Legislature(2023 - 2024)ADAMS 519
03/04/2024 08:30 AM 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 | |
| HB268 || HB270 | |
| Subcommittee Closeout Reports | |
| Department of Education and Early Development | |
| Department of Public Safety | |
| Department of Commerce, Community, and Eccomonic Development | |
| Department of Corrections | |
| Adjourn |
* 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 |
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."
8:36:34 AM
^SUBCOMMITTEE CLOSEOUT REPORTS
8:37:04 AM
^DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION and EARLY DEVELOPMENT
Representative Coulombe introduced herself and her staff.
EDRA MORLEDGE, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE JULIE COULOMBE, read
through the finance subcommittee recommendations for the
Department of Education and Early Development (DEED)(copy
on file):
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Education and Early Development reviewed
the Governor's FY25 budget proposal and recommends the
items contained in the below details.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Fund Source: (dollars are in thousands)
Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $84,105.9
Designated General Funds (DGF) $25,293.4
Other Funds $36,818.1
Federal Funds $270,464.3
Total $416,681.7
Compared to the FY25 Adjusted Base, the Subcommittee
recommendations represent an increase of $15,192.0 in
UGF (22.0%), a decrease of $85.2 in Other funds (-
0.2%), and an increase of $90.7 in Federal funds
(0.0%), for a total net increase of $15,197.5 (3.8%).
Positions:
Permanent Full-Time 279
Permanent Part-Time 10
Temporary 12
Total 301
BUDGET ACTION:
• After holding four meetings and reviewing and
discussing each of the Governor's proposed
transactions in detail, the Subcommittee adopted
the Governor's proposal with the following
changes:
• The subcommittee removed a $5,000.0 request for
the Alyeska Reading Academy and Institute (ARAI)
and adopted an amendment for $5,000.0 for the
Head Start Program.
• The subcommittee removed an $84.9 request for an
Administrative Assistant position in the
Executive Administration allocation.
• The subcommittee removed a $1,200.0 request for
Coding in Minecraft licenses.
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS:
• $5,000.0 for the Alaska Native Science and
Engineering Program.
• $1,500.0 for Career and Technical Education
Initiatives.
• $1,500.0 for Teacher Recruitment, Retention,
Certification and Apprenticeship Development.
• $650.0 for increased costs for statewide academic
assessments.
• $1,000.0 FY25-FY26 Multi-Year appropriation for
the Alaska Resource Education Grant Program.
• $1,000.0 for Grant Funding for Hunter Education
Program.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is the intent of the Chair to recommend the
Department of Education and Early Development partner
with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to utilize
their existing hunting and fishing education programs
for their hunter education programs. Additionally, it
is recommended that the Department provide information
to the full House Finance Committee on the increased
Mount Edgecumbe High School dorm management and food
services contractual costs.
SUBCOMMITTEE AMENDMENTS:
The Chair set an amendment deadline, welcomed
amendments from all members, and the committee
entertained five amendments, three of which were
adopted as changes to the Governor's proposed budget,
as noted above.
ATTACHED REPORTS: The House Finance Budget
Subcommittee for the Department of Public Safety
adopted the attached reports:
Agency Totals
• Transaction Compare: Adjusted Base to House
Subcommittee
• Transaction Compare: Governor's Amended to House
Subcommittee
• Wordage
8:42:19 AM
Representative Ortiz noted that there was a $650,000
increase for statewide academic assessments under the
budget highlights section of the recommendations report. He
asked how the total increase compared to the amount of
funding that was already in place. He wondered what the
specific reason was for the increase.
Representative Coulombe replied that during the
subcommittee process, there was a change regarding the
science assessment. The schools had switched to a different
assessment tool but there had been an oversight for science
assessments. The increase would fund the pursuit of updated
science assessment tools to make the process more efficient
and reduce the number of assessments that students would
need to take.
Representative Ortiz asked how much funding was already set
aside for statewide assessments prior to the increase.
Co-Chair Johnson relayed that she intended to make the
subcommittee a work session with reduced formality. She
encouraged dialogue between committee members.
Representative Coulombe would follow up with Representative
Ortiz.
Representative Stapp asked what the purpose was of the $5
million increment for the Alaska Native Science and
Engineering Program (ANSEP).
Representative Coulombe responded that the governor felt
strongly about the increment and it had been in place for a
significant period of time. She understood that the
increment would fund the operations of ANSEP.
8:45:26 AM
Co-Chair Edgmon commented that he had been involved in
ANSEP for years and the intent of the increment was to grow
the program. He emphasized that the program had been
successful in engaging individuals from remote communities
in topics such as advanced mathematics and science, which
were topics that the individuals would not necessarily
learn in remote communities. Due to the success of the
program, the governor and many other individuals involved
in education thought the program should be expanded into
other areas.
Representative Coulombe responded to Representative Stapp
that the purpose was to deliver a service to high school
students. She noted that it would not be a one-time
increment but would be added to the base budget.
Representative Stapp referred to the $1.5 million increment
for teacher certification programs. He asked how many
teachers could get certified for $1.5 million.
Representative Coulombe replied that the department did not
have a specific number of newly certified teachers as its
goal. There were many different elements involved in the
recruitment and retention process, such as a implementing a
marketing program. She did not recall there being a
specific goal for the increment.
Co-Chair Johnson added that she would like the
conversations in the meeting to focus on the changes made
by the subcommittees.
8:48:06 AM
Representative Hannan referred to the removal of the $1.2
million increment for Coding in Minecraft licenses. She
asked if Representative Coulombe had heard direct feedback
from school districts about the increment.
Representative Coulombe responded that she had not heard
directly from school districts but there were concerns from
subcommittee members that the program was set up with funds
related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The goal was to continue
the program using unrestricted general funds (UGF). There
were several subcommittee members who discussed the idea of
finding cheaper ways for students to access Minecraft. She
understood the software itself would cost about $5 to
purchase and there were concerns as to why the program was
so expensive when the software was inexpensive. The
department had explained that there was an upgraded version
that helped train teachers how to teach the programs. The
consensus of the subcommittee was that the increment was
too expensive and school districts could access Minecraft
in other ways.
Representative Hannan asked if there was discussion on the
amount of money that had already been invested in the
program. She understood that school districts had purchased
a significant amount of equipment and trained teachers but
a school could only use the equipment if it became
certified.
Representative Coulombe replied that her understanding was
that there were not many school districts in the situation
described by Representative Hannan. She understood that
DEED had begun setting up the program but it had not
progressed far. There were still many questions about how
much the program needed to cost and whether districts could
find more efficient ways to run the program.
Representative Coulombe suggested that the Legislative
Finance Division (LFD) respond in more detail to
Representative Ortiz's earlier question about the funding
for academic assessments.
8:51:05 AM
CONOR BELL, FISCAL ANALYST, LEGISLATIVE FINANCE DIVISION,
introduced himself and asked Representative Ortiz to repeat
his earlier question.
Representative Ortiz asked how much of an increase was the
$650,000 increment for statewide assessments from what was
already in place.
Mr. Bell responded he would follow up with the committee on
the exact dollar amount for the existing funding. He
explained that the cost for assessment had increased over
time while the amount of federal funding had remained flat.
The assessments had been supported by COVID-19 funds over
the last few years but the federal funding was no longer
available and the increased cost of assessments needed to
be addressed with other funds.
8:52:53 AM
Representative Josephson understood that the funding for
hunter education was in the base. He asked if he was
correct.
Mr. Bell responded in the affirmative.
Representative Josephson asked if the appropriation was
new.
Mr. Bell responded in the affirmative. There were existing
programs for hunter education within the Department of Fish
and Game (DFG). The appropriation in the education budget
was for competitive grants for school districts for hunter
education programs. The districts would submit grant
applications to receive funding for hunter education.
Representative Ortiz referred to the $1.5 million
allocation for teacher recruitment and retention. He asked
how the funding would help with teacher recruitment and
retention.
Mr. Bell responded that the $1.5 million allocation was
focused on a few items that came from the governor's
working group on Alaska teacher recruitment and retention.
The group released a playbook report in 2023 and the
recommendations were based upon the report. There was
funding for the following: surveying teachers on job
satisfaction and on the reasons why teachers were leaving
the state, creating marketing materials to advertise
teaching in Alaska, and other activities that aimed to
promote teaching in the state as a career opportunity.
8:55:37 AM
Representative Josephson acknowledged that multiyear
appropriations were common; however, there were specific
requirements for multiyear appropriations. The state had
been sued in the past when it had tried to implement an
overly large multiyear appropriation for the Base Student
Allocation (BSA) several years prior. He asked if the
requirement was that the funding could not be anticipatory.
He asked how the requirements for multiyear appropriations
worked.
Mr. Bell responded that he would defer to Legislative Legal
Services (LLS) for more details. The entirety of a
multiyear appropriation would be appropriated in the first
year and the department could spend the money across
multiple years; however, the legislature would need to
appropriate the money first. For example, the legislature
would need to appropriate funding in FY 25 before the
department could spend the appropriation in FY 26 and
beyond. The legislature could not create an appropriation
that would force a forthcoming legislature to appropriate
the money because it would inhibit the appropriating powers
of subsequent legislatures. The funding would be
appropriated in FY 24 and the department would have FY 25
and FY 26 to spend the money.
8:57:30 AM
AT EASE
8:58:05 AM
RECONVENED
8:58:19 AM
^DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
Ms. Morledge read through the finance subcommittee
recommendations for the Department of Public Safety
(DPS)(copy on file):
The Finance Budget Subcommittee for the Department of
Public Safety reviewed the Governor's FY25 budget
proposal and recommends the items contained in the
below details.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Fund Source: (dollars are in thousands)
Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $255,594.2
Designated General Funds (DGF) $9,333.8
Other Funds $14,241.4
Federal Funds $40,916.3
Total $320,085.7
Compared to the FY25 adjusted base, the subcommittee
recommendations represent an increase of $11,174.8 in
UFG (4.6%), $-153.8 in DGF (-1.67%), $-2,335.8 in
other funds (-14.1%), and $1,725.0 (4.4%) in Federal
Funds, for a total increase of $10,410.2 (3.4%).
Positions:
Permanent Full-Time 1001
Permanent Part-Time 12
Temporary 30
Total 1,043
BUDGET ACTION:
After holding four meetings and reviewing and
discussing each of the Governor's proposed
transactions in detail, the subcommittee adopted all
items by unanimous consent before taking up
amendments.
It is the intent of the Chair to recommend the budget
item for Alaska State Trooper clothing, uniforms,
tools, and safety gear, move from the language section
of the budget to the numbers section, and changed to a
one-time item (IncOTI), so the legislature can more
accurately assess ongoing annual costs in the
department's budget.
Some highlights of the items are:
• $56.3 for Alaska State Trooper applicants to
cover air travel costs who advance to the testing
process and who are not on the Alaska Road
system.
• $147.0 for three vehicles to replace
decommissioned vehicles used for inmate travel.
• $698.5 for three child crimes Investigators in
Bethel.
• $450.1 for two long-term non-permanent
Investigators for Missing and Murdered Indigenous
Persons.
• $154.1 for a Criminal Justice Planner to oversee
the tactical and administrative functions related
to the Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS).
• $3,499.8 added for 10 new Village Public Safety
Officers, bringing the total to 80.
• A new Victims' Services Division has been created
within the Department of Public Safety.
• $67.0 for a Crime Data Portal for the public,
media, and academia to find crime data reporting
SUBCOMMITTEE AMENDMENTS:
The Chair set an amendment deadline, welcomed
amendments from all members, and the committee
entertained five amendments, three of which were
adopted.
• The subcommittee removed a request for $75.0 for
additional Digital Evidence Management Storage
• The subcommittee removed $193.3 for a Program
Manager for recruitment efforts, leaving intact
the funding for Alaska State Trooper applicant
travel for testing.
• The subcommittee removed $178.4 for an
Administrative Investigator for the Alaska Police
Standards Council.
ATTACHED REPORTS:
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Public Safety adopted the attached
reports:
• Agency Totals
• Transaction Compare: Adjusted Base+ to House
Subcom
• Transaction Compare: GovAmd to House Subcom
• Wordage
9:03:05 AM
Representative Josephson asked if the first page of the
report should state "compared to the FY 24 adjusted base"
instead of the FY 25 adjusted base. He noted that the DEED
closeout report also said FY 25 rather than FY 24.
Ms. Morledge responded that Representative Josephson was
correct and both reports should say FY 24. She would
correct the error.
Representative Josephson asked for a description of the
subcommittee's discussion on the decision to pass
amendments that would remove funding for a program manager
position and an administrative investigator position.
Representative Coulombe responded that there was a request
for a new administrative investigator position for the
Police Standards Council (PSC). She relayed that the
council was not investigating crimes, but it was
investigating officers. In 2022, there were 50 complaints
about officers but only 33 of the complaints were being
investigated. The subcommittee felt that the workload was
manageable but if the council felt overwhelmed, the issue
could be addressed in the following year. The department
had been successful in recruiting Alaska State Troopers
(AST) and there were presently two Human Resource (HR)
consultants working in the commissioner's office. The
subcommittee determined that a program manager was not
needed for there to be successful recruitment efforts.
9:05:59 AM
Representative Galvin asked if there was discussion around
the cost of $250,000 per non-permanent officer as compared
to the cost of Village Public Safety Officers (VPSO) at
about $350,000 each.
Representative Coulombe responded that VPSOs had more
training and were more skilled than non-permanent
investigators. The non-permanent investigators were
responsible for efforts surrounding Missing and Murdered
Indigenous Persons and received a $2.50 per hour increase
in pay.
Representative Galvin asked why the investigators
responsible for Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons
efforts were non-permanent.
Representative Coulombe replied that the intention was to
recruit retired troopers.
Representative Hannan asked about the victim's services
appropriation. She noted that there was funding for
victim's services navigators, but wondered who the victims
would be navigated towards.
Representative Coulombe responded there was a lot of
discussion around the issues. The funding decreased but
there were three new employees in the prior year to
distribute the funding. The topic was still in active
discussion with the department and she thought there might
be some forthcoming changes. She did not think that funding
for administrative positions should be added while
potentially taking away money from victims. She reiterated
that it was a concern that had been brought up in the
subcommittee process.
Representative Coulombe requested that LFD clarify
Representative Josephson's earlier comment about the fiscal
year for the adjusted base. She wanted to clarify whether
the fiscal year needed to be corrected.
Co-Chair Johnson understood that the year was correct.
9:10:11 AM
MORGAN FOSS, FISCAL ANALYST, LEGISLATIVE FINANCE DIVISION,
responded that the division compared the FY 25 budget with
the FY 25 adjusted base and the finance subcommittee
recommendations report was correct and did not need to be
changed.
Representative Josephson asked how the FY 25 adjusted base
could be known.
Ms. Foss responded that the FY 25 adjusted base was
referenced in LFD's reports and the figures were built off
of the governor's subcommittee book request. She asked if
Representative Josephson would like to hear the exact
numbers.
Representative Josephson responded in the negative and
noted that he would discuss it with Ms. Foss outside of the
meeting.
^DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, COMMUNITY, AND ECCOMONIC
DEVELOPMENT
9:11:18 AM
AT EASE
9:12:59 AM
RECONVENED
LAIB ALLENSWORTH, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE BRYCE EDGMON, read
the finance subcommittee recommendations for the Department
of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development (DCCED)
(copy on file):
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic
Development met a total of five times and submits the
following recommendations with no changes from the
Governor's Amended request for the operating budget
for FY25 to the House Finance Committee:
RECOMMENDATIONS: (Dollars in Thousands)
Fund Source:
Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $10,775.9
Designated General Funds (DGF) $64,308.8
Other Funds $62,877.5
Federal Funds $35,641.6
Total $173,603.8
Compared to the FY25 adjusted base, the subcommittee
recommendations represent an increase of $0.00 (+0%)
in Unrestricted General Funds, an increase of $909.9
(+1.4%) in Designated General Funds, an increase of
$6,685.4 (+11.9%) in other funds, and an increase of
$4,050. (+12.8%) in Federal Funds.
Positions:
Permanent Full-time 560
Permanent Part-time 0
Temporary 22
Total 582
BUDGET ACTION:
After reviewing and discussing the Governor's proposed
transactions in detail, the subcommittee adopted all
items by unanimous consent. There were no increases or
decreases to the FY25 Governor's Request.
Some Items of Note:
• A total of approximately $1.56 million in
CIP receipt authority for the Alaska
Broadband office to support their growth and
implementation of various projects related
to Broadband, Equity, Access, and Deployment
program. These are largely Federal Funds
coming through the Capital budget.
• $4 million in federal receipt authority for
Serve Alaska to manage grant funding
staggered over multiple years and to pursue
additional federal grants.
• Approximately $1.25 in CIP receipt authority
for the Alaska Energy Authority Rural Energy
Assistance allocation for 7 positions to
support various capital projects related to
federal IIJA funds.
Subcommittee Amendments:
The Chair set an amendment deadline, welcomed
amendments from all members, and the committee
received no amendments.
Attached Reports:
• DCCED Agency Totals
• DCCED Transaction Compare: Adjusted Base +
to House Subcom
• Wordage
Co-Chair Edgmon noted that there were no questions from
committee members and suggested that Mr. Allensworth
continue to the next report.
9:16:13 AM
^DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Mr. Allensworth read through the finance subcommittee
recommendations for the Department of Corrections (DOC)
(copy on file):
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Corrections submits the following
recommended following recommendations with no changes
from the Governor's Amended request for the operating
budget for FY25 to the House Finance Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Fund Source: (dollars are in thousands)
Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $407,552.2
Designated General Funds (DGF) $14,813.2
Other Funds $10,358.7
Federal Funds $17,928.6
Total $450,652.7
Compared to the FY25 adjusted base, subcommittee
recommendations represent a increase of $31,841.2
(+8.5%) in Unrestricted General Funds, an increase of
$375.0 (+2.6%) in Designated General Funds, a decrease
of $12,531.2 (-54.7%) in Other Funds, and no change in
Federal Funds for a total increase of $19,685.0
(+4.6%) in all funds.
Positions:
Permanent Full-time 2,124
Permanent Part-time 0
Temporary 0
Total 2,124
BUDGET ACTION:
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Corrections reviewed the FY25 budget
request and adopted all items by unanimous consent,
with the addition of intent language.
Some of the highlights of these items are: (dollars
are in thousands)
• A $5,450.0 increase in the Population Management
Appropriation to address increased costs related
to increased costs of commodities, employee
overtime, and employee onboarding.
• A $4,235.0 increase to Pre-Trial Services
associated with the Behavioral Intervention
Contract costs increasing due to the number of
persons being placed on electronic monitoring,
costs associated with lost and damaged equipment,
and to cover contractual services for Anchorage
municipal placements.
• Added intent language directing the directing the
Department to work with Office of Management and
Budget and the Legislative Finance Division to
develop a budgetary projection model for the
agency before December 20th, 2024 and also
directs the department to accurately reflect
expected expenditures as supported by this
projection model.
ATTACHED REPORTS:
The House Finance Budget Subcommittee for the
Department of Corrections adopted the attached
reports:
• DOC Agency Totals
• DOC Transaction Compare: Adjusted Base to House
Subcom
• Wordage
9:18:58 AM
Representative Coulombe referenced a request to replace
$5.6 million of restorative justice funds (RJF) with UGF.
She asked for an explanation of the context.
Mr. Allensworth responded that the RJF were funded through
Permanent Fund Dividends (PFD) that would have gone to
incarcerated individuals. Considering the reduced size of
the PFD in the prior year, there were fewer funds available
and UGF was necessary to cover operational costs.
Representative Coulombe noted that RJF went up and down
frequently. She asked if there was an expectation as to why
the funding needed to be supplemented if the RJF funds were
not sufficient.
Co-Chair Edgmon suggested that LFD respond to the question.
ALEXEI PAINTER, DIRECTOR, LEGISLATIVE FINANCE DIVISION,
responded that all of the uses of RJF apart from the
capitalization of the Crime Victims' Compensation Fund
(CVCF) were essentially replacing UGF. When RJF increased,
UGF was displaced by RJF, and when RJF decreased, UGF
displaced RJF. The only additive item was CVCF, which was
ranked as the top priority for RJF in statute. The
department's costs would not fluctuate depending on the
availability of the fund source.
Representative Coulombe thought it sounded like there had
been a pattern. She understood that operations would not
change depending upon the fund source but she found it
interesting that there was a replacement for RJF. She
thought it seemed as though there was an expectation that a
certain amount of funding needed to originate from RJF and
if there was not enough funding available to cover costs,
UGF would make up for the discrepancy.
Mr. Painter responded that statute dictated that 79 percent
to 88 percent of RJF may be appropriated to DOC. Both the
FY 24 and FY 25 budgets appropriated the 79 percent minimum
to DOC. The statute was designed so that the funds would be
allocated to various purposes and RJF would be replaced as
needed with UGF as RJF increased and decreased.
9:22:16 AM
Representative Galvin understood the intent language for
building a projection model and she thought it made sense.
She was curious if funds were needed in order to build the
model.
Mr. Allensworth replied that the direction to work with the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and LFD would absorb
the costs of building the projection model and was part of
the intent language.
Co-Chair Edgmon added that the DOC subcommittee met three
times and it spoke at length about increased costs and the
increase in UGF. The increase in costs for facility
maintenance, overtime, and the personnel health care
trajectory had been well-managed. The committee wanted to
ensure that DOC would return with reassurance that the
increased costs would not continue because it was not
sustainable. He relayed that the increased cost was the
item that received the most discussion in subcommittee. In
the past, health care had been the most pressing topic, but
it had been managed well in recent years.
Representative Josephson asked for an explanation of the
decrease in "other" funds.
Mr. Allensworth responded that the decrease in other funds
represented the decrease in RJF and the replacement by UGF.
Representative Josephson thought the replacement was $5.6
million but the subcommittee recommendations report showed
$12.5 million.
Mr. Painter responded that the $5.6 million was the
replacement in one area and the remainder was a replacement
in a different area. The replacement happened in two
places: physical health care and institutions. The combined
total was $12.5 million in replaced funds.
9:25:46 AM
Representative Ortiz asked if the budget was protected in
statute. He wondered if there had been debate about
potentially continuing the pattern of increases year-after-
year. He asked if it was the statutory obligation of the
legislature to increase the DOC budget. He wondered if the
legislature was bound by statue to fulfill the obligations
and there was no reason to discuss any other option.
Co-Chair Edgmon responded in the affirmative. He explained
that DOC had been offering bonuses, but it still had not
been able to avoid paying overtime to senior employees.
There were a number of increases in Alaska, such as
operational costs for halfway houses. He suggested that Mr.
Allensworth add more detail.
Mr. Allensworth added that the services provided by the
department were constitutionally mandated. The services
provided were under the purview of the department and the
legislature and there was a level of care that was demanded
and there were increased costs for programs that were
statutorily mandatory. The management of the increase was
dependent upon the legislature and the department.
Co-Chair Edgmon noted that all costs were increasing, and
DOC was almost exclusively funded by UGF. He thought that
if costs were reduced, the costs would reappear in the
following year's supplemental.
9:28:51 AM
Representative Galvin commented that the restrictions of
the pandemic proved that it was possible to conduct many
activities virtually, which could reduce transportation
costs. She wondered if there could be cost savings if some
practices were conducted virtually.
Mr. Allensworth responded that there were no discussions
about the potential cost savings of conducting activities
virtually during the subcommittee process. He would speak
with DOC and follow up with more information.
Co-Chair Edgmon indicated that the department had not
indicated that conducting practices virtually was a cost
savings measure, though he was sure that it saved money. He
asked if Mr. Painter had any additional comments.
Mr. Painter replied that the transportation cost increases
were related to the partial closure of the Lemon Creek
Correctional Center. Many inmates had to be transferred to
Juneau for court appearances, which was a costly endeavor.
Representative Hannan understood that the discussion about
transportation cost savings was within the Alaska Court
System which was now conducting many pre-trial screenings
virtually rather than transporting incarcerated individuals
to the courthouse. She noted that the savings would appear
in the court's budget and not DOC's budget. In the prior
year, the DOC health care costs were projected to decrease
due to a new dialysis unit in the facilities. The dialysis
unit was successful, but other health care costs continued
to escalate, and expected heath care costs were incorrect.
HB 268 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
HB 270 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
9:31:48 AM
Co-Chair Edgmon reviewed the agenda for the afternoon's
meeting.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| DPS Budget Narrative Report 3.1.24.pdf |
HFIN 3/4/2024 8:30:00 AM |
HB 268 |
| DPS HSub Closeout - Agency Totals.pdf |
HFIN 3/4/2024 8:30:00 AM |
HB 268 |
| DPS BA Sheet - Closeout - Final.pdf |
HFIN 3/4/2024 8:30:00 AM |
HB 268 |
| DPS HSub Closeout - Wordage.pdf |
HFIN 3/4/2024 8:30:00 AM |
HB 268 |
| DPS-TransactionCompare1.pdf |
HFIN 3/4/2024 8:30:00 AM |
HB 268 |
| DPS-TransactionCompare2.pdf |
HFIN 3/4/2024 8:30:00 AM |
HB 268 |
| DEED BA Sheet - Closeout - Final.pdf |
HFIN 3/4/2024 8:30:00 AM |
HB 268 |
| DOE-AgencyTotals.pdf |
HFIN 3/4/2024 8:30:00 AM |
HB 268 |
| DOE-TransactionCompare1.pdf |
HFIN 3/4/2024 8:30:00 AM |
HB 268 |
| DOE-TransactionCompare2.pdf |
HFIN 3/4/2024 8:30:00 AM |
HB 268 |
| DOE-Wordage.pdf |
HFIN 3/4/2024 8:30:00 AM |
HB 268 |
| DEED FY25 Subcommittee Closeout Narrative 3.3.24.pdf |
HFIN 3/4/2024 8:30:00 AM |
HB 268 |