Legislature(1993 - 1994)
05/09/1994 08:00 AM House STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 365am - GOVERNOR'S OMNIBUS BILL CHAIRMAN VEZEY opened SB 365am for discussion. Number 100 SHELBY STASTNY, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET (OMB), addressed SB 365am. He stated OMB had asked the departments to point out things in their statutes which were old, out-dated, or could be done away with, in order to make things more efficient and operations easier. From this request, early in the session, four bills were produced, SB 365am being one of them. He explained SB 365am did not have any additional revenues in it. He noted there was a sectional analysis available. CHAIRMAN VEZEY mentioned he had already been through SB 365am and did not have any questions. REPRESENTATIVE ULMER referred to the letter by the Alaska Citizens Transportation Coalition (ACTC), whereby their principal concern was with sections that give additional authority to the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities. She quoted, "It makes no sense for the legislature to give a single administrator a blank check for approximately $200 million a year in federal transportation funds." They're concerned about the extent to which the legislature is giving out its appropriation power to the Commissioner of Transportation and Public Facilites. She asked for comment. Number 145 CLYDE STOLTZFUS, SPECIAL ASSISTANT, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES, answered the committees questions on SB 365am. He believed the ACTC letter was drafted prior to the amendments made in Senate Finance, and he believed the section they were referring to has now been removed. In specific, the repeal of Section 44.42.050(d). CHAIRMAN VEZEY pointed out he was not aware of anything in SB 365am that gave any of the departments appropriation authority. Number 174 REPRESENTATIVE GARY DAVIS moved to move SB 365am from committee with individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes. CHAIRMAN VEZEY stated before the committee entertained a motion to move SB 365am from committee, it first needed to adopt some fiscal notes. He noted there were eight zero fiscal notes to be adopted: Department of Law; Department of Public Safety, Division of Motor Vehicles; Department of Administration, Leasing & Facilities; Office of the Governor, Management & Budget; Department of Transportation and Public Facilities; Department of Environmental Conservation, Environmental Quality; Department of Labor; and the Department of Corrections. Number 200 REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS moved to adopt the eight fiscal notes. CHAIRMAN VEZEY, hearing no objection, adopted the fiscal notes. REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS interjected he had another question to ask MR. STASTNY. He stated had been informed there was some controversy over the "preferred provider" section. CHAIRMAN VEZEY stated he was not aware of a "preferred provider" clause in SB 365am. MR. STASTNY commented it was certainly not in SB 365am. CHAIRMAN VEZEY recollected REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS was referring to an amendment to an omnibus insurance bill that is in the process. REPRESENTATIVE ULMER mentioned she had another question to ask MR. STOLTZFUS. She commented it is true that the appropriation section was removed, but she questioned why Department of Transportation wanted two other changes. One is changing the six-year capital improvement program to three years, page 12, line 9. The other is changing on page 13, Section 29, so that the cost estimates for project funding are no longer required under that section. She believed there used to be a cost estimation requirement in statute, with regard to priorities. MR. STOLTZFUS asked, because he did not have a copy of the bill before him, for clarification of what statute was being amended. REPRESENTATIVE ULMER responded AS 37.07.040, subsection (1). MR. STOLTZFUS answered the six-year plan DOT is required to report is actually in Section 1 and it remains a six-year plan. He believed the discrepancy REPRESENTATIVE ULMER noticed referred to OMB, who is required to do a four-year plan. The plan would be the current fiscal year plus three fiscal years succeeding. REPRESENTATIVE ULMER clarified DOT's six-year plan remains the same. MR. STOLTZFUS answered correct, under the Senate amendments. REPRESENTATIVE ULMER inquired about AS 37.07.060, which does not require cost estimates for the projects. Is there a particular reason for this. She believed DOT usually includes cost estimates when it lists the projects. MR. STOLTZFUS answered correct. The requirement is removed is that section because in the six-year plan "it is really a guess as to what those costs are." The legislature sees this in the capital budget it receives from DOT. REPRESENTATIVE ULMER clarified the numbers are not sufficiently defined. MR. STOLTZFUS answered correct. Number 289 CHAIRMAN VEZEY reiterated the motion before the committee is to adopt SB 365am with the eight attached zero fiscal notes. He called for a roll call vote. IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES VEZEY, KOTT, ULMER, B. DAVIS, G. DAVIS, SANDERS, OLBERG. The MOTION PASSED, ADJOURNMENT CHAIRMAN VEZEY, having no further business before the committee, adjourned the meeting at 10:28.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|