Legislature(1995 - 1996)
04/27/1995 03:05 PM House STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
April 27, 1995
3:05 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Jeannette James, Chair
Representative Scott Ogan, Vice Chair
Representative Joe Green
Representative Caren Robinson
Representative Ed Willis
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Ivan Ivan
Representative Brian Porter
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HB 241: "An Act relating to the use of a state candidates
campaign account and to assets owned by a state
campaign; and providing for an effective date.
PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE
* HJR 2: Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the
State of Alaska relating to redistricting and to the
length of a regular session, and establishing a
unicameral legislature; and providing for an
effective date for each amendment.
PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE
CSSB 80(FIN): "An Act relating to police protection service areas
in certain unified municipalities; and to police
protection provided by the state in certain
municipal areas.
HEARD AND HELD
* HB 304: "An Act relating to geographic differentials for the
salaries of certain state employees who are not
members of a collective bargaining unit; relating to
periodic salary surveys and preparation of an annual
pay schedule regarding certain state employees;
relating to certain state aid calculations based on
geographic differentials for state employee
salaries; and providing for an effective date.
SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
(* First public hearing)
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR STEVE RIEGER
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol Building, Room 516
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
Telephone: (907) 465-3879
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor Statement for SB 80
LIEUTENANT TED BACHMAN, DPS/AST
Department of Public Safety
450 Whittier Street
Juneau, AK 99811
Telephone: (907) 465-4322
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 80
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 241
SHORT TITLE: NO PERSONAL USE OF CAMPAIGN ACCOUNT
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) BUNDE,Rokeberg
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
03/08/95 642 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
03/08/95 642 (H) STATE AFFAIRS, FINANCE
03/10/95 713 (H) COSPONSOR(S): ROKEBERG
04/06/95 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102
04/06/95 (H) MINUTE(STA)
04/11/95 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102
04/11/95 (H) MINUTE(STA)
04/27/95 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102
BILL: HJR 2
SHORT TITLE: UNICAMERAL LEGISLATURE/SESSION LIMIT
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) GREEN,Navarre
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/06/95 16 (H) PREFILE RELEASED
01/16/95 16 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/16/95 16 (H) STA, JUD, FIN
04/27/95 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102
BILL: SB 80
SHORT TITLE: MUNICIPAL POLICE SERVICES
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) RIEGER
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
02/09/95 222 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
02/09/95 222 (S) STA, FIN
03/02/95 (S) STA AT 03:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211
03/02/95 (S) MINUTE(STA)
03/03/95 468 (S) STA RPT 1DP 4NR
03/03/95 468 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DPS #1)
03/27/95 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/28/95 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/30/95 840 (S) FIN RPT CS 2DP 4NR 1AM SAME TITLE
03/30/95 840 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FN (DPS)
04/10/95 956 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 4/10/95
04/10/95 960 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
04/10/95 960 (S) FIN CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT
04/10/95 960 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN
CONSENT
04/10/95 960 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME CSSB 80(FIN)
04/10/95 960 (S) PASSED Y15 N5
04/10/95 960 (S) KELLY NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION
03/30/95 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
04/10/95 (S) RLS AT 08:30 AM FAHRENKAMP RM 211
04/10/95 (S) MINUTE(RLS)
04/11/95 980 (S) RECON TAKEN UP - IN THIRD READING
04/11/95 980 (S) LETTER OF INTENT OFFERED BY HOFFMAN
04/11/95 980 (S) AM 1 TO LETTER OF INTENT ADPTD
UNAN CON
04/11/95 980 (S) (S) ADOPTED LETTER OF INTENT AS
AMENDED
04/11/95 981 (S) PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION
Y14 N5 E1
04/11/95 984 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
04/12/95 1277 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
04/12/95 1277 (H) STATE AFFAIRS, FINANCE
04/27/95 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102
BILL: HB 304
SHORT TITLE: GEOGRAPHIC PAY DIFFERENTIALS
SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
04/07/95 1174 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
04/07/95 1174 (H) STA, L&C, FINANCE
04/07/95 1174 (H) GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER
04/07/95 1174 (H) 2 FISCAL NOTES (ADM, GOV-ALL
DEPT)
04/20/95 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102
04/20/95 (H) MINUTE(STA)
04/25/95 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102
04/25/95 (H) MINUTE(STA)
04/27/95 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 95-56, SIDE A
Number 000
CHAIR JEANNETTE JAMES called a special meeting to order of the
House State Affairs Committee at 3:05 p.m., April 27, 1995, and had
a quorum with five members present. Those present at a silent roll
call were Representatives Ogan, Green, Robinson, and Willis.
Absent were Representatives Ivan and Porter.
HB 241 - NO PERSONAL USE OF CAMPAIGN ACCOUNT
CHAIR JAMES noted that the first bill on this agenda was HB 241 and
asked if there were any objections to CSHB 241, Version K, as the
working document. There were no objections.
REPRESENTATIVE CAREN ROBINSON moved the acceptance of CSHB 241,
Version K, as the working document. There being no objections the
motion passed.
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON then moved to pass CSHB 241(STA), Version
K, out of committee with individual recommendations. There were no
objections, so the motion passed.
CHAIR JAMES said, for the record, that Representative Joe Green was
there. She also listed the members present: Representative
Robinson, Willis, Ogan, Green and James.
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON wished it to be on record that being she
was also in HESS and if they needed her vote on a bill there, she
might have to leave. She said if that happened and they needed
her back, she would be there.
HJR 2 - UNICAMERAL LEGISLATURE/SESSION LIMIT
CHAIR JAMES announced HJR 2, which was the next bill on the agenda
and she asked for at least two minutes from Representative Green on
this bill, before he had to leave.
Number 040
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN said this bill passed the body last year
late in the session and never got another committee hearing. This
bill goes from a two-body bicameral to a single-body unicameral
legislature. As per the fiscal note there is a significant amount
of money to be saved. More money can be saved that is not shown on
the fiscal note, however. Besides reducing time of session to 90
days, plus having only one body, they do away with the duplicity
that exists now. By duplicity he was saying it was not uncommon
for both bodies to introduce bills that are much the same, and
several committees of reference will work the bill. At the final
hour, the theory is that when one bill goes to the other body it
gets there with a track record. Each body has its own little
twist, and they are forever calling conference committees to
resolve these twists, all of which results from committee hearings
in both bodies. His suggestion was that with a unicameral
legislature such as has been in effect in Nebraska for some 50
years, they will do away with duplicity that now exists, and it
will become a more responsible legislature. It would eliminate the
opportunity to finger point at the body. This would require that
each person who votes for or against a bill would be visible, and
this would help the accountability. Some people ignore bills
thinking the other body will accept or deny it, which is not
accepting responsibility, and he requested the committee vote in
favor of it.
Number 096
CHAIR JAMES said she was undecided about this whole process, so she
has not made up her mind about HJR 2. One concern is about going
to a unicameral legislature without term limits. She would not be
willing to do that. If there is only one body with powerful people
in it, we are doomed. Regardless of her concerns she felt
comfortable passing the bill out to the next committee of referral,
which was the Judiciary Committee.
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON stated that she loved the concept of this
bill, and she said she knew a Senator in Nebraska who convinced her
that the unicameral legislature is a good idea. She had no problem
moving the bill, and spoke jokingly of the new capitol building
they need to hold a 60-member legislature.
REPRESENTATIVE ED WILLIS informed the committee that he was not yet
sure how he would vote on this bill personally. He has vacillated
on this for years, and said it might be something the people of the
state should address. If it got to the floor of the House, he said
he was not sure how he would vote.
Number 137
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said he wasn't excited about the bill. He
felt reluctant about it, with all due respect to Representative
Green, and it seemed too big to him to blow it out of committee
without discussion. He personally wanted to hear the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES said if Representative Green wished to have
interim meetings on the bill she would be willing to do that in
State Affairs. They would move it on to Judiciary, since that is
what they requested, but she would leave it up to the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN stated it would be his desire to have some
extensive review, since it is a significant change. The debate on
the pros and cons should be on record. In the interim, without
time constraints, we could set up lengthy, competitive discussions,
which he thought should happen. It should be done, then brought
back and sifted through. There is a tremendous amount of
background, he said. It will all have to come out.
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON made a motion to pass out HJR 2 with
recommendations and attached positive fiscal notes, and also with
the understanding that they all believe and want to have the
Judiciary Committee have special hearings on it during the interim,
to get full airing of the issue.
CHAIR JAMES asked if there was any objection to that motion.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said he had no objections, as long as it is not
going to get waived out of Judiciary.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said he would go on record that he would not
want that either.
CHAIR JAMES said there being no objections, HJR 2 was moved out of
committee.
SB 80 - MUNICIPAL POLICE SERVICES
Number 217
CHAIR JAMES said we only had a few minutes, but SB 80 would be
heard next. The sponsor, Senator Steve Rieger, was there and she
called him forward to present a sponsor statement. She received a
note from her Committee Aide that Anchorage Mayor Mystrom called
with strong opposition to this legislation, saying it would create
severe damage to public safety.
SENATOR STEVE RIEGER came before the committee with his sponsor
statement, saying that SB 80 is the culmination of a grassroots
effort to try to find an interim solution to an ongoing problem in
the Anchorage area. The bill is a measure to allow a citizenry,
which has expressed a desire and willingness, to pay for the cost
of their public safety protection. This will have a positive
affect on the Department of Public Safety's operating budget. It
would help every legislator who has public safety enforcement in
their area, and it is clearly a local option, and a self-
determination issue and has received a full hearing in the district
he represents. He thought it was a local annexation issue and this
was probably the reason for the call from Mayor Mystrom. Senator
Rieger said it does not, in any way, preclude any local annexation
issues. There is inflammatory rhetoric from downtown Anchorage,
but he urged the committee to recognize that was not their concern,
as state officials. Their concern was about a local effort, and a
desire and willingness to pay, if they should allow it to happen.
Senator Rieger said this bill would prevent that from happening.
Number 252
CHAIR JAMES asked if this bill passed, if he would have the
authority and wish to pay the Department of Public Safety for
protection, and where the people would come from who would provide
the protection. She asked if they would take people from other
areas, which might result in those areas being short of protection.
SENATOR RIEGER said additional money would go into the department,
which would pay for additional troopers for backup. Not only would
there be no erosion for anybody else's services, this bill would
provide an override financially to contribute to the rest of the
system. The additional people put on in public safety would serve
as an additional backup if there were a special need anywhere in
the state. There would be a financial and manpower benefit to all
areas of the state.
Number 265
CHAIR JAMES said she supported this bill when it passed last year.
The reason was that it might relate to her area, the Healy area,
which needed a trooper. They had been working to get a trooper
there for two years.
TED BACHMAN, a Lieutenant with the Alaska State Troopers in
Anchorage, wanted to put on the record that the department strongly
opposes this bill, as Mayor Mystrom did. He had a number of
reasons, and one was that it draws from other areas of the state.
The bills says it won't, but it will. If this bill passes, Mr.
Bachman said, they would be under a contractual obligation to
provide a certain number of troopers to particular areas. They are
not under contractual obligation now, to provide positions anywhere
else in the state; positions are provided on a management decision
basis. A statement was made that troopers would act as backup for
other areas of the state. This could present problems if an
emergency called troopers out of the contract area.
Number 308
REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT OGAN mentioned being involved in the fire
department and asked if they could get a mutual aid agreement with
the APD that would cover it.
LIEUTENANT BACHMAN answered that he did not know that they would
need a mutual aid agreement. He thought they could get one, but
he did not know if he could respond adequately.
CHAIR JAMES queried whether this bill spells out exactly what would
be in that contract agreement. She thought those things could be
included in the contractual agreement so it would work for both
parties.
LIEUTENANT BACHMAN said that to an extent some of the things could
be accounted for, although it says in the bill that "the contract
will be for direct services to the contract area." That was
another point they objected to. They could not account for the
indirect services: for instance, criminal investigation units, drug
investigation units, and laboratory services. All these things
would come to the contract area by virtue of the fact that the area
was being served by the state troopers.
CHAIR JAMES thanked Lieutenant Bachman for his statement and said
time was running out. Her feeling was that there were other areas
of the state that do not have police powers and might be able to
get more police protection by contracting with the state troopers.
If they had that opportunity they could have more troopers, and
everyone would be better off.
Number 343
REPRESENTATIVE ED WILLIS asked where the bill will go next if they
passed it out of committee. He had mixed feelings about it.
CHAIR JAMES determined from the committee that it would go to
Finance.
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIS said he would feel better about it knowing
it was going to another committee. If it got to the floor he
wondered if he would vote for it. He resented actions being taken
outside of the local jurisdiction, and Anchorage is a first class
home-ruled city and there are ways to address it.
CHAIR JAMES asked if there was anyone who wanted to move the bill
out.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said he was having problems with the bill.
Public Safety is against it, the mayor is against it, and the
richest area of the state is not willing to pay for its own police
protection.
Number 367
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said he would move to pass the bill out of
committee. He was not sure of its chances, however.
CHAIR JAMES asked if there were any objections.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN objected.
CHAIR JAMES said that since there were only four members present,
since Representative Robinson was called to HESS, and one member
objected, the bill could not be moved out.
ADJOURNMENT
CHAIR JAMES adjourned the meeting at 3:25 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|