Legislature(1995 - 1996)
04/28/1995 03:10 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 28, 1995
3:10 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Jeannette James, Chair
Representative Scott Ogan, Vice Chair
Representative Ivan Ivan
Representative Caren Robinson
Representative Ed Willis
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Brian Porter
Representative Joe Green
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
* HR 9: Relating to Alaska Garden Week.
PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE
SB 150: "An Act establishing Dutch Harbor Remembrance
Day."
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."
PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE
(* First public hearing)
WITNESS REGISTER
SHERMAN ERNOUF, Administrative Assistant
Senator Tim Kelly
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building. Room 101
Juneau, AK 99801
Telephone: 465-3822
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided sponsor statement SB 150
SENATOR STEVE RIEGER
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building Room 516
Telephone: 465-3879
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 80
GREG MACDONALD, Secretary-Treasurer
Alaska Public Safety Employees Association
5700 East Tudor Road
Anchorage, AK 99507
Telephone: 269-5604
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 80
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HR 9
SHORT TITLE: ALASKA GARDEN WEEK
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) ELTON,Robinson
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
04/27/95 1596 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
04/27/95 1596 (H) STATE AFFAIRS
04/28/95 (H) STA AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 102
BILL: SB 150
SHORT TITLE: DUTCH HARBOR REMEMBRANCE DAY
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) KELLY, Taylor, Hoffman, Zharoff, R.Phillips,
Leman, Miller, Halford, Sharp, Torgerson, Green, Donley, Duncan,
Salo, Ellis, Frank
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
04/05/95 873 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
04/05/95 873 (S) STA
04/18/95 (S) STA AT 03:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211
04/20/95 (S) STA AT 12:00 PM BELTZ ROOM 211
04/20/95 (S) MINUTE(STA)
04/21/95 1138 (S) STA RPT 5DP
04/21/95 1138 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (GOV)
04/22/95 (S) RLS AT 02:30 PM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203
04/24/95 1208 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 4/24/95
04/24/95 1209 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
04/24/95 1209 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN
CONSENT
04/24/95 1209 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME SB 150
04/24/95 1210 (S) COSPONSOR(S): MILLER,HALFORD,SHARP,
04/24/95 1210 (S) TORGERSON,GREEN,DONLEY,DUNCAN,SALO,
04/24/95 1210 (S) ELLIS,FRANK
04/24/95 1210 (S) PASSED Y18 N- E2
04/24/95 1215 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
04/25/95 1491 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
04/25/95 1491 (H) STATE AFFAIRS
04/28/95 (H) STA AT 03:00 PM 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 ROOM 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
04/27/95 (H) MINUTE(STA)
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 95-57, SIDE A
Number 000
CHAIR JAMES called the meeting to order at 3:10 p.m.
#HR 9 - ALASKA GARDEN WEEK
REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT OGAN moved to pass HR 9 out of committee with
individual recommendations and zero fiscal note.
REPRESENTATIVE ED WILLIS said, as a summer-time gardener, he really
appreciated the resolution and commended the sponsor of the
resolution.
CHAIR JAMES asked if there were objections to moving the bill.
There were none, so HR 9 was moved from committee.
SB 150 - DUTCH HARBOR REMEMBRANCE DAY
Number 026
SHERMAN ERNOUF, Administrative Assistant to Senator Kelly, reported
Senator Kelly had introduced this bill to commemorate events at
Dutch Harbor during World War II. These events are important to
Alaska's citizens, though they have gone unrecognized. The
recapture of the islands there constitute the only land battles
fought on North American soil during World War II. This bill
honors those persons who gave their lives at Dutch Harbor in
recapturing Attu and Kiska from the Japanese, and further it honors
all Native Aleuts who were interned and those who were captured and
sent to Japan during the War. SB 150 would proclaim June 3 of
every year as Dutch Harbor Day to honor these patriots.
Number 179
CHAIR JAMES remarked she remembered the conflict in Alaska during
World War II, though many people were not aware of it because it
was kept very quiet at the time. When her husband was in the Navy,
he spent time at Dutch Harbor, Amchitka, and Adak. She is very
supportive of this bill.
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIS said he agreed with Chair James' comments.
Representative Ogan said "ditto," and so did Representatives
Robinson and Ivan.
Number 107
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said seeing that it's sunny and warm outside,
and this is a really fine bill, he would make a motion to move SB
150 from committee with individual recommendations and zero fiscal
note. There were no objections, so the bill was moved.
SB 80 - MUNICIPAL POLICE SERVICES
Number 117
CHAIR JAMES said, "Yesterday when we were meeting we had SB 80 on
the schedule, and there was a motion to move SB 80. We had limited
discussion on the bill. There were not four votes to move it from
committee, so it is still here. The sponsor, Senator Rieger, is
here to give us another presentation."
SENATOR STEVE RIEGER said he had several testifiers available in
favor of the bill the day before but had asked them not to testify
because of time constraints. He had one person there presently who
would be available for questions. He added SB 80 was an attempt to
be fair to the state, wherein a group of residents have volunteered
to self-assess themselves to cover the state costs for police
protection services in their area.
Number 156
CHAIR JAMES restated her concerns as a result of her conversations
with the Department of Public Safety and with Commissioner Otte, in
which she was told the department would be willing to testify
regarding their concerns but they feel they are here to enforce the
law, not to make the law, and they like to take a neutral position.
One of their concerns was what happens if there is a contract to
service a certain area with state troopers, and troopers are hired
for that job which would not take troopers away from other areas,
and then one of them retires, quits, or leaves. This means a
trooper must be pulled from another area of the state to meet the
contractual agreement, and the number of troopers in other parts of
the state is reduced.
Number 180
SENATOR RIEGER responded the language of the bill does not address
a required number of troopers in an area. The bill states troopers
are expected to be present, but are not contractually obligated to
be there. If there are emergencies in other areas, the trooper
could be gone for an extended length of time to meet the emergency.
The community totally understands that.
Number 200
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said he was the chief of the "outlaw" fire
department in his area, a small private nonprofit corporation not
in a fire district. As a result, he knows about "mutual aid
agreements," and he knows fire departments respond only to an area
which pays tax for their service. Without a mutual aid agreement,
they will not respond outside their area regardless of how serious
the situation is. If troopers are asked to respond out of their
district, there is a liability exposure and they will not do it,
and that is why fire departments will not do it. If there were a
mutual aid agreement with the city of Anchorage they would be able
to respond.
Number 242
SENATOR RIEGER said he had a conversation with the commissioner,
during which the commissioner related that this had been discussed
internally and the liability question was not an issue in this
case. They do cross-respond already, so they must have worked it
out. The area he is talking about is already covered by troopers.
Troopers and Anchorage Police Department (APD) people do already
respond across the lines.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN noted currently there is no contract, so
troopers have an obligation to provide service anywhere in the
state.
Number 268
CHAIR JAMES observed the troopers are already obligated to be in
Senator Rieger's area because they have no other protection. So
they are there, but not via a contract. She asked Senator Rieger
who is in charge in Senator Rieger's district and who would someone
talk to as the "boss" who speaks for the people in the Hillside
District on such issues as contractual arrangements.
SENATOR RIEGER replied the bill allows a petition to be signed by
the registered voters in the area, and the question would then
appear on a ballot. It would be ratified through a local option,
and the cost described in the petition would then be assessed
through the normal property tax assessment. There is no executor
per se, because it is all an automatic process. There would be no
written contract.
CHAIR JAMES observed this would be giving people an opportunity to
pay money to the state for services they are already getting.
Number 285
SENATOR RIEGER said yes, it would reduce hard feelings which have
occurred. They are not looking for a free ride.
REPRESENTATIVE CAREN ROBINSON asked why would they do this instead
of just opting into local police department services and paying it
like everyone else in Anchorage does.
SENATOR RIEGER said the technical response is that Anchorage was
never totally unified. The unification charter between the borough
of Anchorage and the city of Anchorage stated the unification would
happen service by service, as the local population in an area voted
that service in. The Eagle River - Chugiak area does not have
building codes because they have never voted it in. Both there and
in South Anchorage there are limited road service areas which have
not voted themselves into municipal road service. The area is
riddled with non-unified pieces, and his district is one. They
never voted police services in, and part of the original deal was
that they would not have to until they chose to. The actual
reasons why a vote proposition has not passed are more complex. He
has avoided dragging the legislature into their issues and problems
regarding services provided because it would not be productive.
Number 319
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked Senator Rieger what made him think
they would agree to this.
SENATOR RIEGER replied there was a thorough survey in the earlier
1990s in which 90 percent of the people said they would pay. They
only wanted the right to not be forced into the annexation of the
local service until they were ready.
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked how the money would be collected.
SENATOR RIEGER replied through property tax, with the money being
sent to the state instead of the city.
Number 339
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON said she was under the impression the
Department of Public Safety had serious concerns about the bill,
but that the Alaska Public Safety Employees Association was in
favor of it. She asked why the association was in favor of the
bill.
SENATOR RIEGER replied they have never had a problem with
patrolling the area. The only reason the official position of the
Department of Public Safety as a whole is in opposition is because
they were directed by the Governor to oppose it.
Number 356
CHAIR JAMES noted the department would still not say they favor it
because they have been ordered to take a neutral position. She
added her concern is that she sees the bill impose a tax for a
service; that tax would be collected by the municipality of
Anchorage and then presumably forwarded to the state. She asked if
the municipality of Anchorage would then keep some money for
administration.
SENATOR RIEGER replied, yes.
CHAIR JAMES then said, "You and I both know what happens to program
receipts. After the money gets to the state, how are we going to
know that money is going to buy more troopers, or whether they will
just take that money and still not have enough troopers?"
Number 370
SENATOR RIEGER agreed this was a valid concern and said this budget
cycle has demonstrated more than ever before the need to
distinguish program receipts, and he will not support a budget cap
which does not make this distinction. He added the problem is
everywhere, not just Public Safety.
CHAIR JAMES agreed, adding there must be a way to measure the net
when comparing yearly budgets as opposed to the bottom line,
including the money spent on program receipts.
Number 393
GREG MACDONALD, Secretary-Treasurer of the Alaska Public Safety
Employees Association, said his association supports this issue;
they believe it is the right of individuals to choose the service
they want.
Number 400
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked if they felt comfortable with the
fact that this affects only one area. She related her experience
on the Juneau Borough Assembly in 1987 when municipalities were
required to take on police powers. They taxed themselves, and yet
they have gone from 20 to 4 troopers.
MR. MACDONALD replied this group of people were willing to pay for
their service; they were not just sitting with their hands out
saying "Give me."
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON observed they had been one of the richest
areas in the state which had refused to tax themselves while other
areas had taxed themselves to cover police powers, so she did not
sympathize with them. She said there was no guarantee even if this
bill passed that they would agree to pay for themselves, which
would put them back to where they were before.
Number 421
CHAIR JAMES said she was beginning to realize this bill is an
opportunity for them to collect a tax from themselves and pay it to
the state for services they are already getting. She related her
experience trying to get a trooper in Healy, saying she had
supported this bill last year because she thought it would help,
but she realized this bill would not allow this. It definitely
defines only Anchorage and only one area.
SENATOR RIEGER responded to Representative Robinson's concern
first, saying the only reason the former propositions were voted
down was because the voters were never given the chance to vote on
the local option they wanted. Regarding the narrowness of this
bill, that was by request of other legislators who wanted to see
how it would work in his specific area.
Number 456
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked what the Governor's position on this
issue is.
SENATOR RIEGER replied the Governor directed the department to take
a position against it. The Governor is a former mayor of
Anchorage. Their approach is that there is an entitlement to take
over services that were never contemplated in the charter as being
an entitlement. He noted Representative Willis was there when the
charter fights were occurring.
Number 469
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIS said this is a terrible spot to be put in
with members of his own municipality. Being candid and honest, he
said Anchorage is a first-class, home-rule municipality, and they
went through a unification proposition years ago; Eagle River went
in "screaming and kicking," and he was part of the group that kept
it at bay for ten years. Finally the courts put them in with
Anchorage. They were told it would end duplication, and Anchorage
does furnish them troopers. The Anchorage municipal police service
his area. The only other area not incorporated is the Hillside
area, and it remains an unprotected area except for the state
troopers being there. The charter provides for handling it
locally, and many people consider this bill to be an end run around
a charter. He even had one constituent ask to have Senator
Rieger's bill amended to include Eagle River. This opened up a can
of worms. He referred to a letter he and other committee members
had received overnight from Anchorage Mayor Mystrom in opposition
to the bill stating he would work to convince Hillside to join
Anchorage's police service area. The letter continued SB 80 would
make this almost impossible.
Number 538
CHAIR JAMES noted the letter also said SB 80 would allow Hillside
not to pay other parts of police expenses. She referred to the
problem in her district where her area wishes to withdraw from the
Fairbanks North Star Borough and form the North Pole Borough. Part
of what has prompted it is a constant fight against unification
because North Pole has a high tax base but is not getting the
services for the taxes they are paying; their taxes pay for
services received by the more urban areas. The more urban areas
are protesting the separation because it would cause them to pay
more taxes. She noted this is exactly what is happening in the
Hillside District. Mayor Mystrom objects because Hillside would be
paying for police service but not for all the administrative
services in the rest of the downtown area. She remarked to
Representative Willis that she understood the people of Eagle River
were standing by to see how successful the North Pole Borough might
be because they might want to do the same thing. There is a trend
going now. The Boundary Commission has up to 12 factions wanting
to govern themselves.
Number 573
SENATOR RIEGER addressed the mayor's efforts to convince South
Anchorage to join, saying he believed if SB 80 passed the mayor's
efforts would be easier because the mill rate increase would be
gradual. Also, the bill requires renewal every three years and
would allow the mayor to continually offer annexation. He noted
the editor of the Star said this was the right thing to try.
Number 599
CHAIR JAMES said there was an ongoing trend with people wanting
government closer to home. People on the fringe of large boroughs
are tired of paying for services that only go to people in the
center of the borough. She added it is a difficult step, because
once something is in place it is almost impossible to take it away.
Number 609
REPRESENTATIVE IVAN IVAN said he initially did not support SB 80,
but now that he understands it he respects the self-determination
efforts of the people in the community. He added the bill has a
two-year phase out if the people decide on unification, and he now
supports the bill.
CHAIR JAMES said she understands it better now too and was glad
they had this opportunity to hear more about the bill.
Number 619
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked if the two-year phase out was a
sunset provision.
SENATOR RIEGER said every three years the ballot is voted on again.
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked if he had considered sunsetting all
of the provisions of the bill.
SENATOR RIEGER said he had not.
Number 636
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN commented he had discussed the bill earlier
with Senator Rieger. His concern was that the bill might prevent
the Anchorage Police Department from ever going into Hillside and
it might be a way to duck paying taxes in an area where homes are
worth more than in other areas, despite the fact that residents
work downtown, drive and shop downtown, and utilize Anchorage
police protection whenever they are off the hillside. Too many
Alaskans have gotten used to getting something for nothing.
Number 670
SENATOR RIEGER said they do pay plenty of property taxes to
Anchorage, and this is just an expression of desire for more local
control. All the commercial property in Anchorage is outside the
area being considered in the bill, so that all goes to the
Anchorage Police Department.
CHAIR JAMES observed it was the same thing as in North Pole where
they pay the taxes and someone else gets the benefits. She said it
will probably be a case where they will resist until forced by the
courts to unify, but in the meantime she admires their spunk.
Number 692
REPRESENTATIVE IVAN made a motion to move CSSB 80(FIN) from the
House State Affairs Committee with a zero fiscal note and
individual recommendations. Representative Willis asked that he be
shown as reluctantly objecting. A roll call vote was taken.
Representative Willis voted no. Representatives Robinson, Ivan,
Ogan and James voted yes. The bill was moved.
ADJOURNMENT
CHAIR JAMES adjourned the meeting at 4:00 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|