Legislature(1993 - 1994)

02/16/1993 01:30 PM L&C

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
               SENATE LABOR AND COMMERCE COMMITTEE                             
                        February 16, 1993                                      
                            1:30 p.m.                                          
  MEMBERS PRESENT                                                              
  Senator Tim Kelly, Chairman                                                  
  Senator Steve Rieger, Vice-Chairman                                          
  Senator Drue Pearce                                                          
  Senator Georgianna Lincoln                                                   
  Senator Judy Salo                                                            
  MEMBERS ABSENT                                                               
  COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                           
  SENATE BILL NO. 97                                                           
  "An  Act  relating  to  enhanced   911  emergency  reporting                 
  systems; and providing for an effective date."                               
  SCHEDULED BUT HELD OVER UNTIL 2/23/93.                                       
  SENATE BILL NO. 99                                                           
  "An  Act  relating  to  the  improvement of  state  finances                 
  through  reduction  of  operating  costs  of  certain  state                 
  agencies  and establishment of  certain fees;  and providing                 
  for an effective date."                                                      
  SENATE BILL NO. 106                                                          
  "An  Act  authorizing power  transmission  interties between                 
  Anchorage  and  the  Kenai  Peninsula,   between  Healy  and                 
  Fairbanks,  and  between   the  Swan  Lake  and   Tyee  Lake                 
  hydroelectric  projects,  and   approving  the  design   and                 
  construction costs of  the interties;  and providing for  an                 
  effective date."                                                             
  PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION                                             
  SB 97 -  NONE                                                                
  SB 99 -  NONE                                                                
  SB 106 - NONE                                                                
  WITNESS REGISTER                                                             
  Cheryl Frasca, Division Director                                             
  Division of Budget Review, O.M.B.                                            
  Office of the Governor                                                       
  P.O. Box 110020                                                              
  Juneau, Alaska 99811-0020                                                    
    POSITION STATEMENT: Reviewed SB 99.                                        
  Stephanie Cole                                                               
  Deputy Administrative Officer                                                
  Judicial Branch                                                              
  303 K Street                                                                 
  Anchorage, Alaska 99501-2084                                                 
    POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 99.                                         
  Brent McGee, Director                                                        
  Office of Public Advocacy                                                    
  Department of Administration                                                 
  900 W. 5th, Suite 200                                                        
  Anchorage, Alaska 99501-2090                                                 
    POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 99                                        
  Arthur H. Snowden                                                            
  Administrative Director                                                      
  Judicial Branch                                                              
  303 K Street                                                                 
  Anchorage, Alaska 99501-2084                                                 
    POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 99.                                         
  Mary Lou Madden, Asst. Director                                              
  Postsecondary Education Commission                                           
  Department of Education                                                      
  P.O. Box 110505                                                              
  Juneau, Alaska 99811-0505                                                    
    POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 99.                                       
  Jack Wray, Executive Director                                                
  Alaska Police Standards Council                                              
  Department of Public Safety                                                  
  P.O. Box 111200                                                              
  Juneau, Alaska 99811-1200                                                    
    POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 99.                                       
  Juanita Hensley, Chief                                                       
  Driver Service                                                               
  Division of Motor Vehicles                                                   
  P.O. Box 20020                                                               
  Juneau, Alaska 99802-0020                                                    
    POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 99.                                       
  ACTION NARRATIVE                                                             
  TAPE 93-11, SIDE A                                                           
  Number 001                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN TIM KELLY  called the Labor and  Commerce Committee                 
  meeting to order at 1:30 1:50 p.m.                                           
  SENATOR  KELLY  announced  the substantive  work  on  SB 106                 
  (AUTHORIZING  POWER  TRANSMISSION   INTERTIES)  would   more                 
  appropriately be under-taken in the Finance Committee.                       
  SENATOR  RIEGER moved to pass SENATE BILL  NO. 106 on to the                 
  Finance Committee with  individual recommendations.  Without                 
  objections, so ordered.                                                      
  SENATOR  KELLY   introduced  the  Governor's   bill,  SB  99                 
  CHERYL FRASCA, Office of Management and Budget, to lead  the                 
  committee through the bill.                                                  
  MS. FRASCA explained the  bill was drafted to  improve state                 
  finances by reducing costs in the operation in certain state                 
  agencies,  and  to  authorize  state  agencies to  defray  a                 
  greater portion  of their  costs through  the imposition  of                 
  fees.  She said the title would allow for this consolidation                 
  in the bill.                                                                 
  SENATOR KELLY directed MS. FRASCA to explain all sections of                 
  the bill.                                                                    
  MS. FRASCA directed attention  to the Governor's transmittal                 
  letter in the bill  packet, which, she said, gave  a section                 
  by section description of the bill.   Attached to his letter                 
  is a  fiscal sectional which  associates any revenues  to be                 
  generated by the bill, or costs associated with implementing                 
  the bill.                                                                    
       -  Sections  1  through  32  deal  with  the  Alcoholic                 
  Beverage  Control  Board,  and would  make  the  issuance of                 
  liquor licenses a double fee biennial.  It would lighten the                 
  renewal-related work and spread the load.                                    
       -  Sections   33  through   35  would   delete  certain                 
  duplicated functions in  the Office  of Public Advocacy  and                 
  would enable OPA to charge fees for public guardians.                        
  Number 057                                                                   
       - Sections 36 to 38 relate  to the state's student loan                 
  program   and  would   allow   the   Alaska  Commission   on                 
  Postsecondary Education  to assess a  one percent  guarantee                 
  fee for  all student loans  made under the  Scholarship Loan                 
  Program  -  effective July  1,  1994.   MS.  FRASCA  gave an                 
  example of how the assessment would work.                                    
       - Sections 39  through 43 would authorize  the same one                 
  percent loan guarantee fee to be assessed on loans under the                 
  Memorial Scholarship  Loan Program, the  Teacher Scholarship                 
  Loan Program, and the Family Education Loan Program.                         
  SENATOR  KELLY asked if  anyone from Postsecondary Education                 
  was there to testify, and MS. FRASCA said there was.                         
       - Section 44 would allow the Department of Labor to set                 
  fees,  by regulation, for administering examinations, and to                 
  process applications for special boiler  and pressure vessel                 
  inspectors.  Currently,  there is  no charge for  processing                 
  these applications.                                                          
  Number 090                                                                   
       - Sections  45 and  46,  related to  the Department  of                 
  Labor, would make  the issuance  of plumber and  electrician                 
  certificates more efficient, stabilize program receipts, and                 
  set the time  frame by  regulation.  MS.  FRASCA said  there                 
  would be no fiscal impact, but just evens out the workload.                  
       - Section 46  would also allow the Department of Labor,                 
  by regulation, to charge a fee for duplicate certificates of                 
  fitness, in line with the  actual costs incurred in  issuing                 
  the certificates.                                                            
  SENATOR RIEGER  and SENATOR  SALO asked  MS. FRASCA  to slow                 
  down.  SENATOR KELLY said after the overview the departments                 
  would be providing more details.                                             
       - Section 47 related to the Department of Public Safety                 
  and  would  permit the  Alaska  Police Standards  Council to                 
  adopt   regulations   to   collect   fees   for   processing                 
  applications for state certification of police, correctional                 
  officers, and instructors employed by non-state agencies.                    
  SENATOR KELLY asked MS.  FRASCA if she charged just  to make                 
  an application to go to work, and MS. FRASCA said it was for                 
  processing  applications for  state certification.    It was                 
  agreed there would be additional explanation later.                          
  SENATOR  KELLY  outlined  a  procedure  for  reviewing  each                 
  section after her overview.                                                  
  Number 120                                                                   
       -  Section 48 would raise the  required fees for filing                 
  an  application  for an  employment  agency permit  under AS                 
  23.15.390 from  $10 to  $100, to  reflect the  costs of  the                 
  review done by the Department of Labor for these permits.                    
       - Section  49 again  relates  to the  Office of  Public                 
  Advocacy  and  deletes a  requirement  that has  allowed the                 
  Office of Public  Advocacy to provide guardians  ad litem in                 
  child  custody  proceedings.     She  explained  the  courts                 
  currently do a similar investigation, and it would  save OPA                 
  investigating costs of about $100 thousand.                                  
       - Section  50 would  clarify the  Department of  Public                 
  Safety's ability to recover the costs involved in generating                 
  computerized registration  lists.  SENATOR  KELLY made  sure                 
  someone was present from the Department of Public Safety.                    
       -  Section  51  would allow  the  Department  of Public                 
  Safety to issue  special request  license plates, which  she                 
  described.    MS. FRASCA  said  there  was  a potential  for                 
  generating #300 thousand in revenue.                                         
  Number 144                                                                   
       - Section 52  changes the eligibility for  free vehicle                 
  registration  and  license  plates for  disabled  persons by                 
  adopting the definition  of limited  or impaired ability  to                 
  walk,  which  appears in  federal  regulations.   MS. FRASCA                 
  described the contrast to the present program.                               
       -  In  Section  53  the  Department  of  Public  Safety                 
  clarifies  that car dealers  must use both  dealer plates on                 
  each vehicle.   MS. FRASCA explained it was the  result of a                 
  court case.                                                                  
       - Sections 54 and 58, and the repeal of AS 28.10.011 in                 
  Section 70,  clarify that  mobile homes  are not  considered                 
  vehicles for purposes  of administering motor  vehicle laws,                 
  and  motor homes would no  longer be subject to registration                 
  by the Division of Motor Vehicles.                                           
       - Section 55  explains senior citizens are  entitled to                 
  free vehicle  registration for  only one  vehicle once  each                 
  calendar year.                                                               
       - Section 56 would create an incentive for people to do                 
  mail-in registration  for vehicles by charging an additional                 
  fee of $10.00 for those who do not participate by mail.  MS.                 
  FRASCA estimated  it would generate  an extra $2  million in                 
  revenue as a result of the $10.00 fee.                                       
       - In  Section 57, the Department of Public Safety would                 
  clarify that companies  and businesses, registering vehicles                 
  in  their  company  or business  name,  must  pay commercial                 
  registration fees.                                                           
       - Section 58 was covered in the explanation for Section                 
  54, relating to mobile homes.                                                
       -  Section  59 would  amend  the definition  of program                 
  receipts   to   exclude   money  the   state   receives  for                 
  administering  group insurance health  programs.  MS. FRASCA                 
  explained how the  money reimbursed  by AETNA  is viewed  as                 
  "program receipts," and deposited in the general fund.   She                 
  said  this  change would  reclassify  that money  to "system                 
  benefits receipts."                                                          
  Number 184                                                                   
       -  Sections  60  and  61  would require  payments  from                 
  insurance claims settlements  to be deposited  directly into                 
  the Catastrophe Reserve Account.  MS.  FRASCA  explained the                 
  Division of Risk  Management credits  the general fund,  and                 
  the insurance claim settlement is  appropriated to the state                 
  agency to which the  payment is related.  The  United States                 
  government  demands   that  a  portion   of  such  insurance                 
  recoveries be refunded to the appropriate federal program.                   
       -  Section  62  would give  the  Department  of Natural                 
  Resources authority  to accept  cash or  other donations  to                 
  support   the  system  of   state  parks   and  recreational                 
  Number 213                                                                   
       -  Section  63  would  expand   the  authority  of  the                 
  Department of Natural Resources  to collect reasonable  fees                 
  for services provided in  state parks.  MS. FRASCA  said, in                 
  the fourth year  of a phased implementation  schedule, these                 
  new fees are expected to raise around $400,000.                              
       - Section 64 is  related to the other Office  of Public                 
  Advocacy changes.                                                            
       -Sections  65  and  66  would  amend  and   add  a  new                 
  subsection  to  AS 44.46.025  to  provide the  Department of                 
  Environmental  Conservation  with  increased   authority  to                 
  charge fees to  offset the direct costs  of various programs                 
  designed to avoid  and rectify pollution, to  ensure healthy                 
  and  safe  public facilities,  and  to assist  businesses in                 
  complying  with  local,  state,  and  federal  environmental                 
  standards.    MS.  FRASCA  outlined  the problems  presently                 
  facing DEC.                                                                  
       - Section 67 would  amend AS 47.07.020(b) to add  a new                 
  category of  persons to  the state's  option  list of  those                 
  eligible for federal  Medicaid coverage and would  allow for                 
  reimbursement by the federal government.                                     
       - Section 68 would add to  the list of groups eligible,                 
  under the optional Medicaid program, those persons under the                 
  age of 21, who  are eligible for adoption assistance  due to                 
  special   medical  or  rehabilitative  needs.    MS.  FRASCA                 
  explained how this  program would  allow reimbursement  from                 
  the federal government, also.                                                
       - Both Sections 69 and 70 refer to the Office of Public                 
  Advocacy, and Section 70 would repeal several statutes, some                 
  of which are related to earlier amendments.  An exception is                 
  AS 28.22.181(k), in  which the  Department of Public  Safety                 
  which  would no longer  register vehicles, only occasionally                 
  used on a highway, but would require them to charge the same                 
  fees as full use vehicles.                                                   
       - Section 71  would allow for a  temporary fee schedule                 
  to allow state parks to begin  charging fees, while they get                 
  their  regular   fee   schedule   through   the   regulatory                 
  promulgation process.                                                        
       - Section  72 provides  a transition  schedule for  the                 
  Alcohol Beverage Control Board to  change liquor licenses on                 
  a bi-annual schedule.                                                        
  Number 256                                                                   
  SENATOR KELLY opened the meeting to questions for MS. FRASCA                 
  by the committee members.                                                    
  SENATOR RIEGER  asked about  any consideration  of fees  for                 
  agency services in  the preparation  of the bill  as to  who                 
  initiates the  fee.  MS.  FRASCA said  some of the  fees had                 
  been  discussed last  year by  both the legislature  and the                 
  agencies,  but   there  was  no   philosophical  discussion.                 
  SENATOR RIEGER reviewed  why an  imposition of  fees by  the                 
  agencies concerned him.                                                      
  MS.  FRASCA  mentioned  restaurants  and fees,  and  SENATOR                 
  RIEGER gave an example of his  discomfort.  She didn't think                 
  the fees were  in that type  of category, but she  said they                 
  would look  at them in a discretionary  nature of generating                 
  revenue.  SENATOR RIEGER  wanted to know who was  in control                 
  of the process.                                                              
  Number 291                                                                   
  SENATOR  SALO  questioned  the  reason  user fees  were  put                 
  together in this  kind of a  package.  MS. FRASCA  explained                 
  there was a similar bill  generated by the legislature  last                 
  year,  and it was  to focus on the  whole package this year.                 
  She discussed  the role of the legislative liaison office in                 
  the number of bills that could be introduced, and why it was                 
  packaged as an OMB bill.                                                     
  SENATOR SALO, in following  SENATOR RIEGER'S concerns, asked                 
  about the air quality permits and  the regulation of fees in                 
  Section  66.     She  described   the  annoyance  from   her                 
  constituents on inspections and fees.  MS.  FRASCA said they                 
  were federally mandated  to make  the inspections and  cover                 
  the  costs.    She elaborated  on  federal  requirements for                 
  direct and indirect costs.                                                   
  SENATOR SALO asked MS.  FRASCA if it was better  to have the                 
  fees established in  regulation v. setting in statute.   MS.                 
  FRASCA said it was the direction being followed by the state                 
  the last couple of years, where previously the fees were set                 
  by  law, specifying the  dollar amount.   She  discussed the                 
  difficulty in having  the fees revisited by  the legislative                 
  process,  so  the trend  has been  to  have them  changed by                 
  Number 333                                                                   
  SENATOR KELLY  referred to  a letter  from DAVID  DIERDORFF,                 
  Revisor of Statutes,  questioning the  single title, and  he                 
  asked his  aide,  JOSH FINK  for  clarification.   MR.  FINK                 
  quoted  MR. DIERDORFF'S  suggestion for four  separate bills                 
  and an  opinion from TAM COOK, Director of Legislative Legal                 
  SENATOR KELLY surmised the present SB 99 wouldn't survive as                 
  presently  written and was liable to broken up into separate                 
  SENATOR LINCOLN, in  reviewing the memo from  MR. DIERDORFF,                 
  noted his  comments about  the title  of the  bill, and  she                 
  expressed pleasure the committee may either separate it into                 
  a number of bills or rework the title.                                       
  SENATOR PEARCE questioned the funding of APUC for  one year,                 
  and  how it would be continued.   MS. FRASCA said she didn't                 
  realize it  had just a  one year  funding, it wasn't  in the                 
  bill, but she would check.                                                   
  SENATOR KELLY moved  to the  teleconference network to  hear                 
  STEPHANIE  COLE, a  Deputy  Administrative Officer  for  the                 
  Court System.                                                                
  MS. COLE expressed concerns about  three particular sections                 
  of SB 99 by the Office of Public Advocacy.  First  she noted                 
  Sections 33 through 35 dealing with the charging of fees for                 
  the cost of providing  public guardians - which she  did not                 
  MS. COLE said the court was opposed to Sections 49,  64, and                 
  69,  because  these  sections  would  shift  the  burden  of                 
  providing representation, in certain  types of court  cases,                 
  from the Office of Public Advocacy to the Court System.  She                 
  had  provided a fiscal  note and a  narrative explaining the                 
  court's  objections  to  the  sections  mentioned.   If  the                 
  legislation  was  passed,  the  court  would  be  forced  to                 
  contract for these types of services at a higher cost to the                 
  MS. COLE said  the sections deleting certain  types of cases                 
  from the responsibility  of Office of Public  Advocacy would                 
  erode the statutory  scheme adopted  in 1984, which  created                 
  the Office of Public Advocacy as a more efficient, conflict-                 
  free system for providing state-funded representation.                       
  MS.  COLE, in reference  to Section  49, explained  it would                 
  affect   representation   of  child-in-custody   support  in                 
  visitation disputes,  and would delete  OPA'S responsibility                 
  to provide a  guardian ad litem  or attorney for the  child.                 
  She  quoted  from  the transmittal  letter  and  argued that                 
  Section 49 was misleading.                                                   
  MS. COLE admitted  the court had custody  investigators, but                 
  she explained there were only  a few investigative personnel                 
  and only  in  Anchorage and  Fairbanks. She  said part  time                 
  personnel  would be added to Ketchikan and Juneau.   MS COLE                 
  added these  investigators have such a heavy case load, they                 
  hardly  ever  operate  outside of  their  metropolitan area.                 
  Currently, out of 15 superior courts,  with hideous kinds of                 
  cases, only two locations have custody investigators.                        
  Number 396                                                                   
  MS. COLE explained the investigators  were neither attorneys                 
  nor advocates, and  do not  fulfill the same  function as  a                 
  guardian  ad  litem  appointed  by   the  Office  of  Public                 
  Advocacy.  She continued to explain  why the process was not                 
  duplicated in reference to Section 29.                                       
  MS.    COLE   said   Section   64   would   delete   certain                 
  responsibilities from the Office of  Public Advocacy such as                 
  representing indigent  parents,  guardians  of  children  in                 
  cases  where  the children  are  being committed  for mental                 
  illness, legal and guardian services in adoptions, and legal                 
  services for  emancipation cases.                                            
  MS. COLE explained  Section 69 also  referred to the  mental                 
  commitment of  children for mental  disease.   She said  the                 
  court  would have to find the representation provided by OPA                 
  elsewhere, and could  not do it  as cost effectively as  the                 
  Office of Public  Advocacy could do with  staff and contract                 
  resources.  She explained the problem of  having an employee                 
  of the court appearing in front of the court, which would be                 
  against court rules.                                                         
  MS.  COLE  said the  court would  have  to rely  entirely on                 
  contract awards, which would be more expensive.   Before OPA                 
  was  available,  the  court relied  on  conscription,  where                 
  private attorneys were  told to come into court to represent                 
  the type  of  cases as  described.   They  were  paid at  an                 
  extremely low rate, which did not cover their overhead.  She                 
  explained this type of conscription  was no longer available                 
  because of the DeLisio case.                                                 
  Number 438                                                                   
  In her final point, MS. COLE said the court system is devoid                 
  of advocacy functions,  and necessary  to the separation  of                 
  powers.  This was the reason for the creation  of the Office                 
  of Public Advocacy,  and she warned  of the blurring in  the                 
  separation of powers.                                                        
  SENATOR  KELLY  opened  the meeting  to  questions  from the                 
  committee members.                                                           
  SENATOR KELLY next  called on BRENT MCGEE, Director  for the                 
  Office of Public Advocacy, to testify.                                       
  SENATOR LINCOLN asked if MS. COLE was going to stay on line,                 
  but the teleconference was not set up to do that.                            
  SENATOR  KELLY  addressed  ARTHUR   SNOWDEN,  Administrative                 
  Director  for  the Judicial  Branch,  and suggested  he felt                 
  strongly  about the subject.  MR.  SNOWDEN agreed and quoted                 
  several studies  saying the  Office of  Public Advocacy  was                 
  doing marvelously under  the Executive Branch, and  for many                 
  reasons should not be transferred.                                           
  SENATOR KELLY  wondered what OPA would have  left if certain                 
  duties  were  deleted,  and  MR.   SNOWDEN  said  some  were                 
  constitutional and  some were the  same as offered  in other                 
  states.  They discussed  the role of the public  defender in                 
  the court system.                                                            
  Number 465                                                                   
  MR. MCGEE  told SENATOR KELLY he was  not able to respond to                 
  the  testimony from  MS.  COLE,  because the  teleconference                 
  system  was not  set up  to do  so.   He  was asked  for his                 
  opinion of SB 99.                                                            
  MR. MCGEE clarified that HB 65 before him was  the same bill                 
  as SB 99.  He began with Sections 32 through 35  which would                 
  allow the Office  of Public Advocacy  and the Department  of                 
  Administration to  adopt  regulations  under  which  persons                 
  could  be  charged  for  the  provision of  public  guardian                 
  services.  He outlined a process in such a way that would be                 
  fair to the individuals and efficient for OPA.                               
  MR. MCGEE noted  the controversial Sections  of 49, 64,  and                 
  69, and suggested  the court  system misunderstood what  was                 
  trying to be accomplished.  He said  it was a choice between                 
  what  was nice and what was  necessary.  He had reviewed the                 
  court system  fiscal notes,  the Office  of Public  Advocacy                 
  statute  to  see  which representation  is  constitutionally                 
  required, and where the form of representation is crucial to                 
  a fair adjudication of the case.                                             
  MR. MCGEE did not think it was essential to provide guardian                 
  ad litem services for some people, and he gave some examples                 
  from  Section  49  to  explain  why  he  thought  they  were                 
  duplicated  services.  He thought  it would be important for                 
  the committee and the legislature to examine the appointment                 
  of OPA in cases where  the custody investigator was  already                 
  performing the service.                                                      
  SENATOR  SALO  questioned  the  child  custody  investigator                 
  serving the same purpose as the person appointed from OPA to                 
  the  case, and  she wanted to  know who  served the  role of                 
  being an advocate for the child in a custody case.                           
  Number 520                                                                   
  MR. MCGEE answered her questions in terms of what was in the                 
  best interest of the child and the functions of the guardian                 
  ad litem and the investigator.                                               
  SENATOR SALO asked  for an explanation of  the distinctions.                 
  MR.  MCGEE   explained  the   role  of   both  the   custody                 
  investigator and the  guardian ad litem, and he didn't think                 
  it was cost effective to offer duplicated services.                          
  SENATOR SALO  quoted MR.  MCGEE  as saying  the guardian  ad                 
  litem was  used infrequently,  and asked  him  what was  the                 
  problem.  MR. MCGEE said  infrequently still meant thousands                 
  of  cases and  hundreds of  cases  paid by  his office.   He                 
  described custody cases as being complex and time consuming,                 
  and he describe the  majority of their services as  being to                 
  child-in-need-of-aide cases.                                                 
  TAPE 93-11, SIDE B                                                           
  Number 001                                                                   
  MR. MCGEE told SENATOR SALO he  didn't think there should be                 
  duplicate  services  unless  there   were  some  exceptional                 
  circumstances shown in a particular case.  He  suggested the                 
  committee  mandate  that  guardians ad  litem  would  not be                 
  appointed  in  cases  where  custody  investigators  provide                 
  services, and he gave some examples.                                         
  SENATOR KELLY asked  MS. FRASCA  if there was  some kind  of                 
  position  transfer  from  OPA to  the  court  system  if the                 
  changes  are made.  MS. FRASCA asked MR. MCGEE to answer his                 
  MR. MCGEE proceeded  to Section 64, the modification  of the                 
  existing statutory mandate  of the agency, and  he described                 
  the statute as  having a  number of changes,  each of  which                 
  affects a relatively  small number  of cases.   He picked  a                 
  couple of  examples, one  which would  take OPA  out of  the                 
  representation of adults, when their child is the subject of                 
  delinquency proceedings.   He also described the  removal of                 
  OPA from emancipation cases.                                                 
  MR. MCGEE explained the provisions in  SB 69 were in regards                 
  to parents of minors involved in commitment proceedings, and                 
  he used the same arguments as in Section 68.                                 
  Number 056                                                                   
  SENATOR LINCOLN,  in reference  to  the emancipation  issue,                 
  asked if a 17  year old could go before a  judge, fill out a                 
  form,  and ask for emancipation.   MR. MCGEE explained there                 
  was other criteria that  must be met, and a  lawyer could be                 
  appointed to assist that child.  SENATOR LINCOLN said it was                 
  not a simple task to become emancipated.                                     
  SENATOR LINCOLN  asked how the changes, as  described by MR.                 
  MCGEE, affect persons not in an urban area.  MR. MCGEE  said                 
  they could testify by teleconference, and he gave an example                 
  of a delinquent  child proceedings.   He  didn't find  rural                 
  parents any  less involved in  the lives  of their  children                 
  than urban parents,  and would be welcome to  participate in                 
  those proceedings.                                                           
  SENATOR LINCOLN returned to Section  33 for clarification on                 
  a quote from  the Commissioner of Administration,  where the                 
  fee schedule may be based upon  ability to pay, whereas, the                 
  Office  of  Public Advocacy  shall  charge and  collect fees                 
  established.  Who makes the determination the fee schedule?                  
  Number 110                                                                   
  MR. MCGEE explained the Commissioner of Administration would                 
  be authorized to establish regulations for the collection of                 
  fees related to public guardian services.  He suggested  the                 
  word  "may"  was   to  allow  for  greater   flexibility  in                 
  developing these regulations, and gave  an example.  He also                 
  explained how the fees could be computed.                                    
  SENATOR  KELLY thought there  might be a  consensus from the                 
  committee to pull Sections  49, 64, and 69, and  let someone                 
  put  them  in  a separate  bill.    He moved  to  delete the                 
  sections.  Without objections, so ordered.                                   
  MR. SNOWDEN said  he would  be glad to  answer any  specific                 
  questions,  if  another bill  was  written.   He  asked  the                 
  committee to read the OMB report,  which explained where the                 
  Office of Public Advocacy should be and why.                                 
  Number 160                                                                   
  SENATOR  LINCOLN  asked   MR.  SNOWDEN  about   the  deleted                 
  sections, and  he said the court system's  fiscal note would                 
  SENATOR  KELLY  returned  to  Section  1 and  the  Alcoholic                 
  Beverage Control Board,  and asked  for questions.   SENATOR                 
  RIEGER said he  had no questions  of the first 32  sections.                 
  SENATOR KELLY asked for testimony on any of these sections.                  
  SENATOR SALO questioned  MS. FRASCA about switching  from an                 
  annual  fee  to  a  biannual,  and  whether  there  was  any                 
  consideration in reducing the license fee.                                   
  MS. FRASCA explained  the license  fees exceed  the cost  of                 
  administering the ABC Board, so the excess revenue goes into                 
  the general fund.                                                            
  SENATOR KELLY asked for questions on Sections 33 through 35,                 
  and SENATOR RIEGER  expressed some uneasiness at  the extent                 
  of the discretion granted in the sections.                                   
  SENATOR KELLY asked if there was any support for maintaining                 
  sections 33 through 35.                                                      
  SENATOR LINCOLN  expressed reservations at  making decisions                 
  when she hadn't  read all  of the material.   SENATOR  KELLY                 
  assured her there would be two more meetings on the bill.                    
  SENATOR KELLY invited MARY LOU MADDEN, Assistant Director to                 
  the  Postsecondary  Education  Commission,  to  testify   on                 
  Sections 36 through 38.                                                      
  MS. MADDEN explained how the student loan fund was funded by                 
  bond receipts  and repayment  of past loans,  and no  longer                 
  receive a  general fund  appropriation.   She said about  $1                 
  million in loans was written off each year from death, total                 
  disability, or bankruptcy.  She explained the commission was                 
  seeking to conserve its capital for the long term by using a                 
  guarantee fee, or  insurance fee, to  help off set the  fund                 
  loss.   They had  estimated a  1% fee  on their  funds would                 
  generate about $500  thousand, to  recover about  a half  of                 
  what they lose each year.                                                    
  In  answer  to a  question  from SENATOR  KELLY,  MS. MADDEN                 
  answered  discussed  bankruptcy,  and  said  they  had  only                 
  written off $94 thousand.  He  asked her if the student loan                 
  fund was asking  for a general  fund appropriation, and  she                 
  said they  weren't.  SENATOR  KELLY clarified the  loan fund                 
  could manage well with the assistance of Sections 36 through                 
  Number 228                                                                   
  SENATOR RIEGER asked for some  clarification on the interest                 
  rate for the loan fund, bond purchase, and portfolios at 5%.                 
  MS  MADDEN  answered  his  questions  and  expanded  on  the                 
  handling of their loan funds.                                                
  SENATOR KELLY led a discussion with MS. MADDEN on all facets                 
  of the student loan fund with questions from  SENATORS SALO,                 
  RIEGER,  and  LINCOLN.     They  discussed  the  forgiveness                 
  benefits,   5%   loans,   percent   of   defaults,   default                 
  personalities,  aggressive  collections,  and  the  use   of                 
  private collection agencies.                                                 
  Number 291                                                                   
  SENATOR KELLY asked if the Department  of Labor was ready to                 
  discuss Section  44, but since no one  was there, he said it                 
  would be heard  again on Thursday, 2/18/93.   SENATOR RIEGER                 
  expressed concern over  both an increase in  inspection fees                 
  and in spending from some of the departments.                                
  MS. FRASCA said she  was not aware he wanted  testimony from                 
  all of the departments.                                                      
  SENATOR KELLY proceeded to Sections 45, 46, and 47.  SENATOR                 
  RIEGER expressed the same  concerns on Section 45 as  he did                 
  on Section 44.                                                               
  SENATOR KELLY  had some  questions on  Section 47,  and JACK                 
  WRAY,  Executive  Director of  the  Alaska  Police Standards                 
  Council, was there to testify.                                               
  MR. WRAY explained the council had asked him to request this                 
  section submitted in order for them to have the authority to                 
  collect professional fees  for certification.   He said  the                 
  intent of the council that all  officers should pay this fee                 
  for certification.                                                           
  SENATOR KELLY asked for the procedure involved in processing                 
  applications for certifications, and  MR. WRAY described the                 
  process in detail.  There followed an extensive question and                 
  answer  period  between  SENATOR  KELLY   and  MR.  WRAY  on                 
  certification, professional fees, personnel  checks, and new                 
  Number 362                                                                   
  SENATOR  LINCOLN asked  whether  the Village  Public  Safety                 
  Officers  came  under  the  provisions,  and MR.  WRAY  said                 
  currently the  VPSO'S were  not under  the Police  Standards                 
  Council, which are set by the Department of Public Safety.                   
  SENATOR KELLY asked for a reasonable  figure to put into the                 
  bill rather than  using "reasonable fee," and MR.  WRAY said                 
  he had used the figure of $50 per certificate  in the fiscal                 
  note he wrote  for HB 65.  SENATOR  KELLY clarified it would                 
  be directed  to  all officers,  and MR.  WRAY estimated  the                 
  number for each year, generating about $10,000 per year.                     
  Number 420                                                                   
  SENATOR KELLY  asked MS. FRASCA  about Section  48, and  she                 
  said it dealt  with employment  agency permits, to  increase                 
  the fee from $10 to $100.   SENATOR KELLY suggested it was a                 
  1000%   increase,   and   MS.  FRASCA   said   it   was  the                 
  recommendation from the Department of Labor.                                 
  SENATOR LINCOLN quoted Legislative  Legal Counsel as stating                 
  Section 48 was not within the present title of the bill, and                 
  asked for a  response.  MS.  FRASCA said the  Administration                 
  had asked the Department of Law  to respond to the statement                 
  from  Legal  Counsel about  the  title,  and  she was  still                 
  waiting for an answer.                                                       
  Number 403                                                                   
  SENATOR KELLY introduced  Section 50 and noted  that JUANITA                 
  HENSLEY, Chief of Driver Services  for the Division of Motor                 
  Vehicles, was there to testify.                                              
  SENATOR  RIEGER asked  her  about "special  request  license                 
  plates," and MS. HENSLEY described the current statute which                 
  would  allow  a gold  and  blue  flag instead  of  "The Last                 
  Frontier."    She  had  been  approached by  people  wishing                 
  special  plates  designed separate  from  their personalized                 
  plates or vanity plates.  MS. HENSLEY said it would give the                 
  department  the opportunity  to design  a plate  for a  fee,                 
  similar to the personalized plate.                                           
  SENATOR SALO asked  for clarification on colors  for plates,                 
  and  MS.  HENSLEY explained  it  would only  be  for special                 
  plates such  as the  previous plate  with the  Alaskan bear.                 
  She said  there  were people  who had  requested that  plate                 
  again, but this would only be  for special designed plates -                 
  with an extra charge.                                                        
  SENATOR LINCOLN said she had a problem  with Section 51.  In                 
  reference to designing  a special  plate for the  Centennial                 
  Highway commemoration, she described the extensive committee                 
  hearings to get it accomplished.                                             
  SENATOR LINCOLN stressed strongly the committee was  getting                 
  away from fees and into a new service.   She opposed Section                 
  51 on the grounds of cost.                                                   
  SENATOR KELLY asked MS. HENSLEY why there wasn't a provision                 
  in the bill  to charge  more money for  the special  request                 
  plates, and she said it was in the fee bill last year, which                 
  was not passed.  SENATOR KELLY asked MS. FRASCA  if it would                 
  fit in this bill, and she explained it would cost $30  extra                 
  to get  special request plates.                                              
  SENATOR LINCOLN  suggested there would  need to be  a design                 
  department, and asked  for comments  from the Department  of                 
  Public Safety.   She  also asked  MS. HENSLEY  how the  city                 
  police feel about  having different types of  license plates                 
  out on the streets.                                                          
  MS.  HENSLEY  said  COMMISSIONER  BURTON  was  in  favor  of                 
  changing  the  license  plates  as  long  as  it  meets  the                 
  regulations for clearly marked licenses.                                     
  SENATOR  LINCOLN thought  COMMISSIONER BURTON meant  one new                 
  plate, but  she knew  from previous  testimony twelve  newly                 
  designed plates  were to be  established.  MS.  HENSLEY said                 
  they would have  to pay extra  for the designed plates,  and                 
  she explained plates  had to be purchased in lots of 900 and                 
  over in order to get a price break.                                          
  SENATOR KELLY suggested  it was a  revenue measure, and  MS.                 
  HENSLEY agreed.   SENATOR LINCOLN and MS.  HENSLEY discussed                 
  the ordering of the plates.                                                  
  TAPE 93-12, SIDE A                                                           
  Number 001                                                                   
  SENATOR SALO returned to Section 50  to question the fee for                 
  generating  computerized  vehicle  registration  lists,  and                 
  wanted to know  who would request such a list.   MS. HENSLEY                 
  referred to a freedom  of information bill, which made  such                 
  lists public information,  and in order to  recoup the cost,                 
  they charge $35 per thousand.  She discussed the sale of the                 
  entire motor vehicle tape to two companies and  the services                 
  these companies  provide.   She said  motor vehicle  records                 
  have become useful  information, and she described  the sale                 
  of Public Safety records.                                                    
  Number 042                                                                   
  SENATOR KELLY asked if he could request the name of a person                 
  if he had the license number, and  MS. HENSLEY said he could                 
  - for a fee.  She also described a cheaper way to do it at a                 
  public terminal in the motor vehicle office on Dowling Road.                 
  She said the exception was driver's license records.                         
  SENATOR SALO clarified  the fees  would just recover  costs,                 
  and MS. HENSLEY agreed.   In answer to questions  by SENATOR                 
  LINCOLN on the same  subject, there was a general  review of                 
  the information.                                                             
  SENATOR KELLY decided to finish  the driver license sections                 
  for this committee meeting, and  continuing with Sections 52                 
  and 53.                                                                      
  Number 107                                                                   
  MS. HENSLEY  explained,  presently,  a  handicapped  license                 
  plate can be secured at the designation of  a doctor or from                 
  agencies such as the Veteran's Administration.  She said the                 
  bill  would  use  the  federal  language, which  states  the                 
  handicapped  person  must not  be  able  to  walk a  certain                 
  distance and affects their mobility, to allow motor vehicles                 
  to issue handicapped license plates.                                         
  SENATOR SALO asked if  there was some problem with  the bill                 
  title and  Section 52,  and MS.  FRASCA  provided the  logic                 
  behind the  change.  SENATOR  KELLY clarified the  change in                 
  law would only apply to new applicants, but MS. HENSLEY said                 
  it  would  apply  to  everyone.    There  was   a  lengthily                 
  discussion between SENATOR  KELLY and MS. HENSLEY,  and both                 
  SENATOR KELLY and  SENATOR SALO decided  quite a few  people                 
  presently having free  handicap licensees  were going to  be                 
  unhappy.  MS. HENSLEY  presented the flip side of  those who                 
  objected  to  seemingly handicapped  people  walking through                 
  parking lots and malls.                                                      
  Number 178                                                                   
  SENATOR LINCOLN referred to the  memo from Legislative Legal                 
  Counsel to suggest the  change might increase administrative                 
  expenses to the state.   MS. FRASCA argued the  bill was not                 
  adding anything new and shouldn't increase the costs.                        
  SENATOR  KELLY  questioned  whether  a  person could  get  a                 
  handicapped license for  a spouse, but does  the driving for                 
  the handicapped spouse.   MS. HENSLEY  said they would  need                 
  proper documentation.                                                        
  SENATOR  KELLY asked  for comments  on Section  53,  and MS.                 
  HENSLEY  described the  license requirements  as  a clean-up                 
  measure for automobile dealers.  It would generate revenue.                  
  SENATOR KELLY asked about  Section 54, and MS. HENSLEY  said                 
  titles would no longer be issued for mobile homes, since the                 
  use of titles was lax.  She  explained the hassle of keeping                 
  track of  previous owners of  mobile homes.   SENATOR  KELLY                 
  asked for  a  definition of  mobile  home, and  MS.  HENSLEY                 
  referred  to  Section 58  for  a  definition.    MS.  FRASCA                 
  referred SENATOR SALO to  page 18, line 3 of the bill, which                 
  removes mobile homes.                                                        
  MS. HENSLEY said Section 55 clarified, by statute, that only                 
  once each calendar year, a  senior citizen would be eligible                 
  for  a  free vehicle  registration  and one  set  of license                 
  Number 250                                                                   
  SENATOR SALO and  MS. HENSLEY discussed the  registration of                 
  snow  machines,   and  she  asked  if  Section   54  was  an                 
  appropriate place to register snowmobiles.  MS. HENSLEY said                 
  the Department of Public Safety would oppose registration of                 
  snowmobiles, since they do not want them on the highways.                    
  SENATOR SALO was  thinking of the growing problem  in Alaska                 
  with theft of  snowmobiles with no way  to trace them.   She                 
  asked some related questions about  personal property tax in                 
  relation to snow machines.                                                   
  SENATOR KELLY asked MS. FRASCA how she was going to stop the                 
  floor amendments  on the bill,  and he  asked if it  was the                 
  same as the fee bill last year.  MS. HENSLEY answered it did                 
  go to the floor, and had lots of amendments.                                 
  Number 305                                                                   
  SENATOR LINCOLN asked if the bill was  going to be broken up                 
  into four other bills,  and MS. FRASCA said she  was willing                 
  to work to see some of the parts proceed.                                    
  There  being  no   further  business  to  come   before  the                 
  committee, the meeting was adjourned at 3:25 p.m.                            

Document Name Date/Time Subjects