Legislature(2013 - 2014)BUTROVICH 205
03/27/2014 01:30 PM Senate TRANSPORTATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB197 | |
| SB94 | |
| HJR10 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 94 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 197 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HJR 10 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE TRANSPORTATION STANDING COMMITTEE
March 27, 2014
1:36 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Dennis Egan, Chair
Senator Anna Fairclough
Senator Click Bishop
Senator Hollis French
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Fred Dyson, Vice Chair
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 197
"An Act extending the termination date of the Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities' interim project
authorization regarding naturally occurring asbestos; and
providing for an effective date."
- MOVED SB 197 OUT OF COMMITTEE
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 94
"An Act vacating a portion of the Copper Center - Valdez right-
of-way; relating to rights-of-way acquired under former 43
U.S.C. 932 that cross land owned by a private landowner; and
relating to the use of eminent domain to realign a right-of-
way."
- HEARD & HELD
CS FOR HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 10(FIN)
Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of Alaska
creating a transportation infrastructure fund.
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 197
SHORT TITLE: NATURALLY OCCURRING ASBESTOS
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) OLSON
02/24/14 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/24/14 (S) TRA
03/13/14 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/13/14 (S) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/20/14 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/20/14 (S) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
03/25/14 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/25/14 (S) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/27/14 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: SB 94
SHORT TITLE: RIGHTS-OF-WAY
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) OLSON
03/29/13 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/29/13 (S) TRA, JUD
02/26/14 (S) SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE INTRODUCED-REFERRALS
02/26/14 (S) TRA, JUD
03/13/14 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/13/14 (S) Heard & Held
03/13/14 (S) MINUTE(TRA)
03/20/14 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/20/14 (S) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
03/25/14 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/25/14 (S) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/27/14 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: HJR 10
SHORT TITLE: CONST. AM: TRANSPORTATION FUND
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) P.WILSON
02/15/13 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/15/13 (H) TRA, JUD, FIN
02/26/13 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
02/26/13 (H) Moved Out of Committee
02/26/13 (H) MINUTE(TRA)
02/27/13 (H) TRA RPT 6DP
02/27/13 (H) DP: LYNN, FEIGE, ISAACSON, GATTIS,
KREISS-TOMKINS, P.WILSON
04/03/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
04/03/13 (H) Heard & Held
04/03/13 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
04/05/13 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
04/05/13 (H) Moved CSHJR 10(JUD) Out of Committee
04/05/13 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
04/06/13 (H) JUD RPT CS(JUD) 5DP 1DNP
04/06/13 (H) DP: FOSTER, LEDOUX, LYNN, PRUITT,
KELLER
04/06/13 (H) DNP: GRUENBERG
02/04/14 (H) FIN AT 8:30 AM HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/04/14 (H) Heard & Held
02/04/14 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
02/28/14 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/28/14 (H) Moved CSHJR 10(FIN) Out of Committee
02/28/14 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
03/03/14 (H) FIN RPT CS(FIN) 2DP 7NR
03/03/14 (H) DP: T.WILSON, MUNOZ
03/03/14 (H) NR: GUTTENBERG, GARA, NEUMAN, EDGMON,
HOLMES, COSTELLO, AUSTERMAN
03/13/14 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
03/13/14 (H) VERSION: CSHJR 10(FIN)
03/14/14 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/14/14 (S) TRA, FIN
03/20/14 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/20/14 (S) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
03/25/14 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/25/14 (S) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/27/14 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
DAVID SCOTT, staff to Senator Donald Olson
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 197 for the sponsor.
ROGER HEALY, Chief Engineer
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOTPF)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Explained why regulations allowing for the
use of gravel aggregate containing naturally occurring asbestos
had not been written yet.
POKE HAFFNER, Assistant Attorney General representing DOTPF
Civil Division
Transportation Section
Department of Law (DOL)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that under AS 01.10.100, the
authorizations DOTPF has provided under its interim authority
are effective even though the interim authority expired at the
end of December.
KENT SULLIVAN, Attorney
Civil Division
Natural Resources Section
Department of Law (DOL)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Explained concerns the DOL had with SB 94.
GEORGE HELMS, representing himself
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Said he is a private land owner who
supported SB 94.
REPRESENTATIVE PEGGY WILSON,
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HJR 10, speaking as sponsor.
TOM BRICE, lobbyist
Alaska Laborers
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HJR 10.
SARAH GEARY, Legislative Coordinator
Alaska Municipal League
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HJR 10.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:36:45 PM
CHAIR DENNIS EGAN called the Senate Transportation Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:36 p.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Bishop, French, Fairclough and Chair Egan.
SB 197-NATURALLY OCCURRING ASBESTOS
1:38:01 PM
CHAIR EGAN announced SB 197 to be up for consideration.
1:38:12 PM
DAVID SCOTT, staff to Senator Donald Olson, sponsor of SB 197,
said this bill provides a one-year extension to the deadline for
the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOTPF)
to adopt or prescribe a method of bulk testing for gravel or
other aggregate material containing naturally occurring asbestos
under AS 44.42.420(a). He explained that the underlying bill
(House Bill 258), which passed in the 27th legislature, required
DOTPF to put into place a system and requirements for this
testing, but DOTPF has been unable to quickly establish those
regulations.
Section 1 of SB 197 is the extension for interim project
authorization and Section 2 extends the immunity clause in the
underlying legislation.
1:40:24 PM
ROGER HEALY, Chief Engineer, Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities (DOTPF), Juneau, Alaska, introduced himself.
SENATOR FAIRCLOUGH asked why the regulations are not written.
MR. HEALY answered that the program is unique within the nation
and state, and the department ran into hiring difficulties
originally, but someone has been hired and the draft regulations
were issued last week. The department is are on schedule to hold
the public hearings in the week of April 14 in Juneau,
Fairbanks, and Ambler.
SENATOR FAIRCLOUGH stated that Representative Joule, who passed
the original legislation, was trying to make aggregate available
in his community, but it, unfortunately, contains asbestos. She
asked if DOTPF had done everything it could to protect the
health of the individuals as well as the state and the region
where the aggregate is being used.
MR. HEALY explained that the original bill provided a period for
implementation of interim regulations, which served the purpose
of identifying designated areas within the state where this
immunity would apply. Ambler is the one area that was
designated. Under those interim procedures, the department
received and approved a number of applications for projects from
the Housing Authority and a few smaller projects including
smaller DOTPF projects, namely the airport reconstruction. The
interim provision allowed those applications and that project to
go forward.
1:43:48 PM
Regarding the overall health of the community as a result of
these projects, the interim procedures and application approvals
identified the provisions within the bill requiring the final
product to have some type of coverage over the naturally
occurring asbestos material that is identified.
1:44:37 PM
POKE HAFFNER, Assistant Attorney General representing DOTPF,
Civil Division, Transportation Section, Department of Law (DOL),
Anchorage, Alaska, testified that under AS 01.10.100(a), the
authorizations DOTPF provided under its interim authority are
effective even though the interim authority expired at the end
of December. The point of having the extension of the interim
authority is in the event that there are additional requests for
approval of either naturally occurring asbestos areas or a site-
specific plan that comes in before the regulations can become
final.
SENATOR FRENCH commented that he wasn't a fan of this bill, but
wouldn't stop it from going forward.
SENATOR FAIRCLOUGH moved to report SB 194, labeled 28-LS1513\A,
from committee with attached fiscal note(s) and individual
recommendations. There were no objections and SB 197 passed from
the Senate Transportation Standing Committee.
1:47:03 PM
At ease from 1:47 to 1:48 p.m.
SB 94-RIGHTS-OF-WAY
1:48:31 PM
CHAIR EGAN announced SB 94 to be up for consideration; the
sponsor is Senator Olson. [SSSB 94 was before the committee.]
KENT SULLIVAN, Attorney, Civil Division, Natural Resources
Section, Department of Law (DOL), Juneau, Alaska, said the DOL
had concerns with SB 94. A major concern is that it would cause
the state to relinquish, on a massive scale, the RS-2477
property interests that it currently possesses. From a legal
perspective, this would make the RS-2477 a far less valuable and
effective tool to the state of Alaska.
1:51:24 PM
This bill would cause the typical width of a state RS-2477
rights-of-way (ROW) to be narrowed from 100 feet to 60 feet. It
would also greatly limit the allowed scope of uses that can
occur within an RS-2477 ROW, and it would freeze RS-2477 ROW to
the condition, mode, and method of use that existed at the time
of its repeal in 1976. Finally, it would effectively grant
private property owners veto authority over the state's
maintenance and improvement activities on RS-2477 rights-of-way
across private property. All of these things would have an
impact to the state's RS-2477 property rights.
MR. SULLIVAN explained that the state's interest in RS-2477 can
be viewed as a bundle of sticks, with each stick considered
separately. The width of the ROW, the right to access streams or
park or camp within the ROW, and the right to pull over and take
pictures are all different sticks. The state's right to maintain
and improve the ROW and the different modes of transportation
that can be used are also different sticks.
He said the state's current RS-2477 rights are very broad and
encompassing and include many, many sticks. This bill would
effectively strip many of those sticks away, thereby diminishing
the state's property interest. Each of those sticks has value,
many of which are hard to determine. However, one that can
easily be determined is the reduction in the width of the ROW
from 100 feet to 60 feet.
He explained that currently there is more than 20,000 linear
miles of RS-2477 rights-of-way in the state, about half of which
occur across private property. DNR estimates that reducing the
ROW width would have a fiscal impact to the state of $48.5
million. He emphasized that that is just one of the many ways
that SB 94 would reduce the state's property interests in RS-
2477 rights-of-way.
1:53:13 PM
MR. SULLIVAN said that another reason for concern is whether or
not the bill would cause a problem with regard to the state's
obligation to preserve the public trust and constitutional
requirements to protect access to state land and resources. RS-
2477 is a valuable tool in achieving access to state land and
resources and this bill would effectively give up a lot of
rights that the state possesses in that regard.
1:53:33 PM
SB 94 would also create a disparate patchwork of property
interests. RS-2477s frequently cross state, private and federal
land, and this would create a different set of rules that apply
to private land from the rules that apply to federal land and
state land. There would be different widths, different
management rights and responsibilities, and different scope of
uses that would apply to each of the underlying land ownerships.
That is extremely problematic from a management perspective and
from a public use perspective.
He said that SB 94 arguably would promote litigation because it
creates a mechanism whereby if a private landowner objects to
maintenance or improvement activities by the state it would
first have to go to mediation and if it didn't go to mediation
it would have to go to court. The concern is that this would
hold up the state's ability to do those things until that legal
action took place.
1:54:54 PM
MR. SULLIVAN noted that the state is currently involved in
litigation with Ahtna Corporation over the Klutina Lake Road.
Under SB 94 anywhere that the Klutina Lake road RS-2477 ROW
overlaps a 17(b) easement, the state would give up its RS-2477
ROW and accept a 17(b) easement. The problem is that there are
many distinctions between 17(b) easements and RS-2477 rights-of-
way. In that situation the bill would create a ROW that's a mix
of the two.
He explained that one of the problems with the 17(b) easement is
that they are much more restrictive; they are owned, possessed
and managed by the federal government as opposed to the State of
Alaska. The state doesn't have control, and the federal
government can unilaterally terminate a 17(b) easement without
the state's say-so. Another concern is that the 17(b) easement
can only be used for travel. You can't stop along it and take
pictures or have day-use sites or camp or launch boats or any of
the typical things that you can sometimes do on an RS-2477 ROW.
Mr. Sullivan emphasized that it would basically circumvent all
of the state's defenses and assertions that it has made in that
case.
1:56:51 PM
GEORGE HELMS, representing himself, Anchorage, Alaska, said he
is a private landowner who would be affected by SB 94. It
appears that the state can unilaterally add arterials to these
RS-2477s, meaning if additional trails had been created across
private property that connect to an existing RS-2477 the state
has asserted that it can unilaterally collect those as well. In
many cases, the state's routing goes on what are actually
privately funded improvements and the state would basically be
taking these free of charge for public use. This includes the
cabins and outhouses on private land.
SB 94 would help to curb some of that behavior and protect the
private property interests on the adjacent properties. For those
reasons he said he supports the bill.
CHAIR EGAN, finding no further comments, held SB 94 in
committee.
1:59:53 PM
At ease from 1:59 to 2:01 p.m.
HJR 10-CONST. AM: TRANSPORTATION FUND
2:01:30 PM
CHAIR EGAN announced HJR 10 to be up for consideration [CSHJR
10(FIN) was before the committee].
REPRESENTATIVE PEGGY WILSON, sponsor of HJR 10, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, said two other bills in the other
body make up the concept behind HJR 10. She noted that those
bills are sitting in House Finance. She asked to be able to
present the entire package concept before drilling down into HJR
10. It would give the committee an idea how the fund could come
together if the Constitution were changed to allow it. All
methods of transportation in Alaska are very important to
everyone in Alaska she started.
2:04:09 PM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said Alaska's transportation system is
aging; no major road has been built in this state in 30 years.
With population growth comes congestion, especially since that
growth is primarily in the Railbelt where the population has
tripled, she said.
She highlighted that the state ferries are well-maintained but
cost a lot to operate and are aging. Alaska has over 250 state-
owned airports that need upgrades and major maintenance. Barges
can only travel up the rivers during the few warm months to
bring the necessary gravel to maintain those unpaved airstrips.
The state owns 25 harbors and is in the process of transferring
them to municipalities, but the harbors are deteriorating and
the municipalities often don't have the money for maintenance.
2:06:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said our natural resources are not
normally on the transportation grid or close to railroads, and
access to them is needed in order to diversify the sources of
revenue the state receives.
2:06:56 PM
She said the state has a backlog of projects in excess of $20
billion, and over $700 million in deferred maintenance. The
funding from both the state and federal government is not
keeping up with the demand. Rural highway traffic across the
U.S. is up 23 percent and continues to grow; vehicle miles
traveled is up 35 percent and still growing, too. There is an
estimated $65 billion loss due to traffic congestion every year
and that loss is passed on to consumers.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said federal fuel taxes are not keeping
up with inflation. In Alaska and nationally fuel taxes can't
keep up with demand. Revenues for fuel taxes aren't going as far
because advances in technology result in cars going further on a
gallon of gas. Alaska has not had an increase in motor fuel
taxes since 1961, and at 8 cents/gallon it's the lowest in the
nation. The next closest is Wyoming at 14 cents/gallon.
2:08:24 PM
The new federal transportation funding program, MAP-21, focuses
on national highways and safety which are great goals, but
Alaska only has four national highways. The state used to have
greater flexibility with regard to safety dollars, but now it is
limited to roads with notable crash histories, and the national
highway system funds are now driven by performance. Since the
penalties for non-performance are painful, the state match could
have to double or triple.
The state may be forced to focus more on just keeping up than
modernization and there are a lot of maintenance projects that
don't provide new lanes or access, which is what Alaska needs.
She said the Council of State Governments said states can expect
to see a slowdown in payments from the Federal Highway Trust
Fund as early as this summer and by next summer the fund will be
empty.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said the dwindling pre-MAP 22
allocations to Alaska make it difficult for DOTPF to fund Alaska
highways and communities. To further complicate matters, 14
percent of the 28 percent that is allocated for the non-national
highways is divided depending on population: 4.4 percent goes to
cities that have more than 200,000 in population (only Anchorage
qualifies); 5.4 percent is directed to cities with a population
less than 200,000 but more than 5,000. That only reaches Sitka,
Ketchikan, Juneau, Fairbanks, Wasilla, Kodiak and Kenai. The
remaining 4.2 percent is for all the other roads in the state. A
portion is flexible, but unfortunately it is consumed by
increased mandatory requirements from the federal government
like data collection, bridge inspections, geographic information
mapping and other necessities leaving very little for project
purposes.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said Alaska has always had a serious
problem with financing transportation infrastructure; there is a
new transportation funding program in the works, but no one
knows what that will mean. There will be no more money in the
highway trust fund in 2015 and Alaska needs to bring its aging
infrastructure into the 21 Century.
2:13:03 PM
She emphasized that to access Alaska's natural resources the
state needs to take responsibility for developing a
transportation system that depends less on the federal
government for Alaska's roads, harbors, airports, and railroads.
Alaska needs to start planning for the future and that is not
happening now. These problems are not new; they are just
compounding, she said.
She related that the House Transportation Committee started
investigating these funding issues five years ago and for three
years they listened to DOTPF, grass roots organizations, and
transportation organizations identifying the challenges of all
the transportation in this geographically diverse state. The
committee flew to remote villages to view transportation systems
and subsequently started its quest for a solution. The committee
heard from the Alaska Municipal League (AML), the MatSu Borough
that contracted an independent study on statewide transportation
fiscal issues, and from national experts. The committee rejected
fixing the problem by bonding, which would make future
generations pay the debt.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON explained that the proposal in HJR 10
has three parts: the first establishes the dedicated Alaska
transportation taxes and fees as a part of the Transportation
Fund that was in existence at statehood. She noted that the
Alaska Constitution contained two dedicated funds related to
transportation: the Highway Fund and the Water and Harbor
Facilities Fund.
She said the Alaska Transportation Infrastructure Fund (ATIF)
will combine these two funds. It requires a vote of the people
to change the Constitution to reinstate the fund, but it will
ensure that all taxes and fees pay for transportation
activities.
The second part of the proposal is to continue funding
transportation as in the past. This is the key to making real
progress and improving the transportation infrastructure. This
is the one way to slowly chink away at the $20 billion backlog
of projects and to have more 100 percent state funded projects.
The third solution is to take advantage of both the cost savings
and the time savings for state funded projects (projects without
federal strings) while providing for growing transportation
needs. This fund will move projects from planning to completion
much faster and cost less. With state funded projects Alaskans
will see the impact of state dollars in communities much sooner
and they will cost less.
For example, state funds were used in the construction of the
Elmore Road Extension in Anchorage, which was completed in three
years as opposed to the 7-10 years it would have taken going
through the federal process. She said the intention is to
provide a dedicated revenue stream that will allow more projects
to be completed faster and cheaper in addition to the ongoing
state and federal funds.
2:18:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said the concept of funding ATIF is to
endow it with a large initial investment. It will progress while
maximizing federal dollars the state gets. She noted that she
heard that a federal dollar is worth 75 cents compared to a
state dollar. This endowment will be determined after the
Constitution has been changed to reinstate the dedicated
Transportation Fund. She highlighted that special use fees -
vanity license plates, airport lease revenues - have been
preserved.
She said the plan would be to have the Department of Revenue
(DOR) manage ATIF and appropriate it like the Permanent Fund
(each year 5 percent of the market value averaged over the
previous 5 years) and 5 percent of the profits would be
reinvested into the fund and each year there would be funds
available for appropriation - plus half of the taxes and fees
collected from the previous year). Also coming out of the fund
would be the expenses for the Division of Motor Vehicles, the
expenses to administer and manage the fund, and costs for the
Advisory Council. The fund would be self-sufficient and not
require general funds for administration. The appropriations
will follow the regular budgetary process and would be approved
by both the governor and the legislature.
She said the fund needs to be set up and then next year the
projects can be prioritized. Her idea is that it could be
handled by a two-panel, two-set process. The first step is to
prove and decide if the projects are better suited for
development using state funds or going through the regular STIP
process, effectively deciding if it will be a federalized
project or a 100 percent state funding project.
The Alaska Transportation Panel (ATP) could be comprised of
seven members: four public, the DOTPF commissioner, a STIP board
member, and a member from the Alaska Infrastructure Commission
(AIC). Members will serve four-year staggered terms; DOTPF would
develop a set of guidelines to decide if a project would be best
to be federalized or funded through ATIF.
2:22:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said the intent is to take the politics
out of the decision making process for funding projects. When
the project has been selected for using ATIF funds it must then
be reviewed by the AIC, which would prioritize ATIF selections
using DOTPF criteria. This list will need to be completed by the
Advisory Commission by October 15 each year and submitted to
both the governor and the legislature to make sure the ranked
projects get into the capital budget.
She explained that ATIF projects are limited to capital
transportation and major maintenance projects. The proposed
constitutional amendment states that the appropriations from the
fund must be used for transportation and related facilities that
are designated by law. In the enabling statutes she proposed to
constrain the fund to only be used on capital projects and major
maintenance. This keeps the funds functioning as an additional
revenue stream to what gets appropriated. The difference in the
language from the constitutional amendment to the enabling
statutes will give future legislators the ability to use the
money from this fund for operations only in times of fiscal
shortfalls. All the legislature would have to do is make a
statute change, which would allow the fund to be used for
operations.
Further, she explained that anyone could submit a project for
consideration: the state, a borough, the unorganized borough, a
municipality, a community or a village. She said she envisions
submission forms with enough information for the commission to
rank the projects. Every project would be considered. The funds
available for federalized projects, which are constrained to use
the federal processes, could be no more than 20 percent of the
fund. This is to incentivize more state-funded projects.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON showed a graph of examples and repeated
that a statute change could allow the fund to be used for other
things. The payout starts at about $83 million the first year
and then $131 million the second year and rises to a rate of
about $3.3 million in the early years. She reminded the
committee that this is $103 million in addition to the existing
operating and capital budgets.
2:25:19 PM
She projected that putting in $2 billion now will grow to $5
billion in 20 years. That includes 50 percent of the revenue
that had been deposited over the 20 years. This is what can be
expected if the other two pieces of legislation in the other
body pass, she said.
2:26:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON summarized that the ATIF would allow
Alaska to plan for its future and get rid of the deferred
maintenance list; it would leverage more federal funds and
encourage more state projects to be done; and it would decrease
dependence on the federal dollars.
It would increase property values, employment, and Alaskans
would see an increase in real wages. It would reduce the cost of
production and noncommercial travel time. ATIF would improve
access to the state's resources and reduce the cost of
production resulting in an improved quality of life for
Alaskans. Alaska has a majority of the nation's coast lines, but
has significant challenges developing and maintaining the
state's docks and harbors for access to fishing resources. The
state has world class mineral deposits but few transportation
corridors to get to those resources. ATF will improve access to
those resources which will decrease the cost of production.
She summarized the two major issues: declining funds, both
federal and state, and an aging transportation system. This
constitutional amendment needs to be on the ballot this
November; let the people decide, she concluded.
2:30:14 PM
TOM BRICE, lobbyist, Alaska Laborers, Juneau, Alaska, stated
that HJR 10 will break down some constitutional barriers that
exist in terms of long term transportation projects for the
state.
2:31:31 PM
SARAH GEARY, Legislative Coordinator, Alaska Municipal League
(AML), stated that HJR 10 will help the state be ready to
maintain and build new infrastructure to meet future needs.
CHAIR EGAN found no further comments and held HJR 10 in
committee.
2:33:32 PM
CHAIR EGAN adjourned the Senate Transportation Standing
Committee meeting at 2:33 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|