Legislature(2017 - 2018)HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/26/2017 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 | |
| HB131 | |
| HB128 | |
| HB76 | |
| HB124 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 131 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 128 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 124 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 76 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL NO. 131
"An Act relating to relocation assistance for
federally assisted public construction and improvement
projects and programs; and providing for an effective
date."
1:34:55 PM
MATT GRUENING, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE LOUISE STUTES,
introduced himself and read a prepared statement:
Good afternoon, Mister Chair and members of the House
Finance Committee, for the record, Matt Gruening,
staff to the House Transportation Committee.
It has been about a month since the committee has
heard this bill and my intention is to provide a brief
refresher.
I would be remiss, if did not mention that Laura
Stidolph, who previously presented this bill has a
very good reason for not being here today. I am
pleased to announce that at 3:58 this morning, Laura
gave birth to an 8 lb. 15 oz. baby boy. Both mother
and baby are in perfect health.
In front of you is House Bill 131 "Federal Relocation
Assistance Programs/Projects" which will bring Alaska
into compliance with Federal law concerning
reimbursement for relocation expenses incurred by
individuals or businesses that were displaced due to a
federally funded highway, bridge, or facilities
project. Alaskans deserve to be fairly compensated in
these circumstances. HB 131 will also protect Alaska's
approximately $700 million annual allocation of
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) funding by bringing the
state into compliance. $500 million is allocated
annually from the FHWA and on average $200 million is
allocated from the FAA. Having an equivalent state
statute is one of the requirements for a state to
receive a delegated authority to independently
administer the federal program. Additionally, being
out of compliance, even for a short period of time,
jeopardizes our relationship with our funding
partners, putting our entire program at risk. These
projects currently amount to approximately $700
million annually in federal participation, as well as
countless jobs.
In 2012, Congress relaxed the eligibility criteria and
increased the maximum reimbursement limits for State's
relocation assistance payment programs when they
passed their transportation authorization and funding
bill, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st
Century Act, aka MAP-21. Prior to MAP-21, the payment
rates had not been changed for 30 years.
These changes went into effect October 1, 2014.
Unfortunately, Alaska Statute continues to reflect the
more stringent eligibility criteria and the smaller
maximum reimbursement limits.
During the second half of the 29th Alaska Legislature,
this inconsistency between state and federal law was
nearly fixed. Language similar to HB 131 was proposed
and passed the House unanimously. It passed through
the Senate State Affairs and Senate Finance. However,
the bill was held in Senate Rules and never calendared
for a Senate floor vote.
HB 131 assures Alaskans that their Legislature wants
them to be compensated the same as a resident of any
other state.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this bill on
behalf of the House Transportation Committee. Heather
Fair, the Department of Transportation & Public
Facilities' Statewide Right-of-Way Chief, is here to
answer any questions you may have.
Representative Wilson conveyed that last time the committee
heard the bill there would be approximately $12 thousand or
9 percent in state funding, although the fiscal note was
zero. She wanted to make sure the fiscal note was accurate.
Mr. Gruening responded that the zero fiscal note was
correct. He added that federal funding was approximately 91
percent with a 9 percent state match.
Representative Wilson asked why the fiscal note would be
zero if there was a 9 percent state note. She was fine with
the bill.
1:39:19 PM
HEATHER FAIR, CHIEF RIGHT-OF-WAY, DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION, answered that the state would design
projects based on available state funding and absorb the
additional costs when the department allocated projects.
Representative Wilson noted that the fiscal note was
retroactive to 2014. She wondered if the department was
confirming that even though there might be funding, the
department had enough in its budget to absorb the costs.
Ms. Fair responded affirmatively. She indicated that the
department estimated about $12 thousand liability to the
state, a small enough amount that the department could
absorb the cost back to 2014.
Representative Wilson suggested that in the future the
committee might want to take a closer look at the
department's budget.
1:40:24 PM
Representative Guttenberg spoke about the railroad recently
acquiring a significant amount of right-of-way. The
railroad's authority to make that acquisition was in
question. He asked if the bill would cover what the
railroad was doing. Right-of-way was required but not for
capital projects. The bill encompassed compensating people
for property right of ways. He asked if the railroad's
actions were covered in the legislation. Ms. Fair responded
that the railroad was a separate corporation.
Vice-Chair Gara understood the explanation about the zero
fiscal note. He thought it was due to the projects being
dependent on there being a federal project in the future
and the legislature having to pay to relocate a family. He
suggested that the department would not know when or how
frequently it would happen and when it would be in the
capital budget. He remarked it was an ongoing operating
budget expense normally seen in a fiscal note. He queried
the reason for the zero fiscal note. Ms. Fair responded
that it was very difficult to estimate how the department
would impact businesses, farms, and families with future
projects. The department took it into consideration when it
had the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
(STIP). The department prioritized projects based on
available funding and need.
Vice-Chair Gara asked if there would be a capital expense
request of 9 percent. Ms. Fair responded, "That's correct,
and again we expect it to be a de minimis impact to the
state."
Representative Wilson suggested that in the future
relocation funds would be part of federal funding which
would be matched with 10 percent state funding. She thought
that what had been discussed applied to retroactive funds
and which accounts they would come out of. She reiterated
that going forward the relocation of funds would be part of
the grants from the transportation program and would be
seen in the capital budget. She asked if she was correct.
Ms. Fair responded affirmatively. She added that roughly
$12 thousand of the state liability was retroactive to-date
as well as what the department could foresee in the
following 1 to 2 years on known projects.
Representative Guttenberg commented that in a capital
appropriation for a project it included engineering costs
and costs associated with property acquisitions including
right-of-way properties. He thought the legislation would
authorize DOT to add 10 percent or absorb the cost.
However, it was enclosed inside a capital project bid
document going forward. He did not believe the legislature
would see the amount in a budget item. He asked if his
assessment was accurate. Ms. Fair responded that the
legislature would not see the detailed line items in the
request. She added that the legislature was currently not
seeing a line item, as it was already something the
department paid. There would be new limits.
1:45:44 PM
Vice-Chair Gara reviewed one zero fiscal note:
Department: Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities
Appropriation: Design, Engineering, and Construction
OMB Component: 2357
Vice-Chair Gara MOVED to report HB 131 out of Committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
note.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
HB 131 was REPORTED OUT of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with a previously published zero fiscal
note: FN1 (DOT).
1:46:46 PM
AT EASE
1:50:01 PM
RECONVENED