Legislature(2025 - 2026)ADAMS 519
03/06/2025 01:30 PM House FINANCE
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 | |
| HB53 || HB55 | |
| Subcommittee Closeout Reports | |
| Department of Law | |
| Department of Family and Community Services | |
| Department of Labor and Workforce Development | |
| Department of Administration | |
| Department of Natural Resources | |
| University of Alaska | |
| Judiciary | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 53 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 55 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL NO. 53
"An Act making appropriations for the operating and
loan program expenses of state government and for
certain programs; capitalizing funds; amending
appropriations; making supplemental appropriations;
making reappropriations; making appropriations under
art. IX, sec. 17(c), Constitution of the State of
Alaska, from the constitutional budget reserve fund;
and providing for an effective date."
HOUSE BILL NO. 55
"An Act making appropriations for the operating and
capital expenses of the state's integrated
comprehensive mental health program; and providing for
an effective date."
1:34:09 PM
^SUBCOMMITTEE CLOSEOUT REPORTS
1:34:44 PM
^DEPARTMENT OF LAW
ALEXANDER SHROEDER, STAFF, REPRESENTATITVE ANDY JOSEPHSON,
reviewed the finance subcommittee recommendations for the
Department of Law (DOL)(copy on file):
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Law held a total of four meetings and
submits the following recommended operating budget for
FY26 to the House Finance Committee:
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Fund Source: (dollars are in thousands)
Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $84,799.1
Designated General Funds (DGF) $3,016.8
Other Funds $42,482.1
Federal Funds $2,452.3
Total $132,750.3
Compared to the FY26 Governor's Amended budget, the
Subcommittee recommendations represent a decrease of -
$500.0 (-0.6%) in Unrestricted General Funds, for a
total of-$500.0 (-0.4%) in all funds.
Positions:
Permanent Full-Time 611
Permanent Part-Time 0
Temporary 29
Total 640
BUDGET ACTIONS
The subcommittee only addressed the Governor's items
as no other items were proposed.
The subcommittee adopted all the Governor's proposed
Budget Action items except
• Item 5: Continued Statehood Defense Efforts
Across Multiple Agencies Supporting Alaska's
Statehood Sovereignty (FY26-FY27)
The department will already receive $500.0 from a
temporary increment in the base budget (FY25-FY27).
Furthermore, $3,700.0 in previously appropriated
statehood defense monies are unspent. The department
testified that statehood defense costs the state an
estimated $2,000.0 - $3,000.0 per year (since FY22) on
average. Therefore, the subcommittee was not convinced
that the department required another $1 million over
the next two fiscal years.
Highlights- Approved Budget Action Items
• Criminal Division
o Funded 5 new Permanent Full-Time positions
to reduce increased caseloads to manageable
levels ($1,194.1 UGF)
o Funded an Attorney 5 position dedicated to
complex "Brady Case" disclosures ($279.9
UGF)
o Funded an Attorney 5 position and a Law
Office Assistant position for post-
conviction relief cases ($387.3 UGF)
• Civil Division
o Approved the transfer in of funding for
Labor Relations Analysts from the Department
of Administration in conjunction with the
Governor's Administrative Order 356
o Funded an Attorney 5 position to assist with
labor relations work ($279.9 UGF)
SUBCOMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
The Chair set an amendment deadline, welcomed
amendments from all members, and the subcommittee
received no amendments.
ATTACHED REPORTS
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Law adopted the attached reports:
• LAW Agency Totals
• LAW Transaction Compare: Adjusted Base+ to House
Subcom
• LAW Transaction Compare: GovAmend to House Subcom
1:39:07 PM
^DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
1:39:33 PM
ERIN PAGE, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE ANDY JOSEPHSON, reviewed
the finance subcommittee recommendations for the Department
of Family and Community Services (DFCS)(copy on file):
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Family & Community Services held three
meetings to receive five department and division
budget presentations and discuss the Governor's
proposed and amended operating budget. Based on those
considerations, the Subcommittee made no changes to
the items in the Governor's proposed operating budget
and added one item. The Subcommittee submits the
following recommended operating budget for FY2026 to
the House Finance Committee:
RECOMMENDATIONS
Fund Source ( dollars are in thousands)
Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $273,553.4
Designated General Funds (DGF) $30,743.6
Other Funds $104,621.9
Federal Funds $86,394.4
Total $132,750.3
Compared to the FY26 Adjusted Base, the Subcommittee
recommendation represents an increase in Unrestricted
General Funds of $4,444.0 (1.7%) from the Governor's
items and $5,500.0 (2.1%) from the Subcommittee's
item. The total increase in UGF is $9,944.0 (3.8%).
For other funding sources, the Subcommittee
recommendation reflects no change in Designated
General Funds, a decrease of $2,871.4 (-2.7%) in Other
funds, and no change in Federal funds. The increase
across all fund sources is $7,072.6 (1.4%).
Positions
Permanent Full-Time (PFT) 1870
Permanent Part-Time (PPT) 6
Temporary 69
Total 1945
Compared to the FY26 Adjusted Base, the Subcommittee
recommendations represent no change in the number of
positions in any category (Permanent Full Time,
Permanent Part Time, and temporary) within the
Department.
BUDGET ACTION
The Subcommittee members reviewed the Governor's
proposed transactions in detail. After consideration,
the subcommittee made no changes to those
transactions. The subcommittee added one new
transaction.
That transaction is:
• $5,500.0 General Fund Increment to the Office of
Children's Services, Family Preservation
allocation, to replace lost Federal funding for
Children's Advocacy Centers.
SUBCOMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
The Chair set an amendment deadline and welcomed
amendments from all members. Twelve amendments were
received. No amendments were adopted by the
Subcommittee.
ATTACHED REPORTS
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Family & Community Services adopted the
attached Budget Action Report for the Department of
Family & Community Services. This report incorporates
agency totals, transaction comparisons for the FY26
Adjusted Base to the House Subcommittee Proposal, and
transaction comparisons for the FY26 Governor's
Amended Proposal to the House Subcommittee Proposal.
1:43:18 PM
Representative Allard asked about the $5,500,000 general
fund increment for the Office of Children's Services on
page 2 of the report. She noted that the federal government
had paused federal funds and asked if the increment was for
non-profits.
Ms. Page responded in the affirmative.
Representative Allard asked if she could be provided with a
list of the non-profits.
Ms. Page responded that she would follow up with the
information. She noted that there was a list on the
Department of Health's (DOH) website.
1:43:59 PM
^DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
CAROLINE HAMP, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE CALVIN SCHRAGE,
reviewed the finance subcommittee recommendations for the
Department of Labor and Workforce Development (DLWD) (copy
on file):
The House Finance budget subcommittee for the
Department of Labor and Workforce Development
recommends the following Fiscal Year 2026 budget:
Subcommittee Recommendations (Numbers Section Only):
Fund Source: (dollars are in thousands)
Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $23,148.6
Designated General Funds (DGF) $32,795.7
Other Funds $17,793.9
Federal Funds $17,793.9
Total $166,358.6
Positions:
Permanent Full-Time 683
Permanent Part-Time 40
Temporary 16
Total 739
Compared to the FY26 adjusted based, the subcommittee
recommendations represent an increase of $366.5 (or
1.6%) in Unrestricted General Funds, a decrement of
$15,852.2 (-32.6%) in Designated General Funds, a
decrement of $2,547.1 (-12.5%) in Other Funds, and a
decrement of $2,150.0 (-2.3%) in Federal Funds. 0The
primary change reflected in the DGF decrement is from
moving the Technical and Vocational Education Program
(TVEP) appropriation to the Language Section.
Budget Actions:
The House Finance budget subcommittee for the
Department of Labor and Workforce Development held
three informational meetings with the Department and
one-close-out meeting during the review of the FY2026
budget request.
After reviewing and discussing each of the Governor's
proposed budget changes, the subcommittee adopted all
but one budget item. The subcommittee voted to deny
the Governor's proposed increase of $290.4 UGF for the
Alaska Safety Advisor Program (ASAP).
Some highlights of the accepted budget items are:
• Adding one Alaska Vocational Technical Center
(AVTEC) instructor to expand Industrial
Electrical Program.
• Resolving last year's fiscal notes for the
Workers' Compensation Stay-at-Work legislation
(Senate Bill 206) and Plumbers and Electricians
Certificate of Fitness legislation (Senate Bill
204).
Subcommittee Amendments:
The Chair set an amendment deadline, welcomed
amendments from all members, and received zero
amendments.
Attached Reports:
The Finance Budget Subcommittee for the Department of
Labor and Workforce Development (DOLWD) adopted the BA
Report and corresponding Legislative Finance Division
documents, which are attached.
1:46:54 PM
Representative Stapp understood that a single position had
been removed from the Alaska Safety Advisory Program
(ASAP). He asked why the position was removed.
Ms. Hamp responded that there was a proposal from the
governor to change the Alaska Safety Advisory Council
(ASAC) to ASAP, which would have added an additional
position. However, volunteers for the council had already
been performing the necessary work. As a result, the
department retained the statutory designated program
receipts so the program could continue its work using
volunteers.
Representative Johnson asked for clarification on whether
the change was a true budget cut or simply a reduction in
receipt authority. She understood that the positions were
funded with interagency receipts in FY 25, but had been
reclassified. She understood that the receipt authority
allowed the state to collect money from sponsors and
vendors at a conference in exchange for booth space. She
asked whether the department would still be able to collect
the receipts.
Ms. Hamp responded that the department had retained
$281,600 in statutory designated program receipts. However,
the position and the unrestricted general funds (UGF)
associated with it were not retained, which resulted in a
cut to the budget.
Co-Chair Josephson asked if there were any further
questions for Ms. Hamp.
Representative Johnson asked if there were positions that
had been eliminated as part of the cut.
Ms. Hamp confirmed that there was one cut position in the
subcommittee's recommended budget.
Representative Johnson understood that Executive Order (EO)
135 was the reason for the cut. She asked for a reminder of
the details of the EO.
Ms. Hamp replied that EO 135 had transferred the
responsibilities of ASAC and created ASAP. She stated that
she could follow up with additional information.
Representative Johnson asked whether the eliminated
position was either the electrical inspector or the safety
inspection and compliance electrical inspector.
Ms. Hamp asked for clarification on what Representative
Johnson was referring to.
Representative Johnson clarified that she was trying to
understand what precisely was being cut.
Co-Chair Josephson suggested that it might be helpful to
hear from the Legislative Finance Division (LFD).
1:51:13 PM
VALERIE ROSE, FISCAL ANALYST, LEGISLATIVE FINANCE DIVISION,
responded that EO 135 had been introduced and approved by
the legislature the previous year and transferred the
authority and activity of ASAC to DLWD as ASAP. The
governor submitted a request for UGF for FY 26 but he did
not submit a monetary request for FY 25, which was when the
transfer occurred. She clarified that that subcommittee
chose not to approve the request.
Ms. Rose stated that two positions associated with ASAP
were transferred from within the department. She recalled
that the positions were electrical inspectors and were
formerly vacant. The positions were supported by
interagency receipt authority in FY 25. However, the
receipts might be considered uncollectible because there
was no funding source for the receipts. The department had
indicated that it intended to reclassify the positions to
roles appropriate for supporting the new program. She added
that the FY 26 budget included a request from the governor
to delete the interagency receipt authority, and the
subcommittee had accepted the item.
Representative Johnson asked if there were any other cuts
to the budget.
Ms. Rose replied in the negative.
Representative Johnson asked whether the change affected
the conference revenue.
Ms. Rose responded that it did not. She confirmed that the
statutory designated program receipts remained in place and
would still support the conference.
Representative Johnson asked for confirmation that the
positions were transferred because they were not needed.
Ms. Rose replied that the two positions already existed in
the department but had been vacant for a long time. When
the responsibilities of the council were transferred to the
department, the positions were reassigned.
1:54:20 PM
Representative Stapp asked for confirmation that the two
positions were unfunded.
Ms. Rose responded that the two positions were supported by
interagency receipt authority in FY 25. Throughout FY 25,
the department had indicated that it was working to
reclassify the positions in a way that would support the
program, but the funding that had been previously
associated with the positions was not allowed to be used
for the purposes of the program. As a result, the
department utilized interagency receipt authority as the
selected funding mechanism for the positions. She relayed
that there was no viable funding source for the receipts.
The governor had requested to delete the receipt authority
in FY 26, which the subcommittee had accepted.
^DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
1:55:35 PM
Ms. Hamp reviewed the finance subcommittee recommendations
for the Department of Administration (DOA) (copy on file):
The House Finance budget subcommittee for the
Department of Administration recommends the following
budget proposal for consideration of the House Finance
Committee:
Subcommittee Recommendations (Numbers Section Only):
Fund Source: (dollars are in thousands)
Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $96,265.9
Designated General Funds (DGF) $34,367.8
Other Funds $203,445.3
Federal Funds $1,287.1
Total $335,366.1
Positions:
Permanent Full-Time 1,200
Permanent Part-Time 4
Temporary 26
Total 1,230
Compared to the FY26 Adjusted Base budget, the
subcommittee recommendations represent an increase of
$1,246.3 (1.3%) in Unrestricted General Funds, an
increase of $152.5 (0.4%) in Designated General Funds,
an increase of $851.2 (0.4%) in Other Funds, and no
change in Federal Funds. The percentage difference
from the Governor's proposed budget to the
subcommittee recommendation is 0.1%.
Budget Action:
The House Finance budget subcommittee for the
Department of Administration held five informational
meetings with the Department and one close-out
meeting. The subcommittee adopted the BA Report, which
included multiple proposals from the Governor, a few
of which are detailed below:
• Transferring Labor Relations to the Department of
Law and the Office of the Governor in accordance
with Administrative Order 356, costing $175.8 UGF
and $805.6 UGF, respectively
• Rising software and contract costs in the Office
of Information Technology, costing $529.0 Info
Services Fund
• Funding overtime eligibility for Guardian ad
Litem and Public Guardian positions working on
Child in Need of Aid casework, costing $450.0 UGF
• Adding 4 positions at the Office of Public
Advocacy for a total $605.1 in various fund
sources
The BA report also included four deviations from the
Governor's proposed budget:
• Adding a Tech 2 position to the Division of
Retirement and Benefits, costing $93.6 in various
fund sources
• Adding Public Radio Funding for emergency
communications at rural stations for $1,200.0 UGF
• Removing funding for two allocations related to
AI tools and projects, costing $732.7 UGF and
$360.0 UGF, respectively.
Subcommittee Amendments:
The Chair set an amendment deadline, welcomed
amendments from all members, and received zero
amendments.
Attached Reports:
The House Finance budget subcommittee for the
Department of Administration (DOA) adopted the
attached BA Report.
1:58:49 PM
Representative Stapp remarked that the use of fund sources
for the centralized retirement technician position was
clever. He asked if the state could hire individuals using
Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) trust funds.
Ms. Hamp suggested that LFD could respond to the question.
ROB CARPENTER, LEGISLATIVE FISCAL ANALYST, LEGISLATIVE
FINANCE DIVISION, explained that the entire Division of
Retirement and Benefits (DRB) was essentially funded
through the retirement system trust accounts. He clarified
that the funding was proportionally distributed across the
fund sources.
Representative Stapp asked for an explanation of the group
benefit, the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA)
account, PERS, and the Teachers' Retirement System (TRS)
sources. He also asked whether permission from the Alaska
Retirement Management Board (ARMB) was required in order to
use the funds.
Mr. Carpenter responded that ARMB did not necessarily
approve the budget, as that responsibility fell under the
purview of the legislature.
Representative Johnson asked if the public radio emergency
funding item had been requested by the department or if it
was included for another reason. She inquired if the
funding was related to efforts to fix a broken element
within emergency services.
Ms. Hamp responded that the subcommittee had added the item
to the report at the request of Representative Ashley
Carrick.
Representative Johnson asked for confirmation that there
was no additional backup information.
Ms. Hamp confirmed that there was not.
Representative Johnson noted that she understood the reason
for funding public radio. She stated that she was simply
trying to determine whether there was an emergency services
issue the legislature was attempting to address.
Representative Stapp understood that funding for public
radio was a recurring budget item that was included in the
budget every year and was vetoed every year. He understood
that another item that was removed by the subcommittee was
funding Microsoft Co-Pilot. He asked why the subcommittee
deemed the program an unworthy expense.
Ms. Hamp responded that her understanding was that the
subcommittee preferred to allocate the funds toward human
resources rather than artificial intelligence (AI) tools.
2:02:58 PM
^DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Ms. Hamp reviewed the finance subcommittee recommendations
for the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) (copy on
file):
The House Finance budget subcommittee for the
Department of Natural Resources recommends the
following Fiscal Year 2026 budget:
Subcommittee Recommendations (Numbers Section Only):
Fund Source: (dollars are in thousands)
Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $66,627.3
Designated General Funds (DGF) $50,369.4
Other Funds $52,713.8
Federal Funds $13,584.2
Total $183,294.7
Positions:
Permanent Full-Time 746
Permanent Part-Time 208
Temporary 72
Total 1,026
Compared to the FY26 adjusted based, the subcommittee
recommendations represent an increase of $1,437.0
(2.2%) in Unrestricted General Funds, $3,096.6 (6.6%)
in Designated General Funds, $10,321.0 (24.3%) in
Other Funds, and no change in Federal Funds.
Budget Action:
The House Finance budget subcommittee for the
Department of Natural Resources held four
informational meetings with the Department and one
close-out meeting. After reviewing and discussing each
of the Governor's proposed budget changes, the
subcommittee adopted the majority of the items. The
subcommittee made changes to the way the following
three requests were funded:
• Big Game Guide Concession Area Implementation was
changed from UGF to GF/Prgm - $342.0 DGF
• Positions to Support Development of New Lands for
Timber Sales was changed from UGF to Timber Rep -
$420.4 DGF
• Authority for the Denali Commission Grant from an
Inc to a One Time Increment - $800.0 Stat Desg
IncOTI
The subcommittee made one decrement from the
Governor's proposed budget:
• $139.5 MHTAAR for the Trust Land Office
Administration Budget
Compared to the FY26 Governor Amend budget, the
subcommittee recommendations represent a decrease of
$762.4 (-1.1%) in UGF.
Subcommittee Amendments:
The Chair set an amendment deadline, welcomed
amendments from all members, and the committee
received eight amendments. The subcommittee approved
four amendments. Two of the adopted amendments are
detailed in the above section (Denali Commission Grant
OTI and the MHTAAR decrement). The other two adopted
amendments were:
• Maintaining funding for a AK.LNG Commercial
Analyst - $385.0 GF/Prgm
• Appropriating the additional revenue in the
Vehicle Rental Tax Fund to the Division of Parks
and Outdoor Recreation - $2,334.2 DGF
Additionally, two amendments were withdrawn but
provided fruitful conversation. From the discussions
and topics of the two withdrawn amendments, the Chair
offers the following recommendations to the full House
Finance Committee:
• During consideration of the creation of the
Department of Agriculture, utilize pre-existing
resources - particularly administrative and IT
personnel - within the Department of Natural
Resources.
• Request a report from the Department listing the
details and cost of each infrastructure project
funded within the Forest Management and
Development allocation.
Attached Reports:
The House Finance budget subcommittee for the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) adopted the
attached BA Report.
2:07:07 PM
Co-Chair Josephson asked what the purpose of the Denali
Commission grant was.
Ms. Hamp responded that the grant would be used for forest
management activities such as reforestation, fire
mitigation, and health treatments on private lands.
Representative Allard shared that she had recently spoken
with someone in the executive branch and she had
recommended the use of lateral transfers to support the
proposed Department of Agriculture. She appreciated that
the lateral transfer idea appeared to be gaining traction
and thought that there was no reason for the state not to
use utilize lateral transfers for its 24,000 state
employees. She hoped that any changes would be supported by
the following year's budget.
Representative Stapp asked whether deleting the Mental
Health Trust Authority Authorized Receipts (MHTAAR) funds
was a request from the Alaska Mental Health Trust
Authority's (AMHTA) Trust Land Office (TLO). He noted that
MHTAR funds were not legislative funds.
Ms. Hamp responded that the deletion had been an amendment
proposed by a subcommittee member and not a direct request
from AMHTA.
Representative Stapp understood that the fund source for
the request for two positions to support the development of
new lands for timber sales would change from UGF to timber
receipts. He asked if the reason for using the timber
receipts fund source was because there was an expectation
that timber sales would increase. He wondered if the fund
source was already sufficient to cover the costs for the
positions.
Ms. Hamp replied that there was already enough timber
receipts revenue to support the positions. She added that
the department hoped the fund source would continue to grow
based on changes made to timber practices over the last
year.
Representative Stapp asked whether the additional vehicle
rental tax receipt authority was based on anticipated
increases in vehicle rentals or if it reflected
unexpectedly high collections from the previous fiscal
year.
Ms. Hamp answered that the Vehicle Rental Tax Fund (VRTF)
had seen an increase in revenue in the past fiscal year and
the additional authority was supported by an existing
surplus in the fund.
Representative Stapp understood that the increased receipt
authority would simply allow the department to access and
spend the collected funds from increased rentals. He asked
if his understanding was correct.
Ms. Hamp responded in the affirmative.
2:10:29 PM
Representative Hannan noted that multiple agencies utilized
VRTF and asked whether increasing authority at DNR would
decrease available funding for other departments. She asked
if subcommittees for other agencies had accounted for such
reductions or if there was extra funding available for
multiple agencies.
Ms. Hamp responded that there was additional revenue in the
fund and that the subcommittee ensured it did not touch
allocations designated for other subcommittees. She added
that DNR had been the first to act on the available funds.
Representative Allard observed that the report listed the
total permanent full-time positions, part-time positions,
temporary positions, and the total overall number of
positions. She noted that it was her first year serving on
the House Finance Committee and asked whether the documents
traditionally included vacancy figures. She asked for the
definition of part-time, full-time, and temporary, and
asked why temporary positions were needed at all.
Ms. Hamp replied that she would need to follow up with the
information.
Co-Chair Josephson suggested that LFD could respond.
Representative Allard requested that the breakdown of
vacancies be provided after the meeting. She clarified that
she was simply curious whether the information was already
on hand.
Co-Chair Josephson recalled that the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) had previously presented to the committee
the detailed vacancy rates across all departments.
Representative Allard stated that the information was
important to her because if funds were not spent on vacant
positions, she believed the departments would likely spend
the funds elsewhere before being required to return the
funds to the state. She stated that she wanted to see the
numbers reflecting what portion of the funds from the
vacancies were spent before being reallocated or returned
to the state, or if the funds were returned at all.
Co-Chair Josephson responded that he suspected it was a
case-by-case situation. He stated that it was probably
something Mr. Alexei Painter could address.
2:13:20 PM
ALEXEI PAINTER, DIRECTOR, LEGISLATIVE FINANCE DIVISION,
responded that he did not know the exact number of
vacancies for DNR. He confirmed that OMB had recently
provided a response to a committee question that included a
listing of long-term vacant positions and the percentage of
vacant positions as of December of 2024. He noted that more
recent data had also been submitted. He explained that the
FY 26 budget was speculative because it was unclear how
many positions would remain vacant in a year. He noted that
there could be parts of DNR's budget and other departments'
budgets where the actual vacancy rate exceeded the budgeted
vacancy factor. He explained that most allocations included
a maximum 7 percent vacancy factor, which was the standard
practice of intentional under-budgeting to account for
anticipated vacancies. There could be instances in which
funds lapsed due to vacancies, but he did not have more
information available offhand. He offered to provide the
current vacancy numbers and the associated funding levels
as of January of 2025 in a follow up.
Representative Allard stated that she specifically wanted a
line-item breakdown of vacancies and salary levels, and an
explanation of whether the funds allocated to the vacant
positions were used elsewhere. She acknowledged that the
response required additional effort, but she believed it
was important to understand where the funds were going.
Mr. Painter responded that it would be challenging to track
exactly how the funds were used. He reported that OMB had
submitted its lapse report earlier that day, as required by
statute. The report indicated no lapse in personal services
spending for any agency, which he thought was unlikely. He
clarified that it was still unknown what would lapse from
FY 25. He stated that it was possible to look back at FY 24
and compare budgeted personal services funding with actual
expenditures to identify any increases in other line items;
however, the information was retrospective and had limited
predictive value for FY 26.
Mr. Painter suggested that LFD could provide a comparison
of line item changes between final budgets and actual
expenditures for DNR or any agency or department. The
expenditure data provided by OMB consisted of preliminary
actuals, which were all pre-audit figures. He stated that
the FY 24 audit had not been completed yet and might not be
finalized for another month. The figures represented a
single point in time and should not be considered fully
accurate because the figures had not yet been audited.
Representative Allard thought LFD could examine past data
to understand the state's habits and how it was using its
money.
2:17:21 PM
Representative Johnson recalled that the subcommittee had
accepted a $2.5 million item for a wildland fire
replacement aircraft. She understood that DNR owned two
aircrafts that were used to coordinate wildland fire
responses but that one of the aircrafts had reached the end
of its operational life, which had increased maintenance
requirements and decreased operational efficiency. She
remarked that if the state was going to purchase a new
aircraft, it should use the maintenance funds from the old
aircraft to maintain the new one. She stated that hopefully
the new aircraft would require less maintenance. She asked
what would happen to the old aircraft and whether there had
been any discussion of offsetting the cost of the new
aircraft by selling the old one.
Ms. Hamp responded that she believed Representative Johnson
was referring to items in the capital budget.
Representative Johnson acknowledged that might be the case
and stated that she did not know how she had come across
the item.
Ms. Hamp understood that LFD had merged operating and
capital items in its overview.
Representative Johnson asked about the addition of a couple
of positions for broadband right-of-way specialists. She
questioned whether the need for state expenditures had been
evaluated in light of the significant amount of federal
funding received for broadband development. She expressed
surprise that the state would need to use UGF to support
broadband development and asked whether the subcommittee
had reviewed the matter.
Ms. Hamp stated that she believed Representative Johnson
was referring to item 5 in the attached BA report.
Representative Johnson responded in the affirmative.
Ms. Hamp responded that she could not recall offhand
whether federal funds were available for the positions. She
added that the increase in workload from the federal grants
was why additional staff were required, which was not an
expense that was eligible for federal funding.
Representative Johnson thought that federal funding often
came with hidden costs that impacted the state's UGF. She
remarked that while the broadband grants brought in
additional resources, the grants also increased the
department's workload and required state funding. She
emphasized the importance of identifying ways to manage
added costs within the scope of the federal grant funding.
Ms. Hamp responded that the positions had been added as
temporary increments. She stated that the positions would
not be included in the base budget due to the timing and
nature of the workload.
2:21:49 PM
^UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA
LISA KELLER, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE ALYSE GALVIN, reviewed
the finance subcommittee recommendations for the University
of Alaska (UA) (copy on file):
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
University of Alaska submits the following recommended
operating budget for FY26 to the House Finance
Committee.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Fund Source: (dollars are in thousands)
Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $358,065.8
Designated General Funds (DGF) $313,927.0
Other Funds $219,148.0
Federal Funds $216,257.8
Total $1,107,398.6
Compared to the FY26 governor's amended budget
proposal, subcommittee recommendations represent an
increase of $3,000.0 (+0.3%) in Unrestricted General
Funds (UGF).
Positions:
Permanent Full-Time 3,863
Permanent Part-Time 343
Temporary 0
Total 4,206
BUDGET ACTIONS
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for University
of Alaska reviewed the FY26 budget request and adopted
all items and added:
• An increase of $3,000.0 in UGF to Increase
Recruitment, Retention, and Graduation.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The subcommittee is forwarding the following
recommendations for the full committee's
consideration:
• That the $3,000.0 increment be used to raise
recruitment, retention, and graduation rates
across the University of Alaska system,
• That the University focuses the majority of
$2,500.0 on best practice strategies engaging in-
state students to impact recruitment, retention,
and graduation rate across the University of
Alaska system,
• That $500.0 of the $3,000.0 increment be used to
increase mental health care access for students
across the University of Alaska system.
SUBCOMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
The chair set an amendment deadline, welcomed
amendments from all members, and the subcommittee
received no amendments.
ATTACHED REPORT
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
University of Alaska adopted the attached report:
• House Finance University of Alaska Budget Action
Report
2:24:57 PM
Representative Stapp expressed appreciation for the
extensive work completed by the UA subcommittee. He noted
that the work was often not rewarded appropriately given
the number of hours involved. He noted that the legislature
had moved a significant amount UA receipt authority and
that the university had conducted substantial private
fundraising for projects. He explained that it was
important to ensure that the university had sufficient
receipt authority to accept all donations in the event that
receipts exceeded what had been authorized. He asked
whether the subcommittee had reviewed the issue.
Representative Galvin responded that the overview provided
by UA President Pat Pitney included a request from the
university for additional receipt authority. She confirmed
that additional authority had been granted. She noted that
the university had evaluated the need and requested the
amount accordingly. There had been some last minute changes
in the past due to underestimating UA's needs, but she
offered reassurance that the university had provided a more
complete assessment during the subcommittee process. She
suggested that Ms. Keller provide more details.
Ms. Keller requested that LFD provide more information.
2:27:10 PM
MICHAEL PARTLOW, FISCAL ANALYST, LEGISLATIVE FINANCE
DIVISION, responded that the university had proposed a
number of technical adjustments that were included in the
governor's budget and adopted by the subcommittee. The
adjustments included additional statutory designated
program receipt authority to accept donations as well as a
reclassification of some UA receipt authority to statutory
designated program receipt authority. He explained that the
purpose was to clarify the difference between revenue
generated as tuition and revenue brought in as donations or
from federal funding.
Representative Stapp understood that the legislature had
adjusted the receipt authority to reflect revenues more
accurately. He noted that he wanted to ensure that the
university would not be limited in its ability to accept
private donations if it exceeded the authorized amount for
statutory designated program receipts. He asked whether the
adjustments made had accounted for such a possibility.
Mr. Partlow responded that "tens of millions" of dollars in
receipt authority had been added. He stated that it was an
aspirational amount and he expressed hope that the
university would receive such an aspirational level of
donations.
Co-Chair Josephson remarked that he was confident that
concerns would have been raised already if the amount had
been insufficient.
Representative Tomaszewski asked if the $3 million
increment for recruitment, retention, and graduation rates
was considered intent language.
Mr. Partlow responded that the recommendation was not
intent language. He stated that the subcommittee had
approved the $3 million increment for recruitment and
retention. The subcommittee had recommended that $2.5
million of the $3 million increment go toward recruitment
and retention. He noted that the committee could choose to
designate $500,000 toward student mental health. He
emphasized that it was a recommendation and not intent
language and allowed for broad usage of the funds under the
general category of recruitment and mental health support.
The university could currently use the $3 million for broad
recruitment and retention activities. He relayed that the
subcommittee recommended that more clarification be
provided as to how the money should be spent.
Representative Tomaszewski asked for confirmation that
there was no intent language.
Mr. Partlow responded that as currently written, it was a
broader category. The recommendation in the narrative was
that the finance committee could further clarify the
spending if desired, but as currently written, there was no
requirement for how the funds must be allocated within the
recruitment and retention category.
2:31:15 PM
Representative Allard asked if the funding was a "blank
check."
Mr. Partlow responded that he would not characterize it as
such. He stated that the $3 million increment was intended
specifically for recruitment and retention within the
university system. He noted that the Board of Regents had
discretion over how its goals were accomplished but he
affirmed that the subcommittee intended the funds to
support the university's objectives.
Representative Allard remarked that she did not think the
university was required to spend the funds on recruitment
and retention. She asked if the lack of intent language
meant the funds were not formally "earmarked" for those
purposes.
Co-Chair Josephson added that there had been frustration in
the past about how UA was spending its funds. He explained
that the legislature had decided to require the university
to operate under nine separate appropriations to increase
legislative oversight of UA. He noted that the legislature
had subsequently returned the university to a single
appropriation structure. If the university did not spend
the funding as intended, the legislature could respond more
strictly in the FY 27 budget. He relayed that the current
funding was based on a request from the Board of Regents
and he expected that the board would monitor how the money
was spent.
Representative Allard asked if Mr. Partlow had anything to
add.
Mr. Parlow responded that the university retained some
discretion in how the funds were spent. However, the
transaction language in the budget was clearly written with
a stated purpose. He confirmed that the legislature could
hold the university accountable in the future if it failed
to align its expenditures with legislative intent.
2:33:34 PM
Representative Galvin noted that the university had given a
formal presentation to the committee on its expenditure
plan and had provided a detailed red book outlining how the
funds would be spent. She stated that she had further
discussions with the university and Chancellor Sean Parnell
to better understand the funding priorities and she would
be happy to have offline discussion with anyone who was
interested in learning more. She acknowledged that the
university had requested $10 million, and the legislature
had to make difficult decisions. She hoped that the funds
provided would make a positive difference. She stressed the
importance of the university reporting back in the
following year to account for how the funds were spent.
Representative Allard commented that she had also met with
the chancellor and she understood what was going on. She
thought it was important for certain matters to be placed
on the public record.
Co-Chair Josephson stated that he had also met with the
chancellor, who had advocated strongly for the University
of Alaska Anchorage (UAA) athletics program and the
University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) hockey program. He
clarified that the requests were not included in the
current budget.
Representative Tomaszewski stated that he thought there had
been a $5 million request for sports funding and asked
whether that was included in the current budget.
Co-Chair Josephson replied that the $5 million request was
not included in the budget.
2:36:30 PM
^JUDICIARY
RACHAEL GUNN, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE NELLIE JIMMIE, reviewed
the finance subcommittee recommendations for the Judiciary
(copy on file):
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the Alaska
Courts System submits the following recommended
operating budget for FY26 to the House Finance
Committee. Note that that all dollars are in thousands
and the Subcommittee's recommendations are limited to
the numbers section of the operating budget
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Source of Funds Total Change Change
(in dollars) (as percent)
Unrestricted
General Funds (UGF) 154,525.2 1,187.7 0.8%
Designated
General Funds (DGF) 518.0 0.0 0.0%
Other Funds 2,710.0 278.3 11.4%
Federal Funds 1,805.3 0 0.0%
Total 159,558.5 1,466.0 0.9%
*Funding changes are in comparison to the FY25
Adjusted Base +
Position Type Number
Permanent Full-Time 755
Permanent Part-Time 38
Temporary 6
Total 799
BUDGET ACTIONS:
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the Alaska
Court System carefully reviewed and discussed the
Office of the Governor's FY26 operating budget and
amendments from its members and the Governor.
The subcommittee accepts the budget proposal submitted
by the Office of the Governor with the following
changes:
- Add a $170.8 UGF Increment to reflect the needs of
the Court system for facility, utility, and contract
costs as originally requested by agency
2:38:39 PM
Representative Johnson asked for more information about the
reason for the $170,000 increase in UGF.
Ms. Gunn responded that the $170,000 had been requested by
the courts but had not made it into the final budget item.
Representative Johnson asked if the request had simply come
in late.
Ms. Gunn responded that the request had not come in late,
but it was not originally included in the subcommittee's
request. She added that the number had changed slightly and
that the initial request had been $552,300 but the final
amount was $534,000. She explained that the lease cost had
come in slightly lower while the building cost had
increased; however, utility costs had remained unchanged.
Co-Chair Josephson returned to the topic of the university
and clarified that funding for university athletics
programs was included in the budget, but it was in the form
of university receipts rather than UGF. He cited item 38
for UAA and item 64 for UAF.
Co-Chair Josephson noted that the committee had reviewed
seven reports during the meeting. He commended
Representative Allard for her comments. He relayed that it
was important to clarify on public record that the
legislature had appropriation authority and it expected the
executive branch to spend funds accordingly.
Representative Tomaszewski asked for clarification
regarding the athletics line items.
Co-Chair Josephson confirmed that the correct items in the
report were 33, 38, and 64. He added that the items
represented authority for the university to spend money
that it already had.
Representative Allard added that she had discussed
athletics with the chancellor and noted that athletics
served as a recruitment tool for the university. She
suggested that more students might attend a UA school
because of athletic programs. She indicated that she
intended to bring an amendment forward to make cuts.
Co-Chair Josephson remarked that he liked part of
Representative Allard's comment.
HB 53 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
HB 55 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
Co-Chair Josephson reviewed the agenda for the following
day's meeting.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 53 OP Budget SubC Closeout Reports 030525 (2).pdf |
HFIN 3/6/2025 1:30:00 PM |
HB 53 HB 55 |
| HB 53 Rsponse to DFCS Closeout CACs FY25-Grant-Book DFCS.pdf |
HFIN 3/6/2025 1:30:00 PM |
HB 53 HB 55 |