Legislature(2021 - 2022)SENATE FINANCE 532
04/20/2021 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB101 | |
| SB25 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 10 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 101 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 25 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
April 20, 2021
9:02 a.m.
9:02:08 AM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Bishop called the Senate Finance Committee meeting
to order at 9:02 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Click Bishop, Co-Chair
Senator Bert Stedman, Co-Chair
Senator Lyman Hoffman
Senator Donny Olson
Senator Bill Wielechowski
Senator David Wilson
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Natasha von Imhof
ALSO PRESENT
Kris Curtis, Legislative Auditor, Alaska Division of
Legislative Audit; Nate Graham, Staff, Senator Bill
Wielechowski.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Betty Tangeman, Staff, Senator Josh Revak; Charles McKee,
Self, Anchorage; Michael Chambers, Self, Anchorage; Deantha
Skibinski, Alaska Miners Association, Anchorage; Ray Kreig,
Self, Anchorage; Hans Zigmund, Director, Division of
Finance, Department of Administration; Ryan McKee, State
Director, Americans for Prosperity, Wasilla; Portia Noble,
Self, Anchorage.
SUMMARY
SB 25 STATE GOV'T FINANCES: WEBSITE
SB 25 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
SB 101 ADVISORY COMMISSION ON FEDERAL MGT AREAS
SB 101 was HEARD and HELD in committee for
further consideration.
Co-Chair Bishop reviewed the agenda for the meeting.
SENATE BILL NO. 101
"An Act extending the termination date of the
Citizens' Advisory Commission on Federal Management
Areas in Alaska; and providing for an effective date."
9:03:36 AM
BETTY TANGEMAN, STAFF, SENATOR JOSH REVAK (via
teleconference), introduced the legislation. She read the
sponsor statement (copy on file):
SB 101 is an important affirmation by the Alaska
Legislature of the compelling need to maintain the
vital efforts of the Citizens' Advisory Commission on
Federal Management Areas in Alaska (CACFA). This bill
extends this commission's sunset date from June 30,
2021 to June 30, 2029.
CACFA was first established in 1981, shortly after
Congress passed comprehensive legislation governing
all federal public lands in the state, the Alaska
National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA).
Under the balanced compromise Congress crafted in
ANILCA, 104+million acres were set-aside in permanent
federal ownership as conservation system units,-(e.g.,
parks, preserves, wildlife refuges, wilderness areas)
with many unique provisions enabling Alaskan's to
maintain their traditions and livelihoods,
accommodating the States and ANCSA corporations'
social and economic needs, safeguarding opportunities
for responsible resource development, and facilitating
improvements in transportation and utility
infrastructure. Those provisions included
opportunities for the State, its communities, and
rural populations to access and develop inholdings,
allotments, and adjacent lands; construct and maintain
transportation and utility systems; access, manage,
and use State lands and waterways; retain state
management of fish and wildlife; and provide for
access and necessary facilities on federal lands.
Adding in the Alaska Statehood Act and Alaska Native
Claims Settlement Act, most Alaskans and most of
Alaska are regulated under an extremely unique and
complex legislative web.
CACFA's mission is helping Alaskans navigate these
complex rules and regulations and work with federal
agencies to ensure Congressional intent is implemented
with respect to their interests. As nationwide
directives frequently ignore the Alaska context and
balanced requirements in ANILCA, CACFA serves as a
vigilant and knowledgeable resource for Alaskans to
defend the rights and protections they were promised
as stakeholders. While the State's ANILCA program and
CACFA both monitor federal actions, the State cannot
represent individuals/businesses and CACFA cannot
defend State agencies' authorities. As institutional
memory and expertise is lost, and as agency decisions
that revise our history and upend our reasonable
expectations are deferred to by the courts, federal
managers have little incentive to uphold Congress's
promises to Alaskans. The Sturgeon v Frost, U.S.
Supreme Court case, is an example of a private
citizen's $1.5 million battle against federal laws
being enforced on state land. More recently, President
Biden issued an Executive Order directing that at
least 30% of our lands and waters be placed in
permanent protection status by 2030 (30 by 30), placed
a moratorium on new oil and gas leases and halted
leasing in ANWR's 1002 area. These examples emphasize
the need for vigilance to fight against the erosion of
ANILCA protections by uninformed federal managers and
politicians.
With federal land management policies increasingly at
odds with Alaska's desire to access, manage, and
sustainably develop its natural resources, CACFA is an
essential tool in ensuring Alaskans have a strong and
powerful voice. Over the 62 years since statehood, the
federal government has consistently failed to keep its
promises to honor the Alaska way of life. Now is not
the time to allow CACFA to sunset. I urge you to join
me in allowing CACFA to continue its important mission
by passing SB 101.
9:06:33 AM
KRIS CURTIS, LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR, ALASKA DIVISION OF
LEGISLATIVE AUDIT, stated that there was an audit on CACFA
dated April 2020 (copy on file). She explained that the
purpose of the sunset audit was to determine whether a
board or commission was serving the public's interest and
whether it should be extended. The commission was active
from 1981 until 1999 at which point its funding was
eliminated. The commission was reestablished in 2007 and
operated from FY 08 through FY 17 at which point its
funding was again eliminated. Federal management of land in
Alaska had been widely criticized. Concerns with federal
overreach and unfulfilled commitments led to the
reestablishment of CACFA. The commission was reestablished
to advocate on behalf of Alaska's citizens on issues
related to federal management of land in Alaska.
Ms. Curtis indicated report conclusions began on page 7.
She pointed out that the prior sunset audit was
February 2015. The current sunset audit reviewed the period
from February 2015 through June 2017.
Ms. Curtis reported that beginning in FY 17 funding for
CACFA had not been a priority - not a consistent priority
for the governor or the legislature. Both entities had
funded the commission at different times. Funding for the
commission in FY 17 was approved by the legislature but
vetoed by the governor. Funding for the commission for FY
18 and FY 19 was not included in the governor's request or
in the final operating bills. The legislature approved
funding in FY 20 but the governor again vetoed the
appropriation. The governor's amended FY 21 included
funding for the commission, but it was not part of the
operating bill.
Ms. Curtis continued that overall, the audit concluded that
from the date of the prior sunset through June 2017 the
commission operated effectively and did not significantly
duplicate the activities of other entities. The audit also
concluded that there was a continued public need for the
commission and recommended an 8-year extension. The audit
found that when CACFA was active, the executive director
monitored the federal register for new information related
to CACFA's mission, provided comments on proposed changes,
and brought relevant information to the commission's
attention. If determined necessary, CACFFA sent a comment
letter to the applicable federal agency. Comment letters
formally summarized CACFA's concerns with proposed
management plans and changes to regulations and laws. The
commission sent 14 comment letters and testified 4 times
from February 2015 through August 2016 - indicative of a
very active commission. Letters and testimony were directed
to federal agencies and congressional subcommittees.
Ms. Curtis added that CACFA invited federal agencies to
present information and discuss federal plans and policies
via panel discussions to help facilitate communication
between the public, state, and federal agencies. Meetings
generally lasted from 1 to 2 days and included multiple
presentations from individuals representing federal
agencies such as the U.S. National Park Service, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife, the Bureau of Land Management, and state
agencies like the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and
the Department of Fish and Game (DFG).
Ms. Curtis continued that per the CACFA executive director,
the director and staff assisted between 15 and 20 Alaska
citizens at a time with issues related to federal land
management by helping write complaints and requests for
information and by guiding citizens to the appropriate
agencies. In addition, staff accompanied citizens to permit
and informational meetings to provide support and
expertise. The report made no recommendations. She
indicated that responses to the audit began on page 21. The
DNR commissioner concurred with the recommended 8-year
extension.
9:10:38 AM
Senator Olson had heard Ms. Curtis discuss the
effectiveness of the commission while it was funded. He
asked her to provide an example of a significant effect the
commission had regarding federal overreach.
Ms. Curtis replied that one thing that impressed her most
about the commission was how it advocated on behalf of
citizens. The complexity of the Alaska National Interest
Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), the Alaska Native Claims
Settlement Act (ANCSA), and the Federal Land Act, was a
challenge for the average citizen to wade through and
decipher. The commission was advocating on behalf of
Alaska's citizens. She was extremely impressed with how the
commission was hands on with the average person needing
assistance.
Co-Chair Bishop indicated someone from DNR was online and
available for questions.
Senator Olson commented that in looking at the commission
make up there was a lack of ANCSA representation. He asked
why more native corporation folks were not involved.
Ms. Curtis responded that the commission was composed of 6
appointees of the governor, 3 from each body of the
legislature including 1 House member and 1 Senate member.
The audit did not investigate the makeup of the board.
9:13:07 AM
Co-Chair Bishop OPENED public testimony.
CHARLES MCKEE, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
testified in support of the bill but did not understand how
the legislation would be funded without additional resource
extraction.
9:16:39 AM
MICHAEL CHAMBERS, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
testified in support of SB 101 and the funding of CACFA. He
was aware the commission operated on $285,000, the bulk of
which went to the intellectual property of the lawyer
involved in the case. He referred to the Alaska State Lands
Advisory Group (ASLAG) report which could be found on DNR's
website and recommended that members read it. The 53-page
report was put together under the chairmanship of Mr. Mead
Treadwell regarding the violations of the federal
government around ANILCA. He reported that since 1980, the
federal government had violated ANILCA in accordance with
the State of Alaska over 2000 times. The state's sovereign
nature had been violated several times, and the commission
stood in support of recognizing the violations and bringing
them to a public format. He thought it was important to
understand and recognize that in the ANILCA report there
was a "no more" clause. He opined that having CACFA intact
was essential to protecting Alaska's sovereign rights.
9:18:57 AM
DEANTHA SKIBINSKI, ALASKA MINERS ASSOCIATION, ANCHORAGE
(via teleconference), spoke in support of extending the
sunset of CACFA. The commission was initially created a
year after the passage of ANILCA to give Alaskans a voice
in navigating the complex land management issues in Alaska.
Ms. Skibinski continued that the state's largest landlord
was not the state. It was the U.S. Department of Interior
with large swaths owned and managed by the U.S. Department
of Agriculture and the U.S. Forest Service. She noted that
there was a secretarial order signed on the previous Friday
by Interior Secretary Holland that revoked the following
previous secretarial orders on the National Petroleum
Reserve Alaska (NPRA), American Energy Independence,
America First Offshore Energy Strategy, and streamlining
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) policy reviews.
She indicated that the introductory conversation included
some great information about the 30/30 initiative.
Ms. Skibinski continued that the orders and other
initiatives were massive land management actions that
required hours of reading and research to fully understand
the implications to all Alaskans. She suggested that for
many years CACFA had been the entity to keep up with the
information. The Alaska Miners Association thought it was
more critical than ever for the commission to be engaged in
identifying the impacts of federal actions coming from the
current administration. She believed SB 101 was a great
start keeping CACFA in statute and addressing the issues.
She noted having a letter on record and urged members to
pass the bill out of committee.
9:21:03 AM
RAY KREIG, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), spoke in
support of SB 101. He reported that in 1978 when President
Carter declared national monuments across Alaska as a
precursor to ANILCA, he owned two properties - one near Mt.
McKinley National Park and one in the Upper Yukon River
area. He noted Alaskans having had a huge problem with
federal and state interface because of the action. He
learned about CACFA being proposed, testified, and followed
the legislation at the beginning of CACFA when Betty
Fehrenkamp was carrying it 40 years prior. Since then, he
had watched CACFA become an effective and economic means of
helping citizens deal with federal overreach. He urged the
legislature to extend CACFA's existence and to support it
financially.
9:23:34 AM
Co-Chair Bishop CLOSED public testimony.
Co-Chair Bishop stated that the amendment deadline was
Friday, April 23, 2021 at 12:00 P.M.
Co-Chair Stedman commented that the funding for CACFA in
the amount of $178,000 was not insurmountable and would be
money well spent.
SB 101 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
SENATE BILL NO. 25
"An Act relating to the establishment and maintenance
of an Internet website providing information on state
government financial transactions and specifying the
information to be made available on the website."
9:24:57 AM
SENATOR BILL WIELECHOWSKI, SPONSOR, introduced the bill.
Senate Bill 25 would create a publicly searchable online
checkbook. The state currently had an excel spreadsheet
that could be downloaded. However, it was extremely
difficult to download and very slow to operate. It was not
intuitive and did not provide much information. It was also
not easily searchable.
Senator Wielechowski continued that all of the things he
mentioned had led to the State of Alaska receiving a grade
of F from groups that monitored access to government
information. In the supporting documents there was a report
from the United States Public Interest Research Group, a
non-partisan organization, which rated states on financial
transparency. The organization had given Alaska an F in 5
out of the previous 6 years. Alaska was currently ranked
49th out of the 50 states in terms of access to the state's
financial information. In the prior spring the Department
of Administration (DOA) removed the state's checkbook from
the website. The information was back online after the most
recent hearing in the Senate State Affairs Committee. The
committee was displeased that the checkbook had been taken
down.
Senator Wielechowski asserted that Alaska was effectively
the least transparent state in the United States when it
came to providing access to government financial
information. The bill was easy to implement, as the
financial information was already collected by the state.
It was simply a matter of someone putting together a
publicly searchable website. He noted that when the website
was taken down, he had his staff build an online checkbook
which took about a day and a half. His staff's version was
not as sophisticated as he would have liked, but the
state's talented IT staff would likely be able to get the
task done with ease. The bill had widespread support. He
had introduced a bill in 2009 that was almost identical
which passed in the Senate but not in the House in the
final days of session. One of the arguments against it was
that it was not needed because the state had already
started doing it once the bill had been proposed. However,
currently it was needed since the administration had taken
it down.
Senator Wielechowski relayed there were a couple of reasons
why he thought the legislation could save the state in the
long run. First, it allowed the public to see where state
money was being spent and suggest efficiencies. He had
heard from businesses and contractors who supported the
bill because it allowed them to see the amounts of their
competitors' contracts which would encourage more
competitive bids to the state and save the state money.
Currently, anyone who wanted information from the state had
to submit a request. In other states where there were more
sophisticated online checkbooks, it saved state resources.
Instead of people having to submit formal requests for
information, they would be able to go online and get the
information themselves. It would reduce the efforts of
state employees having to obtain the information in
response to formal requests. He argued that the bill was a
common-sense piece of legislation and urged members'
support.
Senator Olson wondered what other states did to try to make
an online format more user friendly for looking at the
state's finances.
Senator Wielechowski noted that Ohio was one of the best
states in terms of its access to state financial records
online. He had talked to the department responsible for the
State of Ohio's checkbook online to find out more. He
deferred to his staff to provide additional insight.
9:29:59 AM
NATE GRAHAM, STAFF, SENATOR BILL WIELECHOWSKI, replied that
in Alaska if a member of the public wanted to see the
state's financial transactions, they had to download an
Excel spreadsheet that had 100,000 or more lines of data
and search individually from the downloaded Excel sheet for
the expenses they wanted to see. States like Ohio had a
tool similar to a Google search where a person could type
in a department or a vendor and the expenses would
automatically pop up. Ohio used a system that did not use a
giant Excel spreadsheet. The process was all online and it
was easy to extract the necessary data. He suggested the
search was similar to the one used on Alaska Public Offices
Commission's (APOC) website.
Senator Wilson directed a question to DOA.
9:31:44 AM
HANS ZIGMUND, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION (via teleconference), introduced himself.
Senator Wilson asked about the fiscal note and the new
software upgrade to IRIS which was expected to conclude in
FY 22. It would have to automatically be placed into the
reporting requirement. He wondered if the new upgrade of
IRIS already included a searchability function or whether
it would be an additional cost. It looked like the
additional consulting and development costs were expected
to be $40,400. However, the fiscal note was zero. He
wondered if the costs of the reporting requirement were
already included.
Mr. Zigmund responded that it was an additional fee. The
IRIS upgrade was expected to conclude in January 2022 and
was being paid for with the capital appropriations that had
already been provided to the Division of Finance. The
expense was a separate capability that required a separate
capital expenditure. The monies that were in the online
checkbook bill were for the servers and data visualization
software that the state would be using to overcome some of
the challenges that Senator Wielechowski presented in his
testimony. For example, the current checkbook was not as
visually appealing or as easily searchable as Ohio's.
Mr. Zigmund continued that part of what the department
intended to do was utilize software licenses and servers
through the Office of Information Technology and would be
ongoing operating expenses. There were also development
costs for creating an online checkbook. The complexities of
creating an online checkbook came from a number of
different areas. He explained that when the Division of
Finance was working with the data, they started at a level
below what the public would see. The state had to do mass
data for confidentiality, aggregate confidential payments,
and avoid disclosure of anything that could not be
disclosed. He also noted that conversations with the State
of Ohio also highlighted some of the challenges they
experienced in building their online checkbooks so that
things like child welfare payments and victim restitutions
were not improperly disclosed. The division would be using
additional resources from CGI to help with the development
beyond the cost of the IRIS upgrade.
Senator Wilson wondered whether the vendor in Ohio would be
the same vendor in Alaska.
Mr. Zigmund replied in the negative.
Senator Bishop asked Mr. Graham to walk through the
sectional analysis of the bill.
9:36:11 AM
Mr. Graham reviewed the Sectional Analysis (copy on file):
Section 1
Names the act "the Alaska Online Checkbook Act."
Section 2
Adopts legislative findings and intent:
Subsection (a) establishes that this bill is
intended to allow people identify and discover
state revenue and expenditures.
Subsection (b) requires that this act by
interpreted in favor of disclosure and
transparency.
Subsection (c) finds that state revenue and
expenditures must be accounted for and easily
accessible to the public in order to maintain a
fair and open government.
Subsection (d) adopts intent that the state
should strive to create a user-friendly website
that gives the public access to the state's
financial information in a centralized location.
Section 3
Requires that the Department of Administration to make
the financial transactions of the state and the annual
audit available electronically for use in the public
finance internet website.
Section 4
Creates a new AS 37.05.215.
AS 37.05.215 (a) Requires the Department of
Administration to develop operate and maintain a
searchable, free to the public, website that
provides financial information available from the
central accounting system or the annual financial
report.
AS 37.05.215 (a) (1)-(3) Requires the following
information and transactions to be posted on the
online check book website and monthly state
income including:
? Receipts or deposits by a state agency
into a fund or account established within
the state treasury.
? Proceeds from taxes received, categorized
by source type, including compulsory
contributions imposed by the state for the
purpose of financing services.
? Agency earnings including amounts
collected for sales or services, licenses,
or permits issued, or otherwise received by
an agency.
? Revenue received for the use of state
money or property including interest and
lease payments gifts, donations and federal
receipts and other revenue.
Expenditures including:
? The names and locations of any persons to
whom payment was made.
? The amounts of the expenditures disbursed.
? The type of transaction, by account code,
including the purpose of the expenditure.
? Other information specified by the
department.
The balance of the following state accounts:
? Statutory Budget Reserve.
? Constitutional Budget Reserve.
? Permanent Fund Earnings Reserve Account.
AS 37.05.215 (a) (4)-(7) Requires the following
information be posted on the online check book
website and updated monthly:
The amount deposited into the Permanent Fund from
all mineral lease rentals, royalties, royalty
sale proceeds, federal mineral revenue sharing
payments, and bonuses received by the state.
State revenue and expenditures, summarized by:
General fund revenue sources categorized by
function, department, and account.
Total general fund income compared to
expenditures.
Total assets compared to liabilities at the end
of the fiscal year.
For the preceding 10 years, by fiscal year the
following:
? The number of state employees by
department.
? The number of independent contractors
engaged by the state by department.
? The total long-term debt owed by the
state.
? Total general fund expenditures.
? All general fund payroll by department.
AS 37.05.215 (b) Describes the reporting
requirements for the previous subsection.
AS 37.05.215 (c)(1) Requires that the website
have reference materials to assist the public in
understanding the financial provided on the
website.
AS 37.05.215 (c)(2) Requires the website to
have a feature that allows users to search for
information on the website by keyword and
recipient.
AS 37.05.215 (c)(3) Requires the site to have a
link to the website of the Legislative Audit
Division. The site must also include electronic
copies of information related to state service
procurement contracts, including compensation and
contract length and of information related to
independent contractors engaged by the state, by
state agency, including compensation and contract
length.
AS 37.05.215 (d) Requires the Department of
Revenue and other state agencies that use the
central accounting system to provide information
to the Department of Administration that is
necessary to comply with this act.
AS 37.05.215 (e) Clarifies that this bill will
not require the disclosure of information that is
confidential under state or federal law and
requires that aggregated information be disclosed
if it can properly protect confidentiality
AS 37.05.215 (f) Defines "expenditure,"
"searchable Internet website," and "state
agency."
Section 5
Requires the website to be operating on or before
October 1, 2022.
Section 6
Requires information from the previous fiscal year be
on the website by October 1, 2023 and requires site to
be updated.
Requires the Department of Administration to continue
to make their current Alaska Checkbook Online Internet
website operational until the bill goes into effect.
Transitional Provisions
Requires the Department of Administration to continue
to maintain their current online checkbook, until
section 4 of this act take effect.
9:42:05 AM
Senator Hoffman pointed to page 5, and the definition of
"expenditure." He remarked that at the end of each fiscal
year the State of Alaska had encumbrances that committed to
making payments of substantial amounts. He did not see
encumbrances as a category. He wondered why it had not been
included in the definition of expenditure.
Mr. Graham would have to get back with an answer. There
were a few issues with the expenditure that Senator
Wielechowski was trying to address. For example, a
Permanent Fund Dividend would be included, yet it was not
the intent to list every Alaskan who was paid a PFD in the
checkbook. There were some issues that still needed to be
resolved.
Senator Hoffman noted that it was not a small item, rather
it was huge. Individuals would not see the total amount
until an encumbrance was paid. He suggested that
encumbrances be included in the expenditures to provide
Alaskans a clear picture of committed monies. He provided
an example of building a school. At the halfway mark of a
project $10 million was expended, but $20 million was
appropriated. The appropriation amount was important
information for the public to know about as well as the
amount already expended for the school project. Both pieces
of information were critical for transparency.
Co-Chair Stedman added to the topic of accrual. He thought
it was also significant when looking at the state's
savings. For example, the Constitutional Budget Reserve
(CBR) had encumbrances, and it was nice to know about
available cash balances. He wanted to avoid as much
misinformation as possible.
9:46:10 AM
Co-Chair Bishop asked if the bill sponsor had any anecdotal
or analytical figures regarding the traffic accessing the
checkbook in a given year.
Mr. Graham deferred to Mr. Zigmund.
Mr. Zigmund replied that he would have to research the
answer and get back to the committee.
Senator Wilson asked if the bill sponsor would consider
including the reimbursable service agreements (RSAs). He
was aware of one department having about $17 million of
unbudgeted RSAs. He wondered if it had been a consideration
and why it was excluded.
Mr. Graham agreed to provide the information.
Co-Chair Bishop asked Mr. Graham if he understood the
senator's question.
Mr. Graham replied in the affirmative.
9:48:00 AM
Co-Chair Bishop OPENED public testimony.
RYAN MCKEE, STATE DIRECTOR, AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY,
WASILLA (via teleconference), testified in support of the
bill. Senate Bill 25 would create a free searchable website
that would provide Alaskans with easy access to detailed
and comprehensive information on state spending. It would
encourage better understanding of state operations and
ultimately reduce waste and ensure that funding was
directed to the state's most important needs. All 50 states
operated websites that made information on state
expenditures and revenue open to the public. However,
compared to other states, Alaska's website was ranked as
one of the worst in the nation. Additionally, the state's
online checkbook website removed all of FY 20 expenses and
has not been updated in nearly a year. Although the state
had an online checkbook, it did not provide any big picture
context about state expenditures versus revenue. The
checkbook codified in law.
Mr. McKee continued that the ability to see how Alaska's
government used public funding was fundamental to
transparency, bolstered public confidence in government,
and promoted fiscal responsibility. Americans For
Prosperity also believed that if the state maintained a
better website, it could save the state time and money.
State employees currently spent time responding to freedom
of information requests for public information that could
and should already be accessible online. It was his hope
that the state and federal government would champion
economic opportunity-focused reforms that allowed Alaskans
to keep more of their hard-earned paychecks and recover
stronger from COVID-19. He encouraged the Senate Finance
Committee to pass the legislation.
9:50:27 AM
PORTIA NOBLE, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
testified in support of the legislation. She was grateful
for Senator Wielechowski's approach to giving Alaskans more
access and transparency. Nearly every state in the nation
had some kind of transparency website including Alaska.
However, some websites were better than others. Alaskans
deserved to know exactly how tax dollars were being spent.
The checkbook site would be a user-friendly tool that would
help Alaskans understand where public dollars were being
used. More importantly, her hope was that the bill would
help elected officials root out wasteful government
spending. Increasing transparency and accountability was
key to restoring trust in government and to not be a
partisan issue. She was grateful that Senator Wielechowski
addressed the concerns of the former commissioner of DOA
regarding the number of independent contractors engaged by
each agency and the total long-term debt owed by the
agencies. She reiterated her support for SB 25.
9:52:10 AM
Co-Chair Bishop CLOSED public testimony.
9:52:13 AM
AT EASE
9:52:55 AM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Bishop stated that there were many outstanding
questions that needed addressing before an amendment
deadline could be set. He discussed the following day's
agenda.
SB 25 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
9:53:45 AM
The meeting was adjourned at 9:53 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 101 Sponsor Statement-CACFA 3.26.21.pdf |
SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SRES 3/29/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 101 |
| SB 101 White Paper Differneces ANILCA Program & CACFA.pdf |
HRES 5/14/2021 1:00:00 PM SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SRES 3/29/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 101 |
| SB 101 Letter of Support Stan Leaphart 3.28.21.pdf |
HRES 5/14/2021 1:00:00 PM SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SRES 3/29/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 101 |
| SB 101 Letter of Support SCI AK 3.28.21.pdf |
HRES 5/14/2021 1:00:00 PM SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SRES 3/29/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 101 |
| SB 101 Letter of Support Charlie Lean 3.28.21.pdf |
HRES 5/14/2021 1:00:00 PM SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SRES 3/29/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 101 |
| SB 101 Support DOC Newsminer Editorial 11.15.2020.pdf |
HRES 5/14/2021 1:00:00 PM SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SRES 3/29/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 101 |
| SB 101 AOC Letter of Support 3.26.21.pdf |
HRES 5/14/2021 1:00:00 PM SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SRES 3/29/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 101 |
| SB101 Letter of Support CAP 4.2.21.pdf |
HRES 5/14/2021 1:00:00 PM SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SRES 3/29/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 101 |
| SB 101 Letter of Support AMA 4.12.21.pdf |
HRES 5/14/2021 1:00:00 PM SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SRES 4/12/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 101 |
| SB 101 LB&A CACFA Audit Report 4.8.2020.pdf |
HRES 5/14/2021 1:00:00 PM SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SRES 3/29/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 101 |
| 3 SB 25 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SSTA 2/2/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 25 |
| SB 25 Explanation of Changes V.a to V.b.pdf |
SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SFIN 1/24/2022 1:00:00 PM |
SB 25 |
| 6 SB 25 Supporting Doc 2 Historical 10-19 Reports Follow The Money.pdf |
SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SSTA 2/2/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 25 |
| 5 SB 25 Supporting Doc 1 Follow the Money 2018 Report.pdf |
SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SSTA 2/2/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 25 |
| SB 25 Updated Sectional Version b.pdf |
SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM |
SB 25 |
| 7 SB 25 Supporting Doc 3 Online Checkbook Examples.pdf |
SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SSTA 2/2/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 25 |
| SB 25 AKPIRG ST AFF testimony.pdf |
SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SFIN 1/24/2022 1:00:00 PM |
SB 25 |
| SB 25 AFP-AK Support Letter_ (002).pdf |
SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SFIN 1/24/2022 1:00:00 PM |
SB 25 |
| SB 25 Responses to SFIN Committee Members re SB 25 Online Checkbook 5.03.21.pdf |
SFIN 4/20/2021 9:00:00 AM SFIN 1/24/2022 1:00:00 PM |
SB 25 |