Legislature(2021 - 2022)ADAMS 519
03/15/2022 01:30 PM House FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB322 | |
| HB158 | |
| HB395 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 322 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 395 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 158 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE BILL NO. 395
"An Act relating to the Alaska marine highway system
fund and the Alaska marine highway system vessel
replacement fund; establishing the Alaska marine
highway system fund and the Alaska marine highway
system vessel replacement fund outside the general
fund; authorizing the commissioner of transportation
and public facilities to expend money from the Alaska
marine highway system fund and the Alaska marine
highway system vessel replacement fund; and providing
for an effective date."
2:18:37 PM
Co-Chair Merrick asked if members had questions.
2:18:55 PM
Co-Chair Merrick OPENED public testimony.
DAVID IGNELL, SELF, JUNEAU, spoke in opposition of HB 395
because it seemed to give the commissioner of the
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT)
authority to spend a significant amount of money. He noted
that the bill was introduced less than a week ago and
questioned why public testimony had been scheduled so
quickly. He expressed that it seemed like someone was
trying to "pull a fast one" with the bill. It reminded him
of the events that led up to the defunding of the Alaska
Marine Highways System (AMHS). He thought that the bill
would be detrimental to rural communities. He requested
that public hearing of the bill be postponed until the
people of Alaska were more aware of it, and for the public
to be given a "reasonable opportunity to be heard" through
public testimony.
Co-Chair Merrick indicated that the committee was not
trying to rush the bill hearing process. She relayed that
the hearing had been noticed in the previous week and that
this was the first hearing of the bill.
Mr. Ignell stated that he had spent only a few minutes
looking at the bill. He shared his understanding of the
bill hearing process in that once public testimony was
closed for a bill, the public had no more opportunities for
input. He thought the amount of time given for public
testimony was insufficient.
Co-Chair Merrick asked the testifier to keep his comments
focused on the bill. She explained that the committee
procedurally held public testimony and then would decide
whether to draft amendments based on the testimony. She
invited the next testifier to begin.
2:25:55 PM
PAT ALEXANDER, SELF, SITKA (via teleconference), agreed
with Mr. Ignell that the legislation had been brought forth
too quickly. She thought the monies were being moved to
another account to avoid the sweep provision. She was
interested in protecting the funds so that they would only
be spent to support AMHS and not diverted to any other
purpose. She asked for clarification on the legislation.
Co-Chair Merrick indicated committee hearings could be
revisited online.
Representative Rasmussen asked if the testifier objected to
creating a separate account that was outside of the general
fund to disallow the fund from being sweepable. The reason
the legislation was brought forward was because there had
been previous accounts that fell under the general fund
that were subject to the sweep and it did not achieve the
three-quarter vote threshold. It was clear in the bill that
the money was for a specific purpose. It also specified to
what purpose the commissioner could use the funding.
Ms. Alexander did not want the money to be swept into the
general fund. She wanted to ensure that the money would be
spent on AMHS.
2:30:16 PM
Representative Rasmussen thought the bill accomplished what
the testifier was hoping for it to accomplish.
Co-Chair Merrick indicated that HB 395 dealt with the
sweepability of AMHS, but HB 322 also dealt with that
matter. They were two versions of the bill with slight
differences.
2:31:15 PM
Representative Josephson noted that there were differences
in the bill. He wondered if Ms. Alexander's and Mr.
Ignell's testimony came from a place of well-deserved
confusion because the administration was not in favor of
additional AMHS funding earlier in the term. He wondered
whether the testifiers were suspicious of the
administration because of its prior opposition to funding
AMHS.
Ms. Alexander was concerned that the money would be used
for a purpose other than AMHS because of the state's dire
fiscal position.
Representative Josephson clarified that neither bill could
guarantee that funds would be used for designated purposes.
He explained that it was a presumptive designation. It came
down to a question of control of the funds, and whether the
legislature or the commissioner should be made responsible
for those funds.
2:33:35 PM
FRANK LEE, SELF, DOUGLAS (via teleconference), spoke in
support of funding the AMHS for as long as possible. He
indicated that the funds should be allocated for AMHS and
should not be allocated for any other purpose. There had
been historic problems maintaining the ferries due to lack
of funds. He stated that AMHS was important to sustain
Alaskan communities and was a lifeline for Southeast
Alaska.
2:35:15 PM
WANDA CULP, SELF, JUNEAU (via teleconference), commented
that the State of Alaska was corporate-based due to Alaska
Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA). She added that
Southeast Alaska was still suffering from the governor's
last withdrawal of the AMHS and that it was more expensive
than ever to travel on the ferry. She noted that DOT used
federal and state transportation funding and that it must
not be abused. She suggested that [federal] Indian-based
funding had most likely been absorbed by DOT. She stated
that Native people deserved equal access to AMHS and the
road system, otherwise it was akin to genocide. She
wondered if the governor's action of taking from the AMHS
was specifically to accommodate the corporate-rooted
infrastructure in the northern areas of the state rather
than accommodating the Tongass National Forrest. It seemed
that the funding the governor took was used for business
corporations. She spoke of the high cost of travel by air
and wanted to keep the AMHS out of the governor's hands.
She emphasized the importance of equality, and that the
state needed to step back.
2:39:28 PM
SHANNON ADAMSON, ALASKA REGIONAL REPRESENTATIVE, MASTERS
MATES AND PILOTS, JUNEAU (via teleconference), spoke in
support of AMHS. She spoke in support of HB 322 and in
opposition to HB 395. She opined that AMHS needed stability
and predictability, and HB 322 provided AMHS with the
knowledge that future vessels would be available on a
yearly basis. Although HB 395 provided some protection to
the funds, it allowed the DOT commissioner to spend some of
the funds without much oversight. She was concerned that
the current management system would have control of the
funds, which was troubling because management had problems
making decisions that were in the best interest of the
vessels and the communities. The bill failed to provide
some protections of the fund from the political cycle which
had always been a problem for AMHS. She concluded that HB
322 would be a huge step forward.
2:41:44 PM
GERRY HOPE, TRANSPORTATION DIRECTOR, SITKA TRIBE OF ALASKA,
SITKA (via teleconference), indicated that the Sitka Tribe
of Alaska had submitted comments in writing and had been
solicited by AMHS over the past few decades regarding the
winter and summer ferry schedules. He noted the declining
service of AMHS to Sitka. He thought the bill had a good
intent except for the control of funding. The concept of
money being set aside for the specific purpose of AMHS was
appreciated. However, he thought the wheels came off the
bill by putting too much authority into the hands of the
commissioner. He liked the concept of the bill but noted
the constitutional requirement for funds to not be
designated for a specific purpose.
2:44:48 PM
Vice-Chair Ortiz noted that there were two different bills
before the committee, HB 395 and HB 322, but that both
bills did essentially the same thing. The main difference
was that the control of the funds was in the hands of the
commissioner of DOT under HB 396. Under HB 322, the
authority rested in the hands of the legislature. He asked
whether Mr. Hope had a preference between the bills.
Mr. Hope preferred the authority be in the hands of the
legislature but acknowledged that things could change in
the future. He stated that more heads were better than one.
He questioned the role of the newly created AMHS board
because it was unclear.
2:47:05 PM
Co-Chair Merrick CLOSED public testimony.
2:47:14 PM
Representative Thompson asked Co-Chair Foster about the new
timeline since the Department of Revenue had released the
spring revenue forecast.
Co-Chair Merrick asked Representative Thompson to hold his
question until the committee was done with HB 395.
Representative Wool appreciated Co-Chair Merrick's decision
to bring both bills forward at the same time. He thought
the committee would be taking action on one bill at a time
because the bills were very different. He thought there was
no rush to move the bills forward without first having deep
discussions.
Co-Chair Merrick set an amendment deadline for March 16,
2022.
2:49:15 PM
Co-Chair Foster indicated amendments on the budget would be
due by March 18, 2022. The committee would begin taking up
amendments on Monday, March 21, 2022 and planned to discuss
amendments through Thursday, March 24, 2022. He hoped that
the budget would be moved out no later than the following
week. The committee would have hearings twice a day until
amendments were completed. The budget would be moved to the
House floor from March 28, 2022 to March 31, 2022.
2:51:17 PM
Representative Thompson thanked Co-Chair Foster for laying
out the timeframe.
Co-Chair Merrick reviewed the agenda for the following
meeting.
Representative Rasmussen asked Co-Chair Foster when the
committee substitute (CS) would be taken up.
Co-Chair Foster thought that the spring revenue forecast
was supposed to have been released earlier that morning,
and the intention was to base a CS on that forecast. More
money was coming into the state and there was more funding
available for appropriation. There would be a rollout of
the changes the following afternoon.
HB 395 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
Co-Chair Merrick adjourned the meeting.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 158 Amendment 1 Thompson 030822.pdf |
HFIN 3/15/2022 1:30:00 PM |
HB 158 |
| HFIN HB158 DOR response 03.25.22.pdf |
HFIN 3/15/2022 1:30:00 PM |
HB 158 |