Legislature(2021 - 2022)GRUENBERG 120
03/30/2021 03:00 PM House STATE AFFAIRS
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 | |
| HB137 | |
| HB63 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 137 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 63 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
HB 63-ALASKA MARINE HIGHWAY OPERATIONS BOARD
3:50:20 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the final order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 63, "An Act relating to the duties of
the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities; renaming
the Alaska Marine Transportation Advisory Board the Alaska
Marine Highway Operations Board; relating to the membership and
duties of the Alaska Marine Highway Operations Board; and
providing for an effective date." [Before the committee was
CSHB 63(TRA).]
3:50:27 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 3:50 p.m. to 3:53 p.m.
3:53:18 PM
KERRY CROCKER, Staff, Representative Louise Stutes, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Stutes, prime sponsor,
introduced HB 63 with a PowerPoint presentation, titled "HB 63"
[hard copy included in the committee packet]. He began on slide
2, titled "Background Information," which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
AK FERRY SYSTEM ESTABLISHED
?M/V Chilkat, became operational in 1957
?1959, Alaska becomes 49thstate making M/V Chilkat
first state-owned ferry
?Alaska Legislature approved the Alaska Ferry
Transportation Act, 1959
?Voters approved bond issues totally $18 million to
expand services and build four new vessels and docks
?1963, Alaska Marine Highway established
AMHSTASKFORCE CREATED
?Governor Sheffield created AMHS Taskforce in 1984
?Focus of Taskforce was to assess AMHS structure and
rates
?Conclusion of Taskforce: system was archaic with a
lack of continuity or purpose
?Suggestion of Taskforce: need change in management
structure
MR. CROCKER conveyed that meanwhile, while the Alaska Marine
Highway System (AMHS) management structure was lacking without a
proper business structure, new boats were built throughout the
1960s and 1970s, followed by several decades without the
construction of new ships. This lack of planning and direction
is one of the core challenges that AMHS continues to face today,
as 7 out of 10 vessels are more than 40 years old, he said. He
directed attention to slide 3, which depicted the "aging fleet"
of ferries that are still in operation.
3:55:47 PM
MR. CROCKER continued to slide 4, titled "Management Issues
Early On," which highlighted a section of a 1989 memorandum from
the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF)
commissioner [Mark Hickey], which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
The combination of our inability to articulate the
comprehensive system plan, and the real and perceived
impacts resulting from the growing budget dilemma
(including the resulting impact on legislative
perceptions about the System's efficiency), has served
as the primary impetus for may to support the
establishment of a public authority as a way to
address existing problems.
3:56:34 PM
MR. CROCKER proceeded to slide 5, titled "Same Problems, Same
Answers," which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
?1984, Alaska Marine Highway System Taskforce
?Determination: Need change in management structure to
help provide business directive and success in system
?2016, Alaska Marine Highway System Reform Initiative
?Determination: Need management to invest in long-term
planning and strategy
?2020, Alaska Marine Highway Reshaping Work Group
?Determination: Management needs to be restructured
and privatization not feasible
MR. CROCKER reported that one of the recommendations from
Governor Dunleavy's Alaska Marine Highway Reshaping Work Group
was to create a "Marine Operation's Board" or ferry commission.
The Marine Operation's Board of directors would have the ability
to suggest and assess marine business and procurement practices,
enhance revenue, reduce costs, and offer experience and
knowledge in marine and personnel management.
3:58:04 PM
MR. CROCKER advanced to slide 6, titled "What HB 63
Accomplishes," which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Creates a nine-member Marine Transportation Operations
Board
?Marine Highway Director
?2 members appointed by Speaker of House
?2 members appointed by Senate President
?4 members appointed by Governor
Changes reporting of long-range comprehensive plan
from every five years to every three years.
MR. CROCKER conveyed that HB 63 would replace the current Alaska
Marine Transportation Advisory Board with a smaller, nine-member
AMHS Operation's Board. He noted that one of the four members
appointed by the governor would be a representative of an Alaska
Native organization or tribe who is from a community served by
AMHS; another member [appointed by the governor] would represent
a maritime union. The bill also requires the commissioner of
DOT&PF to incorporate the board's recommendations in a long-
range comprehensive transportation plan for the state.
3:58:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR sought verification that the reoccurring
determination has been that AMHS is not structurally sound. She
surmised that the current infrastructure does not allow [the
Alaska Marine Transportation Advisory Board] influence over the
management and operations, which is "the missing component of
transitioning from one [board] to the other."
MR. CROCKER explained that the current board is composed of 12
members who are appointed by the governor. He noted that the
appointments are primarily geographical. Additionally, he
shared his understanding that the current board's
recommendations are not always followed. He conveyed that under
CSHB 63(TRA), the new board would be composed of marine
professionals and incorporate the director of AMHS; further, the
commissioner of DOT&PF would be required to incorporate their
recommendations, which would ultimately, give the new board more
authority.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked why the effective date is January 1,
2022, instead of July 1, 2021.
MR. CROCKER said [January 1, 2022] would allow an appropriate
amount of time to for board [members] to be appointed and to
transition.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY inquired about the decision to select the
AMHS director [Captain John Falvey] to head the board instead of
the commissioner [of DOT&PF].
MR. CROCKER stated his belief that it would be more appropriate
to involve the director because he is more intimately involved
with the day-to-day operations of AMHS.
4:02:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to Section 5 of the bill and
inquired about the head of the division of marine
transportation's intended participation in the board.
MR. CROCKER said that individual's presence would be required.
He explained that the head if the division could not be removed
from the board due to lack of attendance unless done so by the
governor himself, as that position works for the governor. He
added that the exemption in question was a drafting
determination by Legislative Legal Services.
MR. CROCKER in response to Representative Eastman's question
regarding whether the position could be filled by an authorized
designee, said [the bill sponsor] would consider the suggestion.
4:03:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN remarked:
I noticed that there's nothing about continuous
improvement - the whole slate of quality management
knowledge and understanding that allows organizations
to transform without causing undue upset or the
negative effects of change.
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN asked whether that would help achieve the
bill's mission.
MR. CROCKER answered "absolutely."
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS suggested including that in a "Findings and
Intent" section.
4:05:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE questioned why the board's title would be
changed from the Alaska Marine Transportation Advisory Board to
the Alaska Marine Highway Operation's Board.
MR. CROCKER said the title originated from a report by the
Alaska Marine Highway Reshaping Work Group.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS expressed his hope that the board would be
as empowered as possible. He opined that "operation's board"
gives a more "forceful" impression than "advisory board."
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE expressed support for the language [in
Section 1 of the bill] that speaks to developing short-term and
comprehensive long-range plans for AMHS. Additionally, she
inquired about the meaning of the language "who serve at the
pleasure of" in Section 3, paragraphs (5) and (6).
MR. CROCKER noted that typically, the board would work at the
pleasure of the governor; however, because the presiding
officers would appoint [4] board members, those members would
work at the pleasure of the speaker of the house and the
president of the senate, so they could not be arbitrarily
removed.
4:08:23 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS inquired about the current precedents that
exist under statute for board and commissioner appointments by
presiding officers of either body.
MR. CROCKER said he had asked Legislative Legal Service for an
opinion on that matter.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked Mr. Crocker to share that information
with the committee upon receipt.
4:09:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to Section 4, subsection (c),
which states that if a vacancy arises on the board, the governor
or the presiding officer of either body, as applicable, shall
appoint a new person within 30 days. He pointed out that twice
in the last several years, the House had been without a speaker
for 30 days. He suggested changing that language.
MR. CROCKER acknowledged the point made by Representative
Eastman; however, he said the bill sponsor is comfortable with
the current language.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN shared his understanding that Section 9
of the bill would repeal the requirement that [at least two]
members should be members who are residents of areas not
directly served by AMHS. He asked why [those seats] "[are]
being taken away."
MR. CROCKER stated his belief that those seats are not being
taken away, because nothing in CSHB 63(TRA) would preclude the
governor or either presiding officer from appointing a member
[who is a resident of areas not directly served by AMHS] if
he/she met the requirements.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN opined that there would be value in
maintaining that diversity on the board, as the state is
subsidizing AMHS. He asked why that requirement is being
eliminated.
MR. CROCKER pointed out that geographical appointments from
specific areas would be eliminated altogether. He added that
the bill enables the governor and presiding officers to appoint
from any geographic area. He maintained that if an individual
from Willow, Alaska had the appropriate credentials, he/she
could still be appointed to the board under CSHB 63(TRA).
4:12:46 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN asked why the head of the division of
marine transportation would sit on the board rather than take
direction from the board.
MR. CROCKER said that comment has been raised numerous times.
He explained that the bill sponsor determined that the
director's expertise would be needed. He further noted that the
board would make recommendations to the commissioner of DOT&PF
instead.
4:13:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN asked what is reported and who it's
reported to. Additionally, he questioned how the bill ensures
that the board would achieve its mission.
MR. CROCKER said the board would report annually to Senate and
House transportation committees. Furthermore, under AS
44.42.050, the commissioner is required to develop a statewide
comprehensive intermodal long-range transportation plan for the
state. He added that if the bill were to pass, the commissioner
would be required to adopt the recommendations of the board into
that plan.
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN pointed out that most consider AMHS as
critical infrastructure and acknowledge the need for its
improvement. He asked whether it would be beneficial to
implement a more detailed "progress-reporting structure" in
which targets would be identified and tracked to drive and
sustain a high rate of improvement.
MR. CROCKER stated that the board can only have so much
constitutional authority. He continued to explain that the
board cannot have "teeth" to direct DOT&PF, per the advisement
of Legislative Legal Services.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS addressed the notion of a public
corporation, which is a fully and formally empowered government
structure. He expressed his support for that concept even
though it's outside the scope of the bill. Nonetheless, he
shared is belief that there would be room for a "Findings and
Intent" section in CSHB 63(TRA), which could state the
legislature's intent for the board to set performance goals.
4:18:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY expressed concern about the current
effective data of January 1, 2022, adding that she would like to
see a product sooner.
MR. CROCKER said [the bill sponsor] would entertain that
suggestion.
4:19:31 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that HB 63 was held over.