Legislature(2021 - 2022)GRUENBERG 120
04/13/2021 01:00 PM House MILITARY & VETERANS' AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB144 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 144 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON MILITARY AND VETERANS' AFFAIRS
April 13, 2021
1:03 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Chris Tuck, Chair
Representative Andi Story
Representative Geran Tarr
Representative Matt Claman
Representative George Rauscher
Representative Laddie Shaw
Representative David Nelson
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 144
"An Act establishing the Alaska Military Affairs Commission; and
relating to the duties and powers of the Alaska Military Affairs
Commission."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 144
SHORT TITLE: ESTABLISH AK MILITARY AFFAIRS COMMISSION
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) HOPKINS
03/20/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/20/21 (H) MLV, FIN
04/13/21 (H) MLV AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE GRIER HOPKINS
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor, presented HB 144.
NOLAN KLOUDA, Director
Center for Economic Development
University of Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information and answered questions
on HB 144.
BRYCE WARD, Mayor
Fairbanks North Star Borough
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information and answered questions
on HB 144.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:03:48 PM
CHAIR CHRIS TUCK called the House Special Committee on Military
and Veterans' Affairs meeting to order at 1:03 p.m.
Representatives Shaw, Rauscher, Claman, Nelson, and Tuck were
present at the call to order. Representatives Tarr and Story
arrived as the meeting was in progress.
HB 144-ESTABLISH AK MILITARY AFFAIRS COMMISSION
1:04:43 PM
CHAIR TUCK announced that the only order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 144 "An Act establishing the Alaska Military
Affairs Commission; and relating to the duties and powers of the
Alaska Military Affairs Commission."
1:04:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRIER HOPKINS, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor, presented HB 144, which creates the Alaska Military
Affairs Commission (AMAC). He offered a history on the
conception of this bill, saying that the inspiration came about
in the Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB) in 2010. The mayor
created the "Tiger Team," a varied group of civilian
stakeholders, in order to prepare the city for the arrival of an
F-35 squadron, he said. He explained that the city wanted to
know how to put its best foot forward and how to advocate for
the community to make sure that the Department of Defense (DoD)
knew that Fairbanks was the right place to house the squadron.
He informed the committee members that trying to get the F-35
squadron into Fairbanks was the largest economic development
effort the city had seen in years. He shared that as the Tiger
Team has continued to be in existence, Fairbanks has continued
to reap benefits, for both the military community and for the
economy, bringing many more military projects to [FNSB].
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS stated that the goal of HB 144 is to
create a Tiger Team at a state-wide level. He said that that
effort would allow the state to have a long-term plan for what
the state is going to do when it comes to military development
in the Arctic and across the state, and he advised the effort
should span administrations and include different levels of
government. He noted that the Army and the Air Force recently
released their first set of Arctic strategies. He opined that
this is important timing for the state because as the polar ice
opens and Russia's and China's aggressions continue, Alaska's
role will only increase on the national front, due to the
state's strategic location. He argued that the state has to be
ready for these developments, so the DoD decides it is best
housed in Alaska, rather than other states. He said Alaska
needs to advocate for itself and offer what communities can put
forward at a local level, [such as] chambers of commerce,
hospitals, and public safety for new deployments.
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS stated that HB 144 would bring impacted
and proactive parts of Alaska together to create a commission
for long-term planning, so community and business voices could
be heard. He argued that Alaska's economic future can only be
strengthened by these developments coming to Alaska, as the
state continues to play its role in national security in the
Pacific area. With the new Arctic strategies, he reiterated
that the bill is perfectly timed. He then offered a timeline
for the bill's presentation and testimony in the committee.
1:10:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS led the committee members through the
bill packet, beginning with the sponsor statement. He informed
the committee that many states across the country have
established military affairs commissions. He said he believed
23 states had them, many of which had been created in the last
five years. He shared that there is opportunity for [military]
growth in Alaska. He pointed out a number of economic impact
points in the second paragraph of his sponsor statement. He
stated that HB 144 creates the commission and also gives it a
number of new powers, such as how [Alaska] prepares for new
bases and infrastructure needs. The commission would also
recommend methods to improve private and public employment
opportunities, he stated. He explained that Alaska is renowned
for its support of the military - welcoming them, being ready
for them, and having services that bring military service and
their family members into the community, as opposed to just on
the base, which is outside of the community. He stated that the
commission would work to advocate for the state in matters
relating to military expansion and decision making, by
emphasizing the state's strategic location, infrastructure, and
community support.
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS walked the committee members through the
bill. He explained that Section 1 would establish the Alaska
Military Affairs Commission in the Office of the Governor and
then gave committee members an overview of the commission's
membership structure. He said the lieutenant governor would
chair the commission, the adjutant general of the Department of
Military and Veterans' Affairs (DMVA) or the adjutant general's
designee and the commissioner of the Department of Commerce,
Community, and Economic Development (DCCED) or the
commissioner's designee would also have seats. Additionally, he
said three members would be mayors, or their designees, who
would be nominated by municipal organizations and appointed by
the governor.
1:14:34 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
1:15:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS continued, sharing that there would be
six non-voting members that would include the congressional
delegation, to ensure coordination with the federal level [of
government]. He highlighted the seventh duty of the commission
in the bill, to "prepare and maintain a strategic plan." He
explained that that would be a living document which would be
housed within the governor's office and would continue to
develop through different administrations.
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS moved on to Section 2 of the bill,
explaining that the commission would be housed within the boards
and commissions, with a sunset date of June 30, 2029. He
presented the fiscal note, which came from the governor's
office. He said the fiscal note includes costs of travel and
added that two of the four meetings would be in person. The
other fiscal note would be a full-time special assistant to the
commission, which was proposed by the governor's office.
Representative Hopkins said he hoped [the position] would be
paired down in committee so not as to increase the [state]
budget.
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS discussed the economic impact of military
spending in Alaska, directing attention to a research summary
entitled "AK Defense Spending." He mentioned defense contracts
for construction, administrative services for running the bases,
and the personnel and number of jobs. He pointed out two charts
on the next page, showing the monetary impacts on different
regions of the state, and said nearly every region is impacted
by military spending.
1:18:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS presented a comparison on different
military affairs commissions. He used this to show the
potential improvements from the existing structures in Alaska.
He stated that the first column has what is proposed in HB 144,
and the next column is the Alaska Civilian Armed Services Team
(ACAST) from Administrative Order No. 291 from 2017. He argued
that ACAST doesn't have quite the community and economic
development outlook that the AMAC would be providing. The last
column is the Joint Armed Services Committee, which would not be
impacted by this legislation. He acknowledged that a number of
other legislators have put a lot of work into JASC and clarified
that he does not want to remove it from statute. He said it has
its own mission, which is outside of what AMAC would be looking
at.
1:19:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SHAW pointed to the existence of [the Alaska
Veterans Advisory Council (AVAC)] and asked why the duties in
question could not be addressed by AVAC.
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS asked if [Representative Shaw's question
pertained to] AMAC or ACAST, because ACAST is housed within
DMVA.
REPRESENTATIVE SHAW clarified that he was saying there is
already a council that exists with 12 members that deals with
military and veterans affairs under DMVA. He was looking at the
reasoning why Alaska needed a new commission and could not blend
the structure of HB 144 with the existing commission that
already [deals with] military affairs around the state.
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS answered that the point of HB 144 is to
give municipalities and business communities a strong voice as
stakeholders in the economic development and to make sure [the
council] is proactively advocating for Alaska and bringing in
expanded missions and the infrastructure that is needed. He
shared that [AMAC would be] looking at it from a drastically
different perspective from that which ACAST and the Joint Armed
Services Committee have put forward.
1:20:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked if this had been run past the
governor, if it was at the request of the governor, and whether
the governor supported [HB 144].
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS answered that the bill draft was run past
the Office of the Governor to make sure that his office had some
input. He shared that the first draft of the bill had a 22-
member committee, and his office worked with the Office of the
Governor to pair it down to the people who are currently listed
in the commission. He remarked that while he can't speak for
the Office of the Governor, the current draft [of the bill] is
what resulted from working with that office.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked if the DMVA had been contacted,
and whether HB 144 had been run by them for approval.
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS replied that his office worked with the
Office of the Governor for the draft of the bill, and the
current draft of the bill clarifies membership and direction of
the commission. He said, "We have not received any opposition
from them at all."
1:22:47 PM
CHAIR TUCK pointed out that the fiscal note is from the Office
of the Governor, with allocation to the Office of the Lieutenant
Governor; therefore, he offered his understanding that "the
staff and travel" would be from the Office of the Lieutenant
Governor, not from DMVA.
1:22:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NELSON observed that ACAST and AMAC had similar
powers and duties. He asked if it would be easier to amend
ACAST rather than create a new commission, or if Representative
Hopkins did not see ACAST working in this scope.
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS acknowledged that there were some
crossovers but argued that one of the important ways other
states had used this [type of committee was the] long term
planning structure. He further stated that ACAST was just an
administrative order; however, he acknowledged that since it was
created four years ago, it has a decent history. He said one of
the main points of AMAC would be long-term planning over
multiple administrations and making sure that the communities
and municipalities have a stronger voice. [It is important
that] the legislature has the ability to establish this
commission, not through an administrative order that the
legislature doesn't have the ability to amend, he stated.
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS continued his response directing
attention to the strategic plan mentioned under number seven in
the "Powers and Duties" section [on page three of the
Comparisons of Provisions chart] of the AMAC [column], arguing
that it would be a living document rather than an annual report
to the legislature. He said the document could be amended at
various times. He said the way that AMAC would provide
recommendations for action would go far beyond what ACAST does.
This would give recommendations to the congressional delegation,
the governor, the legislature, and to communities, he explained,
a power that ACAST currently does not have.
1:24:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NELSON followed up asking if Representative
Hopkins did not see ACAST and the Joint Armed Services Committee
accomplishing the goals that he assigned to AMAC.
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS told Representative Nelson his
understanding was correct. He said he believed that Alaska
needs a long-term, multi-level economic look at the impacts of
new bases and structures and the Army's and the Air Force's
strategic decisions. He stated that the Joint Armed Services
Committee is based on ensuring that [the legislature] doesn't
run into issues with base realignment and closures (BRACs) and
is less community driven and more legislative driven, as 10
members are from the legislature themselves.
1:26:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR offered her experience as the Joint Armed
Services Committee co-chair, sharing that she was engaged in
early conversations with Mr. Klouda and Senator Revak about the
idea [in HB 144] that the military is a sector of the [Alaska]
economy. She suggested that when thinking about mining and oil
and gas, military should be considered in terms of the economic
impact, because it is not just the federal dollars that come in;
there is also a compounding effect in the [Alaska] economy. In
terms of the conversation about what differentiates it from
other existing organizations, that was her big takeaway. She
stated that bringing the business sector into [AMAC] seemed to
be the real advantage of this kind of framework.
1:27:14 PM
CHAIR TUCK noted that a lot has been done in the legislature to
accommodate the military over the years. He recalled an
economic development partnership in the Fairbanks area, as well
as [construction of] malls to support the areas around the
base[s]. He also believed the legislature accomplished some
work regarding gun ranges over massive acreages of land [for
military benefit]. He recalled Representative Hopkins'
acknowledgement of Alaska as a strategic location and questioned
how much competition [the state] had with other bases. He
remarked that there has been resounding support for the
military, and [HB 114] would be a way of furthering that
support.
1:28:16 PM
NOLAN KLOUDA, Director, Center for Economic Development (CED),
University of Alaska, provided information and answered
questions on HB 144. He gave a PowerPoint presentation to the
committee members, entitled "Economic Impacts of the Military in
Alaska" [hard copy included in the committee packet]. He
explained that he would overview military economic impact and
share some of the background and recommendations from a project
of CED's that helped produce the current concept and some of the
thinking behind HB 144 and AMAC.
MR. KLOUDA moved to slide 2 in his presentation and informed the
committee that CED has been working on an effort called the
Alaska Defense Industry Resilience Initiative since 2019. He
explained that the initiative's major goal was trying to
identify many of the challenges that go on with the military in
Alaska, especially with regard to vendors and contractors that
are in the defense space, but also to understand community
sensitivities to changes in defense activity, including those
economic impacts. He stated that CED wanted to figure out how
to help defense-related vendors and contractors, and also wanted
to do some work to lay the groundwork for a state-wide strategy
or approach on the military in Alaska.
1:30:05 PM
MR. KLOUDA presented slide 3 and discussed the impact of
statehood on military in Alaska, which he argued was one of the
major impacts. He expounded on that, sharing that in the 1950s,
the impetus behind statehood was the fact that Alaska was
important in the Cold War as a major part of the bulwark against
the Soviet Union. At one point in the 1950s almost half of the
state's population was tied to the military, between being
active-duty service members, civilian DoD employees,
contractors, or the dependent family members, he said. Before
the discovery of oil in Prudhoe Bay, he continued, the military
played the role in Alaska that oil plays now, as the main
backbone and driver of the state economy.
MR. KLOUDA moved along to slide 4. He stated that legacy is
still seen today in much of the state's infrastructure and big
projects. Many were built with a military need behind them or
upgraded or improved with a military justification behind them,
he shared. He offered a number of examples, citing the ports of
Seward, Valdez, and Whittier, the Alcan Highway, research
institutes from the University of Alaska (UA), airports around
the state, telecommunications systems, and more. He argued that
the economic foundation laid by the military made Alaska the
place that it is today, both as a state and as part of the rest
of the United States.
1:31:39 PM
MR. KLOUDA presented slides 5 through 8. He fast-forwarded to
the present day and stated that the state's leading industries
do a good job of telling their stories economically with how
many jobs each creates. He stated that these are all major
sources of employment in Alaska. He referred to slide 6 and
stated that oil and gas supplies over 77,600 jobs, and even more
if one considers the impact on state government. He also
credited mining, seafood, and tourism as big job creators.
MR. KLOUDA argued that there is often a missing piece that
causes individuals to overlook the military, noting that there
is not an organized body that is advocating for the military,
telling the military's story, and being a source of information
for what is going on with it.
MR. KLOUDA moved onto slide 7 and said part of CED's work was to
take a look at what CED knew about military spending in Alaska,
which is largely contracts and payroll, and run it through an
economic model to see how many jobs that creates in Alaska. He
then shared the model's results tallying about 58,000 total
jobs, as shown on slide 7. Most of the employment numbers CED
talks about are civilian jobs, so when taking out the active-
duty jobs, Mr. Klouda found there were about 33,000 civilian
jobs created by the military. That is 1 in 10 civilian jobs, he
observed, leaving out the active-duty service members who are
also employed and contributing to the economy, which would make
the number 1 in 6 total jobs. He argued that no industry makes
this impact other than oil and gas. He noted that fisheries may
have more jobs total, but many of those are seasonal and several
of them are [filled by] non-resident[s]. He said that
[military] jobs pay more [than other sectors] in Alaska.
MR. KLOUDA argued that this is a major job creator for the
state. He then referenced the economist Mouhcine Guettabi from
the Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER) University
of Alaska Anchorage (UAA). He said CED worked with Dr. Guettabi
on part of its work, and he used a different method to factor
job creation from the military, and that by Dr. Geuttabi's
estimates the numbers should be much higher. That means
military may be creating upwards of 70,000 jobs in the state.
1:34:19 PM
MR. KLOUDA turned to slide 9 in the presentation, which showed
how the jobs break down. The first column was direct DoD
payroll, showing 29,706 jobs. He explained that that is active
duty, civilian DoD employees, and United States Coast Guard
(USCG) employees, as well as members of the reserves and the
National Guard. The next bar on the graph was for contractor
employment, which he said represented the first tier of contract
spending at a conservative number of over 10,000 [jobs]. The
next bar on the graph represented second and third-tier
spending, which he explained was when contracted businesses and
employees spend money in the economy which creates additional
jobs. He said [when added together] this gave the total number
of jobs of about 58,000 total.
MR. KLOUDA turned to slides 10 and 11 and said another way to
look at this is regionally. He said that in the Interior of
Alaska, the job impacts are especially important. About one-
third of all civilian jobs are in the Interior, specifically
FNSB, Denali Borough, and the Southeast Fairbanks census area
because those areas include the Fort Greely, Clear Air Force
Station, Eielson Air Force Base, and Fort Wainwright. The
number is even higher when counting active-duty service members.
These numbers illustrate that this region of the state's main
economic anchor is the military, he stated.
MR. KLOUDA said military jobs are not isolated to the Interior.
About 1 in 10 [civilian jobs are military related in] Anchorage
and Matanuska-Susitna ("Mat-Su") together. He explained that
the two functioned as a combined economic unit, and even though
the bases are within the municipal boundaries [of Anchorage],
many personnel, contractors, and employees are in the Mat-Su
Valley. He reiterated that within the region, about 10 percent
of civilian jobs, 30,000 total jobs in the Anchorage and Mat-Su
area [are military related].
MR. KLOUDA stated that in other parts of the state, because of
the size of the population it is a little bit harder to do the
modeling for the employment impact. In Southeast Alaska there
is a huge presence from the Coast Guard and from other branches
of service as well, he shared. In Kodiak, Southwest Alaska, and
the Aleutians there are also fairly large impacts from the
military. In some of [CED's] work it was found that in the last
three years there was only one borough or census area in the
state that there was not any military spending that took place
there. He concluded that it is something that effects all parts
of the state to one degree or another.
1:37:08 PM
MR. KLOUDA continued onto slide 12, which presented the
consulting team's suggestions. He explained that in addition to
the economic impact piece, one of the aspects of CED's work was
overseeing a contract through a request for proposal (RFP)
process with a consultant agency called TIP Strategies. He
shared that TIP was hired to look at models around the country
for what states can do to enhance and strengthen their military
presence, especially relating to economic impacts to help create
a stronger economy and economic ties to the military. He said
that TIP Strategies focused its recommendations around two
pieces. One was the establishment of a military coalition or
alliance through state legislation specifically, and AMAC fits
these recommendations closely. The other was to establish an
office of military affairs within the state government, which
would be more of an executive office. He said he would not
speak to the second recommendation, but it is a potentially
valuable complementary piece.
1:38:13 PM
MR. KLOUDA dug into the coalition concept that helped to inform
the current legislation over the next few unnumbered slides of
his presentation. He shared that the consultants recommended a
few points about what the body should look like, the first of
which is that members should be identified in statute and
appointed by the governor. He stated this is important [to
ensure] continuity between administrations, since ACAST exists
as an administrative order and under varied administrations.
MR. KLOUDA stated that representing military communities is
important. He also mentioned private sector representation,
because of the large contracting base and other kinds of
business impacts. He advised that the commission should meet
regularly to discuss and act on key issues and build continuity
between administrations.
1:39:19 PM
MR. KLOUDA presented the next slide about the mission and
activities, which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
.notdef Advocating to Congress and DoD in support of
Alaskas military installations, missions, and defense
sector
.notdef Advising the Governor and the Legislature on defense
and military issues in the state
.notdef Developing strategies to protect the state's
existing military missions and positioning Alaska to
compete for new and expanded military missions and
defense industries
.notdef Identifying public infrastructure needs and
recommending state community grant assistance programs
to support the retention and expansion of military
installations, missions, and defense sector
MR. KLOUDA expanded on the contents of the slide, explaining
that in some cases the military is considering basing missions
and personnel in many different places, and there is competition
between places to host a new mission or a new expanded military
presence. He argued that if a state isn't competing, that puts
the state at a disadvantage, because advocacy is important. In
addressing the advisory role, he stated that ACAST is generally
focused on making recommendations to the commissioner of DMVA to
the adjutant general and the governor, but not necessarily the
legislature.
1:40:38 PM
MR. KLOUDA presented the last slide which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
.notdef Reviewing state policies to support military
installations and maximize economic benefits to local
communities (e.g., land use, transportation, noise
restrictions);
.notdef Making policy recommendations to improve the quality
of life for Uniformed Servicemembers, Veterans, and
their families (e.g., housing, professional licensing
reciprocity, education, workforce training); and
.notdef Expanding connections and collaboration between the
states businesses, universities, business
organizations, and installations.
MR. KLOUDA elaborated that about one third of military spouses
need a state level license or certification [to work in their
field]. He explained that many states don't have a streamlined
way to get those people relicensed, which factors into [the
military's] decision making. He argued there isn't a body in
[Alaska's] state government that works on collaboration,
especially in regard to commercial aspects of the military.
MR. KLOUDA responded to earlier comments in the meeting about
ACAST. He added that he gave a similar presentation to ACAST a
few months ago, and ACAST co-chairs General Randy "Church" Kee,
who is retired and works for the university, and Bill Popp, from
the Anchorage Economic Development Corporation, are both
supportive of the idea of a more expansive type of a body that
can do a bit more to advance economic development with the
military. He then recommended those two individuals as a source
of information for the committee.
1:42:50 PM
MR. KLOUDA said those are the main two points that he wanted to
mention, and he is happy to take questions. He also mentioned
that he believed the committee members had been paying attention
to DoD's strategy in regard to the Arctic. He noted the Army
and Air Force each have an arctic strategy. Both branches say
they recognize that the Arctic is a domain for great power
competition between the United States, Russia, and China, and
that dynamic justifies a stronger military presence in Alaska,
he stated. It behooves Alaska, he suggested, to think
proactively about what that means for the state, and how to
derive the most value from it.
1:43:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER said that he noticed a lot of redundancy
with all of the programs.
CHAIR TUCK suggested Representative Rauscher's was asking what
would make AMAC unique.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER named the Joint Armed Services
Committee, ACAST, DoD, and DMVA, and he remarked that a large
percentage of what this program is trying to accomplish is
already [addressed by the other organizations]; therefore, he
does not see the actual need for the proposed commission.
1:46:44 PM
MR. KLOUDA stated that on paper, there is the Joint Armed
Services Committee, which performs an important function, but it
generally meets once per year and has a mission specifically of
preventing BRAC, rather than a broad mission of perusing more
proactive opportunities. So, he continued, the Joint Armed
Services Committee is good and serves a purpose, but it doesn't
fulfill "this" purpose. He said that the adjutant general of
DMVA has said economic development aspects of the military is
something that DMVA is not equipped to do. He stated that in
the course of [preparing this plan], members of DMVA, JASC, and
the ACAST group were consulted, so the recommendation to form
[AMAC] was to provide a missing piece. He said that on paper,
there are many groups, but in reality, there is a vacuum when in
it comes to the state having one body that is the main focal
point for military and commercial aspects that flow from an
economic development aspect.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked for specific examples of failures
in the past that the proposed commission would prevent going
forward. He clarified that he was not speaking against the
proposed commission.
1:49:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR shared that she served on the Joint Armed
Services Committee, both as member and co-chair, and she echoed
the previous speaker's comment that with only one meeting a
year, the Joint Armed Services Committee is limited in its
activities. She pointed out that when the Alaska Defense Forum
took place, the Joint Armed Services Committee was one of the
co-sponsors of it and organized a round table, which in her
experience was the only time the joint committee has done
something outside of [its annual meeting]. She stated that the
Joint Armed Services Committee does not have the resources or
the membership to do what is being proposed for the commission.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR shared that in an annual report, [she and
her co-chair] had recommended that the statute that enacted the
Joint Armed Services Committee be reviewed, because many things
have changed overtime. She said maybe right now is the right
time to rethink all the pieces and how they fit together, but
the Joint Armed Services Committee, in her experience, has never
taken on discussion about any of the economic pieces or
supporting the military sector in Alaska.
1:52:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS responded to Representative Rauscher's
question. He acknowledged that [the different entities] can
look similar. When it comes to the goal and drive of the
membership, [being] proactive [about the] economic well-being
and growth of the state [is] the main driver for the creation of
the AMAC under HB 144 and is an entirely different mission and
goal when compared to the Joint Armed Services Committee, with
its legislative and military membership. Being proactive,
trying to find ways to make sure Alaska's best foot is put
forward, and being ready to support the families of military
members and veterans would be something unique to AMAC.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked Representative Tarr if there was
any way [the legislature] could expand the directive of the
Joint Armed Services Committee, and the number of times it could
meet, so it could take on [more].
1:53:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR commented that Representative Shaw could
also speak to the question, since he is also on the Joint Armed
Services Committee. She replied that the big difference she saw
is the joint committee has $10,000 to stretch over two years.
She explained that a little was used to be a sponsor of the
Alaska Defense Forum recently, but primarily that budget is so
that when the Joint Armed Services Committee holds its annual
meeting, the members from outside of Juneau can attend. It
typically covers [the members'] flight, hotel, and food. She
said in order to take on the tasks of the proposed commission,
the Joint Armed Services Committee would need a full-time staff
person, statutes would have to be amended, and the joint
committee would have to consider how to [provide] the resources
to operate.
1:55:06 PM
CHAIR TUCK shared that he also served on Joint Armed Services
Committee during the Alaska Defense Forum. He commented that
Jeff Steppe was working with the mayor [of Fairbanks] at the
time, and he continued on to help put [the defense forum]
together and now serves as staff at the legislature.
1:55:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SHAW made comments relative to the direction HB
144 was going. He recounted that early on he felt his question
was very well answered by Representative Hopkins, because the
key part to this bill that the Joint Armed Services Committee,
ACAST, and [AVAC] does not carry is the social and economic
landscape. He said the Alaska Defense Forum deals with defense
statewide, and ACAST is primarily a civilian armed services
team. He shared that he thought the importance and value of [HB
144] is relative to the social and economic landscape of the
state, and the strength that this bill gives to bringing
together the different defense sectors of the state and the
civilian community [together]. Representative Shaw pointed out
that a report had been done by CED, which doesn't even have a
direct military connection. But, he argued, that is the focus
and value of HB 144. Having worked across the military
community for 20 years, Representative Shaw said he could see
how something like this would be such a huge benefit because
Alaska has so many DoD dollars coming into the state, and so
much potential for growth in the state within DMVA, the
Department of Homeland Security, and the State Department. He
said now that he has the insight to the bill, he can see why the
key part of this legislation exists.
1:57:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY commented that she thought the point would
be that collaboration was productive between these groups,
because they each have a unique niche.
1:58:26 PM
BRYCE WARD, Mayor, Fairbanks North Star Borough, provided
information and answered questions on HB 144. He began his
presentation by stating that the creation of AMAC is needed to
facilitate better coordination between administration,
legislature, and local governments across the state. He
concurred with many of the comments Mr. Klouda had made, as well
as the bill sponsor Representative Hopkins, [who did] a
wonderful job of explaining the benefits of the bill.
MAYOR WARD spoke to the specifics of how FNSB has been able to
utilize something similar to this in the local community. He
recalled Representative Hopkins having talked about the Tiger
Team, which coordinates efforts between the local businesses and
local leadership between cities and the borough, as well as
connects with state leaders and the congressional delegation.
This team has been an incredible tool in leveraging strategic
locations in the Interior and statewide to benefit the nation's
defense. He shared that many conversations over the past few
years on FNSB's work with the Association of Defense Communities
(ADC) have looked to military affairs commissions across the
United States as powerful ways to be able to drive some of these
agendas and policy at a statewide level to benefit the state.
He listed a few ways that a military affairs commission would
benefit the state. He said it would be proactive and lean into
issues before they become something undesirable by the community
or state, and it could lean into some of those positive-facing
decisions and mission potential for when DoD is looking for
potential communities to fulfil its mission for the nation's
defense.
MAYOR WARD offered that one thing FNSB noticed with the local
Tiger Team is that the military is really interested in
fulfilling its mission in communities that support [the
military]. He said that Alaska's ability to come together as a
state and as strong local communities to provide support for the
mission of defense while supporting the families of the service
members as they come into the communities has been incredibly
powerful.
2:01:29 PM
MAYOR WARD said one of the things FNSB has also noticed over
that last year or two is that the DoD is looking at quality of
life for their military members and the military families. He
explained that DoD has begun basing its decisions on metrics
such as education, reciprocity, and other aspects of quality of
life, such as what kinds of opportunities are available for
family members when they are in a particular community. He
argued that being able to look at these issues from a statewide
perspective speaks to not only Alaska's ability to support DoD's
mission of defending the United States, but also to its capacity
to support the military families that come along with the
soldiers and airmen. Being able to have that comprehensive
perspective is important, he emphasized, and he thinks it is
something the state has been missing.
MAYOR WARD said it's hard to believe he has served almost nine
years in some capacity as a mayor, six years with the City of
North Pole and coming up on three years with FNSB. He shared
that he has worked with three different governors and three
different governor's task forces. He said he believes ACAST is
the current model that the state has. He recounted that his
first experience with that was with the Alaska Military Force
Advocacy Team (AMFAST), under Governor Sean Parnell. He stated
that those committees, when used to their full potential, are
effective. He said AMFAST was able to the move forward the
Tanana River Bridge, as Representative Hopkins mentioned, [as
well as moving] other strategic projects across the state of
Alaska such as securing the F-16 mission [in FNSB] and working
on the F-35 mission with the newer executive order commissions
through the Office of the Governor. One of the things he had
noticed in his time in local office, he shared, was that with
every change in administration there is a huge loss of momentum
from those executive order committees. He said this is because
every new governor wants to put new people on and set a new
direction. Many times, if one looks at the work that has come
out of those committees, he argued, after a year or two they
pick back up the same projects, but with the loss of a year or
two [of progress].
MAYOR WARD said he looks at a legislatively authorized
commission as being the key to establishing consistency between
state agencies, the legislature, and local communities. He said
he thinks there are some opportunities for efficiency between
the different agencies, because it will take coordination
between the governor's office and the legislature to make those
things happen. He argued that having a military affairs
commission that is legislatively authorized gives the greatest
chance for success in moving items forward. His final comment
was that the nation's defense is strongest when [the government]
supports the nation's defense families with strong communities
and strong strategies. He felt that HB 144 is the best
opportunity the legislature can do to move things forward and be
supportive in the future.
2:05:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NELSON asked Mayor Ward if he had ever served on
the ACAST team.
MAYOR WARD replied that he has not served on any of the
governors' task forces.
REPRESENTATIVE NELSON asked whether, if AMAC were to pass, Mayor
Ward would stand down the Tiger Team.
MAYOR WARD answered that he has no intent on disbanding the
local Tiger Team effort. Many of the projects that FNSB is
working on are very specific to the FNSB community. However, he
stated that he does look forward to the ability to coordinate
with a statewide operation on these different issues being delt
with, whether locally or on a statewide level. He said he sees
[the Tiger Team] as being supportive of AMAC, not competitive.
2:06:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SHAW shared his concern about the bill is the
cost of the personnel services. He said every commission that
he has seen such as the Joint Armed Services Committee or the
Veterans Affairs Council generally can thrive among itself
without a $124,000 position. He said he would like to move
forward with a possible amendment to delete the position and
allow the commission to run its own program debt free. He
commented that everyone is trying to cut the budget, and if
there is any chance to make this commission viable and still
gain the strength within itself, it would make a big difference.
2:07:52 PM
CHAIR TUCK commented that he does not know how many boards the
commissioner of the Department of Commerce, Community & Economic
Development must serve on, but the commission proposed under HB
144 would be an additional obligation. [The House Special
Committee on Military and Veterans Affairs] is trying to make it
so the lieutenant governor has the ability to chair the
commission. He said he agrees that [the state] is in a fiscally
tight situation, and it is difficult to add personnel, but [it
is also important] to make sure this commission succeeds. He
stated that he was unsure what the best balance was at this
point.
CHAIR TUCK asked if the bill sponsor had spoken with Kris
Curtis, Legislative Auditor with the Legislative Audit Division,
on the eight-year time frame. He commented that the legislature
is trying to balance out when commissions sunset so there is not
too much burden on the division at one time. He clarified that
he had no opposition to eight years but wanted to be sure it
would not be better served at six or seven years.
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS replied that he was happy to work on
that. He said the bill described eight years, because it is the
general cycle when looking at audits. He also commented to
Representatives Nelson and Shaw that he wanted to make sure the
commission has the staff it needs to be able to function well to
keep the long-term plan happening, but at the same time using a
full-time employee that is in place instead of creating another
one.
[HB 144 was held over]
2:10:15 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Military and Veterans' Affairs meeting was
adjourned at 2:10 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 144 version A 4.12.2021.PDF |
HMLV 4/13/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 144 |
| HB 144 Sponsor Statement 4.12.2021.pdf |
HMLV 4/13/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 144 |
| HB 144 Sectional Analysis 4.12.2021.pdf |
HMLV 4/13/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 144 |
| HB 144 Fiscal Note OOG-AMAC 4.9.2021.pdf |
HMLV 4/13/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 144 |
| HB 144 Presentation from Nolan Klouda 4.12.2021.pdf |
HMLV 4/13/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 144 |
| HB 144 Research 2019 AK Defense Spending 4.12.2021.pdf |
HMLV 4/13/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 144 |
| HB 144 Research Comparison_AMAC-ACAST-JASC 4.12.2021.pdf |
HMLV 4/13/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 144 |
| HB 144 Research Economic Impacts of the Military in Alaska 4.12.2021.pdf |
HMLV 4/13/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 144 |
| HB 144 Research Alaska Defense Coalition Report 4.12.2021.pdf |
HMLV 4/13/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 144 |
| HB 144 Testimony FNSB 4.12.2021.pdf |
HMLV 4/13/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 144 SB 4 |