Legislature(2013 - 2014)CAPITOL 106
02/11/2014 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB274 | |
| HJR18 | |
| HB275 | |
| HB199 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HJR 18 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 275 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 199 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 274 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 275-ELECTRONIC DISTRIB. OF REPORTS/NOTICES
9:11:51 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the next order of business was HOUSE
BILL NO. 275, "An Act relating to electronic publication of
certain municipal notices and to publication and electronic
distribution of reports by state agencies."
[Before the committee was CSHB 275(CRA).]
9:12:06 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 9:12 a.m. to 9:14 a.m.
9:14:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER, Alaska State Legislature, as sponsor,
presented HB 275. He indicated that the two main purposes of
the proposed legislation pertain to the state's ability to
promote efficiency and effectiveness of government and to reduce
unnecessary government spending, which he said could also be
called government waste. He said the first three sections of
the proposed bill would affect municipalities and the last two
sections would affect state agencies. The first three sections
would permit a municipality to adopt an ordinance to post the
following three things on its web site rather than printing
them: mill rates, foreclosure listings, and [expiration of]
redemption of foreclosures. He said similar legislation was
proposed in the past, but did not pass. He indicated that the
provisions in Section 1-3 of HB 275 were added after listening
to the concerns of the municipalities.
9:16:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER stated that the core of bill is in
Sections 4 and 5, which would reduce paper waste. He questioned
how many legislators actually read all the agency reports that
are required by law. He said under the proposed legislation, it
would be mandatory for those reports to be delivered
electronically. He said there would be exceptions, found in
language of Section 5, [beginning on page 4, line 30, through
page 5, line 4], which read as follows:
An agency may not produce print copies of
reports except as
(1) required
(A) under AS 14.56.120;
(B) by agreement; or
(C) by federal law; or
(2) requested under AS 44.99.260
or specifically approved by the head of a state agency
or the head's designee.
9:20:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER said the bill would not compromise the
public's right to know or the legislature's ability to access
information. He directed attention to Section 4, and said the
state already utilizes the Alaska Online Public Notice System,
and language on page 4, line 24, would require reports of state
agencies to go onto that system. Representative Hawker said HB
275 is not all-encompassing, but is a step in making government
activities more efficient. He said he thinks if this works out,
it will merit discussion in future years for expansion.
9:23:22 AM
CHAIR LYNN asked how much money might be saved under HB 275.
9:23:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER indicated that in 2011, $1.6 million was
spent on publications. He said that "as we have narrowed the
scope of this legislation," the Office of Management & Budget
(OMB) believes it is spending $530,000 for this type of
reporting. He said, "The savings is going to be somewhere
within that." He said he thinks it is realistic to believe that
there will be material savings across all agencies under HB 275,
and that future legislation could "go after the second million
dollars that's out there" and "be more efficient and effective
without compromising the public's need to know."
9:24:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES thanked the bill sponsor for what she
called "common sense legislation." She said as a new legislator
last year, she soon realized the difficulty in reading every
hard copy report and finding space to keep them all. She said
she had made a suggestion that the reports be provided
electronically, with a list of all the reports for legislators
to see. Representative Hughes questioned the reasoning behind
the language regarding graphic design reports, on page 5, [lines
13-17].
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER indicated that some reports seem to have
more emphasis on technical beauty than content. Under the
proposed legislation, an agency would not be allowed to hire a
contractor to provide photographs or graphics unless there is no
one in the agency qualified to do the work or hiring a
contractor would cost the state less. In response to a follow-
up question, he said he has no idea if an agency has ever [hired
a contractor for a job that would have cost less done in house],
but he has noted the "large volume of what would appear to be
very costly photographs" in the reports to legislators that are
delivered and "going by the wayside so very quickly." He said
the concept of the bill is to allow agency heads to retain as
much decision-making latitude as possible, while being mindful
that the directive from the legislature is to use the state's
resources more efficiently.
9:30:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER remarked he is sure the sponsor agrees
that the intent is not to quell information. He said he would
not mind if agencies spent funds doing work on getting
information available, such as a specialized application where a
legislator could find information on an iPad. He said he does
not want to propose an amendment, but would like the sponsor's
response.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER acknowledged the importance of testimony
in terms of conveying the intent of legislation, and he
confirmed that the "need in the state" suggested by
Representative Keller would not be compromised under HB 275.
9:32:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS opined that the proposed
legislation is fantastic. He echoed Representative Hughes'
remark about being a new legislator and noticing the money being
spent on reports. Regarding graphics, he said he thinks there
is an incentive for state agencies to out-do each other in
design, in an attempt to garner the most attention from the
legislature to secure funds for their causes. He surmised that
the cost of design has got to be extraordinary. He stated,
"When we're hearing numbers like half a million to over a
million, it's not ... just a symbolic gesture, but it's real
savings." He said he suspects the aforementioned language on
page 5, regarding graphics, would result in even greater
savings.
9:34:04 AM
KATHIE WASSERMAN, Executive Director, Alaska Municipal League
(AML), testified that AML supports HB 275. She remarked that
this is the first time in her many years involved in local
government that she has witnessed the state relax a mandate on
municipalities, and she said that is reason for celebration.
She stated that most communities know best how to relay
information to their people. She pointed out that, unlike
legislators who must leave their constituents to take part in
the 90-day legislative session, municipal officials are in the
vicinity of the people they serve every day; therefore,
municipal officials know early on whether information has been
delivered or not. She said as a former mayor in many small
communities, she was required many years ago to post everything
in the closest newspaper, which, with any luck, was delivered to
her community six days later. She said that was a waste, but
she knew how to get the information to the people, and other
municipalities do, as well. She thanked the bill sponsor for
bring HB 275 forward.
9:35:52 AM
CHAIR LYNN suggested that perhaps [legislators] should not be so
isolated.
9:36:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON said he echoes the testimony of Ms.
Wasserman and thinks the proposed legislation is "extremely
helpful." He said the elective aspect of posting requirements
is good. He asked Ms. Wasserman what kind of feedback she may
have received regarding HB 275.
9:37:13 AM
MS. WASSERMAN said she has heard from a few communities, but
AML's winter meeting is not until another week, at which point
the issue will be discussed at length. She said she thinks she
has been in her job long enough to know that for the most part,
if a legislative bill "falls under local control," AML would
never oppose it.
9:38:05 AM
DEBORAH L. REICH, Foreclosure Specialist, Real Estate Services
Division, Department of Real Estate, Municipality of Anchorage,
testified in support of HB 275. She said the Municipality of
Anchorage appreciates the provision in the proposed legislation
that would give municipalities across the state the option to
publish foreclosure notices on line or in local news
publications. She said that change would save the municipality
a minimum of $20,000 annually, a significant savings in times
when budgets are so tight. She expressed appreciation to the
bill sponsor and offered to answer questions from the committee.
9:39:37 AM
CHAIR LYNN, after ascertaining that there was no one else who
wished to testify, closed public testimony.
9:39:46 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to report CSHB 275(CRA) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB 275(CRA) was
reported out of the House State Affairs Standing Committee.