Legislature(1997 - 1998)
1997-07-10 Senate Journal
Full Journal pdf1997-07-10 Senate Journal Page 2076 SB 55 Message dated and received May 30, stating: Dear President Miller: On this date I have signed the following bill and am transmitting the engrossed and enrolled copies to the Lieutenant Governor's Office for permanent filing: 1997-07-10 Senate Journal Page 2077 SB 55 HOUSE CS FOR CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 55(FIN) An Act relating to the definition of certain state receipts, to state fiscal procedures, to the state budget, to agency performance reports, and to appropriation bills, eliminating the authority of a department to award a grant to a recipient other than the one named in the appropriation or allocation for the grant; and providing for an effective date. Chapter 59, SLA 1997 Effective Date: See Chapter Because its worthwhile provisions for designated program receipts (the original subject of the bill) should not be tossed out along with a legislative add-on that prohibits an administration from opening the grants process up to competition when it is in the best interest of the state. I proposed the original designated program receipts bill last year to address a budgetary catch-22 that does not recognize the difference between activities that are self-supporting and those that are not. This bill does not include all my recommendations for what should be considered designated program receipts but it does move in the right direction. I would hope we could pursue further designations in the future if the Legislature agrees that this treatment of program receipts is consistent with good budget discipline. Current law allows the administration to solicit bids from other potential providers in lieu of a grantee named in a budget bill if a competitive process is deemed in the public interest. A provision in this bill bars competitive bids if monies are not granted to the designated recipient. 1997-07-10 Senate Journal Page 2078 SB 55 In recent years, the Legislature and administrations have worked diligently and appropriately to reduce the proliferation of named grant recipients that occurred in the states boom years. The governors authority to put named grants out for competition under AS 37.05.316 has been exercised very rarely. While the bill allows the governor to impound funds rather than issue a grant to a named recipient, this will not be an acceptable alternative if essential services must be provided. I will introduce a bill next session to maximize the opportunities for competitive grants when services are to be provided with public funds. Sincerely, /s/ Tony Knowles Governor