Legislature(2015 - 2016)HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/24/2015 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 | |
| Confirmation Hearings: Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority Board of Trustees | |
| HB136 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | HB 136 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
March 24, 2015
1:33 p.m.
1:33:45 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Thompson called the House Finance Committee
meeting to order at 1:33 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Mark Neuman, Co-Chair
Representative Steve Thompson, Co-Chair
Representative Dan Saddler, Vice-Chair
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative Les Gara
Representative Lynn Gattis
Representative David Guttenberg
Representative Scott Kawasaki
Representative Cathy Munoz
Representative Lance Pruitt
Representative Tammie Wilson
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Carlton Smith, Alaska Mental Health Trustee; Representative
Steve Thompson , Sponsor; Brodie Anderson, Staff,
Representative Steve Thompson; Elizabeth Nudelman,
Director, School Finances and Facilities, Department of
Education and Early Development.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Christopher Cooke, Alaska Mental Health Trustee; Mary Jane
Michael, Alaska Mental Health Trustee.
SUMMARY
HB 136 SCHOOL BOND DEBT REIMBURSEMENT
HB 136 was HEARD and HELD in committee for
further consideration.
CONFIRMATION HEARINGS: ALASKA MENTAL HEALTH TRUST AUTHORITY
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Christopher Cooke, Anchorage
Mary Jane Michael, Anchorage
Carlton Smith, Juneau
Co-Chair Thompson discussed the agenda for the day.
^CONFIRMATION HEARINGS: ALASKA MENTAL HEALTH TRUST
AUTHORITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES
1:34:56 PM
CARLTON SMITH, ALASKA MENTAL HEALTH TRUSTEE, introduced
himself indicating that he resided in Juneau. He spoke
about his private sector background in the timber, land
management, and real estate fields. He reviewed his
management background working for Sealaska in timber sales
and shared that he was the Chief Executive Officer (CEO).
He indicated that he was the owner of the only commercial
real estate company in Southeast Alaska and brokered
transactions statewide as well as nationwide totaling $225
million in value. He relayed his experience with non-
profits which included serving as chairman of the state
board of the Salvation Army, as the "incorporator" of the
Sealaska Heritage Institute, and serving as Chairman of
Kootznoowoo Permanent Fund Settlement Trust (KPFST); a
private trust where he managed over $15 million in private
assets. He spoke to the challenges facing the trust. He
pointed to the increased costs of service delivery and
increased numbers of beneficiaries. He maintained that the
trust's revenue sources should be increased to meet the
needs of future beneficiaries. He relayed that since 2010,
the trust's Land Office made substantial changes and
improvements in its resource management in all areas. He
noted the decision by the Land Office to further invest in
commercial real estate in the lower 48 states. He shared
his desire was to be involved in the commercial real estate
investment process and "contribute to the trust."
Co-Chair Neuman referenced the trust's need to increase
revenues. He observed that the trust possessed substantial
properties available for resource development. He asked
whether Mr. Smith was "a pro-resource development type of a
person." Mr. Smith responded in the affirmative. He added
that his previous experience in marketing timber could
assist the land office in its duty to manage the trust's
216 thousand acres in Southeast Alaska in a more productive
manner.
Co-Chair Neuman discussed the popularity of snow machine
use and activity in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough which
included over 2 thousand miles of tracked trails. He
alluded to the fact that the Alaska Mental Health Trust
Authority (AMHTA) had made it difficult for snow machine
organizations to have access to trust lands for tracking
and trails. He asked whether he was open to expanding trail
systems on trust land. Mr. Smith replied that he was not
familiar with the issue and thought that it was a
management issue. He elaborated that the board would have
to consider "many different simultaneous uses" of its lands
in the future and would "contribute to the management
input."
1:39:20 PM
Co-Chair Neuman commented that many legislators were
supportive of "access to Alaska's lands."
Representative Gara commented that the state provided land
to the trust to raise revenue but granted the trust the
"lowest value" and "most controversial" land. He hoped that
the state could provide the trust with "more valuable" land
in the future. He wondered what "higher yield" endeavors
the trust could undertake with the lands it currently
oversaw. Mr. Smith answered that discovering the highest
value for the trust's lands was the board's immediate
priority. He referred to trust land utilized for the
University of Alaska's Providence Corridor, which he
credited the trust's Land Office with turning into "cash
flow." He conveyed that he "thoroughly reviewed" the Land
Offices management plan for each one of the asset
categories and felt that the office was more seriously
engaged in its management responsibilities over the last
four years.
Representative Gara voiced that the trust needed general
fund money to supplement its programs for the
beneficiaries. He noted the waiting list for certain
programs especially for substance abuse treatment and asked
for Mr. Smith's view on the matter. Mr. Smith referred to
his time on the Juneau Assembly and observed that the
programs with the best and most successful outcomes worked
in "tandem" with other programs. He voiced his confidence
in supporting that type approach for the trust. He was
interested in understanding "the program side" of the
trust.
1:46:02 PM
Representative Kawasaki cited Mr. Smith's resume and
referred to statute regarding board appointments. He noted
Mr. Smith's previous appointment to the board from 2010 to
2011 and wondered why his time on the board was so short.
Mr. Smith responded that due to his previous employment for
a state agency he had to resign and that the appointment
was an oversight.
Representative Munoz asked about the "sub-port property" in
Juneau and noted that it was considered the "crown jewel"
of the trust's properties. She requested that he share his
ideas for the property's use. Mr. Smith disclosed that he
had not marketed the property. He commented on the
desirability and value of the waterfront property. He
recommended that from a land-use stand point he would hire
waterfront development experts due to the fact that the
type of waterfront property the sub-port was held the "most
risk" and "the most opportunity."
Representative Wilson indicated that the Trust was well
known to start a project then turn it over to the
legislature to fund from the state's general fund. She
asked whether he could find a "way to change that
mentality" and discover other ways of funding programs. Mr.
Smith asked for a specific example. She mentioned a
Department of Labor and Workforce Development (DLWD)
project. She asked who was responsible to ensure that a
trust's program funding was sustainable without additional
general fund money. Mr. Smith reported that he had not been
briefed on the situation but stated that his immediate goal
was to generate additional revenue.
Co-Chair Thompson OPENED public testimony.
1:51:43 PM
Co-Chair Thompson CLOSED public testimony.
CHRISTOPHER COOKE, ALASKA MENTAL HEALTH TRUSTEE (via
teleconference), discussed his background. He reported that
he came to Alaska through the VISTA program serving as a
lawyer in Kotzebue and Nome. He met his wife in Nunapiachak
and practiced as an attorney in Bethel before his
appointment as a Superior Court Judge for 10 years. He
subsequently returned to private practice and represented
many residents from rural Alaska. He currently lived in
Anchorage but maintained a home in Bethel. He relayed his
familiarity with mental health issues and needs around the
state. He noted that there were many challenges,
particularly in rural areas, in dealing with mental health
issues and accessing programs for beneficiaries. He
announced that one of his priorities as a board member
would be to examine ways to provide rural areas with mental
health programs more effectively. He was confident that he
could carry out his trustee duties and looked forward to
his participation and collaboration with the trust.
1:57:24 PM
Representative Wilson reiterated her question about general
fund dollars for programs for the Mental Health Trust. Mr.
Cooke responded that he did not yet possess "the depth of
knowledge or history" of the trust. However, he understood
that the trust regularly partnered with other agencies and
entities for program development and often acted as an
"incubator" for programs. He exemplified working with the
Court System to develop the Drug Court and cited a recently
completed study concerning recidivism in the Court System
and the Department of Corrections (DOC). He thought that
the Trust's role in partnerships was not adding an
additional program but provided efficiencies to or replaced
existing programs or efforts that generated cost savings or
better outcomes.
Representative Wilson was not sure who to direct her
question to. She wanted to know if Mr. Cooke was related to
Senator Hoffmann and whether that presented a conflict.
Representative Edgmon expressed his strong support for Mr.
Cooke and thought he was an excellent candidate with an
extensive legal and rural background. He confirmed that Mr.
Cooke was related to Senator Hoffmann indirectly through
his daughter's marriage. He thanked him for his willingness
to serve.
2:02:24 PM
Vice-Chair Saddler asked whether Mr. Cooke been involved in
"public affairs" for the benefit of understanding his
background more thoroughly. Mr. Cooke responded that he had
been a member of the University Of Alaska Board Of Regents
for two years in the 1970's but had to resign due to his
judgeship at the ruling of the state's attorney general at
the time. He remarked that he was a member of various
boards and commissions over the years in addition to a
number of other private boards. He noted his previous
appointment to the Rural Governance Commission by Governor
Knowles. He responded to Representative Wilson's question.
He confirmed that Senator Hoffman was very distantly
related to Stanley Hoffman whom married his daughter but
was not directly related to his daughter's "immediate
family."
Vice-Chair Saddler asked whether Mr. Cooke had been the
state Chair of the Democratic Party in Alaska. Mr. Cooke
replied in the affirmative and added that he acted as chair
from 1998 through 2000. Vice-Chair Saddler asked whether he
was on Governor Walker's transition team. Mr. Cooke
responded in the affirmative. Vice-Chair Saddler asked
whether Mr. Cooke felt that his public involvement in
politics enhanced, inhibited, or did not affect his role on
the board. Mr. Cooke did not believe that the board had
"anything to do with politics and was not a factor" for
him.
Co-Chair Thompson OPENED public testimony.
Co-Chair Thompson CLOSED public testimony.
Co-Chair Thompson asked Ms. Michael to tell the committee
why she wanted to continue to serve on the board.
MARY JANE MICHAEL, ALASKA MENTAL HEALTH TRUSTEE (via
teleconference), spoke about her experience and background
having just completed a five year term as a board member.
She relayed personal information. She reported that she
served as the executive director for the Arc of Anchorage
for twenty years. She detailed that the organization
"served the trust beneficiaries" and operated under a $10
million budget with 400 employees. She was involved in the
original home and community based waiver program. She
believed her experience and personal knowledge of the
system was beneficial to the board and trust staff. She
shared that she worked as a Director of Economic and
Community Development for the City of Anchorage. She noted
that during her first term on the board she served on the
Planning and Program Committee and the Resource Management
Committee. She indicated that the Planning Committee
successfully completed the Bring the Kids Home Initiative
and continued to focus on disability justice, housing and
long-term support, beneficiary employment, and workforce
development. She remarked that the Resource Management
Committee worked hard to generate new income for the trust
and increased revenue "three-fold." She reported that she
had personally worked closely on the first Housing First
project in Anchorage. She spoke about the state's tough
economic predicament and thought that the board was
committed to becoming part of the solution. She looked
forward to assisting in the development a comprehensive
mental health plan for the state and beneficiaries that was
cost effective and innovative.
2:11:17 PM
Representative Wilson reiterated her funding question
regarding whether the trust had other revenue sources
besides general funds. Ms. Michael responded that she
viewed the relationship between the trust and the state as
a partnership and attempted to focus on programs that
provided the most benefit and were cost effective. She
exemplified the Bring the Kids Home Program that shifted
the money spent on psychiatric residential treatment out of
state at higher costs back to Alaska to treat the children
in the state, which produced a multitude of benefits
including spending state resources in the state. She
believed that "it was worth it to make the change." She
understood that not all programs would survive and thought
that the emphasis would shift to core services. She did not
expect that the trust would request additional funding for
new programs.
Representative Wilson asked whether the Bring the Kids Home
initiative was successful in providing the same level of
care as the out of state services. Mr. Cooke responded that
she would provide the information. She noted that the out
of state care was typically hospitalizations, which was
very expensive and that the returned children were placed
back in their community either with community based
services or group homes at much reduced costs.
Co-Chair Thompson OPENED public testimony.
Co-Chair Thompson CLOSED public testimony.
Ms. Michael thanked the committee for the opportunity to
serve on the Trust.
Co-Chair Thompson thanked all three appointees.
Co-Chair Thompson read a statement regarding the
confirmation committee process that reminded the committee
that full confirmation took place in a joint session of the
full legislature.
2:17:00 PM
AT EASE
2:20:37 PM
RECONVENED
HOUSE BILL NO. 136
"An Act relating to school bond debt reimbursement;
and providing for an effective date."
Co-Chair Thompson indicated that he would not be moving the
bill out of committee today.
REPRESENTATIVE STEVE THOMPSON, SPONSOR, read the sponsor
statement for the bill.
Under the current fiscal shortfall of $3.5 billion,
the state must control expenses. It is imperative that
the state not only find efficiencies and reduce the
size of operational costs of the state, but also limit
the potential growth of state spending. House Bill 136
(HB 136) will allow the state to control expenses.
There are four major cost drivers in Alaska's
statewide operating costs: K-12 education, Health and
Social Services, debt service (PERS/TRS and bond
payments), and employee salaries and benefits. HB 136
addresses the growth in state debt service expenses by
suspending subdivisions of government's ability to
bond without explicit state approval.
House Bill 136 would sunset Alaska statutes relating
to state aid for costs of school construction and
major maintenance debt for five years. After five
years, if the legislature does not take further action
on these statutes, the reimbursement rates for school
construction would be reinstated and reduced from 70%
to 50% for eligible projects described under AS
14.11.100 (h), (i), (j) (2) - (5) and from 60% to 40%
for eligible projects described under AS 14.11.100(h),
(i), and (j) (2), (3), and (5).
BRODIE ANDERSON, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE STEVE THOMPSON, read
the sectional analysis of the bill.
*Section 1: Amends AS 14.11.014, adds new subsection
(d)
Sunsets the bond debt reimbursement provisions for
school construction and major maintenance for five
years, May 1, 2015 - July 1, 2020.
*Section 2: Amends AS 14.11.100(a)
Page 6, line 21 restricts reimbursement of bonds
authorized after May 1, 2015. Page 7, lines 1 - 11,
deletes language relating to bonds authorized after
May 1, 2015.
*Section 3: Amends AS 14.11.100(a)
Page 12, line 17 - Page 13, line 2 inserts
language relating to bonds authorized on or after
July 1, 2020.
(18) For projects approved under AS 14.11.100
(h), (i), and (j) (2) - (5) the reimbursement
would be 50 percent.
(19) For projects approved under AS 14.11.100
(h), (i), and (j) (2), (3), and (5) the
reimbursement would be 40 percent.
*Section 4: Amends AS 14.11.100
adds a new section (s) Restricts the Commissioner
from approving an application for bond debt
reimbursement between May 1, 2015 - July 1, 2020.
*Section 5: Amends AS 14.11.102
adds new section (c) Restricts the Commissioner
from approving an application for bond debt
reimbursement between May 1, 2015 - July 1, 2020.
*Section 6: Repeals sections 1, 4, and 5 of this
act on July 1, 2020
*Section 7: Retroactivity clause
Sections 1, 2, 4, and 5 of this act are
retroactive to May 1, 2015
*Section 8: Section 3 of this act takes effect July
1, 2020
*Section 9: Sections 1, 2, 4, 5, and 7 of this act
take effect immediately
2:25:55 PM
Representative Guttenberg cited the multi-year allocation
totals shown on the document titled, "Multi-year Allocation
Totals - Operating Budget - FY 2016 Senate Structure" (copy
on file) and asked whether the purpose was to point out the
total amount of the state's obligation from 2007 through
2015. Mr. Anderson responded affirmatively. He indicated
the information conveyed prior reimbursement obligations.
Representative Guttenberg asked what the totals would be
for FY 17 and FY 18 based upon past history. Mr. Anderson
referred to an additional page in the committee packet
titled, "Statewide Liability School Construction Debt
Retirement, Updated 2/13/2015" (copy on file) that reported
the debt from FY 15 through FY 34. He explained that based
on the document the FY 16 total was approximately $108
million.
Co-Chair Thompson interjected that the document showed that
by paying off the debt through 2034 the state liability
totaled $1,212,713,044.
Mr. Anderson added that the totals only reflected bonds
already issued.
Vice-Chair Saddler inquired about the physical condition of
the schools around the state. Mr. Anderson responded that
he did not have the answer to that question and referred to
the Department of Education and Early Development (DEED).
Vice-Chair Saddler asked whether the state would be
"abrogating" its responsibility if it did not fund at the
level of the 70 percent 30 percent [state - local]
reimbursement split. Mr. Anderson indicated he would have
to review before he could answer. He added that the bill
did not prohibit school districts from bonding. The
legislation only restricted the state's reimbursement of
the bonds.
2:30:19 PM
Vice-Chair Saddler restated his question about the general
condition of the schools in the state.
ELIZABETH NUDELMAN, DIRECTOR, SCHOOL FINANCES AND
FACILITIES, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND EARLY DEVELOPMENT,
answered that the condition of the schools varied. She
elaborated that the condition of a school was based on the
"useful life of the components" which created a continued
need for repair. However, many buildings were in very good
condition based on maintenance and repair needs being met.
Representative Wilson asked about the history of the school
bond debt reimbursement program and the reasoning behind
the program. Ms. Nudelman replied that the bonding program
was initiated sometime in the 1970's. She determined that
upon examination of the previous statute, the state
partnered with school districts and municipalities to
construct and repair schools around the state. The program
mandated that the municipalities carried the debt and the
state reimbursed a portion of the debt under eligibility
requirements. She confirmed that the bill did not prohibit
municipalities from bonding.
Representative Wilson asked about the bonding ability of
schools that were not in municipalities. Ms. Nudelman
responded that Regional Education Attendance Area (REAA)
schools were located in unorganized boroughs and did not
have the "legal capacity" to bond. She added that some
schools located in small municipalities could not obtain
the backing to bond for school construction or repair. She
detailed that a second statutory program was a school grant
program called the CIP Program (capital improvement
project). The department received applications each year
and ranked the projects according to need and forwarded the
list to the governor and legislature for funding from the
capital budget.
Representative Wilson reported that from 2005 through 2015
the grant program totaled $763 million. She wondered
whether with passage of the bill, the districts would
switch over to the grant program instead of bonding without
reimbursement from the state. Ms. Nudelman assumed that the
grant program would receive more applications in the
absence of the debt reimbursement program. Representative
Wilson commented that she hoped the grant program would
also be reexamined by the legislature and include all
school construction.
Co-Chair Thompson remarked that the school debt
reimbursement program was subject to appropriation by the
legislature and therefore, some sideboards were in place.
He agreed with Representative Wilson's latter comment and
noted that the point of the bill was to completely halt
bonding for a period of time until the state could "get our
financial house in order."
Representative Wilson wanted to ensure that the legislation
was applied equally throughout the state.
2:37:14 PM
Co-Chair Neuman asked whether the bill would affect the
construction of the last Kasayulie School. Ms. Nudelman
responded that the bill did not apply to the Kivalina
School. Co-Chair Neuman expressed more concern about the
bill affecting the Kasylie case mandate and asked for
further clarification. Ms. Nudelman relayed that the debt
reimbursement program timeline eligibility happened when
the voters authorized the debt. She expounded that debt
that was authorized in 2011 would remain in the program.
The Kivalina School was part of the Kasayulie settlement
resolved in 2011. In the FY 2016 budget the governor
appropriated approximately $4.7 million for design of the
school. In order for the bill to affect the Kivalina
project, either the governor or legislature would have to
deny funding for the project. The Kivalina School was a
separate issue from the legislation. Co-Chair Neuman
indicated he wanted to ensure that the bill would not
create a legal issue with the mandated Kasayulie
settlement.
Vice-Chair Saddler asked whether the legislation would
prompt lawsuits for the state from municipalities or school
districts. Ms. Nudelman responded that she "did not have a
basis" to form an opinion about the potential for lawsuits.
She maintained that the legislature held the authority to
appropriate funds and create statute.
2:41:35 PM
Representative Kawasaki wondered what portion of the
overall state debt belonged to schools versus other bonding
debt. Co-Chair Thompson answered that the state's total
bond payments in FY 15 was approximately $264 million, of
which $114.6 million was attributed to school debt.
Co-Chair Neuman stated that total debt bond reimbursement
was actually $228 million.
Representative Kawasaki expressed concern about the May 1,
2015 effective date of the bill. He indicated that every
other school district except Anchorage would be excluded
from the program this year base on the date. He wondered
whether any discussion ensued in regards to changing the
effective date. Mr. Anderson relayed that both the Bristol
Bay Borough and the Anchorage School District was holding
school debt bonding elections before May 1, 2015. He
confirmed that every other school district "would be
impacted" by passage of the legislation.
Co-Chair Thompson reminded the committee that reimbursement
of any school debt bond package was subject to legislative
appropriation. He cautioned that both school districts
needed to remember that with passage of the bond issue,
they still might be required to pay 100 percent
reimbursement.
Representative Kawasaki asked whether other school
districts were planning on having a bond measure as part of
elections in the fall. Ms. Nudelman was uncertain. However,
she did know of one other school district that was
anticipating a new bond proposal at some point.
Representative Kawasaki asked whether many districts would
rush to add school bonding proposals as part of the
upcoming elections in the fall if the date was changed. Ms.
Nudelman was not certain but thought that it was possible.
2:45:56 PM
Representative Edgmon clarified that the debt reimbursement
program had "historically come and gone in the past."
Recently, there had not been a sunset date attached to the
program. He stated that the grant program was highly
competitive. He offered that the Ketchikan lawsuit was
focused on the K - 12 funding formula and the operational
side of education funding. He also indicated that he had
some "conflicted feelings about the bill." He understood
the reason from the standpoint of "fiscal discipline."
However, from the standpoint of the small Bristol Bay
Borough School District, he thought that it would be the
last opportunity for the school to take advantage of the
program. He added that the school was in desperate need of
repair and that repairs would render the school more energy
efficient and overtime could save money. He wondered
whether a "rush" of school districts were expected to
attempt to qualify before the program would sunset. Ms.
Nudelman believed that school districts were restricted by
its voters who understood the larger fiscal crisis facing
the state and thought that the voters would need convincing
before a bond issue was passed.
Mr. Anderson responded that through his research in
anticipation of the legislation he discovered that the
municipal school bonding process was lengthy and could last
months. He observed that "in regards to the bum rush"
scenario, current evidence of that would be apparent.
2:50:21 PM
Representative Edgmon wondered whether the committee had a
legal opinion from the Department of Law regarding the
legality of imposing a definitive cut-off date. Mr.
Anderson reported that no legal memo existed regarding HB
136.
Co-Chair Thompson informed Representative Edgmon that
Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) had a program
applicable to public buildings, including schools that was
being utilized in many rural areas. He explained that the
program was focused on energy efficiency and weatherization
and the grant would be repaid through guaranteed savings
from lower energy costs achieved overtime.
Co-Chair Neuman interjected that private entities also
offered the same energy efficiency type programs.
Vice-Chair Saddler remarked that in response to the
suggested "land office rush" for the remaining school debt
program , he thought that the notion of the "generous state
reimbursement coming to an end" would not be surprising to
the school districts given the state's financial condition.
Representative Munoz asked whether non-REAA schools can
apply for the grant funding. Ms. Nudelman replied in the
affirmative. Representative Munoz asked what the number of
applications the department received for the grant program
in a given year was versus the number of awarded grants.
Ms. Nudelman responded that DEED received approximately 160
to 200 applications and that in the FY 2016 budget four
applications were awarded totaling $13 million exclusive of
the capital construction project for the Kivalina School
design. She noted that the number of applications typically
decreased during leaner budget years.
2:55:12 PM
Representative Munoz asked whether all of the funds for the
grant program was state funding. Ms. Nudelman responded
that the grant program required a percentage of matching
funds based on the assessed value per ADM (average daily
membership).
Representative Gattis believed that over the 40 year period
of the reimbursement program it incentivized the school
districts to overbuild buildings which all required
maintenance. She felt that the school districts were moving
into a period of necessary maintenance and with passage of
HB 136, were getting its source of funding revoked, which
was not planned for. She asked for the total amount of
deferred school maintenance in the state. Ms. Nudelman
responded that one way that the department assessed
deferred maintenance was reviewing the insurance value for
all of the school buildings statewide. She elaborated that
DEED also required six year plans from school districts
regarding maintenance needs. She thought that both methods
gave the department a good indication of general
maintenance needs of the schools. Representative Gattis
wondered whether the district had a specific number. Ms.
Nudelman had access to a report with the numbers that she
would provide to the committee.
Representative Kawasaki notified the committee that a 2010
report on school construction and major maintenance funding
had been distributed.
Representative Munoz stated that charter schools became
eligible for the school debt reimbursement program. She
wondered whether charter schools were included in the bill.
Mr. Anderson was uncertain.
HB 136 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
He discussed the agenda for the next day.
3:00:46 PM
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Trust - Smith #1.pdf |
HFIN 3/24/2015 1:30:00 PM |
|
| Mental Health - Michael #4.pdf |
HFIN 3/24/2015 1:30:00 PM |
|
| Mental Health - Cooke #3.pdf |
HFIN 3/24/2015 1:30:00 PM |
|
| HB 136 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HFIN 3/24/2015 1:30:00 PM |
HB 136 |
| HB 136 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HFIN 3/24/2015 1:30:00 PM |
HB 136 |
| HB 136 Fiscal Note EED.pdf |
HFIN 3/24/2015 1:30:00 PM |
HB 136 |
| HB 136 Support Material - State Debt Liability.pdf |
HFIN 3/24/2015 1:30:00 PM |
HB 136 |
| HB 136 Support Material - MultiYearAllocationTotals.pdf |
HFIN 3/24/2015 1:30:00 PM |
HB 136 |
| HB 136 Supporting Documents - May 1 Date Only - Letter From Bristol Bay Borough.pdf |
HFIN 3/24/2015 1:30:00 PM |
HB 136 |
| HB 136 Opposing Documents - FNSB School Debt Reimbursement Letter.pdf |
HFIN 3/24/2015 1:30:00 PM |
HB 136 |
| HB 136 DEED 6 YR Plan 2015 Final.pdf |
HFIN 3/24/2015 1:30:00 PM |
HB 136 |
| HB 136 DEED Response to Rep. Gattis.pdf |
HFIN 3/24/2015 1:30:00 PM |
HB 136 |