Legislature(2017 - 2018)ADAMS ROOM 519
04/02/2018 01:30 PM House FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB268 | |
| HB221 | |
| HB400 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 268 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 221 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 400 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL NO. 400
"An Act relating to the collection of fees by the
Department of Public Safety for fire and explosion
prevention and safety services."
4:20:17 PM
Co-Chair Foster informed that if it was the will of the
members, it would pass HB 200 out of committee.
REPRESENTATIVE JONATHAN KREISS-TOMKINS, SPONSOR, introduced
himself.
CATHY SCHLINGHEYDE, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE JONATHAN KREISS-
TOMKINS, introduced herself.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins indicated the bill was one
page and was simple. There had been a statutory change
recommendation in a House Finance Subcommittee under the
auspices of the House Community and Regional Affairs
Committee. The recommendation would try to help the
Department of Public Safety streamline its operations,
operate more efficiently, and cut down on Unrestricted
General Fund (UGF) spending. The UGF would be replaced with
user fees or Designated General Funds (DGF). The state Fire
Marshal's Office had identified the opportunity, and the
subcommittee unanimously agreed the idea merited
exploration. The bill had passed the House State Affairs
committee in four hearings, after consideration of multiple
amendments that had not passed.
Representative Wilson read from page 2 of the fiscal note:
Fire Inspections - $50 per hour with a one-hour minimum. DFLS
anticipates the average inspection to take two hours. The
goal is to accomplish 1,500 inspections per year; but
currently 500 is more likely. Considering 500 two-hour
inspections per year at $50 per hour, the estimated annual
revenue would be $50,000.
Representative Wilson asked what happened to the additional
1,000 properties that would not receive an inspection. She
wondered if properties on the road system were more likely
to receive inspections.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins deferred to the state fire
marshal.
4:23:56 PM
DAVID TYLER, DIVISION OF FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY, DEPARTMENT
OF PUBLIC SAFETY, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), explained
that the $50 per hour charge was arrived at after
considering potential outcomes. He discussed inspection
rates and size of properties. He acknowledged that
properties on the road system received inspection more
frequently as there was easier access. Increased funding
would allow the inspectors to reach more communities so
that inspections would be more equitable across the state.
Representative Wilson asked about properties not on the
road system that needed inspection.
Mr. Tyler responded that the properties not being inspected
and would not be charged a fee.
Representative Wilson asked him to tell her about the
places that were not currently being inspected and would be
subject to a $50 per hour fee.
Mr. Tyler replied that hotels, lodges, and large assembly
areas such as auction houses and schools would be in the
category.
4:26:34 PM
Representative Wilson supported the bill but was concerned
with justifying the charging of fees. She wondered how the
state would keep up with the demand. She thought it would
be difficult to justifying the fees.
Mr. Tyler indicated that by charging the fees the
department would be better able to reach the outlying areas
to do additional inspections and hit the goal of 1,500
structures per year.
Representative Wilson asked if $50 per hour would provide
enough money for the travel to outlying areas.
Representative Wilson did not want to charge more to the
communities in rural area. She discussed fees. She asked if
the bill was governed by square footage rather than by
hour.
Mr. Tyler thought a flat rate for square footage was a much
fairer way of billing for the service.
4:29:30 PM
Representative Thompson noted that the City of Fairbanks
had its own building department, codes, and fire department
which completed inspections. He noted that the fire
department certified building plans. He suggested that
there were private companies in Fairbanks that could
inspect fire extinguishers and fire extinguisher systems.
He asked if the state was adding another layer of charges
to cities that had existing codes and departments.
Mr. Tyler explained that the City of Fairbanks was a
deferred jurisdiction and did all the work itself; as did
the cities of Juneau and Anchorage. It was his goal for any
community (that was able) to do the inspection work itself.
He thought a local community could do a much better job of
accomplishing the work. He relayed that the private
companies that did the inspections mentioned by
Representative Thompson were certified by the division.
Representative Kawasaki asked about the ability to waive
fees for non-profits such as churches.
Mr. Tyler believed bill was worded so that it was possible
to waive the fees.
Representative Kawasaki stated that the bill would allow
the director the ability to waive the fees.
4:33:16 PM
Representative Guttenberg did not believe the state should
simply do inspections because it could charge for it. He
asked if there was a statistical analysis on prevention. He
mentioned non-conforming properties in rural Alaska.
Mr. Tyler reported that from 2001 to 2007 there had been 76
uncontained fires in public schools with a total monetary
loss in excess of $50 million. Fires in Hooper Bay and
Talkeetna schools had resulted in total losses. In FY 08,
the division had requested and received a $105,000
increment to get the fire inspections current. From 2008 to
2012, there was 47 uncontained fires in school with a total
monetary loss of $1.4 million. Since 2012 there had been
staffing issues and a reduction in travel funding. Since
2013 the total fire loss had added up to $7 million. He
emphasized that the inspections made a difference through
education and elimination of hazards.
Representative Tilton asked about the permit period for
fire systems technician permits and fire extinguisher
technician permits. She wondered if the building
inspections only required in an initial inspection or a
longer term.
Mr. Tyler responded that the division's goal was to do
inspections every 2 years. He elaborated that the industry
standard was to do inspections every year but did not think
it was realistic for Alaska.
Representative Tilton asked how many inspections were done
in the previous year.
Mr. Tyler reported that the division had done about 213
inspections the previous year, but his department had been
short by 2 deputy fire marshals. He expected to complete
close to 500 inspections in FY 18.
Representative Tilton wondered how many buildings there
were that needed inspection, not including new
construction.
Mr. Tyler estimated there was a little more than 3,000
structures the division was statutorily responsible to
inspect.
Representative Wilson asked if the regulations were new.
Mr. Tyler replied that the statute that required the
inspections was existing.
4:37:42 PM
Co-Chair Foster OPENED Public Testimony.
Co-Chair Foster CLOSED Public Testimony.
Vice-Chair Gara read FN 1 from the Department of Public
Safety, OMB Component number 3051. The note was
indeterminate. It was estimated that the bill would raise
about $84,000 of DGF through fees.
Representative Wilson indicated that for her it was not
about the fees; but rather the amount of money spent after
inspections were not done, resulting in fires and damage to
schools. She hoped for further inspections to prevent
fires.
Co-Chair Seaton MOVED to report HB 400 out of Committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
note.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
HB 400 was REPORTED out of committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with one previously published
indeterminate fiscal note: FN1(DPS).