Legislature(2009 - 2010)HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/18/2009 08:30 AM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB116 | |
| SB125 | |
| HB36 | |
| HB157 | |
| SB72 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 116 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 125 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 36 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 72 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 157 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
April 18, 2009
8:44 a.m.
8:44:36 AM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Stoltze called the House Finance Committee meeting
to order at 8:44 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Mike Hawker, Co-Chair
Representative Bill Stoltze, Co-Chair
Representative Bill Thomas Jr., Vice-Chair
Representative Allan Austerman
Representative Harry Crawford
Representative Anna Fairclough
Representative Les Gara
Representative Reggie Joule
Representative Mike Kelly
Representative Woodie Salmon
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Richard Foster
ALSO PRESENT
Senator Linda Menard; Jay Livey, Staff, Senator Lyman
Hoffman; Ron Kreher, Chief of Field Services, Division of
Public Assistance, Department of Health and Social
Services; Jeff Stepp, Staff, Senator Joe Paskvan;
Representative Kyle Johanson; Ginger Blaisdell, Director,
Division of Administrative Services, Department of Revenue;
Senator Hollis French; Tim Lamkin, Concerned Parent; Mary
Siroky, Special Assistant, Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Bob Charles, Association of Village Council Presidents;
Dale Nash, Chief Executive Officer, Alaska Aerospace
Development Corporation; Ronnie Sullivan, Emergency Medical
Service Provider; Jane Fellman, Coordinator, Safe Kids,
Kenai; John Cook, Legislative Director, Alaska Auto Dealers
Association; Margaret Hayashi, Emergency and Critical Care
Nurse; Janice Tower, Alaska Chapter of the American Academy
of Pediatrics; Gordon Glaser; Gordon Glaser.
SUMMARY
HB 36 "An Act prohibiting initiatives that are
substantially similar to those that failed within
the previous two years; relating to financial
disclosure reporting dates for persons, groups,
and nongroup entities that expend money in
support of or in opposition to initiatives,
initiative information contained in election
pamphlets, initiative petitions, initiative
petition circulators, and public hearings for
initiatives; and requiring a standing committee
of the legislature to consider initiatives
scheduled for appearance on the election ballot."
HB 36 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
HB 157 "An Act amending the State Personnel Act to place
in the exempt service the chief economist and
state comptroller in the Department of Revenue
and certain professional positions concerning oil
and gas within the Department of Natural
Resources; relating to reemployment of and
benefits for or on behalf of reemployed retired
teachers and public employees by providing for an
effective date by amending the delayed effective
date for secs. 3, 5, 9, and 12, ch. 57, SLA 2001
and sec. 19, ch. 50, SLA 2005; and providing for
an effective date."
CS HB 157(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with
a "do pass" recommendation and with attached new
indeterminate fiscal note by the Department of
Revenue, zero note 2 by the Department of Natural
Resources, and zero note 4 by the Department of
Administration.
CS SB 72(STA)
"An Act relating to use of child safety seats and
seat belts."
HCS CSSB 72(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee
with no recommendation and attached zero note 1
by the Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities.
CS SB 116(FIN)
"An Act making a special appropriation for energy
assistance for Alaska residents; and providing
for an effective date."
CS SB 116(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with
a "do pass" recommendation.
SB 125 "An Act changing the name of the Alaska Aerospace
Development Corporation to Alaska Aerospace
Corporation."
SB 125 was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with attached fiscal
note 1 by the Department of Commerce, Community
and Economic Development.
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 116(FIN)
"An Act making a special appropriation for energy
assistance for Alaska residents; and providing for an
effective date."
8:47:24 AM
JAY LIVEY, STAFF, SENATOR LYMAN HOFFMAN, stated that SB 116
required a one-time appropriation of $9 million to assist
Alaskans in paying for energy costs. Although the amount of
fuel was abundant, the cost of fuel has forced families to
make difficult budgetary choices, and has been compounded
by lower than average yearly incomes. In 1990, fuel costs
in Bethel were 45 percent higher than fuel costs in
Anchorage, by 2007, the differential was 92 percent. The
one-time appropriation would be divided between the Low
Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), and the
Alaska Heating Assistance Program (AKHAP). Both programs
provide state-wide assistance. Approximately 162
communities are served. Communities with recipients
include; Anchorage, Palmer, Wasilla, North Pole and Homer.
He added that some areas of rural Alaska are served by
tribal programs as well.
Mr. Livey detailed the criteria set out for residents to
establish enough points to qualify for assistance under the
two programs. The applicant must be a state resident and
must live in the home in which the heating costs occur. Set
income guidelines must also be met. Each applicant would be
assigned a number of points based on the climate in the
area in which they live, which would be assessed by degree
days in the area. The number of disabled and elderly in the
household would also be considered. The requirements
determine that the assistance would be rewarded to those
with the highest need. In addition, the assistance money,
determined by the application points, would be distributed
directly to the vendor and not the individual applicant.
8:52:27 AM
Mr. Livey noted that The Department of Health and Social
Services (DHSS) would initiate a final check run in April
of 2009. This would allow enough time for the appropriated
funds to become available to those with established vendor
accounts, or who become eligible before April 2009. This
would assist families with fuel debts from the winter of
2009 in paying existing debts and continue to afford heat
through the spring.
Mr. Livey furthered that based on the amount of federal and
state funds DHSS had to spend on heating assistance, he
could calculate that $220 was spent per applicant point.
The average number of points is 15, which equals $3300 for
heating assistance in 2009. If the resident pays $6.50 per
gallon for 84 gallons per month, or 507 gallons total
during the winter months, and uses 150 gallons per month,
the existing program will only pay 56 percent of the
heating need. He thought that the additional assistance was
not extravagance for the state.
8:55:37 AM
Representative Fairclough wondered if one household could
receive assistance from both LIHEAP and AKHAP
simultaneously. Mr. Livey replied that it would depend on
the family's income. The qualification would be based on
the federal poverty level. He added that AKHAP was funded
through general state funds and LIHEAP was funded
federally.
Representative Fairclough requested further clarification.
Mr. Livey explained that the funding for LIHEAP cannot be
used to fund AKHAP, but the funds for AKHAP can be used for
LIHEAP. If a family of four earns under $40,000 per year,
funding may be combined from both programs, but would be
distributed under LIHEAP. If the family's income exceeds
$40,000, general funds must be used under AKHAP.
Representative Fairclough asked how many families under
each program receive combined funds. Mr. Livey guessed that
13,000 families in the state are served by both programs;
90 percent of the families are under the poverty line.
8:58:22 AM
Representative Joule queried what percentage of a family's
available income, throughout the state, is spent on energy
costs. Mr. Livey replied that he did not have the exact
percentages. He believed that the percentages were
significantly higher in rural Alaska.
Representative Joule thought that the elderly and disabled
should be the first to qualify for assistance. He told
story of two elderly people who needed assistance but did
not qualify for AKHAP. He worried that the funds were not
going to those who needed the assistance most. He wondered
if the point system could be negatively manipulated.
9:01:36 AM
Mr. Livey responded that the program used to assign points
has a component that provides extra points to the elderly
and disabled. He added that income does factor into the
determination of points.
Representative Joule asked about CITGO, which provides fuel
assistance to Alaska Native families. He wondered how long
the program had been in effect, what was the cost, and who
was eligible. Mr. Livey understood that CITGO had provided
some fuel to a few communities in 2008, and was expected to
again in May 2009. Through regional corporations, some
communities had accepted the fuel, some did not.
Representative Joule asked if the cost of the program was
known. Mr. Livey replied no.
Representative Crawford questioned the ratio of federal to
state dollars for the individuals under the federal poverty
level. Mr. Livey explained that the money is melded and a
dollar value is assigned per point. A family under $40,000
would receive one dollar, which would be combination of
both federal and state money, per point. A family above
$40,000 per year would receive only state money.
9:05:02 AM
Representative Crawford asked for further clarification on
the ratio of melded state and federal funds. Mr. Livey
thought that the ratio was 2/3 federal dollars and 1/3
state dollars.
Vice-Chair Thomas asked if two families, living together in
one household, could qualify for assistance. Mr. Livey
understood that one application was allowed per house.
Vice-Chair Thomas said that when AGIA was moved out of
committee in 2007, intent language had been written into
the bill that would have allocated $60,000 per year into
LIHEAP. The Senate Finance Committee removed the intent
language. He felt that that action may be connected to the
funding problems the programs currently face.
RON KREHER, CHIEF OF FIELD SERVICES, DIVISION OF PUBLIC
ASSISTANCE, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES,
explained that families below 150 percent of poverty
receive 100 percent federal funds, and families above
receive 100 percent state funds. The appropriation of $10
million for FY 2008, stipulated that the funds be used for
heating assistance programs. At the end of the program year
the department examines the number of households served by
the programs. Surplus funds are used as supplemental
payments. The $10 million would be spread out between
LIHEAP recipients and AKHAP recipients. The amount of state
versus federal funds distributed would depend on where
families fell on the poverty line.
Representative Joule proposed that the department
manipulate the point system to ensure assistance to the
elderly and the disabled.
9:10:14 AM
Mr. Kreher felt that manipulation of the point system would
require regulatory changes. With the creation of AKHAP, and
the pushing up of income limits to 225 percent of poverty,
any household that is income ineligible for the program has
an income in excess of the limited amount. The income
qualifications do not currently take into consideration how
the income budgeted. He thought that the number of
households at the higher end of the income bracket may be
dropping of in assistance use because their gross income
exceeds the limits set forth by the program. The program
also requires seasonal incomes to be annualized, which can
put a family above the income limit.
Representative Joule stated his support for the provision,
but reiterated concerns regarding people in need who are
denied assistance. Mr. Kreher replied that the department
would work with the legislature to remedy the concerns
regarding elderly and disabled persons with need.
Representative Joule expressed excitement for the
collaborative effort.
9:14:37 AM
Representative Gara asked if federal portion of the LIHEAP
program was funded at $10 million. Mr. Kreher replied that
the program received $22 million in federal funds,
including emergency contingency funds, and an increased
black grant amount.
Representative Gara asked if the federal portion would be
closer to $10 million, in a year without a federal stimulus
package. Mr. Kreher replied yes.
Representative Gara asked how many LIHEAP applications were
filed each year. Mr. Kreher shared that 2008 had been
unusual, with 37 percent more applications filed than in
previous years. This was because of the poor economy, but
also marketing efforts by the department. Of the 9,000
applications that have been processed, the majority are
well below poverty level.
Representative Gara asked how many applications the
department expected to receive by the end of 2009. Mr.
Kreher thought it could be 16,000.
Representative Gara asked how much assistance each
applicant would receive. Mr. Kreher answered that in rural
Alaska the average household received $4,000. A very low
income household in an urban setting received $900.
9:17:53 AM
Representative Salmon commented on the 15 point system. He
wondered if 15 points was the maximum amount of points that
could be received. Mr. Kreher answered that the maximum
number of points that could be received was 32, the minimum
was 2.
Representative Salmon what were the qualifications that
would earn the applicant 15 points. Mr. Kreher said that
the points were based on community heating points,
calculated based on location and heating degree days. For
example, heating points for Willow is 7; there are
additional points for children, elderly, and disabled. The
factor is also based on housing type, such as size. Where a
family falls in the poverty income brackets also determines
the percentage of points.
Representative Salmon asked if there were points given
based on distance from urban centers. Mr. Kreher said that
the points were based on heating degree days and where the
community is located, including being on the road system.
Representative Kelly wondered how the effective date ending
FY 2009 related to FY 2008.
Mr. Livey understood that the bill would provide a one-time
appropriation to fund the department's last check run of FY
2009. The money would be obligated by June 30, 2009.
Representative Kelly asked how much state funding had been
given to the program in 2008. Mr. Livey replied $10
million.
9:22:21 AM
BOB CHARLES, ASSOCIATION OF VILLAGE COUNCIL PRESIDENTS
testified via teleconference, spoke in support of the
legislation.
Representative Kelly expressed frustration with the bill.
He opined that there had been significant discussion about
the one-time nature of past appropriations. He considered
it an entitlement that would be expected in perpetuity. He
understood the need, but was upset about provisions that
purport to be one-time. He thought federal funding should
only be used to help the truly needy. He cited statistics
around the state regarding use of state and federal funds.
9:28:28 AM
Representative Salmon pointed out to the committee that
state funds have been made available to urban areas for
energy assistance in the past. He felt that the rural areas
of the state had been treated unfairly. He felt that a
long-term solution had been established in urban areas and
he wanted the same solutions for rural areas.
Representative Gara recognized that the Healy coal plant
had been heavily subsidized over the years. He surmised
that the reason there was no road money in rural areas was
because there are no roads. He emphasized that the
assistance funds that were distributed in rural Alaska were
necessary, not extravagant, and should not be limited to a
one-time commitment. He stated that he did not vote for a
one-time commitment.
9:32:37 AM
Representative Kelly countered that Fairbanks does not have
a hydro plant. He maintained his position on the
legislation.
Co-Chair Stoltze MOVED to report CS SB 116(FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CS SB 116(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation.
9:33:39 AM RECESSED
9:47:15 AM RECONVENED
SENATE BILL NO. 125
"An Act changing the name of the Alaska Aerospace
Development Corporation to Alaska Aerospace
Corporation."
9:47:36 AM
JEFF STEPP, STAFF, SENATOR JOE PASKVAN, SPONSOR, explained
that the bill was an act that would change the name of the
Alaska Aerospace Development Corporation to the Alaska
Aerospace Corporation.
Representative Austerman expressed support for the bill.
Co-Chair Stoltze asked if the funds reflected in the fiscal
note were federal funds. Mr. Stepp replied that it was all
federal receipts.
Representative Crawford wondered why the name change was
necessary. Mr. Stepp explained that the facility has
evolved, from when it was created in 1991, from a
development facility, to fully functioning launch facility.
The name change would reflect that evolution.
Co-Chair Stoltze opened public testimony.
DALE NASH, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ALASKA AEROSPACE
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, testified via teleconference, he
spoke in support of the legislation. He said the name
change would add clarification as to the nature of the work
performed at the facility.
9:53:02 AM
Co-Chair Stoltze closed public testimony.
Co-Chair Hawker MOVED to report SB 125 out of Committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
SB 125 was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with attached fiscal note 1 by the
Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development.
HOUSE BILL NO. 36
"An Act prohibiting initiatives that are substantially
similar to those that failed within the previous two
years; relating to financial disclosure reporting
dates for persons, groups, and nongroup entities that
expend money in support of or in opposition to
initiatives, initiative information contained in
election pamphlets, initiative petitions, initiative
petition circulators, and public hearings for
initiatives; and requiring a standing committee of the
legislature to consider initiatives scheduled for
appearance on the election ballot."
9:54:10 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KYLE JOHANSON, SPONSOR, explained that the
presentation was to allow a full vetting of the concepts in
the bill, to be contemplated during the interim.
Representative Johanson reviewed sectional analysis (Copy
on File). Section 1 refers to disclosure of money going
into the initiative process. If more than $500 is spent,
the process of disclosure begins, which would inform the
public who is contributing to the changing of state
statute. Sections 2 and three contain conforming language.
Section 4 removes initiative from AS 15.13.110e and moves
it into Section 5. Section 6 reexamines contribution
disclosure; how money is reported to the public after it is
put into the system. Section 7 remains the same. Section 8
was included by the Judiciary Committee. Section 9 requires
that all signature gatherers have a complete copy of the
initiative on their person, at all times, while collecting
signatures. Section 10 discusses the change in the $1 per
signature payment method to an hourly payment method.
Research shows that the hourly method allows for honest
signature collection and the possibility for discressionary
bonuses. Section 11 discusses the requirement for two
public hearings, in all four judicial districts, on the
initiative, before the Lieutenant Governor announces that
it will go to the ballot. This would allow for intention to
be understood before an election takes place. He summarized
that the intention of the bill was to allow for a better
informed electorate.
10:02:40 AM
Representative Johanson urged members to look at the
legislation in the interim. He looked forward to discussion
and debate of the bill in the 2010 session.
SS HB 36 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
10:05:00 AM AT EASE
10:19:45 AM RECONVENED
HOUSE BILL NO. 157
"An Act amending the State Personnel Act to place in
the exempt service the chief economist and state
comptroller in the Department of Revenue and certain
professional positions concerning oil and gas within
the Department of Natural Resources; relating to
reemployment of and benefits for or on behalf of
reemployed retired teachers and public employees by
providing for an effective date by amending the
delayed effective date for secs. 3, 5, 9, and 12, ch.
57, SLA 2001 and sec. 19, ch. 50, SLA 2005; and
providing for an effective date."
10:19:57 AM
Co-Chair Hawker MOVED to ADOPT the CS for HB 157, Work
Draft 26-GH1035\S, Wayne, 4/18/09, as a working document.
Representative Gara objected for discussion.
Co-Chair Hawker gave some history of the legislation. He
reported that several amendments to the bill had been made
in the Senate, which resolved contention between concerned
parties. Expedition of the bill would allow the Department
of Law to retain four attorneys, who would otherwise be
laid off.
10:22:13 AM
Representative Gara asked if the bill reflected the most
current version in the Senate. Co-Chair Hawker replied yes.
Representative Gara removed his objection.
CS for HB 157, Work Draft 26-GH1035\S, Wayne, 4/18/09, was
ADOPTED as a working document.
GINGER BLAISDELL, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, explained that she had
been asked to carry the bill by three different
departments; The Department of Administration (DOA), which
does the retire/rehire portion of the bill, The Department
of Revenue (DOR), which has requested two positions go into
exempt status, and The Department of Natural Resources
(DNR), which was requesting full time exemption for 23 part
time exempt positions. The CS deleted Section 1 from the
original bill, which amended AS 39.24.110, moving certain
positions from one sub-section to another, changing what
was called "special inquiry", and was a temporary exempt
status, into a full-time exempt status. The positions would
be retained within DNR. In the DOR, Section 2 was changed
by eliminating the Chief Economist position. The position
has been vacant for a year due to a lack of qualified
applicants and the low salary offered for qualified
applicants. The state comptroller position remains as
originally requested. Changes in the retire/rehire sunset
extension would require a person to be retired for 90 days,
rather than 30, before rehire. Another change requires the
teachers' retirement system and other government PERs
participants to follow more rigorous recruitment efforts. A
third change reduces a minimum of five eligible applicants
to three eligible applicants, before considering a retiree
for a position. The fourth request changes the sunset of
the program from four years to one year.
10:25:44 AM
Vice-Chair Thomas asked who had requested the changes in
the bill. Ms. Blaisdell replied that the bill originated
from the governor's office, but several committees
contributed to the changes.
Co-Chair Stoltze warned that care should be taken to not
breaching bicameral prerogatives. He felt that this bill
was the best vehicle to please both bodies.
Representative Gara asked if the bill allows for the rehire
of retirees across the board without exempting any
agencies. Ms. Blaisdell replied in the affirmative.
Representative Gara asked if the rehired retiree would be
receiving pension benefits and medical insurance in
addition to being a rehire. Ms. Blaisdell answered yes.
Representative Gara asked if there was a cost to the state
in those situations. Ms. Blaisdell said that the position
would be filled either way, by a retiree or a new hire. A
retiree would only be rehired if they were the most
qualified applicant. She reiterated the sideboards in the
bill that regulate the rehire of retirees.
10:29:46 AM
Representative Kelly asked if the intent of the original
bill had been changes by the CS. Ms. Blaisdell explained
that one major difference is the 90 day minimum retirement
requirement before a retiree is eligible for rehire.
Representative Kelly asked who generated the changes. Ms.
Blaisdell replied that the changes were generated by the
administration and the Senate State Affairs Committee.
Representative Kelly expressed support for the bill.
Representative Gara asked if the bill applied to Tier IV
employees who retire. Ms. Blaisdell shared that she did not
know of any Tier IV employees that had been eligible for
retirement.
10:31:55 AM
Representative Joule interpreted that the bill encouraged
local rehire. Ms. Blaisdell said that was correct.
Representative Kelly said that he had heard that some
people "fell through the cracks", he wondered what that
meant. Ms. Blaisdell answered that there were two
provisions in the bill; the retire/rehire program, which
includes all participants who are eligible to be retired
under PERs or TERs, would be included as long as their
municipality offered the program. The elimination of the
positions considered under exempt status, are not retired
individuals, but positions that have been difficult to
fill, and do not fit within the classified service.
Co-Chair Stoltze opened public testimony. There being none,
public testimony was closed.
10:34:12 AM
Co-Chair Stoltze commented on the three, zero fiscal notes.
Co-Chair Hawker stated he would not be supporting the bill
at this time, were it not for the consequences on senior
attorneys at the Department of Law. He felt it would be
more detrimental to the state to not continue their
employment, than to pass the bill at this time.
Co-Chair Stoltze expressed remorse that he had been
uncomunicative with the department as of late.
Co-Chair Hawker MOVED to report CS HB 157(FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CS HB 157(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with attached new indeterminate
fiscal note by the Department of Revenue, zero note 2 by
the Department of Natural Resources, and zero note 4 by the
Department of Administration.
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 72(STA)
"An Act relating to use of child safety seats and seat
belts."
10:37:03 AM
SENATOR HOLLIS FRENCH, SPONSOR, explained the legislation.
He stated that he bill would bring in $200,000 in federal
funds to help people afford the booster seats that are
necessary under law. He said that the current statute was
in need of articulation. The bill breaks the statute into
five parts. He referred to a handout with pictures
explaining the different sections of the bill. Section 1
applies to children under one year; Section 2 applies to
children one year to four years. Section 3 applies to
children over four years, but under eight years. Section 4
applies to children who exceed the height/weight
requirements in Section 3, and Section 5 is a catch-all
provision, which allows the driver to determine whether a
booster seat or a car seat should be used.
10:39:39 AM
Co-Chair Stoltze opened public testimony.
RONNIE SULLIVAN, EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE PROVIDER
testified via teleconference, spoke in support of the
legislation. She felt that the bill would reduce confusion
when deciding the best type of safety seat for a child.
JANE FELLMAN, COORDINATOR, SAFE KIDS, KENAI testified via
teleconference, testified in support of the bill. She
emphasized the importance of the safety of children in
cars. She described the level of protection provided by
boosters and car seats. She relayed a story of children who
did not fit in the seat belts and who needed bolsters. She
stated the need for both education and legislation.
10:44:54 AM
JOHN COOK, LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA AUTO DEALERS
ASSOCIATION testified via teleconference, urged passage of
the legislation. He felt that the current law was vague and
outdated and did not address the needs of children four to
eight years of age. He stated that many states have updated
child restraint laws. He described broad-based support for
the legislation.
MARGARET HAYASHI, EMERGENCY AND CRITICAL CARE NURSE,
testified via teleconference, spoke in support of the bill.
She stressed that current law was outdated. She stated that
two children in her community had died in the past year
because they had not been properly restrained.
10:49:26 AM
JANICE TOWER, ALASKA CHAPTER OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF
PEDIATRICS, testified via teleconference, testified in
support of the legislation. Alaska's pediatricians are
willing to educate citizens regarding the issue. She urged
timely passage to receive the federal funds.
GORDON GLASER, CARSEAT TASKFORCE AND INJURY PREVENTION,
testified via teleconference, urged committee support for
the legislation. He shared that the single leading cause of
death and the second leading cause of hospitalization of
children four to eight years old is motor vehicle
accidents. None of the children who were hospitalized were
properly restrained in booster seats.
10:53:20 AM
TIM LAMKIN, CONCERNED PARENT, spoke in opposition of the
legislation. He felt that the bill was of being poorly
written and was not good policy. He explained Anton's Law,
which established improved safety ratings for
manufacturers, and improved law enforcement of safety seat
laws. He felt that it was important that no loopholes could
be found in the legislation. He expressed confusion for the
purpose of booster seats for eight year old children over
80 lbs. He felt that there could be situation where
children over the required booster age limit, but under the
weight requirement, would be expected to sit in a booster
seat. He stressed that he supported the intent of the bill
in keeping children safe, but felt that it was a poorly
written policy.
11:00:01 AM
Co-Chair Stoltze closed public testimony.
Representative Kelly asked why the provision could not be
simplified. Senator French stated that the intent was to
work with experts from the American Academy of Pediatrics
and the National Highway Transportation Safety
Administration to adopt language that clearly expressed
intent. He furthered that Section 5 is in the bill for a
reason, to protect young people up to age 16. Dropping the
section, without a major re-write of the bill, would make
the bill unclear.
11:03:56 AM
Representative Kelly asked why the height requirement was
insufficient. He wondered about the last line on page 2,
"determined solely by the driver". Mr. French no objection
to clarifying the language on page 2. He emphasized that
the bill saves lives and raises money. He said that the
experts think that the weight requirements should be on
statute.
Representative Kelly asked if federal dollars would be lost
if the weight requirement was removed from the bill. Mr.
French replied yes. Representative Kelly clarified that the
weight limit was a federal requirement. Mr. French replied
in the affirmative. Representative Kelly asked what the
weight requirement was. Mr. French answered that it was 65
lbs.
11:06:51 AM
Co-Chair Hawker voiced concern about ambiguity in the
language in Section 5. He thought that the provision could
result in undue fear of police officers for children.
Vice-Chair Thomas shared a negative experience with money
obtained for a seat belt law in his district. He also
expressed concern for 15 year old children, who do not meet
the weight requirements, but do meet the height
requirements, being expected to ride in booster seats. He
thought they would be unduly stigmatized.
11:12:08 AM
Senator French said that the example would fall under
Section 5.
Representative Fairclough requested confirmation that the
65 lb limit would comply with federal law.
MARY SIROKY, SPECIAL ASSISTANT, DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES, replied that that was
her understanding.
Representative Fairclough asked if the sponsor was in
opposition to the amendment that would change the weight
requirement from 80 to 65. Senator French replied no.
Representative Fairclough asked if there was a choice
between the height and weight requirements. Ms. Siroky
replied that the height and weight requirements must be
included in statute in order to receive the federal funds.
11:15:11 AM
Representative Kelly asked if Section 5 gave parents
control in determining the use of child restraints for
children over eight and under 16 years of age. Ms. Siroky
replied that that was correct. Representative Kelly
requested further clarification. Ms. Siroky thought that
federal height and weight requirements must be met.
11:16:51 AM
Representative Kelly asked if the language stated, "height
and weight" or "height or weight". Mr. Lamkin interpreted
that the requirement was for children to be over 65 lbs or
over 4' 9".
Representative Fairclough queried the document Mr. Lamkin
was reading information from. Mr. Lamkin replied that it
was the grant requirement under federal law.
Representative Fairclough pointed out that a grant
requirement is different from federal law. She wondered if
a federal code could be cited. Mr. Lamkin said that
according to Anton's Law, there is no federal height or
weight requirement.
11:19:58 AM
GORDON GLASER testified via teleconference, reported that
the language states that both height and weight
requirements must be met, under Anton's Law, in order to
meet federal funding requirements.
Representative Austerman asked if the testifier was an
attorney. Mr. Glaser said he was not.
11:22:00 AM
Vice-Chair Thomas MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 1:
Page 2, Line 11:
Delete: "80"
Insert: "65"
Co-Chair Stoltze objected for discussion.
Co-Chair Stoltze withdrew his OBJECTION. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
11:23:04 AM
Vice-Chair Thomas MOVED Amendment 2:
Page 2, Lines 18-23
Delete all material
Co-Chair Stoltze objected for discussion.
Representative Gara thought that Lines 18 through 23
clarified the language of the bill.
11:24:09 AM
Senator French reported that the same amendment was voted
down in another committee. He explained that the amendment
has legal drafting problems.
11:25:43 AM
Co-Chair Hawker commented that deleting the lines would
resolve the intent of the amendment.
Representative Kelly suggested a legal opinion from the
Department of Law.
11:26:36 AM
Representative Gara asked the committee to consider moving
the bill out of committee and resolving the semantic matter
on the Floor.
Representative Gara maintained a continued OBJECTION to
Amendment 2.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion to ADOPT Amendment
2.
IN FAVOR: Thomas, Hawker
OPPOSED: Gara, Kelly, Austerman, Crawford, Salmon, Stoltze,
Fairclough
Representative Foster and Representative Joule were absent
from the vote.
The MOTION FAILED (7-2).
11:29:57 AM
Representative Kelly MOVED to ADOPT Conceptual Amendment 3:
Page 2, Line 23:
In between "determined" and "by"
Insert: "solely"
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
11:30:17 AM
Representative Fairclough pointed out the continued
argument between "and" and "or", in the height and weight
requirement language of the bill.
Vice-Chair Thomas revisited his comment concerning the
money that had been theoretically going to his district for
mandatory seatbelts laws. He expressed frustration with the
negative impact of not receiving those funds. He felt that
if the bill would force families in rural areas to but
boosters for their children, the state should help finance
the booster seats.
Co-Chair Stoltze commented on the fiscal notes.
11:32:41 AM
Representative Gara MOVED to report HCS CSSB 72(FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
HCS CSSB 72(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with no
recommendation and attached zero note 1 by the Department
of Transportation and Public Facilities.
11:33:08 AM RECESSED TO THE CALL OF THE CHAIR
10:15:37 PM RECONVENED
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:16 PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 02__Sponsor_Statement_HB157_Exempt_13Mar09[1].doc |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
HB 157 |
| 03__HB_157_-_legislative-report-on-retiree-return-program-2-6-09.pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
HB 157 |
| HB036-OOG-LtGOV-4-17-09.pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM HFIN 3/15/2010 1:30:00 PM HFIN 3/16/2010 9:00:00 AM |
HB 36 |
| 07 HB36 Legal Opinions.pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM HFIN 2/8/2010 1:30:00 PM HFIN 3/15/2010 1:30:00 PM HFIN 3/16/2010 9:00:00 AM |
HB 36 |
| 08 HB36 Back up.pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM HFIN 3/15/2010 1:30:00 PM HFIN 3/16/2010 9:00:00 AM |
HB 36 |
| SB 125 Sponsor Statement (S FIN).pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
SB 125 |
| SB 125 Letter of Support.pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
SB 125 |
| Alaska Heating Assistance Programs.ppt |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
SB 116 |
| ANHB Support Letter.pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
SB 116 |
| AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPERATURES FOR BETHEL ALASKA.doc |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
SB 116 |
| SB 116 - gallons by comunity.xls |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
SB 116 |
| CSHB 157 (FIN) Version S.pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
HB 157 |
| SB 125 Talking Points Sen. Paskvan.pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
SB 125 |
| SB 72 HFC Amendment 1 and 2.pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
SB 72 |
| SB72AAPSupportLetter.pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
SB 72 |
| SB72ABINSupportLetter.pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
SB 72 |
| SB72Changes.PDF |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
SB 72 |
| SB72Chart.pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
SB 72 |
| SB72OtherStates.pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
SB 72 |
| SB72Sponsor.pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
SB 72 |
| Senate Bill 116 Sponsor Statement.doc |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM |
SB 116 |
| SSHB 36 Hearing Request Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM HFIN 3/15/2010 1:30:00 PM HFIN 3/16/2010 9:00:00 AM |
HB 36 |
| SSHB 36 Hearing Request Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM HFIN 3/15/2010 1:30:00 PM HFIN 3/16/2010 9:00:00 AM |
HB 36 |
| SSHB 36 Hearing Request Backup.pdf |
HFIN 4/18/2009 8:30:00 AM HFIN 3/16/2010 9:00:00 AM |
HB 36 |