Legislature(1999 - 2000)
12/07/1999 09:25 AM Senate PRI
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
COMMISSION ON PRIVATIZATION AND DELIVERY OF GOVERNMENT SERVICES
Anchorage, Alaska
December 7, 1999
9:25 a.m.
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Cowdery, Co-Chair
Senator Ward, Co-Chair
Senator Al Adams (via teleconference)
Tom Fink, Former Mayor of Anchorage
Emil Notti
Mike Harper, President, Kuskokwim Corporation (via
teleconference)
Kathryn Thomas, Former Chair of Alaska State Chamber of Commerce
Don Valesko, Business Manager of Public Employees Local 71
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Brice
Bill Allen, Former Mayor of Fairbanks
George Wuerch, Alaska Municipal League
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
Discussion and adoption of recommendations
Reports from the following Privatization Subcommittees:
University of Alaska - postponed
Alaska Railroad Subcommittee - postponed
PREVIOUS ACTION
See Commission on Privatization minutes dated 7/20/99, 8/16/99,
9/20/99, 10/28/99, 11/04/99, 11/10/99, 11/18/99, 11/24/99,
11/30/99 and 12/01/99.
WITNESS REGISTER
MARCO PIGNALBERI, Commission Director and
Legislative Assistant to Representative John Cowdery
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions and presented information
on behalf of the commission.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 99-22, SIDE A
CO-CHAIR COWDERY called the Commission on Privatization and
Delivery of Government Services meeting to order at 9:25 a.m.
Members present during the meeting were Representative Cowdery;
Senators Ward and Adams; and Commissioners Fink, Thomas, Harper,
Notti and Valesko. Marco Pignalberi, Commission Director, was
also present. It was noted that Representative Brice was out-of-
state. Commissioners Allen and Wuerch were not in attendance.
APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MINUTES
Approval of previous minutes was postponed until the members had
a chance to read them.
OLD BUSINESS
MARCO PIGNALBERI, Commission Director and Legislative Assistant
to Representative John Cowdery, noted that the University of
Alaska has not provided sections of its report because Wendy
Redman has been out-of-state.
NEW BUSINESS
Subcommittee Reports
CO-CHAIR COWDERY announced that the University of Alaska's report
would be postponed until the next meeting [December 8]. [It was
later announced that the report of the Alaska Railroad
Corporation would be postponed as well.]
[Most of the information contained in subcommittee reports will
be available at the commission's web site at
www.privatizealaska.org.]
Discussion and adoption of recommendations
CO-CHAIR COWDERY suggested discussing recommendations and
presenting them in alphabetical order.
COMMISSIONER FINK mentioned there are approximately 90 different
recommendations, some short and some three pages long. He said
he believes only a few commissioners agree on one or two; other
than that, there is a lot of disparity.
CO-CHAIR COWDERY proposed going through the recommendations,
noting that there was a lot of duplication.
COMMISSIONER FINK agreed that there was duplication regarding
vouchers and charter schools. Observing that six members were
present out of eleven, he suggested all members participate in
deciding the outcome; otherwise, it may weaken the report or
commissioners who are not present may subsequently disallow the
recommendations that are passed.
[A discussion was held regarding the absent members.]
CO-CHAIR COWDERY asked members if they should proceed without the
representatives from the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC); it
was indicated that the ARRC would present comments tomorrow.
COMMISSIONER FINK, CO-CHAIR WARD and CO-CHAIR COWDERY indicated
they didn't believe the commission should wait.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS pointed out that the merger report is
available.
CO-CHAIR WARD indicated he personally didn't have a desire to
hear any more reports.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS expressed concern about how to meld this
process. She suggested perhaps providing a basis that this
commission could work from, to go forward and make a
recommendation on what type of strategy should be used in the
future, something that a piece of legislation could be written
around. Specifically, she recommended establishing a commission
by another name. She said she had received recommendations on
what the new commission should be asked to produce for Alaskans,
including what services could be streamlined or put up for
competition. Suggesting there are three components, she proposed
the need to have a popular budget format so that all Alaskans are
accountable for the cost of their government. (Indisc.-
background noise.)
COMMISSIONER THOMAS said the third component on the "financial"
would be an independent audit committee. Other subcommittees had
real concerns about how some of the money was allocated. She
also had included some labor considerations because she thinks
the commission would like to give the workforce in state
government an opportunity to participate in managed competition.
However, if they can't easily see what the cost of management is
for providing those services, they of course are burdened
severely. Commissioner Thomas emphasized charging this
organization with reviewing whether certain items should be sold,
such as the railroad, the Four Dam Pool, or things that may be
hanging out there. She said someone hasn't clearly made a
decision for it in the government or the legislature.
CO-CHAIR COWDERY agreed with creating a full commission. He said
we [the legislature] will look for a source of funding and asked
what is the makeup of this commission.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS said she doesn't have ownership to the name
of the proposed commission. Furthermore, she thought the
privatization commission should be charged with (indisc.-
background music). She said she had reviewed issues and thought
the commission needed more information.
COMMISSIONER NOTTI suggested, due to time constraints, that the
[current] commission ought to limit what they are going to
consider. Obvious issues are privatization, the university, the
railroad, the school district and the Four Dam Pool.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER indicated he would echo some of Commissioner
Thomas's concerns. He emphasized that the commission lacks
information and that no in-depth analysis was made in any
recommendation regarding cost-effectiveness. However, he
believes that is what the bottom line of this commission should
be. He cautioned that recommending privatization for its own
sake could end up costing twice as much. He indicated he was
intrigued by Commissioner Thomas's recommendation of another
commission or body or entity but acknowledged the question of the
budget and whether that would create another entity that would
last 10 - 15 years. He said he would leave it up to the rest of
the commissioners as far as what direction to go.
CO-CHAIR WARD indicated that the proposed commission would never
receive the details necessary. Nor does the [Knowles]
Administration probably have the capability of telling the
privatization commission or the legislature what they need to
know. That is one of the problems with government. He doesn't
think it is stonewalling on the part of any administration.
CO-CHAIR COWDERY emphasized that no matter what the commission
recommends, those issues have to go before the legislature, which
may or may not take them up. However, the subcommittees' and
commission's recommendations will give the legislature more
insight. He surmised that some legislators might pick things up
that weren't recommended and go forward with them. Although the
privatization commission can say more information is needed, he
concluded, he thinks the commission should go forward and follow
maybe Commissioner Thomas' recommendation of an operational
governmental commission.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS said it is impossible for the people who
testified to know what their costs are; she believes they are
sincere when they state that. She suggested that the next
organization require other budget components, that the accounting
system be changed to be consistent throughout all [state]
departments, and that there be mechanisms for an activity-based
system. That will allow "us" to know how much it costs, for
example, to mow an acre or to fill a pothole. Furthermore, it
will identify the 16 managers for the three guys out there with
the dump truck and the shovel. The state currently doesn't have
a way to measure that. That is something they can amend their
system to do.
COMMISSIONER FINK referred to the Act which created the
privatization commission and its responsibilities. He said he
reads it that the legislature expected the commission, composed
of mostly nonlegislators, to look into what goes on in government
and how to save money. He said they realized the commission
wouldn't have all the information available. Furthermore, the
legislature wanted the commission's opinion and expected the
members to come up with new ideas or to lend some credence to the
legislature's taking a position. He again suggested that the
commission not vote until all members were present because it
would be hard to get six votes on anything.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO mentioned credibility and recommended that
six members be the majority on passing recommendations forward.
CO-CHAIR WARD concurred that the final report should have six
votes but said nothing should stop the process.
[There was further discussion of whether to move the
recommendations.]
COMMISSIONER VALESKO explained that if a majority of four [of
those currently present] made a recommendation, and seven
commissioners didn't like the recommendation when the final
report went out, they could say that recommendations 1, 5 and 7
should not be included, for example.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS pointed out that when the subcommittees sat
at the table with their reports, a high number said, "We're still
not sure if we have all the information to make this
recommendation - all the numbers that we needed, everything that
we needed." She also indicated it has been difficult for the
commission to weigh subcommittee recommendations and those from
the administration. She mentioned that she had attended numerous
subcommittee and commission meetings.
TAPE 99-22, SIDE B
CO-CHAIR COWDERY suggested that Mr. Pignalberi read the
recommendations.
MR. PIGNALBERI indicated the commission might reach a consensus
on six recommendations.
University Land Grant
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER noted that the university land endowment
passed the legislature three times but was vetoed by the
governor. He pointed out that either Congressman Murkowski or
Young is trying to get the federal government to throw in 250,000
acres - to match that - to add to the university's land grant.
CO-CHAIR WARD said Alaska has a land-based university without
enough land to operate. He then moved to adopt Commissioner Fink
recommendation (13), "that the commission request the legislature
to administrate - to take whatever action to transfer the 250,000
acres to the university for a land base."
COMMISSIONER VALESKO objected for the purpose of discussion. He
requested clarification about the specific land to be
transferred.
COMMISSIONER FINK asked what was in the language of the
legislation.
CO-CHAIR WARD explained that previous language instructed the
commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources, Division of
Lands, to identify those lands from state lands that were to be
transferred - not federal lands or any other lands. He further
stated, "We have 103 million acres, and we have 90 million acres
that they can select from. ... What we're doing is we're
fulfilling, under our obligation, to a land grant college." He
reiterated that the governor had vetoed the legislation.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO said he is hesitant to vote in support of
this recommendation because he has too many questions about what
land they are referring to.
CO-CHAIR WARD pointed out that legislation introduced by Senator
[Robin] Taylor had proposed to take every "Section 16" out of
every township, if available. He suggested that the land issue
should be left up to the legislature and the administration.
Upon a roll call vote, the motion to adopt [Fink-(13)] carried by
a vote of 6-1: Commissioners Fink, Harper, Notti and Thomas, and
Co-Chairs Ward and Cowdery, voted "yea"; Commissioner Valesko
voted "nay."
Sale of the Matanuska Maid Dairy
CO-CHAIR WARD moved recommendations Fink-(11) and Cowdery-(6), to
sell the Matanuska Maid [Dairy]; he asked unanimous consent.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO objected, saying he hadn't seen
documentation that this would save the state money. In addition,
it provides a service that the legislature decided to put in
years ago.
CO-CHAIR WARD stated his understanding that the subcommittee had
thought it would save money; he suggested accepting their
recommendation. He added that the commission should not be
burdened with trying to do financial investigations.
CO-CHAIR COWDERY offered an amendment that would require the
proceeds from the sale of the Matanuska Maid [Diary] and/or the
Alaska Railroad to be deposited into the permanent fund, which he
indicated would take it off the board for legislatures to spend.
In response to staff's comment that the commission was not
addressing the Alaska Railroad, Co-Chair Cowdery emphasized that
he would like to have it apply to both.
UNIDENTIFIED COMMISSIONER said he would not vote for this
amendment because he doesn't want to put any more into the
permanent fund. He said it is contrary to the goal.
CO-CHAIR WARD also objected to the proceeds going into the
permanent fund and suggested Co-Chair Cowdery withdraw his
amendment. He indicated it could be dealt with on the
recommendation of selling the railroad.
CO-CHAIR COWDERY responded that he would rather have his
amendment fail than withdraw it because he feels that if the
railroad is sold, [the money] goes into the general fund.
Furthermore, the purpose of this commission is to reduce the size
[of government].
MR. PIGNALBERI asked if a motion could be made without being
seconded.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER seconded the motion.
Upon a roll call vote, the motion to adopt the amendment
requiring the proceeds of the sale go into the permanent fund
failed by a vote of 3-4: Commissioners Notti and Thomas, and Co-
Chair Cowdery, voted "yea"; Commissioners Fink, Harper and
Valesko, and Co-Chair Ward, voted "nay."
Upon a roll call vote, the motion to adopt [Cowdery-(6)],
regarding the sale of Matanuska Maid Dairy, carried by a vote of
6-1: Commissioners Fink, Harper, Notti and Thomas, and Co-Chairs
Ward and Cowdery, voted "yea"; Commissioner Valesko voted "nay."
Sale of the Alaska Railroad
[A motion by an unidentified commissioner to recommend selling
the Alaska Railroad was made; however, it was withdrawn after Mr.
Pignalberi reminded commissioners that members of the railroad,
who hadn't had an opportunity to come before the commission with
recommendations, would do so the following day.]
Electronic Tracking Devices
CO-CHAIR WARD moved recommendation (9), by Harper:
Nonviolent inmates, DWI offenders should be removed from
state incarceration in favor of half-way houses and/or
electronic tracking devices to the extent major cost savings
can be attained.
COMMISSIONER FINK seconded the motion and noted that he himself
had made the same recommendation: Fink-(10).
There being no objection, Harper-9 was adopted.
Charter Schools
CO-CHAIR WARD made a motion to adopt charter school
recommendations Fink-(1), Notti-(1) and Wuerch-(1).
COMMISSIONER FINK seconded the motion.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER asked for an explanation because the three
recommendations are not worded the same.
COMMISSIONER FINK noted that his own recommendation requires 75
percent funding. However, he suggested adopting the language by
Commissioners Notti and Wuerch, which was recommended by the
subcommittee and which makes funding equal:
We recommend that the legislature enact revised charter
school laws that provide for educational choice by: (1)
increasing the number of charter schools allowed in Alaska;
(2) extending the contract period from five to ten years;
(3) require school districts to provide equal funding for
charter school students in their district; and (4) provide
school facilities equal to other schools in their district.
CO-CHAIR COWDERY asked whether a charter school could be a Native
or religious school.
CO-CHAIR WARD pointed out that charter schools are defined by
statute.
COMMISSIONER NOTTI, noting that he had added recommendation (4),
pointed out that some charter schools are in buildings without
windows and are not properly funded.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO said he was going to vote against this
recommendation because of his lack of understanding.
CO-CHAIR COWDERY asked whether that means that if they build an
elaborate school, everybody has to do so.
COMMISSIONER NOTTI said that isn't what he intended. For
example, there was an abandoned school in the Anchorage area, and
the charter school people had to fight hard to use that facility.
There is a concern of where to put these children.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS expressed concern about the financial aspect
of providing equal school facilities. Although she hadn't
monitored the charter school issue a lot, she surmised that there
is some funding formula for them. She asked, "If so, is it an
allocation of how the money comes down that we're not providing
for facilities or how it's attributed?"
COMMISSIONER NOTTI answered that he is not clear on that.
However, they don't receive the same dollar amount as the [other]
students in the same school district, and their facilities are
not equal, even though they are all publicly funded. He
suggested they should be treated the same.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS said her concern is that the commission is
setting the scenario for a charter school to say, "We want you to
bond and build a facility for us."
COMMISSIONER NOTTI said he doesn't know what it implies except
that they need better facilities.
COMMISSIONER FINK commented that it liberalizes charter school
requirements, and in the end there will be more because of these
various gray areas. Charter schools are growing rapidly in
Arizona but not in Alaska. One reason is statutory limitations,
and the basic law should be changed. Another is that they are
totally under the thumb of the local school district, which
precludes having a good charter school system. He suggested the
concept of control has to be dealt with.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER remarked that he hadn't looked at that and
agreed with Commissioner Fink.
COMMISSIONER FINK said he is willing to vote in order to move the
issue forward.
CO-CHAIR WARD said he supports charter schools but doesn't want
to take citizens' money, put it into government, and then hand it
back with too many strings. He added that he may be slipping
into the "voucher" area but the same thing runs true to charter
schools. He agreed that charter schools should have funding
equal to other schools in a district. Furthermore, there are
statewide building codes regardless of the location. However,
placing mandates on a charter school about structural things that
take away from a curriculum is one fear he would have.
COMMISSIONER NOTTI responded that the commission doesn't have the
perfect information. Furthermore, cities are not required to put
money into charter schools. The state is. It seems they don't
receive the same funding because charter schools don't have
gymnasiums, libraries or furniture.
CO-CHAIR WARD agreed with Commission Fink about voting on this
issue but said he has a concern with putting strings on their
money. Instead of their having a gymnasium, for example, he
would like them to have the option of buying a laptop computer.
COMMISSIONER FINK pointed out that that is not his intent. He
indicated that if Commissioner Ward wants him to nullify it,
he'll go along with that just to get it on the table.
CO-CHAIR WARD concurred.
MR. PIGNALBERI asked Commissioner Notti if the additional words
solve the problem alluded to. He clarified that Commissioner
Notti wanted to help them get better facilities but doesn't want
to set a standard (indisc.-fading).
COMMISSIONER NOTTI replied, "If it's fine with the commissioner."
CO-CHAIR WARD commented that he was going to vote for the "other
one" but he likes this one better. He made a motion to adopt the
conceptual amendment.
MR. PIGNALBERI explained that the conceptual amendment is that it
is the intent of this language to help charter schools get better
facilities. The key amendment is "without impeding their
creation or development".
CO-CHAIR WARD moved to amend his motion to reflect that
amendment.
COMMISSIONER FINK clarified that it refers to recommendation (4).
MR. PIGNALBERI specified that the following phrase would be
added: "without impeding their creation or development."
CO-CHAIR COWDERY asked if everyone understood the proposal.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO asked why recommendation (2) extends the
contract period from five to ten years.
COMMISSIONER FINK said he thinks the argument was that five years
was too short. They need ten years for planning and raising
money.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO asked if that makes it easier for them to
organize.
COMMISSIONER FINK replied yes, it is a lot easier for them to
organize and put together a program.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO said he is opposed to the motion.
Upon a roll call vote, the motion carried by a vote of 6-1:
Commissioners Fink, Harper, Notti and Thomas, and Co-Chairs Ward
and Cowdery, voted "yea"; Commissioner Valesko voted "nay."
Vouchers for K-12
CO-CHAIR WARD made a motion to adopt recommendation Fink-(1):
Voucher for K-12 education to parents at maximum 75 percent
of the per pupil cost in each district.
COMMISSIONER FINK seconded the motion.
CO-CHAIR WARD said he supports the concept of vouchers. He
mentioned that some people believe vouchers are going to hurt the
public school system, and others think that choice in education
is the highest and best use. He further stated:
I absolutely believe in vouchers, but as when any money
comes from the federal government or comes from the
state government, if in fact it has strings attached to
it - and they all have strings attached to it - we have
to be very guarded of that. And as a legislator, I
relay to you that I will be very guarded of that. To
me, the cleanest mechanism would be to just make a
recommendation to our congressional delegation to make
any and all educational expenditures 100 percent
deductible on their federal income taxes. But, since
that is not before us at this time, I have moved the
voucher amendment because I believe without a bunch of
governments strings, if we can keep a true, pure
voucher system going, then I believe that that would be
good for the educational system of Alaska.
COMMISSIONER FINK explained that the 75 percent is there for two
reasons. The people who object to the voucher system, the NEA
[National Education Association] and "AEA," argue that it will
cost the public education money. He indicated he didn't care
what the percentage was as long as it was less than 100 percent,
so those who say it costs the public school system money will
have a much more difficult time winning their argument.
Furthermore, it should be saving the public school money.
Private schools can "live" well off of 75 percent of what the
public schools pay.
CO-CHAIR WARD supported that concept. He again explained that
the only reason for his addition was to eliminate any government
strings attached to this money that would just create another
branch of controlled education systems.
COMMISSIONER FINK said it seems to him that the state had set as
standards only reading, writing and arithmetic.
CO-CHAIR WARD agreed.
COMMISSIONER FINK said he is also in support of that. However,
he doesn't know whether that should be incorporated.
CO-CHAIR WARD said he wants the basic academics of reading,
writing and arithmetic but is leery of the other things.
COMMISSIONER FINK suggested adding that to the language because
some of the commissioners are afraid of the state system setting
standards that will interfere with the private or religious
school. He said "we" don't want those standards. He moved to
adopt the following conceptual amendment:
Voucher for K-12 education to parents at maximum 75 percent
of the per pupil cost in each district "with no more than
reading, writing and arithmetic standards."
CO-CHAIR WARD seconded the motion.
MR. PIGNALBERI asked Commissioner Fink to restate the amendment.
COMMISSIONER FINK stated, "with standards limited to reading,
writing and arithmetic."
COMMISSIONER VALESKO said the commission is trying to put the
weight of this commission behind some recommendations to go back
to the legislature, which has already considered this many times
and brought forward bills that have not passed. Therefore, he is
opposed to the recommendation.
CO-CHAIR WARD mentioned that it took perhaps six years to pass
the tort reform legislation.
Upon a roll call vote, the motion to adopt [Notti-(1)] carried by
a vote of 6-1: Commissioners Fink, Harper, Notti and Thomas, and
Co-Chairs Ward and Cowdery, voted "yea"; Commissioner Valesko
voted "nay."
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER asked for a point of order.
TAPE 99-23, SIDE A
CO-CHAIR WARD called for the question on the "main" motion.
SENATOR ADAMS indicated he would be voting against the motion
because he didn't hear the full motion.
Upon a roll call vote, the motion to adopt [Fink-(1)] carried by
a vote of 6-2: Commissioners Fink, Harper, Notti and Thomas, and
Co-Chairs Ward and Cowdery, voted "yea"; Senator Adams and
Commissioner Valesko voted "nay."
University of Alaska's Fairbanks Utilities
CO-CHAIR WARD moved recommendation Cowdery-(2) regarding the
privatization of the University of Alaska's utilities in
Fairbanks.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER objected.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER mentioned that it is also Commissioner
Allen's recommendation.
MR. PIGNALBERI pointed out that the recommendations are stated
differently. For example, Co-Chair Cowdery's recommendation,
which is the same as recommendation 496 on the master list,
states:
Determine the true cost/benefit of selling the power plant
and/or privatizing its operation, and compare to shutting it
down and buying electric power from local utilities.
MR. PIGNALBERI further explained that this recommendation only
pertains to the Fairbanks power plant. It doesn't address the
telephone and water utilities that the university owns and
operates. In contrast, Commissioner Allen's recommendation
encompasses all utilities:
Selling U of A utilities to private regulated utility in
Anchorage, Juneau, and Fairbanks.
CO-CHAIR COWDERY said he would like to have his language
approved.
MR. PIGNALBERI indicated that if Commissioner Allen returns, he
can move the other part of his recommendation.
CO-CHAIR WARD again moved the recommendation [Cowdery-(2)].
COMMISSIONER FINK seconded the motion.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO indicated he might support this. He
interpreted the motion as not recommending doing it but rather
determining the true cost and benefit of selling or privatizing
it. He emphasized that he stands firmly in favor of determining
those kinds of things.
The motion [Cowdery-(2)] passed unanimously.
Sale of State Land
CO-CHAIR WARD made a motion to adopt recommendation Fink-(2):
"Put up state land for sale similar to open to entry for oil
leases."
[THIS WILL BE WITHDRAWN, THEN LATER MOVED AGAIN AND ADOPTED.]
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER seconded the motion.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO asked if it was a subcommittee
recommendation.
MR. PIGNALBERI replied in the affirmative, 404 on the master
list.
The promotion and sale of Alaska public land should be
privatized including 5,000 parcels that have been foreclosed
on, relinquished or otherwise returned to the state for
private ownership.
MR. PIGNALBERI indicated recommendation 404 is narrower than
Commissioner Fink's recommendation, and its value is maybe to
provide some contextual background - but it is about 5,000
parcels that the state is taking back from private owners.
COMMISSIONER FINK pointed out that recommendation 404 says
"including 5,000," not "only the 5,000."
CO-CHAIR WARD suggested that Commissioner Fink's recommendation
includes the 5,000 parcels without saying it.
COMMISSIONER FINK agreed.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER remarked that he is happy with it.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS said she thought Commissioner Fink's
recommendation may be a little more clear to his intent. She
said she remembers "this" saying that the promotion and sale of
the land should be privatized, without a lot of language about
actually selling it. She indicated the commission may want to
mesh those a little more.
MR. PIGNALBERI pointed out that 404 recommends the handling of
the sale transactions.
COMMISSIONER FINK said his recommendation addresses putting the
land up for sale with the idea that it raises money and puts land
on the tax base for local governments for all kinds of
development.
MR. PIGNALBERI supported moving both recommendations separately.
CO-CHAIR WARD suggested combining them because he supports
Commissioner Fink's recommendation to move land into private
ownership.
COMMISSIONER FINK agreed. He then referred to periods of time
since statehood when the state had made a lot of land available,
with auctions held over the counter. However, that came to a
screeching halt.
CO-CHAIR WARD asked whether there would be an objection to
combining the two - forgetting the political ramifications.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER replied, not as long as the combination is
in the nature of being permissive.
CO-CHAIR WARD indicated that is what he was trying to do. He
said he liked the first part of "that one."
MR. PIGNALBERI read the following proposed amendment:
"Put up state land for sale similar to open entry for oil
leases." The promotion and sale of Alaska public land
"subject to this recommendation" should be privatized
including 5,000 parcels that have been foreclosed on,
relinquished or otherwise returned to the state for private
ownership.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS said the state has a disposal program. She
suggested perhaps saying "accelerated."
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER remarked, "We don't have anything like open
to entry. Open to entry states - opens up the whole state - as
nominates."
CO-CHAIR WARD commented, "We have open entry in there. We've
given the division plenty of time to do this."
COMMISSIONER THOMAS said that is why she hates to see them drag
their feet.
CO-CHAIR WARD withdrew his original motion and moved the
following:
Put up state land for sale similar to open entry for oil
leases. The promotion and sale of Alaska public land
subject to this recommendation should be privatized
including 5,000 parcels that have been foreclosed on,
relinquished or otherwise returned to the state from private
owners.
CO-CHAIR COWDERY seconded the motion.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO objected.
Upon a roll call vote, the motion carried by a vote of 7-1:
Senator Adams, Commissioners Fink, Harper, Notti and Thomas, and
Co-Chairs Ward and Cowdery, voted "yea"; Commissioner Valesko
voted "nay."
[THIS MOTION WILL BE RESCINDED].
COMMISSIONER VALESKO indicated that by having some private entity
take state land and sell it, it turns it into a profit-making
enterprise.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER asked Commissioner Valesko if he is in favor
of the first half.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO replied he is; however, he is not in favor
of the second half.
CO-CHAIR WARD moved to rescinded his motion and asked unanimous
consent. Hearing no objections, the motion was rescinded.
CO-CHAIR WARD moved to adopt recommendation Fink-(2), "as is."
There being no objection, the recommendation was adopted.
CO-CHAIR WARD moved to adopt recommendation 404:
The promotion and sale of Alaska public land should be
privatized, including 5000 parcels that have been foreclosed
on, relinquished or otherwise returned to the state from
private owners.
[THIS MOTION WILL BE WITHDRAWN].
COMMISSIONER FINK seconded the motion, adding that he is neutral
on it.
SENATOR ADAMS objected.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO also objected. He said the commission was
going to try to go through the commissioners' recommendations,
but now they were starting to tack on things that came out of the
subcommittees.
CO-CHAIR WARD concurred and withdrew his motion. There being no
objection to withdrawing the motion, it was so ordered.
CO-CHAIR WARD moved recommendation Cowdery-(9), also number 188
on the master list:
The legislature shall devise a task-based budget format and
require, by statute, that the governor's budget be submitted
in that format.
SENATOR ADAMS objected because [the legislature] is currently
working on more of a performance-based budget. Both the Senate
and the House have started identifying missions and measures; the
legislature has been working on this process for the last two
years. He emphasized that the commission should let the
legislature's finance committees continuing working on that.
Senator Adams said he believes the commission is going in the
wrong direction.
MR. PIGNALBERI said performance measurement indicators (PMIs) are
an important step forward in the budget process, but it must be
cost-based. One has to know, for example, how many dollars are
being spent on Tudor Road for maintenance or on the access road
from the airport into town. Task-based budgeting gives that
information, and then one can design one's PMIs accordingly.
CO-CHAIR WARD said he doesn't believe this is in conflict with
the current (indisc.--interrupted) the legislature whatsoever.
He said he believes it reinforces it.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS spoke in support of the recommendation. She
said this is by rights the same language as activity-based
budgeting. Furthermore, this is the tool needed to go farther in
this process.
Upon a roll call vote, the motion to adopt Cowdery-(9) carried by
a vote of 5-3: Commissioners Fink, Notti and Thomas, and Co-
Chairs Ward and Cowdery, voted "yea"; Senator Adams and
Commissioners Harper and Valesko voted "nay."
Child Support
CO-CHAIR WARD made a motion to adopt recommendation Harper-(3):
Issue Request for Proposal for the purpose of all
collection of Court Systems-fines, issuing of
restraining orders, warrants et cetera. Likewise as
well as for collection of Non-payment of child support
enforcement.
[THIS WILL BE WITHDRAWN, THEN MOVED AGAIN, AMENDED AND ADOPTED.]
CO-CHAIR WARD asked whether there is a difference between
Commissioner Harper's and Senator Adams' recommendations
regarding child support.
COMMISSIONER HARPER mentioned that he would have to leave in five
minutes. He asked if the commission will be meeting again this
afternoon.
CO-CHAIR COWDERY said he believes the commission can finish
within an hour.
CO-CHAIR WARD withdrew his motion.
MR. PIGNALBERI noted there is a slight difference between the two
versions. He read Senator Adams' recommendation, which is narrow
and only pertains to Child Support Enforcement Division (CSED)
collections:
Privatize the collection of delinquent child support debt
owed to the State of Alaska.
MR. PIGNALBERI noted that Harper-(3) [see above] also pertains to
the Alaska Commission on Postsecondary Education, and there may
be [Alaska Department of] Fish and Game collections.
Commissioner Harper's interpretation is that the collection of
all fines that are presently assigned to the Department of Law
should be contracted out or an RFP should be issued, Mr.
Pignalberi said. He asked Commissioner Harper if he had
characterized his recommendation correctly.
COMMISSIONER HARPER affirmed that.
CO-CHAIR WARD restated his motion to adopt Harper-(3).
COMMISSIONER VALESKO objected, saying this might mean that the
lack of any collection because of the unwillingness of the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to reveal documentation regarding
social security numbers to private contractors. He noted that
one report he had read says that is a serious concern. He
concluded that it may hinder the collection.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS said she believes the latest information the
commission received clarified that, and was contradictory.
MR. PIGNALBERI further explained that this issue is being worked
out in several states. He suggested all that is needed is a
qualifier that says, "We don't want to do this at the expense of
losing federal funds."
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER said the point was that the IRS information
would help to locate people.
MR. PIGNALBERI agreed.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER remarked, "I never got that impression that
it was totally answered, that the feds had said there was certain
information they have which is valuable for collection of debts
in Alaska - they would not provide other than to a government
agency. I thought they said that."
COMMISSIONER THOMAS said she believed that the Legal Services
Division of the Legislative Affairs Agency had provided an
opinion after that.
CO-CHAIR WARD contended that Legal Services had not interpreted
it that way. "The strings that came from the federal monies were
not what was stated by the federal government."
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER indicated the discussion was about federal
information, not money.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER clarified that he was talking about whether
the IRS was willing to share that information to a private
entity.
CO-CHAIR WARD said he believes the [Senate] Judiciary Committee
will be looking at this issue.
SENATOR ADAMS suggested dividing the question. One (1) would
privatize delinquent child support that is owed to the state; two
(2) would include the first sentence of Commissioner Harper's
recommendation. He added that if the commission had future
problems, the motion could be withdrawn.
There being no objection, the motion carried.
CO-CHAIR WARD renewed his motion to adopt Harper-(3).
COMMISSIONER VALESKO objected. He asked if the motion is, "Issue
Request for Proposal for the purpose of all collection of court
system fines, issuing of restraining orders, warrants, et cetera
- likewise, as well, for collection of nonpayment of child
support enforcement."
CO-CHAIR WARD replied yes.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO expressed concern that if there is going to
be a proposal for collection, it is going to get into the IRS
consideration and this may become a problem.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER said he would like to see Legal Services'
opinion. He indicated this information can be provided to him
tomorrow or the following day.
CO-CHAIR WARD said the commission can always rescind its action.
MR. PIGNALBERI referred to Commissioner Harper's recommendation.
He stated:
We're talking about three different things. We're
calling for an RFP for court system fines, which I
don't think is very controversial. However, in the
subcommittees, I know when they talked about putting
out an RFP for restraining orders and warrants ...
there was testimony that that could be dangerous, that
really does require somebody with some training to
serve a warrant because they're subject to abuse from
somebody ... at the time they're served. And the two
aren't necessarily related. And I just wonder if
Commissioner Harper would like to propose moving his
recommendation to include only the court system fines.
MR. PIGNALBERI indicated the commission could come back and
revisit the restraining orders and warrants.
COMMISSIONER HARPER said that sounds like an excellent idea.
CO-CHAIR WARD offered the following, which Mr. Pignalberi read:
Issue a request for a proposal for the purpose of all
collection of court system fines.
Upon a roll call vote, the motion carried by a vote of 7-1:
Senator Adams, Commissioners Harper, Fink, Notti and Thomas, and
Co-Chairs Ward and Cowdery, voted "yea"; Commissioner Valesko
voted "nay."
CO-CHAIR WARD offered a motion to adopt Adams-(2).
MR. PIGNALBERI noted that the commission needed to vote on the
main motion for Commissioner Harper's recommendation.
CO-CHAIR WARD moved to adopt Harper-(3), as amended.
MR. PIGNALBERI read:
Issue a request for a proposal for the purpose of all
collection of court system fines.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO said he thought he'd just voted against that
a minute ago.
CO-CHAIR WARD said to Commissioner Valesko that he'd voted
against the amendment separating it.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO stated for the record that he didn't vote
against the amendment to split it. He added, "I did vote against
it, but I didn't understand what I was voting against. To amend
it, I'm for that."
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER asked Commissioner Valesko what his stand is
on the main motion.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO said he is opposed to it.
CO-CHAIR WARD again moved Harper-(3), as amended.
Upon a roll call vote, the motion carried by a vote of 7-1:
Senator Adams, Commissioners Harper, Fink, Notti and Thomas, and
Co-Chairs Ward and Cowdery, voted "yea"; Commissioner Valesko
voted "nay."
CO-CHAIR WARD made a motion to adopt privatization collection,
Adams-(2).
COMMISSIONER VALESKO objected.
SENATOR ADAMS explained that CSED is responsible for collection
of all child support obligations. He said he feels this is
appropriate for current obligations; however, past debts are
difficult to collect. It would probably be more effective to
turn the past debts over to a collection agency. He pointed out
that the division supports this proposal.
CO-CHAIR COWDERY seconded the recommendation.
COMMISSIONER FINK read Senator Adams recommendation (2):
Privatize the collection of delinquent child support debt
owed to the State of Alaska. (Revenue 2)
COMMISSIONER FINK turned the members' attention to "Revenue 2,"
which states:
Thorough review and analysis by an independent efficiency
expert with regard to "CSED." The review should include
compliance with state and federal requirements.
Additionally, a cost/benefit analysis should be performed.
COMMISSIONER FINK asked if the two were the same.
SENATOR ADAMS said he did not have his packet in front of him to
refer to "Revenue 2."
COMMISSIONER FINK asked, "Isn't that child support question ...
also one that -- this cloud of the federal people opening their
books to a private firm? And 'Revenue 2' just says they want to
review an analysis, and it should include compliance with state
and federal requirements."
COMMISSIONER VALESKO said he'd heard Senator Adams saying that he
is not necessarily making the recommendation of "Revenue 2" but
is looking at the past debt owed to the state going to a
collection agency.
SENATOR ADAMS agreed.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS recalled testimony of the subcommittee that
if it is so many days overdue, it is considered delinquent. She
said she can't remember whether that is 60 or 90 days.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER indicated the state doesn't get into
collections unless there is delinquency.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS replied yes, it is all paid through the
state.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER commented, "If you and I were divorced, and
I was ordered to pay you money, I couldn't pay you. I'd have to
pay the state."
COMMISSIONER THOMAS and CO-CHAIR COWDERY concurred.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER said it seems silly.
COMMISSIONER THOMAS agreed.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO asked whether Senator Adams had said the
department is in favor of doing this.
SENATOR ADAMS affirmed that CSED supports this proposal.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO asked if there is a problem for a private
agency to obtain information from the IRS, for example.
SENATOR ADAMS said he would defer to the department.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO noted that he would be voting in opposition
to the recommendation.
CO-CHAIR COWDERY asked if the department was online.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER said they'd gone to lunch.
Upon a roll call vote, the motion to adopt [Adams-(2)] carried by
a vote of 7-1: Senator Adams, Commissioners Harper, Fink, Notti
and Thomas, and Co-Chairs Ward and Cowdery, voted "yea";
Commissioner Valesko voted "nay."
COMMISSIONER HARPER announced he would be off-line until after
lunch.
SENATOR ADAMS informed members that he would be off-line that
afternoon but would be available until noon.
Four Dam Pool, Electrical Intertie and Bradley Lake
CO-CHAIR WARD made a motion to adopt recommendation Fink-(12)
regarding the sale of the Four Dam Pool.
[Commissioner Fink's recommendation 12, as found on the
commission's web page, number 12, stated:
Sell or solicit proposals for a sale of:
Electrical Intertie
Four/dam pool for fair market value
Bradley Lake
Either get a consultant to try to find an economical
method of sale or request proposal ideas from potential
buyers. (increase income)]
COMMISSIONER FINK seconded the motion.
SENATOR ADAMS asked whether [the state] is getting true and full
value, and whether anything in the recommendation states that
"we" follow AIDEA's ideas on how to recover on the Four Dam Pool.
He thinks it cost the state $483 million, he said, and
communities wanted to buy it for $83 million. He emphasized that
he wants to be sure, in the motion, that [the state] is getting
the true and full value.
COMMISSIONER FINK elaborated: "Sell or solicit proposals for a
sale of the Four Dam Pool for fair market value. Either get a
consultant to try to find an economical method of sale or request
proposal ideas from potential buyers." He emphasized that it is
to sell, if possible, for fair market value. He also indicated
he is not positive that they can find an economical way of doing
it.
SENATOR ADAMS asked who is going to give out the fair market
value. Is it the communities or the consultant? Or should [the
state] go with AIDEA's letter of recommendation?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER remarked, "We left that open, I understand."
COMMISSIONER FINK remarked that if there aren't a couple of
bidders, that is a problem, in his view.
CO-CHAIR WARD said Commissioner Fink's recommendation doesn't tie
the state to only the communities.
COMMISSIONER FINK agreed, noting that his recommendation doesn't
mention communities.
CO-CHAIR WARD remarked that it doesn't exclude them either.
COMMISSIONER FINK emphasized that he is talking about fair market
value.
CO-CHAIR WARD pointed out that he had moved the recommendation
because it doesn't lock the state into the communities or exclude
them. He added, "What it does is it says to put it on the table
and see what comes forth. And if something more tangible than
the communities, or Mike Gravel, come forth, then it's something
for the legislature to consider, with the proper revenue streams
maybe coming off for other things."
MR. PIGNALBERI urged members to look at the report from the
Hydro-Electric Subcommittee, which recommended with regard to the
intertie: "Keep the status quo, transfer of the intertie to the
utilities of the current (indisc.) not appear to result in
significant benefits to either the state or the participating
utilities."
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER interjected, "His motion was just about the
Four Dam Pool, right?"
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER affirmed that.
MR. PIGNALBERI indicated Fink-(12) included all of them, however.
TAPE 99-23, SIDE B
MR. PIGNALBERI said the subcommittee report treats them
separately and has individual recommendations for each: they
basically said the Four Dam Pool probably should be sold, but
Bradley Lake and the intertie should not be, and they gave their
reasons in the subcommittee report.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER indicated the subcommittee [recommendation]
limits selling it to one of the local utilities.
MR. PIGNALBERI said it is to the electric utilities within the
communities they serve.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER noted that this proposal clearly does not do
that. This says, "Whoever will pay the most money."
MR. PIGNALBERI suggested dividing the recommendation into three
parts.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER said he was in favor of all three, and it
wasn't necessary to divide it.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO supported dividing the question because the
subcommittee did have diverse recommendations.
MR. PIGNALBERI suggested that part (1) would be: "Sell or
solicit proposals for the sale of electrical intertie."
COMMISSIONER FINK said he seconded the motion. He thinks the
subcommittee recommended against this, he explained, and they
said it had no value because of the contracts they have with the
user utilities. He himself had added the second paragraph in
order to get a consultant to come up with an economical method of
sale or to request proposal ideas for potential buyers. If the
subcommittee is correct that perhaps it isn't salable, don't sell
it. Regarding recommendation 12, he emphasized the desire to
sell them all, but only if a fair value can be obtained.
CO-CHAIR WARD objected to dividing the recommendation.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO said the subcommittee recommended selling
the Four Dam Pool but not the electrical intertie or the Bradley
Lake project. If the commission acted affirmatively to selling
all of them, it would be disregarding the subcommittee in that
case.
COMMISSIONER FINK stated, "I understand the way [Commissioner]
Don [Valesko] is reading it, but I thought by the qualifying
paragraph I made is that's not true that you have to sell all
three of them. For example, Bradley Lake has terrible
difficulties in selling it because it's got different sets of
bonds." He said a consultant may come up with a manner to do it
for Bradley Lake and the intertie, but the way they currently
stand, nobody will want to buy them.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER said he understands this.
COMMISSIONER FINK noted that sometimes various consultants come
up with a method to do a particular thing to achieve their goals,
but sometimes one can't find a method. He indicated the
subcommittee had seemed to be more [interested] in keeping
ownership in the state, or certainly limiting it to the local
utilities. Commissioner Fink emphasized that he doesn't agree
with that. He restated that it ought to be sold if it's saleable
and we can get a fair market price for it, but not if that isn't
the case. Furthermore, he recognizes the problems on the
intertie and Bradley Lake.
MR. PIGNALBERI suggested modifying the recommendation to read:
Sell the Four Dam Pool but solicit proposals for the
electric intertie and Bradley Lake.
COMMISSIONER FINK replied:
The qualification really applies to all of them because
the Four Dam Pool, according to the subcommittee, has
contracts for sale, which will make it undesirable for
anybody to buy other than those municipalities. So, I
don't want it sold either if they can't get that thing
modified so that it's a salable commodity. The way it
currently is, they have locked in low rates, as I
understand from the subcommittee, and nobody is going
to want to pay a decent price for it other than those
utilities. I don't want to sell it that way either.
So "on the condition of making it a salable product"
would apply to all three of them.
CO-CHAIR WARD agreed that if it isn't economically sound, then it
isn't done.
CO-CHAIR COWDERY asked Mr. Pignalberi to read the motion.
MR. PIGNALBERI responded:
Sell or solicit proposals for sale of electrical intertie,
Four Dam Pool, Bradley Lake for fair market value. Either
get a consultant to try to find an economical method of sale
or request proposal ideas from potential buyers.
Upon a roll call vote, the motion to adopt [Fink-(12)] carried by
a vote of 4-2: Commissioners Fink and Notti, and Co-Chairs Ward
and Cowdery, voted "yea"; Senator Adams and Commissioner Valesko
voted "nay."
Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC)
CO-CHAIR WARD asked how Commissioner Wuerch's recommendation,
which is similar to number 580 on the master list, fits in with
Fink recommendation (7).
FINK-(7):
Withdraw AHFC from the secondary mortgage market
wherein taxable bonds or assets of AHFC would be used.
WUERCH (AHFC Subcommittee recommendations):
AHFC 2: We recommend combining other bonding entities
with AHFC. In particular, we think that AIDEA, the
Postsecondary Loan Program, and perhaps the Municipal
Bond Bank all should be combined under the AHFC
umbrella.
AHFC 3: The commission should consider privatizing or
otherwise segregating the entirety of AHFC under a state
charter that requires it to provide the public services it
currently provides and pay dividends on net income above a
certain level.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER said it is totally different from his
recommendation because he is trying to shrink AHFC. As he
understands it, the other recommendation joins the various loan
programs.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER said he believes it makes it much more
difficult to get the government out of it. Furthermore, it will
increase the size of government rather than cut it. Therefore,
he doesn't support that.
CO-CHAIR WARD made a motion to adopt recommendation Fink-(7) and
asked unanimous consent.
COMMISSIONER FINK seconded the motion. He explained that AHFC
originally was a secondary mortgage market for Alaska when there
weren't others. He believes the state has a private market. The
subcommittee had reported that AHFC mostly sells bonds for
government programs, which nobody else other than a municipality
would sell. It is the government's arm that sells bonds for the
community for the "first buyer," for some veteran programs, and
so forth. He has limited cutting AHFC back only in the private
sector market, and not in selling tax-free bonds but only tax
bonds. So it would still be in all of the government-insured
program. He noted that AHFC had indicated it is getting out of
that; this will help it do that. He recalled that AHFC had
testified they issue two or three different bonds, and one is in
the secondary mortgage market. In his view, the private market
is adequate to carry it - AHFC doesn't need to do that.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER recalled that Mr. Crawford's testimony had
been that there was plenty of room for AHFC in the secondary
market. They didn't see it as competing.
COMMISSIONER FINK disagreed. He said Mr. Crawford is in the
business, and, for whatever reason, he is going to go along with
AHFC. Commissioner Fink said he was convinced by testimony that
a governmental agency has to issue those tax-free bonds.
Therefore, he is not objecting to that.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER referred to the housing market.
COMMISSIONER FINK said the housing market is in some kind of
government-insured market.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER recalled that a testifier had said, "If you
don't have AHFC loaning money, they won't be building as many
houses and, therefore, property values will go down - or up."
The other testifier had said, "Moving them out of there is going
to cause the opposite." One was an attorney and the other a
builder.
COMMISSIONER FINK indicated this isn't a big item. It is trying
to get government out of an area that is private enterprise in
every other state of the Union.
CO-CHAIR WARD explained that he'd made the motion because he
wanted AHFC to be submitted forward to the legislature for
consideration. This may open it up to a very broad spectrum of
what AHFC is. He said he doesn't believe this recommendation
will hurt the housing market.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER also voiced the belief that it wouldn't hurt
the housing market. He further stated:
We have built up - in the AHFC, there's so many ways -
we've built up separate governments. Different
agencies get so much money coming in that they become a
government [un]to themselves, and AHFC is that way.
They have so much money. A lot of legislators like it
because it's a cash cow. Whenever you need money, you
can go over there and steal some from it because
they've got surplus, and I'm trying to cut that down.
I'm trying to make government more open, and it's an
area where there is a very big market in the United
States. It's equally available today now to Alaska,
where it wasn't when we originally passed the law. So
as long as the mover wants to stick with it, I want to
stick with it too.
Upon a roll call vote, the motion to adopt [Fink-(7)] carried by
a vote of 5-2: Commissioners Fink, Notti and Thomas, and Co-
Chairs Ward and Cowdery, voted "yea"; Senator Adams and
Commissioner Valesko voted "nay."
Homestead Law
CO-CHAIR WARD made a motion to adopt recommendation Fink-(3).
A homestead law.
CO-CHAIR WARD seconded the motion.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER objected because he was not part of any
discussions on the topic.
CO-CHAIR COWDERY spoke in support of the motion. He said
homesteading gives Alaska's young people the opportunity to build
sweat equity into property.
COMMISSIONER FINK said it is a sweat equity loan: someone
without any money can get a piece of property. Furthermore, it
does take land out of state ownership and put it in the hands of
private individuals. If they happen to select land within a
municipality, it would be added to the tax base of a
municipality. He emphasized that it wouldn't bring money
directly into the state because if people on homesteads pay
anything, it is a nominal application fee.
CO-CHAIR COWDERY commented that homesteading helped the tax base
in Anchorage.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER indicted homesteads would most likely be
built 20 to 150 miles away from populated areas. They would be
in the boroughs, not in the downtown municipal areas.
COMMISSIONER FINK remarked that the homesteaders would still pay
taxes to the big boroughs. It is part of the concept of making
state lands available to people. In this case, it is sweat
equity, not money.
COMMISSIONER VALESKO objected for clarification.
SENATOR ADAMS also voiced his objection, then stated:
It's no matter how good or bad the Homestead Act is,
it's basically what we're doing. We're going beyond
the policies of, and recommendations of, what the
privatization committee has (indisc.). And we're just
doing anything we feel like. And basically I'd like to
have a motion that ... the AIDEA bonds in the Red Dog
Mine be sold to the Northwest Arctic Borough. And
that's privatizing something like that, but it wasn't a
recommendation that came up from the citizens that were
on these privatization task forces. We're just coming
up with different ideas there.
CO-CHAIR COWDERY indicated it was stated from day one that that
would happen. Both the subcommittees and the commission will
have an opportunity to make recommendations.
[Changing the language of the recommendation was discussed.]
MR. PIGNALBERI read:
The legislature shall pass a law making land available for
homesteading.
Upon a roll call vote, the motion carried by a vote of 5-2:
Commissioners Fink, Notti and Thomas, and Co-Chairs Ward and
Cowdery, voted "yea"; Senator Adams and Commissioner Valesko
voted "nay."
There being no further discussion or business before the
Commission on Privatization and Delivery of Government Services,
Co-Chair Cowdery adjourned the meeting at 12:10 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|