HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE MARCH 5, 1997 1:40 P.M. TAPE HFC 97 - 46, Side 1, #000 - end. TAPE HFC 97 - 46, Side 2, #000 - end. TAPE HFC 97 - 47, Side 1, #000 - end. TAPE HFC 97 - 47, Side 2, #000 - #682. CALL TO ORDER Co-Chair Gene Therriault called the House Finance Committee meeting to order at 1:40 P.M. PRESENT Co-Chair Hanley Representative Kelly Co-Chair Therriault Representative Kohring Representative Davies Representative Martin Representative Davis Representative Mulder Representative Foster Representative Grussendorf and Representative Moses were not present for the meeting. ALSO PRESENT Representative Alan Austerman; Amy Daugherty, Staff, Representative Austerman; Timothy Sullivan Jr., Staff, Representative Eldon Mulder; Nico Bus, Chief, Financial Services, Department of Natural Resources; Barbara Ritchie, Deputy Attorney General, Civil Division, Department of Law; Jerry Dugan, (Testified via teleconference), Executive Director, Alaska Marine Safety Education Association (AMSEA), Petersburg; Ian Fulp, (Testified via teleconference), Director, Parks and Recreation, City of Kodiak, Kodiak; Pat Holmes, (Testified via teleconference), Fisherman, Kodiak; Al Burch, (Testified via teleconference), Kodiak; Bill Barker, (Testified via teleconference), Fisherman, Kodiak; Barbara Burch, (Testified via teleconference), Kodiak Fishermen Wives Association, Kodiak; Sue Hargis, United States Coast Guard, Juneau; Betty Martin, State Comptroller, State Treasury, Department of Revenue; Mark Johnson, Emergency Medical Services (EMS), Department of Health and Social Services; Kevin Smith, Alaska Municipal League (AML), Joint Insurance Association, Juneau; Fred Fisher, Director, Division of Administrative Services, Department of Law. SUMMARY 1 HB 13 An Act relating to marine safety training and education programs. CS HB 13 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "no recommendation" and with two zero fiscal notes by the Department of Labor dated 2/21/97 and the House Finance Committee. HB 30 An Act relating to civil liability for skateboarding; and providing for an effective date. CS HB 30 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with zero fiscal notes by the Legislature dated 1/31/97 and the Alaska Court System dated 1/31/97. HB 113 An Act extending lapse dates for certain prior year appropriations; making supplemental, capital, and special appropriations; and providing for an effective date. HB 113 was HELD in Committee for further consideration. HOUSE BILL 13 "An Act relating to marine safety training and education programs." REPRESENTATIVE ALAN AUSTERMAN stated that the Alaska Marine Safety Education Association (AMSEA) has been operating in the State of Alaska for 12 years. The primary purpose of the organization is to reduce the loss of life and injury in the Alaskan marine environment by providing education through a statewide network of qualified marine safety instructors. AMSEA provides the safety training required by the Commercial Fishing Vessel Safety Act of 1988 to communities throughout Alaska. The Act, which took effect in 1991, requires a minimum in safety training and equipment for commercial fishing vessels. Representative Austerman continued that AMSEA also helps Alaskans by providing marine safety instructor training, and that some of these teachers teach drill instructor courses. Other marine safety instructors also train the Alaska boating and fishing public, including many children and adults, in marine safety. Of the 7,300 people AMSEA trained in 1995, 2000 were from the commercial fishing industry and 3,700 were children. 2 According to a study conducted in 1995 by the Native Health Service, the AMSEA training significantly reduced fatalities among commercial fishermen, thus, coinciding with a 50% percent drop in fishing fatalities in Alaska over the past four years. Representative Austerman suggested that AMSEA deserves the State's intervention to ensure a long-term stable funding source. He pointed out that the Fishermen's Fund (AS 23.35.060) was created before statehood. One hundred percent of the fishermen's fund is provided by commercial fishing license fees. Sixty percent of license fees are dedicated to that fund. Since commercial fishermen are often the beneficiaries of the required marine safety training, it would be appropriate to allow part of the interest of that fund to be used to support some of AMSEA's marine safety programs. Representative Austerman pointed out that the note which passed out of the House Finance Committee last year was in the amount of $150 thousand dollars. The group would be comfortable with that amount, although, he pointed out that current interest earnings for the fund are in the amount of $450 thousand dollars. Representative Mulder asked if the program had considered a fee-based structure for funding. Representative Austerman requested that Mr. Dugan, the Executive Director of the program respond. Representative Martin asked the amount currently available in the fund. Representative Austerman replied that approximately $7.367 million dollars remains in the Fishermen's Fund. The Department of Treasury would be responsible for any investment. Co-Chair Therriault corrected that the current balance in the account was $9 million dollars. Representative G. Davis questioned why the fiscal note indicated only a 5.3% interest rate. JERRY DUGAN, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA MARINE SAFETY EDUCATION ASSOCIATION (AMSEA), PETERSBURG, responded to Representative Mulder explaining that AMSEA currently uses a fee-based structure for most of the provided training. A sliding scale fee is used, which varies depending upon the need. Most of the fees are used to pay the instructor and not to supplement the program. At the end of last year, the program was faced with a $50 thousand dollar budget, reducing the staff to one person to run the entire State program. In October, 1996, the program 3 received a federal grant increasing that budget, although, those funds end September 30, 1997. There is no guarantee of funding after that point. Representative J. Davies inquired about the needed amount. Mr. Dugan responded that the program would need $150 thousand dollars to stay "afloat". That amount would provide the core program and staff a 2.5 person office to coordinate, administer and instruct programs throughout the State. In response to Representative Davies, Mr. Dugan noted that his office had provided a budget detail sheet to Representative Austerman's office last year. A handout of the budget detail sheet was provided to Committee members. [Attachment on file]. Representative Mulder inquired the "range" of charges required of the communities. Mr. Dugan explained that the least amount would be free and only for a very needy group. The highest amount charged was $65/hour. Representative Mulder questioned the criteria used to determine if a group had "great need". Mr. Dugan stated that "great need" could be used to reference a commercial fishermen group under a federal deadline mandating the training before the fishing season had begun and before income had begun to come in. He suggested that a good example would be the Village of Angoon on Admiralty Island, an area with a high level of unemployment. Representative Mulder asked who was required to complete the AMSEA training. Mr. Dugan explained that fishermen on documented fishing vessels which fish in outside waters or beyond the western coast would be required. Representative Mulder questioned how the "children" aspect worked into the training. Mr. Dugan explained that marine safety is also taught to high school children who fish or crew on boats. For younger children, there is an abbreviated program to familiarize them with boating devices and safety procedures. Mr. Dugan continued, if someone were certified in the training, they would then be able to train others. That instruction would be beyond the regular level of instruction and is the core of the program. Representative Mulder observed that once a funding mechanism is in place, it becomes close to impossible to remove it from the books. Mr. Dugan pointed out with more instructors trained, the group then will be responsible to administer the programs. PAT HOLMES, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), FISHERMAN, 4 KODIAK, testified in support of the legislation. He pointed out that Alaska has ten times the national rate of drowning. Alaska is the only State which has no marine safety statutes or programs. AMSEA provides in Alaska, what many other states government's are mandated to provide. He emphasized how important the program is to the State. He pointed out that previous funding had been provided through grants, a program which now is "drying" up. He urged the Committee's support of the legislation. AL BURCH, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), KODIAK, voiced support of the legislation. He provided a brief history of fishing in Alaska. He spoke to the resistance that most fishermen have had toward a federal initiative to mandate training and how that attitude has changed through the many lives which have been saved because of the program. He urged that a portion of the interest on the Fishermen's Fund be used to further save lives. BILL BARKER, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), FISHERMAN, KODIAK, spoke in favor HB 13. He stressed that AMSEA's work saves lives and how important the training would be for the fishing communities. The program is an educational concern and would be appropriately funded through the Fishermen's Fund. Mr. Barker reiterated that the training saves lives. BARBARA BURCH, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), KODIAK FISHERMEN WIVES ASSOCIATION, KODIAK, testified in support of the legislation stressing the importance of the program. SUE HARGIS, UNITED STATES COAST GUARD (USCG), JUNEAU, noted support of the legislation. She noted the importance of the program as there are no other State programs which coordinate any type of boating efforts. She urged members to support the legislation. MARK JOHNSON, EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES (EMS), DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES, voiced strong support of HB 13. Drowning in Alaska is a major public health problem; often there are more drownings in the State than there are deaths on public highways. He advised that the Office of Emergency Medical Services provided the first drowning study in 1979, and recognized drowning as a major public health problem since then. EMS is one of the agencies which helped form AMSEA and has continued to help fund them through a variety of federal grants since that time. All those grants have been temporary. Mr. Johnson stressed that the organization deserves stable funding. Co-Chair Hanley asked if the Governor had included funding for that item in this year's budget. 5 AMY DAUGHERTY, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE ALAN AUSTERMAN, stated that no funding had been included in the FY98 budget for AMSEA. Co-Chair Therriault asked if it had been acknowledged that only AMSEA be the recipient of the grant for education. Representative Austerman responded that the AMSEA organization, to date, has provided the training as a result of federal laws. He agreed that as the program matures, it could be placed into the private sector. Representative Martin exclaimed that a 5.2% interest rate was a low rate. BETTY MARTIN, STATE COMPTROLLER, STATE TREASURY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, replied that the current general investment funds include over one hundred smaller funds, some of which, through statutory or Attorney General opinions have the right to receive their own interest. The Fishermen's Fund is not one of those funds. The Department of Administration determines which of those funds are eligible for interest. The current agreement is to pay each organization at the rate of 5.2% interest income. The State at this time is reconsidering the practice with the intent to pay the entire interest received to each of the individual funds. (Tape Change HFC 97-46, Side 2). Representative Martin asked if there was a major disaster, could the principle of the fund be used quickly. Ms. Martin explained that there was a limit of $2,500 dollar per person cap to the amount paid out of the fund. Representative Martin questioned the cap. Representative Martin suggested that the amount provided to AMSEA should be a guaranteed amount rather than a moving amount as predetermined by the interest rate. Co-Chair Therriault pointed out that the language was permissive and that the Legislature could appropriate "none" or "all" through the budgeting process. Representative Martin reiterated that a specific number should be guaranteed. Co- Chair Hanley added that the appropriation would be a budgetary issue and that any amount could be appropriated. He pointed out that if the bill passes, it would be accompanied by a fiscal note, however, next year, the request would only be a line item in the budget, open to debate. Representative J. Davies asked where the money for the fiscal note would be indicated in the budget. Co-Chair Therriault distributed the House Finance Committee a new zero fiscal note, suggesting that through the budget process, the amount would be determined. In the past, the 6 Department of Administration placed the request in designated grants component in Department of Community and Regional Affairs budget. Representative J. Davies asked if the money was appropriated, would it appear as designated program receipts. Co-Chair Therriault stated that the Department would be responsible to show a reduction in order to authorize requested funding for the program. Representative G. Davis MOVED to delete language on Page 1, Lines 9 & 10, "to the Alaska Marine Safety Education Association". There being NO OBJECTION, it was adopted. Representative Martin MOVED to change Page 1, Line 8, deleting "50 percent" and inserting "up to $250 thousand dollars". Co-Chair Hanley believed that could create a problem when $250 thousand dollars was not earned in interest income. He reiterated that the issue could be addressed in the budget process. Co-Chair Therriault OBJECTED to Amendment #2. Representative J. Davies voiced support to keep the number "floating", reminding members that there will always be pressure to keep it as small as possible. A roll call vote was taken on the MOTION. IN FAVOR: G. Davis, Martin, Mulder OPPOSED: Foster, Kohring, J. Davies, Therriault, Hanley Representatives Grussendorf, Kelly, and Moses were not present for the vote. The MOTION FAILED (3-5). Representative G. Davis noted for the record that he supported the work of AMSEA and that the reason for his amendment was not intended as a personal threat to that group. Representative Foster MOVED to report CS HB 13 (FIN) out of Committee with individual recommendations and with the accompanying fiscal notes. Co-Chair Hanley disclosed that he had a conflict of interest as he does acquire a commercial fishing license and has utilized the AMSEA fund. Representative J. Davies requested more discussion regarding the fiscal note. He understood that a fiscal note needed to be funded for the first year and would then be dropped into the budget line items the second year. Co-Chair Hanley commented that had been the approach last year. Conference Committee often reduces fiscal notes to 7 squeeze them within a certain dollar amount. He suggested that the fiscal impact of the legislation be discussed in the Department of Community and Regional Affair's Subcommittee priority. He added that the Governor should offer an amendment to cover the requested dollar amount. Co-Chair Therriault said if a statutory change is made to start a new program, the first year, it would be funded through a fiscal note, thereafter, it would be built into the base of the budget. Because HB 13 is permissive, it could be either way. Representative J. Davies foresaw a problem with the subcommittee trying to place money into a budget for a program not yet signed into effect. Co-Chair Therriault advised that to appropriate to the program, would not require that the program be in effect. Representative J. Davies voiced concern that there clearly was a fiscal impact which should be noted in the fiscal note. Co-Chair Hanley responded that all fiscal notes accompany the bill to Conference Committee. CS HB 13 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "no recommendation" and with zero fiscal notes by the Department of Labor dated 2/21/97 and the House Finance Committee. HOUSE BILL 30 "An Act relating to civil liability for skateboarding; and providing for an effective date." TIMOTHY SULLIVAN JR., STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE ELDON MULDER explained that the Municipality of Anchorage, City and Borough of Juneau and several other municipalities would like to create skateboard parks so skateboarders will have a place to ride, rather than using other areas designed for pedestrians. The municipalities are willing to develop areas suitable for skateboard riding if they can be insulated from liability for claims arising from hazards inherent in skateboarding. The intent of HB 30 would be to encourage the municipalities to proceed with development of areas for outdoor recreation without increasing their liability unnecessarily. The bill would apply only to municipal skateboard parks. Mr. Sullivan added that the legislation is patterned after legislation passed providing limited protection to ski areas. The protection from liability relates to inherent dangers and risks of skateboarding. The municipality is required to post signs warning that there are inherent risks to skateboarding and the liability would then rest with the 8 skateboarder. Representative J. Davies questioned benefits to the municipalities. Mr. Sullivan stated that it would be cost prohibitive to create these areas without the legislation. Letters have been included in the packet from various municipalities indicating support for the legislation. Representative Mulder spoke to the work draft on Page 5, Lines 6 & 7, indicating language added in the House Judiciary Committee clarifying that the legislation would not provide a "blanket" shield to the municipality or borough who constructs it, although, it would provide for a limited amount of protection. IAN FULP, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), DIRECTOR, PARKS AND RECREATION, CITY OF KODIAK, KODIAK, spoke in support of the legislation. He stated that the bill would provide a place to skateboard and would then provide better management of the sport. He asked if a supervisor were present, would the municipality be more liable if there were an accident. Representative Mulder suggested that it would depend on the function of that supervisor. Committee members discussed "inherent risk" and the responsibilities of the municipalities and boroughs regarding that concern. Co-Chair Hanley MOVED that work draft #0-LS0192\K, Ford, 3/5/97, CS HB 30 (FIN), be the version before the Committee. There being NO OBJECTION, it was adopted. Representative J. Davies noted for the record that he supports the legislation, although, recognized that there exists some grey areas. KEVIN SMITH, ALASKA MUNICIPAL LEAGUE (AML), JOINT INSURANCE ASSOCIATION, JUNEAU, testified that AML supports the legislation. The AML Joint Insurance Association is a pool formed by Alaska Statute, and created for local government entities, specifically the municipalities and school districts. He noted that it has been the experience of his group that municipalities, in general, are reluctant to become involved with that type of activity. Skateboarding in particular has been a common exclusion throughout most insurance league industry. The Joint Insurance Association's Trustee Board is willing to drop the exclusion with passage of HB 30. (Tape Change HFC 97-47, Side 1). Representative Kohring MOVED to report CS HB 30 (FIN) out of 9 Committee with individual recommendations and with the accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. CS HB 30 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with two zero fiscal notes by the Legislature dated 1/31/97 and the Alaska Court System dated 1/31/97. HOUSE BILL 113 "An Act extending lapse dates for certain prior year appropriations; making supplemental, capital, and special appropriations; and providing for an effective date." DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Section 4(e) $200.0 thousand dollars - Perseverance Trail NICO BUS, CHIEF, FINANCIAL SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, stated that the requested funding would provide emergency repairs to the severely storm damaged Perseverance Trail. Though the trail is closed, use continues under extreme hazardous conditions. The work needs to be done before the summer season, to capture the high use period. Delaying the work until the Fall would expose workers to dangerous avalanche and weather conditions and would increase project costs by limiting the time and access. Co-Chair Therriault inquired if any of the trail rested on private property. Mr. Bus noted that the entire trail system was an "easement into perpetuity", belonging to the State of Alaska. Mr. Bus advised that no permits would be needed for blasting. Co-Chair Hanley voiced concern with the impact of the blasting on the streams. He requested that a letter of response be provided by the Department of Fish and Game, which would address the impacts of blasting on the streams, in order that consistency could be created in use for other requests. Mr. Bus replied that no permit is needed because a concrete flume exists at the bottom of the area and that no salmon can run up. Mr. Bus spoke to the breakdown of the request; $120 thousand dollars would be used for the blasting work and $80 thousand dollars would be used for the bridge repair and tread work from the beginning of the trail to the last bridge. Mr. Bus provided Committee members a handout illustrating the 10 Perseverance trail emergency repairs. [Copy on file]. He provided an overview of that handout. Representative Kohring questioned the "emergency" need of the project. He urged that the request be addressed in the Capital Budget Request (CBR). Mr. Bus reminded Representative Kohring that over 35,000 people use the trail. It is necessary to begin the work in May to be able to address summer tourism. Representative Kohring noted that the trail is used for recreation purposes only. Representative J. Davies argued that the timing of the project places it into the Supplemental Request category and that the impact of not doing the work now, would close the trail for the entire summer. Representative Martin asked if tourism raised enough money to address the concern and future repairs of the area. Mr. Bus replied that the user fee for tourism was $250 dollars a year. He argued that the State of Alaska is the land owner, whose responsibility it is to keep the area safe. Representative Martin asked if the City of Juneau would participate in covering the costs. Mr. Bus noted that the City's budget was limited as a result of many areas experiencing significant storm damage this year. Mr. Bus spoke to the timing of the repair work noting that if it commenced on May 1st, it would be ready for the summer tourists in early June. Representative J. Davies asked if the commercial use fees were placed into the General Fund. Mr. Bus informed members that those fees are placed into the Division of Parks budget, and then used for operation purposes. Section 9(a) $3,788.3 thousand dollars - Fire Suppression Mr. Bus noted that the request would address the fire suppression budget from January through June, 1997. Last year, the Department spent $7.8 million dollars and carried forward $2.1 million dollars, leaving a balance of $1.5 million dollars. Costs between now and June, 1997, are estimated to be $5.3 million dollars. Co-Chair Hanley asked the amount of fixed costs in the request. Mr. Bus replied that the fixed costs from January through July, would be $2.3 million dollars. Co-Chair Hanley understood that the fixed costs would be addressed in the Operating Budget and that the "non-fixed costs" would be addressed in the Supplemental Budget Request. Mr. Bus 11 replied that the fixed costs to the Department were $4.6 million dollars, and were divided into two time segments. Mr. Bus added that the increase to the fixed cost budget resulted from long term contracts coming up for renewal at higher amounts than originally contracted for. Section 9(c) $100.0 thousand dollars - Old Eagle School Site Mr. Bus informed Committee members that this supplemental request would fund the removal of existing buildings and facilities at the Old Eagle School site and would allow for eventual remediation of contaminated soils at the site so to reduce health and safety hazards. The request had resulted from a lawsuit which was filed by the Village of Eagle. The judge ordered that the money be appropriated by July, 1996. Co-Chair Hanley asked who built the school. Mr. Bus stated that it was purchased from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). To make the site useable, the buildings will need to be cleaned up and the soil contamination addressed. The Village of Eagle sued the U.S. Government and the State of Alaska. BARBARA RITCHIE, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL, CIVIL DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, noted that the settlement was adopted as an order of the Court. The U.S. government is not contributing to the removal costs. There is no evidence to indicate that the contamination existed in 1967 when the State took title of the property. She stated, the State of Alaska is responsible for the clean-up costs and all hazards on the property. Ms. Ritchie continued, the Village of Eagle brought their law suit against the State in order to bring the property back to it's original state. The U.S. government and the State of Alaska moved to dismiss the case based on sovereign immunity. There exists a statute stipulating that a suit can be brought forward, if the complaint is filed by the same entity who owned the property before the contamination. The United States dismissed it, noting that they were not the former owner of the property. The judge denied that action and requested a briefing in order to check the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) status of government at that time. Co-Chair Therriault pointed out that the building was "laced" with asbestos before the State took ownership from the federal government. Ms. Ritchie assessed that the asbestos tiles were in the floor and were not in and of 12 themselves illegal. If they were well maintained, there would not be a release of fiber. The problem developed when the State purchased the property, and it was no longer maintained. Co-Chair Hanley voiced his frustration that the State is held liable for an REAA responsibility. Ms. Ritchie reiterated that this is State property and that it is not being operated by an REAA at this time. Mr. Nico advised that the requested funding would only address Phase I of the project. Following completion of that, the oil contamination problem would need to be addressed. This request has been expedited because of the Court settlement order completion by July 1, 1997. Ms. Ritchie reiterated that there are no facts indicating that a problem existed before the State took over ownership of the property. Committee members noted their surprise that the federal government would not be responsible for any of the costs. (Tape Change HFC 97-47, Side 2). DEPARTMENT OF LAW Section 6(a) 0.0 - Oil and gas audits & legal proceedings FRED FISHER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, pointed out that in most years since FY79, the Department has received more than one appropriation per year for oil and gas litigation purposes. Beginning in FY92, the Legislature changed that policy by making only one appropriation per year. Consequently, from the years FY92 through FY95, the Department requested supplemental appropriations, although, had difficultly spending those appropriations by the end of the fiscal year. As a result, management policy was to encumber the funds received late in the fiscal year and spend those funds during the following fiscal year. This practice was questioned last year by the Division of Budget and Audit, at which time, the Department requested a lapse date extension which was granted by the Legislature. Mr. Fisher spoke to the available options. He noted that concerns had been expressed with tapping the Constitutional Budget Reserve (CBR) fund 3/4 vote. Ms. Ritchie noted her surprise by handout provided from the Governor's Office recommending deletion of the request. [Copy on file]. 13 Mr. Fisher referenced another option which would request a General Fund supplemental in leu of the last date extension. An additional option would be deleting the entire section. He believed, to discontinue the current practice would place the Department in a situation requiring future supplemental appropriations. Co-Chair Hanley agreed that there have been carry-forwards for many years. He suggested that the Department provide a budget which clarifies what they anticipate the need will be for litigation. Should the Department have unforseen circumstances, they will then come to the Legislature for a supplemental. Co-Chair Hanley requested no more carry- forwards. Mr. Fisher advised, of the $7 million dollars allocated, the Department has spent $6.1 million dollars and anticipates using the remainder before the end of the fiscal year. He pointed out that the request had been made in order to clear potential audit questions. Co-Chair Hanley noted that a split supplemental would not create problems; carry-forwards create problems. Mr. Fisher pointed out that prior year costs to the budget generally are representative of actual expenditures and encumbrances as of the end of the fiscal year. That action has created confusion to oil and gas litigation costs. Co-Chair Hanley requested a spread-sheet of the "actual" costs as well as anticipated "actual" costs to be spent by the Department over the year. The chart should indicate the $7 million dollars that was encumbered in the previous fiscal year and spent in this fiscal year. Section 6(b) $97.1 thousand dollars - Civil Ms. Ritchie provided Committee with a handout identifying additional FY97 judgments from the General Fund. [Copy on file]. The list contains a total itemized request of $235.1 thousand General Fund dollars. Co-Chair Hanley asked if the Venetie versus State case was a judgement or settlement. Ms. Ritchie stated that request was for $11.7 thousand dollar costs awarded to the plaintive by the federal District Court arising from the trial of that case. The request does not cover attorney fees or settlement costs. No payment was involved in the settlement. 14 She commented that this was not the Venetie case that the State is currently taking to the Supreme Court. The case referenced in Section 6(b) originated in November, 1986, when the IRA Councils of Venetie sued the State and the Commissioner of the Department of Health and Social Services for an injunctive and declaratory relief addressing substitute birth certificates. The State declined to issue the birth certificates on the basis that the Tribal Courts did not have the authority to undertake the adoption. Mr. Ritchie continued, the case went to the 9th Circuit Court and then remanded back to the District Court for a trial on the Tribal status issue. When the case was remanded, it was consolidated for the purposes of a trial. Eventually, the judge issued a decision on tribal status and Indian country. Ms. Ritchie noted that the request would cover costs accrued by the plaintiffs in that case. They also sought attorney fees which Judge Holland denied. The issue of case addressed Tribal status and costs were awarded. Co-Chair Hanley noted that Alaska Legal Services was representing the Venetie case. Ms. Ritchie interjected that case was being represented by Alaska Legal Services, although, the tax case was represented by the Native American Rights Fund. Alaska Legal Services is a private, non-profit, established by federal law, and recipient of funding under the Legal Service's Act appropriated by Congress. Legal Services is allowed under federal law, to represent any sort of group or association if that group is composed of people eligible for that assistance under the Legal Services Corporation Act. That criteria is based upon income. Representative J. Davies asked if the interest column would increase. Ms. Ritchie replied that the interest column had been calculated through June 30, 1997. Ms. Ritchie noted that in 1996, Congress amended the Legal Services Act to prohibit recipients of Legal Services funding from collecting attorney's fees. That prohibition applies to all cases after the enactment date, although, would not apply to cases with pending issues prior to that time. HB 113 was HELD in Committee for further discussion. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 4:29 P.M. 15