Legislature(1993 - 1994)
04/14/1994 09:25 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
CSSB 365(STA): An Act relating to the improvement of state finances and fiscal accountability by increasing fees, by collecting additional revenue, by reducing certain program expenditures by changing services or eligibility requirements for programs, by changing certain statutory limitation periods, by providing for use of certain electronic records, by making changes to state agency functions or procedures including certain reporting and planning procedures, and by authorizing extensions for state leases for real property if certain savings can be achieved; and providing for an effective date. CSSB 365(FIN) was ADOPTED by the committee. Nancy Slagle, Director, Budget Review, Office of Management & Budget, Office of the Governor; Linda Rexwinkel, budget analyst, Division of Budget Review, Office of Management & Budget; M. Clyde Stoltzfus, Special Assistant, Commissioner's Office, Department of Transportation & Public Facilities; Juanita Hensley, Chief, Driver Services, Division of Motor Vehicles, Department of Public Safety; Diane Schenker, Special Assistant, Commissioner's Office, Department of Corrections; Paul B. Arnoldt, Director, Division of Workers' Compensation, Department of Labor; Dugan Petty, Director, Division of General Services, Department of Administration; and Deena Henkins, Chief, Drinking Water & Wastewater Section, Division of Environmental Quality, Department of Environmental Conservation; spoke to CSSB 365(FIN). SB 365 was HELD in committee. CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 365(STA): An Act relating to the improvement of state finances and fiscal accountability by increasing fees, by collecting additional revenue, by reducing certain program expenditures by changing services or eligibility requirements for programs, by changing certain statutory limitation periods, by providing for use of certain electronic records, by making changes to state agency functions or procedures including certain reporting and planning procedures, and by authorizing extensions for state leases for real property if certain savings can be achieved; and providing for an effective date. Co-chair Pearce announced that SB 365 was before the committee. Senator Rieger MOVED for adoption of CSSB 365(FIN) version "K" for consideration. No objection being heard, it was ADOPTED. Ms. Slagle said she would like department representatives to go through the sections applying to them. She also said a sectional analysis had been provided to the committee, and the fiscal note packet would be complete by the afternoon. Senator Kerttula noted that he had drafted questions according to version "J". Co-chair Pearce noted that the sections should be the same although some small changes had been made. M. CLYDE STOLTZFUS, Special Assistant, Commissioner's Office, Department of Transportation & Public Facilities, said he would like to address all the capital improvement program changes in Sections 1, 2, 26, and 27. He went on to say: Section 1 set up a six-year program in a priority format. It would modify AS 19.10.140. It also dropped out the requirement to have the six-year program address maintenance so it would only address the capital projects intended to be built with federal dollars. The maintenance budget was appropriated by the legislature and the department made the best use of those dollars not knowing what they would be from year to year. Under Section 2, the second report to the legislature would be an annual construction season program report, modifying AS 19.10.150. Under Section 26, in the six-year program, it would require a general project description and the source of funding be provided in that report, modifying AS 37.07.060. The only change in Section 27 was that the report would be done on an annual construction season rather than the fiscal year. End SFC-93 #69, Side 2 Begin SFC-93 #71, Side 1 In answer to Senator Sharp regarding Section 27, Mr. Stoltzfus said that the amount of financing would be given as a lump sum. Mr. Stoltzfus said that the estimated project cost would be in the annual program as listed in Section 2. Senator Rieger said Section 2 only referred to the period immediately following the construction season. He went on to ask if the estimated costs would be included in the longer range program referred to in Section 1. Mr. Stoltzfus said that the bill would not require that. Senator Rieger said that it would be prudent to request an estimate of costs. He also said that the cost to complete had not been provided by the department from the prior year. He said that was critical information in preparing the capital budget. Senator Kerttula asked if Legislative Finance could provide that information. Senator Rieger felt that they would not be able to do that. Co-chair Pearce said she did not know how the department could have a project on the development list and not have an idea or estimate of what the cost was going to be for that project. Senator Rieger agreed. Co- chair Pearce felt cost estimates needed to be attached to projects early-on but she said she understood why the Commissioner was asking for this process. She said this administration wanted to go to a lump sum appropriation for federal projects and this legislature had no intention of allowing that. Senator Kerttula said that a check and balance system for this area had been tried about 10 years ago but it had failed. Senator Sharp agreed that cost estimates had to be approved at an early point even though it would be a rough estimate. Mr. Stoltzfus said Section 3 would amend the internal document that was used for project development. Besides a technical word change, the department would not be required to have a maintenance standard. It was an important liability issue and related to highway design and accidents. In answer to Co-chair Pearce, he said this change was proposed by the DOT&PF but the Department of Law did concur. Co-chair Pearce requested a letter by the Department of Law explaining this issue. He went on to say the third change was the deletion of the requirement that the department's standards conform to the American Association of State Highways and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). The reason for this request was the difference between Alaska's roads and other states, and because of the change in ISTEA funds where that funding could be used in roads off the main highway system. AASHTO's standards did not match the types of projects that would be developed in Alaska. Mr. Stoltzfus said that Section 28 was the requirement of the state transportation plan. This revision acknowledged that the state transportation plan was a requirement of the federal legislation which provided the federal highway funding and it must meet those federal requirements. There was an annual plan that was required by the federal law. In answer to Co-chair Pearce, Mr. Stoltzfus said the six year plan was different than this requirement. Mr. Stoltzfus said that Section 32 repealed AS 44.42.050(d) which required the itemization of estimated costs for proposed capital budget projects. PAUL B. ARNOLDT, Director, Division of Workers' Compensation, Department of Labor, said that he would speak to Sections 4, 5 and 6, mainly housekeeping sections. Section 4 related to the rehabilitation program under the workers' compensation. It would require that the rehab specialists in the field use the current federal "revised Dictionary of Occupational Titles". Section 5 codified a practice of the staff scheduling doctor's appointments for the Board. The doctor's report than goes to the Board and the Board could use them or not. Section 6 clarified that the "current edition of the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment" be used at the time of rating. JUANITA HENSLEY, Chief, Driver Services, Division of Motor Vehicles, Department of Public Safety, said Section 7 through 22 related to the Department. Section 7 allowed the department to use an electronic record and certify it in lieu of producing a document or a copy of the original document. The purpose was to be able to use it in court. Section 8 changed the method of notice from certified mail to first class mail. Section 9 allowed administrative hearings to be held telephonically. Section 10 extended a temporary license plate from 30 days to 60 days. This would allow dealers to submit their title information in a reasonable time frame and allow the public time to obtain title. Section 11 repealed the section that required all commercial vehicles be registered in January or the beginning of the year. The department had been lumping these vehicles in with the others. Section 12 and 13 dealt with administrative hearings. Those dealing with DWIs could be held telephonically. Senator Kerttula said that rural electrics and cooperatives did not pay for license plates. He felt that should be looked at instead of increasing everyone else's fee. In answer to Co-chair Frank, Ms. Hensley said there was legislation pending that would add mobile homes back on licensing. Section 14 through 22 increased the amount reportable in an accident damage from $500 to $1,000. She pointed out that the average accident claim was now $1,600, and this section had not been changed since the 60s. Section 32 repealed the section that said special and commercial registrations must expire in a certain month and allowed the department to renew them on a rotating basis. It also repealed one section pertaining to the mandatory insurance law. DIANE SCHENKER, Special Assistant, Commissioner's Office, Department of Corrections, said Section 23 listed the standard that was used, clarified that it was the standard, and made it consistent with the standard for psychological and physiatric care. It clarified that the department was not obligated to provide cosmetic surgery or other medical procedure that was not necessary for a serious condition. In answer to Senator Kerttula, Ms. Schenker said there was a medical review board that made the decision for medical treatment, and any request received three levels of review before performed. Ms. Schenker said that she was not that familiar with all the cases but she had checked with risk management regarding law suits. There did not seem to be many settlements even though many complaints had been filed. Senator Kerttula said he had been very critical of the medical care in the prisons. Ms. Schenker said there was a medical grievance procedure that a prisoner could use and assistance was available for claimants. Senator Kerttula felt reasonable medical care should be given to the people in prisons without having to file a claim. Ms. Schenker felt this section did not stand in the way of prisoners getting reasonable medical care. DUGAN PETTY, Director, Division of General Services, Department of Administration, said that Section 24 extended a bill, SB 129, that was passed last year, allowing the department the ability to negotiate rent concessions of 5 percent of the base rent with ADA compliance in return for an extension of that lease. This allowed an eighteen month window of opportunity. This section extended that period and allowed the department up to a 10 year extension instead of five. A much more favorable rate could be advanced if the department could extend the lease for ten years because of refinancing, etc. Under SB 129, he said that 18 leases had been renegotiated and a substantial amount of money had been saved. He noted that if it was not a good business deal the department would pass it up. Senator Kerttula said he was concerned with long term leases and would like to compare that to ownership. However, he agreed the department was saving money with this section. Mr. Petty agreed with Senator Kerttula's concerns but said that the bill would not cover lease purchases. He said that if the department would see an opportunity for lease purchase it would be brought before the legislature but at this time no structure was set up for this to be a competitive process. Mr. Petty said that Section 25 was an attempt to streamline the process for acquisition of leases. There were over 300 leases that the department was required to replace as they expired. Currently there were 16 leases on a month to month backlog, 32 expiring in FY95 without renewal options, and 51 expiring with renewal options. Many of those would have to be rebid because they would not comply with ADA. With this section, many of the small leases, under 2500 square feet, could be included in the small procurement category without using a formal bid. In answer to Senator Rieger, Mr. Petty said this section could include initial lease acquisition. Senator Rieger said he had a problem with this section since a lease of as large as $225,000 could be initiated. Senator Rieger felt that might be acceptable for a renewal. DEENA HENKINS, Chief, Drinking Water & Wastewater Section, Division of Environmental Quality, Department of Environmental Conservation, said in regard to Section 30, that it was the department's intent to audit a statistically valid sample of these certifications annually. Either the department would audit them or it would contract it out. In answer to Senator Kerttula, Ms. Henkins said that the department was taking various steps from writing a letter regarding an oversight to dealing with a violation of department regulations like a septic tank too close to a well. She felt that could include refusing to sell stamps to an engineer, or bringing that engineer's actions to the Board depending on the seriousness of the problem. Ms. Henkins said that the department was just starting to do the audits and was only aware of one complaint. However, the department had been involved in this process for about 10 years and there had been fewer complaints now, than when the department was doing the certification themselves. End SFC-93 #71, Side 1 Begin SFC-93 #71, Side 2 Ms. Henkins said Section 31 provided legal authority for the department to delegate the review of plans for domestic sewage systems to a competent government entity such as a municipality. This had been provided for in wastewater regulations for quite a few years and the department had made similar delegations to communities like Wasilla, Anchorage and Valdez. This would clarify the plan review function. In answer to Senator Kerttula, Ms. Henkins said the city of Wasilla had taken delegation only for sewer connections to their sewer system. DEC would deal with any other plan reviews in the Wasilla area and she assumed the state could have some liability if DEC was not overseeing Wasilla's plan reviews in some competent fashion. Ms. Slagle said that Section 33 allowed the departments to develop regulations to implement the various sections that pertain to them. Section 34 provided an immediate effective date for that section. Section 35 gave July 1, 1994 for an effective date for the remainder of the bill. Senator Kerttula commented that sometimes when the law was written in sufficient detail, it limited authorization of regulatory imposition. He called it "lazy law." Co-chair Pearce said that SB 365 would be HELD in committee. BILLS SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD:
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|