Legislature(1995 - 1996)
02/22/1995 03:00 PM House L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE LABOR AND COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE
February 22, 1995
3:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Represent Pete Kott, Chairman
Representative Norman Rokeberg, Vice Chairman
Representative Brian Porter
Representative Jerry Sanders
Representative Beverly Masek
Representative Kim Elton
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Gene Kubina
PREVIOUS ACTION
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
*HCR 3: Relating to correcting errors in a workers'
compensation pamphlet published by the Department of
Labor.
HEARD AND HELD
*HB 147: "An Act relating to the Alaska Sport Fishing Industry
Marketing Council and a nonresident sport fishing
license surcharge."
HEARD AND HELD
*HB 65: "An Act establishing a loan guarantee and interest rate
subsidy program for assistive technology."
PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE
HL&C - 02/22/95
SB 55: "An Act repealing the sunset of the enhanced 911
emergency reporting systems."
SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
(* First Public Hearing)
WITNESS REGISTER
ELIZABETH ROBERTS, Researcher
for Representative Bettye Davis
Capitol Building, Room 430
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-3875
Position Statement: Provided sponsor statement for HCR 3
DWIGHT PERKINS, Special Assistant
to the Commissioner
Department of Labor
P.O. Box 33922
Juneau, Alaska 99802
Telephone: (907) 465-2700
POSITION STATEMENT: Provide information on HCR 3.
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN
State Capitol Building, Room 24
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-4931
POSITION STATEMENT: Prime Sponsor HB 147
JEFF LOGAN, Legislative Assistant
to Representative Joe Green
Capitol Building, Room 24
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-4931
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 147
JOHN BURKE, Deputy Director
Sport Fish Division
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
P.O. Box 25526
Juneau, Alaska 99802-5526
Telephone: (907) 465-4180
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 147
JEFF BUSH, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Commerce
and Economic Development
P.O. Box 110800
Juneau, Alaska 99811
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 147 as it was currently
written
GEORGE UTERMOHLE, Attorney
Legislative Affairs Agency
130 Seward Street, Suite 409
Juneau, Alaska 99801-2105
Telephone: (907) 465-2450
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 147
BUD HODSON, Owner
Tikchik Narrows Lodge
Founding Member, Alaska Sport Fishing Industry Association
4852 Hunter Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Telephone: (907) 243-8450
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 147
DUKE BERTKE
Chelatna Lake Lodge, Inc.
Founding Member, Alaska Sport Fishing Industry Association
3941 Float Plane Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99502
Telephone: (907) 243-7767
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 147
MITCH GRAVO, Lobbyist,
Alaska Sport Fishing Industry Association
170 Botanical Circle
Anchorage, Alaska 99515
Telephone: (907) 244-2406
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on HB 147
BEN ELLIS, Executive Director
Kenai River Sport Fishing, Incorporated
P.O. Box 1228
Soldotna, Alaska 99669
Telephone: (907) 262-8588
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in tentative support of HB 147
PAUL DALE
King Salmon Fund
P.O. Box 701
Kenai, Alaska 99611
Telephone: (907) 776-5342
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 147
MAX LOWE, General Manager
Regal Alaskan Hotel
4800 Spenard Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99517
Telephone: (907) 243-2300
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 147.
BILL SIMS, Owner
Lake Illiamna Lodge
3851 Chiniak Bay Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99515
Telephone: (907) 522-3355
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 147.
BARBARA BINGHAM, Member
Sitka Charter Boat Operator's Association
P.O. Box 6112
Sitka, Alaska 99835
Telephone: (907) 747-5777
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 147
JOSEPH JOLLY, Board Member
United Cook Inlet Drift Association
Commercial Fisherman
HCO 2, Box 753
Soldotna, Alaska 99669
Telephone: (907) 283-3600
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 147
KEITH JOHNSON
3646 North Point Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99515
Telephone: (907) 243-5087
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 147
ROD BERG
266 Redmood Court
Soldotna, Alaska 99669
Telephone: (907) 262-6064
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol, Room 422
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
Telephone: (907) 4457
POSITION STATEMENT: Prime Sponsor HB 65
NANCY ANDESON
9346 Parkview Court
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 789-2914
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified
KEN DEAN
1136 Slim Williams
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 789-4309
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 65
ELENA KILBUCK
1621 Tongass Avenue
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Telephone: (907) 225-4735
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 65
PATRICK REINHART, Independent Living
701 East Tudor Road, Number 280
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Telephone: (907) 562-5613
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 65
JIM JANSEN
Challenge Alaska
P.O. Box 164
Girdwood Alaska 99587
Telephone: (907) 783-2453
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 65
GREG ALLISON
Southeast Alaska Independent Living
P.O. Box 35097
Juneau, Alaska 99803-5097
Telephone: (907) 789-5097
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 65
PAM GUY, State Employee, Deaf Advocate
P.O. Box 20377
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 780-4551
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 65
STAN RIDGEWAY, Deputy Director
Division of Vocational Rehabilitation
Department of Education
801 West 10th Street, Suite 200
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-6932
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 65
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HCR 3
SHORT TITLE: WORKERS' COMPENSATION PAMPHLET ERRORS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) B.DAVIS
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/17/95 50 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/17/95 50 (H) LABOR AND COMMERCE
02/22/95 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 147
SHORT TITLE: SPORT FISHING MARKETING COUNCIL/SURCHARGE
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) GREEN, Mulder
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
02/03/95 235 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
02/03/95 235 (H) LABOR AND COMMERCE, FINANCE
02/10/95 322 (H) COSPONSOR(S): MULDER
02/22/95 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 65
SHORT TITLE: ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY LOAN GUARANTEES
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) PORTER, Davies, Brice, Brown,
Mackie, B.Davis, Finkelstein, Kubina, Kott, Elton,
Foster, Ivan, Robinson, Nicholia
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/06/95 37 (H) PREFILE RELEASED
01/16/95 37 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/16/95 38 (H) L&C, HES, FIN
01/26/95 147 (H) COSPONSOR(S): BRICE, BROWN, MACKIE
01/26/95 147 (H) COSPONSOR(S): B.DAVIS, FINKELSTEIN
01/26/95 147 (H) COSPONSOR(S): KUBINA
01/27/95 162 (H) COSPONSOR(S): KOTT, ELTON
01/30/95 180 (H) COSPONSOR(S): FOSTER, IVAN
02/06/95 256 (H) COSPONSOR(S): ROBINSON
02/10/95 321 (H) COSPONSOR(S): NICHOLIA
02/22/95 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: SB 55
SHORT TITLE: REPEALING SUNSET OF ENHANCED 911 SYSTEM
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) TORGERSON; REPRESENTATIVE(S) Navarre,
Phillips, Bunde
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/26/95 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/26/95 (S) LABOR & COMMERCE
02/02/95 (S) L&C AT 01:30 PM FAHRENKAMP RM 203
02/02/95 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
02/03/95 162 (S) L&C RPT 4DP
02/03/95 162 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTES (DHSS, DPS, DCED)
02/07/95 (S) RLS AT 11:40 AM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203
02/07/95 (S) MINUTE(RLS)
02/08/95 205 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 2/8/95
02/08/95 207 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
02/08/95 207 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN
CONSENT
02/08/95 207 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME SB 55
02/08/95 208 (S) PASSED Y17 N1 E2
02/08/95 208 (S) ADAMS NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION
02/09/95 219 (S) RECON TAKEN UP - IN THIRD READING
02/09/95 220 (S) RECONSIDERATION HELD TO END OF
CALENDAR
02/09/95 223 (S) PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y19 N- E1
02/09/95 226 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
02/10/95 291 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
02/10/95 291 (H) L&C
02/10/95 323 (H) CROSS SPONSOR(S): NAVARRE
02/20/95 426 (H) CROSS SPONSOR(S): PHILLIPS
02/22/95 453 (H) FIN REFERRAL ADDED
02/22/95 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 95-8, SIDE A
Number 000
CHAIRMAN PETE KOTT called the meeting of the House Labor and
Commerce Standing Committee to order at 3:00 p.m. Members
present at the call to order were Representatives Kott, Rokeberg,
Sanders, Masek, Porter and Elton. Representative Kubina was
absent due to a family emergency.
HL&C - 02/22/95
HCR 3 - WORKERS' COMPENSATION PAMPHLET ERRORS
Number 049
ELIZABETH ROBERTS, RESEARCHER FOR REPRESENTATIVE BETTYE DAVIS,
Prime Sponsor of HCR 3, explained is resolution relates to
correcting errors in a worker's compensation pamphlet published
by the Department of Labor.
MS. ROBERTS said the little blue pamphlet entitled "Workers'
Compensation and You," is frequently the first information the
injured worker receives. It is essential the information
contained inside the pamphlet is accurate and up to date.
Unfortunately, the new revised edition contains misleading and
unconstitutional information.
MS. ROBERTS said there are inconsistencies between statements
made in the pamphlet and the requirements of the Americans with
Disabilities Act in that the pamphlet misstates what information
may be requested of future employees. The correction of errors
and inconsistencies may take the form of an erratum insert until
the next formal revising of the pamphlet.
MS. ROBERTS stated HCR 3 is a bill that they had hoped wouldn't
have to become a bill. Ms. Roberts quoted from the pamphlet on
page 3, under the heading "What If You Don't Tell The Truth," as
follows: "There are strict penalties for not telling the truth.
When you fill out applications for work, be sure to answer
questions about your health truthfully. If you lie about your
health when you apply for a job, you may not be able to get
workers' compensation benefits if you get hurt." (AS 23.30022).
Ms. Roberts stated according to the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA), it is unconstitutional to ask anybody about their
health until you actually employ them. She stated they would
like to see this corrected, in the form of an erratum insert.
The Department of Labor has assured her this will be taken care
of. However, she said the pamphlet was published in August, and
her office has had no formal notification that anything was
actually going to happen. She stated Representative Bettye Davis
wanted to be assured of a time line when the whole pamphlet
itself will be checked for inconsistencies and misstatements and
then corrected.
Number 101
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if Ms. Roberts had noted any other
inconsistencies in the pamphlet, or whether she was asking the
department to review this to insure that there was nothing but
accurate information provided in the pamphlet
MS. ROBERTS stated at the beginning of last summer, the
department had contracted out to have the pamphlet revised.
However, the person had quit before the job was done. She stated
that the department then advised Representative Davis' office
that the director of the division had finished the job and, in
fact, there are more inconsistencies. However that director was
no longer with the department. Ms. Roberts stated that she did
not have the background to know what else was misleading and that
the pamphlet was very complicated, probably too complicated for
the average working man.
REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG asked Ms. Roberts if the ADA
statute specifically prohibits inquiring into health status.
MS. ROBERTS read from the ADA as follows: "Except as permitted,
it is unlawful for a covered entity to conduct a medical
examination of an applicant or to make inquiries as to whether an
applicant is an individual with a disability or as to the nature
or severity of such disability." She stated that after you hire
someone, you may then ask anything you want, for insurance
purposes, or to see if the employee is physically capable of
doing the job.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG commented that this was not asking about
health specifically, it was asking about a persons able
bodiedness.
REPRESENTATIVE JERRY SANDERS said when Ms. Roberts stated "except
as permitted," this statement covers a large amount of territory.
MS. ROBERTS continued to read, as follows: "Discrimination,
general rule; no covered entity shall discriminate against a
qualified individual with a disability because of the disability
of such individual in regard to job application procedures, the
hiring advancement or discharge of employees, employee
compensation, job training and other terms conditions and
privileges of employment." She stated that you're not allowed to
discuss an applicant's health during a job interview, only after
the hiring. This is so you're not prejudiced against people with
disabilities.
CHAIRMAN KOTT stated you can ask someone whether or not they can
perform certain tasks associated with that job prior to the
actual hiring.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated his understanding of the law was you
may ask certain questions, and even go so far as to test, prior
to hiring, for specifically qualified job requirements. But
those requirements have to be related specifically to the job,
not to some general condition. He further stated he could see
where this paragraph might need to be reworded, but not to the
extent that no questions regarding physical conditions may be
asked.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG stated that he was in full support of
this resolution.
CHAIRMAN KOTT said he agreed, but the question he had was how to
go about it. He stated that he felt a resolution was overkill.
With the change in Administrations, there is some allowance to
make sure things get caught up. He comment that, "it seems we're
killing a fly with a nuclear bomb."
MS. ROBERTS stated that she had been told it would take two to
three weeks for the erratum insert, and two to three months for a
reprint. Representative Davis just wants to be assured that
these guidelines were met.
DWIGHT PERKINS, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT
OF LABOR, stated he had been in contact with Representative
Davis' office. He stated currently, they were going through a
revision of the pamphlet. He explained that it was hard to read
for the average person, and they were working to make it shorter
and easier to read. He referred to what was mentioned earlier
about AS 23.3022, if the committee didn't like the wording in the
pamphlet, the pamphlet could quote the statue in total; but, as
long as the statute exists, the board must apply it. He stated
that they would have the erratum ready in two to three weeks, and
they would forward a copy for the committee to review.
Number 307
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked Mr. Perkins if he agreed the statute cited in
the booklet did not conform with the ADA standards.
MR. PERKINS stated it could be a potential conflict.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if inconsistent state laws were preempted
under the supremacy clause.
MR. PERKINS stated he did not know, but would get back to the
committee on that issue.
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER stated that this question should be
turned over to the Department of Law, which could come up with
wording that would balance the existing statute and ADA.
Number 321
REPRESENTATIVE KIM ELTON agreed with Representative Porter. He
stated in reading the pamphlet, it was like reading a legal ad.
Number 335
CHAIRMAN KOTT stated that it shouldn't be the responsibility of
the committee to thoroughly analyze the pamphlet. He would ask
the Department of Labor, through the Division of Workers'
Compensation, to work on the pamphlet. He said the committee
would hold the bill.
HL&C - 02/22/95
HB 147 - SPORT FISHING MARKETING COUNCIL/SURCHARGE
Number 379
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN, PRIME SPONSOR OF HB 147, stated he
introduced the bill to establish, within the state, a proponent
for encouraging non-resident sports fisherman to come to the
state and enjoy what we can offer them. He said the bill would
not be geared to bringing non-residents to places suffering from
over use such as the Russian and Kenai Rivers. The purpose of
this council would be to appeal to non-resident sports fisherman,
the people who want to be in the "out back." The council would
direct publicity and advertising towards that end.
JEFF LOGAN, LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANT TO REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN,
stated Alaska was a maturing tourism market. He made reference
to specialized marketing, such as eco-tourism, which focuses on
environmental tourism, and senior citizen tourism, which brings
senior citizens up during the off seasons. He stated that this
market was ready for the Alaska sport fishing experience, as a
specialized market. This bill does not create a new organization
as much as it helps bring together the members of an existing
industry to promote themselves. He stated in the committee
member's packet was a page from the Governor's transition report,
where the Governor's Task Force on Fisheries recognizes that an
effort to market a sport fishing experience is something the
state needs to do. HB 147 creates a marketing council, which is
directed by a board, and managed jointly by the Commissioner of
Commerce and a qualified trade association. As the bill was
initially written, the board would have 19 members. Mr. Logan
stated he had some proposed amendments for HB 147. He stated
that they would amend the number of members to 11. The board
then would be comprised of the director of the Division of
Tourism, and the director of the Division of Sport Fish, in which
both would be permanent positions. The sport fishing industry
would nominate five members, and the Governor would nominate
four. The board would be responsible for directing the efforts
of the council in entering into agreements with private and
public organizations to market Alaska as a sport fishing
destination. The bill says that the board may not hire
employees. It brings an existing industry together to promote
itself. The board and the council would have the ability to
enter into contracts to accomplish their duties, but it wouldn't
be necessary to hire any new people to do this.
Number 476
CHAIRMAN KOTT stated since the legislature was appropriating some
money in the form of per diem, it would be creating another layer
of bureaucracy. Whether this was essential or necessary is the
issue.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said it was his understanding that the
Alaska Tourism Marketing Council (ATMC) members pay their own way
to board meetings, and that would be the case here as well.
Number 493
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN stated that the bill allows per diem
expenses within the state but not outside the state. He stated
that there would be a self generating extreme surplus of funding.
The current fiscal note shows a large amount of money going to
this council; however, that isn't the intent of the council. It
would be less than $100,000 for the first couple years. He
stated that it would never approach the $900,000 shown on the
fiscal note. In essence, the added layer would be more of a kin
to an advisory council.
Number 511
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON stated that the fiscal note reflects over $1
million a year. He inquired as to how they estimated their
expenditures at substantially less than that amount.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN commented that this was one of the items to
which Mr. Logan referred to, in that the fiscal note should be
down sized considerably. He stated that the misunderstanding in
the preparation of the note was in thinking that all of the items
were expenditures, with the balance of the fund being used by the
council for advertising. He stated that in reality, the fiscal
note would be 15 percent of that.
MR. LOGAN added that in the preparation of the fiscal note, there
were a number of assumptions the department utilized. There were
a large number of unanswered questions in the preparation of the
fiscal note. Now that they'd seen it, the note would be a
working document. He acknowledged that it posed a number of
questions, and that they would answer those questions. The
fiscal note then would change.
Number 528
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON noted that some of the outstanding costs
would be for travel. To accomplish the purposes of the council,
he assumed there would be a substantial amount of contractual
money. He inquire regarding the anticipated size of that
expenditure.
Number 538
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said the amount utilized would depend on
what the Department of Fish and Game actually allocates. There's
the possibility that once the funds are realized, Fish and Game
wouldn't allocate anything.
MR. LOGAN stated that a marketing program would take a lot of
money. He referred to the difference is in the fiscal notes for
FY 96 and 97 and said they don't expect to have too much income
generated by that point, so those numbers will be reduced
considerably.
Number 559
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER surmised that there wouldn't be any net
impact on the general fund. He stated that with the program
receipts going back into the general fund from the sale of
brochures and the $5 increase on the 220,000 out of state
licenses, there was a chance that the receipts would never come
back to the program. He stated that it was not inappropriate to
dedicate them all to this program.
Number 571
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN stated the proponents of this council were
concerned in having money coming in then having to allocate back
out, they were willing to take that chance. The more money
available, the better the advertising.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG stated he had concerns with the
memorandum sent by Mr. Bertke and Mr. Hodson, dated the February
21. He said the committee should be talking about whether they
should continue considering the bill before the problems were
cleared up. The point of the memorandum was that they could be
guilty of diverting federal funding and be in jeopardy of losing
$10 million of federal funds.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT pointed out to Jeff Logan that on page 4,
line 30 of the bill, it suggests that the council shall deposit
the money in the general fund, and on page 5, line 16, the money
collected from the $5 surcharge will be deposited into the fish
and game fund. He asked if the $5 surcharge goes to the fish and
game fund, we don't have to divert monies from the general fund
to the fish and game fund, which is currently being done. He
asked if under federal law, the money that went to the fish and
game fund would have to stay there.
MR. LOGAN stated that in the committee member's packet, there is
a memorandum from George Utermohle, Attorney, Legislative Affairs
Agency, explaining the workings of the fish and game fund. He
further stated that once the $5 surcharge went into the fund, it
stayed there and could only be used for sport fish research or
management.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked if there was an anomaly between the two
sections on pages 4 and 5.
MR. LOGAN answered, "No."
Number 619
JOHN BURKE, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, SPORT FISH DIVISION, ALASKA
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME (ADF&G), AND FEDERAL AID COORDINATOR,
explained he is in charge of federal aid to sport fish
restoration for the ADF&G, and stated he had spoken several times
with the Federal Aid Office in Anchorage and was told they would
view this as a diversion of funds. Money collected for licenses
must, in turn, be used to directly benefit sports fisherman.
TAPE 95-8, SIDE B
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if the Sport Fish Division receives any money
at this time.
MR. BURKE replied no. They were asking for $200,000 next year,
specifically to support the Earl West Cove project through the
Crystal Lake Hatchery. Outside of this, they have no general
funds.
Number 013
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated there had to be a way to craft this
legislation so that it didn't fall under the federal mandate. He
was requesting those involved try to get around this.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG agreed with Representative Porter. He
stated that he was conceptually in full support of the council,
but at this stage, he would be uncomfortable moving on the bill.
Number 041
JEFF BUSH, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, stated that his department favored any
efforts to market Alaska in any form. However, he regretfully
stated that the department would oppose this bill as it is
currently written. His concern with the bill is that essentially
the Alaska Tourism Marketing Council (ATMC) has always run a
generic marketing campaign, but this bill sounds like the
sponsors would like to essentially make marketing "target
specific" for sport fish. The concern was that the state has a
limited amount of marketing money available. If they start
fragmenting those efforts, by taking out $1 million for sport
fish, the next people at the table would be the hotel operators
and other specialized groups. He stated that he didn't oppose
these efforts. If the money is there for more marketing, then
great. What he opposes was that they have a finite amount of
money, and he didn't want it being fragmented. Another problem
he had is that it was a state entity. If the state can raise $1
million and the legislature deems that they can use this for
sport fish marketing, then they could do this through a grant.
He doesn't want the Department of Commerce and Economic
Development to be creating an association for this particular
industry. He felt that this would end up having a snowball
effect.
Number 190
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if current marketing, in Alaska, within ATMC
or the Division of Tourism, couldn't use its own staff to assist
in this procurement or delineation of (indisc.).
MR.BUSH answered, "certainly." But, what they would be asking
them to do was to take on more work with an already overworked
staff. This would be taking efforts away from what they do on a
daily basis. Since they are working with program receipts, he
didn't feel it would be unreasonable to add a Marketing
Coordinator. The response he has received from the people
supporting this legislation is that they don't want to create
more bureaucracy. They feel they can contract out. They need to
find a person who is a specialist in advertising or marketing.
He said that what they need is an administrator. He stated that
you need one state employee to administer this program.
Number 160
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON stated that he was sympathetic to Mr. Bush's
plight.
GEORGE UTERMOHLE, ATTORNEY, LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS AGENCY, stated
that the issues raised by the Department of Fish and Game, on
behalf of the Federal Fish and Wildlife Service, concerns the
diversion of fish and game license fees. The state participates
in the federal aid program for sport fisheries. As a result, the
state gets a large sum of money from the federal government. The
state has to dedicate its fish and game license fees to a
particular fund that can only be used for sport fishing purposes.
If participation in the federal program was to be suspended, we
would lose the ability to be able to dedicate those funds. We
cannot divert the fish and game license fees to a purpose other
than the management of sport fisheries. The federal regulations
relate only to the diversion of license fees, not to the
diversion of any other state money that might go to the ADF&G or
the Division of Sport Fisheries. It does not address the issue
of general funds. Mr. Utermohle stated that HB 147 does not
provide for any diversion from the fish and game fund. He felt
there was no logic behind the position of the Fish and Wildlife
Service.
Number 283
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER asked if there was a similar program where
this problem had been addressed. He asked if we could have the
existing license fee, with an additional $5 marketing surcharge
directed to the general fund as opposed to this other dedicated
fund.
MR. UTERMOHLE replied that we can't, under the terms of the
federal program. The fish and game license fee is any fee
imposed upon a person which conveys the right to engage in sport
fishing. If you can't go sport fishing without a sport fishing
marketing fee, its considered a license fee for purposes of the
federal program and must be dedicated to this program.
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON said if the Sport Fish Program does not
receive general funds, are they taking general funds out of a
different part of the ADF&G or another department's budget?
MR. UTERMOHLE stated that would be the case, but he didn't see
how that could come out of the Commercial Fisheries Division's
budget. The loss to their budget in general fund dollars could
not be offset by money taken by the Sport Fish Program because
that money is restricted to sport fish purposes. Therefore, the
commercial fisheries program would take a loss, and that would be
out of the jurisdiction of the Fish and Wildlife Service.
BUD HODSON, OWNER, TIKCHIK NARROWS LODGE; FOUNDING MEMBER,
ALASKA SPORT FISH INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION, stated that he was a
proponent of this bill. He stated that they had a mechanism to
be self-funding, but they are running into some roadblocks. What
they are trying to establish with the marketing council is not to
bring more people into problem areas. He stated that they wanted
to provide a vision for sport fishing and to target fisheries
that were under utilized. It also is a goal to help the industry
identify where it could expand or recuperate closed fisheries.
Their intent is not to pump more anglers into the Kenai, it is to
educate the public and the industry to look at what the options
are for helping people survive closures. The industry and the
state needs to look at where they are going to be in ten years.
Number 373
DUKE BERTKE, CHELATNA LAKE LODGE; FOUNDING MEMBER, ALASKA SPORT
FISHING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION, stated that the sport fishing
industry was in no way trying to fragment the ATMC. He felt they
could operate under the umbrella, doing value-added marketing to
help keep the tourists happy. They felt they could direct people
out of problem areas out and into Western Alaska, Prince William
Sound, or parts of the valley that haven't been utilized. The
funding mechanism is in no way an assault on the ADF&G or the
general fund. They felt they had something in mind to carry its
own weight. They are willing to go back and do whatever it takes
to accomplish that goal.
MITCH GRAVO, LOBBYIST, ALASKA SPORT FISHING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION,
stated with respect to fragmentation issue, they do not take any
money from any marketing organization. If that happens, he
stated, he would ask the House and the Senate to withdraw the
bill.
Number 373
BEN ELLIS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, KENAI RIVER SPORT FISHING
INCORPORATED, testified via teleconference. He stated that he
was speaking in tentative support of HB 147, providing that the
funding mechanism can be addressed. He gave the following
testimony: "Alaska contains some of the world's best sports
fishing opportunities. It is only right that the state market
this potential in a clear concise, accurate, and logical manner.
We believe that it is fair to say that, regardless of whether
you're a strong advocate of commercial fisheries or a staunch
supporter of sport fishing, we all agree that the states
fisheries have been a crucial part of Alaska's past and will be
an important aspect of the state's future. I think we can also
agree that Alaska's fishing footprint is changing. Depressed
prices in commercially caught fish, overseas competition from pen
reared salmon and the waste of hundreds of thousands of tons of
incidental by-catch each year has sent commercial fishing not
only in Alaska but across the United States in a tailspin. While
the state's commercial fishing industry is facing its toughest
decade ever, sport fishing has grown from a `wet behind the ears
toe head,' to a `full blown adult' in the state's economic
employable arena. Sport fishing continues to fuel a growing
tourist economy that accounted for more than $1 billion. In a
recent memo to the Governor's fisheries transition, former Deputy
Commissioner of the Department of Fish and Game, Chuck Meacham,
underlined the potential for sport fishing across the state, and
he quotes, `We have great challenge ahead in terms of how we
promote and develop our fisheries he wrote under the section of
sport fishing. Alaska contains more than 40 percent of the
nation's surface water resources, while not all of our lakes and
streams contain sport fish resources, there are over 12,000 known
anadromous fish streams with 120,000 to 180,000 linear miles of
fresh water. Alaska also has thousands and thousands of
coastline and adjacent marine waters rich with sport fishing
opportunities. With over half of the sport fishing effort
presently concentrated in the Cook Inlet Region, there is
substantial area into which this industry can be encouraged to
expand."
MR. ELLIS continued by stating that the need for marketing a
quality sport fishing experience was noted in a recent report by
the Governor's Fisheries Transition Team. For the state sport
fishing industry to grow, it is imperative to advance the concept
that is behind this bill. He stated that HB 147 will provide the
tool to polish this jewel in the ruff, called Alaska's sport
fishing.
Number 467
PAUL DALE, representing THE KING SALMON FUND, testified via
teleconference. Mr. Dale stated that The King Salmon Fund is a
non-profit organization in the Kenai area interested in
protecting the Kenai River habitat. He stated that he was
pleased to hear that this legislation would not increase user
activity on the Kenai River; but the bill does not specifically
prohibit marketing increased sport fishing on the Kenny Peninsula
or the Kenai River. He stated that people fishing for halibut
off the coast, or fishing for salmon in Seward, would be in the
area. He felt that would result in increased pressure on the
Kenai River. He would feel much more comfortable with the
legislation if it specifically precluded the Kenai Area from
being marketed. There should be a consensus among agency people,
or user participants, that we have addressed the habitat concerns
and developed policies and infrastructure to handle the load that
exists currently.
Number 503
MAX LOWE, GENERAL MANAGER, REGAL ALASKAN HOTEL, testified via
teleconference, that he has watched the continued positive impact
of the Alaska sport fishing industry on individual tourism
related businesses. He feels it imperative that tourism, sport
fishing, and smaller businesses have a voice in their own future,
especially as it relates to visitor preferred activity. The
Alaska Sport Fishing Industry Marketing Council is a good idea,
and it allows fair representation by all the individuals in
Alaska who actually have invested in our state resources. He
stated that, like any other marketing effort, it will create more
jobs, more revenue, and it will bolster the state of Alaska, the
sport fishing industry, and all related industries.
Number 536
BILL SIMS, OWNER, LAKE ILLIAMNA LODGE, testified via
teleconference that we need this council because the fisherman
that normally would come to Alaska are now traveling to foreign
countries that we are competing with. He stated many of his
clients are traveling to Russia because of their advertising
campaigns. He also pointed out when there are closures, we need
to let people know that the whole state is not being closed. A
closure in the Cook Inlet area doesn't mean that Bristol Bay and
the Prince William Sound areas are also closed.
BARBARA BINGHAM, MEMBER, SITKA CHARTER BOAT OPERATOR'S
ASSOCIATION, testified via teleconference that, in Sitka, the
state marketing of sport fishing to non-residents will aggravate
an already tense situation. Many resident anglers and charter
operators are very concerned about local fish recourses. She
explained that, in the Southeast king salmon are allocated
between commercial and sport anglers. The proposed allocations
of halibut between Alaska sport and commercial users is currently
before the North Pacific Fisheries Management Counsel. She noted
that the local Sitka's Visitor's Bureau and the private sector
were doing a good job marketing in Sitka
Number 580
JOSEPH JOLLY, BOARD MEMBER, UNITED COOK INLET DRIFT ASSOCIATION,
and COMMERCIAL FISHERMAN, stated that there was nothing in HB
147, as it is currently written, to insure that only remote
location promotion will be done. As it stands, the people who
would benefit from this act would be the sport fish entities in
the already overworked areas with habitat problems. He stated
that the commercial fisheries industry would be harmed further by
the reduction in raw fish taxes, jobs would be lost, and the
trucking and support industries would suffer. This, he said,
would keep snowballing and the taxpayer would end up paying the
bill. Mr. Jolly stated he was against HB 147.
Number 616
KEITH JOHNSON explained he was the owner and operator of a lodge
in Southwest Alaska. He stated he was in favor of HB 147. It
has the potential to start the organizational business of taking
care of the sport fishing, guiding, and lodge activities
throughout the state. He agreed that the Kenai, Russian, Deshka,
et cetera, were over worked. The way to ease that pressure would
be to build a road from Wasilla across the drainage ditches to
Talkeetna Bay. He concluded that HB 147 would bring in money and
let the people in the lower 48 know that there's is organized
fishing all over the state.
TAPE 95-9, SIDE A
ROD BERG, testifying via teleconference, stated HB 147 has some
merits; however, the ATMC, the Kenai Peninsula Tourism Council
and other entities, were adequately promoting all angles of
tourism within the state. He noted when the king salmon stamp
was added onto licenses a few years ago, funds were suppose to go
back into a king salmon enhancement fund. However, 60 percent to
70 percent of the funds are generated in Southcentral Alaska, but
less the 50 percent is going back into that area. Being from the
Kenai Peninsula area, he testified that he was totally opposed to
any more governmental involvement in the promotion of the area.
CHAIRMAN KOTT closed public testimony on HB 147, and pointed out
that the basic problem with the bill was the funding mechanism
He stated that he was hopeful that Representative Green would be
able to work out the funding problems and, thereafter, bring the
bill back before the committee.
Number 119
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN noted that the funding problem had been
brought to his attention only just prior to the meeting. Had he
known about it sooner, he stated, he wouldn't have brought the
bill before the committee. He pointed out though, that it had
been a very beneficial meeting, addressing a wide cross section
of ideas. He thanked the committee and said he would bring the
bill back with changes.
HL&C - 02/22/95
HB 65 - ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY LOAN GUARANTEES
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked for the sponsor of HB 65 to give an opening
statement.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES read the following sponsor statement
for HB 65, "An Act establishing a loan guarantee and interest
rate subsidy programs for assistive technology."
"According to a 1991 study, over 20,000 Alaskans experience at
least one form of disability. Assistive technology, such as
specialized keyboards, hearing aids, or wheelchairs make the
difference to many disabled as to whether they keep a job or live
independently. Of the disabled, approximately 63 percent need
adaptive devices and are unable to purchase these items due to
personal financial constraints.
"HB 65 establishes a loan guarantee and interest rate subsidy
program for those in need of assistive technology. It is a
unique public-private sector partnership that enables persons
with disabilities to obtain loans who would not otherwise
qualify. The Division of Vocational Rehabilitation administers
the loan program with seed money from the federal Vocational
Rehabilitation Technology-Related Assistance Program. Private
lending institutions process the loan and arrange a loan
guarantee and any interest rate subsidy with the applicant and
the Division.
"A study by the National Council of Disabilities has shown that
over half of the disabled persons receiving assistive technology
loans were able to reduce their dependence on public assistance.
This bill establishes an assistive technology loan program for
Alaskan residents."
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES stated that the legislation will help
people help themselves. The individual gains in self-sufficiency
and self-respect, society wins because the individuals become
more productive members of the work force. The state treasury
benefits by the reduction in need for assistance payments.
Number 201
CHAIRMAN KOTT was going to open testimony on the teleconference
line, then learned that individuals in Juneau were being picked
up at 5:00 p.m., so he opened public testimony in Juneau.
NANCY ANDESON stated that this was a classic example of why
independence was so important. The Care-A-Van was there to pick
them up at the Capitol Building at 5:00 p.m. They must give the
operators of the Care-A-Van 24 hours advance notice. She
explained that she, herself, had a van waiting to get outfitted.
Currently, she works at home, but if she could get a wheelchair
and scooter that worked without duct tape she could go into the
office and be independent. The bottom line she stated, was to
make everyone taxpayers. The best way to do that was to allow
people the independence and the ability to go to work, keeping in
mind that just getting to and from work is not all that's
involved. Having disabilities is very expensive. Even if you're
fully insured, that doesn't cover buying light-weight comforters
because your feet can't turn over in bed under a heavy wool
blanket. She stated that she was in the range that did not
qualify for any of the programs. She was either too rich, too
poor, too young, too old, not mentally disabled, et cetera, to
qualify. The Assistive Technology Council has had very good
records in other states, the default rate is close to zero. It is
something they really want, and they are not going to default.
KEN DEAN explained that his chair cost $13,500, the van he
normally uses cost another $26,000. He stated that he was the
exception to the rule, as he was able to fund those things
through insurance. For every one of him, he explained, there
were at least five to ten others that fall through the cracks.
He stated he had a full-time job. Half the day he works for
Southeast Alaska Independent Living (SAIL), and the other half he
is a paralegal at his home. One of the basic human tendencies is
to be able to get out of the house, some of the disabled can't
even leave their homes unless they have some assistance to be
able to buy a van or whatever it takes to get them out. He
stated that in the studies that he's done, from 5,000 to 10,000
people would become functional parts of society instead of being
a "blob" in a room, kind of like in years past people with
disabilities were pretty much locked in the closet.
ELENA KILBUCK testified via teleconference. She read a letter
from Brenda Spintz, which stated HB 65 was just what she needed.
She is care giver, thus, the power of attorney, and is the
daughter of Laura Roberts who, is disabled with progressive
super-nuclear palsy, which is a neurological degeneration that
effects muscle control and forms of communication with related
dementia. She stated her goal was to keep her mother in a home
setting for as long as possible. Assistive technology is a
necessity to survive on a daily basis, income is strained at all
times. If these loans were to become available with low
interest, this would be the long term answer for them. She
stated that with this loan, they could see a future in their
home, and they could purchase needed handicapped equipment for
the bathroom. She concluded that HB 65 would enable her mother,
and other individuals, to live happier fuller lives in their
family surroundings and outside of institutions.
Number 341
PATRICK REINHART, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, STATE INDEPENDENT LIVING
COUNCIL (SILC), stated he was in support of HB 65. SILC believes
that this legislation is a critical part of a whole array of
independent living services. It is an enabling piece of
legislation, allowing Alaskans with disabilities, or families
with disabled members, to purchase needed adaptive equipment and
devices for their needs. Contrary to current popular belief, not
all persons in need want government help They want the
opportunity to do it on their own.
Number 360
JIM JANSEN, CHALLENGE ALASKA, testified via teleconference, in
favor of HB 65. He stated that he designs and builds adaptive
recreational equipment. He has seen a lot of improvement in
people's attitudes and health because of their experiences with
recreation. He felt it will be worth the money, in the long run,
to give people with disabilities the opportunity to function in
recreational settings as well as in employment, and by granting
them independence. These loans can get people off welfare,
thereby decreasing the cost of caring for persons. The loans
will increase people's self-worth through doing more of their own
things.
Number 401
GREG ALLISON, SAIL, stated that he couldn't emphasize enough the
importance of assistive technology, such as hearing aids, which
cost $2,000 dollars each. He stated that there are many
communities that require you to have hearing aids for their
communication needs at home, at play, and during everyday use.
He pointed out that the closed caption and TDD machines needed
cost as much as $600 dollars and need to be replaced every five
years. He stressed the importance of these types of equipment in
the deaf community, and he reiterated his support for HB 65.
Number 436
PAM GUY, STATE EMPLOYEE, DEAF ADVOCATE, stated how important HB
65 was to people in helping them to achieve their goals, with
more independence. The 90 percent loan guarantee would help,
especially those people whose benefits are cut. She stated that
this would be great for their needs.
Number 451
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated this was a bill that every
legislator, regardless of their position in the spectrum of
philosophy, could support. He stated that if you are a hard
hearted conservative you can support it because this will get
people who might otherwise be on welfare or general assistance
back off of those roles. If you are a bleeding heart liberal,
you are actually improving the quality of life for some citizens
in the state. Representative Porter moved and asked unanimous
consent to move HB 65 out of committee with individual
recommendations.
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS asked if they were talking about $100,000.
STAN RIDGEWAY, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF VOCATIONAL
REHABILITATION, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, stated that there was a
fiscal note of $300,000. This is $100,000 each year for the next
three years, with the possibility of additional funding the
fourth year. This is federal funding. This grant ends in five
years, and in the fourth year gets cut to 75 percent. In the
fifth year it gets cut 50 percent. However, they are not sure
how much will be available those years.
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS asked how many people they could help with
only $100,000.
MR. RIDGEWAY answered that most of the loans would be under
$5,000. They were hoping to leverage the money by buying bonds
or an insurance policy.
Number 542
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS stated that this money would go much
farther if it were possibly a 60 percent loan, instead of a 90
percent loan.
MR. RIDGEWAY stated that the banking industry had been in support
of this bill. It would help those people in the banking
community to deal with their community reinvestment loans.
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS asked at what point would they would
oppose this.
MR. RIDGEWAY answered that, at this point, he wouldn't make a
recommendation without speaking with the Alaska Banker's
Association.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG stated HB 65 had two other committee
referrals and that he'd keep an eye on it.
Number 554
CHAIRMAN KOTT stated that there was a motion to move HB 65 out of
committee. Hearing no objections, the motion passed.
He then stated that SB 55, "An Act repealing the sunset of the
enhanced 911 emergency reporting systems," would be heard on
Monday, February 27, 1995.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the House Labor &
Commerce Committee, Chairman Kott adjourned the meeting at 5:15
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|