                   
discussions. He recounted personal  discussions with retirees                                                                   
noted that teachers may want to  rehire after being refreshed                                                                   
by time off. He added that the  RIP bill's intent was to make                                                                   
ends meet within their budget.                                                                                                  
Vice-Chair Bunde  acknowledged that  teaching is  a stressful                                                                   
job. He asked  how much discussion has occurred  with retired                                                                   
teachers  to  assess their  desire  to  return to  work.  Mr.                                                                   
Johnson  responded  that there  has  not been  a  coordinated                                                                   
effort to interact with retired  teachers. He emphasized that                                                                   
the early  retirement (RIP)  effort was  a resource  issue of                                                                   
trying to make budgets balance.                                                                                                 
Representative Croft questioned  what salary retired teachers                                                                   
would be  returned at their  same salary. Mr.  Johnson stated                                                                   
that it  would be  up to the  individual school district.  He                                                                   
observed that it  could be a negotiated item.  Teachers could                                                                   
be  paid on  the  salary  schedule  but without  the  benefit                                                                   
Representative  Hudson observed that  the teachers  that took                                                                   
early retired  would be excluded.  He noted that the  RIP was                                                                   
an attempt  to retire higher  paid, longer tenured  teachers.                                                                   
He  questioned if  it would  be  the best  policy to  exclude                                                                   
these qualified employees.                                                                                                      
Mr. Johnson  observed that it  would create a larger  pool if                                                                   
teachers  that  took  early  retirement   were  included.  He                                                                   
acknowledged the  challenge of accommodating the  rules under                                                                   
which teachers  who took early retirement operated.  He added                                                                   
that the rip program resulted in a brain drain.                                                                                 
Vice-Chair Bunde pointed out that  the agencies requested the                                                                   
rip bill. He  questioned what would prevent  retired teachers                                                                   
from coming back  to work at the same wage  with the addition                                                                   
of  their  retirement.  Mr.  Johnson   responded  that  these                                                                   
teachers are currently taking  teaching jobs in other states.                                                                   
Some  of these  people  might  stay in  the  state and  serve                                                                   
Alaskan  children.  Rehiring retired  teachers  would  become                                                                   
part of collective bargaining  to prevent misuses. He did not                                                                   
know if  the best  public policy  would be  to rehire  on the                                                                   
current salary schedule and negotiate  the 30 percent benefit                                                                   
package in some other way in order  to allow school districts                                                                   
to achieve a savings.                                                                                                           
KEVIN BROOKS, DIRECTOR, DIVISION  OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES,                                                                   
DEPARTMENT  OF FISH  AND  GAME testified  in  support of  the                                                                   
legislation.  He  observed  that   the  agency  has  lost  25                                                                   
biologists in  their commercial fish  division in the  last 6                                                                   
months to jobs  with the federal government.  The legislation                                                                   
would allow the  department to keep some of  these employees.                                                                   
He noted  that  that department  anticipates federal  funding                                                                   
for marine  mammal research.  The best  candidates for  these                                                                   
projects  would  be  retired  marine  mammal  biologists.  He                                                                   
stressed that  rehired retired  employees would not  maintain                                                                   
their  longevity,   which  would  allow  a   savings  to  the                                                                   
Vice-Chair  Bunde  questioned  if discussions  have  occurred                                                                   
with retired employees. He noted  that he has received emails                                                                   
requesting early  retirement. Mr. Brooks stressed  that there                                                                   
are recruitment and retention  issues along with fairness and                                                                   
equity issue. He maintained that  there isn't any one tool to                                                                   
address every need.                                                                                                             
Representative Lancaster questioned  if the legislation would                                                                   
allow double  dipping. Mr. Brooks  reiterated that  the state                                                                   
of  Alaska  is  losing  personnel to  other  states  and  the                                                                   
federal government. He stressed  that nothing will change. He                                                                   
acknowledged  that  retired  employees  would  still  receive                                                                   
retirement while  drawing a paycheck, but emphasized  that an                                                                   
asset would be  preserved while getting the job  done for the                                                                   
Representative John  Davies pointed out that  employees would                                                                   
not earn additional retirement.                                                                                                 
TIM ROGERS, LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM  COORDINATOR, MUNICIPALITY OF                                                                   
ANCHORAGE  testified   in  support.  He  observed   that  the                                                                   
municipality  is  experiencing  a brain  drain  as  employees                                                                   
leave the  municipality. He  maintained that the  legislation                                                                   
would help resolve  their problems. He noted  that 25 percent                                                                   
of  the  police  officers  in   Anchorage  are  eligible  for                                                                   
retirement.  He noted  that  the issue  is  how to  encourage                                                                   
these  employees to  retire and  come back  or not retire  at                                                                   
all.  The Anchorage  police  department  employees went  into                                                                   
PERS in 1994 so the legislation  would not solve that problem                                                                   
for a number of years.                                                                                                          
VERON  MARSHALL,  EXECUTIVE  DIRECTOR,   NEA-ALASKA,  JUNEAU,                                                                   
spoke in support of the legislation.  He stressed that the 25                                                                   
and  out  provision   would  help  retain  teachers   in  the                                                                   
classroom. He maintained that  the qualifying factor of major                                                                   
medical after 25  years would encourage a number  of teachers                                                                   
to stay in  the state. The legislation would  provide another                                                                   
tool to  enhance the pool  of qualified teachers  to reenter.                                                                   
He  noted that  most  collected bargaining  agreements  allow                                                                   
teachers to be  hired from out of district.  He stressed that                                                                   
a retired teacher  would be viewed as a break  of service and                                                                   
come  under the  experienced  credit  variable  and would  be                                                                   
subject to scrutiny.                                                                                                            
Vice-Chair  Bunde noted  that there  is a  limitation of  how                                                                   
much service can be brought back.  Salaries would be reduced.                                                                   
Representative  John Davies  MOVED to  ADOPT Amendment  1. He                                                                   
reiterated that the amendment  would provide a 3-year sunset.                                                                   
He expressed  support for  the legislation  but felt  that it                                                                   
would be good legislative policy to review the change.                                                                          
Representative Kott  did not object to the  sunset provision.                                                                   
He   acknowledged  that   the   sunset   would  require   the                                                                   
legislature to review  the issue, but felt that  any problems                                                                   
would be discovered in the next few years.                                                                                      
Ms.  Elgee testified  that the  amendment would  not have  an                                                                   
adverse affect but questioned  if 3 years would be sufficient                                                                   
time to review the program.                                                                                                     
Representative  John Davies stated  that he would  not object                                                                   
to a longer period.                                                                                                             
Co-Chair Williams  questioned if a five-year  period would be                                                                   
too long.                                                                                                                       
Representative  Kott  observed  that the  sunset  would  fall                                                                   
before the increase in retiring  teachers that is expected in                                                                   
the year 2005. He suggested the time be expanded.                                                                               
Vice-Chair Bunde  reiterated that actuarial impact  would not                                                                   
be felt until 2005.                                                                                                             
Representative John  Davies stated that he would  entertain a                                                                   
motion to change the date to 2006.                                                                                              
Vice-Chair Bunde  Moved to Amend Amendment 1  by changing the                                                                   
sunset date  to the year 2005.  There being NO  OBJECTION, it                                                                   
was so ordered.                                                                                                                 
There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment 1 was adopted.                                                                              
Representative Foster  MOVED to report CSHB 242  (FIN) out of                                                                   
Committee with  the accompanying fiscal note.  There being NO                                                                   
OBJECTION, it was so ordered.                                                                                                   
CSHB  242 (FIN)  was REPORTED  out  of Committee  with a  "do                                                                   
pass"  recommendation and  with  previously published  fiscal                                                                   
impact note (#1) by the Department of Administration.                                                                           
The meeting was adjourned at 3:28 p.m.                                                                                          

Document Name Date/Time Subjects