Legislature(2015 - 2016)HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/10/2015 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB72 || HB73 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 72 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 73 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL NO. 72
"An Act making appropriations for the operating and
loan program expenses of state government and for
certain programs, capitalizing funds, making
reappropriations, and 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."
HOUSE BILL NO. 73
"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."
1:33:50 PM
Co-Chair Neuman discussed the agenda for the day. He asked
members to limit their comments to the scope of the
amendments. He communicated that the committee would
address a Committee Substitute the following morning.
Co-Chair Thompson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 1:
OFFERED BY: Reps. Neuman and Thompson
DEPARTMENT: Department of Commerce, Community and
Economic Development
APPROPRIATION: Insurance Operations
ALLOCATION: Insurance Operations
POSITIONS: Add 2 PFT PCNs and delete 2 Non-Perm PCNs
EXPLANATION: The House Subcommittee deleted a total of
$598.2 and deleted 8 PFT positions in Insurance
Operations. The intent was to delete 6 PFT positions
and 2 Temporary positions. This amendment corrects the
error.
Representative Gara OBJECTED.
Co-Chair Neuman explained that the amendment was technical
and corrected an error. He detailed that the budget
subcommittee had deleted a total of $598,200 and eight
full-time positions in insurance operations. The amendment
reflected the subcommittee's intent, which deleted six
full-time and two temporary positions.
Representative Gara WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 1 was ADOPTED.
Co-Chair Thompson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 2:
OFFERED BY: Rep. Neuman and Thompson
DEPARTMENT: Department of Commerce, Community and
Economic Development
DELETE THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE
Sec.12. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, COMMUNITY, AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. (h) The sum of $345,000 is
appropriated from federal receipts for energy projects
to the Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic
Development, Alaska Energy Authority for operating
costs associated with emerging energy technology fund
data collection for the fiscal years ending June 30,
2016, June 30, 2017, and June 30, 2018.
EXPLANATION: The Governor's FY15 supplemental request
includes $345,000 of federal receipts as a multi-year
appropriation. After discussions with the department,
it was determined that both this appropriation and the
supplemental appropriation are better described as a
capital project. The intent of the House Finance
Committee is to include the full amount ($690.0) of
federal receipts as a supplemental capital project.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion. He explained that
the amendment was technical. He elaborated that the federal
appropriation request belonged in the supplemental capital
budget. He noted that the amendment did not add any money
to undesignated general funds (UGF).
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 2 was ADOPTED.
1:37:24 PM
Co-Chair Neuman MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 3:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Neuman, Thompson
DEPARTMENT: Education and Early Development
APPROPRIATION: Teaching and Learning Support
ALLOCATION: Student and School Achievement
DELETE: $350,000 General Funds, 1004
EXPLANATION: This removes funding that was not
requested by the Governor. Funds were for a statewide
license for Microsoft Academies to be used by all
public schools.
Co-Chair Thompson OBJECTED for discussion.
Co-Chair Neuman explained the amendment. He communicated
that the project cost $350,000 and was for Microsoft work
for public schools. He understood that the program would
probably benefit a significant number of schools, but he
believed it was an increase that should go into the capital
budget for consideration. He thought the funds were
included in the wrong piece of legislation.
Representative Guttenberg asked for further explanation on
the origin of the initial funding request.
Representative Gattis replied that the request had been
included in the Department of Education and Early
Development (DEED) budget. She furthered that the request
had been in the former governor's budget. The department
had explained to her that the program licensed Microsoft
certificates for programs such as Word and Engineering, for
all schools including the Department of Corrections (DOC).
She had agreed to remove the increment because it was not
in the correct budgetary location.
Representative Gara understood that former Governor Parnell
had included the item in the budget to provide students
with job skill training on software programs. He asked if
his understanding was accurate. He believed the program was
valuable.
Representative Gattis explained that the program was
utilized by students throughout the state and was not
related to training done by the Department of Labor and
Workforce Development (DLWD). She had been told by
Microsoft that the company wanted to get a "toe-hold" in
the Alaska industry; it wanted a pilot program in Alaska in
rural and urban areas. She did not believe the operating
budget was the right location for the increment; therefore,
she had agreed with the co-chair to withdraw the item.
Co-Chair Neuman remarked that additions were not typically
inserted into the operating budget by the subcommittees. He
repeated his belief that the request should be added into
the capital budget.
Representative Gara OBJECTED.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion to adopt Amendment
3.
IN FAVOR: Gattis, Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon,
Thompson, Neuman
OPPOSED: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
The MOTION PASSED (8/3). Amendment 3 was ADOPTED.
1:43:11 PM
Co-Chair Thompson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 4:
OFFERED BY: Reps. Wilson, Neuman, and Thompson
DEPARTMENT: Labor and Workforce Development
APPROPRIATION: Workers' Compensation
ALLOCATION: Workers' Compensation Appeals Commission
ADD: $439.6 Workers Safety & Compensation
Administration Account (1157)
POSITIONS: 2 PFTs
EXPLANATION: This amendment restores the Workers'
Compensation Appeals Commission subcommittee
decrement. AS 23.30.008(a) specifies that the
"commission shall be the exclusive and final authority
for the hearing and determination of all questions of
law and fact arising under this chapter in those
matters that have been appealed to the commission,
except for an appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court."
Defunding the Commission without repealing this
statute leaves aggrieved workers with no recourse. If
the Commission is eliminated in statute, the fiscal
note should remove the funding.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Co-Chair Thompson explained that the amendment would add
$439,600 back to the Workers' Safety and Compensation
Administration Account. The increment would restore the
Workers' Compensation Appeals Commission. He detailed that
commission would be the exclusive and final authority for
the hearing and determination of all questions. He
elaborated that the amendment would reinstate the
commission because without it the state would face Alaska
Supreme Court cases. He communicated that if the commission
was eliminated the fiscal note would remove funding and
injured workers would have no appeal status or leverage to
aggrieve a case.
Co-Chair Neuman added that the item was funded by the
Workers' Safety Compensation Administration Account and not
UGF.
Representative Gara requested to add his name as a
cosponsor to the amendment.
Representative Guttenberg requested to add his name as a
cosponsor to the amendment. He believed there would be
movement later in the session to eliminate the entire
commission through legislation. He explained that without
the funds aggrieved workers had no place to go; the state
did not want workers taking cases directly to the Supreme
Court. He furthered that workers would be stuck in limbo if
the funding was eliminated. He believed the amendment
showed universal acceptance that there could be other ways
of handling the issue besides the Workers' Compensation
Appeals Commission.
Co-Chair Neuman noted that legislation on the topic would
possibly be before the committee at a later time.
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 4 was ADOPTED.
1:45:08 PM
Representative Munoz MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 5:
OFFERED BY: Reps. Munoz and Edgmon
DEPARTMENT: Fish and Game
APPROPRIATION: Commercial Fisheries
ALLOCATION: Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission
ADD: It is the intent of the legislature that moving
the Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission Allocation
under the Commercial Fisheries Appropriation does not
diminish or affect their statutorily designated
budgetary or judicial autonomy or authority; nor does
this move grant the Commissioner of Fish and Game or
designee any budgetary or operational control over the
Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission.
EXPLANATION: This intent language is to preserve the
independent and quasi-judicial autonomy of the
Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Munoz explained that during the budget
subcommittee process the allocation for the Commercial
Fisheries Entry Commission (CFEC) had been moved to the
Commercial Fisheries area of the Department of Fish and
Game (DFG) budget. The amendment reaffirmed the intent of
the legislature that CFEC functions, and its statutory or
quasi-judicial authority would not be diminished. She asked
for the committee's support.
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 5 was ADOPTED.
1:45:56 PM
Co-Chair Neuman moved Amendment 6:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Neuman and Thompson
DEPARTMENT: Department of Fish and Game
ADD: It is the intent of the legislature that the
department focus research and management dollars on
fishery systems which have stocks of concern, in order
to satisfy its constitutional responsibility of
managing for sustained yield.
Co-Chair Thompson OBJECTED for discussion.
Co-Chair Neuman explained that the amendment asked DFG to
focus its research projects and management funds on
fisheries with a stock of concern or areas in the state
that were stressed. He pointed to areas of concern in
Yukon-Kuskokwim, Cook Inlet, and Southeast. He noted that
additionally the item satisfied the constitutional
responsibility on sustainable yield management.
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT a friendly amendment to
Amendment 6. The amendment to the amendment would insert
the word "first" before the word "focus." He explained that
the current wording of the amendment could require DFG to
focus its research on stocks of concern. He reasoned that
the amendment may unintentionally require all of the
department's funds to go to stocks of concern.
Co-Chair Neuman further explained the amendment to the
amendment. He had no objection.
Representative Edgmon asked for clarification.
Co-Chair Neuman explained that the word "first" would be
inserted between the words "department" and "focus."
There being NO OBJECTION, the amendment to Amendment 6 was
ADOPTED.
Co-Chair Thompson WITHDREW his OBJECTION to the adoption of
Amendment 6. There being NO further OBJECTION, Amendment 6
was ADOPTED as amended.
Representatives Pruitt and Saddler requested to have their
names added as cosponsors to Amendment 6.
1:48:24 PM
Vice-Chair Saddler MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 7:
OFFERED BY: Rep. Saddler, Neuman, Thompson
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Behavioral Health
ALLOCATION: Alcohol Safety Action Program (ASAP)
ADD: $500,000 Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Treatment &
Prevention Fund, 1180
$703,800 General Fund, 1004
DELETE: $1,203,800, General Fund/Program Receipts,
1005
EXPLANATION: This action amends a change made by the
DHSS Budget Subcommittee; it replaces GF Program
Receipts with money from the general fund and from the
Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Treatment & Prevention
Fund. Collections for the ASAP program are currently
maximized and additional GP/Program receipts are not
available. Over 80 percent of the participants in the
24-7 Sobriety Program are deemed indigent by the
courts and are not required to pay the testing fees
themselves. DHSS estimates that, without the funding
provided by this amendment, ASAP would be able to test
less than 20 percent of participants in the 24-7
Sobriety Program. People unable to be tested and
monitored often remain incarcerated, increasing costs
to the state.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Vice-Chair Saddler explained that the budget subcommittee
had sought to place more costs of the Alcohol Safety Action
Program on the costs of participants. The subcommittee had
learned from the department that it was maxed out and could
not get additional receipts even if it had receipt
authority. He discussed that many of the program
participants were indigent and could not make payment
themselves. He elaborated that $500,000 of the funding had
been located in the Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Treatment
and Prevention Fund and the remainder would come from
General Funds (GF).
Co-Chair Neuman clarified that the amendment replaced
$500,000 in UGF spending with funds from the Alcohol and
Other Drug Abuse Treatment and Prevention Fund. Vice-Chair
Saddler agreed.
Representative Guttenberg asked about the source of the
funds in the Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Treatment and
Prevention Fund. Vice-Chair Saddler replied that funds came
from alcohol taxes. He relayed that the Legislative Finance
Division had provided assurance that there were sufficient
funds in the account to support the increment.
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 7 was ADOPTED.
Vice-Chair Saddler MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 8:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Neuman, Thompson and
Saddler
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Office of Children's Services
ALLOCATION: Family Preservation
DELETE: $2,938.4 UGF (1004)
EXPLANATION: The Office of Children's Services plans
to partner with the Division of Public Assistance to
use available T ANF grants to provide funding for
Child Advocacy Centers with federal funds. The receipt
authority in the Division of Public Assistance is
already present.
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Office of Children's Services
ALLOCATION: Family Preservation
ADD: $2,938.41/A Receipt Authority (1007)
EXPLANATION: In order to use Division of Public
Assistance grants, the Office of Children's Services
Interagency Receipt authority.
Co-Chair Neuman and Representative Gara OBJECTED.
Vice-Chair Saddler explained that the amendment reflected a
fund source change from UGF to interagency receipts. He
noted that diligent work had discovered the availability of
$3 million in [federal] Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families to pay for child advocacy centers under Family
Preservation. The amendment allowed the Department of
Health and Social Services (DHSS) to transfer the $2.9
million from Public Assistance to the Office of Children
Services (OCS) Family Preservation.
1:50:21 PM
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
Representative Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION. He believed
the amendment was missing a crucial component. He
elaborated that DHSS had been diligently searching to
locate federal funds to replace general funds; the
department had located $3 million to fund child advocacy
centers, which freed up $3 million in GF. He relayed that
that the department planned to use the $3 million in GF to
begin fixing the foster care system. The system was
experiencing challenges due to short staffing in OCS (a
study by the former governor indicated that the division
was 50 staff short). Additionally, foster youth had
increased from 1,700 to 2,400 in the last five years. He
stressed that the funds offered the best chance at fixing
the staff shortage at OCS and the division's ability to
detect child abuse and neglect. He emphasized that it was a
lost opportunity to protect abused and neglected children
in the state. He noted that 100 percent of the children did
not have parents to responsibly take care of them and 60
percent of the children were Alaska Native. He concluded
that the state acted as the guardian of foster children
because it had taken them away from their parents.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gattis, Guttenberg, Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler,
Wilson, Edgmon, Thompson, Neuman
OPPOSED: Kawasaki, Gara
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 8 PASSED (9/2). Amendment 8
was ADOPTED.
1:54:21 PM
Representative Edgmon MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 9:
OFFERED BY: Rep. Edgmon, Neuman, Thompson
DEPARTMENT: Administration
APPROPRIATION: Public Communications Services
ALLOCATION: Public Broadcasting Commission
ADD: $21,800 General Fund (1004)
ALLOCATION: Public Broadcasting - Radio
ADD: $1, 182, 700 General Fund (1004)
ALLOCATION: Public Broadcasting- T.V.
ADD: $295,500 General Fund (1004)
EXPLANATION: This amendment restores a total of
$1,500,000 in the Public Communications Services
appropriation, or 87 percent of the House subcommittee
proposed budget reduction of $1,716,000.
This amendment would increase funding for
· Public Broadcasting Commission from $24,900 to
$46,700;
· Public Broadcasting - Radio from $1,353,000 to
$2,535,700; and
· Public Broadcasting-T.V. from $337,800 to
$633,300.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Edgmon explained that the amendment would
restore $1,500,000 in the Public Communications Services
appropriation, or 87 percent of the House subcommittee
proposed budget reduction of $1,716,000. He pointed out
that the amendment detailed how the money would be
allocated between three areas.
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
Representative Wilson OBJECTED. She remarked that the item
was "public" radio and the state did not have the money to
provide the funds. She elaborated that the state was in
deficit and could not continue every program. She believed
communities would have to be responsible for funding some
programs.
Representative Edgmon appreciated the need to cut the
budget, which the committee was doing during the current
meeting. He countered with the importance of public
broadcasting. He reasoned that the committee had heard
about the importance of public broadcasting repeatedly from
every corner of the state. He believed the need had been
fully demonstrated.
Representative Gattis reluctantly supported the amendment.
She had been raised on public radio, but it was "a long
time ago." She believed there were other opportunities
available at present. She communicated her intent to work
on the budget in depth throughout the interim with public
radio stations.
Representative Guttenberg recalled former Senator Ted
Stevens speaking up for public broadcasting. He remarked
that public broadcasting included more than Sesame Street
and Alaska News Nightly. He cited Senator Steven's belief
that public broadcasting was the backbone and
infrastructure of communication across the state. He noted
that the cut proposed by the budget subcommittee was not
the first cut to public broadcasting; it was on the
chopping block annually. He stated that the stations had
been successful at building a network of efficiencies. He
elaborated on the significant percentage of people giving
to public broadcasting. He believed even the small cut that
would remain under the amendment was too much. He stressed
that making significant cuts to public broadcasting would
mean the loss of an infrastructure in Alaska that was
irreplaceable.
Representative Gara asked to have his name added as a
cosponsor. However, he noted concern that the amendment did
not reflect a full restoration of the cut.
Representative Wilson MAINTAINED her OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler,
Edgmon, Gara, Gattis, Thompson, Neuman
OPPOSED: Wilson
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 9 PASSED (10/1). Amendment 9
was ADOPTED.
1:59:03 PM
Co-Chair Neuman MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 10:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Neuman, Thompson
DEPARTMENT: Administration
APPROPRIATION: Centralized Administrative Services
ALLOCATION: Office of the Commissioner
ADD the following language:
It is the intent of the legislature that, in FY2016,
the Department of Administration implements the plan
to consolidate statewide information technology
services including IT procurement, IT support, IT
contractual services and IT services currently
performed by executive branch state employees. The
stated goal of the plan is to improve services while
reducing executive branch information technology
spending. The legislature established a savings goal
of approximately 30 percent --estimated to be
$67,000,000--over three fiscal years. It is the intent
of the legislature that the Department of
Administration submit a report to the House and Senate
Finance Committees annually by January 15th, for the
next three years, identifying in detail the path and
tasks to achieve the total savings.
APPROPRIATION: Enterprise Technology
DELETE intent language reading:
It is the intent of the legislature that the
Department of Administration, through implementation
of its five-year statewide plan to consolidate
statewide information technology services, including
procurement, support, and contracting services
previously done by state employees, realize twenty
five million dollars in savings statewide during
FY2016. It is the intent of the legislature that the
Department of Administration submit a report
identifying and detailing these savings to the House
and Senate Finance Committees by January 15, 2016.
EXPLANATION: Facilitate implementation of the
Department of Administration 2015 Enterprise Strategic
IT Plan
Co-Chair Thompson OBJECTED for discussion.
Co-Chair Neuman explained that the amendment had been
brought to the committee by the Department of
Administration (DOA). He detailed that the department had
recently had research conducted on the consolidation of
information technology (IT) services. He elaborated that
the amendment directed the department to provide for
financial savings. A program had been implemented several
years earlier with the anticipation that some savings would
occur; the legislature had established a savings goal of
approximately 30 percent (estimated to be $67,000,000 over
three fiscal years). The amendment would direct the
department to follow through on what it would cost to cover
some of its investments in IT. He thanked the department
for bringing the amendment forward for the committee's
consideration.
Co-Chair Thompson WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
Representative Guttenberg voiced his support for the
amendment. He spoke to the IT infrastructure that the state
was building for procurement support, contractual services,
and other things the state should be doing. He spoke to
savings in IT and the state moving towards a modern,
efficient telecommunications infrastructure. He discussed
the need for greater expansion of broadband, which was
expensive. He believed the need for further broadband would
be beneficial for the entire state. He noted that all
departments pointed to deficiencies in broadband and the
inability to deliver services due to slow speeds. He
assumed the department would build out the infrastructure
and efficiencies and would need increased bandwidth.
Representative Pruitt requested to add his name as a
cosponsor to the amendment. He appreciated the amendment
and opined that the strategy was exactly what the state
should be doing if it was going to get control of state
spending. He had been told the prior fall that the
Department of Public Safety (DPS) and DOC computer systems
were not aligned; therefore, the state was wasting money
transporting prisoners. He stressed the importance of
consolidation and tightening up procurement.
Representative Gara wondered if the amendment restored a
$400,000 reduction by the budget subcommittee for the
University of Alaska student advising services.
Co-Chair Neuman noted that the issue was separate. He noted
that the issue pertained to the University of Alaska; the
current amendment related to DOA IT services.
Representative Gattis requested to add her name as a
cosponsor to the amendment. She had chaired the DOA budget
subcommittee. She detailed that the savings would be 10
percent per year.
Representatives Wilson, Saddler, and Guttenberg requested
to add their names as cosponsors to the amendment.
Co-Chair Thompson WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 10 was ADOPTED.
2:04:24 PM
Representative Munoz MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 11 [Note: see
copy on file for detailed explanations]:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Neuman, Thompson, Munoz &
Edgmon
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Various (21 Allocations)
TOTAL ADD: $10,831.2 UGF (1004)
The University of Alaska budget recommended by the
subcommittee contains $334,768.5 of Unrestricted GF.
That amount is $35,83 I .2 below Mgt Plan for FYI 5.
This amendment will bring the FY16 UGF budget to $25
million below the FYI 5 Mgt Plan. The University
estimates that approving the subcommittee
recommendation would result in the elimination of
approximately I 78 positions throughout the state.
This amendment would allow the University to retain
approximately 75 of those positions (and provide
associated services) throughout the University of
Alaska system. Individual allocations, line-item
breakouts, and impacts of this amendment are as
follows:
ALLOCATION: Statewide Services
ADD: $402.6 UGF (1004)
$348. I personal services
$ 54.5 travel
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$3,691.7)
ALLOCATION: Office of Information Technology (OIT)
ADD: $280.6 UGF (1004)
$280.6 personal services
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$2,224.3)
ALLOCATION: System-wide Education & Outreach
ADD: $32.5 UGF (1004)
$32.5 personal services
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$257.8)
ALLOCATION: Anchorage Campus
ADD: $2,564.5 UGF (1004)
$1,214. 7 personal services
$ 849.8 travel
$ 500.0 contractual services
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$6,777.8)
ALLOCATION: Small Business Development Center
ADD: $27.8 UGF (1004)
$13.9 personal services (71000)
$13.9 contractual services (73000)
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$47.5)
ALLOCATION: Kenai Peninsula College
ADD: $110.6 UGF (1004)
$14.1 personal services
$96.5 contractual services
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$329.4).
ALLOCATION: Kodiak College
ADD: $47.1 UGF (1004)
$11.2 personal services
$35.9 contractual services
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$122.6)
ALLOCATION: Mat-Su College
ADD: $80.4 UGF (1004)
$ 11.8 personal services
$ 68.6 contractual services
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$234.2)
ALLOCATION: Prince William Sound College
ADD: $69. 7 UGF (1004)
$26.5 personal services
$43.2 contractual services
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$147.6)
ALLOCATION: Fairbanks Campus
ADD: $3,310.6 UGF (1004)
$2,352.3 personal services
$ 958.3 travel
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$7,555.4)
ALLOCATION: Fairbanks Organized Research
ADD: $616.7 UGF (1004)
$461.4 personal services
$155.3 contractual services
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$922.8)
ALLOCATION: Cooperative Extension Services
ADD: $29.5 UGF (1004)
$29.5 travel
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$50.0)
ALLOCATION: Bristol Bay Campus
ADD: $22.3 UGF (1004)
$2.8 personal services
$19. 5 contractual services
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$66.8)
ALLOCATION: Chukchi Campus
ADD: $14.5 UGF (1004)
$1.2 personal services
$13 .3 contractual services
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$45.6)
ALLOCATION: Interior-Aleutians Campus
ADD: $30.8 UGF (1004)
$6.6 personal services
$24.2 contractual services
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$82.5)
ALLOCATION: Kuskokwim Campus
ADD: $53.6 UGF (1004)
$10 .4 personal services
$43.2 contractual services
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$147.4)
ALLOCATION: Northwest Campus
ADD: $39.4 UGF (1004)
$16.9 personal services
$22.5 contractual services
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$76.7)
Representative Wilson objected.
ALLOCATION: College of Rural and Community Development
ADD: $140.1 UGF (1004)
$59.0 personal services
$81.1 contractual services
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$276.9)
ALLOCATION: UAF Community and Technical College
ADD: $74.9 UGF (1004)
($4.1) personal services
$79.0 contractual services
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$269.5)
ALLOCATION: Juneau Campus
ADD: $558.6 UGF (1004)
$360.6 personal services
$198.0 travel
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$1,405.3)
ALLOCATION: Ketchikan Campus
ADD: $40.7 UGF (1004)
$40.7 personal services
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$116.2)
ALLOCATION: Sitka Campus
ADD: $48.0 UGF (1004)
$48.0 personal services
(House Finance Subcommittee recommended reduction:
$152.0)
ALLOCATION: Budget Reductions/Additions - System-wide
ADD: $754.2 General Fund (1004)
ADD: $1,081.5, general funds (1004)
Representative Wilson OBJECTED.
Representative Munoz explained Amendment 11. She detailed
that the current reduction to the University budget was
$35.8 million below the FY 15 management plan; the
amendment would bring the FY 16 UGF to $25 million below
the FY 15 management plan.
Representative Wilson spoke against the amendment. She
stated that the University budget was difficult; one amount
was basically appropriated to the Board of Regents for
distribution. She stated that the amendment gave the
impression that a designated number of individuals would be
put back to work. She referred to discussion during the
committee process related to graduation rates that were
about 31.8 percent statewide; part of the discussion had
related to increased revenue that would result if the
students were retained [throughout their college careers].
She remarked on the large size of the state's budget and
noted that over 55 people at the University made more than
the governor and over 1,500 earn more than $100,000 per
year. She stated that cuts were hard and "the private
industry are making those." Additionally, she believed the
University was leasing a multitude of buildings that it
would be looking at in the coming year to determine if more
needed to be brought back on campus. She opined that
perhaps the budget needed to be provided in multiple
allocations. She believed it may be prudent to some combine
training schools with the University. She stated that the
proposed reduction was less than 10 percent. She remarked
that the University received over $899 million. In response
to an earlier question by Representative Gara, she added
that the amendment would restore $400,000 in student
counseling.
Representative Gara agreed that the University had poor
graduation rates, which were the lowest in the nation.
However, the university had begun a student advisor program
to increase graduation rates. He opined that eliminating
funding for student advisors would increase the graduation
rate problem. He asked where the increase appeared in the
amendment.
Co-Chair Neuman replied that the University received one
allocation that it could split how it wanted.
Representative Gattis struggled with putting $10 million
back in the university budget under the current financial
circumstances. She recognized that other areas had been
cut.
Co-Chair Thompson referenced Representative Gara's earlier
question and pointed to page 9 of the amendment. The
explanation read that $400,000 GF would be added as a one-
time funding restoration for student advising.
Representative Pruitt echoed the comments of Representative
Gattis. He spoke as University alum; one of the struggles
that existed was the failure to recognize that the
university was a system and not three universities. He was
not confident that the University had gotten out of the
silos that were creating some of the barriers and burdens
to being more efficient with the state's money. He spoke in
opposition to the amendment; he felt that it was time the
state did something to address the need for increased
efficiency. He stressed that the state could not afford to
continue its current path.
2:10:17 PM
Representative Guttenberg clarified that the amendment was
not an addition of $10 million to the University's budget;
it was a reduction of the proposed cut from $35 million
down to $25 million.
Representative Edgmon spoke in support of the amendment. He
added that the proposed cut was in addition to a $16
million cut from the prior year. He contended that the
figures represented a steep phasing down of staff,
services, curriculum, and programs. He believed the
amendment better achieved the delicate balance of
downsizing without crippling a government entity.
Vice-Chair Saddler was torn on the amendment. He applauded
the efforts of Representative Munoz to find significant
reductions; the state faced significant budget challenges.
However, he noted that it was a reduction of $25 million in
round one. He remarked that there would be a second round
of reductions the following year. He intended to spend time
over the interim sharpening his perspective on the
University budget and how to "sharpen his budget knife."
Representative Wilson clarified that there had been an $18
million and not a $60 million cut the previous year.
Representative Edgmon replied that he had said $16 million.
Co-Chair Neuman added all of the budgets would be scrubbed
and looked at throughout the rest of the year. He
elaborated that the legislature would continue to look at
all departments for clarification on how they could be
refined and improved.
Representative Wilson MAINTAINED her OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Kawasaki, Munoz, Saddler, Edgmon, Gara,
Guttenberg, Thompson, Neuman
OPPOSED: Pruitt, Wilson, Gattis,
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 11 PASSED (8/3). Amendment 11
was ADOPTED.
2:14:01 PM
Co-Chair Neuman MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 12:
OFFERED BY: Reps. Neuman and Thompson
ADD a new subsection to section 4 (Legislative
Intent):
It is the intent of the legislature that all state
agencies and instrumentalities that intend to contract
for basic or applied research, including consultation,
undertaking a study, performing a needs assessment, or
providing an analysis, pursue discussions and
negotiations with the University's Vice-President for
Academic Affairs and Research to determine if the
University can provide that service to the agency, and
if so, to obtain that service from the University
unless contrary to the best interests of the State or
contrary to another provision of law.
EXPLANATION: The directive to contract with the
University is subject to negotiation including
negotiations regarding the cost of services-as
indicated by the phrase "in the best interests of the
State."
Co-Chair Thompson OBJECTED for discussion.
Co-Chair Neuman explained that the amendment directed state
agencies and "instrumentalities that intend to contract for
basic or applied research" to try to use the University to
conduct research projects needed by the state. He detailed
that he had received a "glossy" report from the wildlife
commission that had been done by the University of Oregon
related to the economics of wildlife in Alaska. He
questioned why the state was not using its own university
to do the work. The amendment asked state agencies to use
the University of Alaska and its students [for research
projects]. He spoke to the knowledge the University and its
students had about Alaska's wildlife.
Representative Wilson spoke in strong support of the
amendment. She remarked on the great research abilities the
University had. She noted that the University had done an
"awesome" presentation.
Representatives Wilson, Saddler, Pruitt, Gattis, Munoz,
Edgmon, Guttenberg requested to add their names as
cosponsors to the Amendment 12.
Co-Chair Thompson WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 12 was ADOPTED.
2:16:33 PM
Representative Edgmon MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 13:
OFFERED BY: Rep. Edgmon
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ADD: It is the intent of the legislature to have the
University of Alaska focus the majority of additional
decrements through reduction in management positions
from below the chancellor level through the levels of:
Associate Deans; Vice, Assistant, and Associate Vice
Provosts; Vice, Assistant, and Associate Vice
Chancellor; and Shaping Alaska's Future staff.
EXPLANATION: The University of Alaska can consolidate
positions to increase efficiencies and reduce
overlapped job duties.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Edgmon explained that the amendment included
intent language he had received by Representative Paul
Seaton, a member of the University budget subcommittee. The
language specified that in the future the University should
focus the majority of its additional decrements on
reduction in management positions below the chancellor
level. The intent was that the action would be a better way
to absorb reductions by increasing efficiencies and
reducing any overlapping job duties.
Representative Kawasaki observed that the amendment
appeared to only speak to the local chancellor's level and
not statewide presidents and vice presidents.
Representative Edgmon replied that the appropriation was to
the University. He believed the maker of the amendment
intended it to apply to the statewide system.
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 13 was ADOPTED.
Representatives Wilson, Gattis, Thompson, Gara, Pruitt,
Saddler asked to be added as cosponsors to Amendment 13.
2:18:09 PM
Vice-Chair Saddler MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 14:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Neuman, Thompson & Saddler
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Behavioral Health
ALLOCATION: Behavioral Health Treatment and Recovery
Grants
DELETE: $500,000 UGF 1004
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Senior and Disabilities Services
ALLOCATION: Senior Community Based Grants
ADD: $500,000 UGF 1004
EXPLANATION: This amendment removes funding from the
Behavioral Health Treatment and Recovery Grants in
order to add funding to the Senior Community Based
Grants to restore funding for Adult Day Services.
Adult Day Services provided through Senior Community
Based Grants allow family caregivers to maintain their
own employment schedules by providing day care to
seniors, enabling them to return to their own homes
every evening instead of moving in to more expensive
alternatives. The Senior Community Based Grants
program encompasses multiple services with a total
budget of $16,608.8; the Adult Day Services portion
comprises $1,575.0 of that total. A $500.0 reduction
is a 31.7 percent cut.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Vice-Chair Saddler explained that the amendment would
transfer $500,000 in UGF from Behavioral Health Treatment
and Recovery Grants to Senior Community Based Grants for
adult day services. He spoke to significant public
testimony in support of adult day services that kept
seniors at home, occupied, provided a cost savings, and
other. He detailed that Senior Community Based Services had
$16 million and adult day services had approximately $1.5
million. He stated that the reduction in Behavioral Health
Grants was a small reduction. He believed the amendment
represented an appropriate transfer of assets.
Representative Guttenberg supported the amendment. He
addressed the grant and the impact it would have on the
community. He recognized that the amendment would keep and
support families at home, but he observed that the state's
population was growing. He hoped the state would monitor
and quantify what it cost the state if the population did
not receive the grants. He reasoned that a little money up
front would save a significant amount down the road. He
spoke to results that would pay off for the state. He hoped
the department would monitor the issue going forward.
Representative Kawasaki MOVED to divide the amendment. He
spoke in support of the second half of the amendment that
restored funding to Senior Community Based Grants, but he
was uncertain about the cut to Behavioral Health Treatment
and Recovery Grants. He observed that the cut was not
insignificant (approximately 13 percent GF reduction). He
referred to many discussions that had taken place with the
department about Behavioral Health and the need for active
management.
Co-Chair Neuman replied in the negative. He clarified that
$500,000 was not a 13 percent reduction to Behavioral
Health. He believed Behavioral Health Grants were close to
$200 million. Vice-Chair Saddler agreed.
Co-Chair Neuman opposed dividing the question because the
amendment would transfer money from one grant to another.
2:22:25 PM
Representative Gara MOVED an amendment to Amendment 14 to
delete the $500,000 reduction to Behavioral Health
Treatment and Recovery Grants. He agreed with
Representative Kawasaki. He referred to compelling public
testimony the committee had heard from families that use
adult day services. He highlighted that families using the
services worked and needed a place for a family member in
their care to stay during the day. He supported restoring
funds to the program. However, he stressed that cutting
$500,000 from substance abuse treatment was unwise. He
noted that drug abuse was increasing in Alaska. He spoke to
current lengthy waiting lists for substance abuse treatment
programs. He disputed that the amendment would save money.
He underscored that the amendment would cut money that
would result in increased crime and dangerous
neighborhoods.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED to the amendment to Amendment 14.
Representative Gattis supported the original Amendment 14.
She agreed with Representative Gara, but stressed that
making cuts was not easy. She emphasized that the state
could not afford its past level of spending.
Co-Chair Neuman communicated that the committee would vote
on whether to amend Amendment 14 by separating it into two
parts. He reiterated his objection to the proposed
amendment.
Representative Guttenberg asked a procedural question. He
wondered why Representative Kawasaki's request to divide
the question had not been allowed, but Representative
Gara's motion to amend Amendment 14 had been allowed.
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to amend Amendment 14 FAILED (3/8).
A roll call vote was taken on the motion to adopt Amendment
14.
IN FAVOR: Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis,
Kawasaki, Munoz, Gara, Thompson, Neuman
OPPOSED: Guttenberg
The MOTION PASSED (10/1). Amendment 14 was ADOPTED.
2:28:32 PM
Representative Pruitt MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 15:
OFFERED BY: Rep. Pruitt, Neuman, Thompson
DEPARTMENT: Natural Resources
APPROPRIATION: Land & Water Resources
ALLOCATION: Forest Management & Development
ADD: $245,200 General Fund, 1004
$400,000 Timber Rep, 1155
POSITIONS: Add 3 positions in the Ketchikan Area
Office and 1 position in the Juneau Office
EXPLANATION: Use timber receipts to fund operations of
southeast forestry offices. Currently timber receipts
alone aren't enough to cover operations of the timber
sale program in southeast. This amendment reinstates
southeast forestry offices at a reduced level using
timber receipts to help fund operations with some UGF.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Pruitt explained that the amendment would
restore a portion of funding to the timber sales program.
He detailed that the budget subcommittee had recognized
that a substantial amount of UGF (approximately $3 million)
was going into the overall timber program with a $400,000
return in sales receipts the prior year. The subcommittee
had worked to determine how the industry could cover more
of the costs; the subcommittee had cut some of the funding,
but the cut had been more significant than intended. He
relayed that the goal was to bring about increased
efficiency, but not to shut down the Southeast timber
industry. He had worked with the department on the ability
to maintain operations with the Southeast forestry office
to continue sales with three positions in Ketchikan and one
position in Juneau. The amendment would bring timber
receipts up to $400,000 with the intent that it would give
the department the buffer it needed to perform the work.
Representative Wilson asked if timber receipts went back to
the general fund. Representative Pruitt replied that the
timber receipts would go back to the forestry office. The
amendment would give the forestry office the authority to
use up to $400,000. He elaborated that the office estimated
that there may be up to $400,000 in the upcoming year; if
there were funds that exceeded the amount he believed they
would be deposited into designated receipts.
Co-Chair Neuman agreed.
Representative Kawasaki stated that timber receipts were
received from timber sales and proceeds. He wondered if it
was reasonable to believe that the same number of receipts
would be generated if the number of staff was reduced by
seven.
Representative Pruitt replied in the affirmative. He
elaborated that the receipts should still be received from
Southeast because timber sales could continue.
Representative Munoz spoke in support of the amendment and
requested to have her name added as a cosponsor. She
appreciated the subcommittee chair's work on the issue. She
stressed that the item was a very important function for
Southeast Alaska. She noted that the committee had heard
public testimony from operators throughout Southeast who
had been concerned about the removal of the program.
2:31:56 PM
Representative Gara asked for an explanation pertaining to
the deletion of 11 positions throughout Southeast; the cut
was $1.292 million in UGF. He noted that the amendment
would restore approximately one-fifth of the amount. He
wondered how the same level of timber activity could occur.
Representative Pruitt explained that there were ten
positions in Southeast and one in Copper. The amendment
would restore four of the ten positions in Southeast. He
discussed that the Anchorage and Fairbanks offices had
staff that could assist with the program. There were
several administrative positions. Essentially, the issue
pertained to increasing efficiency in a division that
received substantially more general funds than money it was
bringing back in. He did not claim that the Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) believed the change would be
simple, but it had indicated that it could make it work. He
acknowledged that the shift would be challenging. He
planned to monitor the change over the interim.
Representative Kawasaki supported the amendment, but did
not believe the amendment went far enough to restoring
DNR's ability to make the sales possible for many people.
He had been told the decrease in funds would not
necessarily impact the Tanana Valley State Forest. However,
according to the state forester, the level of service and
the pace of sales auctions would be impacted because there
would be a reduction in state foresters from a region
stretching from Tok to Kantishna. He spoke to impacts to
the Interior, the potential loss of the forester position
in Delta and other statewide forest planning positions.
Additionally, personal use firewood sales particularly in
Fairbanks and over the counter sales would have significant
trouble. He noted that DNR was a money maker for the state.
Vice-Chair Saddler spoke in support of the amendment. He
believed the reduction was necessary, responsible, and
intelligent given the state's financial challenges.
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 15 was ADOPTED.
2:36:04 PM
Representative Pruitt MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 16:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Neuman, Thompson & Pruitt
(for Rep. Colver)
DEPARTMENT: Department of Natural Resources
APPROPRIATION: Fire Suppression, Land & Water
Resources
ALLOCATION: Fire Suppression Preparedness, Fire
Suppression Activity
TRANSFER: Transfer the Fire Suppression Preparedness
allocation ($1,486.6 Fed, $15,984.5 UGF, $398.9 I/A
Rcpts, $850.8 CIP Rcpts, 200 PCNs) from the Fire
Suppression appropriation to the Land & Water
Resources appropriation. Transfer the Fire Suppression
Activity allocation ($11,960.4 Fed, $6,659.1 UGF,
$1,500.0 Other, 0 PCNs) from the Fire Suppression
appropriation to the Land & Water Resources
appropriation.
EXPLANATION: This amendment transfers the Fire
Suppression Preparedness and Fire Suppression Activity
allocations into the Land & Water Resources
appropriation. These two allocations and the Forest
Management & Development allocation make up the
Division of Forestry. Consolidating the division into
a single appropriation would facilitate cooperative
efforts and eliminate the need for RSAs within the
division, reducing the administrative burden on the
department.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Pruitt discussed the backstory behind the
development of the amendment. He relayed that the
Legislative Finance Division thought the amendment could
potentially create some efficiencies. He explained that the
amendment would transfer the Fire Suppression Preparedness
and Fire Suppression Activity allocations into the Land and
Water Resources appropriation. The transfer would eliminate
some of the paperwork passing between the entities. He
spoke to the importance of ensuring that the money
appropriated to fire suppression remained in suppression.
Co-Chair Neuman noted that the amendment would not add
funds and the ability to track funds through the program
would be preserved.
Representative Guttenberg OBJECTED. He spoke to his concern
that fire suppression and land and water resources offered
two distinct functions. He was concerned about losing the
ability for rapid fire suppression response time. He
questioned whether transferring fire suppression would blur
the ability to rapidly respond to fires.
Co-Chair Neuman answered that DNR was neutral on the
amendment. He read from the amendment explanation:
This amendment transfers the Fire Suppression
Preparedness and Fire Suppression Activity allocations
into the Land & Water Resources appropriation. These
two allocations and the Forest Management &
Development allocation make up the Division of
Forestry. Consolidating the division into a single
appropriation would facilitate cooperative efforts and
eliminate the need for RSAs within the division,
reducing the administrative burden on the department.
Co-Chair Neuman added that based on the explanation the
amendment would decrease the administrative burden on the
department; therefore, speed would increase.
Co-Chair Neuman and Representative Guttenberg WITHDREW
their OBJECTIONS. There being NO further OBJECTION,
Amendment 16 was ADOPTED.
2:41:01 PM
Co-Chair Neuman MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 17:
OFFERED BY: Reps. Neuman and Thompson
AMEND THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE
Sec. 6. PERSONAL SERVICES TRANSFERS. It is the intent
of the legislature that agencies restrict transfers to
and from the personal services line. It is the intent
of the legislature that the office of management and
budget submit a report to the house and senate finance
committees [Legislature] on January 15, 2016, that
describes and justifies all transfers to and from the
personal services line by executive branch agencies
during the first half of the fiscal year ending June
30, 2016, and submit a report to the house and senate
finance committees [Legislature] on October 1, 2016,
that describes and justifies all transfers to and from
the personal services line by executive branch
agencies for the entire fiscal year ending June 30,
2016.
EXPLANATION: This amendment clarifies that OMB will
need to submit the personal services transfers report
to the house and senate finance committees.
Co-Chair Thompson OBJECTED for discussion.
Co-Chair Neuman explained that the amendment directed
budget related reports from the Office of Management and
Budget to be sent to the House and Senate Finance
Committees instead of the Senate President and the House
Speaker.
Co-Chair Thompson WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 17 was ADOPTED.
2:41:54 PM
Vice-Chair Saddler MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 18 [Note: see
copy on file for detailed explanations]:
OFFERED BY: Reps. Neuman, Thompson, Saddler and Munoz
DEPARTMENT: Legislature
APPROPRIATION: Legislative Council
ALLOCATION: Administrative Services
DELETE: $681,500 General Fund (1004)
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Juvenile Justice
ALLOCATION: Youth Courts
ADD: $530,900 General Fund (1004)
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Anchorage Campus
ADD: $125,000 MHTAAR (1092)
$125,000 General Fund (1004)
1PFT, 2 PPT
ADD THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE SECTION
Sec. XX. LEGISLATIVE INTENT LANGUAGE RELATING TO
REDUCING
ALASKA RECIDIVISM: It is the intent of the legislature
that the Department of Corrections, Department of
Health and Social Services, Department of Labor and
Workforce Development, Alaska Mental Health Trust
Authority, Alaska Housing Finance Corporation, Alaska
Criminal Justice Commission, and Alaska Court System
continue to work collaboratively to implement a
recidivism reduction plan using evidence-based
practices for the purpose of slowing Alaska's three
percent prison population growth rate and reduce its
63 percent recidivism rate.
The above-identified state agencies shall continue to
engage in and support meaningful consultation with
Alaska Native entities on the design, content and
operation of the Alaska Justice system with the
purpose of reducing the overrepresentation of Alaska
Native people in this system. Further, these entities
shall work together to:
1. Analyze the state's criminal justice data to
identify the factors driving Alaska's rate of prison
population growth;
2. Identify evidence-based or promising practices that
will address each of those factors; and
3. Outline a plan for the implementation of each
proposed practice that:
a. identifies the service or treatment program
proposed;
b. identifies the number of inmates or returning
citizens to be served; and
c. includes a five consecutive year, beginning in
FY 2017, phased-in outline of the programs and
services to be implemented and the cost per
fiscal year.
The implementation plan shall include effectiveness
and efficiency measures addressing, but not limited
to:
1. Recidivism rates and cost per client served of
current practices and programs;
2. Recidivism rates and cost per client served of
proposed practices and programs;
3. Quality assurances;
4. Fidelity to the model assurances; and
5. projected savings to the State of Alaska.
The draft implementation plan described herein shall
be delivered to the Office of Management and Budget by
September 30, 2015 so it can be considered for
inclusion in the Governor's FYI 7 budget and
legislative proposals. The final implementation plan
shall be delivered to the legislature by January 22,
2016.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Vice-Chair Saddler explained the four-stage amendment.
First, it would cut approximately $680,000 from the
legislature's budget (due to increased efficiencies);
$530,900 of the funds would be transferred to the Youth
Court. He referred to public testimony on the Youth Court's
ability to reduce youth recidivism and youth offences. The
remainder of the funds in addition to a contribution from
Mental Health Trust Funds and GF ($125,000 each) would go
towards funding an Alaska Justice Information Center under
the University of Alaska Anchorage. The center would enable
the compilation of information to inform a Smart Justice-
type initiative in cooperation with the Pew Trust. The
initiative would provide the state access to the expertise
and cost-benefit modeling offered by the Pew Trust.
Finally, the amendment included language declaring the
intent of the legislature that the state coordinate with
departments to generate and monitor recidivism in order to
comply with Pew Trust requirements.
Co-Chair Neuman elaborated on the state's recidivism
reduction plan. He spoke to work done the prior year to
reduce recidivism. He remarked that currently correctional
facilities were at 101 percent. He stressed that additional
work was needed to reduce the number of people entering the
correctional system. He discussed that the amendment would
allow the state to partner with Pew Trust results. He noted
that Texas had worked with Pew Trust to reduce the number
of individuals entering the correctional system. The
amendment would add $125,000 GF to match $125,000 in Mental
Health Trust Funds. The goal was to considerably reduce the
recidivism rate, which was currently 63 percent.
Representative Kawasaki spoke in support of the second
component of the amendment and expressed uncertainty about
the remaining components. He asked if the sponsor intended
to make sure the GF deletion was roughly the same as the GF
addition.
Vice-Chair Saddler replied in the affirmative.
Representative Kawasaki referred to the explanation for the
deletion $681,500 from the legislature's budget. He spoke
to a new legislative building in Anchorage [Legislative
Information Office] that would cost significantly more than
it had in the past. He mentioned another building purchased
by the legislature in recent years that would cost more. He
wondered what the efficiencies and cost reductions may
mean.
Co-Chair Neuman believed that the Masonic building had been
paid for. He noted that the increment represented a 5
percent reduction to the legislature's appropriation to
Legislative Council. He noted that considerable reductions
to the legislature's budget were expected throughout the
budgetary process. He noted that funds were included in the
legislature's budget in anticipation of a special session
to move gasline discussions forward. He spoke to costs of
special session including clerks, Legislative Legal
Services, Legislative Finance Division, consultants, and
other. He explained that any extra funds would be returned
to the general fund; the legislature did not have the
ability to come back for a supplemental. Also funded was
Legislative Council, Legislative Budget and Audit, and all
other legislative components.
Representative Pruitt thanked the chairs for taking his
concerns into account pertaining to the legislature's
budget, specifically related to increasing efficiencies and
applying the funds to some of the important services
statewide (e.g. Youth Court and recidivism). He believed
there were significant opportunities to save the state
money and to put people back to work.
2:48:47 PM
Representative Gattis liked the first few portions of the
amendment. She spoke to efficiencies created in the
legislature's budget. She remarked that the legislature was
cutting other budgets and would locate efficiencies in its
own. She commented on youth court and its success. She
noted that the City of Wasilla sponsored the Mat-Su Youth
Court and had done a great job. She believed there were
significant savings resulting from catching kids at a young
age. She spoke to recidivism and a Pew Trust report and
noted that the state would get a large bang for its buck.
She believed it would benefit the state.
Representatives Gara, Kawasaki, Gattis, Guttenberg, Wilson,
Edgmon, and Pruitt requested to add their names as
cosponsors to Amendment 18.
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 18 was ADOPTED.
2:50:56 PM
Co-Chair Thompson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 19:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Neuman and Thompson
(Governor's request)
DEPARTMENT: Labor and Workforce Development
APPROPRIATION: Labor Standards & Safety
ALLOCATION: Occupational Safety & Health
ADD: $300,000 Workers' Safety and Compensation
Administration Account (WSCAA) (1157)
EXPLANATION: This increases designated general funds
(DGF) in the Occupational Safety and Health (AKOSH) to
offset a corresponding unrestricted general fund (UGF)
reduction. The subcommittee reduced the UGF that
supports AKOSH activities by $759,600, and increased
the DGF (WSCAA) supporting AKOSH by $459,600 to help
offset a portion of the UGF reduction. Recent fund
projections demonstrate there is a sufficient WSCAA
fund balance to offset the entire UGF decrease, which
will allow AKOSH to continue the extremely effective
workplace safety consultation activities that this UGF
previously supported.
With this funding, the AKOSH consultation and training
team has developed a seafood processing training
course in partnership with a major seafood producer in
Alaska to increase workforce training and awareness of
hazards common to the seafood processing industry. The
seafood industry has historically experienced a high
rate of lost time accidents; to respond, AKOSH focused
additional efforts on training these workers. Not only
does this training provide awareness about the
hazards, but it provides awareness necessary to
develop a positive culture about workplace safety
within the workforce. This additional training and
consultation is a key reason why Alaska's workplace
injury rate dropped to a historic low in FY2014. A
$300,000 cut to AKOSH will impact the delivery of
consultation and training services to private sector
employers and workers across Alaska. These services
help reduce workplace accidents and would be curtailed
by the subcommittee reduction.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Co-Chair Thompson explained that the amendment had come at
the governor's request. He explained that the [DLWD] budget
subcommittee had reduced the GF spending for Alaska
Occupational Safety and Health by $759,600, replacing
$459,600 with Workers' Safety and Compensation
Administration Account (WSCAA) funds. He elaborated that
subsequently it had been determined that sufficient funds
remained in the WSCAA to offset the entire UGF decrease.
The amendment would restore the $300,000 cut back to the
WSCAA. He spoke to the importance of the program that had
been proven to reduce injuries, especially in the seafood
industry. He noted that no GF were included.
Representative Wilson appreciated that the funds had been
located. She hoped the department would go to industries
that were also saving money due to the programs being put
together. She asked to have her name added as a cosponsor
to the amendment.
Co-Chair Neuman believed the intent was to reduce workers'
compensation rates within the state.
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 19 was ADOPTED.
2:52:49 PM
Representative Munoz MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 20:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Munoz, Neuman and Thompson
DEPARTMENT: Labor and Workforce Development
APPROPRIATION: Business Partnerships
ALLOCATION: Construction Academy Training
ADD: $2,504,200 General Fund 1004
EXPLANATION: This amendment would restore 80% of the
funding for the Construction Academy to allow this
program to continue to train young people and adults
for employment and apprenticeship programs in the
high-demand construction and trade industry. The
construction industry requires an estimated 700 new
workers every year to keep up with demand. The high
demand for a construction workforce is driven by 1) an
aging workforce; 2) job growth in the industry; and 3)
a desire to reduce Alaska's dependence on nonresident
workers.
Representative Wilson OBJECTED.
Representative Munoz explained that the amendment would
restore $2,504,200 GF to the Alaska Construction Academy
programs. She elaborated that the funding paid for ten
programs across the state for adults and high school
students. She detailed that training was in mining, oil and
gas, maritime, building, transportation, and construction.
She expounded that 2,100 adults had been trained through
the funds over the past seven years; between 1,500 and
3,000 students had been trained through the Career and
Technical Education funds over the past four years. The
amendment funded 80 percent of the previously funded GF
portions of the two programs.
Representative Wilson reiterated that the state did not
have the money. She acknowledged the benefit of the
program, but stressed that the state did not have the
money. She thought it was a problem that the program did
not charge for training. She noted that the state was
asking training schools to charge; the university charged
for similar classes. She referred to other programs such as
the State Training Employment Program. She believed unions
and businesses could put funding in. She was concerned that
the state was competing against other programs it funded
for the same children. She was not speaking against the
program.
Representative Gara stated that it was important to be
pound wise and not penny foolish. He spoke to the
difference between a $3.5 billion and a $3.4 billion budget
(the governor's proposed budget compared to the committee's
proposed budget). He disputed that the committee's budget
was getting the state's financial house in order. He stated
that there was currently no bill or budget proposal that
would get the state's house in order. He remarked that the
state was running out of savings in the next two to three
years. He believed the difference was negligible. He opined
that cutting job training programs in a state that was on
pace to lose 2,000 jobs in the current year was not wise.
He remarked that the amendment did not restore the full $3
million subcommittee cut. He appreciated the sponsor's
intent. He supported the restoration of the construction
academies.
2:57:52 PM
Representative Pruitt disputed that the difference in
budgets was insignificant. He noted that he did not
necessarily agree with the fact that the state was paying
for the construction programs. He stated that the programs
competed with the University and private sector entities.
However, he supported the amendment because he appreciated
that the sponsor was willing to work with a "step down"
approach (80 percent instead of full funding). He noted
another amendment would follow that continued the
discussion, which would allow the opportunity to give
notice to the programs that they needed to begin raising
their own money.
Representative Guttenberg was happy to see 80 percent
restoration, but was unhappy that it was not a restoration
of 100 percent. He stressed the importance of workforce
training. He elaborated that the programs guided
individuals into high-skilled jobs. He remarked that the
state should just come out and say it if the it was not
going to train Alaskans for jobs in Alaska. He spoke to the
state's resource development goals and the need for
workers. He stated that many private sector training
programs were not good deals for students due to the
expense. He elaborated that some students left University
programs as soon as they got the job they wanted in their
field of study. He discussed the goal of putting
individuals on track to do the jobs; there were 2,000
replacement jobs per year in the oil and gas industry in
Alaska. He stressed that the training programs had all been
in place for years. He stated that if the program did not
put qualified youth and people into the positions the
programs would not be supported. He underscored that the
issue was about putting Alaskans to work. He stated that
the programs did not turn out journeymen level electricians
and pipe welders; but the programs put people on track to
become those things later on. He reasoned that as the
budget contracted the legislature would need to look
increasingly at the things the state wanted to do, but
contractors had pressure to hire Alaskans because the
legislature applied the pressure. He emphasized that cuts
to the programs would stop training for Alaskans. He noted
that he would support the amendment, but would not support
the subsequent one.
3:04:07 PM
Co-Chair Neuman spoke in support of the amendment. He spoke
to his personal experience making a living with his hands.
He shared that he had served on the board of the Alaska
Construction Academy. He detailed that the program reached
many youth and adults that generally did not have access to
the opportunities; the program opened up opportunities to
introduce individuals to different trades. He noted that 8
to 9 percent of high school students in Alaska attended a
four-year college program. He believed it was important to
provide opportunities for the rest of Alaskans and to
introduce them to trades.
Representative Wilson MAINTAINED her OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Saddler, Edgmon, Gara, Gattis, Guttenberg,
Kawasaki, Munoz, Pruitt, Thompson, Neuman
OPPOSED: Wilson
The MOTION PASSED (10/1). Amendment 20 was ADOPTED.
Co-Chair Neuman MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 21:
OFFERED BY: Neuman, Thompson
DEPARTMENT: Labor and Workforce Development
APPROPRIATION: Business Partnerships
ALLOCATION: Construction Academy Training
ADD INTENT: It is the intent of the legislature that
the department implement a plan to annually supplant
$600,000 of general funds with private or federal fund
sources until, after a five-year period, the
Construction Academy Training program uses no general
funds.
Co-Chair Thompson OBJECTED for discussion.
Co-Chair Neuman explained that the amendment directed DLWD
to implement a plan to locate increased private funding for
the Construction Academy Training program. The amendment
specified that at the end of a five-year period the program
would use no general funds. He recalled board discussions
about working to develop more [private funding]. Many other
programs within the state were facing a similar issue due
to budget reductions. He noted that historically when the
state had been flush with money it tended to fill in holes
in society. He stressed that due to a lack of money it was
necessary for the state to pull back. The remarked that the
state would expect private industry and individuals to do
more. The amendment instructed the department to implement
a plan to annually supplant $600,000 of general funds with
private or federal fund sources until the end of the five-
year period.
3:07:35 PM
AT EASE
3:07:48 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Neuman believed the $600,000 figure in the
amendment was incorrect.
3:08:09 PM
AT EASE
3:08:25 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Neuman explained that he intent was that the
amount in the amendment would be near $600,000. He noted
that the figure would change [as other funds were brought
in].
Representative Wilson stated that the issue was not just
about the money. She reported that there had been two
presentations given by the Alaska Construction Academy and
the committee had not received the statistics it desired.
The committee had been told how many students participated,
but not what kind of training had resulted. She explained
that it was not just about the money, it was about
accountability. She questioned whether it was the mission
of DLWD to put people back to work or obtain better paying
jobs.
Vice-Chair Saddler expressed that it was his desire that
the focus of money spent by the program focused more on
adults. He believed young students had significant
opportunities.
Co-Chair Thompson WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
Representative Guttenberg OBJECTED.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis, Kawasaki, Munoz, Pruitt,
Saddler, Thompson, Neuman, Gara
OPPOSED: Guttenberg
The MOTION PASSED (10/1). Amendment 21 was ADOPTED.
3:12:02 PM
Representative Munoz MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 22 (copy on
file).
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Munoz explained that the DLWD commissioner
had provided an explanation on the Interpreter Referral
Line program. She detailed that there were 10 interpreters
in Fairbanks and Juneau and their services would continue
to be available to the public. Therefore, she WITHDREW
Amendment 22.
Representative Edgmon MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 23:
OFFERED BY: Rep. Edgmon
DEPARTMENT: Labor and Workforce Development
APPROPRIATION: Business Partnerships
ALLOCATION: Southwest Alaska Vocational and Education
Center Operations Grant
ADD: $78,700 General Fund (1004)
ALLOCATION: Alaska Technical Center
ADD: $265,000 General Fund (1004)
ALLOCATION: Northwest Alaska Career and Technical
Center
ADD: $173,000 General Fund (1004)
EXPLANATION: The CS removed all of the general funds,
$1,099,400, from the three allocations. This amendment
restores $516, 700. This amendment would increase
funds for
· Southwest Alaska Vocational and Education Center
from $375,300 to $454,000;
· Alaska Technical Center from $1,126,000 to
$1,391,000; and
· Northwest Alaska Career and Technical Center from
$375,300 to $548,300.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Edgmon explained that the amendment would
partially restore reductions in UGF that would normally be
appropriated to three out of four regional training centers
in Western Alaska. He estimated the restoration was
approximately 40 to 45 percent of the original governor's
appropriation. He contended that there was a right way to
downsize and another way to dismantle programs. He
discussed that if the total funding was removed from the
three training centers, the programs would be set on the
pathway towards being dismantled. He detailed that the
Southwest Vocational Technical Center in King Salmon would
have to lay off two of its five employees if the amendment
did not pass. He elaborated that the center had done many
positive things and was partnering with the Bristol Bay
Economic Development Corporation with a focus on the
seafood industry. He communicated that the Alaska Technical
Center in Kotzebue was a newly renovated regional training
center that offered housing, a culinary section, a
healthcare training facility, and provided training for the
Red Dog Mine; the Northwest Arctic Borough and others had
been working closely on keeping a local workforce in place.
He believed the center would play an important role for the
Ambler mining district when it came online in the future.
He discussed that the Nome facility focused more on
secondary students; 390 students had gone through the
facility the prior year. He asserted that the Nome region
was a potential staging area for the opening of the Arctic.
He would like to see full funding restored, but in the
spirit of compromise he recognized that a partial
restoration of funds was better than no restoration.
3:15:54 PM
Representative Wilson thanked the sponsor and the operators
of the three schools for working with her. She referred to
great information that had been provided. She noted that
the Nome center catered to high school students and was
expanding its healthcare industry training. She noted that
the center had more equipment to offer adult training as
well. She encouraged members to support the amendment. She
elaborated that the schools needed the funding and she
planned to help them look for other funding sources.
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 23 was ADOPTED.
3:17:26 PM
Representative Edgmon MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 24:
OFFERED BY: Rep. Edgmon
DEPARTMENT: Commerce, Community and Economic
Development
APPROPRIATION: Community and Regional Affairs
ALLOCATION: Community and Regional Affairs
ADD: $100,000 UGF (1004)
EXPLANATION: This amendment adds back $100,000 of the
$200,000 subcommittee reduction to the Alaska Legal
Services grant. The grant amount will now be $450,000.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Edgmon explained that the amendment
partially restored $100,000 of the $200,000 reduction that
took place at the Department of Commerce, Community and
Economic Development (DCCED) subcommittee level for Alaska
Legal Services. He detailed that with no reduction the
agency would have received $550,000 in state funds that
would be matched by other revenue sources. He believed that
the program stretched state dollars farther than any other
entity or program in the state; it provided a tremendous
amount of legal work helping families deal with crisis
(i.e. domestic violence, foreclosures, evictions), writing
wills, lack of access to healthcare, and other. He believed
the amendment represented a good compromise.
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 24 was ADOPTED.
3:18:52 PM
Representative Edgmon MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 25:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Neuman, Thompson, Edgmon
DEPARTMENT: Education and Early Development
APPROPRIATION: Alaska Library and Museums
ALLOCATION: Online with Libraries (OWL)
ADD: $761,800 Alaska Higher Education Investment Fund
(1226)
ADD: It is the intent of the legislature that
libraries utilizing Online with Libraries (OWL)
establish a fee structure that covers the cost of OWL
in FY2017.
EXPLANATION: This amendment restores the amount
requested in the Governor's Amended Budget, but
replaces general funds with money from the Alaska
Higher Education Investment Fund. This program is
aligned with the mission of the Higher Education
Investment Fund because it enables students in rural
areas to take distance classes and tests that are
needed for the Alaska Performance Scholarship program.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Edgmon explained that the amendment would
fully restore the Online with Libraries (OWL) program. The
funding allowed community facilities (primarily libraries)
to leverage federal dollars 10 to 1. He detailed that
broadband accessibility in the state's smaller communities
was sometimes virtually nonexistent. He elaborated that the
library was the one place that people could go to [for
internet service]; libraries provided valuable service for
seasonal workers in the seafood industry and other. He
believed it was a wise investment. He added that much of
the state's future was tied to broadband; particularly in
rural areas.
Representative Gattis agreed that the program was good for
libraries. She relayed that she and the amendment sponsor
had discussed the goal of establishing a fee schedule for
FY 17 that covered the cost of the program. She spoke to
potential opportunities to make money for the program. She
furthered that the amendment sponsor had discussed fishing
industry employees who used the services in the summer
months; they had discussed the possibility of selling a
library card to the individuals. She requested to have her
name added as a cosponsor of the amendment.
Representatives Gara, Kawasaki, Guttenberg, and Munoz
requested to be added as cosponsors to the amendment.
Representative Wilson asked for verification that the
amendment did not increase UGF spending.
Co-Chair Neuman replied that the funding would come from
the Alaska Higher Education Fund and no UGF funds were
added.
Representative Kawasaki asked if the Alaska Higher
Education Fund was solvent. He wanted to ensure the money
could be used without jeopardizing other programs.
Co-Chair Neuman replied in the affirmative. He elaborated
that the fund had been created by former Governor Sean
Parnell to assist students who had done well in school. He
shared that the fund had performed well in the current
year; there was some "spinoff" that did not affect the core
of the fund or the available funds for other students to
receive a higher education. He noted that the sponsors had
carefully checked the programs supplanted by funds from the
account to ensure they fell within the boundaries and
qualifications. He stated that the account was fully
functional and was not affected by the reductions due to
its positive investment performance.
3:23:36 PM
Vice-Chair Saddler spoke in support of public libraries. He
stated that online library access and broadband were force
multipliers and helped to keep libraries vibrant learning
centers. He asked to be added as a cosponsor to the
amendment.
Representative Kawasaki noted that the amendment's intent
language discussed the establishing of a fee structure. He
observed that there were numerous participating libraries
across the state. He believed there were many urban areas
using OWL that could potentially absorb a decrease in
funding; however, he would hate to see rural communities
without a tax base try to come up with enough money to fund
their share.
Representative Edgmon believed the federal matching
component prohibited any kind of fee structure. He agreed
with Representative Kawasaki about creative ways for
communities to come forward in the future. He opined that
by providing the funding in the current year the
communities would be given additional time to search out
other opportunities. He believed the approach was fair.
Co-Chair Neuman noted that some of the discussion had
included solutions such as offering a library pass for
purchase.
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
Representatives Wilson and Guttenberg requested to be added
as cosponsors to the amendment.
There being NO further OBJECTION, Amendment 25 was ADOPTED.
3:26:24 PM
Co-Chair Neuman MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 26:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Neuman, Thompson
DEPARTMENT: Education and Early Development
APPROPRIATION: Teaching and Learning Support
ALLOCATION: Student and School Achievement
DELETE: $525,000 General Funds, 1004
ADD: $525,000 Alaska Higher Education Investment Fund,
1226
EXPLANATION: This fund source change for the College
and Career Readiness Assessment (SAT, ACT, or
WorkKeys) is aligned with the goal of the Alaska
Higher Education Investment Fund and supports the
Alaska Performance Scholarship program. Students must
take one of these tests to be eligible for an Alaska
Performance Scholarship.
Co-Chair Thompson OBJECTED for discussion.
Co-Chair Neuman explained that the amendment supplanted
$525,000 in GF with funds from the Alaska Higher Education
Investment Fund. He detailed that the fund source change
was aligned with the goals of the Alaska Higher Education
Investment Fund and supported the Alaska Performance
Scholarship. He discussed that students were required to
take one of the tests [SAT, ACT, or WorkKeys] to be
eligible for the scholarship.
Representative Gattis appreciated the amendment. She spoke
to legislation that had passed through the House Education
Committee. The amendment "essentially gets us through so
that these kids that we can fund for these tests."
Co-Chair Thompson clarified that the Alaska Higher
Education Investment Fund held approximately $436 million.
He explained that the funds used by the amendment did not
reduce the principal of the account.
Representative Gara expressed concern that three amendments
would take money from the account that was supposed to fund
scholarships. He ascertained that something would need to
be done if the fund began disappearing or the state was
unable to provide students with funds needed for vocational
and higher education in the state. He remarked that the
fund was already asked to spinoff what he deemed to be an
unsustainable amount (7 percent annually); most trust funds
were asked to generate 4 to 5 percent. He noted that it had
been a lucky stock market year. He supported the amendment,
but if the fund began to dissipate it would need to be
replaced.
Co-Chair Neuman understood the situation, which was why the
sponsors had determined the fund would not be adversely
affected.
Representative Gara asked for verification that the three
amendments used the fund source indefinitely. Co-Chair
Neuman replied that the amendments used the fund source for
the current year.
Representative Gattis stated that the use of funds would
not continue if a bill was passed.
Co-Chair Thompson WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 26 was ADOPTED.
3:30:14 PM
AT EASE
3:47:32 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Edgmon MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 27:
OFFERED BY: Reps. Neuman, Thompson, Munoz, Saddler,
Gattis & Edgmon
DEPARTMENT: Department of Education and Early
Development
APPROPRIATION: Alaska Library and Museums
ALLOCATION: Library Operations
ADD: $3,600,000 Alaska Higher Education Investment
Fund (1226)
EXPLANATION: Currently there are 122 rural schools
funded through the broadband program, bringing these
schools up to the minimum of 1 OMB. This is a
tremendous opportunity for the State to leverage its
investment at a 4: 1 ratio on a statewide basis,
meaning this $3.6 million can leverage an additional
$14.4 million in federal funding. Broadband access is
critical to the delivery of distance courses for
students and teachers in rural areas to improve the
quality of education and increase graduation rates.
This amendment uses money from the Alaska Higher
Education Investment Fund as this purpose is
consistent with the goals of the fund.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Edgmon explained that the amendment would
restore $3.6 million of the $5 million that the budget
subcommittee had removed from the broadband program. There
were currently 122 rural schools funded through the
program. He explained that the Federal Communications
Commission had taken special interest in the program and
had increased target speeds and the size of the federal e-
rate subsidies available for the service. He reasoned that
broadband was the primary tool of the 21st century. He
believed many schools were finding that increased
coursework was available online and that with proper
broadband capability rural schools had the ability to
download presentations, pictures, video tutorials, and
other. Additionally, the connectivity would enable rural
schools to stretch their limited funds. He added that the
rural students would have access to the Alaska Performance
Scholarship due to a broadened curriculum the increased
broadband would provide.
Representative Gattis spoke in support of the amendment.
She shared that the increment had been in the education
subcommittee budget. She relayed that she had struggled
with restoring the increment; however, the last thing she
wanted to do was "hog tie" a large portion of Alaska by
taking away their opportunity to provide education in a
different way.
Representative Guttenberg requested to add his name as a
cosponsor to the amendment. He remarked that broadband was
"the road we all travel." He noted that one of the major
problems in Alaska had been distances between communities
and the delivery of goods and commodities. He reasoned that
expanding broadband capabilities across the state,
especially in libraries, was a basic infrastructure need.
He stressed that it was needed for daily life, teaching,
business, and other. He discussed that the broadband task-
force had an expensive plan to increase speed to 100
megabits [per second]. He did not know if the goal would be
achieved, but the state would be driven in the direction.
He believed the amendment represented a good start for the
libraries around the state.
Representative Gara requested to add his name as a
cosponsor to the amendment.
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 27 was ADOPTED.
3:52:40 PM
Co-Chair Neuman MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 28:
OFFERED BY: Representative Neuman, Thompson
DEPARTMENT: Department of Education and Early
Development
APPROPRIATION: Teaching and Learning Support
ALLOCATION: Student and School Achievement
DELETE: $1,000,000 Unrestricted General Funds, 1004
EXPLANATION: SERRC was granted funds for a pilot
Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM)
program through the operating budget during a time of
significant budget surpluses. This program currently
serves 45 students at a cost of close to $22,000 per
student.
Co-Chair Thompson OBJECTED for discussion.
Co-Chair Neuman explained that the amendment would delete
$1 million UGF from Teaching and Learning Support student
and school achievement for the SERRC pilot Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) program. He
relayed that when the pilot program had begun there had
been more money in the budget. He believed the program
could probably be worthwhile. He communicated that the
program currently served 45 students at a cost of
approximately $22,000 per student. He believed the money
needed to be used elsewhere in the budget.
Representative Kawasaki stated that the pilot program was
almost through the first year of a three-year commitment.
He discussed that STEM program administrators had
communicated that the program could be replicated and used
in various environments. He believed it would be hasty to
end a pilot project when one year of data was close to
complete. He preferred to see the program completed,
receive a report, and have the ability to duplicate the
project. He spoke against ending pilot projects prior to
their completion.
3:54:49 PM
Representative Gattis supported the amendment. She noted
that there were some great programs with good data. She
pointed to the Alaska Native Science and Engineering
Program (ANSEP) as an example. She agreed that the $1
million needed to be used elsewhere in the budget due to
the difficult budget environment. She acknowledged that
STEM was a great program; however, she believed there was
existing data for another successful program [ANSEP].
Co-Chair Thompson WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
Representative Kawasaki OBJECTED.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Edgmon, Gattis, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson,
Thompson, Neuman
OPPOSED: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Munoz
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 28 PASSED (7/4). Amendment 28
was ADOPTED.
Representative Gattis MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 29:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Neuman, Thompson and
Gattis
DEPARTMENT: Education and Early Development
APPROPRIATION: Alaska Postsecondary Education
Commission
ALLOCATION: WWAMI Medical Education
DELETE:
It is the intent of the legislature that the
department begin discontinuing the WWAMI program.
After the 2015 cohort begins, the department shall
reduce the number of students accepted by 50 percent
annually. The number of students accepted in 2016
shall be 10; 2017, 5 students; 2018, 2 students and no
new students in 2019. The funding will be reduced
accordingly for the reduced number of students.
ADD:
It is the intent of the legislature that the Alaska
Postsecondary Education Commission give notice of
termination of the WWAMI agreement. The termination
clause requires a three years' formal written notice
to the other parties and that no new students would be
admitted to the WWAMI program
EXPLANATION: Any party of WWAMI may terminate the
agreement with three years' formal written notice.
This language serves as notice to terminate the
program in three fiscal years. No new students will be
admitted in 2017-19, and the program will be completed
at the end of FY20.
DELETE: $1,482.4 General Fund (1004)
ADD: $1,482.4 Higher Education Investment Fund (1226)
EXPLANATION: The subcommittee changed 50 percent of WW
AMI funding from the general fund to the Higher
Education Investment Fund. The effect of this
amendment is that 100 percent of WWAMI's funding will
now come from the Higher Education Investment Fund.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gattis explained that the amendment
recognized the legislature's intent to begin discontinuing
the WWAMI medical program. She detailed that the program
had a three-year contract that could not be undone without
providing notice. She relayed that she had met with a
couple of doctors in her district with positive ideas about
how to make improvements in the program. She stated that
the amendment would keep the WWAMI program whole, while
providing intent that the legislature was looking at
tightening the state's belt.
3:57:32 PM
Representative Kawasaki did not know how WWAMI would work
if its agreement was terminated. He asked if the program
received notice of the intent to terminate the agreement
could it be restored if something changed later on.
Representative Gattis replied that action to discontinue
the program had not been taken as of yet. She noted that
there were doctors in the community that were excited about
participating. She opined that something better could be
done. She was uncertain that the current WWAMI program was
accomplishing its original goal. She believed it was
important to look at what hospitals and doctors really
need, which she intended to research over the summer.
Vice-Chair Saddler testified in support of the amendment.
He spoke about a physician in his district who was
associated with the program. He believed it was important
to consider new ways to accomplish healthcare goals. He
opined that the old ways were not always necessarily the
best. He thought the amendment was respectful to current
program participants and would allow time to figure out how
to move forward.
Representative Guttenberg spoke in opposition to the
amendment. He had spoken to the hospital administrator in
his district who had not heard about the potential
discontinuation of the program; the administrator could not
believe the program may end. He had heard that residency
programs were cost-effective for communities. He spoke to
the success of the WWAMI program; there was nothing
comparable in place. He stated that it took significant
time to educate doctors. He noted that the shortage of
doctors in Alaska had been severe in the past. He
elaborated that it was not possible to start a program,
stop it, and to start it again. He stressed that the
program had been successful at bringing doctors back. He
remarked that people would lose confidence in the state's
ability to have similar programs. He stated that there were
three states that used the University of Washington's
facilities to educate their students. He emphasized that
the other states would fill the voids and Alaska would lose
doctors.
4:02:28 PM
Representative Munoz struggled with the amendment; however,
she appreciated the sponsor's decision to delete
subcommittee language that would have immediately begun
ramping down the program. She wondered if it would be wise
to seek input from the medical community prior to
announcing an intent to terminate the program.
Co-Chair Neuman noted that the current termination clause
required a formal written notice to the WWAMI program three
years in advance.
Representative Gattis communicated that she had spent
significant time speaking with long-term doctors in her
district. When she had looked at the program records she
had discovered that the program's original mission was no
longer occurring. She detailed that there were long-term
doctors in her district who hired from the West Coast and
Alaska; they were part of international hiring teams and
believed the program could do a better job. She intended to
reach the people who were hiring and to determine what
Alaska could do to accommodate it. She and others were not
certain WWAMI was the appropriate program. She intended to
extensively explore the issue. She invited Representative
Munoz to join her in the process.
Representative Gara spoke to a shortage of family practice
doctors in Alaska. He stated that the two best ways to get
doctors to move to Alaska were residencies and the WWAMI
program. He was concerned that the program would be
eliminated without knowing what would replace it.
Additionally, he was concerned that the program would be
ended when there was a shortage in family practice. He
wondered about a plan to fill the shortage.
Co-Chair Neuman underscored that the amendment fully funded
WWAMI.
4:06:23 PM
Representative Kawasaki noted that the program was funded
through the next year; therefore, no new students would be
admitted after the upcoming year. He wondered about buying
time to communicate with the medical community to determine
whether WWAMI was or was not the best program. He believed
that given physician shortages across the state it did not
make sense to discontinue the program. He did not believe
it made sense to end the program prior to knowing what the
medical community thought. He relayed that the program had
been terminated in the 1980s when there had been a budget
issue. As a result, for a long time there had not been
physicians trained for Alaska. He noted that the program
had been reinstated under the University of Alaska
Anchorage in the 1990s. He MOVED an amendment to Amendment
29 to add that the notice of termination would be made in
the coming year at this time. He believed the change would
provide time for the committee to learn whether the program
was performing well.
Co-Chair Neuman believed the amendment would already
accomplish the goal. He explained that the amendment fully
funded the WWAMI program for three years, but would prevent
the program from adding new students beginning in FY 17.
The change would allow time for the state to try to catch
up on budgetary needs. He surmised that perhaps the economy
would improve in the future or maybe there would be other
options.
Representative Gattis observed that the state had come a
long way since the WWAMI program had been implemented. She
relayed that there were other programs the medical field
believed offered more bang for the state's buck. She
planned to continue work on the issue during the summer.
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
Representative Guttenberg OBJECTED. He stated that the
ability to attract general physicians and internists was
difficult. He noted that it was even more difficult and
expensive to recruit heart surgeons and specialized
doctors. He did not believe the WWAMI program should be
terminated or phased out until there was a better
understanding of the options. He stated that a general
practitioner was difficult to bring home. He remarked that
expensive doctors would come if they were paid enough. He
reasoned that training Alaskan residents and bringing them
home to work put the state ahead of the curve.
4:11:24 PM
Co-Chair Neuman noted that the intent of the amendment was
to serve notice. He remarked that whether or not notice of
termination was served was a separate question. He believed
it would most likely would take legislation to serve
termination notice. He stressed that the amendment
contained intent language only.
Representative Guttenberg MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gattis, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Thompson, Neuman
OPPOSED: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Munoz, Edgmon
The MOTION PASSED (6/5). Amendment 29 was ADOPTED.
4:13:26 PM
Representative Edgmon MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 30:
OFFERED BY: Rep. Edgmon
DEPARTMENT: Education & Early Development
APPROPRIATION: Teaching and Learning Support
ALLOCATION: Pre-Kindergarten Grants
ADD: $1,900,000 UGF (1004)
EXPLANATION: This restores Pre-Kindergarten grants to
the level proposed in the Governor's Amended Budget.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Edgmon relayed that he intended to withdraw
the amendment after speaking to it. He discussed the value
of early learning. He believed committee members were all
aware that there was more evidence of the life-long
benefits that early learning provided to children. He
remarked on difficult choices the legislature had to make
related to budget cuts. He wondered if the legislature was
dipping into the "seed-core" with the cut to Pre-K. He
detailed that the cuts were going to a program that had
existed for a few years. He stated that the funds would
have allowed for six facilities (Anchorage, Mat-Su, Lower
Kuskokwim, Yukon-Koyukuk, Juneau, and Nome) to continue a
two-year Pre-K cycle. He relayed that he had attended a
Council of State Governments forum on early learning the
prior August in Anchorage; the forum had communicated that
early learning was still struggling to find its niche in
school curriculum throughout the country. The broad
consensus was that there is an increasing amount of
evidence that early learning provides life-long benefits.
He recalled that a couple of years earlier the Department
of Corrections commissioner had told the committee that one
of the major ways to combat recidivism was through early
learning. He WITHDREW the amendment.
4:16:27 PM
Co-Chair Neuman MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 31:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Neuman and Thompson
DEPARTMENT: Education and Early Development
APPROPRIATION: Teaching and Learning Support
ALLOCATION: Statewide Mentoring
ADD: $500.0 Alaska Higher Education Investment Fund
(1226)
EXPLANATION: The purpose of this amendment is to add
$500.0 of the $750.0 for the Statewide Mentoring
Program that the House Finance Subcommittee reduced.
The Statewide Mentoring Program includes two specific
activities: the Alaska Statewide Mentor Project (ASMP)
and the Alaska Administrative Coaching Project (AACP).
The ASMP supports the profession of teaching in
Alaska. The program provides individualized support to
firsthand second-year teachers, developing an
effective teaching force that is responsive to the
diverse academic needs and cultural backgrounds of all
students. Since the beginning of the program in 2004,
teacher retention has increased from a 67 percent
retention rate to a 77 percent retention rate.
Additionally, in-state research shows a positive
impact of mentoring on the learning of students who
have new teachers who are receiving mentoring.
The AACP component provides coaching to Alaska's new
principals. Data collected indicates that early career
principals overwhelmingly report that the knowledge
and skills necessary for effective school leadership
are learned through the AACP.
Co-Chair Thompson OBJECTED for discussion.
Co-Chair Neuman explained that the amendment would restore
$500,000 of the original $750,000 increment to the
statewide mentoring program from the Alaska Higher
Education Fund. The Statewide Mentoring Program included
two specific activities: the Alaska Statewide Mentor
Project (ASMP) and the Alaska Administrative Coaching
Project (AACP). He explained that since the program's
inception in 2004 teacher retention had increased from 67
percent to 77 percent. He believed the most significant
impacts of the program were seen in rural Alaska.
Additionally, research showed that AACP had a positive
impact on principals and their ability to perform their
jobs. He surmised that maintaining the program to help with
retaining skilled personnel and coaching opportunities was
important during a time of budget cuts. He relayed that the
amendment had come at the request of the governor.
Representative Gara observed there were six amendments
funded through the Alaska Higher Education Fund. He
referred to an earlier statement that the funds were a one-
time occurrence. He did not see how the items would be
funded in the future. He wondered if the fund could sustain
the expenditures.
Co-Chair Neuman noted that the state was currently facing a
$3.5 billion deficit. He elaborated that the committee had
been tasked with finding reductions to state operating
budgets. He stressed that the state did not have sufficient
savings to continue to fund at the current level. He
emphasized that the Alaska Higher Education Fund was not in
jeopardy. He observed that fortunately the state could use
the funds to get through another year, which would give the
state more time to find other ways to fund items.
Co-Chair Thompson WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 31 was ADOPTED.
4:20:54 PM
Representative Edgmon MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 32:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Neuman and Thompson
DEPARTMENT: Education and Early Development
APPROPRIATION: Alaska Library and Museums
ALLOCATION: Live Homework Help
ADD: $138,200 Higher Education Investment Fund 1226
EXPLANATION: Live Homework Help assists Alaskan
student to do well in courses, participate in
statewide initiatives such as the Alaska Performance
Scholarship Awards, meet goals and prepare for post-
secondary success by providing online tutoring
services with accomplished and vetted tutors. Last
year Live Homework Help delivered 25,046 tutoring
sessions online in match, physics, chemistry, biology
and writing for grades four through early college. It
is a widely used, beneficial, and less expensive
alternative to in-person sessions requiring travel,
especially in rural Alaska. Using the Higher Education
Investment Fund for this purpose is consistent with
the goals of the fund.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Edgmon believed the benefit of the program
would far outweigh its relatively low cost. He communicated
that the previous year the Live Homework Help program had
delivered 25,046 tutoring sessions online in various topics
(e.g. physics, chemistry, biology, and writing) to students
in grade 4 through college. The amendment would fund
$138,200 to the Live Homework Help program through DEED. He
noted that the program worked in tandem with the OWL
program. He believed the program contributed to enabling
students to move into the 21st Century with online learning
capabilities and to access resources that may not be
immediately available in their communities.
Representative Wilson noted that some of Alaska's great
school districts were providing tutoring through other
universities in the Lower 48. For example, one district was
working with a university in Pennsylvania and had matched
education students with students in Pennsylvania. She
remarked that there were more volunteers at the specific
university than children in the school district. She hoped
the University of Alaska could be a participant and
believed it would be a great training experience. She added
that the tutors had come to different districts and had
stayed longer than those under the mentoring program. She
thought the state should look at potentially repeating some
of the great ideas already being put into districts. She
believed it would be a positive transition to utilize the
University of Alaska as opposed to universities out-of-
state.
Representative Gara remarked that he had an identical
amendment later on in the amendment packet. He requested to
be added as a cosponsor to Amendment 32 and noted he would
withdraw his amendment later on in the meeting.
Representatives Kawasaki, Guttenberg, and Edgmon requested
to add their names as cosponsors to the amendment.
Co-Chair Thompson WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 32 was ADOPTED.
4:24:04 PM
Representative Munoz MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 33:
OFFERED BY: Munoz
DEPARTMENT: Transportation/Public Facilities
Part 1:
APPROPRJATION: Marine Highway System
ALLOCATION: Marine Vessel Operations
ADD:
$700,000 Unrestricted General Funds
Explanation: This addition changes the decrement for
"Service Level Reduction and Efficiencies" from $6
million to $5.3 million by adding $.7 million back to
Personal Services.
Part 2:
ALLOCATION: Marine Vessel Operations
Transfer $1 million from the Services line-item to the
Personal Services line-item.
Explanation: The intent of this action is to decrease
repair/maintenance on equipment and machinery
(Expenditure Account 73676) by $1 million and apply it
to Personal Services to lessen the impact to service
levels. This expenditure account had Actuals of $117.3
in FY14, but has $1.3 million budgeted for FY16.
Commissioner Part 3:
ALLOCATION: Marine Vessel Operations
Transfer $1 million from the Commodities line-item to
the Personal Services line item.
Explanation: The intent of this action is to decrease
commodities by $1 million and apply it to Personal
Services to lessen the impact to service levels. This
expenditure account has $7.8 million budgeted for
FY16.
Part 4:
ALLOCATION: Marine Vessel Operations
ADD: $1,500,000 Unrestricted General Funds
ALLOCATION: Marine Vessel Fuel
DELETE: $1,500,000 Unrestricted General Funds
Explanation: The intent of this action is to decrease
Marine Vessel Fuel by $1.5 million and apply it to
Personal Services to lessen the impact to service
levels. With average fuel delivery costs now projected
to be lower in FY16 over FY15, it is rational to
assume that the overall cost for fuel will decrease.
Co-Chair Thompson OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Munoz explained that the amendment would
move approximately $4.2 million into the Alaska Marine
Highway System (AMHS) service levels for ferry system
service. The funds were broken down into four components.
She detailed that the first component would add $700,000
UGF; the second component would move $1 million from the
services line item, which had 34 components totaling $12.1
million; the third component would move $1 million from the
commodities line item, which contained $7.8 million for
items like mattresses, restaurant items, and other; and the
fourth component would take $1.5 million from marine vessel
fuel. She detailed that the current budgeted amount for
AMHS fuel was $2.56 per gallon (based on 10.4 million
gallons), whereas the current published rate for petroleum
out of Seattle, WA was $1.94 per gallon. She elaborated
that the average delivery fee was about $0.42. She reasoned
the two costs combined still equated to a $0.20 to $0.25
savings per gallon, which more than covered the reduction
of $1.5 million.
Representative Wilson spoke in opposition to the amendment.
She wondered why the $700,000 UGF funding was necessary
especially if fuel costs continued declining. She
understood wanting to add additional money to AMHS, but
observed that the Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities (DOT) budget had been reduced statewide. She
remarked that the northern region would be losing quite a
bit of funding; she had told constituents to get used to
driving on new snow due to a reduction in DOT services.
Co-Chair Thompson spoke in support of the amendment. He
discussed that he had chaired the DOT budget subcommittee.
He detailed that the subcommittee had reduced the DOT
budget by $20 million: $10 million from roads and airports
and $10 million from AMHS. He was sensitive to the island
communities using the ferries as roads to receive groceries
and travel to the doctor. He stated that significant work
needed to be done on the ferry system budget, which he
planned to do over the summer. He stated that with the
restoration of $700,000 UGF there would still be a
reduction of $9.3 million. He noted that there was some
readjusting of funds between the current amendment and
Amendment 34. He reiterated that much work would be done on
the budget over the summer to determine ferry routes and
other.
4:29:30 PM
Representative Gattis struggled with the amendment, but
understood that $10 million had already been removed from
the AMHS budget. She hoped that Southeast recognized that
the state was struggling with its road system; some of the
state's fastest growing communities were struggling with
keeping roads. She supported the amendment reluctantly due
to adding back funds. She recognized that a $20 million
reduction was a substantial reduction to the DOT budget.
Representative Pruitt echoed the words of Representatives
Gattis and Thompson. He struggled with adding funds due to
the fiscal situation; however, he credited Representative
Munoz for looking at various areas within the department
where money could be used more efficiently. He remarked
that the funds were a temporary plug. He looked forward to
information in the future on how service could be continued
in a more efficient way. He stated that there had been many
people over many years who had done some "fascinating
things" that prevented the state from managing AMHS. He
vocalized support for the amendment due to the work put in
by the sponsor and because the issue would be worked on
over the summer. He recognized that restoring $700,000 did
not represent adding new UGF, but lessened the cut to $9.3
million.
Representative Edgmon spoke in support of the amendment. He
underscored the importance of the seasonal ferry system
service to Southwest Alaskan communities (i.e. Sandpoint,
King Cove, Chignik, Unalaska, Akutan, False Pass, and
other). He stated that the amendment acknowledged that
times were changing; it provided AMHS with a short
reprieve, but the ferry system would be required to
continue to prove its existence. He lauded Representative
Munoz and Co-Chair Thompson for their work on the amendment
and pointed to its creativity.
4:33:04 PM
Vice-Chair Saddler associated himself with previous
comments by committee members. He was conscious of adding
money back, but he took comfort knowing there would still
be reductions. He observed that it was only in times of
shortage that people really worked to find creative ways to
find service at the lowest possible cost, while maintaining
essential services. He looked forward to the work going
forward and looking into the possibility of preferential
pricing. He remarked that the service was important and was
also a scarce commodity for visitors in the summer. He
commented on the high price of a last-minute airline ticket
and wondered about increasing prices for last-minute ferry
travel.
4:34:02 PM
Co-Chair Thompson WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
Representative Wilson OBJECTED. She stated that the rest of
the DOT system was taking a larger hit than AMHS.
Representative Pruitt clarified that he would be frustrated
if a ferry schedule was published in October that put the
legislature in a position of making more cuts. He remarked
that AMHS had previously published a schedule while it had
been under consideration for potential downsizing. He
remarked that because the legislature was putting the ferry
system on notice, he expected AMHS to be cognizant of
potential cuts when setting its schedule. He stated that it
was not fair to Alaskan communities.
Representative Gara remarked that legislators represented
the entire state. He stated that the people driving roads
in his part of the state (Southcentral) were fortunate that
they did not pay. He did not want them to pay and did not
want to impose tolls; however, they drove their roads for
free. He stated that people in Southeast actually pay to
travel their roads (i.e. the marine highway). He had heard
many people beating up on AHMS. He thought it was important
to recognize that it was the only highway where people pay
in Alaska.
Co-Chair Thompson agreed that people did pay fees; but the
fees accounted for slightly less than 30 percent of the
$160 million cost. He stated that of the $124 million cost
to maintain the state's roads, over 80 percent was paid for
with gas, tire, and rental car taxes. He would be happy if
the state could get the ferry system pay for 80 percent of
its cost.
4:37:37 PM
Representative Wilson MAINTAINED her OBJECTION to Amendment
33.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gattis, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Munoz, Pruitt,
Saddler, Edgmon, Gara, Thompson, Neuman
OPPOSED: Wilson
The MOTION PASSED (10/1). Amendment 33 was ADOPTED.
Co-Chair Thompson requested to have his name added as a
cosponsor to Amendment 33.
4:38:36 PM
Representative Munoz MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 34:
OFFERED BY: Munoz
DEPARTMENT: Transportation/Public Facilities
APPROPRIATION: Marine Highway System
ALLOCATION: Marine Vessel Operations
ADD: $1,800,000 Alaska Marine Highway System Funds
(Fund Code 1076)
Explanation: This increase would stem from a fare
increase of 4.5 percent to be applied to the Winter
2015 and Summer 2016 schedule.
ADD INTENT LANGUAGE: It is the intent of the
legislature that the Alaska Marine Highway System
continue existing service levels during the peak
summer months and any reduction in service levels will
occur during non-peak months."
Co-Chair Thompson OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Munoz explained that the amendment would
give AMHS the authority to institute a 4.5 percent fare
increase, which would be applied to the winter and summer
schedules. She detailed that the increase was anticipated
to generate $1.8 million for the ferry system.
Co-Chair Thompson explained that the 4.5 percent increase
was projected to generate $1.8 million, which would be
marine highway service funds. The amendment would give AMHS
receipt authority to utilize the money, but it would not be
given to the system in completeness; if the money was not
raised, it could not be spent. He stated that the funds
would make AMHS whole through the winter. He hoped that by
the coming fall the funding would be exceeded.
Co-Chair Neuman asked if the fare increase was in addition
to a recent fare increase. Representative Munoz responded
in the affirmative. She detailed that a fare increase had
been instituted in the 2015 summer schedule. She elaborated
that the amendment would enable AMHS to adjust the fee for
the winter and following summer; the total increase would
equal approximately 9 percent. She believed it was
appropriate as it had been many years since a fare increase
had been implemented.
Representative Gara asked for verification that the
amendment would mean an overall fare increase of 9 percent.
Representative Munoz replied that an increase of 4.5
percent had been published for the summer of 2015. The
amendment would allow the ferry system to increase rates
for the following winter and summer by an additional 4.5
percent.
Co-Chair Thompson WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 34 was ADOPTED.
4:41:53 PM
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 35 [Note:
final page of Amendment 35 titled "Annual State Spending on
Expansion" on file]:
OFFERED BY: Representative Gara
DEPARTMENT: Corrections
APPROPRIATION: Health and Rehabilitation Services
ALLOCATION: Physical Health Care
DELETE: $4,108.2 Gen Fund (1004)
EXPLANATION: This portion of the amendment reinstates
the budget savings of $4,108.2 UGF that will no longer
be required to be spent if the Governor's proposal to
expand Medicaid is reinstated in the Operating Budget.
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Behavioral Health
ALLOCATION: Behavioral Health Treatment and Recovery
Grants
DELETE: $1,558.7 GF/MH (1037)
EXPLANATION: This portion of the amendment reinstates
the budget savings of $1,558.7 UGF that will no longer
be required to be spent if the Governor's proposal to
expand Medicaid is reinstated in the Operating Budget.
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Health Care Services
ALLOCATION: Catastrophic and Chronic Illness
Assistance
DELETE: $1,000.0 Gen Fund (1004)
EXPLANATION: This portion of the amendment reinstates
the budget savings of $1,000.0 UGF that will no longer
be required to be spent if the Governor's proposal to
expand Medicaid is reinstated in the Operating Budget.
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Health Care Services
ALLOCATION: Medical Assistance Administration
ADD: $410.0 ($205.0 Fed [1002], $205.0 MHTAAR [1092])
POSITIONS: ADD: 3 PFT positions
EXPLANATION: This portion of the amendment allows the
state to accept Federal and Mental Health Trust funds
for three positions associated with Medicaid
expansion.
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Public Assistance
ALLOCATION: Public Assistance Field Services
ADD: $2,777.3 ($1,385.6 Fed [1002], $1,385.7 MHTAAR
[1092])
POSITIONS: ADD: 23 PFT positions
EXPLANATION: This amendment allows the state to accept
Federal and Mental Health Trust funds for 23 positions
associated with the expansion of Medicaid.
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Departmental Support Services
ALLOCATION: Commissioner's Office
ADD: $0.0
POSITIONS: Establish a project manager to manage
Medicaid expansion team.
EXPLANATION: This amendment adds a temporary position
to manage the Medicaid expansion team - not money or
PFTs.
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Medicaid Services
ALLOCATION: Behavioral Health Medicaid Services
ADD: $4,799.5 Fed (1002)
EXPLANATION: This portion of the amendment allows the
department to accept $4, 799.5 in Federal funds that
will benefit Behavioral Health.
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Medicaid Services
ALLOCATION: Adult Preventative Dental Medicaid
Services
ADD: $5,381.2 Fed (1002)
EXPLANATION: This portion of the amendment allows the
department to accept $5,381.2 in Federal funds that
will benefit Adult Preventative Dental services.
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Medicaid Services
ALLOCATION: Senior and Disabilities Medicaid Services
ADD: $2,908.8 Fed (1002)
EXPLANATION: This portion of the amendment allows the
department to accept $2,908.8 in Federal funds that
will benefit Senior and Disability Medicaid services.
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Medicaid Services
ALLOCATION: Health Care Medicaid Services
ADD: $132,348.9 Fed (1002)
EXPLANATION: This portion of the amendment allows the
department to accept $132,348.9 in Federal funds that
will provide the opportunity for healthcare to the
over 40,000 individuals without it in Alaska, create
4,000 jobs, and inject money into the state's economy.
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Medicaid Services
ALLOCATION: Health Care Medicaid Services
DELETE WORDAGE: No money appropriated in this
appropriation may be expended for services to persons
who are eligible pursuant to 42 United States Code
section 1396a(a)(l0)A)(i)(VIII) and whose household
modified adjusted gross income is less than or equal
to one hundred thirty-three percent of the federal
poverty guidelines.
EXPLANATION: This portion of the amendment deletes
wordage that prohibits the expenditure of Medicaid
funding on the expansion population.
Vice-Chair Saddler OBJECTED.
Representative Gara opined that the amendment represented
the easiest $6.6 million savings anywhere in the budget by
accepting Medicaid expansion. The amendment included a
summary from the Evergreen study (copy on file), provided
by DHSS. He stated that not only would state savings be
achieved, Alaska would receive $145 million in federal
money. He detailed that the federal money would generate
4,000 good jobs, which were important to the state's
economy. He referred to a comment by labor economist Neil
Fried that the state would lose 2,000 jobs in the coming
year. He stressed that it would not be wise to speed a
recession. He reasoned that turning away budget savings and
4,000 jobs would be a mistake. He expounded that Medicaid
expansion would provide healthcare to 20,000 to 40,000
Alaskans (the difference factored on including or excluding
individuals who received Indian Health Service medical
care). He continued that expansion would fix a gap created
by a lawsuit brought by a number of governors. He explained
that a gap existed for low-income people working for a
living who did not receive insurance subsidies. Accepting
Medicaid expansion would provide the individuals with
insurance subsidies.
Representative Gara addressed that without expansion,
Medicaid covered individuals with disabilities or a child,
but it did not cover single individuals or a couple with no
child. He explained that with Medicaid expansion the state
would receive 100 percent federal funding for costs the
state was currently paying (e.g. costs for alcohol
treatment). He stated that $4 million in savings would
result because the state funded prisoner healthcare outside
its prison system. He discussed that Evergreen had been
working for the state and analyzing its Medicaid data for
approximately 12 years. He stressed that no consultant had
studied the state's Medicaid system more than Evergreen. He
addressed an argument that the amendment should not be
passed because someone should file a bill. He remarked that
most bills in the legislature failed due to road blocks. He
wanted to include Medicaid expansion in the budget to avoid
the subject getting blocked in the committee process. He
referred to presentations to the committee on the subject
by DHSS. He emphasized that the committee had the
information it needed to make an informed decision. He
reiterated that there was no easier $6.6 million cut to the
budget. He believed the increment should be included in the
current budget.
Co-Chair Neuman remarked that there was no $6.6 million in
the budget. He stated that Evergreen had been the third
group to conduct a report on Medicaid expansion and Alaska.
One report had found that expansion would not work for
Alaska and another report done by Econ One had found
different conclusions than the Evergreen report.
4:49:11 PM
Co-Chair Neuman stated that the amendment attributed
specific values to money the state did not have. He thought
it was difficult to write a budget with money the state did
not have.
Vice-Chair Saddler spoke in objection to the amendment. He
stated that the amendment would add $150 million to the
budget on top of $1.7 billion already spent on Medicaid. He
believed the amendment would put Alaska on the hook for
Medicaid expansion forever. He noted that the amendment
included no provisions for reform, cost-containment,
utilization control, managed care, care coordination,
health savings accounts, medical provider tax, side boards
for withdrawal, and other. He stated that the legislature
took big policy issues and put them through big policy
committees with a transparent public process. He believed
the issue should and would be debated in another bill.
Representative Guttenberg spoke in support of the
amendment. He supported Medicaid expansion and he believed
the budget was an appropriate place to put it. He stated
that in many ways Medicaid reform and expansion took
inefficiencies and created efficiencies. He stressed that
the lowest-income residents were the most costly to the
system due to how they used the healthcare system. He
referred to an example of homeless individuals who visited
the emergency room 20 times per year and had 45 encounters
with police; when those individuals received insurance the
cost to the state decreased dramatically. He reasoned that
the approach could be viewed as a fiscally conservative
approach to managing medical care in the state. He
elaborated that one of the side benefits would be building
out the medical community. He noted that the value may not
be possible to demonstrate in current dollars, but he
believed the benefits had been shown. He remarked that the
savings would not all be accrued by the state, but there
were many savings that would accrue back to the
communities. He noted that expansion would accept $145
million in federal money. He continued that the governor
had committed to withdrawing from the program if the
reimbursement decreased to a certain level. He remarked
that the state fought to keep military personnel in the
state, who were funded by federal money. He spoke to a huge
benefit to the state dealing with the health of all
Alaskans. He believed the budget was an appropriate place
to put the funds.
4:55:23 PM
Representative Gara provided closing remarks. He responded
to a statement made about studies conducted on Medicaid
expansion in Alaska. He stated that Evergreen used the real
demographics in the state that they were familiar with,
which had resulted in their conclusion that expansion would
save the state $6.6 million in the first year. He relayed
that the study had factored in that 53 percent of the
Medicaid recipients in the state were male; males tended to
go to the doctor less frequently than females. He furthered
that of the 53 percent, 20 percent were between the ages of
19 and 33, which was a low-cost group related to healthcare
costs. He stressed that the great political mistake would
be to pass on expansion in the years the federal government
would pay 100 percent. He had heard the argument that there
was no Medicaid reform; however, the DHSS commissioner had
proposed $20 million in Medicaid reform. He added that any
legislator could file a reform bill if they desired. He
asserted that committee had held full and transparent
hearings on the subject. He remarked that he had never seen
the state turn away 90 percent federal road funding. He
believed the state should accept 100 percent medical care
funding that would turn into 90 percent funding by 2020. He
remarked on the many benefits of Medicaid expansion for the
state.
Vice-Chair Saddler MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Gara
OPPOSED: Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 35 FAILED (3/8).
4:58:28 PM
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 36:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
DEPARTMENT: Education and Early Development
APPROPRIATION: Teaching and Learning Support
ALLOCATION: Early Learning Coordination
ADD: $357.5 UGF (1004)
EXPLANATION: Restores all funds to the Parents as
Teachers program and adds $50.0 to reach more
families. Parents as Teachers was passed as a bill by
the Legislature because it is the most cost-effective
way to provide Pre-K education to young children, and
is proven to save money by graduating more students,
reducing social service and criminal costs, and
increasing a student's future earning potential and
educational attainment.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gara discussed that all state funded Pre-K
had been eliminated by the DEED budget subcommittee. He
pointed to the benefits of Pre-K programs. He detailed that
youth who went to Pre-K graduate high school in higher
numbers, attend college in higher numbers, earn more money,
end up in jail in smaller numbers, and cost the state less
in criminal costs. He elaborated that Parents as Teachers
had been an effort by many legislators including himself,
former Representative Bill Thomas, Representative Chris
Tuck, and others (Parents as Teachers was a non-classroom
Pre-K program). He stressed that the program worked; he
referred to significant public testimony in support. He
explained the amendment would add $50,000 to funding from
the prior year. He stated that the investment would save
the state money in the long-term. He underscored the
program would improve the state's low ranking in reading
proficiency and would improve graduation rates.
5:01:03 PM
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Kawasaki, Gara, Guttenberg
OPPOSED: Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 36 FAILED (3/8).
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 37:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
DEPARTMENT: Education and Early Development
APPROPRIATION: Teaching and Learning Support
ALLOCATION: Early Learning Coordination
ADD: $287.5 UGF (1004)
EXPLANATION: Restore the Governor's proposed level of
funding to the Parents as Teachers program. Parents as
Teachers was passed as a bill by the Legislature
because it is the most cost-effective way to provide
Pre-K to young children, and is proven to save states
money by graduating more students, reducing social
service and criminal costs, and increasing a student's
future earning potential and educational attainment.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED.
Representative Gara explained the amendment would restore
funding to Parents as Teachers at the governor's level of
$287,500. He relayed that the amendment was more modest
than the previous amendment ($70,000 less).
Representative Guttenberg spoke in support of the
amendment. He noted that the committee had heard compelling
public testimony on the program. He commented that many of
the parents who supported Parents as Teachers had received
stress relief as a result of their experience in the
program. He believed that eliminating funds for the program
during the challenging budget environment was a disservice
to residents. He stated that expenses in other areas such
as social service programs and public safety would increase
without the program. He noted that the program had been in
place for several years and had been proven as cost-
effective. He believed it was important to support Parents
as Teachers and similar programs that would help keep the
state stable. He spoke to the decrease in recidivism that
resulted from early childhood programs. He opined that the
program was healthy for the state in the long-term.
5:04:15 PM
Representative Kawasaki testified in support of the
amendment. He believed the proposal was modest. He spoke to
past bipartisan support of the program. He elaborated that
the program was a great way to get parents engaged with
families. He communicated that the program had exceeded his
expectation; it was currently in 50 communities and the
program in Southeast included 343 families in various
communities. He highlighted that parents relayed that the
program offered them with a successful education. He
observed that the education would help the state down the
road. He noted that the program was currently offered in
all other states; Alaska would be the only state in the
nation without the program if funding was eliminated.
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Munoz, Edgmon, Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Gattis, Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 37 FAILED (5/6).
5:06:19 PM
Representative Gara WITHDREW Amendment 38 (copy on file).
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 39:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
DEPARTMENT: Education and Early Development
APPROPRIATION: Teaching and Learning Support
ALLOCATION: Pre-Kindergarten Grants
ADD: $1,900.0 UGF (1004)
EXPLANATION: Restore all funding to the Pre-K grants
deleted by the Subcommittee. This is the mainstay of
Alaska's state voluntary classroom Pre-K program and
has proven to improve intellectual growth.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gara discussed that in the past the
legislature had worked across party lines to become the
43rd state to try for a statewide Pre-K program. He noted
that Alaska was one of just a handful of states without a
statewide Pre-K program. He continued that former Governor
Sarah Palin had agreed to work with the legislature to
start a pilot program; the administration had agreed to
double the funding to $4 million if the program was shown
to be successful after three years. He stressed that the
program had worked and was evidence-based. He spoke to
increased graduation rates and a reduction in criminal
costs. He discussed that Pre-K decreased costs in K-12
schools and increased the well-being of students. He
stressed that the eradication of the state's only Pre-K
program would be a mistake. He noted that the amendment
would fund the program at the level of the governor's
request of $1.9 million. He underscored that it was not
possible to do better than evidence. He hoped members would
support the amendment.
5:09:33 PM
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Edgmon, Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Munoz
OPPOSED: Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Gattis, Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 39 FAILED (5/6).
5:10:17 PM
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 40:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
DEPARTMENT: Education and Early Development
APPROPRIATION: Teaching and Learning Support
ALLOCATION: Early Learning Coordination
ADD: $937.5 UGF (1004)
EXPLANATION: This amendment restores the Best
Beginnings program to the level of funding in the
Governor's budget. Best Beginnings fosters strong
partnerships with local and statewide entities that
promote early learning opportunities for children to
start school prepared to succeed. Studies show
children with more books in the home are more likely
to become good readers. Best Beginnings supports
Imagination Libraries and early childhood partnerships
that provide services in 113 Alaskan communities with
an enrollment of 23,603. These partnerships promote
healthy parent-child interaction, higher quality early
care and learning, and parent education. The program
costs $30 per year per child (0-5), and is funded
through a combination of state and private sources,
nearly half of which are raised locally. In FY 2014
the partnerships raised $1.40 (cash and in-kind) for
every Best Beginnings dollar they received.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gara stressed that the state was running out
of ways to remain in the list of states that provide state-
funded Pre-K. He emphasized that Best Beginnings was
successful; it leveraged private money and provided books
to youth through the Imagination Library. He detailed that
the program increased the intellectual activity of use
beginning in infancy. Additionally, the program had been
proven to increase academic achievement. He remarked that
the state had funded the low-cost program for many years;
the program reached out to over 23,000 children. He opined
that it would be a large mistake to get rid of the program.
The amendment would restore the DEED subcommittee cut and
elimination of the program.
5:12:09 PM
Representative Gattis opined that all of the committee
members believed that books for kids were important. She
stressed that the state did not have the money. She
remarked that it was necessary to focus on what the state
was constitutionally mandated to fund. She believed it was
not possible to fund everything for everybody. She
understood that the programs worked. She believed parents
should be involved with reading books to their children and
taking them to libraries.
Representative Guttenberg shared a story about a child who
had received her book in the mail at the post office. He
recognized that the state's decline curve in income was
significant, but all of the childhood education programs
had an impact either way. He emphasized that Best
Beginnings and providing books to children had huge
benefits to the state. He disputed the argument that the
state could not afford to provide the programs.
Alternately, he wondered how the state could not fund the
programs.
Representative Wilson stated that the program had begun
with volunteers who signed up for $25 to sponsor a child.
She believed it had done well under the initial model that
did not depend on state funding. She believed communities
would pick up the programs to make them work. She
emphasized that the absence of state funding did not mean
the program would end; it meant it may revert back to its
original form of communities supporting children through
libraries and possible donations.
Vice-Chair Saddler spoke against the amendment. He
questioned when parents had not been teachers. He wondered
when parents did not want to have a best beginning for
their child that was not contingent on a state program. He
was not against kids, books, or parents; however, he did
not believe it was the state's role to provide the
functions.
Representative Kawasaki spoke in support of the amendment.
He communicated that the Imagination Library in Fairbanks
had started due to volunteers and state capital funding. He
noted that the programs continued largely because of a good
organizational backbone. He pointed out that the
partnership raised cash in addition to funds provided by
the state. He stated that the organization clearly worked
outside the frame of government in a more cost-effective
way than the state could provide. He stated that if the
legislature cut the last program related to early education
it represented less than 0.5 percent of the DEED budget. He
stressed that the legislature was not funding early
education like it should be.
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Edgmon, Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Munoz
OPPOSED: Saddler, Wilson, Gattis, Pruitt, Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 40 FAILED (5/6).
5:18:02 PM
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 41:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
DEPARTMENT: Education and Early Development
APPROPRIATION: Teaching and Learning Support
ALLOCATION: Student and School Achievement
ADD: $320.0 UGF (1004)
EXPLANATION: This amendment restores the
Subcommittee's cut to the K-3 Literacy Project. This
allocation allows school districts to perform early
literacy screening for students in kindergarten
through third grade. These funds also provide
intervention direction for educators, parents, and
agencies that work with children to improve literacy
for all learners. Approximately 40,000 students are
served.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED.
Representative Gara hoped the House Finance Committee was
not the last stop for statewide Pre-K. He stated that
without funding Alaska would be one of the ten states
without the program. He relayed that the amendment was a
low-cost way for the state to screen young children having
problems with reading in K-3. He spoke to Alaska's ranking
as last in the nation in 4th grade reading levels. The
amendment would restore funds to the K-3 early literacy
program that had been cut by the DEED budget subcommittee.
He believed it was smart to screen youth to determine who
had fallen behind. He stressed that it would save the state
money in jail and education costs in the long run.
5:20:10 PM
Representative Gattis disputed that the amendment
represented a money saver. She stressed that the amendment
was a money spender. She believed the state had "rock
stars" for teachers who knew whether their students could
read or not. She stated that the money went to the
department for another unfunded mandate for schools to
report what they already know. She believed that if
teachers did not already know that students could not read,
the increment would not be helpful.
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis, Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to Adopt Amendment 41 FAILED (3/8).
5:21:44 PM
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 42:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
DEPARTMENT: Education and Early Development
APPROPRIATION: Teaching and Learning Support
ALLOCATION: Student and School Achievement
ADD: $150.0 UGF (1004)
EXPLANATION: This amendment reverses the
Subcommittee's cut to the Statewide Literacy project.
The State Literacy Institute is designed to support
and train teachers in literacy instruction from
preschool to graduation. This allocation supports
presenter contracts and expenses, EEO staff costs for
organization and travel to the institute, facility and
conference expenses, and scholarship and support for
teachers to attend. In 2014, 118 participants from 11
different districts and organizations participated.
This amendment restores the Governor's proposed level
of funding for the program.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gara explained that the amendment would
restore a $150,000 cut from the governor's budget by the
DEED budget subcommittee. He detailed that the Statewide
Literacy program trained teachers and educators to help
youth who were behind in reading. He discussed that the
program would help get the state out of last place in 4th
grade reading level. He had heard no explanation about how
or why the small amount of money did not work.
Representative Wilson replied that the money did not go
into school districts. She stated that districts had
already provided the function. She stated that DEED had
wanted increased reporting and the funds did not go towards
literacy for children. She stressed that the department had
decided to force unfunded mandates; the money went to the
department and not districts. She stated that services
would continue to be funded outside of the increment.
5:23:27 PM
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Edgmon, Gattis, Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 42 FAILED (3/8).
5:24:03 PM
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 43 [Note:
final three pages of Amendment 35 titled "Legislative
Research Services Research Brief" on file]:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
Page l, line 2, following "capitalizing funds;":
Insert "lapsing appropriations"
Page 76, line 18, following "APPROPRJATIONS.":
Insert "(a)"
Page 76, line 19:
Insert new subsections to read: "(b) the unexpended
and unobligated balance on June 30, 2015, estimated to
be $17,973,847, of the appropriation made in sec. 01,
ch. 16, SLA 2013, page 12, lines 20-21, lapses to the
general fund on June 30, 2015."
EXPLANATION: This causes the available general fund
balance appropriated to the Anchorage - U-Med District
Northern Access project to lapse into the general
fund. The Bragaw Road extension in Anchorage is not an
affordable project compared to other priorities in
this fiscal climate.
"(c) $6 million of the unexpended and unobligated
balances, estimated to be a total of $6,681,700, of
the appropriations made in sec. 4, ch. 16 SLA 2013,
page 105, lines 20-24, and sec. 4, ch. 18, SLA 2014,
page 87, lines 10-11, and without elimination of any
department positions, lapses to the general fund on
June 30, 2015."
EXPLANATION: This causes the available general fund
balance appropriated to Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric
projects to lapse into the general fund. The Susitna
Dam would serve the same customers as the two gasline
projects being considered by the State at this time,
and all three projects will bring excess power to the
Railbelt. This amendment withdraws the remaining
unobligated funds with appropriated to the Susitna Dam
in a time of budget shortfalls. This lapse does not
affect any positions at DCCED.
DEPARTMENT: Education and Early Development
APPROPRIATION: K-12 Aid to School Districts
ALLOCATION: Additional Foundation Funding
ADD: $62,243.7 UGF (1004)
ADD: Language: The sum of $62,243.7 is appropriated
from the general fund to the Department of Education
and Early Development to be distributed as state aid
to districts according to the average daily membership
for each district adjusted under AS 14.17.410(b)(l)(A)
- (D) for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2016. If any
portion of the $32,243.7 intended to be appropriated
in HB278 passed in 2014 is appropriated in FY 16, and
distributed through the foundation formula per the
language in HB278, the amount of this appropriation
shall be reduced by that appropriated amount.
EXPLANATION: HB278 effectively flat funds schools in
the coming two school years, and staff and education
cuts, even under HB278 without the Governor's
reductions, will be seen in Mat-Su, Juneau, Fairbanks
and other districts. This amendment seeks to prevent
staff cuts, and make up for some prior year's cuts.
HB278 passed in 2014 adds a $50 Base Student
Allocation increase at a roughly cost of $12.5
million. But in the coming school year HB278 grant
funds to be distributed through the Foundation Formula
fall by $11,710,000, effectively nullifying the Base
Student Allocation Increase. According to a recent
2015 Legislative Research Report, the amount in this
amendment will hold schools even with inflation
compared to last school year. Without this amount, the
Mat-Su School District predicts a roughly $2 - $3
million deficit; Fairbanks estimates it will lose
between 30 - 70 educators, and the Juneau School
District has stated in the Juneau Empire that it will
pile more educator cuts on top of prior year cuts.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gara spoke to Amendment 43. He discussed
that there had been teacher layoffs on and off in Alaska
for the past five years. He noted that the superintendent
in Juneau had called the layoffs devastating. He elaborated
that in Juneau, Mat-Su, and Fairbanks (even with one-time
grant funding provided the previous year) the districts
would face shortfalls and layoffs. The amendment would
restore grant funding promised by the legislature the
previous year and added an amount to inflation proof
funding to the prior year. He detailed that the amendment
moved funds into education from places that served a lesser
need, including $17.9 million in unobligated funds for the
controversial Bragaw Road in Anchorage and $6 million in
unobligated funds for the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) for
the Susitna-Watana Dam. He stated that the $23.9 million
funded the majority of the increase over grant funding
promised by the legislature the prior year. He remarked
that it was not possible to keep running schools that cut
teachers. He cited projections that Mat-Su, Juneau, and
Fairbanks would lay off over 70 staff (the layoffs would
increase without the one-time grant funding). He
underscored that shedding teachers was not the way to move
the state's schools forward. He understood that money
needed to be saved; the governor had proposed roughly $250
million in agency operations cuts and with the committee's
amendments it would have cut a bit more. He agreed with the
governor's goal to make cuts without hurting the economy.
He believed it was possible to make cuts, while continuing
to fund schools at a level that would prevent layoffs. He
directed attention to a memorandum from Legislative
Research Services stating that in addition to funds from
the education bill that passed the prior year [HB 178], an
increase to the Base Student Allocation (BSA) of
approximately $129 was needed to keep up with inflation
(the amount equaled about $30 million). He added that the
money from the Susita-Watana Dam would not stop the
progress on the project; the money had already been
obligated. He did not believe the state could afford the
Bragaw Road until its fiscal house was in order.
Representative Pruitt spoke in strong opposition to the
amendment. He stressed that the Bragaw Road project would
cut seven minutes off the access from his district to the
hospital. He could not support taking money away from a
project that could save lives in his community. He
addressed the Susitna-Watana project and stated that the
amendment would "take from tomorrow to pay for today." He
relayed that the project had the opportunity to provide
additional energy opportunities for Southcentral Alaska. He
referred to a potential gasline and hoped that the state
sold the majority of the gas to the Pacific Rim for a "ton
of money", which would enable the state to generate its own
electricity to power its own resources. He understood that
the legislature made a commitment the previous session to
provide education funds at a specific level; however, he
stressed that the amendment proposed allocating even more
funds. He asserted that the state was in a fiscal crisis
and did not have the money. He added that the state was
short $20,000 per household. He underscored that it was not
possible to get the state's fiscal house in order by adding
money to projects. He agreed that education was worth the
money, but he recognized that it was not possible to add
additional funds to programs. He believed it was necessary
to reanalyze how the state provided education to students;
it would have to be done with less money.
5:30:16 PM
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Gattis, Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 43 FAILED (3/8).
5:31:02 PM
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 44 [Note:
final three pages of Amendment 44 titled "Legislative
Research Services Research Brief" on file]:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
DEPARTMENT: Education and Early Development
APPROPRIATION: K-12 Aid to School Districts
ALLOCATION: Additional Foundation Funding
ADD: $32,243.7 UGF (1004)
ADD: Language: The sum of$32,243,700 is appropriated
from the general fund to the Department of Education
and Early Development to be distributed as state aid
to districts according to the average daily membership
for each district adjusted under AS 14.l7.410(b)(l)(A)
- (D) for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2016.
EXPLANATION: This amendment returns the amount of
funding promised in HB 278 passed in 2014 to K-12
through the foundation formula.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gara explained that the amendment would
restore $32 million in the education funding formula. He
detailed that a loss of the funds would result in a $6
million shortfall in Mat-Su, major cuts in Juneau and
Fairbanks, and most likely cuts in Anchorage. He understood
that the state was facing a budget crisis and that it was
necessary to determine how to deal with it. He stated that
the governor's budget meant a deficit of $3.5 billion and
the committee's version would mean a deficit of $3.4
billion. He stressed that the bill would not solve the
state's budget crisis. He did not believe the state should
be fixing the budget on the backs of children. He reasoned
that decreasing academic opportunity would not fix the
budget. He continued that fixing the budget by telling
parents that they could not count on the legislature to
fund schools was not the way to fix the budget; he noted
that people would begin considering moving out of state. He
stressed that the solution was short-sighted. He relayed
that the amendment was offered as a compromise, which would
fund education at the level the legislature promised the
previous year.
Representative Gattis emphasized that the state did not
have the money to fund education at the same level the
legislature had promised the previous year.
Vice-Chair Saddler contended that the budget did not defund
education. He remarked on the state's constitutional
mandate to fund education. He stated that the legislature
took the education mission very seriously. He discussed the
complex funding formula that took into account things like
school size, location, expenses, and other. He added that
the state spent more on education than on any other budget
item in the state. He believed that to claim the
legislature was not funding the state's schools was
disingenuous.
Representative Gara disputed the use of the word
disingenuous and stressed that its use was not appropriate.
Vice-Chair Saddler disagreed with the characterization that
the legislature was not funding education. He found it
"interesting." He opposed the amendment.
Representative Pruitt spoke about an article in the Alaska
Dispatch News about his school district. He spoke about
money spent on expensive lunches and other for faculty. He
stated that the legislature talked about not funding
students, but somehow the state could carve out substantial
money for things that did not educate its students. He
believed the state needed to do a better job at seeking out
efficiencies. He understood that it was expensive to
educate the state's students; however, he could not
continue to allow money to go to entities that were
spending funds on grant supplies at a restaurant. He
stressed that the state could not keep throwing money at a
broken system and a system that was abusing the fact that
the legislature did not have the ability to dictate exactly
what schools did. He elaborated that cuts were not made to
penalize the Anchorage School District because of the
situation. He stressed that the state was funding
education. He added that districts were not necessarily
choosing to use the money where it needed to go. He did not
believe it was correct to add more money during a fiscal
crisis. He believed the legislature should look at how the
money was being spent during the interim. He thought it was
an opportunity to have a better discussion, potentially
about the education formula.
5:38:06 PM
Representative Kawasaki supported the amendment. He agreed
that the state spent money on education, but it did so
inadequately. He noted that there had been a significant
number of cuts in Fairbanks. He detailed that the school
district had been frugal, requiring larger one-time
payments from the borough, while trying to keep the K-3
classroom levels at a moderate level. He stated that there
were schools in Fairbanks that had 24 hangars for
children's coats, but 30 children in the classroom. He
stressed that that type of system was bound to have
failures. He believed the state had done a good job since
the Joint Legislative Education Task Force had established
what would be an adequate amount of education funds. He
underscored that the state funding had not kept up with
inflation in the past four years. He relayed that without
the one-time funding there would be well over 100 cuts in
Fairbanks schools including teachers and staff.
Representative Guttenberg testified in support of the
amendment. He noted that Pre-K and Parents as Teachers had
been cut. He emphasized that there was more than one school
district in the state. He stated that there were many
communities that did not want to see hydrocarbons exported;
they wanted to use them locally. He stressed that there
were many needs beyond what had been discussed earlier. He
referred to one school district that had hung up the band
instruments long ago [due to a lack of funding]; other
school districts farther west could no longer visit
legislators to discuss their schools because funds were not
available. He believed that the state needed to put
additional funding in classrooms. He referred to the
commitment the legislature had made to education the prior
year and remarked that it may be harder to live up to in
the current year; however, he emphasized that education was
the single most important thing done in the state. He
believed it was terrible that there was almost nothing in
the bill that looked to the "other side of the equation."
He stated that legislators could choose to take funds out
of their school districts, but teachers had been laid off
in Fairbanks. He stated that the loss of teachers and the
rising number of children in classrooms were problematic.
He contended that the excuse that the state did not have
the funds was one side of the equation, but simply cutting
and saying that the funds were not available was
irresponsible. He underscored the importance of examining
what it was the state was actually doing when money was not
put into the classrooms or school districts.
Representative Guttenberg continued that schools had
budgeted for the current year based on the commitment made
by the legislature the prior year. He remarked that the
state was providing less support all of the time. He
stressed that the amount in the amendment barely moved the
line on the graph on the state's needs and the deficit. He
commented that the legislature would go through the cycle
again the upcoming year and it would be harder. He believed
the $32.2 million should be restored to the state's school
districts. He stated that schools were expecting it. He
added that some schools were not having parties or spending
money on lavish items. He emphasized that some districts
had been hard hit for a long time. He expounded that there
were some beautiful new schools in rural Alaska, but
maintaining them and retaining teachers was challenging. He
believed the amendment was the right thing to do even in
the face of declining revenues.
5:44:03 PM
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Munoz, Gara
OPPOSED: Gattis, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon, Thompson,
Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 44 FAILED (4/7).
5:44:50 PM
AT EASE
5:54:42 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Kawasaki MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 45:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Kawasaki, Guttenberg and
Gara
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Statewide Services
ADD: $ 3,691.7
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Office of Information Technology
ADD: $ 2,224.3
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: System wide Education and Outreach
ADD: $ 257.8
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Anchorage Campus
ADD: $ 6,777.8
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Small Business Development Center
ADD: $ 47.5
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Kenai Peninsula College
ADD: $ 329.4
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Kodiak College
ADD: $ 122.6
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Matanuska-Susitna College
ADD: $ 234.2
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Prince William Sound College
ADD: $ 147.6
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Bristol Bay Campus
ADD: $ 66.8
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Chukchi Campus
ADD: $ 45.6
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: College of Rural and Community Development
ADD: $ 276.9
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Fairbanks Campus
ADD: $ 7,555.4
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Interior-Aleutians Campus
ADD: $ 82.5
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Kuskokwim Campus
ADD: $ 147.4
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Northwest Campus
ADD: $ 76.7
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Fairbanks Organized Research
ADD: $ 922.8
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: UAF Community and Technical College
ADD: $ 269.5
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Cooperative Extension Service
ADD: $ 50.0
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Juneau Campus
ADD: $ 1,405.3
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Ketchikan Campus
ADD: $ 116.2
DEPARTMENT: University of Alaska
APPROPRIATION: University of Alaska
ALLOCATION: Sitka Campus
ADD: $ 152.0
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Kawasaki relayed that the passage of an
earlier amendment meant the section numbers in Amendment 45
were incorrect. He WITHDREW Amendment 45 with the intention
of introducing a similar amendment on the House floor.
Representative Guttenberg WITHDREW Amendments 46 through 47
(copy on file).
Representative Gara WITHDREW Amendments 48 through 49 (copy
on file).
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 50:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Gara, Guttenberg, and
Kawasaki
DEPARTMENT: Education
APPROPRIATION: Teaching and Learning Support
ALLOCATION: Alaska Learning Network
ADD: $599.7 UGF (1004)
EXPLANATION: GovAmd cut the Alaska Learning Network by
$250,000 and the House Subcommittee eliminated the
program. This amendment returns the funding level to
the GovAmd level.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gara explained that the amendment would
restore subcommittee reductions to the governor's proposal
on the Alaska Learning Network (AKLN). He explained that a
merit scholarship implemented by former Governor Parnell
required courses that were unavailable in many rural school
districts. He detailed that AKLN had been implemented to
make the necessary courses available online to rural
districts to ensure students had an equal opportunity to
qualify for the scholarships. He stated that Governor
Walker had responsibly included the increment in his
proposed budget, while achieving his goal of $250 million
in agency operations budget cuts.
Representative Wilson stated that the program had begun
with federal stimulus funding. She relayed that school
districts had been advised to not count on the funds being
back filled once federal funding ended; districts had been
asked to determine how to self-sustain the program. She
stated that schools could self-sustain the program because
they received state funding for high school classes. She
elaborated that the intent had been for districts to share
programs with other districts. She stated that AKLN was
never meant to be a stand-alone program. She pointed to
districts with a high number of online courses including
Kenai, Mat-Su, and Ketchikan. She added that the University
of Alaska Southeast (UAS) had been the entity that had
"gathered it from within." She believed the program could
continue, but with funding already provided through the
BSA.
5:59:56 PM
Representative Gattis spoke in opposition to the amendment.
She discussed that AKLN had recently moved over to UAS. She
relayed that the initial program strategy was not working;
therefore, it had joined a program called Apex [Learning].
She noted that it was unfortunate that AKLN acted as a
"middle man" between itself and the school district. She
stated that currently AKLN was expensive and cost $150 to
$200 per student, per class, per semester. Whereas Apex
cost $125 per student, per semester, for any given number
of classes. She explained that Mat-Su currently used Apex
and had agreed to share its licenses; the state wanted
schools to perfect their program and share it across
district lines. She elaborated that Mat-Su indicated it
would work with other districts. She concluded that there
were alternate programs to AKLN; Apex was a national
program that could be purchased directly or shared with
other school districts.
Representative Kawasaki testified in support of the
amendment. He stated that there was a myth that AKLN was
only for rural schools; however, there was a large
participation Fairbanks. He furthered that AKLN currently
served every school district and offered over 100 courses
including ones needed for the performance scholarship in
addition to advanced placement courses. He believed the
program was a bargain, provided efficiency, and had a
course completion rate of almost 80 percent. He opined that
it did not make sense for every school district to have its
own online courses, which was the reason for the creation
of AKLN. He believed the model should be enhanced and
replicated.
Representative Munoz testified in support of the amendment.
She discussed her support of the mining training program in
Juneau. She recalled that in the past former Governor
Parnell had attended one of the training classes and had
been inspired by the statewide reach of the online UAS
classroom, which had prompted his inclusion of the concept
in education funding legislation approved in 2014. She
shared that the program had been successful in a short
period of time; UAS had seen the program increase from 100
students to 300 students at present. She struggled with
taking away the opportunity right when it was beginning to
get going.
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Munoz, Edgmon, Gara
OPPOSED: Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Gattis, Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 50 FAILED (5/6).
Representative Gara WITHDREW Amendment 51 (copy on file).
6:06:15 PM
AT EASE
6:06:29 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Guttenberg WITHDREW Amendment 52 (copy on
file).
Representative Guttenberg MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 53:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Guttenberg and Gara
DEPARTMENT: Labor and Workforce Development
APPROPRIATION: Business Partnerships
ALLOCATION: Business Services
ADD: $456.0 UGF 1004
EXPLANATION: Despite low oil prices and low
production, continuing loss of older, retiring workers
who must be replaced means the-workforce needs around
1,000 new construction workers each year. This
amendment restores the Career and Technical Education
Plan's Oil and Gas Training Program to accommodate
industry needs with Alaska-trained Alaska workers.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED.
Representative Guttenberg explained that the amendment
would restore $456,000 [UGF] for the Career and Technical
Education Plan's Oil and Gas Training Program. He
highlighted that the oil and gas industry was growing
regardless of flow-through capacity on the North Slope. He
elaborated that the state was providing the industry with
tax credits and other incentives to encourage the growth.
He discussed the challenge with an aging workforce; there
were approximately 2,000 people retiring or leaving the
industry workforce per year. He believed the state needed
to train its residents to compete with workers from out of
state for the high skilled and high paying jobs, some of
which were industry specific. He believed the training was
a basic function the state should provide.
Representative Wilson stressed that the state was providing
training opportunities for its youth and adults. She stated
that the University, the Alaska Vocational Technical Center
(AVTEC), and other schools were providing training for
residents. She believed that per capita Alaska had more
training opportunities than anywhere else. She discussed
other employers such as the construction industry, small
businesses, and unions. She stated that the program was not
able to provide statistics on how many people it was
training.
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Kawasaki, Gara, Guttenberg
OPPOSED: Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 53 FAILED (3/8).
Representative Guttenberg WITHDREW Amendment 54 (copy on
file).
Representative Kawasaki MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 55:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Kawasaki, Guttenberg and
Gara
DEPARTMENT: Natural Resources
APPROPRIATION: Land & Water Resources
ALLOCATION: Forest Management & Development
ADD: $1,292.9 (UGF) $400.0 Timber Rep.
POSITIONS: Add 11 PFT Positions
EXPLANATION: This funding supports ten state jobs in
SE Alaska that are essential to the region's timber
industry. These positions perform all the
infrastructure prep work that allows the private
sector to perform the logging. They are responsible
for building bridges, creating roads and marking trees
for harvest. The SE Alaska logging industry is much
more than just chopping down trees. These logs are
then barged to lumber mills where they are converted
to building material. The closure of the offices in
Ketchikan, Juneau and Haines would decimate, if not
absolutely eliminate, this industry and be extremely
detrimental to the economic vitality and
diversification of the region.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Kawasaki referred to an amendment that had
passed earlier in the meeting restoring three Ketchikan
positions and one Juneau position [in the DNR Forest
Management and Development budget]. He still had great
concerns that the additions would not be adequate enough to
match anticipated timber receipts. Additionally, he was
concerned about the potential for loss of firewood sales in
the Interior given resident's reliance on wood for fuel.
He WITHDREW the amendment with the intent to gather
additional information.
Representative Guttenberg MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 56:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Guttenberg and Gara
DEPARTMENT: Labor and Workforce Development
APPROPRIATION: Commissioner and Administrative
Services
ALLOCATION: Commissioner's Office
POSITIONS: 2 PFTs
Restore PCNs 07-1003 and 07-1037
EXPLANATION: Maintain the $321.9 General Fund
reduction, but not by PCN. Commissioners should be
allowed to craft and manage their top management
teams, without position-by-position instruction from
the Legislature.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Guttenberg explained that the amendment
would delete a reference to PCNs in a budget closeout
report for the DLWD Commissioner's Office. He felt that it
made sense for the commissioner to decide the top
management positions. He stated that the issue of which
PCNs [position control numbers] get used had been
contentious for years. He stated that it appeared the
legislature was targeting specific people. He noted that
there were approximately 800 DLWD employees. The current
budget would eliminate one of the two deputy commissioners,
the legislative liaison, and a public relations (PR)
position. He requested allowing the commissioner to make
the decision.
Representative Wilson commented that every year the
legislature heard about the number of vacant positions;
money was kept for vacant positions as well. She believed
sometimes it was necessary to decide whether two deputy
commissioners were needed by the department. She noted that
there were three other positions including a communications
director, special assistant, and PR position. She wondered
about the need for a legislative liaison within the
departments; she thought it would be easier to call the
person in charge. She believed the deletion of the
positions showed that the legislature was working to make
government leaner.
Representative Edgmon spoke in support of the amendment. He
remarked that the amendment did not change the amount of
money that had been deleted, it just deleted a reference to
specific PCNs. He spoke to consistency and noted that the
legislature had not identified specific PCNs for other
agencies.
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Edgmon, Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Gattis, Thompson,
Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 56 FAILED (4/7).
Representative Guttenberg WITHDREW Amendment 57.
Representative Guttenberg MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 58:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Guttenberg and Gara
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Public Health
ALLOCATION: Bureau of Vital Statistics
ADD: $168.2 General Fund Program Receipts 1005 (DGF)
POSITIONS: 2 PFTs (PCNs 06-1760 and 06-1761)
EXPLANATION: If the Fairbanks field office of the
Bureau of Vital Statistics can be closed and its
services provided on line, the Anchorage and Juneau
field offices can do the same. This amendment is
intended to place the entire system up for further
discussion.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Guttenberg explained the current budget
would eliminate two positions and close the Fairbanks
Bureau of Vital Statistics. The rationale was that the
services could be provided online. Under the same rationale
he wondered why the offices would not be closed statewide
for greater efficiencies. The amendment was intended to
point out the discrepancy of closing one office for work to
be done online, while leaving other offices open. He
reasoned that work could be done online for one office, it
could be done online for all of the offices. He commented
that the discussion would be ongoing in the future. He
WITHDREW Amendment 58.
Representative Guttenberg MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 59:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Guttenberg and Gara
DEPARTMENT: Natural Resources
APPROPRIATION: Land and Water Resources
ALLOCATION: Geological and Geophysical Surveys
ADD: 1,000.0 UGF 1004
DELETE:
POSITIONS: 4 PFTs: airborne geophysics supervising
geologist; coal/geothermal geological scientist;
technical/software assistant; and administrative
assistant
EXPLANATION: Continued mapping of mineral and
geothermal resources is a critical first step toward
advancing the development of Alaskans' natural
resource wealth. New mining is wholly dependent on new
surveys of previously unmapped areas, and uncovering
new energy sources is vitally important to reducing
energy costs for Alaskans, especially those in rural
parts of the state. Private industry does very little
of this sort of work, and when it does, the
information is proprietary. The state's program makes
public not only the initial maps, but the very
valuable ground-trothed mapping and sampling
information.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Guttenberg explained that the amendment
applied to the DNR Geological and Geophysical Surveys. He
detailed that the division provided unique work. He
explained that when mineral exploration surveys were
conducted the mining companies followed up by staking the
ground with claims. He stated that there was a significant
backlog of information the office could address without
expending high end helicopter time. He elaborated that the
employees could work for years on bringing information up
to date and making it available. He spoke to the specific
publications specialist position that was responsible for
publishing information for the public. He stated that the
budget cut would eliminate the state's capacity to develop
mining resources. He detailed that without the work,
someone looking to conduct resource development would only
have old records available. He had located information on
the website about mineral exploration in the Ray River
north of the Yukon and was amazed at the extensive nature
of the information. He stressed that the elimination of the
four positions and program would eliminate data and
research on mining exploration. He remarked that it would
be difficult to bring skilled workers back into the
positions at a later time if the program was mothballed. He
pointed to mines that had benefited from the work including
Greens Creek, Pogo, and mines around Livengood and
Kotzebue.
Representative Pruitt spoke against the amendment. He
stated that the reduction had been included in the
governor's proposed budget. He agreed that the service was
beneficial to the industry in Alaska; however, he believed
that it was a service the state could "pull back from"
during revenue shortfalls. He understood the challenges the
reduction could present, but there would be challenges in
all of the departments. He acknowledged that private
industry may not do some of the work, but there were other
opportunities and significant information was available. In
light of the challenges that the state faced, he believed
the state could focus its money elsewhere in DNR.
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis, Munoz,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 59 FAILED (3/8).
6:24:32 PM
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 60:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
DEPARTMENT: Labor and Workforce Development
APPROPRIATION: Vocational Rehabilitation
ALLOCATION: Special Projects
ADD: $118.4 UGF (1004)
EXPLANATION: This amendment restores the Governor's
cut to the Interpreter Referral Program. The
Interpreter Referral Program Provides face-to-face
interpreters for deaf Alaskans so they can communicate
at work and in life activities. Without these
services, the state would likely pay more in social
services for deaf Alaskans who are unable to work.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gara remarked that Representative Munoz had
introduced the same amendment and there had been mixed
signals about whether it was needed. He relayed that there
was a decrement in the governor's budget of $118,000 for
two referral services for deaf Alaskans in Southeast and
the Interior. He stated that under the Americans with
Disabilities Act and according to DLWD, employers were
supposed to provide the services; however, few employers
actually provided the services. He stated that public
testimony from the deaf community had been adamant that the
services improved their lives and ability to get work and
communicate with employers. He stressed that employers
should be providing the services, but that was different
than what was actually being done. He underscored that the
burden in life for a deaf person was already significant.
He believed the program should be continued with an
instruction to the DLWD commissioner that the deaf
community needed help and employers should be following the
law. He opined that the decrement should be restored until
deaf individuals were able to access a referral service for
an interpreter when needed.
Representative Wilson referred to a letter from the DLWD
commissioner and remarked that it did not specify that
someone ensured who paid for the referral service. She
noted that the letter specified that if the need was
personal it should be paid by the individual; if it was
business related it should be paid by the business. She
opined that restoring the funding meant that a person in
need of the service would be contacting a person to arrange
for the interpreter versus connecting directly with an
interpreter. She believed the issue discussed by
Representative Gara was separate and related to whether the
state was ensuring that whoever was responsible for paying
for an interpreter service was actually paying. She
believed the concern may be legitimate, but she did not
believe the increment proposed in the amendment would
address the issue.
Vice-Chair Saddler believed the interpreter referral line
was essentially a "market maker." He surmised that people
in the deaf community requiring interpreter services knew
who the limited number of interpreters were. He remarked
that it was in the interpreters' interest to make their
contact information available to the community they were
serving.
Representative Gara commented that no one was claiming the
state should be paying for the interpreters. He clarified
that payment for interpreter service was the responsibility
of an individual or employer. He explained that deaf
individuals could contact the interpreter referral service
through its TTY machine to find an interpreter. He believed
that the numerous people who had testified in support of
the service would not have come forward if the service was
not needed.
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis, Munoz, Pruitt,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 60 FAILED (3/8).
Representative Guttenberg WITHDREW Amendment 61.
6:30:46 PM
Representative Kawasaki MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 62:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Kawasaki, Guttenberg and
Gara
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Public Assistance
ALLOCATION: Senior Benefits Payment Program
ADD: $5,871.2 (UGF). Restores funding to the FY 16
Adjusted Base level. Reverses FY l6 GovEndo cut.
EXPLANATION: Alaska faces exponential growth in the
senior population with a doubling of the senior
population in the next 10 years (roughly 70,000 to
140,000). The Senior Benefits Payment Program provides
vital supplemental funding to low-income seniors that
allow them to stay in their homes. Keeping seniors at
home saves the state thousands of dollars and slows
their move up the continuum of care. With the pending
Senior Tsunami, it is prudent to invest in cost saving
measures that will reduce spending later. Eligibility
is income based and is divided into three categories;
75 percent, 100 percent and 175 percent of the Federal
Poverty Level.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Kawasaki disagreed with some components of
the governor's proposed budget including "deep cuts" to
education and the senior benefit program. He remarked that
the committee had the ability to change the cuts. The
amendment sought to restore funding to adjusted base levels
for the Senior Benefits Payment Program, which would
reverse the governor's proposed cuts. He detailed that the
program applied to individuals age 65 and older, many of
whom lived on a fixed income. He expounded that a
recipient's average age was 75; the oldest recipient was
104. He furthered that most of the recipients were female
widowers. He stressed that the 27 percent cut would impact
individuals with household incomes between 75 and 175
percent of the poverty level (roughly 10,000 seniors
statewide). He elaborated that the payments ranged from
$100 to $175 per month; there was a gross annual income cap
for married couples of $35,000. He added that there were
seniors in the program who were well below the income cap.
He noted that debate had occurred on the House floor the
prior year when senior benefits had been reinstituted. He
stressed that the reduction would hurt the most vulnerable
Alaskans.
Vice-Chair Saddler spoke in opposition to the amendment. He
countered that the neediest Alaskans were protected under
the current version of the budget. He elaborated that there
were three levels of senior benefits; the lowest level
(individuals earning less than 75 percent of the federal
poverty level) still received the full $250 per month. He
remarked that the reduction meant that individuals
receiving $125 per month would receive $100 and those
receiving $175 per month would receive $140. He believed
the funding reflected compassion to the neediest seniors,
while taking into account the state's limited funds. He
added that the payment was income-based; someone with a
fixed income may have assets such as a home, savings,
stocks, and other. He concluded that the 20 percent cut had
been proposed by the governor. He cited the statistic that
the senior population would double in Alaska by 2026 as a
good reason for the state to consider how much of its
limited financial resources it should spend. He believed
the reduction was responsible.
6:34:24 PM
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis, Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 62 FAILED (3/8).
6:35:04 PM
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 63:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Office of Children's Services
ALLOCATION: Early Childhood Grants for Disabled
Infants and Young Children
ADD: $237.3 UGF (1004)
EXPLANATION: This restores a Subcommittee cut to the
most needy, harmed foster youth and the cut will cost
the state more than it saves in the long run.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gara explained the effort by the Office of
Children's Services (OCS) to screen the most vulnerable of
the state's 2,400 foster youth. He detailed that the grant
for disabled infants and young children allowed OCS to
contract to screen children for cognitive disabilities and
any services that were needed in the case of a disability.
He highlighted that foster parents were hard to find for
children with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS) or severe
disabilities. He stressed that taking away the ability to
screen the youth it would become more challenging to find
foster parents. He did not support the cut made by the
governor.
Vice-Chair Saddler appreciated the clarification that the
cut had been made by the governor. He stated that the
$237,000 was only a 2.5 percent reduction to the grants. He
detailed that $10 million remained in Early Childhood
Services. He believed the "modest" cut was responsible
given the state's budget challenges. He added that there
were alternative ways for children and infant screening
including the Infant Learning Program, Child Find Program
in schools, and waivers.
6:37:44 PM
Representative Gara countered that regardless of other
services, the program had provided services to over 2,000
children for things other screeners had not found.
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Edgmon, Gattis, Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 63 FAILED (3/8).
6:39:06 PM
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 64 [Note: a
copy of the backup material provided by the Department of
Health and Social Services attached to the amendment is on
file.]:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Office of Children's Services
ALLOCATION: Family Preservation
DELETE: $2,938.4 UGF (1004)
EXPLANATION: The Office of Children's Services plans
to partner with the Division of Public Assistance to
use available T ANF grants to provide funding for
Child Advocacy Centers with federal funds. The receipt
authority in the Division of Public Assistance is
already present.
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Office of Children's Services
ALLOCATION: Family Preservation
ADD: $2,938.4 VA Receipt Authority (1007)
EXPLANATION: In order to use Division of Public
Assistance grants, the Office of Children's Services
requires Interagency Receipt authority.
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Office of Children's Services
ALLOCATION: Front Line Social Workers
ADD: $2,726.7 UGF (1004); $681.7 Fed (1002)
POSITIONS: ADD: 28 PFT positions
EXPLANATION: The Office of Children's Services suffers
from a severe shortage of support staff, Front Line
Caseworkers, licensing staff, and Independent Living
Program staff who help youth succeed as adults with
job training and education. The caseload in Anchorage
and the Matsu is 70 percent higher than the national
standard. Adding these positions will get us much of
the way to the recommendations in the 2012 study that
recommended 45 new positions at OCS. Since that 2012
study, we have seen an increase of 600 foster youth,
meaning that our staff shortage has grown since that
study.
The additional federal receipt authority is due to a
20% federal match on the $2,726.7 devoted to the
allocation category for these staff of front line
social workers.
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Office of Children's Services
ALLOCATION: Family Preservation
ADD: $211.3 UGF (1004)
EXPLANATION: This adds $211.3 GF to Employment
Training Vouchers. The funds are going to assist youth
aging out of foster care in attending job training
programs, continued education and postsecondary
education, so that they can successfully transition
into being independent adults who do not need to rely
on expensive state services.
ADD A LANGUAGE SECTION.
If any portion of the $2,938,400 federal T ANF funding
that will be used to support the Child Advocacy
Centers in the Department of Health and Social
Services, Family Preservation, is not received, that
amount is appropriated from the general fund to Family
Preservation and an equal amount is decremented from
the Department of Health and Social Services, Front
Line Social Workers.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gara relayed that he had worked hard to
locate cost-effective methods to fix a broken foster care
system. He detailed that 40 percent of the youth coming out
of care were either homeless or "couch surf." He relayed
that couch surfing was no longer included in the federal
definition of homelessness; therefore, the homelessness
rate had been reduced from 40 percent to 20 percent without
getting homeless youth in homes. He communicated that 24
percent of the youth ended up in jail. He referred to a
2011 workload study that OCS was short by roughly 50
support staff (there had been approximately 1,700 foster
youth at the time compared to 2,400 at present). The
department had testified that it did not have sufficient
staff to meet the national standard of a youth visit every
30 days. Youth visits enabled staff to detect signs of
harm, neglect, abuse, and to act as a stable influence for
children. He stressed that OCS was missing cases of abuse
and harm because it was under-staffed. He discussed that
Anchorage and Mat-Su caseloads exceeded national standards
by roughly 70 percent, which caused caseworkers to burn out
on average every 18 months. He discussed that due to the
high caseworker burnout rate youths saw many different
social workers over time, which was damaging to youths with
no stability in their lives. He stated that the amendment
would provide the ability for OCS to come close to the
number of caseworkers it needed; caseworkers who worked
with families and youth and to ensure families did not
leave the foster care system. He elaborated that families
were leaving the system because they did not receive
communication from caseworkers due to high caseloads. He
remarked that a system comprised of the best foster parents
would save the state a substantial amount of money.
Additionally, the state was unable to work cases to get
children into adoption; there were currently 894 youth
waiting for adoption. He elaborated that the division did
not have the ability to reunite a child with their
biological family (if the family "got its act together") in
a timely manner. He relayed that some youth were only in
foster care for a number of days, while others were in care
for 5 to 15 years (the average was between 2.5 to 4 years).
Representative Gara communicated that the amendment was a
"no cost amendment." He explained that DHSS had been
working to leverage federal funding to cut the state budget
and had qualified for $2.9 million to pay for the state's
child advocacy centers. He noted that the department
supported the amendment. The amendment would transfer the
$2.9 million in state funding for child advocacy centers to
OCS, which would enable the division to hire 60 to 70
percent of the staff needed. He emphasized that increased
staff would reduce the high burnout rate and would enable
the division to respond to foster care parents. He relayed
that $200,000 of the increment would go to educational
training vouchers; the vouchers went to children age 16 to
23 to transition them to jobs, schools, and job training.
He underscored that the amendment would add no additional
cost to the state. He emphasized that the state had
responsibility for the crisis in the OCS system because it
had taken the children away from their parents. He stressed
that the department would not have the ability to repair
OCS problems without staff. He believed largely the social
workers at OCS worked very hard with high caseloads. The
amendment would help to fix the system. He believed it
would save money in the long-term. He stated that a foster
care system where 24 percent of the youths went to jail, 40
percent needed housing assistance, and many collected
partially state-funded Medicaid was not cost-effective.
6:46:35 PM
Vice-Chair Saddler spoke against the amendment. He noted
that the first couple of sections of Amendment 8 were made
moot by Amendment 8 that deleted $2.9 million in UGF and
added $2.9 million in interagency receipt authority so the
money could go back to OCS and Family Preservation. He
stated that Representative Gara's proposal to use the money
would be considered. He addressed money that the amendment
would allocate to vocational programs. He stated that there
were other employment aid programs that foster children
qualified for in public schools, construction academies,
Job Corps, Nine Star Education and Employment Services, job
services, and Youth Corps. He noted that the only increase
he had made in the DHSS budget was the addition of $250,000
UGF for frontline social workers.
Representative Guttenberg calculated that if 28 percent out
of 1,000 youths ended up in jail, at a jail cost of $58 per
day, it would cost the state $5.3 million annually. He
believed investing in cost-effective programs was the right
thing to do. He emphasized that the costs for prison time
could not be avoided.
6:49:55 PM
Representative Kawasaki asked if there was someone from the
department who could speak to the amendment. He was
concerned with the federal receipt authority. [There was no
one available.]
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Munoz, Edgmon
OPPOSED: Gattis, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 64 FAILED (5/6).
6:51:37 PM
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 65:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Office of Children's Services
ALLOCATION: Family Preservation Grants
ADD: $500.0 UGF (1004)
EXPLANATION:
This amendment restores both the Subcommittee's $330.5
cut and the Governor's $169.5 cut. Family Preservation
Grants are used to keep families together so youth do
not end up in long term foster care. This not only is
beneficial for children, but saves the state
significant money in terms of lower foster care daily
reimbursement rates, and in terms of relieving the
pressure to hire additional social workers. Keeping
families together is much cheaper than placing kids in
foster care.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gara explained that the amendment would help
to save costs in the state's foster care system and would
create opportunity for children in the system. He
communicated that there had been a $500,000 cut to family
preservation, which entailed getting youth back with their
parents. He reasoned that it would save the state money if
parents could be rehabbed and youth could be returned home;
the state would no longer have to pay for foster parents,
adoptive parents, subsidized adoptions, or $40 to $50 per
day for the daily reimbursement rate (closer to $100 for
children with disabilities). He noted that everyone in the
social work field agreed with the strategy. He hoped
members would support the amendment; if they did not
support it, he wanted to know why. He underscored that the
program was evidence-based.
6:54:12 PM
Vice-Chair Saddler stated that the governor had proposed a
1.7 percent reduction (about $170,000) in family
preservation grants. The DHSS budget subcommittee had
increased the reduction to a total of $500,000. He believed
the reduction was modest and represented a 5 percent
reduction in the close to $10 million in grant funding that
remained. He stated that in times of fiscal challenges some
difficult reductions were needed. He opined that the
reduction was responsible. He remarked that the reductions
were not ones that anyone wanted to make. He furthered that
the reductions were necessary due to the state's limited
means and resources. He concluded that the legislature was
doing the best it could to allocate the state's resources
to existing needs.
Representative Guttenberg spoke in support of the
amendment. He discussed his earlier calculation related to
funding for foster care related services compared to paying
to keep people in prison. He remarked that the committee
had just allocated about $250,000 for the Pew Trust to talk
about recidivism. He supported the decision and suspected
that a significant part of the report would recommend
keeping people out of prison to begin with. He believed the
recidivism question was legitimate; the State of Texas had
successfully looked at how to avoid the continuous
construction of prisons. He discussed that the Pew study
would look at what the state was not doing, how many
children were in foster care, how many should be in foster
care that were not, the wait list, and other. He stressed
that if the state was serious about combatting recidivism
that it would be investing in items such as family
preservation grants in the future. He stressed that the
state did not want to be building prisons because it
couldn't keep its population out of jail. He opined that
the family preservation grants were perfectly in line with
the philosophy of preventing people from going to jail in
the first place.
6:58:26 PM
Co-Chair Neuman invited Representative Gara and
Representative Guttenberg to the recidivism reduction group
discussions with the Pew Trust.
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Gara
OPPOSED: Gattis, Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 65 FAILED (3/8).
6:59:23 PM
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 66:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Department Support Services
ALLOCATION: Commissioner's Office
ADD: $500 GIF Match (1003)
DELETE: $500 I/A Receipts (1007)
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Department Support Services
ALLOCATION: Administrative Support Services
ADD: $3,500 UGF (1004)
DELETE: $3,500 I/A Receipts (1007)
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Department Support Services
ALLOCATION: Information Technology Services
ADD: $500 UGF (1004)
DELETE: $500 II A Receipts (l007)
EXPLANATION: The HSS Subcommittee requires the
department to cut $4.5 million, which is an
unallocated cut that will harm the ability of the
department's eight divisions to assist Alaska's most
vulnerable seniors, children, and disabled
individuals. The department cannot absorb this
additional cut, which was proposed to be used to pay
for salary and infrastructure costs.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gara explained that the amendment told the
legislature to determine where the waste and duplications
were within DHSS if it was going to cut the department's
budget by $4.5 million. He disputed claims that the cut was
not unallocated. He stated that the eight divisions within
DHSS including divisions protecting vulnerable adults,
behavioral health, OCS, Medicaid, and other, were asked to
charge each other or the department for services provided.
He stated that the concept was a "shell game" and
constituted $4.5 million the department did not have. He
encouraged members to go after waste in the department if
they located it. He was unsupportive of cutting the
department's budget by $4.5 million without identifying
where the cuts would occur. He remarked that the former
DHSS commissioner had done a good job and had located every
cut he could. He noted that in recent years the GF spending
on DHSS budget had decreased outside of Medicaid. He
commented that Co-Chair Neuman had chaired the DHSS budget
subcommittee for the past couple of years and had done a
compassionate job. However, at present the committee had
been unable to find additional places to cut; therefore, it
had asked the department to locate ways to cut an
additional $4.5 million. He stated that the strategy may be
alright for some departments, but it did not work for the
department directed to deal with the most vulnerable
seniors, adults, and children. He stressed that $4.5
million in cuts the department did not know how to achieve
was the wrong way to go. He understood there was a need to
fix the budget, but he did not support fixing it on the
backs of the most vulnerable people in the state. He agreed
that it was necessary to cut the budget, but it needed to
be done responsibly. He agreed with $250 million to $300
million in cuts to agency operations as proposed by the
governor, but not if the locations could not be identified.
He requested working with the department to identify areas
of waste and duplication.
7:04:07 PM
Vice-Chair Saddler spoke in opposition to the amendment. He
stated that with reduced income, reductions were necessary.
He stated that the cut in question was $4.5 million to a
$2.7 billion budget, which equated to 0.2 percent. He did
not believe the cut was extravagant. He believed the idea
that it was impossible to cut government programs was a
"trope" that would be of special interest to people in his
district or elsewhere in Alaska who may find themselves
without a job. He stressed that for people to protest that
reductions were not possible was ludicrous. He stated that
people, institutions, and states had to respond to changing
financial situations. He relayed that the budget
subcommittee had made some targeted reductions to reduce
expenditures. He added that the subcommittee had also made
some targeted increases. He anticipated that the interim
would be spent learning about the department and how to
deal with efficiencies and other. He reasoned that
allocating costs to the division would allow the department
to use other fund sources in UGF to pay for core services.
He believed it was not inappropriate to let the
commissioner decide on reductions given the complexity of
the department.
Co-Chair Neuman asked members to keep the focus on
amendments.
Representative Pruitt was frustrated about waste within
DHSS. He spoke to recent Facebook and Twitter
advertisements by the department advocating for Medicaid
expansion. He believed it indicated that the department had
extra money available that the legislature could look at to
determine if it was being spent correctly. He believed
there was waste within DHSS, which needed to be addressed
by DHSS.
7:07:35 PM
Co-Chair Neuman noted that the chairs had addressed the
issue with the commissioner.
Representative Guttenberg testified in support of the
amendment. He believed that an unallocated cut transferred
the legislature's responsibility to the department. He
stated the legislature was responsible for making policy
and that transferring the responsibility to the department
to make the cuts abdicated the legislature's role.
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Gara
OPPOSED: Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 66 FAILED (3/8).
7:09:11 PM
Representative Kawasaki MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 67:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Kawasaki, Guttenberg and
Gara
DEPARTMENT: Department of Natural Resources
APPROPRIATION: Division of Agriculture
ALLOCATION: Farm to School
ADD: $181.0 (UGF).
DEPARTMENT: Health and Social Services
APPROPRIATION: Public Health
ALLOCATION: Chronic Disease Prevention and Health
Promotion
ADD: $734.7 (UGF).
EXPLANATION: Restore the Obesity Prevention Program.
These additions restore 16Gov amended levels. In 2013,
65% of Alaskan adults were overweight or obese and the
state has high rates of childhood and youth obesity.
In 2006 the annual medical costs for obese individuals
nationwide were $1,429 higher than those of healthy
weight individuals. Farm to School brings local
produce into school lunches. FTS fosters economic
development in the agricultural sector and promotes
healthy eating in our schools. The obesity prevention
program raises awareness for childhood obesity and
reduces health costs associated with the epidemic
later in life. This small investment today will save
us tremendous funds later. Thousands of Alaskans rely
on these services for balanced school lunches and non-
bias information on the real-world consequences of
obesity.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Kawasaki explained the governor had made
programmatic cuts to the Department of Agriculture,
consolidating and locating efficiencies within the agency.
The cut deleted a natural resource technician and other
professional staff and contracts. He elaborated that the
specific contracts dealt with agriculture projects,
marketing, and the Farm to School program. He relayed that
the budget subcommittee had subsequently cut the entire
Farm to School program. He stated that there were two
amendments that addressed the same issue: one through DNR
and one through DHSS. He discussed the high cost of obesity
in Alaska; studies showed obesity cost close to $460
million annually in direct healthcare costs. He reasoned
that by getting youth to understand good health and
nutrition, the staggering costs could be offset. He
surmised that providing good quality food through the DHSS
Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion program and
offsetting childhood diabetes and obesity would save the
state significant money in the future. He believed Farm to
School was a great program that had expanded over the past
couple of years; there had been an 11 percent increase in
school gardens statewide, 78 percent of the school
districts participate in some form of the program,
stretching from Barrow, to Ketchikan, to Unalaska. He
summarized that the combined amendments addressed an issue
that the state would need to address in the overall
conversation about healthcare and associated costs. He
believed the programs would bring cost savings.
Co-Chair Neuman remarked jokingly about his expectation of
a healthy lunch in Representative Kawasaki's office the
following day.
Representative Guttenberg testified in support of funding
for the state's Farm to School program that brought produce
into the school cafeteria. He addressed his frustration
related to the state of agriculture in Alaska. He believed
there had been many "starts and stops" related to the
program. He remarked that Alaska had the lowest amount of
agriculture support in the country. He spoke to the
importance of food security. He stressed that farming was a
long-term endeavor; it was not something that could be
started and stopped. He highlighted that supporting Farm to
School supported two sides of the equation. He advocated
for school gardens and underscored the benefits the program
would provide to everyone.
7:14:02 PM
Vice-Chair Saddler testified against the amendment. He
questioned whether it was essential for the state to
operate a program to encourage kids to do what they
ordinarily would do by nature to get outside and move and
play. He agreed that obesity control was a good and worthy
goal, but he did not believe it was an essential state
function. He could not believe that children did not get
exercise outdoors. He hoped the benefits of the Alaska
Grown program and fresh produce grown in-state were seen in
the state's schools. He believed Alaska produce should have
the ability to compete in the market. He spoke to other
health, food, and nutrition programs for children.
Representative Pruitt spoke against the amendment. He
discussed a desire to continue to assist farmers in Alaska.
He believed the committee could agree there were challenges
in the division; however, the goal was not to punish
farmers because of the challenges. The focus of the budget
subcommittee had been to locate any areas that were not
directly benefiting farmers. He appreciated that local
produce could be brought to the state's schools. He
summarized that subcommittee had aimed to limit the impact
the cut had on the assistance the division could provide to
farmers.
Representative Gara believed it was important to be careful
about talking about how committee members got to do things
as children and assuming that someone living in some of the
poorer areas around the state had the same opportunities.
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Kawasaki, Gara, Guttenberg
OPPOSED: Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 67 FAILED (3/8).
7:18:08 PM
Representative Kawasaki MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 68:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Kawasaki, Guttenberg
and Gara
DEPARTMENT: Administration
APPROPRIATION: Public Communication Services
ALLOCATION: Public Broadcasting - Radio
ADD: $1,634.0 (UGF).
DEPARTMENT: Administration
APPROPRIATION: Public Communication Services
ALLOCATION: Public Broadcasting- T.V.
ADD: $405.0 (UGF).
EXPLANATION: GovAmd cut the Public Broadcasting
Radio budget by 18.5 percent ($613.0) and the
T.V. budget by 18 percent ($150.1). This
amendment reduces that cut to 10 percent of the
l5MgtPln budget and allows Public Broadcasting
budgets to be maintained and provide vital
informational services to our communities while
also cutting the budget. Thousands of Alaskans
rely on these services for balanced local, state,
federal and international news. Providing this
funding will allow these stations to find
additional funding to prevent a large loss of
service. Additionally, public radio and
television can be an essential service in times
of emergency such as floods, forest fires,
earthquakes, extreme weather events and many more
public dangers.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Kawasaki conveyed his appreciation for an
earlier amendment offered by Representative Edgmon. He
stated that although the earlier amendment had restored
some funding to public broadcasting, it still represented a
22 percent cut. He noted that the effects would be adverse
in some communities. He WITHDREW Amendments 68 and 69 (copy
on file).
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 70:
OFFERED BY: Representative Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
DEPARTMENT: Legal and Advocacy Services
APPROPRIATION: Administration
ALLOCATION: Office of Public Advocacy
ADD: $508.0 UGF (1004)
POSITIONS: Add: 5 PFT positions
EXPLANATION: Guardians ad Litem (GALs) advocate on
behalf of children, often taken from their parents,
who have been determined to be Children In Need of
Aid. The GAL program is currently severely
understaffed. Currently each GAL serves on average 88
children. The national recommended level is 40.
Without adequate staffing, the GALs are not able to
advocate for the vulnerable youth they are supposed to
help by letting the courts know their treatment,
educational, and other needs. The GALs often are
unable to get to know the youth they are supposed to
represent.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gara explained the amendment. He discussed
that guardians ad litem represented Children in Need of Aid
in court. The positions were housed within the Office of
Public Advocacy and had some of the highest caseloads in
the country. The recommended caseload was somewhere below
40 children; the caseloads turned over quickly, which meant
a caseworker saw hundreds of children during a year's time.
The caseload in Alaska had an average of 88 children, which
meant the guardians often met children in court for the
first time. He stressed that a good lawyer got to know
their client; a guardian ad litem who did not have the time
to know their client could not represent their client. The
amendment aimed at reducing caseloads by adding 5
positions.
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 70 FAILED (3/8).
Representative Kawasaki WITHDREW Amendment 71 (copy on
file).
7:21:51 PM
Representative Gara WITHDREW Amendment 72 (copy on file).
Representative Guttenberg MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 73:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Guttenberg and Gara
DEPARTMENT: Administration
APPROPRIATION: Legal and Advocacy Services
ALLOCATION: Public Defender Agency
ADD: $387.5 UGF 1004
EXPLANATION: Restore cut proposed by Governor and
accepted by Finance Committee. Eliminating contract
services will create a future backlog of cases and
appeals requiring even more funds to resolve. PDA is
working to foster in-house capacity to reduce the need
for contract services.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Guttenberg explained that the amendment
would restore a governor's cut to the Public Defender
Agency. He stressed the importance of the amendment;
without the funding the courts would be backlogged. Other
entities would be backlogged as well including,
prosecutors, troopers, and jailers. The funding would
ensure that people had access to a public defender. He
noted that ideally all people would have the ability to pay
for their own attorney; however, that was not the reality.
7:23:26 PM
Representative Gara spoke in support of the amendment. He
relayed that victims would also be backlogged by a
backlogged system. He noted that victims of violent crimes
waited for their case to be resolved; the cut would delay
the time when the victim would get to see some justice. The
amendment would help alleviate some of the pain experienced
by victims of violent crimes.
Representative Gattis testified in opposition to the
amendment. She had elected not to make any further cuts to
the Department of Administration increment in the budget
subcommittee. She stated that the bigger problem was that
new laws were needed that would make changes to some of the
reasons people were put in jail. She did not believe the
increment in the amendment would make the difference. She
believed some consequences needed to be changed that would
enable people to "get in and move on." She proposed working
with the amendment sponsors to develop new statute.
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis, Munoz,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 73 FAILED (3/8).
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 74:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Gara, Guttenberg, and
Kawasaki
DEPARTMENT: Public Safety
APPROPRIATION: Alaska State Troopers
ALLOCATION: Alaska Bureau of Investigation
ADD: $191.5 UGF (1004)
POSITIONS: 2 PFT positions
EXPLANATION: Cold case investigators help solve
murders that have to date been unsolved. Alaska's cold
case investigators have been successful. This
amendment restores two of the four positions the
Governor cut.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gara explained that the amendment would
reinstate two of the four cold case investigator positions
that had been cut from the budget. He detailed that cold
case investigators did an amazing job solving crimes that
had gone unsolved for a long time. Given the state's
growing population, he believed it was hard to imagine the
need for cold case investigators decreasing. He elaborated
that there was need to help victims with closure and to get
dangerous people off the street. He stated that the
amendment included a modest add to a questionable cut.
7:26:49 PM
Representative Edgmon relayed that according to DPS the
four cold case troopers were retired state troopers
performing highly specialized services. He detailed that
the department believed retaining as many troopers in
regular patrol was important. The department offered to
have other troopers provide the services in place of the
specialized troopers. He agreed that the situation was not
ideal, but it allowed the department to keep four other
troopers in a regular rotation conducting highway patrol,
working various detachments, and providing oversight
functions in remote communities. He concluded that the
decision had been difficult, but the department had offered
the cut through the governor's budget.
Representative Gara WITHDREW Amendment 74.
Representative Kawasaki MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 75:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Kawasaki, Guttenberg and
Gara
DEPARTMENT: Public Safety
APPROPRIATION: Alaska State Troopers
ALLOCATION: Alaska Wildlife Troopers
ADD: $146.8 (UGF)
POSITIONS: Add 1 PFT position
EXPLANATION: This amendment restores the Wrangell
trooper position that was decremented by the Governor
and accepted by the House Subcommittee.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Kawasaki explained that the amendment would
restore the one trooper position in Wrangell.
Representative Edgmon relayed that the decision had been
difficult, but DPS felt that the trooper from Petersburg
could provide similar services. He noted that the
department had brought the cut forward, which the budget
subcommittee had accepted.
7:29:17 PM
Representative Kawasaki WITHDREW Amendment 75.
Representative Kawasaki MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 76:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Kawasaki, Guttenberg and
Gara
DEPARTMENT: Department of Public Safety
APPROPRIATION: Alaska Wildlife Troopers
ALLOCATION: Aircraft Section
ADD: $1,187.0 (GF)
EXPLANATION: This amendment restores half of an
increment requested by the Governor that was not
approved by the subcommittee. According to the
Department of Public Safety, an audit actually
recommended even more than the 8 permanent full time
employees that were originally financed. These
positions would impact the ability of Alaska Wildlife
Troopers to maintain their aircraft. The Division must
enforce Fish and Game regulations in the entire
586,000 square miles of Alaska as well as its 36,000
miles of coastline. The Aircraft Section provides the
Department with aircraft that are safe and dependable
to complete their patrols and other law enforcement
assignments.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Kawasaki explained the amendment that would
restore half of the increment requested by the governor
that had not been approved by the DPS Finance Subcommittee.
The governor's request would have funded the operation of
King Air, and A-Star [helicopters] out of Anchorage and
Fairbanks. He detailed that the aircrafts were used in
tandem with things like the mast unit located in Anchorage,
the civil air patrol, volunteers for search and rescue,
crime scene investigation, or incidents in progress. He
stated that the cut would put the aircrafts in "cold"
status, which he did not support. He referred to hunters in
Fairbanks who were picked up by the aircrafts. He noted
that mast had originally taken over the responsibility, but
that was not its role; it was the statutory responsibility
of DPS.
Representative Edgmon relayed that the reduction had been
the most difficult decision the subcommittee had made. He
noted that the subcommittee had not cut a large amount from
the department. He elaborated that the reduction had come
in concurrence with the department. The subcommittee felt
that to add eight additional positions would make what was
the largest aircraft fleet of any public safety department
nationwide, more vulnerable for reduction the following
year. The additional positions had come through audits by
the National Transportation Safety Board and the Federal
Aviation Administration. The aircraft section had been
operating without the additional positions. He relayed that
in a perfect world with no revenue shortfalls the positions
may have been added, but given the financial climate the
subcommittee had elected to scale back the positions.
Representative Gattis shared that she had come from an
aviation background. She remarked that the private sector
would be available for hire on a charter basis or for
mechanic work. She opined that the private sector would be
ready if the state was in need of the service.
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis, Munoz, Pruitt,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 76 FAILED (3/8).
Representative Kawasaki MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 77:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Kawasaki, Guttenberg and
Gara
DEPARTMENT: Natural Resources
APPROPRIATION: Administration & Support Services
ALLOCATION: Recorder's Office
ADD: $202.0 (UGF).
POSITIONS: 2 PFT Positions
EXPLANATION: These funds would reopen the Recorder's
Offices in Ketchikan and Sitka, but allow those
offices in Homer and Valdez to close. Ketchikan and
Sitka are isolated from the road system and residents
do not have access to a Recorder's Office. While there
is a department-wide effort to make all filings
electronic, access to a physical office is paramount
to protecting the rights of Alaskans.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Kawasaki explained that the amendment would
restore two out of six positions in state Recorder's
Offices; offices were currently located in Kodiak,
Ketchikan, Homer, Valdez, and Sitka. He relayed that the
Homer office was moving to Anchorage. The amendment would
add two positions that were off the road system in
Ketchikan and Sitka. The justification for the selections
was that someone on the road system could probably get to
an office.
Representative Pruitt remarked that technology upgrades had
allowed for filing efficiencies. He believed the online
capability would enable the state to continue to provide
service at a reduced funding level.
Representative Gattis surmised that the locations off the
road system were a part of the U.S. mail system.
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Wilson, Edgmon, Gattis, Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 77 FAILED (3/8).
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 78:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
DEPARTMENT: Commerce, Community, and Economic
Development
APPROPRIATION: Tourism Marketing & Development
ALLOCATION: Tourism Marketing
DELETE: $3,000,000 Unrestricted General Fund (1004)
ADD: $1,500,000 Statutory Designated Program Receipt
(1108)
ADD: Language Section: An amount not to exceed
$1,500,000 is appropriated to the Department of
Commerce, Community and Economic Development, Tourism
Marketing and Development from the unrestricted
general fund to match each dollar in excess of
$2,700,000 contributed by the tourism industry.
EXPLANATION: This amendment removes $3 million UGF
from the Tourism Marketing budget; reducing UGF
funding from $9,264,400 to $6,264,400. The Tourism
Marketing budget also includes $2.7 million of
Statutory Designated Program Receipt (SDPR) authority
for receipts collected from the tourism industry. This
amendment increases SDPR authority to $4.2 million.
The language portion of this amendment will match up
to $1.5 million of the newly authorized SDPR with UGF.
This one-time match will retain the level of Tourism
Marketing in the Finance CS, while reducing the UGF
budget by $1.5 million.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gara addressed the DCCED budget subcommittee
$9.26 million recommendation to fund the state's tourism
marketing campaign. He detailed that the campaign provided
print, radio, and television advertisements. The amendment
would allow the same amount of money to go to the marketing
program, but with a contribution from the industry. He
communicated that outside of the cruise ship industry, most
tourism companies did not contribute to marketing campaign
costs. He elaborated that the only companies that paid a
tax in Alaska were C-corporations outside of oil, fishing,
and a couple of other areas; any other businesses paid
nothing more than their $100 license fee. He stated that
businesses in the tourism industry did pay to advertise
their companies in a vacation planner (paid to DCCED);
however, he did not attribute the personal advertising as a
contribution to the marketing campaign. He added that the
vacation planner worked well. The amendment would remove $3
million in UGF from the Tourism Marketing budget; reducing
UGF funding from $9.2 million to $6.2 million. The
amendment included a 50/50 match specifying that if the
industry contributed up to $1.5 million, the state would
match the funds. He stressed that there had to be some
contribution from industry. He discussed that determining
where to cut the budget was not easy. He noted that kids
and others were baring much of the burden imposed by budget
cuts. He believed it was necessary to locate able-bodied
adults who could carry some of the burden as well. He
communicated that other states had taxes on tourism
companies; the companies received tax credits if they
contributed to a tourism marketing campaign. He concluded
that a voluntary contribution to help match had been
discussed in the legislature for a long time.
7:38:32 PM
Representative Munoz opposed the amendment and believed the
state needed to support its small businesses. She believed
that Alaska needed to stay in the marketing game. She spoke
to competition with other locations including Hawaii,
Europe, Mexico, and Latin America. She observed that the
marketing budget had already been reduced from $16 million
down to $9 million. She stressed that the reduction was a
significant hit in one year.
Representative Pruitt opposed the amendment. He discussed
that the reduction had been made in one of his committees.
He applauded the idea of asking the industry to continue to
contribute; however, the subcommittee had already reduced
the tourism marketing budget by $6 million. He did not want
to imply that he did not want to discuss the concept in the
future. He believed it was necessary to give the industry
an opportunity for "step down." He noted that Alaska
Seafood Marketing Institute (ASMI) had taken a 40 percent
cut. He elaborated that there had been a goal to be
equitable on the cuts.
Representative Gattis had a difficult time opposing the
amendment. She reasoned that the amendment reduced state
funds, which aligned with what [majority] members had been
asking for throughout the meeting. She wanted to hear
further comments before making a decision on the amendment.
7:41:36 PM
Representative Guttenberg stated that tourism marketing had
been on the table over the years. He believed that at one
point it had been decided that tourism marketing would be
wholly financed by the industry with a state match. He
wanted Alaskan tourism to be strong, but he believed the
amendment was appropriate under the current financial
circumstances.
Representative Wilson supported the chair of the
subcommittee, although she did agree with the amendment's
direction. She had struggled with the issue due to a
statutory requirement specifying that the state was
supposed to match funds raised by the industry. She
questioned what counted as raising money (e.g. funds from
rental cars and other). She did not know enough to vote for
the amendment at present. She hoped that the chair of the
committee would look closer to determine whether there was
other revenue the state should be looking at (i.e. the
possibility of taxing S-corporations).
7:43:29 PM
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
Representative Munoz OBJECTED.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg, Saddler, Thompson, Neuman
OPPOSED: Gattis, Munoz, Pruitt, Wilson, Edgmon
Representative Kawasaki was absent from the vote.
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 78 FAILED (5/5).
7:45:05 PM
Representative Guttenberg MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 79:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Guttenberg and Gara
DEPARTMENT: Natural Resources
APPROPRIATION: Administration and Support Services
ALLOCATION: Citizen's Advisory Commission on Federal
Areas
DELETE: $288.1 UGF l004
POSITIONS: 1 PFT, 1 FT seasonal (11 months/year)
EXPLANATION: Unnecessary function of state government.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Guttenberg explained the amendment would
delete the Citizen's Advisory Commission on Federal Areas
and would eliminate 1.5 positions. He stated that the
commission provided an unnecessary government function
given that the work was already conducted by the state, the
governor, the Department of Law, DNR, and legislative floor
citations. He added that the public had also weighed in
strongly.
Co-Chair Neuman WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 79 was ADOPTED.
7:46:55 PM
Representative Guttenberg MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 80:
OFFERED BY: Rep. Guttenberg
DEPARTMENT: Revenue
APPROPRIATION: Language Section
ALLOCATION: Fund Capitalization
ADD: $500,000,000 UGF 1004
Add text: "not to exceed $500,000,000"
DELETE: $700,000,000 UGF 1004
Delete text: "estimated to be $700,000,000"
EXPLANATION: Amend language HB 72, page 70, lines 4-9
as follows: (d) If the balance of the oil and gas tax
credit fund (AS 43 .55.028) is insufficient to
purchase transfer tax credit certificates issued under
AS 43 .55.023 and production tax credit certificates
issued under AS 43.55.025 that are presented for
purchase, the amount by which the tax credit
certificates presented for purchase exceeds the
balance of the fund, not to exceed $500,000.000
[estimated to be $700,000,000] is appropriated from
the general fund to the oil and gas tax credit fund
(AS 43.55 .028).
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Guttenberg explained the amendment. He spoke
to tax credits provided by the state to the oil and gas
industry. He explained that two of the credit types could
be cashed in for a certificate; others were allowed to be
written off on taxes. He noted that the certificate could
be sold from one company to another. He relayed that DNR
had different estimates on the amounts from year to year,
but some would be or had expired. He highlighted that the
expected outlay for the credits in cash in the current year
was $700 million. The amendment would reduce the credits
from $700 million to $500 million. He elaborated that the
credits would still be honored by the state. He stressed
that he was not asking the state to not honor the credits.
He opined that the state needed to tell the people looking
to cash the credits in that it only had $500 million of the
projected $700 million. He detailed that under the
amendment companies would cash in on a first come first
serve basis; the department would pay out until the cap was
reached, which was expected to occur in May or June. The
department would begin paying out credits again at the
start of the next fiscal year on July 1.
Co-Chair Neuman asked committee members to refrain from
using technology at the table.
Representative Guttenberg continued to explain the
amendment, specifying that the state did not have $700
million to pay for credits in the current year; it would be
necessary for companies to wait a few months. He remarked
that perhaps the price of oil would increase, but perhaps
it would not. He addressed that if projections by DOR were
accurate, the price of oil would continue to decline. The
amendment specified to companies that they would have to
wait a few additional months to receive their cash due to
the state's budget crisis. He believed the industry would
understand the situation. He emphasized that the amendment
did not represent a change to tax policy; the state's
liability for the credits would remain. He stressed that
paying out $700 million in cash was a substantial burden
for the state in the current year. The credits applied
statewide for Prudhoe Bay, Cook Inlet, and Middle Earth
because they could not differentiate between tax payers. He
compared the situation to curtailing a promise to increase
funding to education in the current year. He believed it
was necessary to have participation across the political
spectrum. He opined that in another state the budget would
include much more than reductions; it would include
increases in motor-fuel tax, road service charges, and
income tax. He stated that the amendment was the closest to
achieving a balance sheet that looked at both sides of the
equation. He summarized that the state could not afford to
pay the out $700 million in the present year; the amendment
would pay out $500 million in the current year. The
legislature would figure out what to do the following year.
He emphasized that the state's liability would remain.
7:52:51 PM
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
OPPOSED: Gattis, Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Edgmon,
Thompson, Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 80 FAILED (3/8).
7:53:32 PM
Representative Gara MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 81 [Note: a
copy of the backup letter from the Alaska Energy Authority
to the Office of Management and Budget, dated January 8,
2015 is on file.]:
OFFERED BY: Representatives Gara, Guttenberg, Kawasaki
Page 1, line 2, following "capitalizing funds;":
Insert "lapsing appropriations"
Page 76, line 18, following "APPROPRIATIONS.":
Insert "(a)"
Page 76, line 19:
Insert new subsections to read: "(b) the unexpended
and unobligated balance on June 30, 2015, estimated to
be $17,973,847, of the appropriation made in sec. 01,
ch. 16, SLA 2013, page 12, lines 20-21, lapses to the
general fund on June 30, 2015."
EXPLANATION: This causes the available general fund
balance appropriated to the Anchorage - U-Med District
Northern Access project to lapse into the general
fund. The Bragaw Road extension in Anchorage is not an
affordable project compared to other priorities in
this fiscal climate.
"(c) $6 million of the unexpended and unobligated
balances, estimated to be a total of $6,681,700, of
the appropriations made in sec. 4, ch. 16 SLA 2013,
page 105, lines 20-24, and sec. 4, ch. 18, SLA 2014,
page 87, lines 10-11, and without elimination of any
department positions, lapses to the general fund on
June 30, 2015."
EXPLANATION: This causes the available general fund
balance appropriated to Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric
projects to lapse into the general fund. The Susitna
Dam would serve the same customers as the two gasline
projects being considered by the State at this time,
and all three projects will bring excess power to the
Railbelt. This amendment withdraws the remaining
unobligated funds with appropriated to the Susitna Dam
in a time of budget shortfalls. This lapse does not
affect any positions at DCCED.
Co-Chair Neuman OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Gara explained that the amendment sought $23
million in savings. He elaborated that currently there was
enough money in the Susitna-Watana project its work for the
coming fiscal year. He believed the $6 million left over
should be reappropriated to the General Fund. He stated
that the Susitna project served the same people that three
potential gas lines would serve. Additionally, the
amendment would remove funds from the Bragaw Road
extension. The amendment sought to use the savings from the
two projects to help cut the budget deficit by $23 million.
7:54:33 PM
Co-Chair Neuman MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Guttenberg, Kawasaki, Edgmon, Gara
OPPOSED: Gattis, Munoz, Pruitt, Saddler, Wilson, Thompson,
Neuman
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 81 FAILED (4/7).
Co-Chair Thompson MOVED to authorize the Division of
Legislative Finance and Legislative Legal Services to make
technical and conforming amendments to incorporate the
amendments adopted by the committee into a CS.
HB 72 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
HB 73 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
Co-Chair Neuman discussed the schedule for the following
morning.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 72 - HB 73 Budget Amendments.pdf |
HFIN 3/10/2015 1:30:00 PM |
HB 72 HB 73 |
| HB 72 Amendment 22 Backup.pdf |
HFIN 3/10/2015 1:30:00 PM |
HB 72 |
| HB 72 HB 73 Amendments with Actions.pdf |
HFIN 3/10/2015 1:30:00 PM |
HB 72 HB 73 |
| HB 72 Public Testimony PKT 7.pdf.1.pdf |
HFIN 3/10/2015 1:30:00 PM |
HB 72 |