Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/22/1999 09:07 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. 149
"An Act relating to awards of federal funds to
municipalities for road projects and to the statewide
transportation improvement program; and providing for
an effective date."
This was the first hearing for this bill.
Co-Chair John Torgerson made general remarks to the bill.
There had been discussion in committee regarding
appropriation to specific transportation projects, which
the department failed to do even after the projects passed
the entire legislative process and was approved by the
Governor. This legislation would address that. It would
also place into statute, under the Community Road Program,
how the funds would be broken down.
MARY JACKSON, staff to Senator John Torgerson came to the
table. The bill contained two things. It would put the
Statewide Transportation Program (STIP) into statute and it
would establish a new program for municipalities.
She gave a sectional analysis of the bill.
Section 1 set the STIP into statute and broke it down into
three components: the National Highway System, the
Community Transportation Program and Trails and Recreation
Access for Alaska. It established a percentage value for
all federal funds. It also set out a process for revising
the STIP to give direction to the department. It made
clear the legislative process was clear when the
Legislature took action on a STIP during the budget
process.
Subsection (b) addressed the CTP and established the
categories and percentages. The Anchorage Metropolitan Area
Transportation Study (AMATS) was identified at 30 percent.
Remote Areas was identified at ten-percent. State Highway
Systems was identified at 15 percent. Gravel Improvement
and Upgrades was identified at 15 percent as well.
Reconstruction and Transfer was identified at ten-percent.
Finally, Statewide Competitive was identified at 20
percent.
Subsection (C) gave direction to the department on how to
rank the projects with priority given to road that would be
upgraded from gravel or asphalt treatment and turned over
to a municipality for maintenance. They intent was to
reduce the cost of maintenance to the department.
Subsection (d) stipulated that if there were not sufficient
projects within a component, a transfer to other categories
was provided.
Subsection (e) gave definitions.
Section 2 provided the Gravel to Pavement was a separate
program that would sunset after four years. The 15 percent
allocation for that category would transfer to the
Statewide Competitive category. It also stipulated that
projects could not be included in this category if they
qualified for either the NHS or TRAAK programs.
Section 3 gave the definitions with reference to the Gravel
and Pavement category and would sunset in four years.
Section 4 was a new program for the award of federal funds
to municipalities. This would allow the municipalities to
come to the department with projects that qualified under
federal program eligibility standards. The municipalities
would undertake construction of the projects and provide
the matching grant requirement.
Sections 5 and 6 were the effective dates for the
components.
Mary Jackson noted that representatives were present from
the department and the National Highway System.
Co-Chair John Torgerson wanted to hear from the
representatives but did not intend to take up amendments at
this meeting.
Senator Al Adams commented that some of the projects would
be passed along to municipalities. He wanted to know if the
bill contained language that shifted liability from the
state to the municipality, once the funds were transferred.
He also commented that the percentages should not be
dictated. While he felt the remote category should be at
least 15 percent, he didn't believe the limitations should
be placed on the department.
Co-Chair John Torgerson felt those were good questions for
the department. He commented that the matter had been
discussed and the proposed percentage amounts closely
mirrored history.
Senator Al Adams noted the available funding amounts
fluctuated.
TOM BRIGHAM, Director, Division of Statewide Planning,
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities was
called to the table to respond to Senator Al Adams's
concerns about local liability. The department believed it
was never completely off the hook, according to Tom
Brigham. Language in the bill would help however.
In addressing Senator Al Adams's concerns about the ten-
percent allocated to rural projects, Tom Brigham said it
would depend on the future of sanitation roads in rural
communities. If you look at the out-years currently
projected for the program, ten-percent was not
unreasonable. However, Public Health Service and Village
Safe Water staff saw additional projects on the horizon and
felt a higher percentage would be needed.
Senator Al Adams wanted to know if language could be added
to limit the state's liability. Tom Brigham responded that
the Attorney General would be better suited to address the
matter.
Senator Gary Wilken wondered why a particular area of the
state was singled out (Anchorage) and wanted to know if
other areas such as Fairbanks should be considered for
inclusion.
Senator Gary Wilken had a question on what would happen
when the gravel to pavement provision sunset. Mary Jackson
responded that the intent was the percent allocated to that
program would be added to the statewide competitive
category.
Senator Gary Wilken wanted to know the percentage
allocation for the six categories in the past for
comparison.
Co-Chair John Torgerson said there wasn't officially an
FMATS established for Fairbanks even though there was some
money appropriated to it. However, the question was well
taken. Tom Brigham confirmed.
Senator Gary Wilken then asked what was the FMATS if it was
not an official organization. Tom Brigham said it was an
operating agreement between the Department of
Transportation and Public Utilities, the borough, the City
of Fairbanks and the City of North Pole. Once the urban
area of Fairbanks reached 50,000 people, it would then
qualify. At that point, the department would treat it in
the same manner AMATS was treated.
Senator Gary Wilken wanted to make sure the matter was
clear before the bill was moved from committee.
Senator Lyda Green asked how the Gravel to Pavement Upgrade
timeframe was established. Was the intent that all projects
would be completed in four years, or if projects after that
date would not be listed in the separate allotment? Co-
Chair John Torgerson said the target was set by the TEA21.
Mary Jackson confirmed and detailed.
DAVE MILLER, Assistant Division Administrator, Federal
Highway Administration, came before the committee to
address the municipal road project portion of the bill.
Title 23 in itself specifically allowed for states to
contract with municipalities or other governmental agencies
to conduct projects. He read the specific language into the
record.
The same provision stipulated that the state agency was not
relieved under federal law or regulation in the event it
utilized the services of another organization. In his
interpretation, that held the state responsible for
assuring compliance with federal regulation.
Senator Al Adams asked if federal law allowed an
appropriation to rural Alaska or if the funds were granted
in a lump sum to the state for disbursement. Dave Miller
answered that TEA21 provided funds to the state in a number
of general categories. Considerable flexibility was
granted to the State Of Alaska that was not normally
considered for other states. The subcategories proposed in
this bill was a practice done throughout the US and was
acceptable but not necessarily encouraged.
Dan Miller noted that his office did not have an
opportunity to assess the proposed percentages.
Co-Chair John Torgerson ordered the bill held in committee.
He told members that amendments would be distributed by the
time of the next hearing on the bill.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|