Legislature(2001 - 2002)
05/07/2002 01:09 PM House TRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 502-RUSTIC ROADS AND HIGHWAYS [Contains discussion of HB 8] CHAIR KOHRING announced that the final matter before the committee was HOUSE BILL NO. 502, "An Act relating to the designation of and funding for rustic roads and highways; and providing for an effective date." [HB 502 was sponsored by the House Transportation Standing Committee.] Number 1128 MIKE KRIEBER, Staff to Representative Vic Kohring, Alaska State Legislature, speaking as the committee aide, noted that before the committee was Version T, 22-LS0822\T, Utermohle, 4/15/02 [adopted as a work draft on 4/23/02]. Version T would use what [the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF)] already currently has as regulations, placing those funding categories and "very similar percentages of the funding" into statute. It creates a fifth category called "rustic roads" that includes rustic trails and highways, with a basic definition of a rustic road being "one that would not be paved." He said the intent was to spur economic development and create access into areas that have none, for both recreation and economic development purposes. MR. KRIEBER explained that Version T picks up where the previous year's HB 8, which didn't pass the Senate, left off. [Section 4 of Version T] directs DOT&PF to study [economic development] roads; it doesn't define the roads as "rustic roads" at this point. The report will define the funding category the roads should go into, define the project scope, identify any issues such as environmental issues, and develop a funding schedule for the roads, rather than using the current DOT&PF practice of saying the department doesn't believe it is worthwhile to look into these roads. He said these are roads that the legislature has deemed as important economic development roads. The bill therefore provides legislative policy direction to DOT&PF for looking into economic development associated with its road construction projects. Number 1262 REPRESENTATIVE SCALZI asked: If funding in any single fiscal year is not utilized, would the money roll over into DOT&PF's general account or go to the same category for the next year? MR. KRIEBER answered by pointing to an implementation schedule in the bill that would allow DOT&PF to identify the category the funding would go towards. Number 1313 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN remarked that [Chair Kohring] had made clear that the Alaska Highway System also includes the ferry system. Number 1333 REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked why the percentages of the funding categories did not include the ferry system. MR. KRIEBER explained that Representative Ogan's comment was about the definitions in current DOT&PF regulations for ferry systems outside of the Alaska Marine Highway System such as the inter-island ferry system [serving Prince of Wales Island]. He referred to Version T, page 4, paragraph 1, beginning at line [23], which read in part: "'Alaska highway system' includes marine vessels and facilities of the Alaska marine highway system that are not included in the national highway system, vessels and facilities owned [and operated] by political subdivisions of the state...." Mr. Krieber said the National Highway System provides funding for the [Alaska Marine Highway System]; the Alaska Highway System is in addition to that. He said the Alaska Marine Highway System is a separate funding category in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP). REPRESENTATIVE WILSON surmised that Mr. Krieber was saying all of these monies are federal monies, and that the federal government funds separately for the marine highway system. MR. KRIEBER concurred. REPRESENTATIVE WILSON remarked, "We have no control how much money it gets from the feds." MR. KRIEBER said the state has no control of the total pot of money for the rest of the road categories, either, other than through congressional appropriations. REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked if the state contributes funds for roads and the marine highway. MR. KRIEBER explained that the department receives a heavy percentage of federal funding, with state matching money [required]. There is no separate state fund associated [with roads]. REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked if the percentages in the bill are for federal money or also for state money. MR. KRIEBER answered that it is 90 percent federal money and 10 percent [state] matching money. REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked what the percentages were before the bill. MR. KRIEBER said the department's new percentages are based on new regulations; there was no set percentage previously. He said there was no shifting of funds to any of the new categories from the Alaska Marine Highway System. Number 1527 REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked what percentages [DOT&PF] has called for, and what percentages [the bill] is calling for. MR. KRIEBER said the National Highway System would remain the same, at 48 percent [of federal highway funds], with 1 percent going to coordinated public transportation systems; the Alaska Highway System would go from 8 percent to 7 percent; the 33 percent for the community transportation system would be the same as the department's current proposals; the 4 percent to TRAAK [Trails and Recreational Access for Alaska] would be down from the original 8 percent. REPRESENTATIVE WILSON said she didn't like the bill. CHAIR KOHRING assured her that the bill would not go through in the present session because there was not enough time. He said it would send a message to DOT&PF, however. Number 1640 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN moved to report CSHB 502, version 22- LS0822\T, Utermohle, 4/15/02, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB 502(TRA) was moved out of the House Transportation Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|