Legislature(1997 - 1998)
03/06/1998 01:50 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
March 6, 1998
1:50 P.M.
TAPE HFC 98 - 57, Side 1.
TAPE HFC 98 - 57, Side 2.
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Therriault called the House Finance Committee
meeting to order at 1:50 P.M.
PRESENT
Co-Chair Hanley Representative Kelly
Co-Chair Therriault Representative Kohring
Representative J. Davies Representative Martin
Representative Grussendorf Representative Moses
Representative Foster Representative Mulder
Representative G. Davis was not present for the meeting.
ALSO PRESENT
Representative Joe Ryan; Kathy Cronan, (Testified via
Teleconference), CEO, Charter North Star Behavioral Health
System, Anchorage; Barbara Brink, (Testified via
Teleconference), Prosecuting Attorney, State of Alaska,
Department of Law, Fairbanks; Theresa Tanoury, Child
Protection Services Administrator, Division of Family and
Youth Services, Department of Health and Social Services;
Elmer Lindstrom, Special Assistant, Office of the
Commissioner, Department of Health and Social Services;
Mike Tibbles, Staff, Representative Gene Therriault; Janice
Adair, Director, Division of Environmental Health,
Department of Environmental Conservation; Bob Bartholomew,
Deputy Director, Income and Excise Audit Division,
Department of Revenue.
SUMMARY
HB 16 An Act relating to delinquent minors, to the
taking of action based on the alleged criminal
misconduct of certain minors, to the services to
be provided to the victims of criminal misconduct
of minors, and to agency records involving minors
alleged to be delinquent based on their criminal
misconduct; and amending Rule 19 and repealing
Rules 6, 7, 11(a), 12(a), and 21(f), Alaska
Delinquency Rules.
HB 16 was HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
HB 144 An Act authorizing the Department of
Environmental Conservation to charge certain fees
relating to registration of pesticides and
broadcast chemicals; and providing for an
effective date.
HB 144 was HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
HB 239 An Act relating to the liability of motor fuel
dealers for payment of tax imposed on certain
credit transactions involving motor fuel sales or
transfers that become worthless debts or on sales
or transfers to persons who declare bankruptcy;
and providing for an effective date.
CS HB 239 was reported out of Committee with a
"do pass" recommendation and with a fiscal note
by the Department of Revenue.
HB 321 An Act relating to trusts, to the prudent
investor rule, and to standards of care
applicable to personal representatives,
conservators, and trustees; and providing for an
effective date.
HB 321 was reported out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with a zero fiscal note
by the Department of Commerce and Economic
Development dated 2/18/98.
HOUSE BILL NO. 321
"An Act relating to trusts, to the prudent investor
rule, and to standards of care applicable to personal
representatives, conservators, and trustees; and
providing for an effective date."
REPRESENTATIVE JOE RYAN urged the Committee's support in
passage of HB 321. The bill would implement the Alaska
Trust Act which was passed last year.
Representative Foster MOVED to report HB 321 out of
Committee with the individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
HB 321 was reported out of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with a zero fiscal note by the
Department of Commerce and Economic Development dated
2/18/98.
HOUSE BILL NO. 239
"An Act relating to the liability of motor fuel
dealers for payment of tax imposed on certain credit
transactions involving motor fuel sales or transfers
that become worthless debts or on sales or transfers
to persons who declare bankruptcy; and providing for
an effective date."
Co-Chair Therriault MOVED that 0-LS0768\H, Glover, 3/6/98,
be the version before the Committee. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was adopted.
MIKE TIBBLES, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE GENE THERRIAULT,
highlighted the changes between the current working draft
and the original version of the bill. He noted that in the
committee substitute the "findings" section had been
eliminated. The second change, eliminated the three-year
credit limit and replaced it with five year per individual
distributor. The final change removed Section F(2),
leaving only Subsection F. He continued, as determined by
Legal Services, both Sections E and F were understood to be
mutually exclusive, however, Section E suggested a finite
time period, whereas, Section F suggested an infinite
period. By addressing this section, a potential conflict
was eliminated.
Mr. Tibbles spoke to the proposed Amendment #2. [Copy on
file]. He noted that the amendment would change "sale and
transfer" to "sales and transfers". When billing, there
could be more than one particular sale. Co-Chair
Therriault added that the action would make it an
aggregate, not a credit on a single transaction.
BOB BARTHOLOMEW, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, INCOME AND EXCISE TAX
DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, spoke to the deletion of
Section F(2). That section would limit any transaction,
which occurred right after bankruptcy. The language was
confusing as to when the clock began. The deletion made
the application simpler, clarifying the bill's credit while
not removing the State's protection.
Mr. Bartholomew added, by removal of that language, the
State's protection would not be removed when reaching a
bankruptcy level or an IRS write off to be eligible. The
credit continues to work and yet does have safety valves.
Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to adopt Amendment #2. There
being NO OBJECTION, it was adopted.
Representative Grussendorf proposed and MOVED that a
conceptual amendment be added stipulating that the bill
have a five-year sunset clause. There being NO OBJECTION,
the amendment was adopted.
For the record, Representative Kohring voiced his
opposition to the addition of the sunset clause.
Representative Foster MOVED to report CS HB 239 (FIN) out
of Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CS HB 239 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with "no
recommendation" and with a fiscal note by the Department of
Revenue.
HOUSE BILL NO. 144
"An Act authorizing the Department of Environmental
Conservation to charge certain fees relating to
registration of pesticides and broadcast chemicals;
and providing for an effective date."
JANICE ADAIR, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH,
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION (DEC), informed
Committee members that the language referencing direct and
indirect costs would limit the Department by charging only
direct costs. The stipulation has been part of AS
44.60.025(a) since it was first adopted by the Legislature
in 1990 in passage of HB 85.
Direct versus Indirect Costs. Ms. Adair stated that in
1993, when the Legislature passed legislation establishing
the comprehensive air program in the State (HB167), it
included what is now AS 44.46.025(c), and allowed DEC to
include in its air permit fees both direct and "indirect"
costs. Adding the authority for "indirect" costs was
necessary because AS 46.14.400(h), also a part of HB 167,
prohibits the Department from delegating or enabling
another department or government entity (i.e.
municipalities) from establishing air permit fees or
collecting them. Therefore, since the air fees established
by DEC were intended to cover the costs of a municipality
that might run the air permitting program rather than just
the department's own costs of providing the service, the
term "indirect" was added to give the necessary authority.
Other Services Provided by the Department. Ms. Adair spoke
to the language, which originated in AS 44.46.025(a)(1)
relating to the food and public facility activities of DEC.
The language was moved into the introductory paragraph of
AS 44.46.025(a) as part of SB 99, which passed the
Legislature in 1993.
The language was moved in recognition of the fact that
there are a number of other services the Department
provides which directly benefit individuals. The
Legislature wanted DEC to charge for those services. Ms.
Adair noted, currently, the types of services charged for
that are not included as part of an inspection, permit
preparation, administration or plan review and approval
include:
? Laboratory analyses of food products for export;
? Certification of seafood products for export;
? Certificates of Origin for seafood products for
export;
? Sanitary surveys of public drinking water
systems;
? Domestic wastewater installer certification;
? Dog and cat health certificates;
? Food Service facility recognition program
(planned);
? Monitoring waivers for public drinking water
systems;
? Determinations of whether or not a public water
system is groundwater under the direct influence
of surface water;
? Determination of optimal corrosion control for a
public water system that exceeds the lead and
copper action levels;
? Certified Pool and Spa operator training;
? Various other training opportunities as they
arise and are needed.
Ms. Adair continued, there are some services in the current
statuary list for which the Department can charge fees that
are not part of an inspection permit or plan approval. The
proposed amendment to the introductory paragraph would make
the Department's authority to charge a fee for those
services highly questionable.
This would create a problem of funding, not authority. In
a program that is heavily reliant on fees, every hour of an
employee's time must be charged to a project. The costs
incurred by answering questions about a facility or permit
have to be covered. The only way to do that is to charge
the costs to the project because there are insufficient
general funds to cover the costs.
Water and Wastewater Operator Training. Ms. Adair noted
that in this section, DEC specifies how to address the
advisory board because they cover the training and
certification of operators for certain public water and
wastewater systems. The primary authority used for
domestic wastewater certified installers program is found
in AS 46.03.020(a)(10)(D).
Prohibition on Hourly Fees. She noted that hourly fees are
"tough" for the Department. The reason that they exist is
that those who pay these fee have asked for them.
Currently, the only fees on the books that would be
affected by the prohibition are the solid waste fees. For
the new industrial solid waste component, the prohibition
would create a large problem since the Department was given
direction by the Legislature, last session, to make that
aspect of the solid waste program fully funded by fees.
Reimbursement Agreements. Ms. Adair pointed out that the
Department's ability to enter into these funding
arrangements has been supported in previous testimony
before the Committee. These arrangements are used for
large development projects, primarily mines. They
essentially pay the cost for DEC services. Ms. Adair
thought that for site-specific determinations in the water
quality program area, an hourly fee would be the fairest
fee to establish.
Pesticide registration. Ms. Adair continued that if the
Department has fees strictly based on the cost to the
Department to register a pesticide product, it would be
approximately $100 dollars per label. However, the
Department needs only to cover the match for the federal
pesticide grant. If pesticides are not divided into
categories, it would appear that a $50 dollar per label fee
for all products would bring in enough money to provide the
match. She recommended that a $50 dollar label might be
too high, depending on how many of the 2,000-3,000
pesticides the market survey found being sold in the State.
Ms. Adair pointed out that the distinction between a
household pesticide and a non houseshold pesticide made in
the bill is problematic for the Department. She added that
if categories had to be divided, it would be much easier to
determine between restricted use and non-restricted use
pesticides. If these categories were to be delineated, it
would become an administrative nightmare for the Department
and the companies involved.
Co-Chair Therriault asked how many chemicals registered in
the State would fall under "restricted". Ms. Adair noted
that it would be the smallest amount presented. She added
that the Department's proposed number of 2,000 - 3,000 was
based on a recently conducted market survey. She pointed
out that Alaska does not have a lot of pesticides being
used in comparison to other states. Most of the
agriculture here is organic. She reiterated that the
determination is problematic and is another reason why the
Department would like to have the fee established in a
regulatory process which matches the federal grant.
Co-Chair Therriault commented that the proposed committee
substitute would not preclude the Department from entering
into the reimbursable service agreement.
Ms. Adair noted that the proposed water fees are creating
angst and that they have not gone out for public comment
yet. She stated that many changes occur during the public
comment process.
Co-Chair Therriault asked if there was an appeal process
available for those who want to challenge their permit
application. Ms. Adair replied there is. Some cases have
been more informal than others. The regulations are in the
process of being amended.
Co-Chair Therriault questioned if training Department
personnel was included in the fees. Ms. Adair responded
that the hourly fees only cover the actual personnel
service costs plus a certain percentage of the common
costs. The fees do not cover costs associated with travel
or training. This requires a well-trained staff. Ms.
Adair concluded her testimony.
HB 144 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
(Tape Change HFC 98- 57, Side 2).
HOUSE BILL NO. 16
"An Act relating to delinquent minors, to the taking
of action based on the alleged criminal misconduct of
certain minors, to the services to be provided to the
victims of criminal misconduct of minors, and to
agency records involving minors alleged to be
delinquent based on their criminal misconduct; and
amending Rule 19 and repealing Rules 6, 7, 11(a),
12(a), and 21(f), Alaska Delinquency Rules."
Co-Chair Therriault questioned the fiscal impact of the
legislation.
THERESA TANOURY, ADMINISTRATOR, CHILD PROTECTION SERVICES,
DIVISION OF FAMILY AND YOUTH SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
AND SOCIAL SERVICES, commented that there are two ways for
a child to be placed in a locked facility. The first is if
the child commits a delinquent act; the other is through
the mental health commitment door if that child presents a
danger to himself or others.
She spoke to the situation of a child falling under the
"Children needing aid Statutes". The Department has
increasingly witnessed that group of kid's need the locked
and more secured care. The Department supports Amendment
out that many physicians across the State have recommended
more locked and secure settings for these youth. Often
times, youth need to be moved out of State for this level
of care.
Ms. Tanoury noted that Medicaid has changed the way the
Department provides secure settings for these children. At
present time, the average stay is 3 to 5 days. Amendment
Division by broadening the definition so that residential
care providers could be better utilized.
KATHY CRONEN, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), CEO, CHARTER
NORTH STAR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SYSTEM, ANCHORAGE, commented
that the amendments proposed to HB 16 are critical in
providing comprehensive treatment for this classification
of youth in Alaska. Expanding the continuum of care by
adding semi-secure and secure residential treatment centers
will provide in-State treatment for youth.
There is a large group of in-need youth that do not or
cannot travel outside the State. These children's needs
are attempted to be met by having multiple admissions to
acute care inpatient psychiatric facilities. She stressed
that this is not optimal clinical treatment and that in the
long run, it is more expensive.
Ms. Cronen advised that these children do not belong in
acute care hospitals. Their symptoms or behavior cannot be
adequately addressed in a 2-week period. They need long
term treatment.
A small group of children cannot safely be maintained in a
semi-secure setting. The children may be sexual
perpetrators, chronic runners, sniffers or haffers who have
failed at or left the semi-secure program. She stressed
that they need a locked facility. The secure residential
psychiatric treatment center proposed in the amendment
would be such a facility. Ms. Cronen emphasized that both
the semi-secure and the secure facilities are vitally
important pieces of the treatment continuum.
BARBARA BRINK, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), PROSECUTING
ATTORNEY, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, FAIRBANKS, asked for more time
to adequately digest the language proposed in Amendment #1.
Co-Chair Hanley requested that Ms. Brink also address if
the Department would be fiscally affected by adopting the
proposed amendments.
Representative J. Davies distributed Amendments #2 & #3.
[Copies on file]. He stated that the amendments would
provide options regarding fiscal obligations. Amendment #2
would remove all dual sentencing, thus reducing the fiscal
impact. Amendment #3 would remove 13, 14 and 15 years olds
from the effective dual sentencing, making the language
more permissive. He believed that language in Amendment #3
would reduce the original bill's fiscal note by about $57
thousand dollars.
Representative Kelly distributed Amendment #4. [Copy on
file]. He noted that the amendment would repeal a drafting
oversight.
HB 16 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 2:50 P.M.
H.F.C. 10 3/06/98 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|