02/13/2001 08:10 AM House STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
February 13, 2001
8:10 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative John Coghill, Chair
Representative Hugh Fate
Representative Gary Stevens
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Harry Crawford
Representative Joe Hayes
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Jeannette James
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 1
"An Act relating to the location of legislative sessions; and
providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 1
SHORT TITLE:MOVE LEGISLATURE TO ANCHORAGE
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)ROKEBERG, GREEN
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
01/08/01 0023 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 12/29/00
01/08/01 0023 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
01/08/01 0023 (H) STA, FIN
01/08/01 0023 (H) REFERRED TO STATE AFFAIRS
02/13/01 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 102
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 403
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as co-sponsor of HB 1.
REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 118
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as co-sponsor of HB 1.
REPRESENTATIVE BILL HUDSON
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 502
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 1.
REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT OGAN
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 108
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 1.
SALLY SMITH, Mayor
City and Borough Of Juneau
155 South Seward Street
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 1.
REPRESENTATIVE BETH KERTTULA
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 430
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 1.
WIN GRUENING, Chair
The Alaska Committee
P.O. Box 22138
Juneau, Alaska 99802-2138
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 1.
JEFF LOGAN, Staff
to Representative Green
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 403
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information in support of HB 1.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 01-11, SIDE A
Number 0015
CHAIRMAN JOHN COGHILL called the House State Affairs Standing
Committee meeting to order at 8:10 a.m. Representatives
Coghill, Fate, Stevens, Wilson, Crawford, and Hayes were present
at the call to order.
HB 1 - MOVE LEGISLATURE TO ANCHORAGE
Number 0112
CHAIR COGHILL announced that the topic before the committee was
HOUSE BILL NO. 1, "An Act relating to the location of
legislative sessions; and providing for an effective date." He
stated that it was his intention to hear HB 1 and begin
discussion, but not to vote on passing the bill from committee
before having another meeting, perhaps on a Saturday, to hear
further testimony.
Number 0200
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN, Alaska State Legislature, testified as
co-sponsor [with Representative Rokeberg] of HB 1. He noted
that the co-sponsors are "coming at this in slightly different
ways but the same result, we hope." Representative Rokeberg
will discuss problems with the building and with the ability to
find lodging in Anchorage, while Representative Green's premise
is that for the past eight years, the majority of his
constituents have been suggesting strongly that the legislature
should be convening in a place that is much more accessible to
the majority of the people of the state," he said. "Although
there are electronic ways to communicate and a couple of ways to
get into the capital, there is a problem in connecting with the
majority of our people. About 60 percent of the population
lives within about a 50-mile radius and many of them commute to
work [in Anchorage]."
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN told the committee it is time to reconsider
where the legislature convenes. He noted that the legislature
has been "on a roll for the last eight years" trying to reduce
costs of state government. This [HB 1] certainly would reduce
the commuting costs of 57 of our 60 legislators coming into
Juneau; 60 percent of them wouldn't even have to move. Further,
the location in Juneau discourages many good people, especially
those with young families, from serving in the legislature. The
result is not a good representation of a cross-section of the
people of the state. The pool from which we to select elected
officials is diminished.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said it is important that on any given day,
people can easily go down to the capitol to testify in person or
to see the legislators in action. He noted that school children
who are the state's future leaders, could benefit from visiting.
Number 0738
REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG, Alaska State Legislature,
testified as co-sponsor of HB 1. The primary reason for
introducing HB 1 is the issue of access for the people of the
State of Alaska. He has lived in Alaska since 1946. The first
time he entered the capitol was to be sworn in when he was 52
years old. He said that is indicative of what citizens believe
is their inability to access to this particular building to talk
to their representatives and participate in the policy-making
activities.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG acknowledged that strides have been made
in teleconferencing, but said, "We haven't even touched the
technology in terms of videoconferencing and other things. He
suggested that one of the problems is the lack of building
capability and structure. The present capitol building was
delivered in 1931 and he believes it is inappropriate and
obsolete. The state has matured to a level [that justifies
having] a legislative hall in which the people of the state can
take pride and that also is a functional building. He testified
that Room 17 and the House and Senate chambers are illegal
because fire [escape] access is through them. The corridors and
door systems are illegal and "not fixable unless we were to
totally rework the building," he said. He alluded to another
bill [HB 57] he is sponsoring, characterizing that approach as,
"build it and they will come."
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG explained that his expertise includes
three decades of marketing office space in the Anchorage area.
It is only recently that the market there has tightened up, and
he thinks space can still be obtained there that would serve on
an interim basis until a legislative hall is built.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG addressed the fiscal notes, echoing
Representative Green's statement that the legislature would
achieve substantial savings [by moving to Anchorage] although
the administration would incur substantial cost in meeting with
the legislature if [the administration] were to remain sited in
Juneau. "That might be a wash [in terms of cost]," he said.
Number 1085
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG emphasized that the real issue is what
he called "a private fiscal note," that individuals who want to
travel to meet with their legislators incur substantial costs.
There are some 35,000 people in Juneau and more than 635,000
people in the rest of the state.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said the people of this state want a new
capital location, and have voted to [move the capital] at least
twice. He disagreed with the FRANK [Frustrated Responsible
Alaskans Needing Knowledge] Initiative [AS 44.06.050-060],
saying it is based on the false premise that the state would
incur extraordinary costs in relocating the capital. He said,
"I would be more than happy as a real estate developer, to build
the state capitol building [and] all the other premises ...
needed ... for the state capitol building for absolutely no cost
to the state. You just give me the additional land around that
capitol site and I'll make up the difference and make a profit."
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG then addressed the issue of so-called
"reparations for the municipality of Juneau." He would be the
first to admit that the community would be severely impacted, he
said, but on the other hand:
I would call this the most anti-business environment
I've ever seen in my life of any community in the
United States of America, even to the point of federal
white collar research jobs that pay very much and are
in the area of environmental science have been
repudiated in my understanding by this community. The
community has also voted down any additional road
access ... and also has put up barriers to even the
extension of the north road so that the ferry run
between this area and Haines could be reduced
substantially, to say nothing of rejecting its
historic roots ... [as a] community built mostly on
old mine tailings.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG went on to say that people need to
recognize that Alaska is basically a natural resource state,
and:
This community has been the hotbed for, I think, the
total destruction of the timber industry and the
forestry industry in Southeast Alaska. I don't mean
to pick on this community too much. I would say that
the people [of] this town are some of the nicest folks
I've ever met in my life ... and I think it is a very
hospitable city. But I think they need to recognize
eventually, the capitol of the state of Alaska is
going to be moved.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG concluded by predicting that the people
of Alaska "will take up the initiative process once again and
speak to this issue."
Number 1385
CHAIR COGHILL asked Representative Rokeberg if he thinks moving
the legislature would [make] any difference in access to some
parts of the administration, perhaps creating "a greater
disconnect in communication."
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said he thinks there has already been a
major division, as many state departments have "the vast
majority of their employees" in the Anchorage area ... or
throughout the state" [while] the core executive activities are
maintained in Juneau.
CHAIR COGHILL anticipated that there will be discussion about
the cost of real estate, and he referred to Representative
Rokeberg's expertise in that area.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG noted that he had participated in
discussions about what is now known as the Robert B. Atwood
Building, in Anchorage. He helped develop that structure in the
early 1980s and was responsible for marketing it for a number of
years. He had advised the legislature that he thought it was an
excellent bargain when they bought a $50 million building for
less than $25 [million]. In doing so, they got $5 million worth
of additional land for nothing in downtown Anchorage that
includes Block 80 of the original town site. He said he has
always regarded that property as a choice piece of real estate
in terms of potential development. He said there has been some
discussion of using the Atwood Building as a legislative hall,
and although that would be feasible, he would counsel against
it.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG went on to say that HB 1 contemplates
use of existing premises and office space that would be on the
market. In recent years, there was a surplus of office space
extending all the way back to the economic collapse in 1986.
Now, people are "jockeying to build new premises in Anchorage,"
he said. He said there should be plenty of space available.
Number 1645
CHAIR COGHILL noted that in Fairbanks, "some of us have a little
problem ... letting Anchorage have everything." On the other
hand, they have to spend quite a bit to get to Juneau. If [the
legislature] is moved, he is not sure he would want it moved to
Anchorage. He asked Representative Rokeberg if he had done any
polling or seen any other indication of what the people want.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said [he thought the people of Mat-Su
would understand] that relocating to Anchorage, even on an
interim basis, would "break the barriers we might have on
relocating out of Juneau." He said, quite frankly, that is one
reason he introduced another bill he had mentioned earlier.
That bill [HB 57] allows any municipality in Alaska with more
than 30,000 residents to vie to build a state capitol building
and lease it to the state government for the nominal
consideration of $1 a year. "It's like build it and they will
come," he repeated. That would create competition ... and also
reduce the expense. The state would pay for all operating
costs, repairs, and maintenance, and then have a reversionary
interest in the property after 30 years or whatever financing
period was necessary to build it.
CHAIR COGHILL observed that people in Fairbanks might struggle
with that parochial geographic problem.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG volunteered that his college senior
thesis at Willamette University had been on Alaska's sectional
politics in the late 1960s to 1971. "It's an ongoing thing
that's been with Alaska since Day 1, since before the fish
traps," he said.
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS asked about the economic impacts on
community and asked Representative Rokeberg to delineate some of
those.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG acknowledged, "They [the economic
impacts] would be clearly pretty severe. I think Juneau depends
in large part on the legislature, particularly in their winter
season, which is their off-tourist season .... I think there
would be dislocation. But frankly ... my sympathy ... is
mollified to a large degree by the attitude ... I perceive." He
said he had not done any analysis of the economic impacts, but
recognizes that they would be substantial.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked about statistics that show where
visitors go in Alaska. She said she assumes they come to Juneau
because it's the capital, but thinks they also make their way up
to Anchorage. She wondered if visitors would still come [to
Juneau if it were not the capital.]
Number 1930
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said he thinks that depends on how much
Juneau charges as a head tax on cruise ship passengers. "That's
just one more nail in the coffin in my opinion ... not to say
that those tourists that visit this community shouldn't pay
their fair share in the infrastructure costs." Responding to
Representative Wilson, he said he does not have the numbers
[regarding tourist destinations], but he knows they are readily
available from the travel industry.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON commented, "It really does depend on where
you live in the state how you feel about this. I used to live
in Tok and I can remember at the time I thought it was
ridiculous that I had to come to Juneau to ... [reach] my
legislators and ... [see] what's going on. However, I live in
the Southeast now, and it does change your perspective quite a
bit and I think that the Southeast really is in economic trouble
at this point in time and I think pulling the capital out would
be devastating. I really think that would have a big effect on
all of Southeast."
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON recalled living in North Carolina, where
the population is dense and there are roads everywhere. She
served in the legislature there, too, and was "totally amazed"
to find that people in Alaska have more access to the capital
than those in North Carolina, "despite all those roads." She
said that because of teleconferencing, many Alaskans take part
on a regular basis. "Our legislators are very, very accessible
to the people in the state just because of the way we do conduct
business here, and it's really quite remarkable and it is
wonderful," she said.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said due to the debate over the timber
industry in the last few years, "I think there's a lot of people
in Southeastern and people in Ketchikan particularly [who] are
not as fond of this community any more," he said. "They view it
(and I think probably wrongly) as the hotbed of environmentalism
and the reason that the timber industry has ... almost gone out
of business here. And so I think that [some of] the support
that Juneau shared for many years in the old battle of
coalitions [of anti-Anchorage elements] has been lost." He
asked Representative Wilson if when she lived in Tok, she ever
came to the state capital.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON replied, "Yes, I did."
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked how much it cost her.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON said she could not remember, adding that
she was in Juneau for a month one summer while her husband was
in school there.
Number 2155
REPRESENTATIVE FATE asked Representative Rokeberg if he had
considered a "piggyback phenomenon," whereby even though [only]
the legislative session is moved, other administrative offices
would be forced to move in the future. "Do you envision that
there would be more and more curtailing of the activities in
Juneau as far as state government is concerned?" he asked. It
was his understanding that HB 1 does not propose a total capital
move, but only a session move.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said he would characterize the move as
evolutionary. He said Representative Fate's analysis is
probably correct, that there would be "kind of a leakage toward
the legislative activity by the executive." He reiterated that
many commissioners now live in Anchorage and travel a lot to
Juneau. Representative Rokeberg then referred to a $2 million
fiscal note on HB 1 from the administration related to "running
people back and forth," and said it ... doesn't make sense to
him.
REPRESENTATIVE HAYES referred to the three fiscal notes, and
asked which one the committee should be looking at.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG replied, "Add 'em up."
REPRESENTATIVE HAYES said he has a big problem with what [HB 1]
is going to cost, a great deal of money when one adds up all
three fiscal notes. He stated:
On top of it, we don't have a long-term fiscal plan,
and this is a minute issue compared to the other
issues facing our state at this moment. When I went
through talking to my constituents, no one said moving
the session from Juneau to Anchorage or wherever was a
hot-button issue. I guarantee you [that] safety [and]
education, were ... paramount issues. Moving the
capital was not. Moving the session was not. I had
no one tell me that they had a major argument with the
way that we do business currently. I think that
you'll have folks looking at this as a "power grab"
from Anchorage and hurting Southeast, and I don't see
what the true benefit of this is other than to
increase the prosperity of the Municipality of
Anchorage.
Number 2327
CHAIR COGHILL said that might be characteristic of some of the
division [of opinion] in Fairbanks. He added that if the
capital were closer to the people, more people might be involved
in building that [economic] plan.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said he tended to agree with Chair
Coghill and Representative Hayes about the priority of the
issues for the state. "I don't think this [moving the
legislature] is on the very top of the list," he said.
"However, given the age of this building and the issues coming
forward, we are going to have to confront this sooner rather
than later ... because we are going to need a new facility.
Frankly, the life support systems of this building are failing.
There's no sprinkler system.... This building by any stretch of
the imagination doesn't meet fire code ...."
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG emphasized that the people of
Southcentral Alaska "overwhelmingly" would like to see the
capital closer to them. There's a huge difference between
[participating in] a teleconference and being able to talk to
somebody face to face. There's "a huge disconnect," he said.
The people of Anchorage participate in their government to a
very limited degree. It's only the people that have an interest
that do participate.
CHAIR COGHILL recalled how frustrating it was to him when as a
private citizen, he would take time from work to go to a
teleconference, and be "out of sight and out of mind." He noted
that it takes constant vigilance to make sure people
participating from remote locations are not squeezed out by
those present and are heard properly.
CHAIR COGHILL then returned to the issue of access. He said
Anchorage is not as accessible as he would like "as a country
boy from Nenana," and that finding a parking space in Anchorage
can be difficult.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG replied, "Worse than Juneau?" He said
he was late this morning because somebody parked in back of him
and he couldn't get his car out.
CHAIR COGHILL brought up the possibility of people playing "hide
and seek." When a person comes to Juneau to see a legislator,
that legislator will be in the capitol building. In Anchorage,
he said, legislators would be more likely to escape from the
building and go into other parts of town.
CHAIR COGHILL also noted that access to committees is important,
and if he could drive to a building and get into a committee
meeting, would more likely do that than to go to a
teleconference.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG agreed, adding, "That is another one of
the problems with this structure. There is no public parking.
There's no public lounge. You can get a cup of coffee and
that's about all. This building is not consumer- or public-
friendly. The poor press is in this little room down there in
the end of a hallway ... next to Room 17."
Number 2642
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN emphasized that he is not trying to move
the capital, but to move the legislative session closer to the
people, and that if [the capitol building] were road accessible,
it would make a major difference. He then pointed out that the
power goes with the number of votes you have, and there are more
votes coming from Anchorage than there are from any other
community in the state. So wherever the legislature meets,
Anchorage is going to have the power. He also said it shouldn't
be forgotten that the capital originally had been in Sitka and
that moving it to Juneau had not decimated Sitka. "Juneau is a
beautiful and quaint town and tourists do not [come] here to see
the capital," he said.
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS noted for the historic record that before
the capital was in Sitka, it was in Kodiak.
REPRESENTATIVE HAYES referred to previous remarks about the
quality of legislators. He said one of the things he has
noticed in the House is that its membership is diverse, with
ages ranging from the 20s up to 70. He said those people are
making choices about whether they can make the commitment to
[serve], and he doesn't think that has much to do with where the
capital is.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN took exception, noting that Senator Sean
Parnell left the legislature because he has two young daughters
of school age. He said he could provide a list of people who
have young families and who won't run for the legislature for
the next 10 years because it would disrupt their families.
REPRESENTATIVE HAYES replied that he thinks that has less to do
with family than it has to do with salary. Again, he said,
that's the kind of choice a person has to make when deciding
whether to run for office.
CHAIR COGHILL said having raised a family, he can understand who
some people would not want to leave their families to come down
here [to Juneau].
TAPE 01-11, SIDE B
Number 2915
REPRESENTATIVE BILL HUDSON, Alaska State Legislature, came
forward to testify. He separated himself "from the comments of
Representative Rokeberg when he tries to assign the will and the
feelings of the people of Juneau as relates to economics."
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON then pointed out "that all of us who are
in this body ... have a responsibility to look after the
holistic health of the whole state." Each legislator needs to
look at what is good for the other districts as well as for the
12,000 people that legislator represents. "Juneau has
everything to lose in this particular instance and has every
year that I've been in the legislature. This is perhaps the
most divisive and difficult issue that a representative from
Juneau will have to deal with because it is ... a back-breaker.
This is not just moving the session to Anchorage.... This will
be a de facto capital move...."
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON reminded the committee that the
legislatures principal contacts during the session are with the
administration, "because we're sitting here developing a $7
billion budget that the governor and all of his commissioners
and all of the "hands and feet of government" have to live
with." He continued:
The fact that we're here and the governor is here
[facilitates] that interaction between the
administrative and the legislative sides of
government. If we move the legislature to
Anchorage, the governor and all of these commissioners
are going to be up there as well, and they're going to
be on per diem. Instead of having 57 legislators
sitting in rented rooms, you would have most of the
centralized arm of government sitting in motel rooms
in Anchorage waiting until they are called. And for
those four months the legislature is convened in
Anchorage, they would be all be away from their
primary responsibilities.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON recalled that when he was commissioner of
administration, he was responsible for 15 to 17 divisions of
government. He testified:
When I left my office and walked across the street and
stayed here for an hour or two and interacted with the
legislative committees, I then went back over and took
up my work. If the legislature is up in Anchorage and
I'm sitting in Juneau, I've got to go up there with
the directors and fiscal people and the other
specialists I need to back up my position. Most of
them are here because the governor is here. If you
move the legislature to Anchorage, you will in effect
be moving the capital to Anchorage.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON reminded proponents of HB 1 that moving
the capital is not a new idea, and that a procedure has been
established:
First of all you have to get a vote of the public that
you want to move the capital. Then, ... all bondable
costs [for the next 12 years] of moving the capital or
the legislature ... have to be prepared and presented
to the public for a vote. That is required by the
FRANK Initiative ... that was passed resoundingly by
the people of Alaska not once but twice.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON agreed with to some of Representative
Rokeberg's concerns, including [the need for more] parking and
for modifications to the capitol building. He suggested that if
the governor were to consent to move to the State Office
Building, the legislature could take over and modify the entire
third floor of the capitol building. It also would be possible
to construct three new floors behind the capitol building for
very little money. Work is in progress with the city on
developing better parking, and there are "ways in which we could
triple the parking ... within a stone's throw of the capitol."
He thinks all of those things are very important.
Number 2556
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON emphasized that the capital in Juneau is
an anchor or linchpin for Southeast Alaska. The region has been
hit very hard by recent closures in the Tongass National Forest,
the diminishment of the timber that is available, the sawmills
that have closed down, the pulp mills that have closed down, the
impact on fishing of the farmed salmon coming from Chile and
Norway. The economic health of the region is a very important
consideration. He went on to counter the assertion that Juneau
has not been attracting new businesses in recent years, noting
the dramatic increase in the number of tourists and cruise
ships, and the opening of the Greens Creek Mine, which employs
400-500 people and affects twice that many people [involved in
related work].
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON said in his opinion, discussion] needs to
focus primarily on [addressing] the inefficiencies of the
capitol building rather than on moving the whole capital. The
fiscal implications of moving even just the session, "at a time
when we are $530 million in arrears [and] have no long-term
fiscal plan -- I just think that it's the wrong way to go."
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON referred to Representative Green's
assertion that the capital's location deterred people from
running for public office. He observed that he had seen very
few uncontested races. He noted that the legislature holds
interim hearings, and that legislators who do not live in Juneau
have eight months a year [when the legislature is not in
session] and can have an office in their home town right in the
middle of their 10,000-12,000 constituents and can draw per diem
for just going down and spending four hours a day interacting
with those constituents. There can be interim hearings, and he
would support the leadership of the House and the Senate taking
action to hold hearings in Anchorage and Fairbanks and even in
the villages of Alaska.
Number 2397
CHAIR COGHILL noted that another bill that referred to the
committee deals with having committee authority outside of
regular session times, and that other bills are going to be
before the legislature dealing with limiting the length of the
session and different building issues. He said his commitment in
[foster] discussion of any of the problems and issues and then
to look for solutions to some of those problems.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON wished to put on the record that the FRANK
Initiative [passed in 1994] requires that before the state can
spend money to move the capital or the legislature, the voters
must know the total cost and approve a bond issue for all
bondable costs of the move for the 12-year period after
approval. A commission would determine both bondable and total
costs of the move including moving personnel, offices, and
social, economic, [and] environmental costs to the present and
the new sites. It would also include costs to plan, build,
furnish, use, and finance facilities at least equal to those
provided by the present capital. Representative Hudson pointed
out that 159,000 Alaska voters, 77 percent, voted in favor of
the FRANK Initiative on November 8, 1994. He said, "This is the
last spoken word of the majority of the people of Alaska, and I
think ... if people want to move the capital, this is what they
have to do. They have to convince the people of Alaska that it
is the right thing to do and then they have to [put it up to a]
public vote."
CHAIR COGHILL said he also understands that an act of the
legislature could affect the FRANK Initiative.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON said he was not completely certain [about
that].
CHAIR COGHILL said he, too, would have to find out for certain.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON noted that there have been many
initiatives to move the capital, and that has been an issue
since the 1960s. There's no other state that holds its session
in [another city than] the capital, he emphasizes, and there is
a provision in the [Alaska] constitution that says the capital
of Alaska is in Juneau.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said he thinks one reason to move the
legislative session at least part of the time is what he called,
"grocery store politics." When legislators are back in their
districts in the interim between sessions, "It's off people's
radar screens," he said. [During session,] when the media are
putting the issues of the day before the people on a regular
basis and he goes home to his district, people stop him in the
grocery store. "I think it's important that your constituents
look you in the eye during session and figure out if you're
lying or not," he declared.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN recalled the end of the session when
legislators passed a Permanent Fund tax out of the House without
a vote of the people. Jerry Sanders stood up and said, "This
could only happen after 180 days of isolation in Juneau."
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said he thinks that sums it all up. "I
think there's something in the water here or something in the
building here that makes people's behavior just get kind of a
little off kilter. A lot of it's the influence of and the
access the administration has, the lack of access that regular
people, ordinary people from all walks of life that can't come
here because they can't afford to. I think it makes a
difference."
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN then commented on the point of that had been
made about commissioners having to go up north. He said he
thinks the legislature now hears a lot testimony from division
directors based in Anchorage who come down here [to Juneau] to
give their presentations during budget time, so he would suspect
[the cost of] that would probably be a wash.
Number 1979
REPRESENTATIVE HAYES asked Representative Ogan how often he goes
home to his district, which he thinks is one of the important
functions of a legislator. He recalled that during the
Permanent Fund controversy, there had been many opportunities
for folks to comment, and that the office where he was working
as an aide received quite a few comments.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said he goes home to his district and has
town meetings about once a month. About 30-40 people come every
time, and many of those are "regulars." But he finds that
people who won't come to a town meeting, call, or e-mail will
"sure stop you in the grocery store and they'll let you know
what they think .... You're public property."
CHAIR COGHILL commented that from either side of the issue, the
fact that legislators want to assure the best access is
heartening, and one of the things the committee is going to be
discussing is how to keep that access as clear as possible.
Number 1854
SALLY SMITH, Mayor, City and Borough of Juneau, acknowledged
that it is hard to represent a community and listen to it be
disparaged. She recognized that [the disparagement] was not
meant to be personal.
MAYOR SMITH noted that she had spent three terms in the Alaska
Legislature representing Fairbanks, and said she had looked
forward to the drive to Juneau and the trip on the Marine
Highway System. "Southeast does have a highway system; it's the
Marine Highway System," she stressed. "We may not have all the
vessels we need, but we've got the roadway."
MAYOR SMITH continued:
During the interim was the time when I got close to my
constituency and I learned what they wanted and the
issues that were going to be important. Those issues
don't change when you come to Juneau. They may get
refined a bit, but that's where the teleconference
system comes in, and I'm proud to have been on of the
pioneers of the teleconferencing system. I believe
that Juneau is accessible for the needs of the
capital, and I'm also proud of this community, which
is my now adopted home, because of the things it has
done to make it a capital city. We have been the
capital for 101 years. We've had this building for
... 70 years. That's a long heritage. There is a
campus here ... that includes the administration and
... the judicial branch as well.
I could go on and reinforce some of the speakers who
have spoken up in favor of Juneau, but I want more
importantly to say that our assembly last night
[appropriated] $150,000 [for] planning to improve the
footprint of this building. Representative Hudson
mentioned the [addition] that could be put in. We can
also look at crossing Fifth Street over to the Terry
Miller Building. That would perhaps provide ample
space.
But as I bring this up, I also want to suggest that
any condition that this building is in falls solely on
the shoulders of the Legislative Council. Juneau does
not own the building. But we are here to make it as
hospitable as we possibly can. Again, I'm really
proud of our community and I'm proud of what to we do
to make legislators welcome. I was on the receiving
end of that for six years. Now I'm on the giving end,
and I'm happy to have you here....
Number 1688
CHAIR COGHILL concurred that the community had made a strong
effort to welcome the legislature.
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS asked Mayor Smith to go into more detail
about the $150,000. "That's city funds that they are going to
invest into looking at how to improve the state-owned building
here ... and hiring architects?"
MAYOR SMITH explained that the city is allocating the money to
the Alaska Committee ...[to have] an architect draw up potential
plans. "We want to cooperate with you in that direction," she
emphasized.
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS said he was very pleased to see Juneau
step up and take part in this.
CHAIR COGHILL said it also should be mentioned that [Juneau] has
been involved in providing Gavel-to-Gavel television coverage of
the legislature. That is a big help, although access still is an
issue. He added that the House State Affairs Standing Committee
room is going to be used for a demonstration of closed
captioning [for Gavel-to-Gavel coverage] that Juneau is going to
present February 22. People who have certain impairments are
going to be brought into the discussion, and he thought that was
another important part of the access issue.
MAYOR SMITH mentioned that she had seen a demonstration of video
streaming with closed captioning last week, and that it is very
exciting.
CHAIR COGHILL said that it is another worthwhile effort that is
being made to improve access. He added, "But if you're coming
from Kotzebue or Wainwright, it takes two days to get here [to
Juneau], and that is part of the issue, too."
MAYOR SMITH stated:
Anchorage is a marvelous city, but Anchorage is not
typical of Alaska or of the problems that Alaska
faces. I believe that when we get out of the city and
we see another region, we then begin to understand
that we're part of a bigger picture, we're part of a
larger fabric. If we stay where the majority are, we
don't get that broadening and we see Alaska through
distorted eyes.
Number 1461
REPRESENTATIVE HAYES asked who owns the capitol building.
MAYOR SMITH said she believes the state does.
REPRESENTATIVE HAYES asked if the legislature could appropriate
funds to bring the building up to code.
MAYOR SMITH said the legislature could do so.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON expressed appreciation for Mayor Smith's
ability to speak to both sides of the issue [as a legislator
coming from Fairbanks and as a resident of Juneau].
REPRESENTATIVE FATE asked about an earlier reference to a road
from Juneau, and asked if that is still being considered.
MAYOR SMITH said an opinion poll had been taken of Juneau
voters. The question was, "Do you prefer a road or enhanced
ferry service?" The difference in votes was about 100 more in
favor of enhanced ferry service. She said her perspective is
that there is a whole series of communities in Southeast that
would benefit from improved ferry service, whereas a road would
serve only Juneau, Skagway, and Haines. "Where funds are
limited, it seems prudent to serve the greater good," she said.
"Enhanced ferry service would improve it for all of you, too,
when you come down in the winter," she added
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA introduced herself as the representative
from downtown Juneau. She said she has a unique perspective on
the issue because she was raised as a legislative child, every
year moving back and forth between Palmer and Juneau. She
recalled family jokes about living out of boxes, and (despite
her mother's efforts) playing in the capitol building. She said
she felt very fortunate to have grown up getting to know some of
the great leaders of the state, living in the capital and then
going home to the Matanuska Valley and watching her father in
his political activities there. "I also know from growing up as
a legislative child what a huge sacrifice it is to serve, and
I'm finding that out every day as I [am] serving myself".
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA pointed out that legislators need to
look at what they themselves need to do ... "so that we can keep
our families with us, so that we can travel back appropriately
to our districts, because the bottom line is, no matter where we
are in the state, some families, some people, will not be at
home." That raises the issue of legislative salary and about
better travel budgets. Some of the problem is exactly that, she
said, and no matter where we are, that will be an issue.
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA emphasized that "the real issue is
access: How do our constituents, no matter where they are in the
state, feel close to us? How do we give them ... the "grocery
store" factor, no matter where we are?" She thinks television
and closed captioning are pieces of the answer. She noted that
now one can log onto the computer and listen to a hearing.
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA pointed out that, "No matter where we
are in the state, someone is not going to be able to visit us."
Rural Alaska will not be able to drive and many people will not
be able to fly [to the session], no matter where it is, She
asked the committee to think carefully about HB 1 and what it
means to the state as a whole. "I think all of you realize we
are one state, we are one people, and it doesn't make a lot of
sense to focus on moving a locality when what we really need to
do is continue to improve our access," she said.
CHAIR COGHILL remarked that the discussion is a good one because
it is bringing up many other [associated] issues, including some
he would like to address.
Number 0982
WIN GRUENING, Chair, The Alaska Committee, explained that The
Alaska Committee is is a 21-member group representing a "pretty
good cross-section of the community." The volunteer group has
been working since 1994 to make the capital more accessible to
all Alaskans and to make the capital city and the capitol
building better places. He distributed a card with information
on the committee's efforts, including constituent airfares that
the committee worked out with Alaska Airlines, Gavel to Gavel
television coverage, and the Global Positioning System (GPS)
approach to the Juneau International Airport that has
"dramatically improved" access.
MR. GRUENING described "streaming" Gavel-to-Gavel coverage to
the Internet. Currently, it is possible to hear some committee
hearings, but what they are talking about doing and have
recently have demonstrated is technology that allows
simultaneous coverage of live events on the Internet including
the regular Gavel to Gavel coverage plus audio of several
committee hearings. Constituents would be able to hear events
going on in several places at the same time. All of that can be
archived and played back later. Video streaming also overcomes
the need for cable as a connection. He said it should be
available during this session or the next.
MR. GRUENING said the Alaska Committee feels the [condition of
the capitol] building is an important issue not just to
legislators, but also to the public. He mentioned crowded
committee hearings, limited gallery space, and the scarcity of
parking. Current legislation [several bills] proposes to build
a new building, but there are more cost-effective solutions.
Mayor Smith mentioned the committee's cooperative effort with
the City and Borough of Juneau to work with the legislature in
developing some proposals for building improvement. Money is
available to contract with architects to work with the
legislature. He asked for cooperation from the legislators,
saying he assumes their goals are the same, to improve the
facilities and access as well.
MR. GRUENING said the Alaska Committee does not think there is
political support for constructing a brand-new building either
in Juneau or anywhere else in the state. "In fact, our polling
suggests ... that most people feel that building a new building
or moving the legislature is ... a de facto capital move," he
said. "I would respectfully suggest that even though we have a
fiscal note, that that fiscal note should ... disclose all the
costs of moving the capital, not just the legislature." He
concluded by assuring legislators that the Alaska Committee
stands ready to assist them in improving the facilities, in
improving access, or in any other ways they feel are important
to carrying out their business.
Number 0440
CHAIR COGHILL expressed appreciation for the work the Alaska
committee has done and for actually putting "feet to it" with
money. He noted that issues rising to the surface include the
cost of moving the capital and the cost of moving people to the
capital to visit, lobby, or see their legislators -- costs that
are never fully expressed in the fiscal note.
MR. GRUENING said the Alaska Committee views the cost of getting
to the capital as an access issue. That is why they work on
issues like the constituent fare, road access, and enhanced
ferry service. It is costly not only to get to Juneau, but also
to get out of Juneau.
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS asked about the timeline for the $150,000
study.
MR. GRUENING said the Alaska Committee would like to start
working with the legislature before the end of the current
session. That would mean leadership identifying some people
within the legislature to help determine what the legislature
needs. Part of the study will inventory and evaluate current
facilities, but the intent is to move beyond that and determine
what the legislature's requirements actually are. He envisions
working on the study through the current calendar year and
presenting a draft product early next session.
REPRESENTATIVE HAYES asked if the Alaska Committee would share
the polling information to which he had referred.
MR. GRUENING volunteered results of the 1998 poll and
information from a new poll being taken this summer.
CHAIR COGHILL said he would like to provide that to all
committee members.
Number 0069
JEFF LOGAN, Staff to Representative Green, Alaska State
Legislature, assured the committee that the reasons behind the
introduction of HB 1 "are sound and true, and that every time we
have done a constituent survey, knocking on doors, when this
question is included, percentages ... upwards of 70 percent of
[Representative Green's} constituents indicate that it is
something they would like to see happen."
TAPE 01-12, SIDE A
Number 0001
JEFF LOGAN continued his testimony, noting that although it may
not be a top state issue, it is certainly an important issue in
Representative Green's district.
MR. LOGAN indicated that he would like to fill in some gaps in
the testimony. He began by referring to the fiscal note that
states a potential cost of office space in Anchorage at the rate
of $2.25 per square foot. He noted that the legislature
currently rents office space in Anchorage at $1.39 per square
foot. Regarding constituent [airline] fares, he quoted a news
article saying that the city [of Juneau] contributed $27,000 to
publicize the fares. He noted that the discount is available
only to members of the Alaska Airlines mileage plan. Regarding
the executive branch moving north, he quoted another newspaper
article reporting that another state commissioner had moved from
Juneau to Anchorage, and that six of 14 commissioners now live
primarily in Anchorage. "During the interim when we work
outside the district, we certainly see an increasing number of
key departments and key functions being performed in Anchorage
already," he said. "The nation that there will be a bunch of
commissioners sitting in hotel rooms in Anchorage instead of
legislators isn't quite the way we see it."
MR. LOGAN referred to testimony about video and audio streaming
over the Internet "and maybe over the legislature's system."
The technology is available, but it is very expensive. The
Information Technology Group, the division of the Department of
Administration that handles telecommunications and information
technology, has put out a Request for Proposals to privatize
some of those services. If that happens, it is likely that the
cost to the legislature for some of these services could
increase dramatically. It is important to balance out the cost
of some of these technologies and ... there may come a point
when it does make sense ... to simply move our proceedings
north. He concluded, "What we hear in Anchorage is that it will
be an issue until it happens...."
Number 0464
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD noted that he was the other Anchorage
representative on the committee [along with Representative
Hayes]. He said had heard a lot of interesting arguments this
morning about why the legislature should or shouldn't move the
capital. Most of his constituents "would like to have the
legislature in Anchorage, but it's not anywhere near the top
issue," he said. "That's not what people sent me down here to
do. They sent me down here to get a long-term fiscal plan.
They sent me down here to deal with education issues [and] a
number of other things. This one seems to be way down the list,
and it's hard for me to understand why we're spending time every
session on moving the capital when we've got so many other more
pressing issues."
CHAIR COGHILL cited an analogy to raising children: "If they're
hungry, that's an immediate issue, it's important. But
disciplining them and clothing them properly and giving a long-
range structural thing is important, too. So important and
immediate ... have to go hand in hand, and I think part of this
discussion is [about what is] structurally important to Alaska.
Access to government and the place of population, how we can
access our policy makers ... is an important issue [although] it
may not be an immediate issue." He noted that time remaining
for the meeting was short, and that he did not intend to close
public testimony, but to continue it.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG agreed with Representative Crawford's
prioritization of issues. He reminded the committee that the
state constitution provides for three branches of government:
the executive, the court system, and the legislature. The court
system has done a wonderful job of capital expenditures and
getting new additions, including a new courthouse in Anchorage.
The administration in the Anchorage area is housed primarily in
the Atwood building. It's important that the legislature be in
a functional, accessible, friendly, and safe [facility] just as
the administration and the courts are. When [the state
government] has a depreciated asset that's not doing its job,
that is an issue that needs to be addressed. He said he thinks
the vast majority of people in the state ... recognize that, and
that's why it's been an issue for the 40 years since statehood."
The issue is one of those that are near and dear to his heart.
Another is that of interim committee hearings. "We can have
interim hearings now but we can't take substantive action in
those," he explained
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said things like a shorter session,
interim hearings, and even a biennial budget could help with
some of the problems of access and recruitment if the
legislature remains in Juneau. "If we can shorten the session
and make it more efficient and less costly, and also carry out
interim activities that are more accessible to the public and
have hearings around the state, I think those are positive steps
in overcoming and ameliorating some of those problems that we
have," he said.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG continued:
I do appreciate the point the mayor made about people
being statesmanlike, holistic, and looking at the
entire state when you make decisions. I think each
one of us, as a legislator, is first and foremost
responsible to our own constituency and district, but
also I agree with that theory. We have to look at the
whole state. And I think that this particular issue
is a matter of concern for the whole state. Clearly,
major economic impacts on the City of Juneau should be
considered, make sure that they are part of the
equation ....
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said he is very pleased to hear about
the activities of the Alaska Committee and the appropriation of
funds from the City and Borough of Juneau. "Those are positive
steps, and I think that perhaps in a very small way, maybe we've
helped keep the fire lit and ... this issue before the public.
It is something that is very important."
He concluded:
This may be my last term in the legislature -- and I
emphasize "may" -- in large part because of the access
issue ... and hardships it leaves on family
life....After this number of years, it becomes very
telling. And I think that the comments that
Representative Ogan made regarding how we finish our
sessions ... how there's an anxiousness to leave this
community and get back home, that puts a lot of
pressure on people. Some people think theoretically
that's a good thing in terms of our decision-making
process. I don't agree with that. I think that we
should make the best decisions in the best time when
the time is right and not necessarily to meet that
deadline.
Number 1172
CHAIR COGHILL said it is an interesting discussion, he is
grateful for the Juneau community coming forward and sharing
with us what their intentions are, trying to make access and
work a little easier for the legislature. He thinks how to get
people involved in government is going to be part of the
discussion. Geography definitely has a part to play in it
because the vast majority of the population of Alaska is
somewhere in the central part of the state. He said he would
like to see the legislature moved, but that he also is open to
discussion. He plans to continue hearings on the issue and
wants get other communities involved in the discussion. [HB 1
was held over.]
ADJOURNMENT
CHAIR COGHILL adjourned the meeting of the House State Affairs
Standing Committee at 10:00 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|