Legislature(1993 - 1994)

04/06/1994 09:07 AM STA

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
txt
                SENATE STATE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE                                 
                         April 6, 1994                                         
                           9:07 a.m.                                           
                                                                               
  MEMBERS PRESENT                                                              
                                                                               
 Senator Loren Leman, Chair                                                    
 Senator Mike Miller, Vice Chair                                               
 Senator Robin Taylor                                                          
 Senator Jim Duncan                                                            
 Senator Johnny Ellis                                                          
                                                                               
  MEMBERS ABSENT                                                               
                                                                               
 All Members Present                                                           
                                                                               
  COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                           
                                                                               
 SENATE BILL NO. 357                                                           
 "An Act relating to certain study, publication, and reporting                 
 requirements by and to state agencies; relating to certain fees for           
 reports; and providing for an effective date."                                
                                                                               
 SENATE BILL NO. 358                                                           
 "An Act relating to the existence and functions of certain                    
 multimember state bodies, including boards, councils, commissions,            
 associations, or authorities; and providing for an effective date."           
                                                                               
 CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 315(JUD) am                                             
 "An Act relating to the unauthorized use of or unauthorized                   
 interference with transmission and delivery of subscription cable             
 services; and amending the definition of the offense of theft of              
 services and the penalties for its violation."                                
                                                                               
 HOUSE BILL NO. 402                                                            
 "An Act requiring that an owner's motor vehicle liability insurance           
 policy used as proof of financial responsibility designate by                 
 description or appropriate reference the motor vehicles it covers;            
 and providing for an effective date."                                         
                                                                               
 SENATE BILL NO. 365                                                           
 "An Act relating to the improvement of state finances and fiscal              
 accountability by increasing fees, by collecting additional                   
 revenue, by reducing certain program expenditures by changing                 
 services or eligibility requirements for programs, by changing                
 certain statutory limitation periods, by providing for use of                 
 certain electronic records, by making changes to state agency                 
 functions or procedures including certain reporting and planning              
 procedures, and by authorizing extensions for state leases for real           
 property if certain savings can be achieved; and providing for an             
 effective date."                                                              
                                                                               
 CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 323(JUD) am                                             
 "An Act relating to requests for anatomical gifts and to the                  
 release of certain information for the purpose of facilitating                
 anatomical gifts."                                                            
                                                                               
  PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION                                             
                                                                               
 SB 357 - See State Affairs minutes dated 3/30/94.                             
                                                                               
 SB 358 - See State Affairs minutes dated 3/30/94.                             
                                                                               
 HB 315 - See State Affairs minutes dated 3/30/94.                             
                                                                               
 HB 402 - See State Affairs minutes dated 3/30/94.                             
                                                                               
 SB 365 - See State Affairs minutes dated 3/30/94.                             
                                                                               
 HB 323 - See Health, Education & Social Services minutes dated                
          3/21/94, and State Affairs minutes dated 3/30/94.                    
                                                                               
  WITNESS REGISTER                                                             
                                                                               
 Linda Rexwinkel, Budget Analyst                                               
 Division of Budget Review                                                     
 Office of Management & Budget                                                 
 P.O. Box 110200, Juneau, AK 99811-0200¶465-4694                               
  POSITION STATEMENT:  in favor of SB 357                                      
                                                                               
 Sharon Barton, Director                                                       
 Division of Administrative Services                                           
 Department of Administration                                                  
 P.O. Box 110208, Juneau, AK 99811-0208¶465-2277                               
  POSITION STATEMENT:  in favor of SB 357                                      
                                                                               
 Wallace Olson, Ret. Professor                                                 
 Box 210961, Auke Bay, AK 99821¶789-3311                                       
  POSITION STATEMENT:  testified on SB 358                                     
                                                                               
 Bea Shepard                                                                   
 Museums Alaska                                                                
 12585 Glacier Hwy., Juneau, AK 99801¶789-7354                                 
  POSITION STATEMENT:  testified on SB 358                                     
                                                                               
 Kristie Leaf, Director                                                        
 Boards & Commissions                                                          
 Office of the Governor                                                        
 P.O. Box 110001, Juneau, AK 99811-0001¶465-3500                               
  POSITION STATEMENT:  in favor of SB 358                                      
                                                                               
 Eric Musser, Aide                                                             
 Representative Porter                                                         
 State Capitol, Juneau, AK 99801-1182¶465-4930                                 
  POSITION STATEMENT:  prime sponsor of HB 315                                 
                                                                               
 John George                                                                   
 National Association of Independent Insurers                                  
 9515 Moraine Way, Juneau, AK 9801¶789-0172                                    
  POSITION STATEMENT:  in favor of HB 402                                      
                                                                               
 Juanita Hensley, Chief                                                        
 Driver Services                                                               
 Division of Motor Vehicles                                                    
 Department of Public Safety                                                   
 P.O. Box 20020, Juneau, AK 99802-0020¶465-4335                                
  POSITION STATEMENT:  testified on HB 402                                     
                                                                               
 Diane Schenker, Special Assistant                                             
 Department of Corrections                                                     
 2200 E. 42nd Ave., Anchorage, AK 99508-5202¶561-4426                          
  POSITION STATEMENT:  testified on SB 365                                     
                                                                               
 M. Clyde Stoltzfus, Special Assistant                                         
 Department of Transportation & Public Facilities                              
 3132 Channel Drive, Juneau, AK 99801-7898¶465-3906                            
  POSITION STATEMENT:  testified on SB 365                                     
                                                                               
 Deena Henkins, Chief                                                          
 Drinking Water & Wastewater Section                                           
 Department of Environmental Conservation                                      
 410 Willoughby Ave., Suite 105, Juneau, AK 99801-1795¶465-5300                
  POSITION STATEMENT:  testified on SB 365                                     
                                                                               
  ACTION NARRATIVE                                                             
                                                                               
 TAPE 94-23, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 001                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN calls the Senate State Affairs Committee to order at           
 9:07 a.m.                                                                     
                                                                               
 HB 323 (RELEASE OF CERTAIN DEATH CERT. INFO) was not heard on this            
 day.                                                                          
                                                                               
 Number 010                                                                    
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN brings up SB 357 (REQUIRED REPORTS OF STATE                    
 AGENCIES) as the first order of business before the Senate State              
 Affairs Committee today.  The chairman asks why, under section 13             
 of SB 357, would it be desirable to shift the reports two months.             
 He has heard that it is recommended practice by a national                    
 organization of auditors that audits be performed within six months           
 of the end of a fiscal year.  His initial reaction to shifting                
 reports two months is that it is not an appropriate action.                   
                                                                               
 Number 030                                                                    
                                                                               
 LINDA REXWINKEL, Budget Analyst, Office of Management & Budget                
 (OMB) introduces Ms. Barton, and says Ms. Barton will answer                  
 questions on that particular section.                                         
                                                                               
 Number 035                                                                    
                                                                               
 SHARON BARTON, Director, Division of Administrative Services,                 
 Department of Administration (DOA) states some of the reports                 
 needed from other state agencies are not available until October.             
 Therefore, the DOA is unable to meet the October 16 deadline.                 
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks if a deadline of December 16 is needed, or if             
 a deadline in November would be acceptable.  Why is two months                
 needed?                                                                       
                                                                               
 MS. BARTON responds that, as the chairman is aware, DOA was even              
 later in getting out the report this year due to staffing                     
 requirements.  The combination of the lateness of reports from                
 other state agencies to DOA and the staffing levels within the                
 Division of Finance require at least two months to prepare the                
 report.                                                                       
                                                                               
 Number 057                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks Ms. Barton what her projection is for reports             
 becoming available.                                                           
                                                                               
 Number 061                                                                    
                                                                               
 MS. BARTON replies it would be sometime after December 16, but she            
 cannot answer as to a definite time.                                          
                                                                               
 Number 065                                                                    
                                                                               
 MS. REXWINKEL adds the audits are done for the previous fiscal                
 year, so they are actually a year behind.  The current year's audit           
 is not done within that period of time.  What is in this report is            
 merely the financial statement from the Division of Finance.  These           
 are not the audited statements that originate from Legislative                
 Audit.                                                                        
                                                                               
 Number 085                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN states he was told by the commissioner of the                  
 Department of Revenue that it was the policy guideline of a                   
 national organization of auditors, that audits be completed within            
 six months of the end of a fiscal year.  He wonders if that is                
 something that should be important to the State of Alaska.                    
 Number 097                                                                    
                                                                               
 MS. REXWINKEL responds, as she understands it, one of the concerns            
 the Department of Revenue has relates to the bond underwriters.               
 The underwriters review those financial statements in underwriting            
 and rating the State of Alaska for bond issues.  So the timeliness            
 of those reports is of concern to them.                                       
                                                                               
 Number 102                                                                    
                                                                               
 MS. BARTON adds that the situation is that, in order for the                  
 state's annual financial report to comply with government                     
 accounting standards, the state must have previously audited                  
 reports going into that annual financial report.  Those previously            
 audited reports are not available, particularly on federal                    
 programs, until after October 16.  So if the state proceeds with              
 the October 16 deadline, the state would not be using materials to            
 compile the annual report that comply with GASBY (?) requirements.            
                                                                               
 Number 125                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks if there are further questions or if anyone               
 else wishes to testify on SB 357.  Hearing none, the chairman asks            
 the pleasure of the committee.                                                
                                                                               
 Number 127                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR MILLER makes a motion to discharge SB 357 from the Senate             
 State Affairs Committee with individual recommendations.                      
                                                                               
 Number 129                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN, hearing no objection, orders SB 357 released from             
 committee with individual recommendations.                                    
 Number 131                                                                    
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN brings up SB 358 (ELIMINATE SOME STATE MULTIMEMBER             
 BODIES) as the next order of business before the Senate State                 
 Affairs Committee.  The chairman calls the first witness.                     
                                                                               
 Number 139                                                                    
                                                                               
 WALLACE OLSON, Retired University Professor, states he has worked             
 with universities and museums around the world, and is familiar               
 with museums and museum operations.  Mr. Olson gives background               
 information on why the current Museum Collections Advisory                    
 Committee exists as it does today.  Apparently, in 1973, one man              
 decided to trade items back and forth.  It was really a bad deal.             
 At that point, the state decided that, in the future, all museum              
 collections would be monitored by a Museum Collections Advisory               
 Committee.  SB 358 would drop that committee, giving authority over           
 collections to the Commissioner of the Department of Education.               
 This would lead us right back into that same problem in 1973.  If             
 the control of a museum collection lies with one person, the same             
 problems will arise again.  Mr. Olson says other museums have told            
 him that, and he has seen it himself.  Museums do not operate in              
 this manner.                                                                  
                                                                               
 Number 166                                                                    
                                                                               
 MR. OLSON points out that, even though the museum is under the                
 jurisdiction of the Division of Libraries, Archives, & Museums,               
 museums are totally different from a library.  Comparisons cannot           
 be made as far as purchasing books for a library and making                   
 acquisitions for a museum.  Museum collections reflect the heritage           
 of the state for the next hundred years or so.  Whoever decides               
 what acquisitions will be made is deciding what will be preserved             
 for future generations.  Those decisions should be made by a                  
 committee representing all the population of the state.                       
                                                                               
 MR. OLSON states that, if the concerns with the committee relate to           
 the fiscal costs related to the committee, those costs can be                 
 overcome with the application of modern technology.  Mr. Olson                
 thinks the costs associated with the committee could possibly be              
 cut back to almost nothing, but he urges that the committee not be            
 eliminated.                                                                   
                                                                               
 Number 197                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN informs Mr. Olson of the existence of an amendment             
 to SB 358 which would restore the committee, making changes to save           
 costs.  The Museum Collections Advisory will be allowed to meet by            
 teleconference, and it does change the value of items that must be            
 approved by the committee from 1,000$ to 5,000$.  The chairman asks           
 that a copy of the amendment be given to Mr. Olson.                           
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks Ms. Shepard if her testimony is along the same            
 lines as Mr. Olson's testimony, and asks Ms. Shepard if the                   
 amendment would satisfy her concerns.                                         
                                                                               
 BEA SHEPARD, with Museums Alaska, responds the amendment would                
 satisfy her concerns and she hopes it is adopted.                             
                                                                               
 Number 215                                                                    
                                                                               
 MR. WALLACE adds that his testimony is in written form, and he will           
 submit it to the committee.                                                   
                                                                               
 Number 219                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN thanks Mr. Wallace for his testimony and asks Ms.              
 Leaf if there is opposition to amendment #2 from the governor's               
 office.                                                                       
 Number 221                                                                    
                                                                               
 KRISTIE LEAF, Director, Boards & Commissions, Office of the                   
 Governor, states there is no opposition to amendment #2 from the              
 governor's office.  The purpose of the bill is to improve                     
 efficiency.                                                                   
                                                                               
 Number 228                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks if anyone else wishes to testify on SB 358.               
 Hearing none, the chairman brings up amendment #1 and asks for a              
 motion to adopt the amendment.                                                
                                                                               
 Number 229                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR MILLER makes a motion to adopt amendment #1 to SB 358.                
                                                                               
 Number 233                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR objects and asks for an explanation of amendment #1.           
                                                                               
 Number 235                                                                    
                                                                               
 MS. LEAF responds amendment #1 would increase the Worker's                    
 Compensation Board from five panels to six panels.  Concern has               
 been expressed that decisions from the board have been tardy.                 
 There would be no fiscal cost associated with amendment #1 because            
 there would not be additional meetings, the panels would simply               
 meet sooner.                                                                  
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR withdraws his objection to amendment #1.                       
                                                                               
 Number 265                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN, hearing no further objection to amendment #1,                 
 states the amendment has been adopted.                                        
                                                                               
 Number 267                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN introduces amendment #2 to SB 358.                             
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR makes a motion to adopt amendment #2.                          
                                                                               
 Number 271                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks if there is discussion or opposition to                   
 amendment #2.  Hearing none, the chairman states amendment # 2 has            
 been adopted.                                                                 
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN introduces a conceptual amendment to SB 358 which              
 would add language from SB 286.  The opinion of legislative counsel           
 is that for the language in SB 358 to match the language in                   
 SB 286, the committee should simply adopt language directly from              
 SB 286.  The portions of SB 286 which relate to sections 7 and 9 of           
 SB 358 would be adopted into SB 358.                                          
                                                                               
 Number 328                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR ELLIS asks the chairman if there would be any substantive             
 changes with the adoption of the technical amendment.                         
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN replies there would be no substantive changes with             
 the adoption of the amendment.                                                
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks if there are any objections to amendment #3,              
 the conceptual amendment.  Hearing none, the chairman states                  
 amendment #3 has been adopted.                                                
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks if there are further amendments or discussion             
 on SB 358.                                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 342                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR MILLER makes a motion to discharge SB 358 from the Senate             
 State Affairs Committee with individual recommendations.                      
                                                                               
 Number 343                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN, hearing no objection, orders SB 358 released from             
 committee with individual recommendations.                                    
 Number 344                                                                    
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN brings up HB 315 (THEFT OF SUBSCRIPTION TV SERVICES)           
 as the next order of business before the Senate State Affairs                 
 Committee.                                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 348                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR asks if a committee substitute has been drafted for            
 HB 315.                                                                       
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN replies there was not a cs drafted for HB 315.                 
                                                                               
 SENATOR ELLIS asks if the bill has been heard previously.                     
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN responds the committee has heard the bill and taken            
 testimony on it.                                                              
                                                                               
 Number 355                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR DUNCAN asks what the penalty for theft of cable services              
 would be under HB 315.                                                        
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN calls a representative of the prime sponsor to                 
 respond to that question.                                                     
                                                                               
 Number 364                                                                    
                                                                               
 ERIC MUSSER, Aide to Representative Porter, responds that the                 
 manufacturers, distributors, and sellers of converter boxes, if               
 convicted, would be guilty of a class C felony.  Users of                     
 unauthorized boxes could be subject to a penalty of a class A                 
 misdemeanor.                                                                  
                                                                               
 SENATOR DUNCAN asks if this type of theft is occurring at this                
 time.                                                                         
                                                                               
 MR. MUSSER replies that it is.  Presently, Alaska's theft of                  
 service statute makes unauthorized use of converter boxes illegal.            
 But at this time, the theft of services statute is too broad and              
 undefinable.  HB 315 would define the crime.                                  
                                                                               
 Number 381                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR MILLER makes a motion to discharge HB 315 from the Senate             
 State Affairs Committee with individual recommendations.                      
                                                                               
 Number 382                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN, hearing no objection, orders HB 315 released from             
 committee with individual recommendations.                                    
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN brings up HB 402 (PROOF OF MOTOR VEHICLE INSURANCE)            
 as the next order of business before the Senate State Affairs                 
 Committee.  The chairman calls the first witness.                             
                                                                               
 Number 394                                                                    
                                                                               
 JOHN GEORGE, Representing the National Association of Independent             
 Insurers, states HB 402 would correct an unintentional equity.                
 Insurance companies insure specific vehicles.  If a person is                 
 determined to have driven without insurance, or a person has their            
 license suspended, that person is required to file a form SR22 with           
 the State of Alaska, which verifies that that person now has                  
 insurance on their vehicle.  Unfortunately, the SR22 form does not            
 list specific vehicles.  This means a person could have five                  
 vehicles, insure only one, and when an insurance company fills out            
 an SR22 for that driver, the courts interpret that as meaning that            
 person has insurance on all five vehicles.  If one of those                   
 vehicles was an 18 wheel truck, that person's policy would cover              
 that.  The insurance companies feel this is inequitable.  If a                
 person wants coverage on all the vehicles, that should be paid for.           
 If a person does not have an SR22, they are not covered for                   
 vehicles not on their policy.  So a person who is required to file            
 an SR22 actually has broader coverage under their insurance policy            
 than someone who has not broken the law.                                      
                                                                               
 Number 428                                                                    
                                                                               
 MR. GEORGE states a person can get a policy that covers the driver,           
 and not the vehicles they drive.  It may be appropriate for someone           
 who has a number of vehicles to get that type of a policy.                    
 However, if that person loans one of their vehicles to another                
 person, the borrower would not be covered while driving the                   
 borrowed vehicle.  Unless, of course, the borrower had a                      
 conventional policy.                                                          
                                                                               
 SENATOR DONLEY adds the borrower would not be covered if he also is           
 an SR22 driver.                                                               
                                                                               
 Number 449                                                                    
                                                                               
 MR. GEORGE states the standard auto insurance policy covers someone           
 when they are driving someone else's vehicle.                                 
                                                                               
 Number 458                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR states, under a standard policy, if a person owned             
 eight vehicles, but only insured one, he would not be covered while           
 driving one of the seven uninsured vehicles.  However, if that                
 person borrowed a friend's car, that person would be covered.                 
                                                                               
 Number 464                                                                    
                                                                               
 MR. GEORGE responds that is correct.  However, the owner policy is            
 primary.  But if the owner is uninsured or underinsured, then the             
 borrower's insurance would kick in.                                           
                                                                               
 Number 469                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR MILLER asks how many people in the state have SR22's.                 
                                                                               
 Number 474                                                                    
                                                                               
 JUANITA HENSLEY, Chief, Driver Services, Division of Motor                    
 Vehicles, Department of Public Safety says there are currently                
 26,000 persons who have revoked or suspended licenses.  Those                 
 drivers are required to have an SR22 policy at the time they                  
 reinstate their licenses.                                                     
                                                                               
 Number 479                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR wants to ask the Division of Insurance if anyone is            
 keeping track of the claims made and the actual costs of SR22                 
 policies, or if the state is allowing the insurance industry to rip           
 SR22 drivers off as they choose.  He wonders if anyone has ever               
 looked at those policies to see if they reflect the actual cost of            
 insuring those drivers.                                                       
                                                                               
 Number 491                                                                    
                                                                               
 MS. HENSLEY responds that is something the Division of Motor                  
 Vehicles does not track.  She would like to clarify a statement               
 made earlier by Mr. George regarding a commercial vehicle being               
 covered by an SR22.  If that commercial vehicle is operating inter-           
 state, they are required to have a lower limit of liability                   
 insurance of 700,000$.  So their private SR22 would not cover a               
 commercial vehicle.                                                           
                                                                               
 Number 496                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks if there are any further questions of Mr.                 
 George or Ms. Hensley.  Hearing none, the chairman invites Senator            
 Donley to present his testimony.                                              
                                                                               
 Number 498                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR DONLEY states HB 402 will create an especially dangerous              
 situation.  The only people required to show proof of insurance up            
 front, are those drivers who have exhibited some reason for that              
 requirement: drunk drivers, dangerous drivers, persons who have               
 been caught driving previously without insurance.  When mandatory             
 auto insurance was reinstated in 1989, the decision was made to               
 require dangerous drivers to show proof of insurance for all the              
 vehicles they owned.                                                          
                                                                               
 SENATOR DONLEY states he was the prime sponsor of the legislation             
 that was passed in 1989, and he remembers specifically discussing             
 this very point.  The representation that it was a mistake or                 
 inadvertent that dangerous drivers be covered for all the vehicles            
 they own, even though they actually insure just one vehicle, is               
 completely false.  That was the subject of intense discussion and             
 debate, and a vote on this very issue in committee.  Senator Donley           
 states he remembers it very well; he remembers, at the beginning of           
 the discussion, being torn about which side was best.  He was                 
 convinced by the debate that the way the law stands now, is the               
 right thing to do.                                                            
                                                                               
 Number 545                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR DONLEY states HB 402 is simply making it easier for                   
 dangerous and drunk drivers.  Under HB 402, if an SR22 driver                 
 injures a person while driving a vehicle not covered by his policy,           
 the state and social service agencies will end up footing the bill            
 for the accident.                                                             
                                                                               
 SENATOR DONLEY believes the proponents of HB 402 twist the facts to           
 support the bill.                                                             
 SENATOR DONLEY states automatic coverage of all vehicles an SR22              
 driver owns are reflected in the high rates paid by SR22 drivers.             
                                                                               
 He also states it is not entirely true that SR22 drivers are not              
 required to disclose all vehicles under their ownership.  While it            
 is true that SR22 drivers are covered, even when not disclosing all           
 vehicles under their ownership, non-disclosure is clearly grounds             
 for termination of coverage by the insurance company.                         
                                                                               
 SENATOR DONLEY restates the only people he thinks will benefit from           
 HB 402, if their rates are structured properly, are the dangerous           
 drivers.                                                                      
                                                                               
 Number 591                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR DONLEY states a much better option than HB 402 would be to            
 require dangerous drivers to show proof of insurance for every                
 vehicle they own.  Make the policies vehicle specific, and make               
 dangerous drivers insure every vehicle registered to them.                    
                                                                               
 TAPE 94-23, SIDE B                                                            
 Number 593                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR DONLEY continues his analysis of alternatives to HB 402.              
 He thinks that, at a minimum, the penalties for dangerous drivers             
 who do not carry insurance on their vehicles be increased.  HB 402            
 will increase the risk to citizens of the state; it will make the             
 problem worse than it is.                                                     
                                                                               
 SENATOR DONLEY's last point is that the Division of Insurance no              
 longer supports HB 402.  The division is, at a minimum, neutral on            
 HB 402.  The division originally supported HB 402, but they have              
 now withdrawn their support of the bill.                                      
                                                                               
 Number 496                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks if there are any questions of Senator Donley,             
 or if anyone else wishes to testify on the bill.  Hearing none, the           
 chairman asks the pleasure of the committee.                                  
                                                                               
 Number 578                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR MILLER makes a motion to discharge HB 402 from the Senate             
 State Affairs Committee with individual recommendations.                      
                                                                               
 Number 573                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR objects to the motion to discharge HB 402 from the             
 State Affairs Committee.                                                      
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN notes the objection and asks if there is any                   
 discussion regarding the objection.  Hearing none, the chairman               
 asks for a roll-call vote on whether to discharge the bill.                   
                                                                               
 The motion fails, with Chairman Leman and Senator Miller voting in            
 favor of the motion, and Senators Taylor, Ellis, and Duncan voting            
 against the motion.                                                           
 Number 568                                                                    
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN brings up SB 365 (GOVERNOR'S OMNIBUS BILL) as the              
 next order of business before the Senate State Affairs Committee.             
 The chairman announces that the committee has two amendments to               
 SB 365.  Amendment #1 has been suggested by the Department of                 
 Corrections, and amendment #2 has been suggested by the Department            
 of Law.  The chairman offers amendment #1 and moves the amendment.            
                                                                               
 Number 555                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR ELLIS objects for purposes of discussion and asks for an              
 explanation of the amendment.                                                 
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks Ms. Schenker to explain the amendment.                    
                                                                               
 Number 552                                                                    
                                                                               
 DIANE SCHENKER, Special Assistant, Department of Corrections states           
 the amendment would address section 27, line 10.  It would delete             
 the reference to AS 33.30.071 (c).  It is a technical error to                
 refer to subsection (c).  Subsection (c) actually refers to people            
 for which the Department of Corrections does not have medical             
 responsibility.  The rest of the amendment would allow the                    
 department to collect payments from inmates or other sources for a            
 broader scope of services than the medical, psychological, and                
 psychiatric services originally listed.  This would allow the                 
 department to collect for any service provided that is listed under           
 AS 33.30.011 (a).                                                             
                                                                               
 MS. SCHENKER states she is not certain which services might or                
 might not be collected for by the department.  It will depend on              
 the level of tension in the institutions, etcetera.  Not only could           
 it generate some program receipts, but it can also be used to                 
 discourage frivolous use of services.  For instance, persons filing           
 fifty grievances per day.                                                     
                                                                               
 Number 535                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR ELLIS asks Ms. Schenker to explain how the level of tension           
 in an institution could affect the fees that are collected.                   
                                                                               
 Number 533                                                                    
                                                                               
 MS. SCHENKER responds that overcrowding in the institutions causes            
 management problems, and if the tension level is already high, it             
 can cost the state more money than actually will be collected by              
 instituting the fee.  There would be a careful assessment of how              
 well the department is able to manage the population before                   
 instituting collection of fees.  Also, if it is a service to which            
 the inmate has a constitutional right, then obviously the                     
 department cannot charge a fee for that service if the inmate is              
 indigent.                                                                     
                                                                               
 Number 520                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR ELLIS asks if Cleary addresses fees for medical services.             
                                                                               
 Number 516                                                                    
                                                                               
 MS. SCHENKER replies there is nothing specific in Cleary addressing           
 charges for medical services or the other services listed under               
 this section.  Cleary does define an indigent prisoner.  It is very           
 restricted as to what must be provided to indigent prisoners, but             
 it does not speak to fees.                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 509                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks if there is any further objection to amendment            
 adopted.                                                                      
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN offers amendment #2 from the Department of Law.                
 Amendment #2 redrafts section 33 of AS 37.07.060.  The chairman               
 asks if there is anyone from the executive branch to address the              
 redrafting of section 33.                                                     
                                                                               
 Number 495                                                                    
                                                                               
 CLYDE STOLTZFUS, Special Assistant, Department of Transportation &            
 Public Facilities states he initially raised the question about the           
 original draft of section 33.  Mr. Stoltzfus states the original              
 draft was not understandable.                                                 
                                                                               
 Number 490                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks if everyone understands the redraft of section            
 33.  Hearing no comment, the chairman asks if there is any                    
 objection to the adoption of amendment #2.  Hearing none, the                 
 chairman states the amendment has been adopted.                               
                                                                               
 Number 483                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks Mr. Stoltzfus, under section 10, if the term              
 "standard plans and specifications" should be changed to the term             
 "standard drawings and specifications".                                       
                                                                               
 MR. STOLTZFUS responds the chairman is correct, and the term should           
 be changed.                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks if there is objection to using the term                   
 "standard drawings and specifications" and offers that change as              
 amendment #3.                                                                 
                                                                               
 Number 466                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN, hearing no objection, states amendment #3 has been            
 adopted.                                                                      
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks, under section 42, line 9, what is intended to            
 be regulated under the term "sewerage".                                       
                                                                               
 Number 449                                                                    
                                                                               
 DEENA HENKINS, Chief, Drinking Water & Wastewater Section,                    
 Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) states that language           
 is intended to make clear that DEC can delegate sewer system                  
 (sewerage) plan review to other competent government agencies.                
 However, she does not think it is important whether the term sewer            
 system or sewerage is used there.  Sewerage is just all-                      
 encompassing.                                                                 
                                                                               
 Number 433                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN states it would be his preference to use the most              
 precise term.  The chairman asks if it is intended that the term be           
 applied only to domestic sewerage.                                            
                                                                               
 MS. HENKINS replies the term is intended to apply to domestic                 
 sewerage.                                                                     
                                                                               
 Number 426                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN offers, as amendment #4, to delete the words                   
 "wastewater collections and", and asks if there is any objection.             
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN, hearing no objection, states amendment #4 has been            
 adopted.                                                                      
                                                                               
 Number 424                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN notes there is similar language on lines 13 and 14,            
 and asks, as amendment #5, that "wastewater collection and" be                
 deleted.                                                                      
                                                                               
 Number 419                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR asks what authority the State of Alaska has to                 
 impose state law on a military facility or base.                              
                                                                               
 Number 416                                                                    
                                                                               
 MS. HENKINS states she is an engineer and not an attorney, but she            
 thinks it can depend on whether there is a federal law that gives             
 the state that authority.  She also thinks there are executive                
 orders telling the military to comply with state and local                    
 regulations as well.                                                          
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks if there is objection to amendment #5.  Hearing           
 none, the chairman states amendment #5 has been adopted.                      
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks Ms. Henkins what the reason is to have, on page           
 16, lines 5 and 7, why the language states, "sewerage system or               
 treatment works", and asks why "treatment works" is included.                 
                                                                               
 MS. HENKINS thinks that may be more in line with Title 46 of Alaska           
 Statutes.                                                                     
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN states if that language is already in statute, he              
 will not go into it.                                                          
                                                                               
 Number 396                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR makes a motion to delete section 38, 39, 42, and               
 those provisions within section 43 impacted by that be deleted.               
                                                                               
 Number 388                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR ELLIS objects to that motion.                                         
                                                                               
 Number 387                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR states his reasons for that motion are because the             
 department will establish regulations increasing fees wherever the            
 department determines that they have an "indirect cost".  It is               
 obvious to him that DEC is reaching out to further increase what he           
 considers to be already astronomically high fees.  He thinks                  
 everything DEC is doing under this authority is offensive.                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR then adds he will also ask that, as his next                   
 amendment, AS 44.46.025 (a).                                                  
                                                                               
 Number 363                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN notes that there was objection to Senator Taylor's             
 first motion.  The chairman lists the sections Senator Taylor just            
 motioned to be deleted and notes that section 42 is the section the           
 committee just worked on amendments to.  Chairman Leman states he             
 also objects to Senator Taylor's motion.                                      
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR withdraws his motion, saying he does not think the             
 state has any business "dinking" around with military facilities.             
 SENATOR TAYLOR states he will modify his amendment so as not to               
 delete section 42.                                                            
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks if there is any objection from the committee to           
 the amendment to the amendment.  Hearing no further objection, the            
 chairman states Senator Taylor's amendment has been amended.                  
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN states Senator Taylor's amendment now is to delete             
 sections 38, 39, and those portions of section 43 that relate to              
 those two sections.                                                           
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR states he did not ask to delete section 39.  All he            
 wanted was sections relating to DEC.                                          
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN clarifies that Senator Taylor only wanted his                  
 amendment to delete section 38 and those portions of section 43               
 that relate to DEC.                                                           
                                                                               
 SENATOR DUNCAN asks that Senator Taylor withdraw his original                 
 motion for an amendment and propose a new amendment.                          
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR makes a motion to withdraw his amendment.                      
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN, hearing no objection, states Senator Taylor's                 
 amendment has been withdrawn.                                                 
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR proposes a new amendment, that being to delete                 
 section 38 and replace it with, " AS 44.46.025 (a) is hereby                  
 repealed."                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR DUNCAN and SENATOR ELLIS object to Senator Taylor's                   
 amendment.                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN notes objection has been made and asks Ms. Henkins             
 if she would like to speak to the amendment.                                  
                                                                               
 Number 315                                                                    
                                                                               
 MS. HENKINS states she deals principally with fees for drinking and           
 wastewater issues, including plan reviews and permit issuing.  In             
 her opinion, DEC has taken a very conservative approach in                    
 establishing fees for services.  Fees typically reflect the time of           
 the professional involved in the permitting process.  For the most            
 part, DEC has avoided fees based on hourly computations because of            
 potential abuses of that.  DEC's fees currently only recover a                
 fraction of the direct costs involved.                                        
                                                                               
 Number 290                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN states adding the words "and indirect" to page 15,             
 line 2 trouble him.                                                           
                                                                               
 MS. HENKINS responds that language is to allow DEC to come closer             
 to recovering the entire cost of some of the programs.                        
                                                                               
 Number 283                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks what is included in direct costs at this time.            
                                                                               
 Number 280                                                                    
                                                                               
 MS. HENKINS replies she is speaking only for those fees in which              
 she has been personally involved, says it tends to be the cost of             
 the one person conducting the plan review or issuing the permit.              
 It hasn't included any kind of clerical support, management costs,            
 or any other costs.  Taken into the calculations are the salary and           
 benefit costs of the person involved.                                         
                                                                               
 Number 259                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR states he does not understand what the additional,             
 indirect costs are, since inspections, permit preparation,                    
 administration, plan review- administration ought to include every            
 secretary.  He cannot imagine an indirect cost that is not                    
 currently included in law.                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 252                                                                    
                                                                               
 MS. HENKINS responds that if that is Senator Taylor's                         
 interpretation, then Ms. Henkins would certainly not have any                 
 objection to deleting the "and indirect".                                     
                                                                               
 Number 248                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR asks why ten through fourteen (unclear as to what he           
 is referring) have been added.                                                
                                                                               
 Number 245                                                                    
                                                                               
 MS. HENKINS replies she can personally only speak to about three of           
 these.  The on-site water and sewer system certification and audit            
 program is in reference to section 41.  This is the so-called bank            
 loan certification program, where banks want DEC, or someone                  
 overseen by DEC to look at the water and sewer systems on a                   
 property before making a loan on that property.  For about ten                
 years, DEC did do this, as a service to the banks.  In 1990 it was            
 estimated that the program was costing the department 540,000$ per            
 year.  DEC instituted a 250$ fee for those inspections in early               
 1993.  When the FY 94 wastewater budget was cut, DEC elected to try           
 to back out of the bank loan certification program, because it is             
 not required by Alaska Statute or regulations.  The lenders simply            
 will not let DEC get entirely out of the program.  So DEC is                  
 proposing a statute allowing registered engineers to do the                   
 certifications, with an audit of the engineers to satisfy the banks           
 that the engineers are doing adequate certifications.  DEC proposes           
 that they be allowed to charge a fee to audit the engineers doing             
 the certifications.                                                           
                                                                               
 Number 220                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN agrees that the private sector should be doing these           
 certifications.  He thinks the banks and lending institutions are             
 being overly cautious in this case.                                           
                                                                               
 Number 206                                                                    
                                                                               
 MS. HENKINS agrees that professional engineers can easily do these            
 certifications.  However, the banks do not agree and want at least            
 minimal involvement by DEC or say they simply will not lend.  DEC             
 thinks the program provided for in section 41 is the least costly             
 way DEC can continue to be involved, while making sure that the               
 banks will continue to lend.                                                  
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN appreciates the department working to try to resolve           
 this problem.                                                                 
                                                                               
 Number 193                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR states this is not the least costly way.  What we              
 are talking about is DEC wanting to get out of the business of                
 testing drinking water for people in Alaska.  To suggest the evil             
 banks and lending institutions are behind this is garbage.  We                
 can't even have decent water and sewage systems for half of our               
 villages.                                                                     
                                                                               
 Number 174                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN notes for Senator Taylor that the Municipality of              
 Anchorage has had this type of program for a number of years.  The            
 chairman further states that he does not think DEC should be doing            
 a lot of the testing that it does; the testing should be done by              
 private laboratories.                                                         
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks if there is further discussion regarding the              
 amendment.  Hearing none, the chairman asks if there is objection             
 to the amendment.                                                             
                                                                               
 SENATOR DUNCAN voices his objection to the amendment.                         
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN restates the amendment, it being to delete section             
 38 and repeal the ability of the Department of Environmental                  
 Conservation to collect fees.  The chairman asks for a roll-call              
 vote on adoption of the amendment.                                            
                                                                               
 The adoption of the amendment fails by 2 yeas, 3 nays, with                   
 Senators Miller and Taylor voting in favor of the amendment, and              
 Chairman Leman and Senators Ellis and Duncan voting against the               
 amendment.                                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 145                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN offers amendment #7, which would delete "and                   
 indirect" on page 15, line 2.                                                 
                                                                               
 SENATOR ELLIS voices objection to amendment #7.                               
                                                                               
 Number 141                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR makes a motion to amend amendment #7 by also                   
 deleting lines 21 through 30.                                                 
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks Senator Taylor if he would offer that as a                
 separate amendment.                                                           
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR withdraws his amendment to amendment #7.                       
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asks if there are questions on amendment #7.                   
 Hearing none, the chairman asks if there are continued objections             
 to the amendment.                                                             
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN, hearing continued objection, asks that a roll-call            
 vote be taken on the amendment.                                               
                                                                               
 Amendment #7 fails by a vote of 2 yeas, 3 nays.  Voting in favor of           
 the amendment are Chairman Leman and Senator Miller, voting against           
 the amendment are Senators Taylor, Ellis, and Duncan.                         
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN announce SB 365 will not be passed from the Senate             
 State Affairs Committee today.                                                
 Number 122                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN LEMAN adjourns the Senate State Affairs Committee meeting            
 at 10:35 a.m.                                                                 
                                                                               

Document Name Date/Time Subjects