Legislature(2005 - 2006)CAPITOL 106
03/03/2005 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HJR7 | |
| HB48 | |
| HB103 | |
| HB127 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HJR 7 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 48 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 103 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 127 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 48-EXPENDITURE FOR CAPITOL CONSTRUCTION 8:06:45 AM CHAIR SEATON announced that the next order of business was HOUSE BILL NO. 48, "An Act relating to a determination of costs attributable to relocating the legislature or the state capital or of constructing a new capitol building in the present capital city, and to a determination of all costs of retaining the existing capitol building and keeping the state capital and legislature in the present capital city; relating to voter approval of certain bondable costs; and providing for an effective date." 8:06:46 AM REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE, Alaska State Legislature, as co- sponsor of HB 48, indicated that, since the last hearing on the bill, many questions arose. He deferred further discussion of the bill to his staff. 8:08:16 AM BEN MULLIGAN, Staff to Representative Bill Stoltze, Alaska State Legislature, testifying on behalf of Representative Stoltze, co- sponsor of HB 48, addressed the questions that had arisen during the last hearing on the bill. First, regarding whether the state would have any jurisdiction over a Juneau bond, for example, he said, "The city is free to apply for a bond to pay for a capitol building." Second, he provided definitions for "capitol" - the building and "capital" - the city serving as the seat of government. Third, regarding the meaning of "new," he said there had been questions as to whether that would include additions and renovations. He said that may be a matter for the committee to adopt an amendment to defined the term. 8:09:40 AM CHAIR SEATON asked who has the authority to negotiate terms for lease agreements for buildings in the state, including a capitol. 8:10:13 AM REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE indicated that it would depend on the cost of the building. He noted that some leases in the past have been controversial. 8:10:50 AM MR. MULLIGAN said he would look into an answer regarding at what amount the legislature would become involved. 8:11:41 AM REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE, in response to questions from Representative Gardner, said he believes the bill, as currently written, would require that any kind of restructuring of the current use of the existing capitol that would involve partial use of another existing building would have to go before the voters, which is why his staff had suggested the committee may want to amend the bill. 8:12:39 AM CHAIR SEATON reopened public testimony. 8:12:55 AM REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE clarified that [HB 48] is not about moving the capital, but is the public's say about the cost of building a capitol. 8:13:59 AM CHAIR SEATON asked if Representative Stoltze has any suggestions for amendment language. 8:14:41 AM REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE responded that he respects the committee process in perfecting a bill. He said, "This is certainly my best stab at protecting the public's voice." 8:15:30 AM CHAIR SEATON said he thinks the committee would agree that it doesn't want to "have something that would constrain the legislature from improving the capitol building." Furthermore, he encouraged Representative Stoltze to provide the committee with any "discrete language." 8:15:51 AM REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE said, "I want flexibility, not loopholes." 8:16:03 AM LEONARD DEAL, testifying on behalf of himself, stated concern about the way the bill is written. He offered his understanding that the bill strongly weighs the costs - of either building, relocating, or improving - "on the Juneau side." He opined that the bill doesn't take into account what the majority of people in Alaska really want. MR. DEAL directed attention to [the bill title], which read as follows: "An Act relating to a determination of costs attributable to relocating the legislature or the state capital or of constructing a new capitol building in the present capital city, and to a determination of all costs of retaining the existing capitol building and keeping the state capital and legislature in the present capital city; relating to voter approval of certain bondable costs; and providing for an effective date." MR. DEAL said his interpretation of "determination of all costs of retaining the existing capitol building" is that it would include the costs of remodeling. He noted that a capitol is anywhere the legislature meets. 8:18:46 AM MR. DEAL made some comments related to a capital move. 8:20:01 AM REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE proffered that Mr. Deal is partially speaking to another bill sponsored by Representative Norman Rokeberg regarding "a competitive process" of capital location. 8:20:04 AM CHAIR SEATON told Mr. Deal that that bill should be heard by the committee in about a week, at which point, Mr. Deal would be welcome to come back and testify on that issue. 8:20:47 AM WIN GRUENING, Chair, Alaska Committee, noted that his committee is an all-volunteer group dedicated to improving and enhancing Alaska's capital city. He emphasized that the committee's current mission is to be proactive, whereas many years ago, it was more of a reactive mission - waiting for the next capital move effort to surface. He stated that the citizens of Alaska have repeatedly voted down efforts to move the capital. Mr. Gruening offered a brief history of results of the committee's proactivity. He said the impact of losing the capital would be devastating to Juneau. He expressed the need to advocate for the best and most technologically advanced facilities. 8:24:44 AM MR. GRUENING said whether it's the proposed legislation or some other proposal, some form of legislative approval will be required and the cost would be known in advance. He stated, "There is no need to amend the Frank Initiative to accomplish this." He stated his belief that the legislature is required to approve all leases in excess of $1 million. He predicted that, unfortunately, HB 48 may hinder genuine efforts to improve Alaska's capital city. 8:26:24 AM MR. GRUENING, in response to a request from Chair Seaton to conclude his testimony in the interest of time, stated that the FRANK Initiative was never designed to be "used in this way"; rather, it's intent was to prevent the wholesale move of a capital city without the electorate knowing the cost in advance. He reminded the committee members that the legislature can, in fact, evaluate and consider future proposals that will improve the facilities, without unnecessary, time-consuming, and expensive statewide votes. 8:27:18 AM CHAIR SEATON closed public testimony. 8:27:28 AM REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER said, when she was campaigning, one of the themes brought to her attention was that people didn't want to go to a vote over every little thing that is controversial. She said constituents come to their legislators with feedback and depend on them to address problems. Representative Gardner stated that she doesn't think HB 48 is necessary. She indicated that her constituents do not support a new capitol building. 8:30:12 AM REPRESENTATIVE GATTO suggested that changing a room is renovation, while moving a building is beyond renovation. He illustrated several examples ranging between those two actions. Representative Gatto said the key question is: "Does the Frank Initiative indicate that whenever we're going to spend a significant amount of money involving the only capital that the people of the state have, shouldn't they be entitled to a voice?" He said he thinks the answer to that question is yes. 8:31:27 AM REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS revealed that his constituents, although they would enjoy having better access to their capital, specifically told him, "Don't build a new one and don't spend the money to move the one that we have." He said he likes his office and the capitol building just as it is. He suggested that there are more important concerns before the legislature, such as the state's finances and the burden of the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) and the Teachers' Retirement System (TRS). 8:32:51 AM REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE said he and co-sponsor Representative Carl Gatto will "run the language proposals by members so we can come before a committee at your convenience." He stated that his primary goal is to "maintain the spirit of the Frank Initiative." He indicated that he thinks most constituents want to have a voice regarding the capitol building. He added, "The way this Frank Initiative is marketed, I think folks think they have the right to vote." 8:33:53 AM CHAIR SEATON, regarding the concerns expressed relating to limiting the scope of the bill so that it does not include renovation or additions to the existing capitol building, asked Representative Stoltze to provide the committee with language addressing that concern. 8:34:28 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG reminded the committee that Avrum Gross had testified at a previous hearing on HB 48 [on 2/22/05], at which time he had promised to provide the committee with some written legal comments. He said he would like to get those comments as soon as possible. 8:35:04 AM CHAIR SEATON asked all committee members to get those types of comments to his office as soon as possible. 8:35:38 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG stated that [HB 48] "is a bill to require a vote." He noted that there is a retroactivity clause, and he questioned how a bill requiring a vote could be retroactive. 8:36:04 AM CHAIR SEATON announced that HB 48 was heard and held.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|