Legislature(2025 - 2026)BARNES 124
04/10/2025 01:00 PM House TRANSPORTATION
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB26 | |
| HJR14 | |
| Presentation: Department of Transportation's Role in Emergency Response | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 26 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HJR 14 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
HB 26-STATEWIDE PUBLIC & COMMUNITY TRANSIT PLAN 1:02:10 PM CO-CHAIR CARRICK announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 26, "An Act relating to the duties of the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities; and relating to a statewide public and community transit plan." [Before the committee was CSHB 26(CRA).] 1:02:56 PM CO-CHAIR CARRICK moved to adopt Amendment 1 to CSHB 26(CRA), labeled 34-LS0276\N.1, Walsh, 4/4/25, which read as follows: Page 3, lines 8 - 9: Delete "public and community transit operators, including ferry operators, local governments, communities, and tribal entities" Insert "metropolitan planning organizations, local governments, communities, tribal entities, and public and community transit operators, including ferry operators" CO-CHAIR CARRICK objected for the purpose of discussion. She spoke to the amendment, stating that this would include metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) in the development of a community transit plan. CO-CHAIR CARRICK withdrew her objection. There being no further objection, Amendment 1 to CSHB 26(CRA) was adopted. 1:04:09 PM REPRESENTATIVE MINA moved to adopt Amendment 2 to CSHB 26(CRA), labeled 34-LS0276\N.2, Walsh, 4/4/25, as amended, which read as follows: Page 3, line 8: Delete "cooperation" Insert "coordination" CO-CHAIR CARRICK objected for the purpose of discussion. REPRESENTATIVE MINA explained that replacing "cooperation" with "coordination" would conform the language concerning stakeholders on page 2, line 5 of the proposed legislation. 1:05:08 PM CO-CHAIR CARRICK removed her objection. There being no further objection, Amendment 2 was adopted to CSHB 26(CRA), as amended. 1:05:31 PM REPRESENTATIVE MINA moved to adopt Amendment 3 to CSHB 26(CRA), labeled 34-LS0276\N.3, Walsh, 4/4/25, as amended, which read as follows: Page 2, line 5: Delete "local governments and tribal entities" Insert "metropolitan planning organizations, local governments, communities, tribal entities, and public and community transit operators, including ferry operators" CO-CHAIR CARRICK objected for the purpose of discussion. REPRESENTATIVE MINA explained the purpose of Amendment 3 is similar, as it would make the language in the proposed legislation consistent. 1:06:36 PM CO-CHAIR CARRICK removed her objection. There being no further objection, Amendment 3 was adopted to CSHB 26(CRA), as amended. 1:06:58 PM CO-CHAIR EISCHEID moved to report CSHB 26(CRA), as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. 1:07:18 PM REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE objected, stating that he does not [generally] oppose the bill; however, he argued that Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) is already doing this work, and he questioned the necessity of the proposed bill. He expressed the opinion that "this is an Anchorage bill" and has nothing to do with his constituents and those in some of the other remote parts of the Interior. In conclusion, he expressed opposition to the proposed legislation. 1:08:34 PM REPRESENTATIVE MINA explained that even if DOT&PF is doing this work now, leadership and federal rules could change; therefore, active work on multimodal transportation planning and public transit planning is not guaranteed. In terms of this being an "Anchorage bill," she stated that, while DOT&PF can do this for all areas in the state, in current statute it is only a requirement for urban transportation. She argued that the current statute is biased towards Anchorage, and the proposed legislation would remove the term "urban" because it is outdated. She reiterated that the proposed legislation would ensure DOT&PF would work on transit options in areas other than the larger cities in the state. She noted the funding issues and added that this would make sure community groups are involved with the department to address their community concerns. She added that including MPOs would allow others to be included in the process. 1:11:09 PM REPRESENTATIVE STUTES thanked the sponsor of the proposed bill for including ferry operators, as this represents rural areas. 1:11:29 PM REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE argued that the 8,200 Alaskans in Southeast, Kodiak, and Dutch Harbor would not include villages, such as Ruby, as it could use a ferry. He continued that the proposed legislation would not address the villages of Healy, Denali, Cantwell, Willow, or Talkeetna. He stated that it would do nothing to solve the issue of transportation between Healy and Fairbanks, which is a problem for Healy, as it has no health care services. He argued that this would not even service Big Lake. He explained that for him to support the proposed legislation, the needed additions would create too great an expense. He commented that on the fiscal note, the department has stated that it is already doing everything it can. He expressed appreciation for the proposed legislation; however, he expressed opposition. 1:13:30 PM REPRESENTATIVE TILTON noted that the fiscal note is zero because DOT&PF is already doing the work. She argued that if things were to change, the fiscal note would change as well, and more costs would be incurred. She expressed opposition to the proposed bill. 1:14:11 PM CO-CHAIR EISCHEID commented on his experience in rural Wisconsin, where a transit system accessed rural places. He shared his experience as a city planner for the Matanuska- Susitna Borough, stating that transportation planners had discussed issues concerning those who live in remote areas. He suggested that talking and planning would lead to action. He expressed support for the proposed legislation. 1:15:45 PM REPRESENTATIVE MINA requested that Andy Mills speak to the proposed legislation, concerning the changes in [paragraph] 5. Per this, she questioned whether rural areas would be included in the community transit plan. 1:16:20 PM ANDY MILLS, Legislative Liaison, Special Assistant to the Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner, Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, responded that the department's work already consists of area and statewide planning. Concerning Representative McCabe's comment, he stated that no matter the planning, without additional funding there will be no service to the remote areas. He continued that without additional resources, he could not envision a path for new services. 1:17:27 PM CO-CHAIR CARRICK expressed support for the proposed legislation, as her district has many semiurban areas, and a transportation plan here is important. She commented on the zero fiscal note, recognizing that in the future the bill could generate a fiscal impact. She opined that the fiscal impact would be positive if it led to better connectivity for communities, such as Healy. She expressed the opinion that MPOs need to be included. She noted that there would be a statewide effect for rural communities because of the inclusion of ferry and tribal consultation. 1:19:03 PM CO-CHAIR EISCHEID opined that, from a former planner's perspective, plans are the envisioned future of a community; with a robust process involving public comment and professional planners, the result would be a roadmap for the future, and the funding would follow. He suggested that often a plan is needed to receive a grant, so a plan would be a first step. 1:20:02 PM REPRESENTATIVE MINA, in closing, shared that she had joined the Public Transit Advisory Board in Anchorage in 2017, when the board had been undergoing a plan for Transit on the Move. She stated that the plan was the result of a decline in ridership, and the board was trying to determine what needs were not being met. She pointed out there had been robust community involvement, but there was no new funding or new routes. She stated that the plan was created with the direction of community members who use the service. She continued that a few years later, the municipality had been able to work out the funding for the Transit on the Move plan. She argued that even if the funding were not available, planning would be important to understand the needs of the community. She concluded that the proposed legislation represents transparency and accountability. 1:22:36 PM REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE stated that if the proposed bill were a statewide plan, he would offer an amendment to include rail stops in Anchorage, Wasilla, Houston, Talkeetna, Cantwell, Healy, and Fairbanks. He argued that this would provide community transport and involve the Alaska Railroad. He suggested that this would change the railroad's focus from tourism. He maintained his objection. 1:23:47 PM CO-CHAIR CARRICK expressed appreciation for Representative McCabe's suggestion. 1:24:04 PM A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Moore, Stutes, Mina, Eischeid, and Carrick voted in favor of the motion to report CSHB 26(CRA), as amended, out of committee. Representatives Tilton and McCabe voted against it. Therefore, CSHB 26(TRA) was reported out of the House Transportation Standing Committee by a vote of 5-2.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HJR 14 Ver A. Support Letter. MSB Mayor and Manager.4.1.25.pdf |
HTRA 4/10/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 14 |
| HJR 14 Ver A.SupportLetter.CityofHouston.4.2.25.pdf |
HTRA 4/10/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 14 |
| HJR14 Ver A.Support Letter.City of Fairbanks.04.02.2025.pdf |
HTRA 4/10/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 14 |
| HJR14 Ver A SponsorStatement 3.27.25.pdf |
HTRA 4/10/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 14 |
| HJR14 Ver A.Support Letter Nova Minerals. 4.3.25.pdf |
HTRA 4/10/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 14 |
| HJR 14 Ver A. Support Letter ARRC.04.03.25.pdf |
HTRA 4/10/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 14 |
| HJR Ver A Support Letter.UpperSusitnaCC.4.8.25.pdf |
HTRA 4/10/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 14 |
| HB 26 Amendment Packet.pdf |
HTRA 4/10/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 26 |
| HJR 14 Ver A. Support Letter Denali Borough.4.10.25.pdf |
HTRA 4/10/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 14 |
| 20250410 HTRA DOTPF Emergency Response - FINAL.pdf |
HTRA 4/10/2025 1:00:00 PM |
|
| HJR14 Ver A Support Letter BigLakeCC.4.12.25.pdf |
HTRA 4/10/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HJR 14 |