Legislature(2017 - 2018)ADAMS ROOM 519
03/08/2018 01:00 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 | |
| HB285 || HB286 | |
| Amendments | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 286 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 285 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL NO. 285
"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."
HOUSE BILL NO. 286
"An Act making appropriations for the operating and
loan program expenses of state government and for
certain programs; capitalizing funds; amending
appropriations; making supplemental appropriations;
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."
1:05:25 PM
^AMENDMENTS
1:05:30 PM
Co-Chair Seaton noted that the committee would be taking up
special appropriations amendments, and amendments for
Judiciary (JUD), the University of Alaska (UOA), the
Department of Revenue (DOR), and the Department of Military
and Veterans Affairs (DMVA). The rest of the amendments
would be addressed in the order of the packet. He wanted to
get through all of the language amendments in the current
day because it would help Legislative Legal Services in
drafting the final budget bills.
Co-Chair Seaton MOVED to ADOPT Amendment L H SAP 25 (copy
on file):
Language Amendments
L H SAP 25 - Increase the capitalization of the
Disaster Relief Fund
Offered by Representative Seaton
See 30-GH2564O.28
The amendment adds a new sec. 19(d) that capitalizes
the Disaster Relief Fund with an estimated $6,154,862,
from the balances of several funds. These sources were
identified as available funds in the Governor's budget
amendments submitted February 13th.
Alternative energy conservation revolving loan fund,
$2,744,400 (DGF) Mining loan fund, $200,900 (DGF)
Unincorporated community capital project matching
grant fund, $646,200 (DGF) Municipal capital project
matching grant fund, $253,500 (DGF) Investment loss
trust fund, $2,298,862 (UGF) From FY 14 through FY18
to date, $51.5 million has been appropriated into the
Disaster Relief Fund. Over the four-and-a-half-year
period, the average annual expenditure has been $11.4
million.
This amendment increases the FY19 capitalization to
$8.2 million, closer to the average annual
expenditure.
The current fund balance is only $1.5 million. HB 321,
the supplemental bill, includes an additional $4
million of capitalization in FY18.
Representative Wilson OBJECTED for discussion.
Co-Chair Seaton read the amendment (see above).
Representative Wilson replied to her objection. She asked
about the loan transfers and whether they had been
stagnated. She did not see a backup page in the packet. She
asked for more information.
Co-Chair Seaton invited Lacey Sanders from the Division of
Legislative Finance to the table.
1:09:12 PM
LACEY SANDERS, ANALYST, LEGISLATIVE FINANCE DIVISION,
responded that there should have been an attachment. The
Legislative Finance Division had been provided with a
report from the Office of Economic Development on each of
the revolving loan funds. She could provide a summary on
the two funds that had been identified. Regarding the
mining revolving loan fund, there were currently no active
loans in the fund. There was one remaining foreclosed
property being collected on and it had been identified as
available. She reported that the alternative energy
revolving loan fund had no outstanding loans either. The
governor's office had identified the fund as available for
use.
Representative Wilson asked if the accounts would be
drained to zero or if money would remain in the accounts.
Co-Chair Seaton relayed that on February 13, 2018 the
governor's amendments were submitted and he had identified
the funds as available. Co-Chair Seaton asked Ms. Sanders
if she had the ending balances for the accounts or whether
they had been zeroed out.
Ms. Sanders responded that she had the balances and added
that the language was to utilize the unexpended and
unobligated balance on the loan funds and drain the two
funds - the alternate energy revolving loan fund and the
mining revolving loan fund. No future loans would be made
from these two programs.
Representative Wilson wondered if the balances could just
be zeroed out or if it would take a statutory change to get
rid of the funds altogether. Ms. Sanders responded that the
language would drain the loan funds. She thought it would
take a statutory change to remove the accounts altogether.
Representative Kawasaki conveyed that it was his
understanding that with the $2 million increment in the FY
19 budget and the supplemental request, the disaster relief
fund would get to where it needed to be. He wondered if the
legislature was over-capitalizing the fund. Ms. Sanders
replied that the administration's position was to increase
the fund balance to $5 million. The amendment would bring
the fund balance higher than that amount. Looking at
historical trends, it was a very low balance. She continued
that because disasters were so unpredictable, the amendment
put forward capitalized it further in anticipation of
spring disasters and future disasters.
Co-Chair Seaton reiterated that in FY 14 the fund was
capitalized with $32.5 million, which had been used over
time. He added that he was trying to prevent supplementals.
If the legislature underfunded the fund, supplementals
would be necessary.
Representative Wilson was concerned with having $11.5
million by using other funds, rather than addressing how
the state would pay for it in the future.
Representative Wilson WITHDREW her OBJECTION.
There being NO further OBJECTION, Amendment L H SAP 25 was
ADOPTED.
1:14:46 PM
Representative Pruitt MOVED to ADOPT Amendment L H SAP 26
(copy on file):
Language Amendments
L H SAP 26 - Reappropriating $416,060 from the Office
of the Governor to CACFA.
Offered by Representative Pruitt
Reappropriates the remaining unexpended, unobligated
balance of $416,060 from the Office of the Governor,
Arctic Policy Leadership and Economic Development
Projects originally appropriated in FY14, to CACFA.
Representative Guttenberg OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Pruitt MOVED Conceptual Amendment 1 to
Amendment L H SAP 26.
Representative Pruitt explained the conceptual amendment.
It would allow the balance to be used over the course of
FY 19 and FY 20, spreading the $415,000 over 2 years rather
than 1 year.
1:15:37 PM
AT EASE
1:17:44 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Seaton OBJECTED for discussion.
Co-Chair Seaton drew attention to the original amendment.
He clarified that on Page 1, Line 21 "June 30, 2020" would
be inserted after June 30, 2019.
Co-Chair Seaton WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
There being NO further OBJECTION, Conceptual Amendment 1 to
Amendment L H SAP 26 was ADOPTED.
Representative Pruitt read the amendment (see above). He
explained that the intent of the initial money that had not
been utilized was for arctic policy leadership and economic
development projects including oil and gas development.
Essentially, it had been used for the climate change
commission that the governor had been involved in. He
argued that the money had been used against oil and gas
development. He suggested that instead of spending money on
an issue that was more of a federal, rather than a state
issue, the money could be used for the Citizens Advisory
Commission on Federal Areas (CACFA). He thought the
commission should be out advocating on behalf of Alaska. He
asked for member support.
1:21:52 PM
SHAWN HENDERSON, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATOR SERVICES, OFFICE
OF THE GOVERNOR, spoke on behalf of the Governor in
opposition of the amendment. He explained that the reason
for the governor's opposition was that the arctic policy
funding was the primary funding source for the Alaska
Climate Change Strategy and Climate Action for Alaska
Leadership Team. On October 31, 2017, the governor signed
Administrative Order 289 establishing the Alaska leadership
team to advise the governor on critical and timely action
to address climate change challenges that safeguarded
Alaska. The order called for state departments to review
previous work on climate change and to identify immediate
action responses the state could take. The administrative
order also zeroed in on climate initiative and addressed 4
key action areas: mitigation, research, response, and
adaptation. The initial action plan was due to the governor
on September 1, 2018 and following the report submission
additional work would transpire. He respectfully asked that
the funding remain part of the arctic funding policy.
Representative Wilson mentioned that CACFA had to do with
federal overreach. She asked if federal overreach was part
of the problem with climate change. Mr. Henderson responded
that he did not know if it entailed overreach.
Representative Wilson asked how the $416,000 was currently
allocated. Mr. Henderson indicated that $416,000 was the
remaining balance of the fund. It had not been designated
for any particular purpose other than for use of the Alaska
leadership team. He could provide historical detail of
where the money had been used.
Representative Wilson asked how much had been used and for
what purposes. Mr. Henderson responded that the initial
appropriation was $900,000. Representative Wilson asked in
which year the initial amount was appropriated. Mr.
Henderson replied in 2014. Since that time, to-date $95,857
had been used for personal services, $71,633 for travel,
$267,489 for services, and $5803 for commodities. The total
amount spent to-date was $440,782.
1:26:26 PM
Representative Wilson asked where the FY 14 appropriation
was originally supposed to be spent. Mr. Henderson would
have to bring detail back to the committee. He could
generally say that it was intended for arctic policies and
project analyses.
Representative Wilson asked about using the governor's
contingency fund to make up the difference if the
legislature were to use the $416,000 for CACFA. Mr.
Henderson could not speak to how the contingency funds
would be used. The purpose of that fund was for shortfalls
in certain areas and to be used as needed for possible
emergencies or other actions. The money was the governor's
fund.
Representative Wilson asked if the contingency fund could
be used to make up for the amount of $416,000. She wondered
if there was anything that would prevent the fund from
being used in this way. Mr. Henderson replied, "Not to my
knowledge, Representative Wilson." Representative Wilson
responded that that was her understanding as well.
Representative Pruitt asked about the membership team and
whether they were all Alaskans. Mr. Henderson responded
that all but one member of the team was from Alaska. He was
unsure about the last person. He could follow-up with the
information.
Vice-Chair Gara did not see the spending of $416,000 on an
agency that had no power as a wise use of money. It was a
state entity, rather than an agency, created to look at and
watch federal laws. Alaska had two senators, a congressman,
and staff from the Office of the Governor in Washington
D.C. He suggested that it was unreasonable to spend money
to watch federal laws that the state legislature could not
change, when Alaska already had four representatives in
Washington D.C. who could affect change. He would be
opposing the amendment.
1:30:33 PM
Representative Guttenberg recalled that in FY 17 the House
did not fund the appropriation, the Senate funded it, and
the governor vetoed it. In FY 18 the appropriation was not
in the budget. He commented that the entity was a citizen
commission, and there was nothing to prevent citizens from
continuing their activity as their own endeavor.
Representative Wilson remarked that the amendment would
provide an option of leaving $416,000 as a fund to be used
as needed or the legislature could put the funding towards
a purpose that Alaskans were concerned about. She would not
be supporting the amendment if a position was going to be
cut. She spoke of a contingency fund that the governor
could use. She was in support of the amendment.
Representative Tilton asked how long the CACFA had been in
the budget prior to 2017. Representative Kawasaki responded
that it was reinstated in 2009 by Senator Mike Kelly.
Representative Tilton asked if it was the governor that
removed the amount in FY 17. Mr. Henderson responded that
the funding had been dormant since 2016. The funding at the
time was $262,000 UGF.
Representative Kawasaki would be opposing the amendment. He
indicated there were three young Alaskans in the audience
that were representing the Alaska Youth for Environmental
Action. They were very concerned with the things that went
on in Washington D.C. He thought it was an appropriate use
of state money when it came to the governor's office being
able to advocate for arctic policy and economic development
projects. It was one of the reasons for their visit. He
thanked them for being in Juneau.
1:34:58 PM
Representative Tilton thought the committee had heard
earlier from Representative Wilson that the project was a
good use of the fund, but there was an alternate funding
source that could be used to fund the CACFA. She thought
the legislature should be listening to its citizens. She
reemphasized that there was an alternative funding source
that could be used. She was in support of the amendment.
Co-Chair Seaton would be opposing the amendment for two
reasons. First, he thought the Artic Policy Leadership and
Economic Development Projects were extremely important. He
opined that the state should be focusing on that and
adapting to climate change. H also argued that CACFA was
basically a slush fund for use in a most ineffective way.
Putting a large portion of money into a private effort that
had no function to accomplish anything other than talking
to the legislature was not something he supported. He would
be opposing the amendment.
1:37:03 PM
Representative Pruitt thought one of the members of the
artic leadership team was from Seattle. He did not think
Alaskans would appreciate someone from Seattle, Washington
setting arctic policy for Alaska. He indicated that Alaska
had a delegation from Alaska, however, they basically lived
in Washington DC. He argued that Alaska did not need
another group advising the state what to do in federal
areas. He thought it was better to have citizens of Alaska
advising the federal government on what to do in federal
areas. He asked for the committee's support.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson
OPPOSED: Gara, Grenn, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Ortiz, Foster,
Seaton
The MOTION to adopt Amendment L H SAP 26 as amended FAILED
(4/7).
1:41:04 PM
Vice-Chair Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment H JUD 4 (copy on
file):
Alaska Court System
Trial Courts
H JUD 4 - Delete 16 of 32 Unfunded Positions
Offered by Representative Gara Deletes
16 long term vacant positions for which there is no
funding. Although 16 unfunded positions remain in the
budget, the Alaska Court System would like to retain
them.
Representative Wilson OBJECTED for discussion.
Vice-Chair Gara explained the amendment. He had worked with
the court system. He opined that Judiciary had been doing a
good job at cost containment for the constitutional
function they performed. The agency had been losing money
to inflation, experiencing budget reductions over the
previous few years, and had empty positions that would
probably not be filled in the current budget climate. He,
along with the court system, identified 16 positions that
were unfunded and would likely remain unfunded for the
following few years.
Representative Wilson WITHDREW her OBJECTION.
There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment H JUD 4 was ADOPTED.
Co-Chair Seaton MOVED to ADOPT Amendment L H UOA 3 (copy on
file):
University of Alaska
Anchorage Campus
L H UOA 3 - Alaska mother and baby vitamin D research
Offered by Representative Seaton
See 30-GH2564O.2
This adds $499.5 over FY19 and FY20 for research to be
conducted by the Institute for Circumpolar Health
Studies to establish a baseline for prenatal and
newborn vitamin D levels for Alaska women and
children, to determine the prevalence of vitamin D
deficiency among pregnant women and newborns, and to
consider whether prenatal vitamin D screenings and
supplementation guidelines should be modified for
Alaska women and children.
Representative Wilson OBJECTED for discussion.
Co-Chair Seaton read the amendment (see above).
Representative Wilson asked if there was someone available
to testify from the Institute for Circumpolar Health
Studies.
JEFF JESSEE, DEAN, COLLEGE OF HEALTH, UAA, ANCHORAGE (via
teleconference), introduced himself.
1:44:14 PM
Representative Wilson asked how the institute established a
baseline for prenatal and newborns for anything, not just
vitamin D. Mr. Jesse responded that it was a matter of
taking blood samples, having them analyzed, gathering them
together, and looking at the values of vitamin D in the
blood systems of both the mothers and their newborns. One
of the advantages of the study being discussed was that the
newborn vitamin D levels could be obtained through an
umbilical cord draw rather than sticking the baby.
Representative Wilson asked if any study had been done in
the United States on women and children and vitamin D. Mr.
Jesse replied not to his knowledge. There might have been
some studies done in the United states, but none done in an
arctic or near-arctic geographic area.
Co-Chair Seaton noted there was a 4-page supporting
document in member packets from the Institute of
Circumpolar Health Studies, University of Alaska, Anchorage
(copy on file). [Document can be found in the supporting
documents section of the amendment packet.] He indicated
there had been a number of studies done in different places
around the world that had looked at vitamin D levels in
cord blood and in pregnant mothers. There was a significant
amount of data that showed that if a person had low vitamin
D during pregnancy, they had 4 times the level of moderate
to severe language impairment at age 5 going into school.
He referred to other studies that showed the benefits of
adequate levels of vitamin D. He explained that he was
putting forth the amendment because Alaska had a severe
amount of health costs that could be reduced with the
intake of vitamin D. He continued to speak to the benefits
of taking vitamin D.
1:47:53 PM
Representative Wilson indicated that it sounded like the
data was already available. She wondered why the state
would spend money on a study to confirm what was already
known.
Co-Chair Seaton would agree with Representative Wilson
except that in 2011 the legislature proposed a volunteer
study across the state sampling all newborns, about 10,000
newborns. At the time, the Department of Health and Social
Services indicated it did not do research in Alaska. He
referred to the State of Alaska Epidemiology Bulletin No.
27, dated November 1, 2016 (copy on file). He highlighted
the conclusion of a vitamin D deficiency study in prenatal
Alaska Native women in the upper right column. He read a
portion of the bulletin:
Data from these three studies suggest that vitamin D
deficiency appears to be highly prevalent in YKD
[Yukon Kuskokwim Delta] prenatal women. While current
evidence does not support routine vitamin D screening
and supplementation for prenatal women on a national
level, such screening and supplementation appears to
be warranted in YKD.
Co-Chair Seaton concluded that DHSS was admitting that the
state needed to worry about the problem of low vitamin D
levels in Alaskans. The department was identifying that the
only population that had been studied was native women in
the YKD. Alaska was the only arctic state. He indicated
that 90 percent of vitamin D was transmitted through sun
exposure to the skin and a person's own production of
vitamin D. For 7 months of the year, a person in Alaska did
not produce any vitamin D. He continued to discuss the
importance of further study of vitamin D. He indicated that
the chief medical officer had testified that he did not
want to take any actions until he saw research on Alaskans.
He continued to explain the needs of a study on the general
population of Alaskan women and newborns. Until the state
conducted a study, the state would continue experiencing a
huge cost in the medical system. He indicated that about
half of the babies born in Alaska were born under Medicaid,
about 5000 per year. The greatest proportion of newborns
were deficient in vitamin D. He concluded that, according
to the testimony of the chief medical officer, the state
had to have Alaskan research on Alaskans from different
parts of the state before he would agree to address the
high cost medical measure. The proposed funding would
provide actual research on Alaskans so that DHSS would
start saving the state money by avoiding the condition of
vitamin D deficiency.
1:52:23 PM
Representative Wilson provided a hypothetical scenario in
which she brought her child to a pediatrician. She wondered
if the doctor would not be able to address, test, or
provide a prescription for a vitamin D deficiency until
research was conducted.
Co-Chair Seaton was not saying that a particular physician
would not address the issue. However, in general, most of
the state's doctors went to school 30 years prior and never
took a course in immunology. Some physicians were up to
speed on things. He reported that about half of Alaska's
babies were born under Medicaid and most of them did not
have a pediatrician. A large portion of Alaska's population
was vitamin D deficient. The state needed data that applied
to Alaska's general population showing a need for
treatment. He noted that the preventative medicine group in
Washington D.C. refused to look at Alaska as the only
arctic state that might need more than what was needed in
California. The research would help provide the necessary
data that could save the state a significant amount of
money.
Representative Wilson asked if a Medicaid representative
was present. She was very concerned about Denali Kid Care
patients not seeing pediatricians. She asked if there was
anything preventing pediatricians from doing testing and
providing necessary vitamin supplements. She wanted to hear
from Medicaid. Co-Chair Seaton clarified that the
discussion was about neonatal care.
Representative Wilson was pretty sure a person saw an
obstetrician prior to seeing a pediatrician.
Vice-Chair Gara indicated that from working with a
significant amount of youth and people who had very little
in their lives, they did not necessarily have a regular
doctor. People sought treatment in emergent situations such
as giving birth. It was the reality for folks without a lot
of money.
1:56:44 PM
Representative Ortiz opined that it was common in rural
Alaska not to have access to an obstetrician.
Representative Grenn acknowledged the co-chair's passion
for the subject. He had learned a significant amount about
Vitamin D from the handouts that had been distributed. He
noted the co-chair having shined a light on the importance
of vitamin D and the negative impacts of vitamin D
deficiency. The amendment would not change whether someone
had a pediatrician. The amendment asked for $500,000 to
conduct research on something that the state already knew
about but was necessary to move forward. He would rather
spend $500,000 on Vitamin D to distribute throughout the
state. He thought a larger issue was at hand.
1:59:04 PM
Representative Pruitt thought the appropriation was more
fitting as a capital expenditure. He expressed concerns
about using Alaska Comprehensive Health Insurance
Association (ACHIA) funding for the proposed amendment. He
noted the co-chair had discussed the issue of vitamin D
deficiency for the past several years, so much that the
member from Anchorage currently had a bottle of Vitamin D
at his desk, and departments were including vitamin D in
their presentations. He wondered what the end results would
be confirming that Alaskans were deficient in vitamin D. He
thought it was already established that Alaskans needed
more vitamin D. He could not think of a better way of
getting vitamin D except to stand in the sun or to take a
pill. He wondered about the benefit of the expenditure.
Co-Chair Seaton responded that although half of Alaska's
babies were born under Medicaid, it was not a change of a
federal program. It was a change in state guidelines and
standards of what should be done. Currently, the state
guidelines were the national standards suited for the Lower
48. He argued that Alaska was the only arctic state, and
DHSS was following national guidelines, the only exception
was for mothers and babies in the Yukon Kuskokwim Delta.
For mothers and babies in the Anchorage area, for example,
they fell under national guidelines which indicated that it
was not necessary to test or supplement pregnant women. He
argued that there was a huge medical cost accruing to the
State of Alaska.
2:03:58 PM
AT EASE
2:10:58 PM
RECONVENED
HB 285 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
HB 286 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
Co-Chair Seaton relayed that the meeting would be
adjourned. He discussed the schedule for the following day.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 286 H UOA 3 Amendment Supporting Document.pdf |
HFIN 3/8/2018 1:00:00 PM |
HB 286 |
| HB 286 H SAP 25 Amendment Fund Analysis Supporting Document.pdf |
HFIN 3/8/2018 1:00:00 PM |
HB 286 |
| HB 286 HB 285 Amendments with Actions as of 3-8-18.pdf |
HFIN 3/8/2018 1:00:00 PM |
HB 285 HB 286 |