Legislature(2015 - 2016)BUTROVICH 205
03/31/2016 09:00 AM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
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 | |
| SB144 | |
| SB171 | |
| SB194 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 194 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 171 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 144 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 144-RELOCATION ASSISTANCE FOR FED. PROJ/PROG
9:02:13 AM
CHAIR STOLTZE announced the consideration of SB 144. He noted
that the bill was previously heard in committee. He asked
Heather Fair from the Alaska Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities (DOT) if she recalled the questions posed to
her regarding issues from past DOT projects.
9:02:30 AM
HEATHER FAIR, State Right-of-Way Chief, Alaska Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT), Juneau, Alaska,
noted that DOT had submitted a response letter to the
committee's questions that were posed on March 17. She noted
that the committee asked numerous questions regarding historical
right-of-way acquisitions that may have impacted Alaskan
families and businesses. She detailed that some of the
information was specific to relocations in the Eagle River area
[circa late 1980s]. She noted that SB 144 focuses on relocation
assistance rather than acquisition. She summarized that some of
the challenges DOT faced were due to changing economic times.
CHAIR STOLTZE said the question posed to DOT was an example that
occurred during the state's last major economic downturn. He
said he was not trying to say that the state was going to have a
downturn, but admitted that a lot of the indicators signal the
possibility. He explained that there was a major federally-
funded state-participatory project in Eagle River at a time when
there was an economic downturn. The majority of property owners
had negative equity in their property and DOT was innovative in
trying to assist them. Many of the property owners were
relocated to other economically distressed, but physically sound
homes. He specified that the ability to relocate to other homes
was a mechanism that helped. He opined that the example he posed
was a dynamic that could possibly occur again due to a right-of-
way acquisition through eminent domain. He asked Ms. Fair if he
had left anything out from the Eagle River situation.
9:04:45 AM
MS. FAIR answered no. She said she believed that Chair Stoltze
covered the situation well.
CHAIR STOLTZE noted that the committee asked DOT about the Alano
Club. He detailed that the Alano Club was a civic organization
that was involuntarily moved and the club found themselves in a
similar situation regarding the cost of a new building. He noted
that the Alano Club had taken pride in eschewing all government
funding. He asked Ms. Fair if she could share additional
information on the Alano Club.
MS. FAIR explained that DOT did not have specific information on
the Alano Club due to the length of time that passed. She
concurred that the Alano Club was a community organization that
needed to be relocated due to a project. She pointed out that
the Alano Club was an example that dealt mostly with an
acquisition at a price differential between what was paid for
their property and an acceptable substitute property that they
could acquire. She pointed out that SB 144 assists in price
differentials and the new federal rules provide for a larger
differential between what was paid for the property that DOT
acquires and the new piece of property the owner acquires. She
reiterated that DOT was asking for the state to authorize DOT to
pay the higher maximums to Alaskan families and businesses.
CHAIR STOLTZE explained that Alano Club was ultimately made
whole through assistance in the capital budget rather than from
DOT. He asked Ms. Fair to verify that SB 144 has the mechanics
to assist on a relocation.
9:06:46 AM
MS. FAIR answered correct. She detailed that DOT has new
maximums and more available agreements with its funding
partners. She said DOT tries to find innovative ways to get
federal participation for higher unexpected amounts. She
summarized that DOT works on a case-by-case basis in addition to
working closely with its funding partners to assist so that no
one is in a worse position due to involuntarily relocation.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI noted that Section 6 in SB 144 makes the
act retroactive to October 1, 2014. He asked how much the
retroactive act would cost the state and who would be the
recipients of any retroactive payments.
MS. FAIR concurred that SB 144 has a retroactivity provision.
She explained that only a handful of affected parties to date
would be eligible for potentially higher amounts based on the
new maximums. She detailed that the state's share for the
retroactive payments were estimated to be about $12,000. She
summarized that very few folks have come into retroactive
eligibility.
9:08:40 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the October 1, 2014 retroactive
date was tied to a federal statute.
MS. FAIR answered yes.
CHAIR STOLTZE noted that the federal government's fiscal year
starts on October 1.
MS. FAIR answered correct.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked how many individuals would receive
the $12,000.
MS. FAIR replied that the retroactive provision effects more
than one party, but she did not know the exact number.
CHAIR STOLTZE remarked that tying in real-life circumstances
makes a piece of legislation like SB 144 more relevant. He
admitted that he hates to talk about economic depressions and
people being "upside down." He thanked DOT for their indulgence
and patience with the committee in fleshing out the legislation.
He summarized that no changes were made to the bill and the
committee thoroughly discussed the fiscal note.
9:10:16 AM
SENATOR COGHILL moved to report SB 144, [29-GS2709\A], from
committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal
note.
9:10:25 AM
CHAIR STOLTZE announced that without objection, SB 144 moves
from committee.