03/12/2009 08:00 AM House COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB19 | |
| HB161 | |
| HB153 | |
| HB150 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 161 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 150 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 19 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 156 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 153 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
March 12, 2009
8:02 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bob Herron, Co-Chair
Representative Cathy Engstrom Munoz, Co-Chair
Representative John Harris
Representative Wes Keller
Representative Charisse Millett
Representative Sharon Cissna
Representative Berta Gardner
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 19
"An Act exempting the state and its political subdivisions from
daylight saving time."
-MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 161
"An Act relating to the Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority
Subport Office Building; authorizing the issuance of
certificates of participation for construction of the building
and authorizing the use of up to $25,000,000 from the mental
health trust fund for construction of the building; approving
leases of all or part of the building by the Department of
Administration; and providing for an effective date."
-HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 153
"An Act exempting municipal boards, committees, commissions, or
other similar bodies from the requirements of conducting
meetings open to the public when a meeting is administrative or
managerial in nature; and amending the definition of 'meeting'
as it relates to public governmental meetings."
-MOVED CSHB 153(CRA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 150
"An Act repealing certain provisions relating to modifying the
factors that apply to calculate the amount of power cost
equalization; providing for an effective date by repealing the
effective date of sec. 3, ch. 2, 4SSLA 2008; and providing for
an effective date."
-HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 156
"An Act relating to municipal fees charged for disposal of waste
material from the substantial rehabilitation, renovation,
demolition, removal, or replacement of a structure on
deteriorated property."
-SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 19
SHORT TITLE: ELIMINATE DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) FAIRCLOUGH
01/20/09 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/9/09
01/20/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/20/09 (H) CRA, L&C
03/03/09 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
03/03/09 (H) Heard & Held
03/03/09 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
03/12/09 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
BILL: HB 161
SHORT TITLE: CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION FOR SUBPORT
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) MUNOZ
02/27/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/27/09 (H) CRA, FIN
03/12/09 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
BILL: HB 153
SHORT TITLE: OPEN MEETINGS: EXCEPTION AND DEFINITION
SPONSOR(s): COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS BY REQUEST
02/25/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/25/09 (H) CRA, JUD
03/03/09 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
03/03/09 (H) Heard & Held
03/03/09 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
03/12/09 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
BILL: HB 150
SHORT TITLE: POWER COST EQUALIZATION
SPONSOR(s): AUSTERMAN
02/25/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/25/09 (H) CRA, FIN
03/12/09 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE ANNA FAIRCLOUGH
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke as the sponsor of HB 19.
WAYNE JENSEN, Architect
Jensen, Yorba, Lott Inc.
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Reviewed the preliminary planning concepts
of proposed building.
BRUCE BOTELHO, Mayor
City & Borough of Juneau
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 161, Version T.
JEFF JESSEE, Chief Executive Office
Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority
Department of Revenue
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing on HB 161, answered
questions.
TIM SPERNAK, Senior Resource Manager, Alaska Mental Health Trust
Authority
Department of Revenue
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of SB 161, answered
questions.
HARRY NOAH, Executive Director
Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority Land Office
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Natural Resources
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 161, answered
questions.
KEVIN BROOKS, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Administration
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 161.
DEVEN MITCHELL, Debt Manager
Treasury Division
Department of Revenue
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 161, provided
clarifying information.
CHARLES COLLINS, President
Juneau Chamber of Commerce
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 161.
ERIN HARRINGTON, Staff
Representative Alan Austerman
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 150 on behalf of the sponsor,
Representative Austerman.
ROBERT NICK, Chairman
ABC Housing Association
Nunapitchuk, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 150, requested
continued funding of PCE at the cost ceiling of $1.00 per kWh
and to do so in a permanent fashion.
RICHARD JUNG
Napakiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 150, requested that
businesses be included in the PCE program.
MEERA KOHLER, President/CEO
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 150.
PATRICK SAMPSON, Low Income Home Energy Assistance Director
Association of Village Council Presidents (ACVP)
Bethel, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 150, requested
continuation of the PCE program and the current $1.00 ceiling.
MICHELLE NICKLES
AVCT Energy Assistance Program
Bethel, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 150, related the
struggle to pay utility bills.
STEVEN MAXIE, JR.
Napaskiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 150, testified that
business should be eligible for PCE.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:02:24 AM
CO-CHAIR BOB HERRON called the House Community and Regional
Affairs Standing Committee meeting to order at 8:02 a.m.
Representatives Herron, Munoz, Keller, and Gardner were present
at the call to order. Representatives Millet, Harris, and
Cissna arrived as the meeting was in progress.
HB 19-ELIMINATE DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME
8:03:02 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON announced that the first order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 19, "An Act exempting the state and its
political subdivisions from daylight saving time."
8:03:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ANNA FAIRCLOUGH, Alaska State Legislature,
speaking as the sponsor of HB 19, informed the committee that
due to questions at the prior hearing she requested extra energy
data from Nome, Anchorage, and multiple other utilities.
Chugach Electric provided some energy information, although
anecdotal, that the weekend after implementation of daylight
savings time (DST) there is a decrease in electrical usage
whereas there's an increase in electrical usage after
implementation of DST. However, Chugach Electric noted that the
largest factor related to electrical usage is the temperature.
She then related that Channel 2 performed a survey that reported
that 75 percent of those responding supported repealing DST.
The sponsor's own survey has an increased number of respondents
as has those in support of repealing DST. With regard to the
questions about fuel usage on the North Slope, Representative
Fairclough explained that the fuel is purchased in bulk and thus
DST doesn't impact the cost, although it may impact the
consumption.
8:06:27 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON related that he has only received support for a
change from the current system and has received no opposition to
HB 19 from his district.
8:06:57 AM
CO-CHAIR MUNOZ moved to report HB 19 out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
There being no objection, it was so ordered.
8:07:31 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 8:07 a.m. to 8:09 a.m.
HB 161-CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION FOR SUBPORT
8:09:13 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON announced that the next order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 161, "An Act relating to the Alaska Mental
Health Trust Authority Subport Office Building; authorizing the
issuance of certificates of participation for construction of
the building and authorizing the use of up to $25,000,000 from
the mental health trust fund for construction of the building;
approving leases of all or part of the building by the
Department of Administration; and providing for an effective
date."
8:09:30 AM
CO-CHAIR MUNOZ, speaking as the sponsor of HB 161, explained
that HB 161 will allow the Alaska Mental Health Trust ("The
Trust") to construct a new office facility in Juneau, on land
holdings The Trust owns in downtown Juneau. She noted that this
particular piece of land is a top priority for The Trust to
develop. Co-Chair Munoz then reviewed the history of The Trust.
Prior to statehood individuals experiencing mental illness were
often taken against their will and placed in institutions
outside of Alaska in Portland, Oregon. Many of these
individuals spent the remainder of their lives in institutions.
As Alaska transitioned to statehood, Congress passed the Alaska
Mental Health Enabling Act of 1956. The aforementioned allowed
the state to receive title to one million acres of land, which
was conveyed to The Trust, to help generate income to pay for
the services to care for the mentally ill through the
Comprehensive Integrated Mental Health Program for Alaska. The
Trust's cash assets are managed under contract by the permanent
fund. She explained that a portion of the construction funds
that will be enabled through this legislation are Trust funds
that are held in the permanent fund and invested on behalf of
The Trust by the permanent fund. The noncash assets of The
Trust are managed by The Trust land office, within the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
CO-CHAIR MUNOZ highlighted that the core mission of The Trust is
to develop and manage The Trust's assets for the maximum benefit
of beneficiaries in the areas of health, safety, quality of
life, and economic security. The Trust's beneficiaries live
across Alaska and are individuals who face mental illness,
developmental disability, chronic alcoholism, Alzheimer's
disease, and dementia. Co-Chair Munoz explained that in order
for the development of this property in downtown Juneau, the
legislature must pass legislation that enables The Trust to
access trust funds currently held in the permanent fund and
enter into an agreement to bond for approximately $22.7 million.
The bond will be repaid through lease payments from four
departments of state government, including the Department of
Corrections, Alaska Department of Fish & Game, Department of
Public Safety, and Department of Labor & Workforce Development.
Currently, the aforementioned agencies are located in aging
facilities throughout Juneau and Douglas. She opined that it's
important for the state to quickly take advantage of this
opportunity because existing buildings are in drastic need of
improvement and substantial investment would be required to
allow future use. She then highlighted HR 6, which the House
unanimously passed on February 25, 2009, that urges The Trust to
develop its assets to the maximum benefit of its beneficiaries.
8:14:56 AM
WAYNE JENSEN, Architect, Jensen, Yorba, Lott Inc., presented a
slide presentation entitled "The Trust Land Office Juneau
Subport Development". The first slide is an aerial photo of
downtown Juneau, which includes an outlined area of the land The
Trust owns. The area designated as 1 is the area where the
office building would be constructed. Item 2 is the location of
the old subport building site, which would initially be the
parking lot for the new building. However, that land is very
valuable and would eventually be developed for something more
appropriate. Item 3 is the site of the existing Department of
Public Safety (DPS) building and the plan is to eventually
develop that as a parking garage for sites 1 and 2. He then
presented a slide illustrating the proposed location of the
building and parking. The building will be set back a bit from
Egan Drive but close to the US Coast Guard building. Mr. Jensen
informed the committee that the firm has been working with the
city in recognition of the importance of this site to connect
with pedestrian activity and access. The next few slides
illustrate the floor plans for the four-story office building.
He pointed out that 90-95 percent of the building is anticipated
to be occupied by four state agencies with some portion of the
lower floor open to commercial retail development. The next
couple of slides provide some conceptual renderings of the
façade of the building, which he opined would enhance the
appearance of the building. There has been discussion of a
covered canopy along Egan Drive, which will make pedestrian
access more convenient. He then turned attention to the last
slide that's a photograph looking toward downtown with the
building imposed in it. He noted that it's to be a four-story
building.
8:21:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS opined that the largest issue in Juneau is
parking. Therefore, he asked if there is adequate parking for
this proposed building or will there have to be parking in area
3.
MR. JENSEN opined that the parking needs can be satisfied. In
fact, some parking under the second floor of the building has
been included. Across the street [from the new office building]
there would be a 300-car parking area, which satisfies the
state's parking requirements. Furthermore, the proposed
building would be located only a block from the city's new
transit center, which will also have parking.
8:23:10 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER inquired as to the timeframe of
converting area 3 into a parking garage. She then recalled
legislation to encourage construction of more energy efficient
buildings.
MR. JENSEN answered that the timeframe for development of phase
3 is dependent upon when The Trust sees an opportunity to
develop lot 2. He noted that the Department of Transportation &
Public Facilities is already under contract to place a signal at
Whittier and Egan to ease pedestrian and vehicular traffic.
8:24:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER surmised then that it could be years and
years before that opportunity arises. Therefore, she questioned
whether the parking for area 2 is adequate for the building.
MR. JENSEN answered that he believes it is. He added that The
Trust is in the process of acquiring area 3 as part of the
replacement lands trust, and thus would have control of the lot
such that there would be the opportunity to develop the parking
lot in the future without any restrictions.
8:25:46 AM
MR. JENSEN, regarding energy efficiency, said that this would be
a new building and offer the opportunity to incorporate newer
technologies of energy conservation. He informed the committee
that they are reviewing the geothermal process and talking with
the U.S. Coast Guard regarding a potential biomass project. He
noted that there are three other projects in Juneau that are in
the process of using a geothermal ground source heat system. He
indicated that anything that can be done to lower operating
costs is a high priority of The Trust.
8:26:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT asked if the 300 parking spots on The
Trust land would be available for the life of lease.
MR. JENSEN explained that the requirement regarding the number
of parking spots will be part of the allowable use permit from
the city. If the parking lot were developed as a building later
on, there would still be the obligation to provide the same
number of parking spots to serve the [subport building]. The
Trust has to provide parking, as part of the lease with the
Department of Administration (DOA) and in order to meet the
allowable use permit from the city.
8:28:14 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON inquired as to whether the Zach Gordon building
would be part of this project.
MR. JENSEN responded that it wouldn't be impacted at this time.
8:28:53 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER highlighted the movement to make public
buildings meet new standards.
MR. JENSEN suggested that Representative Gardner is referring to
the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
standard, which will be reviewed. He explained that the LEED
standard is a process through which buildings can go through in
order to achieve certification at certain levels. Regardless of
whether they participate in the certification or not, the
criteria will be used in the design of the building. The
criteria include energy [efficiency] and sustainable materials.
8:30:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS moved to adopt CSHB 161, Version 26-
LS0605\T, Cook, 3/11/09, as the working document. There being
no objection, Version T was before the committee.
8:31:24 AM
BRUCE BOTELHO, Mayor, City & Borough of Juneau, related support
for HB 161, Version T. Mayor Botelho then commended The Trust
on its efforts to construct a building of high quality,
durability, energy efficiency, and sustainability. There have
been some questions, in terms of the city's role. For instance,
there is a requirement for a zoning change that will likely
receive a favorable vote on Monday. Although there are many
benefits to the city, he highlighted the following few. This is
an area that has needed redevelopment for many decades, and thus
is a fulfillment of aspects of the downtown waterfront
development plan. Furthermore, the project will generate
construction-related economic activity and will generate
revenues for The Trust. From a statewide perspective, the
proposed office building will establish a new standard for
excellence in public construction in Alaska.
8:34:06 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS asked if the proposed office building will
pay taxes to the city.
MAYOR BOTELHO replied no. In further response to Representative
Harris, Mayor Botelho confirmed that other buildings, the
Department of Labor & Workforce Development (DLWD) building,
being vacated under this plan are currently paying taxes to the
city.
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS related his understanding that the
proposed office building will include retail space. Therefore,
he surmised that a government entity will possibly be
contracting out for competitive service to the private sector.
MAYOR BOTELHO related his agreement. In terms of leasing to
private entities, that may well be a taxable economic activity.
Activity generated by the businesses occupying the retail space
will be subject to taxes.
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS stressed that any government entity
competing with the private sector with government buildings
should pay taxes because the aforementioned is direct
competition with the private sector. Representative Harris
further stressed that he supports The Trust, but doesn't want
The Trust competing with those who pay taxes to the city. In
this process, there will be a vacant private sector building
that will continue to pay taxes that the city continues to
charge.
MAYOR BOTELHO acknowledged that economic balancing will need to
take place. He then opined that the benefits of this proposed
office building to the state and Juneau far outweigh some
economic dislocation, which he charged would take place
regardless due to the nature of the existing DLWD building.
8:36:44 AM
CO-CHAIR MUNOZ informed the committee that the state will have
to go through a Request for Proposals (RFP) process to replace
DLWD's space in the event that the proposed office building
isn't constructed.
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS clarified that his point is that the state
isn't renewing an existing lease and the owner of the building,
an existing taxpayer, has no recourse. The owner of that
building will have to continue to pay taxes even once the
building is vacant. Furthermore, there is the fact that there
will be vacant buildings in Juneau where the state employee pool
isn't growing.
MAYOR BOTHELO noted his agreement.
8:40:28 AM
JEFF JESSEE, Chief Executive Office, Alaska Mental Health Trust
Authority, Department of Revenue, related that it's been over 50
years since The Trust was created. In 1956, as the Mental
Health Enabling Act was nearing enactment, it came under
significant attack. The attack came most noticeably from a
group that later became known as the Scientologists. The
federal government attempted to send dissidents to Alaska. The
U.S. Senators Goldwater and Bartlett fought the aforementioned
and clarified that a land trust was being created to support
Alaska developing something better for those needing mental
therapy.
8:42:40 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON highlighted how remarkable the national outcry
against the Mental Health Enabling Act was and how many people
thought Alaska should take care of itself.
8:43:26 AM
MR. JESSEE related his surprise when the Palin Administration
approached The Trust regarding development of the subport
building property. The Trust had, for some time, been in
discussions with Juneau regarding how that waterfront property
would be developed, as it's very valuable land. Of course, The
Trust wanted to be sure that the land was developed in a manner
that's consistent with Juneau's vision. Once The Trust was
assured that, in fact, this [proposed office building] was
consistent with Juneau's desire to see development occur on this
property, The Trust has worked diligently with DOA to put
together this proposal. Mr. Jessee related that he is pleased
with how this proposal is coming together as it provides
advantages for all parties. For the state, this project would
provide much needed office space in a centrally located place.
Mr. Jessee explained that The Trust is around to stay and will
eventually own this building, which is one of the reasons it
wants the building to last as long as it can while being as
inexpensive to operate as possible. The aforementioned
maximizes the long-term return on the building as well as The
Trust's revenue. Mr. Jessee related the desire to maximize the
return on the investment into this building in 50 years, and
therefore the intent is to construct a quality building as
energy efficient as technology allows. At some point
development of the subport in conjunction with the development
of other waterfront development will likely generate significant
revenue to The Trust. At that time, it will financially be
worth it to The Trust to build the parking garage in order to
move the parking from the subport to the parking garage. The
Trust has the ongoing obligation to provide parking, and
therefore it's not an option to use the subport property for
something else and not replace it with similar parking
facilities somewhere in the area. With regard to the tax issue,
Mr. Jessee said he understood Representative Harris' concern.
He then related his understanding that The Trust will pay taxes
on the commercial space. He then related that an advantage to
working with The Trust is that the lease rates will be less
because The Trust's expenses will be less. Another advantage of
this project is that ultimately all lease payments end up in the
private sector through either the developer or the rent lease
payments will recycle through The Trust and ultimately end up in
the hands of the nonprofit providers who provide services to the
beneficiaries. Mr. Jessee opined that from the state's
perspective, this is a good deal.
8:48:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS inquired as to the definition of a
certificate of participation.
MR. JESSEE opined that DOA would be the best to answer.
However, he related his understanding that it's basically a
bond, loan that's sold on the market. Part of the lease
payments are used to payoff the bonds over 20 years.
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS then inquired as to the expected rate of
return for this building.
MR. JESSEE deferred to Tim Spernak.
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS inquired as to when The Trust would own
the building.
MR. JESSEE answered that The Trust would own the building in 20
years, when the certificates of participation are paid off. He
highlighted that The Trust is actually putting up half of the
capital for the building.
8:50:43 AM
TIM SPERNAK, Senior Resource Manager, Alaska Mental Health Trust
Authority, Department of Revenue, explained that there are two
financing mechanisms to construct the building. One is the
certificates of participation that carry a bond rate of 5.5
percent, which is backed by the full faith and credit of the
state. The bond market and the purchasers of those certificates
feel comfortable that they have assurance of being paid and the
interest rate is being calculated on that. The other half of
the funds to construct the building comes from The Trust, out of
the permanent fund, and it carries an interest rate of 7.5
percent. The latter is being amortized over 30 years whereas
the bonds are being amortized over 20 years. The purpose of the
30-year amortization for The Trust funds is that it lowers the
monthly payment. All of the aforementioned brings down the rate
and makes [the lease] more affordable to the state tenants. The
operating expenses component is almost a direct pass through to
DOA. He then noted that the ground underneath the office
building is being leased separately from the ground underneath
the parking area in order not to encumber the parking area land
with the certificates of participation.
8:53:10 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS asked if the lease includes an escape
clause for the state.
MR. SPERNAK replied yes, and added that if The Trust doesn't
operate the building in accordance with the lease, the state has
the opportunity to cancel the lease.
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS asked if the demand for those offices will
remain even if the trend of the state reducing personnel in
Juneau continues.
MR. SPERNAK said he can't predict that.
8:54:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT recalled that the Juneau Empire quoted
Mr. Noah as saying that adding the parking garage would make the
lease cost prohibitive. She then asked whether the cost of the
parking garage will be incorporated into the lease cost to the
state.
HARRY NOAH, Executive Director, Alaska Mental Health Trust
Authority Land Office, Office of the Commissioner, Department of
Natural Resources, responded that the cost of parking is a
requirement of leasing the building to the state, and therefore
the cost will be borne by The Trust. The cost of developing a
new parking garage was about $20 million in addition to the cost
of the building, which made the cost per foot unreasonably high.
Although The Trust, he related, was fairly reluctant to use the
old subport for parking due to the fact that it's valuable
property, it was the only reasonable way to proceed at this
point. If and when The Trust decides to utilize the old subport
building area for other development, The Trust will have to
develop other parking which would be at the location of the
existing DPS building. When The Trust develops that parking
garage, there won't be an increase in the lease cost or
additional impact to the state. In further response, Mr. Noah
confirmed that The Trust will bear the cost of the parking
garage and there will be no increase to any of the leases held
by the state.
8:57:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS asked if the cars currently parking along
the street will be made to park in the parking garage being
built on the corner of Main Street and Egan.
MAYOR BOTELHO said that the city isn't looking at car free
zones, at this point. In further response to Representative
Harris, Mayor Botelho specified that the parking garage will
have in excess of 200 parking spots with the ability to expand.
He then related that the Juneau Assembly Finance Committee took
action on the expansion of express bus service, which is another
manner in which the city hopes to alleviate parking congestion
and have a bearing on the service of the proposed office
building.
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS expressed the desire to have the street in
front of the capitol building closed to vehicles.
9:00:29 AM
KEVIN BROOKS, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Administration,
began by noting that this process started about a year ago for
DOA as it decided the DLWD building is space that should be
replaced. The lease for the DLWD building expires June 30,
2012. In recent years the building's problems have manifested
themselves in a number of ways. For instance, the DLWD building
has had water intrusions and mold problems. The problems have
resulted in union issues, grievances, and moving staff out of
the building. Therefore, a year or so ago DOA reached the
conclusion that it wouldn't renew the lease at the next
extension. However, there's not much [office space] available.
The DOA approached The Trust, with whom it already has a
relationship.
MR. BROOKS informed the committee that the existing DLWD
building is about 68,000 square feet and houses 300 people. The
Douglas Island building, which was constructed in 1961, is
nearly 32,000 square feet and houses nearly 200 people. The
Department of Public Safety building, which was constructed in
1970 as a temporary facility, is about 16,000 square feet and
houses 34 people. The Douglas Island building and the DPS
building will require much investment to allow them to be
tenantable. The maintenance required for the Douglas Island
building would be replacement of the entire envelope of the
building, the roof, and the windows. He recalled that there are
no plans to move other state employees in the aforementioned
buildings. There could be an alternate use for the Douglas
Island building. There would be significant maintenance
required for the DPS building as well. If this project doesn't
move forward, then an RFP for the DLWD building would be put out
and the other buildings would continue to be used. The building
being proposed is about 120,000 square feet and works for the
investment being discussed by The Trust. With regard to
parking, all of the leases include a formula that specifies a
certain number of parking spaces. The location of the parking
garage makes no difference to the state, as a tenant, so long as
the parking lot has enough spaces for the people working in the
building. Recalling earlier discussion about the long-term
[state employee] position loss, Mr. Brooks informed the
committee that currently there are over 3,300 employees in
Juneau. He further informed the committee that Juneau has
experienced about a 100 position net loss, which is significant.
Still, the office space will be needed for the long-term. Mr.
Brooks clarified that the term of the lease for the proposed
office building is 20 years with two 10-year renewals. Once a
space is filled, it's significant to undertake a lease and thus
the hope would be that the state would be a long-term tenant.
In the end, the deal has to pencil out for the state as well as
The Trust, to which The Trust has been very responsive.
9:10:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS surmised that the state hasn't given any
thought as to what to do with the buildings being vacated.
MR. BROOKS reiterated that the DPS building could be used for
future parking, but it's hard to specify when that would occur.
The department is trying to balance spending to keep the
buildings tenantable without spending additional deferred
maintenance money foolishly. The possibilities for the
buildings being vacated range from demolishing them to perhaps
cold storage for the Douglas Island building. In response to
Representative Harris, Mr. Brooks confirmed that the buildings
could be sold to the private sector. The main priority is to
find a replacement location for DLWD. However, if the proposal
embodied in HB 161 moves forward, options for the state's
vacated buildings would have to be reviewed.
MR. BROOKS, in further response to Representative Harris,
explained that parcel 3 belongs to the state, not The Trust.
Therefore, he wasn't clear how the title transfer would occur
between the state and The Trust. "But it's not part of any deal
we're working on with this building and this lease," he
clarified. He further clarified that parcel 3 is part of the
deal to the extent it's viewed as a potential future site for a
parking garage; but it's not part of the legal deal.
9:13:06 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS surmised that if The Trust builds on the
subport area, there's no guarantee that area 3 would be made
available for parking.
MR. BROOKS answered that the state isn't in opposition to such,
but a deal and arrangement with The Trust would be required. He
noted that DNR holds title to all land, and therefore there's a
process that has to be followed. He further noted that the
process isn't one that DOA would direct.
9:14:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER inquired as to what the state is paying
The Trust for the parking [at the subport].
MR. BROOKS responded that it's a nominal amount. He informed
the committee that [parking at the subport] was utilized as a
temporary measure due to all the other projects occurring. Work
is being done in the State Office Building parking garage that
necessitates the closure of two levels. Therefore, [the subport
parking] was secured as a temporary measure to move parking
while some of the state's own construction projects were being
performed.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER inquired as to the amount of the ground
lease for the proposed parking in the subport area.
MR. BROOKS said that there wouldn't be a separate lease on the
surface parking. If that was the case, the cost per space would
likely be astronomical. If the deal moves forward, DOA would
lease a building with a certain number of square feet that has
to have a certain amount of parking spots within a certain
proximity to the building.
9:16:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT inquired as to where the displaced State
Office Building parking that's currently using the subport
parking lot will be diverted.
MR. BROOKS reminded members that the subport parking is being
used temporarily for displaced parking due to renovations at the
State Office Building parking garage. That renovation should be
completed in the next several months, and therefore DOA wouldn't
be in an ongoing relationship with The Trust for that particular
parcel.
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT inquired as to the current lease rates
per square foot for each of the buildings the state agencies to
be moved are located. She further inquired as to how that
compares with what will be paid in the new building.
MR. BROOKS said that he could provide that information. He
related that the department anticipates that the existing lease
space for DLWD is at a lower cost than it will be for the new
building. However, he attributed part of that to the condition
of the existing building versus that of a new building. Mr.
Brooks said that DOA anticipates an increase in lease costs no
matter if the scenario is one in which there's an RFP or this
legislation. With regard to the state-owned buildings, he
related that it's a very nominal amount that the state charges
itself to direct money back into the public building fund to do
deferred maintenance and pay for operating costs. Again, the
costs of the Douglas Island building and the DPS building are
lower [than what's anticipated with the proposed new building],
which he attributed to the age, quality, and condition of the
buildings.
9:18:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT surmised then that those agencies will
face an increase in lease costs for that space.
MR. BROOKS stated that the costs wouldn't be passed on to
agencies. He informed the committee that DOA has a leasing
budget of over $40 million for the entire portfolio of leases.
The department would factor in the inclusion of the new lease
that would begin in 2012, which would be included in fiscal year
(FY) 2013. Therefore, DOA's FY 13 budget would reflect the
anticipated lease costs.
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT expressed interest in seeing a lease
market analysis of what's available in Juneau versus this
proposed project. She then related that she is going to have
difficulty explaining to her constituents the need for a newer
waterfront building at a higher lease cost than what the market
is bearing in Juneau. She noted that she recently went through
a similar situation with Block 39 in Anchorage.
MR. BROOKS offered to provide the cost comparison analysis to
the committee.
9:21:42 AM
DEVEN MITCHELL, Debt Manager, Treasury Division, Department of
Revenue, clarified that a certificate of participation is when
title interest is provided to a trustee with whom one enters
into a lease, which is fractionalized and sold to investors. A
certificate of participation, which is very similar to a bond,
is a subject to appropriation commitment of the state. Other
projects funded with similar commitments are the Atwood parking
garage and building in Anchorage, the Goose Creek Correctional
Facility, and the virology laboratory in Fairbanks. He
explained that there are two separate leases such that there is
a lease for the operating cost of the facility as well as the
investment The Trust makes in the facility and the other lease
is for purposes of securing the certificates. He opined that
the two are very different, in as a much as the commitment that
is going to be made with the certificates of participation would
be made to the market. While the commitment to pay is subject
to appropriations and there is discretion on the legislature's
part, a failure would negatively impact the state's continued
access to capitol markets.
9:24:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA related her observation that most of the
locations mentioned [with similar commitments] weren't Juneau.
Juneau has its own economy and situation. She opined that there
is risk. She then inquired as to Mr. Mitchell's analysis of the
risk.
MR. MITCHELL opined that HB 161 is an interesting proposal in as
much as it's the state and The Trust partnering. He recalled
his involvement with the new Alaska Psychiatric Institute (API),
which he said was a similar project as it was a blend of forces.
9:26:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS highlighted that one major difference
between this proposal and the API facility is that the functions
of the API facility were largely involved with The Trust and
mental health providers. The facility proposed by HB 161 has no
connection with mental health providers.
9:26:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT asked whether [the state] has used
participation bonds for financing of lease space like this.
MR. MITCHELL replied yes, adding that the state uses its subject
to appropriation credit to acquire things or build projects. He
then pointed out the Mat-Su example was a lease revenue bond of
the Matanuska-Susitna Borough. However, the borough doesn't
pledge any borough assets. The documentation merely says that
the lease that was entered into by the state is hereby pledged.
The last certificate of participation from DOA was issued for
the Fairbanks virology laboratory.
9:28:24 AM
CHARLES COLLINS, President, Juneau Chamber of Commerce,
testified in support of HB 161. He emphasized that the project
proposed in HB 161 is important to Juneau, particularly to the
businesses of Juneau. This proposed project would anchor some
of the departments in Juneau and upgrades the facilities that
customers use. Furthermore, the proposal is a long-term
solution and provides a long-term source of funds for The Trust.
More importantly to Juneau and its business, the project would
provide consistency to what business owners can plan for in the
future. Consistency is important as it helps businesses
forecast their future. This project provides an opportunity for
businesses in Juneau because any construction project creates
jobs and the need to [furnish and maintain] the building. For
many businesses in Juneau, the number one customer is the State
of Alaska, which is why Mr. Collins said he opposed losing state
jobs in Juneau. He then pointed out that this proposed building
will bring diversity to downtown Juneau. Although some would
suggest that a new hotel would be a better project on the
location, The Trust is looking for a long-term return. State
government business, as the main economic engine in Juneau, is
very important because services available in Juneau wouldn't be
present without it. State government business allows Juneau, a
relatively small town, the ability to offer services that might
not otherwise be available and increases the quality of life in
Juneau. Mr. Collins related that the Juneau Chamber of Commerce
and the business community of Juneau are very happy to have
state jobs and the legislature here in Juneau. This building
will allow better department interaction and a sharing of
resources at a central location.
9:33:34 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON, upon determining no one else wished to testify,
closed public testimony.
9:33:40 AM
CO-CHAIR MUNOZ related her belief that HB 161 proposes a great
project that would serve The Trust and its beneficiaries well
while bringing much needed office space to the community. She
indicated her agreement with Mr. Collins comments regarding the
stability the building would bring to the community. She
characterized the legislation as a great opportunity for all and
expressed her hope that there would be action on the legislation
today.
9:34:27 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT said that she would like to see the lease
information prior to moving the legislation. With regard to the
participation bonds, Representative Millet highlighted that all
of the other projects/buildings discussed were state-owned
facilities. However, the facility proposed in HB 161 won't be
owned by the state.
9:35:07 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON relayed that he has asked the sponsor to work
th
with members prior to moving the legislation on March 17.
Therefore, HB 161 was held over.
9:36:25 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 9:36 a.m. to 9:39 a.m.
HB 153-OPEN MEETINGS: EXCEPTION AND DEFINITION
9:39:48 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON announced that the next order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 153, "An Act exempting municipal boards,
committees, commissions, or other similar bodies from the
requirements of conducting meetings open to the public when a
meeting is administrative or managerial in nature; and amending
the definition of 'meeting' as it relates to public governmental
meetings."
9:39:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS moved to adopt CSHB 153, Version 26-
LS0653\E, Kane, 3/5/09, as the working document. There being no
objection, Version E was before the committee.
9:40:20 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON explained that Version E tightens the concerns
about service area boards. He then related that any discussions
regarding improvements to the Open Meetings Act should be
addressed in the House Judiciary Standing Committee, the chair
of which has agreed to address. He further related his wish to
move HB 153 on to the next committee of referral.
9:41:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS highlighted that one of the difficulties
with issues pertaining to the Open Meetings Act is that it deals
with public trust and the public wants to know what's happening.
He announced that he supports this legislation, but opined that
it's important not to gloss over this topic as insignificant.
9:42:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS moved to report CSHB 153, Version 26-
LS0653\E, Kane, 3/5/09, out of committee with individual
recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER objected for discussion purposes. She
then requested an explanation as to why it's problematic to have
an open meeting on matters that are administrative or managerial
in nature.
9:42:38 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON expressed his concern that the intent of the
borough is to have legislation that addresses service area
boards without a lot of other collateral implications. He
related that this committee recognizes that service area board
members should be able to meet on the street to address, say a
clogged culvert, without posting the meeting and waiting the
specified time period before making a decision. Version E
allows the aforementioned to happen. However, the proposed
legislation tried to carve out requirements for councils,
administrative bodies, and assembly bodies. The debate on the
aforementioned needs to be addressed in the House Judiciary
Standing Committee because of the subtle impacts it may have to
the Open Meetings Act.
9:45:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER inquired as to why that debate should
only occur in the House Judiciary Standing Committee and not in
this committee.
CO-CHAIR HERRON opined that the Fairbanks North Star Borough is
using an abundance of caution in order to avoid challenges in
the future. He expressed his desire to move HB 153 to the House
Judiciary Standing Committee, which is chaired by a Fairbanks
resident.
9:46:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER, speaking as a member of this committee,
expressed her reluctance to support moving HB 153 when she
doesn't understand the ins and outs of the issue. Therefore,
she said she maintained her objection.
CO-CHAIR HERRON explained that he would like to delete the
portion of HB 153 that pertains to the Open Meetings Act and
move the portion related to municipal service area boards when
they meet solely on administrative and managerial matters. He
further explained that he tightened [paragraph] 8 because he was
concerned that there would be a degradation of meetings without
public notice. He then opined that there's no need to change
the Open Meetings Act for organizations, save service areas.
The service areas face decisions related to immediate needs for
which there would be severe consequences. Therefore, Co-Chair
Herron said that he feels comfortable reporting Version E from
committee because it addresses the service area boards without
changing the Open Meetings Act whereas the previous version of
HB 161 addressed service area boards as well as the less
important committees in municipalities.
9:49:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS called for the question.
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER surmised then that Version E is a
narrower focus than the original legislation.
CO-CHAIR HERRON replied yes, Version E is narrowed to focus on
the service area boards.
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER withdrew her objection.
9:51:18 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON then stated that he has no problem holding HB
153 for further explanation. However, he emphasized that
changes to the Open Meetings Act are very serious. He said he
didn't want to lessen the importance of a local parks and
recreation meeting or a public works meeting, which he indicated
would loosen the importance of the Open Meetings Act.
9:52:17 AM
CO-CHAIR MUNOZ pointed out that the change in language to
paragraph (8) is specific to boards such as road service area
boards and fire service area boards, which may have an immediate
need to act [prior to being able to meet public notice and
hearing requirements].
CO-CHAIR HERRON said that he wanted to take care of the
aforementioned boards without other types of boards, such as
parks and recreation boards, making decisions without following
the Open Meetings Act.
9:53:52 AM
There being no further objection, CSHB 153(CRA) was reported
from the House Community and Regional Affairs Standing
Committee.
HB 150-POWER COST EQUALIZATION
9:54:10 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON announced that the final order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 150, "An Act repealing certain provisions
relating to modifying the factors that apply to calculate the
amount of power cost equalization; providing for an effective
date by repealing the effective date of sec. 3, ch. 2, 4SSLA
2008; and providing for an effective date."
9:54:22 AM
ERIN HARRINGTON, Staff, Representative Alan Austerman, Alaska
State Legislature, speaking on behalf of the sponsor, explained
that HB 150 removes the sunset of an increased ceiling on the
power cost equalization (PCE) program that the legislature put
in place last summer. She informed the committee that PCE was
established in 1984, when the state was making significant
investments in power projects that would cause a significant
decrease in the cost of power generation in certain areas of the
state. This relates to what was eventually known as the Four
Dam Pool Dams. At the time PCE was established to equalize
power costs across the state in recognition that the state's
investment in power in certain areas couldn't necessarily be
replicated across the entire state. The program included all of
the communities in the state that generated 75 percent or more
of their power using diesel fuel, which is expensive. The
current program covers 135 communities that are served by 85
utilities, which include a number of cooperatives and single
community utilities. The largest of the cooperatives is the
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC), which has 53
communities within its utility. The PCE program has an
endowment that has been funded over the years from various
sources. Ms. Harrington explained that when the PCE program was
implemented there was a floor, which was the weighted average
for the cost of power in Juneau, Anchorage, and Fairbanks and a
ceiling of 52.5 cents. Therefore, any power generation above
the floor and beneath the ceiling was offset by the PCE program.
In 1984, the ceiling of 52.5 cents was high and there was no
concern that power generation would cost more than that.
However, since that time there have been significant increases
in oil prices that reached their peak last year, which is when
the legislature recognized the need to implement a new ceiling
and did so in the amount of $1.00. Although fuel costs have
somewhat decreased since that time, communities, particularly
those in the north, only receive fuel deliveries when the season
allows it. Therefore, those northern communities received fuel
deliveries in the summer and last summer was about the peak of
fuel generation costs and thus rural communities are still
generating power from diesel purchased last summer and paying as
much as $7 per gallon for fuel. Ms. Harrington emphasized that
essentially HB 150 removes the sunset of June 30, 2009, placed
on the $1 ceiling.
10:00:48 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON announced his intent to listen to all the
testimony today.
10:02:25 AM
ROBERT NICK, Chairman, ABC Housing Association, informed the
committee that gas prices in Bush Alaska are $7-$8 per gallon
and heating oil is just above that. In Anchorage the average
electric bill is about $80-$100, which is $.07-$.08 per kilowatt
hour (kWh) for a 2,000 square foot home in the winter using
around 1,000 kWh. In Bethel the same square foot home pays
$150-$200 for about 600 kWh of electricity with the PCE program.
However, without the help of the PCE program the costs would be
$300-$400. This winter has been one of the coldest, and in fact
some in Bush Alaska used electric appliances to heat which
correlates to the rise in the use of electricity. Moreover,
cold temperatures have increased heating fuel use, especially in
poorly built homes. Mr. Nick pointed out that almost all
families use fuel burning systems that also require electricity
to run. He related that in the lower Yukon some families paid
about $1,000 a month for electricity. He highlighted that Bush
Alaska residents are now choosing fuel over food and instructing
their children to eat breakfast and lunch at school. Many homes
have empty cupboards and refrigerators and are getting by on
purely subsistence food. As for jobs, they are lacking in rural
areas, he related. On top of all that, grocery and store items
are very expensive due to high freight and operating costs. The
high cost of consumables, he opined, will be further increased
due to the proposed 30-40 percent increase in bypass mail costs
in two months. Many village residents have limited income. In
fact, the Bethel census unemployment rate is 16.6 percent while
the Wade-Hampton unemployment rate is 22.8 percent. The Bethel
census poverty rate is 20.7 percent while the Wade-Hampton
poverty rate is 26 percent. Mr. Nick related his thankfulness
for last year's increase in the ceiling of the PCE program,
which was very helpful to the rural communities. In conclusion,
Mr. Nick requested continued funding of PCE at the cost ceiling
of $1.00 per kWh and to do so in a permanent fashion. He also
requested the legislature consider the household limit from 500
kW per month to the national average of 750 kW per month. The
regional economy is fragile and vulnerable and needs further
consideration in the PCE program, he said. He then requested
the restoration of PCE eligibility to businesses, clinics, and
other public facilities that were originally included in the
program. Without PCE, schools are struggling with very high
energy and electrical costs, maintaining utilities, and taking
away from teachers and classroom budgets, and therefore
compromising the quality of education in those schools. Mr.
Nick noted that he will provide emails from tribes in the
villages and he encouraged the members to read them.
10:11:59 AM
RICHARD JUNG, speaking as a business owner, opined that this
winter has been the worst with the high cost of fuel and
groceries. He noted that he sells the groceries and is in shock
as to what they cost. He related his desire for businesses to
be able to get a break with the PCE. Although the higher
ceiling this winter was helpful for homeowners, he said he
struggled to keep his electric usage to less than 550 kW per
month. He related that he tried an electric heater for one
month and the cost was $350; without the electric heater his
bill was only $57. As a business owner he has been able to cut
$400-$500 in electric costs per month at his business, but is
unable to reduce it further and thus has to pass on those costs
to customers.
10:14:45 AM
MEERA KOHLER, President/CEO, Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
(AVEC), related her support of HB 150. She reminded the
committee that last year the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
(AVEC) was in favor of enacting a higher ceiling to the PCE
eligible cost. Unfortunately, the ceiling was done with a
sunset date of this year. She said that she could offer fairly
graphic testimony as to the impact there will be if the ceiling
reverts back to 52.5 cents. Ms. Kohler informed the committee
that AVEC serves 53 villages, which represents a population of
22,000. When last year's fuel costs heat the village
communities, the average cost of fuel was $4.73 a gallon.
Therefore, the fuel only component of the electric costs
averages over $.37 kWh and the non-fuel costs increases the
total to $.62. Therefore, if the PCE ceiling returned to 52.5
cents, there would be an average increase of $.10 kWh to
residential users. In some communities, such as those in
western Alaska, that increase will be as high as $.25 kWh. The
higher cost will continue through October 2009. "It is silly
for the cost cap to keep fluctuating back and forth between a
$1.00 a kilowatt hour and 52.5 cents a kilowatt hour because
anybody that believes that the cost of fuel is going to stay
where it is today obviously has not paid close attention to
what's happening in the entire world," Ms. Kohler opined. The
world's supply of oil is diminishing and she predicted that once
the economy recovers there will be extremely high fuel costs for
which the $1.00 ceiling will likely not be sufficient. In
conclusion, Ms. Kohler strongly urged the extension of the PCE
cost ceiling to $1.00 per kWh.
10:18:04 AM
PATRICK SAMPSON, Low Income Home Energy Assistance Director,
Association of Village Council Presidents (ACVP), informed the
committee that AVCP is a private nonprofit tribal human services
organization that serves the 56 tribal villages of the Yukon-
Kuskokwim Delta region. In recent years, electric and fuel
costs have taken almost all of the disposable income of village
residents. As has been reported in the news media, many
families have had to choose between food and the cost of energy.
The PCE program is a priority for the region, and therefore he
requested continuation of it and the current ceiling of $1.00
per kWh. He informed the committee that residents in the region
are already paying upwards of 70 percent of their available
disposable income on energy costs. If the PCE rate decreases,
the villagers' costs will increase immediately and local
utilities will have to collect those fuel costs in order to
recover the 2008 outlay. The cost, he relayed, is transferred
to the families in the villages. Increased funding to PCE is
part of the solution as it helps to equalize energy costs
between rural and urban areas on the first 500 kW used. He then
informed the committee that only 29 percent of electricity sold
by PCE utilities is eligible for PCE while the other 71 percent
is paid for by homeowners and businesses at rates almost five
times those in urban Alaska. Additionally, Mr. Sampson
requested an increase in the household limit to the national
average of 750 kW per month. After last year's fuel prices,
virtually all of the PCE communities are over the 52.5 cents
ceiling. Mr. Sampson also requested that PCE eligibility be
restored to clinics, businesses, and other facilities that were
included in the original program. The aforementioned, he said,
is critical to keeping down inflation and increasing the
viability of local economies in rural Alaska. Mr. Sampson then
related that yesterday his office called 14 communities in the
area and discovered that the average cost of electricity is $.71
kWh, with the highest being at $.81 kWh in the Village of
Newtok.
10:23:15 AM
MICHELLE NICKLES, AVCT Energy Assistance Program, related that
she is struggling to pay utilities as they are $400-$500 per
month.
10:24:23 AM
STEVEN MAXIE, JR., testified that businesses should be eligible
for PCE at either a lower rate or the same rate as that for
residential customers otherwise the high food costs will
continue.
10:25:35 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON announced that HB 150 would be held over until
Tuesday, March 17th.
10:25:59 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Community and Regional Affairs Standing Committee meeting was
adjourned at 10:26 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| FNSB Support for HB153.pdf |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 153 |
| draft cshb153.PDF |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 153 |
| HB 150 Sectional Analysis.doc |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 150 |
| HB150 - SB4002Z.PDF |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 150 SB4002 |
| HB 150 - PCE One-Pager (3.12.09).doc |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 150 |
| HB 156 Background Part 2 Support Letters.pdf |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 156 |
| HB 156 Background Part 3 Relevant Alaska Statute.pdf |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 156 |
| HB 156 Sectional Summary.pdf |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 156 |
| HB 156 Sponsor Statement (2).docx.doc |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 156 |
| HB 150 Sponsor Statement.doc |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 150 |
| HB 161 legal memo.PDF |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 161 |
| HB 161 sponsor statement.PDF |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 161 |
| HB150-CCED PCE Overview .pdf |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 150 |
| HB150-CED-AEA(Fund Cap) 03-06-09.pdf |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 150 |
| HB150-CED-AEA-03-06-09.pdf |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 150 |
| HB150-PCE primer II (2).doc |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM |
|
| HB150TestimonyPacket.PDF |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 150 |
| HB156 Background Part 1 FNSB Ordinance.pdf |
HCRA 3/12/2009 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 156 |