04/05/2008 11:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB202 | |
| SB201 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 202 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 201 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
April 5, 2008
11:10 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bob Lynn, Chair
Representative Bob Roses, Vice Chair
Representative John Coghill
Representative Kyle Johansen
Representative Craig Johnson
Representative Andrea Doll
Representative Max Gruenberg
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 202
"An Act relating to expenditures in aid of or to implement the
provisions of the federal Real ID Act."
- MOVED HCS SB 202(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 201(FIN)
"An Act relating to the establishment and maintenance of an
Internet website providing public finance information; and
identifying the information to be available on the Internet
website."
- MOVED CSSB 201(FIN) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 202
SHORT TITLE: PROHIBIT STATE SPENDING FOR REAL ID ACT
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) WIELECHOWSKI
01/16/08 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/4/08
01/16/08 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/16/08 (S) STA, JUD
02/14/08 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BELTZ 211
02/14/08 (S) Heard & Held
02/14/08 (S) MINUTE(STA)
02/19/08 (S) STA RPT 2DP 1DNP 1AM
02/19/08 (S) DP: MCGUIRE, FRENCH
02/19/08 (S) DNP: BUNDE
02/19/08 (S) AM: STEVENS
02/19/08 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BELTZ 211
02/19/08 (S) Moved SB 202 Out of Committee
02/19/08 (S) MINUTE(STA)
02/27/08 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 211
02/27/08 (S) Heard & Held
02/27/08 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
03/19/08 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 211
03/19/08 (S) Moved SB 202 Out of Committee
03/19/08 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
03/21/08 (S) JUD RPT 5DP
03/21/08 (S) DP: FRENCH, WIELECHOWSKI, HUGGINS,
MCGUIRE, THERRIAULT
03/25/08 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/25/08 (S) VERSION: SB 202
03/26/08 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/26/08 (H) STA, FIN
04/05/08 (H) STA AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 106
BILL: SB 201
SHORT TITLE: PUBLIC FINANCE WEBSITE
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) WIELECHOWSKI
01/16/08 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/4/08
01/16/08 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/16/08 (S) STA, FIN
01/31/08 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BELTZ 211
01/31/08 (S) Heard & Held
01/31/08 (S) MINUTE(STA)
02/12/08 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BELTZ 211
02/12/08 (S) Moved CSSB 201(STA) Out of Committee
02/12/08 (S) MINUTE(STA)
02/13/08 (S) STA RPT CS 3DP 2NR SAME TITLE
02/13/08 (S) DP: MCGUIRE, FRENCH, STEVENS
02/13/08 (S) NR: GREEN, BUNDE
02/21/08 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
02/21/08 (S) Heard & Held
02/21/08 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/21/08 (S) FIN RPT CS 5DP SAME TITLE
03/21/08 (S) DP: STEDMAN, ELTON, THOMAS, DYSON,
HUGGINS
03/21/08 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/21/08 (S) Moved CSSB 201(FIN) Out of Committee
03/21/08 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/27/08 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/27/08 (S) VERSION: CSSB 201(FIN)
03/28/08 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/28/08 (H) STA, FIN
04/05/08 (H) STA AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR BILL WIELECHOWSKI
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced SB 202 as prime sponsor;
testified as prime sponsor of SB 201.
PATRICK DALTON
Delta Junction, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of himself in support
of SB 202.
ZEFFORAH DALTON
Delta Junction, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing on SB 202.
KEVIN BROOKS, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Administration
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing on SB 202.
WHITNEY BREWSTER, Director
Division of Motor Vehicles
Department of Administration
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing on SB 202.
MICHELLE SYDEMAN, Staff
Senator Bill Wielechowski
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented SB 201 on behalf of Senator
Wielechowski, prime sponsor.
CHRIS NELSON
Alaskans for Tax Reform
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of Alaskans for Tax
Reform in support of SB 201.
KIM GARNERO, Director
Division of Finance
Department of Administration
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on SB
201.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR BOB LYNN called the House State Affairs Standing Committee
meeting to order at 11:10:37 AM. Representatives Roses,
Coghill, Johansen, Johnson, Doll, and Lynn were present at the
call to order. Representative Gruenberg arrived as the meeting
was in progress.
SB 202-PROHIBIT STATE SPENDING FOR REAL ID ACT
11:11:52 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the first order of business was SENATE
BILL NO. 202, "An Act relating to expenditures in aid of or to
implement the provisions of the federal Real ID Act."
11:11:57 AM
SENATOR BILL WIELECHOWSKI, Alaska State Legislature, introduced
SB 202 as prime sponsor. He said the proposed legislation would
prevent the state from spending money to implement the [federal]
Real ID Act. He said there were some concerns as to whether or
not HB 202 would impact the good business practices of the
Division of Motor Vehicles and may impact other bills before the
legislature.
11:13:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES moved to adopt the proposed HCS (House
committee substitute) for SB 202, Version 25-LS1145\M,
Luckhaupt, 4/1/08, as a work draft. There being no objection,
Version M was before the committee.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI stated, "To the extent that other ... legal
presence bills are not implemented solely for the purpose of
meeting the requirements of Real ID, then this bill has
absolutely no impact on those." Furthermore, he said HB 202
would have no impact on the ability of the Division of Motor
Vehicles to implement good business practices. Digital
identification (ID) cards would still be permitted.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI related that there is a shared concern
regarding the sharing of data with other states and the security
risk that doing so may expose Alaskan citizens to. He said,
"That's the essence of what this goes to." Another issue the
bill addresses is state sovereignty and responding to the
federal government dictating to Alaska how its driver's license
and ID card should look.
11:14:44 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI, in response to Representative Doll, said
federal law is under siege; 36 states have said no to the Real
ID Act. There is every expectation that the federal government
will back off, but if it does not, all states must comply by
December of 2009.
11:16:10 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he has struggled with the idea of
having a straight-out prohibition of using any money, and he
said he thinks lining out what the requirement would be would
create a much larger bill. He stated for the record that his
expectation is that the legislature would be able to make a
judgment call as to what the requirements would be.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI confirmed that would be the case. He said
there has been a lot of discussion in the Senate on this issue,
because the Senate does not want to do anything to impede the
good business practices of DMV, for example, the technological
advances that would make licenses more secure. He said listing
what can and cannot be complied with is "a dangerous route." He
concluded, "So, I think this is a very fair compromise that the
chair has worked out."
11:17:28 AM
CHAIR LYNN, in response to a question from Representative
Johansen, indicated that [Version M] came primarily from his
office after speaking with the bill sponsor.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI confirmed that the chair came to his office
with concerns that the legislature not "hamstring" the Division
of Motor Vehicles. He said this issue was broached by the
Senate, and the states of Maine, Montana, and Washington - who
have similar pieces of legislation - were contacted. Those
states did not list specific items and said that has had
absolutely no impact on their ability to have good business
practices. He said Alaska's legislation actually goes further
to give "wiggle room" to keep from preventing good business
practices of DMV.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI, in response to Representative Johansen,
said there is no "funding hammer" involved, which is a problem.
The Real ID Act will cost the state tens of billions of dollars,
and the federal government will provide only about $80 million
total in funding for the states. He reviewed that the Real ID
Act requirements are that a Real ID must be shown any time a
person enters a federal building or boards an airplane;
therefore, the federal government could tell a person [without
that ID] that he/she must be subjected to "secondary security"
in order to enter a federal building or board a plane.
11:20:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON interpreted that Version M guts the
intention of the bill by specifying, "A state agency may not
expend funds", then using the term, "solely for the purpose of".
He said, "A good bureaucrat could find two reasons to do
something - one being Real ID and one being anything else."
11:21:00 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he had the same concerns, but talked
to several attorneys who are helping out nationwide regarding
the Real ID Act, and they support SB 202 and feel comfortable
with the language. He added that he would rather have the
language of the first draft, but thinks Version M is a fair
compromise.
11:21:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL talked about the extremes of allowing the
federal government to issue a federal ID and letting Alaska make
a state license that turns into a federal passport. He said he
would like the state to be able to implement aspects of the Real
ID Act.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON stated, "I still think if I'm a good
bureaucrat, I could implement anything in Real ID I wanted to
just by saying it's also for something else." He offered
examples.
11:24:09 AM
CHAIR LYNN stated that he has concerns about the Real ID Act
"from the other side of the coin." He indicated that [Version
M] is the draft that was arrived at in an attempt to see the
bill moved out of committee.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI reiterated that his concerns had been the
same as Representative Johnson's, and he outlined the thought
process involved in arriving at an acceptable draft:
The policy is clearly there; we passed the resolution
[that shows] we don't want to spend money as a state
on Real ID. Now, if the federal government decides to
give us money for Real ID, ... they way the grants are
written, ... the federal government would give us a
grant and say, "This grant is for the purpose of
implementing Real ID; it's for 'x,' 'y,' 'z.'" And
so, under this bill, ... people back in [Washington,
D.C.] who specialize in this ... say we would not be
able to expend those funds to do that. So, there's a
block.
Then you've got the state with a state statute, and
with a resolution, saying, "No money for Real ID."
So, that's a second block. And then ... we have the
appropriation power. So, I think a finance committee
that went ahead and implemented money to go ahead and
enact a Real ID law, they'd probably have a lot of
angry phone calls from people out there. And I didn't
try to get people to call in today, but I can tell you
that in the committees that I've sat on in the past on
this issue, there are people [that] are very concerned
about this.
So, I think this does provide adequate protection, and
I'm satisfied with it.
11:26:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN, regarding Representative Coghill's
comments, questioned if the bill would tie the state's hands
from choosing to use portions of the Real ID Act that it likes
because the language specifies that a state agency may not spend
money solely for the purpose of "implementing or aiding in the
implementation of, the requirements of the federal Real ID Act".
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL explained that there are "two ways to
look at it." One is when Alaska decides for itself which
procedures it wants, wherein some procedures may be the same,
and the other is "a top down mandate from the feds."
11:29:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL said some states have opted out of the Real
ID Act through legislation, while others have opposed it. She
asked how the proposed legislation would be categorized.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI confirmed that SB 202 would mean Alaska was
opting out.
11:30:12 AM
PATRICK DALTON testified on behalf of himself in support of SB
202. He described the ways in which the Real ID Act is poor.
First, he said, it "trashes" individual rights, including the
right of privacy, the right to be free from unreasonable
searches and seizures without warrant and probable cause, and
the right to practice religion freely. Second, he said the Real
ID Act is poor in relation to states' rights, on which Mr.
Dalton said the committee is focusing currently. Third, he said
is the overlooked issue of national sovereignty. Mr. Dalton
explained that he thinks the Real ID Act is stripping the nation
of its sovereignty. He said if more people realized that, then
there would be an increasing amount of people against the Act.
MR. DALTON speculated that the idea for the Real ID Act began
within the United Nations. He related that all 27 European
nations have agreed to implement similar measures. He stated,
"So, really this is a United Nations global umbrella that we're
submitting ourselves to if we go along with this." He urged the
committee to consider that "what we're doing is we're falling
into the first part of a global government if we accept the Real
ID [Act]."
11:33:25 AM
ZEFFORAH DALTON echoed the testimony of Mr. Dalton that the Real
ID Act violates certain rights relating to freedom of religion,
freedom from search without cause, and the right of privacy,
states' rights, and sovereignty. Regarding the Real ID Act, she
concluded, "It's not a national ID; it's a global ID."
11:34:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that he had just come from an
Administrative Regulation Review (ARR) meeting dealing with the
legality of a regulation that the Division of Motor Vehicles
(DMV) has put forth. The question is whether or not DMV can,
without statutory authority, require social security numbers.
He noted that litigation was taking place regarding that issue.
He said "the bill" was cited in that discussion and the term
"funds" was used to mean federal funds. Representative
Gruenberg asked the sponsor if the term "funds" in the bill
relates to state funds, federal funds, or both, and if
specification is needed.
11:35:48 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said his intent is that "funds" mean both
state and federal funds. He said the issue was discussed with
the bill drafter, and he offered his understanding that
"expending funds means any funds."
11:36:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he would like an amendment that
clarifies that language.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he thinks the language is clear the
way it is.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG explained that he does not want anybody
to think the bill refers to only federal funds.
11:36:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt Amendment 1, as follows:
On page 1, line 6, between "expend" and "funds":
Insert "state or federal"
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked if the committee was still hearing
public testimony.
CHAIR LYNN confirmed that public testimony was still open, and
he asked Representative Gruenberg to hold Amendment 1.
CHAIR LYNN closed public testimony.
11:38:07 AM
KEVIN BROOKS, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Administration,
regarding a previous point raised regarding the use of funds,
said he also was at the ARR meeting and heard the chair refer to
funds as being federal; however, he said the administration
understands that "funds" means [state and federal funds].
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG [withdrew Amendment 1].
MR. BROOKS continued. He stated that there are certain things
that DMV does that make good business sense. Overall, the goal
is to ensure that when a license is issued to someone, he/she is
who he/she claims to be. He said there are "many things that we
do that you could find in the regulations that have been
promulgated on the Real ID Act," such as using digital photos
instead of Polaroid photos. Another important issue is ensuring
that people have a legal presence in the state. He stated that
"we" don't want to be precluded from doing something that is a
good idea. He indicated that Version M allows for that.
CHAIR LYNN said, "And so, you'd want to have good practices,
whether it's what we do here, or Real ID, or whatever - as long
as the state agrees."
MR. BROOKS confirmed that is right.
11:41:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL asked if the practices that the state is
involved in will also meet the federal government's
requirements.
MR. BROOKS responded that there is no single practice that will
make the state compliant with the Real ID Act. In response to a
follow-up comment by Representative Doll, he stated his belief
that [adopting new practices] will be done by point-by-point
compliance. He said data sharing, for example, is a point "that
we probably are always going to have some heartburn about."
11:42:49 AM
WHITNEY BREWSTER, Director, Division of Motor Vehicles,
Department of Administration, concurred with the comments of Mr.
Brooks and offered to answer questions of the committee.
11:43:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked, "Is there anything in the Real ID
Act that couldn't be considered dual purpose?" For example, a
requirement to have a photo ID, which then could also be used
for criminal investigation, or using a birth certificate
requirement to obtain a license to also prove a person is a
citizen.
11:44:22 AM
MR. BROOKES deferred to Ms. Brewster.
11:44:40 AM
MS. BREWSTER responded that requiring verification with other
states electronically "would be solely for Real ID." She added,
"I can't think of, at this time, any other purpose for that
...."
11:45:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked, "Couldn't you want to verify that
someone didn't live in another state for an election's purpose?"
MS. BREWSTER replied, "I don't know that the Division of
Elections verifies that information through the DMV."
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON posited that the division could do so.
MS. BREWSTER conceded that it would be possible.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON concluded, "So then, it wouldn't be
solely for the purpose of Real ID." He stated, "I can't see a
single reason in the Real ID Act that is solely for Real ID, and
therefore [it] can be used for another purpose. And I think
this bill, basically, does nothing to prevent the Real ID Act
from being implemented."
CHAIR LYNN remarked that Senator Wielechowski would not be
sponsoring the bill if that were the intent.
11:46:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON, after ascertaining that it was the
intent of Chair Lynn to move the bill out of committee,
reiterated his concerns about Version M, warning that it would
not have the end result desired by the committee or expected by
the public.
11:47:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES moved to report HCS SB 202, Version 25-
LS1145\M, Luckhaupt, 4/1/08, out of committee with individual
recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
11:48:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON, in response to a query from Chair Lynn,
stated that he would not object to the motion, since he does not
think it would "do any good," and since he had already stated
his opinion for the record.
11:48:16 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that there being no further objection, HCS
SB 202(STA) was reported out of the House State Affairs Standing
Committee.
11:48:22 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 11:48:32 AM to 11:50:37 AM.
SB 201-PUBLIC FINANCE WEBSITE
11:50:49 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the last order of business was CS FOR
SENATE BILL NO. 201(FIN), "An Act relating to the establishment
and maintenance of an Internet website providing public finance
information; and identifying the information to be available on
the Internet website."
11:51:07 AM
MICHELLE SYDEMAN, Staff, Senator Bill Wielechowski, Alaska State
Legislature, presented SB 201 on behalf of Senator Wielechowski,
prime sponsor. She paraphrased her written introduction, which
read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
The intent of SB 201, the Alaska Open Government Act,
is to mandate creation of a free, searchable website
that provides Alaskans with easy access to detailed
information on state spending.
Such a website will foster better understanding of
state operations and, ultimately, ensure that funding
is directed to the state's most important needs.
Creation of similar websites is occurring across the
country.
In 2006, President Bush signed the Federal Funding
Accountability and Transparency Act. This Act calls
for the creation of a searchable website for federal
contracts and grants of more than $25,000. The
website recently went on-line at
www.federalspending.gov.
Interestingly, this legislation was introduced years
ago by a bipartisan team of four U.S. senators,
including senators John McCain and Barak Obama.
Last year, five states -- Kansas, Texas, Oklahoma,
Minnesota, and Hawaii -- passed legislation mandating
the creation of on-line databases with comprehensive
information on their state's expenditures.
Efforts are underway in 17 other states to pass so-
called "taxpayer transparency acts," including New
Mexico, Colorado, Washington, and North Dakota.
A national consensus is emerging, supported by
advocates from both ends of the political spectrum--
from Ralph Nadar to Grover Norquist--that taxpayers
should be able to easily track and help direct
government spending.
Real accountability and good decision-making require
an informed public, a public with access to
information on government spending at their finger
tips.
While Senator Wielechowski first learned about the
benefits of "taxpayer transparency acts" at a National
Conference of State Legislatures meeting last August,
this is an issue that Governor Palin has also
embraced.
The senator applauds her for the commitment made by
her Administration to begin implementation of such a
system.
This bill would put the requirement for a free,
publicly searchable database in statute, so that all
future governors will show the same commitment to
transparency and accountability.
This is good public policy, worthy of being enshrined
in statute.
SB 201 also provides guidance as to the type of
information that a public finance website should
contain. While the Administration's current website
can best be described as an "on-line checkbook," this
bill calls for inclusion of information that will
provide a context for daily expenditures.
For example it calls for a listing of total state
expenditures over the past 10 years and a comparison
of revenues received versus funds expended.
It also requites an accounting, which can be in the
form of a simple bar chart, of the total number of
state employees over each of the past 10 years.
This information is currently available in other state
publications, but will be compiled on-line and
presented in clear manner for all Alaskans to
understand.
The fiscal note for accomplishing this is zero, as it
can be accomplished by existing webmasters and finance
staff.
In closing, we ask for your support of SB 201 and the
right of all Alaskans to easily accessible and
detailed information on how their dollars are being
spent.
11:55:02 AM
MS. SYDEMAN, in response to a question from Representative Doll,
said most state expenditures over $1,000 would be listed.
11:55:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN said he would be extremely surprised if
the Department of Administration (DOA) could do anything without
requesting money for it. He warned, "And if it's not in this
fiscal note, I can almost guarantee you that when we get the
operating budget next year, there'll be something in there to
implement this." He said he would pay extreme attention to this
issue, and he said he would like to hear from the administration
how it plans to "accomplish this without spending one dime."
11:56:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG directed attention to the reference in
the bill to the amount of $1,000, found on page 4, line 10. He
said while that language limits expenditures greater than
$1,000, it does not seem to limit income sources over $1,000.
He asked if it is the sponsor's intent to require only category
receipts, or "are you going to do every little $20 dollar[s]?"
He suggested having $1,000 "on that, too" to avoid being
"inundated with stuff."
11:57:22 AM
MS. SYDEMAN stated her understanding that the proposed online
checkbook component would be updated on a monthly basis;
therefore, all the monthly funds received would be aggregated on
a monthly basis into certain categories. She suggested that Ms.
Garnero might be able to offer a better answer.
11:58:46 AM
CHRIS NELSON, Alaskans for Tax Reform, testified on behalf of
Alaskans for Tax Reform in support of SB 201. He noted that
Americans for Tax Reform, in Washington, D.C., also supports the
proposed legislation. He echoed that this measure is being
considered in other states. He said information in Alaska is
available but difficult to find. He said putting together a
single, searchable web portal will streamline the research
process, resulting in people's increased involvement in their
state government.
11:59:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG mentioned a report card related to
state governments, and he said he thinks the proposed bill will
increase Alaska's marks for getting information available to the
public.
MR. NELSON concurred that the passage of the proposed bill would
result in Alaska's getting high marks from people who evaluate
the efficiency of state government and "its commitment to making
information available." Furthermore, he suggested that even
higher marks would come from members of the public who "have
honest questions, but really don't know where to go to find the
answers." The bill would provide a web portal with access to
more information, which "will help ensure a more informed, and
therefore more active, electorate, and a more active
population."
12:01:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG directed attention to language in
Section 5 of the bill, which read, "the list shall be updated
monthly or annually, as specified." He asked if the sponsor
means "as specified in the Act, here."
MS. SYDEMAN answered yes. She explained that there are certain
types of information that would be provided annually - the
"bigger picture ... snapshots" - to help provide a context.
Then the ongoing checkbook would be updated monthly.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG explained that he would like it stated
for the record that "as specified" means in the Act, rather than
"by some agency."
MS. SYDEMAN responded, "In the Act."
12:02:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON directed attention to page 3, lines [7-
8], which read:
(2) expenditures for the preceding month,
including
(A) the name and location of any person
to whom payment was made;
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked if that would include welfare and
child enforcement checks, which could "possibly render someone
capable of tracking someone to do them harm."
12:02:51 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI, Alaska State Legislature, testifying as
prime sponsor of SB 201, explained that those expenditures are
excluded, as shown in Section 3, on page 4, line 14.
12:03:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG questioned if there might be another
type of payment to an individual that would not be categorized
as state or federal assistance, for example, a permanent fund
dividend payment. He said he thinks Representative Johnson has
touched upon an important point - the consideration to protect
people from, for example, stalkers.
12:03:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN directed attention to page 4, lines 3-7,
which read as follows:
(d) Nothing in this section requires disclosure
of information that is confidential under state or
federal law. However, the Department of
Administration shall provide aggregated or summarized
information describing confidential revenue and
expenditures if the aggregated or summarized
information continues to protect confidentiality.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked, "Would that protect the
confidentiality of information?"
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI answered yes. He offered his belief that
permanent fund dividend information has already been made
confidential in statute.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked if a private contractor with the
state could say he/she does not want payments released because
of confidentiality problems.
12:04:23 PM
MS. SYDEMAN said the Department of Law is currently reviewing
"the 20 different categories of information" to determine which
types would be considered confidential and which would not. She
offered her understanding that a person would have to "have
solid legal ground" to argue that certain information should be
kept confidential.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON described "the constitution" as being
solid, legal ground, guaranteeing him the "right to
confidentiality."
CHAIR LYNN queried, "But this does not really identify anybody
by name, does it?"
MULTIPLE UNIDENTIFIED VOICES confirmed that the bill does
exactly that.
12:05:54 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI explained, for example, that a contractor
who takes a bid out with the state would be listed. He said
that is exactly his intent. He clarified, "You lose your right
to privacy the moment you enter in your contract with the
state." He reiterated that the citizens of the state have a
right to find out what the state is spending money on.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON said he does not think legal opinion
would trump the Constitution of the State of Alaska. He said he
thinks a contractor may have some grounds to have his/her
privacy protected, unless he/she signs that right away. He
added, "And I'm pretty sure that you can't contract away your
constitutional right."
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI confirmed that a person has - through the
Constitution of the State of Alaska - a right of privacy;
however, the citizens also have the right to find out what their
state is spending money on. If the state is spending money on
public contracts, then that information is public. He pointed
out that citizens currently have that right and can file a
freedom of information request; the bill does not change that
public aspect of the information, but only proposes to compile
it into one, concise database.
CHAIR LYNN indicated that the state's money is the people's
money.
12:07:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG told Representative Johnson that a
person can contract away his/her state rights by means of
"Miranda warnings."
12:07:22 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI, in response to Representative Johansen,
reconfirmed that the bill would not expand the amount of
information obtained by the state. In response to Chair Lynn,
he said the perfect example has to do with the operating and
capital budgets of the state. He explained that it is difficult
to find items in the budget, and SB 201 proposes to create a
searchable database to help locate those items.
12:09:09 PM
KIM GARNERO, Director, Division of Finance, Department of
Administration, in response to Representative Gruenberg's prior
question as to how revenues would be presented on the proposed
web site, related that while expenditures would show who was
paid, revenues would not show who [the state] got the money
from, but would show "the flavor of money by the account code."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked, "And it will be large
aggregates?"
MS. GARNERO answered, "Absolutely aggregate."
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked what the cost to other states has
been to run this program.
MS. GARNERO recollected that State of Missouri has spent over
$100,000 to create a database; however, she said the State of
Alaska would be using a simpler version on Excel, which is a
tool already available to the state. She said, "I have had no
complaints from any of the people I've talked to - on what we've
posted on the web site so far - that they've not been able to
access the information."
MS. GARNERO related that the state now uses a version which
provides a "checkbook detail," and the proposed legislation
would add on to that. She mentioned an annual financial report,
and said:
Publishing those -- this is already on the web as a
document as a whole. Publishing in this public
finance (indisc. -- coughing) is no additional cost.
MS. GARNERO said the division has been working on its data
warehouse - called, "the Alaska Date Enterprise Reporting
System" - since July of 2006, and would not have been able to
produce its Excel spreadsheets without that new system.
12:11:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN said his pet peeve is redundancy. He
asked if it would be possible, if the bill passes and all the
information becomes available on a single web site, to avoid
creating two or three separate reports relating to the same
information. He used the Alaska Department of Fish & Game in an
example.
12:13:07 PM
MS. GARNERO replied that the information that the division is
publishing on the web site is coming from its statewide
accounting system. She said, "If [these] tickets generate a
revenue, which I don't know if they do or not, then those
revenues would be reflected in our statewide accounting system.
We'd publish from there; it would have nothing to do with [the
Alaska Department of] Fish & Game." Regarding the annual
financial report, she said the division delivers a copy to every
legislator's office each January. She asked if value was
obtained by having a hard copy of that report.
12:14:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG stated that he finds value in having a
hard copy and wants the division to continue to disperse them.
12:14:18 PM
MS. GARNERO noted that the division prints fewer than 400
copies.
12:14:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN said he does not want to get specific
about the publications; he clarified that he just wants to know
whether the proposed web site can "supplant other forms of
getting the information to the public."
12:15:09 PM
MS. GARNERO responded that the division would not add employees
to produce the proposed web site, and she said she doubts "it
will be freeing anybody up." She stated, "It's a publication of
existing information on a public finance web site."
12:15:32 PM
CHAIR LYNN closed public testimony.
12:15:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to report CSSB 201(FIN) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSSB 201(FIN) was
reported out of the House State Affairs Standing Committee.
12:16:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN, in response to a request from the
chair, offered a report of the latest discussion by the House
State Affairs Standing Committee's subcommittee reviewing bills
related to conflict of interest issues.
CHAIR LYNN asked whether either the subcommittee or other
members of the House State Affairs Standing Committee should
work on the issue during interim.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN replied, "Mr. Chairman, if you want to
do something with it, feel free; I'm not going to spend one more
second on it."
12:17:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG proffered, "If it's the chair's wish to
pursue this matter, we have done some work on it in my office,
and I'm at your disposal."
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN said, "As an aside, I will continue to
retain control of those on the subcommittee."
CHAIR LYNN offered an update regarding the issue of Darfur, on
which the committee had heard a bill that Chair Lynn sponsored.
He noted that he had sent a letter to Mike Burns of the
Permanent Fund Corporation, and the letter was distributed to
the committee. He said the committee would be considering this
issue during the interim.
12:18:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he knows there is an equivalent
Senate bill regarding Darfur.
12:19:05 PM
CHAIR LYNN noted that this may be the last committee meeting of
regular session, and he thanked the committee members for their
hard work.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at
12:19:10 PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|