Legislature(1999 - 2000)
02/01/2000 01:08 PM House TRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION STANDING COMMITTEE
February 1, 2000
1:08 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Andrew Halcro, Chairman
Representative Beverly Masek
Representative Bill Hudson
Representative John Cowdery
Representative Allen Kemplen
Representative Albert Kookesh
Representative Vic Kohring
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 243
"An Act relating to taxes on motor fuel used in or on boats and
watercraft; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 243(TRA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 182
"An Act relating to charitable gaming and to gaming on state
ferries; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 243
SHORT TITLE: MARINE FUEL TAX FOR HARBOR MAINTENANCE
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
5/15/99 1445 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
5/15/99 1445 (H) TRA, FIN
1/27/00 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 17
1/27/00 (H) Heard & Held
1/27/00 (H) MINUTE(TRA)
2/01/00 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 182
SHORT TITLE: CHARITABLE GAMING & GAMING ON FERRIES
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
4/08/99 690 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
4/08/99 690 (H) TRA, JUD, FIN
2/01/00 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 17
WITNESS REGISTER
PATRICK HARMAN, Staff
to Representative Pete Kott
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 118
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented sponsor statement on behalf of
Representative Pete Kott for HB 182.
GERALD LUCKHAUPT, Attorney
Legislative Legal and Research Services
Legislative Affairs Agency
129 6th Street, Room 329
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 182.
TERRY MARTIN, Former-Representative
PO Box 102381
Anchorage, Alaska 99510-2381
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 182.
LARRY PERSILY, Deputy Commissioner
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Revenue
PO Box 110405
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0405
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of the Department of
Revenue on HB 182.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 00-6, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIRMAN ANDREW HALCRO called the House Transportation Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:08 p.m. Members present at the
call to order were Representatives Halcro, Masek, Hudson, Kemplen,
Kookesh and Kohring. Representative Cowdery arrived as the meeting
was in progress.
HB 243 - MARINE FUEL TAX FOR HARBOR MAINTENANCE
CHAIRMAN HALCRO announced the first order of business as House Bill
243, "An Act relating to taxes on motor fuel used in or on boats
and watercraft; and providing for an effective date." There is a
proposed committee substitute.
REPRESENTATIVE VIC KOHRING made a motion to adopt the proposed
committee substitute for HB 243, version 1-LS074\K, Kurtz, 2/1/00.
There being no objection, Version K was before the committee.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO explained the proposed committee substitute
incorporates the issues discussed on Thursday [January 27, 2000]
related to the definition of a qualified municipality. The
proposed committee substitute does not incorporate the issues of
limiting the tax, a sliding scale, or collecting the rebate because
the Department of Revenue thought that those issues would be best
left to the purview of the House Finance Committee.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO explained the changes were made to Section 3,
subparagraphs (A) and (B) [page 2]. The changes define the
qualifying municipality as one that has assumed responsibility for
its harbor, and has adopted a local ordinance dedicating the funds
to its harbor for maintenance and operation.
Number 0227
REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY MASEK asked whether the changes apply to
Section 4, of the proposed committee substitute, as well.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO replied "Yes."
Number 0282
REPRESENTATIVE ALBERT KOOKESH asked whether the proposed committee
substitute would harm in any way the areas that would normally
receive money.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO replied no. It simply addresses the municipalities
who have chosen to accept responsibility and take title for their
port or harbor. The other communities who have not accepted that
responsibility would still get a benefit through the Department of
Transportation & Public Facilities.
Number 0336
REPRESENTATIVE BILL HUDSON stated, for the record, that this is not
a dedication of funds; it is strictly an indication of the intent
of the legislature.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO noted that the Department of Revenue is very
concerned about the dedication of the revenues, which is why they
prefer to deal with that issue in the House Finance Committee.
Number 0377
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK made a motion to move CSHB 243, version
1-LS074\K, Kurtz, 2/1/00, out of committee with individual
recommendations and attached fiscal note; she asked unanimous
consent.
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING stated he would like to see the bill go one
step further of eliminating the tax altogether and going to a
user-fee system. The beneficiaries would then pay directly for the
different services offered by a harbor, as opposed to a tax being
applied to everybody across the board, especially since many might
not benefit.
Number 0506
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK stated, to Representative Kohring, that his
comments on moving the bill to a user-fee [system] is way out of
line. It would require a lot of changes to a system that is
already in place.
Number 0559
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked Chairman Halcro whether there is a
revised fiscal note.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO replied no. The Department of Revenue wants to
work with the House Finance Committee in determining the final
outcome in relation to the issues of collection and reimbursement
before submitting a fiscal note.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO stated, in response to Representative Kohring's
comments, that this tax along with the motor fuel tax is as close
to a user fee as possible. The problem with eliminating the marine
fuel tax altogether is because for some ports and harbors it's hard
to generate revenues. In addition, under the concept of assuming
responsibility and relieving the state's liability, he thinks, that
those communities should be the beneficiary of the revenue.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO stated, there being no objection to the motion,
CSHB 243(TRA) so moved from the House Transportation Standing
Committee.
HB 182 - CHARITABLE GAMING & GAMING ON FERRIES
CHAIRMAN HALCRO announced the next order of business as House Bill
182, "An Act relating to charitable gaming and to gaming on state
ferries; and providing for an effective date."
Number 0691
PATRICK HARMAN, Staff to Representative Pete Kott, came before the
committee to present the sponsor statement. He will limit his
comments to the issues as they relate to transportation. He read
the following:
HB 182 also allows machines to be used on vessels of the
Alaska marine highway. It allows the Commissioner of
Revenue to adopt the necessary regulations for use of
electronic machines on vessels of the Alaska marine
highway. Revenues generated from this use may go to the
general fund and may be appropriated for funding the
Alaska marine highway.
HB 182 does not require the Alaska Marine Highway System
to install electronic gaming machines, it would only
permit or allow their existence. There are several
benefits for permitting electronic gaming machines on our
ferries. Primarily, it would be increased revenue,
mostly from out-of-state passengers. And, the ferry
system presently allows video games, but adult
entertainment is minimal.
MR. HARMAN explained that he recently road the M/V Kennicott from
Seward to Juneau, a 2-day trip. During that time the cafeteria was
only open during meal hours and the bar was only open for a few
hours. He probably would have enjoyed putting a few dollars into
a video game.
Number 0827
CHAIRMAN HALCRO announced that he would like to limit the debate to
the transportation aspects of the bill. It has two further
committees of referral - Judiciary and Finance - where the other
issues can be discussed.
Number 0858
REPRESENTATIVE ALLEN KEMPLEN asked Mr. Harman whether the state
allows gambling in any of its public facilities.
MR. HARMAN replied, no, but he can't say that with authority. He
remarked that recently there was a football pool for the Super Bowl
game floating around the capitol.
Number 0891
CHAIRMAN HALCRO stated, in relation to the payout schedule in the
bill, 30 percent would go to the permittee; 30 percent would go to
the vendor; 20 percent would go to the state; and 20 percent would
go to the city and borough. In light of the fact that a ferry
moves from port-to-port, he wondered who would benefit from the 20
percent that would go to a city and borough. In other words: If
a ferry is going from Sitka to Juneau, who would get that 20
percent, Sitka or Juneau?
MR. HARMAN replied that issue is not addressed in the bill as
currently drafted. Obviously, a ferry is transient while at sea,
but when tied to a dock that ferry may or may not operate its
gaming machines. He remarked that he would be inclined to let the
state keep the revenue.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO stated the term "vendor" is defined in the bill as
where the machine is located. He asked Mr. Harman whether a bar
owner would receive 30 percent of the payout if there was a video
poker machine in the bar.
MR. HARMAN replied, "That's correct."
CHAIRMAN HALCRO stated in this case the ferry system is the vendor
because they are providing a place for the machines; the people to
use them; and the overhead associated with them. He said: "Let's
be honest. People aren't going to take the ferry to use -- to play
video gaming. They're going to play video gaming because they're
on the ferry." He asked Mr. Harman whether the 30 percent should
then go back to the state.
MR. HARMAN replied that's what he believes. The ferry system could
also be the permittee [and get that portion of the payout], as well
as the state's portion. And, in the lack of a municipality having
jurisdiction, they could also get the municipality's portion.
Number 1082
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN COWDERY remarked that he has been to places
like Las Vegas. He wondered who would deliver the free cocktails
and provide change.
MR. HARMAN replied he can't answer that question.
Number 1120
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON stated he sees this bill as a clean-up of the
existing charitable gaming laws, except for Section 19.65.045,
"Revenues to general fund; appropriation for Alaska Marine Highway
System," [Section 32, of the bill]. He doesn't believe that the
changes in the early portion of the bill have to do with the Marine
Highway System. The only portion of the bill that involves them is
the authorization - for the very first time - to place video
lottery machines [on the vessels] and for the proceeds to go into
the general fund.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON further stated there are already bars on
every one of the vessels; there is already space for these types of
video machines. The question is, Do they violate the effective
operation of the vessels? The answer is, "No." The social
question, of whether or not this is this the right thing to do, is
based on individual judgement.
Number 1269
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH noted that the M/V Le Conte and Aurora do
not have bars; they would not have a place set aside for these
machines. He further noted that when they had a bar and went into
Angoon - a dry community - they would have to close it for that
period of time. He also stated it seems that the current
regulations are set up so that gaming is allowed for everybody. In
other words, if the state only allows video lottery machines on the
ferries, other charitable organizations may say that's not fair.
He further pointed out that anything allowed in the state for
gaming purposes is allowed under Indian gaming compact laws. He
cited a compact negotiated by the state with the village of Klawock
as an example.
Number 1341
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON commented that Representative Kookesh is
absolutely right. He would like to see this restricted to the main
line vessels rather than the feeder vessels, which haul a lot of
school children, and to the summer season with the possibility of
removing them in the winter. That way, the rich outsiders who
travel to the state via the ferries can help underwrite some of the
operating costs, as well as help to keep it out of some of the
villages.
Number 1385
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH wondered whether the bill would impact the
cruise ships while in Alaskan waters, and their ability to use
their gaming machines. Right now, when the cruise ships are in
Alaskan waters, they are not allowed to use their machines because
gambling is not allowed in the state.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON stated he remembers when the cruise ships
allowed gambling right up to the dock. He doesn't remember,
however, whether it was a statute or lawsuit that stopped them. He
suggested looking into that further.
Number 1457
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN referred to Section 38, of the bill, and
noted that it repeals AS 05.15.690(25) and 05.15.690(34). He asked
Mr. Harman to explain what exactly is being repealed.
MR. HARMAN deferred the question to the bill drafter [Gerald
Luckhaupt, Attorney, Legislative Legal Counsel, Legislative Legal
and Research Services, Legislative Affairs Agency].
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH asked Chairman Halcro whether he intends for
the bill to go to a committee to deal with the legal aspects.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO replied he agrees that the House Judiciary
Committee should look at the legal aspects. The question is,
Should the state allow video lottery machines on the ferries? The
question is not, What are the impacts on the rules that govern
them?
Number 1540
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY stated this is an interesting issue because
he and others who have sat at this table have criticized the
subsidy given to the ferry system. He sees this as an opportunity
to help the fiscal crunch. He supports the transportation portion
of the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH stated he agrees with everything that
Representative Cowdery just said, except for the part about the
state subsidizing the Marine Highway System. He said, "It's not
any different than the money we use to plow the roads in
Anchorage."
CHAIRMAN HALCRO pointed out that is why he brought up the issue of
payout. He would like Mr. Doll [Robert J. Doll, General Manager
Ferry Operations, Southeast Region, Department of Transportation &
Public Facilities] to have as much money as possible to pay for the
fast ferries.
Number 1632
GERALD LUCKHAUPT, Attorney, Legislative Legal and Research
Services, Legislative Affairs Agency, came before the committee at
the request of the chairman. In response to committee discussion,
he noted that the sections in the bill to amend Title 5 do not have
anything to do with the authorization of the Marine Highway System
to conduct video lottery gaming on their ferries. That
authorization, as observed by Representative Hudson, starts in
Section 29; the meat is in Section 32. He further noted, in
response to committee discussion, that the [payout] percentages
found in the bill apply to Title 5 - charitable gaming. The
[revenues from] gaming conducted on the state ferries would go to
the general fund. That language can be found on page 23, lines
5-10.
MR. LUCKHAUPT explained, in response to committee discussion, that
the state sort of looked the other way in regards to gaming on
cruise ships while in state waters and while in port. It was not
until the Hickel Administration that the attorney general's office
issued an opinion saying that activity was illegal. The cruise
ship industry then came to the legislature for authorization and
was given a 6- to 8-month window - the end of the legislative
session to January 1 of the following year. The cruise ship
industry then approached Congress and [U.S.] Representative [Donald
E.] Young was able to attach a rider to a budget bill that exempted
them from federal law. That exemption allows them to conduct
gaming in state waters only if the state allows it. According to
his understanding, the cruise ship industry, right now, is
conducting gaming in state waters but not while in port and so many
miles outside of port.
MR. LUCKHAUPT further explained, in response to committee
discussion, that Congress passed the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act
[IGRA] a number of years ago which allows Indian tribes to conduct
gaming on Indian lands. He noted that three types of gaming were
created under that statute, Class I, Class II and Class III. Class
I are traditional types of games such as horse racing. Class II
are games such as poker and lotteries. Class III are the type of
games found in casinos. Under the Act, an Indian tribe cannot
conduct gaming in a state that does not allow Class III type of
gaming. He noted that there was a court case in which an argument
was won on the grounds that since a state allowed for Monte Carlo
nights gambling should be allowed on Indian lands. That argument
has failed, however, in the states of California and Idaho in the
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. As a result of that decision, the
Alaska State Legislature repealed Monte Carlo nights during the
negotiations with the village of Klawock due to the fact that it
could conceivably authorize full-scale casino gaming on Indian
lands by Indian tribes. Right now, however, that is not allowed.
He explained the problem for the state under the IGRA is the
definition of Indian lands. The Act doesn't use a traditional
definition which includes reservations and the like. The Act uses
a term that includes any land held in-trust by the U.S. government
for any tribe or individual. He noted that is not a problem down
South where there are traditional reservations, but it is a problem
in Alaska. He cited Juneau as an example where the traditional
Native site is located downtown, and conceivably a casino could be
built at that location.
MR. LUCKHAUPT further stated, in response to committee discussion,
that the bill does two separate things. It authorizes charitable
organizations to conduct video lottery gaming as part of their
authorized activities under their permit, and it authorizes the
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities to conduct video
lottery gaming on ferries. That authority operates independently
of Title 5; it is derived under Title 19. The bill also repeals
labor and political organizations from the definition of charitable
organization [Section 38]. As a result, they would no longer
qualify to conduct charitable gaming.
Number 2064
CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked Mr. Luckhaupt whether it would be possible to
create a different payout, whereby the state would get more [of the
revenues] for providing the location and the people.
MR. LUCKHAUPT replied, as the bill is currently written, the state
would receive 100 percent of the revenues - less the prizes awarded
- from the gaming that occurs on state ferries. Those revenues
would go to the general fund. Mr. Harman's earlier testimony was
incorrect. The payout percentages in Title 5 would not apply to
the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities; they would
only apply to charitable organizations, and the state would not be
considered a charitable organization under the bill.
Number 2115
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK asked Mr. Luckhaupt whether all of the
revenues would go to the state rather than the charities. The bill
is not clear.
MR. LUCKHAUPT replied 100 percent of the revenues conducted on the
state ferries would go to the general fund. That language can be
found on page 23, lines 5-10, of the proposed committee substitute.
The state would not be considered a charitable organization, and
its authority to conduct gaming would not arise from Title 5.
Number 2187
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK asked Mr. Luckhaupt to discuss the repealers
in the bill.
MR. LUCKHAUPT replied the repealers would remove political and
labor organizations from the authorized list of permitted charities
to conduct charitable gaming in the state.
Number 2226
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked Mr. Luckhaupt whether the bill affects
the cruise ships.
MR. LUCKHAUPT replied no. The bill does not do anything to the
cruise ships. As he stated earlier, they have an exemption from
federal law; they can only conduct gaming in certain areas of the
Inside Passage.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked Mr. Luckhaupt whether there would be
restrictions on the Marine Highway System in Seattle and
Bellingham, for example, where gambling is not authorized.
MR. LUCKHAUPT replied this authority would only apply in state
waters.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO opened the meeting up to public testimony.
Number 2297
TERRY MARTIN, testified via teleconference from Anchorage as a
former state representative. He first remarked that the LIO
[Legislative Information Office] was not properly notified of the
hearing today. It seems that there is a rush to get the bill out
of the committee.
FORMER-REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN further stated that Representative
Kookesh is actually right. This type of gaming would oppose the
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act thereby allowing gambling all over the
state, not just on the ferries. In addition, it's unbelievable
that the state would allow "gambling," not "gaming," when a few
years ago the public absolutely opposed it. The only difference
between gambling and gaming, he stated, are the letters "bl." He
also noted that the legislature opposed gambling on state ferries
a few years ago for many of the reasons discussed today. He also
remarked that in most states their history of gambling began with
an innocent saying that, "We're just going to have historical
gambling up the Mississippi [River] or down the Missouri [River] or
down the Colorado [River]." After that, it spread all over.
FORMER-REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN further stated that, when Senator Ted
Stevens amended the U.S. Coast Guard Act to allow gambling on the
cruise ships, it was made very clear the state would not be able to
access any of those revenues.
FORMER-REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN further stated, in conclusion, that
the question before the House Transportation Committee is very
important because history shows gambling starts in most states on
ships. He reiterated it would be a disservice to the people of the
state to move the bill out of the committee today, especially given
that there was little notification of the bill being on today's
agenda.
Number 2485
CHAIRMAN HALCRO stated, to Representative Martin, that he takes
exception to the idea that a lobbyist...[TAPE CHANGE]
TAPE 00-6, SIDE B
Number 0001
CHAIRMAN HALCRO continued. As the new chairman of the House
Transportation Committee, he made a decision to clear the calendar
and give every bill a fair hearing.
Number 0019
LARRY PERSILY, Deputy Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Revenue, came before the committee to testify. He
pointed out that because of a communication problem with the
Governor's office the department is not able to provide a fiscal
note today. They will present a fiscal note and an analysis of the
bill to the committee by Thursday.
MR. PERSILY further stated the Department of Revenue is opposed to
the expansion of charitable gaming in that they are responsible for
overseeing those regulations. The department feels that the bill
would significantly change the state's role from regulating to
owning, maintaining, and using these types of machines as a source
of revenue. He explained that the department currently regulates
the industry - a $300-million industry - with six people. Those
six people make sure that the charities get their legal minimum
guaranteed under statute. He noted that their concerns will be
addressed in the fiscal note, which will be high because they would
have to buy and maintain the machines, as well as maintain a
connection to the ferries via a state mainframe computer system for
monitoring purposes. The department is not convinced, therefore,
that the state's share of 20 percent would cover those costs.
MR. PERSILY further stated that the Department of Law is working
with the Department of Revenue as this issue relates to the IGRA
and equal protection. The Department of Revenue feels that the
bill could open up full-gaming on tribal lands. The department
also feels that the bill could allow these types of machines on the
premises of existing pull-tab and bingo operations, bars and liquor
stores. The department's not sure whether that would apply to
future licensees, however. In addition, the bill would not limit
charitable gaming to 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3) (Internal Revenue Code)
charities. Currently, an organization does not have to be a
501(c)(3) recognized charity to reap the proceeds from charitable
gaming. He lastly mentioned the department feels that such an
expansion would mix one addictive behavior - gambling - with
another addictive behavior - drinking.
Number 0196
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY stated he has been to a few communities in
rural Alaska during the fishing season and has noticed two inches
of used pull-tabs on the floor in places like bingo parlors and
town halls. He wondered whether those revenues are going to a
charity and whether or not they would be wiped out under the bill.
MR. PERSILY replied the department feels that video gaming would be
more attractive to patrons than pull-tabs.
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY asked Mr. Persily whether pull-tabs would
come under the purview of being a charitable organization in
relation to his testimony.
MR. PERSILY replied an organization has to be a charity according
to state law to hold a charitable gaming permit; it doesn't have to
fit the more restrictive IRS definition of a charitable
organization.
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY asked Mr. Persily whether Emmonak, Mountain
Village, or Kotlik, where this type of activity takes place, are
based under a charity.
MR. PERSILY replied only a charity can operate a game. A charity
can hire an operator, but there has to be a charity at the end of
the line.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH pointed out that an organization in any part
of the state has to show a charitable license to a vendor in order
to buy a box of pull-tabs.
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY said he wasn't concerned about what an
organization is suppose to do; he was wondering whether the
villages that he mentioned earlier are in fact charities and
whether they have gone through the procedure mentioned.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH replied they have to. The non-profit
organizations in his village cannot buy a box of pull-tabs unless
they have a license from the state. Furthermore, he resents the
fact that Representative Cowdery wants to check only those
villages.
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY said he just named the villages that he has
been to. He has doubts that they are conforming to the law.
Number 0372
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked Mr. Persily whether the Governor
supports the portion of the bill that allows for gaming devices in
the bars on the ferries.
MR. PERSILY replied, according to his understanding, the Governor
opposes any expansion of charitable gaming in the state at this
time. He would, however, go back and specifically ask him whether
there is an exception for state ferries.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON stated he would also like to know whether the
Governor supports or opposes any of the amendments to Title 5 in
the bill. He specifically referred to the amendment(s) that would
replace pull-tabs. He would also like to know the Governor's
position on repealing political parties and labor unions as
charitable organizations.
MR. PERSILY replied he would return with an answer to the question
regarding political organizations and labor unions, but according
to the department's understanding, the bill would not replace
pull-tabs; it would allow any site that has pull-tabs on its
premise to add a video lottery machine. He cited $216 million as
the most recent figure for pull-tab gross receipts.
Number 0512
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN asked Mr. Persily whether the Department of
Revenue thinks that the Marine Highway System would incur
significant costs to allow this to happen.
MR. PERSILY explained his earlier testimony indicated that the
Department of Revenue, not the Marine Highway System, would incur
significant costs because it would be responsible for buying and
maintaining the machines. The department would also be responsible
for maintaining the communication links, and responding to service
calls within a 24-hour period. Those are the types of fiscal
issues the department is looking at.
Number 0571
CHAIRMAN HALCRO noted that HB 182 was notified and posted by the
Chief Clerk's office on Thursday, January 27, 2000, and that is has
been in the system since that time. The committee aide, Kevin
Hand, has officially met all of the notification requirements by
the clerk's office, contrary to earlier testimony. He did not want
anyone to think the committee aide was doing anything but a good
job.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO closed the meeting to public testimony.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO announced that the bill would be held over for
further consideration in order to look at Representative Hudson's
suggestion of limiting video gaming machines to the main lines and
to a particular season. He also wants to give consideration to the
Departments of Law and Revenue and their look into the possibility
of this being a slippery slope.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, Chairman
Halcro adjourned the House Transportation Standing Committee
meeting at 2:11 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|