03/11/1998 03:20 PM House L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE LABOR AND COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE
March 11, 1998
3:20 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Norman Rokeberg, Chairman
Representative Bill Hudson
Representative Jerry Sanders
Representative Joe Ryan
Representative Tom Brice
Representative Gene Kubina
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative John Cowdery, Vice Chairman
OTHER HOUSE MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Kim Elton
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 304
"An Act relating to the location of the convening of the
legislature in regular session; repealing provisions relating to
student guests of the legislature; and providing for an effective
date."
- HEARD AND HELD; ASSIGNED TO SUBCOMMITTEE
* HOUSE BILL NO. 411
"An Act relating to issuance of a winery license in a local option
area."
- MOVED HB 411 OUT OF COMMITTEE
* HOUSE BILL NO. 451
"An Act relating to assistive technology devices and mobility aids
for physically disabled persons."
- HEARD AND HELD
(* First public hearing)
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 304
SHORT TITLE: MOVE LEGISLATURE TO ANCHORAGE
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) GREEN, ROKEBERG, Ryan, Cowdery,
Hodgins
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
01/12/98 2024 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/2/98
01/12/98 2024 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/12/98 2024 (H) STA, L&C, FINANCE
01/15/98 2056 (H) COSPONSOR(S): RYAN
01/27/98 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 102
01/27/98 (H) MINUTE(STA)
01/28/98 2167 (H) COSPONSOR(S): COWDERY
01/30/98 2189 (H) COSPONSOR(S): HODGINS
02/11/98 2277 (H) STA RPT 2DP 2DNP 3NR
02/11/98 2278 (H) DP: DYSON, HODGINS; DNP: ELTON, VEZEY
02/11/98 2278 (H) NR: JAMES, BERKOWITZ, IVAN
02/11/98 2278 (H) FISCAL NOTE (GOV/ALL DEPTS)
02/20/98 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
02/20/98 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
02/27/98 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
02/27/98 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
03/11/98 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 411
SHORT TITLE: LOCAL OPTION FOR WINERY LICENSE
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) AUSTERMAN
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
02/16/98 2331 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
02/16/98 2331 (H) L&C, FINANCE
03/11/98 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 451
SHORT TITLE: ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY & MOBILITY AIDS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) GREEN, Davies, Berkowitz
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
02/18/98 2361 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
02/18/98 2361 (H) L&C, JUDICIARY
03/06/98 2552 (H) FIRST COSPONSOR: DAVIES
03/11/98 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
WITNESS REGISTER
JEFF LOGAN, Legislative Assistant
to Representative Joseph Green
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 118
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-6841
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as co-prime sponsor's representative
on HB 304; presented HB 451.
MAYOR DENNIS EAGAN
City and Borough of Juneau
155 South Seward Street
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 586-5257
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 304.
ERROL CHAMPION
Capital City Republicans
P.O. Box 33066
Juneau, Alaska 99803
Telephone: (907) 789-9033
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 304.
DON ABEL
9999 Glacier Avenue
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 789-7639
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 304.
RICK URION
118 Fifth Street
Douglas, Alaska
Telephone: (907) 364-2315
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 304.
REPRESENTATIVE ALAN AUSTERMAN
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 434
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-2487
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 411.
WILLIAM ROCHE, Enforcement Supervisor
Alcoholic Beverage Control Board
550 West Seventh Avenue, Suite 350
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Telephone: (907) 277-8678
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 411.
DERRILL L. JOHNSON, Administrator and
Community Services Coordinator
Developmental Disabilities Program
Division of Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities
Department of Health and Social Services
P.O. Box 110620
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0620
Telephone: (907) 465-3370
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 451's intent.
MILLIE RYAN, Health Planner
Governor's Council on
Disabilities and Special Education
Department of Health and Social Services
P.O. Box 240240
Anchorage, Alaska 99524-0240
Telephone: (907) 269-8992
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 451.
KEN DEAN, Independent Living Specialist
Southeast Assisted Independent Living Incorporated
P.O. Box 35097
Juneau, Alaska 99803-5097
Telephone: (907) 789-9665
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 451.
SHELLEY GREENE, Direct Service Supervisor
Access Alaska Fairbanks
3550 Airport Way
Fairbanks, Alaska 99709
Telephone: (907) 479-7940
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 451.
PATRICK REINHART, Executive Director
Statewide Independent Living Council
Department of Education
1016 West Sixth Avenue, Suite 205
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Telephone: (907) 269-3571
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 451.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 98-29, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIRMAN NORMAN ROKEBERG called the House Labor and Commerce
Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:20 p.m. Members present
at the call to order were Representatives Rokeberg, Hudson, Sanders
and Brice. Representatives Kubina and Ryan arrived at 3:24 p.m.
and 3:56 p.m., respectively.
HB 304 - MOVE LEGISLATURE TO ANCHORAGE
Number 0062
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG announced the committee's first order of business
was HB 304, "An Act relating to the location of the convening of
the legislature in regular session; repealing provisions relating
to student guests of the legislature; and providing for an
effective date." Chairman Rokeberg presented HB 304, noting he and
Representative Joseph Green were co-prime sponsors of this
legislation. He said he wished to bring a few items to the
committee's attention and there would be limited testimony.
Chairman Rokeberg commented that Jeff Logan, Legislative Assistant
to Representative Green, had a map exhibit for the committee.
Number 0158
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG stated HB 304 was brought forward with the
initial intention of relocating the legislature to Anchorage,
however he referred to testimony he gave before the House State
Affairs Standing Committee, to local Juneau radio, the press, et
cetera, whereas he believes it is very important the legislature be
near the people and that access be available. He said a major
reason he became involved in the legislation is concern he has
about the Capitol Building itself, stating he wanted to briefly
focus on this that day. He referred to a March 1998 letter he
wrote which was published in an Anchorage neighborhood newspaper,
Westside Pulse, noting there were copies in the committee members'
packets. Chairman Rokeberg emphasized he wanted to take up the
different alternatives needed to generate greater access for the
people of Alaska to their Capitol.
Number 0258
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG listed choices to be examined: 1) Remodeling the
existing Capitol Building structure. 2) Moving to a leased
premises in the Anchorage area. 3) Building a 75,000 square foot
addition to the Bank of America building [550 West Seventh Avenue
in Anchorage, to be renamed the Robert B. Atwood Building];
Chairman Rokeberg noted expansion had been considered in the
building's initial architectural design. He said he had stated
before the legislature the previous year that housing the
legislature was not the reason for the building's purchase, and he
reiterated the building had not been purchased to be a defacto
Capitol building. 4) Drafting a Request for Proposal (RFP) from
any community in the state that wished to respond for the need for
a new Capitol building, including Juneau. Chairman Rokeberg said
he calls this his "field of dreams alternative; build it and they
will come," which he will address further. 5) Bringing back the
Willow capital move initiative with what he calls the truthful cost
(indisc.) analysis. 6) Rotating legislative sessions between the
cities or having committee meetings in various communities
throughout the state for certain time periods during the session.
7) What he terms, "Anybody else got an idea?" He asked for ideas
as to how they can enhance access for the people of Alaska to their
legislators, making this branch of government more responsive and
sensitive to people's needs.
Number 0387
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG referred to State of Alaska Invitation to Bid
Number 5401, for 7,100 square feet in downtown Anchorage for an
adult public assistance office. He pointed out "A" under
"paragraph" 3 on page 13 of the bid, the second page of the copy
distributed to the committee. He noted this is the current minimum
standard regarding building type for any state lease. It read:
3. Type of Building:
A. The space offered shall be in a building of sound and
substantial construction, and shall meet all applicable
building codes, life safety codes, regulations and
standard building practices of the City, Borough and
State in which located. The building shall be protected
against fire and other hazards and shall be provided with
ventilation. The building shall also conform to
applicable thermo and energy standards, and shall comply
with OSHA [Occupational Safety and Health Administration]
safety codes. The building and the area in which it is
located shall be clean and free from objectionable
tenancy, odors, vermin, rodents, or other conditions
which, in the opinion of the State, will be detrimental
to agency operation.
Number 0523
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG stated this was boilerplate language in the state
lease document, and he submitted to the committee that the current
Capitol Building would not qualify for a bid for state occupancy.
He noted this was particularly relating to the life safety code
provisions, other applicable building codes, et cetera. Chairman
Rokeberg stated that there is a clear need for new premises for the
legislature. He referred to a vote brought before the people to
move the capital, noting he thinks that vote failed because of the
legislature's lack of commitment, as he said before the House State
Affairs Standing Committee. He commented the City and Borough of
Juneau (CBJ) and its people have tried to face up to this issue in
the past; he doesn't think the people of Juneau should commit
themselves to a very large financial expenditure without a
commitment. Drawing on his 25-year experience as a commercial real
estate specialist in building development, he noted the statement,
"If you don't have a deal you can't make a move," is fundamental
logic.
Number 0618
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG said he has not intended to bring any hardship or
ill feelings to the community of Juneau with his position on this
legislation. He thinks Juneau is a wonderful and delightful
community, but he truly believes Alaska's Capitol needs to be
accessible to the people and also be a functional building the
people of the state can take pride in as representing their
government. He said that currently expending any money on this
project would not be wise, given the clear economic problems the
state is presently facing. On the other hand, he thinks it is not
an issue that they can avoid for too much longer, given the Capitol
Building's current condition. He stated, "I think the sufferance
of the particular peculiar building codes here and the ability to
continue occupying is something that needs to be really finally
recognized." Chairman Rokeberg said the building's staff does an
excellent job of doing what they can. He indicated the financial
ability to make capital appropriations to the Capitol Building
through legislative carry-forward funds and other means no longer
exists, commenting that there have been substantial improvements to
the structure. He said this has been particularly in the areas of
compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility
requirements and other obvious needs. However, he noted this only
goes so far with a building which he believes was designed and
built in 1931 and he said is basically structurally obsolete.
Chairman Rokeberg stated the committee would take limited testimony
and HB 304 would be held for further consideration.
Number 0785
JEFF LOGAN, Legislative Assistant to Representative Joseph Green,
came forward to testify. He stated Representative Green, the co-
prime sponsor of HB 304, was conducting a House Judiciary Standing
Committee hearing on subsistence legislation and apologized for his
absence which in no way indicated any waning of his support for HB
304. Mr Logan said he would bring two issues to the committee's
attention: 1) the Capitol Building's condition, 2) the Capitol
Building's location. Addressing the second point he referred to
the previously mentioned map which had been distributed to the
committee.
[The map Mr. Logan referred to showed the outline of the state of
Alaska with approximately 43 communities labeled. Anchorage was
shown at the center of three concentric circles and Juneau at the
center of two concentric circles. The circle closest to the two
cities was colored green and represented a straight-line distance
of 100 miles out from the cities. The second concentric circles
around both cities was colored blue and represented a straight-line
distance of 200 miles out from the cities. The third concentric
circle around Anchorage was colored red and represented a straight-
line distance of 300 miles from Anchorage. There was no third
concentric circle for Juneau. The map legend indicated the first
concentric circle around Juneau at 100 miles contains a population
of 50,000; the second circle at 200 miles contains an additional
24,000; for a total population of 74,000 within a 200-mile radius
of Juneau. The population within a 100-miles radius of Anchorage
is 361,000, according to the map legend; the additional population
at the 200-mile radius is 7,100; and the additional population at
the 300-mile radius is 115,000; for a total population of 483,100
within a 300-mile radius of Anchorage.]
MR. LOGAN said there are 483,000 people 300 miles out of Anchorage
and 74,000 people 300 miles out of Juneau, noting this graphically
illustrates why the other prime sponsors believe the legislature
should be located in Anchorage [Note: the map does not show a
population figure for a 300-mile distance from Juneau].
Number 0875
MR. LOGAN referred to the condition of the Capitol Building and the
chairman's previous remarks. Mr. Logan said that for many years
the Capitol Building has been maintained with the legislative
carry-forward; he said this was the portion of the budget unspent
in the previous year which went into somewhat of a "slush" fund.
He stated a few years ago the legislature had decided to do away
with that account under Republican leadership and be on budget,
noting the governor is still allowed to have such a fund but the
legislature has taken its own away. Mr. Logan said these types of
expenditures for repairing and restoring the Capitol will now have
to be stated on the capital budget, and will become much more
apparent as the need for these types expenditures escalates. He
commented that Chairman Rokeberg had stated some of the
alternatives, noting they look enthusiastically at the process the
chairman has set out to examine what some of the other
municipalities might be able to provide in the way of a suitable
Capitol. In his final statement, Mr. Logan asked the committee to
look around the room with the next bill to be heard. He said it
would be good illustration of how inadequate the building was to
meet the legislature's current needs. He stated there were going
to be people in the room in wheelchairs and the only exit from this
room, other than the crowded entryway, was up a set of stairs. Mr.
Logan said that is not right and it should be fixed, stating, "We
hope to continue with this effort to the extent we can to make sure
that everybody has equal access to the Capitol from other cities,
and in and out of the Capitol while/if it remains here."
Number 0998
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG stated that they were currently in an illegal
fire configuration because they were at the end of, basically, a
20-foot dead-end corridor and, under the Uniform Building Code and
"all the fire permutations thereto," the exit stairwell could not
be exited through a meeting room. Chairman Rokeberg indicated this
particular code violation occurs throughout the Capitol Building,
including the House and Senate chambers, and he noted this was just
a "drop in the bucket" of all the other violations.
Number 1038
REPRESENTATIVE JERRY SANDERS said the testimony indicated HB 304
would not be moving out of committee at this meeting, and he asked
Mr. Logan if it was Representative Green's intention in sponsoring
HB 304 that the bill would move or that it would just be used as a
conversation piece and then dropped.
Number 1058
MR. LOGAN replied it was the sponsor's intent to move all
legislation he introduced. Mr. Logan stated, "If, in the
chairman's wisdom, this piece of legislation needs more review by
the Labor and Commerce Committee, we're willing to sit down and
work on it and make it a better bill, and hopefully see it move at
a later date intact."
Number 1082
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG stated the committee would take testimony from
Mayor Eagan, asking all witnesses to limit their testimony to three
minutes.
Number 1110
MAYOR DENNIS EAGAN, City and Borough of Juneau, came forward to
testify. He noted he appreciated the chairman's remarks and offer
to (indisc.) legislative approval for construction of a new state
Capitol building in Juneau. Upon the chairman's lobbying and
working with the community, Mayor Eagan stated he would be more
than happy to give Chairman Rokeberg the plans they tried put forth
the last time and appreciated the chairman's efforts to assist
them. Mayor Eagan said there had not been enough copies of the
map, but to him it is a matter of semantics; he can draw the same
thing on Washington, D.C. Mayor Eagan said he had just returned
from that city, noting it is a 4,000 mile journey to the nation's
capital. He spoke from a prepared statement:
On behalf ... of the assembly and the citizens of this
community, I'd like to thank you for allowing me to
testify this afternoon. And I hope that you'll
appreciate the advances that Alaska's capital city has
made in providing opportunities to residents of Alaska.
Since statehood in 1959, just 37 short years ago, we've
been in the unique position of trying to focus not only
on the critical elements of sustainability: economic
vitality, social equity and environmental health, but the
single issue few other communities in the nation, or for
that matter, the world face, and that's the issue of
being the ultimate destruction of our city through the
ballot process by way of a vote of the statewide
electorate.
Eight times since statehood, Juneau has faced economic
and social upheavals that normal communities would not
face. With dedication and diligence, we have confronted
this issue, with absolutely no idea what the outcome will
be regarding our basic economic and social vitality.
The issue here is moving the seat of state government to
an area outside of Juneau to where some say is a location
closer to the people. While we have ultimately won all
those battles, the most recent in 1994, these votes take
a tremendous toll on the citizens of our community who
have lived here for any length of time. I was born here.
When we should be attending to making Juneau a model for
sustainable development, we have had to spend untold
resources on fighting efforts to change the seat of
government in the state of Alaska. In just the past two
elections, 1982 and 1994, and associated ballot
initiatives since statehood, it has cost this city of
32,000 residents over $7 million in taxpayer and
community-donated funds to fight these battles. So when
folks in the rest of the United States talk about
sustainability, we call it survivability.
To sustain Juneau as the capital of Alaska, we're
accomplishing many things to make our city more
accessible to the rest of Alaska and the world. You see,
I believe access comes in many other ways than an
interstate highway. We were one of the first communities
on the west coast of the United States to recognize the
importance of the Internet. We established a home page
on the World Wide Web, affording access not only to
Alaskans to their capital city, but to anyone in the
world that has an inquiry about Juneau.
We've been instrumental in providing electronic access
through video teleconferencing through a major investment
in telecommunications technology. Juneau is the major
investor in C-Span type programming called Gavel-to-Gavel
coverage, that allows over 450,000 Alaskans, that's about
85 percent of the adult population, to view uninterrupted
coverage of the daily deliberations of the Alaska State
Legislature during its 120-day sessions.
The CBJ, Federal Aviation Administration, the National
Center for Atmospheric Research and Alaska Airlines are
in the final stages of a multi-million dollar research
project that is going to ultimately change the way
airline travel is accomplished throughout the world, and
Juneau is at the forefront of development and
implementation of that technology in which aircraft will
not travel routes as you know them, but on courses
dictate by global positioning satellites.
We're doing many other things to make Juneau a better
capital, from increasing affordable housing, increasing
our housing vacancy rate, getting a handle on managing
our burgeoning tourism industry, working with mining
concerns to bring about projects on line, and initiating
plans for a vision for our capital city.
While these are just a few of the major projects that
we're undertaking, and issues we're confronting, I
believe we're making great strides in making Juneau a
better capital city for all Alaskans.
We're proud of the men and women in the legislature and
staff who work tirelessly to make our state a model for
the rest of the nation. ... Thank you for your hard
work. Pro or con, the citizens of this community
appreciate your efforts. Again, thank you Mr. Chair and
members of the committee for this opportunity to testify.
Number 1411
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG thanked the mayor, noting this hearing had been
scheduled so the mayor would be able to attend.
Number 1433
ERROL CHAMPION, Capital City Republicans, came forward to testify
next. He spoke from a prepared statement:
I have been in Alaska for over 35 years and I've lived in
Juneau for the past 21. As I was thinking about what
points to cover this afternoon, I found it very difficult
to write down anything that hasn't already been stated
over and over during the last 40 years of debate on this
issue. I recall the argument in 1961 while I was living
with my aunt and uncle in Anchorage. Even though this
was shortly after statehood, the discussion of where to
locate the capital was an issue for a few, and,
unfortunately, it's still with a few of us today. The
lack of support for a capital move in those days was
based on the fact we had to be frugal. Alaska had
limited funds as Prudhoe Bay had yet to be discovered.
Elected leaders had to make very prudent decisions on
where to spend those limited funds to do the most good
for Alaska. The issue of moving the capital was not high
on the priority list then, and after 37 years which has
seen numerous statewide votes, initiatives and the
expenditure of millions on studies, moving the
legislature and the capital is not a topic with the
majority of Alaskans. It continues to remain at the
bottom of the list on priority of needs.
I'm co-chair of the Capital City Republicans which also
includes a position on the state central committee of the
Republican Party. In all of my work with statewide party
leaders, the topic of moving the legislature and
ultimately the capital is not in our platform. In fact,
it's never even been on the agenda for discussion. We
Republicans are focused on shrinking the size of state
government, doing more with less, and returning the
delivery system of public services back to the local
communities. Our party is committed to electing Alaskans
who share and support this philosophy. The location of
where "downsizing" state government takes place is not an
issue for the RPA [Republican Party of Alaska].
I ask that you think very carefully about what are the
real preferences of Alaskans. I believe it's our public
education system, crime, making needed repairs to our
transportation systems, fixing up our public facilities
and, most of all, creating a healthy economic climate
that will stimulate the growth of private enterprise to
provide jobs and opportunities for generations to come.
After all these years, isn't it time to get on with
solving the real priority issues for Alaskans? The
philosophy of the Republican Party must remain the focus
of our collective efforts while we have the opportunity
to make things happen. Let's not spend any more time on
issues such as moving the legislature which is tantamount
to a capital move. And I thank this committee and you,
Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to testify.
Number 1579
DON ABEL came forward to testify next. He stated he was a lifelong
Alaskan, had been in Juneau for 61 years, and was a candidate for
the state Senate seat from that area. Mr. Abel testified regarding
the effects on the private sector, stating, "Just to give you an
idea of what it's like to be in the private sector and have this
kind of hammer hanging over our head. ... It's a ripple effect."
He said, "I'm in the building supply business, we have been since
1936 here. And when ... these come forward like this what happens
is, we see the long-term projects start to come off the table.
Who's gonna still go into a 10 or a 20-year financing program to
put up apartments or condos or whatever they're gonna build ...
when they don't know if the job base is gonna be around." He said
this has happened over and over again, and some of the problems the
legislature has experienced in trying to find decent or affordable
housing in Juneau has been exacerbated by this over the years. He
commented, "We saw it again this year, we're seeing it now. And
... it's very prevalent. We eventually overcome it, things settle
down, we gain a little bit, then somebody wants an issue and back
it comes again. And so it's a ripple effect throughout the whole -
whole economy here, and I think it's very serious for us." Mr.
Abel related that he had recently spoken with a former Anchorage
legislator, stating, "And I did not ask ... whether he would give
his permission to give his name, but I think he would if I asked
him, but he says, 'Don, this is ... very wrong. I served down
there for many sessions. The idea is to go down, to go to Juneau,
get the work done, focus on it. ... That's what you do, get ...
the state's business done and then go home. ... The idea of
bringing it into the Anchorage arena, ... gosh knows what you're
gonna wind up with and how long it'll take to get it done, whether
they'll even show up most of the time. ... It'll won't be the same
way at all, ... your sessions could run extremely long and be very
unproductive. ... I think it's a very, very bad idea.'" Mr. Abel
indicated that completed his testimony.
Number 1699
RICK URION came forward to testify next. He indicated he was a
former member of the Alaska State Legislature House of
Representatives and said he was testifying on his own behalf. He
stated, "In 1972 I was elected to this body from Anchorage. In
1972 the capital move was a big issue. We had a newspaper in town
that every other day was an article about the capital move, and all
of us supported the capital move. When I first came here I
supported the capital move because I thought that was the right
thing to do. ... I don't remember the time frame, but it wasn't
very long when I was here that I realized what a terrible issue
this was, and ... the issue wasn't what ... it looked like. It was
a real estate transaction, it had nothing to do with government.
It was an issue of greed and selfishness. It makes no difference
where the capital is. Would the Dallas Cowboys have won the Super
Bowl in January ... if they were based in Denver? The answer is
no. It's not ... where you base the team, it's the members of the
team. And you have a good team, and you can perform here in Juneau
as well or if not better than anywhere else. I think it's long
past time that this issue needs to be put to rest. If this
building is bad, fix it. I'll dare say that this building's gonna
be in service long after everybody in this room is dead. If you
want a new building, appropriate some money and build it, but don't
blame it on Juneau, don't blame it on the location. The
communication system, everything, is much better than it was.
(Indisc.) the last 25 years have made tremendous improvements in
communications. Here is an issue that's the heart and blood of
this community, right in this community. Is the room full of
Juneauites? Are they packing the halls? No, they're not. Would
they in Anchorage? ... People (indisc.) want access to government
but they really elect you to do the job, and they really don't want
to worry about government. And they're not worried government,
they put it in your hands. Let's put this issue of the capital
move to rest. Fix the building if you need to fix it, or build the
building, but don't move the legislature or the capital from
Juneau. That's stupid. That's all I have to say."
Number 1804
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if there was anyone else who wished to
testify on HB 304. Hearing none, he stated the public testimony
was closed.
Number 1816
REPRESENTATIVE BILL HUDSON thanked the chairman for hearing this
bill and indicated he wished to testify himself on HB 304, having
talked with Chairman Rokeberg and the other prime sponsor.
Representative Hudson stated he thought he understood some of the
concerns expressed, noting he recognized the difficult exit
situation from the committee chambers. He said he thinks it is a
reasonable thing to examine how they might be able to improve the
current space or move into another space. He said he has suggested
taking a hard look at even moving the legislature over to one of
the top floors of the State Office Building and perhaps housing
some of the state employees somewhere else on a regular basis.
However, Representative Hudson said, "Those are the kind of things
that we can look at if we have the cooperation of people like
yourself from outside of the town here," and he indicated Juneau
could not build a new Capitol building unless there was some sort
of an agreement with the legislature to lease the building back
over a period of time to amortize it. Representative Hudson noted
the chairman's real estate background. He said he looked forward
to working with the chairman, hopefully on an interim committee
basis to examine this situation. Representative Hudson stated,
"We're looking at a road, Mr. Chairman, trying to improve the
access ... from the rest of the state of Alaska into the capital.
We're also, I think, the possibility of looking at reduced
legislative sessions. ... We're up to 120 days every session that
we're down here, and that's exactly what we do. We might want to
take a look at [the] possibility ... of developing a reduced
legislative session period of time, perhaps a 90 to 120, or 90 to
100 days."
Number 1897
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON continued, "The two-year capital budget
process would reduce, I think, the second year of the legislative
session as well. So, I think that ... there's ways to do that. I
notice in one state, they've actually moved to amend their
constitution to allow their members, under certain circumstances
literally to vote from home. And here we are, in the state of
Alaska, where nobody is connected by roads except literally from
that distance around the Anchorage area .... All the rest of us
are somewhere up in the villages or down in Southeast Alaska or
somewhere else out on an island somewhere ...." Representative
Hudson indicated they might want to take a look at the possibility
of establishing some parameters within Alaska's rules and, if
necessary, in Alaska's constitution allowing members of the
legislature to literally be able to vote on floor sessions from the
nearest Legislative Information Office (LIO) or from home, giving
emergency medical, transportation, and inability to get in as
possible reasons. Representative Hudson stated, "Those are, in my
opinion, some constructive ways in which we could expand our
opportunity to interact with the legislature, ... and at the same
time, to expand the amount of time that we're closer to the
constituents that we serve. We already have eight months out of
the year where we are directly related to our constituency and
these may be some suggestions on how we could expand that
opportunity. ... I just wanted to put that on the record, Mr.
Chairman, I think those are constructive comments that I'm looking
forward to working with you on ...."
Number 1970
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if there were any further comments from the
committee. There being none, Chairman Rokeberg said he would
respond to Representative Hudson by noting that HCR 9, legislation
the chairman had introduced the previous year, would allow
committee interim activity; but also on Representative Hudson's
point, most importantly, it would allow a teleconference or
electronic vote from a committee member not physically present.
Chairman Rokeberg said while committee members can participate in
discussion via teleconference, they are not allowed to formally
vote unless physically present, under rules of this body. He noted
that perhaps Mayor Eagan could get behind a resolution supporting
the chairman's resolution which he said was presently in the House
Finance Standing Committee and which he would like to move this
year. Also, Chairman Rokeberg pointed out that both he and
Representative Sanders are prime sponsors of a bill shortening the
legislative session to 90 days. He indicated that bill was also
concerned with term limits and other legislative reform.
Number 2038
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG stated the committee would suspend the
proceedings on HB 304. He said it was his desire to further
investigate the condition of the current Capitol Building and look
at potential drafting of alternate methodologies for developing a
plan for a new Capitol building, wherever it may be. Chairman
Rokeberg said because of that, and the information he has received
from Mr. Logan, the chairman will be sending HB 304 to a
subcommittee as he said he has indicated. He stated he wishes the
subcommittee to take up the bill this session to review the
information the bill sponsors will be providing and to invite the
mayor and "the folks here from Juneau" to participate. Chairman
Rokeberg said he would particularly like to look at the plans
developed previously for Telegraph Hill [in downtown Juneau near
the State Office Building]. The chairman stated, "We can do that
quietly and amiably, and without ruffling too many feathers, but
maybe we can get some work done for the good of the people of the
state." With that, he assigned HB 304 to a subcommittee chaired by
Representative Hudson, with Representative Rokeberg and
Representative Kubina as the other subcommittee members. The
legislation was held.
Number 2141
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG called a very brief at ease at 3:57 p.m. The
committee came back to order at 3:57 p.m.
HB 411 - LOCAL OPTION FOR WINERY LICENSE
Number 2142
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG announced the committee's next order of business
was HB 411, "An Act relating to issuance of a winery license in a
local option area." He noted the presence on teleconference of Mr.
Roche, Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Board, to answer questions.
Number 2160
REPRESENTATIVE ALAN AUSTERMAN, the bill sponsor, came forward to
present HB 411, noting it came from a request by one of his
constituents in the village of Port Lions on Kodiak Island. He
said this person would like establish a winery on Kodiak Island,
making wine from the natural salmonberries and then selling it
wholesale. Representative Austerman indicated that, in order to do
this, apparently this person would end up having a liquor license
and the potential to sell alcohol across the counter. This was
something neither the person nor the village wanted to do.
Representative Austerman indicated he and his staff had come up
with a very small change to the laws, adding a winery license
exemption to AS 04.11.491. He referred to the sponsor statement,
noting that once this language was added, a local-option election
could be sought in the City of Port Lions, or any other city or
village in Alaska. He indicated that after the local-option
election was held, the individual would apply for a winery license
and agree to have the ABC Board ban retail sales, noting the board
has the authority to impose such limitations.
The sponsor statement read:
This legislation adds a winery licensee under AS
04.11.491(a)(2) and (b)(2).
By adding this language, an individual could seek a
local-option election in any city to ban liquor licenses
except a winery, as would be allowed under this amended
statute.
When the statute is amended and a local-option election
held, the individual would then apply for their winery
license and agree to have the Alaska Alcoholic Beverage
Control Board (ABC Board) ban retail sales under the
license in that particular city. The ABC Board has the
authority to impose limitations on licenses as per AS
04.11.395.
The individual would then have the privilege of selling
to persons/entities holding a valid Alaska liquor
license. This small change will created many business
opportunities, while preserving the integrity of alcohol
control.
Continued economic development is essential in our
village communities if they are to further their goals of
self-sufficiency. The State of Alaska needs to persist
in expanding opportunities for the establishment of
production and marketing cooperatives.
Number 2230
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked Representative Austerman if he had tasted
this person's salmonberry wine.
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN responded he had not.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if he had tried someone else's.
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN answered in the affirmative, noting it was
excellent.
Number 2243
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG said, then, that there was the potential for a
small, successful cottage industry in the village. Chairman
Rokeberg asked Mr. Roche if the ABC Board and the Administration
had any objections to HB 411.
Number 2250
WILLIAM ROCHE, Enforcement Supervisor, Alcoholic Beverage Control
Board, testified via teleconference from Anchorage. He stated the
board took a neutral position on HB 411, seeing it as a local-
option issue. Mr. Roche indicated the reason for the omission of
this option was not known, whether it had been intentional or
simply an oversight, but he stated that basically adding it would
not have any adverse effect.
Number 2289
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if there were further questions or further
witnesses. There being none, he stated the public hearing on HB
411 was closed.
Number 2297
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON made a motion to move HB 411 out of the House
Labor and Commerce Standing Committee with individual
recommendations and the attached zero fiscal note, asking unanimous
consent. There being no objections, HB 411 was moved out of the
House Labor and Standing Committee.
AN UNIDENTIFIED COMMITTEE MEMBER asked if it was the chairman's
intention to move any further bills at this meeting.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG replied it was not his intention. He stated the
next bill would be held over because of technical problems. There
was a brief discussion regarding committee attendance.
Number 2367
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG stated the committee would take a brief at ease
at 4:03 p.m. The committee came back to order at 4:07 p.m.
HB 451 - ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY & MOBILITY AIDS
TAPE 98-29, SIDE B
Number 0001
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG announced the committee's next item of business
would be HB 451, "An Act relating to assistive technology devices
and mobility aids for physically disabled persons."
Number 0020
JEFF LOGAN, Legislative Assistant to Representative Joseph Green,
came forward to present HB 451. He summarized the sponsor
statement which read:
HB 451 establishes an express warranty for technology
designed to assist physically disabled persons. Under
the terms of the bill, if a consumer reports a
nonconformity to a manufacture within a year of delivery,
the manufacture must repair or replace the equipment, or
offer a refund of the purchase price.
Assistive technology and mobility aids for the physically
disabled are not covered by "lemon laws" and consumer
protection statutes in Title 45. The automobile lemon
law in chapter 45 makes no mention of wheel chairs.
Similarly, the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer
Protection Act, found in chapter 50, makes no mention of
assistive equipment. Yet, 11 states have passed such
laws, and others are considering doing so.
Non-working assistive equipment can be not only
inconvenient, but dangerous. Many of us have experienced
the frustration of dealing with a non-responsive
salesperson far from Alaska; imagine doing so without the
benefit of the equipment you depend on to communicate, or
get around. When people lose their mobility, or ability
to communicate, they may not be aware of, or may not be
able to remove themselves from, dangerous situations.
Assistive technology allows the physically disabled to
operate in a manner most of us take for granted.
I ask for your support in enacting a law that affords
basic protection to a group of consumers who already face
obstacles unimagined by most of us.
Number 0113
MR. LOGAN said the legislature is looking at this type of
legislation because the number of people using this kind of
equipment is growing, indicating this is due to the aging of the
"baby boom" generation. He said it is estimated 1 in 7 Alaskans,
approximately 80,000, are somehow disabled. He indicated there is
currently no protection in law for these people regarding this
equipment and he explained HB 451. Section 600 establishes an
express warranty. Manufacturers who sell assistive technology or
mobility aids directly or through a dealer must furnish a warranty
for the equipment they sell, and if they do not, the equipment will
be considered to have such a warranty by the state. He said
warranties are often taken for granted but these consumers do not
enjoy that benefit. Section 610 states if a consumer reports a
nonconformity to the manufacturer within one year after first
delivery, the nonconformity shall be repaired. Referring to his
extensive research, Mr. Logan said there is still a great deal he
does not know. He suggested the committee members ask the
witnesses questions about the use and cost of this equipment,
indicating one witness's assistive equipment cost over $25,000.
Mr. Logan also indicated he thought the committee would find most
of the consumers of this equipment treat their equipment very well
because it is almost necessary to maintain their standard of
living. In Section 620 of the bill, if the consumer makes a
reasonable effort to get the nonconformity repaired but fails, the
manufacturer must accept return of the equipment and replace it
with comparable new equipment, or refund the full purchase price
including finance charges, to the consumer. Mr. Logan said Section
630 states some of the return and refund procedures for this type
of equipment.
Number 0415
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG commented that he had a concern about the meaning
of the term "collateral costs" in Section 620.
MR. LOGAN replied that could involve finance charges and other
costs to the consumer, possibly concerning the manufacturer.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG indicated the bill contains a definition of
collateral costs which is too broad to be useful, and this is a
concern ["Section 690. Definitions. ... (3) "collateral costs"
means expenses incurred by a consumer in connection with the repair
of a nonconformity including the costs of obtaining an alternative
assistive technology device or mobility aid;"].
Number 0462
MR. LOGAN stated this language has been successful in other states
but it would be acceptable if the committee wanted to "tighten it
up." Continuing with his explanation, he said Section 650 states
if a consumer leases assistive equipment and the equipment is
returned for a refund, that equipment cannot be leased or sold to
another consumer without full disclosure of the reasons for return.
Section 640 states the lease can not be enforced if a piece of
equipment is returned for a nonconformity. Section 660 states
consumers cannot waive the rights granted to them under
legislation, even if a manufacturer offers a discount on
malfunctioning equipment in return for a statement that the
consumer understands this and won't return the equipment when it
turns out to be nonusable. Section 670 states that nothing in the
bill limits the rights or remedies available to consumers under
other laws. Section 680 states that a consumer may bring a legal
action to recover damages resulting from a violation of the
provisions of the bill; the court shall award twice the amount of
any pecuniary loss together with cost disbursements, reasonable
attorney fees, and any equitable relief the court determines is
appropriate to a consumer who prevails in an action. Mr. Logan
said the remainder of the bill is definitions, noting some may need
further refinement, as the chairman indicated.
Number 0637
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked why there were 3 1/2 pages of definitions
and 3 1/2 pages of bill.
MR. LOGAN said it was their intent to be specific.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if any of the laws in the 11 other states
were shorter.
Number 0662
MR. LOGAN relied this bill is very similar to most of the other
laws. The definitions section was modeled after Rhode Island's
legislation, and appears very similarly in Colorado's and
Wisconsin's. He noted these two states recently enacted this
legislation. Mr. Logan said there is definitely a concern about
loopholes as these types of statutes are considered by
legislatures. He indicated the practice has been to attempt to be
as specific as possible to avoid such loopholes.
Number 0697
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked Mr. Logan to provide the committee with
copies of legislation from other states.
MR. LOGAN agreed to do so.
Number 0706
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON mentioned his familiarity with this issue
through a neighbor's experiences. He asked how enforceable this
would be on manufacturers located outside Alaska, indicating it is
particularly difficult to take action when this equipment comes
from out-of-state.
Number 0731
MR. LOGAN said they understand it is enforceable, noting there are
small East Coast states without manufacturers that have been able
to enforce this. He said he can obtain more information on
enforceability for the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON said he would appreciate that.
Number 0770
DERRILL L. JOHNSON, Administrator and Community Services
Coordinator, Developmental Disabilities Program, Division of Mental
Health and Developmental Disabilities (DMHDD), Department of Health
and Social Services (H&SS), came forward to testify next. He
stated the department is in support HB 451's intent. The
department also believes the bill is rather detailed and lengthy,
but considers this to probably be the best of the three versions
out. Mr. Johnson indicated any changes making the bill easier to
understand would be acceptable. He said his division buys a lot of
medical equipment, and he noted he deals with many of these issues
helping families get problems resolved when equipment malfunctions
or does not meet advertised claims.
Number 0825
REPRESENTATIVE TOM BRICE referred to the definition of collateral
costs. He asked Mr. Johnson how may people in rural Alaska, for
example, are using assistive technology devices, from his
experience at DMHDD.
MR. JOHNSON replied he couldn't estimate off the top of his head
but indicated it is a substantial number. He said they provide
services to about 2,300 families statewide and estimated that well
over 30 percent of those families use some type of assistive
technology.
Number 0890
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON questioned whether this kind of legislation
would actually improve the access for Medicaid approval and the
acquisition of many of these assistive technology devices.
Number 0920
MR. JOHNSON was not sure he could address that question properly
but said it would seem reasonable that the department would be more
inclined to "broaden the scope of equipment" if it had better
assurances about the equipment it was purchasing. He indicated the
department, when purchasing equipment for individual families,
tries to steer families toward those types of vendors the
department has had good past experiences with and who stand behind
the equipment they sell.
Number 0959
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked who paid to fix or replace a piece of
assistive equipment purchased by the department for an individual
if that equipment malfunctions. He gave the example of a
wheelchair.
MR. JOHNSON replied that generally, if it was a consumer they were
working with, they would assist the family in working through that
process with the manufacturer. He said it would probably save
state dollars, staff time and department dollars if they had better
access for equipment repair. He also indicated this would save the
individual consumers the frustration of being without their means
of communication or movement.
Number 1044
MILLIE RYAN, Health Planner, Governor's Council on Disabilities and
Special Education, Department of Health and Social Services, came
forward to testify next. She stated the council recently completed
a three-year process developing a state plan. During that planning
process they talked to a lot of different people in a variety of
communities statewide; she said this issue came up frequently and
stated the council is very supportive of a bill like this.
Number 1094
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE stated a conflict, noting he is a member of
the council.
Number 1125
KEN DEAN, Independent Living Specialist, Southeast Assisted
Independent Living Incorporated (SAIL Inc.), came forward to
testify next. He noted he is also the director of the multiple
sclerosis (MS) society and the MS Douglas Lions loan closet, which
he said loans out a lot of equipment. He said freight to return
equipment to the manufacture was one of the collateral costs
mentioned earlier, relating a situation which he said began in
1990. He received the wheelchair in question in January of 1991
and said it had broken down by that March. He noted that
wheelchair sits to this day in his living room and offered to give
it to any of the committee members who wanted to make a planter out
of it, stating, "It's an $8,500 wheelchair that is absolutely
dangerous." He said the wheelchair pulls to the right and once
dumped him off the curb into the street. An attorney he was
working with wrote a "letter of demand" to Redman Wheelchairs; Mr.
Dean said the attorney was told by Redman Wheelchairs' attorney,
"'You don't have a lemon law in your state; try to enforce it.'"
Mr. Dean referred to his current wheelchair which cost $27,500,
noting the only differences between it and most other electric
wheelchairs are that the feet can be raised independently and the
back can be reclined independently. He said it is exactly like the
one Duane French [Director, Division of Vocational Rehabilitation,
Department of Education] uses except for those features. Mr. Dean
said the manufacturer of his current chair, Everest and Jennings,
stands behind its products but the reclining back and the leg lift
parts were built by Faulken Enterprises (ph) of Colorado which does
not honor its warranties. He indicated the footrests had
malfunctioned at one point and Everest and Jennings had paid
another contractor to fix them because Faulken Enterprises (ph)
said the wheelchair was too far away from Colorado and the company
just couldn't deal with it.
Number 1286
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked how long he had had this chair.
MR. DEAN said since 1993.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG noted the wheelchair was about five years old,
and he asked what a wheelchair's normal expected life was.
MR. DEAN said Medicare says wheelchairs should be replaced every
seven years, but doesn't cover replacement at seven-year periods;
it generally allows one wheelchair per lifetime. He indicated the
aging process of a wheelchair is noticeable and that some of these
things can be dangerous for the person using the equipment, noting
he thought that was the point Mr. Choate, the attorney he had
worked with, was trying to make to Redman Wheelchairs. He referred
to written materials he provided the committee.
Number 1356
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked Mr. Dean how he gained access to his
current wheelchair.
MR. DEAN replied he went to a dealer in Juneau.
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked how many dealers there were in Juneau.
MR. DEAN replied there was currently one, the other one had passed
away.
Number 1385
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked if Mr. Dean had a broad understanding
about access to dealers across the state, asking how many dealers
he knew of in Alaska who might be able to provide this type of
equipment.
MR. DEAN said he knew of one other, Geneva Woods (ph) in Anchorage.
From his time with the MS society, he said he knows there are a lot
of people with MS outside of Anchorage, Fairbanks and Juneau who
use wheelchairs that are breaking down all the time. He said these
people literally just stay in their houses until another wheelchair
is flown out to them from the Lions' loan closet.
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE confirmed, then, that there isn't a great deal
competition within that market to provide greater access.
Number 1441
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG mentioned the collateral cost issue, noting he
has some concerns about it, and said he understands the freight and
mailing costs could be very high.
MR. DEAN stated it cost $481 dollars each way to ship his previous
wheelchair to Tucson, Arizona, and back to Juneau. It had to be
shipped back to Tucson a second time for the same cost; he noted
Redman Wheelchairs paid for the shipping back to Juneau that time.
Number 1475
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG indicated there was a problem with the term
collateral costs because was so broad and he asked Mr. Dean what
else he felt needed to be included in that category for recovery.
Number 1489
MR. DEAN confirmed that telephone calls and "all of that stuff"
should be included, noting it was itemized out in the materials he
was providing to the committee. He indicated it was important to
provide for replacement rental. He said he also had to convince
Redman Wheelchairs all the problems stemmed from the wheelchair,
not his weight, although that is what the company told him. Mr.
Dean related his father went down to purchase the wheelchair,
specifically asking if it could carry someone weighing over 200
pounds but less than 250. His father was shown one wheelchair by
the salesman and assured this was true, but Mr. Dean said a
different wheelchair was shipped and it had been an ongoing
argument for eight years.
Number 1552
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG confirmed Mr. Dean felt a replacement rental for
nonconforming equipment should be part of collateral costs.
MR. DEAN answered in the affirmative, noting how important the
equipment was to his mobility.
Number 1582
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if there were any further questions of Mr.
Dean and thanked him for his testimony and additional information.
MR. DEAN responded that this bill was very important to him.
Number 1597
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG commented that he was going to become a cosponsor
of HB 451, stating there were a few technical issues the committee
would correct and then move the bill on. Chairman Rokeberg
indicated the work done in this committee would help the
legislation with its next committee of referral, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee.
Number 1649
SHELLEY GREENE, Direct Service Supervisor, Access Alaska Fairbanks,
came forward to testify next. She stated she was there
representing Access Alaska Fairbanks, an independent living center
which provides services to people in the northern region who
experience disabilities. Ms. Greene said she was testifying in
support of HB 451 basically as a service provider but noted the
committee could see she, too, experiences disability [Ms. Greene
walks with a crutch and has MS]. She knows from personal
experience that she would not be able to get to work to provide for
her family without adaptive equipment. She would certainly like,
for herself and the consumers they serve through Access Alaska
Fairbanks, to be assured of warranties and the likelihood of
replacement in the event that their equipment should break. She
said they receive about 1,000 information and referral calls per
year, noting many calls are about servicing equipment and many of
these concern advocacy in relation to getting equipment serviced.
Referring to earlier testimony, she reiterated it is emotionally
difficult to lose a piece of adaptive equipment and difficult to
deal with in many other ways. As a service provider offering
advocacy, Access Alaska Fairbanks finds it spends a lot time
helping people with deal with the issue of settlement of equipment
breakdown. She mentioned earlier information relating that one in
seven Alaskans potentially faces a disability. Out of those 1 in
7, she said surveys they have done show that 2/3 of those people
want to work. She said in order for these people to work, their
equipment must be acceptable, in good repair and warrantied.
Number 1766
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked how accessible assistive technology is
in the Interior, in Fairbanks. He asked how many dealers and how
many avenues of access people have for wheelchairs, for example.
Number 1792
MS. GREENE said there are probably about three providers in the
Interior: the hospital, Geneva Woods (ph) and Apria Medical (ph).
She indicated most of the rest is done by mail, both through other
parts of the state and outside Alaska.
Number 1812
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked if Access Alaska Fairbanks helped its
clients through the process of obtaining assistive equipment.
MS. GREENE answered in the affirmative. Access Alaska Fairbanks
helps with research for the most part, but not necessarily with the
purchase of these items although it may assist in finding a
resource to help pay.
Number 1831
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG referred to the list of items qualifying as
assistive technology devices which included computer equipment,
(indisc.) devices, artificial voice output devices, optical
scanners, et cetera. He asked if she or other people from Access
Alaska Fairbanks have ever gotten involved with any of that "high
tech" equipment.
Number 1851
MS. GREENE answered in the affirmative, noting when they feel out
of their element they always seek the advice of more skilled
individuals or organizations. She said they use scanning devices
and other equipment in their office, both for employee use and for
informational use by community members.
Number 1882
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG stated it is the committee's responsibility to
make sure business works and services are provided for the people
of Alaska in all sectors. He commented he had a somewhat difficult
question and he apologized if he was putting her on the spot. He
asked what would keep someone from being an overly picky, problem
consumer in this situation. He indicated he was asking if they
were going too far here, or if it was something human nature would
take care of.
Number 1944
MS. GREENE said she thought human nature would take care of it
herself, noting there would always be the occasional person who can
never be satisfied. However, as a service provider at Access
Alaska Fairbanks, she said they provide advocacy as one of their
services and that is something they would help a person sort
through so that, hopefully, it wouldn't become problematic either
for the consumer or the businessperson.
Number 1996
PATRICK REINHART, Executive Director, Statewide Independent Living
Council (SILC), Department of Education, came forward to testify
next. He said the SILC is made up of a majority of people with
disabilities from around the state; its primary responsibility is
the development of a state plan for independent living and the
implementation of that plan with its partner centers for
independent living around the state like Access Alaska in
Fairbanks. He said they are all working toward the right of self-
determination for people with disabilities and the ability for
these people to hopefully live independent of institutional walls
in the communities of their choice. Referring to Ms. Ryan's
previous comments, he said when they collect testimony from around
the state, this issue of the ability to get assistive technology
equipment and have it repaired when appropriate has come up quite
a bit. He said, therefore, SILC is very much in support of HB 451.
Mr. Reinhart noted the council had, in fact, requested the bill's
introduction. He said this had been especially through the efforts
of one of the council members, Jeri Best (ph), noting the committee
had probably been receiving e-mail messages from Ms. Best for a
while. Mr. Reinhart thanked Representatives Green and Davies for
their efforts.
Number 2058
MR. REINHART said much of this equipment is purchased through
third-party vendors like state entities such as DMHDD, as Mr.
Johnson mentioned; or the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation.
He said Medicaid also purchases equipment for individuals, noting
the programs he has mentioned are all state and joint federal-state
programs. He indicated that possibly the motivation to pursue
fixing broken equipment may not be there all the time, especially
if there is the possibility another piece of equipment might be
purchased for a consumer by another state entity or group. Mr.
Reinhart said he thinks this bill will provide motivation and
support for agencies purchasing equipment for people with
disabilities as well as for those people themselves, noting it
might eventually save the state some money. He noted the
definitions of assistive technology and communication devices had
been mentioned; he said Mr. Johnson told him some of these devices
run from $3,000 to $40,000. Mr. Reinhart stated this brings up an
issue that is not in HB 451 but that the committee might consider:
maybe a warranty period of more than one year could be considered
for pieces of equipment meeting a threshold cost level. He
commented on the cost of Mr. Dean's wheelchair and suggested longer
warranties for equipment costing, perhaps, $10,000 or more,
indicating a one-year warranty seemed inadequate when dealing with
equipment costing $20,000 to $30,000. Additionally, Mr. Reinhart
pointed out that this really is not a problem with the in-state
businesses and dealers who are reputable and working on behalf of
people with disabilities. He indicated it is the best interest of
these businesses to provide good service for the equipment they
sell and that a lot of the problems have been with out-of-state
purchases. He commented this might "level the playing field" for
those in-state dealers competing with "cutthroat" out-of-state
operators. Mr. Reinhart said he thought, for that reason, there
would be a lot of support from the in-state dealers.
Number 2217
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if he had any comments on the collateral
cost issue.
MR. REINHART referred to the items Mr. Dean mentioned. He said he
has heard those before, commenting on the shipping costs and rental
of replacement equipment. He stated it could be further defined to
actually list those types of things, noting this might add to the
bill's length. Mr. Reinhart indicated he understood the concern
about possible misconstruing of the term to apply to unrelated
items, but said he thinks "collateral" itself means that it is
related.
Number 2246
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG said his desire to shorten the bill might be more
form than substance. Chairman Rokeberg asked Mr. Logan about use
of the term "express warranty" indicating he was troubled by the
wording of the sentence on page 1, lines 11 through 14, "If a
manufacturer fails to furnish an express warranty as required by
this section, the assistive technology device or mobility aid shall
be covered by the express warranty as if the manufacturer had
furnished an express warranty as required by this section." He
asked Mr. Logan to check with the drafter, commenting it might be
an implied warranty but he questioned whether it would have the
strength. Additionally, Chairman Rokeberg referred to Mr. Dean's
letter and commented that the definition of "collateral costs"
would have to be lengthened to cover these items. Chairman
Rokeberg also noted the amortization schedule, page 2, Section
620(1)(B), based on 1,825 days (five years) was not clear. He
asked if it was lease vis- -vis a purchase.
Number 2394
MR. LOGAN replied that it was simply an attempt to construct a
formula to determine the remaining value of a piece of equipment.
He said it hadn't seemed complicated to him before, but now that
the question has been asked he sees that and thinks they could come
up with a simpler formula.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG said subsection (1) appeared to refer to purchase
and that subsection (2) might apply to leasing.
MR. LOGAN said that was correct.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG noted he didn't understand why there had to be a
differentiation. He also commented on the "reasonable allowance
for use" in the amortization, asking Mr. Logan to explain that for
the committee.
Number 2442
MR. LOGAN said, again, they were trying to determine the remaining
value of the piece of equipment. He indicated this would allow the
manufacturer to deduct, in essence, some depreciation for a piece
of equipment that had been used by a consumer for some time before
malfunctioning and being returned to the manufacturer. Mr. Logan
said that is the intent behind "less a reasonable allowance for
use".
TAPE 98-30, SIDE A
Number 0001
MR. LOGAN indicated they would work with the committee staff to
present an acceptable committee substitute [BEGINNING OF TESTIMONY
CUT OFF BY TAPE CHANGE].
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG stated they looked forward to moving HB 451. The
legislation was held.
ADJOURNMENT
Number 0037
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG adjourned the House Labor and Commerce Standing
Committee meeting at 4:57 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|