Legislature(2017 - 2018)BARNES 124
02/21/2017 01:30 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 | |
| HB60 | |
| HB131 | |
| HB117 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 60 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 131 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 117 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 117-ART PUBLIC FACILITIES: EXEMPT ST. FERRIES
1:50:44 PM
CO-CHAIR WOOL announced that the final order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 117, "An Act relating to the art requirements
for certain state ferries; and providing for an effective date."
1:51:08 PM
MATT GRUENING, Staff, Representative Louise Stutes, Alaska State
Legislature, presented HB 117 on behalf of the House
Transportation Standing Committee, on which Representative
Stutes is co-chair. He stated that the intention of HB 117 is
to create a specific exemption for the two new Alaska Class
Ferries (ACFs) and the replacement vessel, Motor Vessel (M/V)
Tustumena. He explained that there is a requirement in statute
that 1 percent of the construction cost of public facilities be
used for the purchasing, administration, and hanging of art.
Mr. Gruening noted that currently the state has the M/V Taku -
which is in unmanned layup status because the state is trying to
sell it - and all the art has been removed and placed in a
climate-controlled facility in Ketchikan. He explained that the
aforementioned art is available for reuse and refurbishment on
the two new ACFs. He added that the two new ACFs are scheduled
to be delivered for upper Lynn Cannel operation in 2018. Mr.
Gruening mentioned that there is art on the old M/V Tustumena
that is going to be removed then put on the new replacement
vessel. He stated that there is a zero fiscal note accompanying
HB 117.
MR. GRUENING noted that the analysis section on the second page
discusses the savings to the state by seeking a one-time
exemption for the reuse of art. He pointed out that the bill is
not opposed by the Alaska State Council on the Arts. He added
that HB 117 is not an attack on the program but is a one-time
exemption in recognition of the state's current fiscal
challenges. Mr. Gruening reiterated the idea to use existing
art for refurbishment instead of purchasing new art.
1:53:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN offered his understanding that HB 117 only
exempts the two new AMHS vessels.
MR. GRUENING answered that HB 117 would exempt the two new ACFs
currently being constructed and the replacement Tustumena, which
is funded in "this year's budget."
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN offered that since sometime in the
foreseeable future AMHS would need new vessels, the state should
consider doing away with the "one percent for art" on the
ferries, which he added would eliminate the need to come back to
the legislature for another exemption.
CO-CHAIR WOOL explained that one of the reasons the Alaska State
Council of the Arts is not opposed to HB 117 is because the
proposed legislation is not an open-ended exemption. He
expressed uncertainty in knowing when the next vessels would
need to be replaced in AMHS's fleet, but said he hoped it would
not be any time soon. Co-Chair Wool asked for clarification
that the exemption in the proposed legislation is for the two
new vessels currently under construction and the replacement
vessel for the M/V Tustumena.
MR. GRUENING responded that is correct. He said that the
exemption for the three aforementioned vessels would save the
state over $5 million in construction cost.
CO-CHAIR WOOL asked the Department of Transportation & Public
Facilities (DOT&PF) to address the question of when, if at all,
the next round of vessel replacements would take place.
1:55:03 PM
MICHAEL NEUSSL, Deputy Commissioner, Department of
Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF), stated that the
department does not have an exact timeline for further vessel
replacement, beyond the M/V Tustumena. He added that the
Tustumena replacement vessel has already been designed and, as
Mr. Gruening previously mentioned, its construction funding is
requested in the 2017 budget. Mr. Neussl noted that the
department's vessel replacement plan is very fluid.
1:55:30 PM
CO-CHAIR STUTES asked how much the state would save if the
proposed legislation passes. She rephrased her question by
asking whether the one percent for art is reflective of the
total construction cost or if it is based solely on the state's
portion of the cost.
1:56:05 PM
MR. NEUSSL stated that the "one percent for art" is based on the
construction cost of the facility. He noted that AMHS vessels
are specifically listed in the statute regarding 1 percent of
vessel construction cost be set aside for the purchase of art.
Mr. Neussl stated that the two new ACFs are under a $101 million
construction contract and 1 percent would have to be set aside
for art. He added that the replacement cost for the M/V
Tustumena is $237 million, which would mean $2.37 million would
need to be set aside for art. He noted that the M/V Tustumena
replacement vessel is a federally funded project that would
allow the $2.37 million to be a 90:10 split.
CO-CHAIR STUTES asked Mr. Neussl to clarify the M/V Tustumena
federal/state split.
MR. NEUSSL explained that typically federal aid projects are 90
percent federally funded and 10 percent state funded. He noted
that the amount varies between projects.
CO-CHAIR STUTES offered her understanding that specifically for
the M/V Tustumena replacement project, the state would be saving
1 percent of the 10 percent.
MR. NEUSSL stated that specifically regarding state funds, Co-
Chair Stutes is correct.
CO-CHAIR WOOL inquired whether the federal funds could be used
for the "one percent for art." He also asked whether that would
mean the federal funds would cover 90 percent of the 1 percent.
MR. NEUSSL answered that the "one percent for art" set aside
would be the same 90:10 split as the total construction cost.
1:58:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SULLIVAN-LEONARD mentioned that the question and
answer handout, included in the committee packet, details state
savings. She said that the handout notes a savings of $3.5
million to the state from the construction budget on that
particular art.
CO-CHAIR WOOL said that the $2.37 million from the M/V Tustumena
would be 90 percent paid by the federal match, so the state
obligation would be one-tenth of that amount.
1:59:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN asked whether there is a companion federal
"one percent for art" match that is required.
MR. NEUSSL answered no, not to his knowledge.
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN offered clarification that the sponsor
statement said the two ACFs are 100 percent state funded and the
M/V Tustumena is only 90 percent [federally] funded.
MR. NEUSSL answered that is correct. He added that the "one
percent for art" set aside is not a cost savings and the
department does not pocket the saved funds back into the general
fund (GF). Mr. Neussl explained that in order to stay within
the funding available to award the contract for the two new
ACFs, a lot of the critical equipment on board had to be listed
as state furnished equipment. He noted that the state would
have to come up with the aforementioned equipment, either by
other funding sources or by salvaging it from a vessel that is
leaving service, in order to fully outfit the two new ACFs. Mr.
Neussl stated that instead of 1 percent being applied to art,
the money would go for things such as radars and ridged hull
inflatable boats, which are outfitting requirements for the
vessels.
CO-CHAIR WOOL offered his understanding that some of those
things are not included in the price when listed and are
essentially add-ons.
MR. NEUSSL answered that is correct. He added that when the
construction contract was negotiated and awarded for $101
million dollars, there were many items listed that would be
state furnished equipment. He said that the state-furnished
equipment would need to be provided outside of the contract.
Mr. Neussl offered to provide the committee with the list of
state funded equipment.
CO-CHAIR WOOL offered his understanding that the $101 million is
the 1 percent state obligation and "the other items are ...
extras ..."
MR. NEUSSL explained that Alaska Statue requires 1 percent on
top of the $101 million awarded for the vessel construction
cost. He added that the contract was awarded to Vigor
Industrial LLC. at the shipyard in Ketchikan. He said that some
of the equipment he mentioned earlier, such as the boats, the
radars, and some of the heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning (HVAC) equipment, is not funded in the construction
contract. He noted that technically the aforementioned
equipment is not under the "one percent for art" requirement.
2:01:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND shared her understanding that the items
in discussion are mostly movable items, like furniture, that
would not normally be included in construction cost. She
inquired why the ACFs are totally state funded and why the state
did not ask for the federal share.
MR. NEUSSL replied that there is a long history behind that
reasoning. He explained that there was a desire to direct the
project to Ketchikan, and with a federally aided project, the
department would have no discretion of where the ACF project
would be steered. Mr. Neussl noted that the department did an
innovative procurement for the ACFs called a construction
manager/general contractor (CM/GC) process where the state
competed for a shipyard to be that CM/GC, then negotiated a best
price with that firm directly, instead of bidding it out like on
normal projects.
2:03:19 PM
CO-CHAIR WOOL announced that HB 117 was held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB60 OMB Response 2.15.17.pdf |
HTRA 2/21/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 60 |
| HB131 ver D.PDF |
HTRA 2/21/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 131 |
| HB131 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HTRA 2/21/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 131 |
| HB131 Fiscal Note DOT-DES 2.17.17.pdf |
HTRA 2/21/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 131 |
| HB117 v D 2.13.17.pdf |
HTRA 2/21/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 117 |
| HB117 Sponsor Statement 02.20.17.pdf |
HTRA 2/21/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 117 |
| HB117 Fiscal Note DOT 02.19.17.pdf |
HTRA 2/21/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 117 |
| HB117 1% for Art Q&A.pdf |
HTRA 2/21/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 117 |
| SB3 Supporting Document - ASCA Letter 2.6.17.pdf |
HTRA 2/21/2017 1:30:00 PM |
SB 3 |
| CSHB60 (TRA) ver D Work Draft.pdf |
HTRA 2/21/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 60 |