Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/07/2000 09:09 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
MINUTES
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
April 7, 2000
9:09 AM
TAPES
SFC-00 # 79, Side A and Side B
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair John Torgerson convened the meeting at
approximately 9:09 AM.
PRESENT Co-Chair John Torgerson, Co-Chair Parnell, Senator
Dave Donley, Senator Lyda Green, Senator Pete Kelly,
Senator Loren Leman, Senator Randy Phillips, Senator Gary
Wilken
Also Attending: SENATOR LYMAN HOFFMAN; REPRESENTATIVE CARL
MORGAN; GERON BRUCE, Legislative Liaison, Office of the
Commissioner, Department of Fish and Game; SUSAN SCHRADER,
Conservation Advocate, Alaska Conservation Voters; JONATHAN
LACK, staff to Representative Andrew Halcro; ROBIN
GILCRIST, President, Housing First; DAN FAUSKE,
CEO/Executive Director, Alaska Housing Finance Corporation;
Attending via Teleconference: From Anchorage: KEVIN
DELANEY, Director, Division of Sport Fish, Department of
Fish and Game; KNEELAND TAYLOR, Chair, Alaskan's Against
Snaring Wolves; DAVID GUNDACKER SR; MIKE BURNS; DAVID
LAWER, President, Alaska Bankers Association; JAN SIEBERTS;
HUBERT GELLERT, Private Landlord, Former Chair, Board of
Equalization, Municipality of Anchorage; MATT REAMS; WILEY
BROOKS, Property Manager; JEFF JUDD, Executive Director,
Anchorage Mutual Housing Association; From Fairbanks: STAN
BLOOM, Vice President, Chitina Dip Netters' Association;
DICK BISHOP, Vice President, Alaska Outdoor Council; MIKE
TINKER, Chair, Fairbanks Fish and Game Advisory Committee;
MARY BISHOP; MAC MINARD, Interior Regional Supervisor,
Division of Sport Fish, Department of Fish and Game; GREG
MACHACEK, Fairbanks Fish and Game Advisory Committee, part-
time charter boat operator on the Chitina River; PETE
BUIST, President, Alaskan Trappers Association From
Glennallen: JOSEPH HART, representing the Chitina and Ahtna
Native Corporations; JOE MATTIE; From Bethel: JAMES BERLIN
JR, Resource Specialist, ABCP, Inc.; From Barrow: BEN
HOPSON JR., Chair, Coalition to the Alaskan Way of Life;
From Mat-Su: RON ARNO, Guide
SUMMARY INFORMATION
SB 192-APPPROPRIATIONS; CAPITAL BUDGET/REAPPROPS
The Committee heard a summary of the recommendations of the
Capital Budget Subcommittee. The bill was held in
Committee.
SB 256-PHYSICIAN NEGOTIATIONS WITH HEALTH INSURE
The bill was reported from Committee with no further
debate.
SB 301-CHITINA DIPNET FISHING PERMIT
The Committee adopted a committee substitute and an
amendment. Public testimony was heard. The bill was
reported from Committee.
SB 271-FOOD SAFETY: DEC OVERSIGHT/ADVISORY GRP.
The Committee adopted a committee substitute and reported
the bill from Committee.
SB 259-CRIMES: REPRESENTATIONS/I.D./COMPUTERS
After brief debate, the bill was held in Committee.
HJR 56-CONST. AM: PROHIBIT WILDLIFE INITIATIVES
The Committee heard from the sponsor, the Department of
Fish and Game and various members of the public. The
resolution was reported from Committee.
HB 272-MUNICIPAL TAX: LOW INCOME HOUSING
The Committee heard from the sponsor, the Alaska Housing
Finance Corporation and members of the public. The bill was
held in Committee.
HB 3-DRUGS: LISTED CHEMICALS/METHAMPHETAMINE
This bill was scheduled but not heard.
HB 380-INSURER TAX CREDIT: FIRE STANDRDS COUNCIL
This bill was scheduled but not heard.
SENATE BILL NO. 192
"An Act making and amending capital appropriations and
reappropriations and capitalizing funds; and providing
for an effective date."
Co-Chair Torgerson announced the Committee would be hearing
a report from the Capital Budget Subcommittee and if the
report were adopted, a committee substitute would be
drafted and distributed. He continued saying the deadline
for amendments to the capital budget legislation would be
the following Monday at 3:00 PM.
Senator Donley, chair of the Capital Budget Subcommittee,
talked about the relatively new process of addressing
capital budget requests in a subcommittee setting. He
listed the membership of the subcommittee as Senator
Torgerson, Senator Wilken, Senator Adams and himself. He
stated that Senator Leman also participated in some of the
subcommittee meetings in the place of Senator Adams.
Senator Donley shared that the proposal from the
subcommittee was to utilize $138,474,201. Those funds are a
combination of approximately $80 million general funds,
$18.5 million Alaska Industrial Development and Export
Authority (AIDEA) dividend funds and $39 million Alaska
Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) funds, he said. He noted
that the total amount is $15,679,932 less than the previous
year's enacted capital spending and over $33 million less
than the governor's requested funding level.
Senator Donley told that the subcommittee was assigned the
task of assisting in making reductions to the operating
budget to reach the targeted goal of $30 million. He
stressed that the subcommittee was faced with reducing the
governor's requested budget increase as well as reducing
the amount of funds spent in the previous fiscal year.
Senator Donley conveyed the priorities and criteria
established by the subcommittee for project evaluation of
the proposed capital items. These, he said, included
whether the project was life, safety or health related,
school education related, was eligible for unique and
special federal funding sources and met deferred
maintenance needs. He continued listing criteria as whether
the funding request was for essential completion of a
phased project, met critical administrative needs, and
whether the project would have a high level of use to
maximize benefit to the greatest number of users. He stated
that none of the criteria was considered by itself and that
the criteria had changed some from the previous year.
Senator Donley added that the subcommittee attempted to not
include projects that were not requested by the State Of
Alaska and also to avoid projects where the state was asked
to provide funding for projects requested by other
governmental entities.
Senator Donley qualified that the subcommittee did try to
approve funding for projects that could reduce future
operating budget expenses. He gave examples of capital
projects that provided more efficient record keeping and
case-management tracking.
Senator Donley continued that to stay within the funding
allocation goals, the subcommittee could not approve all
the requested projects that met those criteria. He stressed
that the subcommittee did attempt to rate the projects to
include those that would have the most benefit.
Senator Donley relayed that the subcommittee did not
attempt to remedy the on-going problems with the Department
of Transportation and Public Facilities Statewide
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) process. He said
this was because it was felt that decisions related to
these projects should be made by the full Senate Finance
Committee.
Senator Donley also reported that the subcommittee did not
consider Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicles (GARVEE) bonds
as a funding source for capital projects.
SENATOR LYMAN HOFFMAN was invited to join the Committee to
speak for the Senate Minority on behalf of Senator Adams
who was not present.
Senator Hoffman spoke to an issue raised at the
subcommittee level concerning the stated intent to try to
obtain the maximum amount of federal matching funds as
possible. He regarded most of the projects meeting this
criteria were economic development projects. He believed
this year was the first in five or six years that this
criterion was not applied to consideration of funding
projects.
Senator Hoffman then expressed concerns about the confusion
over which document the subcommittee was working from. He
came to the conclusion that the original version of SB 192
was what the subcommittee was using. He reached this
conclusion after asking the subcommittee chair the direct
question and was told on the record that the original SB
192 was before the subcommittee. He stated that he would
have objected to the adoption of the governor's amended
version of SB 192 due to the omission of several rural
projects.
Senator Hoffman talked about the impacts on rural projects
contained in each version. He wanted to make sure all of
the important projects receive funding.
Senator Hoffman spoke to the governor's amended request
saying he did not think that the added STIP projects
followed a fair public process in being included in the
updated version.
Co-Chair Torgerson stated that he had a side-by-side
spreadsheet prepared by the Division of Legislative Finance
that compared GARVEE bonds related to the STIP. He said he
was trying to obtain information from the Administration as
to what projects properly belong in the STIP.
Co-Chair Torgerson spoke to frustrations the Committee has
had with the Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities in having the directions given by the
legislature followed. He shared that he intended to remedy
the situation. He went into detail about the federal
funding allocated by the legislature to certain projects
that the department refuses to undertake saying they do not
rank high enough.
Senator Leman clarified that Senator Hoffman suggested that
if certain projects were not funded this year they would
"drop off the list" of eligibility for federal funding. He
understood that they would not be dropped, but only be
delayed a year or so.
Senator Hoffman conceded these projects could get funding
in the future but that it was not fair that they be dropped
after six years and supplanted by other projects that have
not been on the STIP.
Co-Chair Torgerson told Senator Hoffman that he hoped the
Minority member would share those concerns with the
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, who
made those decisions.
Senator Donley emphasized the serious concerns with the
entire STIP process as implemented by the Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities. He questioned the
constitutionality of the process. He stressed that the
matter was more complicated than it seemed and expressed
his desire that the Committee work to change the process.
Co-Chair Torgerson announced that a committee substitute
would be drafted to incorporate the recommendations of the
subcommittee. He stated his intent to use AIDEA funds to
pay for a portion of the capital projects.
Co-Chair Torgerson ordered the bill HELD in Committee.
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 256(HES)
"An Act relating to regulation of managed health care
and allowing physicians to collectively negotiate with
a health benefit plan that has substantial market
power."
This was the third hearing for this bill in the Senate
Finance Committee. At the last meeting, the Committee
adopted CS SB 256, 1-LS1291\I as a workdraft and made an
amendment to the committee substitute.
Senator P. Kelly offered a motion to report from Committee,
CS SB 256, 1-LS1291\I, as amended with forthcoming fiscal
notes from the Department of Administration, the Department
of Community and Economic Development and the Department of
Law.
There was no objection and the bill MOVED FROM COMMITTEE.
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 301(RES)
"An Act relating to the Chitina dip net fishing
permit; and providing for an effective date."
This was the second hearing for this bill in the Senate
Finance Committee.
Senator Wilken moved to adopt CS SB 301, 1-LS1516\K as a
workdraft. There was no objection.
Amendment #2: this bill made the following changes to page
1, lines 7-10 of the committee substitute.
Delete: "A person who has in the person's
physical possession a permanent identification card
issued under AS 16.05.100(b) and members of the
person's family who are in the presence of the person
are not required to pay the fee for the permit while
engaged in dip net fishing at Chitina."
Insert: "A person who has received a permanent
identification card issued under AS 16.05.400(b) may
obtain a Chitina dip net fishing permit without
charge.
The members of the family of a person who
has obtained a Chitina dip net fishing permit are
not required to have a Chitina dip net fishing
permit while they are engaged in dip net fishing
at Chitina if they are engaged in fishing in the
presence of the person and the person has the
Chitina dip net fishing permit in the person's
physical possession."
Senator Wilken moved for adoption. He referenced a
memorandum from the Division of Legal and Research Services
dated April 6, which recommends the adoption of this
amendment. [Copy on file.] Senator Wilken explained it
clarifies the stipulation that senior citizens are required
to obtain a permit, but that there is no charge to them for
the permit. In addition, he said, the amendment allows
family members of a person holding a permit to participate
in the fishery so long as the permit holder is present.
Without objection, the amendment was ADOPTED.
KEVIN DELANEY, Director, Division of Sport Fish, Department
of Fish and Game, testified via teleconference from
Anchorage in support of the bill.
STAN BLOOM, Vice President, Chitina Dip Netters'
Association, testified via teleconference from Fairbanks in
favor of the ten dollar fee proposed in the bill. He spoke
of the hassle-free dip netting that has been occurring on
the Chitina River for the past 20 years. He requested a
legislative letter of intent that stipulates the revenues
raised by the fees only be used for access to the fishery
and for no other purpose.
DICK BISHOP, Vice President, Alaska Outdoor Council,
testified via teleconference from Fairbanks in support of
the legislation and stated his appreciation for the
Committee's work on the bill. He stressed that the
Administration and the legislature must address the access
issues within the next year.
MIKE TINKER, Chair, Fairbanks Fish and Game Advisory
Committee testified via teleconference from Fairbanks about
his approval in changing the name of the fishery to
"Chitina Dip Net Fishery". He spoke to the problems in
settling the trespass issue.
MARY BISHOP testified via teleconference from Fairbanks
that she thought something else must be done to make the
public aware that the state is doing something about the
trespassing issue.
MAC MINARD, Interior Regional Supervisor, Division of Sport
Fish, Department of Fish and Game, testified via
teleconference from Fairbanks thanking the legislature for
its efforts on this bill. He reiterated the department's
support of the bill saying it was viewed as the best
solution to some complex problems. He stated the bill
attempts to maximize legal public access while minimizing
conflicts between the users.
GREG MACHACEK, part-time charter boat operator on the
Chitina River, testified via teleconference from Fairbanks
about his efforts with the Native association to establish
a positive relationship. He was also in support of the
legislation.
JOSEPH HART, representing the Chitina and Ahtna Native
Corporations, testified via teleconference from Glennallen
that he supported the original intent of the bill but was
concerned about giving access to some without compensation
for the impact on the corporations' property. He remarked
that the corporations would need to renegotiate with the
Department of Fish and Game, the amendment pertaining to
senior citizens' access without payment.
Co-Chair Torgerson stated that it was understood that this
was only a temporary solution and that the issue would need
to be revisited next year.
Senator Wilken offered a motion to report from Committee,
CS SB 301, 1-LS1516\K with accompanying $250,000 fiscal
note from the Department of Fish and Game. There was no
objection and the bill MOVED FROM COMMITTEE.
SENATE BILL NO. 271
"An Act relating to fees charged for inspections by
the Department of Environmental Conservation; and
providing for an effective date."
This was the fifth hearing for this bill in the Senate
Finance Committee.
DARWIN PETERSON, staff to the Senate Finance Committee
addressed the proposed committee substitute, 1-LS1223\H,
and noted the major changes made to the bill based on
remarks made at the previous hearing.
Mr. Peterson noted the first change as reflected on page
one of the committee substitute, gave the definition of
"mobile food unit" as a facility "that serves only
beverages and prepackaged food that are from an improved
source and are not potentially hazardous.". He said this
essentially refers to espresso carts.
Mr. Peterson continued with the second change shown on page
2, lines 17 through 19. This language, he said further
defines that buildings housing more than one establishment
and share the same kitchen would be charged only one
inspection fee. He gave as an example, a bar and restaurant
that share the same kitchen. He noted that if the bar and
restaurant have separate kitchens, they would be charged
separate inspection fees.
Mr. Peterson pointed out that the make-up of the Food
Safety Advisory Group was changed on page 3, lines 6 and 7
of the committee substitute. Instead of having the members
of the group selected by the commissioner of the Department
of Environmental Conservation, he stated the Speaker of the
House of Representatives and the President of the Senate
would select the members.
Mr. Peterson added that the legislature's Regulation Review
Committee would now be responsible for staffing the Food
Safety Advisory Group as stipulated in language on page 3,
lines 14 through 16.
Mr. Peterson noted an additional change that was present in
both the previous committee substitute and this proposed
committee substitute establishing the effective date at
January 1, 2001, by request of the department.
Senator Green noticed the language pertaining to the Food
Safety Advisory Group did not address notices of upcoming
meetings to the staff. She was concerned that the group
might hold meetings without notifying the staff.
Co-Chair Torgerson knew of no specific language other than
the Open Meetings Act that pertains to notices of meetings.
He commented that it would not always be necessary to have
staff present at these meetings. He hoped the group would
get together on it's own. However, he stressed that when
official recommendations are made, the Regulation Review
Committee staff needs to write the regulations to present
to the legislature.
Senator Green relayed that if she were a staff member of
the Regulation Review Committee, she would want to attend
the meetings and be involved in the formation of
regulations.
Senator Leman moved to adopt CS SB 271, 1-LS1223\H as a
workdraft. It was adopted without objection.
Senator Leman then offered a motion to report CS SB 271, 1-
LS1223\H from Committee with forthcoming fiscal note from
the Department of Environmental Conservation. Without
objection, the bill MOVED FROM COMMITTEE.
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 259(JUD)
"An Act relating to crimes and offenses relating to
aural representations, recordings, access devices,
identification documents, impersonation, false
reports, and computers; and providing for an effective
date."
This was the forth hearing for this bill in the Senate
Finance Committee.
Co-Chair Torgerson announced that he would oppose adoption
of the proposed committee substitute, 1-LS1284\M. He
commented that the sweeping changes should be addressed in
the Senate Judiciary Committee if they were to be
considered.
Senator Donley said there were some elements of the
committee substitute that he supports, but that there were
also concerns.
Co-Chair Torgerson said he would hold the bill if Senator
Donley wanted to work on improvements but that the
Committee did not have time to get into it at this time.
Co-Chair Torgerson ordered the bill HELD in Committee.
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 56
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the
State of Alaska prohibiting certain initiatives
relating to wildlife.
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate
Finance Committee.
REPRESENTATIVE CARL MORGAN, sponsor of the bill, noted the
bill has wide bipartisan support.
Representative Morgan talked about the ballot initiative
process in Alaska and the wildlife-related initiatives
placed on the ballot in 1996 and 1998.
Representative Morgan stressed that the claims made in
support of the same-day airborne wolf hunting initiative
that was adopted in 1986 were untrue. He asserted that
these claims dealt with people's emotions and passions in
the use of video footage of wolves being killed by an
employee of the Department of Fish and Game. He stated that
in the footage showing a wolf being shot from a helicopter,
the wolf was actually being tranquilized and not killed.
Representative Morgan told of the efforts required to spot
wolves from an aircraft, find a place to land the aircraft
and then run over 100 yards to the place were the wolf was
last seen before a shot can be taken. He remarked on the
difficulty of running in the snow and then stopping to aim
and shoot. He asserted that fair chase is given to the
wolves in this case.
Representative Morgan stated that similar ballot initiative
legislation has been adopted in Minnesota, and was pending
in Arizona, Idaho and North Dakota.
Representative Morgan referred to the animal rights groups
efforts to eliminate funding from Ameri-Gas for Iditarod
musher, Randy Brooks. Representative Morgan admonished that
the groups never researched the positive works of Mr.
Brooks, which include the receipt of a humanitarian award
in 1998.
Representative Morgan addressed the argument that this
resolution is taking away the people's right to vote on
important matters. He asserted that by placing this
constitutional amendment on the ballot, all Alaskan's are
given the chance to decide how wildlife should be managed.
Representative Morgan countered the assertion that only 20
percent of Alaskans hunt and/or trap, saying that the
constitution is intended to protect the freedom of the
minority.
Representative Morgan relayed that tourists come to Alaska
to see the Native people and how they live, as well as to
see wildlife. He said it is important for visitors to see
Alaskan Natives thriving culturally, which includes a
dependence on wildlife.
Representative Morgan listed some of those who have written
letters in support of the resolution. [Copy of list and
letters on file.] One of these organizations is the Alaska
Wildlife Society, which he remarked is made up of 300
professional biologists working for the Department of Fish
and Game or the federal government.
Senator Phillips requested copies of the Utah and Minnesota
constitutional amendments regarding wildlife.
Representative Morgan supplied the Utah constitutional
amendment language. [Copy on file.]
GERON BRUCE, Legislative Liaison, Office of the
Commissioner, Department of Fish and Game, stated that the
department could not support the proposal because it fails
to recognize that there is more to the management of the
public's wildlife resources than the application of science
and technical expertise. He stressed that wildlife
management must also consider and respond to the values
held by the public about how they want their wildlife
managed.
Mr. Bruce pointed out that there are usually many options
for wildlife management that are all biologically
sustainable and therefore consistent with the sustained
yield principal. He stated that the principle of achieving
the maximum human harvest of big game as always the highest
and best use of big game is not a scientific matter, but a
public policy matter. Like many public policy issues, he
asserted, there are different views. He said the initiative
process is the most direct way the public sorts out its
views on public policy and taking the process away is not
something the department can support.
Mr. Bruce continued saying wildlife management does involve
scientific and special expertise, but so does the
administration of many other public functions, such as
education, public health and transportation planning. It
appeared to him and the department, to be no reason to
separate wildlife management as a subject too complex for
the public to make policy decisions through the initiative
process.
Mr. Bruce added that it is worth remembering that a law
enacted can be amended by the legislature immediately if
there is some error, or if it brings about an unanticipated
consequence that is injurious to the public or the wildlife
resource. After only two years, he continued, the
legislature may repeal the initiative entirely if the
legislature believes it is an inappropriate policy for the
state.
Mr. Bruce concluded that given these checks and balances to
the initiative process, there is little risk that a poor
initiative would cause any lasting harm to Alaska's
wildlife. On the other hand, he remarked that to remove
wildlife management issues from the reach of the initiative
process would lead to more conflict rather than less.
JAMES BERLIN JR, Resource Specialist, ABCP, Inc., testified
via teleconference from Bethel on behalf of 56 villages and
one-quarter of Alaska's tribes. He relayed the
corporation's support of the resolution. He spoke to the
fine balance required to manage resources, saying a ballot
initiate process could not achieve this. He told of his
forefathers' management of wildlife that was dictated by
the proper leaders and users of the resources.
Tape: SFC - 00 #79, Side B 9:56 AM
Mr. Berlin, Jr. continued stressing that the public input
in wildlife management is already considered through the
Board of Game process.
BEN HOPSON JR., Chair, Coalition to the Alaskan Way of
Life, testified via teleconference from Barrow in support
of the resolution. He described the organization as a
diverse coalition of many Native organizations, sportsmen,
trappers and hunters in both rural and urban Alaska. He
stressed that Outside interests are managing the state's
renewable resources through their money and by using
emotional influences. He contended that these animal rights
groups only want to see total elimination of hunting and
trapping in the United States, including Alaska.
RON ARNO, Guide, testified via teleconference from Mat-Su
that it is not in the best interest of Alaskans to use the
initiative process for fish and wildlife matters. He spoke
of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960's, animal rights
and racism.
DICK BISHOP, Vice-President, Alaska Outdoor Council,
testified via teleconference from Fairbanks in strong
support of HJR 56. He asserted that contrary to popular
press reports, this resolution is not a matter of ignoring
the public's interest, but instead is responding to the
public's interest.
MIKE TINKER, Chair, Fairbanks Fish and Game Advisory
Committee testified via teleconference from Fairbanks about
the importance of this resolution to the advisory
committee.
MARY BISHOP testified via teleconference from Fairbanks
suggesting that while the adage "don't watch sausage or
legislation being made" was wise, watching laws made by 30-
second sound bites was more painful.
JOE MATTIE testified via teleconference from Fairbanks in
favor of the resolution saying that the legislature and the
Board of Game is the best voice for Alaskans.
GREG MACHACEK, Fairbanks Fish and Game Advisory Committee
testified via teleconference from Fairbanks to say that the
advisory committee is the best process for managing fish
and game. He suggested that the only parties who benefited
from ballot box biology were those who got paid for their
efforts in getting the initiative passed.
PETE BUIST, President, Alaskan Trappers Association,
testified via teleconference from Fairbanks that he did not
think it was fair that Alaskans had to spend their money
fighting heavily funded groups.
KNEELAND TAYLOR, Chair, Alaskan's Against Snaring Wolves,
testified via teleconference from Anchorage in opposition
to the resolution. He argued that Alaskans should put their
trust in democracy. He asserted that if this resolution
passes, it would be a "slap in the face" to the large
number of Alaskans who voted for the two previous
initiatives from 1996 and 1998. He noted that there was a
third ballot initiative relating to wildlife, which was on
the ballot in 1994 and pertained to sport fishing. He noted
that HJR 56 does not apply to fish and commented the
omission is a political move. He addressed the assertion
that voters are not smart enough to voice their opinions on
wildlife matters. He compared the amount of money spent by
interest groups on both sides of the wildlife management
issue, saying that the conservation groups are vastly
outspent by the sportsmen's groups. He suggested the
election to decide this initiative will be funded on both
sides from sources outside the state.
Senator P. Kelly stated that he did not approve of Outside
interests deciding Alaskan's way of life.
SUSAN SCHRADER, Conservation Advocate, Alaska Conservation
Voters, testified in Juneau talked about the importance of
the ballot initiative process. She stated that her
organization opposes the resolution. She suggested that if
the concern is with the influence of Outside factors, why
the legislature is proposing to limit Alaskan's rights. She
asserted passing this resolution would not solve the
problem of Outside money and suggested campaign finance
reform was a better option.
Senator Green mentioned the downside of this particular
type of initiative. She wanted to know if this resolution
poses a limitation on limited entry.
Senator Leman answered there is no limited entry for the
taking of wildlife. He noted that Mr. Taylor brought up a
good point worth considering regarding managing of fish at
the ballot box, which he thought, was not good.
Senator Green noted there was no constitutionally valid
method restricting Outside interests' spending money and
influencing Alaskan elections. She stated that a court
decision issued the previous year made it even broader.
Co-Chair Torgerson had the same understanding.
Senator Phillips asked if, constitutionally, the state
could limit the amount of spending on constitutional
amendment initiatives.
Co-Chair Torgerson didn't think so.
Several members commented it was a matter of free speech
and the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Senator
Donley cited court decisions affirming this.
Senator Phillips spoke to the constitutional amendment
proposed in the State of Utah, saying its provision
requires that two-thirds of voters must vote in favor to
any constitutional amendment regarding wildlife.
Senator Phillips was curious to know how much Outside funds
was spent of the wildlife-related ballot initiatives in the
1996 and 1998 elections.
Senator P. Kelly supported the initiative and wanted to
counter some points brought up in testimony. He noted that
in many states, voters do not have the right to amend their
constitutions in any way. He suggested that on wildlife
issues, the initiative process can be set aside because the
animal rights and environmental extremists want to change
Alaskan's way of life and turn Alaska into a big park.
Results at stake at the ballot box. Secondly, he stated
that the results of a mistake made at the ballot box are
more dramatic with wildlife.
Senator P. Kelly did not claim whether people knew what
they were voting on or not in the 1996 election. However,
he thought they did not understand the consequences on
Rural Alaska, and in fact he didn't fully understand them
either. He said this inability to understand the
implications is the reason for the fish and game advisory
committees and the Board of Game. He attested that it
would take ten years to bring the moose population near
McGrath back to minimum standards.
Senator P. Kelly contended that the legislature could not
turn these types of issues over to Outside interests who
are very well financed. He asserted these groups use
Alaska's issues to raise money. He stated that he saw no
other reason for environmental and animal rights groups
than to raise money to provide income for executive
directors and to influence elections.
Senator P. Kelly talked about college students from Oregon
working to get signatures for the 1996 initiative. He
stated that these "20-year old students with stars in their
eyes" had no idea about the issue and knew nothing about
Alaskans' way of life. He claimed they said things about
the initiative that were not true.
Senator P. Kelly stressed, "the fact remains, Outside
groups are coming for this state and they've found a chink
in our armor."
Senator P. Kelly next asserted that wildlife viewing is a
ruse and the arguments in favor are irrelevant. He stated
that he has been in Alaska all his life and has seen very
few wolves. He argued against the claim that this
resolution would result in a loss of tourism due to too few
wolves, saying it would be the exact opposite because there
will be more moose, which are the animals more likely to be
seen.
Senator Green found it interesting that the Committee is
told in the testimony against this resolution that
constitutional amendments can be changed after the two-year
period. She stressed that when the legislature actually
attempts to make those changes it is accused of acting
against the people's will. She surmised that this
resolution was the answer to the dilemma.
Senator P. Kelly offered a motion to move from Committee,
HJR 56 with accompanying $1,500 fiscal note from the
Division of Elections. Senator Phillips objected.
A roll call was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Senator Leman, Senator Wilken, Senator P. Kelly,
Senator Green, Senator Donley, Co-Chair Parnell and Co-
Chair Torgerson
OPPOSED: Senator Phillips
ABSENT: Senator Adams
The motion PASSED (7-1-1)
The resolution was MOVED FROM COMMITTEE.
AT EASE 10:36 AM / 10:36 AM
HOUSE BILL NO. 272
"An Act relating to the tax assessment by a home rule
or general law municipality of housing that qualifies
for the low-income housing credit under the Internal
Revenue Code; and providing for an effective date."
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate
Finance Committee.
JONATHAN LACK, staff to Representative Andrew Halcro,
testified that this bill would set into law, a formula for
accessing federally qualified low-income housing. He shared
that until 1998, local governments throughout the State Of
Alaska were assessing low-income housing based on a
federally restricted rental income, taking into
consideration deed restrictions and other covenants on the
properties that are required by the federal government. In
1998, he continued, the Municipality of Anchorage changed
its formula for accessing its low-income housing. He stated
the formula is now based on the market value of these units
without consideration of deed restrictions.
Mr. Lack remarked that unfortunately, because these units
have deed restrictions on the amount of rent that can be
charged, the non-profit organizations that sponsor these
housing units, couldn't raise rents to compensate for these
increased property taxes. In some cases, he shared; the
increase in property taxes through the difference in
assessment methods has been over 100 percent.
Mr. Lack stated that this bill places these low-income
housing units in jeopardy and places all units throughout
Alaska at risk. He explained that banks are refusing to
finance these projects anywhere in the state without a
uniform taxation policy. Additionally, he said, the City
and Borough of Juneau has tried to change its taxation
policy in the past, but fortunately, the non-profit
organizations were successful in their appeals to the local
boards of equalization.
Mr. Lack asserted that the bill follows the standards
approved by the "uniform standards of special appraisal
practices". He stated all Alaskan communities are affected
by the Municipality of Anchorage policy; Anchorage is the
only city affected by this legislation because other
communities properly assess their qualified low-income
housing.
Mr. Lack stressed the need to support low-income housing in
Alaska, saying that most rental housing in the state was
constructed during the pipeline days and targets single
adults. Today, he said there are more small families
looking for housing due to low-paying service industry jobs
that are replacing higher paying oil industry jobs.
Mr. Lack relayed that other states, including Washington,
Oregon, California and Hawaii, have exempted low income
housing from all property taxes. HB 272 does not go that
far, he stated. Instead, he said it only requires the
assessor take into consideration, the rent restrictions
that are on these properties. He added that this bill fills
the need for affordable housing.
ROBIN GILCRIST, President, Housing First, testified in
Juneau in support of the bill. She described the Juneau-
based non-profit housing development organization and the
need for the organization to annually appeal its
assessment. She stated that the assessment is based on a
market-value system rather than a rent restricted system.
DAN FAUSKE, CEO/Executive Director, Alaska Housing Finance
Corporation, testified in Juneau in support on bill and the
concept behind it. He thought this legislation would help
"level the playing field." He talked about the
corporation's low-income housing investments of
approximately $58 million statewide. He said this bill
would be a tool to use as the federal government is moving
away from public housing and toward more "Section 8" rent
subsidies.
Senator Donley wanted to know the public policy
ramifications. He gave a situation of a low-income family
in Anchorage that saved to buy or built a house, using AHFC
funding and is now paying a higher mortgage rate than those
living in rural areas.
Tape: SFC - 00 #80, Side A 10:44 AM
Senator Donley commented on how this bill will require low-
income homeowners to now subsidize the renters' portion of
public services. He noted that some low-income renter have
higher incomes than the homeowners do.
Mr. Fauske replied that this housing would not have been
built without some kind of "layered financing." He stressed
that building these low-income units brings in more tax
base, which eases the burden on the existing taxpayers
because there is more property to be assessed.
Senator Donley asked if those low-income residents wouldn't
have to live somewhere.
Mr. Fauske referenced a study done by the military at
Elmondorf Air Force Base, that found the number of low-
income units unacceptable. While he was not critical of
private landlords, he stated that without the input of new
stock, the state finds itself in a situation where demand
exceeds supply. He said this results in a lower quality of
units. He spoke of the large waiting list for the Section 8
program and the extensive work developers and financiers
must go through to build low-income housing.
Co-Chair Torgerson announced this bill would be brought up
at a future Committee meeting for more public testimony.
DAVID GUNDACKER SR testified via teleconference from
Anchorage that he is a retired disabled veteran living in
low-income rental housing. His biggest concern was that
banks would no longer finance housing units such as where
he lived if there were no tax break. He stressed this would
devastating for people like himself.
Senator Leman clarified that the bill would have just the
opposite affect of what the witness stated.
MIKE BURNS testified via teleconference from Anchorage to
defer his time to the next testifier.
DAVID LAWER, President, Alaska Bankers Association,
testified via teleconference from Anchorage in support of
HB 272. He referenced written testimony submitted by and
representatives from Alaskan banks. [Copies on file.]
JAN SIEBERTS testified via teleconference from Anchorage
stating that Mr. Lawer spoke on his behalf.
HUBERT GELLERT, Private Landlord, Former Chair, Board of
Equalization, Municipality of Anchorage, testified via
teleconference from Anchorage that he is currently
developing low-income housing units in Girdwood. He
supports the legislation. He challenged the appraisal
process in Anchorage, giving details of its faults.
MATT REAMS, resident of Spruce View low income housing
area, testified via teleconference from Anchorage
qualifying that he did not understand the legislative
process but did not want increased taxes that would hamper
the development of low income housing.
WILEY BROOKS, Property Manager, testified via
teleconference from Anchorage that he was not opposed to
affordable housing but he did not like special interest
legislation. He said no one was representing the small
property owners. He referenced written testimony. [Copy on
file.]
JEFF JUDD, Executive Director, Anchorage Mutual Housing
Association testified in Juneau about quality affordable
housing. His organization was in support of the bill. He
asserted that affordable housing was in a crisis situation.
Co-Chair Torgerson ordered the bill HELD in Committee.
ADJOURNED
Senator Torgerson adjourned the meeting at 11:04 AM.
SFC-00 (22) 04/07/00
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|