Legislature(1999 - 2000)
02/28/2000 01:48 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
February 28, 2000
1:48 P.M.
TAPE HFC 00 - 42, Side 1
TAPE HFC 00 - 42, Side 2
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Therriault called the House Finance Committee
meeting to order at 1:48 p.m.
PRESENT
Co-Chair Therriault Representative Foster
Vice Chair Bunde Representative Grussendorf
Representative Austerman Representative Moses
Representative J. Davies Representative Phillips
Representative G. Davis Representative Williams
Co-Chair Mulder
ALSO PRESENT
Kevin Hand, Staff, House Transportation Committee and
Representative Halcro; Karen Crane, Director, Division of
Libraries, Archives and Museums; Kevin Brooks, Director,
Division of Administrative Services, Department of Fish and
Game; Bea Sheppard, Board Member, Museums Alaska, Juneau;
Geron Bruce, Legislative Liaison, Department of Fish and
Game; John Manly, Staff, Representative Harris; Mike
Tibbles, Staff, Representative Therriault;
TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE
Donna Mathews, Executive Director, Museums Alaska,
Anchorage; Diane Brenner, Archivist, Anchorage Museum of
History and Art, Anchorage.
SUMMARY
HB 206 "An Act relating to the migratory game bird
conservation tag, to a nonresident combined sport
fishing and hunting license, to the nonresident
military small game and sport fishing license, to
applications for certain licenses, tags, and
permits issued by the Department of Fish and Game,
and to duplicate crewmember licenses."
HB 206 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration. HB 206 was assigned to a
subcommittee consisting of: Representative Mulder
as chair and Representatives Phillips and
Grussendorf.
HB 218 "An Act relating to property loaned to or held by
museums."
zero fiscal note by the Department of Education
and Early Development.
HB 243 "An Act relating to taxes on motor fuel used in or
on boats and watercraft; and providing for an
effective date."
HB 243 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
HOUSE BILL NO. 243
"An Act relating to taxes on motor fuel used in or on
boats and watercraft; and providing for an effective
date."
KEVIN HAND, STAFF, HOUSE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE AND
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO testified in support of the
legislation on behalf of the sponsor. He observed that the
State of Alaska has currently been attempting to divest
itself of the ownership and maintenance and operation
obligations for many of Alaska's harbors. He maintained that
the legislation encourages local governments to assume that
responsibility. The legislation generates revenue for
municipalities that assume local responsibility of ownership
for their port and harbor facilities.
Mr. Hand emphasized that the bill reduces the state marine
fuel tax in a qualified municipality to 2 cents from the
current 5 cents, and allows the local governing body to
impose their own 3 cent tax, the revenue from which could
then be used for maintenance and operation obligations.
Mr. Hand observed that this process comes with specific
caveats required of the local entity. A qualified
municipality must:
- Assume possession and responsibility for operation
and maintenance of all state port and harbor
facilities within its boundaries - except those
owned by a public corporation or a state agency and
used for state purposes: the Alaska Marine Highway
System and the Alaska Railroad corporation (both
operate dock facilities around the state).
- The state shall not retain any maintenance and
operation obligation or liability for the operation
of these facilities
- The local government must adopt municipal ordinances
that dedicate these revenues to be used in their
harbors.
Mr. Hand asserted that the legislation represents an
efficient "user-pay" system since part of the revenue
generated from fuel purchases will return to benefit the
harbor where the fuel was purchased. The tax on the consumer
remains constant; the effective 5-cent tax per gallon will
remain consistent throughout the state.
Mr. Hand maintained that the implementation of HB 243 would
encourage small communities around the state to gain local
control of their harbors and free the Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities of maintenance and
operation obligations. He acknowledged that the legislation,
in its current form, has some working difficulties. He
suggested that the bill be placed in a subcommittee to hash
out the remaining problems.
Co-Chair Therriault noted that the legislation only pertains
to maintenance and operation. He observed that the intent
has been to turn facilities over to municipalities and asked
that the subcommittee consider if there is a way to dedicate
a revenue stream for local municipalities to pay for
improvements, in order to remove the state from the process
a step earlier. He noted that Co-Chair Mulder has expressed
concern over the loss of revenues to the state of Alaska and
noted that revenue loss needs to be balanced with a
reduction in responsibility.
In response to a question by Representative Foster, Mr. Hand
observed that there is an indeterminate fiscal note. The tax
is imposed at the local level. The department estimates a
possible loss of $3.7 million dollars.
Co-Chair Therriault appointed a subcommittee consisting of
Representative Mulder as chair and Representatives Phillips
and Grussendorf.
HB 206 was heard and HELD in Subcommittee for further
consideration.
HOUSE BILL NO. 206
"An Act relating to the migratory game bird
conservation tag, to a nonresident combined sport
fishing and hunting license, to the nonresident
military small game and sport fishing license, to
applications for certain licenses, tags, and permits
issued by the Department of Fish and Game, and to
duplicate crewmember licenses."
JOHN MANLY, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS testified in
support of the legislation. He noted that the legislation is
a general cleanup bill for technical problems within the
Department of Fish and Game. A significant portion of the
bill deals with changing "waterfowl" conservation tags to
"migratory game bird" tags. The definition would be expanded
to include snipes and cranes, which are not currently
covered.
Mr. Manly noted that other sections of the bill would make
statutes consistent with current practices. Section three
requires formerly exempt holders of $5 licenses and free
disabled veteran licenses to register in the National
Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program, through one of
two methods.
Section 4 would create a combination 7-day hunting and
fishing license for nonresidents, a popular combination that
is more convenient for those visitors who want to hunt and
fish during a short stay.
Section 5 would equalize the fees paid by nonresident
military personnel for small game and sport fishing
licenses. Currently, the fee for a nonresident military
license is higher than the fee for ordinary nonresidents.
The final significant change in section 16 would authorize
the Department of Fish and Game to issue a duplicate
commercial-fishing crewmember license for $5.
Co-Chair Therriault clarified that section 16 is a
replacement fee in case of loss. Additional language was
added to conform statutes to changes made in section 3.
In response to a question by Representative Austerman, Mr.
Manly clarified that wording in section 4 utilizes current
statutory language.
Representative Phillips noted that the legislation joins
crew licenses and migratory birds. She questioned if the
legislation would run afoul of the single subject rule. Mr.
Manley did not think the legislation would conflict with the
single subject rule.
GERON BRUCE, LEGISLATIVE LIAISON, DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND
GAME observed that the legislation was offered on behalf of
the Department of Fish and Game. He explained that the
change would help with conservation efforts. Snipes and
cranes are harvested in a number of states. Their inclusion
would provide information on their harvest and the impact of
harvest. They are not included under current statutes.
Mr. Bruce referred to sections 8 and 9. He observed that
vendors must swear an oath; vendors essentially act as a
notary. Since vendors are not setup to swear oaths, the
provision has not been enforced. This language would be
deleted.
Co-Chair Therriault referred to section 4. He emphasized
that the legislature must make the policy decision of
whether or not to authorize consolidated licenses. There is
no discount for the combination of licenses. He noted that
any combination of licenses could occur. If the language is
retained an amendment would be needed on page 3, line 12 to
clarify that it is a seven day sport fishing and "annual"
hunting license.
Mr. Bruce emphasized that the department has heard from
vendors and guides, who support this combination. The
combination would be convenient for persons visiting the
state of Alaska. It is a customer driven combination. Vice
Chair Bunde noted that residents can currently buy a number
of combination licenses. There is only one accommodation for
non-residents. Co-Chair Therriault observed that residents
do not have the time limit. He did not think requiring two
licenses would be a burden.
Vice Chair Bunde stressed that the combination license would
save administrative time and money. Representative Phillips
echoed remarks of Vice Chair Bunde and added that she has
sold licenses and stressed that one piece of paper is more
convenient.
Representative Austerman spoke in support of the combination
license. He questioned if a game animal outside of the
license could be taken under section 4. Mr. Bruce explained
that nonresident hunters can already take a different game
animal. The language is included for consistency. In
response to a question by Representative Austerman, Mr.
Bruce affirmed that an elk hunter could shoot a deer while
hunting for elk.
Co-Chair Therriault suggested that section 5 be amended to
list the cost of each type of license. Mr. Bruce noted that
nonresident military personnel stationed in the state of
Alaska can purchase a small game hunting license for $20
dollars, the same rate as a resident; and nonresident
military personnel stationed in the state of Alaska can
purchase a sport fishing license for $15 dollars, at the
same rate as a resident.
Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to ADOPT "annual" on line 12, page
3 before "hunting". There being NO OBJECTION, it was so
ordered.
Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to ADOPT a conceptional amendment
to clarify that nonresident military personnel stationed in
the state of Alaska may obtain a small game hunting license
for $20 dollars and an annual sport-fishing license for $15
dollars.
In response to a question by Representative Austerman, Mr.
Bruce explained that the intent is to offer the license at
the lowest rate available.
Representative Austerman questioned if the amendment was
necessary.
Mr. Bruce clarified that when the license fees for residents
and nonresidents were raised, the resident rate for a small
game-hunting license became more expensive than a
nonresident license. The intent is to offer nonresident
military personnel stationed in the state of Alaska the
lowest rate. The license only authorizes hunting of small
game such as rabbits and birds.
Vice Chair Bunde observed that the license would allow
persons to enjoy hunting at a reasonable rate until they get
their residency.
Co-Chair Therriault WITHDREW his amendment.
Representative Phillips questioned if there is a problem
with the single subject rule. Mr. Bruce stated that the
drafter has not indicated that there would be a problem with
the single subject law.
Representative Austerman stated that he understood the
intent but felt that military personnel already receive
sufficient perks.
Co-Chair Therriault asked if the legislation was offered to
meet federal law mandating fees charged to military
personnel.
KEVIN BROOKS, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES,
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME provided information relating to
HB 206. He explained that the legislation would comply with
federal law.
Co-Chair Therriault noted that federal law might dictate the
perks.
HB 206 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
HOUSE BILL NO. 218
"An Act relating to property loaned to or held by
museums."
Co-Chair Therriault provided members with a proposed
committee substitute, work draft 1-LS0786\D, 2/28/00 (copy
on file).
Mr. Hand testified in support of the legislation on behalf
of the sponsor. He acknowledged the good job that Alaska's
many museums do in preserving the state's rich cultural
heritage. Unfortunately, there are numerous artifacts in
Alaska's museums that are currently in a quandary because
the owners or lender of the property have lost contact with
the museum. Lenders pass away or move without maintaining
notice with the museum. Sometimes, there is little or no
documentation as to the origins of items. This leaves
museums in a difficult position since without contact with
the lender or defined ownership by the museum, it is very
difficult to properly care for these artifacts. Artifacts
require care and maintenance over time. Some artifacts
require maintenance/upkeep that could be potentially
damaging to the property. It is even possible that an item
has degenerated to a point where the best thing to do, is to
dispose of the property. Without contact with the lender,
museums are put in the unenviable position of having to care
for these items without authority to do so. He maintained
that museums cannot reasonably be expected to properly care
for an item while simultaneously incurring liability for
doing so. House Bill 218 establishes a process through which
museums may clarify title on unclaimed objects.
Mr. Hand outlined the process through which museums may
clarify title on unclaimed objects. At least 7 years must
have passed after the expiration date of the loan without
any contact between the lender and museum. The museum must
first send a notice by certified mail, return receipt
requested, to the lender's last known address. If, after 30
days, no notice of delivery has been received, the museum
then publishes notices for a period of 4 weeks in a general
circulation newspaper in the area of the museum and in the
area of the lender's last known address:
- The notice states that the museum intends to take
title to the property.
- The bill specifically stipulates the information
that must be included in the notices.
Mr. Hand explained that if no response is received within a
period of 65 days, the museum then sends another certified
mailing to the last known address of the lender. If again
there is no response, the museum then undertakes another
round of newspaper notices for a period of two weeks. A
lender still has legal recourse through a reclamation period
of 2 years after the museum has taken title to the property.
The bill also stipulates that a museum must take responsible
steps in order to keep proper written records regarding
loaned property, including notifying any lenders about a
change of location of the museum. Also, under this act,
museums must notify all new lenders of this statute.
Mr. Hand concluded that the legislation provides for a
course of action museums can follow in order to alleviate
very serious problems that seemingly every museum in the
state is encountering. There is strong support from those in
the museum community who are working very hard to preserve
Alaska's cultural heritage.
Vice Chair Bunde questioned if notification costs could be
absorbed with a zero fiscal note. He questioned how many
certified letters would be sent to artifact owners. Mr. Hand
observed that the department felt that the cost of newspaper
notification would be minimal and could be included in the
cost of doing business. He did not know how many letters
would have to be sent.
Vice Chair Bunde asked if loan contract agreements have
provisions for forfeiture. Mr. Hand did not know. He added
that the legislation would address undocumented items.
MIKE TIBBLES, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT provided
information regarding the proposed committee substitute. He
noted that the first change occurred in section 2 of the
bill. Section 2(a)(1) and (2) differentiate between loans
with and without expiration dates. Redundant language was
taken out of section 2(a)(2); the museum can take possession
if there is no expiration date and seven years have passed.
The telephone number of the museum representative was added
in subsection (b) on line 11, page 2.
Mr. Tibble continued to explain changed made in the proposed
committee substitute. The third change occurred on line 21,
page 2: "or" was added to clarify that notice would be
provided by newspaper in the judicial district the museum is
located and in the judicial district in which the lender's
last known address or the county, borough or geographical
organization of their last known address. The final change
was on page 3, line 9: "at least" before "once a week" was
added to provide consistency.
Mr. Hand observed that the requirement for a telephone
number was also added on page 4, line 5; and "at least" was
also added page 4 and line 10. The sponsor agreed with the
changes made in the proposed committee substitute.
Vice Chair Bunde MOVED to ADOPT work draft 1-LS0786\D,
2/28/00. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative Austerman questioned how estates would be
handled. Mr. Hand clarified in the case of an estate that
the heirs would be the titleholder of the property.
Representative Phillips questioned why seven years was
chosen and asked if it would be retroactive. Mr. Hand
explained that the provision would be in affect for items
that have been in the museum's custody for the previous
seven years without contact from the lender. They would not
have to begin another 7-year period. The seven-year period
was chosen arbitrarily based on provisions in other states.
KAREN CRANE, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF LIBRARIES, ARCHIVES AND
MUSEUMS spoke in support of HB 218. She observed that out of
25,000 objects that there are 85 objects that would be
affected; 24 are unclaimed; the rest are undocumented.
(TAPE CHANGE, HFC 00 - 42, SIDE 2)
Ms. Crane explained that the cost of contacting owners would
occur over a number of years. She did not anticipate that
all 85 objects would be addressed in the first year. She
observed that old airplane parts are among the unclaimed
objects. These could be transferred or sold. It is expensive
to maintain objects that the state does not hold title to.
The legislation would cleanup problems encountered by the
department.
Representative J. Davies asked if there is a problem with
the affective date of the bill. Ms. Crane indicated that
effective date is not a problem.
Vice Chair Bunde asked about forfeiture provisions. Ms.
Crane responded that there is a forfeiture provision
containing the same seven-year period. The timeline chosen
for the legislation was modeled after the American
Association of Museums.
DONNA MATHEWS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MUSEUMS ALASKA, ANCHORAGE
testified via teleconference in support of the legislation.
She noted that the legislation would affect private museums
around the state. All museums have some items that cannot be
cared for, disposed of or transferred to other interested
parties. The legislation provides strong guidelines for
future practices and is clear and specific.
DIANE BRENNER, ARCHIVIST, ANCHORAGE MUSEUM OF HISTORY AND
ART, ANCHORAGE testified via teleconference in support of
the legislation. She noted that in 1969 an old organ was
brought to the museum for a temporary display. The owners
disappeared. The museum wishes to dispose of the organ. The
legislation would allow for disposal.
BEA SHEPPARD, BOARD MEMBER, MUSEUMS ALASKA, JUNEAU testified
in support of the legislation. She noted that Museums Alaska
has supported the change for many years. She observed that
abandoned property must be handled by an auction. In many
cases museums wish to retain the property or turn them over
to other museums.
Representative Austerman questioned if there is a policy of
trying to contact heirs. Ms. Sheppard responded that in many
cases the museum does not know whom to contact.
Co-Chair Therriault asked if the current practice is to
enter into a written agreement. Ms. Crane explained that the
current practice is to accept loans for a period of a year;
if the museum desires to keep the object longer the loan is
renegotiated. It is easier to find the heirs to the estate
or the legal owners after only a year.
Co-Chair Therriault provided members with a timeline showing
the proposed schedule for acquisition (copy on file). He
questioned if the process could be streamlined. Ms. Crane
stressed the relationship of trust with owners and donors.
Ms. Sheppard observed that the legislation is based on
similar legislation in other states. She felt that the
legislation is a good compromise and emphasized the need for
private institutions.
Vice Chair Bunde asked if the contract requires owners to be
contacted at the end of a year. Ms. Crane noted that the
obligation is on the museum to contact donors. Notification
occurs before the year has ended.
Vice Chair Bunde observed that museums would obtain title to
objects that are in need of care and that there would be
additional costs associated with the assumption of these
objects.
Co-Chair Therriault asked if the museum could take
possession prior to seven years. Ms. Crane interpreted the
legislation to require the museum to wait for seven years
before taking possession. Ms. Crane felt that seven years is
a reasonable period and reiterated the need to maintain
trust with owners. She did not feel that the problem would
occur in the future. Ms. Sheppard noted that the one-year
period only pertained to the state museum and that there are
up to 70 other museums in the state.
Representative J. Davies asked if the legislation would
preclude museums from entering into different contract
arrangements. Ms. Crane responded that the museum would
follow state guidelines.
Co-Chair Therriault did not know if passage of the
legislation would preclude other contractual provisions.
Co-Chair Therriault observed that the museum would take
possession before the requirement for the second notice
expired. Ms. Crane thought that the legislation would
provide for possession after the 65th day.
Co-Chair Therriault questioned if the Committee would prefer
a timeline that would be shorter and less expensive.
Vice Chair Bunde spoke in support of a compromise between 60
days and seven years. Co-Chair Therriault clarified that it
was not his intent for the museum to take possession as soon
as the expiration of the contract occurred. Vice Chair Bunde
noted that the Department of Public Safety has a one-year
time period for dealing with property that comes into their
possession.
Vice Chair Bunde asked how many items the state museum has
acquired in the last seven years without a contract. Ms.
Crane stated that there have not been any acquisitions
without a contract in the last seven years.
Representative G. Davis pointed out that the statute would
be unnecessary after the backlogs of past acquisitions have
been addressed.
Representative J. Davies expressed concern that museums not
be precluded from entering into shorter contracts. Page 5,
line 11 states that the provisions in the legislation would
govern over conflicts in other state law.
Co-Chair Therriault did not expect that the museum would
hear from anyone that has not contacted them over the past
seven years. He questioned if the expense of two newspaper
notifications was warranted. He stressed that the intent is
to take care of the backlog of items and felt that the
legislation could be streamlined to shorten the time period
and reduce the costs of notification.
Ms. Crane acknowledged that the intent of the legislation is
to address old objects. Ms. Sheppard agreed that the concern
is to take care of the backlog.
Co-Chair Therriault acknowledged that the intent is to
address backlog but pointed out that the legislation would
pertain to future purchases as well.
HB 218 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 3:05 p.m.
House Finance Committee 11 2/28/00
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|