HB 65: FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF STATE GOVT. Number 140 CHAIRMAN VEZEY noted CSHB 65 (STA) had been proposed to replace CSHB 65 (L&C), and invited comment on both versions. Number 155 DONALD G. STUDY, ACTING DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS AND SAFETY, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR (DOL), told the committee it would be a mistake to delete section 44 of HB 65, which would allow the DOL to regulate user fees in accordance with their budget needs. Number 170 REPRESENTATIVE ULMER asked if the tentative budget before the finance committee had been based on the fees being allowed. MR. STUDY replied in the affirmative. REPRESENTATIVE ULMER then asked what might be the effect on the DOL if the budget was not accurate, and the fees not allowed. Number 178 MR. STUDY alleged the DOL would lose the $93,500 the fees would have generated, and unless general fund monies were substituted for those fees, the DOL would have to lay off workers and cut service levels. He stated the DOL would also cut back on travel, and probably see electrical inspection service cut by at least 25%. Number 207 CHAIRMAN VEZEY noted the latest CSHB 65 would cut those fees, which he advocated, since the increasing fees, he deemed, constituted a direct tax on the working men and women of Alaska. He went on to note later sections of the bill also deletes regulatory rights for fees by both the Department of Natural Resources and the DEC. In both cases, many of the fees are taken away from regulatory language and put back into statute. He also noted the DEC anticipated getting $750,000 from the fee structure, but in CSHB 65, that had been greatly reduced. Number 262 REPRESENTATIVE GARY DAVIS expressed concern CSHB 65 might be making too many drastic changes after being submitted in the budget process. He stated many of the fee changes had been mandated by the previous legislature, and he was concerned about the movement toward more user fees. While he saw an opportunity to put the brakes on a direct tax, he did not see how the departments could carry out their constitutional duties without the fees, and preferred CSHB 65 (L&C) to CSHB 65 (STA). Number 315 REPRESENTATIVE BETTYE DAVIS asked if Mr. Study could support CSHB 65 (STA) if the fees were eliminated. MR. STUDY explained the DOL had taken budget cuts in the previous three years, and he could not support the DOL without the fees. Number 339 CHAIRMAN VEZEY MOVED ADOPTION of CSHB 65 (STA). REPRESENTATIVE ULMER opposed CSHB 65 (STA) and favored CSHB 65 (L&C). She stated the basic philosophy behind CSHB 65 (L&C) is that users must eventually pay for the services they use, or the state will eventually have to subsidize the service. Number 358 CSHB 65 (STA) was ADOPTED by a 4-3 vote; Representatives Vezey, Kott, Sanders, and Olberg voting YES; Representatives Ulmer, B. Davis and G. Davis voting NO. Number 362 CHAIRMAN VEZEY MOVED passage of CSHB 65 (STA) from committee. Number 383 CSHB 65 (STA) passed from committee by a 7-0 vote.