Legislature(1999 - 2000)
03/18/1999 09:02 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE BILL NO. 101
"An Act amending the definition of 'disaster.'"
This was the second hearing for this bill.
Co-Chair John Torgerson shared a committee substitute he
had prepared for the meeting and called upon a member of
his staff to explain the changes.
DARWIN PETERSON, staff to Senator John Torgerson, explained
the committee substitute.
Section 1 amended the statute AS 26.23.020 to provide that
a proclamation of disaster emergency is effective for only
30 days unless extended by the Legislature by law.
Section 2 repealed and reenacted AS 26.23.025 relating to
the Legislature and disaster emergencies.
Section 8 set out the information the Governor must provide
the Legislature upon declaring a disaster emergency. This
subsection also set out the procedure that the Governor
must follow to obtain approval for additional money or
expenditure authority from the Legislature to cope with a
disaster. Approval for additional money or expenditure
authority could only be obtained by an act of the
Legislature.
Subsection (b) provided that if a declaration of a disaster
emergency occurs while the Legislature is in session or if
a special session is held, actions taken by the Governor
that are not ratified by law, adopted during that session
are void.
Subsection (c) provided that the Legislature may terminate
a declaration of disaster emergency any time by law.
He explained some of the differences between the CS and the
original bill. In current law, if the Legislature is
session, the Governor's disaster declaration can be
ratified by a current resolution. If it was during the
interim, a special session was convened unless the
presiding officers of the House of Representatives and the
Senate agree in writing that a special session was not
necessary. The Legislature may terminate a disaster
emergency by concurrent resolution.
The committee substitute would require a disaster
declaration to be ratified or terminated by law rather than
by a concurrent resolution. It would also require a
special session to be convened during the interim to ratify
a declaration.
Section 3 repealed and reenacted AS 26.23.300 that provided
for the creation and operation of the disaster relief fund.
Subsections (b) and (c) were in current law and stated that
the Governor may expend up to $500,000 of the fund to
address an event that posed a direct and imminent threat of
disaster that warranted state action. It also provided
that the Governor could expend up to $1 million from the
fund to address disaster.
Subsections (d) through (h) were reenacted language.
Subsection (d) provided that the Governor could expend up
to $5 million from the fund to address a disaster resulting
from certain specified events: fire, flood, earthquake,
severe storm, tsunami, volcanic activity, epidemic,
explosion, riot and release of oil or hazardous substance.
Subsection (e) provided that the Governor could not exceed
the spending limits set out in (c) and (d) unless the
President of the United States declared the disaster to be
a major disaster and the Legislature approved the
expenditure of additional assets from the disaster relief
fund.
Subsection (f) provided that a community or area was
eligible only once for flood disaster relief funded from
the disaster relief fund.
Subsections (g) and (h) stated that the Governor shall
provide an annual accounting of expenditures from the
disaster relief fund and that the Governor could adopt
regulations to implement this section.
Section 4 amended the definition of disaster. The language
"a natural or manmade cause including" was removed "or
shortage of food, water, fuel or clothing" was inserted.
Subsection (a) "the event of weather condition" was removed
and "severe storm" was inserted. Also deleted was the
language, "or shortage of food, water, fuel or clothing".
Senator Sean Parnell moved for adoption of CS SB 101
Version "H". Senator Al Adams objected. He had questions
on the special session provisions. He wondered if there
would be numerous special sessions.
He also felt the need to elaborate on the definition of
"severe storms". It should include cold snaps and long term
cold temperatures. He then asked how often the community
could have one flood - in a lifetime or annually.
Co-Chair John Torgerson walked through his intentions.
Most of the things incorporated were attempts to clarify
language. It would bring the Legislature back into a
special session for expenditures over $5 million. This
provision was inserted at the suggestion by Senator Dave
Donley.
He referred to a handout listing the incidences of
disasters over $5 million. There were only two. Therefore,
past history did not show that the Legislature would be in
special sessions under this new provision.
The definition of "severe storms" was at the suggestion of
Senator Randy Phillips to remove "weather conditions" and
provide a broader definition. He believed it would cover
severe cold snaps.
He noted that FEMA would not provide assistance for a
second flood if their suggestions after the first flood
were not heeded, such as building above the flood plain.
He admitted the bill still needed work and that was the
reason for this discussion.
Senator Dave Donley explained that part of his proposal for
the $5 million limit, was to include a safety valve to
allow the presiding officers to poll the members of the
Legislature to see if a majority supported allowing the
Governor to go beyond $5 million. This was a way to avoid a
special session. He still supported that and felt it was
reasonable in a disaster situation.
Co-Chair John Torgerson said he wished to ask the
Legislative Council from the Legal Services Division for an
opinion on the issue of binding the Legislature through a
poll.
Senator Al Adams asked if with the figures stated in the
proposed CS, would the disaster relief fund be funded in
the regular budget or be incorporated the special session.
He then referred to another provision that stated a
disaster relief could not continue for more than 30 days
unless set into law. He wanted history of the length of
prior disasters from the Division of Emergency Services.
Co-Chair John Torgerson commented that provision was in
existing law and that it could be looked at.
Co-Chair John Torgerson addressed the question on funding.
This would not change any of the available funding
mechanisms. The Governor was not prevented from taking
funds where legally available to be used for the disaster.
GEORGE UTERMOHLE, Legislative Council, Division of Legal
Services, Legislative Affairs Agency, came to the table at
the request of Co-Chair John Torgerson. Co-Chair John
Torgerson questioned him about polling the Legislature and
the binding authority. George Utermohle replied that there
was precedent in the state for action to be taken other
than passage of a law by the Legislature. He detailed the
reasons for this.
Co-Chair John Torgerson asked if this was changed back to
concurrent resolution, would the poll not be binding.
George Utermohle responded that a decision or approval by
the presiding officers would not be sufficient, nor would a
concurrent resolution.
Senator Dave Donley asked what was the difference between
that method and the existing practice of the presiding
officers giving approval to the Governor. George Utermohle
answered that there was no difference. Senator Dave Donley
then challenged that the current law was also illegal. Co-
Chair John Torgerson explained the present law did not
approve funds. The current decision made by the presiding
officers was whether to come into a special session.
Senator Dave Donley countered that was still binding
because the Legislature could petition a special session.
Co-Chair John Torgerson agreed. There was further debate.
Senator Al Adams noted the different funding limits set in
the CS. He wanted to know if there was a requirement for a
special session for any disaster over $1 million. George
Utermohle it would require additional approval is obtained
from the Legislature in that particular instance. Co-Chair
John Torgerson affirmed that the special session would be
required for additional funding if the disaster didn't
conform to the definition of disaster.
The CS SB 101 Version "H" Workdraft was adopted without
objection.
DAVID LIEBERSBACK, Director, Division of Emergency
Services, Department of Military and Veterans Affairs,
testified via teleconference to the adopted CS. He spoke
to the need for special sessions. In the reality of his
experience over the last few years, the special session
would be required more often because there was no
appropriation to the disaster relief fund and the fund was
currently empty. Therefore, the Governor would need to call
special session because he would not have other sources
sufficient to cope with the disaster.
Co-Chair John Torgerson interrupted to ask what made him
say that since no changes in the provisions for financing
disasters were proposed. David Liebersback responded that
there was no money in the disaster relief fund and the
provision stated that if there was no money in the fund to
deal with the disaster a special session would be required.
Co-Chair John Torgerson said that was not true, the
Governor had the option of taking funds available to him
from other departments to use for relief.
David Liebersback spoke to another potential problem under
the special session provision and that was the time it
would take to get the funding processed to enable relief
efforts.
He then noted numerous events over the past 20 years where
flooding occurred in the same place. He listed several
floods in Anchorage, the Mat-Su Borough and Fairbanks.
Without state money to match, the division would be unable
to get federal funds for these floods.
Relating to the definition of disaster, David Liebersback
felt that what had been done was good, but that it limited
the division. He suggested "resulting from and event
including" would allow for the possibility on an unforeseen
event.
Senator Al Adams asked if he had a definition of severe
storms. David did not and said it would have to be
developed.
Senator Sean Parnell wanted to know if there was a
definition of severe storms that FEMA used. He thought
FEMA used similar language but wanted more information.
Senator Lyda Green referred to US Code definition. She had
been concerned about the difference between disasters and
major disasters noting the differing amounts of money spent
to respond to each.
Co-Chair John Torgerson asked for the definition of major
catastrophe. Would the Bristol Bay situation return to the
definition? Senator Lyda Green answered no.
Senator Sean Parnell commented on Senator Lyda Green's
referral to the US code.
Recess 9:30 AM teleconference connection lost - [recording
affected] / 9:34 AM
Senator Lyda Green continued talking about the federal
definition of disasters that the state would have to
provide matching funds to receive federal relief. It
referred to a catastrophe being the trigger. Then a major
disaster meant, "any natural catastrophe including,
hurricane, tornado, storm, high water, wind driven water,
tidal wave, tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption,
landslide, mudslide, snow storm or drought. She thought
Senator Loren Leman's drafted amendment followed that
definition.
Co-Chair John Torgerson explained that Senator Loren Leman
had drafted an amendment that was not yet distributed that
incorporated many of Senator Lyda Green's suggestions. He
gave her a copy of the amendment in case she wished to
sponsor it. Senator Lyda Green said she would like to
incorporate a definition of emergency into the amendment.
Senator Al Adams requested Nico Bus to come to the table to
answer questions about relief for fires. Under the proposed
language, would the state avert federal funding for relief?
NICO BUS, Administrative Services Manager, Division of
Support Services, Department of Military and Veterans
Affairs and Department of Natural Resources, commented on
the fire program in general. The emergency statutes
referred to both fire and the disaster relief fund.
Previously, there was a fire suppression fund that was used
for fire disasters. That fund had been completely
depleted. The next recourse was through the disaster
relief fund, where up to $1 million could be used. He
noted that fund was also depleted. When looking at money
regularly appropriated for fire suppression, the fund was
insufficient. Over the last four or five years, the
department found itself in the position where they had to
declare a disaster for even the smallest fires. He
detailed the budget expenditure process. Recently, the only
option was to take funds from other governmental
operations. The Administration and the Legislature decided
that was not a good plan. Government and projects should
not be halted for this. The solution was to do a financing
plan then request a supplemental appropriation when the
Legislature came back into regular session. The money was
borrowed against the general fund. Under the CS, he was
unsure if there would be many requests for special sessions
because the financing plan would no longer be used. He felt
that to borrow money from existing programs would be
problematic.
Co-Chair John Torgerson repeated that the financing schemes
would not be changed. He stressed that while the department
claimed each year that the disaster relief fund was under-
funded, the Legislature never short funded the programs. As
to the matter of special sessions, that was a call of this
Legislature.
Senator Al Adams had a question on the CS if it would allow
the capture of all available federal funds. Nico Bus
responded that most of the federal funds appropriated to
both the Department of Natural Resources and the Department
of Military and Veterans Affairs was sufficient. The
problem was with the federal fund appropriations.
Senator Lyda Green noted her amendment was being drafted.
There was another issue regarding Senator Randy Phillips'
proposed amendment to the original bill relating to the
Department of Commerce and Economic Development for
economic disasters. She felt the committee should address
one type of disaster without addressing the other.
Senator Randy Phillips moved for adoption of Amendment #1
with technical changes to comply with the CS Version "H".
BRUCE CAMPBELL, staff to Senator Randy Phillips, explained
the amendment. There had been some concern about the
assistance grants language. Discussions with George
Utermohle changed their understanding of what that language
meant. Furthermore, this amendment would add language in
which the government shall encourage private capital. There
seemed to be implications on line 14 that the capital
projects were public capital projects. They wanted to make
sure it was clear that it could include private, as well as
capital projects for economic disasters. In an economic
disaster, the Governor could select projects that needed to
be moved forward rapidly in permit review and other capital
expenditures.
Senator Dave Donley wondered what would be different about
this law compared to the current law. Bruce Campbell
explained that the new language would encourage the
Governor to move more quickly with permit packages. He
detailed a past instances with the Southeast timber
disasters where if the Governor had the power, state land
could have been opened and the mills possibly kept open.
While if may or may not work, he stressed the need to offer
the opportunity.
Senator Lyda Green suggested the federal definition of
economic disaster added to this section. She read, "the
annual income to workers in the designated area drop below
the average annual income for the base period for workers
in the designated area and the drop in income is of just
magnitude."
Senator Sean Parnell said it would open the title up for
further review and the question was whether the committee
wished to only address natural disasters or add economic
disaster. Senator Lyda Green felt this was the section
where natural disasters fell and thought they needed to
oversee that.
Senator Sean Parnell agreed and noted that if the title
would be opened it should be dealt with in this committee
rather than passing the bill along.
Co-Chair John Torgerson understood the intent and didn't
disagree that there needed to be work done with the
economic disasters. However, he didn't think this
amendment would accomplish that without causing more
problems.
Senator Sean Parnell said if it was to be added it needed
to be dealt with here.
Senator Randy Phillips offered holding this amendment until
after the other amendments were heard.
Co-Chair John Torgerson asked David Liebersback how much
total funds could be distributed under economic disasters.
David said his department didn't handle the economic
disasters, the Department of Commerce and Economic
Development did. He didn't have that information. Co-Chair
John Torgerson said his office would request that
information from the Department of Commerce and Economic
Development.
Senator Randy Phillips withdrew his motion to adopt
Amendment #1.
Senator Randy Phillips moved for adoption of Amendment #2.
Co-Chair John Torgerson explained would delete the term, "a
major disaster" and reinsert, "determined by the President
of the United States to cause damage of significant
severity and magnitude to warrant major disaster assistance
under the Federal Disaster Relief Act of 1974." This was
to address the concern that there could be a major disaster
but it may not qualify for federal disaster relief aid.
Senator Al Adams asked if this amendment would cover all
federal funds that might be available. Would it limit the
state's ability to obtain federal funds?
Tape: SFC - 99 #58, Side B 9:54 AM
Senator Al Adams concluded his question.
Co-Chair John Torgerson answered no, it authorized the
Governor to obtain funds from all sources. It just said
that before the Governor could spend over $1 million, or $5
million, the disaster must be declared to qualify under the
federal standards.
Amendment #2 was adopted without objection.
Senator Randy Phillips moved for adoption of Amendment #3.
Senator Randy Phillips explained this was to address a
concern that the department expressed. Co-Chair John
Torgerson objected because the language, "such as" may be
too broad.
Senator Al Adams commented this amendment was similar to
the suggestions made by David Liebersback to insert,
".resulting from a cause, including."
CAROL CARROLL, Director, Division of Support Services,
Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, came to the
table. She addressed the question of whether Senator Randy
Phillips's amendment would take care of the concerns of the
Division of Emergency Services. It would. She restated the
concerns that it was unknown what types of events would be.
By limiting events to a list of disasters, some events may
be excluded that the Legislature may later want to declare.
Senator Randy Phillips said he now viewed the change as
opening it up rather than narrowing it down. He didn't
want to do that. He withdrew his motion to adopt Amendment
Senator Dave Donley moved to amend and adopt Amendment #4.
He detailed the technical change to line 20 to insert, "in
writing" and spoke to the intent of the amendment to have
the notice and the assent in writing. He felt it was
important to have discussion on the special session matter.
He was not convinced that this was the answer, but it would
facilitate a discussion. He agreed with the provisions in
the CS placing the $5 million limit before additional
Legislative appropriation. He wanted the committee to talk
about the flexibility to avoid a special session.
Senator Sean Parnell wanted to know if it was the intent
that all members of the respective houses be polled in
writing. Senator Dave Donley answered it was.
Senator Sean Parnell moved to amend Amendment #4 to insert
"all" following "after polling". Senator Al Adams requested
the amendment be read in its proposed form. Senator Dave
Donley complied.
Without objection Amendment #4 was amended to change "in
writing". Without objection, Amendment #4 amended was
amended to insert the word "all".
Co-Chair John Torgerson said his earlier object to the
polling was under the pretense that the committee would be
approving money to exceed the $1 million or the $5 million
disaster cap. But under this amendment, the questions
before the members would only be whether or not to come
into special session. George Utermohle affirmed and
detailed.
Co-Chair John Torgerson asked if this basically conformed
to the CS or was there major changes. George Utermohle
explained that including this amendment into the CS would
require a substantial change to the structure. Co-Chair
John Torgerson wanted to know if it would affect just the
polling or if it would change other provisions as well.
George Utermohle replied that it would make major changes
to the CS. The conceptual issue of capping the Governor's
unrestricted expenditures at $5 million was consistent.
But how those two melded in the CS and the amendment took
different approaches. A new CS would probably be required
to see how they worked together.
Senator Dave Donley was willing to withdraw the amendment
and draft another to the CS version to offer on the Senate
floor. Co-Chair John Torgerson did not have a problem with
the approach but just wanted to understand what was being
changed. He spoke to his concerns with the polling of the
Legislature.
George Utermohle said he would need to have time to study
and compare the effects of the CS and the amendment.
Senator Dave Donley said it was too major to send out of
Senate Finance Committee incomplete.
Senator Randy Phillips suggested that Senator Lyda Green's
concern with Amendment #1 could also be worked on in a new
CS. Co-Chair John Torgerson spoke of the effect this bill
would have on the FY99 supplemental budget bill.
Senator Dave Donley felt the CS was adequate and he did not
want it to impede the supplemental budget. Co-Chair John
Torgerson said the matter should be debated before the bill
left committee.
Senator Sean Parnell offered to take up the bill the next
day. Co-Chair John Torgerson said it was his intent that
the bill held in committee until the Monday meeting.
He wanted direction from the committee on Amendment #1.
Senator Gary Wilken felt the two should be separate. Co-
Chair John Torgerson asked if Senator Lyda Green would
consider separate legislation to address economic disaster.
Senator Lyda Green didn't see how one could be addressed
without consideration of the other.
Senator Sean Parnell commented that the economic disasters
might have been a more appropriate route with this bill.
He reread the definition of economic disasters and
concluded the economic disaster section was pointed
directly at helping people whose income had been
dramatically affected. The question was, did the committee
want to open that matter up as well. It could be such that
once the emergency disaster statutes were fixed, then the
Administration had the option to utilize the current
economic disaster statute as it was. The difference would
be that when the Governor designated an area as being an
economic disaster are, the Legislature then considered
whether to appropriate the money. He didn't see an
automatic appropriation by the Governor.
Senator Lyda Green said it appeared there was a very high
standard since the income had to drop below the base income
for workers in the designated areas and the average family
of all residents had to drop below the poverty guideline.
She was unsure if the Western Alaska Fishing Disaster would
have qualified. She still felt the matter needed to be
considered Senator Sean Parnell said the point was well
taken.
Co-Chair John Torgerson asked Senator Lyda Green to
research the matter. It was his desire that if it involved
a major change, it be handled as separate legislation. If
it were a small change, it could be incorporated in this
bill.
Senator Al Adams requested consideration be given to the
definition of severe storms. Co-Chair John Torgerson
agreed.
Senator Dave Donley withdrew his motion to adopt Amendment
Senator Al Adams requested the adopted amendment
incorporated into the new CS for the members to review.
Co-Chair John Torgerson ordered the bill held in committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|