Legislature(1997 - 1998)

04/30/1997 08:07 AM FIN

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
txt
                                                                               
                             MINUTES                                           
                    SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE                                   
                         April 30, 1997                                        
                            8:07 A.M.                                          
                                                                               
                                                                               
  TAPES                                                                        
                                                                               
  SFC-97, # 133, Sides 1 & 2 (000-590, 590-000)                                
  SFC-97, # 134, Sides 1 & 2 (000-590, 590-261)                                
                                                                               
                                                                               
  CALL TO ORDER                                                                
                                                                               
  Senator  Bert  Sharp,  Cochair,  Senate  Finance  Committee,                 
  convened the meeting at approximately 8:07 A.M.                              
                                                                               
                                                                               
  PRESENT                                                                      
                                                                               
  In addition to  COCHAIR SHARP, SENATORS PHILLIPS,  TORGERSON                 
  and  ADAMS  were  present  when  the meeting  was  convened.                 
  COCHAIR PEARCE, SENATORS  DONLEY and PARNELL arrived  as the                 
  meeting was in progress.                                                     
                                                                               
  Also Attending:                                                              
  REPRESENTATIVE PETE KELLY; TIM BENINTENDI, Legislative Staff                 
  to Senator Kelly; DIANE WORLEY, Director, Division of Family                 
  and  Youth  Services,  Department   of  Health  and   Social                 
  Services;  RUSSELL  HUFFMAN,  M.D.,  Forensic  Psychiatrist,                 
  Bethel; MIKE CORKILL, 1st  Sergeant, President, Alaska Peace                 
  Officers  Association;  ANGELA SALERNO,  Executive Director,                 
  National Association of Social Workers  - Alaska; BOB PARKS,                 
  President, TRF  Pacific, Inc.;  DOUGLAS EXWORTHY,  Executive                 
  Vice-President, TRF  Pacific, Inc.;  DUGAN PETTY,  Director,                 
  Division of General  Services, Department of Administration;                 
  FORREST BROWNE, Debt Manager,  Treasury Division, Department                 
  of  Revenue; KEITH  GERKEN, Gerken  and Associates,  Juneau;                 
  MITCH   GRAVO,   Lobbyist,    Frontier   Building    Limited                 
  Partnership; fiscal analysts and aides to committee members.                 
                                                                               
                                                                               
  SUMMARY INFORMATION                                                          
                                                                               
       HB 66 APPROVE CENTRALIZED PUBLIC HEALTH LAB                             
                                                                               
       TIM   BENINTENDI  testified  on  behalf  of  the  bill.                 
       SENATOR TORGERSON MOVED  the bill  from committee  with                 
       individual  recommendations.   Without  objection, CSHB
       66(HES) was REPORTED  OUT with  a previous zero  fiscal                 
       note from the Department of  Public Safety and previous                 
       fiscal notes from the Department of Administration, the                 
       Department  of  Health  and  Social  Services  and  the                 
                                                                               
                                                                               
       Department of Revenue (2378.3).                                         
       HB 152 REGULATION OF HOSPICE CARE                                       
                                                                               
       There was discussion on the bill.  SENATOR DONLEY MOVED                 
       for  adoption of  the SCS,  version P.   SENATOR  ADAMS                 
       objected,  then  withdrew  his  objection, and  SCSCSHB
       152(FIN) was ADOPTED.   SENATOR PARNELL MOVED  the bill                 
       from   committee   with   individual   recommendations.                 
       Without objection,  SCSCSHB 152(FIN)  was REPORTED  OUT                 
       with  a  previous fiscal  note  from the  Department of                 
       Health and Social Services (7.5).                                       
                                                                               
       HB 6 RELEASE OF INFORMATION ABOUT MINORS                                
                                                                               
       REPRESENTATIVE  KELLY,  Sponsor,  was  present  at  the                 
       table.  Testifying were DIANE WORLEY, RUSSELL  HUFFMAN,                 
       MIKE CORKILL and ANGELA SALERNO.   SENATOR DONLEY MOVED                 
       the    bill    from    committee     with    individual                 
       recommendations.  SENATOR ADAMS objected.  By a vote of                 
       6 to 1, SCSCSHB 6(FIN) was REPORTED OUT with a previous                 
       zero fiscal note from the  Department of Public Safety,                 
       a   zero   fiscal   note   from   the   Department   of                 
       Administration, and fiscal notes from the Department of                 
       Health and Social  Services and  the Department of  Law                 
       (22.9).                                                                 
                                                                               
       HCR 4 DHSS RECORDS FOR DELINQUENTS & CINA                               
                                                                               
       REPRESENTATIVE  KELLY   testified  on  behalf   of  the                 
       resolution.   COCHAIR PEARCE MOVED the  resolution from                 
       committee  with  individual  recommendations.   Without                 
       objection,  CSHCR  4(JUD)  was  REPORTED   OUT  with  a                 
       previous  zero  fiscal  note  from  the  Department  of                 
       Administration, and six previous fiscal notes  from the                 
       Department of Health and Social Services.                               
                                                                               
       SB 178 ANCHORAGE OFFICE BUILDING                                        
                                                                               
       Testimony was heard from  DUGAN PETTY, FORREST  BROWNE,                 
       BOB PARKS,  DOUGLAS  EXWORTHY, KEITH  GERKEN and  MITCH                 
       GRAVO.   SENATOR DONLEY  MOVED Amendment  #1.   COCHAIR                 
       PEARCE objected.  Amendment #1 FAILED by a vote of 3 to                 
       3.  SENATOR  DONLEY MOVED Amendment #2.   COCHAIR SHARP                 
       objected, then withdrew his objection.  Without further                 
       objection,  Amendment  #2 was  ADOPTED.  SENATOR DONLEY                 
       MOVED Amendment #2.  COCHAIR SHARP objected.  Amendment                 
       Amendment  #4.   Without  objection,  Amendment #4  was                 
       ADOPTED.     SENATOR  PHILLIPS  MOVED   the  bill  from                 
       committee  with  individual  recommendations.   Without                 
                                                                               
                                                                               
       objection, CSSB 178(FIN) was  REPORTED OUT with  fiscal                 
       notes from the Department of Revenue and the Department                 
       of Administration (1823.0) and (<914.6>).                               
                                                                               
       SB 42 ALASKA RR BUDGET AND LAND                                         
                                                                               
       This bill was scheduled but not heard.                                  
                                                                               
  CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 66(HES)                                                
  "An Act giving notice  of and approving the entry  into, and                 
  the  issuance  of   certificates  of  participation   in,  a                 
  lease-purchase  agreement for  a  centralized public  health                 
  laboratory facility."                                                        
                                                                               
                                                                               
  TIM   BENINTENDI,  Legislative   Staff  to   Senator  Kelly,                 
  testified that the  bill was identical  to SB 51, which  the                 
  committee had  heard and  reported out  last week.   He  was                 
  available for questions  and noted representatives from  the                 
  Department  of Health  and  Social  Services  were  present.                 
  COCHAIR  SHARP acknowledged that  it appeared  identical and                 
  the  amounts that were changed on  SB 51 matched up with the                 
  latest figures.  MR. BENINTENDI confirmed.                                   
                                                                               
  SENATOR   TORGERSON  MOVED  the  bill  from  committee  with                 
  individual recommendations.  Without objection, CSHB 66(HES)                 
  was REPORTED OUT with  a previous zero fiscal note  from the                 
  Department of Public  Safety and previous fiscal  notes from                 
  the Department  of Administration, the Department  of Health                 
  and Social Services and the Department of Revenue (2378.3).                  
                                                                               
  CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 152(HES)                                               
  "An Act regulating hospice care."                                            
                                                                               
  COCHAIR SHARP pointed out that the bill was comparable to SB
  96  which  also  had been  heard  and  reported  out by  the                 
  committee.   There was  a slight change in  the title of the                 
  house bill, that being "regulating hospice care" as compared                 
  to  "relating to hospice care" in the senate bill.  He asked                 
  the committee's pleasure regarding the title.  COCHAIR SHARP                 
  noted  there was  a  proposed SCS  before the  committee for                 
  consideration that would conform the  house bill verbatim to                 
  the  senate  bill and  that the  SCS  would require  a title                 
  change resolution.                                                           
                                                                               
  SENATOR DONLEY was  supportive of the legislation  and MOVED                 
  for adoption of the SCS, version P.  SENATOR ADAMS objected,                 
  then  withdrew  his  objection,  and  SCSCSHB  152(FIN)  was                 
  ADOPTED.                                                                     
                                                                               
  SENATOR  PARNELL   MOVED  the   bill  from   committee  with                 
                                                                               
                                                                               
  individual  recommendations.    Without  objection,  SCSCSHB
  152(FIN) was REPORTED  OUT with a previous  fiscal note from                 
  the Department of Health and Social Services (7.5).                          
                                                                               
                                                                               
  CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 6(FIN) am                                              
  "An Act relating to minors and amending laws relating to the                 
  disclosure of information relating to certain minors."                       
                                                                               
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE  PETE KELLY, Sponsor, joined the committee at                 
  the table.                                                                   
                                                                               
  DIANE  WORLEY,  Director,  Division  of  Family   and  Youth                 
  Services,  Department   of  Health   and  Social   Services,                 
  testified that the division continued to have concerns about                 
  the  bill.   They  recognized  the  need for  some  level of                 
  disclosure, the  need to protect  the public, and  levels of                 
  information regarding youths  and criminal acts they  may be                 
  committing.  The  conflicts had to do with how  far the bill                 
  went related to  the mission  of the agency  to protect  and                 
  rehabilitate  juvenile  offenders   while  still   providing                 
  community protection.  She  noted the bill was  not intended                 
  to deter  crime, but  to provide  public safety.   She  gave                 
  examples of cases  to illustrate  the concerns and  dynamics                 
  involved   with   perpetrators   who   were  also   victims.                 
  Guarantees  needed to  be  in place  to  protect those  that                 
  needed treatment and  services.  She also  expressed concern                 
  about impeding cooperation with a  family when an adjustment                 
  would have  to be  disclosed.  There  was also the  issue of                 
  petition  versus  adjudication  and whether  they  would  be                 
  disclosing  on  kids who  would later  be found  innocent of                 
  charges.                                                                     
                                                                               
  SENATOR   PHILLIPS   commented   to   MS.   WORLEY  on   the                 
  responsibility  of families  and what  sounded like  "social                 
  engineering" on her part.  He stated he could barely contain                 
  his emotion on the issue and that his constituency supported                 
  the bill  and would "rip" her apart.   He thought the public                 
  had a right to know.                                                         
                                                                               
  SENATOR DONLEY asked what the administration's position was.                 
                                                                               
  MS. WORLEY  stated she  was speaking  for the Department  of                 
  Health  and  Social  Services.    She  noted  that  previous                 
  testimony  from  Margot  Knuth, of  the  Department  of Law,                 
  reflected  the  broader  administration.    MS.  WORLEY  had                 
  limited her discussion  to her department because  they felt                 
  it would affect them  more broadly and they wanted  to bring                 
  up specific points they dealt with on a day to day basis.                    
                                                                               
  SENATOR  DONLEY  commented  that Section  4  related  to the                 
                                                                               
                                                                               
  authorized areas for information and  development of a clear                 
  protocol.  He asked how MS. WORLEY read the language "as may                 
  be necessary."   It caused him  concern because it gave  the                 
  department reason not  to do  what they didn't  like to  do.                 
  MS. WORLEY  responded that  there was  a need  to make  sure                 
  there was  reason for  sharing information  with those  that                 
  needed  to know.   SENATOR DONLEY asked if  there would be a                 
  problem with deleting that language in Section 4.                            
                                                                               
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KELLY said  there would not be  a problem and                 
  he was in agreement.   He noted it was also in Section 5 and                 
  other parts of existing statute.                                             
                                                                               
  RUSSELL  HUFFMAN,  M.D.,   Forensic  Psychiatrist,   Bethel,                 
  testified  that  he  advised  the  court   system  regarding                 
  juvenile  behavior and  treated  victims of  crime.   He had                 
  worked  with Representative Kelly  to improve the  bill.  He                 
  believed there needed  to be  more protection for  children.                 
  Children  and the mentally ill receive statutory protection.                 
  He felt the bill made it easy for those under the  age of 18                 
  to  be  criminally stigmatized  for  immature judgment.   He                 
  stated that justice was due process  and the bill eroded the                 
  steps  of  due  process  to  protect  children.    Releasing                 
  information  about  people  and victims  hurts  people.   He                 
  referred to  a recent tragedy of February 19 in Bethel as an                 
  example of the ripple effect.  No disclosures had been made,                 
  yet everyone  knew.   Information about  other students  had                 
  affected families,  grandparents, and siblings to the extent                 
  that some  would have  to  leave the  community.   He had  a                 
  petition signed by over a  hundred Bethel residents opposing                 
  the  release of  information about  children.  He  urged the                 
  protection of children  by waiting  for a conviction  before                 
  releasing names.  He encouraged the  committee to be careful                 
  and go slowly.                                                               
                                                                               
  SENATOR PHILLIPS gave  an example of a simple juvenile theft                 
  and asked how DR. HUFFMAN would handle the situation.  There                 
  was brief discussion.                                                        
                                                                               
  SENATOR ADAMS referred to a proposed Amendment #3 that would                 
  take  care of  some of  DR. HUFFMAN'S  concerns by  removing                 
  mandatory disclosure on adjusted cases.  He referred to page                 
  6, lines 30-31,                                                              
  regarding  disclosure  by  electronic means  that  could  be                 
  recovered  from a computer database  and asked if the public                 
  would have access to that information  via the internet.  He                 
  noted that  it would be in the database for five years after                 
  authorization, even though  someone could  have completed  a                 
  sentence and restitution in  a shorter period.  He  believed                 
  it was damaging.                                                             
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KELLY responded  that it  would make it  easy                 
  for the department  to give constructive notice  on criminal                 
                                                                               
                                                                               
  activities  through  an  easily  accessible  and  relatively                 
  inexpensive home page  on the internet.   There was language                 
  in the  bill providing  that if  a minor  stayed clean,  the                 
  record could be removed from the  internet page.  It created                 
  an  incentive  for  people  not  to commit  further  crimes,                 
  regardless of whether they had completed restitution or not.                 
                                                                               
  SENATOR ADAMS stated that it could greatly affect  a child's                 
  ability  to go to college,  join the military  or even get a                 
  job.   He  suggested holding  the bill  to work on  that and                 
  other issues.                                                                
                                                                               
                                                                               
  MIKE CORKILL, 1st Sergeant, President, Alaska Peace Officers                 
  Association, testified in  support of  the bill for  several                 
  reasons.  He believed  the system was broken with  regard to                 
  juvenile issues.  There were  frustrated victims and parents                 
  that   needed    to   protect   themselves    from   further                 
  victimization.  He explained that the bill related  to those                 
  well entrenched in  the system  and involved in  recidivism.                 
  It was no one individual's fault as to the reason the system                 
  was not working.   Juveniles needed  to be held  accountable                 
  and people needed to know who the criminals were.                            
                                                                               
  End SFC-97 #133, Side 1, Begin Side 2                                        
                                                                               
  SGT. CORKILL  continued.   He  had  been involved  in  youth                 
  issues for over  twenty years.  In reference to  a letter in                 
  committee files,  he stated  the Peace Officers  Association                 
  wanted to be able to disclose a juvenile's name at  the time                 
  of  arrest,  just  as they  did  with  adults.   He  had  no                 
  objection to a change to a  petition process.  He noted  the                 
  DFYS would have a chance to screen.  He had concern with how                 
  and when  the  disclosure  information  would  be  released.                 
  Another  concern  was with  Section  1  regarding controlled                 
  substances, which  basically  had to  do  with the  sale  of                 
  marijuana.  He was appalled  that it would be added  to that                 
  section because he believed any violation of AS 11.71 should                 
  be part of  the disclosure information.   It was a  terrible                 
  message to send out.  He believed people had a right to know                 
  if someone  was selling  any kind  of controlled  substance.                 
  With regard to rehabilitation and  stigmatization, he stated                 
  that the child  had "placed  themself in  the position  they                 
  have by  their own  action" rather  than by  the actions  of                 
  others, and there  was still a need  for the public to  know                 
  what  was going on.  To  illustrate his position, he gave an                 
  example of a Fairbanks youth who had shot a police officer.                  
                                                                               
  COCHAIR PEARCE asked SGT. CORKILL to elaborate on the  issue                 
  of disclosure before adjudication.   SGT. CORKILL  explained                 
  that  conviction was way  down the road  in the  course of a                 
  several month  process.   He believed  disclosure should  be                 
  made  at the time of petition.  The initial position was for                 
  the time of  arrest, but the compromise was okay.  There was                 
                                                                               
                                                                               
  a brief question and answer session regarding various crimes                 
  defined in law.                                                              
                                                                               
  In response  to the  same hypothetical  theft question  from                 
  SENATOR  PHILLIPS, SGT.  CORKILL  offered his  philosophical                 
  viewpoint based on personal experience.                                      
                                                                               
  COCHAIR SHARP  asked when  information was  available to  an                 
  officer with regard to someone criminally entrenched but not                 
  convicted.    SGT.  CORKILL  replied   that  they  had  some                 
  capability through the Alaska Public  Safety Network.  There                 
  was brief discussion on this topic.                                          
                                                                               
  ANGELA SALERNO, Executive Director, National Association  of                 
  Social Workers  - Alaska, testified  in opposition to  HB 6.                 
  She supported the mission of the  juvenile court, that being                 
  rehabilitation and  reintegration of  a youth  into society.                 
  She believed  the bill  was a serious  and radical  measure.                 
  She noted that forty percent of  the population of the state                 
  was  under the age of  twenty.  The  bill would overturn the                 
  mission  of  the  juvenile  court.   Disclosure  compromised                 
  rehabilitation  and it  was a  punishment  with far-reaching                 
  effects.    She supported  Amendment  #3 and  didn't believe                 
  anyone  would  be safer  after  passage  of the  bill.   She                 
  believed  the  bill  may  have   an  unintended  outcome  by                 
  stigmatizing  youth, narrowing  options, and  that it  could                 
  promote  crime.    MS.  SALERNO  stated  that  there  was  a                 
  misperception that kids were not  held accountable for their                 
  crimes,  noting  there  were   a  variety  of   dispositions                 
  available for kids who commit crime.                                         
                                                                               
  COCHAIR PEARCE introduced members of the Saukhalin Duma from                 
  Russia, escorted  and interpreted  by former  Senator Victor                 
  Fischer.                                                                     
                                                                               
  COCHAIR PEARCE offered a "what if" scenario.  REPRESENTATIVE                 
  KELLY responded, noting  that many scenarios had come up and                 
  they could not create  public policy to cover all  the "what                 
  ifs."  He explained that second  chances had been built into                 
  the bill.  He  added that serious and dangerous  crimes were                 
  addressed by the bill.                                                       
                                                                               
  SENATOR DONLEY asked if  there were any changes  the sponsor                 
  wanted in the bill.  REPRESENTATIVE KELLY replied  that many                 
  changes had already been made  to address various scenarios.                 
  He opposed large  amendments at this  time.  SENATOR  DONLEY                 
  had  concern with  existing language  in Section  4 and  the                 
  reluctance  of the department  to fulfill the  intent of the                 
  law.                                                                         
                                                                               
  SENATOR ADAMS  reiterated his  hope that  the bill  would be                 
  held  for  further  consideration of  issues  that  had been                 
  brought up.  He again expressed his concern about disclosing                 
  information on the internet for five years.                                  
                                                                               
                                                                               
  SENATOR DONLEY commented  that it applied to  serious crimes                 
  and  repeat offenders.   He believed it  was appropriate for                 
  employers to  know if  they  were employing  those types  of                 
  people.    Additional  discussion and  debate  ensued  among                 
  SENATORS  DONLEY, ADAMS,  PHILLIPS and  REPRESENTATIVE KELLY                 
  regarding this issue.                                                        
                                                                               
  COCHAIR SHARP acknowledged that SENATOR  ADAMS had asked the                 
  bill be held an  additional day.  SENATOR PARNELL  urged the                 
  bill be moved from committee.                                                
                                                                               
  SENATOR DONLEY MOVED the bill from committee with individual                 
  recommendations.  SENATOR ADAMS objected.                                    
                                                                               
                                                                               
  End SFC-97 #133, Side 2                                                      
  Begin SFC-97 #134, Side 1                                                    
                                                                               
  A roll call vote was taken on the MOTION.                                    
  IN  FAVOR:  Phillips,  Donley, Torgerson,  Parnell,  Pearce,                 
  Sharp                                                                        
  OPPOSED: Adams                                                               
  By a vote of 6 to 1, SCSCSHB 6(FIN) was REPORTED OUT with  a                 
  previous  zero  fiscal note  from  the Department  of Public                 
  Safety,  a  zero   fiscal  note   from  the  Department   of                 
  Administration,  and  fiscal notes  from  the Department  of                 
  Health and Social Services and the Department of Law (22.9).                 
                                                                               
  CS FOR HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 4(JUD)                                
  Relating  to   records  generated  and   maintained  by  the                 
  Department of Health and Social Services.                                    
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE KELLY testified on behalf  of the resolution.                 
  It had been  requested by the department  for reorganization                 
  purposes related to the  previous bill in order to  retain a                 
  larger portion of federal funds.                                             
                                                                               
  COCHAIR  PEARCE MOVED  the  resolution  from committee  with                 
  individual recommendations.  Without objection, CSHCR 4(JUD)                 
  was REPORTED OUT with  a previous zero fiscal note  from the                 
  Department of  Administration, and six previous fiscal notes                 
  from the Department of Health and Social Services.                           
                                                                               
  SENATE BILL NO. 178                                                          
  "An  Act  giving notice  of  and approving  a lease-purchase                 
  agreement by the Department of  Administration for an office                 
  building  in  Anchorage; relating  to  the financing  of the                 
  lease-purchase  agreement; and  providing  for an  effective                 
  date."                                                                       
                                                                               
  BOB PARKS, President, and  DOUGLAS EXWORTHY, Executive Vice-                 
                                                                               
                                                                               
  President, TRF Pacific, Inc., addressed  the committee.  MR.                 
  PARKS explained  that their company  was one of  two general                 
  partners in the Frontier building.  They intended to present                 
  a proposal for a long-term lease for state occupancy in that                 
  building.    He noted  they had  not  been asked  to  make a                 
  proposal until a  couple weeks ago by a member  of the House                 
  Finance Committee.  He passed the  proposal out to committee                 
  members (copy on file) and explained the details.                            
                                                                               
  MR.  EXWORTHY asked  that the  Department of  Administration                 
  include  certain factors  in  their analysis  of  comparison                 
  between  the purchase of  the Bank  of America  building and                 
  their long-term lease proposal.   He further discussed areas                 
  of concern regarding development, parking and risks inherent                 
  in long-term ownership of real estate.                                       
                                                                               
  SENATOR  PARNELL  inquired  about  the  time period  of  the                 
  proposal and operating costs.  He also asked about including                 
  the value of  existing leases.   SENATOR PHILLIPS asked  for                 
  the department's response  to the  proposal.  COCHAIR  SHARP                 
  expressed concern that it was a contingent proposal based on                 
  approval of three  additional lenders within a  limited time                 
  period.                                                                      
                                                                               
  DUGAN  PETTY,  Director,   Division  of  General   Services,                 
  Department of  Administration, had received the  proposal at                 
  the  same  time as  committee  members.    He commended  the                 
  management of the  Frontier building on behalf of the state.                 
  He noted that the proposal had  a smaller square footage and                 
  a different  method and length of control  of the space.  He                 
  believed  the   Bank  of  America  scenario   compared  more                 
  favorably for the state  than the proposal for the  Frontier                 
  building.                                                                    
                                                                               
  There was additional  lengthy discussion between MR.  PETTY,                 
  COCHAIR PEARCE  and SENATOR  TORGERSON regarding details  of                 
  the pros and cons of the two buildings.                                      
                                                                               
  FORREST BROWNE, Debt  Manager, Treasury Division, Department                 
  of  Revenue, was  invited to joint  the committee.   COCHAIR                 
  PEARCE asked him  about falling interest rates  with respect                 
  to financing of  the Bank of  America building.  MR.  BROWNE                 
  responded that  they retain  some flexibility to  refinance,                 
  but there would  be a cost.   He explained further.   He had                 
  recently reconfirmed  the timing  schedule with  the lender,                 
  noting  that  it was  important.    He  was  confident  that                 
  flexibility  may be  extended  based on  a  showing of  good                 
  faith.                                                                       
                                                                               
  In response  to a question  from SENATOR DONLEY,  MR. BROWNE                 
  explained that  they would have  no authority to  accept the                 
  Frontier building proposal without special legislation.                      
                                                                               
  SENATOR DONLEY MOVED Amendment #1.  COCHAIR PEARCE objected.                 
                                                                               
                                                                               
  SENATOR DONLEY  explained that  the amendment would  require                 
  the state to continue to pay property tax to communities for                 
  existing  buildings  that  they  purchase.   He  noted  that                 
  Anchorage taxpayers would be paying the cost and subsidizing                 
  the  building.   The amendment  dealt only with  purchase of                 
  existing buildings.                                                          
                                                                               
  SENATOR  TORGERSON asked if the footage  rented by the state                 
  in the Frontier building was exempt from municipal taxation.                 
  COCHAIR SHARP said  it was not.  MR. PETTY confirmed.  There                 
  was  discussion about  the  fact that  municipalities  could                 
  grant an exemption to taxation.                                              
                                                                               
  SENATOR DONLEY  noted Amendment #1 would apply to all future                 
  purchases.                                                                   
                                                                               
  A roll call vote was taken  on the MOTION to adopt Amendment                 
  IN FAVOR: Torgerson, Parnell, Donley                                         
  OPPOSED: Phillips, Pearce, Sharp                                             
  Amendment #1 FAILED by a vote of 3 to 3.                                     
                                                                               
                                                                               
  End SFC-97 #134, Side 1, Begin Side 2                                        
  SENATOR DONLEY MOVED Amendment #2.   COCHAIR SHARP objected.                 
  SENATOR DONLEY explained that there should be a guarantee of                 
  public access to  parking.  There was  additional discussion                 
  between SENATORS DONLEY and PHILLIPS, COCHAIR PEARCE and MR.                 
  PETTY about the issue of parking.                                            
                                                                               
  COCHAIR  SHARP  withdrew  his objection.    Without  further                 
  objection, Amendment #2 was ADOPTED.                                         
                                                                               
  SENATOR DONLEY MOVED Amendment #3.   COCHAIR SHARP objected.                 
  SENATOR  DONLEY  explained  that  the amendment  dealt  with                 
  parking fees for lower salaried  employees.  SENATOR PARNELL                 
  agreed with the  concept but questioned  how it would  work.                 
  He also questioned  the impact and practicality.   MR. PETTY                 
  did not have  the information before  him to respond to  the                 
  question.  COCHAIR PEARCE inquired if the state paid parking                 
  for lower range employees of the court system.                               
                                                                               
  KEITH GERKEN,  Gerken and Associates, Juneau, explained that                 
  there  was no statewide policy.   Some spaces were allocated                 
  to judicial  officers, others  were on a  first come,  first                 
  served basis.  Some paid for  their own parking by necessity                 
  because of lack of spaces.                                                   
                                                                               
  A roll call vote  was taken on the MOTION to adopt Amendment                 
  IN FAVOR: Donley                                                             
  OPPOSED: Parnell, Phillips, Pearce, Sharp                                    
  Amendment #3 FAILED by a 1 to 4 vote.                                        
                                                                               
                                                                               
  SENATOR PHILLIPS noted a proposed  letter of intent, stating                 
  that he  would rather have  it added to the  language of the                 
  bill.   It  would protect  people  already in  the  building                 
  regarding standard of  maintenance and  parking.  MR.  PETTY                 
  spoke to the concerns,  explaining that they would be  bound                 
  to  the  existing leases  and  would honor  existing rights.                 
  Additional discussion ensued  among all  members present  at                 
  the table regarding existing tenant leases.                                  
                                                                               
  SENATOR PHILLIPS MOVED  the intent language as  a conceptual                 
  Amendment #4.  Without objection,  Amendment #4 was ADOPTED.                 
                                                                               
                                                                               
  MITCH   GRAVO,   Lobbyist,    Frontier   Building    Limited                 
  Partnership, commented that the department negotiated a sole                 
  source agreement to  purchase the Bank of  America building.                 
  He asked if  and when  the commissioner had  made a  written                 
  finding that  the sole source  negotiation was  appropriate,                 
  and if so,  he requested a  copy.  MR. PETTY  responded that                 
  under AS 36.38.050, the acquisition of real property was not                 
  subject to that type of determination.                                       
                                                                               
  SENATOR   PHILLIPS  MOVED  the   bill  from  committee  with                 
  individual recommendations.                                                  
                                                                               
  SENATOR  DONLEY   objected  for   the  purpose   of  further                 
  discussion.  He had concerns that the proposal was unfair to                 
  Anchorage  property  taxpayers   and  suggested  the   state                 
  continue to pay  property tax  on the building.   MR.  PETTY                 
  responded that the state would continue  to pay a portion of                 
  property  tax   for  private  interests  remaining   in  the                 
  building, but would be exempt itself.                                        
                                                                               
  SENATOR  PHILLIPS  expressed   similar  concerns   regarding                 
  property  tax  as well  as  the  sole source  nature  of the                 
  contract in light of the new proposal.                                       
                                                                               
  SENATOR  DONLEY  withdrew  his objection.    There  being no                 
  further  objection,  CSSB  178(FIN)  was  REPORTED  OUT with                 
  fiscal  notes  from  the  Department  of  Revenue,  and  the                 
  Department of Administration (1823.0) and (<914.6>).                         
  COCHAIR SHARP announced the agenda for tomorrow's meeting.                   
                                                                               
  ADJOURNMENT                                                                  
                                                                               
  The meeting was adjourned at approximately 11:12 A.M.                        

Document Name Date/Time Subjects