Legislature(2023 - 2024)ADAMS 519
02/27/2024 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 |
|---|---|
| Adjourn | |
| Start | |
| Overview: Department of Administration Fy25 Budget | |
| Overview: Department of Military and Veteran's Affairs Fy25 Budget |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 268 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 270 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL NO. 268
"An Act making appropriations for the operating and
loan program expenses of state government and for
certain programs; capitalizing funds; amending
appropriations; making capital 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. 270
"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."
^OVERVIEW: DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION FY25 BUDGET
1:38:48 PM
LESLIE ISAACS, LEGISLATIVE LIAISON, DEPARTMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION, introduced himself and the PowerPoint
presentation "State of Alaska Department of Administration
FY2025 Governor Amend Budget Overview" dated February 27,
2024 (copy on file). He relayed that the presentation
included the budget items that were introduced in the prior
week.
Mr. Isaacs continued to slide 2 and explained that the
Department of Administration (DOA) provided services in two
categories: services to state agencies and services to the
public. All of the divisions and agencies within DOA fell
into one of the two service categories. The only exception
was the Division of Retirement and Benefits (DRB), which
fell into both categories. The division provided services
to current state employees, which was considered a service
to state agencies, and also provided services to former
state employees, which was considered a service to the
public.
1:40:48 PM
Representative Ortiz asked how DOA provided public
communication services to the public.
Mr. Isaacs responded that public communication services was
a dormant section of DOA called the Program Acceleration
Office. The office was intended to share information with
the public about DOA's current projects and explain how the
projects impacted the public. The office was active during
the COVID-19 pandemic but DOA was still determining how to
utilize the office post-pandemic. The office was not
presently in operation but DOA's goal was to stand up the
office once again.
Representative Ortiz understood that the office was created
in response to the pandemic. He asked if the agency existed
prior to the pandemic.
Mr. Isaacs responded that it was stood up during the
pandemic to address pandemic-related issues and the
department wanted to stand up the office again. The
organization and exact functions of the office were still
being determined.
Mr. Isaacs added that public communication services
included satellite infrastructure, which was the "backbone"
for the radio communication system (RCS). There was one
appropriation within public communication services that was
used for RCS.
Representative Ortiz asked for more information about RCS.
He asked if it referred to public radio, emergency
broadcasting radios, or something else.
Mr. Issacs responded that the radio aspect referred to
emergency broadcasting, primarily in the villages. There
used to be three components to RCS, including public radio,
but presently it only referred to emergency broadcasting
radio.
1:45:56 PM
Mr. Isaacs continued to slide 3 and detailed the way in
which leadership was organized within DOA. He noted that
the legislative liaison position was listed as vacant on
the slide, but it had been since filled as he now occupied
the position.
Representative Hannan asked who had replaced Mr. Issacs in
his previous role as the Administrative Services Director.
Mr. Issacs responded that his replacement's name was Eric
DeMoulin. He explained that Mr. DeMoulin would be making
presentations to the committee from now on.
Representative Hannan understood that Mr. DeMoulin had
previously worked for the Department of Revenue (DOR) and
asked who had replaced Mr. DeMoulin.
Mr. Issacs responded that he understood that the
Administrative Services Director position within DOR was
currently vacant.
Mr. Issacs continued to slide 4 and gave an overview of the
DOA budget from FY 20 through the FY 25 governor's amended
budget. He noted that the budgets for FY 24 and FY 25 were
almost identical.
Mr. Issacs continued to slide 5 and detailed the funding
sources for the FY 25 governor's amended operating budget.
The slide broke down the budget into unrestricted general
funds (UGF), designated general funds (DGF), and federal
funds. The red numbers on the slide showed duplicated funds
that also appeared in other departments' budgets. The chart
in the lower right corner of the slide also showed which
fund sources were duplicated.
Mr. Issacs advanced to slide 6, which was a visual
comparison between the FY 24 management plan and the FY 25
governor's amended budget by fund category. The slide also
included a visual comparison of the number of positions and
employees of DOA by location and number of vacancies. As of
January 15, 2024, there was a 15 percent vacancy rate
within DOA.
Mr. Isaacs moved to slide 7, which gave an overview of the
FY 25 budget's results delivery units (RDU). The graphs on
the slide compared the FY 24 management plan RDU to the FY
25 RDU. The majority of UGF funding was allocated to the
Legal and Advocacy Services (LAS) section of DOA. The
department received some federal funding, but it was a
small amount.
Mr. Isaacs moved to slide 8 which detailed the significant
changes in the FY 25 operating budget for DOA. The second
column showed the governor's amended items that were
introduced in the previous week, and all other components
on the slide were the governor's proposed items.
Mr. Isaacs advanced to slide 9. He explained that the
remainder of the presentation would be broken down by RDU.
He relayed that slide 9 detailed the FY 25 changes within
the Centralized Administrative Services (CAS) section of
DOA and included a list of the services provided by CAS.
Co-Chair Johnson asked about the digitization of the
payroll services item listed under the significant FY 25
budget changes for CAS. She had heard that some state
employees were not getting paid in a timely manner. She
asked if digitization would help alleviate the issue.
Mr. Isaacs responded in the affirmative and indicated that
the project would help streamline the payroll process.
Co-Chair Johnson commented that it was important to ensure
that employees were satisfied with their jobs and timely
paychecks were an important part of job satisfaction.
Mr. Isaacs agreed.
1:54:51 PM
Mr. Isaacs continued to slide 10 and reviewed the fund
comparison by category for CAS. The most significant fund
category was the "other" fund, half of which was allocated
to DRB.
Mr. Issacs advanced to slide 11 and the Shared Services of
Alaska (SSA) section. The services provided by SSA were
listed on the left side of the slide and the significant FY
25 budget changes were listed on the right side. The
biggest change was a decrement of $4.5 million to eliminate
interagency authority that was no longer necessary. He
relayed that the decrement was an example of a duplicated
fund source that could not be utilized. The budget aligned
SSA's budget with the proposed charge-back rates.
Ms. Issacs advanced quickly through slide 12, which showed
the fund category comparison for SSA. He continued to slide
13 which detailed the Office of Information Technology
(OIT). The services provided by OIT were listed on the
right side of the slide and the significant FY 25 budget
changes were listed on the left side. He highlighted that
OIT was not responsible for every element of information
technology across the state because some departments
managed elements of information technology in-house.
1:57:42 PM
Representative Galvin referred to slide 10 and recalled
that Mr. Issacs stated that half of the other funds for CAS
were allocated to DRB. She asked how the rest of the other
funds were allocated.
Mr. Isaacs responded that the remaining half of the other
category was charge-back rate authority for the purpose of
billing out the services provided by the divisions, such as
the Division of Finance (DOF) and the Division of Personnel
and Labor Relations (DPLR).
Representative Coulombe referred to slide 13 and thought it
would be useful for Mr. Issacs to offer an update on the
transition of existing servers to the cloud. She shared
that she had spoken with him about the project in a
subcommittee.
Mr. Issacs explained that there was a budget request for
$575,000 to transition the existing servers to the cloud.
The purpose was to operationalize the cloud migration in FY
25. He noted that OIT received a large allocation for a
rapid shift to the cloud and there was enough money to
cover the FY 24 operating costs and part of the projected
FY 25 operating costs. The increment would allow OIT to
bill out for the additional operating costs.
Representative Coulombe asked for confirmation that the
mainframes were still being maintained.
Mr. Issacs responded in the affirmative.
2:01:20 PM
Mr. Isaacs continued on slide 14, which showed the fund
category comparison for OIT. The graph showed that other
funds were the predominant fund source for the services
provided by OIT and that the funds were within the
Information Services Fund (ISF). He highlighted that the
budget included $989,000 in UGF for a multi-year operating
allocation to address security in FY 24 and there was no
funding allocated for the project in FY 25.
Mr. Issacs moved to slide 15 and detailed the Risk
Management (RM) section of DOA. The services provided by RM
were listed on the left side of the slide and the
significant FY 25 budget changes were listed on the right
side. There was a $2 million decrement due to the fiscal
impact of HB 102 [passed in 2022]. He explained that HB 102
created a reduction in the State Insurance Catastrophe
Reserve Account (SICRA). The catastrophe fund balance was
$18 million in FY 22 and $50 million in FY 23 due to the
impact of HB 102. As of February 15, 2024, there was $52
million in the catastrophe fund. He noted that the
statutory limit for the fund was $50 million unencumbered,
but there were a number of claims with encumbrances that
would not be included in the total unencumbered balance. He
was proud that the fund was fully operational and fully
funded.
Mr. Issacs continued to slide 16, which was the fund
category comparison for RM. He noted that 100 percent of
RM's budget was within the other funds category, which was
used to bill out services to the other agencies.
Co-Chair Johnson noted that a few years prior, there had
been an attempt to charge back to departments for a variety
of services in order to ensure that the state received
federal funding whenever possible. She asked if the project
had been completed or if DOA was continuing to look for
potential chargebacks in the budget.
Mr. Isaacs responded that the effort was called the
Chargeback Program and it was used to bill other agencies
for the essential services provided by DOA. The program
sought federal reimbursements for services provided by
various departments, which made it unnecessary for all
programs to be 100 percent funded with UGF. The program
allowed the state to maximize federal funding.
2:07:15 PM
Co-Chair Johnson asked if the department was continuing to
look for potential areas in the budget where federal
funding could be utilized to cover expenses.
Mr. Isaacs responded that it was the responsibility of the
other departments to find areas in which federal funding
could be utilized. If a department found such an
opportunity, it was the responsibility of the department to
seek reimbursement and pay DOA through the chargeback
process.
Mr. Isaacs continued on slide 17 which detailed LAS. The
left side of the slide included an abbreviated list of the
services provided and the right side included the
significant FY 25 budget changes. He explained that LAS had
many responsibilities and the remainder of their duties did
not fit on the slide.
Representative Josephson noted that there had been
significant media attention on the problems within the
Office of Public Advocacy (OPA), which fell under LAS. At
one point, OPA had ceased taking additional guardianship
cases. He asked if there was a funding problem within OPA
that could be solved with a larger appropriation.
Mr. Isaacs responded that there was not one simple solution
for the problems within OPA, which were layered and
complicated. A joint DOA subcommittee meeting between the
House and the Senate was scheduled for later in the day to
discuss OPA. Some of the main problems within the office
were high staff turnover and a substantial case backlog.
The budget changes included four non-permanent positions as
a "band-aid solution" while a long term solution was
established. He explained that OPA was included in the
presentation because the administration issued the
supplemental to include the four additional positions at
the same time the governor's proposed budget was released.
Representative Josephson asked if he was right that the
Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) program moved from
DOA to the Alaska Court System.
Mr. Isaacs replied that was hesitant to say that CASA had
moved because although he knew that the move was included
in the proposal, he needed to follow up with the DOA
director to learn if the move had been completed.
2:12:22 PM
Co-Chair Johnson suggested that increasing the funding
would not necessarily fix the problem. She asked Mr. Issacs
to provide an overview of the discussion at the upcoming
joint DOA subcommittee. For example, prioritizing caseloads
or hiring private attorneys could potentially be helpful.
She wanted to know what other potential solutions came out
of the subcommittee meeting.
Mr. Issacs responded that he would provide the information.
Mr. Issacs continued on slide 18, which showed the fund
category comparison for LAS. He noted that LAS was
primarily funded with UGF.
Mr. Issacs advanced to slide 19 and the Division of Motor
Vehicles (DMV). The services provided were listed on the
left side of the slide and the right side noted that there
were no significant changes in the FY 25 governor's amended
budget for DMV. The vacancy rate had decreased
significantly to 8.4 percent.
2:15:19 PM
Mr. Issacs continued to slide 20 and relayed that the
primary fund source for DMV was DGF. He concluded the
presentation.
Representative Josephson noticed that there was no slide on
DPLR. He was aware of at least one bargaining unit that was
hoping that contract negotiations would speed along at a
faster rate. He understood that if a new contract was not
adopted and approved by the time the legislature adjourned
in a couple of months, the bargaining unit would need to
wait until 2025 to revisit the negotiations. He hoped that
the legislature would include all important contractual
items in the budget prior to adjournment. He asked for
reassurance that contracts were moving along.
Mr. Issacs responded that DPLR resided within CAS. He was
hesitant to speak beyond his knowledge, but he was certain
that a resolution to the bargaining unit contract
negotiations was desired. He would pass along
Representative Josephson's comments and concerns to CAS
leadership and he would provide any responses from CAS to
Representative Josephson.
Representative Josephson thought that the information would
be interesting and educational and would help offer context
on the overall budget.
2:18:20 PM
AT EASE
2:20:48 PM
RECONVENED
^OVERVIEW: DEPARTMENT OF MILITARY AND VETERAN'S AFFAIRS
FY25 BUDGET
2:21:23 PM
CRAIG CHRISTENSON, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
MILITARY AND VETERAN AFFAIRS, introduced the PowerPoint
presentation "FY2025 Operating Budget Overview" dated
February 27, 2024 (copy on file). He advanced quickly
through slide 2 of the presentation, which included the
mission of the Department of Military and Veterans' Affairs
(DMVA). He continued to slide 3 and offered an overview of
the way in which leadership was organized within DMVA. The
department was led by Commissioner Torrence Saxe who was
also the Adjutant General. Underneath the commissioner were
two organizations that operated independently: the Alaska
Aerospace Corporation (AAC) and the Alaska Wing Civil Air
Patrol (AWCAP). As the deputy commissioner, Mr. Christenson
reported directly to Commissioner Saxe, and all of the
divisions within DMVA reported directly to Mr. Christenson.
Mr. Christenson relayed that the Alaska Naval Militia (ANM)
was slightly different than the Alaska State Defense Force
(ASDF) in that ANM included reservist members of the Navy
and Marines and a small number of retirees. Comparatively,
ASDF was not associated with the military and was comprised
entirely of volunteers. He shared that ANM had about 50
members and ASDF had approximately 230 members. The Air
National Guard and Army National Guard totaled
approximately 4,000 members. There were two divisions that
reported directly to the Army and Air National Guards that
contained state employees who supported the two entities.
2:24:24 PM
Representative Hannan asked whether the DMVA commissioner
was always the adjutant general.
Mr. Christenson responded in the affirmative.
Co-Chair Johnson asked if her understanding was correct
that there was a vacancy within AAC.
Mr. Christenson replied that the CEO position had been
filled earlier in the week. The new CEO was Colonel John
Oberst, who had previously retired. There were some other
vacancies within AAC as well.
Co-Chair Johnson asked who was responsible for hiring for
AAC.
Mr. Christenson responded that the hiring of the CEO was
the responsibility of the board of directors and the CEO
was responsible for hiring other employees.
Representative Stapp understood that the Army was presently
facing many challenges. He asked if there had been any
conversation about augmenting ASDF to assist in the new
model of Arctic security.
Mr. Christenson replied that ASDF had about 150 members in
2018 and had about 230 members in 2024. The department was
hoping to expand ASDF to about 275 members by 2025. He
noted that ASDF had about 13 detachments in 2018 and it
currently had about 23 detachments and aimed to increase
the number by four within the next year. He shared that the
goal was to expand ASDF into more rural communities with
five or more members dedicated to each rural community. The
members would be individuals who lived in the communities
and understood the people and the culture of the community.
The system had worked well in the past because when a
larger military presence was needed in rural communities in
a situation such as a natural disaster, there were already
knowledgeable members on the ground who could help
streamline the process.
2:28:37 PM
Representative Galvin understood that ASDF currently had 23
detachments and 230 members. She thought the group numbers
seemed small for a state as large as Alaska. She asked for
more information on how the small groups functioned.
Mr. Christenson responded that the goal was to eventually
increase the force to 500 members. He explained that the
department was looking to expand ASDF in small increments
because it seemed to be a more realistic goal. A team of
five members was adequate in many of the smaller rural
villages due to the size of the community. He relayed that
ASDF had successfully provided the necessary assistance in
response to wildfires, floods, and other natural disasters.
Representative Galvin asked if there was some integration
already happening between ASDF and the Army and Air
National Guards and whether there was a desire to expand
the integration.
Mr. Christenson replied in the affirmative. By statute,
ASDF was required to augment the Army and Air National
Guards. He noted that ASDF primarily augmented the Army and
it was fully integrated into its role.
2:31:25 PM
Mr. Christenson continued on slide 3 and relayed that
Veterans Affairs (VA) connected over 70,000 veterans in the
state with benefits that were earned during military
service. The Alaska Military Youth Academy (AMYA) provided
education to children aged 15 through 18 who were at risk
of not graduating from high school. In 2024, the academy
had returned to its pre-pandemic graduation rates and was
back on track. He added that the Administrative Services
Division (ASD) supplied support to the other divisions and
Homeland Security and Emergency Management (HSEM) assisted
during disasters.
Mr. Christenson indicated that DMVA was requesting a few
new positions within the department, and the cost was often
considerable. He noted that the general fund request for
the positions was not as high as it appeared because there
was amble opportunity for federal funding. He shared that
Commissioner Saxe was proud of the department's reduced
vacancy rate and the efforts the department had made to
improve the rate. He reported that the vacancy rate was
presently at 5.3 percent throughout the department. He
offered reassurance that there were processes in place to
ensure that the divisions would not increase the vacancy
rates. He had found that putting the onus on the directors
to maintain the vacancy rates and encouraging proactive
recruitment had been a successful strategy. He noted that
AAC was not included in the vacancy rates because DMVA was
not responsible for hiring within AAC.
2:34:57 PM
BOB ERNISSE, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT
OF MILITARY AND VETERAN AFFAIRS, continued the presentation
on slide 4. He relayed that the intent of the slide was to
show a high-level budget comparison between the FY 24
actuals and the FY 25 governor's request. Overall, the UGF
request in the budget had remained consistent over the
years apart from a couple of exceptions. One of the
exceptions was the UGF increase in FY 23 due to the Alaska
Public Safety Communication Services transferring from DMVA
to the Department of Public Safety (DPS). The other
exception was an increase in the FY 25 budget request,
which he would review in subsequent slides.
Mr. Ernisse advanced to slide 5, which showed the budget
request for AMYA. In 2023, the department was able to
utilize additional federal funding for the academy and was
able to take a decrement in UGF; however, there was a 75
percent to 25 percent split required in order to be awarded
the federal dollars. The first budget request was for UGF
in order to meet the 25 percent split requirement. The
second request was for $631,000 for the purpose of
operational costs associated with increased class sizes and
inflation. When the department took the decrement in 2023,
the legislature put a one-time increment back in the budget
to fund the increased operational costs. The request was
for the one-time increment to become a permanent part of
the budget. The second request was for two AMYA
coordinators as the case manager to pupil ratio was not up
to standard.
2:37:26 PM
Mr. Christenson added that the coordinators were similar to
guidance counselors at high schools. He explained that the
addition of the two positions would ensure that AMYA was
adhering to the National Guard's ratio standards.
Representative Hannan asked how many staff were currently
employed by AMYA and how many students were currently
attending the academy.
Mr. Ernisse would follow up with the information.
Mr. Christenson shared that AMYA graduated 126 students in
its most recent class and roughly two classes per year
graduated. There were approximately 70 staff members. He
would provide the exact numbers to the committee.
Mr. Ernisse responded that there were 71 employees.
Representative Hannan asked if a graduate was an individual
who had graduated from the academy or an individual who had
graduated from high school.
Mr. Christenson responded that he was referring to
individuals who had finished the course of instruction at
the academy and not necessarily the individuals who had
graduated from high school. He explained that some students
completed their GED through AMYA while others returned to
their public high school after a period of time at AMYA. Of
the 198 students who had attended the academy in the last
year, 30 students had earned a diploma and 123 had earned a
GED. The class sizes over the last year were smaller than
normal due to the pandemic but the numbers had since
recovered.
2:41:29 PM
Mr. Ernisse continued on slide 6 and detailed the changes
within HSEM. He explained that the FY 25 operating budget
request included the addition of three new employees. The
work was currently being done by contractors and the state
was paying the contractors at a 174 percent higher rate
than it would be paying state employees. All of the funding
for the positions would be from disaster relief dollars and
other money received from the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA).
Representative Stapp asked if benefits and retirement were
included when comparing the cost of contractors and state
employees.
Mr. Ernisse responded that the comparison included
retirement and benefits.
Representative Galvin understood that the plan was that the
employees would address natural emergencies and that
contractors were currently hired to do the work. She asked
if the same level of training would be provided to state
employees that was provided to contractors.
Mr. Ernisse responded in the affirmative.
Mr. Ernisse continued to slide 7 and explained that there
was a request for a program manager position within the
Office of the Commissioner. There was an additional request
for $261,000 to expand the operations of ASDF, ANM, and
AWCAP in order to improve emergency responses.
Mr. Christenson added that the department was asking for a
program manager because there was a group of volunteers
that was receiving administrative support from ASD. The
department would like to see a state employee with the
authority to approve purchases perform the administrative
work currently done by ASD. The process would be more
seamless if one employee with a high-level of authority was
performing the work rather than a group of administrative
support personnel. The second ask for $261,000 was
primarily to purchase high-frequency radios to allow for
increased communication streams during disasters in rural
communities. The funding would also pay for technological
support, survival equipment, uniforms, lodging, utilities,
training and certifications, recruitment and community
engagement travel, fleet vehicles, and other equipment and
supplies.
2:46:31 PM
Representative Hannan noted that some of the items were
described as equipment and others were described as
support. She asked if the funding would become part of the
base budget because it was not a capital item.
Mr. Christenson responded that the funding would be added
to the base. He explained that the department was
expanding, and the need was expanding with it.
Mr. Ernisse continued on slide 8, which included a request
for a Systems Programmer II position within the Office of
the Commissioner. The employee would focus on cybersecurity
to reduce the risk of data breaches and increase emergency
preparedness. The employee would be able to help a
community respond as quickly as possible to a disaster.
Representative Hannan asked how cybersecurity currently
operated. She understood that cybersecurity was provided by
DOA for all other departments.
Mr. Ernisse replied that the position would be within DMVA
and would be eligible to receive federal funding. If the
position remained within DOA, it would continue to be
ineligible to receive federal funding. Within DMVA, the
position would be able to collaborate directly with HSEM.
He thought it made more sense to be in HSEM because DOA was
more focused on working with state workers and operations
as a whole. The position being within DMVA would make it
easier for the employee to work with communities during
cybersecurity disasters.
Mr. Ernisse continued on slide 9 and indicated that the
next request was for an Accounting Technician II within the
Office of the Commissioner. He noted that the position
would be eligible for federal funding if it was within
DMVA. The position would help support increased travel
needs for the Army due to maintenance requirements for
aging armories around the state. There had also been an
increase in travel needs for the purpose of recruiting and
training related to organized militia, and the position
would help support the increased workload. The addition
would allow for more timely processing of travel related
costs.
2:51:16 PM
Mr. Ernisse continued on slide 10 and relayed that there
was an additional request for a Procurement Specialist III
within the Office of the Commissioner. The work that would
be done by the specialist was previously done by an Army
guard employee; however, the work done by the specialist
would be contractual work for other divisions and could
jeopardize DMVA's ability to receive federal funding. He
stressed that the position was required to address
increasing procurement needs associated with construction
projects without threatening the department's federal
funding.
Co-Chair Johnson appreciated the effort to fund positions
with federal monies when possible.
Representative Galvin asked if there was a coordination
effort between the various military entities. She wondered
if the National Guard had indicated that it would like
help.
Mr. Christenson asked for clarification whether
Representative Galvin was referring specifically to the
Procurement Specialist III or to the larger picture.
Representative Galvin responded that she was talking about
the big picture.
Mr. Christenson replied that in the past, the federal
government and the state were pitted against each other and
the various entities within DMVA were very separate.
Presently, the commissioner had worked hard to eliminate
disconnectedness and every military entity was now
considered part of DMVA. There were separate funding
streams, but the entities within DMVA were now interacting
in a more unified manner.
2:54:58 PM
Mr. Ernisse continued on slide 11 and the request for
$100,000 in general funds to address the rising costs of IT
infrastructure. Unlike the rest of the state, DMVA's data
center and servers were housed locally within the Joint
Base Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER). The data center contract
renewal was set to occur in 2025 and the department had
identified that there were rising costs associated with the
data center. The second request on the slide was for
$200,000 in general funds for tuition assistance for
members of the National Guard and ANM. The tuition
assistance would be applicable for the University of Alaska
and other educational opportunities within the state.
Mr. Ernisse concluded the presentation on slide 12.
Co-Chair Johnson reviewed the agenda for the following
day's meeting.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| (H) FIN DMVA FY25 Operating Budget Overview_022724.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2024 1:30:00 PM |
HB 268 |
| HFIN - DOA Budget Department Overview 022724.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2024 1:30:00 PM |
HB 268 |
| HFIN DMVA Response Overview 022724 Mtg. 030624 .pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2024 1:30:00 PM |
HB 268 |