Legislature(1997 - 1998)
03/21/1997 09:03 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
Testimony was heard from TOM WILLIAMS and ANNALEE
MCCONNELL. SENATOR PARNELL MOVED Amendment #1.
SENATOR ADAMS objected then withdrew his objection.
There being no further objection, Amendment #1 was
ADOPTED. Amendment #2 was not offered. Amendment #3
was held. SENATOR PARNELL MOVED Amendment #4. Without
objection, Amendment #4 was ADOPTED. SB 136 was HELD
for further consideration.
SENATE BILL NO. 136
"An Act relating to the state budget and to appropriation
bills."
TOM WILLIAMS, Staff to Senate Finance Cochair Sharp, read
the Sponsor Statement relating to SB 136 (copy on file).
Following is an excerpt of the first and last paragraphs:
"Senate Bill 136 was introduced to clarify current
law, making it explicit that the Governor is required
to present all three of his necessary budget bills on
December 15 of each year --an operating budget bill, a
capital budget bill, and a mental health program
operating/capital budget bill.
This legislation also conforms the general budget
submission provisions of AS 37.07.020 to the
requirement in AS 37.14.003(a) for a separate mental
health program bill."
MR. WILLIAMS added that, according to Legislative Finance,
the last time a consolidated capital and operating budget
bill was submitted to the legislature was in 1983 for FY 84.
The practice since then has been to separate the bills which
has led to substantial delays in submitting a capital
budget.
The presence of Senators Parnell and Donley was noted.
SENATOR PARNELL stated he had amendments he would be
offering.
SENATOR ADAMS pointed out that the practice of separating
budgets was not new, but had been the past practice of other
governors regarding whether they were Republican or
Democrat. He suggested that, for SB 136 to work, the
session would need to be shortened. He supported voting for
a ninety-day session in addition to SB 136.
VICE-CHAIR PHILLIPS brought up amendments in the files.
SENATOR PARNELL explained Amendment #1. It would change the
due date for the governor's budget amendments from the 60th
legislative day to the 45th day. It was a recommendation of
the Legislative Finance Division and something he agreed
with because in recent years, the first finance committee to
move its budget has been ready to close out before the
governor's amendments were provided. If the process could
be moved up a little, the first house would be able to close
out with all the budget amendments in hand rather than
getting them up to the last moment. He MOVED the amendment,
then WITHDREW his motion.
SENATOR PARNELL continued by explaining Amendment #3.
Currently, the Executive Budget Act requires the agencies to
submit performance reports to the Office of Management and
Budget. The amendment would say the performance reports
would be available to the legislature. It would not be the
budget numbers, simply the performance reports which cover
how the agencies are accomplishing their mission and goals.
SENATOR PARNELL next described Amendment #4, which specified
January 10 that the summary of performance reports would be
due.
SENATOR ADAMS asked to hear the position of the
administration.
ANNALEE MCCONNELL, Director, Office of Management and
Budget, testified that there were tremendous numbers of
improvements that could be made in the budget process both
on the executive and legislative sides. She was supportive
of many of the things SB 136 would achieve. She was in the
process of making major changes to the mechanics of the
budget system which will allow more timely production of
amendments and updates. In addition to automation, she was
working toward drawing in other information not currently
provided. She referred to past conferences with Senator
Parnell, noting that areas such as performance measures and
future trend information would be incorporated. MS.
MCCONNELL claimed that difficulties exist because the budget
system is poor from a mechanical standpoint. It is highly
manual, diffuse, and has no ability to roll things up
centrally.
MS. MCCONNELL continued her testimony by pointing out that
an updated six-year plan was recently delivered that would
be helpful in the arena of capital budget timing. She
suggested it would be a good focus for discussion over the
interim. A six-year plan will make it possible to do each
year's capital budget more easily because there will be a
better overall sense of where the state is headed.
MS. MCCONNELL had concerns with some provisions of the bill.
One was that there had to be an identical bill between what
was submitted on December 15 and January 15. Her reasoning
was that life doesn't stop still just because there are
deadlines and statutes. There were very few differences
this year in the operating budget, but technical errors do
occur. Another issue was that bringing the budget out in
December gives the public notice, not just the legislature.
If they were not allowed to make any changes between
December and January, it would give a message that "we don't
care what the public tells us about what's in the budget
proposal." She didn't anticipate lots of changes, but minor
adjustments may be needed and it wasn't a good idea to
preclude those from being made. She acknowledged the
governor had opportunity to provide amendments to the budget
proposal. MS. MCCONNELL believed there were things that
they could work out that would deal with the technical
concerns and timing issues the Legislative Finance Division
may have with preparation of their books. It was also her
hope that if there was going to be a requirement that
anytime something was presented that full back-up material
be there, it would also apply to the court system and the
legislature. She noted there were currently projects from
the legislative branch that had no back-up and it has
created problems trying to see whether things have met
appropriation requirements.
MS. MCCONNELL summarized her remarks by noting there were
improvements that could be made in addition to other changes
in the executive branch that would be warranted. She was
willing to work with the committee to improve the budget
process.
VICE-CHAIR PHILLIPS asked if there was further testimony on
SB 136. There being none, he stated the bill would be held.
SENATOR PARNELL asked to take up the amendments he described
earlier.
SENATOR PARNELL MOVED Amendment #1. SENATOR ADAMS stated
for clarification that it was a simple change from the
current 60 days to 45 days. SENATOR PARNELL affirmed that
was correct. He added that, according to his understanding
from the Legislative Finance Division, when the session
deadline was established at 120 days, the budget amendment
deadlines were not changed. There was no objection, and so
Amendment #1 was ADOPTED.
VICE-CHAIR PHILLIPS inquired about Amendment #2. SENATOR
PARNELL stated it had been withdrawn, and that he wanted to
hold Amendment #3 until the next meeting. SENATOR PARNELL
MOVED Amendment #4, regarding the date of the performance
report summary. There being no objection, Amendment #4 was
ADOPTED.
VICE-CHAIR PHILLIPS stated SB 136 would be HELD to the next
meeting. He brought up SB 126 next.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|