Legislature(2009 - 2010)SENATE FINANCE 532
04/02/2009 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB161 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 161 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
April 2, 2009
9:12 a.m.
9:12:05 AM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Stedman called the Senate Finance Committee meeting
to order at 9:12 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Lyman Hoffman, Co-Chair
Senator Bert Stedman, Co-Chair
Senator Charlie Huggins, Vice-Chair
Senator Johnny Ellis
Senator Donny Olson
Senator Joe Thomas
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Karen Rehfeld, Director, Office of Management and Budget,
Office of the Governor; Dan Spencer, Director, Division of
Administrative Services, Department of Public Safety; Larry
Persily, Staff, Representative Hawker; Jo Ellen Hanrahan,
Analyst, Office of Budget and Management, Office of the
Governor; Chris Ashenbrenner, Council on Domestic Violence
and Sexual Assault; Alison Elgee, Assistant Commissioner,
Finance and Management Services, Department of Health and
Social Services; Mike Maher, Director, Division of
Administrative Services, Department of Revenue; Bryan
Butcher, Director, Government Affairs and Public Relations,
Alaska Housing Finance Corporation, Department Of Revenue.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
John Mallonee, Acting Director, Child Support Enforcement
Division, Department of Revenue.
SUMMARY
SB 161 "An Act making supplemental appropriations and
capital appropriations; amending appropriations;
and providing for an effective date."
SENATE BILL NO. 161
"An Act making supplemental appropriations and capital
appropriations; amending appropriations; and providing
for an effective date."
SB161 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
9:12:14 AM
KAREN REHFELD, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET,
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, mentioned the items not included in
SB 161 known as the Economic Stimulus Bill. She noted that
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) gleaned additional
information regarding the requirements for receipt and
expenditure of the federal funds along with application
eligibility including costs and long term benefits for
Alaska. Initially the Governor presented the legislation
without many of the federal stimulus items due to questions
regarding fund requirements. She remarked that the Governor
submitted the required certification identified as Section
st
1607 Certification dated the 31 of March, 2009 in order to
meet the timelines required by law. The legislature adopted
a resolution regarding acceptance of federal stimulus funds.
She suggested the next step is the appropriation bill. She
emphasized the Governor's appreciation for the legislature's
efforts during public hearings on SB 161.
Co-Chair Stedman informed that the first order of business
was Page 3, Item #26 of the spreadsheet titled "Items Not
Included in the March 19 Economic Stimulus Bill" dated March
30, 2009 (Copy on File).
9:18:39 AM
DAN SPENCER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES,
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, discussed item #26 identifying
it as a $50 thousand item originating from the municipality
of Anchorage as a direct grant from the Department of
Justice. He explained that funds are used to enhance law
enforcement's response to online child victimization and
child pornography cases. He expected additional stimulus
funds of $400 thousand to flow directly to the Municipality
of Anchorage. The funding encompasses overtime and supplies,
but not additional personnel. He anticipated a final
agreement with the Municipality of Anchorage for receipt of
federal stimulus funds.
Co-Chair Stedman asked for clarification of the additional
personnel issue. Mr. Spencer responded that existing funding
covers overtime, supplies, and travel costs related to the
combined effort of the Municipality of Anchorage and the
Department of Public Safety's work on the enforcement of
internet crimes against children, yet neglects the inclusion
of a personnel position.
Co-Chair Stedman recounted concern regarding the budget and
the potential of "strings attached" or unfunded mandates to
the receipt of federal economic stimulus funds. He inquired
about the department's position on potential budgetary
impacts. Mr. Spencer replied that the department did not see
potential budgetary impacts in receiving federal stimulus
funds.
Co-Chair Hoffman understood that the only eligible applicant
is the Anchorage police department. He asked why the police
department sub-grants the funds to the state as opposed to
using the funds themselves. Mr. Spencer answered that the
Anchorage police department currently employs a similar
grant. The economic stimulus grant allows the Anchorage
police department to employ additional enforcement staff.
9:21:47 AM
Co-Chair Stedman asked if the department found unknown
"strings attached" to item #26. Mr. Spencer repeated that
the department did not find any "strings attached" to item
#26.
LARRY PERSILY, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER, addressed item
#26 at $50 thousand stating that he and the House Finance
Committee found no "strings attached."
Senator Thomas stated that the concern about item #26 was
the requirement of state money supplanting federal stimulus
money. He asked if the department's opinion changed
regarding the issue. Mr. Spencer responded that the
department's opinion about the item changed due to the
reduction of allowable overtime compensation.
9:24:15 AM
Mr. Spencer addressed item #27 and funding for the Alaska
State Troopers. Item #27 addresses personal service costs of
new trooper positions, travel, training, supplies and sub-
grants to other state agencies and to units of local
government for the funding of projects supporting the
approved Justice Assistance Grant (JAG). The funds include
$5,821,000 for the JAG program, with $1,282,000 specifically
directed to local governments. This formula is similar to
that of current grants received on regular annual programs.
The plan passes $150 thousand annually to the Department of
Law (DOL) with the expectation of one attorney position. A
small amount of funding is designated to the crime lab for
supplies and equipment related to the investigations. A
small sum is related to internet crime, but the focus is
sexual assault and child abuse cases. The department's
preference is that new positions exhibit their worth by the
end of three years and thereby continued. The commitment is
for long range planning and investigative resources. All
necessary trooper positions are taken. Added positions
increase patrol and investigative capacity providing
proactive law enforcement.
9:29:53 AM
Mr. Spencer informed that the funds in item #27 are directed
toward equipment costs, software improvements, and
municipalities. He stated that the Governor and the
legislature make decisions regarding use of the funds. He
noted that the application is due April 9, 2009.
Co-Chair Stedman requested clarification about the
application process. He asked if the application process was
covered in the Governor's letter to President Barack Obama.
Mr. Spencer responded that the Governor's letter to the
President mentioned ongoing work with the legislature on
various programs. Co-Chair Stedman clarified that the
application was not yet submitted.
Co-Chair Hoffman requested the portion of domestic violence
and sexual assault efforts focused on Alaska's rural areas.
Mr. Spencer answered that item #27 prioritizes areas of high
domestic and sexual assault incidence giving rural areas
significant focus.
9:32:36 AM
Co-Chair Hoffman stated that he recognized the severity of
childhood sexual abuse and opined that the control of
alcohol abuse is equally important. He opined that alcohol
abuse is the root of both the sexual abuse and domestic
violence problems. He supported the use of one time funds to
stem the flow of alcohol into rural areas thereby reducing
the incidence of domestic violence, child sexual abuse, and
virtually all other crimes in rural Alaska.
Mr. Spencer acknowledged the issues expressed by Co-Chair
Hoffman. Co-Chair Hoffman opined that the enforcement of
alcohol abuse programs is passive. He requested increased
enforcement in the Bethel area. Mr. Spencer admitted that he
lacked information regarding Bethel.
9:35:48 AM
Co-Chair Hoffman repeated that law enforcement efforts in
the Bethel area remain inadequate and ineffective.
Co-Chair Stedman requested the opinion of Mr. Persily on
item #27. Mr. Persily announced that $5.8 million are
allotted to the state, with $1.25 million designated to
local governments. The $3.8 million for 19 different cities
and boroughs in the state is an allocation set by the
Department of Justice. He stated that the municipalities
have a May 18, 2009 deadline for funds not subject to
legislative appropriation. The funds travel directly to the
municipalities including Fairbanks, Anchorage, Bethel,
Wasilla, Palmer, North Slope Borough, Dillingham, and Sitka.
Co-Chair Stedman noted concern about the growing operating
account. He asked if the department increased the trooper
count by six or more over the next several years through its
natural evolution, or were the changes contemplated in
planning sessions with the Department of Public Safety. Mr.
Spencer answered that the expectation is for long range
planning sessions in the upcoming summer. Based on the crime
rates observed and required allocations for investigative
resources, the positions are necessary.
Co-Chair Stedman clarified that the department requires the
positions regardless of the stimulus package. He asked the
amount of positions were available in the public safety
trooper arena. Mr. Spencer answered that vacant trooper
positions do not exist.
9:38:53 AM
Co-Chair Stedman noted the process confuses legislators and
citizens. The Governor amended the 2010 budget. He cited the
1,957 increase of full time employees across the state. He
stated that 6 trooper positions and one attorney position
remain imbedded in the overall evolution of employee growth.
This equates 392 new positions added each year since 2007.
He opined that the stimulus package addresses approximately
18 new positions. The natural evolution adds nearly 400
positions each year. The potential increase in the operating
budget results from "strings attached" to the federal
stimulus dollars. The state increases its employee count by
2 percent each year. The proposed plan impacts the employee
count minimally and the six troopers requested exist in next
year's operating budget request regardless of the stimulus
package.
9:41:48 AM
Mr. Spencer agreed that a request for position funding is
required pending the disapproval of federal stimulus funds
for the requested positions. Co-Chair Stedman appreciated
the public discussion prior to important policy decisions.
Mr. Spencer addressed item #28 or victim assistance formula
grants of $545 thousand for the Council on Domestic Violence
and Sexual Assault. The council submitted an application.
The funding allocations are statutorily mandated. The focus
areas are determined by the council subject to the guidance
from the Governor and the legislature through a competitive
grant application process.
9:45:32 AM
Mr. Persily stated that a review performed by the House
Finance Committee identified item #28 as a "one time" boost
with strong support. No problems or questions were
identified. Co-Chair Stedman asked about "strings attached"
to item #28. Mr. Persily responded that reporting
requirements were the only identified "strings attached."
Co-Chair Stedman asked about the application process for
both items #28 and #29. Mr. Persily answered that the
applications for items #28 and #29 were submitted.
Co-Chair Stedman mentioned the requested employee count
increase of 18-20 positions with the stimulus package. The
amended budget for FY10 includes a 148 position count
increase. He encouraged focus on the scale of the stimulus
package request, which is counter to press information.
JO ELLEN HANRAHAN, ANALYST, OFFICE OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT,
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, addressed reporting and tracking
requirements. She opined that the level of tracking increase
requires more detail when dealing with federal stimulus
funds. She mentioned that the potential uses of fiscal
stabilization funds to offset the cost of the increased
reporting and tracking requirements. She informed that the
requirements are frequently beyond that which is normally
required in a federal program.
9:49:42 AM
Mr. Spencer mentioned three other competitive grant programs
not included on the spreadsheet. The programs with the
Department of Justice include counterparts in the federal
stimulus program. This particular program allocates $1
billion nationwide for additional police officers in the
event that police officers are dismissed due to state or
local budget reductions. This program comes with an
immediate cost to grant applicants. He opined that there
were many "strings attached."
9:53:06 AM
Co-Chair Hoffman asked about the application process. Mr.
Spencer responded that the process includes a proposal. The
scoring criteria for the stimulus bill are unknown. He
speculated that Alaska is ineligible for the grant.
Mr. Spencer expressed interest in yet another funding
source. This item addresses rural drug crimes, particularly
those with a federal prosecution nexus. The third
application encompasses rural law enforcement. The goal is
three troopers for Village Public Safety Officers (VPSO)
oversight. The operating budget proposal presented by the
Governor and adopted by the committee included
recommendations for 15 additional VPSO positions in FY10 and
the proposal from the task force requests another 15
positions in FY11.
9:56:41 AM
Senator Thomas asked if the justice assistance grants
include additional costs. Mr. Spencer answered that the
grants for the justice assistance cover all of the costs.
Senator Thomas asked about denied applications for the
Police Grants Program and the lack of concern about "strings
attached" during the prior application processes.
Senator Olson addressed items #3 and #4 and funds addressing
victims through the Council for Domestic Violence. He
inquired about the amount of money allocated for shelters.
Mr. Spencer answered that a significant amount, perhaps most
funds aid shelters for the victims of domestic violence.
Senator Olson asked if approximately fifty percent of the
funds will go to shelters in need of funding.
9:59:18 AM
Mr. Spencer stated that the requirements of the program
identify the types of services eligible for funding, with
most services in Alaska provided by the shelters.
CHRIS ASHENBRENNER, COUNCIL ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND SEXUAL
ASSAULT, announced that a great majority of the eligible
funds exist for victim's service programs. The STOP violence
against women formula grant program addresses law
enforcement, prosecution, and victim services including
shelters.
Senator Ellis stated that the Alaska Women's Aid in Crisis
shelter in Anchorage must close without available funding.
He understood that the shelter required a new boiler. He
requested information regarding an emergency fund for a
shelter in need of a new boiler.
Ms. Ashenbrenner responded that capital improvement or
emergency funds are unavailable to women's shelters. She
advocated for the use of federal funds for emergency
purposes funding energy efficiency in the shelters. The use
of "one time" funds in this way provides savings to the
organizations in the long run.
Co-Chair Hoffman understood that funds exist for rural
areas. He opined that the federal stimulus package neglected
rural Alaska. Mr. Spencer requested clarification about the
fund source that Co-Chair Hoffman referred to.
10:03:16 AM
Co-Chair Hoffman explained that he understood the
flexibility of local governments applying for funds. He felt
that rural Alaska received inadequate attention under the
stimulus package submitted by the state.
Mr. Spencer answered that investigators are responsible for
the entire state. The investigators travel as needed to all
regions of Alaska, including the rural areas.
Co-Chair Hoffman opined that the state should take a
regional approach to addressing the issues.
Mr. Spencer offered an upcoming response for the committee
regarding the issue of rural inclusion in federal stimulus
applications. Co-Chair Stedman stated that the committee
would anxiously await the response.
10:05:42 AM
Ms. Hanrahan moved on to the Department of Revenue's
requests. The state receives federal funding for the state
match allowing eligibility for additional state dollars. The
American recovery act allows a state use of federal
incentive receipts as a portion of their state match. The
state is also eligible for additional federal funds in the
form of earned incentive receipts. The American Recovery Act
allows the Child Support Services Division use of the
existing federal incentive receipts as state match. The
state is eligible for $3.2 million in the next two years.
Co-Chair Stedman asked about the portion referred to by Ms.
Hanrahan. Ms. Hanrahan answered the transaction allows the
division to receive $2.7 million in economic stimulus funds
reducing receipt supported services. Co-Chair Stedman asked
the identifying number listed on the handout. He asked if
this was the item marked $585 thousand. Ms. Hanrahan
answered that both the unmarked item and item #30 accomplish
the same goal, but the transactions for technical budgetary
reasons must list separately. In addition, a $400 million
general fund match is required.
Mr. Persily clarified that the original FY10 budget request
submitted by the Governor requested state funds to replace
the loss of federal funds. For at least 15 years prior to
2008, the federal government allowed states the use of these
incentive monies for successful child support operations.
The federal government allowed states use of the federal
incentive money in a two for one matching federal dollars
for child support operations. In FY08, a change in federal
law took affect and it is no longer possible to turn federal
dollars into matching funds. This budget request for state
funds makes up for that loss by reducing the need for state
money in child support operations.
10:11:07 AM
Ms. Hanrahan noted that this is merely a switching of funds
and there is little change in total fund authorization for
the Child Support Services Division. Co-Chair Stedman
detailed that the state merely supplants state funds while
receiving some federal funds. Ms. Hanrahan acknowledged that
the state reduces receipt quoted services and regular
federal authorization. Co-Chair Stedman asked about the
application for these two items. Ms. Harnahan admitted that
she lacked information about the application process for the
two items. She remarked that federal incentive receipts
remain eligible as state match for the period of October 1,
2008 through September 30, 2010.
JOHN MALLONEE, ACTING DIRECTOR, CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT
DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (testified via
teleconference), stating that no formal application exists.
He informed that the grant is open ended and based on actual
expenditures.
Co-Chair Hoffman asked about the sections for child support
services. He inquired about applying for one section alone.
Mr. Mallonee answered that the application requires multiple
sections.
10:14:22 AM
Ms. Hanrahan explained that the federal language expires in
2010. The federal incentive funds then expire as state match
for the Child Support Services Division.
Co-Chair Stedman introduced item #35 and the Alaska Housing
Finance Corporation (AHFC) State Energy Program.
BRYAN BUTCHER, DIRECTOR, GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS AND PUBLIC
RELATIONS, ALASKA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION, DEPARTMENT OF
REVENUE, discussed item #35 and the $28 million contingent
on the application of a statewide energy code. The United
States Department of Energy (DOE) funds for State Energy
Program (SEP) special projects such as building
technologies, codes and standards, wind and power
technologies, renewable energy for remote areas, and
transportation technologies. He explained the state has
eight years to comply and compliance following the eight
year period means that a minimum of ninety percent of the
state is deemed energy efficient. He stated that the Alaska
Energy Authority (AEA) is influential. He stated that the
money is strictly residential developing standards for
public and commercial buildings. Since 1992, AHFC has
complied with the building efficiency standards by statute
and financing cannot occur with out meeting those codes. He
suggested that the policy decision splitting the policy code
lies in the hands of the legislature and the Governor.
10:20:18 AM
Co-Chair Stedman asked about potential "strings" attached.
He mentioned the requirement of achieving 90 percent energy
efficiency in eight years. He requested the difference
between commercial and residential and how the arrival of
ninety percent efficiency is calculated. Mr. Butcher
answered that the percentage of energy efficiency is
determined by square footage and applies to homes built or
renovations preformed using federal funds.
Mr. Persily informed that the law states that within eight
years of enactment or 2017, at least ninety percent of new
and renovated commercial and residential square footage must
comply with energy efficiency standards. This lumps
residential and commercial together.
10:22:29 AM
Co-Chair Stedman asked about whether the expected changes
are large or small. Mr. Butcher responded that the
residential aspect includes most communities that have
building codes including Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Kenai.
Many rural Alaskan loans are handled by Alaska Housing
Finance Corporation (AHFC). Co-Chair Stedman understood that
the star rating system was obsolete.
Mr. Persily added that large commercial buildings in
Anchorage meet the energy efficiency standards required by
the Act.
Co-Chair Stedman asked about the state meeting hall in
Anchorage and its level of energy efficiency. Senator Ellis
informed that state funds were not used for the Dena'ina
convention center in Anchorage. Mr. Persily offered to
research the current standards of the building.
10:24:41 AM
Mr. Butcher informed that AHFC addresses residential aspects
of the item. Most banks have interest in borrowing on
buildings with efficiency standards already met.
Co-Chair Stedman asked how burdensome the "strings attached"
with item #35 are to Alaskan citizens. Mr. Butcher answered
that the cost of a rating is $300 required to obtain an AHFC
loan. He stated that he had been told by builders that $5-8
thousand must be spent on an average building to qualify as
energy efficient.
Co-Chair Stedman asked about building codes. Ms. Hanrahan
answered that 13 communities in Alaska require building
codes. Anchorage and Fairbanks are now upgraded with the
energy building code. The American Recovery Act insists on
using the 2009 energy codes. She stated that the cost for
the inspectors to travel is covered by an energy rater for
40 out of 385 communities. Co-Chair Stedman requested a list
of the stated figures. Ms. Hanrahan agreed to comply.
Co-Chair Stedman asked about building codes and whether most
metropolitan areas are under the new building codes. Ms.
Hanrahan answered that only two communities have an energy
code in force.
10:28:14 AM
Co-Chair Stedman stated that Ketchikan, Wrangell, Sitka, and
Petersburg have building codes. He asked about South East
Alaska and the existing building codes.
Ms. Hanrahan stated that a building code is different from
an energy code. She listed the communities with building
codes as Anchorage, Juneau, MatSu, Fairbanks, Kenai,
Ketchikan, Kodiak, Nome, Palmer, Petersburg, Valdez, and
Wrangell, and Skagway.
Co-Chair Stedman requested a breakdown from AHFC and their
portion of the building and energy code requirements.
10:30:14 AM
Senator Thomas realized that resistance to the expansion of
building and energy codes exists. He inquired about
accepting federal funds with the expectation of saving state
money in the long term. Mr. Butcher proposed the question
"is the benefit of the energy code worth the state expense
and inconvenience." He opined that this program required
additional information.
Co-Chair Hoffman asked about new construction funds. He
asked if the blueprints must meet the new requirements in
addition to an energy rating for verification. Mr. Butcher
responded that the state must submit an energy rating with
proper paperwork to AHFC confirming the four star plus
rating.
Co-Chair Hoffman asked if the requirements applied to new
construction. Mr. Butcher responded that the requirements
apply to new construction and renovation.
Co-Chair Stedman asked if this applied to all new
residential construction or only that financed through AHFC.
10:34:04 AM
Mr. Butcher answered that any new construction requires the
state energy standard.
Co-Chair Stedman asked about a newly built recreation cabin
and whether that would require building to the energy
efficient codes.
Mr. Butcher stated that AHFC finances owner occupied homes,
not recreational homes.
Mr. Persily stated that the research in House Finance shows
that if the state adopts an energy efficiency code, the
state could allow exemptions for cabins without running
water or electricity. Co-Chair Stedman asked about the
existing program and complimentary synergy existing with
that which is already in place for Alaska.
Mr. Butcher suggested that the residential aspect requires
little change, but the commercial side is unfamiliar.
Co-Chair Stedman asked if the $20 million would be
supplanted by these federal stimulus funds.
10:37:00 AM
Ms. Hanrahan stated that there are no exemptions from the
law for the state. She opined that ninety percent compliance
with energy requirements was extremely high. She explained
that the law did not state the requirement based on square
footage, but instead on the requirement of ninety percent
compliance of new construction or renovated space. The
measurement of percentage whether it is square footage,
population, or number of units is yet unknown. Final
guidance is not yet available from the Federal Government
regarding this program.
Co-Chair Hoffman addressed high energy costs in Alaska. He
suggested that Alaska may comply, as opposed to states with
warmer climates. Mr. Persily added that the energy code law
suggests that states must meet or exceed either the
standards for the international energy conservation code or
achieve greater energy savings.
Co-Chair Hoffman asked if funds are redirected to energy
projects in other states if Alaska chooses not to accept
them. He inquired if Alaska might receive additional funds
that are not accepted by other states. Ms. Hanrahad did not
understand the question.
Co-Chair Hoffman restated the question "if other states
forgo their dollars, can Alaska access them?" He explained
the advantage of accessing unclaimed stimulus dollars.
10:41:38 AM
Ms. Hanrahan answered that she was unsure whether unused
funds are allocated to other states. She promised a follow
up report to the committee.
Senator Thomas inquired about proof of ninety percent
compliance and a potential penalty for lack of compliance.
Mr. Butcher stated that a portion of the funds in item #35
develop software allowing tracking of compliance levels.
Mr. Persily stated that he had a conversation with a member
of the department of energy headquarters who presented the
question "what if Alaska is at 70 percent compliance in
eight years."
Ms. Hanrahan stated that she receives different answers from
various sources encouraging conservative decisions and
written documentation from legal council.
10:43:44 AM
Co-Chair Stedman addressed item #36 and weatherization. Mr.
Butcher informed that the AHFC weatherization program
assists low and moderate income families in attaining decent
and affordable housing though the weatherization and
rehabilitation of existing homes. Weatherization provides
for fire safety, furnace and electrical repairs, education,
chimney and woodstove repairs, and the installation of
egress windows during bedroom window replacement. He noted
that $18 million is administered along with the $200 million
received last year from the legislature. The funds were used
to increase the limit from 150 to 200 percent of the Federal
Poverty Limit (FPL) upgrading the definition of low income.
The previous amount of federal funds placed into a home was
$2500 currently updated to $6500. The funds are administered
as a portion of the $200 million. The program is exempt from
Davis-Bacon wages because they are cost prohibitive.
Currently, the exemption is questioned.
Co-Chair Stedman addressed potential repairs and the impact
of Davis-Bacon wages.
Mr. Butcher stated that the wages apply internally to the
five weatherization providers responsible for energy audits.
The consumer hiring a contractor is not affected.
Co-Chair Stedman asked if contractors pay Davis-Bacon wages.
Mr. Butcher reminded that the exemption currently exists.
10:48:09 AM
Senator Thomas suggested that this proves an excellent
opportunity to change and spread the money around. Ms.
Hanrahan addressed the Davis-Bacon wage issue as a national
issue that is applicable to all funds spent for the American
Recovery Act must meet the Davis-Bacon Act. The federal OMB
is currently addressing the issue.
Co-Chair Hoffman asked about the administration's position
on the acceptance of the weatherization dollars. Ms.
Hanrahan answered that the Governor's position is unchanged.
Her belief is that these are items that increase the budget
and place a burden on Alaskans, but remain open for
discussion with the legislature.
Co-Chair Hoffman asked the administration's position
regarding building code requirements. Ms. Hanrahan responded
that all requests are available for discussion by the
legislature.
10:50:32 AM
Mr. Butcher addressed item #37 and the implementation of
energy efficiency and conservation block grants. The U.S.
DOE funds for energy efficiency and conservation activities
for communities, including but not limited to
developing/implementing an energy efficiency and
conservation strategy. The DOE retain technical consultant
services to assist in the development of such a strategy.
He mentioned the varying grants. The amount of funds has
been amended to $9.5 million. In addition, $4.3 million of
direct grants exist through municipalities.
Mr. Persily expanded that the law states that 60 percent of
the $9.5 million allocation must be granted to communities
that do not qualify for funding directly from the DOE. He
stated that there are 20 communities receiving funding
directly from DOE. Mr. Butcher noted that two percent was
designated for Indian tribes and two percent is competitive.
Mr. Persily stated that the funds going directly to the
communities, the $4.3 million is not subject to the state's
application or going through the legislature.
Co-Chair Hoffman asked how the amount was determined
throughout the communities. Mr. Persily answered that it was
through federal law or allocation.
10:53:06 AM
Co-Chair Stedman recessed until 1:30
10:54:06 AM RECESSED
1:37:30 PM RECONVENED
Mr. Persily informed that the new Dena'ina Convention center
in Anchorage does indeed conform to energy code standards.
He spoke with the engineer of record for the new building
who explained that the standards have become commonplace in
the industry and tend to save money.
Co-Chair Stedman began with the Department of Health and
Social Services.
ALISON ELGEE, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT
SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES,
addressed item #12 regarding health information technology.
She spoke to the concept of transitioning providers to
electronic medical records while providing an exchange
environment where medical records are safely transferred
from one entity to another while avoiding duplication of
expensive testing. The $2 million item is a placeholder. The
item is an area of the economic stimulus funding with little
provided guidance. She stated that little information is
available from the federal government regarding potential
"strings attached."
Ms. Elgee stated that she was unaware of "strings attached."
The time horizon is longer than other items of the Economic
Stimulus bill as it is available through 2015. The proposal
in the bill carries a match rate of ten percent initially
for administrative functions. The match rate then increases
throughout the time horizon by 10 percent per year.
1:41:56 PM
Co-Chair Stedman acknowledged the four positions for item
#12 and the general fund match of $40 thousand, which he
considered "strings attached." He mentioned that Senator
Paskavan sponsored SB 133 which creates an electronic health
information exchange system. He wondered about the
connection between SB 133 and SB 161.
Ms. Elgee responded that SB 133 addresses a similar subject
matter, the creation of a health information exchange. The
suggested fiscal note for SB 133 utilized the Economic
Stimulus funding. The fiscal note projects the real cost of
creating the information exchange without clarification from
the federal government about whether the federal funds are
available to the state. The money seen on the spreadsheet
(Copy on File) was intended as a placeholder as there is a
significant planning effort in terms of meeting the Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA)
requirements involved in insuring privacy of patient
records.
Co-Chair Stedman asked if the department supports SB 133.
Ms. Elgee responded that the department supports the concept
of SB 133, although she could not make a statement regarding
the Economic Stimulus funding due to all of the unknowns.
1:44:30 PM
Mr. Persily noted that the state administers grants for
healthcare providers across Alaska. One provision of the
stimulus bill is the eligibility of up to $67,750 per health
care provider for implementation of electronic medical
records.
Senator Olson asked electronic medical records for rural
Alaska. Ms. Elgee answered that the state recognized
significant band width issues associated with rural Alaska.
She informed that anon-profit group; The Alaska Health
Network conducted a study estimating the need of $13 million
as a solution to the band width problems faced by rural
Alaska. Mr. Persily noted that $7.2 billion in the economic
stimulus bill are administered as grants or loan guarantees
for rural areas.
Senator Olson asked if competitive grants existed among the
three telecommunications companies in Alaska. Mr. Persily
answered that two federal agencies run the competitive grant
programs.
1:47:08 PM
Co-Chair Stedman addressed item #13 and the public
assistance for child care benefits. Ms. Elgee stated that
the funding includes approximately $4 million. One
requirement states that Alaska may not supplant state
funding with this increase. A portion of the funding must
targeted quality expansion of infant and toddler care
programs. The balance of funding improves access to
childcare assistance for rate reimbursement charged for
childcare or expanding eligibility.
Mr. Persily stated that the House Finance Committee had no
problems and found no "strings attached" to item #13.
Ms. Elgee addressed item #14 and the public assistance
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) formerly
known as the food stamp program. Included is an increase in
food stamp benefits for all recipients. The funding
addresses administrative costs for outreach and necessary
program changes. Mr. Persily noted the lack of "strings
attached" to item #14.
1:50:27 PM
Ms. Elgee addressed item #15 and the Women, Infant, and
Children (WIC) nutrition program administered through the
Department of Public Assistance. This program eligibility is
caseload driven. She estimated the availability of $177
thousand pending Alaska's eligibility.
Mr. Persily added that research in the House Finance
Committee showed no negative impacts or "strings attached."
Ms. Elgee addressed item #16 and increased funding for
immunization, prevention and wellness, and infection
reduction grants. Mr. Persily stated that the House Finance
Committee found zero "strings attached" minus the ongoing
issue of proper accounting, reporting, and following of the
rules.
Ms. Elgee addressed item #17, an expansion of the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act which expands
the state's infant learning program. Infrastructure
improvements such as converting providers to electronic
education records and improving Medicaid claiming
opportunities are the focus.
Mr. Persily stated that the House Finance Committee found no
"strings attached" to item #17.
1:53:09 PM
Ms. Elgee addressed item #18 and the expansion of the grant
program through the administration on aging for home
delivered and congregate meals provided throughout senior
centers. The amount is $485 thousand administered as grants
to those senior centers already part of the existing
commission on aging grant program. Mr. Persily stated that
item #18 remains available throughout the federal stimulus
period only.
1:54:06 PM
Co-Chair Stedman introduced item #34 from the Department of
Environmental Conservation.
MIKE MAHER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, addressed item #34 and the Air Non-
point mobile source stimulus. The item allows the department
the provision of grants predominantly to rural areas of
Alaska for diesel emission reduction. The item allows for
the replacement of diesel generators, school buss fleets,
and the conversion of vehicles from diesel power to natural
gas or propane. The small program requires no additional
positions. The program requires grant authority. Co-Chair
Stedman clarified that the grant requires statutory work.
Mr. Persily stated that this program has available funds for
municipalities. The purpose of the item is the reduction of
emissions and energy savings. Co-Chair Stedman asked if this
was a "one time" grant. Mr. Maher responded that additional
funding might exist downstream, although exact amounts are
unknown.
SB161 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 1:57 PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| American Recovery & Reinvestment Act DERA.DOCX |
SFIN 4/2/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 161 |
| Amendment 2 A.5.pdf |
SFIN 4/2/2009 9:00:00 AM |
HB 98 |
| OMB_Economic_Stimulus_capital_not_included_in_3-19-09.pdf |
SFIN 4/2/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 161 |
| Economic Stimulus Not Included Op and CIP items 3-30-09.xls |
SFIN 4/2/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 161 |
| Assoc of AK School Boards Support SB161.pdf |
SFIN 4/2/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 161 |
| SB161 Congressional Research Service.pdf |
SFIN 4/2/2009 9:00:00 AM |
SB 161 |
| CSHB 199 (FIN) Version E (2).pdf |
SFIN 4/2/2009 9:00:00 AM |
HB 199 |