Legislature(2005 - 2006)SENATE FINANCE 532
01/24/2006 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB54 | |
| HB217 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| = | SB 54 | ||
| = | HB 217 | ||
MINUTES
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
January 24, 2006
9:02 a.m.
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Lyda Green convened the meeting at approximately 9:02:28
AM.
PRESENT
Senator Lyda Green, Co-Chair
Senator Gary Wilken, Co-Chair
Senator Fred Dyson
Senator Bert Stedman
Senator Lyman Hoffman
Senator Donny Olson
Also Attending: JASON HOOLEY, Staff to Senator Fred Dyson; PETE
FELLMAN, Staff to Representative John Harris
Attending via Teleconference: From Anchorage: STEVE VAN SANT, State
Assessor, Central Office, Division of Community Advocacy,
Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development
SUMMARY INFORMATION
SB 54-PROTECTIVE ORDERS FOR SEXUAL ASSAULT
The Committee heard from the bill's sponsor and reported the bill
from Committee.
HB 217-FULL & TRUE VALUE OF TAXABLE MUNI PROP.
The Committee heard from the bill's sponsor and the State Assessor,
Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development. A
committee substitute was adopted and the bill was held in
Committee.
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 54(JUD)
"An Act relating to protective orders for crimes involving
sexual assault or stalking, to notifications to victims of
sexual assault, and to mandatory arrest for crimes involving
violation of protective orders and violation of conditions of
release; and amending Rule 65, Alaska Rules of Civil
Procedure."
This was the third hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
JASON HOOLEY, Staff to Senator Fred Dyson, the bill's sponsor,
explained that committee substitute, Version 24-LS0132\B would
change two provisions. The first being the addition of the words
"and sexual abuse" in the bill's title on page 1 line 2. The second
change, which was requested by the Department of Public Safety, was
the addition of language pertaining to the entry of protective
orders into the State's central registry as specified in Sec. 3
page 2 lines 19 through 24.
Mr. Hooley noted that, rather than imposing new procedures in
regards to the central registry, the language in Sec. 3 would
simply require protective orders to be entered into the central
registry.
In response to a request from Co-Chair Green, Mr. Hooley
communicated that the rational for the inclusion of Sec. 3 is
included in the analysis section of the Department of Public
Safety's February 16, 2005 fiscal note #4.
Co-Chair Green understood the language to relate to peace officers.
Mr. Hooley clarified that the previous committee substitute,
Version 24-LS0132\N, had included a new provision that required
protective order information to be entered into the registry. The
Department of Public Safety suggested that instead of adding a new
provision, the language be inserted into an existing Statute to
which regulations and procedures regarding such things as domestic
violence orders already exist.
9:06:12 AM
Co-Chair Green communicated that the changes included in Version
"B" were recommended by the bill's drafter rather than by the
Committee.
Co-Chair Wilken moved to adopt committee substitute, Version "B" as
the working document.
There being no objection, the Version "B" committee substitute was
ADOPTED.
In order to correct recent criticism regarding his position on
protective orders, Senator Stedman stated that current protective
orders statutes "don't have enough teeth" in them. This is
substantiated by the fact that in one recent case, a woman was
found dead hours after "a particular person" was released from
incarceration. Furthermore, two women with protective orders have
died in his Senate district in the past three years. This issue
must be addressed. He has worked with both Senator Dyson and
Senator Gretchen Guess on this issue.
9:07:45 AM
Senator Stedman stated that he takes "personal offense" to being
mischaracterized as someone who "feels that the State's restrictive
restraining orders are too restrictive. It is actually just the
opposite." He would appreciate his position on this issue to be
clarified with the public.
9:09:01 AM
Senator Dyson stressed that it would be "naïve" for someone to
assume that a protective order would insure the safety of the
person. "It does not unfortunately." While a protective order would
provide another legal tool for arrest in the case of contempt of
the order, it would not prevent "the perpetrator from showing up at
their door or confronting them in a parking lot." A victim should
not interpret a protective order as meaning that they would be
safe. However, a victim should have the right to be notified, "in
real time, before the conditions of restraint of the alleged
perpetrator are changed." While this notification has been
statutorily required, sometimes that notification "breaks down in
execution."
Senator Dyson stated that Senator Stedman has raised a valid point.
While a protective order is a tool that would allow law enforcement
to act, "the order in and of itself does nothing in real world,
real time to protect the victim from physical violence and/or
harassment."
Co-Chair Green observed that several zero fiscal notes accompany
the bill. An updated sponsor statement had also been provided.
Co-Chair Wilken moved to report the bill from Committee with
individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes.
There being no objection, CS SB 54(FIN) was REPORTED from Committee
with six new fiscal notes: a Department of Corrections zero fiscal
note dated January 17, 2006; a zero fiscal note dated January 18,
2006 from the Office of Public Advocacy, Department of
Administration; a zero fiscal note dated January 17, 2006 from the
Public Defenders Agency, Department of Administration; a $4,200
fiscal note dated January 24, 2006 from the Criminal Records and ID
Division, Department of Public Safety, a $10,000 fiscal note dated
January 24, 2006 from the Alaska State Troopers, Department of
Public Safety; and a zero fiscal note dated January 25, 2006 from
the Department of Law
Senator Dyson thanked the Committee, his staff, and the Department
of Public Safety for their efforts in developing this bill.
9:11:59 AM
HOUSE BILL NO. 217(title am)
"An Act relating to the determination of full and true value
of taxable municipal property for purposes of providing
planning assistance to the Department of Education and Early
Development and the legislature, calculating funding for
education, calculating school district participating shares
for school construction grants, and calculating tax resource
equalization payments and excluding from that determination
the value of property in certain areas detached from a
municipality and the value of certain property involved with
oil and gas that is not taxed by a municipality."
This was the second hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
Co-Chair Green noted that the bill had been held in Committee in
order to continue discussion and receive additional information
regarding concerns that had been raised.
PETE FELLMAN, Staff to Representative John Harris, the bill's
sponsor, explained that additional testimony pertinent to the
discussion could be presented by Eddy Jeans, Department of
Education and Early Development, Steve Van Sant, State Assessor,
and Dan Bockhorst, both with the Department of Commerce, Community
and Economic Development.
Co-Chair Green asked for confirmation that Mr. Bockhorst was with
the Local Boundary Commission, Department of Commerce, Community
and Economic Development.
Mr. Fellman affirmed.
Mr. Fellman stated that this bill would provide "a choice to
communities" that are considering forming a borough. "That choice
being that, were there a pipeline or gas property in the proposed
borough boundaries, their value could be excluded from the overall
value of the proposed borough. This would enable proposed boroughs
to find other ways to fund a borough that doesn't include property
tax." Such alternate taxation methods could include utility and
fuel taxes.
Mr. Fellman noted that the State's Assessor, Steve Van Sant, has
developed and would be explaining two handouts: "Explanation of 4
mill Equivalency (Local Contribution for Education) For the
Proposed Deltana Borough" and "The Full Value Determination"
[copies on file].
9:14:26 AM
STEVE VAN SANT, State Assessor, Central Office, Division of
Community Advocacy, Department of Commerce, Community and Economic
Development testified via teleconference from Anchorage and
explained that the Department utilizes Full Value Determination
(FVD) to compare the wealth of different municipalities based on
the community's property tax.
Mr. Van Sant exampled some of the tax methods and tax exemptions
that different boroughs have incorporated. Of the 16 boroughs in
the State, twelve levy property taxes. The Fairbanks North Star
Borough does not levy a personal property tax, however the
Municipality of Anchorage does. Fairbanks has exempted the first
$20,000 of residential property, and Anchorage has recently allowed
that exemption. The Mat-Su Borough exempts up to $250,000 of
business inventory as well as all business equipment; however,
Anchorage does not.
Mr. Van Sant continued that, in order to compare boroughs as
"apples to apples and not apples to oranges", a formula, referred
to as the "Full Value Determination" has been developed.
Mr. Van Sant explained that the FVD formula utilizes "the total
value of a municipality that could be taxed should they decide to
levy a property tax". Once that value is determined, the boroughs
could be compared. The FVD for each municipality is based "on the
full value of all the taxable property within their boundaries".
That value is utilized by the Department of Education and Early
Development to calculate the municipality's "4-mill equivalency"
education contribution.
Mr. Van Sant referred to the handout titled "Explanation of 4 mill
Equivalency (Local Contribution for Education) For the Proposed
Deltana Borough". The top portion of that handout defines a mill as
being "one-one-thousandth of a dollar." Therefore, the minimum
local contribution for a $1,000 property value would be four
dollars. The minimum local contribution for a $100,000,000 property
value would be $400,000.
Mr. Van Sant continued that, as reflected on the lower portion of
that handout, the estimated valuation of the proposed Deltana
Borough would be $182,078,000. This area also includes the Pogo
Mine, which was valued at $125,000,000 in 2005. He noted that that
value would be expected to double when mine construction is
completed in the near future. In addition, the area includes
$194,500,000 in oil and gas property.
Mr. Van Sant pointed out that the "Explanation of 4 mill
Equivalency (Local Contribution for Education) For the Proposed
Deltana Borough" handout also depicts how the Mandatory Education
Contribution (MEC) would be calculated for the proposed Borough.
Based on the Borough's $182,078,000 estimated valuation, the
minimum MEC local contribution would be $728,312. The minimum MEC
for the Pogo Mine would be $500,000. Those two numbers would equate
to a minimum MEC obligation of approximately $1,200,000.
Mr. Van Sant continued that were the oil and gas properties
included within its boundaries, the Borough would be required to
contribute an additional $778,000 MEC. It should be noted that the
MEC required of the borough on the value of the gas and oil
properties within its boundaries would reduce the amount of money
the State would receive under its ability to collect 20 mills on
the value of oil and gas properties. In other words, were the oil
and gas properties excluded from the borough, the revenue the State
would collect from the 20 mills on the value of those properties
would amount to $3,900,000. Otherwise, the State's revenue would be
lowered to approximately $3,222,000.
Mr. Van Sant stated that even were the borough to exempt the oil
and gas entities from its local property taxes, the borough would
be required to replace the $778,000 MEC through other taxation
means. "That's difficult to do if you're talking about a sales tax
or utility tax, or whatever it might be. It just doesn't make a
whole lot of sense when we talking about what we call 'centrally
assessed property'. That's property assessed by the State of Alaska
and in this case the State is already getting tax dollars off of
it." Therefore, were the oil and gas properties excluded from the
Borough's FVD and were no Borough property taxes levied, "this
Legislation is a wash: they don't have to include it in their full
value, they don't have to come up with the money, and they're not
going to be taking any out of the State's pockets."
Mr. Van Sant continued that were the oil and gas properties
included in the Deltana FVD, the total minimum MEC would amount to
$2,000,000. Absent the oil and gas properties, the minimum local
MEA would be $1,200,000.
9:20:00 AM
Co-Chair Wilken stated that in a recent discussion about the bill,
a question arose in regards to borough and first class cities that
do not have property taxes. He referred to language in Mr. Van
Sant's "The Full Value Determination" handout that states "the full
value 'equalizes' the values in all municipalities by measuring the
local 'wealth' using the total taxable value as the measuring
stick." The Fairbanks North Star Borough has developed a market
value system through which to measure the borough's valuation
increase or decrease. Thus the Borough's 4-mill obligation
calculation could be automatically increased or deceased each year.
However, there is no "mechanism in place" through which the
Legislature could annually revisit the valuations of the four
boroughs that do not levy property taxes. To that point, he
suggested that consideration be given to incorporating a measuring
mechanism in this legislation.
9:21:39 AM
Co-Chair Wilken referred to a handout developed by his office
titled "Required Local Contribution for Schools Residents of Four
Boroughs Elected Alternate Method of Payment - Not by Property
Tax". The four communities include the Aleutian East Borough, the
Lake & Peninsula Borough, the Denali Borough, and the Northwest
Arctic Borough. The handout depicts the 4-mill MEC requirement of
those communities' FVD from 1995 through 2006. This handout was
accompanied by another handout titled "Required Local Contribution
for Schools Residents of Six First Class Cities Elected Alternate
Method of Payment - Not by Property Tax". That handout depicted the
MEC based on the FVD of Galena, Kake, Hoonah, St. Mary's, Hydaburg,
and Tanana. Since the assessed values of many of six first class
cities have remained flat over the time period of FY 95 through FY
06, this might be the time to incorporate a system through which to
review the FVD of those communities "that have chosen not to have a
property tax and ask that the State Assessor go and visit those
areas." He noted that Mr. Van Sant had visited the community of
Delta in his effort to determine their FVD, their MEC, and "their
contribution to government". To that point, he asked Mr. Van Sant
his opinion on this suggestion.
9:22:49 AM
Mr. Van Sant voiced support for the suggestion; however, he noted
that due to the fact that he is the sole staffer in the State
Assessor's Office, "It is difficult to get around in the State".
Mr. Van Sant continued that he is currently endeavoring to develop
a model through which to determine the FVD of the Lake & Peninsula
Borough. "It's just impossible for one person to get around in the
State" in addition to having to provide education and training to
the different boroughs and conducting FVDs on cities and boroughs.
To that point, he shared that a recent request for an additional
staff position had been denied.
Mr. Van Sant stated that the Assessors Office must conduct FVDs on
95 cities and boroughs, and "luckily" many, such as the Fairbanks
North Star Borough, have their own assessors who conduct the
majority of the FVD effort.
9:24:14 AM
Mr. Van Sant noted however, that other areas, such as the Lake &
Peninsula Borough, are difficult to get to on a regular basis. The
lack of funding for his Office would be an obstacle.
Co-Chair Wilken asked for an estimate of the number of hours
required to develop the Deltana FVD.
Mr. Van Sant responded that, in addition to an untold number of
office hours, the effort required "800 man hours in the field".
9:24:53 AM
Co-Chair Wilken understood therefore that the effort required
"between one-third and one-half of a man year".
Mr. Van Sant affirmed. He reminded that the Deltana FVD started
"from scratch." This would be the case with numerous others.
9:25:21 AM
Co-Chair Wilken opined that one of the most interesting pieces of
information that Legislators are provided each year is the "Alaska
Taxable" book [copy not provided]. That book provides the basic
information "about how this State runs their government and the way
different areas have chosen through our eleven different ways of
organizing to fund different governments". The creative manners
through which this State of 640,000 people has addressed its local
needs are "fascinating".
9:25:47 AM
Co-Chair Wilken shared being fascinated by Mr. Van Sant's work.
While the work is difficult to address, the information that has
been developed is good and reliable. To that point, he stated that
the "potshot" efforts that have been directed at Mr. Van Sant's
work "have come up unsuccessful".
Co-Chair Wilken noted that while this is a good bill, this might be
"an opportune time" to "up the profile of how we ascertain the
values so that all of Alaskans are paying their fair share towards
education". Therefore, he requested that the bill be held in
Committee in order for this "important discussion" to occur. The
determination could be that staff should be added to the Assessor's
Office.
9:26:54 AM
Co-Chair Green commented that, in that case, the fiscal notes would
require revision. Further discussion with the bill's sponsor, Mr.
Van Sant, the Department of Education and Early Development, and
others should transpire.
9:27:31 AM
Co-Chair Wilken asked Mr. Van Sant to assist the Committee in the
development of an appropriate fiscal note. Were it deemed
acceptable, it would be formalized.
9:27:50 AM
Mr. Van Sant affirmed that he would work on that.
With Co-Chair Green's concurrence, Co-Chair Wilken offered to work
with Mr. Van Sant and others in developing a committee substitute
to address the issue at hand. In anticipation of developing a
committee substitute that would be acceptable to the Committee, he
asked Mr. Van Sant to work on developing a mechanism through which
to determine the FVD on communities throughout the State.
Mr. Van Sant agreed.
9:28:34 AM
Senator Stedman noted that of the six first class cities identified
in Co-Chair Wilken's handout, the small village of Hydaburg might
cease to exist in the future due to a decrease in population and
there being no economic base. He noted that Kake's population has
dropped by one third.
Co-Chair Green observed that that would "change the landscape".
Senator Stedman noted that the community of Kake is over 1000 years
old.
9:30:02 AM
Co-Chair Green asked Mr. Fellman whether the substance of Co-Chair
Wilken's comments had previously been considered.
Mr. Fellman replied in the negative.
Co-Chair Green stated that in order to address the concerns that
have been raised, further work would be conducted on the bill.
9:30:33 AM
Senator Olson asked the number of boroughs that have exempted all
or a significant portion of their property taxes. He understood
that Fairbanks had no personal property tax.
9:31:17 AM
Mr. Van Sant affirmed that neither Fairbanks nor Valdez levy a
personal property tax. The City of Valdez does however levy a
tanker tax.
Senator Olson asked for further clarification regarding the
exemption of the first $20,000 of residential property taxes.
Mr. Van Sant communicated that AS 29.45.050 contains a list of
optional exemptions allowed to municipalities. One of those would
allow a municipality to exempt up to $20,000 of residential
property. The communities of Fairbanks, the City of Valdez, the
North Slope, Borough, the Municipality of Anchorage, the Bristol
Bay Borough, and the Kenai Borough have allowed this exemption.
9:32:23 AM
Senator Olson, noting the lack of calls in regards to this bill,
specifically asked the sponsor about the "local input" from the
communities of Delta and Greely.
9:32:44 AM
Mr. Fellman responded that this issue has been underway for
approximately two years. There has been a lot of discussion. Delta
Junction is a community that is fairly split on the issue of
forming a borough. However, this legislation "is really an issue of
choice"; it would not "force or mandate" that a borough exclude gas
and oil properties "from a proposed borough funding mechanism".
Therefore, people are against the formation of a borough "don't
really care." People who support the formation of a borough have
weighed in favor of the bill.
9:33:58 AM
Senator Olson asked whether the community might be equally split on
the issue.
9:34:06 AM
Mr. Fellman communicated that it would be approximately a 50/50
split even though the community of Delta has changed quite a bit in
last few years due to the development of the anti-ballistic missile
site.
9:34:35 AM
Co-Chair Wilken clarified for the record that while the Fairbanks
North Star Borough does not have personal property tax, it does
have a real property tax. The City has opted to exempt up to
$20,000 off real property taxes.
Co-Chair Green ordered the bill HELD in Committee.
ADJOURNMENT
Co-Chair Lyda Green adjourned the meeting at 9:35:17 AM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|