03/14/2023 03:30 PM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB46 | |
| SB21 | |
| SB9 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 46 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 21 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 9 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
March 14, 2023
3:31 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Scott Kawasaki, Chair
Senator Matt Claman, Vice Chair
Senator Jesse Bjorkman
Senator Kelly Merrick
Senator Bill Wielechowski
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 46
"An Act establishing the month of March as Brain Injury
Awareness Month."
- HEARD & HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 21
"An Act relating to the Executive Budget Act; relating to
strategic plans, mission statements, performance plans, and
financial plans for executive branch agencies; and providing for
an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 9
"An Act establishing a violation for hindering the Alaska Sunset
Commission; relating to the Legislative Budget and Audit
Committee; relating to the duties of the legislature; relating
to the legislative audit division and the legislative finance
division; establishing the Alaska Sunset Commission to review
and make recommendations on discontinuation of or changes to
state entities; relating to the powers and duties of the Alaska
Sunset Commission; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 46
SHORT TITLE: BRAIN INJURY AWARENESS MONTH
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) TOBIN
01/25/23 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/25/23 (S) STA
03/14/23 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: SB 21
SHORT TITLE: STRATEGIC PLANS FOR STATE AGENCIES
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) KAUFMAN
01/18/23 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/9/23
01/18/23 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/18/23 (S) STA, FIN
03/14/23 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: SB 9
SHORT TITLE: ALASKA SUNSET COMMISSION
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) HUGHES
01/18/23 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/9/23
01/18/23 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/18/23 (S) STA, JUD, FIN
03/14/23 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR LÖKI TOBIN, District I
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 46.
MACKENZIE POPE, Staff
Senator Löki Tobin
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the sectional analysis for SB 46
on behalf of the sponsor.
ANNA ZIERFUSS, Acting Chair
Brain Injury Council of Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided invited testimony in support of SB
46.
ANNETTE ALFONSI, community activist on brain injury issues
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided invited testimony in support of SB
46.
MARIE WILSON, affiliate
Access Alaska
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 46.
LISA MALONEY, representing self
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 46.
PAMELA SAMASH, member
Right to Life Interior Alaska
Nenana, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 46.
MIKE MASON, Staff
Senator Löki Tobin
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Read the fiscal note analysis for SB 46.
NEIL STEININGER, Director
Office of Management and Budget
Department of Administration
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided invited testimony on SB 21.
SENATOR JAMES KAUFMAN, District F
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 21.
MATHEW HARVEY, Staff
Senator James Kaufman
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented a PowerPoint during the
introductory hearing on SB 21.
SENATOR SHELLEY HUGHES, District M
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 9.
BRIAN FRANCIS, Executive Director
Texas Sunset Advisory Commission
Austin, Texas
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided invited testimony on SB 9.
STEVEN OGLE, Deputy Director & General Counsel
Texas Sunset Advisory Commission
Austin, Texas
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided invited testimony on SB 9.
MEAD TREADWELL, former Lieutenant Governor
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided invited testimony on SB 9.
PAMELA SAMASH, representing self
Nenana, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 9.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:31:43 PM
CHAIR SCOTT KAWASAKI called the Senate State Affairs Standing
Committee meeting to order at 3:31 p.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Kaufman, Merrick, Claman, and Chair
Kawasaki. Senator Wielechowski arrived soon thereafter.
SB 46-BRAIN INJURY AWARENESS MONTH
3:32:36 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 46
"An Act establishing the month of March as Brain Injury
Awareness Month."
He stated this was the first hearing and the intention was to
hear the introduction, take invited and public testimony, and
hold the bill for future consideration.
He invited Senator Löki Tobin and Mackenzie Pope to introduce
the bill.
3:32:58 PM
SENATOR LÖKI TOBIN, District I, Alaska State Legislature,
Juneau, Alaska, sponsor of SB 46, introduced the legislation
speaking to the sponsor statement.
Senate Bill 46 would designate each March as Brain
Injury Awareness Month in Alaska. This will help focus
public attention on the prevalence of brain injuries
and highlight ways to prevent these injuries.
Both traumatic and acquired brain injuries can happen
to anyone. These injuries can bring a lifetime of
secondary health conditions, including persistent
concussion symptoms, post-traumatic stress injury,
physical impairment, and developmental delays.
It's estimated that 3.2 to 5 million Americans live
with long-term disabilities due to brain injuries, and
Alaska has one of the highest rates of traumatic brain
injuries in the nation. The Brain Injury Association
of America reports that every 9 seconds, someone in
the U.S. sustains a brain injury. The Department of
Defense reports that over 430,000 service members have
sustained traumatic brain injuries since 2000.
Thousands of lives are impacted every day by brain
injuries even though most traumatic brain injuries are
preventable, especially by wearing a seatbelt when in
a vehicle and wearing a helmet when skiing, biking,
and snow-machining.
Permanently designating each March as Brain Injury
Awareness Month in Alaska will increase public
awareness about the dangers of brain injuries and,
potentially, help prevent future brain injuries among
Alaskans. We ask for your support.
3:36:14 PM
MACKENZIE POPE, Staff, Senator Löki Tobin, Alaska State
Legislature Juneau, Alaska, presented the sectional analysis for
SB 46.
Section 1 Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska to add a new section recognizing the importance
of brain injury awareness in the State of Alaska.
Section 2 Amends AS 44.12 by adding a new section to
article 2 establishing the month of March as Brain
Injury Awareness Month in Alaska. This allows schools,
community groups, and other public and private
agencies and individuals to observe Brain Injury
Awareness Month with appropriate activities that
increase the public's awareness of the prevention and
treatment of brain injuries.
CHAIR KAWASAKI turned to invited testimony.
3:37:28 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI joined the committee.
3:37:32 PM
ANNA ZIERFUSS, Acting Chair, Brain Injury Council of Alaska,
Anchorage, Alaska, provided invited testimony in support of SB
46. She paraphrased her prepared testimony.
I am here to testify in support of this bill, which
would primarily make the month of March Brain Injury
Awareness Month. This would lend stability to the
outreach throughout the state and further the message
that this is important in Alaska. The statistics about
brain injury in Alaska paint a grim picture. From 2016
to 2018, Alaska had one of the highest number of
deaths from traumatic brain injury (TBI) in the
nation. The Alaska Native and American Indian
populations had a higher proportion of the brain
injuries from assault, ATV, and snow machine
accidents, and the lowest rate of access to care.
Overall, Alaska has one of the highest rates
nationwide for any type of brain injury. This is seen
in children whose learning is permanently affected; in
teens who are injured in sports and are never properly
diagnosed; in adults who are affected by homelessness
and domestic violence; and in seniors who are
misdiagnosed because of age-related disabilities. All
segments of the population are touched, whether as a
survivor, caregiver, family, or friend. An individual
who gets a brain injury is twice as likely to suffer
another TBI or get addicted to alcohol or drugs.
Eighty-seven percent of adults in the justice system
have had a TBI; 50 percent of the homeless suffered a
TBI before becoming homeless; death by suicide is four
times more likely in individuals who sustain a TBI.
MS. ZIERFUSS conveyed her personal story of being among the 20-
30 percent of individuals who sustained a mild to moderate brain
injury from concussion and did not fully recover. Six years ago
she sustained a moderate concussion after slipping on black ice
and hitting her head. She lived in a haze of pain and fog for
two years before she found a doctor at an urgent care center who
had experience in brain injuries from his time in Afghanistan
and working with veterans. She gave him carte blanche to
experiment on her with medications, nutraceuticals, and
therapies. In year five her doctor tried a new medication. It
masked her pain and haze and gave her more mental energy to get
through the day. She still has severe limitations and the two
things that were integral to her soul - time with her son and
singing, were taken from her.
MS. ZIERFUSS urged the committee to pass SB 46, which would
bring awareness to this issue and be the first step in bringing
more services to Alaska for survivors and their families.
3:43:52 PM
ANNETTE ALFONSI, community activist on brain injury issues,
Anchorage, Alaska, provided invited testimony in support of SB
46. She relayed her story about persistent concussion symptoms.
She was looking at graduate school before she was in a rollover
accident in 2012. She sustained a concussion the symptoms of
which became persistent. She was given medication that is
contraindicated for brain injury recovery and subsequently told
that she was not in a category that people care to help.
She described helping to plan annual educational events only to
be told that she could not attend because she was a patient. She
said this contributes to a "don't ask don't tell" mentality of
disability. She now plans events with people who want
multidisciplinary standards of excellence around neurological
wellness in Alaska, and everybody is invited. She described the
website she launched this year that has on-demand credits for
attorneys and occupational therapists. She also described being
the volunteer Alaska partner for the international project for
unmasking brain injury. Alaska stories and associated art about
brain injury can be viewed at the website
unmaskingbraininjury.org. Alaskans with brain injury are not
alone.
MS. ALFONSI spoke about inappropriate and fiscally inefficient
training programs to become a certified brain injury specialist,
the need to offer a shorter work week to people with a brain
injury, and the importance of timely treatment. She emphasized
that there is a place for everyone in the community, even those
with brain injury symptoms. She expressed hope that long-term
brain injury symptoms will become a thing of the past in the
21st Century.
MS. ALFONSI urged the committee to pass SB 46.
3:48:57 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI opened public testimony on SB 46.
3:49:18 PM
MARIE WILSON, affiliate, Access Alaska, Wasilla, Alaska,
testified in support of SB 46. She relayed her story of getting
a brain injury nine years ago after being hit from behind by a
drunk driver who was speeding. She is grateful for the
opportunity to share her story and know people are listening.
3:51:30 PM
LISA MALONEY, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 46. She is looking at the benefits that can come
from greater recognition and awareness of brain injury. She
realizes that she is surrounded by people who have been affected
by traumatic brain injury and didn't get treatment timely.
3:54:45 PM
PAMELA SAMASH, member Right to Life Interior Alaska, Nenana,
Alaska, testified in support of SB 46. She initially thought the
bill included Alzheimer's but now realizes that TBI can lead to
that disease. She hopes this awareness will lead to more
recognition of and help for special needs children in the state.
CHAIR KAWASAKI asked the sponsor if she had any closing remarks.
3:57:13 PM
SENATOR TOBIN said she'd like Mr. Mason to review the fiscal
note.
3:57:31 PM
MIKE MASON, Staff, Senator Löki Tobin, Alaska State Legislature,
Juneau, Alaska, read the following fiscal note analysis for SB
46 that was submitted by the Office of Management and Budget.
This bill establishes March as Brain Injury Awareness
Month. The administration does not anticipate any
programmatic effects to departments as a result of
this legislation; therefore, a zero fiscal note for
all agencies is submitted.
SENATOR MERRICK stated that she was a proud co-sponsor of SB 46.
She asked if there was a reason for selecting March and if other
issues were highlighted for awareness in March.
SENATOR TOBIN answered that the Department of Defense (DoF)
recognizes March as Brain Injury Awareness Month, so this
ensures that the awareness is co-branded in Alaska and on the
military bases in the state. She noted that March also has
noteworthy birthdays, the start of the Iditarod, and the
recognition of Women's History Month.
MR. MASON reminded the committee that resolutions were
introduced for several years proclaiming March as Brain Injury
Awareness Month. But it's such an important issue it was brought
forward as a bill, first last year by former Representative Tuck
and Senator Tobin this year.
3:59:37 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI closed public testimony on SB 46 and held the
bill in committee.
3:59:57 PM
At ease
SB 21-STRATEGIC PLANS FOR STATE AGENCIES
4:01:47 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI reconvened the meeting and announced the
consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 21 "An Act relating to the
Executive Budget Act; relating to strategic plans, mission
statements, performance plans, and financial plans for executive
branch agencies; and providing for an effective date."
He stated this was the first hearing and the intention was to
hear the introduction, take invited and public testimony, and
hold the bill for future consideration.
He asked Mr. Steininger to provide an overview of the current
budget process.
4:02:22 PM
NEIL STEININGER, Director, Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), Department of Administration, Juneau, Alaska, stated that
he was asked to review the current budget process and the
documents that are included with the budget to explain what the
agencies are doing with the money the legislature appropriates.
He explained that the budget cycle the public sees begins when
the governor releases the budget on December 15, continues when
the legislature convenes in January, and completes when the
legislature passes the budget and returns it to the governor.
For the executive agencies, the budget is a year-round process.
OMB works with state agencies to review the budget that passed,
makes plans to execute the appropriations, and makes
recommendations to the governor about potential veto actions.
OMB works with the state agencies throughout the summer to
understand needed realignments that are within OMB's statutory
authority to make internally. The end product is the Management
Plan, which is also the starting point for the next year's
budget. It's analogous to what Legislative Finance calls the
Adjusted Base Budget. This is produced in the same time period
that agencies are closing their prior fiscal year's budget.
Towards the end of July, OMB issues a Guidance from the Governor
memo that informs state agencies about the executive's
expectations for the next year's budget. Thereafter, the
agencies develop and present their proposed budgets to OMB in
the September timeframe. Throughout the process, agency staff
has been working to provide the technical work and backup
documentation that is additional information on the core mission
and deliverables of each department. This work product is
referred to as the Budget Books. This documentation, which is
laid out in statute, is what SB 21 seeks to amend.
MR. STEININGER explained that the Budget Books currently
reference the statute attached to a given budget component and
lists the existing or future challenges that impede achieving
that component objective. The Budget Books also contain detailed
reports about how the positions in a component are spent, the
planned expenditures, expenditures in prior years, and
descriptions of the year-over-year changes in the budget
proposed by the governor.
He described the performance measures in the Budget Books as
inconsistent in value. Every state agency is supposed to provide
performance measures that give objective statistics on how well
the agency is delivering on their statutory missions. Some, but
not all, of the information is useful to the budgeting process.
Internally, OMB challenges state agencies to review the
information in the Budget Books and improve their performance
measures, but that's not always a high priority during a busy
time. Ultimately, that information is the primary documentation
for the public to understand what's done with the appropriations
and the reason for current requests.
4:12:33 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN asked whether the performance measures were
written in statute, established by regulation, or metrics the
departments believe are reasonable.
MR. STIININGER replied that statute requires a system to measure
performance. The system is a web portal that OMB maintains, but
the measures are set by the agencies. What he's seen over eight
legislative sessions is that the quality of the information is
dependent on the culture of the given department and the
commissioner's focus.
SENATOR CLAMAN asked whether the measures the department
determines are important are put into regulation or simply
internal documents that could change at any time.
MR. STEINGER replied that the measures that are on the website
or in the Budget Books could change the following year.
4:15:53 PM
SENATOR JAMES KAUFMAN, District F, Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska, sponsor of SB 21, stated that his goal today is
to make performance management, budgeting, and strategic plans
exciting. He briefly summarized the sponsor statement that read
as follows:
SB 21 reorganizes the Executive Budget Act (EBA) to
better integrate the planning and budgeting processes
used by the executive and legislative branches. Alaska
is often in the news for the wrong reasons. When
national rankings of performance metrics in key social
and economic areas are released, we often come in
close to the bottom. This is true for education,
health, public safety, and many other critical areas.
We spend billions to serve a relatively small
population, but somehow improvement seems elusive
sometimes impossibleto achieve. We live in a
beautiful and truly amazing state, but the performance
of our state programs has not done justice to our
potential.
The State of Alaska is a vast and complex multi-
billion-dollar enterprise, but we do not have a well-
developed and fully integrated Operations Management
System and Quality Management System (OMS/QMS). We
have fragments of an appropriate enterprise-scale
performance management system, but nothing that can
properly manage an enterprise of our magnitude.
So, the question is: How can we start to drive a
higher level of performance in our state agencies? How
can we rise to meet our many challenges while
simultaneously successfully improving the cost to
benefit ratio of our programs?
Fortunately, the answer to that question is available,
and has been successfully implemented by high
performing organizations in both the public and
private sector. We have adapted those successful
systems into SB 21 as it is today. SB 21 reorganizes
the Executive Budget Act. Under the new system, every
annual budgeting cycle will occur within the framework
of a 4-year strategic plan, biennial updates to that
strategic plan, and yearly performance management &
execution plans. The people managing and doing the
work will set goals, objectives, and key performance
metrics that honor the legislative intent confirmed
with every budget cycle. That way, each year, the
legislature will consider department budgets that are
aligned with strategic and performance plans.
Transitioning to this form of planning, budgeting, and
performance management will put us on a path towards a
more efficient and stronger future. Our Operations
Management System will guide how our enterprise runs,
while the Quality Management System will address how
we continually improve and how those improvements are
sustained. SB 21 does not provide an instant cure for
all problems. But by reforming the EBAwhich is the
foundation of how we plan, manage, measure, and fund
our programswe will be able to pursue other, more
comprehensive continuous improvement processes that
will lead to a better future for Alaska.
4:18:46 PM
MATHEW HARVEY, Staff, Senator James Kaufman, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, presented a PowerPoint during the
introductory hearing on SB 21 relating to strategic planning,
budgeting, execution, and reporting to improve outcomes and
address longstanding performance and management issues.
MR. HARVEY began on slide 2 with an overview of the
presentation.
• Problem Statement
• Current State
o AS 37.07 The Executive Budget Act (EBA)
• Proposed Future State: SB 21
o Structural Changes to AS 37.07
o Plan Content Summaries
o Boards and Commissions
• Benefits
• Examples
MR. HARVEY advanced to slide 3, "Problem Statement," and spoke
to the following:
• Alaska's management of programs and projects has not
been as strong as many citizens expect from their
government
• Alaska consistently scores lower than other states
in key metrics
o e.g. No. 45 overall in US News' best states
square4 https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/alaska
o e.g. Received a C- Report Card for Infrastructure
by ASCE
square4 https://infrastructurereportcard.org/state-
item/alaska/
• Alaska has fragments of an appropriate enterprise-
scale management system, but not something that
cohesively blends operational, performance, and
quality management
• How can we start to drive a higher level of
performance while successfully improving our overall
cost/benefit ratio?
4:20:29 PM
MR. HARVEY continued to slide 4, "Current Executive Budget Act,"
and reviewed the following:
• Title 37: Public Finance
• Chapter 07: Executive Budget Act
Sec. 37.07.010. Statement of policy.
It is the purpose of this chapter to establish a
comprehensive system for state program and financial
management that furthers the capacity of the governor
and legislature to plan and finance the services that
they determine the state will provide for
• Describes the role of the legislature, OMB, and the
governor in the budgeting and program execution process
• Includes two sections which deal mainly with planning and
performance
o 37.07.050 Agency program and financial plans; mission
statements
o 37.07.080 Program Execution
4:21:30 PM
MR. HARVEY advanced to slide 5, "Proposed Future State: SB 21,"
and spoke to the following:
• Responsibility Change (Measures/targets set by
executive branch)
• Planning Hierarchy and increased organization
o Statewide Priorities (3-6 long-term priorities
set by governor)
o Strategic Plans (4-year plan, updated at least
every two years)
square4 Mission, goals, and objectives for each agency
o Performance Plans (Annual Plan)
square4 Program structure and performance
history/targets
o Financial Plans (Annual Plan)
square4 Financial History and Budget information
• Transparency and Reporting
o Quarterly Performance Reports: Progress towards
targets
o All plans and reports are posted on a single,
public website
4:22:40 PM
MR. HARVEY explained that slide 6 is a graphic that illustrates
the hierarchy of plan locations and planning cadence.
Plan Location includes:
Governor's Recommendations,
Agency Strategic Plans, and
Performance and Financial Plans
Planning Cadence includes:
Long-term priorities submitted annually with budget and rarely
updated,
4-year plans that are updated every 2 years, and
Annual plans
4:23:06 PM
MR. HARVEY advanced to slide 7, "Structural Changes to AS
37.07," and spoke to the following:
• Title Change of AS 37.07.016: Governor's use of
strategic plans, mission statements, and performance
plans
• Title Change of AS 37.07.050: Agency strategic
plans; mission statements
o Refocuses this section on strategic plans and
changes title due to moving performance and
financial information
• New Section AS 37.07.055: Specific requirements for
Boards/Commissions
• New Section AS 37.07.085: Performance and Financial
Plan section
4:24:21 PM
MR. HARVEY advanced to slide 8, "Agency Strategic Plans AS
37.07.050," and reviewed the following:
• 4-Year Strategic Plans submitted at the beginning of
each gubernatorial term
• Updated at least once every two years
• Includes:
o Description of strategic plan and mission
statement
o 3-6 goals for the agency
o Specific, measurable, realistic, and timely
objectives
o Methods of gathering user group opinions
o Population served by the agency and population
trends
o Key external factors that could affect progress
o Required legislation and regulatory changes
4:25:21 PM
MR. HARVEY advanced to slide 9 "Agency Performance Plans New AS
37.07.085(b)," and spoke to the following:
• Annual Plan submitted to Legislature by December
15th of each year
• Includes:
o Description of the agency's program structure and
proposed changes
o Identification of each program's constitutional
or statutory authority
o A program purpose statement: describes the
services provided, customers served, and the
benefit or intended outcome of the program
o Identify performance measures aligned with
strategic plan
square4 Identify goals and objectives that the measures
correspond to
o Identify results for each performance measure
over the past four years
o Identify performance targets for each measure for
the next fiscal year
4:26:28 PM
MR. HARVEY advanced to slide 10, "Agency Financial Plans New AS
37.085(c)," and described the following:
• Annual Plan submitted to Legislature by December
15th of each year
• Includes:
o Revenue and expenditures for each program for
prior four fiscal years
o Breakdowns: Amounts received by each revenue
source and expended on each type of expenditure
o Estimates of revenue and expenditures for current
and next fiscal year
o Budget requested for succeeding fiscal year
o Number of positions employed or under contract
o Cost of services provided by each program
o Report of receipts made last year, estimates for
current and next year
o Other Information (expenditures authorized,
required legislation, etc.)
4:27:16 PM
MR. HARVEY advanced to slide 11, "Boards and Commissions New AS
37.07.055," and described the following additions:
• Creates a section specific for Boards and
Commissions
• Boards and Commissions must annually provide a
financial plan:
o Budget requested for next year
o Expenditures made last year, authorized this
year, and proposed for next year
o Explanation of services to be provided next year,
including need for and cost of services
o Number of total positions employed or under
contract by the board or commission
o A report of receipts made last fiscal year and
estimated for the current and next fiscal year
o Identified legislation
• Boards and Commissions must annually provide a plan
for operation of programs
• Boards and Commissions shall develop a method of
measuring results
• A closeout report is required upon termination of
the board, commission, and agency programs related
to the board or commission
4:28:22 PM
MR. HARVEY advanced to slide 12, "Benefits," and provided the
following high-level overview:
• Align the strategy of all agencies with a governor's
statewide priorities
• Link short term tactics/funding to mid-range,
department-level strategy
• Push responsibility for defining measures and
targets to the executive branch. The people closest
to the customers of services
• Reduce duplication of goal-setting and financial
information at a program or component level
• Increase the level of detail regarding program
structure and program definition
4:29:07 PM
MR. HARVEY advanced to slide 13, "Examples," and described the
following:
• Federal Government (GPRAMA)
o https://www.gao.gov/leading-practices-managing-
results-government
• AZ Strategic Plans: https://azospb.gov/
• North Carolina:
o https://www.osbm.nc.gov/operational-
excellence/strategic-planning/strategic-
planning-guide
• New Mexico: Accountability in Government Act
o https://www.nmlegis.gov/entity/lfc/Documents/
Accountability_In_Goverment_Act/
Legislating%20For%20Results.pdf
• Other Guides
o https://www.osc.state.ny.us/files/local-
government/publications/pdf/strategic_
planning.pdf
o https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/
publication/62616/410067-State-
Approaches-to-Governing-For-Results-and-
Accountability.PDF
4:30:08 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked Mr. Steininger whether he supports
the bill and thinks it will make his job easier and whether it's
feasible and would be helpful for future planning.
MR. STEININGER answered that the administration does not have an
official position on the bill. His observations were that some
of the things in the Budget Books don't add as much value as
they could; some of the work that's drafted in the books is
duplicative; and some of the work inserted by analysists and
agencies isn't used in the budget deliberation process. To the
question about whether the bill would benefit the state, he said
he believes that it's beneficial to look at whether the
legislature and public is using what agencies are required to
produce for budget deliberations.
4:32:35 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI commented that the goal of improving
government efficiency and productivity has merit. He asked Mr.
Steininger to comment on whether the state was operating at
optimal efficiency.
MR. STEININGER replied that he couldn't say that that the state
would ever be 100 percent efficient. He supports having a
mechanism to look at whether things are being done well. He
noted that OMB requested a position for an internal auditor to
look at whether the work being done by the agencies was
achieving the intended goal. SB 21 seems to be a bill that could
help that process.
4:34:17 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN asked if there was anything in SB 21 that a
department couldn't do today in terms of developing new or
changing existing performance metrics.
MR. STEININGER responded that departments currently could
improve their performance metrics and some agencies have worked
to do that within the existing statutory structure. He restated
that this only happens when a particular commissioner has the
organizational mindset to effectuate such a change. By contrast,
SB 21 seems to mandate that focus and effort.
SENATOR CLAMAN observed that regardless of the mandate, it would
likely come down to how much the departments want to do.
MR. STEININGER agreed.
4:37:32 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN asked the sponsor what the bill adds that
couldn't be done today if the governor wanted to push improved
performance metrics.
SENATOR KAUFMAN explained that the bill creates a standardized
improved management framework for setting key goals and
objectives. When governments and corporations have a good
structure, the key goals and objectives flow down and strategic
management plans come back up, are evaluated, and operating
plans are set. This creates a conveyor belt for performance that
is standard across the entire executive branch. It's not that
this doesn't exist today, but not as a standardized performance
management framework for operations. This standardization
provides the opportunity to incrementally improve the management
structure across the entire executive branch.
4:40:48 PM
SENATOR MERRICK asked whether aligning the strategic plans with
the gubernatorial terms might create unnecessary political
overtones as opposed to the off years.
SENATOR KAUFMAN acknowledged that timing was an important
consideration and that separation of powers was another area
that needed more attention.
4:43:36 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI opened public testimony on SB 21; finding none,
he closed public testimony.
SENATOR KAUFMAN thanked the committee for hearing the bill.
4:44:08 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI held SB 21 in committee.
4:44:11 PM
At ease
SB 9-ALASKA SUNSET COMMISSION
4:44:56 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI reconvened the meeting and announced the
consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 9 "An Act establishing a
violation for hindering the Alaska Sunset Commission; relating
to the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee; relating to the
duties of the legislature; relating to the legislative audit
division and the legislative finance division; establishing the
Alaska Sunset Commission to review and make recommendations on
discontinuation of or changes to state entities; relating to the
powers and duties of the Alaska Sunset Commission; and providing
for an effective date."
He stated this was the first hearing and the intention was to
hear the introduction, take invited and public testimony, and
hold the bill for future consideration.
4:45:28 PM
SENATOR SHELLEY HUGHES, District M, Alaska State Legislature,
Juneau, Alaska, sponsor of SB 9, introduced the legislation
speaking to the following sponsor statement:
SB 9 "The Alaska Sunset Commission Act" will help
ensure transparency, efficiency, cost effectiveness,
statutory adherence, and constitutional alignment in
the operation of our state government.
The bill establishes the Alaska Sunset Commission as
an apolitical, independent, and objective entity
charged with reviewing, via detailed and robust
audits, each department by division in the state on a
rotating schedule. The Commission will make
recommendations related to the performance and costs
to the legislature. Along with the submission of the
audit report to the legislature, the Commission will
provide any recommended statutory changes necessary to
accomplish the recommendations in the report. To
prevent a division from sunsetting and its statutory
duties falling to the department's office of the
commissioner, the legislature will need take up and
act on the audit report.
The annual audit reports will also be available to the
executive branch for purposes of both performance and
structural improvements within departments as well as
for the construction of the governor's budget each
year.
The Commission will be comprised of nine individuals
from the private sector with financial, budget
analysis, accounting, operations management, and other
areas of expertise who are appointed by the governor
and confirmed by the legislature. The Commission will
serve without compensation but will be entitled to per
diem and travel expenses authorized for boards and
commissions. The Commission may employ staff as it
determines necessary to perform its duties.
The size and scope of government can be difficult to
grasp and understand, and too often unwieldy and hard
to control. Currently, the House and Senate Finance
members are asked in a matter of a few months to
figure out what is going on in each of the fourteen
departments; essentially their window is what the
executive branch provides. With this limited
information and in short order, legislators are tasked
with making decisions each year involving spending
billions of public dollars. Access to an extensive
audit will help hold future governors accountable to
building a responsible budget and will aid legislators
in appropriating public dollars wisely.
4:51:21 PM
SENATOR HUGHES delivered a PowerPoint titled "Alaska Sunset
Commission." She began on slide 2 that consisted of a color
coded map of the US that showed that blue states have appointed
state auditors and red states have elected state auditors. The
color coded US map depicted on slide 3 shows who appoints the
state auditors. Alaska is a gold state which indicates the state
auditor is appointed by the legislature. Slide 4, "Alaska Would
Be In Good Company," is another color coded map of the US that
shows the other states that have a sunset commission.
SENATOR HUGHES displayed slide 5, "What Would Alaska's Sunset
Commission Do?" She summarized that the commission would review
each department by division, section, and office; make
determinations about modifications or consolidations; and draft
the recommended improvements into legislation for the
legislature to consider.
SENATOR HUGHES advanced to slide 6, "Composition of Commission,"
and described the proposed nine-member commission. The slide
read:
Public-member team of nine must have the following
combination of credentials
• 2 certified public accountants
• 1 budget analyst
• 1 controller/comptroller
• 1 with financial management experience
• 2 with experience as business owner, CEO, or COO
based in-stat
• 2 with experience in finance, investment, or
business management
4:52:26 PM
SENATOR HUGHES directed attention to slide 7, "Sunset
Commission: How It Would Work." She explained that the table
describes the analysis and evaluation process the commission
follows throughout the year with the end product being the bill
that is submitted to the legislature.
SENATOR HUGHES displayed slide 8, "Proposed Audit Cycle Re-
initiated Every 12 Years. The table shows the audits of
executive branch departments start in 2024 and that the
legislature would be audited in 2034, the University of Alaska
in 2035, and the Alaska Court System and agencies in the
judicial branch in 2036.
SENATOR HUGHES turned to slide 9, "Impact of Sunset Commission
Within the State of Texas Since 1977." She summarized the
following outcomes:
Streamlining Government
• 42 agencies and programs abolished
• 52 agencies and programs abolished and transferred
or consolidated
Saving Taxpayer Money
• $1 billion in state and federal savings and revenue
gains
• Return of $18 for every $1 appropriated to the
Sunset Commission since 1985
Providing Effective Oversight
• $570 reviews of state agencies and programs
conducted
• 80 percent of Sunset recommendations to the
legislature have become state law since 2001
4:53:22 PM
SENATOR HUGHES turned to slide 10, "The Impact of a Sunset
Commission Within the State of Alaska," and spoke to the
potential outcomes:
• Higher level of government accountability and
performance
• Dissolved state entities that are redundant,
ineffective, or inefficient
• Improved policies and procedures for public
services
• Millions of dollars in savings that can be
reallocated toward other budget areas where needed
• Targeted revenue resources to ensure efficient and
effective government services
• Encourage greater participation and public input
SENATOR HUGHES acknowledged that the bill needed some work but
she had worked with Legislative Legal Services to resolve
potential constitutional issues. She noted that the commission
would reside within the executive branch but the governor would
not have oversight. The members would serve on a rotating five-
year schedule to avoid the politics associated with a four-year
cycle.
4:55:05 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI turned to invited testimony.
4:55:21 PM
BRIAN FRANCIS, Executive Director for the Texas Sunset Advisory
Commission (TSAC), Austin, Texas, stated that he was neutral on
SB 9. He described TSAC as a nonpartisan legislative agency
created in 1977 whose goal is to objectively analyze and improve
state government. He spoke enthusiastically about the importance
of accountability in public service.
MR. FRANCIS described the three phases of the sunset process.
Evaluation Phase Commission staff gathers information from the
agency being reviewed, the stakeholders, and the public. This
information is used to generate a staff report that includes
findings and recommendations.
Deliberation Phase The staff report goes to the Commission for
evaluation and additional stakeholder and public input. The
commission will approve, deny, or modify each recommendation.
Based on the input, additional recommendations may also be added
in this phase. The two types of recommendations are for
statutory changes or management actions. The latter can be done
within the existing authority of the agency. Recommendations for
statutory changes advance to the Action Phase.
Action Phase Sunset bills are generated and will go through the
normal legislative process.
MR. FRANCIS stated that there is no doubt that the Commission
has streamlined and improved the government in Texas. He
recounted the streamlining and revenue-saving data that the
sponsor presented in slide 9 of the PowerPoint for SB 9. He also
spoke about the improvements that have been initiated in Texas
as a result of the Commission's process. He cited
recommendations related to juvenile justice and the public
utility commission. He continued that a key element in the
sunset process is including the sunset date in the enabling
statute for each agency. It creates a sense of urgency for
action by both the agency and the legislature.
5:04:59 PM
STEVEN OGLE, Deputy Director & General Counsel for the Texas
Sunset Advisory Commission (TSAC), Austin, Texas, stated he was
neutral on SB 9. He said he was available as a resource; he'd
been with TSAC for 16 years and had reviewed nearly every facet
of state government. He relayed that the Texas Legislature meets
for 140 days every two years, so it has to be efficient. He
continued that when a bill comes to the legislature from the
Sunset Commission, members know that agency has undergone a year
and one-half of thorough review and analysis. Each agency goes
through this process every 12 years so it is routinely improved.
The result is that the people of Texas get better service. When
the legislature doesn't meet fulltime, the process only works
because the Sunset Commission is a dedicated agency whose staff
works fulltime.
5:07:20 PM
MEAD TREADWELL, former Lieutenant Governor, Anchorage, Alaska,
stated that he had worked for a long time to have appropriate,
limited government in Alaska. He is president of Alaskans for
Tax Reform and has worked with other organizations to improve
transparency and efficiency in state government. He said none of
these organizations have taken a position on SB 9, but they
believe it's important for the legislature to consider measures
like this. He opined that the need for government is perpetual
but not every government program. He spoke about the impact of
changing technologies and recalled his first sunset exercise in
the Alaska Legislature. He opined that what stands out as
different in SB 9 is that it sets out a regular schedule for
agency reviews in a more public process.
He recommended the committee give serious consideration to both
SB 9 and Senator Kaufman's bill on strategic planning.
5:11:09 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI opened public testimony on SB 9.
5:11:23 PM
PAMELA SAMASH, representing self, Nenana, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 9. She mentioned inflation and offered her
perspective that anything that saves money for the state and the
people has merit. She opined that SB 9 will save money for
everyone and create an honest environment.
5:12:54 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI closed public testimony on SB 9. He asked the
sponsor if she had final comments.
SENATOR HUGHES reminded the committee that the performance
audits that the legislative auditor has been conducting since
2013 will end July 1 of this year. She suggested the members
think about whether those audits were used to their full
potential. The difference that SB 9 offers is that the result of
the analysis and review would come before the legislature in the
form of legislation. She opined that it would help the
administration and the legislature. She expressed hope that the
committee would seriously consider SB 9 and Senator Kaufman's
bill on strategic planning.
5:14:35 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI held SB 9 in committee.
5:15:20 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Kawasaki adjourned the Senate State Affairs Standing
Committee meeting at 5:15 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 9 ver A.pdf |
SSTA 3/14/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 9 |
| SB 9 Supporting Document - LRS Report 19.010m 03.06.23.pdf |
SSTA 3/14/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 9 |
| SB 9 Sectional Analysis Ver A 03.06.23.pdf |
SSTA 3/14/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 9 |
| SB 21 Sponsor Statement Version A 1.25.23.pdf |
SFIN 3/12/2024 1:30:00 PM SSTA 3/14/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 21 |
| SB 46 Version A 03.08.2023.pdf |
SSTA 3/14/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 46 |
| SB 46 Research BIAA 2022 Legislative Issue Briefs 3.1.2023.pdf |
SSTA 3/14/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 46 |
| SB 46 Research Unmasking Brain Injuries 3.1.2023.pdf |
SSTA 3/14/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 46 |
| SB0021A.PDF |
SSTA 3/14/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 21 |
| SB21 EBA Presentation.pdf |
SSTA 3/14/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 21 |
| SB 21 EBA One-pager handout.pdf |
SSTA 3/14/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 21 |
| SB 9 Sponsor Statement 03.06.23.pdf |
SSTA 3/14/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 9 |
| SB 21 Fiscal note.pdf |
SSTA 3/14/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 21 |
| SB 46 Fiscal Note VAR-EXE 03.10.2023.pdf |
SSTA 3/14/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 46 |
| SB 9 fiscal note.pdf |
SSTA 3/14/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 9 |
| SB 46 Sponsor Statement 3.1.2023.pdf |
SSTA 3/14/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 46 |
| SB 46 Sectional Analysis 3.1.2023.pdf |
SSTA 3/14/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 46 |
| SB 9 Presentation v1.3.pdf |
SSTA 3/14/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 9 |