Legislature(1993 - 1994)
03/11/1994 01:35 PM Senate JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
March 11, 1994
1:35 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Robin Taylor, Chairman
Senator George Jacko
Senator Dave Donley
Senator Suzanne Little
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Rick Halford, Vice-Chairman
OTHERS PRESENT
Senator Bert Sharp
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 71
"An Act relating to the involuntary dissolution of Native
corporations; and providing for an effective date."
HOUSE BILL NO. 280
"An Act adopting the Uniform Custodial Trust Act."
HOUSE BILL NO. 415
"An Act making corrective amendments to the Alaska Statutes as
recommended by the revisor of statutes; and providing for an
effective date."
SENATE BILL NO. 332
"An Act relating to the method of calculating the weight of live
marijuana plants for purposes of applying controlled substance laws
and amending the definition of `marijuana'."
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 223
"An Act relating to credits against certain taxes for contributions
to certain public educational radio and television networks and
stations; and providing for an effective date."
SENATE BILL NO. 256
"An Act increasing the tax on transfers and consumption of aviation
fuel."
PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION
HB 71 - See Community & Regional Affairs minutes dated
4/28/93. See Judiciary minutes dated 3/9/94.
HB 280 - See State Affairs minutes dated 3/2/94. See
Judiciary minutes dated 3/9/94.
HB 415 - See Judiciary minutes dated 3/9/94.
SB 332 - See Judiciary minutes dated 2/11/94.
SB 223 - See Community & Regional Affairs minutes dated
3/1/94.
SB 256 - See Transportation minutes dated 1/27/94.
WITNESS REGISTER
Lt. Charles Mallott, Commander
Investigation & Support Services
Ketchikan Police Department
361 Main Street
Ketchikan Alaska 99901
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 332.
Cheri Davis
Box 5723
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 332.
Lynda Adams
Alaskans for a Drug Free Youth
2557 Tongass
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 332.
Sallie Dodd-Butters
P.O. Box 1223
Homer, Alaska 99603
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposes SB 332.
Julie Cesarini
P.O. Box 812
Homer, Alaska 99603
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposes SB 332.
Margot Knuth, Asst. Atty. General
Criminal Division
Department of Law
P.O. Box 110300
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0300
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 332.
Rob Rawls
Alaska Public Radio Network
810 E. Ninth Ave.
Anchorage, Alaska 99510
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 223.
Helvi Sandvic, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Transportation
3132 Channel Drive
Juneau, Alaska 99801-7898
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposes SB 256.
Gary Moore, Planning Director
Tanana Chiefs Conference
OFFNET from 452-8251
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposes SB 256.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 94-15, SIDE A
Number 001
CHAIRMAN ROBIN TAYLOR called the Judiciary Committee meeting to
order at 1:35 p.m.
SENATOR TAYLOR returned HB 71 (DISSOLUTION OF NATIVE CORPORATIONS)
sponsored by REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD FOSTER, and SENATOR TAYLOR
reviewed the problems of Native land titles solved by the passage
of HB 71. There was a discussion of the number of corporations
involved with this problem.
SENATOR JACKO moved to pass HOUSE BILL NO. 71 (DISSOLUTION OF
NATIVE CORPORATIONS) from committee with individual
recommendations. Without objections, so ordered.
Number 053
SENATOR TAYLOR returned HB 280 (UNIFORM CUSTODIAL TRUST ACT) to
committee and reviewed the discussion by DAVID DIERDORFF, Revisor
of Statutes, on the legislation.
SENATOR TAYLOR moved to pass HOUSE BILL NO. 280 (UNIFORM CUSTODIAL
TRUST ACT) from committee with individual recommendations. Without
objections, so ordered.
SENATOR TAYLOR returned HB 415 (1994 REVISOR'S BILL) to committee.
SENATOR LITTLE moved to pass CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 415(JUD) from
committee with individual recommendations. Without objections, so
ordered.
SENATOR TAYLOR introduced SB 332 (WEIGHT OF LIVE MARIJUANA PLANTS)
sponsored by the Senate Judiciary Committee, and invited LT.
CHARLES MALLOTT, Commander for the Ketchikan Police Department, to
testify by teleconference.
LT. MALLOTT began by pointing out that presently their police
department has been addressing the current mandate that involved
processing a large growing operation of 200 marijuana plants, and
this has entailed many personnel hours harvesting, hanging, drying,
and then plucking the buds and leaves from the stems. He explained
the two hundred mature marijuana plant growing operation took the
narcotics enforcement team approximately 32 officer hours to
process. He thought it was a real waste of resources that could be
better allocated time wise.
Number 103
LT. MALLOTT described the growing operation of 200 marijuana plants
as a large growing operation complete with an irrigation system,
lighting equipment, utility records, potting soil, plants, and
fertilizer. He explained all of these items were photographed, but
the processing just wasn't practical.
LT. MALLOTT hoped there could be a number of plants that would be
the determination as to a felony cutoff or a misdemeanor cutoff.
He discussed having to deal with specific weights, and he quoted
the current law dealing with the finished product. He thought it
would be a big help for small agencies if that could be changed in
SB 332 so the plants could be cut off at the stem and weighed at
the time of harvest. He argued that even thought not all of the
plant was smoked, the plant is still an illicit plant.
SENATOR TAYLOR invited former representative, CHERI DAVIS to
testify from Ketchikan.
MS. DAVIS testified in support of SB 332 explained how she thought
it would save money in law enforcement. In talking to persons on
the street in Ketchikan, she commented they thought the process was
crazy. She urged that the legislation be passed quickly to free up
the police for more important duties.
Number 142
LYNDA ADAMS also testified from Ketchikan on behalf of Alaskans for
a Drug Free Youth, and she indicated support for the bill from the
Governor's Advisory Board on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse, as well as
the Ketchikan Mayor's Task Force on Substance Abuse. She thought
the current process was a handicap for law enforcement.
From Ketchikan, SENATOR TAYLOR moved on to Homer, Alaska to hear
first from SALLIE DODD-BUTTERS.
MS. DODD-BUTTER claimed the police were spying on people in their
back yards. In regards to the 4 oz rule, she suggested the police
dry and weigh one plant, and use a formula to decide how much is
lost in the stems and "things," to decide the amount. She declared
the whole process was fascist and ridiculous. She also thought
cigarettes and alcohol use should be pursued rather increasing
marijuana seizures. She claimed to have been a marijuana smoker
since 1966, has had a successful life, and deeply resents this
intrusion on her civil liberties.
Number 208
Next to testify from Homer was JULIE CESARINI, who spoke in
opposition to SB 332, and reviewed her knowledge of the hemp plant,
including the importation of hemp cloth from China. She demanded
to know what scientific evidence was being used to calculate the
amount of mind altering qualities in the stalk. She thought the
troopers should be freed to pursue people who are committing
vicious and anti-social crimes. She urged the committee to read
the information on hemp, which she claimed was a most healthy
plant.
SENATOR TAYLOR explained the legislation only defines the manner in
which the plant of marijuana would be weighed, and he asked if she
knew a better way to weigh the plant.
MS. CESARINI explained the weight was arbitrary, and should only be
the weight of the buds, excluding the seed, leaves, stalks, and
roots. She said the buds were the mind altering portion of the
plant.
Number 252
SENATOR LITTLE asked if the buds were the portion being weighed.
SENATOR TAYLOR called on MARGOT KNUTH with the Criminal Division
from the Department of Law to answer some of the questions.
MS. KNUTH explained the Department of Law supports the provision in
the bill that will allow the entire marijuana plant to be weighed,
including the stalk. She quoted the definition as set out in
present statute is the seeds, leaves, buds, and flowers, but not
the stalk. Adding the stalk, she said would allow the prosecution
to reach the one pound level sooner.
MS. KNUTH addressed the new language at the time of harvest or
seizure and presented a practical problem of having the plants rot
if not dried, and secondly, it is the State's burden of proof in
criminal cases beyond a reasonable doubt. She said the weight of
the plant needs to be the same at the time the case goes to the
jury as has been charged, and she gave an example.
MS. KNUTH reiterated the Department's support for SB 332 -
especially Section 2, but she suggested the phrase on page 1, lines
9 and 10, [WHEN REDUCED TO ITS COMMONLY USED FORM] be reinstated.
Number 298
SENATOR DONLEY questioned the amount of time saved since most of
the time seemed to be in the drying out process.
MS. KNUTH said it would still have to be dried, but with the weight
it would be more for the product.
SENATOR DONLEY protested it would never get passed a judge, and MS.
KNUTH thought the matter could be addressed by changing the
language to include "dried" weight.
SENATOR JACKO asked about the stalks not having THC, and SENATOR
DONLEY confirmed there was nothing in the stalk that is mind
altering, but the whole stalk is illegal.
SENATOR DONLEY agreed there was a compelling reason behind the
bill, because there is a considerable waste of resources for law
enforcement officers to be processing this illegal substance. He
also agreed there had to be a preservation of the evidence, but he
was concerned there would be nothing done but increasing the
penalty for smaller amounts of the drug.
MS. KNUTH was hoping there would be a difference between processing
and simply drying it, so it remains unspoiled evidence. She said
the prosecution had no interest in processed marijuana, but they do
need the marijuana to be a stable amount.
SENATOR TAYLOR expressed concern for the officer who initiate the
process, and talked in terms of fishing violations where just
samples were saved. Illegal fish are sold and the fish ticket is
preserved for evidence. He questioned whether truck loads of
marijuana would be saved, rather than just samples and the
photographs.
Number 350
SENATOR DONLEY, a lawyer, declared he could beat that scenario in
court, and asked about the fish. There ensued a discussion between
SENATOR DONLEY and SENATOR TAYLOR about fishing violations,
penalties, higher standards, evidentiary process, and the lack of
logic in the different violations.
SENATOR TAYLOR asked MS. KNUTH about processing a large growing
operation, and she suggested Public Safety could provide more
information on these facts. She described her position as a
prosecutor and the manner in which she presented marijuana as
evidence.
SENATOR DONLEY clarified the difference from existing law is that
the stocks would be included in the dried product, and he asked
what the difference would be in the aggregate weight. He wanted to
know how many people would be moved into a felony category, and he
also wanted to know the status of the initiative thrown out by the
superior court. He asked MS. KNUTH if her division had appealed
the decision.
MS. KNUTH said her division had not, but she thought it was a
district court from Southeast Alaska, possibly Ketchikan, that
curtailed it in that area. She explained there was a supreme court
decision that if the court did not appeal an adverse decision, the
prior law would prevail. MS. KNUTH quoted a supreme court opinion
that says it doesn't have binding effect in another judicial
district.
SENATOR DONLEY didn't think it was binding completely, but there
was room to maneuver, and asked if the decision was published.
Number 398
MS. KNUTH explained, at this point, the department has no statewide
ruling that says the amendment was unconstitutional, but she
thought the superior litigation was still ongoing, where the
amendment was attacked by a right-to-privacy group. She said it
was stalled out on the plaintiff's burden of proof, and they
continued to discuss the constitutionality of the suit.
SENATOR DONLEY thought the initiative was still good, but he was
unclear as to whether it made all possession of marijuana a felony.
MS. KNUTH said it became a misdemeanor offense that could be
prosecuted to possess, even your own home, but it would require
law enforcement officers to have a reason to be there. If the
officers enter on a search warrant for some other offense and find
marijuana, prosecution could be initiated. There was a discussion
of quantity cutoffs for marijuana. She said one pound was the
felony cutoff.
SENATOR DONLEY indicated that was a beginning point for a
discussion on the impact of prosecutions by including the stalks,
and he opined there would be more people prosecuted on felony
crimes as opposed to misdemeanors. He claimed there would also be
an impact on the fiscal note with the increase in felony crimes,
and he asked the committee if that was what they really wanted.
SENATOR DONLEY also asked if the committee was actually addressing
a procedural and a time problem. SENATOR TAYLOR thought the focus
was in solving the actual practical problem of handling this
contraband subsistence in the manner in which it would have to be
stored, collected, and saved.
SENATOR TAYLOR turned to LT. MALLOTT in Ketchikan to respond to
some of the practical concerns.
LT. MALLOTT explained the actual harvesting of cutting off the
plant at the base and hanging it up in a room to dry, is not as
time consuming as the physical process of taking each marijuana bud
off the plant and storing various parts independently. He claimed
the major time consuming process is the grooming, and he explained
it took 32 officer hours grooming the 200 plants seized in a recent
raid.
LT. MALLOTT explained if they could weigh the entire dried plant it
would be less time consuming, and he objected to having to deal
with the time consuming procedures mandated by law.
Number 452
SENATOR DONLEY indicated a great deal of sympathy for the plight of
LT. MALLOTT and thought the process was ridiculous. However, he
noted the relevant factor to the amount of an illicit substance,
and gave the analogy of how large a theft is involved in a crime.
He thought the punishment should fit the crime and be done in a
rational manner. He expressed concern the change in the bill would
change the level of punishment which would bring about fiscal and
social impacts. He again asked the committee members what they
were trying to do.
LT. MALLOTT explained in his eighteen years experience, extremely
few cases were involved at or near the one pound level, so he
thought it would effect a small number of cases. His concern was
the growing operation of 50 or 75 plants, where there is obviously
more than a pound, and he thought it was a waste of resources to
continue to process all those plants.
SENATOR DONLEY agreed it was a waste of resources but could be
fixed without the increase in penalty for possession to do that,
and he led a discussion of rational ratio adjustment in a felony v.
a misdemeanor.
LT. MALLOTT did not see the bill as increasing penalties so much as
trying to make it simpler for law enforcement to obtain a usable
weight in a large growing operation.
SENATOR TAYLOR reviewed the interchange with SENATOR DONLEY on the
points of the legislation dealing with the inclusion of the stalks
in the grooming of the marijuana, making a major impact on breaking
through the borderline of felony v. misdemeanor. SENATOR TAYLOR
quoted SENATOR DONLEY'S idea for a formula to allow for the stalks
to be of a certain percentage of the groomed weight. SENATOR
DONLEY agreed with his assessment of the problem.
Number 508
MS. KNUTH questioned MR. MALLOTT if someone had dried weight that
included the stalk making it over a pound, would that still be a
quantity that could be arguably "personal use." Or would it be a
commercial quantity when the amount is over a pound including the
stalk.
MR. MALLOTT was not aware of anyone has been in possession of more
than a pound of groomed and processed marijuana for their personal
use. He described various times at which a marijuana plant could
be harvested, and he gave an example of finding 1000 starter
plants, two inches high, but which might not contain a pound of
useable product. He expressed appreciation at the struggles by the
legislators to address his problem, and he restated his dilemma as
continuously discussed.
SENATOR DONLEY suggested using the standard of so many pounds of
total weight or so many plants, saying he would be suspicious of
anyone with 100 plants.
SENATOR TAYLOR talked about MS. KNUTH'S amendment to insert "dried"
on page 1, line 8, before the word "weight." MS. KNUTH suggested
placing a period after the word "attachments" on line 9 on page 1.
SENATOR LITTLE clarified the weight at seizure would not be the
dried weight.
SENATOR DONLEY clarified the use of "dried weight" in the sentence,
line 8, page 1. He said he was also interested in the using the
number of plants as an issue, and there was some discussion of this
among the committee members.
Number 550
SENATOR DONLEY gave some examples for getting a search warrant for
probable cause for large scale marijuana crops, along with some
concerns that 200 small plants might not fit the definition.
MS. KNUTH explained AS 11.71.040 is misconduct involving a
controlled substance in the fourth degree, which is a class C
felony, and she explained how a subsection (g) could be added to
describe the number of plants, which would be the cutoff level.
SENATOR TAYLOR asked MS. KNUTH if she thought it had to be a dried
product, and she quote some statutory authority consistent with the
need from an evidentiary stand point.
After some discussion, SENATOR DONLEY proposed some provisions for
total numbers of plants, along with some adjustment in total weight
as a felony, taking into consideration the stalks.
SENATOR TAYLOR asked MS. KNUTH to work with the committee and his
aide, KEVIN, to amend the bill for a future hearing. SENATOR
DONLEY admitted to having some constitutional qualms about the
lower levels within a person's home and the privacy clause of the
constitution. He thought there was a compelling state interest in
regulating the substance, which goes beyond the constitutional
right to privacy.
SENATOR TAYLOR expressed concern that persons may have in their
homes a substance which we cannot purchase, transport, receive by
gift, or sale and can only appear on his dining room table by
immaculate reception.
SENATOR TAYLOR thanked all who worked on the legislation, asked for
additional ideas, and promised copies of a proposed committee
substitute to the LIO in Ketchikan.
TAPE 94-15, SIDE B
Number 001
SENATOR TAYLOR introduced his bill, SB 223 (TAX CREDIT: GIFTS TO
PUBLIC BROADCASTING) to committee and explained it was "An Act
relating to credits against certain taxes for contributions to
certain public educational radio and television networks and
stations; and providing for an effective date." He said the bill
was really intended to provide for Alaska Public Radio and
television an opportunity to get off of the State general fund, but
he admitted the process could lose some general funds. He didn't
think the State would lose quite the amount as suggested by the
Department of Revenue, who indicates the fiscal note on this bill
is $122,250,000.
There was some raillery about the funding of other educational
facilities.
SENATOR TAYLOR called on ROB RAWLS in Anchorage, to testify.
MR. RAWLS said SB 223 provides a challenge to public broadcasters
in Alaska to see how effective they can be in attracting new
businesses to become involved in underwriting the cost of
programming, and getting current contributors to increase their
contributions to public broadcasting with private funds. He
thought it would mean less demand on the capital budget.
MR. RAWLS explained SB 223 has the potential to bring substantial
new federal dollars to Alaska through a new CBB funding formula
negotiated last year in Washington, D.C. with the support of
SENATOR TED STEVENS.
MR. RAWLS said as of October 1, 1994 stations which are Native
licensed, located in rural areas, are eligible for a higher level
of federal matching dollars to fund public broadcasting stations.
He said it was an important new flow of federal funds to rural
Alaska, and he claimed Bethel and Barrow will now receive over $25
in federal matching funds for every $100 they can raise themselves.
MR. RAWLS explained the Alaska Public Radio Network is facing
difficult times as well, and for the first time the membership is
looking at cutting back programs such as Alaska News Nightly, or
eliminating the morning news. He said this bill would be a
valuable tool for the network to attract new underwriters, which
would be necessary to continue to offer news and information to
Alaskans.
SENATOR TAYLOR questioned the qualifications as an Native community
entitled to the 25%.
MR. RAWLS explained CBB established the qualifications as having
more than 50% Native Alaskans on their Board of Directors, 50%
Native Americans in their audience, and the other criteria would be
50% Native Americans on the staff. He said it is an important
piece of legislation for rural Alaska radio stations.
Number 045
SENATOR TAYLOR asked if the station had to qualify on all three
criteria.
MR. RAWLS explained there was another requirement for rural
stations if it is a sole signal providing the only public
broadcasting, the station can also qualify for increased match for
the dollars raised.
After some discussion among the members, SENATOR TAYLOR asked if
the station had to meet all of the criteria, and MR. RAWLS said
that meeting the 50% of board members, automatically qualified the
station, but he thought the station had to meet two out of the
three if they didn't have the 50% board members. SENATOR TAYLOR
thought his area could meet those qualifications.
SENATOR DONLEY explained the persons currently giving the amounts
would also qualify for the 50% tax credit, and he didn't think this
met the goal of getting more money for public broadcasting. He
thought it only reduced income to the state treasury, and he
contended there should be a threshold beyond which a present
corporation contributes, in order for them to receive the credit,
as an incentive for people to give more.
SENATOR TAYLOR and SENATOR DONLEY said there was a need to reach
for new money, and SENATOR DONLEY said this formula as in current
statute, does not encourage new money.
In another complaint, SENATOR DONLEY expressed a concern as to
where the process would end, and he explained he had opposed it for
the universities. He listed both universities and public radio as
being worthy recipients, but he also thought domestic shelters and
other non-profits as being equally deserving and perhaps more
important than public broadcasting. He used the proliferation of
gaming in Alaska as an argument for his point that others will want
to be included in the formula of tax and credits.
Number 105
SENATOR TAYLOR said he would prefer to spend his income taxes on
his own preferences, which resulted in some raillery on the
subject.
SENATOR LITTLE moved to pass SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO.
223 (TAX CREDIT: GIFTS TO PUBLIC BROADCASTING) from committee.
SENATOR DONLEY objected as being consistently opposed to credits.
SENATOR TAYLOR called for a vote to move SB 223 from committee.
The roll was taken with the following results: SENATORS TAYLOR,
JACKO, and LITTLE voted "yea," and SENATOR DONLEY voted "nay."
SENATOR TAYLOR stated the motion carried and SB 223 was passed from
committee.
SENATOR TAYLOR introduced SB 256 (INCREASE AVIATION FUEL TAX)
sponsored by the Senate Transportation Committee at the request of
the Department of Transportation, and invited SENATOR BERT SHARP to
review the bill. SENATOR SHARP noted the committee would be
considering CS for SENATE BILL NO. 256(TRA).
SENATOR SHARP reviewed some of the history of supporting rural
airports through landing fees. Last session, air carriers were
contacted and asked if they would prefer reinstatement of the
landing fees or collection of an equivalent amount of revenue
through another means. While no firm commitment was made, the
general feeling expressed was that an increase in the aviation fuel
tax to collect an equivalent amount of revenue would be preferable,
since collecting landing fees was expensive and not always
successful.
SENATOR SHARP said the bill would increase aviation and turbine
fuel tax in the amount of $.007/gallon, which would generate $1.6
million which would be needed to support the airports.
SENATOR LITTLE clarified the amount of the tax, and SENATOR SHARP
assured the committee it was not a tax increase.
SENATOR TAYLOR invited HELVI SANDVIC, Deputy Commissioner for the
Department of Transportation, to testify.
Number 153
MS. SANDVIC praised SENATOR SHARP for presenting the issue, and she
explained that DOTPF undertook an effort several years ago to help
off set the costs of maintenance and operation of their airports.
He said an analysis of the airports supported by the general fund
and determined the airports receiving certificated air service were
most costly due to the mandated federal requirements. The decision
at that time, she explained was to go forth with landing fees
applied to aircraft of 6,000 pound or greater, which are the type
of aircraft that require the additional presence of state forces to
respond in the event of a crash or with law enforcement response
security.
MS. SANDVIC said there was significant opposition to any increase
in fees and several alternatives were suggested including the
landing fees, with an increase in fuel tax being the other. It was
decided to go forth with the landing fees; it was challenged in
court, and was ruled against them because they had not followed the
Administrative Procedures Act for implementing the landing fee that
was no longer valid.
MS. SANDVIC said the preference, as stated by the air carriers, was
to apply a fuel tax increase was the most equitable means of
sharing the cost of maintaining the airports among all aviation
users, and she claimed the proposed fuel tax would result in the
same amount of revenue that would have been coming into the State
had the landing fee proposal gone forward.
SENATOR LITTLE asked MS. SANDVIC about the consideration from the
people in rural areas about the idea of the fuel tax, and she
suggested there were problems in collecting the landing fees. She
asked if the people in rural areas approved of the solution.
MS. SANDVIC explained initially there was opposition to landing
fees and difficult to collect, there was a feeling it was
equitable. She described the objection came from the larger
carriers who felt everyone benefitted from the airport, but it was
felt that not everyone was contributing their fair share; whereas,
the tax would properly reflect usage because it wold be adjusted
according to the level of fuel used.
Number 196
SENATOR TAYLOR suggested MS. SANDVIC meant to use "gasoline use
fee." He called on GARY MOORE, Planning Director for the Tanana
Chief's Conference, who testified OFFNET from Fairbanks.
MR. MOORE asked if there was just an increase aviation tax or did
it include motor fuel included in water craft, which is $.05 per
gallon. Is it just aviation tax?
SENATOR TAYLOR directed MR. MOORE'S attention to the bill to the
language in darker print as the only changes being made, and
explaining the rest of the bill is existing language in law. He
reiterated the only changes were to aviation fuels.
MR. MOORE described the aviation fuel tax increase as impacted on
the villages in his region and he reviewed the Interior regions
which are accessible only by air or river, where any increase in
aviation fuel would be passed on to the customers. In checking the
prices of gasoline, MR. MOORE found the current cost of gasoline in
that region is $2.35 per gallon; aviation fuel is $4.18 per gallon;
gasoline in Galena is $2.50 per gallon, and aviation fuel is $3.50
a gallon, and in Fort Yukon the price of gas is $2.55 and aviation
fuel is $2.88 per gallon.
MR. MOORE thought it was a substantial amount of money to pay for
fuel in the rural areas that are more depressed than the urban
areas in Alaska. He expressed concerns the tax would be passed on
to the rural residents, and although he understands DOT's role in
maintenance, he could not support the bill.
Number 240
SENATOR TAYLOR assured MR. MOORE this was not a price increase on
the existing price of gasoline, but only on the amount of the flow.
He gave an example of an airplane burning 20 gallons an hour,
making an increase of $.14 per hour's flying time.
MR. MOORE asked if there would be a corresponding increase in the
fares to the rural areas, and SENATOR TAYLOR explained the $.14
would be divided among the fares of the passengers.
MS. SANDVIC responded in describing the public hearing process
where the air carriers testified the fuel tax was preferable, since
it spreads the burden out amongst more carriers than otherwise.
SENATOR SHARP pointed to Section 6 as a blackmail clause to prevent
double dipping, and SENATOR TAYLOR referred Section 6 to MR. MOORE
which presents the Department of Transportation from charging
landing fees until January 1, 2000. MR. MOORE said most of his
questions had been answered.
SENATOR LITTLE questioned SENATOR TAYLOR'S use of "kerosine
burners," and he explained they were jets, which were very
inefficient.
Number 289
SENATOR LITTLE asked MS. SANDVIC for a review of the fiscal note,
and she quoted the revenue as $1,725.7 million and would cost
approximately $20.4 thousand to administer. SENATOR JACKO asked
what assurance would there be the $1,725.7 million would be spent
on maintenance of rural airports.
MS. SANDVIC said it would not pay for the entire cost of
maintenance of the airports, and she suggested several ways of
dealing with the problem by dedicated funds or a constitutional
amendment.
SENATOR DONLEY declared he was not supporting any new taxes until
the operating budget was under control, and he blamed the
administration for not proposing reductions in the operating
budget. His only exception was alcohol and tobacco taxes.
Second, SENATOR DONLEY didn't think this was a fair tax, and he
blamed the Department of Transportation for not following the
Administrative Procedures Act for implementing the landing fees
regulations. He said he was voting against the bill.
SENATOR JACKO moved to pass CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 256(TRA)
(INCREASE AVIATION FUEL TAX) from committee. SENATOR DONLEY
objected.
SENATOR TAYLOR called for a vote on SENATOR JACKO's move to pass
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 256(TRA) (INCREASE AVIATION FUEL TAX) from
committee. The roll was taken with the following results:
SENATORS TAYLOR, JACKO, and LITTLE voted "yes," and SENATOR DONLEY
voted "nay." SENATOR TAYLOR stated the bill was moved from
committee.
There being no further business to come before the committee, the
meeting was adjourned at 2:55 p.m. by SENATOR TAYLOR.
-
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|