Legislature(2025 - 2026)ADAMS 519
03/09/2026 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 | |
| SB64 | |
| Subcommittee Closeout Reports | |
| Department of Military and Veterans Affairs | |
| Department of Labor and Workforce Development | |
| Department of Natural Resources | |
| Department of Education and Early Development | |
| Judiciary | |
| Department of Public Safety | |
| Department of Fish and Game | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 64 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 263 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 265 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
March 9, 2026
1:36 p.m.
1:36:29 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Foster called the House Finance Committee meeting
to order at 1:36 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Neal Foster, Co-Chair
Representative Andy Josephson, Co-Chair
Representative Calvin Schrage, Co-Chair
Representative Jeremy Bynum
Representative Alyse Galvin
Representative Sara Hannan
Representative Nellie Unangiq Jimmie
Representative Elexie Moore
Representative Frank Tomaszewski
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Jamie Allard
Representative Will Stapp
ALSO PRESENT
Brodie Anderson, Staff, Representative Neal Foster; David
Dunsmore, Staff, Senator Bill Wielechowski; Caroline Hamp,
Staff, Representative Calvin Schrage; Alexei Painter,
Director, Legislative Finance Division; David Jiang, Staff,
Representative Alyse Galvin; Connor Bell, Fiscal Analyst,
Legislative Finance Division; Keenan Miller, Staff,
Representative Nellie Jimmie.
SUMMARY
HB 263 APPROP: OPERATING BUDGET;AMEND;SUPP
HB 263 was HEARD and HELD in committee for
further consideration.
HB 265 APPROP: MENTAL HEALTH BUDGET
HB 265 was HEARD and HELD in committee for
further consideration.
CSSB 64(FIN) am
ELECTIONS
CSSB 64(FIN) am was HEARD and HELD in committee
for further consideration.
SUBCOMMITTEE CLOSEOUT REPORTS:
DEPARTMENT OF MILITARY AND VETERANS AFFAIRS
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
JUDICIARY
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND EARLY DEVELOPMENT
Co-Chair Foster reviewed the meeting agenda.
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 64(FIN) am
"An Act relating to elections; relating to voters;
relating to voting; relating to voter registration;
relating to election administration; relating to the
Alaska Public Offices Commission; relating to campaign
contributions; relating to the crimes of unlawful
interference with voting in the first degree, unlawful
interference with an election, and election official
misconduct; relating to synthetic media in
electioneering communications; relating to campaign
signs; relating to voter registration on permanent
fund dividend applications; relating to the
Redistricting Board; relating to the duties of the
commissioner of revenue; and providing for an
effective date."
1:38:00 PM
Co-Chair Schrage MOVED to ADOPT the proposed committee
substitute for CSSB 64(FIN) am, Work Draft 34-LS0153\R
(Dunmire, 3/6/26).
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED for explanation purposes.
1:38:28 PM
BRODIE ANDERSON, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE NEAL FOSTER,
explained that he would walk the committee through the
changes made in the committee substitute (CS). He stated
that the easiest way for members to follow the changes
would be to have two documents in front of them: the
redline version showing changes from version U to version
R, and the clean version R of the bill (copies on file).
He would primarily reference the redline document and
identify the corresponding page and line numbers in the
bill.
Mr. Anderson began with the first change on page 2 of the
redline document, specifically lines 16 and 17. He
explained that the same change appeared in the bill on page
2, lines 16 and 17. He noted that the language "except for
when provided in the statute reference" had been added and
that the term "personally identifiable" had been replaced
with "confidential." He stated that the change addressed
what information could be provided by the Department of
Revenue (DOR).
Co-Chair Foster asked Mr. Anderson to briefly explain the
reason for the change on lines 16 and 17.
Mr. Anderson responded that he would defer to Mr. David
Dunsmore for the explanation.
DAVID DUNSMORE, STAFF, SENATOR BILL WIELECHOWSKI, explained
that the change clarified that individuals registering to
vote through the Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) application
would still have their names included on the publicly
available voter list. He noted that there had been concern
that the phrase "personally identifiable" might create
ambiguity and could potentially include a voter's name. The
language was revised at the request of the Division of
Elections (DOE) to ensure that standard voter information
would remain publicly available while confidential
information would remain protected.
Mr. Anderson moved to the next change on page 5 of the
redline document, which corresponded to page 5, line 15 of
the bill. He stated that on line 16 of the redline, the
phrase "to the extent possible" had been added. The
language applied to the process of reviewing voter
registration records and updating the master voter
registry. He explained that the change clarified that DOE
should work with other agencies when reviewing voter
registration records to the extent possible. The agencies
listed included the United States Postal Service (USPS),
the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) program,
and other agencies.
1:43:14 PM
Co-Chair Josephson asked what practical effect the phrase
"to the extent possible" would have. He suggested that it
might allow DOE to respond to complaints by stating that it
had used available systems only as time permitted.
Mr. Dunsmore responded that the intent of the language was
to add clarity. He relayed that DOE had expressed concern
that some of the data sources listed in the bill might not
be available in every state or jurisdiction. For example,
certain property or sales tax records and jury duty records
might not exist or might not be accessible in all areas.
The phrase ensured that the division would not be required
by law to consult data sources that were unavailable.
Co-Chair Josephson asked whether the inclusion of the
language also reflected the fact that election
administration operated on strict timelines and that the
division needed flexibility in order to meet election
deadlines.
Mr. Dunsmore responded that the timeline could be a
consideration as well. He explained that Section 8
addressed the records that would be consulted during the
voter roll cleanup process. He relayed that AS 15.07.130(a)
related to who would receive voter notices during the
cleanup process. He noted that the cleanup process occurred
annually in January, and the subsection simply added a list
of data sources that could be consulted during the review.
Co-Chair Josephson noted that the subsection [AS
15.07.130(a)] appeared to be new. He asked whether the
state had ever previously linked voter eligibility
screening to a federal database used to verify citizenship.
Mr. Dunsmore responded that he believed the answer was no.
He clarified that the subsection only identified data
sources that could be consulted during the review process.
The criteria that would trigger a voter roll cleanup notice
was located later in the bill, specifically in Section 4.
If a voter did not meet the criteria, the individual would
not receive a notice related to voter roll cleanup.
Mr. Dunsmore noted that Co-Chair Josephson's question
appeared to reference SAVE. He explained that a negative
query result from the SAVE database alone would not result
in a voter being removed from the voter rolls. He stated
that if a query produced information suggesting that a
voter might be deceased, DOE could investigate further. In
the case of a death, the division might attempt to locate a
death certificate or other documentation before removing
the individual from the voter rolls. He emphasized that the
query result itself would not directly affect a voter's
registration status.
1:47:35 PM
Co-Chair Josephson stated that he had recently read an
article in the Alaska Beacon describing situations in
states such as Missouri and Texas where voters had been
removed from the rolls following database queries without
an initial corrective process. He asked whether Alaska's
approach would differ and whether the first administrative
action in Alaska would avoid directly removing voters.
Mr. Dunsmore responded that Alaska's process would differ.
He explained that the bill would not change the existing
grounds for removing a voter from the registration rolls or
initiating the voter roll cleanup process. The procedures
would continue to be governed by state law and the National
Voter Registration Act of 1993. He stated that voters could
only be removed for specific reasons already recognized
under law, such as a voter's death, a voter registering or
voting in another state, or a felony conviction involving
moral turpitude. Other indicators, such as evidence
suggesting residency in another state, would trigger a
notification process rather than immediate removal. The
voter would receive a notification and have the opportunity
to confirm that they wished to remain registered in Alaska.
He reiterated that the bill would not authorize immediate
removal of voters in the manner described in the reports
from other states.
Representative Bynum remarked that the phrase "to the
extent possible" appeared straightforward and he understood
it had been added because DOE had requested clarity. He
asked whether any legal analysis had been conducted to
evaluate the potential legal effect of the phrase beyond
its inclusion in statute.
Mr. Dunsmore responded that no separate legal evaluation
had been requested beyond the drafting process. When the
bill was prepared, the policy rationale for the language
had been communicated to Legislative Legal Services (LLS),
and the language had been drafted accordingly.
Representative Bynum asked whether the committee could
request LLS to conduct a brief review and provide an
opinion regarding the language at a later time.
Mr. Dunsmore agreed to submit the request through LLS.
1:50:55 PM
Mr. Anderson directed the committee to the next change on
page 6, line 1 of the redline document and page 5, line 30
of the bill. The language changed the reporting deadline
from February 1 to April 1 for the report related to the
recent audit.
Representative Bynum asked for a brief explanation of the
reason for the change in the reporting deadline.
Mr. Dunsmore responded that the report would require DOE to
hire an outside subject matter expert to audit the
division's voter roll cleanup processes and provide a
report to the legislature. He relayed that the division
expressed concern that the original February reporting
deadline was too soon after the January voter roll cleanup
process. He reported that the timeline was adjusted to
April to allow adequate time to complete the audit and to
ensure that the legislature would have more than a month
remaining in the legislative session to consider any
recommendations requiring legislative action.
Mr. Anderson directed the committee to additional changes
on page 6 of the redline document. He explained that
beginning on page 6, line 17, the bill included a
conforming change that created multiple subsections instead
of a single section. The change corresponded with language
appearing later on page 6, lines 27 through 30 of the
redline, which could be found in the bill on page 6, lines
25 through 28. He reported that the new language allowed
DOE to delay the publication of a data breach if law
enforcement agencies thought that public disclosure could
impede an ongoing investigation.
Mr. Anderson directed the committee to page 8 of the
redline document. He reported that the bill included
several technical conforming changes beginning on lines 21
through 27. He stated that the definition of acceptable
proof of identification for voter registration cards was
modified on line 21 of the redline, which corresponded to
page 8, lines 20 through 24 of the bill. Several items
previously accepted as proof of identity would be deleted,
including utility bills, bank statements, paychecks, and
government checks, thereby narrowing the range of materials
that could be used as identification for voter
registration.
1:54:38 PM
Co-Chair Josephson noted that hunting and fishing licenses
were also removed from the list of acceptable
identification. He asked Mr. Dunsmore whether the licenses
could still be considered valid forms of identification if
they were issued after presenting other valid
identification.
Mr. Dunsmore responded that, to the extent a hunting or
fishing license functioned as a state identification card,
it could still fall within the category of government-
issued identification. He explained that the concern that
prompted the change was that hunting and fishing licenses
were sometimes issued through private businesses rather
than directly by government agencies. He stated that the
purpose of the change was to limit acceptable documentation
issued directly by government agencies.
Mr. Anderson added that a similar change regarding
acceptable documentation materials appeared later in the
bill in Section 18 on page 10. The reasoning for the change
was similar to why the definition of acceptable material
had changed.
Mr. Anderson directed the committee to page 10 of the
redline document, beginning on page 10, lines 3 and 4 of
the redline, which corresponded to page 9, line 31 of the
bill. The change included deletions and revisions relating
to the testing official or witness. He explained that the
language was added for clarification to ensure that a
witness signature remained on the envelope. The revision
addressed a request for additional clarification and served
as a conforming change within the bill.
Mr. Anderson directed the committee to page 10, lines 19
through 25 of the redline document, which corresponded to
Section 18 of the bill. The language addressed the types of
identification documents that would be accepted for voter
registration. He stated that the section further defined
and narrowed the list of acceptable documents used to
verify voter identity.
Mr. Anderson moved to page 12 of the redline document,
lines 16 and 17, which corresponded to page 12, lines 11
and 12 of the bill. He explained that the language added
clarification stating that a voter must provide either the
voter's signature or the signature of an attesting official
or witness. He stated that the purpose of the change was to
clarify that ballots could still be cured if a witness
signature was missing. He directed attention further down
page 12 to lines 26 through 27 of the redline document,
which corresponded to page 12, lines 21 through 22 of the
bill. He explained that the language clarified that notices
sent during the ballot cure process must be mailed to the
voter's mailing address rather than any other address that
might appear on the voter's record.
Co-Chair Josephson asked whether the change related to a
previously reported situation in Fairbanks. He relayed that
an individual did not receive a ballot because the address
associated with a PFD application differed from the
individual's current location. He asked if the language was
intended to ensure that only the designated mailing address
would be used regardless of other addresses on file.
Mr. Dunsmore responded that the change was not related to
the situation in Fairbanks. He explained that the language
applied specifically to the ballot curing process conducted
by DOE. When the division reviewed a ballot and identified
a curable deficiency, the division was required to send a
notice to the voter within 24 hours. He stated that the
change clarified that the notice must be sent to the
voter's mailing address if it differed from the voter's
residence address. For example, a voter might maintain a
post office box in addition to a residence address.
2:00:01 PM
Mr. Anderson directed the committee to page 13 of the
redline document, beginning at line 17 and continuing
through page 14, lines 1 and 2. He explained that an entire
section related to procedures for counting ballots during a
recount was deleted.
Co-Chair Foster asked Mr. Dunsmore to explain the reason
for removing the section. He noted that the section had
been previously added and was now being removed.
Mr. Dunsmore responded that the provision had originated in
a governor's bill. He explained that DOE had sought to
clarify an existing statutory requirement regarding whether
ballots received after a deadline should be counted during
a recount. The provision was being removed from the CS
after a legislator raised concerns that repealing the
existing statute could create ambiguity about which ballots
should be counted in a recount. He explained that retaining
the existing statutory language would preserve clear
guidance on recount procedures.
Co-Chair Josephson asked for confirmation that the bill had
not made any changes to existing ballot timelines,
including the 15-day window for absentee ballots submitted
from outside Alaska.
Mr. Dunsmore confirmed that the current deadlines required
ballots mailed domestically to arrive within 10 days after
the election, and ballots mailed from outside the U.S. to
arrive within 15 days. He explained that the bill included
a provision to establish a uniform 10-day deadline for all
ballots, which would allow election results to be certified
five days sooner. Historically, very few valid ballots
arrived during the 10 to 15 day window because ballots
still needed to be postmarked by election day.
2:02:40 PM
Representative Hannan asked whether ballots arriving within
the 10 to 15 day window would still be considered valid or
whether the bill would shorten the return deadline for
international absentee ballots.
Mr. Dunsmore responded that the bill would shorten the
deadline and establish a uniform 10-day return period for
all absentee ballots, including those from outside the
country.
Mr. Anderson directed the committee to page 17 of the
redline document, beginning at lines 3 through 5, which
corresponded to page 16, lines 15 and 16 of the bill. He
explained that the change revised the reporting deadline to
the legislature from November 1, 2026, to the first day of
the regular legislative session. He stated that the revised
timing aligned with standard reporting practices and
allowed additional time for DOE to compile accurate data
following the election.
Mr. Anderson continued to page 17, lines 18 through 31 of
the redline document, corresponding to page 16, lines 25
through 31 of the bill. He explained that the language
addressed applicability provisions and reflected conforming
changes resulting from the deletion of a prior section of
the bill. The revisions ensured that all remaining sections
continued to apply appropriately. He concluded his overview
of the changes.
2:05:46 PM
Representative Jimmie expressed concern that the SAVE
system was operated with involvement from private tech
companies such as Palantir. She asked whether any
confirmation had been obtained regarding whether the
private companies could access Alaskan's voter data.
Mr. Dunsmore responded that he had been researching the
privacy concerns regarding the database. He explained that
SAVE was included in the bill because access to a database
that could be queried would be useful to the state. He
noted that there had been concerns that using the database
might require the state to share sensitive voter
information. He offered reassurance that the sponsor wanted
to work with the committee to ensure that personal
information was not being compromised.
Representative Jimmie understood that SAVE kept all records
for every query for 10 years. She asked what information
was retained by the federal government when Alaska queried
SAVE and what were they allowed to do with the data.
Mr. Dunsmore responded that querying the database would
require certain identifying information, including a
voter's name, date of birth, and Social Security number. In
many cases, DOE might not have Social Security numbers for
a large portion of voters, which could limit the ability to
query the system. He stated that it remained unclear what
specific data the federal government retained from the
queries and how the information was used. He noted that the
system was operated by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services, which was responsible for processing citizenship
and naturalization matters, and that the agency had taken
on an expanded role through management of the database. He
reiterated that the scope of retained query data was not
fully understood.
2:08:46 PM
Co-Chair Foster WITHDREW the OBJECTION.
There being NO further OBJECTION, Work Draft 34-LS0153\R
was ADOPTED.
CSSB 64(FIN) am was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
Co-Chair Foster announced that the amendment deadline for
the bill would be Friday, March 13, at 5:00 p.m.
2:10:07 PM
AT EASE
2:11:15 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Josephson began chairing the meeting. He explained
that the committee would continue hearing finance
subcommittee closeouts.
HOUSE BILL NO. 263
"An Act making appropriations for the operating and
loan program expenses of state government and for
certain programs; capitalizing funds; amending
appropriations; making supplemental appropriations;
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. 265
"An Act making appropriations for the operating and
capital expenses of the state's integrated
comprehensive mental health program; and providing for
an effective date."
^SUBCOMMITTEE CLOSEOUT REPORTS
2:12:26 PM
^DEPARTMENT OF MILITARY AND VETERANS AFFAIRS
2:12:31 PM
Mr. Anderson reviewed the finance subcommittee
recommendations for the Department of Military and Veterans
Affairs (copy on file):
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Military and Veterans Affairs submits
the following recommended operating budget for FY2027
to the House Finance Committee:
Fund Source: (dollars are in thousands)
Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $18,554.4
Designated General Funds (DGF) $ 1.1
Other Funds $14,812.5
Federal Funds $36,379.8
Total $69,747.8
The Unrestricted General Fund difference from FY27
Adjusted Base/House Committee Substitute 1 to the
House Subcommittee budget recommendation is an
increase of $29.0 of Unrestricted General Funds, which
is .2% above the FY27 Adjusted Base.
Positions:
Permanent Full-time 286
Permanent Part-time 0
Temporary 3
Total 286
BUDGET ACTION:
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Military and Veterans Affairs reviewed
the FY2027 Governor's budget request, including
amendments, and recommended the following actions:
1) Accept the Department's transaction for Office of
the Commissioner, adding two Program Managers for
Public Protection and Infrastructure Support. This
includes the following items:
• $318.6 thousand Federal Receipts.
• 2 Permanent Full-time positions
2) Approve the transactions for Information Technology
Classification Study Implementation:
• $49.0 thousand in the Office of the Commissioner
- $16.3 thousand UGF, the rest in Fed and
Other funds.
- $25.5 thousand in Homeland Security and
Emergency Management
-- $12.7 thousand UGF, the rest in CIP
Receipt
3) Accept the Department's transaction for Army Guard
Facilities Maintenance, adding two Environmental
Program Specialists Positions for Hazardous Waste and
Water Resource Management. This includes the following
items:
• $ 252.2 thousand Federal Receipts.
• 2 Permanent Full-time positions
4) Approve the decrement of $27.4 DGF in Army Guard
Facilities Maintenance due to uncollected rental fees.
ATTACHED REPORTS:
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Military and Veterans Affairs adopts the
attached report:
• The House Finance Subcommittee for the Department
of Military and Veterans Affairs Budget Action
Report
2:16:20 PM
Representative Tomaszewski asked for more information about
uncollected rental fees.
Mr. Anderson responded that due to the decrease of rentals
and armories, the department was able to reduce authority
and lower rental fees. Many of the armories were either not
in use or not being utilized, and those in remote locations
had no armory attendants.
^DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
2:17:05 PM
CAROLINE HAMP, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE CALVIN SCHRAGE,
reviewed the finance subcommittee recommendations for the
Department of Labor and Workforce Development (copy on
file):
The House Finance budget subcommittee for the
Department of Labor and Workforce Development (DOLWD)
recommends the following Fiscal Year 2027 budget:
Fund Source: (dollars are in thousands)
Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $23,364.7
Designated General Funds (DGF) $28,683.5
Other Funds $17,094.3
Federal Funds $98,031.7
Total $167,174.2
Positions:
Permanent Full-time 672
Permanent Part-time 32
Temporary 8
Total 712
Compared to the FY27 House Committee Substitute 1, the
subcommittee recommendation represents a decrement of
$534.0 (or -2.2%) in Unrestricted General Funds, a
decrement of $5,724.3 (-16.6%) in Designated General
Funds, a decrement of $1,453.8 (-7.8%) in Other Funds,
and a decrement of $2,591.8 (-2.6%) in Federal Funds.
Budget Actions:
The House Finance budget subcommittee for the
Department of Labor and Workforce Development held two
informational meetings with the Department and one
close-out meeting during the review of the FY2027
budget requests.
The subcommittee adopted:
• all Governor proposed budget changes with two
fund source changes (detailed in Member
Amendments below);
• a technical transaction correction from the
Legislative Finance Division;
• a transfer of the State Training and Employment
Program (STEP) from the numbers section to the
language section; and
• a deletion of two positions within the
Commissioner's office.
Member Amendments:
The Chair set an amendment deadline, welcomed
amendments from all members, and received an amendment
to change the fund source for a Workers' Compensation
increment. DOLWD requested a one-time increment of UGF
to maintain Workers' Compensation operations. The
Worker's Safety and Compensation Administration
Account (WSCAA) is currently underfunded due to a
decrease in revenue derived from employer-paid
insurance premiums and lack of reverse sweep, leaving
no carryforward funding. Due to a member amendment,
the subcommittee voted to change the increase
($1,405.0) from UGF to Timber Sale Receipts.
A member conceptual amendment was also adopted to
fully fund ($478.9) the Office of Citizenship
Assistance and its three positions through STEP funds
instead of previously-used UGF.
Attached Reports:
The Finance Budget Subcommittee for the Department of
Labor and Workforce Development (DOLWD) adopted the BA
Report and corresponding Legislative Finance Division
documents, which are attached.
2:20:34 PM
Representative Hannan asked how money from a different
department's receipts could be taken to fund workers'
compensation, which was a legal obligation. She asked what
would happen to timber receipts if there was no timber
sale.
Ms. Hamp responded that the timber sale receipt could be
used for any public fund source. There was collaboration on
the change with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
and the Legislative Finance Division (LFD) to ensure that
there were currently sufficient timber sale receipt funds
to fund the item.
Representative Hannan noted that she had previously been a
member of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) finance
subcommittee, but she was not currently on the
subcommittee. She understood that timber receipts were
typically used to support operations within the Division of
Forestry. She asked whether the change would require a
reduction in the DNR budget for previously planned uses of
timber receipts or whether the funds were considered excess
and available for reallocation.
Ms. Hamp responded that there were sufficient funds for the
current fiscal year. She explained that adequate funding
was available both within the existing DNR budget and
through the one-time allocation, because the item was a
one-time increment.
Representative Hannan asked whether both the $84,000 in UGF
and approximately $343,000 in interagency receipts
associated with two positions in the commissioner's office
were being removed. She asked if the positions were being
removed also.
Ms. Hamp confirmed that both the funding and the positions
were proposed for deletion.
Representative Hannan stated that she intended to pursue
restoring at least one of the positions. She explained that
one of the positions was a legislative liaison for the
Department of Labor and Workforce Development and played an
important role in assisting constituents, particularly with
unemployment-related issues. She indicated that the
department was willing to fund the position internally
using interagency receipts, but removal of the position
authority would prevent that option. She expressed her
intent to work with the committee to restore the position
while still allowing for the reduction in general fund
support.
2:25:11 PM
Representative Galvin asked for a brief explanation of the
decision to change the fund source for the Office of
Citizenship Assistance (OCA) from unrestricted general
funds (UGF) to statutory designated program receipts. She
asked whether the change would make funding for the program
less stable.
Ms. Hamp responded that the subcommittee had sought
opportunities to reduce UGF spending and determined that a
fund source change would allow the program to continue
operating while achieving savings. She did not have a
definitive answer regarding the long-term stability of the
funding.
Representative Galvin asked for clarification on whether
the fund source change would require annual reconsideration
to maintain funding for OCA.
Ms. Hamp responded that the program would remain in the
base budget even with the use of statutory designated
program receipts and would not necessarily require
reauthorization each year.
^DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
2:27:13 PM
Ms. Hamp reviewed the finance subcommittee recommendations
for the Department of Natural Resources (copy on file):
The House Finance budget subcommittee for the
Department of Natural Resources recommends the
following Fiscal Year 2027 budget:
Subcommittee Recommendations (Numbers Section Only):
Fund Source: (dollars are in thousands)
Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $23,364.7
Designated General Funds (DGF) $28,683.5
Other Funds $17,094.3
Federal Funds $98,031.7
Total $167,174.2
Positions:
Permanent Full-time 672
Permanent Part-time 32
Temporary 8
Total 712
Compared to the FY27 House Committee Substitute #1,
the subcommittee recommendations represent an decrease
of $272.5 (-0.4%) in Unrestricted General Funds, an
increase of $3,896.5 (7.3%) in Designated General
Funds, $1,355.2 (2.5%) in Other Funds, and $7,609.9
(41.6%) in Federal Funds.
Budget Action:
The House Finance budget subcommittee for the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) held two
informational meetings with the Department and one
close-out meeting. The subcommittee adopted:
• All of the Governor's proposed budget requests
except changes to create the Department of
Agriculture, which included denying structure
changes and two increments totaling $301.1 of
various fund sources (the subcommittee
recommendation is to keep the Division of
Agriculture housed within DNR);
• A decrement of $641.1 UGF to delete four vacant
forester positions located in Anchorage, Haines,
and Ketchikan;
• A $900.0 fund source change from UGF to Timber
Sales Receipts to pay for forestry related
positions, reversing action taken in FY25;
• A deletion of the recently vacated Deputy
Commissioner position;
• A one-time increment of $1,956.6 in Vehicle
Rental Tax to fund revenue-generating facilities
and infrastructure projects within Parks
Management and Access.
Compared to the FY27 Governor Amend budget, the
subcommittee recommendations represent a decrease of
$1,960.5 (-2.6%) in UGF.
Subcommittee Amendments:
The Chair set an amendment deadline, welcomed
amendments from all members, and received one
amendments that ultimately was not offered during the
close-out meeting. A conceptual amendment was offered
but failed.
Attached Reports:
The House Finance budget subcommittee for the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) adopted the
attached BA Report.
Co-Chair Josephson asked whether the proposed use of the
vehicle rental tax in the final bulleted item of the
narrative would exceed the available revenue or whether
sufficient funds existed.
Ms. Hamp responded that the proposal would exceed the
typically allocated amount and would result in over-
appropriating the vehicle rental tax.
Co-Chair Josephson asked whether expenditures would be
limited to the available revenue or whether spending could
continue.
Ms. Hamp requested assistance from LFD for a more detailed
explanation.
2:30:46 PM
ALEXEI PAINTER, DIRECTOR, LEGISLATIVE FINANCE DIVISION,
responded that the legislature typically appropriated
vehicle rental tax revenue based on actual receipts from a
prior completed fiscal year. He clarified that the proposal
would exceed the amount of revenue collected in FY 25,
which was the prior fiscal year. He explained that the
vehicle rental tax functioned as a tracking code within the
general fund rather than as a standalone fund with a
retained balance. As a result, if appropriations exceeded
the recorded revenue, general funds would be used to cover
the additional spending.
Co-Chair Josephson asked if he would effectively be able to
tell his constituents in Anchorage that spending on parks
management, access, and infrastructure had increased by
$1.95 million.
Mr. Painter responded that the situation was unusual
because the vehicle rental tax was classified as a
designated general fund rather than a standalone fund with
its own balance. He explained that the revenue ultimately
rolled up into the general fund. In past instances where
small over-appropriations occurred, the excess had simply
been covered by the general fund. He added that the state
had not previously intentionally over-appropriated by a
significant amount and that it was unclear how the governor
or the Division of Finance would respond in such a case.
Representative Galvin asked whether the vehicle rental tax
had originally been intended, either in statute or intent
language, to support tourism marketing efforts such as
those carried out by the Alaska Travel Industry Association
(ATIA).
Mr. Painter responded that statute designated the entire
amount of vehicle rental tax revenue for tourism marketing
purposes.
Representative Hannan asked for clarification on how much
the fund was being over-appropriated.
Mr. Painter explained that the over-appropriation was
approximately equal to the proposed increment of about $1.9
million. He noted that the fund had already been slightly
overspent by a small amount prior to the addition by around
$50,000.
2:34:39 PM
Representative Hannan asked for confirmation that the
calculation accounted for all relevant appropriations
drawing from the vehicle rental tax, including those within
the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
(DOT) and the Department of Commerce, Community, and
Economic Development (DCCED).
Mr. Painter responded in the affirmative.
Representative Bynum asked whether the budget currently
funded tourism marketing.
Mr. Painter responded in the negative.
Representative Bynum expressed concern that the state
maintained a revenue source designated for tourism
marketing while not allocating those funds toward the
intended purpose. He thought complications could be created
in future budgeting decisions by requiring reliance on UGF
instead of the intended revenue stream.
Co-Chair Josephson asked Mr. Painter whether ATIA was
sometimes funded in the capital budget rather than the
operating budget.
Mr. Painter responded that ATIA had been included in the
capital budget more often than not, although it had
occasionally appeared in the operating budget. He added
that, in the current governor's proposal, it was included
in neither.
Representative Galvin relayed that she had been advised
against shifting positions from designated general funds to
UGF due to potential accounting issues or statutory
concerns. She asked for clarification on how that guidance
applied to the current discussion.
Mr. Painter responded that the positions in question were
tied directly to the collection of receipts, making the
designated general fund an appropriate funding source. He
explained that there was a prior policy decision that had
shifted funding to UGF in order to free up timber sale
receipts for capital projects. He noted that the governor
currently proposed using timber receipts for capital
purposes, and that the present change would effectively
revert to using timber receipts for operating expenses,
consistent with earlier practice prior to that shift.
2:38:07 PM
Representative Bynum asked for clarification on item 12
related to fire suppression and land and water resources
forestry management development. He noted that the item
proposed deletion of four vacant forestry positions and
asked whether the deletions were based solely on vacancy
status or whether there had been discussion regarding the
operational need for the positions.
Ms. Hamp responded that the deletions were partially a
cost-saving measure and partially due to the positions
being vacant. She added that the budget included federal
Good Neighbor Authority funding intended to support a
forestry position in Ketchikan, which was expected to help
offset staffing impacts.
^DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND EARLY DEVELOPMENT
2:39:15 PM
DAVID JIANG, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE ALYSE GALVIN, reviewed
the finance subcommittee recommendations for the Department
of Education and Early Development (copy on file):
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Education and Early Development (DEED)
held a total of seven meetings and received eight
presentations on department and division budgets,
including the Governor proposed and amended budget
actions. Based on that information and related
discussions, the Subcommittee accepted all Governor
operating budget actions and added seven items. The
Subcommittee submits the following recommended FY 27
operating budget to the House Finance Committee.
RECCOMENDATIONS:
Fund Source: (dollars are in thousands)
Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $105,018.7
Designated General Funds (DGF) $38,364.6
Other Funds $38,416.3
Federal Funds $267,354.3
Total $449,153.9
Compared to the FY27 governor's amended budget
proposal, subcommittee recommendations represent an
increase of $4,900.1 (+4.9%) in UGF.
Importantly, the amounts above are for the Department
of Education & Early Development and do not include
public education funds that go directly to districts
based on formula funding, base student allocation
(BSA) or Pupil Transportation, which accounts for
$1,233,953.1 and $72,826.1 UGF respectively, since
these are considered language items not in the purview
of the subcommittee. Should these items be included,
the increment of $4,900.1 UGF discussed would account
for a 0.3 percent increase.
Positions:
Permanent Full-time 280
Permanent Part-time 10
Temporary 16
Total 306
[Due to length, please view the copy on file for the
Budget Action section of the summary.]
2:49:22 PM
Co-Chair Josephson commended Representative Galvin and her
staff for presenting a strong and well-supported case for
the requested increments.
Representative Hannan directed attention to items 21 and 22
related to the Higher Education Investment Fund (HEIF). She
asked would happen to those increments if the fund was not
recapitalized.
Mr. Jiang deferred the question to LFD.
2:50:11 PM
CONNOR BELL, FISCAL ANALYST, LEGISLATIVE FINANCE DIVISION,
responded that HEIF was subject to appropriation. He stated
that sufficient funding existed for the current fiscal year
to support the increments regardless of whether
recapitalization occurred. He cautioned that without
recapitalization, the fund would continue to be drawn down
at an unsustainable rate relative to expected market
returns, leading to a gradual depletion over time.
^JUDICIARY
2:51:07 PM
KEENAN MILLER, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE NELLIE JIMMIE,
reviewed the finance subcommittee recommendations for the
Judiciary (copy on file):
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Judiciary (Court System) held a total of 2 meetings
and submits the following recommended operating budget
for FY27 to the House Finance Committee:
RECCOMENDATIONS:
Fund Source: (dollars are in thousands)
Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $105,018.7
Designated General Funds (DGF) $159,591.6
Other Funds $0.0
Federal Funds $2,812.0
Total $1,805.3
Compared to the FY27 Governor's Amended budget, the
Subcommittee recommendations appropriates $1,085.3
more UGF (0.7%).
Positions:
Permanent Full-time 755
Permanent Part-time 38
Temporary 6
Total 799
BUDGET ACTIONS
The Governor's proposed budget was accepted with the
following changes:
- Add $600.3 UGF for inflationary increases to lease,
utility, and service payments.
- Add $115.5 GF/MH for salary and benefit increases of
two paralegals for centralized competency calendar
management (IncT; FY27-28)
- Add $6.0 UGF to the Commission on Judicial Conduct
for increasing annual travel expenses of quarterly in-
person commission meetings.
SUBCOMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
The Chair received one amendment from subcommittee
members in advance of the deadline. The following was
adopted:
- Add $363.5 UGF to address increased court visitor
caseload and backlog.
ATTACHED REPORTS
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Judiciary (Court System) adopted the attached Budget
Action Report provided by the Legislative Finance
Division.
^DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
2:54:02 PM
Mr. Miller reviewed the finance subcommittee
recommendations for the Department of Public Safety (copy
on file):
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Public Safety held a total of 4 meetings
and submits the following recommended operating budget
for FY27 to the House Finance Committee:
RECCOMENDATIONS:
Fund Source: (dollars are in thousands)
Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $290,560.7
Designated General Funds (DGF) $9,984.2
Other Funds $16,604.4
Federal Funds $41,352.6
Total $358,501.9
Compared to the FY27 Governor's Amended budget, the
Subcommittee recommendations appropriates $2,292.0
more UGF (0.8%).
Positions:
Permanent Full-time 1,009
Permanent Part-time 11
Temporary 38
Total 1,058
BUDGET ACTIONS
The Governor's proposed budget was accepted with the
following changes:
- Add $1,200 UGF for inflationary increases for direct
service provider grants for survivors of domestic
violence and sexual assault.
- Add $500.0 UGF to replace lost federal Victims of
Crime Act funding and provide legal services to
survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault.
- Adds $592.0 UGF to replace reduced Restorative
Justice Funds allocated to the Violent Crime
Compensation Board and used to capitalize the Crime
Victim Compensation Fund.
SUBCOMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
The Chair received 10 amendments from subcommittee
members in advance of the deadline. None were adopted.
ATTACHED REPORTS
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Public Safety adopted the attached
Budget Action Report provided by the Legislative
Finance Division.
^DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
2:56:41 PM
Mr. Miller reviewed the finance subcommittee
recommendations for the Department of Fish and Game (copy
on file):
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Fish and Game held a total of 4 meetings
and submits the following recommended operating budget
for FY27 to the House Finance Committee:
RECCOMENDATIONS:
Fund Source: (dollars are in thousands)
Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $77,802.1
Designated General Funds (DGF) $12,875.8
Other Funds $92,639.4
Federal Funds $95,906.9
Total $279,224.2
Compared to the FY27 Governor's Amended budget, the
Subcommittee recommendations spend equal UGF funds. It
adds three temp positions.
Positions:
Permanent Full-time 868
Permanent Part-time 576
Temporary 4
Total 1,448
BUDGET ACTIONS
The Governor's proposed budget was accepted with the
following changes:
- Add $400.0 UGF to the commercial Fisheries/Westward
Region Fishery Management to supplant contributions
made by the Bristol Bay Science and Research Institute
to the Port Moller Test Fishery. The Port Moller Test
Fishery is used to generate estimates of sockeye
salmon stock and age composition and is deemed a core
program by the Bristol Bay Fisheries Collaborative, of
which the Department is a member.
The subcommittee Chair recommends a technical
correction to transfer this increment from Commercial
Fisheries/Westward Region Fisheries Management to
Commercial Fisheries/Central Region Fisheries
Management in the full Finance Committee. The
correction would change nothing about the intended use
of this funding.
- Replace $1,160.3 in CFEC receipt authority with UGF
in the Commercial Fisheries/Statewide Fisheries
Management allocation. This eliminates the Commercial
Fisheries Entry Commission's (CFEC's) projected
negative carryforward balance.
- Add $532.9 in CFEC receipt authority to the CFEC
Appropriation to fund three positions related to
records reduction, Bristol Bay permitting, and IT
modernization; restore the services budget to
sustainable levels; and reclassify IT positions.
- Add a $150.0 FY27-FY29 IncT to give the Commercial
Fisheries Entry Commission the CFEC receipt authority
needed to fund its IT modernization project.
- Replace $682.8 CFEC receipt authority with UGF in
the statewide fisheries management allocation to again
eliminate CFEC receipt overdraw.
- Replace $2,243.1 UGF with FED so the hatcheries can
leverage in-kind contributions from construction costs
for the use of Dingell-Johnson funds.
SUBCOMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
The Chair received no amendments from subcommittee
members in advance of the deadline.
ATTACHED REPORTS
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Fish and Game adopted the attached
Budget Action Report provided by the Legislative
Finance Division.
Co-Chair Josephson asked whether item 7 might be amended to
move the item from the Westward Region to the Central
Region.
Mr. Miller replied that an amendment could be offered and
explained that the original designation had been an error.
He clarified that the mistake resulted from referencing the
location where the study was conducted rather than the
region in which the department actually administered the
program.
3:01:12 PM
Representative Hannan asked for more information about the
Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission (CFEC) projected
negative carryforward balance. She asked for confirmation
that the anticipated negative balance applied to the
current fiscal year.
Mr. Miller responded that he would prefer to consult LFD
for a precise answer. He understood that at the current
rate of overdraw, the CFEC balance was expected to reach
approximately negative $1.2 million in the following fiscal
year.
Representative Hannan asked how many staff CFEC currently
had, especially highly paid positions such as commissioners
and the executive director. She asked if there were any
vacant positions.
Mr. Miller responded that as of February of 2026, there
were five vacant positions within CFEC. He relayed that the
commission had already folded the positions into its
organizational structure.
Representative Hannan asked how the agency could be
accruing a negative spend prediction despite having a high
number of vacancies, given its relatively small total staff
size. She did not understand how CFEC was spending a high
amount of money despite having five vacancies.
Mr. Miller responded that the deficit was driven by overall
expenditures exceeding projected receipt revenue rather
than staffing levels alone. He outlined that expected
receipt revenue for FY 27 was approximately $6.5 million,
while combined expenditures included about $4.023 million
for CFEC operations, approximately $3.579 million for
commercial fisheries expenditures, and about $300,000 was
expected for the Fishermen's Fund. The combined
expenditures resulted in a projected negative carryforward
balance of roughly $1.16 million.
Representative Hannan asked whether the subcommittee had
considered eliminating any of the existing vacant positions
within CFEC, separate from positions related to IT
modernization.
Mr. Miller responded in the negative.
HB 263 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
HB 265 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
Co-Chair Josephson reviewed the agenda for the following
day's meetings.
ADJOURNMENT
3:06:47 PM
The meeting was adjourned at 3:06 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 64 CS WorkDraft HFIN R 030626 (2).pdf |
HFIN 3/9/2026 1:30:00 PM |
SB 64 |
| SB 64 CS Workdraft Compare v. R 030626 (1).pdf |
HFIN 3/9/2026 1:30:00 PM |
SB 64 |
| SB 64 Calista Corporation Letter of Support for 030625.pdf |
HFIN 3/9/2026 1:30:00 PM |
SB 64 |
| SB 64 Support Letter AFN.2.26.26.pdf |
HFIN 3/9/2026 1:30:00 PM |
SB 64 |
| SB 64 Public Testimony Rec'd by 030625_R.pdf |
HFIN 3/9/2026 1:30:00 PM |
SB 64 |
| SB 64 Sectional Analysis Version R.pdf |
HFIN 3/9/2026 1:30:00 PM |
SB 64 |
| SB 64HCSCS(FIN) NEW FN-OOG-DOE-03-06-26.pdf |
HFIN 3/9/2026 1:30:00 PM |
SB 64 |
| SB 64 HCS Summary of Changes U to R 030626.pdf |
HFIN 3/9/2026 1:30:00 PM |
|
| SB 64 Public Testimony rec'd by 030926 2026.pdf |
HFIN 3/9/2026 1:30:00 PM |
SB 64 |
| HB 263 HFIN Subcommittee Reports 030926pm.pdf |
HFIN 3/9/2026 1:30:00 PM |
HB 263 |