Legislature(2011 - 2012)CAPITOL 17
02/10/2011 01:00 PM House TRANSPORTATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB10 | |
| HB102 | |
| HB57 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 10 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 102 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 57 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 10-NONCOMMERCIAL TRAILER REGISTRATION FEE
1:08:07 PM
CHAIR P. WILSON announced that the first only order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 10, "An Act relating to the registration
fee for noncommercial trailers and to the motor vehicle tax for
trailers."
1:08:24 PM
DARRELL BREESE, Staff, Representative Bill Stoltze, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of the prime sponsor of HB 10,
Representative Bill Stoltze, explained that HB 10 relates to
registration fees for noncommercial trailers. During the 20th
Legislature the legislature passed a bill granting permanent
trailer registration for commercial trailer owners. This bill
would offer the same permanent registration to consumers and
owner of noncommercial trailers.
MR. BREESE offered one secondary effect should provide
additional efficiency and help streamline the Division of Motor
Vehicles (DMV) processing of trailer registrations. He remarked
that another measure before the legislature would also offer
similar changes to motor vehicles. He pointed out that this
bill would still allow noncommercial trailer owners to opt to
use the biennial registration method to pay fees rather than the
permanent registration.
CHAIR P. WILSON, in response to Representative Gruenberg,
clarified that the bill heard by the House State Affairs
Standing Committee technically was not a companion bill since
that bill refers to motor vehicles.
1:11:15 PM
MR. BREESE, in response to Chair P. Wilson, agreed that the fees
would increase to $100 for the permanent registration of
noncommercial trailers. He explained the process to determine
the registration fee amount. The sponsor's goal attempts to
cover costs by projecting an estimated cost for someone who has
owned a trailer for 10 years. Thus, the fees included in this
bill would probably be close to $100. He further explained that
the DMV did not project the number of trailers that these fees
may apply to since people often register a trailer, park it, and
only re-register the trailer when the owner needs to use the
trailer again. This is unlike a car since people tend to keep
their vehicles currently registered. While using a 10 year
ownership seemed reasonable the fees in HB 10 are not based on
any statistical data. In response to Chair Wilson, he reported
that commercial vehicle registration fees currently are a one-
time $20 fee. He related his understanding that the intent of
the enabling legislation for commercial trailers are also based
on the owner paying increased taxes and higher fees for the
truck operation. However, noncommercial trailer fees were not
adjusted since no additional taxes are associated with the fees.
In further response to Chair Wilson, he answered that the fees
for commercial trailers are a flat $20 fee and are not based on
the number of axles.
1:14:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE asked for DMV's costs to register one
trailer.
MR. BREESE said he was unsure.
CHAIR P. WILSON noted that someone from the DMV would be
testifying later who could answer that question.
1:14:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG referred to page 3, line 18 of HB 10.
He asked which statutes are being repealed in this subsection.
MR. BREESE referred to page 3, lines 2-4 of HB 10. He said that
this language is being reinserted in another part of the
statute.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked for clarification on the fees.
He asked whether the fees for noncommercial vehicles on page 3,
line 1 of HB 10 would apply if the person decided to pay the
biennial fees. If the person decided to apply for permanent
registration fees, the fees listed on page 3, line 14 of HB 10
would apply. He offered his belief that the permanent one-time
fee would be $51 as opposed to $17 for an annual fee.
MR. BREESE, referred to page 2, beginning on line 13 of the bill
to the chart, "Tax According to Age of Vehicle." He advised
that the chart calculates the taxes for the vehicle depending on
the vehicle's age. The fee for a vehicle, such as a motorcycle
[line 19] would be $17 in the first year but would drop to $4 in
the eighth year. He agreed that the biennial registration for
every year past the eighth year would be $4 for a motorcycle.
He also agreed that on page 3, line 14 of HB 10, the fee of $51
refers to the permanent one-time fee.
1:17:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ asked why the fee structure for commercial
fees is different than those for noncommercial vehicles.
MR. BREESE explained that owners of commercial vehicles
currently pay a higher tax registration and tax rate based on
the weight of the vehicle and the number of axles. He stated
that the flat fee for noncommercial vehicles is a structure that
was used in the enabling legislation. This bill is consistent
with the enabling legislation, which is to charge the bulk of
the fees for a commercial vehicle rather than to charge a fee
for the vehicle being towed. An owner is already paying
registration fees for his/her truck so an extra charge would not
be passed on for the vehicle registration in this bill.
1:18:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ asked whether the analogy would also be the
same for noncommercial vehicles.
MR. BREESE agreed that some consistency would be achieved, but
to be perfectly consistent would require rewriting the whole
section for non-commercial vehicles and "that's a bigger pie
than we were trying to cut at this time," he said.
1:18:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG referred to the title, which is "An Act
relating to the registration fee for noncommercial trailers and
to the motor vehicle tax for trailers." He referred to page 1,
lines 12-14, to proposed Section 2 of HB 10, which applies only
to noncommercial trailers. He reiterated that subsection (j)
refers only to noncommercial vehicles.
MR. BREESE answered that subsection (j) reads, "When a person
registers a trailer not used or maintained for the
transportation of person or property for hire or for other
commercial use..." He explained that this subsection means that
if the purpose is not for commercial use that this provision
would apply.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG agreed, noting the language is a double
negative, so he initially missed the intent.
1:20:24 PM
WHITNEY BREWSTER, Director, Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV),
Department of Administration (DOA), addressed an earlier
question by Representative Feige. She responded that she did
not have a definitive answer to how much it costs the agency to
process a trailer renewal but she estimated the staff time for a
renewal transaction would be about three minutes. She thought
an initial registration transaction may take about seven minutes
to complete. She pointed out the clerks processing these
transactions fall in the payroll ranges of range 10-12. She
estimated the time needed to process noncommercial trailers
would be included as part of the scope of their regular job
duties. She explained that online transactions cost the state
about $1 per transaction and including the credit card fees
charged would amount to two percent of the total transaction.
Thus, transaction fees would cost about $2 on noncommercial
trailer registration fees of $30. In response to Chair P.
Wilson, she answered that the motor vehicle fees collected are
deposited to the general fund. In further response to Chair P.
Wilson, she agreed that the revenue collected would increase in
the first two years and then would decrease every year
thereafter.
1:23:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE asked how many trailer applications were
anticipated per year.
MS. BREWSTER answered that the DMV processes about 5,000 new
trailer applications per year. In further response to
Representative Feige, she responded that due to the small
numbers of registrations, the DMV does not anticipate a decrease
or reduction in staff levels.
1:24:37 PM
CHAIR P. WILSON recalled that the DMV's costs of operation are
taken directly from the revenue it collects.
MS. BREWSTER responded that the DMV is a receipt-supported
services organization, which means that the DMV's funding is
based on the amount of revenue it generates. In response to
Chair P. Wilson, she explained that the DMV operates on an
annual amount of $16.5 million. The proposed bill would not
sufficiently impact the DMV to affect its operating funds. She
added that the DMV's receives approximately $68.5 million
annually in total revenue.
1:26:37 PM
MS. BREWSTER advised that this program would be a fairly simple
program to administer at the DMV. In response to Representative
Johnson, she answered that the DMV is neutral on HB 10.
MARC LUIKEN, Commissioner, Department of Transportation & Public
Facilities (DOT&PF), stated the Department of Transportation &
Public Facilities (DOT&PF) does not have a position on HB 10 at
this time.
1:28:00 PM
CHAIR P. WILSON after first determining no one else wished to
testify closed public testimony on HB 10. She explained that
the bill would be discussed at a subsequent hearing.
1:28:41 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 10 Sponsor Statement.doc |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 10 |
| HB 10 Support Information.doc |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 10 |
| HB 10 Support Other States.docx |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 10 |
| HB0010A.PDF |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 10 |
| HB 57 backup DOT.pdf |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 57 |
| HB010-TRA-DOA-DMV-02-04-11.pdf |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 10 |
| HB 57 Burnett letter of support.pdf |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 57 |
| HB 57 Kennedy Letter of support.pdf |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 57 |
| HB 57 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 57 |
| HB 57 Bikes Program Description.pdf |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 57 |
| HB057-DOT-AS-2-4-11.pdf |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 57 |
| Anchorate Palmer Wasilla Plan.pdf |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 57 |
| HB 57 Paperman support.pdf |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 57 |
| HB 57 Lindholm support.pdf |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 57 |
| HB57 Sponsor Statment.pdf |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 57 |
| HB57 text (2).pdf |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM |
HB 57 |
| HB 102 fiscal Note DOA.pdf |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/15/2012 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/22/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 102 |
| HB 102 fiscal Note DOR.pdf |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/15/2012 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/22/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 102 |
| HB 102 Governors Sponsor.pdf |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/22/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 102 |
| HB 102 Sectional.pdf |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/15/2012 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/22/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 102 |
| HB 102 text.pdf |
HTRA 2/10/2011 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/22/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 102 |