Legislature(2007 - 2008)HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/20/2008 08:30 AM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB311 | |
| HB54 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 311 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 54 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE BILL NO. 54
"An Act relating to construction of a legislative hall;
and repealing provisions relating to relocating the
capital, the legislature, or any of the present
functions of state government."
Vice-Chair Stoltze MOVED to ADOPT the work draft to HB 54,
labeled 25-LS0284\L, Cook, 3/19/08.
Representative Gara OBJECTED. He requested to know the
changes made in the new CS. Co-Chair Meyer said he would
provide that information.
Representative Gara WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
There being NO further OBJECTION, the work draft to HB 54
was adopted.
REPRESENTATIVE MARK NEUMAN, sponsor, stated that the changes
in the new CS were in response to discussions from committee
members.
Representative Gara pointed out that the FRANK Initiative
has been deleted in the bill and there is no provision that
would let voters approve the construction of a legislative
hall. He wondered if there was any provision in the bill
for a voter response. Representative Neuman thought that
Representative Gara's job should be to represent his area
regarding this legislation. Representative Gara pointed out
that he represents people throughout the state.
Co-Chair Meyer clarified that the bill proposes to build a
new legislative hall, not move the capital. Representative
Neuman agreed.
Co-Chair Meyer announced that Amendments 1 and 2 were
withdrawn.
9:38:32 AM
Co-Chair Meyer MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 3:
Page 4, line 1
After "consider"
Insert "the cost to state residents of transportation
to and from the proposed site based on calculation
involving transportation costs from at least five
cities, including one city in each judicial district.
The legislative council shall also consider"
Representative Hawker OBJECTED.
Co-Chair Meyer thought the wrong approach was being taken
when considering costs in this legislation and in the FRANK
Initiative. He opined that the cost of the people's access
to government should be considered, not the cost to the
state. He thought the people's government should be closer
to the people. The average person cannot afford to see
their legislators in action. This amendment requires
legislative council, when considering the proposal to build
a legislative hall, to consider the cost to the average
Alaskan. He maintained it would cost less to access
Fairbanks, Anchorage, or the MatSu Valley than it would to
access Juneau. He noted that it costs over $1,000 to travel
from Kotzebue to Juneau.
9:40:27 AM
Representative Gara countered that if costs to citizens are
the most important factor, then the move of the legislative
hall should be to Anchorage.
Co-Chair Meyer said cost is one of many factors considered
in the bill. Representative Gara argued that since nothing
can cost more than $1, it would end up in Anchorage.
Representative Neuman said nothing in Amendment 3 addresses
$1. He agreed with Co-Chair Meyer that the costs expressed
in the amendment should be considered.
9:42:29 AM
Representative Hawker WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
Representative Kelly OBJECTED. He clarified that the bill
removes the FRANK Initiative so the total cost is not
identified, yet the cost of travel for Alaskans is required
in the bill.
Co-Chair Meyer noted the amendment deals with costs of
travel only.
Co-Chair Chenault said costs of transportation, as well as
for utility service and airport access, should be
considered.
Representative Gara pointed to the five factors listed on
page 4: adequate utility services, adequate airport access,
adequate access by road, air, or marine ferry, and adequate
health, education, and social services facilities and
adequate housing. He maintained that the lowest costs of
all five are in the biggest community - Anchorage.
Co-Chair Meyer did not agree.
Co-Chair Chenault argued that Juneau has the cheapest
electric costs in the state. Each description of service or
access carries different ramifications for different areas
of the state.
9:45:06 AM
Representative Gara noted that Juneau cannot keep the
capital under this bill unless they tear down the old one
and build a new one.
Representative Hawker corrected that the bill says for
construction or renovation.
Representative Kelly WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment 3 was adopted.
9:46:44 AM
Representative Hawker MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 4:
Page 2, lines 18-19
Delete all material
Vice-Chair Stoltze OBJECTED.
Representative Hawker explained that Amendment 4 removes two
lines in the bill that address the request for proposal:
"one courtroom and adequate offices for judicial officers of
the supreme court and staff;". He thought that was beyond
the scope of a legislative hall.
Vice-Chair Stoltze agreed.
Vice-Chair Stoltze WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
Co-Chair Chenault requested a response from Representative
Neuman. Representative Neuman had no objection to the
amendment.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
9:48:04 AM
Representative Hawker MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 5:
Page 4, lines 30-31
Delete all material
Vice-Chair Stoltze OBJECTED.
Representative Hawker explained that the amendment removes
the controversial language that would have repealed the
FRANK Initiative. He said he wanted the costs associated
with the capital move to remain before the public. He
shared the beliefs in his district that a majority of the
people would like to see the legislative hall relocated, but
a minority want to see the capital moved.
Co-Chair Meyer thought Amendment 3 took care of the cost
concerns of Alaskans.
9:49:59 AM
Representative Neuman reported that the Administration
planned to make all costs known to the people. He agreed
that Amendment 3 does require a cost to the people be
included. He termed this a policy call.
Vice-Chair Stoltze commented that he had conflicting
feelings about the issue
9:53:13 AM
Representative Hawker spoke to Amendment 3, "the legislative
council shall consider the costs" to the people. He voiced
concern about legislative council's propensity to overstate
the costs. He said he is comfortable with the FRANK
Initiative's information regarding costs.
Vice-Chair Stoltze clarified he was talking about LAA in
Juneau.
9:56:04 AM
Representative Gara thought that Amendment 3 did not involve
the public enough. He asked if one of the costs of moving
the legislative hall was for relocating current employees.
Representative Neuman noted the costs listed in the packet
to move those who are currently working in Juneau.
Representative Gara said his intention is to minimize the
damage to people if the bill passes. The people have the
right to know the costs and Amendment 3 does not provide
that information. He noted that the public has never yet
approved of the cost of moving the capital. Representative
Neuman took issue with the wording "minimize the damage".
Co-Chair Meyer noted that the fiscal notes would contain the
costs of the bill.
Representative Gara disagreed with Representative Neuman's
explanation of allowing the public to come up with a plan
for more access. The people in his district would not agree
with this legislation.
9:58:32 AM
Representative Thomas commented on the damage done to the
value of homes in Juneau by this move. He thought
legislators and staff with homes in Juneau should be held
harmless on property values.
Vice-Chair Stoltze MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Joule, Kelly, Thomas, Crawford, Harris, Gara,
Hawker, Chenault
OPPOSED: Stoltze, Meyer
Amendment 5 was ADOPTED (8-2).
Representative Crawford WITHDREW Amendment 6.
10:01:02 AM
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 7:
Page 3, line 20
Insert new subsection
"(d) The qualifying bid that makes the Hall most
accessible to the largest number of citizens, and
proximate in location to the largest number of
citizens, shall be accepted, to the extent any bid is
accepted and a decision is made to proceed with a
legislative hall move. If a bid is approved under this
subsection, and provides for a cost that is approved by
the voters, construction of the Hall may proceed even
if the cost to the state exceeds $1 per year."
Representative Hawker OBJECTED.
Representative Gara explained that he has concerns about the
bill, but if it is going to go ahead, an argument in favor
of moving the legislative hall is to make it accessible to
the largest number of people. He thought the public should
be able to approve the project and vote on the cost.
Co-Chair Meyer argued that even if the legislative hall were
to be in Wasilla it would be more accessible than it
currently is.
Representative Hawker commented on the consequence of the
amendment, which would provide single criteria to evaluate a
proposal - access to the largest number of citizens.
Representative Hawker MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
10:04:30 AM
Representative Neuman said he does not support Amendment 7.
Representative Gara said he thought the purpose of the bill
was to make the capital more accessible. He questioned the
real intention of the bill.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara
OPPOSED: Kelly, Stoltze, Thomas, Crawford, Harris, Hawker,
Joule, Meyer, Chenault
The MOTION FAILED (1-9).
Co-Chair Chenault commented on page 2, line 6, where it
addresses the size of the offices.
Representative Kelly said it was hard to price out the non-
economic reasons for moving the capital. He pointed out
that the bill does not address reasons for not locating a
capital in the largest population area of a state. He
questioned the definition of a capital if the legislative
hall is moved to another area. He agreed with the idea of
listing constituency travel costs. He noted that there is
no competition left in the process for a community to attain
a legislative hall.
Vice-Chair Stoltze said this is all about reality and people
vote with their feet.
10:10:47 AM
Representative Gara asked Representative Neuman if he has
researched the impact of this proposal on the economy in
Juneau. He questioned the idea of the $1 proposal and
wondered if there was a response from any other districts.
Representative Neuman said the FRANK Initiative addresses
the impact on Juneau's economy. He said he went to his own
community to find out if this proposal was feasible.
10:12:41 AM
Co-Chair Meyer commented on the fiscal notes.
Vice-Chair Stoltze MOVED to REPORT CSHB 54 (FIN) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes.
Representative Thomas OBJECTED.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Stoltz, Harris, Hawker, Kelly, Chenault, Meyer
OPPOSED: Thomas, Crawford, Gara, Joule
The MOTION to REPORT CSHB 54(FIN) out of Committee PASSED
(6-4).
CSHB 54(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do not
pass" recommendation and with zero fiscal note #1 by the
Department of Administration, indeterminate fiscal note #2
by the Office of the Governor, and fiscal note #3 by
Legislative Affairs Agency.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|