Legislature(2017 - 2018)HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/08/2017 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 | |
| HB57 || HB59 | |
| Amendments | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 57 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 59 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
March 8, 2017
1:35 p.m.
[Note: Meeting recessed and continued on 3/9/17 at 9:30
a.m.]
1:35:34 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Seaton called the House Finance Committee meeting
to order at 1:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Neal Foster, Co-Chair
Representative Paul Seaton, Co-Chair
Representative Les Gara, Vice-Chair
Representative Jason Grenn
Representative David Guttenberg
Representative Scott Kawasaki
Representative Dan Ortiz
Representative Lance Pruitt
Representative Steve Thompson
Representative Cathy Tilton
Representative Tammie Wilson
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
SUMMARY
HB 57 APPROP: OPERATING BUDGET/LOANS/FUNDS
HB 57 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
HB 59 APPROP: MENTAL HEALTH BUDGET
HB 59 was HEARD and HELD in committee for
further consideration.
Co-Chair Seaton addressed the agenda for the meeting. He
relayed there were 139 amendments remaining.
HOUSE BILL NO. 57
"An Act making appropriations for the operating and
loan program expenses of state government and for
certain programs; capitalizing funds; amending
appropriations; repealing appropriations; making
supplemental appropriations and reappropriations, and
making appropriations under art. IX, sec. 17(c),
Constitution of the State of Alaska, from the
constitutional budget reserve fund; and providing for
an effective date."
HOUSE BILL NO. 57
"An Act making appropriations for the operating and
loan program expenses of state government and for
certain programs; capitalizing funds; amending
appropriations; repealing appropriations; making
supplemental appropriations and reappropriations, and
making appropriations under art. IX, sec. 17(c),
Constitution of the State of Alaska, from the
constitutional budget reserve fund; and providing for
an effective date."
1:35:34 PM
^AMENDMENTS
1:36:27 PM
Representative Ortiz MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DOE 19
(copy on file):
H DOE 19 - Pre-K Programs Affected by the Moore
Settlement
Offered by Representative Ortiz
Under the Moore Settlement (Moore vs. State of
Alaska), the State set aside funds to address the
educational needs of students in 40 of the chronically
lowest performing schools in Alaska. Under the
Settlement the state was directed to invest in several
strategies to support student learning, one of which
was in early learning (Pre-K and early literacy)
programs. In 2012, $18 million was appropriated by
the Legislature to meet conditions of the Settlement,
with funding continuing through FY17, at which time
any remaining funds would lapse.
Despite investment made over the last four years under
the Moore Settlement, the need for Pre-K/early
learning programs has not ended.
In FY17, $2.7 million provides Pre-K and early
literacy services to 273 children in 30 communities
with Moore Settlement funds. In FY18, without
legislative action, there is no money for these
services and few if any of the Pre-K programs
developed under Moore will survive. In discussions
with several participating School Districts, it is
clear that constricting school budgets make it
difficult if not impossible to maintain gains that
have been made.
Schools included in the Moore Settlement remain some
of the lowest performing in the State; early
interventions and early learning support remains vital
to give these children the start they need to be
successful in their school years and beyond.
This amendment provides funds to continue the
community based early learning services begun under
the Moore Settlement with the support and
administrative oversight of Early Learning staff at
the Department of Education and Early Development.
Funds will be leveraged to mix and stretch dollars
from all sources including federal, private and non-
profit to offer lean, high quality early learning
programs for these children, some of the most
vulnerable in Alaska.
Representative Wilson OBJECTED for the purpose of
discussion.
Representative Ortiz explained that the amendment was
intended to provide one-time bridge funds into the coming
year in order to give time for the department to address a
long-term plan for the Moore schools. The amendment related
to Pre-K programs affected by the Moore settlement. He read
from the amendment description [see above].
Representative Wilson spoke to her objection. She shared
that she chaired the Department of Education and Early
Development (DEED) budget subcommittee when Moore
settlement items had been going through. She recalled
asking what would happen when the funding ran out. She
detailed at the time there had been no funding for Pre-K.
She spoke to the Moore settlement and read from the judge's
findings on the case (copy not on file):
A related issue on educational content is the topic of
pre-kindergarten. Many witnesses for both the
plaintiffs and the state testified that pre-
kindergarten programs can contribute to academic
success by helping to make young children ready for
formal education. Yet there appears to be no consensus
as to the age to best supply pre-kindergarten programs
or whether they ought to be provided in the public
schools or outside of the school system. Although
there is considerable evidence that pre-kindergarten
programs may be beneficial to children, it is not the
court's role to make such policy determinations.
Representative Wilson spoke to "number 12" of the same
case:
The education clause on its face requires that the
state establish and maintain a system of public
schools. At statehood public schooling began after
kindergarten. The state now provides a public school
system available to children beginning at age five.
This court does not read the education clause of the
Alaska Constitution to accord to preschool-age
children the right to a public school education.
Representative Wilson surmised that although the state gave
money for preschool programs, the appropriate question was
about how the funds would be used. She believed many of the
districts combined classes with four and five-year-olds due
to the low number of students in many villages. She did not
know how many areas did not combine classes with four and
five-year-olds and had been able to utilize the same funds
and teachers for classrooms that would normally be for
kindergarten. She had heard and supported that some
districts were already utilizing funding through the Base
Student Allocation (BSA) because it was not costing them
anymore. She underscored that districts had known the state
funding would not continue in perpetuity and she believed a
plan should have been made.
Vice-Chair Gara supported the amendment. He was not
interested in whether the state was legally required to
provide the funding. He believed the amendment's purpose
was to address the fact that one-sixth of the state's youth
not at reading level by 3rd grade did not graduate from
high school. He stated that those students became the most
expensive. He stressed that children who went to Pre-K
ended up in jobs at higher levels, earned higher pay, and
graduated from high school and college in greater numbers.
He remarked that when the state established its Pre-K grant
program, which was only $2 million in 2008, the promise had
been that after three years of proof of the program's
success, the funding would increase to $10 million. He
stated the program was only referred to as a pilot program
because the legislature had never followed through on its
commitment to get out of the bottom 10 states in the nation
providing Pre-K.
1:41:53 PM
Co-Chair Seaton testified in support of the amendment. He
agreed that the courts did not determine the issue; it was
determined by the legislature. He believed the House
Majority was fully committed to Pre-K education. He
elaborated on his belief that Pre-K education was one of
the most effective things the legislature could do to
promote education and successful outcomes.
Representative Wilson MAINTAINED her OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Kawasaki, Ortiz, Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Seaton,
Foster
OPPOSED: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
The MOTION PASSED (7/4). There being NO further OBJECTION,
Amendment H DOE 19 was ADOPTED.
1:43:35 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DOE 20
(copy on file):
Pre-Kindergarten Grants
H DOE 20 - Eliminate Pre-Kindergarten Grants
Offered by Representative Wilson
Pre-Kindergarten programs are available through Head
Start and private programs. This is not a requirement
of our Constitution and with childcare grants those
unable to qualify for Head Start can still have access
to a great private childcare facility.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson explained the amendment. She noted
that the legislature had discussed Pre-K grants in the
past. She believed it had been intended as a competitive
grant for private and public Pre-K programs. As far as she
knew, grants had not gone to private entities. She
continued that most of the funds had continuously gone to
the same entities versus acting as starting funds for other
places. The amendment would cut $2 million from General
Fund spending.
Representative Ortiz referred to the discussion about Pre-K
in general.
Co-Chair Seaton redirected conversation to the amendment.
Representative Ortiz complied. He discussed that the
amendment would mean 358 children who currently benefitted
from the program would no longer benefit. Additionally, the
programs leveraged and blended federal and private funds to
reach more than 1,206 children directly and indirectly.
Representative Wilson provided wrap up on the amendment.
She emphasized that the grants had been intended to be
moved around to different entities to provide startup
funding. Additionally, she believed programs were supposed
to show where they would get continued funding after
receiving the initial grant.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Ortiz, Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt H DOE 20 FAILED (4/7).
1:46:55 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DOE 21
(copy on file):
Commissions and Boards
Alaska State Council on the Arts
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes two of the three Fine Art
Administrator positions requiring the Department to
redistribute the work to remaining personnel and to
operate in a more efficient and effective manner in
delivering these programs.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above]. The amendment would cut $200,000 in General
Fund match from the Alaska State Council on the Arts.
Representative Ortiz spoke in opposition to the amendment.
He stated that in response to ever tightening budgets, the
Alaska State Council on the Arts took the initiative to
pursue legislation to restructure the organization. He
detailed that HB 137 would restructure the council as a
quasi-governmental entity to better leverage private and
federal funds. He relayed that the bill was currently in
the House Education Committee with companion legislation in
the Senate. He furthered that the leading two fine arts
administrator positions would result in a loss of $2.1
million in revenue from private and federal partners and
the council's collapse.
Representative Grenn asked how many positions the council
currently had.
1:49:01 PM
AT EASE
1:49:36 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Ortiz replied there were five total
positions, three of which were fine arts administrator
positions.
Representative Wilson provided wrap up on the amendment.
She did not believe the amendment would result in the
collapse of the entire program. She detailed that the
amendment would enable the council to continue to look for
replacement funds from other sources. She did not know any
details about HB 137. The amendment would discontinue state
funding for two positions and would not prevent the council
from requesting funds from private entities such as the
Rasmuson Foundation or other.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Tilton, Wilson, Grenn
OPPOSED: Thompson, Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz,
Seaton, Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DOE 21 FAILED (4/7).
1:51:31 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DOE 22
(copy on file):
Mt. Edgecumbe Boarding School
H DOE 22 - Deletes funding for pool storage and
winterizing maintenance operations.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes the increment of $100,000 in
the Services line of the FY 18 Budget request for pool
storage and winterizing maintenance operations at the
Aquatic Center located at Mt. Edgecumbe High School.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED for the purpose of discussion.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above]. She did not know why the cost had not been
figured into development and utilization planning. She
believed $100,000 was excessive, especially given the
current budget deficit.
Representative Ortiz was opposed to the amendment. He
relayed that the legislature had included funding for the
pool in a statewide bond package in 2010, which the public
had approved in a statewide vote. The new Mt. Edgecumbe
High School aquatic center was currently under construction
and was estimated for completion by November 2017.
Currently the operation and maintenance needed for the
center was $583,000 and full funding yet to be identified.
The $100,000 increment in the governor's proposed FY 18
budget was to provide minimal operations and maintenance of
the facility upon its completion, specifically to help
cover the warm storage and maintenance costs until the
state had identified sufficient funds to support a fully
operational aquatic center. The increment was an investment
to protect prior investments into the center and would
maintain hope that the pool would open in the future.
Representative Pruitt explained that the issue had come up
in a Legislative Budget and Audit (LB&A) audit. He stated
that the fact the state built the aquatic center had
baffled the auditor from Texas. He furthered that the
auditor could not believe the state had paid to build the
pool but it had not ensured the facilities built in the
1940s were Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
accessible. He continued that the state had gotten itself
locked into the project, which it could not finish
building. He emphasized the center was less than one mile
away from another pool. He underscored that the legislature
really needed to consider whether or not some projects were
a good idea when contemplating providing funding. He
continued that the aquatic center was an example of a
project where the legislature found itself asking why it
took $100,000 to winterize a pool that had not yet been
built. He believed it was a catch-22 situation. He
questioned whether the legislature should throw out the
money it had already spent or ensure the pool would be
there for the future. He would vote against the amendment,
but he did not like the situation. He underscored that the
project should never have been built in the first place. He
believed the situation was important to keep in mind in the
future.
1:55:08 PM
Representative Wilson provided wrap up on the amendment.
She emphasized that the state knew it did not have
sufficient funds to complete the project. She noted the
issue was not about whether or not the pool should be
built. She questioned the reason the contractor had not
stopped at a point where it would not require $100,000 to
keep the project from being destroyed. Additionally, she
stressed that even if the money to build the pool was
available, it was her understanding there was no money
available to maintain the pool. She questioned how many
years the state would pay $100,000 for storage fees for a
project that may never be completed. She noted there was
another pool in the area that was being utilized. She
wondered how many times the state would pay for something
that could not be completed and could not be operated. She
stressed that money is not free and that someone would have
to pay for it.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Pruitt,
Foster, Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DOE 22 FAILED (3/8).
1:57:42 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DOE 24
(copy on file):
H DOE 24 - Funding reduction for team sports and
extra-curricular activities.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment reduces the FY 18 Budget request of
$505,900 in the Travel line for travel to team
sporting events and extra-curricular activities by
$200,000. Funding is not given to any other public
school for sports and fees can be assessed if this is
an important activity for those that participate.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson explained that the amendment would
reduce funding for team sports and extracurricular
activities. She stressed that the state did not give
schools in her district money for extracurricular
activities. She explained the schools in her district held
fundraisers such as car washes, ticket sales to various
things, and other. She read the amendment description [see
above]. She added that to her knowledge, the state did not
charge to attend school at Mt. Edgecumbe because it was a
state school. However, she did not understand why the state
would fund extracurricular activities for one public school
and not others. She surmised each district in the state
contained schools that had to pay for the activities
themselves.
Representative Ortiz believed it was safe to say that
nearly every school in the state utilized a portion of its
operating funds (foundation funds in addition to local
contributions) for student extracurricular activities
including sports. Mt. Edgecumbe offered a comprehensive
program for its students including extracurricular
activities. He continued that most of the travel funds paid
for roundtrip transportation for students between their
home community and Sitka - the average cost was $1,200 per
student for one roundtrip ticket. The total travel cost for
400 students was approximately $480,000, which did not
cover the cost of traveling home for Christmas (parents
paid for that cost); after those expenditures there was
little funding remaining for sports and extracurricular
travel. He explained that the amendment would hamper the
ability for students to travel home.
2:00:19 PM
Representative Grenn asked about the amount spent on travel
for sports.
Representative Ortiz replied that he was unaware of the
specific amount.
Representative Wilson provided wrap up. She countered that
it did not cost all of the Mt. Edgecumbe students $1,000 to
travel home. She stated that many of the students were from
Anchorage. She had examined the numbers and reported there
was a $200,000 difference. She believed the school received
substantially more money because of its location compared
to other schools in urban districts. She agreed that other
school districts used formula funding for extracurricular
activities, but Mt. Edgecumbe did as well. She stated that
Mt. Edgecumbe received more formula funds than many other
schools. She believed at a certain point a line had to be
drawn.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Tilton, Wilson, Pruitt, Thompson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DOE 24 FAILED (4/7).
2:02:48 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DOE 25
(copy on file):
Alaska State Libraries, Archives and Museums
Library Operations
H DOE 25 - Services Reduction
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment reduces FY 18 Budget request in the
Services line by $900,000 for the RSA with State
Facilities Maintenance for operations and maintenance
support for the Alaska State Libraries, Archives and
Museums combined facility. The Services line increase
by $1,210.5 from the FY 17 Management Plan. This
allocation would still have $875,000 a $320,500
increase from the FY 17 Management Plan.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above]. She stated the reason for the amendment was due to
the large [new] building in Juneau that needed to be
maintained. She relayed she had offered the amendment for
the purpose of discussion. She detailed that the amendment
pointed out that when large buildings were built, large
cost increases occurred. She continued that the money was
not currently left over in the budget - it would be an
increase in the current year and in following years in
order to maintain the facility. She did not know whether
any rent had been saved because DEED had moved into the
building.
Representative Ortiz opposed the amendment. He explained
that the amendment would bring a $900,000 or 93 percent
reduction to operations and maintenance. He explained it
would mean the state would need to close the newly opened
A.P. Kashevaroff building, commonly referred to as SLAM
[State Library Museum Archives].
Co-Chair Seaton spoke against the amendment. He noted it
was important to realize that a number of the items had
been voted on by past legislatures and many had gone out to
bond after receiving public approval. He believed that it
could be problematic for the current legislature to decide
to defund maintenance and operations and close a facility
(without providing funding to keep the building warm).
Representative Wilson provided wrap up on the amendment.
She emphasized that the amendment would leave $320,500 and
would not shut the entire building down. She reiterated she
had offered the amendment for discussion purposes. She
noted that historically when new buildings were considered
she had never seen the House Finance Committee discuss
where the maintenance and heating funds would come from
(i.e. fees or general funds). She stressed that the issue
had occurred numerous times. She did not expect to close
the new library, but she wanted people to understand that
$1 million to keep a library open was a substantial amount
compared to the funds needed for the prior space. She
WITHDREW the amendment.
2:06:29 PM
Vice-Chair Gara remarked that when he had been on the
finance committee in past members had been asked to use
their discretion to not speak twice to an amendment when
possible. He noted it would take substantial time to get
through the approximately 323 amendments.
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DOE 26
(copy on file):
Archives
H DOE 26 - Personal Services Reduction
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes an Archivist position and a
Records Analysis position requiring the Department to
redistribute the workload of these positions to the
remaining staff resources
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson explained the amendment. The
amendment would delete two positions, which would require
DEED to redistribute the workload. The amendment would
remove $242,500 from the personal services line and reduced
the general fund appropriation.
Representative Ortiz stated that the loss of an archivist
position would mean that the records collections would not
be available for the public to use for research and for
state agencies to use for bill drafting, research, and
lawsuits. He continued that state agencies used accessible,
archivable records for civil litigations such as Amareda
Hess and Exxon Valdez oil spill cases, which returned more
than $1 billion to state coffers. There were only two
records analysts on staff. He detailed that the positions
helped agencies with records, dispositions, schedules, and
activities. He stressed that the loss of one of the
positions would result in cost increases to state agencies
as they would be forced to store more of their records over
longer periods of time. The unit had been static for many
years with two staff, even as state government had grown.
He concluded the loss of a records analyst would be
devastating to the orderly management of state records.
Representative Wilson reminded the committee that the
amendment would not remove PCNs. She offered that the
Division of Libraries, Archives and Museums could use the
cut for other areas of efficiencies if it chose to do so.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Wilson, Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DOE 26 FAILED (4/7).
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DOE 27
(copy on file):
Museum Operations
H DOE 27 - Alignment of the FY 18 Budget Request with
the FY 17 Authorized Expenditures
Offered by Representative Wilson
FY 17 Authorized Expenditures are $1,282,100 and FY18
Budget Request is $1,465,700 a difference of $183,600,
therefore $183,600 was deleted.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
2:10:13 PM
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above]. She noted the reduction was to personal services,
but it could be taken out of any line item the Division of
Libraries, Archives and Museums chose.
Representative Ortiz was opposed to the amendment. He
stated that if the museum budget was cut beyond a certain
point, revenues from admission fees (program receipts)
would be lost, further reducing the budget. He believed
there needed to be critical mass of funded positions to
keep the museum open and generating revenue to offset as
many operational costs as possible, while protecting the
state's cultural heritage and artifacts.
Representative Grenn asked how many museums the amendment
would impact.
Representative Wilson answered that the amendment impacted
the museum in Juneau.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Grenn, Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Gara, Seaton, Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DOE 27 FAILED (5/6).
2:12:36 PM
Representative Thompson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DOE 28
(copy on file):
Online with Libraries (OWL)
H DOE 28 - Reduction to Online with Libraries
Offered by Representative Thompson
This is a reduction to services and grants/benefits
for the Online with Libraries program. This reduction
will not impact the classroom, but will reduce the
amount of grants available to public libraries
providing internet service. Internet services have
become cheaper and more accessible, and as the state
looks to balance the budget, funding should be
prioritized towards the core K-12 education services.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Thompson read the amendment description [see
above]. He elaborated that the OWL program began in 2011
with federal funds provided through the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 and administered
through the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program of
the U.S. Department of Commerce. In 2013 the state had
funded the OWL project, which was renamed Online with
Libraries Program. The program was an example of accepting
federal money, but then losing the funds and having to pay
for the program with state funds. He believed that in times
of fiscal uncertainty the state needed to prioritize its
resources and focus funding to programs related to the
classroom. The state needed to encourage local communities
to contribute to internet services. He furthered that local
community contributions were grossly disproportionate to
the subsidy cost. He clarified that the reduction would not
end the OWL program, it would only reduce the amount of
internet services subsidized by the state.
Representative Ortiz spoke against the amendment. He
detailed that a reduction in $140,000 to services meant
that DEED would need to cut maintenance on 60 of the 95
videoconference endpoints in public libraries statewide. As
maintenance ended the endpoint would quickly go dark as
software enhancements to the hardware halted. He furthered
that staff would be unable to arrange for repairs on
endpoints. He relayed the videoconference network would be
reduced by 63 percent. According to the libraries receiving
the OWL grant for internet, the loss of the funding would
force them to cut internet completely. The reduction of
$60,000 to OWL grants from the current $153,000 meant that
39 percent of public libraries receiving OWL subsidy would
go dark; 10 of the 25 libraries would lose internet for the
public and for the videoconference network. In many cases
the libraries provided the only public internet to their
communities and patrons would no longer have the ability to
apply for the Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD), fishing
licenses, or take advantage of other online government
services.
2:15:44 PM
Representative Wilson spoke in favor of the amendment. She
had a hard time believing many people would not use their
phones for the services. She stated that the grant went to
urban libraries as well - it was based on the percentage of
people in communities. She added that most communities had
provided the services long before 2011 when the federal
funding had been received. She believed it may have been
leftover federal stimulus money. She continued that the
program had been funded completely with federal money,
mostly to establish the infrastructure. She believed the
intention had been for communities to implement a plan to
pay for maintaining the services. She remarked that she
would love to see documentation showing which libraries had
issues and which could operate the services on their own.
She agreed that several libraries may be more challenged;
however, she believed the majority could come up with the
funding. She concluded that information from DEED showing
which libraries were having problems with funding would
have been very helpful. She believed urban communities
could make up the difference in their libraries.
Vice-Chair Gara was opposed to the amendment. He stated
that for many years people had been trying to cut OWL, with
some success at times. He believed the response - that
Alaska should operate as one state not two - had been
compelling. For example, a resident in Naknek could spend
five minutes on their phone waiting for a website to
download. He discussed that OWL helped students do research
and there had been times when the program helped people
take online courses. He stressed that the state's education
system was unequal as it was. He referred to the merit
scholarship program requiring students to take certain
courses to be eligible for the scholarship. He explained
that students may have the ability to access the courses
with OWL.
Representative Guttenberg was opposed to the amendment. He
believed in some ways the amendment went back to the intent
language in an amendment he had offered related to the
Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA). He stressed the high
cost of broadband in Alaska and its limited availability.
He shared that the Lower Kuskokwim district paid
$15,375,000, Southwest regions paid $2,500,000, the Tanana
City School paid $450,000, St. Mary's School paid $450,000,
and the North Slope Borough paid $3 million. He supported
helping communities pay for the service.
Representative Pruitt spoke in support of the amendment. He
stated the situation was a consequence of taking federal
money; it happened over and over. He explained that when
the state took federal money it became that the state could
not live without it and ended up having to foot the bill.
He added that the OWL program was a small cost compared to
other examples. He referred to testimony indicating that
many communities would not have broadband. However, he
thought the amendment related to a software update to 60
endpoints, which did not sound like it would mean the end
of broadband for most of the state. He noted that he would
be strongly supportive if $200,000 could provide broadband
to the entire state; however, that was not the case. He
continued that the state had decided to jump into the OWL
program, which it now was responsible for maintaining. He
wondered if the state should keep maintaining the program.
He reiterated that federal money was never free.
2:21:10 PM
Representative Thompson provided wrap up on the amendment.
He emphasized the amendment did not impact schools. He
explained that the goal was to free up money in order to
have more money to keep in schools. He referred to a list
of the 25 communities with OWL assistance. He stressed
there should be more local participation in the costs. He
believed there should be more fees charged for the service
(e.g. a fee should be paid for the use of videoconference
equipment). He believed the legislature had been working
over the past couple of years to increase local
participation to add funding to the program. He reiterated
that the amendment did not impact schools and would keep
the money in the classroom.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Gara, Grenn, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DOE 28 FAILED (4/7).
2:22:45 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DOE 29
(copy on file):
H DOE 29 - OWL 5 percent Reduction
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment reduces Online with Libraries component
by 5 percent ($33,090). These funds are given to
libraries throughout Alaska and leaves $628,710 to be
utilized for this program
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson that the amendment would implement a
5 percent reduction to the OWL program. She clarified that
the program had been started in order to get equipment into
the state's public libraries. However, the program had
become about maintaining service versus what the grant had
been initially intended for. She believed the situation
would be perpetuated into the future unless the legislature
implemented a step-down approach. She referred to the
amendment description [see above].
Representative Ortiz stated that his previous comments
related to OWL stood. He spoke to two letters in support of
OWL. The first was from the rural community of Hollis. The
letter addressed how people attended disability and social
security hearings, and other with the technology. He
explained the OWL program gave people living in remote
areas access to those type of things. Additionally, classes
were offered for early childhood certification, marine
safety, health administration, and other. He concluded the
service was critical for communities like Hollis.
Vice-Chair Gara stressed that the funding had not been
increasing. He emphasized that it had been cut if anything.
Representative Wilson provided wrap up on the amendment.
She spoke to duplication of services in communities. She
stated it cost millions of dollars for E-rate services to
some communities. She did not know why the state was not
utilizing the University or a K-12 program for the
services. She explained that the OWL program applied to
public libraries, while schools were having to contribute
substantial amounts. She believed combining efforts would
lower costs. She summarized that the amendment would take 5
percent or $33,000 from the program.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Ortiz, Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Seaton, Foster
Representative Kawasaki was absent from the vote.
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DOE 29 FAILED (4/6).
2:26:15 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DOE 30
(copy on file):
Alaska Postsecondary Education Commission
WWAMI Medical Education
H DOE 30 - Eliminate funding for WWAMI
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes the funding of the contract
with the University of Washington, School of Medicine
for WWAMI (Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana and
Idaho) from the Higher Education Fund. This is not the
intended use of the Higher Education Fund and funding
the contract with these funds could endanger the
Governor's Performance Scholarships. Therefore, a
reduction of $3,070,800 is made to the Services line
to eliminate the funding for this program.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED for the purpose of discussion.
Representative Wilson explained that the state was using
higher education funds totaling $3,070,800 for the
Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, and Idaho (WWAMI)
program. She detailed that the program was a contract with
the University of Washington. She referred to numerous
discussions about use of the Higher Education Fund - she
believed the legislature had removed the funding when it
came to pension. She stressed that the fund was not meant
to be used for the program. She elaborated that the fund
had been put aside in order for eighth graders and high
school students to take stronger courses and prepare for
college. She stated that the WWAMI program was for students
in medical school. She did no support using the funding put
aside to help high school students for medical students or
the pension program. She believed the real discussion
should be about whether the state could continue to afford
the program. She was interested in knowing where the
funding was coming from and where the students were going.
She did not support taking money out of the Higher
Education Fund.
Representative Ortiz agreed with the prior speaker about
the use of the Higher Education Fund for Public Employees'
Retirement System (PERS) and Teachers' Retirement System
(TRS), which would potentially impact the long-term
solvency of the fund. However, he stressed that WWAMI
funding did not jeopardize or impact the fund's long-term
solvency. He discussed the current physician shortage in
Alaska. He detailed that the prior summer the Mat-Su area
had lost seven primary care physicians to retirement and it
had not been able to replace them. The region was having
great difficulty trying to fill in with nurse practitioners
and physician assistants. He highlighted that the WWAMI
program had a return rate to practice in Alaska of 80
percent. He furthered that WWAMI graduates chose to
practice in Alaska's critical physician shortage areas, as
the majority of WWAMI students entered primary care
specialists. He elaborated that the program was cost-
effective. He mentioned the $4,062 per capita cost for
medical education in Alaska compared to North Dakota at
$20,000.
Representative Wilson stated that the amendment had nothing
to do with whether the program was good or bad, but about
whether or not using the Higher Education Fund was the
appropriate fund source. She reasoned that anytime money
was taken from a fund it would have an impact. She did not
support utilizing the fund for something that was not
intended. She stated they may as well take the funds from
the Power Cost Equalization Fund or any other fund. She did
not know why general funds had not been utilized. She
relayed she had offered the amendment to trigger a
conversation about the funding and program. She believed
the impact could be very negative if the program continued
to grow. She continued that children were increasingly more
ready to go to college, take hard courses, and stay in
Alaska to do it. She stressed that the only place to use
the scholarship program funded by higher education fund was
in Alaska.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Ortiz, Thompson, Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg,
Kawasaki, Foster, Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DOE 30 FAILED (3/8).
2:31:52 PM
Co-Chair Seaton noted the committee would address Amendment
L H SAP 23, which had been held over from a previous
meeting. The amendment was located in the language
amendment packet on page 5.
Representative Pruitt MOVED to ADOPT Amendment L H SAP 23
(copy on file):
L H SAP 23 - Transfer all funds from ISP and AKLNG
funds to UGF.
Offered by Representative Pruitt
30GH1855U.15
This amendment transfers the unexpended and
unobligated balance of the In-State Pipeline Fund and
the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Fund to the general
fund.
Note: The amendment has an effective date of July 1,
2017. May want include a specific lapse date of June
30, 2017.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Pruitt MOVED to AMEND Amendment L H SAP 23
(copy on file) with Amendment 30-GH1855\U.23 (Wallace,
3/8/17) (copy on file):
Page 70, following line 2:
Insert new subsections to read:
"(l) The sum of $21,249,400 is appropriated from the
in-state natural gas pipeline fund (AS 31.25.100) to
the Alaska higher education investment fund (AS
37.14.750).
(m) The sum of $78,144,600 is appropriated from the
Alaska liquefied natural gas project fund (AS
31.25.110) to the Alaska higher education investment
fund (AS 37.14.750."
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED for discussion.
Co-Chair Seaton clarified that the amendment 30-GH1855\U.23
to Amendment L H SAP 23 would insert a new subsection. He
read from the amendment description [see above].
Vice-Chair Gara WITHDREW his OBJECTION to the amendment to
Amendment L H SAP 23. There being NO further OBJECTION,
Amendment 30-GH1855\U.23 to Amendment L H SAP 23 was
ADOPTED.
Representative Pruitt reviewed the amended amendment. He
explained that the amendment reflected a continuation of
the discussion on how the legislature wanted to handle the
[proposed AKLNG] instate gasline. He believed the
legislature should be responsible for making the decision
on how to go forward with the project. He stated that "with
this money out there" it had put the legislature in the
position where it did not have the control it should have.
The intent of the legislature had been to go forward with a
specific project; however, that project had morphed into
something else. He continued that the legislature had been
consigned to sitting on the sideline without really having
the ability to participate in the discussion. He noted that
at times the legislature had sought to participate in the
discussion by adding a couple of members to the board and
other. He believed the legislature needed to ensure that
any future expenditures were not easy for Alaska Gasline
Development Corporation (AGDC) to receive. He believed AGDC
should be required to come back to the legislature for it
to concur with the direction of the project.
Representative Pruitt continued that he believed AKLNG
should be a capital project - it was an infrastructure
discussion. He emphasized the project should be competing
for funds with other infrastructure projects. He was not
confident the funding would cover the initial Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licensing. He noted he
was not trying to stop the project. He stated that the FERC
licensing would be value-in-hand. He believed it was
appropriate to consider the project annually to determine
how far along the project was in the process and whether
the legislature thought the project should continue. He
wanted to ensure that funding for the project did not
continue without the approval of the legislature. He
believed it was important to move the funds to the Higher
Education Investment Fund. He explained that when the
legislature had invested the money into AGDC, the idea had
been to set the money aside to invest in the state's
future. He reasoned that if it could not be invested in the
state's future in that capacity, the state should continue
to invest it in its future in another way - to provide for
scholarships for students. He asked members for their
support of the fund change.
The OBJECTION was MAINTAINED.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Thompson, Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki,
Ortiz, Seaton, Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment L H SAP 23 as amended FAILED
(3/8).
2:39:13 PM
AT EASE
2:54:01 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DEC 1
(copy on file):
Administration
Office of the Commissioner
H DEC 1 - Eliminate Special Assistant position
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes the Special Assistant to the
Commissioner and funding from the FY 18 budget
request. Although this position is partially funded
with Federal funds, general funds are deleted for the
total cost of the position as the federal funds can be
utilized for the 5 remaining positions.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Co-Chair Foster spoke against the amendment. He responded
that the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) had
one special assistant who operated as the conduit between
the department and the legislature. He furthered that the
commissioner's office had been cut over 25 percent since FY
15 and the elimination of the position would be detrimental
to the legislature's ability to effectively and quickly
communicate with the department.
Representative Grenn asked about the amount of federal
funding referenced by the amendment sponsor.
Co-Chair Seaton noted the sponsor could address the
question during wrap up on the amendment.
Vice-Chair Gara remarked that typically when there were
federal funds they matched a salary. He asked if the
amendment sponsor was saying the federal funds for the
upper staff were not already receiving their maximum match.
If so, he wondered how they would use additional matching
funds.
Representative Wilson answered it was not general fund
match; it was general fund. She did not include how much it
was, but there were positions funded by general funds left
within the five remaining positions in order for federal
funding to be utilized in their salaries. She reasoned that
if the cost to fund the position was paid personally by
legislators it would be $29,400 per person. She believed
the position did good work, but she believed the duties
could be absorbed by the department.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Thompson, Tilton, Wilson, Pruitt
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DEC 1 FAILED (4/7).
2:57:36 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DEC 4
(copy on file):
Environmental Health
Food Safety and Sanitation
Unrestricted general funds with Oil Hazard Prevention
fund
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment makes a funding source change replacing
general fund with available funds in the Oil and
Hazardous Substance Release Prevention and Response
Fund. As noted in the Department of Revenue's Fall
Revenue Sources book, in 2016, the Legislature altered
the motor fuel tax to include refined fuel surcharge
of $0.0095 per gallon on non-aviation fuel as well as
a certain non-motor fuels such as home heating oil.
The new surcharge raised $6.5 million in FY 16, its
first year in effect and is projected to raise $7.6
million in FY 17 and $7.7 million in FY 18.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson explained the amendment. The
amendment would move $587,000 from the General Fund to the
Oil Hazard Prevention Fund. She furthered that the fund
continuously made money because the state charged a $0.0095
[per gallon] surcharge on refined fuels, which was
deposited into the Oil and Hazardous Substance Release
Prevention and Response Fund. She noted that the amendment
was unrelated to the new motor fuel tax fund that was
included in other legislation. The new surcharge raised
$6.5 million in FY 16, its first year in effect and is
projected to raise $7.6 million in FY 17 and $7.7 million
in FY 18.
Co-Chair Foster spoke in opposition to the amendment. He
countered that the funds from the Oil and Hazardous
Substance Release Prevention and Response Fund were
designated to work related to response and prevention. He
referred to the surcharge mentioned in the amendment and
clarified that it was not excess revenue - it was necessary
to sustain the fund over the long-term and the fund was
projected to be depleted by FY 25. He believed it was
important to preserve the fund for its designated use.
Representative Wilson surmised that the state was
continuously putting money into the fund and the only way
the account was depleted was when a person could not be
accountable for a spill. She continued that the state would
clean up the spill, sue the party, and collect the money.
Alternatively, if a person was responsible for a spill they
received a bill from DEC. She explained that the fund was
never meant to be utilized and not replenished. The fund
was replenished in two ways - by offenders and through the
surcharge. She did not see how the fund would ever be
depleted by FY 25.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Tilton, Wilson, Pruitt, Thompson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DEC 4 FAILED (4/7).
3:01:04 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DEC 6
(copy on file):
Laboratory Services
H DEC 6 - Reduction in personal services for positions
deleted by the Department (continued)
Offered by Representative Wilson
The Department deleted two positions in the FY 18
budget request without taking a funding reduction in
the Personal Services line item for the positions
deleted. The FY 2017 budgeted cost for these
positions was $158,857. This amendment deletes the FY
17 budgeted position costs that were not deleted by
the Department.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above].
Co-Chair Foster spoke to his objection. He detailed that
the positions had been deleted due to undesignated general
fund (UGF) reductions made in FY 17. He explained that
reducing the funding again in FY 18 would result in more
positions being deleted by the department, which would
impact the division's ability to operate effectively.
Representative Wilson replied that the money had not been
deleted. She furthered that if the money had been deleted
the budget book for FY 17 would have listed the PCN numbers
and zero funding. She explained that the funding had been
listed next to the PCNs.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Wilson, Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DEC 6 FAILED (4/7).
3:03:02 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DEC 7
(copy on file):
H DEC 7 - Fund source change replacing general funds
with the Oil and Hazardous Prevention fund.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment makes a funding source change replacing
general funds with available funds in the Oil and
Hazardous Substance Release Prevention and Response
Fund. As noted in the Department of Revenue's Fall
Revenue Sources book, in 2016, the Legislature altered
the motor fuel tax to include refined fuel surcharge
of $0.0095 per gallon on non-aviation fuel as well as
a certain non-motor fuels such as home heating oil.
The new surcharge raised $6.5 million in FY 16, its
first year in effect and is projected to raise $7.6
million in FY 17 and $7.7 million in FY 18.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above]. She stated it was a good time to utilize the
funds because the fund continued to replenish as people
purchased the associated fuels.
Co-Chair Foster spoke to his objection. He explained that
the funds from the Oil and Hazardous Substance Release
Prevention and Response Fund were designated to work
related to response and prevention. The amendment would put
undue pressure on an already strained fund. He believed it
was important to preserve the fund for its designated use.
Representative Wilson replied that the fund had been
strained in the past, but it was no longer strained in the
same fashion. She stated it was recurring at a level that
was more than sufficient to take on the role considered in
the amendment.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Gara, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DEC 7 FAILED (4/7).
3:05:20 PM
Representative Pruitt MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DEC 8
(copy on file):
H DEC 8 - Eliminate CPVEC funds for Shellfish Biotoxin
and Growing Water Testing Program
Offered by Representative Pruitt
Since 2009 CPVEC funds have been used to pay a portion
of shellfish biotoxin and water testing. This year the
Governor's budget request pays the entire cost from
the fund. This is a questionable use of passenger
vessel taxes, but also an indirect expenditure to the
department that needs to look to increased fees to pay
the costs related to lab testing.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Pruitt addressed the amendment and explained
that the state was involved in animal testing. He detailed
that shellfish biotoxins were injected in female mice to
determine how long it would take for them to die from
paralytic shellfish poisoning. He detailed that the program
used cruise ship funding, which he believed was
questionable. He did not believe the work was directly
related to cruise ships. Additionally, he believed the
issue represented a good example of the indirect
expenditures discussion. He questioned whether some
industries should have to pay for something that another
industry benefitted from for free (paid for by the state).
He suggested there should be consideration of having the
industry participate in ensuring there were not issues with
the biotoxins potentially in the shellfish. He believed the
issue pertained to a key piece of a fee-for-service
discussion the committee had already had.
Co-Chair Foster spoke to his objection. The department did
not believe the commercial shellfish industry could bear
the additional cost and fees to cover the funding without
negatively impacting a budding industry's ability to do
business. He noted that the industry already paid fees in
food safety for permitted growing operations and
harvesters. He detailed that all sampling and shipping
costs to the environmental health lab were paid by the
industry as well. The amendment would effectively halt a
growing industry. He relayed that the subcommittee had
received a memorandum from the department stating that it
saw no negative ramifications from use of the Commercial
Passenger Vessel Environmental Compliance Fund. He added
that during testimony the committee had been told that the
last thing the state wanted was for someone in a market
outside of Alaska to get sick because of shellfish sent out
from Alaska, which could harm the industry.
Representative Wilson asked who was making them [the
industry] do this. She asked if DEC was making the industry
do something that was a high enough cost that it could
result in putting the industry out of business. She noted
there was a fish processor in North Pole who had to do
everything at his own cost; there had been no state
subsidies to help the individual. She asked if any
subsidies were provided by the state to industries that
were forced to do the testing.
3:10:36 PM
Representative Grenn asked if the amendment included the
full amount of the FY 18 request.
Representative Pruitt stated that it was easy for a person
to believe that "funds aren't being used, until you're
sued." He remarked that based on the way the state spent
the money there were 2 million people [cruise ship
passengers] with the ability to sue the state annually. He
noted that the amendment would not take away the entire
proposed funding amount. He believed it was a gamble to use
the funds for shellfish biotoxin and water testing. He
clarified that he was not asking for the state to become
the world importers of poisonous shellfish. He was asking
for the legislature to be cognizant that there was an
expectation from any industry there would be a cost of
doing business that they would need to cover. For example,
a small business owner providing certain services had to
pay for insurance; a business with employees had to pay for
workers' compensation; and other. He emphasized that if
part of doing business for a company included testing
shellfish, it should be included in the company's business
model and factored into the cost of the loan. He noted that
there was a loan program in Alaska that enabled companies
to not pay interest for seven years to give them time for
their business to mature. He wondered why the state was
covering the costs. He thought that it may have been a pet
project by certain legislators who had gotten the funding
in the past. He wanted to get back to ensuring that
government could provide the services if the fees were
covered by the people utilizing the services.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson, Grenn
OPPOSED: Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Gara, Foster, Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DEC 8 FAILED (5/6).
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DEC 9
(copy on file):
Drinking Water
H DEC 9 - Reductions in personal services for
positions deleted by the Department
Offered by Representative Wilson
The Department deleted an Environmental Technician
position in the FY 18 budget request without taking a
funding reduction in the Personal Services line for
the position deleted. The FY 2017 budgeted cost for
this position was $71,302. This amendment deletes the
FY 17 budgeted position costs that were not deleted by
the Department.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
3:14:49 PM
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above]. She added that if the desire was to maintain
personal services positions, the same amount could be taken
from travel services, commodities, leases, grants, or
miscellaneous.
Co-Chair Foster spoke to his objection. He shared that he
had been told by DEC and the Legislative Finance Division
that the funding had already been deleted for the
positions. He reasoned that reducing funding again in FY 18
would result in more positions being deleted by the
department, which would impact the ability of the
department's drinking water component to operate
effectively.
Representative Wilson emphasized that the funding was still
there, which was the reason she proposed to remove it.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Kawasaki, Ortiz, Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DEC 9 FAILED (4/7).
3:16:35 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DEC 10
(copy on file):
Solid Waste Management
H DEC 10 - Deletes two positions and associated
personal services costs
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes two of twelve Environmental
Program Specialist positions from the FY 18 budget
request which will require the Department to
redistribute the workload of these positions to the
remaining staff resources.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Co-Chair Foster spoke to his objection. He stated that the
amendment would put undue strain on an already lean
program. There were currently only 18 positions servicing
landfills and regulating pesticides for the entire state.
He continued that further restrictions to the agency would
likely result in an inability to meet its statutory
obligations.
Vice-Chair Gara believed the amendments were like "wish
amendments." He furthered it was like saying "I wish with
fewer people we could do the same amount of work..."
Representative Wilson disputed the statements and requested
to stay on topic of the amendment.
Vice-Chair Gara stated that the amendment would cut
positions in the hope that other staff could make up the
work. He believed that with no evidence, it was a wish. He
remarked that the committee had been voting on two types of
amendments. One type included cases where funding had been
deleted for positions and there was an attempt to delete
the funding a second time.
Representative Wilson countered the depictions of the
amendment.
Vice-Chair Gara reiterated his belief that the current
amendment represented a wish (with no evidence) that with
fewer staff the same amount of work could be done. He did
not support the amendment.
Representative Thompson spoke in support of the amendment.
He discussed that in the past he had been in business for
35 years and he recalled lean times in the 1980s where he
learned how to work more efficiently with less personnel.
He stressed it was important for the state to learn to do
jobs more efficiently and with less staff due to a lack of
funding. He stressed it was important to cut back and that
people needed to learn to work harder and be more
efficient. He concluded that it was necessary to find a way
to reduce the state's budget.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Ortiz, Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DEC 10 FAILED (4/7).
3:19:42 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DEC 11
(copy on file):
H DEC 11 - Fund source change replacing general funds
with the Oil Hazardous and Prevention fund
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment makes a funding source change replacing
general funds with available funds in the Oil and
Hazardous Substance Release Prevention and Response
Fund. As noted in the Department of Revenue's Fall
Revenue Sources book, in 2016, the Legislature altered
the motor fuel tax to include refined fuel surcharge
of $0.0095 per gallon on non-aviation fuel as well as
a certain non-motor fuels such as home heating oil.
The new surcharge raised $6.5 million in FY 16, its
first year in effect and is projected to raise $7.6
million in FY 17 and $7.7 million in FY 18.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED for the purpose of discussion.
Representative Wilson explained that the amendment would
replace $704,400 in general funds with funds from the Oil
and Hazardous Substance Release Prevention and Response
Fund. She stated that if the fund was completely at zero in
2025, the issue needed to be brought forward to the finance
committee. She furthered that the new tax had been passed
in order to keep the fund healthy and with the hope the
funds would not need to be spent as costs were recouped
from parties responsible for spills.
Co-Chair Foster spoke against the amendment. He cited the
same argument he had spoken to in previous amendments
pertaining to the Oil and Hazardous Substance Release
Prevention and Response Fund. He spoke to the fund's
solvency through FY 25. He agreed it was something the
legislature needed to address to determine if adjustments
needed to be made. Ultimately using the funds for the Solid
Waste Management Fund went against the fund's designated
purpose of oil spill prevention and response.
Representative Wilson provided wrap up. She stated it was a
good example of why there were not designated funds. She
stated the constitution did not allow it, so they were
general funds. She surmised if the funds were put in one
location the legislature would not have to discuss which
place to take them from.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Grenn, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DEC 11 FAILED (4/7).
3:22:23 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DEC 13
(copy on file):
Water
Water Quality
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes 1 of 10 Program Managers, 3 of
36 Program Specialists and 1 of 10 Engineers and
associated personal service cost of $690,000 from the
Personal Services line of the FY 18 budget request.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson clarified that she had taken her
amendment drafting process very seriously. She underscored
there was nothing about a wish list. She wished the state
could afford each and every state worker, but unfortunately
that was not the case. She explained she had worked to
propose taking a small amount of funding from various areas
in order to prevent eliminating an entire section of any
department. She read the amendment description [see above].
She understood the amendment was asking state workers to do
more with less. She wished the state had all the money in
the world, but that was not the case. She noted the
legislature could address the issue again the following
year if there were adverse impacts from the cuts. She
emphasized the importance of being smarter with the money
the state had.
Co-Chair Foster spoke against the amendment. He stressed
that the division had seen a reduction of 40 percent and 25
positions over the past three years. He believed the
department had taken a substantial hit already and was
operating very lean. He continued that additional staff
loss would impact the state's ability to maintain primacy
of its waste water discharge permitting.
Representative Wilson responded that the state had taken
primacy of wastewater from the federal government, which
was not cheap. She asked why the change had occurred. She
expounded that the state had taken federal funding, which
had eventually been pulled back. Consequently, the state
was left paying for the service with general funds. She
remarked that it was not always smarter to take on
responsibilities that the federal government wanted the
state to do. She believed sometimes it was necessary to
stand up for the state's residents by making its own
programs.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Thompson, Tilton, Wilson, Pruitt
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DEC 13 FAILED (4/7).
3:25:33 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DEC 14
(copy on file):
H DEC 14 - Fund source change replacing general funds
with Oil and Hazardous Prevention Fund
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment makes a funding source change replacing
general fund with available funds in the Oil and
Hazardous Substance Release Prevention and Response
Fund. As noted in the Department of Revenue's Fall
Revenue Sources book, in 2016, the Legislature altered
the motor fuel tax to include refined fuel surcharge
of $0.0095 per gallon on non-aviation fuel as well as
a certain non-motor fuels such as home heating oil.
The new surcharge raised $6.5 million in FY 16, its
first year in effect and is projected to raise $7.6
million in FY 17 and $7.7 million in FY 18.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson explained that the amendment would
replace $2,482,500 in general funds with funding from the
Oil and Hazardous Prevention Fund. She stated that although
people may think the Oil and Hazardous Prevention Fund was
dedicated funding, it was still General Fund money.
Co-Chair Foster spoke to his objection. He agreed the funds
could be used anywhere; however, he believed the prudent
thing to do was to use oil spill response funds for their
designated purpose. He recognized there had been times when
exceptions had been made, but he believed it was a policy
call that had to be made.
Vice-Chair Gara remarked that the speaker next to him had
come up with a way to save money, which he had always
supported. He stated that the former [House] Majority had
taken over primacy and had known it would cost the state
more money. He had opposed the move. He suggested that
perhaps the legislature could revisit the issue as a way to
save money.
Representative Wilson provided wrap up. She stated she
would have agreed with the co-chair about touching the fund
when talking about per barrel of oil taxed in the pipeline.
She continued that the tax was adding pennies to each
barrel, which used to go into the fund. She stated that the
likelihood of a spill would most likely come from the
pipeline. She discussed that the legislature had then made
the decision to include other fuels in the tax. She stated
there was no difference if there was a motor fuel tax or a
tax on heating fuel and what it should be utilized for. She
stated if something major happened, funds would come from
the General Fund. When there was a substantial amount of
money merely sitting in the [Oil and Hazardous Substance
Release Prevention and Response] fund, it made sense to use
a portion.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Tilton, Wilson, Pruitt, Thompson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DEC 14 FAILED (4/7).
3:28:50 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DFG 13
(copy on file):
Commercial Fisheries
Southeast Region Fisheries Management H DFG 13 -
Funding reductions in overtime pay, travel, and
services.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This allocation has an FY 18 budget request of
$121,192 for premium pay in the Personal Services line
item. This amendment reduces premium pay by 25
percent of the amount budgeted in anticipation of
reduced overtime. Declining state revenues dictate
that expenditures be reduced by taking a fiscally
conservative approach to working hours and that state
services be provided in a more effective and efficient
manner. Therefore, a reduction of $30,298 is made from
allocation.
The Department deleted three positions that were
partially funded with general funds, however made no
reduction in funding for the positions deleted. This
amendment reduces the Personal Services line of the FY
18 budget request in this allocation by $75,091, the
general fund portion of the positions deleted by the
Department.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Travel line item
were $129,100 and the FY 18 budget request for this
line item is $187,600 resulting in an increase of
$46,900 over FY 16 actual expenditures. This amendment
makes a reduction of $46,900 to this allocation to
align the FY 18 budget request with FY 16 actual
expenditures.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Services line item
for Other Services were $704,000 and the FY 18 budget
request for this line item is $952,100 resulting in an
increase of $248,100 over FY 16 actual expenditures.
This amendment makes a reduction of $248,100 to this
allocation to align the FY 18 budget request with FY
16 actual expenditures.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Services line item
for Equipment/Machinery were $288,800 and the FY 18
budget request for this line item is $350,200
resulting in an increase of $61,400 over FY 16 actual
expenditures. This amendment makes a reduction of
$61,400 to this allocation to align the FY 18 budget
request with FY 16 actual expenditures.
Representative Ortiz OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above]. She elaborated that the PCNs were 11-1251, of which
$63,603 was general funds; 11-1738, of which $10,949 was
general funds; and 11-5078. She stated other non-general
fund funding had been removed.
Representative Ortiz spoke to his objection. He relayed
that his comments would apply to the current and following
five or six amendments. He communicated that the
department's funding had been reduced by 36 percent since
FY 15. He stressed that the department could no longer do
surveys, stream analysis, and data collection needed in
order to allow fishermen to fish at the maximum sustainable
yield, which meant there were foregone fish opportunities
taking place in the fishing industry. He stressed that
fishermen were allowed to catch less fish, which meant less
money for their families and less to the state in landing
taxes because of the reductions that had taken place. He
reminded the committee that DFG had the reputation of doing
one of the best jobs in the world at managing fish
resources. He emphasized it was being threatened by level
of reductions in the past several years. He read from
prepared remarks:
The amendment specifically addressed the premium pay
issue. Premium pay was in employees' contracts and
covered field work under extended and hazardous
conditions. Some of the work they do is truly
dangerous and their unions work to ensure that they
are compensated appropriately. The Alaska Department
of Fish and Game has tragically lost employees over
the years.
Representative Ortiz emphasized that the amendments would
add to the burden DFG was already experiencing. He
reiterated that the burden had been transferred to lost
opportunities to the state's fishermen, which hurt the
state's overall economy. He did not support the amendment.
Representative Wilson suggested that the state should look
at its fee structure. She stated "maybe they're not
upholding their portion" or perhaps the fees they were
paying were not going "to what they are actually being able
to do." She remarked that once everything went into the
General Fund it was difficult to determine who was paying
their way and who was not. She believed going back to 2016
did not seem to be asking that much.
Representative Ortiz MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Wilson, Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DFG 13 FAILED (4/7).
3:34:48 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DFG 14
(copy on file):
Central Region Fisheries Management
H DFG 14 - Funding reduction for overtime pay to
encourage reduced overtime, services, and commodities.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This allocation has an FY 18 budget request of $95,827
for premium pay in the Personal Services line item.
This amendment reduces premium pay by 25 percent of
the amount budgeted in anticipation of reduced
overtime. Declining state revenues dictate that
expenditures be reduced by taking a fiscally
conservative approach to working hours and that state
services be provided in a more effective and efficient
manner. Therefore, a reduction of $23,957 is being
taken in this allocation.
The Department deleted eight positions that were
partially funded with general funds, however made no
reduction in funding for the positions deleted. This
amendment reduces the Personal Services line of the FY
18 budget request in this allocation by $115,510, the
general fund portion of the positions deleted by the
Department.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Services line item
for Equipment/Machinery were $255,700 and the FY 18
budget request for this line item is $355,700
resulting in an increase of $100,000 over FY 16 actual
expenditures. This amendment makes a reduction of
$100,000 in this allocation to align the FY 18 budget
request with FY 16 actual expenditures.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Services line item
for Other Services were $375,400 and the FY 18 budget
request for this line item is $1,150,400 resulting in
an increase of $775,000 over FY 16 actual
expenditures. This amendment makes a reduction of
$775,000 in this allocation to align the FY 18 budget
request with FY 16 actual expenditures.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Services line item
for Equipment Fleet were $88,600 and the FY 18 budget
request for this line item is $110,500 resulting in an
increase of $21,900 over FY 16 actual expenditures.
This amendment makes a reduction of $21,900 in this
allocation to align the FY 18 budget request with FY
16 actual expenditures.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above]. She noted it also allowed for an opportunity
to make up the 25 percent in the event of vacancies. She
communicated that other types of funds had been removed.
Representative Ortiz spoke against the amendment. He stated
that the reductions would result in reduced in-season
harvest stock composition data that guides in-season
management for Prince William Sound. The department would
be forced to manage more conservatively and fewer fish
would be harvested.
Representative Thompson supported the amendment. He
commented that the amendment aligned numbers with the lower
FY 16 numbers. He stressed there was a huge increase
underway. He emphasized that the legislature was supposed
to be trying to figure out how to reduce the budget;
however, the committee was not currently achieving a
reduced budget. He thought the budget had been added to
like crazy since FY 16. He believed the increases were a
mistake that was not supported by the public.
Co-Chair Seaton asked members to keep in mind mandatory
furlough days (unpaid leave) when asking employees to take
on other duties. Additionally, vacancy factors indicated
unfunded positions; therefore, there was no one sitting in
the position to take on the workload because there was no
funding to fill them. He believed it was important to keep
in mind when looking at the budget books to determine
something to delete. He strongly suggested that members
individually check with each agency to determine the
implications moving forward.
Representative Wilson underscored that she had not proposed
to remove any PCNs or people. She stated it had already
been done. She was not asking people to take on more
duties. She noted that much could be learned by reading
about an agency's mission, accomplishments, and challenges.
She added that if she had wanted to make a blanket 10
percent cut she would have proposed it. She reiterated that
the amendment did not propose to eliminate any positions.
The amendment merely removed the remaining portions because
the other funding had been removed previously. She noted it
would remove 25 percent of the overtime.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DFG 14 FAILED (4/7).
3:41:05 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DFG 15
(copy on file):
AYK Region Fisheries Management
H DFG 15 - Funding reduction for overtime pay; delete
funding for positions Department deleted
Offered by Representative Wilson
This allocation has an FY 18 budget request of
$109,062 for premium pay in the Personal Services line
item. This amendment reduces premium pay by 25% of
the amount budgeted in anticipation of reduced
overtime. Declining state revenues dictate that
expenditures be reduced by taking a fiscally
conservative approach to working hours and that state
services be provided in a more effective and efficient
manner. Therefore, a reduction of $27,266 is being
taken in this allocation.
The Department deleted six positions that were
partially funded with general funds, however made no
reduction in funding for the positions deleted. This
amendment reduces the Personal Services line of the FY
18 budget request in this allocation by $121,269, the
general fund portion of the positions deleted by the
Department.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Services line item
for Other Services were $446,100 and the FY 18 budget
request for this line item is $854,900 resulting in an
increase of $408,800 over FY 16 actual expenditures.
This amendment makes a reduction of $408,800 in this
allocation to align the FY 18 budget request with FY
16 actual expenditures. A reduction of $25,000 is also
made to Services line item for State Equipment Fleet
costs.
The FY 18 budget request of $279,400 in the Travel
line is reduced by $100,000 by this amendment.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read portions of the amendment
description [see above]. She referred to the budget book
and noted that the enormous costs were "done every year,"
but she observed that the actual costs were much lower. She
did not know why inflated costs were used or why major
differences appeared. She was certain that the following
year the major costs would be listed and the actuals would
hopefully be closer to FY 16 figures. Her goal with the
amendment was to ensure it would happen.
Representative Ortiz addressed his opposition to the
amendment. He detailed that the reduction would impact
biometric support, eliminate contribution towards triannual
crab trawl survey, discontinue Chinook salmon genetic
sample collection programs and analysis, eliminate multiple
positions associated with the Kuskokwim sockeye run
assessment in multiple salmon tributary weirs (including
all weirs funded by FWS), discontinue the Bethel test
fishery program in favor of mainstream sonar resulting in
two layoffs, and other. He believed the amendment was
harmful to the industry. He agreed that reductions needed
to be found, but greater harm to the economy was not
prudent.
Representative Wilson provided wrap up. She stressed that
when the positions had been deleted, the department should
have communicated if the funds were still needed. She
emphasized that the amendment did not delete positions -
the positions had been deleted by the department. She
stated the department should have specified that the funds
were needed for travel, to fund remaining positions, or
other. She reasoned that the excess $121,000 was most
likely being utilized for some of the services listed by
Representative Ortiz. Her point was that the department
needed to specify where the funds were being used. She
wanted to have a better understanding of where the money
was going and how it was being spent.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Grenn, Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Kawasaki, Ortiz, Gara, Seaton, Foster
Representative Guttenberg was absent from the vote.
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DFG 15 FAILED (5/5).
3:45:49 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DFG 16
(copy on file):
Westward Region Fisheries Management
H DFG 16 - Funding reduction in overtime pay to
encourage reduced overtime; align budget to FY 16
expenditures.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This allocation has an FY 18 budget request of
$159,085 for premium pay in the Personal Services line
item. This amendment reduces premium pay by 25% of
the amount budgeted in anticipation of reduced
overtime. Declining state revenues dictate that
expenditures be reduced by taking a fiscally
conservative approach to working hours and that state
services be provided in a more effective and efficient
manner. Therefore, a reduction of $39,771 is made from
this allocation.
The Department deleted two positions that were
partially funded with general funds, however made no
reduction in funding for the positions deleted. This
amendment reduces the Personal Services line of the FY
18 budget request from this allocation by $100,862,
the general fund portion of the positions deleted by
the Department.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Travel line item
were $169,600 and the FY 18 budget request for this
line item is $271,900 resulting in an increase of
$102,300 over FY 16 actual expenditures. This
amendment makes a reduction of $102,300 from this
allocation to align the FY 18 budget request with FY
16 actual expenditures.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Services line item
were $2,353,900 and the FY 18 budget request for this
line item is $3,167,300 resulting in an increase of
$813,400 over FY 16 actual expenditures. This
amendment makes a reduction of $813,400 from this
allocation to align the FY 18 budget request with FY
16 actual expenditures.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Commodities line
item were $618,900 and the FY 18 budget request for
this line item is $864,400 resulting in an increase of
$245,500 over FY 16 actual expenditures. This
amendment makes a reduction of $245,500 from this
allocation to align the FY 18 budget request with FY
16 actual expenditures.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from portions of the amendment
description [see above]. She added that the amounts
combined totaled a $1.3 million decrease.
Representative Ortiz spoke to his objection to the
amendment. He detailed that the reductions would result in
the elimination of funding for regional finfish support
staff and publications, more conservative management of
herring fisheries, and the elimination of aerial surveys
and vessel support. He furthered that small areas would not
open. Funding would be cut for supply and contract money in
the Kodiak Island limnology lab and sample processing time
would increase, which could impact hatchery stock plans and
other. He concluded the amendment would mean additional
reductions on top of a 36 percent reduction, making it
increasingly more difficult for the department to do its
work.
Representative Thompson remarked [facetiously] that
apparently the state failed to do all of those things
[listed by Representative Ortiz] in FY 16 because it lacked
the funding. He reasoned that the work had been done in FY
16 [with lower funding] and he believed the department
should have the ability to do them at present as well.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Gara, Grenn, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DFG 16 FAILED (4/7).
3:49:03 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DFG 17
(copy on file):
Commercial Fisheries
Statewide Fisheries Management
H DFG 17 - Funding reduction in overtime pay, travel,
and services.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This allocation has an FY 18 budget request of $32,395
for premium pay in the Personal Services line item.
This amendment reduces premium pay by 25 percent of
the amount budgeted in anticipation of reduced
overtime. Declining state revenues dictate that
expenditures be reduced by taking a fiscally
conservative approach to working hours and that state
services be provided in a more effective and efficient
manner. Therefore, a reduction of $8,099 is made from
this allocation.
The Department deleted six positions that were funded
with general funds, however made no reduction in
funding for the positions deleted. This amendment
reduces the Personal Services line of the FY 18 budget
request in this allocation by $396,718, the general
cost of the positions deleted by the Department.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Travel line item
were $235,700 and the FY 18 budget request for this
line item is $312,100 resulting in an increase of
$76,400 over FY 16 actual expenditures. This amendment
makes a reduction of $76,400 from this allocation to
align the FY 18 budget request with FY 16 actual
expenditures.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Services line item
were $4,676,900 and the FY 18 budget request for this
line item is $6,347,500 resulting in an increase of
$1,670,600 over FY 16 actual expenditures. This
amendment makes a reduction of $1,670,600 from this
allocation to align the FY 18 budget request with FY
16 actual expenditures.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Co-Chair Seaton advised that if the arguments for the
amendments were the same Representative Wilson could
reference her previous remarks.
Representative Wilson noted the amounts were different.
She read from portions of the amendment description [see
above]. The amendment totaled $2,151,800. She remarked that
the work had been done in FY 16; therefore, she did not
understand why it could not be done in FY 18.
Representative Ortiz was opposed to the amendment. He
detailed that the amendment would result in the deletion of
seven positions and would reduce travel, the number of
printed regulation books, a division fund, support for
salmon assessment in statewide reporting, and aquatic
permit review. Additionally, it would eliminate programs
for stock identification of sockeye salmon harvest in
Bristol Bay, Kodiak, and Cook Inlet.
Vice-Chair Gara stated that the amendment deleted positions
that had already been cut; therefore, it represented a
double deletion. He suggested that the amendment sponsor
speak to the Legislative Finance Division during a break to
determine which amendments would result in a double
deletion.
3:51:59 PM
Representative Wilson provided wrap up. She relayed that
she had gone through the Legislative Finance Division. She
had found that "most of the money, except the General Fund
money that wasn't deleted, went back after yesterday's
discussion." She reasoned the state must have been much
smarter with its money in FY 16 because she had not heard
there were numerous things the state could not do in 2016 -
things that it could suddenly not do in FY 18.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Kawasaki, Ortiz, Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DFG 17 FAILED (4/7).
3:52:58 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DFG 18
(copy on file):
Sport Fisheries
H DFG 18 - Funding reduction in overtime pay, travel,
and services.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This allocation has an FY 18 budget request of $75,668
for premium pay in the Personal Services line item.
This amendment reduces premium pay by 25% of the
amount budgeted in anticipation of reduced overtime.
Declining state revenues dictate that expenditures be
reduced by taking a fiscally conservative approach to
working hours and that state services be provided in a
more effective and efficient manner. Therefore, a
reduction of $18,917 is made from the Personal
Services line.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Travel line item
were $229,600 and the FY 18 Governor's budget request
for this line item is $326,700 resulting in an
increase of $97,100 over FY 16 actual expenditures.
This amendment makes a reduction of $100,000 from this
allocation to align the FY 18 budget request with FY
16 actual expenditures.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Services line item
were $10,768,400 and the FY 18 budget request for this
line item is $13,549,300 resulting in an increase of
$2,780,900 over FY 16 actual expenditures. This
amendment makes a reduction of $1,343,312 from this
allocation to align the FY 18 budget request with
FY 16 actual expenditures.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson explained that the amendment
pertained to a FY 18 budget request of $55,014 for premium
pay - a reduction of 25 percent (a reduction of $13,754).
The total positions in the department had been 220 in FY
16, 221 in the FY 17 management plan, and 227 in the FY 18
budget request. There had also been an increase of
$1,101,600 in the personal services line between the FY 18
management plan and the FY 18 request. The amendment would
eliminate six positions in the general funds of $1,184,866
from the personal services line of the FY 18 budget
request. She believed the budget should at least revert
back to figures in FY 17.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Ortiz, Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Foster, Seaton
Representative Grenn was absent from the vote.
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DFG 18 FAILED (4/6).
3:54:53 PM
AT EASE
3:55:08 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DFG 19
(copy on file):
Wildlife Conservation
H DFG 19 Reduced funding for extra pay to encourage
reduced overtime and eliminates six PFT positions.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This allocation has an FY 18 budget request of $55,014
for premium pay in the Personal Services line item.
This amendment reduces premium pay by 25% of the
amount budgeted in anticipation of reduced overtime.
Declining state revenues dictate that expenditures be
reduced by taking a fiscally conservative approach to
working hours and that state services be provided in a
more effective and efficient manner. Therefore, a
reduction of $13,754 is made from the Personal Service
line of this allocation.
Total positions in the Department were 220 in FY 16,
221 in the FY 17 Management Plan and 227 in the FY 18
budget request. There was also an increase of
$1,101,600 in the Personal Services line between the
FY 17 Management Plan and the FY 18 request. This
amendment deletes 6 positions and general funds of
$1,184,866 from the Personal Services line of the FY
18 budget request for this allocation.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above]. She requested an "at ease" to review the
amendment. She believed it was the same amendment she had
just spoken to.
3:55:38 PM
AT EASE
3:55:49 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Wilson WITHDREW Amendment H DFG 19.
3:56:02 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DFG 21
(copy on file):
Statewide Support Services
Commissioner's Office
H DFG 21 Removes Special Assistant position and align
FY 18 Services request with FY16 expenditures.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes a Special Assistant to the
Commissioner position and will require the Department
to redistribute the work load to remaining staff.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Services line item
for Other Services were $4,200 and the FY 18 budget
request for this line item is $227,100 resulting in an
increase of $222,000 over FY 16 actual expenditures.
This amendment makes a reduction of $37,800 to the
Services line in this allocation and deletes all
unrestricted general funds.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson explained that the amendment would
remove the special assistant position within the Department
of Fish and Game (DFG), which was currently funded with
interagency receipts of $172,800.
Representative Ortiz spoke in opposition to the amendment.
He detailed that DFG had two special assistants to the
commissioner - one served as the legislative liaison and
worked on the department budget and the other worked on
food security and subsistence on the Yukon and Kuskokwim
Rivers and acted as a liaison to the federal subsistence
board. In recent years the commissioner's office had lost
an assistant commissioner, a public information officer, a
secretary I, and an administrative assistant II. He
furthered that when the deputy commissioner position had
become vacant, the department had shifted the legislative
liaison and budget roles to the new legislative
liaison/special assistant to the commissioner. He concluded
that the department valued both positions.
Representative Wilson stated that everyone was valuable,
but sometimes it was not possible to afford everyone.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Thompson, Wilson, Grenn
OPPOSED: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Seaton, Foster
Representative Pruitt and Representative Tilton were absent
from the vote.
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DFG 21 FAILED (3/6).
3:57:54 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DFG 22
(copy on file):
Administrative Services
H DFG 22 - Reduce funding for deleted positions and
reduce the Commodities line to the FY16 level
Offered by Representative Wilson
Several position were deleted in the FY 18 budget
request with no deletion in funding. This amendment
makes a reduction of $63,398 to the Personal Services
line for the general fund portion of the positions
deleted by the Department with no reduction in
funding.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Commodities line
were $94,500 and the FY 18 budget request for this
line item is $217,200 resulting in an increase
of$122,700 over FY 16 actual expenditures. This
amendment makes a reduction of $122,700 to the
Commodities line in this allocation.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above].
Representative Ortiz spoke in objection to the amendment.
He detailed that funding associated with deleted PCNs was
part of the FY 17 General Fund reduction. The Division of
Administrative Services did not lapse general funds, but
rather excess interagency and federal receipt authority
furthered position deletions from the division. An
amendment had been previously adopted, which eliminated
$182,600 GF from the division.
Vice-Chair Gara stated that the amendment had a problem
consistent with a problem in other previously proposed
amendments. He detailed that the funding had been cut,
positions were not funded, and the amendment would double
the cut. The result would mean another equal number of
employees would lose their jobs. He believed that the
explanation the positions were still funded was inaccurate.
Representative Thompson discussed that unallocated cuts had
been put into the FY 16 budget. He detailed that in FY 17
the positions had gone away, but they had been funded. He
stated that the positions were still funded in the FY 18
budget. He thought the issue was confusing, but believed
the amendment sponsor was correct.
4:00:30 PM
Representative Wilson provided wrap up on the amendment.
She reasoned that if money had not been allocated to the
positions the FY 17 budget would show zero next to the
positions. Additionally, the non-UGF funding for the
positions had been removed, which was indicated in the
budget. She emphasized that no funds had been removed - it
was the reason other funds or federal funds were not shown.
She had reviewed the items and stressed that the funds had
not previously been removed.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
Representative Pruitt was absent from the vote.
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DFG 22 FAILED (3/7).
4:01:54 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H DFG 26
(copy on file):
Habitat
H DFG 26 - Reduce funding for overtime pay to
encourage reduced overtime; align services with FY16
expenditures
Offered by Representative Wilson
This allocation has an FY 18 budget request of
$127,456 for premium pay in the Personal Services line
item. This amendment reduces premium pay by 25
percent of the amount budgeted in anticipation of
reduced overtime. Declining state revenues dictate
that expenditures be reduced by taking a fiscally
conservative approach to working hours and that state
services be provided in a more effective and efficient
manner. Therefore, a reduction of $31,864 is made from
the Personal Services line in this allocation.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Services line for
Other Services were $37,300 and the FY 18 budget
request for this line item is $423,900 resulting in an
increase of $418,464 over FY 16 actual expenditures.
This amendment makes a reduction of $105,000 from this
allocation in the Service line.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above]. She stressed that with the amendment the item
would still receive an increase exceeding $300,000 from FY
16.
Representative Ortiz reminded the amendment sponsor that
all premium pay was related to field work. He continued
that the division did not lapse general funds, but saw
funding authority. The reduction would result in position
deletions.
Representative Wilson countered that the division would
still receive an increase of $300,000, which was a much
larger sum than $31,864. She was certain the allocation
would have the ability to compensate for the difference
easily.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Tilton, Wilson, Thompson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Seaton,
Foster
Representative Pruitt was absent from the vote.
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H DFG 26 FAILED (3/7).
4:04:07 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H GOV 1(copy
on file):
Commissions/Special Offices
Human Rights Commission
H GOV 1 - Personal Services Reduction Offered by
Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes two of eight Human Rights Field
Rep III positions in the FY 18 budget request from
this allocation and will require the Department to
redistribute the workload to remaining staff and
operate in a more efficient manner.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Co-Chair Seaton spoke in opposition to the amendment. He
explained that the reduction would severely hinder the
ability of the Human Rights Commission to meet its
statutory mandate to prevent and eliminate discrimination
in employment, in credit and financing practices, and in
places of public accommodation in the sale, lease, and
rental of real property and in practices by the state or
its political subdivisions because of race, religion,
color, national origin, sex, age, physical or mental
disability, marital status and change in marital status,
pregnancy, and other. The elimination of two human rights
field representatives would result in a significant
increase in unmanageable caseloads. Each investigator
currently closed about 60 cases per year, which could
result in reduced federal funding from the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission, which contributed about 10 percent
of the commission's budget.
Representative Wilson provided wrap up. She remarked it was
five cases per month for each field representative. She
reasoned that deleting two of the positions meant caseloads
would be ten per month, which she did not believe would
over stress the commission.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Wilson, Thompson, Tilton
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
Representative Pruitt was absent from the vote.
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H GOV 1 FAILED (3/7).
4:06:43 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H GOV 2
(copy on file):
Executive Operations
Executive Office
H GOV 2 - Personal Services Reduction
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment reduces the overall costs of the
Executive Office in the Office of the Governor in
anticipation of the office operating in a more
efficient manner. There are a significant number of
management level positions costing the state in excess
of $200,000 per position. As has been required by all
other state agencies, this office should seek
efficiencies in operations by reducing personal
service costs, therefore this amendment make a
reduction of $500,000 to the Personal Services line of
the FY 18 budget request.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Co-Chair Seaton spoke in opposition to the amendment. He
stated that the executive office budget had been reduced by
the current administration from $12,988,000 UGF in 2015 to
$11,303,000 UGF in the FY 18 request - a reduction of 13
percent. He furthered that full time positions had been
reduced from 71 to 60 during the same time period. He
relayed that any further reduction would significantly
hinder the governor from performing his executive
responsibilities. He added that the governor had already
implemented furloughs and a salary freeze for executive
office personnel staff.
Representative Wilson stated that the Governor's Office
appeared to be the luckiest department thus far with a
reduction of 13 percent. She remarked she had been hearing
about reductions of 30 percent or higher for most of the
agencies.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Seaton
Representative Pruitt and Co-Chair Foster were absent from
the vote.
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H GOV 2 FAILED (3/6).
4:08:51 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H GOV 4
(copy on file):
Lieutenant Governor
H GOV 4 - Funding Reduction
Offered by Representative Wilson
The FY 18 budget request for this allocation includes
a deletion of one position, however, no reduction in
funding was taken. This amendment eliminates the
funding associated with the position.
Representative Grenn OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above]. The amendment would eliminate $88,500.
Co-Chair Seaton spoke against the amendment. He stated that
the position in the lieutenant governor's office was
eliminated to reduce the component's vacancy factor from 10
percent to 2 percent. The amendment would mean the deletion
of another position, which would seriously hamper the
operations of the office.
Representative Wilson replied that she was amazed the
committee could not cut $88,000 from a $4.2 billion budget.
Representative Grenn MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Grenn, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Gara, Seaton, Foster
Representative Pruitt was absent from the vote.
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H GOV 4 FAILED (4/6).
4:10:38 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H GOV 5(copy
on file):
Office of Management and Budget
H GOV 5 - Funding Reduction
Offered by Representative Wilson
A position was deleted by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) in the FY 18 budget request. The FY 17
budgeted cost of that position was $138,893. In lieu
of deleting the funding for the position, OMB
transferred $87,000 to the services line item and
retained $51,893 in personal services. The amendment
reduces the Services line in the FY 18 budget request
item by $87,000 and the Personal Services line by
$51,893 for a total reduction to this allocation of
$138,893, the cost of the position deleted.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Co-Chair Seaton spoke against the amendment. He detailed
that the amendment would significantly increase the Office
of Management and Budget's (OMB) vacancy factor requiring
essential positions be kept vacant, and would eliminate
contractual services funding to implement and independent
verification validation process required to ensure the
success of shared services. He furthered that OMB had
already made significant reductions in the budget and had
reduced full-time positions from 17 (at the beginning of
the current administration) to a proposed level of 15 for
FY 18.
Vice-Chair Gara opposed the amendment. He referred to an
earlier statement that there could not be an $80,000 or
$100,000 cut to the proposed budget. He underscored that in
the current proposed budget, agency operations had been cut
by over $60 million from the prior year.
Representative Wilson stated that the money had gone to
different areas, but there continued to be a $4.2 billion
budget no matter what had been done thus far. She concluded
that the position had been deleted and she thought the
funding should have also been deleted.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Gara, Grenn, Foster,
Seaton
Representative Pruitt was absent from the vote.
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H GOV 5 FAILED (3/7).
4:13:39 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H GOV 7
(copy on file):
Elections
H GOV 7 - Reduce FY 18 budget request for election
funding in a non-election year.
Offered by Representative Wilson
The FY 18 budget request in this allocation includes
$1,847,000 for costs associated with conducting the
statewide primary and general elections as well as
REAA and CRSA elections for fiscal years ending June
30, 2018 and June 30, 2019. It is anticipated these
funds will not be spent in FY 18, as there is no
primary or general election, however will carryover
and be included with an FY 19 budget request for an
additional $1.8 million. This would result in a total
of $3.6 million being available for future elections.
This amendment deletes the $1.8 requested in this
allocation and requires that funds be requested in the
FY 19 budget for FY 19 elections.
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson explained that the legislature funded
the Division of Elections for two years at a time. She read
the amendment description [see above]. She stated that
basically the legislature was going to make the division
come back to ask for the money so it could review where the
money had previously been spent.
Co-Chair Seaton spoke in opposition to the amendment. He
explained that beginning in FY 17 the cost of holding
elections every two years was divided in half to reduce the
volatility in the final authorized budget of the Office of
the Governor while allowing for sufficient funding to
conduct elections. He noted that Section 17 of the
governor's operating budget bill would appropriate money
for a two-year period; therefore, money not spent in FY 18
(expected to be nearly all of the FY 18 appropriation)
would be available in FY 19. The funds would combine with
$1.8 [million] appropriated next year for FY 19 and FY 20.
If the amendment was adopted, the cost shift to the next
year and the full election cost of $3.6 million would
appear in next year's budget as an additional cost. He
added that Regional Educational Attendance Area (REAA)
elections still occurred in off-years.
Representative Grenn asked what the allocation requests had
been in previous non-election years.
Representative Kawasaki noted that REAA elections and some
Coastal Resource Service Areas (CRSA) elections were held
in off-years; therefore, the funds would be necessary in
the coming year.
Representative Wilson provided wrap up. She agreed that the
amendment would leave funding in the budget for one year
instead of two. It would mean the Division of Elections
would have to come back to the legislature to explain the
need for the funding request for the given year. She
remarked that instead of forward funding education the
legislature was forward funding elections. The amendment
represented a savings for the current year, but not an
overall savings in the future until the legislature heard
from the division the following year. She did not
understand why the legislature would be taking money from
savings to forward fund the cost when it was not necessary.
Co-Chair Foster MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Kawasaki, Ortiz, Grenn, Guttenberg, Seaton, Foster
Representative Pruitt and Vice-Chair Gara were absent from
the vote.
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H GOV 7 FAILED (3/6).
4:18:23 PM
AT EASE
4:34:48 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Seaton indicated the committee would address
amendments for the Department of Health and Social Services
(DHSS).
4:35:10 PM
Representative Tilton MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 5
(copy on file):
Alaska Pioneer Homes
Alaska Pioneer Homes Management H HSS 5 - Decrease to
Alaska Pioneer Home Management travel and services
Offered by Representative Tilton
This decrease is 18Gov - 16Actual InflAdj (3.5
percent)
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Tilton explained the amendment related to
Alaska Pioneer Home management. She relayed that the
actuals in FY 16 had been $24.1 [thousand] and the
governor's request had been $52.4 [thousand] in travel.
Actuals for services had been $65.2 [thousand] with a
request of $199.6 [thousand]. Actuals for commodities had
been $7.4 [thousand] with a request of $23.1 [thousand].
She stated that the increment had not been impacted the
previous year.
4:36:36 PM
AT EASE
4:36:50 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Ortiz spoke in opposition to the amendment.
He had heard real concerns over the past few years from the
director of the Juneau Pioneer Home about reductions that
had taken place. He detailed the Juneau Pioneer Home would
have to reduce its number of beds if additional cuts were
received. He noted that there was already a waiting list to
get into the home. He spoke to the importance and value of
Alaska's seniors - he wanted to ensure Alaska continued to
be a place for them to live. He concluded that further
reductions to the Pioneer Homes would be detrimental.
Vice-Chair Gara spoke against the amendment. He stated that
the Pioneer Home had already taken over $1 million in cuts
since FY 15. He detailed that the homes were able to serve
fewer people, yet the residents were much more expensive
because of their high level of need (e.g. due to
Alzheimer's, dementia, and other major medical problems).
Part of the amendment would delete funds owed to the
Department of Administration for leasing costs, information
technology, risk management, and other. He noted it would
mean a cut to nursing services or other services at the
Pioneer Homes. He continued that the Pioneer Home had done
a very good job managing its costs as well as possible. He
reiterated that the Pioneer Home had already been cut
significantly.
Representative Tilton relayed that she had checked with the
legislative analyst. She stated there had not been a
reduction in the line in the previous year. She had
significant faith in the state's Pioneer Homes and wanted
to protect the state's seniors. She stated the amendment
was not in "that line," but in their management. She
believed if small cuts were made across agencies it would
be easier than having to do something like close a Pioneer
Home.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
Representative Tilton provided wrap up.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Ortiz, Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 5 FAILED (4/7).
4:40:31 PM
Representative Tilton MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 7
(copy on file):
Pioneer Homes
H HSS 7 - Decrease to commodities
Offered by Representative Tilton
This decrease is 18Gov - 16Actual Infl Adj (3.5
percent)
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Tilton explained the amendment related to
the commodities line of the Alaska Pioneer Home budget. She
referred to an earlier discussion about whether actuals
really represented actuals. She relayed that the actual in
FY 15 was $2,953,000 and $2,766,000 in FY 16. She continued
that in both years the actual spend had not been the
authorized amount. The reduction in the amendment would
come from the General Fund in the amount of $639,000. She
was concerned that Pioneer Home residents were paying more
for an increase that did not equal the amount actually
spent.
Vice-Chair Gara opposed the amendment. He stated that he
would join anyone who would like to help reduce the level 1
cost; however, he relayed that he had failed at building
support for reducing the specific cost. He addressed the
proposed $639,000 reduction in commodities and relayed that
the funds went largely to medical supplies for people with
significant health problems. He believed that unless
someone could identify medical supplies that were not
needed, the cut was unsubstantiated. He listed various
treatment services.
Representative Tilton responded that the commodities budget
line also included landscaping and systems monitoring. She
stressed that the amendment would not result in a reduction
to medications. She was concerned that residents were being
charged for money the state was not actually spending. She
noted that the cost for residents was scheduled to
increase.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 7 FAILED (4/7).
4:44:36 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 8
(copy on file):
Pioneer Homes
H HSS 8 - Funding reduction in Personal Services to
align with FY17 Management Plan level.
Offered by Representative Wilson
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Personal Services
line item were $47,835,600, the FY 17 Management Plan
level was $48,922,000 and the FY 18 budget request is
$49,311,600. The increase between the FY 17 Management
Plan and the FY 18 budget request is $389,600. This
amendment makes a reduction of $389,600 to this
Personal Services line and aligns the FY 18 budget
request to FY 17 Management Plan level.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Vice-Chair Gara spoke in opposition to the amendment. He
found it impressive that the Pioneer Home had found close
to $1.5 million in budget reductions since FY 15. In
reality the cost of healthcare went up for people who were
being hired. He spoke to the $389,000 the amendment would
cut from personnel services and explained the money was
used to pay for step increases for existing staff and for
health insurance increases because the state had never
gained control of its healthcare costs. He believed the cut
would potentially mean laying off three or four nurses or
other people.
Representative Wilson was trying to hold the line to FY 17.
She did not believe it was asking much.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Thompson, Tilton, Wilson, Pruitt
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 8 FAILED (4/7).
4:46:58 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 9
(copy on file):
Pioneer Homes
H HSS 9 - Funding reduction of four non-permanent
position deleted by the Dept. but not defunded.
Offered by Representative Wilson
The Department deleted four non-permanent positions
that had been vacant for more than one year in the FY
18 budget request, however, did not delete the
personal services funding associated with the
positions. This amendment reduces the FY 18 budget
request in the Personal Services line by the amount of
the FY17 budgeted costs of the four positions.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above].
Vice-Chair Gara explained that the Pioneer Homes had a
vacancy factor of roughly 2 percent - vacant positons that
were not funded. He detailed that a cut of $166,000 could
have associated matching funds the legislature was unaware
of because it did not know what positions would be cut. He
continued it could be a deletion of certified nurse aides
or other employees. He reiterated there was no funding for
deleted positions contrary to what the amendment suggested.
The vacancy factor open positions were not funded. He noted
that every once in a while an employee may leave and the
agency could fill the position.
Representative Wilson agreed that the four positions no
longer existed, which was the reason she was proposing to
delete the associated funding.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Tilton, Wilson, Pruitt, Thompson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 9 FAILED (4/7).
Representative Gara WITHDREW Amendment H HSS 14 (copy on
file). He indicated he would not be offering the amendment
in an attempt to keep costs down.
4:50:19 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 16
(copy on file):
Alcohol Safety Action Program (ASAP)
H HSS 16 - Delete three PFT positions and associated
costs.
Offered by Representative Wilson
Due to declining revenues and as a cost containment
measure, this amendment deletes three new positions
established by the Department in the FY 18 budget
request for this allocation. This results in a
reduction of $221,197 from the Personal Services line
of the FY 18 budget request.
The FY 17 Management Plan budget in the Personal
Services line is $2,488,700 and the FY 18 budget
request is $2,599,200 which is an increase of $110,500
over FY 16 actual expenditures. Therefore, a
reduction of $110,105 in the Personal Services line is
made from this allocation to align the FY 18 budget
request with FY 16 actual expenditures.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above]. She clarified the $221,197 in the amendment
description should read $331,300 general funds.
Vice-Chair Gara spoke against the amendment. He clarified
that the funding source was interagency receipts from the
Court System to pay for the Alcohol Safety Action Program
(ASAP). He detailed that the program screened people with
substance abuse problems to determine the necessary
treatment. The goal was to keep people from becoming repeat
customers in the state's criminal justice system and to
save money. He explained that the amendment would delete
the people tasked with screening people to determine needed
treatment. He elaborated that a portion of the funding was
for step and health insurance increases. Without the
services there would be increased crime and fewer treatment
services.
Representative Wilson reported that the amendment pertained
to three new positions. She stated there were other things
happening in the criminal world in relation to SB 91
[omnibus crime legislation passed in 2016] or other
legislation. She did not believe it was the time to
increase personnel.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Wilson, Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 16 FAILED (4/7).
4:53:26 PM
AT EASE
4:53:47 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 21
(copy on file):
Designated Evaluation and Treatment
H HSS 21 - Funding reduction to grants line item
Offered by Representative Wilson
Due to declining revenues, this amendment as a cost
containment measure, reduces the FY 18 budget request
for evaluation and treatment grants from $3,794,800 to
$3,594,800.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above].
Vice-Chair Gara conveyed that the item was more important
that the description of the amendment conveyed. He stressed
there had already been a reduction of $869,000 in the
services since FY 15. He detailed that designated
evaluation treatment services went to individuals with
severe mental health problems who were in crisis. He
continued that the individuals had to be moved to a part of
the state where the services were being offered. He
explained that the services were often court ordered. He
underscored that the services were provided to individuals
who may otherwise be suicidal or end up on the street
(which also cost the state money). He believed the
department had been efficient and perhaps over efficient in
cutting close to $1 million. He wanted to know what would
happen to the individuals if an additional cut occurred.
Additionally, he thought the amendment would result in a
supplemental budget request by the department because the
mental health crisis services were statutorily required.
Representative Wilson imagined most of the individuals
would have other coverage with Medicaid expansion coming
into full force. She believed there should be more federal
funding based on different waivers offered. She thought the
state was still waiting for some of the waivers - they had
not come the prior year, which was the reason for a
supplemental cost. She concluded that more federal funds
should be available.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 21 FAILED (4/7).
4:56:43 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 22
(copy on file):
Alaska Psychiatric Institute
H HSS 22 - Aligning the FY 18 budget request with FY
17 Management plan
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment reduces the FY 18 budget request in the
Personal Services line by $776,400 to align the
request with the FY 17 Management Plan level of
funding which is $26,766,400.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection. He reported that
funding for the Alaska Psychiatric Institute (API) had been
cut since FY 15. He reported that the cuts had yielded poor
results. He detailed that similar institutions in other
states were able to treat people and transition them into
housing, jobs, and services. Whereas, individuals at API
were kept for a very short period of time, funding was not
available to provide needed transitional services, and
close to half of the individuals ended up back in API. He
reiterated that the system was already underfunded. He
wondered if the amendment sponsor had determined how much
more it would cost the state if more individuals returned
to API for treatment. He noted that currently there were no
empty beds at API and it was not even providing the needed
level of services.
Representative Guttenberg remarked that the funding source
was GF mental health funds. He reasoned the amendment would
mean denying a mental health funds increment. He was
unclear if the funding was from Alaska Mental Health Trust
Authority (AMHTA).
Representative Wilson responded that the funds were not
from AMHTA. She stated that the fund source was the General
Fund. She referred to a previous remark that API was not
providing the needed care. She opined that the state needed
to look at alternatives if it was not providing the needed
level of care. She believed it was the worst thing the
state could do. She stated it was not only about funding
and there may be other issues going on, such as the cost of
healthcare in Alaska compared to other places.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Gara, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 22 FAILED (4/7).
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 24
(copy on file):
Alaska Mental Health Board and Advisory Board on
Alcohol and Drug Abuse
H HSS 24 - Delete one PFT position and associated
costs
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes a Health and Social Services
Planner II position from the FY 18 budget request
requiring the Department to redistribute the workload
to the remaining staff.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Vice-Chair Gara spoke against the amendment. He explained
that half of the position was funded with AMHTA money and
was an AMHTA priority. He relayed that taking general funds
out would result in the deletion of two positions. The
positions were responsible for reviewing grant applications
to help leverage additional federal funding, working on
Medicaid reform to save the state money, working on
policies to reverse the heroin and opioid abuse increase,
and working on education and planning to help reduce
adverse childhood experiences. He detailed that children
with adverse childhood experiences commit suicide in much
larger numbers, have higher rates of depression, end up in
mental health institutions at a high cost to the state, and
end up living with much more agony than they should. He saw
the amendment as costing the state money and as
disregarding a priority of the people hired at AMHTA.
Additionally, he believed it would delete two positions
instead of one.
Representative Grenn asked the amendment sponsor to address
the number of positions the two boards currently had.
Representative Wilson discussed that making cuts was not
easy. She explained that the state was not the only one
providing services to the public. She reasoned that some of
the services would have to be the responsibility of the
private sector.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson, Grenn
OPPOSED: Guttenberg, Ortiz, Gara, Kawasaki, Foster, Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 24 FAILED (5/6).
5:04:20 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 26
(copy on file):
Behavioral Health
Suicide Prevention Council
H HSS 26 - Funding reduction in grants line
Offered by Representative Wilson
Due to declining revenues, this amendment is a cost
containment measure that reduces the $461,700 grants
line funding in the FY 18 budget request by $100,000.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Vice-Chair Gara spoke in opposition to the amendment. He
reported that the department had cut roughly $190 million
in state funding since FY 15. He detailed it had cut
roughly $30 million in the current year. He stressed that
the amendment did not represent a wise cut on top of the
cuts that had already taken place. He relayed that Alaska
ranked first in the nation in suicide per capita. The state
had a Suicide Prevention Council working to prevent suicide
get the state out of first place. He specified that suicide
was the number one cause of death for youth between the
ages of 16 and 24. The funds went to DEED to provide
school-based education and services to help reduce the
number of suicides.
Representative Wilson explained that the funds represented
grants through DEED to the state's school districts, which
was counted as another part of the BSA. She stated that by
decreasing the funds there would not be as many grants, but
it did not mean the council could not fulfill its mission.
She believed it could. She wondered why government was
providing this service when it could be provided by
nonprofits. She reasoned there were other nonprofits
dealing with the same subject. She questioned whether the
state was ensuring the districts had money to go forward
with the services once the grants were provided. She
wondered whether the grants were going to the same school
districts all of the time. She did not believe the service
was a function of government; it was a service she believed
should be provided by the private sector.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Kawasaki, Ortiz, Pruitt, Thompson, Gara, Grenn,
Guttenberg, Seaton, Foster,
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 26 FAILED (2/9).
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 28
(copy on file):
Residential Child Care
H HSS 28 - Delete one Accounting Tech PFT position and
associated costs
Offered by Representative Wilson
Due to declining revenues, this amendment as a cost
containment measure, deletes an Accounting Technician
position in the Residential Child Care grant program
from the FY 18 budget request requiring the Department
to use existing accounting resources in another
allocation to provide the accounting services for this
program.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection. He had previously
mentioned that DEED had already received $190 million in
cuts. He detailed that the amendment would require the
department to find some other employee to do the work. He
elaborated that employees worked with children who have
significant problems and require institutional care. The
department worked to try to locate the appropriate facility
for the child, with the child to ensure the facility was as
appropriate as possible, and with the facility. The
department had been drastically reduced. He reasoned that
if the department was asked to absorb the work it would be
forced to use an employee already doing important work in
children's services, senior services, disability services,
or drug and alcohol treatment services. He believed the
amendment would result in the deletion of half the staff
doing the work. He thought more children would end up on
the street or without needed treatment.
Representative Wilson stressed that the budget was
currently $4.2 billion in general funds. She doubted that
$83,000 went to two people, which she surmised was low. She
stressed that every sector was having to do more with less.
The amendment was asking government to do the same. She
detailed that the private sector had been forced to make a
shift because it had nowhere else to get the money from.
She agreed it made it hard getting over the hurdle. She
reasoned that if everyone gave a little it prevented the
need for one entity to give a large amount. She concluded
that at some point the decisions needed to be made.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Ortiz, Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 28 FAILED (4/7).
5:10:59 PM
Representative Wilson WITHDREW Amendment H HSS 31 (copy on
file).
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 35
(copy on file):
Medical Assistance Administration
H HSS 35 - Delete one PFT position and associated
costs
Offered by Representative Wilson
The Department deleted a full time vacant Project
Analyst position in this allocation, however no
funding was deleted. This amendment deletes the
funding for the position from the FY 18 budget request
based on the FY 17 budgeted cost of the position.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Vice-Chair Gara testified in opposition to the amendment.
He relayed that when the funding had been reduced the
position funding had been deleted. The amendment would add
an additional $126,000 in decreases; however, it was really
about $250,000 in decreases because the positions were
matched with federal funds. He surmised two positions would
probably be lost. He detailed that the positions were
responsible for processing claims for people the state owed
Medicaid payments to. He had heard numerous complaints from
the legislature that the claims were not being processed in
time and that it caused a hardship on medical services
providers. He stressed that deleting two positions
responsible for processing Medicaid claims would slow down
claims processing. He underscored that the amendment did
not merely implement efficiencies, but harmful cuts. The
department was serving more people with less funds than in
FY 15 (approximately $200 million less).
Representative Thompson noted that the position had been
deleted by the department, yet the money was still included
in the budget. He emphasized that the money would be
available from July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018, but no
one was working in the position because it had been
deleted. He did not understand how the amendment meant a
doubling up on costs.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 35 FAILED (4/7).
5:14:44 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 37
(copy on file):
Rate Review
H HSS 37 - Delete one Audit and Review Analyst III
position
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes one Audit and Review Analyst
III position and the associated personal services cost
from the Personal Services line of the FY 18 budget
request in this allocation. This will require the
Department to redistribute the workload to remaining
staff and to operate in a more efficient manner.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Representative Wilson MOVED to AMEND Amendment H HSS 37.
She explained the amendment should include a 1 and not a
zero under permanent full-time category. She explained she
was proposing to delete the position.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED for discussion. He asked where the
change was occurring.
Representative Wilson explained that under the permanent
full-time category the number of positions was currently
listed as zero. The amendment narrative proposed deleting
one analyst position; therefore, the permanent full-time
category should show the number 1 instead of a zero. The
position had not been previously deleted.
Co-Chair Seaton directed members to the location of the
change on the document.
Vice-Chair Gara WITHDREW his OBJECTION to Amend Amendment H
HSS 37. There being NO further OBJECTION, the amendment to
Amendment H HSS 37 was ADOPTED.
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection to Amendment H HSS
37 as amended. He did not support the amendment because he
believed it hurt people and was wrong. He believed the
sponsor should have amended the number of positions the
amendment would eliminate to two because by deleting
$139,000 in state funding, it meant the state would also
lose $139,000 in matching federal funds. He believed it
would require the deletion of two positions. He addressed
that the positions were partially responsible for working
on SB 74 reform - to try to reduce medical costs in the
state and save Medicaid money. He explained that the
amendment would hamper those efforts. The individuals were
also responsible for doing assessment work on rate setting
for Medicaid payments. He stated that if the legislature
wanted the state to do an inferior job on determining how
to pay providers, the amendment would do so. He reiterated
that the department was doing more work with less money.
Representative Wilson clarified that the funding was not
General Fund match money. She explained that GF match went
towards federal funding and when the state cut GF match, a
certain percent of the federal funds were not received. The
amendment pertained to general funds - additional funding
the legislature had determined it needed to give the
department over any match that may be required for federal
dollars.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Thompson, Tilton, Wilson, Grenn, Pruitt
OPPOSED: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster, Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 37 as amended FAILED
(5/6).
5:19:33 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 38
(copy on file):
Juvenile Justice
McLaughlin Youth Center
H HSS 38 - Delete ten PFT positions and associated
costs.
Offered by Representative Wilson
Due to declining revenues, this amendment as a cost
containment measure, deletes the three Juvenile
Justice Officers transferred by the Department from
Nome to this center ($489,300), six additional
Juvenile Justice Officers and one Mental Health
Clinician ($825,862) for a total reduction of
$1,315,162 from the FY 18 budget request in this
allocation.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson explained that the amendment
pertained to the Mclaughlin Youth Center. She referred to
charts shown to the committee showing a decline in the
juvenile justice system; the population had gone from 6,800
to 5,048 and referrals had gone from 3,881 to 2,850, and
"juvenile" from 2,674 to 1,914. She reasoned that with the
decline in numbers the cost should also go down. She read
the amendment description [see above].
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection. He communicated
that Mclaughlin was currently 2 percent over capacity. He
agreed there had been a decline in youth in juvenile
justice facilities; however, the amendment pertained to
Mclaughlin, which was on the verge of possibly needing to
open an additional unit. Thus far, the department had
proposed to eliminate 18 positions by closing the Nome
Youth Facility; it was keeping 3 positions to take care of
youth moving from Nome to other areas. The amendment would
cause a decrease of 25 positions. He did not see a
justification for reducing staff at a facility who were
tasked with working with youth to prevent reoffenders and
to transition them to success. He had not heard how
services at Mclaughlin would improve by terminating
numerous positions in a facility that was above capacity.
Representative Wilson stated that the department "decides
where they go" and there were many facilities with very low
numbers. She did not know why the state would not be
evening up the numbers. She wanted to ensure "those being
transferred to Nome - it's included in this number, it's
not in addition to those positions." She continued that the
state was seeing a decline. She believed the fact that one
facility was overloaded while others were not was
indicative of a case management problem. She spoke to
ensure numbers were as evenly distributed as possible,
which had been discussed during the conversation about
where Nome youth would be sent (e.g. Mclaughlin, Fairbanks,
or other) and about needed services. She discussed a graph
presented by DHSS showing a downturn; therefore, she
believed services should match that downturn.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 38 FAILED (4/7).
5:24:16 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 40
(copy on file):
H HSS 40 - Eliminate three positions transferred from
the Nome Youth Center to the McLaughlin Youth Center
Offered by Representative Wilson
The amendment denies the transfer of full three full
time position from the Nome Youth Facility to the
McLaughlin Youth Center resulting from the closure of
the Nome facility. The Nome Youth Facility is being
closed, no longer requires the three positions,
therefore the positions should be deleted. If
McLaughlin requires additional funding to fulfill its
function, a separate increment should be submitted by
the Department.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson relayed the amendment would eliminate
three positions transferred from the Nome Youth Center to
the Mclaughlin Youth Center.
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his opposition to the amendment.
He discussed the goal to keep children in a youth facility
near their home. He did not support the concept of
transferring kids far away from their homes. He continued
that there had been 21 positions at the Nome Youth Facility
and the department was already eliminating 18 of them, but
keeping three to take care of the youth. The amendment
would eliminate any staff for the youth being transferred
from the facility. He continued that the department was
trying to find efficiencies. Deleting 18 positions was
difficult, but leaving no staff left for the youth being
sent 1,000 miles away from their homes did not seem
logical.
Representative Wilson remarked that they did not know where
the youth would go. She argued that where the youths were
sent should be based on the services they need. She did not
believe youths should automatically be sent to any specific
facility. She believed the most important thing was to
ensure the youths were receiving what they needed. She
continued that it may not be the facility closest to home,
but she hoped the facility would get the youths back on
track more quickly to avoid getting in trouble again in the
future. She hoped they would be able to go back home,
finish school, and move forward.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Wilson, Pruitt, Tilton
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz,
Thompson, Foster, Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 40 FAILED (3/8).
Representative Foster WITHDREW Amendments H HSS 41 and H
HSS 43 (copy on file). He detailed that the committee had
passed a contingency language amendment specifying that the
Nome Youth Facility would remain open if it was less
expensive to keep it open as opposed to closing it and
moving youth all around the state.
Representative Tilton WITHDREW Amendment H HSS 45 (copy on
file).
Co-Chair Foster WITHDREW Amendments H HSS 46, H HSS 47, and
H HSS 48 (copy on file). He noted the amendments were
withdrawn for the reason he had just spoken to.
Representative Tilton WITHDREW Amendment H HSS 50 (copy on
file).
5:28:44 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 53
(copy on file):
Juvenile Justice
Probation Services
H HSS 53 - Delete 14 PFT positions and associated
costs. Offered by Representative Wilson
Juvenile Justice Population trends have decreased by
10% from FY 15 to FY 16. As a result of the decreased
population, this amendment deletes the positions and
funding for 12 of the 84 Juvenile Probation Officers
and 2 of the 15 Social Services Associates and the
associated personal service costs from the FY 18
budget request.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above].
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection. He agreed that the
juvenile justice population had been decreasing, but it had
leveled out. Five youth in Nome had been expected, but the
number had increased to eight. Additionally, five had been
expected in Kenai and there were eight. He explained that
initially people thought youths could be transferred to
Mclaughlin in Anchorage; however, a new wing would have to
be opened at Mclaughlin if that happened. He explained the
positions the amendment would delete were responsible for
working with youth and to provide safer neighborhoods for
youth who come out of the juvenile justice system. The
individuals were probation officers who worked with law
enforcement and youths released from facilities to ensure
there a job, education, or no-drug use plan was maintained.
The goal was to ensure youths did not end up back in the
criminal justice system. There was no evidence there were
way too many people in the division to do the work.
Additionally, there was no evidence that by deleting
probation officers, the community would be kept as safe. He
emphasized the community would be less safe.
Representative Wilson stressed that people should be
thrilled the number of youths [in the juvenile justice
system] were decreasing. She clarified she had not stated
the numbers were disappearing [down to zero]. She agreed it
would be great if the numbers were going down to zero. She
reiterated that as the numbers decreased so would the
workload. The amendment reflected a decrease in the
workload associated with a decline in the number of youths
in the system.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 53 FAILED (4/7).
5:32:52 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 55
(copy on file):
H HSS 55 - Delete one PFT position and associated
cost.
Offered by Representative Wilson
The Department closed the Ketchikan Regional Youth
Facility and transferred an Office Assistant position
to Probation Services. Essentially this is a new
position in this allocation. As a result of declining
state revenues and as a cost containment measure, this
amendment deletes the position and the FY 17 budgeted
cost of the position from the FY 18 budget request.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above].
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection. He stated the
amendment contained a cost savings that had already
occurred because the Ketchikan Youth Facility had been
closed. He noted it was not a great cost savings. He
detailed that the state would not pay for the facility,
employees, or to keep the youths near their homes. He
continued that the position was needed because the youth
were no longer in Ketchikan; the youths had to be
transported back to Ketchikan for court appearances. It was
not free to close a youth facility, move a child 500 miles
from their home, and think they could do it all with no
staff.
Representative Wilson asked when office assistants begin
transporting juveniles from one area to another. She
explained that the department wanted to move the position
in Ketchikan somewhere else (due to the closure of the
facility) because there had probably been someone in the
position. She was pretty certain the position was not
responsible for transporting youth. She believed the
position was working in an office doing paperwork.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Grenn, Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster, Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 56 FAILED (5/6).
5:36:24 PM
Representative Foster WITHDREW Amendment H HSS 57 (copy on
file). He explained that the committee had already adopted
contingency language related to the Nome Youth Facility.
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 67
(copy on file):
Public Assistance
Public Assistance Administration
H HSS 67 Delete 2 PFT positions and associated costs.
Funding reductions in Services and Commodities.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes two positions transferred to
this allocation from Energy Assistance Program
administrative personnel and reduces funding for a
position the Department deleted with no reduction in
funds. This amendment also reduces the services line
item to align the FY 18 budget request with FY 16
actual expenditures for information technology
(increased from $13,200 to $307,000) and reduces the
commodities line to align the FY 18 budget request for
business supplies to FY 16 actual expenditures
(increased from $47,200 to $153,300). The total
reduction to this allocation is $642,900.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above].
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection. He addressed that
the only low income heating assistance provided was fully
federally funded - the Low Income Home Energy Assistance
Program (LIHEAP). Until the previous year there had also
been a supplemental state energy assistance policy that
helped people the federal program did not. The amendment
would eliminate positions responsible for administering
LIHEAP. Additionally, while the amendment proposed to
delete two positions, it would mean the loss of 50 percent
matching funds (twice as much). He believed it would mean
the loss of four employees instead of two. He reiterated
that the program was fully federally funded for people
needing help, especially in rural areas where the cost of
heating a home was sometimes over $1,000 per month. He did
not believe deleting the positions was wise. He stated
there was no evidence that the program could be fairly
administered by deleting the employees. He highlighted that
the information technology portion of the amendment
pertained to a chargeback the department had to pay back to
the Department of Administration. He reasoned if the item
was cut, the department would have to cut something else
inside the department. He concluded that the department was
about as lean as it had ever been. He believed it meant the
department would need to choose between children, seniors,
disabled people, and people with alcoholism problems.
Representative Wilson explained that the two positions were
being transferred and were no longer administering LIHEAP.
Additionally, the funds were not interagency receipts. She
did not know why the DHSS was paying anything to the
Department of Administration.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Gara, Grenn, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 67 FAILED (4/7).
5:41:07 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 70
(copy on file):
Fraud Investigation
H HSS 70 - Personal Services reduction and removal of
General Funds.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment removes all general funds in the FY 18
budget request for this allocation and reduces the
request in the Personal Services line item from
$1,542,400 to $1,518,400.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above].
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection. He underscored that
the department had reduced its budget by $30 million in the
current year. He explained that the amendment would lose
money for the state. He spoke to the efforts to bolster up
the fraud unit to detect people engaging in public benefits
fraud. He continued that the testimony in every hearing he
had been in had been that a fraud investigator could be
added and it would save the state money. He believed
deleting the funding would result in a decreased ability to
detect fraud and for the state to recover overpaid monies.
He believed it would inadvertently increase the budget
deficit.
Representative Pruitt asked the amendment sponsor if the
general funds were required for a federal fund match. He
wanted to ensure they would not be jeopardizing any of the
federal funding.
Representative Wilson reported that the money was not
matching funding - the amendment pertained only to General
Fund dollars. She continued that the funds had been added
in - as other money had come in the funds had been taken
out and the amount was down to $24,000. There was still
$1,518,400 remaining in the allocation. She believed the
funds would provide sufficient investigators to continue
the work.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Grenn, Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster, Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 70 FAILED (5/6).
5:44:38 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 72
(copy on file):
Quality Control
H HSS 72 - Remove General Funds and reduce funding to
Personal Services and Travel
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment removes all unrestricted general funds
(fund source 1004) in the FY 18 budget request for
this allocation and reduces the budget request in the
Personal Services line item from $2,318,700 to the FY
17 Management Plan level of $2,301,100, a reduction of
$17,600. A reduction of $22,000 is also made from the
Travel line item to more closely align the FY 18
budget request of $209,300 to FY 16 actual
expenditures of $158,000.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection. He defended the
department in its efforts to increase efficiencies. He
detailed that between the 2017 and 2018 budgets, travel had
already been reduced by 13 percent ($846,000). He added
that travel costs had decreased by 18 percent from FY 15 to
the current year. The staff impacted by the amendment were
responsible for overseeing and ensuring benefit
determinations were done correctly (so benefits were not
inappropriately given or denied). He noted that often
benefits included food stamps for families with children.
He spoke to the importance of getting the determinations
done right. Additionally, the staff referred cases to the
fraud department in order for the state to recover money
that had been overpaid. He stressed that much of the work
was federally mandated. For example, federal law required
field service visits from main hubs to smaller offices. He
underscored that it was not possible to tell the federal
government the state would accept food stamp money, but not
follow the associated requirements. He emphasized that the
funds could not be cut.
Representative Wilson stressed she had based the amendment
on FY 16 actuals. She did not believe the amendment would
cut a position - the entire amendment was $39,600. She
supported spreading cuts in small amounts in order to avoid
closing up numerous programs.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Ortiz, Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 72 FAILED (4/7).
5:48:28 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 73
(copy on file):
Work Services
H HSS 73 - Funding reductions for Personal Services
and Travel to more closely align with FY16
expenditures
Offered by Representative Wilson
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Travel line item
were $6,900 and the FY 18 Governor's budget request
for this line item is $94,400 resulting in an increase
of $87,500 over FY 16 actual expenditures. Therefore,
a reduction of $70,000 is made in the Travel line item
from the FY 18 budget request to more closely align
this line item with FY 16 actual travel expenditures.
The Department deleted two positions in the FY 18
budget request that had been vacant for over a year,
however there was no reduction in funds for the
positions deleted. This amendment makes a reduction
of $41,516 in the Personal Services line item for the
positions deleted.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection. He explained that
the funds for the previously deleted positions had already
been deleted. The remaining position was half federally
funded and was responsible for helping individuals get
things like food stamps in order to feed their families and
return to work. He had consulted with the department and
had learned that if the cut came to fruition the department
would have to cut something else. He relayed it was not a
luxury position and the cut represented a cut to another
part of the department because the work would have to be
done.
Representative Wilson replied that the department needed to
specify if it was utilizing the funds somewhere else. She
reasoned that if the budget books did not show a zero next
to the deleted positions, there was still money attached.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 73 FAILED (4/7).
5:51:36 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 75
(copy on file):
Public Health
Nursing
H HSS 75 - Reduce funding in the personal services
line (including overtime pay), and the travel and
commodities lines
Offered by Representative Wilson
This allocation has an FY 18 budget request of $67,276
for premium pay in the Personal Services line item.
This amendment reduces premium pay by 25% of the
amount budgeted in anticipation of reduced overtime.
Declining state revenues dictate that expenditures be
reduced by taking a fiscally conservative approach to
working hours and that state services be provided in a
more effective and efficient manner. Therefore, a
reduction of $16,819 to the Personal Service line item
is made by this portion of the amendment.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Personal Services
line item were $19,398,200 and the FY 18 budget
request for this line item is $19,490,300 resulting in
an increase of $92,100 over FY 16 expenditures. This
portion of the amendment reduces the FY 18 budget
request for the Personal Services line item by an
additional $92,100 to more closely align the FY 18
budget request with FY 16 actual expenditures
resulting in a total reduction to the Personal Service
line item of $108,919.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the Travel line item
for in-state employee travel were $789,800 and the FY
18 budget request for this line item is $865,400
resulting in an increase of $97,800 over FY 16
expenditures. This amendment reduces the FY 18 budget
request for in-state employee travel by $100,000 to
more closely align the FY 18 budget request with FY 16
actual expenditures. The amendment also deletes the FY
18 budget request of $31,200 in the Travel line item
for moving costs associated with hard to fill
positions resulting in a total reduction of $131,200
to the Travel line item.
This amendment makes reductions to the Commodities
line item of $100,000 in the business category and
$100,000 in the scientific and medical category for a
total reduction of $200,000 to the Commodities line.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above].
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection. He discussed that
the department had done its best to minimize the amount
that people were damaged. He noted that people had been
damaged due to budget cuts. He stressed that the amendment
would do worse damage. He spoke to the nursing function at
the department and relayed it had already lost 39
positions. He stated there were a number of problems with
the amendment. First, cutting overtime meant the department
would be required to hire staff. He stressed, it was not
possible to cut the number of hours provided by the
department to provide the service. He underscored that
overtime was cheaper than hiring a new employee. He
continued that due to prior budget cuts the department had
already closed a public health center in Nome, which meant
it was now necessary to pay for travel. He reasoned that
cutting was not always free. He detailed that the cut of
roughly $500,000 would result in fewer nurses working with
children with undetected hearing problems, especially in
communities without health facilities (providers were often
traveling nurses). He underscored that the nurses helped
families incredibly. He elaborated that if a hearing
problem continued to go undetected a child was likely to do
much worse in school and in life. He stressed the
importance of detecting the problem early on in an
individual's life. Additionally, the nurses did "well baby"
exams, which was a good thing especially for communities
without health centers. He detailed that the nurses
provided immunizations to prevent people from getting sick
or worsening, helped to provide nutrition for young
mothers, and worked with children and families with no
other health options. He stated it was a policy call and
reiterated that 39 positions in the section had already
been lost and the budget had been cut by over 12.5 percent
since FY 15. He believed the department had done its best
to locate cuts; $30 million had already been cut. He opined
that the department was already faced with doing damage
control. He did not want to create more damage.
Representative Ortiz reported that the public health clinic
had been closed in Wrangell. He noted that Wrangell did not
have road access to other health clinics. He believed the
amendment would be a step in the wrong direction.
Representative Wilson was trying to take the budget back to
FY 16 levels.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Thompson, Tilton, Wilson, Pruitt
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 75 FAILED (4/7).
5:57:43 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 76
(copy on file):
Women, Children and Family Health
H HSS 76 - Delete three PFT positions and associated
funding; Services and Grants reduction
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes one of seven Health Program
Managers, one of seven Public Health Specialists and
one of six Research Analyst positions and the
associated personal service costs. As a result, three
positions are deleted and a reduction of $302,500 is
made to the Personal Services line item.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the other services
category of the Services line item were $1,805,600 and
the FY 18 budget request for this line item is
$3,281,300 resulting in an increase of $1,475,700 over
FY 16 expenditures. This amendment reduces the FY 18
budget request in the Services line item by $1,000,000
to more closely align the FY 18 budget request with FY
16 actual expenditures.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the benefit category of
the Grants line item were $11,600 and the FY 18 budget
request for this line item is $171,700 resulting in an
increase of $160,100 over FY 16 expenditures. This
amendment reduces the FY 18 budget request in the
Services line item by $75,000 to more closely align
the FY 18 budget request with FY 16 actual
expenditures.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above].
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection. He relayed that the
Women, Children and Family Health section had been cut
since FY 15. He believed that the three positions the
amendment would cut would likely be five people because it
involved federal matching funds. He surmised that taking
away the $302,000 would eliminate approximately $200,000 to
$250,000 in federal funds. He detailed that the employees
were responsible for health screening for mothers and
children, and opioid addiction work and education. He did
not support cutting funds for the state's opioid taskforce,
which the amendment would inadvertently do. The second
paragraph in the amendment dealt with fixed costs the
department had to pay for leases, risk management, human
resources, information technology paid to the Department of
Administration. He believed that cutting the funds would
mean requiring the department to make cuts to other
programs for kids, seniors, or disabled people. The grants
were largely federally funded; if the grants were replaced
with state funds it meant the cuts would have to go to
another part of the department. He stressed that the
amendment was not free and would require cuts to other
parts of a department that served among the most fragile
people in the state.
Representative Wilson indicated that the funds in the
amendment were not interagency receipts. She was not sure
how the department was giving $3.2 million to the
Department of Administration. She believed there should be
some type of agreement "to be able to do that." She agreed
that $115,000 of the amendment was matching funds, the
$302,500 was not. She continued that $1,261,700 was General
Fund funding.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Tilton, Wilson, Pruitt, Thompson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 76 FAILED (4/7).
6:02:50 PM
AT EASE
6:11:11 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 78
(copy on file):
Public Health Administrative Services H HSS 78 -
Delete one PFT position and associated costs.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes an Administrative Assistant
position from the FY 18 budget request, makes a
reduction to the Personal Services line item of
$98,634 and requires the Department to redistribute
the workload to existing staff.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Vice-Chair Gara discussed that the Division of Public
Health had already lost 63 staff; there were 13 people
remaining in the Administrative Services Division. He noted
the amendment specified it would delete one position;
however, the positions were 50 percent federal match. He
surmised amendment would likely result in the loss of 2,
2.5, or 3 positions. He explained the positions were
support staff for public health nurses and were responsible
for arranging travel, medical supplies, and other. He
reiterated the department's budget had already been reduced
and he did not believe it could afford an additional cut.
Representative Wilson provided closing remarks. She
believed UGF match matched federal funding. She reasoned
that if the department was not listing the item under UGF
match, it should be doing so in the future. The amendment
pertained to UGF only.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Wilson, Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 78 FAILED (4/7).
6:14:50 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 81
(copy on file):
Epidemiology
H HSS 81 - Delete 3PFT positions and associated
funding. Funding reduction to grants line items.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This allocation has an FY 18 budget request of $44,944
for premium pay in the Personal Services line item.
This amendment reduces premium pay by 25% of the
amount budgeted in anticipation of reduced overtime.
Declining state revenues dictate that expenditures be
reduced by taking a fiscally conservative approach to
working hours and that state services be provided in a
more effective and efficient manner. Therefore, the
Personal Services line is reduced by $11,236.
This amendment also makes a reduction from the
Personal Services line item by deleting 3 positions
and the associated personal service costs of $436,500.
This amendment deletes, one of seven Epidemiologist's,
one of five Health Program Managers and one of five
Administrative Assistants.
FY 16 actual expenditures in the grants line item for
Sub-Recipient pass through grants were $1,010,300 and
the FY 18 budget request for this line item is
$1,171,000 resulting in an increase of $160,700 over
FY 16 expenditures, therefore a reduction of $200,000
is made from the Grants line.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read from the amendment description
[see above].
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection. He had spoken with
the department and corrected that the amendment applied to
federal grants, not General Fund grants. He stated that the
budget code 1004 was merely General Fund and did not
indicate whether federal match funding would be lost. He
stated the epidemiology section was roughly 81 percent
federally funded. He stated it was difficult to tell how
much federal money would be lost when state funding was
cut. He underscored that state funding for the epidemiology
section had been cut by 50 percent since 2015
(approximately $13 million). The department was tasked with
monitoring and informing the public about health epidemics
and health trends. He concluded it was unknown how much
federal funding and positions the state would lose as a
result of the cut.
Representative Wilson provided wrap up on her amendment.
She corrected that the code 1004 was UGF, not match money.
She noted that the code 1003 was General Fund match.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 81 FAILED (4/7).
6:18:39 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 84
(copy on file):
Emergency Medical Services Grants H HSS 84 - Emergency
Medical Services Grants
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes all funding for statewide
hospital and healthcare preparedness and for the
operations of the seven EMS regions. Although this is
a good program, it is not the responsibility of the
state to fund these programs but the users that
benefit.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson commented that she believed the
committee would be having real conversations about some of
the appropriations. She had brought forward some of the
amendments because she believed a conversation was needed.
The current amendment pertained to emergency medical
services grants helping various groups to train for
emergencies. She believed the work was a good thing;
however, she believed at some point the committee would
need to discuss whether or not the expenses were the
responsibility of state government versus municipalities or
service area groups. She observed a discussion did not
appear to be occurring; therefore, she WITHDREW the
amendment.
6:19:54 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 85
(copy on file):
State Medical Examiner
H HSS 85 - Funding reduction in extra pay to encourage
reduced overtime; service reduction
Offered by Representative Wilson
This allocation has an FY 18 budget request of $62,766
for premium pay in the Personal Services line item.
This amendment reduces premium pay by 25 percent of
the amount budgeted in anticipation of reduced
overtime. Declining state revenues dictate that
expenditures be reduced by taking a fiscally
conservative approach to working hours and that state
services be provided in a more effective and efficient
manner.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the services line item
for deliver services were $282,900 and the FY 18
budget request for this line item is $333,800
resulting in an increase of $50,900 over FY 16
expenditures, therefore a reduction of $50,000 is made
to this line item to more closely align the FY 18
budget request with FY 16 actual expenditures.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection. He understood that
it was frustrating to file an amendment and not be
successful. However, he underscored there should be no
implication that the other committee members had not done
their work. He had worked hours with the department on the
items. He explained that the medical examiner was a
statutory position responsible for investigating cause of
death. He spoke to the reason for overtime - it was not
possible to time when a person died. The position
investigated homicides and the cause of death. He
emphasized it was not possible to cut overtime unless
additional staff were hired, but the cheaper option was
overtime pay. The reason the section had not been cut in a
major way was because the number of bodies the examiner had
to investigate was the number of bodies they had to
investigate.
Representative Wilson provided wrap up. She did not intend
to come across as implying that other committee members had
not done their work. She was frustrated by the lack of
committee conversation related to her amendments. She
reasoned that offering amendments was the only way the
discussions could occur in the full finance committee. She
was leaving over $57,066 in the budget for overtime. She
noted she did not know how $62,766 had been determined as
the magic number. She stressed it was important to be
concerned about seeing increases of $50,000 to $200,000
every two years to one line item. She reasoned it was how
the state had ended up in the current financial deficit.
She remarked that unfortunately in good financial times it
was less common to look as closely at the budget. She
concluded that the amendment was only $65,700 in total.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Gara, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 85 FAILED (4/7).
6:25:41 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 86
(copy on file):
Public Health Laboratories
H HSS 86 - Funding reduction in Personal Services,
Services and Commodities.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This allocation has an FY 18 budget request of $62,766
for premium pay in the Personal Services line item.
This amendment reduces premium pay by 25% of the
amount budgeted in anticipation of reduced overtime.
Declining state revenues dictate that expenditures be
reduced by taking a fiscally conservative approach to
working hours and that state services be provided in a
more effective and efficient manner. Therefore, a
reduction of $15,692 is being taken in this
allocation.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the services line item
for telecommunications were $12,000 and the FY 18
budget request for this line item is $164,500
resulting in an increase of $152,500 over FY 16
expenditures, therefore a reduction of $100,000 is
made to this line.
FY 2016 actual expenditures in the commodities line
item for scientific and medical supplies were $878,300
and the FY 18 budget request for this line item is
$1,100,000 resulting in an increase of $221,700 over
FY 16 expenditures, therefore a reduction of $200,000
is made to this line item.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection. He discussed that
public health labs did not have substantial control over
services they provided to smaller medical facilities. The
larger medical facilities (e.g. Providence and Alaska
Regional) had their own labs. The smaller health facilities
relied on the public health labs for lab work. The item had
been flat funded over the years because the population and
individuals using medical services had increased. He
reasoned that until the state could come up with a
different way to get money to smaller medical facilities so
they could run their own labs, the costs would have to be
paid; it was part of the healthcare delivery process. It
was one of the economies of scale problems facing Alaskans.
Representative Wilson stated she was merely trying to
revert budget numbers back to FY 16 levels.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Gara, Grenn, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 86 FAILED (4/7).
6:29:17 PM
Representative Wilson WITHDREW Amendment H HSS 87 (copy on
file).
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 92
(copy on file):
Departmental Support Services
Public Affairs
H HSS 92 - Delete 2 PFT positions and associated
costs.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes one of three Information
Officer positions and two of six Publication
Specialist positions for a total reduction of $300,000
in the Personal Services line item from the FY 18
budget request.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above]. She noted the amendment pertained to UGF [fund
code] 1004.
Co-Chair Seaton asked if the amendment would delete two or
three positions.
Representative Wilson answered that the amendment was
intended to delete three positions. She MOVED to AMEND
Amendment H HSS 92 to reflect the deletion of three
positions instead of two. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
Representative Grenn asked for clarification on the
location of the change.
Co-Chair Seaton replied the amendment description read
"this amendment deletes one of three Information Officer
positions and two of six Publication Specialist positions,"
which was a total of three positions. The amendment to the
amendment changed the number of positions from two to three
under the "PFT" column.
Representative Grenn surmised the change also needed to be
reflected in the introduction to the amendment description.
Co-Chair Seaton replied in the affirmative.
Representative Wilson agreed.
Vice-Chair Gara opposed the amendment. He believed the
number of lost positions should be listed as six because
regardless of the funding code used, the positions were
partially funded by federal money (approximately 50 percent
federal match). He reasoned that $300,000 turned out to be
$600,000 roughly. He explained the individuals worked in
rural communities to get information out on education to
address things like the opioid epidemic. Additionally, the
individuals worked with the Division of Public Health to
get information out. He furthered that the individuals got
the information out if there was a tuberculosis outbreak or
other. He continued that it was especially important to
work with rural communities to get the information out on
what they needed to do to protect themselves. He stressed
that the individuals worked to educate people, especially
in smaller communities, to try to combat dangerous health
problems.
Representative Ortiz pointed out that there was
consistently a justification for the proposed reductions
that read "declining state revenues dictate that
expenditures be reduced by taking a fiscally conservative
approach." He opined that the language implied the state
had not been taking a fiscally conservative approach. He
underscored that from FY 15 to FY 18 there had been a
reduction of $190 million to the DHSS budget. He furthered
there had been a reduction to the department of $30 million
from FY 17 to FY 18. He believed a fiscally conservative
approach had been taken.
6:33:24 PM
Representative Wilson replied that the phrase was not
included in the amendment, but she did believe in the
phrase. She stressed that the state had been overspending.
She countered that just because spending had been reduced,
it did not mean the state was not overspending. She did not
know whether it was a department issue or a Legislative
Finance Division issue if the correct code was not being
used for GF match. She elaborated that the purpose of the
codes was to indicate whether funds were matching or
whether the legislature had decided to add UGF to enhance a
program. She stressed there was a significant distinction
between the two. The amendment pertained to 1004, which
related to GF. She stated there was a problem in the
coding/budgeting if matching funds were impacted under the
1004 code. She remarked that the amendment pertained to
public affairs, which she believed needed to be reduced
more than other areas.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Kawasaki, Ortiz, Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 92 as amended FAILED
(4/7).
6:35:23 PM
Representative Wilson WITHDREW Amendment H HSS 93 (copy on
file):
Representative Tilton MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 94
(copy on file):
H HSS 94 - Delete the $25 million wordage allowing
transfers across appropriations
Offered by Representative Tilton
DELETE the following language found on Page 15, lines
27-29 (30-GH1855U):
"At the discretion of the Commissioner of the
Department of Health and Social Services, up to
$25,000,000 may be transferred between all
appropriations in the Department of Health and Social
Services, except Medicaid Services."
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Tilton explained that the amendment would
delete the $25 million language allowing transfers across
all appropriation lines. She detailed that in 2004 there
had been intent language added to the budget that allowed
the transfer of up to $50 million between all
appropriations. The intent language had been added as a
temporary measure to allow the department to better manage
the disaster of the MMIS [Medicaid Management Information
System] and its impact on private sector partners. She
continued that private sector partners had been owed money
and the system had been rejecting their invoices. She
remarked that a number partners had been owed thousands of
dollars and some had closed as a result. The language had
been added to allow the department to send money to private
partners to help keep the businesses operating. She
believed temporary had become standard and that somewhere
along the way the language had been reduced to $25 million
and had become standard. She likened it to a temporary
income tax by the federal government and stated that things
became standard after a while. She explained that at a
relatively recent House Finance Committee meeting a request
had been made to determine how the transfer had been used.
She relayed the committee had been told it was not
something that was really used. She asked to remove the
language from the budget.
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection. He believed
everyone who had served on the House Finance Committee had
supported the language [the amendment sought to remove] in
the past. He stressed the department's large size. He
continued that DHSS could not predict exactly how many
people would need public benefits and each of the services
it provided. Additionally, DHSS could not predict where it
would have a budget shortfall. He explained that the
department did not try to spend every single penny in a
given allocation; if there was funding remaining the
department may need to use the funding in another area if,
for example, there were more people on adult public
assistance than anticipated. The legislature had specified
that $50 million was too much leeway. He furthered that the
prior House Finance Committee chair from Fairbanks
[Representative Steve Thompson] and others on the committee
had also specified they did not want DHSS transferring the
money between Medicaid and non-Medicaid parts of the
department; they did not want DHSS to use Medicaid funds to
pay for public benefits or vice versa. He stated that the
legislature could change its policy, but he believed the
language was rational. He concluded that the language would
prevent DHSS from having to come back to LB&A for an RPL
during the interim or with a supplemental request.
6:39:30 PM
Representative Pruitt appreciated the amendment. He stated
that $25 million was a substantial amount of money. He did
not like it when the legislature started talking about
millions of dollars like it was $50. He did not have a
problem with the department going through the RPL process
with LB&A. He recalled that when he had been on the LB&A
committee, funding had only been denied twice - one time
was related to a federal program; in the end the funding
had gone through. He believed it was worth having a
conversation with the "appropriators" if the needed funding
was "off that far." He supported the amendment.
Representative Kawasaki agreed that $25 million was a large
number, but when considering the totality of the DHSS
budget, Medicaid services represented 1 percent (2 percent
of the non-Medicaid budget). He used the typical household
budget as an example and noted that many budgets slipped
between the 2 percent. He did not believe it was irrational
to have the department dictate the funds without requiring
it to come back to LB&A every time.
6:41:29 PM
Representative Wilson spoke in favor of the amendment. She
had supported including the language in the past, but she
it was important to be more careful with funds. She
underscored that the only check and balance was the
requirement for the department to return to the legislature
for additional funds if it exceeded its allocated amount.
She reasoned that when the legislature was considering
things like an income tax or a reduction to the Permanent
Fund Dividend, it was necessary to watch where every dollar
went. She reasoned that the legislature had implemented the
necessary provisions if the department needed the extra
money. She stated that $25 million may not seem like a
substantial amount when talking about $1 billion; however,
$25 million was significant to Alaskans. She believed the
legislature should definitely be able to tell Alaskans
where the money was going.
Co-Chair Seaton opposed the amendment. He remarked there
was the other option of having departments come back with
supplemental requests. He would prefer not to see
supplemental requests. The language enabled the department
to use funds from one part of its allocation to another,
which decreased the probability of a supplemental request.
6:43:02 PM
Representative Tilton provided wrap up on the amendment.
She stated that no other department had the language,
including DEED. She stressed the language had been included
as temporary assistance and had been added with the intent
of ensuring the private sector did not have to shut its
doors. She remarked that Vice-Chair Gara had spoken about
the substantial $30 million cut to the department. She
emphasized that $25 million is a major amount of money. She
stated it was within the legislature's power to scrutinize
and know where the funds were spent. She referred to a
prior conversation during the subcommittee process about
moving a $3.7 million request. The subcommittee had asked
the department for detail on how the appropriated money had
been moved around. She stressed the committed had been told
it was not something the department really used. She stated
the department had not used the method for the $3.7 million
and had indicated it would not move the funds without
coming to the legislature first. Under that line of
reasoning, she wondered why the department would move $25
million.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson, Grenn
OPPOSED: Ortiz, Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Foster, Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 94 FAILED (5/6).
6:45:30 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 99
(copy on file):
Information Technology Services
H HSS 99 - Delete 5 PFT positions and associated
funding. Reduce travel and service funding.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes 2 of 26 Analyst Programmer
positions, 1 of 8 Data Processing Technicians and 2 of
19 Micro//Network Technicians for a total deletion of
5 positions and $500,000 from the FY 18 budget request
in the Personal Services line item.
FY 16 actual expenditures in the Travel line item for
In-State Employee travel were $27,900 and the FY 18
budget request for this line item is $49,700 resulting
in an increase of $21,800 over FY 16 expenditures.
This amendment reduces the FY 18 budget request by
$20,000 to more closely align the FY 18 budget request
with FY 16 actual expenditures.
FY 16 actual expenditures in the Services line item
for Information Technology were $1,202,700 and the FY
18 budget request for this line item is $1,328,600
resulting in an increase of $126,000 over FY 16
expenditures. This amendment reduces the FY 18 budget
request by $126,000 to align the FY 18 budget request
with FY 16 actual expenditures.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above]. She clarified that the amendment made suggestions
because she had not removed PCNs; it would enable the
department to select other positions instead.
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection. He stressed the
department's large size. The department had worked to find
places to cut travel and had cut almost $1 million in the
current year. He stressed that every part of a department
was not the same. The five positions identified had federal
matching funds and the amendment would likely mean the
deletion of more than five positions. He underscored the
importance of speaking to people about how the cut would
impact the department instead of merely looking at a budget
book. He relayed that the systems impacted by the proposed
cuts were tasked with paying providers (e.g. for Medicaid).
He stressed that deleting the positions would most likely
slow down the payment to Medicaid healthcare providers. The
systems also helped determine benefit eligibility.
Additionally, the systems helped identify fraudulent
applications and was responsible for covering and tracking
the daily payments given to foster parents (enabling the
state to determine how to leverage more federal match
foster care money). The travel was important because there
were not IT specialists in every community. For example,
the past weekend there had been a server outage in
Ketchikan and an IT specialist had to travel to Ketchikan
to get the server running again. The $126,000 for services
went to things like replacement computers, monitors,
cables, servers, and other. He concluded the department had
tried to find its $30 million in cuts and he did not
believe it could be replicated in the future. He did not
believe the department could absorb the additional cut
proposed in the amendment.
6:49:41 PM
Representative Wilson provided wrap up on the amendment.
She remarked that she continued to hear about the impact to
the department, but very little about the impact to
Alaskans if some of the choices were not made. She remarked
the state may have been trading off computers much more
often because it had the money. She stated sometimes things
had to last longer when there was little money. She
underscored that things changed when money gets tight. She
reiterated that it was not merely the impact on the
department, but the impact to Alaska residents if the
budget was maintained at the proposed level.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 99 FAILED (4/7).
6:51:21 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 102
(copy on file):
Human Services Community Matching Grant
H HSS 102 - Funding reduction to the Grants line item.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment reduces the FY 18 budget request in the
Grants line item by $387,000 to a funding level of
$1,000,000 for Sub-Recipient pass-through grants to
municipalities who contract with various non-profit
sub-grantees for human services.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Representative Kawasaki stated that sometimes the item was
overlooked because it only impacted Anchorage, Mat-Su, and
Fairbanks. He explained that the purpose of the human
services matching grants had been to pass off grants to
municipalities in order for municipalities to help
themselves with the social services network. It had been
determined the method was more efficient than having the
state try to do the same thing. He furthered that several
years earlier the total grants to the three municipalities
had been almost $4 million, but the funding had been
reduced to $1.4 million. The cut would further reduce the
amount to $1 million. He spoke to the return on investment;
each of the communities was responsible for coming up with
a 30 percent local match. Many of the different groups
obtaining funding through the grant system had been very
successful. For example, the Fairbanks Food Bank was
reporting a higher number of people requesting food baskets
in the current year. He referred to the Interior Community
Health Center that specifically helped individuals who
could not afford a regular physician. The center looked out
for the indigent in particular and had a sliding fee scale.
The Interior Aids Association operated a methadone clinic
and Big Brothers Big Sisters helped kids primarily in
single parent families. The agencies were desperately
working in communities and improving the social service
network at a time when the state had been faltering. He
concluded that cuts to the granting agencies would further
harm the social service network.
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection. He agreed with
comments made by Representative Kawasaki and noted there
were also matching grants, which would be impacted by the
next amendment seeking to cut matching grants for other
areas of the state. He stressed the legislature could not
keep moving the goal posts. He recalled that in the past
the argument had been that if the state ran shelters for
abused women, a homeless shelter, or an Alzheimer's
resource center it would be very expensive. Instead, the
state had decided that work could be done more efficiently
and less expensively. The amendment's proposed cut to human
services matching grants would be a cut to Beans Café,
AWAKE, Covenant House, the Disease Resource Center, Clare
House, the Food Bank for Alaska, and other. The Mat-Su had
been added to the program when former Senator Lyda Green
had been in the legislature. He stated the money had not
gone up, but Mat-Su had been added and the money was split
three ways. He stressed that the services were crucial and
were provided at significantly lower costs than the state
could offer. He believed the amendment would increase costs
because the state would end up paying for the individuals
when they ended up on the street.
6:55:41 PM
Representative Wilson provided wrap up on the amendment.
She stated it came down to what fell under the state's
responsibility. She believed all of the nonprofits
mentioned were great organizations. She elaborated that
nonprofits came into a community to meet a need and the
community in turn donates time, money, or services to keep
the nonprofit going. She stated Alaska was the number one
for the most nonprofits per capita. She questioned whether
that was good or bad. She believed there were great
nonprofits and there were others that were pumped up with
state or federal funding. She underscored that communities
would have to step up into areas that were not the state's
responsibility to fund. She explained it was a stepdown
approach that did not take all of the funds away. The
Fairbanks North Star Borough matched some of the state
funds; the community was meeting the need at a local level
as well. She was afraid it would reach the time when an
"all or nothing" approach would be necessary.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Thompson, Tilton, Wilson, Pruitt
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 102 FAILED (4/7).
6:57:46 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 103
(copy on file):
Community Initiative Matching Grants (non-statutory
grants)
H HSS 103 - Reduce the FY 18 budget for grants as
these grants are not statutorily mandated.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment reduces the FY 18 budget request in the
Grants line item by $361,700 to a funding level of
$500,000 for Sub-Recipient pass-through grants. These
grants provide human services to communities
throughout the state that are ineligible for Human
Services Community Matching Grant funds. This is not
mandated by statute.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Representative Guttenberg objected to the amendment. He
stated that the matching grants were not statutorily
mandated and over the years it had been determined that
turning the work over to nonprofits was less expensive than
providing the service by the state. At the end of the day,
many of the services were the least expensive way the state
could deal with them. He reasoned it was not possible to
walk away; the expenses happened to residents. He stressed
it would be necessary to pay for the expenses some way -
via the state, hospitals, families, and other. He detailed
that the grants were the most efficient way to handle
situations that were more expensive in every other way. He
continued that the state had been cutting back on the
grants over the years and nonprofits were doing more with
less, sometimes in crisis mode. He continued that
nonprofits were not lucrative places to work - managements
were always stressed on delivering their services.
Vice-Chair Gara believed the amendment was wrong and it
violated his moral compass. He believed a person should
have some compassion for people who had nothing. He
stressed that places like the Rasmuson Foundation did not
fund operating costs, but only one-time capital costs. He
listed places that would be cut statewide including the
Independent Learning Center in Homer for disabled
individuals, the Nome emergency shelter, Alaska Legal
Services for victims of domestic violence, the Brother
Francis Shelter in Kodiak, the Bethel shelter, the Palmer
Senior Center, a SAIL center in Southeast. It was not the
vision he had for the state.
7:01:20 PM
Representative Wilson provided wrap up on the amendment.
She disputed the statement that a person had no compassion
because they believed in a step down approach. She referred
to churches and other nonprofits that did not take any
state or federal funding. She wondered what happened before
Alaska had become a state and before it had money. She
reasoned that friends, neighbors, and churches had taken
care of each other. She continued that in the past every
once in a while a nonprofit popped up to take care of
specific needs. She imagined the food banks may have fallen
in that category. She stressed that people had survived
before the state had become involved. She believed it was
hard to discontinue giving money after allocating the money
in the past. She agreed that it was difficult to fundraise,
which was the reason she proposed the stepdown approach.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Tilton, Wilson, Pruitt, Thompson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 103 FAILED (4/7).
7:03:35 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 104
(copy on file):
Medicaid Services
Adult Preventative Dental Medicaid Services
H HSS 104 - Funding reduction of the FY 18 budget
request for unrestricted general fund match.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment reduces the FY 18 unrestricted general
fund match request of $2,882,600 by $1,400,000,
roughly 50 percent. In these times of fiscal
restraint, this is currently an extra service over and
beyond the initial Medicaid program.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson explained that she had offered the
amendment in order to initiate a committee conversation;
however, she believed since the item was in statute it
would be better for a bill to be submitted the amendment
and WITHDREW it.
7:04:22 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 105
(copy on file):
Health Care Medicaid Services
H HSS 105 - Eliminates all unrestricted General Funds
and reduces general match funding.
Offered by Representative Wilson
The FY 18 budget request in the Grants line item for
Benefits increased by $12,408,500 from the FY 17
Management Plan level of funding. This amendment
eliminates all unrestricted general funds (fund source
1004) in this allocation and reduces general match by
$2,594,500 for a total reduction to this this
allocation of $12,408,500, the amount of the increase.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above]. She MOVED to AMEND the amendment by adding 1003
General Fund match of $2,594,500. The amendment would only
pertain to the $9.814 million in GF.
Co-Chair Seaton asked for clarification.
Representative Wilson explained that the negative
$2,594,500 would be taken away; no General Fund match would
be taken with the amendment. There being NO OBJECTION, it
was so ordered.
Vice-Chair Gara spoke to his objection to Amendment H HSS
105. He believed more information was required. He
explained that the amendment was related to Medicaid
services and those services received matching [federal]
funds at 50 percent or 90 percent for Medicaid expansion.
Co-Chair Seaton asked for clarification on the amendment
Vice-Chair Gara was discussing.
Vice-Chair Gara stated he was speaking to Amendment H HSS
105. He was not sure it was possible to claim federal
funding would not be lost when it would actually be lost.
He surmised that based on the amendment language the money
seemed to be Medicaid funds. First, the state had a
statutory obligation to pay the funds. Second, they were
paid based on the number of people who were sick and on the
cost of medical care. The department did its best to
anticipate what the costs would be over the coming year; it
was known that every year the department was either under
or over by a bit. He did not think it could be said that
the 50 to 90 percent federal match would not be lost. He
believed spending the state money was required to receive
the federal match. He did not understand the amendment. He
believed it seemed like a cut to mandatory Medicaid
services.
7:08:32 PM
Representative Ortiz asked if they were speaking to the
decrement of $9.814 million and the other monies would go
away.
Representative Wilson clarified that the amendment would
reduce the $9.814 million. She noted that if the match
money were removed, federal funds would be lost, which was
not her intent. She stated that the federal fund authority
increase was $10.7 million; therefore, more than what the
state had in GF used to supplement the program.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Wilson, Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 105 as amended FAILED
(4/7).
7:10:15 PM
Representative Tilton MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 106
(copy on file):
Health Care Medicaid Services
H HSS 106 - Limitation on Medicaid funding for
abortions
Offered by Representatives: Tilton, Wilson
No money appropriated in this appropriation may be
expended for an abortion that is not a mandatory
service required under AS 47.07.030(a). The money
appropriated for Health and Social Services may be
expended only for mandatory services required under
Title XIX of the Social Security Act and for optional
services offered by the state under the state plan for
medical assistance that has been approved by the
United States Department of Health and Human Services.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Tilton explained the amendment that would
limit Medicaid funding on abortions. The amendment would
add conditional language to the Medicaid Services
appropriation that no money appropriated within the
appropriation may be expended for an abortion that was not
a mandatory service required under AS 47.07.030(a). The
money appropriated for DHSS may be expended only for
mandatory services under Title 19 of the Social Security
Act and for optional services offered by the state under
the state plan for the Medicaid assistance approved by the
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Vice-Chair Gara stressed the amendment was unenforceable.
He detailed that the Alaska Supreme Court had held that if
services were going to be provided for people who want to
continue towards pregnancy, it was unlawful to choose to
withhold services who decide they are not going to continue
towards pregnancy. He cited situations where an abortion
was needed to protect the life or health of the mother. He
stated the language could be inserted in the budget, but it
was unenforceable. He understood the views of people who
opposed the concept of abortion. He shared that he was pro-
choice, but noted that was irrelevant in the given
situation. He reiterated that the language was
unenforceable. He concluded that the courts would strike
the concept down and had done so in the past.
Representative Grenn was hopeful the amendment sponsor
could expand on the mandatory services listed in statute
and Title 19 of the Social Security Act. He asked for more
details.
Representative Wilson supported the amendment. She stated
there was already intent language included in the budget
that was unenforceable. She reasoned it was about the
message the legislature wanted to send. She stated that
someone could take it to court if they chose to do so. She
continued that "pretty much all" intent language was
unenforceable. She concluded the amendment represented
intent language to communicate the legislature's stance on
a particular issue. She believed it was clear that using
funding for abortions was an improper use of the funds.
Representative Tilton provided wrap up on the amendment.
She stated that the language had been in the budget
throughout the years. She stressed the importance of the
language.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Ortiz, Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Foster, Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 106 FAILED (5/6).
7:15:35 PM
Representative Guttenberg MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS
107 (copy on file):
Senior and Disabilities Medicaid Services
H HSS 107 - Increase Funds to Maintain the FY17 Number
of Hours per day for Day Habilitation Services
Offered by Representative Guttenberg
This amendment restores $2.6 million in UGF in order
to allow the Department of Health and Social Services
to provide the level of day habilitation services in
FY18 that were provided in FY17 (i.e., 15 hours/week
in FY17 vs a proposed 8 hours/week in FY18).
Representative Wilson OBJECTED.
Representative Guttenberg explained that the amendment
sought to restore $2.6 million to enable the department to
maintain its current level of day rehabilitation services
of 15 hours per week versus 8 hours per week. He shared
that over the years he had worked with many individuals
utilizing the services. He detailed that the individuals
just wanted to work and have a job. He continued that when
the individuals got out of the house it also freed their
families. He surmised that even though it may not be
statutorily required or fiscally conservative enough for
some people, it made everything more productive in society.
He elaborated that it provided meaning in people's lives
and their families were also able to work and be out of the
house. He WITHDREW the amendment.
7:17:18 PM
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H HSS 108
(copy on file):
Senior and Disabilities Medicaid Services
H HSS 108 - Funding reduction for grants.
Offered by Representative Wilson
This amendment deletes all unrestricted general funds
(code 1004) in the FY 18 budget request. Actual FY 16
federal receipts were $236,565,300 and the FY 18
budget request for federal receipt authority is
$297,193,100, an increase of $60,627,800. This
increase can replace the general fund request in this
allocation.
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.
Representative Wilson read the amendment description [see
above].
Vice-Chair Gara explained his objection. He and the
department saw the amendment as a straight cut to Medicaid.
He did not believe it was reasonable to say there was no
match. He relayed that the match was either around 50 or 90
percent under Medicaid expansion. He stressed the state had
to pay the Medicaid bills coming in. He stressed that the
greatest thing the legislature could ever do would be to
gain control over medical costs in the state. However, he
reasoned that if control over medical costs was not
achieved, the legislature could not pretend to cut money it
would have to pay. He believed the amendment would lead to
a supplemental request the following year. The department
had made its best guess of how many people would qualify
for Medicaid in FY 18 and was working very hard to reduce
Medicaid costs. He specified that DHSS had reduced Medicaid
costs by $114 million since 2015, in part due to Medicaid
expansion and waivers. He did not expect the "miracles" to
recur. He concluded that paying the funds was a statutory
requirement.
Representative Wilson provided wrap up on the amendment.
She stated it was not about a miracle, but about
accounting. She stated the 1003 code was GF match. She
stressed that the code in the particular amendment was
1004. She relayed that there were additional federal funds
allocated to the item - $60 million over FY 16. She
remarked that the increase could be due to a waiver or
other things related to the passage of SB 74 the previous
year [Medicaid reform legislation]. She stressed that the
amendment would not cut the spending amount, but it
proposed cutting the type of funds with an addition already
in the budget. She requested to Co-Chair Seaton that the
right codes made it into the budget books in the future.
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Gara, Seaton,
Foster
The MOTION to adopt Amendment H HSS 108 FAILED (4/7).
Co-Chair Seaton noted that Representative George Rauscher
was present in the audience. He relayed the committee would
be taking up amendments to HB 115 the following week
related to the Permanent Fund. The committee would not be
taking up amendments on Sections 10, 11, and 12.
Co-Chair Seaton RECESSED the meeting until 9:30 a.m. the
following day.
^RECESSED
7:23:50 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|