04/19/2022 03:30 PM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation: Governor's Infrastructure Plan from a Policy Perspective Sb 241 | |
| SB57 | |
| SB167 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 188 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 167 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 57 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
April 19, 2022
3:34 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Mike Shower, Chair
Senator Lora Reinbold, Vice Chair
Senator Mia Costello
Senator Roger Holland
Senator Scott Kawasaki
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION: Governor's Infrastructure Plan from a policy
perspective
- HEARD
SENATE BILL NO. 167
"An Act relating to elections, voter registration, ballots, and
a system of tracking and accounting for ballots; establishing an
election offense hotline; relating to election fraud, election
interference, and election official misconduct; requiring
signature verification, notice, and the opportunity to cure; and
providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 57
"An Act establishing a violation for hindering the Alaska Sunset
Commission; relating to the Legislative Budget and Audit
Committee; relating to the duties of the legislature; relating
to the legislative audit division and the legislative finance
division; establishing the Alaska Sunset Commission to review
and make recommendations on discontinuation of or changes to
state entities; and relating to the powers and duties of the
Alaska Sunset Commission."
- HEARD & HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 188
"An Act relating to criminal law and procedure; relating to a
petition for a change of name for certain persons; relating to
procedures for bail; relating to consecutive sentencing for
violation of condition of release; relating to the duty to
register as a sex offender; amending Rules 6(r) and 47, Alaska
Rules of Criminal Procedure; amending Rule 12, Alaska
Delinquency Rules; amending Rule 84, Alaska Rules of Civil
Procedure; and providing for an effective date."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 167
SHORT TITLE: ELECTIONS; FRAUD; BALLOTS
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
01/18/22 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/18/22 (S) STA, FIN
01/27/22 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
01/27/22 (S) Heard & Held
01/27/22 (S) MINUTE(STA)
02/03/22 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/03/22 (S) Heard & Held
02/03/22 (S) MINUTE(STA)
02/10/22 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/10/22 (S) Scheduled but Not Heard
03/03/22 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/03/22 (S) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
04/19/22 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: SB 57
SHORT TITLE: ALASKA SUNSET COMMISSION
SPONSOR(s): HUGHES
01/29/21 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/29/21 (S) STA, JUD, FIN
04/07/22 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/07/22 (S) Scheduled but Not Heard
04/19/22 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
MILES BAKER, Infrastructure Investment Coordinator
Office of the Governor
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Delivered a presentation on the policies in
the Governor's Infrastructure Plan.
ROB CARPENTER, Deputy Commissioner
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOTPF)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions related to transportation
during the presentation of the policies in the Governor's
Infrastructure Plan.
JAMES MARKS, Director
Division of Program Development and Statewide Planning
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOTPF)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions related to transportation
during the presentation of the policies in the Governor's
Infrastructure Plan.
ROBERT WELTON, representing self
Douglas, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Stated opposition to SB 167 without
significant amendments.
MORGAN LIM, representing
Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Stated opposition to SB 167, calling it a
voter suppression bill.
SENATOR SHELLEY HUGHES
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 57.
BUDDY WHITT, Staff
Senator Shelley Hughes
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information related to SB 57 on
behalf of the sponsor.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:34:56 PM
CHAIR MIKE SHOWER called the Senate State Affairs Standing
Committee meeting to order at 3:34 p.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Costello, Kawasaki, Reinbold, Holland, and
Chair Shower.
^Presentation: Governor's Infrastructure Plan from a policy
perspective ^SB 241
PRESENTATION: GOVERNOR'S INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN FROM A POLICY
PERSPECTIVE
[Contains discussion of SB 241.]
3:35:21 PM
CHAIR SHOWER announced a presentation on the policies embodied
in the Governor's Infrastructure Plan. He clarified that the
committee was not reviewing SB 241 per se; the intention was to
discuss what the infrastructure bill does and what it brings to
the state.
3:36:38 PM
MILES BAKER, Infrastructure Investment Coordinator, Office of
the Governor, Anchorage, Alaska, stated that he would talk about
the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) that
passed last November, what the administration had been working
on, and the policies involved in the appropriation bill that is
in the Finance Committee.
MR. BAKER began the presentation with the summary on slide 2 of
the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). It read as
follows:
• Enacted November 15, 2021 (PL 117-58; HR 3684)
• 5-year reauthorization of established federal
programs and some new programs
• Only a portion of "Alaska" funding will come
through the State of Alaska
• Many program details are still pending
• Much less discretionary than recent stimulus:
CARES, CRRSA, ARP
o No "tranches" of unrestricted federal
payments
o Spending parameters established by federal
agencies
• Traditional State/Local capital priorities
largely ineligible
• Funding flows by formula (apportionment or
allocation) or grants (competitive and
discretionary)
o Approximately 60% by formula and 40% in
grants on a national basis
• Local governments, tribes and other entities
eligible for most programs
MR. BAKER relayed that more than half the bill was related to
transportation.
3:39:09 PM
CHAIR SHOWER asked if IIJA was being falsely sold because the
funding wasn't necessarily separate or additional.
MR. BAKER confirmed that was correct.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked him to expand on the bullet in slide 2
that read:
• Traditional State/Local capital priorities
largely ineligible
MR. BAKER explained that the point was that most of the funding
was coming through existing federal programs or federal programs
that have or will have specific guidance on the grant
opportunities. This was unlike the three previous stimulus bills
that provided considerable discretion to states and local
governments to set up programs and immediately get money into
the economy. IIJA was not a stimulus bill. It will stimulate
Alaska's economy over the next several years, but it is not
federal money to build things that would typically come through
the legislative capital process.
3:41:51 PM
CHAIR SHOWER asked how much more the state will get over the
next five years as a result of IIJA compared to what it usually
might expect to receive.
MR. BAKER said the details for each of the programs isn't known
at this point, but it was fairly clear for transportation. He
noted that slide 3 illustrates new spending versus base level
spending for DOTPF. The example shows that federal highway
programs typically receive $550 million and the new bill
provides more than $650 million. This means that IIJA will add
about $110 million more the first year and that will increase a
little each of the next four years.
CHAIR SHOWER commented that the briefing was helpful already
because he thought there would be more new money.
3:43:56 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked when the new guidelines would be
finalized.
MR. BAKER said he didn't know because it would take some time to
work out the details for some programs. For example, the
legislative language for broadband programs was very specific,
whereas the new program for rural ferry service with the Federal
Transit Administration (FTA) was created with just three lines
of statutory language and an advance appropriation. The state is
still waiting for FTA to expand that limited direction into
detailed program language.
3:46:04 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked when the state will know what the
required match will be for the IIJA money coming in for local
governments and tribes, and if it was prepared to help
municipalities that are unable to meet the required match.
MR. BAKER relayed that the information about match will be
included in the forthcoming program guidelines, but a 20 percent
match was common. There are exceptions to that for things like a
rural set-aside and some tribal programs. The guidance for the
new cybersecurity program that will come from the Department of
Homeland Security through the Department of Military & Veterans
Affairs (DMVA) stipulates that 80 percent of the money that
comes in must be sub-granted to local and tribal governments.
That match is 10 percent and it increases 10 percent per year
over the life of the program. The administration knows the match
requirements for things in the governor's bill [SB 241] and that
information is included where appropriate.
MR. BAKER said the governor recognizes that there may be a need
for the state and local governments to have an additional match
going forward, so this budget doesn't propose generic match
programs other than those that are required. For example, DOTPF
has the federal match requirement for transportation and
aviation. He also noted that the administration recommended the
continuation of two grants: one was for the Alaska Federation of
Natives to continue the Tribal Navigation Program with COVID
money and the other was for the Alaska Municipal League to do
the same sorts of things for local governments. He opined that
one of the outcomes likely will be policy recommendations about
state match.
SENATOR REINBOLD asked whether the administration was asking for
legislative support much like for the Request for Proposal
Legislative (RPL) process where the governor wants a stamp of
approval for taking charge of and directing money as he wishes,
or if the administration needed the legislature's power of
appropriation to direct funds, as required in the state
constitution.
3:50:34 PM
MR. BAKER responded that [SB 241] is essentially an
appropriation bill. With the exception of the new ferry program
and the grants that he mentioned, it includes things the
administration did not include in the FY2023 budgets. It
combines capital, operating and some supplemental spending for
the current year, as well as what are essentially amendments to
what was submitted in December.
MR. BAKER stated that the administration needs the legislative
authority to do this spending but it was different than the
previous stimulus bills. It is what has come in through federal
programs and under federal restrictions and guidance.
3:53:03 PM
SENATOR REINBOLD restated the question, asking whether the
administration simply wanted a stamp of approval for the $571
million on page 17 because it seemed to be fairly well set. She
noted that she certainly wasn't asked to provide input and
questioned whether any legislators had been consulted.
SENATOR REINBOLD said her second question was how the bill
defines the terms "tribe" and "other tribal entities."
MR. BAKER responded that the administration did not make
determinations about what should be in the bill by looking at a
list of capital projects throughout the state. Most of the
projects listed in the bill are for DOTPF and they go through
the regular project evaluation board, project development
process, and the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
(STIP) process.
CHAIR SHOWER asked what the administration really needs the
legislature to do in the bill process, other than give a stamp
of approval since this is federal money that is primarily for
specific federal programs.
MR. BAKER responded that the bill reflects what the governor has
identified will come to the state through federal programs and
for which legislative authority is required to receive the
money.
CHAIR SHOWER asked if there would be an RPL process associated
with the bill.
MR. BAKER replied the governor is recommending the use of state
money in a few areas to respond to federal funding notices while
the legislature is not in session. He said it's a balance
between getting some authority to maneuver so as to not miss
opportunities, being able to come back through the RPL process
that's established through LB&A, or through the budget process
next year.
SENATOR REINBOLD said she didn't like the RPL process because it
didn't follow the constitution that assigned the power and duty
of appropriation to the legislature. She opined that the bill
was a big RPL with mandates that she didn't support. She
recalled hearing that the bill was drafted last December and
commented that waiting until April to introduce it was an
indication that the administration only wanted a stamp of
approval. She asked if her recollection was accurate.
MR. BAKER said the administration got the bill to the
legislature as soon as it had numbers that could be supported.
Understanding the funding in IIJA took time and in some cases
they had to wait for the federal government to finish the FY2022
appropriation process, which happened about a month ago. For
example, the estimates from the Department of Energy for the
weatherization program through Alaska Housing Finance
Corporation was $35 million initially, but now it looked like it
would be $18 million. He said this has been the typical
appropriation bill process where the executive introduces the
bill and the legislature works it through its process to
determine what authority is returned to the governor.
CHAIR SHOWER reminded everyone that this was a discussion about
the policy decisions, not the bill itself because it wasn't in
the committee's possession.
4:01:23 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO noted the requirement to establish an office of
broadband and asked why the governor didn't do that through
executive order.
MR. BAKER said each state is required to set up an office of
broadband. This could be done through appropriation or statute
and the governor feels the bill he introduced is sufficient to
do that. He noted that a bill was also going through the process
and the governor had been communicating with the sponsor and was
supportive of that approach.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked if he was aware that the Senate Labor and
Commerce Committee had introduced a companion to the House bill
establishing an office of broadband.
MR. BAKER answered no.
SENATOR COSTELLO said she'd read the federal legislation and
traveled to Washington, DC to talk to the delegation, and her
understanding was that the state just has to establish an office
of broadband. She offered her view that the level of detail in
the House bill might be getting ahead of itself if more
information is forthcoming. She asked if it was the
administration's opinion that it was necessary to establish an
advisory board or if it believed that the Department of
Commerce, Community and Economic Development (DCCED) could use
its current process to identify grantees.
4:04:32 PM
MR. BAKER said he wasn't the lead on the policy call but he was
aware that the administration believes the office of broadband
should reside in DCCED and that there was funding in the bill
for that. He acknowledged that there was a lot more guidance to
come.
SENATOR COSTELLO summarized that she heard him say that the
appropriation bill was sufficient to establish the office of
broadband, that more details were forthcoming, and that the
House and Senate legislation to establish an office of broadband
wasn't necessary. She asked if that was accurate.
4:05:30 PM
MR. BAKER replied he wasn't the one to opine on that.
SENATOR COSTELLO said her point was that there was no need for a
controversial bill about who sits on a broadband board if that's
not required.
MR. BAKER responded that the governor's infrastructure bill
appropriates federal funds to hire people to do the work
required in a broadband office, but it does not create a
broadband office by statute.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked who drafted the bill going through the
process.
MR. BAKER said he didn't know.
4:06:32 PM
CHAIR SHOWER read the following items on slide 2 and asked for
clarification because they seem to conflict:
• Traditional State/Local capital priorities
largely ineligible
• Local governments, tribes and other entities
eligible for most programs
MR. BAKER said the first bullet was his inartful way of saying
this wasn't CAPSIS on steroids; that IIJA funding was not for
projects that local government might propose or for legislative
priorities for infrastructure buildout.
The second bullet emphasizes that not everything will come
through the State of Alaska. For many programs in IIJA, the
eligible entities are local governments, Railbelt utilities,
nonprofits, tribes, and institutions of higher education.
CHAIR SHOWER offered his understanding that local tribes and
governments could get these funds for infrastructure projects;
it's just not through the normal legislative process.
MR. BAKER said that's fair, particularly with transportation. A
road on tribal land could be funded through the Indian
Reservation Road Program, or a local road project could be
submitted to DOTPF and funded through the Community
Transportation Program. Both those examples could get funding
through IIJA and they're also the type that could come through
CAPSIS. However, IIJA does not provide funding for such things
as a high school gym, community center, or fire hall.
4:09:55 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO asked if there had been any discussion about
avoiding fraud or waste of the massive amount of money coming to
the state.
MR. BAKER answered that nothing in IIJA increases or suggests
that there should be any greater scrutiny than normally comes
through the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the
Office of the Inspector General (OIG). IIJA created a tremendous
number of new grant opportunities and the expectation is that
the Alaska Federation of Natives will work with tribes and
tribal entities and the Alaska Municipal League will work with
communities to take advantage of these new opportunities while
also working to prevent fraud, waste, or abuse.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked for the name of the governor's point
person for broadband policy.
MR. BAKER relayed that it was Deputy Chief of Staff Tyson
Gallagher
4:12:20 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI referenced line 10 of [the Governor's
Infrastructure Bill Summary (SB 241/HB 414)] and offered his
reading that the $620 million that was coming to the state was
encumbered by $51 million in state general funds (GF). He posed
a hypothetical situation of a city partnering with the federal
government to do an intersection project and asked if that money
would come through DOTPF.
4:13:38 PM
ROB CARPENTER, Deputy Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOTPF),
Juneau, Alaska, asked if he was inquiring about the ability of
local communities to receive funding through DOTPF.
SENATOR KAWASAKI clarified that his question dovetailed Chair
Shower's question about a local project that could have been in
CAPSIS, but was also considered a federal project. He wondered
whether the $673 million [line 10 of the spreadsheet] that has
the GF match from the state might be something that a city or
municipality could participate in for an intersection project.
4:14:43 PM
MR. CARPENTER explained that there were two ways for a local
community to get funding for something like an intersection
project. The option that's available to all local communities is
to submit a project to DOTPF's federally-directed Community
Transportation Program where it will be scored and weighed
against other projects around the state. The second option for
federal funding is available to the Municipality of Anchorage
and the Fairbanks North Star Borough because each has a
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). An MPO is able to
receive Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) money from DOTPF,
based on a formula from the federal government, to plan and do
its own projects for things like intersection improvements
within the municipal boundaries.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if there was any expectation that
municipalities will have to come up with a secondary match for
transportation projects.
MR. CARPENTER replied there is no double match component in the
bill.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked when the legislature will know how the
funds will be spent, so it could sign off on the program.
4:18:22 PM
MR. BAKER responded that the bill summary sheet of the
appropriations was laid out in descending order of priority. He
then described the first two programs on the IIJA federal
programs & match on line 2.
DCCED:
similar AOGCC, as a member of the Oil and Gas Interstate Compact
Commission, will receive $32 million to spearhead a new
Department of Interior program to plug and remediate 12
abandoned wells on state and private land. This program
requires no match and the administration knows exactly
where the money is going.
similar Broadband planning money. The administration expects $6
million federal receipt authority from the National
Telecommunications Information Agency to set up the
broadband office and do the initial administrative planning
to develop the state's five-year plan for broadband. This
process will have robust public and future legislative
engagement.
MR. BAKER said it depends on the program but ultimately these
are all within the legislature's authority to approve or not.
4:20:52 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked whether the project headings FHWA, AIP,
EV, Bridge Programs referenced on line 10 for DOT were specific
projects taken directly from the STIP and sorted from the
highest to the lowest need or if they were chosen more randomly
MR. CARPENTER answered that nearly everything came from the
STIP, although some of the projects in DOTPF's 10-year plan were
advanced. He also noted the department's work in process on a
STIP amendment that will match the bill.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked how the MPOs in Fairbanks and Anchorage,
and the forthcoming MPO in the MatSu will be able to take
advantage of the infrastructure funds if the funding is already
prescribed through the STIP.
MR. CARPENTER answered that the MPOs receive a separate
allocation from DOTPF's Surface Transportation Block Grant
Program based on a formula. It's a separate program from the
Community Transportation Program (CTP) that is open to any
community. He repeated his earlier explanation of the CTP.
CHAIR SHOWER suggested Mr. Baker continue with the presentation.
4:25:22 PM
MR. BAKER recapped his earlier explanation of slide 3 and noted
that it was the $550 million in new spending (split fairly
evenly between transportation and other infrastructure) that was
getting all the attention. The pie chart on slide 4 identifies
the new spending by agency, and the pie chart on slide 5
identifies the spending categories. For example, the energy and
power category encompasses grid efficiency, hydrogen, carbon
mitigation, and rare earth elements; and resiliency refers to
the money that is going towards making infrastructure more
resilient to the impacts of climate change, cyber-attacks,
drought, floods, and wildfires. He noted that large amounts of
this money is not coming to Alaska because it is location-
specific in the Lower 48 or FEMA money for the Gulf Coast
region. Environmental remediation funds are mostly for:
ecosystem restoration, legacy pollution of abandoned mines,
brownfield mitigation, and super fund sites. The public lands
category is for the US Forest Service Legacy Roads Program and
wildfire risk mitigation.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if there were strings attached to the new
money coming in for the new programs. He asked specifically
about strings on wildfire [risk] mitigation regarding the types
of workers employed and whether Davis Bacon wages would be
required.
MR. BAKER replied that it's federal money so there are more than
a few strings attached. For example, the new money for community
wildfire defense grants that the Division of Forestry will sub-
grant to communities, is expected to come with a list of
eligible activities.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked whether the administration intended to
take every available dollar or if it already had or might in the
future decide that the tradeoff between the strings and the
program wasn't worth it.
MR. BAKER relayed that the governor's direction was to look at
and understand the implications of accepting the particular
funds. At this point the administration had not passed up any of
the funds that had been identified as an opportunity for the
state. He acknowledged that this could change going forward.
4:33:01 PM
MR. BAKER reviewed the key principles of state infrastructure
development outlined on slide 6:
• Include identifiable funding coming in FY22 or
FY23
• Identify coordination & implementation needs
• Maintain pressure on UGF spending
• Provide Local Government & Tribal Support
• Maintain tight nexus to programs in federal
legislation
• Pursue significant competitive opportunities for
which Alaska is uniquely positioned
MR. BAKER explained that slide 7 breaks out the FY2022 and
FY2023 spending by the different fund sources. The total
spending is just over $1 billion: $868 million is federal
receipt authority, about $80 million is unrestricted general
funds (UGF), and $56 million of other" (primarily federal)
money.
4:35:50 PM
MR. BAKER described slide 8 as a high-level summary of the
spreadsheet that Senator Kawasaki referenced.
Federal Programs & Match: The bulk of the legislation addresses
existing federal programs and there is $56 million (70 percent
of the UGF) in pure match.
Additional Support of Federal Programs: The governor felt it
would be beneficial to allocate additional state funding to make
certain federal programs more state focused. The spreadsheet
identifies: a little less than $3 million for two cyber-security
projects, increases to the SPAR database to access the EPA
funding for brownfield sites, and $3 million for critical
minerals mapping.
Infrastructure Coordination & Implementation: This is in the
governor's office. There is a $2.5 million grant for the
Navigator Program at AFN and $0.5 for the Alaska Municipal
League.
Competitive Opportunity Investments: The largest policy call in
the bill is to pursue forthcoming Department of Energy
opportunities.
4:38:16 PM
MR. BAKER displayed slide 10 that breaks out the three
coordination appropriations mentioned earlier. It read:
Office of the Governor
• State Infrastructure Planning & Coordination
$5,480.0 ($5,000.0 UGF, $480.0 CIP); 2 PFT
Alaska Municipal League (AML)
• Local Government Capacity Building & Technical
Assistance $500.0 UGF
Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN)
• Navigator Program $2,500.0 UGF
4:38:23 PM
MR. BAKER reviewed slide 10 that expands on the last spending
category in slide 8. There is $5.5 million of UGF to pursue four
categories of large opportunity for Alaska. They are Department
of Energy opportunities in IIJA. These four categories are where
the federal government has determined the US needs to pick up
its game. The intent is to ultimately commercialize the efforts.
Investments in Competitive Opportunities
Electric Grid Modernization - AEA
• Grid reliability, resiliency and transmission
$6,000.0 ($1,000.0 UGF, $5,000.0 Fed)
MR. BAKER explained that the federal legislation has $5 billion
to prevent outages and harden the grid against disruption.
Another $5 billion is for research and development to enhance
electric reliability. $1 billion is to modernize and upgrade
infrastructure in rural and remote areas of the state. And a new
transportation facilitation program is a DOE grant to support
infrastructure on the electric grids.
The governor's bill proposes $1 million to the Alaska Energy
Authority to spend several months to further identify those
opportunities. The work is underway with Railbelt and other
rural utilities to develop teams to go after anticipated federal
funding opportunities over the next two quarters.
Clean Hydrogen Technologies - AGDC
• Clean hydrogen infrastructure development
$6,000.0 ($1,000.0 UGF, $5,000.0 Fed)
MR. BAKER said $8 billion is proposed to fund no fewer than four
clean hydrogen hubs. The decision about the locations will be
made in the next year, so time is of the essence. He highlighted
the work AGDC had done in the hydrogen area as a way to future-
proof their AKLNG project, and that the bill proposes money to
support the continuation of that effort.
Carbon Capture & Sequestration - DNR
• Carbon technology infrastructure research,
development and demonstration $6,000.0 ($1,000.0
UGF, $5,000.0 Fed)
Rare Earth & Critical Minerals - UA
• Rare Earth Elements (REE) Demonstration Facility
$500.0 UGF
• Critical Minerals Security Projects $9,500.0
($2,000.0 UGF, $7,500.0 Fed)
MR. BAKER said these will be joint efforts. He relayed that DOE
had already put out requests for comment or information on most
of the grants and a myriad of interested entities had been
working to ensure that Alaska put in a response so that its
potential competitive advantages would be embedded once DOE
refined its funding opportunities. If the state were to be
successful in any of these areas, the administration would need
to return to the legislature to talk about the forthcoming
funding and any non-federal match that would be required.
CHAIR SHOWER commented that the presentation was helpful but it
brought up more questions.
4:44:45 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if there were any strings attached to the
programs for electric grid modernization, clean hydrogen, and
carbon capture. He also asked whether DOTPF was using the
inflaters that the Associated General Contractors was using to
calculate the general cost of each project in the near term.
MR. BAKER referenced the Rare Earth & Critical Minerals program
that has the requirement to have an industry partner and a
demonstration facility, and said the state will need to evaluate
its willingness and capacity to meet those requirements when the
time comes. He deferred the second question to Mr. Carpenter.
MR. CARPENTER deferred the question to James Marks.
4:47:36 PM
JAMES MARKS, Director, Division of Program Development and
Statewide Planning, Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities (DOTPF), Juneau, Alaska, said the department is
looking at inflation with a laser focus, but is not applying an
inflationary factor at this time. Instead it is looking at
mitigating strategies such as earlier notices for bids to
promote competition; creating steady flows in programing by
region; and breaking up big projects.
CHAIR SHOWER thanked Mr. Baker for the briefing.
SB 57-ALASKA SUNSET COMMISSION
4:49:49 PM
CHAIR SHOWER announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 57
"An Act establishing a violation for hindering the Alaska Sunset
Commission; relating to the Legislative Budget and Audit
Committee; relating to the duties of the legislature; relating
to the legislative audit division and the legislative finance
division; establishing the Alaska Sunset Commission to review
and make recommendations on discontinuation of or changes to
state entities; and relating to the powers and duties of the
Alaska Sunset Commission."
4:50:12 PM
SENATOR SHELLEY HUGHES, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau,
Alaska, sponsor of SB 57 stated that the bill needed work but
she wanted to start the conversation about adjusting the
constitutional spending cap. She described the genesis of the
bill and continued the introduction, speaking to the following
sponsor statement:
SB 57 "The Alaska Sunset Commission Act" will help
ensure transparency, efficiency, cost-effectiveness,
statutory alignment, and constitutional alignment in
the operation of our state government. SB 57
establishes the Alaska Sunset Commission as an
apolitical, independent, and objective entity charged
with reviewing, via detailed and robust audits, each
department by division in the state on a rotating
schedule. The Commission will make recommendations
related to the performance and costs to the
legislature. To prevent a division from sunsetting and
its statutory duties falling to the department's
office of the commissioner, the legislature will need
take up and act on the audit report.
The annual audit reports will also be available to the
executive branch for purposes of both performance and
structural improvements within departments as well as
for the construction of the governor's budget each
year.
The Commission will be comprised of nine individuals
from the private sector with financial, budget
analysis, accounting, operations management, and other
areas of expertise who are appointed by the governor
and confirmed by the legislature. The Commission will
serve without compensation but will be entitled to per
diem and travel expenses authorized for boards and
commissions. The Commission may employ staff as it
determines necessary to perform its duties.
Along with the submission of the audit report to the
legislature, the Commission will provide any
recommended statutory changes necessary to accomplish
the recommendations in the report.
The size and scope of government can sometimes be hard
to grasp and understand, and too often unwieldy and
hard to control. Currently, the House and Senate
Finance members are asked in a matter of a few months
to figure out what is going on in each of the fourteen
departments; essentially their only window is what the
executive branch provides. With this limited
information and in short order, legislators are tasked
with making decisions each year involving spending
billions of public dollars. Access to an extensive
audit will help hold future governors accountable to
building a responsible budget and will help
legislators' appropriate public dollars wisely.
The result will be more cost-effective and efficient
departments that better meet their statutory and
constitutional obligations. This in turn will result
in overall improved state operations which will better
serve Alaskans.
This is especially important as we aim for fiscal
sustainability. Although oil prices are high now, we
all know that this will not always be the case. While
government serves many essential functions, we must
bear in mind that its cost should be proportional to
our relatively small population. The Commission will
help ensure both: that the departments perform their
essential functions well and that they do it cost
effectively.
Senate Bill 57 is based upon the Texas model, the
Texas Sunset Advisory Commission. That Commission was
established in 1977 and is responsible for
recommendations on the need for, performance of and
improvements to agencies under review each year. Since
its establishment, the Texas Sunset Advisory
Commission has abolished 85 unneeded state agencies.
Of that total, 39 agencies were completely abolished
and 46 had their functions transferred to existing or
newly created state agencies.
This bill will not dismantle Legislative Budget and
Audit (LB&A) but note that LB&A's work is solely on
behalf of the legislature and primarily pertains to
reviewing boards and commissions within the executive
branch. SB 57 will provide both the legislative branch
and the executive branch with an important tool, the
Alaska Sunset Commission, for reviewing the operations
and cost of the overall state government.
By establishing this Commission, we can help ensure
that our state government is the right size and
working well for the people of Alaska. With the
guidance of the transparent Commission's reports, the
governor will build more appropriate budgets, and the
legislature will have the information it needs to
route public dollars more accurately and correctly and
adjust statutes as needed for improvements and
efficiencies. Both branches will be held to a greater
degree of accountability. I hope that you will join me
in supporting more responsible government that stays
on mission and does not break the bank by supporting
Senate Bill 57 the Alaska Sunset Commission.
4:54:56 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO recalled that former Representative Mike
Chenault introduced a similar bill that rotated the audits of
entire departments. She asked if the composition of the
commission proposed in SB 57 was based on the Texas model, and
if she had considered having university students who are
majoring in the relevant areas to serve on the commission
instead of relying on unpaid professionals. She voiced support
for more audits and relayed that the State of Kentucky had an
elected state auditor with a $10 million budget who had complete
autonomy as to what is reviewed. She said that investment found
efficiencies and the legislature was able to make more informed
decisions about government.
SENATOR HUGHES responded that former Speaker Chenault's bill
focused on performance and whether or not the departments were
meeting the established statutory goals and missions. SB 57 was
more comprehensive. It seeks to look at not only meeting the
statutory requirements but also the process and how it might be
streamlined. To the question about not compensating the
commission members, she relayed that the commission would rely
on staff who would be compensated. She deferred further
explanation to Mr. Whitt.
4:57:35 PM
BUDDY WHITT, Staff, Senator Shelley Hughes, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, explained that the composition of
the Texas Sunset Commission was entirely state legislators
whereas the sponsor wanted this commission to be as nonpartisan
as possible. He also noted that provisions of former Speaker
Chenault's bill (House Bill 30 that passed in the 28th
legislature) will sunset next year so Legislative Budget and
Audit will no longer perform those duties. SB 57 proposes a more
comprehensive approach to the audits generally and specifically
for the different agencies.
4:58:53 PM
SENATOR HUGHES highlighted that SB 57 proposes to have subject
matter professionals serve on the commission who would be
appointed by the governor and confirmed by the legislature. The
commission would have paid staff to perform the duties. She
acknowledged that the proposed rotating schedule of audits
should be tightened, which would require hiring additional
commission staff. She opined that a five-year rotation of
department audits was the sweet spot.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked if she had considered having a standing
committee serve as the commission so multiple audits could be
done at the same time.
SENATOR HUGHES replied that was a possibility but it would make
the commission partisan and that was contrary to her intention.
She suggested that Mr. Whitt could speak further about the Texas
commission.
5:01:03 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO asked the chair if the information could be
sent to his office and then distributed to the members.
CHAIR SHOWER asked Mr. Whitt to send the information to his
office.
MR. WHITT agreed to provide an overview of what the Texas
commission had done since it was instituted in 1977. He noted
that there wasn't time to go through the sectional analysis and
advised the members to focus on Section 9 when they reviewed the
bill.
CHAIR SHOWER held SB 57 in committee.
SB 167-ELECTIONS; FRAUD; BALLOTS
5:02:30 PM
CHAIR SHOWER announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 167
"An Act relating to elections, voter registration, ballots, and
a system of tracking and accounting for ballots; establishing an
election offense hotline; relating to election fraud, election
interference, and election official misconduct; requiring
signature verification, notice, and the opportunity to cure; and
providing for an effective date."
5:03:05 PM
CHAIR SHOWER opened public testimony on SB 167.
5:03:22 PM
ROBERT WELTON, representing self, Douglas, Alaska, said SB 167
has both good and bad ideas. He said the provisions that provide
a thorough check of voter rolls, mandated audits of election
machines, and a voter tracking system are good ideas. These
things will improve the security and trust in the system. But
changing the PFD automatic voter registration from opt out to
opt in is a bad idea. The provision ignores the will of the
voters who voted in 2016 to make that registration opt out. He
cited a Division of Elections report that indicated that 13,000
new voters have been registered under this program and 4,299 of
those individuals voted. He called it a bad idea to require
voters to reapply every four years to receive an absentee
ballot. He pointed out that the Division of Elections testified
to this committee that no significant fraud had been identified
in Alaska elections so there was no reason to require voters to
jump through this hoop. The third provision he did not support
was the requirement for signature verification on all absentee
ballots because it opens the absentee voting process to partisan
abuse. He noted that a similar law in Texas resulted in 30
percent of absentee ballots in a recent election being rejected,
and warned against opening the door for abuse on this process.
Finally, he said the addition of confusing language about ranked
choice voting on election pamphlets is a bad idea. He
characterized it as an attempt to sow confusion and doubt before
the system had been given a chance.
MR. WELTON concluded his testimony stating that because of the
foregoing articulated objections, he did not support SB 167
without significant amendments. He thanked the committee for
listening and the individual members for their service to the
state.
5:06:19 PM
MORGAN LIM, representing Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates
(PPAA), Juneau, Alaska, stated that PPAA opposes SB 167 as a
voter suppression bill that imposes a web of barriers to access
the polls. The bill claims to combat election fraud in Alaska
when no fraud had been identified. He called it a bill in search
of a problem that, if passed, will disenfranchise voters. By
contrast, PPAA supports policies that make it easier for
eligible individuals to register to vote and ensure that all
votes are counted equally. PPAA opposes the bill's attempt to
eliminate voter registration through the permanent fund dividend
application process. Automatic registration not only streamlines
the process but also sends the message that state government is
committed to the idea that voting is a right, not a privilege.
He thanked the committee and restated that Planned Parenthood
Alliance Advocates opposes SB 167.
5:07:53 PM
CHAIR SHOWER closed public testimony on SB 167 and held the bill
in committee.
5:08:23 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Shower adjourned the Senate State Affairs Standing
Committee meeting at 5:08 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| letter of support april 17.pdf |
SSTA 4/19/2022 3:30:00 PM |
SB 188 |
| SB 167 Memo OPPOSE.pdf |
SSTA 4/19/2022 3:30:00 PM |
SB 167 |
| SB 167 Memo OPPOSE.pdf |
SSTA 4/19/2022 3:30:00 PM |
SB 167 |
| SB 188 - Amendment #1 Explanation_.pdf |
SSTA 4/19/2022 3:30:00 PM |
SB 188 |
| 22.04.19 GOV Infrastructure Bill Sen STA.pdf |
SSTA 4/19/2022 3:30:00 PM |
|
| 2022 04 04 GOA Infrastructure Bill Summary.pdf |
SSTA 4/19/2022 3:30:00 PM |
|
| SB 188Letter of Support SB 188 Criminal Procedure-Change of Name.pdf |
SSTA 4/19/2022 3:30:00 PM |
SB 188 |