Legislature(1997 - 1998)
03/09/1998 01:45 PM House FIN
Audio | Topic |
---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE March 9, 1998 1:45 P.M. TAPE HFC 98 - 58, Side 1 TAPE HFC 98 - 58, Side 2 TAPE HFC 98 - 59, Side 1 CALL TO ORDER Co-Chair Gene Therriault called the House Finance Committee meeting to order at 1:45 p.m. PRESENT Co-Chair Hanley Representative Kelly Co-Chair Therriault Representative Kohring Representative Davies Representative Martin Representative Davis Representative Moses Representative Foster Representative Mulder Representative Grussendorf ALSO PRESENT Representative Bill Williams; Juanita Hensley, Legislative Liaison, Division of Motor Vehicles, Department of Public Safety; Dennis Poshard, Legislative Liaison, Department of Transportation and Public Facilities; Chris Christensen, Staff Counsel, Alaska Court System; Barbara Huff Tuckness, Director, Legislative and Governmental Affairs, Teamsters Local 959; Frank Dillon, Executive Vice President, Alaska Trucking Association, Inc.; Laddie Shaw, Executive Director, Alaska Police Standards Council; Deb Davidson, Staff, Representative Davis. The following testified via the teleconference network: Peter Blanas, Anchorage; William Gates, Anchorage; Harry McDonald, Anchorage; Aves Thompson, Division of Measurement Standards and Commercial Vehicle Enforcement, Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, Anchorage. SUMMARY HB 28 "An Act repealing the Alaska Coastal Management Program and the Alaska Coastal Policy Council, and making conforming amendments because of those repeals." HB 28 was HELD in Committee for further consideration. HB 261 "An Act relating to a surcharge imposed for violations of state or municipal law and to the Alaska police training fund." HB 261 was HELD in Committee for further consideration. HB 404 "An Act relating to the regulation of commercial vehicles; relating to the temporary registration of out-of-state commercial vehicles; relating to registration fees for commercial vehicles; and providing for an effective date." CSHB 404 (TRA) was REPORTED out of Committee with "no recommendation" and with two fiscal impact notes, one by the Department of Administration and one by the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, both dated 2/27/98. SCR 19 Relating to the use of prototype designs in public school construction projects. HCS CSSCR 19 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with a fiscal impact note by the Department of Education, dated 2/6/98. HOUSE BILL NO. 28 "An Act repealing the Alaska Coastal Management Program and the Alaska Coastal Policy Council, and making conforming amendments because of those repeals." Co-Chair Therriault noted that HB 28 would not be heard. He stated that amendments are being drafted for a proposed committee substitute. An amendment to the legislation would change boundaries to 10 miles from the coast. A consistency determination would be required if the proposed activity outside of the boundary dealt with a water discharge. Another change would clarify that coastal districts and agencies have the authority to comment and stipulate on federal projects requiring a consistency determination. Representative Martin observed that the legislation seems to be concerned with inland waters. He maintained that city and municipal governments should be responsible for tributaries. Co-Chair Therriault pointed out that there are no local governments in many areas. SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 19 Relating to the use of prototype designs in public school construction projects. Co-Chair Therriault observed that the House version of the bill was previously reported out of the House Finance Committee. CSHCR 24 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with a fiscal impact note by the Department of Education on 2/18/98. Co-Chair Therriault provided members with a proposed committee substitute for SCR 19, Work Draft 0-LS1357\P, dated 2/27/98 (copy on file). Co-Chair Therriault noted that the work draft is identical to CSHCR 24 (FIN). Co-Chair Hanley MOVED to ADOPT Work Draft 0-LS1357\P, dated 2/27/98. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. Co-Chair Hanley MOVED to report HCS CSSCR 19 (FIN) out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. Representative Davies OBJECTED for the purpose of discussion. He stressed that prototypes should be developed with a particular project in mind to reduce costs. Representative Davies WITHDREW his objection. There being NO OBJECTION, HCS CSSCR 19 (FIN) was reported from Committee. HCS CSSCR 19 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with a fiscal impact note by the Department of Education, dated 2/6/98. HOUSE BILL NO. 261 "An Act relating to a surcharge imposed for violations of state or municipal law and to the Alaska police training fund." DEB DAVIDSON, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS testified in support of HB 261. She noted that the legislation expands a program that is already in effect. Alaska Law requires the Alaska Police Standards Council to provide training for police officers, correctional officers, probation officers and village public safety officers. In 1996, the Alaska Police Training Fund was established. Fund revenues come from surcharges imposed on motor vehicle violations. House Bill 261 expands the surcharge to all crimes and increases the amount of the surcharge. Felony convictions and bail forfeiture for felony offenses would have a surcharge of $85 dollars. Misdemeanor offenses dealing with drug and under the influence revocation of licenses would have a $75 dollar surcharge. Other misdemeanors would have a surcharge of $45 dollars. Violations and infractions would have a surcharge of $15 dollars. She noted that the legislation was amended in the House Judiciary Committee to direct judges not to consider the surcharge when imposing a fine. LADDIE SHAW, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA POLICE STANDARDS COUNCIL spoke in support of the legislation. He observed that the Alaska Police Standards Council has increased its basic training commitments. The Council supported training for 13 officers in FY 96. The Council would support up to 100 officers in training for FY 2000. Training at the Sitka Academy would increase. Fairbanks is developing a police academy and the Council is negotiating to sponsor basic training at the Anchorage Academy. The Council has also taken on the responsibility of a basic municipal corrections officer-training program held at the Anchorage Academy. In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault, Mr. Shaw observed that the proposed surcharge would be similar to those in place in Oregon. Twenty-six states run their programs with surcharges. The legislation was based on the Oregon program. Representative Davis noted that it is difficult to compare Alaska with other states. He noted that the Alaska State Troopers are not highway patrolmen. Other states have highway patrolmen. Co-Chair Therriault referred to the fiscal note by the Alaska Police Standards Council. Mr. Shaw clarified that the Council received $396.1 thousand dollars in surcharge revenues for FY 97. He estimated that $450 thousand dollars would be collected from surcharges in FY 99. The Council had an unfilled authorization of $53.9 thousand dollars. CHRIS CHRISTENSEN, STAFF COUNSEL, ALASKA COURT SYSTEM stated that the Supreme Court does not take a position on the legislation. He provided members with Amendment A (copy on file). Amendment A would neutralize the Alaska Court System's fiscal note. He explained that Alaska Court System's computer system is only capable of accounting for one surcharge. Their new computer system is estimated to be operational in two years. He observed that if everyone that was charged a surcharge paid before they left the courthouse that there would not be a problem. He noted that there are many variables in tracking fines and surcharges. Mr. Christensen observed that the Court System collects approximately $4.4 million dollars in fines and forfeitures. He noted that it would not cost any money to impose a surcharge, collect a surcharge or turn the money over to the General Fund. Accounting for the money would be costly. The amendment would provide that until the Court System's computer system is operational, an annual estimate of collected surcharges would be turned over to the legislature. Once the new computer system is operational the precise figure would be given. Mr. Christensen observed that the legislation would require a $45 dollar surcharge on misdemeanors and a $15 dollar surcharge on infractions. He pointed out that there are many offenses, technically classified as misdemeanors, which are on the bail schedule and are not subject to jail time. New residence addresses must be notified to the Division of Motor Vehicles within 30 days. Failure to do so is a misdemeanor, but since it is on the bail schedule, the maximum fine is $20 dollars. Without the amendment this would receive a $45 dollar surcharge. Mr. Christensen noted that if Amendment A is adopted that there would be a one time $5 thousand dollars cost for form redistribution. In response to a question by Representative Davies, Mr. Christensen estimated that the average fine on a misdemeanor case is $250 dollars. Fines on the bail schedule range from $15 dollars to over $100 dollars. The average fine on the bail schedule would be between $30 and $60 dollars. Felony cases generally receive jail time. In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault, Mr. Christensen suggested that "misdemeanor not on a bail forfeiture schedule" be added on page 2, line 27. "Misdemeanor, which is on the bail forfeiture schedule," could be added to page 2, line 31. Representative Davis observed that he was aware of the problem. Ms. Davidson questioned if language would be needed on line 27. She observed that subsection (3) deals with misdemeanors and violations of municipal ordinances for which a sentence of incarceration could be imposed. She did not know if misdemeanors on the bail schedule are offenses for which a sentence of incarceration could be imposed. She suggested that adding "misdemeanor" to subsection (4) could solve the problem. Representative Davies referred to page 2, line 22. He noted that AS 28.33.030 refers to operating a commercial vehicle while intoxicated. He noted that AS 23.33.033, Presumptions and Chemical Analysis of Breath or Blood, is not included. Representative Davies added that AS 28.35.030, Operating a Vehicle While Intoxicated and AS 28.35.032, Chemical Test were included, but AS 28.35.031, Implied Consent was omitted from offenses relating to driving under the influence with a non-commercial license. Ms. Davidson noted that the legislation was based on current statutes. Representative Davis provided members with Amendment B (copy on file). Ms. Davidson explained that as the legislation is currently written a $15 dollar surcharge is placed on an infraction violation for which a sentence of incarceration is not imposed. She observed that parking tickets would fall under this category. Amendment B would provide that if the fine or bail forfeiture amount were less than $30 dollars then a $5 dollar surcharge would be charged. If the fine or bail forfeiture amount were $30 dollars or more a $15 dollar surcharge would be charged. Co-Chair Therriault observed that the legislation would change the amount of revenue received by the state of Alaska. However, the legislation does not automatically authorize the expenditure to the Alaska Police Standards Council. He maintained that the expenditure should be considered with the Department of Public Safety's budget before the full House Finance Committee. Co-Chair Hanley noted that the fiscal note shows a total operating budget of $627.4 thousand dollars for FY 99. Mr. Shaw clarified that this is the amount of revenues estimated to be collected as the result of HB 261. The estimated change in revenues of $573.5 thousand dollars includes a $53.9 thousand dollar reduction for excess authorization in FY 99. The total operating budget of the Alaska Police Standards Council's budget would be approximately $1.597 million dollars. The Council's FY 98 budget is $524 thousand dollars. The proposed FY 99 budget, without HB 261, would be $627 thousand dollars. Co-Chair Hanley summarized that an additional $627 thousand dollars would be added to the FY 99 proposed budget. Co-Chair Hanley noted that persons are paying for their Community Residential Center (CRC) beds. He asked why half the money should not be diverted to the Department of Corrections to pay for prison space. Mr. Shay stressed that Alaska Police Standards Council has a responsibility to support municipal and state correctional training. The Council will be supporting training for contract jail officers. Co-Chair Hanley observed that funding for training could potentially offset some costs that the Department of Corrections or local communities have normally supported. He emphasized that there should be a corresponding decrease if the Council provides basic training that had been previously paid for by others. Co-Chair Therriault suggested that the fiscal note be zero and the operating expenses be set through the regular budget process. Representative Mulder noted that the Council would provide training for officers of the city of Valdez. Mr. Shaw noted that the community jails officer program was built with the support of the Alaska Police Standards Council. Representative Mulder observed that costs for municipal training would be shifted to the state of Alaska. Representative Davis noted that the Council provides services to all state police departments. City police will collect some of the surcharges. Ms. Davidson observed that, of 67,000 citations issued, approximately 31,000 citations were issued by cities other than Anchorage. Anchorage officers wrote approximately 14,000 citations. State Troopers wrote approximately 22,000 citations. Co-Chair Hanley observed that Anchorage would have to keep track of municipal fines. Mr. Shaw noted that the Council would support the Anchorage Academy by paying some operating costs for use of the academy and providing training. Co-Chair Hanley clarified that the Anchorage Court System would not receive funding from the surcharge. He expressed frustration that communities are being discouraged from taking control. Mr. Shaw noted that the Council sets standards for community correctional officers. The Council supports 63 percent of the police population at the Anchorage training center. Mr. Shaw spoke in support of Amendment A. He stressed that the Court could do a good job of estimating the surcharge. (Tape Change, HFC 98 -58, Side 2) Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to ADOPT Amendment A as Amendment Representative Davis MOVED to ADOPT Amendment B as Amendment 2. He stated that the amendment would lower the surcharge on parking tickets. Co-Chair Hanley questioned if there is a surcharge on parking tickets. Ms. Davidson stated that, under existing law, a surcharge is based on a violation. She did not think that there is currently a surcharge on parking tickets. She observed that the legislation would add a surcharge on infractions. She thought that parking tickets would fall under the definition of infraction. She observed that the statutes contain several types of fines for infractions. Mr. Christensen clarified that, in Anchorage, parking tickets are under the civil system. He thought that most municipalities would charge parking tickets under a civil ordinance. Tickets issued under a civil system would not receive a surcharge. Co-Chair Hanley requested information regarding violations and infractions and the dollar amounts imposed. HB 261 was HELD in Committee for further consideration. HOUSE BILL NO. 404 "An Act relating to the regulation of commercial vehicles; relating to the temporary registration of out-of-state commercial vehicles; relating to registration fees for commercial vehicles; and providing for an effective date." REPRESENTATIVE BILL WILLIAMS, SPONSOR, testified in support of HB 404. He noted that the purpose of HB 404 is to improve efficiency at the Division of Motor Vehicles and to improve efficiency and safety of freight movement into, out of, and within Alaska. Adoption of HB 404 would also allow the State to participate in the International Registration Plan. Representative Williams maintained that the current state commercial vehicle inspection law is unworkable. The bill proposes to conform the inspection program to inspection criteria found in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. Representative Williams added that HB 404 would also increase temporary fees for out-of-state trucks that operate in Alaska from $50 dollars to $350. He asserted that this would bring Alaskan fees in line with fees charged by other states and provinces issuing temporary permits. Revenue generated from this fee may be appropriated to operate weigh stations and commercial vehicle safety programs. Representative Williams observed that HB 404 would eliminate the requirement for annual registration of commercial trailers. The fees collected from the registration of commercial trailers would be transferred to the cost of registration of commercial vehicles, or 'power units'. He pointed out that the bill is revenue neutral. The change is required if Alaska wants to become part of the International Registration Plan, which allows for a simplified method of prorating fees to other jurisdictions in which Alaska commercial vehicles operate, and vice versa. The state and industry will gain substantial efficiencies by not having to issue and physically tag 20,000 commercial trailers annually. Representative William emphasized that House Bill 404 would create efficiencies in government and the private sector, and create a safer transportation environment. Representative Davies asked if there were any safety implications in respect to inspections that would not be done in the future. JUANITA HENSLEY, LEGISLATIVE LIAISON, DIVISION OF MOTOR VEHICLES, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY spoke in support of HB 404. The legislation would create efficiencies for the Division of Motor Vehicles. The Division would not be required to register 18,000 commercial trailers a year. Trailers would be registered once for a lifetime fee. Future fees would be transferred to the power units. The Division of Motor Vehicles does not inspect trailers for safety. Inspections are performed at weigh stations and through the Motor Carriers Safety Assistance Program. Co-Chair Hanley referred to page 1, lines 6 - 9. Ms. Hensley clarified that the section refers to proof of commercial vehicle insurance. Ms. Hensley observed that commercial vehicles carry $700 thousand dollars in insurance. Members questioned the difference between commercial vehicle and a vehicle for which securities are required. Ms. Hensley could not respond. Representative Mulder referred to page 3. line 8. Ms. Hensley explained that a towed vehicle is the same as a combination of motor vehicles and is still a power unit and a trailer. DENNIS POSHARD, LEGISLATIVE LIAISON, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES explained that the definition on page 3, line 8 conforms to the federal definition. The definition does not include vehicles that were not previously covered. In response to a question by Representative Davies, Mr. Poshard noted that section 20 would require a one-time registration fee of $10 dollars per trailer. Section 18 also incorporates the change. In response to a question by Representative Mulder, Mr. Poshard noted that AS 28.10.152 pertains to out-of-state vehicles that are not registered in Alaska. AVES THOMPSON, DIVISION OF MEASUREMENT STANDARDS AND COMMERCIAL VEHICLE ENFORCEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES, ANCHORAGE explained that AS 19.10.300(a) pertains to: "A commercial motor vehicle or a person that carries freight in a motor vehicle for commercial purposes or a person who rents or leases a motor vehicle for the use of another to carry freight should procure and maintain security in the following minimal amount..." Mr. Thompson noted that the statute distinguishes between the vehicle and a rented or leased vehicle. Insurance is needed in both cases. Co-Chair Hanley observed that the section is confusing. He noted that it is based on both commercial purposes and renting or leasing for freight. Mr. Thompson noted that the Division fully supports the legislation. HARRY MCDONALD, ANCHORAGE testified in support of the legislation. He noted the importance of increasing temporary licenses for out-of-state trucks. Most out-of- state trucks do business without paying any fees. He observed that there is a commitment to keep the Tok scale open all the time. He noted that he is with a local state trucking company. He pointed out that the private sector would save from not having to track trailers for annual registration. Representative Davies referred to the definition of commercial vehicle. He questioned if a commercial motor vehicle can be a towed vehicle, which implies that it doesn't have a motor. In response to a question by Representative Davies, Mr. McDonald clarified that safety inspections are separate to licensing. Safety inspections would still be required annually on the trailers. Co-Chair Therriault asked if there are many instances where a person who only owned a truck would have the expense of someone else's trailer. Mr. Thompson noted that anyone who is pulling a trailer is either being paid by someone to pull it or pulling it for hire. He felt that it would come out even in the end. Co-Chair Hanley referred to AS 19.10.300(a). Mr. Thompson noted that 26,000 pounds is the weight a vehicle requires a commercial license to drive, unless it has hazardous materials. A commercial license is required for any vehicle that is carrying hazardous materials, regardless of weight. FRANK DILLON, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, ALASKA TRUCKING ASSOCIATION, INC. explained that the commercial vehicle licensing law looks at commercial vehicles in terms of the operator's license to drive with a weight threshold of 26,000 pounds. The language on page 3, "self propelled or towed" makes sure that when the trailer is released from the further definition of registration that they are still under safety requirements for the purpose of commercial motor vehicles. The intention is that trailers are still considered commercial vehicles and required to follow inspection laws. He observed that the dollies that connect sets of trailers together are considered vehicles even though they cannot go anywhere on their own. For the purpose of insurance, definition, and commerce a trailer is considered a vehicle, not a motor vehicle. He maintained that the legislation clarifies and narrows the scope of existing statute, so that it is more understandable and enforceable than existing statute. Mr. Dillon noted that the legislation requires proof of insurance. He observed that changes were carefully made to prevent unintended consequences. The intention is to give more authority to weight station operators to do truck inspections. He stressed that persons who weigh trucks would be able to inspect them and put them out of service if they are found to be unsafe. The merger of the Commercial Vehicle Unit and the Division of Measurements and Standards into the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, which took place by executive order last year, was a step in this direction. The legislation further refines the authority. He noted that resources for inspections are still lacking. Mr. Dillon stressed that the legislation would authorize the practice of self-inspections. On the road inspections would still take place. One federal standard would apply. Inspections can also take place at a professional shop. Companies that employ professional mechanics can do inspections in house. Current statute prohibits self- inspections, but has not been enforced. Mr. Dillon noted that fees would be increased for out-of- state trucks. He observed that the Tok weigh station is open less than 40 percent of the time. A lot of trucks that come into the state do not register in the state of Alaska. If they do stop at Tok they have the choice of buying a $10 or $50 dollar permit. The legislation would require a $350 dollar 30 day renewable permit. He maintained that the fee is in line with what other states charge. He observed that $300 - $500 thousand dollars in additional fees would be collected from out-of-state trucks. The legislation contains intent language stating that this money may be appropriated for use at weigh stations. Mr. Dillon pointed out that annual registration of commercial trailers would be eliminated. There is no safety inspection attached to registration. Registration can be done electronically. The legislation takes the revenue that is collected on trailers and transfers it to corresponding weights in the power unit area. Fees for smaller trailers are transferred to smaller trucks. Fees for larger trailers would be transferred to larger trucks and tractors. The cost increase would range from $30 to $100 dollars annually. He maintained that the fee would be offset through the economic process and negotiations. More than 90 percent of Alaska's freight comes in on trailers. The Division of Motor Vehicles would save approximately 20,000 transactions. The change only refers to commercial vehicle use. Mr. Dillon referred to sections 18 and 19. He noted that license fees are paid annually or biennially. He did not think that increases in fees would place a hardship on anyone's business. He acknowledged that individuals that only own a truck would not see an economic benefit from the legislation. He pointed out that the change in trailer registration would benefit interstate commerce. He maintained that there would be increased efficiencies way through the entire state economy. (Tape Change, HFC 98 -59, Side 1) In response to a question by Representative Moses, Mr. Dillon noted that an owner operator in Anchorage who pays an increased fee of $30 dollars, grosses between $50 and $80 thousand dollars a year in 8 months. He did not think a $30 dollar increase would be a burden. There would be a maximum increase of $100 dollars per tractor. Mr. Dillon clarified that trailers owned and operated by Sea Land are registered in the state of Alaska. Out-of-state trailers would be subject to a $350 dollar fee. He asserted that the fee is not excessive. He noted that Alaska has fewer requirements and lower fees for interstate commerce than other states. He pointed out that owners would have the option of licensing their vehicles in Alaska. Mr. Dillon emphasized that the entire shift in revenue is approximately $1.6 million dollars in a $7 billion dollar economy. He reiterated that the legislation will gain substantial efficiencies. Mr. McDonald agreed that all of the Sea Land trailers are registered in Alaska. He observed that the main impact of the fee would be on trucks coming across the border. PETER BLANAS, LINE DRIVER, TEAMSTERS UNION, ANCHORAGE testified in support of HB 404. He emphasized that the legislation would charge out-of-state fees for trucks entering Alaska. He maintained that the number of out-of- state trucks have increased and are taking work away from Alaskans. He maintained that outside operators pay almost no fees. He spoke in support of full-time operation of state scales. He stressed that lack of enforcement is a factor in vehicle accidents. Scale operators also appraise drivers in regards to driving conditions and summon help in emergencies. Money collected from outside operators could be used to fund the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities' inspection program. He only received one truck inspection in the last four years. He noted that the inspection was at his own request. WILLIAM GATES, OWNER OPERATOR, SEA LAND, ANCHORAGE spoke in support of the HB 404. He emphasized the need for safety checks and full-time operation of the Tok weigh station. He noted that the Tok weigh station is not open at night or on the weekends. He stated that he could support the additional $100 dollar licensing fee in order to ensure that the inspection teams and weigh stations have sufficient funding. BARBARA HUFF TUCKNESS, DIRECTOR, LEGISLATIVE AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, TEAMSTERS LOCAL 959 testified in support of HB 404. She referred to a letter by Jerry Hood, Secretary-Treasurer, Teamsters Local 959 to Co-Chair Therriault, dated 3/6/98. She stated that their first concern is that the weigh stations be operational 24 hours a day, seven days a week. She maintained that weigh stations are open no more than 30 percent of the time. She asserted that trucks are not being inspected in a safe manner. She anticipated that some of the revenues generated by the legislation would go toward continued funding of the weigh stations. Representative Davies asked if money needs to be appropriated to open the weigh stations so that the money can be collected. Mr. Thompson clarified that the Tok weigh station was opened 24 hours, seven days a week during part of April and all of May 1997. He stated that the proceeds from the legislation would be used to fund weigh station operations and commercial vehicle safety inspections. Tok would be operated 24 hours a day, seven days a week. He noted that expected revenues would be jeopardized if the Tok weigh station is not fully operational. Mr. Dillon clarified that trailers will only pay $10 dollars for registration. Only power units would pay $350 dollars for registration. Mr. Thompson emphasized that the legislation solves some very vexing problems through private sector/government cooperation. Representative Davies provided members with Amendment 1 (copy on file). The amendment would further clarify the definition of commercial vehicles. He observed that he might pursue the amendment at a later date. Representative Davies provided members with Amendment 2 (copy on file). He explained that the amendment would add a new section. The amendment is at the request of the Department of Administration, Division of Motor Vehicles. Ms. Hensley explained that the amendment would add a new section 18. The amendment would allow non commercial trailers to be registered with a one-time fee. The trailer would not have to be reregistered unless it is sold. The amendment would cover snow machine, boat trailers, house trailers, box trailers, baggage trailers, and utility trailers. She observed that the fee could be set by the Legislature. The amendment calls for a $50 dollar fee. She observed that 78,839 trailers were registered in 1997. She observed that these trailers would only have to be registered once more unless they were sold. She emphasized that the amendment would add to the Division's efficiency. The trailers could be registered through the mail. A registration sticker would be issued for the lifetime of the trailer. Ms. Hensley clarified that trailers are currently registered biennially for $10 dollars. The lifetime registration is transferred to the new owner when the trailer is sold. The new owner would only have to pay a transfer fee. Ms. Hensley maintained that the seller would recoup the cost of the trailer's registration. Representative Kelly pointed out that the purpose of the legislation is to regulate commercial trailers and vehicles. The amendment is outside of the legislation's intent. Ms. Hensley observed that the amendment is the result of efficiency measures recommended by a reengineering team of the public and private sectors. Co-Chair Therriault questioned the financial impact of the lifetime $50 dollar fee. Ms. Hensley observed that a $50 dollar fee spread over two years would be approximately $1.9 million dollars for each of the two years. She estimated that 7,000 vehicles would be registered after the initial two-year registration. Co-Chair Therriault observed that revenues would be negatively affected in the out years. Representative Davies pointed out that there would be savings from a reduction of transactions. Ms. Hensley stressed that the Department would like to move employees from backroom operations to the front counter, in order to reduce waiting lines at Division of Motor Vehicle counters to no longer than 15 minutes. She noted that some areas have waiting times of greater than 2 hours. In response to a question by noted that transactions cost the Division between $105 to $5 dollars each. Co-Chair Hanley observed that 70,000 trailer registrations would be reduced annually. He estimated that there would be a $350 thousand dollar savings as the result of the legislation. Ms. Hensley requested that the Division of Motor Vehicles be held harmless in order to meet their service goals. Co-Chair Hanley pointed out that the savings would not appear until after the two-year registration period. Co- Chair Hanley spoke in support of the proposal. Representative Davies stated that he would be more supportive if the savings were rebated to the people making the registration. He spoke in support of reducing the registration fee. Co-Chair Therriault pointed out that registration is based on a 10-year life span. He suggested that trailers would last longer than 10 years. Representative Davis questioned if lifetime registration could be presented as a voluntary option. Co-Chair Hanley spoke against combining options. Representative William stated that he supported the amendment's concept, but requested that the issue be addressed separately. Representative Davis WITHDREW Amendment 2. Representative Foster MOVED to report CSHB 404 (TRA) out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 4:00 p.m. House Finance Committee 12 3/9/98
Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
---|