Legislature(1997 - 1998)

01/27/1998 08:04 AM House STA

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
txt
HB 304 - MOVE LEGISLATURE TO ANCHORAGE                                         
                                                                               
Number 0532                                                                    
                                                                               
CHAIR JAMES announced the next item of business would be HB 304,               
"An Act relating to the location of the convening of the                       
legislature in regular session; repealing provisions relating to               
student guests of the legislature; and providing for an effective              
date," sponsored by Representatives Green and Rokeberg.                        
                                                                               
Number 0623                                                                    
                                                                               
JEFF LOGAN, Legislative Assistant to Representative Joe Green,                 
Alaska State Legislature came before the committee.  He stated that            
there is not much needed in the way of introduction of the concept             
of providing better access to the people of Alaska to their                    
legislature.  He said HB 304 directs the legislature to meet in the            
Municipality of Anchorage beginning in January 2001.  Mr. Logan                
pointed out HB 304 does not move the capital.  He pointed out the              
results of the 1994 statewide ballot initiative indicated that                 
there is considerable statewide support and majority support in                
Southcentral Alaska for the legislature to meet in Anchorage.                  
House Bill 304 directs the Legislative Council to arrange for an               
appropriate meeting place to meet.                                             
                                                                               
MR. LOGAN indicated the current dimensions of the House chambers as            
being 60 feet by 52 feet.  He pointed out it is the largest meeting            
place in the legislature.  He said it is not anticipated that                  
arranging for an appropriate meeting place in Anchorage would be               
much of a problem.                                                             
                                                                               
MR. LOGAN said while credit should be given to the Alaska Committee            
for their efforts to make Juneau a better host to legislators and              
staff, their efforts simply can not overcome Juneau's remote                   
geographical location.  Navigational improvements at the airport,              
telecommunications infrastructure and more available housing have              
all made Juneau a better capital city, but none of these                       
improvements have gotten a majority of legislators in touch with               
the majority of their constituents.                                            
                                                                               
MR. LOGAN continued that in comparison to the capital move, they               
believe the legislative move does not have the same impact on                  
existing departments.  Two of the larger departments have more                 
personnel in Anchorage then they do here in Juneau.  He said                   
department commissioners and the Governor also have offices in                 
Anchorage.  One commissioner designee has already stated that she              
is moving her office from Juneau to Anchorage.  He said they                   
believe the alleged problems of separating the legislative session             
from the administrative offices in Juneau is a "red herring."                  
                                                                               
Number 0909                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG, Co-Sponsor of HB 304, came before the                 
committee.  He said he believes Mr. Logan has reviewed the                     
situation  in a reasonable manner.  He said he would like to bring             
a few other points to the attention of the committee.                          
Representative Rokeberg said he has lived in Alaska since 1946, and            
first came to Juneau in 1946, on the SS Baranof.  He indicated he              
went to Anchorage in 1947 when he was three or four years old, on              
the SS Aleutian.  He pointed out that he had an opportunity to come            
to Juneau once to do a consulting job for Behrends Bank in the late            
1970s.                                                                         
                                                                               
Number 0955                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said he first walked into the Capitol                  
Building in 1994, to be sworn in as a legislator.  Representative              
Rokeberg said he had been active in the business and political                 
affairs of the state for approximately 30 years and had never been             
in the Capitol Building.  He said he believes that is typical of               
most Alaskans.  Representative Rokeberg said, "That's the key                  
element and the key issue when we talk about the capital move                  
itself, but in this instance we're asking for the consideration of             
just moving the legislature.  And I think that's the most important            
thing and one of the overriding things (indisc.) this particular --            
these legislative bodies, during their periods of operation, are               
just not available to the average citizen of this state.  It's too             
costly to come to Juneau to meet with your legislators and to                  
testify at committee hearings.  The legislature has done a lot in              
endeavoring to overcome some of these problems by having                       
teleconferencing and other telecommunication devices that we're                
looking at.  I think we have some T.V. type screens that sit in the            
Anchorage LIO (Legislative Information Office), but I never seen               
them on during a legislative hearing.  But I think we're trying in             
some of those things, but frankly, I don't believe they're really              
adequate.  There is no -- I don't think there is any situation                 
where a constituent or a member or citizen of this state can be --             
not meet directly with their representatives in both the House and             
Senate I think is the most important thing."                                   
                                                                               
Number 1137                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG stated he would like to make a few comments            
about the building the legislature meets in.  He said, "This is the            
State Capitol Building with an 'o,' and Juneau is the State Capital            
with an 'a.'  And we're talking about moving the legislature                   
(indisc.).  Normally, most state capitals include the executive and            
legislative branches, and in many instances also the seats of the              
judicial branch of the government.  Alaska is the only state in the            
Union that does not have a capitol building built for the purpose              
of housing state government.  This is, of course, a federal                    
building - was started in 1929, delivered in 1931, which certainly             
has served its purpose over the years, but it was never designed to            
be a state capitol building.  And frankly, it's some 68 years old              
right now and it's obsolete and antiquated, and frankly Madam                  
Chair, it's on its last legs.  There is no question but what this              
building needs to be replaced.  I would say currently, right now,              
this direction despite all the good efforts of our legislative                 
maintenance folks and all the money we pour into it, is a relic of             
life-threatening importance to the people who occupy this building.            
There is the numerous life safety violations of any building code              
you wish to subscribe to.  Most of the municipalities in the state             
of Alaska, and the state of Alaska itself (indisc.), the uniform               
building code.  There are so many violations here, it's quite                  
something.  First and foremost, I believe this building fairly                 
needs a new sprinkler.  There is an issue whether it's 75 feet or              
more in its (indisc.) in it's height, but I believe it is.                     
Therefore, it would be under a high-rise requirement.  And                     
therefore, any other -- any jurisdiction in the United States would            
be mandated to have a sprinkler system throughout.  This building              
does not."                                                                     
                                                                               
Number 1335                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said the geotechnical engineering and the              
structural integrity of the building is certainly in question.  He             
said he believes the building is a type three geotechnical zone                
which requires structural engineering to be able to withstand the              
potentiality of modest earthquakes.  He pointed out that he knows              
that the ceiling system is not wired in such a manner for                      
earthquake potentialities.                                                     
                                                                               
Number 1429                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG referred to the accessibility for the                  
disabled community and we've said a tremendous amount of money has             
been spent on the building.  He said the building is a historic                
structure.  He said, "To meet the letter of the ADA (Americans With            
Disabilities Act) requirements, we have I think, in a large part,              
done that.  But, Madam Chair, have we met the spirit of the law?               
This particular building is not easily accessible by the disabled              
community and I think that's something we need to be aware of.  In             
spite of all the ramps that we built, the bathroom and shower we               
built, and the other areas that we have  for access to the building            
-- I believe the elevator cabs are marginally sized, but I think               
legal.  But still it's marginal in terms of their size.  I think               
the most damning thing about the building is its floor                         
configuration as it relates to the fire code.  There is numerous               
dead-end corridors in this building and inadequate escape routes               
for accessing on all the floors.  There is a 20 foot dead-end                  
corridor rule in the uniform building codes.  My office on the                 
ground floor is illegal unless I jump through the window.  That's              
not an access that's allowed under the building code.  The House               
chambers -- I think the Senate chambers are also illegal.  You                 
cannot exit through an assembled area and have a designated fire               
exit.  Therefore, I think both the House and the Senate chambers               
are illegal in their configuration."                                           
                                                                               
Number 1611                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG continued, "And I'd just like to point out,            
Madam Speaker, as the chairman of the committee - the Labor and                
Commerce Committee, I have the distinct honor of having a committee            
room on the ground floor area of this building.  Madam Chair, this             
room has a stairway in the middle of the room that people - when I             
have a few people come for the intricate bills which (indisc.) have            
this morning, people would be sitting on the stairway up to the                
back courtyard area of the building.  I suggest that the room is               
too small.  It's inadequate to have meetings.  I don't -- with the             
possible exception of the Senate and the House Finance Committees,             
there is not a committee meeting room in this building that can                
accommodate the needs of the public, barely its members or the                 
television cameras that we need to have in the room.  No matter                
where any committee in this state sat, we absolutely need to have              
such things as the Gavel to Gavel broadcasting to bring everybody              
in the state together so people knows what's going on in their                 
capitol building.  I don't care if (indisc.) Juneau, Anchorage,                
Willow or out in Bethel.  And I think that's really important.  We             
need to have adequate design for the telecommunications of the                 
twenty-first century and frankly, Madam Chair, this building really            
can't accommodate that."                                                       
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said, "I guess, in closing, I would just               
like to say I know a few years back the people of the city of                  
Juneau had an election here, October 5, 1993.  And they had a                  
proposition on the ballot to build a $50 million building for the              
state government center.  I've talked to a few people about it, I              
think there was some concerns at the time because there was the                
Frank Initiative, and so forth, on the ballot in 1994.  And there              
was concerns, particularly in the Senate, that the legislature                 
wouldn't move into the building if the people of Juneau built the              
building.  So I can understand some of the reluctance to vote for              
or against that proposition.  Madam Chair, I would deposit that                
citizens of this community voted by 6,659 against imposing a 2                 
percent sales tax to build a legislative hall and then 4,067 in                
favor.  So by a 3 to 2 majority, this particular community rejected            
the concept of paying for a legislative hall.  And there again,                
echoed their sentiment about this particular legislature being                 
here.  I think this particular legislature has been very important             
to the economy of this particular city and it's a very important               
thing, no doubt.  But Madam Chair, I think that the access and the             
ability of the citizens of this state to their government is a more            
important and overriding concern.  And just one final note on the              
cost - I'd be happy to try to answer some of those questions the               
committee may have.  Even I have the background in some 25 years of            
commercial real estate business in Anchorage and in the state of               
Alaska, I've spent my entire career building and developing and                
marketing high-rise and office building structures and other types             
of buildings throughout this state, so I have a degree of knowledge            
about those costs and related items.  I think there might be a                 
marginal cost to moving the capital or, excuse me - please forgive             
me, the legislature to Anchorage based on the - not on square                  
footage, the efficiency in which we look at the needs and the net              
costs.  If you look at the fiscal notes you have from the executive            
branch, I find that really humorous that the executive [branch] is             
going to spend $2.8 million a year to travel up to Anchorage to                
testify before the legislature.  I don't know.  They haven't heard             
of the $220 fare that Alaska has out here and the fact that they               
almost everyone of them has premises and office space already in               
Anchorage.  So I find that really more than humorous they come up              
with outlandish figure that has no meaning whatsoever.  If that's              
the case, then the state doesn't know how to budget their money                
properly for other items if that's the kind of fiscal note they                
come up with."                                                                 
                                                                               
Number 2052                                                                    
                                                                               
CHAIR JAMES asked if there were questions of Representative                    
Rokeberg.                                                                      
                                                                               
Number 1138                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON stated, "I appreciate your comments on the                
building and I was on the assembly when the issue for the voters.              
I voted on the assembly to take the issue to the voters building a             
new capitol.  And I think you probably gave the reason that the                
vote went the way it did when you said -- and I'm sure you                     
understand  this as a 25-year professional real estate business                
that, 'You don't build a building unless you can make sure you've              
got a commitment that it's going to be occupied.'  I thought that              
was a compelling argument that was made.  I think it was the                   
compelling argument that was made, even though I voted to take the             
risk anyway.  I'm sure you understand, as a 25-year professional in            
the real estate business, that an issue before the people there                
needs to an assurance that (indisc.).  I guess the question I have,            
Madam Chair, for the (indisc.) sponsor of the bill is that -- I'm              
struggling how you ask this and I appreciate the extent of the                 
testimony you gave on the condition of the building because I think            
many of us share that, but I would be interested in your views on              
kind of a 'cowboy credo,' which is you take care of the animal that            
is doing all the work before you take care of the cowboy.  You                 
don't eat your beans until you fed the oats to the horse, and this             
is an especially important credo, I think, after I've spent an                 
awful lot of time this last summer visiting other state facilities.            
It seems to me that if we're going to talk about fixing up                     
buildings that maybe we get to this building that serves our needs             
after we get to the school buildings that are not serving student              
needs, and after we get to the ferries that aren't serving the                 
needs of Alaskans who travel on the ferries, and after we get to               
roads, the harbors, the airports that aren't serving the needs of              
Alaskans, both in the urban and rural situations."                             
                                                                               
Number 2300                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON said, "I guess I'd like to tell you that I'd              
be the first to co-sponsor, with you, a bill for a new capitol                 
building, but I'd feel uncomfortable doing that before we have                 
satisfied the needs of some of these other Alaskans that are out               
there.  I would appreciate your comments on the prioritization of              
buildings that need to be fixed or repaired or built again."                   
                                                                               
Number 2329                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said that is something that all members                
need to look at in terms of prioritization of what the spending                
requirements are.  Clearly, there is an extraordinary number of                
needs.  He said he believes the deferred maintenance task force                
came up with about $1.6 billion of identified needs in the state.              
He said he is very sensitive to that particular need in the state.             
Representative Rokeberg asked where the tens of billions of dollars            
spent since the 1970s go.  Representative Rokeberg said he believes            
his past colleagues didn't really do the job necessary to keep the             
backlog of maintenance down to a minimum.                                      
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said, "But nevertheless, I think when you              
look at the fundamental needs of the state that we have to perform             
the duties of government, and when you do that, you need to be                 
housed and you need to be housed in the buildings that are                     
efficient and safe.  And when we reach that point, and believe me,             
Madam Chair - Representative Elton, I believe we both share the                
view that this building only has so much life that can be breathed             
back into it because of the problems with it.  I mean there is                 
numerous state capitol buildings.  For example, in the summer I was            
in Denver and went into the Colorado State Capitol Building.  It               
was built in 1884 - a significantly older building than this, but              
it was built in such a manner and (indisc.) type U.S. state capitol            
building with the massive structures and open spaces and the                   
architecture at the time -- that it is a very functional building              
to this day.  But this building is not because it was not intended             
to be a capitol building and because of its suffering from these               
problems that I think this building is going to have to be replaced            
within the next 10 to 15 years perhaps.  And I think that the                  
telecommunication demands and what's going to be happening in those            
areas will accelerate that need to have a new building.  So I                  
certainly wouldn't put this building and its replacement, which                
needs to be done, above some of the more pressing needs of the                 
state.  But to say that we don't have need for it and we can't put             
that in our priority list is not really accurate.  We need to                  
recognize that we need the proper structure to conduct business                
in."                                                                           
                                                                               
Number 2630                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON indicated he was significantly surprised at               
the fiscal note.  He asked Representative Rokeberg if there are                
calculations as to what would be saved by moving the legislature to            
Anchorage.                                                                     
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG indicated he hasn't ran any hard numbers.              
He noted he hasn't seen a fiscal note from the legislature.                    
Representative Rokeberg informed the committee members he has seen             
past studies that relate to the existing number of square feet that            
is occupied in Juneau at about 107,000 square feet.  He said he                
knows the 107,000 square feet is not a valid number because it is              
based on the existing premises and not on new design premises which            
would be significantly more efficient.  He referred to 1995                    
legislative studies and said there is a bill of $727,000 just for              
telephone installation on the new premises in Anchorage.                       
Representative Rokeberg said he thinks that is ridiculous and said             
in the private sector, you can go to the suppliers and say, "We'll             
take your service if you install the system."  He said that costs              
zero.                                                                          
                                                                               
Number 2922                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said the problem is identifying the exact              
efficient amount of square feet.  He said the relocation costs are             
grossly overstated.  Representative Rokeberg said, "The fact that              
we have existing premises in Anchorage, which we are paying about              
close to a half a million a year for right now for the LIO office              
there, with all these (indisc.) things I think I've come up with               
rough number where there may be a net increase cost to the state if            
we were to lease premises in Anchorage for the legislature which               
would be a temporary housing through a long-range capitol building             
wherever -- would be maybe in the range to $200,000 to $300,000 net            
if you're very very tight on the budget.  I mean this is rough                 
number - say $200,000 to $500,000 cost.  But Madam Chair, I'm going            
to tell you right now the cost to the constituents and the people              
of the state of Alaska from flying from Anaktuvuk Pass to Barrow to            
Cape Romantzof to Ketchikan to Juneau vis- -vis Anchorage is about             
-- it's got to be a couple of million bucks a year.  So that's the             
issue.  How do you balance that?  That's a subjective type                     
statement.  So if there is a net increase of hard costs of anywhere            
from $200,000 to $500,000, the macro economic number of $2 million             
to $3 million of savings to the people of the state of Alaska is               
more important.  So I would say if you buy into that reasoning, the            
city of Juneau is charging a tax on the people of the state of                 
Alaska to have the capital here in old Juneau because it costs too             
much to get here.  And the people that don't come here, they defer             
it because they can't afford it.  That's an indirect tax, so that's            
the point.  So the numbers become kind of subjective,                          
Representative Dyson, when we look at...."                                     
                                                                               
Number 3130                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN came before the committee to testify.  He             
said, "You heard economically and the problems with the building,              
you've heard those kinds of comments.  Mine are going to be more               
humanitarian.  In the fact that -- first of all though let me                  
address one issue that was discussed on the capitol building and I             
cite some states like Alabama where the capitol building was built             
with the rotunda and all the accouterments of a nice capitol                   
building, but for efficiency sake they now congregate their                    
legislature in a building out of the capital.  The capitol now is              
a museum that people are charged to go and visit.  So there are                
uses for a building, especially a building like this, it was never             
intended to be a capitol building."                                            
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN continued, "But now the humanitarian side, we             
can kind of look at the map behind you and indicate that in no                 
other state does a person have to drive 800 miles, through two                 
international boarders, and catch a ferry to drive to its state                
capital.  No other state has the dispreponderance of it's citizens             
so far removed from its capital site.  And Madam Speaker, If you               
were to include the area around Anchorage, instead some 45 percent             
of the population and its representation, the commutable distance              
including Wasilla and Palmer and those areas that do now commute,              
there are many workers who commute into Anchorage daily, you'd be              
up in the neighborhood of 60 percent of the people as well as 60               
percent representation of those people all within driving range of             
the capital.  I submit to you that is a tremendous improvement over            
this isolated location that we're in.  I don't see anything                    
negative about the city, it's a magnificent, warm, beautiful -                 
beautiful place to be.  As a vacation site, as a place to live,                
it's a wonderful place, so I'm not condemning the city by any means            
I'm just merely saying it's not an efficient place to conduct state            
business."                                                                     
                                                                               
Number 3338                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said, "If you would consider the average                  
person, and we are a state that's comprised supposedly of citizen              
legislators, we're not career politicians - at least the majority              
of us are not, that you actually cut out of the loop a significant             
number of potentially good legislators in the fact that they are               
either forced to do one of two things from that area that comprises            
60 percent of the state.  They either have to uproot their children            
and bring them down here out of their school, or leave the family              
at home and disrupt the family by having the legislature come down             
here.  Now there is transportation to and from but that then                   
becomes an extreme economic burden on the legislator.  So in anyway            
you look at it, it's not a reasonable expectation to continue to               
say that as the rest of the state grows, and the representation                
moves more and more to the central, southcentral part of the state             
that they should remain out of the loop so to speak.  And Madam                
Speaker, other than the 5 percent of the legislators who live in               
Juneau, even the outlying areas of the rest of the state, the bush             
areas as it is often referred to, all have to come through                     
Anchorage before they get a plane to come on down to Juneau.  I                
submit to you, Madam Speaker, that it doesn't make a lot of sense              
to have to go to that extreme to get down here."                               
                                                                               
Number 1824                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said, "And finally I submit to you that while             
driving in Alaska is a risk no matter where you are, and that's                
acknowledged by anybody, insurance companies and the like, but when            
you have to subject yourself to long night time hours of driving in            
order to get here, even a reasonable two, sometimes three days,                
certainly those who drive straight through are in harms way.  We               
had another example of that in this convening this year, Madam                 
Speaker, with a legislative aide having gone off the road, rolled              
down a 60 foot embankment, ended up upside down, destroyed the car,            
fortunately was not killed.  Now that doesn't mean there won't be              
accidents if the state legislature moves and convenes in Anchorage,            
but they won't be subjected to the long driving periods - the                  
fatigue factor that takes over.  What I am suggesting is that                  
looking at it from all of the aspects, the economic aspects, the               
fact that the building is inadequate, and the fact that we are                 
talking about the humanitarian aspect of getting the best possible             
people that we can get to represent the people of this fine state,             
we shouldn't exclude a large number of those, either because of the            
fear of driving or because of the disruption of the family.  So, I             
would, as was done in the last legislative session and has been                
tried for the three legislative sessions that I've been in, would              
request that we consider moving this on up the line.  I realize                
that there were some questions asked about financing and that might            
be appropriate that we would take a shot at a more reasonable                  
number.  It's ironic when an Administration seems to like a bill,              
the fiscal note is very low.  When they dislike a bill, the fiscal             
note is very high.  That may just be (indisc.), I don't know.  But             
I think we could probably get numbers a little more reflective of              
what really would happen and so I would appreciate the committee               
taking all those things into consideration."                                   
                                                                               
Number 3708                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON jokingly said, "I appreciate the inference                
that - because the capital is in Juneau we attract a higher caliber            
candidate."  He pointed out the sponsor statement suggests that                
perhaps the quality of legislative staff and quality of legislators            
from outlying areas had been dragged down to some extent because of            
special circumstances that the capital being in Juneau.  It is easy            
for me to say that Alaskans are very lucky with the quality of                 
legislators that they get, they're very lucky at the quality of                
staff they attract.  While we have our disagreements about the way             
things ought to be done, I don't think that those disagreements are            
based in any way on where the work is being done.  And having said             
that, much to the defense of my other colleagues here on the                   
committee, I guess the only question I have is can you - I'm trying            
desperately to think, but I can not think of another state in which            
the executive branch and the legislative branch are separated by a             
distance of (indisc.) miles.  Am I missing something in the                    
experience of other states that suggest that maybe they ought to be            
together.                                                                      
                                                                               
Number 1964                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN responded, "No, I think just like we will                 
drift off into the fact that we need two bodies of (indisc.)                   
legislature.  I won't get into that donny brook either.  I think by            
convention we have grown up with the fact that the capital is where            
the legislature moves - lives and does their work.  But Alaska, as             
we all know is a very unique state as I mentioned.  I don't know of            
any other state that you have to go so far to get to the capital.              
No, they don't normally and wouldn't have in the, early stages of              
the majority of the states in the nation, have the ability to                  
converse as freely as we do now.  But on one hand, we say it's all             
right to have the capital located remotely from it's citizens and              
they can somehow get here.  We say we shouldn't have it dislocated             
from the governor.  I submit to you, as you heard earlier, that the            
governor and nearly all, if not all of the commissioners, are in               
Anchorage during the session as well as during the interim.  A                 
significant number of the state employees are also located up                  
there.  I don't think you'll find that in other states either where            
you have such a dispropondent number of state employees outside the            
state capital.  So, we're unique in Alaska and yes, you're right,              
it would be another uniqueness of the state."                                  
                                                                               
Number 4007                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON said, I guess that when you say that we're                
unique and the fact that preponderance operations elsewhere, I mean            
I just remind you of Salem, Oregon and Olympia, Washington,                    
Sacramento, California.  I mean I think there are other examples               
which it does work where the legislative body and the executive                
branch are separated from the preponderance population."                       
                                                                               
Number 4030                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN responded that he thinks that's true.  He said            
you can get to Salem, Oregon and most parts of Oregon in a couple              
of hours.  That's not true in Alaska.  You can drive to your                   
capital while they are not in the major metropolitan areas that                
would be here.  They're certainly far more accessible.                         
                                                                               
Number 4100                                                                    
                                                                               
CHAIR JAMES said having recognized and looked at the capital                   
situations all around the country, historically, the capitals are              
not in the center of the population. She said when you have a                  
capitol building, generally it doesn't grow like other areas.  It's            
prohibited from growing because it is housed with state government             
employees.  It doesn't lend itself to industry and all the other               
kinds of things.  She stated that's a progressive thing.  Chair                
James said, "If you look at all the capitals in the other states,              
you'll find the place where the capital is an insignificant place              
-- which, incidently, is one of the issues of the state of Alaska              
and the people wanted to deal with and they didn't want to have the            
capital in Fairbanks or Anchorage and chose to have it somewhere               
else where it wouln't be insignificant, where you could concentrate            
on the state of Alaska.  The whole issue is around money.  So I had            
to say that because it's not that we put the capital where there               
isn't any people living.  It is that people don't do the same                  
things in a capital that they do in other towns.  Quite frankly,               
Fairbanks doesn't want one.  So, I want to put that on the record              
right now.  We don't want the capital and all of the associated                
things that go (indisc.).  You'd never notice it was there."                   
                                                                               
Number 4221                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said, "I certainly concur with that and the               
consideration when they were going to think about moving the                   
capital, was to an area certainly that this is very very remote -              
small outside the city.  But again, I remind you it was only an                
hours commute from the majority of the people.  And that's not                 
unusual in other states and, yes, the economics destroyed that.                
And I also want to reiterate, because I know there was a poll taken            
by an Anchorage television station, talking about this bill which              
is going to try and move the capital.  That, again, is not the                 
issue.  It's not the capital, just the legislature convening."                 
                                                                               
Number 4304                                                                    
                                                                               
BRAD PIERCE, Senior Policy Analyst, Office of Management and                   
Budget, Office of the Governor, came before the committee to                   
testify.  He said the Governor doesn't support this HB 304 at all.             
The seed of government is in Juneau.  It would be expensive and                
wasteful to move the legislature to Anchorage.  Mr. Pierce pointed             
out that he has worked for the past three governors and he believes            
he has compiled a fiscal note about five times.  He explained that             
they took the figures prepared for Senator Phillips two years ago              
and added some inflation.  He said the fiscal note has consistently            
come in at about $2.5 million to $3 million net cost to the state              
to move the legislature.  Mr. Pierce said in the past, every time              
they have turned in the fiscal notes, the sponsor has gotten his               
own fiscal note through Legislative Finance.                                   
                                                                               
Number 4436                                                                    
                                                                               
CHAIR JAMES said recently she received information from Legislative            
Budget and Audit of all the travel expenses  for  commissioners, et            
cetera.  She referred to the calculation of the fiscal note and                
asked Mr. Pierce if he subtracted the other expenses of going from             
Juneau to Anchorage.  In other words, is that on top of what is                
already being spent or would some of it replace some of the                    
spending that is currently occurring.                                          
                                                                               
Number 4508                                                                    
                                                                               
MR. PIERCE explained it is a net figure.  He said the travel that              
is already being done is factored in.  He pointed out that the                 
Department of Natural Resources had a zero fiscal note because                 
there are already people in Anchorage.  Mr. Pierce said the                    
Department of Corrections had a very low fiscal note.  He said the             
reality of it is that the administrators spend most of their time              
in Juneau.                                                                     
                                                                               
Number 4554                                                                    
                                                                               
CHAIR JAMES said there isn't a number as to what the general public            
pays to get to Juneau as opposed to the cost if they went to                   
Anchorage.  She stated that we don't know how much the public is               
paying compared to what the government pays.  She said there is no             
estimate.                                                                      
                                                                               
MR. PIERCE indicated there isn't an estimate.                                  
                                                                               
TAPE 98-7, SIDE A                                                              
Number 0001                                                                    
                                                                               
DENNIS EGAN, Mayor, City and Borough of Juneau came before the                 
committee to testify.  He read his statement into the record.                  
                                                                               
"On behalf the assembly and the citizens of the City and Borough of            
Juneau, I want to thank you for allowing me to testify this morning            
because our community is very appreciative of the positive impacts             
our state legislature makes on our community and on our region.                
                                                                               
"I hope that you'll appreciate the advances in Alaska's capital                
city has made in providing opportunities of access to all residents            
of the state.                                                                  
                                                                               
"Since statehood in 1959, just 38 short years ago, Juneau has been             
in a unique position of trying to focus not only on looking at the             
critical elements of sustainability, economic vitality, social                 
equity, and environmental health, but single issue a few other                 
committees in the nation, or for that matter the free world face,              
and that is the issue of being the ultimate distruction of our city            
through the ballot process by way of a vote in the statewide                   
electorate.                                                                    
                                                                               
"Eight times since statehood Juneau has faced economic and social              
upheavals that normal communities would not face. But with                     
dedication and diligence we've had to confront this issue with                 
absolutely no idea what the outcome would be, regarding our basic              
economic and social vitality.                                                  
                                                                               
"The issue here is moving the seed of state government to an area              
outside Juneau where some say is a location that is closer to the              
people.  While we've ultimately won all those battles, the most                
recent in 1994, these votes take a tremendous toll on the citizens             
of our community who have lived here for any length of time.  When             
we should be attending to make Juneau a model for sustainable                  
development, we have had to spend untold resources on fighting                 
efforts to change the seed of state government in the state of                 
Alaska.  In just the past two elections, 1982 and again in 1994,               
and associated ballot initiative battles, it has cost our community            
of 32,000 residents, since statehood, over $7 million in taxpayer              
and community donated funds to fight these battles.  So when folks             
in the rest of the United States talk about sustainability, we here            
in Juneau call it 'survivability.'                                             
                                                                               
"To sustain Juneau as the capital of Alaska we're accomplishing                
many things, I think, to make our city more accessible to the rest             
of Alaska and to the world.                                                    
                                                                               
Number 0247                                                                    
                                                                               
"You see I believe that access comes in many other ways than an                
interstate highway.  We were one of the first communities on the               
West Coast of the United states to recognize the importance of the             
Internet.  We were one of the first to establish a home page on the            
Worldwide Web, affording access not only to Alaskans to their                  
capital city, but to anyone in the world with inquiries about our              
community.                                                                     
                                                                               
"We've been instrumental in providing electronic access to video               
teleconferencing through a major investment in telecommunications              
technology.  This technology allows citizens from throughout Alaska            
to travel electronically instead of by air to conduct meetings of              
state government, the state legislature and local governments                  
without ever leaving the confines of their local communities.                  
                                                                               
"Juneau is a major investor in C-SPAN type programming called Gavel            
to Gavel, here today, that allows over 400,000 Alaskans in the                 
state, about 80 percent of the adult population, to view                       
uninterrupted coverage of the daily deliberations of the Alaska                
State Legislature during you 120 day sessions.                                 
                                                                               
Number 0349                                                                    
                                                                               
"With the largest and least visible issue to accessability and                 
sustainability to our committee most recently is now approaching               
from the air, and more than likely will have tremendous advances by            
March.  The CBJ (City and Borough of Juneau), the FAA (Federal                 
Aviation Administration), the Nation Center for Atmospheric                    
Research and Alaska Airlines are in the midst of a multimillion                
dollar research project that is going ultimately change the way                
airline travel is accomplished throughout the world.  Juneau is at             
the forefront of development and implementation of this technology             
in which aircraft will not travel routes, as you know them now, but            
on courses dictated by global positioning satellites.  They're now             
in the final testing here in Juneau and will ultimately be approved            
for commercial aviation worldwide.  Because of this technology                 
being developed here in Juneau, airports and the skies we fly                  
throughout the world will see dramatic increases in safety and                 
efficiencies.  This technology also uses an enhanced ground                    
proximity warning system originally developed for the cruse missile            
and used so accurately during the Gulf War in the Middle East.  The            
system allows a pilot of an aircraft to know exactly what the                  
terrain is in the flight path of the airliner.  Needless to say, in            
Alaska this is extremely important.  The ultimate result in Juneau             
alone will be landing minimum being lowered dramatically, 331 feet             
versus 3,500 feet, while making us not only one of safest airports             
in Alaska, but one of the safest airport in the world for aircraft             
approaches and departures.                                                     
                                                                               
"We're doing many other things to make Juneau a better capital from            
increasing affordable housing, lowering our housing vacancy rate,              
getting a handle on managing our burgeoning tourism industry,                  
working with mining concerns to bring their projects online - even             
initiating a vision plan for our city that includes Juneau                     
remaining the state capital.                                                   
                                                                               
"While these are just a few of the projects that we're undertaking             
and issues that we're confronting.  I believe we're making great               
strides in making Juneau a better capital city for all Alaskans."              
                                                                               
Number 0554                                                                    
                                                                               
MR. EGAN said, "I am personally, and I know 99 percent of                      
Juneauites are very proud of the men and women that work in this               
building that represent not only my community, but communities from            
throughout the state and we're very proud of your tireless efforts             
to make Alaska a better state."                                                
                                                                               
Number 0621                                                                    
                                                                               
CHAIR JAMES announced her position has been neutral on this issue.             
She said according to information in the committee file, people of             
her district voted against the capital move in the previous                    
election.  She pointed out that it is a matter of money with her               
constituents.  It isn't that they wouldn't like to have the capital            
closer, but it is a matter of money.  She noted they don't want to             
have the capital in Fairbanks.  Chair James informed Mayor Egan she            
has been a big supporter of University of Alaska, Southeast.  She              
said, "You're located in a place where you could have world class              
in oceanography and marine biology and those other issues.  I think            
that you ought to push for those things.  And I guess my advice to             
you is don't just be centered on that the capital staying here is              
what's going to keep you alive because there is a lot of other                 
things to do it.  In other words, put your eggs in more than one               
basket."                                                                       
                                                                               
Number 0746                                                                    
                                                                               
MR. EGAN responded, "We're putting our eggs in more than one                   
basket, Madam Chair.  In fact you brought up the -- in fact we are             
in the process - in the formative stages of constructing a world               
class research facility from NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric            
Administration) - that their project cost would be $78 million and             
the university's cost is projected at $22 million."                            
                                                                               
Number 0811                                                                    
                                                                               
CHAIR JAMES said it is a problem.  She pointed out that Gavel to               
Gavel is finally being heard now on cable in Fairbanks.  Last year             
it wasn't.  She noted a lot of people who don't have cable still               
don't get Gavel to Gavel.  Chair James said it is interesting that             
in Alaska where there is a closer contact with government than is              
experienced in any other state, we're still not happy about it.                
She pointed out there are LIO offices throughout the state.  Other             
states don't have those kinds of communication, including                      
teleconferences, experiences what we have.  She said, "This issue              
is not going to go away.  There is a sizable amount of the public              
that really doesn't like to have the capital in Juneau.  So I                  
understand the people in your city when they voted down spending               
the money or taxing themselves to build a capital building.  That's            
an issue that's not going to be easily sold because that threat --             
this bill that's in this committee today is not the last threat                
that you're going to hear on this.  And so I understand that that              
does cause us a problem and the more people that we get in the                 
Interior, and we're about crowded up down here so I don't know how             
many more people we can get down in Southeast, the scale is going              
to be tipped the other way.  So my advice, again, is diversify and             
be sure you got your bases covered."                                           
                                                                               
Number 1100                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON stated he personally appreciates the efforts              
that Juneau has made to make it a pleasant place to live.  He said             
everything the city has done has been noticed by him.                          
Representative Dyson said, "I will vote to move the legislature to             
Anchorage for, hopefully, public and personal reasons.  But I'm                
very impressed with what you all have done and you're to be                    
commended for it."                                                             
                                                                               
Number 1143                                                                    
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON said, "I think you touched upon an issue that             
we all ought to be concerned about, the diversification of not just            
the local economies and community economies, but the                           
diversification of the state economy as well.  And I mean I just               
want to emphasize -- I think what you were saying was that                     
(indisc.) colleagues in Juneau have as well as the city council and            
assembly members in Fairbanks and assembly members in Anchorage and            
Kenai.  I think one of the frustrating things that Juneau has                  
always felt is that instead of diverting the resources that we've              
had on  efforts where we just redivide the existing pie.  If we had            
all concentrated on expanding the pie instead we'd all be better               
off.  (Indisc.) felt significantly here in Juneau.  I think it's               
probably shared in Fairbanks - the issue of programs moving from               
the Fairbanks campus to other campuses come up.  I think we all                
share those kinds of frustrations when instead of concentrating on             
what we can do to make everything better and the pie get bigger, we            
have to spend an awful lot of time making sure that the slice of               
pie remains the same."                                                         
                                                                               
CHAIR JAMES said here were no further witnesses to testify on HB
304.  She indicated HB 304 would be held for further consideration             

Document Name Date/Time Subjects