Legislature(2021 - 2022)GRUENBERG 120
04/06/2021 03:00 PM House STATE AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB63 | |
| HB137 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 63 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 137 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
April 6, 2021
3:03 p.m.
DRAFT
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins, Chair
Representative Matt Claman, Vice Chair
Representative Geran Tarr
Representative Andi Story
Representative James Kaufman
Representative David Eastman
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Sarah Vance
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 63
"An Act relating to the duties of the Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities; renaming the Alaska Marine
Transportation Advisory Board the Alaska Marine Highway
Operations Board; relating to the membership and duties of the
Alaska Marine Highway Operations Board; and providing for an
effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 137
"An Act requiring the Department of Administration to maintain
and operate certain offices that provide services related to
motor vehicles; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 137(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 63
SHORT TITLE: ALASKA MARINE HIGHWAY OPERATIONS BOARD
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) STUTES
02/18/21 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/15/21
02/18/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/18/21 (H) TRA, STA
03/11/21 (H) TRA AT 1:30 PM BARNES 124
03/11/21 (H) Heard & Held
03/11/21 (H) MINUTE(TRA)
03/18/21 (H) TRA AT 1:30 PM BARNES 124
03/18/21 (H) Moved CSHB 63(TRA) Out of Committee
03/18/21 (H) MINUTE(TRA)
03/20/21 (H) TRA RPT CS(TRA) NT 4DP 2NR
03/20/21 (H) DP: DRUMMOND, HANNAN, SPOHNHOLZ,
HOPKINS
03/20/21 (H) NR: MCCABE, CRONK
03/30/21 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/30/21 (H) Heard & Held
03/30/21 (H) MINUTE(STA)
04/06/21 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
BILL: HB 137
SHORT TITLE: MOTOR VEHICLE OFFICES
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) FIELDS
03/17/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/17/21 (H) STA, CRA
03/30/21 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/30/21 (H) Heard & Held
03/30/21 (H) MINUTE(STA)
04/06/21 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
WITNESS REGISTER
KERRY CROCKER, Staff
Representative Louise Stutes
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on HB 63, answered
questions on behalf of Representative Stutes, prime sponsor.
ROB CARPENTER, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on HB 63, answered
questions from the committee.
MALENA MARVIN
Petersburg, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 63.
SHANNON NYE
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 63.
SHANNON ADAMSON, Regional Representative
Masters, Mates, and Pilots
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 63.
NANCY BIRD
Cordova, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 63.
MIKE COONS
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 137.
NONA SAFRA
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 137.
PETER MCKEE
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments not on topic with the
published agenda.
REPRESENTATIVE ZACK FIELDS
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on HB 137, answered
questions from the committee, as the prime sponsor.
LESLIE ISAACS, Administrative Services Director
Department of Administration
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on HB 137, answered
questions from the committee.
TRISTAN WALSH, Staff
Representative Zack Fields
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on HB 137, answered
questions on behalf of Representative Fields, prime sponsor.
SABRINA JAVIER, Fiscal Analyst
Legislative Finance Division
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on HB 137, answered
committee questions.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:03:46 PM
CHAIR JONATHAN KREISS-TOMKINS called the House State Affairs
Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:03 p.m.
Representatives Tarr, Story, Claman, Kaufman, Eastman, and
Kreiss-Tomkins were present at the call to order.
HB 63-ALASKA MARINE HIGHWAY OPERATIONS BOARD
3:04:44 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the first order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 63, "An Act relating to the duties of
the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities; renaming
the Alaska Marine Transportation Advisory Board the Alaska
Marine Highway Operations Board; relating to the membership and
duties of the Alaska Marine Highway Operations Board; and
providing for an effective date." [Before the committee was
CSHB 63(TRA).]
3:05:55 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS invited questions from the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked whether an effective date of July 1,
2021, or an immediate effective date would allow the legislation
to move forward as effectively as possible.
3:08:33 PM
KERRY CROCKER, Staff, Representative Louise Stutes, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Stutes, prime sponsor,
deferred to the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities
(DOT&PF).
3:09:18 PM
ROB CARPENTER, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Transportation
& Public Facilities, said the governor's bill has an immediate
effective date. He stated that policy wise, the department
supports the bill moving forward as soon as possible.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked how the legislation would be
implemented if it were effective immediately.
MR. CARPENTER was unsure. He pointed out that it would take
time to convene the Alaska Marine Highway Operations Board ("the
board"), establish board members, and effectively operate.
Further, he acknowledged that Alaska Marine Highway System's
(AMHS's) reliability is a concerning issue. For those reasons,
he said, "the sooner this board can convene and take action, the
better."
3:11:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN stated his understanding that in addition
to the bill before the committee, there's the governor's bill,
which is not identical. He asked for the department's position
on HB 63.
MR. CARPENTER reiterated that conceptually, the department is
fully supportive and aligned on the policy goals that came from
the reshaping work group. He noted that there are several minor
issues that the department would like to resolve with the bill
sponsor, most notably, the "separation of powers issue" in
regard to the appointment of board members, which was identified
by the Department of Law (DOL) and Legislative Finance Division
(LFD).
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN sought to verify that the administration
would likely support this legislation if the aforementioned
concerns could be resolved.
MR. CARPENTER reiterated that [DOT&PF] is "supportive,
conceptually, of the policy direction" of the bill. He declined
to express support for the final product at present.
3:12:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY indicated that she would like the board to
be seen as a decision-making board; further, that the board
would remain throughout administration changes. She pointed out
that CSHB 63(TRA) specifies that the head of the Division of
Marine Transportation would sit on the board and advise the
commissioner [of DOT&PF]. She asked whether the board would
have enough authority to implement lasting changes.
MR. CARPENTER said he envisions the deputy commissioner being on
the board. He opined that if a high-level member from the
agency were on the board, that would give the board considerable
authority; alternatively, if there were no DOT&PF
representation, the board would take on more of an advisory
role.
MR. CROCKER expressed interest in resolving that issue with the
department.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether the department has a position
on the public corporation concept.
3:16:06 PM
MR. CARPENTER stated his understanding that the reshaping
workgroup considered many different possibilities, including the
corporate model to which there were both benefits and downsides.
He emphasized the importance of the intermodal transportation
aspects associated with having AMSH under DOT&PF, along with the
substantial administration functions that the department
provides. He opined that operating under a corporate model
would require duplicating those administration functions, which
would be challenging.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS responded, "sounds like it's complicated."
3:18:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN asked whether there is a quality/risk
management position in AMHS that assures the processes are
working and continuously being improved upon. He noted that
typically, that position would report to someone high in the
organizational structure.
MR. CARPENTER relayed that the reshaping work group recommended
a "change management team" consisting of three people that would
facilitate the board's transition and work on operations to
ensure that goals were being accomplished. He stated that the
department is considering adding a position to facilitate that
recommendation and report back to the commissioner's office.
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN expressed support for the addition of
that new position. Additionally, he indicated that the board
should be enabled to help support that process.
3:20:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN opined that "change management" sounds
similar to "transition." He asked whether the change management
team would exist temporarily or permanently.
MR. CARPENTER said he is unsure whether it would be a long-term
non-permanent position or a permanent position. He conveyed
that he envisions the position interfacing closely with the
board and ensuring that communications between AMHS, the board,
and the commissioner's office are clear. He added that the
continued necessity of the position could be decided in the
future.
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN emphasized that the position he
envisioned would be a permanent position. He speculated that
any organization managing the operational risk posed by Alaska's
waters wouldn't proceed with the endeavor without a position
that's looking at optimizing the organization on a continuous
basis and trying to drive improvement with the full support of
upper management. He reiterated the need for an effective
position that handles quality, integrity, and risk-management.
3:23:08 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS opened public testimony.
3:23:39 PM
MALENA MARVIN urged the committee's support for HB 63. She
opined that "diversity is the spice of life and makes for a good
public board." She indicated that she likes that the bill
allows the legislature to appoint a portion of the board members
as opposed to appointments made only by the governor. In
addition to ensuring that the board represents diverse
communities around the state, she said, the provision
differentiates HB 63 from SB 103 by buttressing the new board
against "changes in the political wind." She also expressed
support for the provision that directs the commissioner of
DOT&PF to incorporate the recommendations of the board into the
department's long-term plans, which further stabilizes AMHS and
ensures that the agency doesn't reverse course with each
political appointee, she said. To succeed, she opined that the
board must be able to shape long-term planning. She stated her
belief that under current statute, a single politician can
unilaterally sink the ship "without ever having ridden it." She
advised working with Alaska's congressional delegation to invest
in an innovative, climate friendly fleet for the future. She
stressed the need for an affordable and dependable marine
highway in coastal Alaska to keep communities connected.
3:26:43 PM
SHANNON NYE stated her support for HB 63. She recommended
involving active employees and licensed marine engineers in this
process, as they have a unique and valuable perspective. She
advised involving people that know the ships and actively engage
in fuel consumption, deck quarters, and overhauls - people that
are familiar with the problems and know the numbers. She urged
the committee to involve these people in furthering AMHS.
3:28:24 PM
SHANNON ADAMSON, Regional Representative; Masters, Mates, and
Pilots (MMP); informed the committee that she sailed with AMHS
as a licensed deck officer for seven years and currently serves
on MTAB [Marine Transportation Advisory Board]. She expressed
MMP's support for the bill for several reasons. Firstly, board
members are appointed by more than just the governor, resulting
in more diversity to level the political playing field;
Secondly, the bill language requires DOT&PF to incorporate the
board's recommendations in long-term plans. She pointed out
that every report on AMHS in the last 10 years has recommended a
change in the management structure. She shared her belief that
HB 63 would initiate that process.
3:29:53 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked for examples of recommendations from
MTAB to DOT&PF, which had not been followed up on or executed.
MS. ADAMSON recalled that five years ago, a dynamic pricing
model was recommended by MTAB to increase fares close to sailing
while decreasing fares when the boats were not full. The idea
was that because it costs the same to sail from point A to point
B regardless of the number of passengers, the dynamic pricing
model would help fill the boat.
3:30:58 PM
NANCY BIRD, expressed strong support for HB 163, adding that she
does not support the governor's bill. She said the new board
for AMHS is "desperately" needed to accomplish long-term
planning. Furthermore, she opined that the appointment of
members must be as non-partisan as possible. She shared her
belief that the past five years demonstrated the negative side
of operating AMHS by political whims. She urged the passage of
HB 163 with the inclusion of an immediate effective date.
3:32:00 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS closed public testimony and invited
questions from the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN directed attention to page 4, line 7 of
CSHB 63(TRA) and inquired about the legal significance of [the
commissioner] approving each component of the plan.
MR. CROCKER stated his understanding that there is no legal
obligation for the department to follow the plan. He expressed
his hope that the department would be more inclined to follow
the recommendations of the new board as opposed to the current
board [MTAB].
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN suggested that the board could issue a
corrective action notice, which would provide notification that
a serious problem required corrective action. Even without a
direct "authority mechanism," he said, there would still be
public and legislative awareness. He indicated that there are
ways to craft levers that would create awareness of existing
problems and drive improvement.
3:34:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN remarked:
I'm just wondering if there's a reason that we have,
in the bill ... this requirement for a plan to be
approved if there's really no requirement for anybody
to follow it once it is approved.
MR. CROCKER shared his belief that the language in question was
already in the existing statute.
3:35:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY inquired about the present status of MTAB
and whether it would help the new board implement its directive.
MR. CARPENTER stated that MTAB is not meeting at present. he
shared his belief that [HB 63] stymied any effort for MTAB to
convene, given the proposed changes. He speculated that if the
passage of HB 63 were delayed, MTAB could reconvene to take
action or discuss with the department.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked who has the authority to schedule
MTAB meetings.
MR. CARPENTER was unsure of the answer. He speculated that "the
director" organizes the meetings.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY expressed her hope that MTAB could meet, as
any direction they could offer to the new board would be
helpful.
3:37:47 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS in response to Mr. Carpenter, sought to
clarify which director he had referred to.
MR. CARPENTER clarified that he meant to say the chair of the
MTAB board, not the director.
3:38:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY inquired as to MTAB's current chair.
MR. CARPENTER answered Robert Venables. He expounded that
[board] meetings may be called by the chair or by the majority
of the members of the board, as per AS 19.65.140.
3:38:49 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that CSHB 63(TRA) would be held
over.
HB 137-MOTOR VEHICLE OFFICES
3:39:09 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the final order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 137, "An Act requiring the Department of
Administration to maintain and operate certain offices that
provide services related to motor vehicles; and providing for an
effective date." [Before the committee was CSHB 137(STA).]
3:39:42 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS opened public testimony.
3:40:04 PM
MIKE COONS expressed his opposition to HB 137. He opined that
the bill is not needed, as "finance" allocated full funding for
the DMV offices in question. He recalled that DOA made a
recommendation to the legislature, which was turned down;
therefore, this bill is not necessary. Instead, he requested
that the committee hear HB 140, sponsored by Representative
Vance, which would have more immediate impact to seniors
throughout the state, he said.
3:41:05 PM
NONA SAFRA stated her support for HB 137. As an advocate for
seniors, veterans, and those with disabilities, she expressed
concern about the continued possibility of DMV closures in rural
Alaska, which would leave many Alaskans with only privatized
DMVs that charge unregulated, arbitrary convenience fees. She
pointed out that DOA is under no obligation to keep local DMV
offices open and, as the former commissioner noted, has the
authority to close DMVs at will. She pointed out that those who
require medical care outside the state need a Real ID to travel,
which entails an in-person visit to the DMV. She added that if
a local DMV closes, that trip could require hundreds of miles of
travel through harsh weather and poor road conditions.
Additionally, she indicated that many residents cannot use
online services for lack of internet connection or broadband
issues. She remarked that HB 137 recognizes that state DMVs are
integral to rural communities and keeps rural Alaskans from
being treated differently than their urban counterparts. She
urged the passage of HB 137 to maintain access for all Alaskans.
3:44:32 PM
PETER MCKEE provided comments not on topic with the published
agenda.
3:48:34 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS closed public testimony on HB 137 and
invited questions from the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN sought to clarify whether the state would
be excluded from [hiring] a short-term contract employee at a
state-operated [DMV] office.
3:49:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ZACK FIELDS, Alaska State Legislature, shared his
understanding that the bill would not prohibit the state from
[hiring] a temporary employee to operate a state DMV.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether that response is based on
the bill sponsor's personal intent or an attorney's opinion.
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS said it's how the bill was written. He
surmised that agency operations had never been construed to
preclude use of temporary employees; further, he shared his
belief that temporary employees are used by many agencies.
3:50:50 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the committee would consider
several amendments. He noted that he would be offering
Amendment 1 on behalf of the bill sponsor, Representative
Fields.
3:51:10 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS moved to adopt Amendment 1, [labeled 32-
LS0650\B.1, Bullard, 4/5/21], which read:
Page 1, line 4, through page 2, line 4:
Delete all material and insert:
"* Section 1. AS 28.05 is amended by adding a new
section to read:
Sec. 28.05.013. Maintenance and operation of
certain offices that provide motor vehicle services.
(a) The department, or the department in partnership
with a municipal, state, or federal agency, shall
maintain and operate at least one office that provides
the public with services related to motor vehicles in
each community of the state
(1) with a population of 850 persons or
more; and
(2) that had, on January 1, 2021, an office
providing services related to motor vehicles operated
by the department, or by a municipal, state, or
federal agency in partnership with the department.
(b) An office under (a) of this section shall
provide the public with all services related to motor
vehicles that the office offered in the community on
January 1, 2021.
(c) In this section, "community" means a place
in the unorganized borough, in a borough, or in a
unified municipality that is not incorporated as a
municipality and in which 850 or more individuals
reside as a social unit."
Renumber the following bill section accordingly.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN objected for the purpose of discussion.
3:51:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS explained that Amendment 1 clarifies that
the term "operate" indicates that the department shall operate a
DMV in one of these communities and that outsourcing to a
private sector entity that could raise prices or potentially
fail to offer core DMV services would not satisfy the
legislative intent, as the purpose is to continue offering core
public service, including some that cannot be provided by a
private firm.
3:52:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referenced line 13 of Amendment 1 and
remarked:
What happens when we have a technological development
and the state ceases to offer a service statewide, but
we have in statute that ... the DMV is going to have
to keep requiring that service at these particular
locations. Is that prudent?
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS stated that there are certain services
that can only be accomplished at the DMV versus a private
provider. He said the intent of Amendment 1 is to continue
offering those services, such as driver's license tests,
driver's license renewals for persons over age 69, commercial
driver's licenses, and driver's license reinstatement. He
opined that the intent is clear: to offer core services at the
DMV. Further, he speculated that if there were a power outage,
the courts would understand.
3:53:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN pointed out that the amendment does not
specify "core services" or "services that only the DMV can
provide," it says "all services." For that reason, he opined
that Amendment 1 is poorly worded, as all accessible services at
DMV locations must continue to be accessible at those locations.
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS said, "these are the services that DMV
offers at its locations." He reiterated that the purpose of the
bill is to continue providing DMV services consistently in rural
communities and not discriminate against communities based on
size.
3:54:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN insisted that because of the political
process, the [DMV] offices were not closed. He remarked:
The people that represent those districts said, "Nope,
can't do it," and the vote went accordingly in the
budgeting process. What that gives is the
flexibility. You don't start to get into the weeds of
having something codified that locks you into a
certain thing.
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN characterized the bill as "a solution
looking for a problem." He said the issue was already voted
down with a great deal of unanimity.
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS acknowledged that the legislation mirrors
prior debates. He explained that sometimes, an administration
follows budget recommendations and other times, they may push
back. Because of the leadership transition at DOA, he believed
moving forward with the bill is a prudent way to ensure that DMV
facilities remain open. He added that the budget language was a
positive step but not as strong as a bill.
3:56:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referenced line 6 of Amendment 1 and
asked what circumstances would require the department to be in
partnership with a federal agency to accomplish one or more of
the services.
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS recalled that when the then Barrow [now
Utqiagvik] DMV closed, the community considered a wide range of
options to continue providing its services. He explained that
the purpose in broadly referencing public agencies is to ensure
there would be an opportunity to offer core services more
efficiently. He pointed out that there is a long-standing
relationship between federal statutes and state provision of
services, including the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act of
1999 and the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986. He
said because of the long-standing state/federal relationship, it
made sense to reference federal agencies, as the potential
permutations of public agencies offering DMV services vary by
community.
3:58:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN considered a scenario in which a
community had a state DMV office that offered 10 services and a
federal agency that offered one service that related to motor
vehicles. Should Amendment 1 be adopted, he offered his
understanding that the DMV office could close if the federal
office remained open and continued to provide that one service.
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS characterized Representative Eastman's
understanding of Amendment 1 as "absurd." He added that
offering one service would not satisfy the intent of the bill.
3:59:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN withdrew his objection to the adoption of
Amendment 1.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN objected. He characterized Amendment 1
as "poorly written." Furthermore, he opined that the "intent
[is] different than what's actually on the page."
3:59:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY expressed her support for Amendment 1 based
on discussions surrounding the Pioneer Homes last year. She
recalled that legislators clearly expressed their intent
regarding the Pioneer Homes; nonetheless, "the department"
continued to act with different intent. She relayed that it
took legislation [House Bill 96] to change that.
4:00:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN noted that with all amendments,
Legislative Legal Services drafts the sponsor's intent
consistent with legislative drafting standards and requirements.
He opined that the current language in Amendment 1 appropriately
conveys the sponsor's intent. He expressed his support for the
amendment and stated his belief that the language is not
ambiguous.
4:01:48 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Tarr, Story,
Claman, and Kreiss-Tomkins voted in favor of the adoption of
Amendment 1. Representatives Kaufman and Eastman voted against
it. Therefore, Amendment 1 failed by a vote of 4-2.
4:02:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN moved to adopt Amendment 2, [labeled 32-
LS0650\B.2, Bullard/Dunmire, 4/6/21], which read:
Page 1, lines 1 - 2:
Delete "; and providing for an effective date"
Page 2, line 5:
Delete all material.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN objected.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN indicated that Amendment 2 would forego
the immediate effective date, which is currently in HB 137, and
implement the "normal" practice of providing for an effective
date 90 days after the bill is passed into law.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN asked whether the bill sponsor,
Representative Fields, is supportive of Amendment 2.
4:03:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS answered no. He explained that the
immediate effective date conveys the legislature's intent to
keep the DMV offices open.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN maintained his objection to the adoption
of Amendment 2.
4:04:34 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Eastman and Kaufman
voted in favor of the adoption of Amendment 2. Representatives
Tarr, Story, Claman, and Kreiss-Tomkins voted against it.
Therefore, Amendment 2 failed by a vote of 2-4.
4:05:10 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS invited final questions from the committee.
4:06:50 PM
LESLIE ISAACS, Administrative Services Director, Department of
Administration, in response to a question from Representative
Kaufman regarding two fiscal notes from DOA, shared his
understanding that one fiscal note had costs in the outlying
years and the other had those costs removed. He asked if that
is correct.
4:07:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN answered yes.
MR. ISAACS explained that DOA was trying to decide the impact
this legislation would have on future years. He believed that
an amended fiscal note would be submitted by DOA that would
reinsert the FY 23 - FY 26 costs as ongoing expenses. He
expounded that should the bill be approved, this budget
decrement would not be able to be offered in the future as a
cost-saving measure; therefore, those costs needed to be
reflected in outlying years as well. He asked if that makes
sense.
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN asked which fiscal note is "official."
MR. ISAACS indicated that the fiscal note with the figure "582"
in the outlying years is accurate. He noted that another
adjustment should be made with respect to the revenue, as there
would be no change in the revenue associated with this
legislation because the activity associated with the existing
DMV services will continue. He stated that the fiscal note was
attempting to convey that these savings could not be offered in
the future. He remarked:
It doesn't work well with the format of the fiscal
note ... to show a loss in savings. So, we would have
to remove the revenue aspect of that fiscal note and
include outlying expenditures for what would be the
official version of the fiscal note.
4:10:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN expressed confusion, as only one fiscal
note was included in the committee packet.
4:10:42 PM
TRISTAN WALSH, Staff, Representative Zack Fields, Alaska State
Legislature, concurred [that there is only one fiscal note].
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS agreed that he had only seen one fiscal
note, which showed 582.5 in FY 22, nothing in the prior years,
and zero in the revenue line. He suggested that Representative
Kaufman was referring to a "phantom" fiscal note.
4:11:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS, in response to Mr. Isaacs, opined that
claiming that the bill would cost money because DOA wouldn't be
able to close a DMV office in the future is a novel way of
presenting a fiscal note. He added that typically, a fiscal
note indicates whether the bill would increase or decrease
costs. He stated that the bill does not increase the number of
services offered by the DMV; therefore, there is no additional
net cost. He proceeded to list the positive profit turned by
the following DMV offices: Delta Junction, $108,000; Eagle
River, $1.1 million; Haines, $33,000; Homer $457,000; Tok,
$162,000; Valdez, $68,000. He said if DOA were to provide an
accurate fiscal note, it would show a loss in DGF revenue,
adding that it is inaccurate to claim that the bill would cost
$0.5 million more. He deferred to Ms. Javier to explain the
cost per facility.
4:13:07 PM
SABRINA JAVIER, Fiscal Analyst, Legislative Finance Division,
Alaska State Legislature, confirmed that there is only one
fiscal note, which she identified by the control code "ShScA".
She cooccurred with Representative Fields that the fiscal note
makes it look like DOA is adding 582.5 in additional DGF funds
for General Fund program receipt authority. She noted that the
numbers listed by the bill sponsor came from an ad hoc report on
FY 20 revenues.
4:15:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN shared his belief that the unpopularity
of the proposed DMV closures resulted in expeditious action by
the [House] Finance subcommittee. He recalled that there was no
support for the proposal. He expressed his hesitation to
"locking" the legislature into something that may make sense in
the future both politically and fiscally. He added that he
would hate to "needlessly dance on the grave of [the
subcommittee's] prior decision."
4:16:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN characterized the legislation as "a
singularly terrible piece of legislation for [his] district."
He reflected on the growth of [District 10], noting that having
[a DMV office] in his district would be a benefit for residents.
He suggested that should the bill pass, that opportunity may be
eliminated because the state may not want to be "handcuffed" to
adding a DMV office near existing offices. He opined that the
bill is a backdoor method of attempting to "handcuff" future
legislators into appropriations. He emphasized his opposition
to HB 137.
4:19:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN moved to report CSHB 137, Version 32-
LS0650\B, Bullard/Dunmire, 3/29/21, as amended, out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes.
4:19:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN objected. He subsequently withdrew his
objection.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS hearing no further objection, announced
that CSHB 137(STA) was moved from the House State Affairs
Standing Committee.
4:19:59 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS provided closing remarks on housekeeping
items.
4:21:04 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 4:21
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 63 Emails of Support - Volume 3.pdf |
HSTA 4/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 63 |
| HB 137 Letter of Support - Zuyus 4.5.21.pdf |
HSTA 4/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 137 |
| HB 137 Letters of Support - 3.29.21 - 4.5.21.pdf |
HSTA 4/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 137 |
| HB 137 Fiscal Note - DOA 3.26.21.pdf |
HSTA 4/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 137 |
| HB 63 Legal Memo - 4.6.21.pdf |
HSTA 4/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 63 |
| HB 137 Amendments B.1 and B.2 - 4.6.21.pdf |
HSTA 4/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 137 |