Legislature(1995 - 1996)
02/27/1995 03:02 PM House L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE LABOR & COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE
February 27, 1995
3:02 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Pete Kott, Chairman
Representative Kim Elton
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Norman Rokeberg, Vice Chairman
Representative Jerry Sanders
Representative Beverly Masek
Representative Gene Kubina
Representative Brian Porter
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HB 116: "An Act exempting the Alaska Seafood Marketing
Institute from the State Procurement Code."
PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE
SB 55: "An Act repealing the sunset of the enhanced 911
emergency reporting systems."
PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE
HB 146: "An Act relating to sled dog race classics."
HEARD AND HELD
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE ALAN AUSTERMAN
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 434
Juneau, AK 99801
Telephone (907) 465-2487
POSITION STATEMENT: Prime Sponsor of HB 116
JERRY MCCUNE, President
United Fishermen of Alaska
211 4th St., Ste. 211
Juneau, AK 99801
Telephone: (907) 586-2820
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 116
DEAN WILDER, Chairman of the Board
Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute
3323 Dry Cook
Port Alsworth, AK 99653
Telephone: Not Available
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 116
ART SCHHEUNEMANN, Executive Director
Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute
1111 W. 8th St., Ste. 100
Juneau, AK 99801
Telephone (907) 465-2250
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 116
SENATOR JOHN TORGERSON
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 427
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
Telephone (907) 465-2828
POSITION STATEMENT: Prime Sponsor of SB 55
MARK JOHNSON, Chief
Emergency Medical Section
Department of Health & Social Services
P.O. Box 240249
Anchorage, AK 99524-0249
Telephone (907) 561-4406
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of SB 55
KEVIN O'LEARY, Chief of Police
Anchorage Police Department
4501 S. Bragaw
Anchorage, AK 99507
Telephone: (907) 786-8595
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of SB 55
JEFF MORRISON, Director
Administrative Services Division
Legislative Liaison
Department of Military & Veterans Affairs
P.O. Box 110900
Juneau, AK 99801-0900
Telephone (907) 564-4600
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of SB 55
KEVIN KOCHLEIN, Emergency Services Coordinator
Mat-Su Borough
Cottonwood Public Safety Building
680 N. Seward Meridian Pkwy
Wasilla, AK 99654
Telephone (907) 373-8800
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 55
LARRY TEAGUE, Building Inspector & Zoning Officer
City of Palmer
231 W. Evergreen
Palmer, AK 99645
Telephone (907) 745-3271
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of SB 55
BRYCE EDGMON, Legislative Assistant
Representative Richard Foster
Capitol Building, Room 410
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
Telephone (907) 465-3789
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided sponsor statement for HB 146
SAM HOOLEY, Executive Director
Iditarod Trail Committee
P.O. Box 870800
Wasilla, AK 99687-0800
Telephone (907) 376-5155
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 146
DAVE LAMBERT, President
Alaska Dog Musher's Association
P.O. Box 1243
Fairbanks, AK 99707
Telephone: Not Available
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 146
JOHN K. HANDELAND, Mayor
City of Nome; and
Vice President, Iditarod Trail Committee
P.O. Box 291
Nome, AK 99762
Telephone (907) 443-6663
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of HB 146
EARL NORRIS
P.O. Box 33
Willow, AK 99688
Telephone: (907) 495-6346
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 146
NATALIE NORRIS
P.O. Box 33
Willow, AK 99688
Telephone (907) 495-6346
POSITIONS STATEMENT: Testified against HB 146
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 116
SHORT TITLE: EXEMPT ASMI FROM PROCUREMENT CODE
SPONSOR(S): SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/25/95 131 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/25/95 131 (H) FSH, L&C, FIN
02/13/95 (H) FSH AT 05:00 PM CAPITOL 124
02/13/95 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
02/15/95 367 (H) FSH RPT 2DP 3NR
02/15/95 367 (H) DP: MOSES, ELTON
02/15/95 367 (H) NR: G.DAVIS, OGAN, AUSTERMAN
02/15/95 367 (H) 2 ZERO FISCAL NOTES (ADM, DCED)
02/27/95 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: SB 55
SHORT TITLE: REPEALING SUNSET OF ENHANCED 911 SYSTEM
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) TORGERSON; REPRESENTATIVE(S) Navarre,
Phillips
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/26/95 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/26/95 (S) LABOR & COMMERCE
02/02/95 (S) L&C AT 01:30 PM FAHRENKAMP RM 203
02/02/95 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
02/03/95 162 (S) L&C RPT 4DP
02/03/95 162 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTES (DHSS, DPS, DCED)
02/07/95 (S) RLS AT 11:40 AM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203
02/07/95 (S) MINUTE(RLS)
02/08/95 205 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 2/8/95
02/08/95 207 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
02/08/95 207 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN CONSENT
02/08/95 207 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME SB 55
02/08/95 208 (S) PASSED Y17 N1 E2
02/08/95 208 (S) Adams NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION
02/09/95 219 (S) RECON TAKEN UP - IN THIRD READING
02/09/95 220 (S) RECONSIDERATION HELD TO END OF CALENDAR
02/09/95 223 (S) PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y19 N- E1
02/09/95 226 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
02/10/95 291 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
02/10/95 291 (H) L&C
02/10/95 323 (H) CROSS SPONSOR(S): NAVARRE
02/20/95 426 (H) CROSS SPONSOR(S): PHILLIPS
02/22/95 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
02/22/95 453 (H) FIN REFERRAL ADDED
02/27/95 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 146
SHORT TITLE: SLED DOG RACE CLASSIC
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) FOSTER,Phillips,Mulder,Navarre,Brice
Grussendorf,Toohey,Ivan
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
02/03/95 235 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
02/03/95 235 (H) CRA, L&C
02/13/95 343 (H) COSPONSOR(S): IVAN
02/14/95 (H) CRA AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 124
02/14/95 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
02/15/95 365 (H) CRA RPT 4DP 1NR
02/15/95 366 (H) DP: MACKIE, ELTON, IVAN, NICHOLIA
02/15/95 366 (H) NR: AUSTERMAN
02/15/95 366 (H) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (REV) 2/15/95
02/27/95 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 95-10, SIDE A
Number 000
The House Labor & Commerce Standing Committee was called to order
by Chairman Pete Kott at 3:02 p.m. Members present at the call to
order were Representatives Kott and Elton. Members absent were
Representatives Rokeberg, Porter, Kubina, Masek and Sanders.
CHAIRMAN PETE KOTT stated there was not a quorum present. He
announced that the meeting was on teleconference with Anchorage and
Fairbanks.
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK arrived at 3:03 p.m.
HL&C - 02/27/95
HB 116 - EXEMPT ASMI FROM PROCUREMENT CODE
Number 021
REPRESENTATIVE ALAN AUSTERMAN, Prime Sponsor of HB 116, stated that
this bill was introduced to exempt the Alaska Seafood Marketing
Institute (ASMI) from the procurement codes. It seeks to eliminate
the restrictive requirements of the state procurement code in
marketing Alaskan products in the United States. He pointed out
there was also an amendment to add to the original bill.
REPRESENTATIVES ROKEBERG, KUBINA & SANDERS arrived at 3:05 p.m.
REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG asked if they had any communications
with other entities that were exempt under this statute.
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN pointed out that if they were exempt, they
wouldn't have any problems.
CHAIRMAN KOTT noted that ASMI had been operating since 1981. He
asked how, up until this time, they had been able to operate under
the confines of this statute as it currently exists.
Number 100
REPRESENTATIVE KIM ELTON stated that changing this procurement code
had been a priority of the ASMI board for the past several years.
The problem was that the ASMI board had received a significant
amount of money from the state, especially in the domestic market
place, but within the last two years there has been a transition
away from this funding. He stated that ASMI domestic marketing is
now completely funded by the industry. The board recognized that
there might have been a problem asking to get rid of state
procurement, when state general fund dollars were going into it at
that time.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if the funding for ASMI was entirely
self-generated and whether there is anything on the horizon for
which they expect to ask for additional funding.
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN replied that he wasn't aware of anything
of that nature. He explained that the amendment to HB 116 directs
the ASMI board to create within themselves a procurement policy of
their own.
Number 149
JERRY McCUNE, PRESIDENT, UNITED FISHERMEN OF ALASKA (UFA), stated
they support HB 116. Most of the members pay their taxes to the
domestic market and feel it very cumbersome to have this code
restricting the way they do business. He stated the procurement
code restricts actions ASMI can do under contracts.
Number 173
DAVE WILDER, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, ASMI, explained that the
situation at ASMI had changed over the past two years. It went
from an 18-member board to a 25-member board, made up of 12
fishermen, 12 processors and 1 member of the public. Their
committee structure, which was put in place by the legislature,
includes a salmon marketing committee designated by the legislature
to oversee the moneys collected from the salmon fisheries and make
recommendations to the board on their behalf. He stated the salmon
industry in Alaska was in a crisis. The encroachment on sales both
domestically and internationally, by farmed salmon, foreign seafood
production, and by other protein markets, has caused them to lose
market share and reduces the price they receive. He stated the
board directed ASMI to change their status to seek relief from the
state procurement code.
MR. WILDER added they had developed a comprehensive domestic
marketing plan that has brought more staff into the Lower 48
operation and has brought a much greater need to have the
flexibility they were seeking. He explained several of the issues
that were involved as the basis for seeking this relief: Fishermen
and processors finance ASMI domestic operations; they have offices
in Juneau and Seattle, and the majority of activities are carried
out in Seattle. Many of these activities require immediate
response and flexibility. Going through the procurement code
process eliminates the possibility of taking advantage of
situations that would benefit the industry and allow them to sell
more product at higher prices. He stated that the board was
committed to a cost efficient structure to promote quality in
marketing Alaskan seafood products. Roughly 33,000 people depend
on the industry for full-time jobs. He concluded that it would be
in the best interest of the state and the industry to get relief
from the procurement code.
Number 250
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked for a recent example of how the procurement
code had adversely affected ASMI.
MR. WILDER said that recently, they had hired two people under
contract to represent ASMI in their domestic retail program. They
were not able to go out and hire them when they needed them because
it was over the $25,000 limit, and it took a substantial amount of
time. He also said this has been the same issue in procurement of
office supplies, and slows up their process in dealing with
out-of-state issues.
Number 274
ART SCHHEUNEMANN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ASMI, related that ASMI had
taken a new course with a new marketing plan. The marketing plan
is regional in nature, targeting the Lower 48 as the newest
opportunity for Alaska's seafood expansion. He explained that it
was an area that had not been evangelized in the past to the degree
that the seafood industry, fishermen and processors want it to be
in the future. Part of the plan, based on extensive research,
strongly suggested that they focus on the central core of the
United States, where 25 percent of the U.S. population resides
above average in disposable income. The marketing strategy also
provided that as they become successful in those regional areas,
they would roll out in other regions placing five individuals for
a total of five regions to represent Alaska's seafood interests.
MR. SCHHEUNEMANN followed up on Mr. Wilder's example of the two
field marketing representatives that were put in place in
September. He stated that it took three and one-half months to
place them in the field. Because the contract for the individual
was over $25,000, they couldn't advertise in the Lower 48 or do
normal recruitment. These people weren't treated like potential
employees applying for a job. They had to accommodate the
procurement process by becoming licensed contractors in the state.
Instead of having those people in the field setting up contacts,
building relationships, and developing what needs to be done in the
retail marketplace, food service and consumer advertising areas,
they were behind the curve. The season had been upon them for some
time. He stated this would be a very cumbersome and costly process
when they hire the other regional representatives. He pointed out
that as the organization becomes more aggressive in terms of
marketing strategy, his retail director might want to work with
multiple contractors to provide different services at any one time.
He indicated that they did not want to have to go through this
lengthy process.
MR. SCHHEUNEMANN pointed out that this system was designed for
state bureaucratic agencies to protect themselves and to make sure
all vendors from "outside" had equal access to state services that
were being contracted out.
Number 402
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if ASMI advertises within the state.
MR. SCHHEUNEMANN replied that virtually all advertising is done
outside the state, although there is an instate awareness
communications program.
Number 428
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON added that many of the instate efforts of ASMI
have been in quality working with fishermen and processors. He
expounded that you could sell a fish once, but if it's bad quality,
you have a tough time selling it a second time.
Number 440
CHAIRMAN KOTT stated there was an amendment before the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG made a motion to adopt amendment 1 to HB
116 as presented.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if there was objection. Hearing none, the
amendment was adopted.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG offered amendment 2, page 1, line 12, to
delete subsection 3, the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC),
and to adjust the following numbers of the underlying subsections.
REPRESENTATIVES ELTON & KUBINA objected.
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN stated that he could not support this
amendment.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG offered that this bill was an exemption to
the procurement code to the state of Alaska. He suggested that
perhaps they should be looking at changing the procurement code and
not the exemptions.
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN agreed with that position. He stated he
would be happy to sign on if someone was willing to redraft the
procurement codes of the state of Alaska.
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON stated he would be intrigued and possibly a
Co-sponsor if there was another bill that discussed the different
things that AHFC was doing. He related that the major difference
between AHFC and ASMI was that ASMI was using industry dollars and
needs the latitude that industry has in their private marketing.
Number 504
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked Representative Elton if industry
dollars refer to a fish tax.
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON answered that there were three primary income
streams into ASMI. The first was the .03 percent tax on seafood
processed in state, the second was created by the last legislature
when they passed a 1 percent assessment on the value of salmon
product in the state, and the last income stream is federal, which
last year was over $5,000,000. The later is used exclusively in
overseas marketing and is secured with a 15 percent cash match by
the state general fund.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG withdrew his amendment.
Number 542
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON made a motion to move CSHB 116(L&C) out of
committee with individual recommendations.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if there was any objection. Hearing none, the
motion passed.
HL&C - 02/27/95
SB 55 - REPEALING SUNSET OF ENHANCED 911 SYSTEM
Number 552
SENATOR JOHN TORGERSON, PRIME SPONSOR OF SB 55, stated this bill
repeals the sunset clause authorizing local governments that have
the enhanced 911 system to continue the surcharge against local
phone cooperatives. He explained that local governments did not
want to lose this revenue stream. It is a shared cost throughout
the municipality based upon this surcharge. It was their request
to remove this sunset provision and let the municipalities continue
to collect the surcharge.
Number 575
MARK JOHNSON, CHIEF, EMERGENCY MEDICAL SECTION, DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH and SOCIAL SERVICES, told the committee that they support
this bill. Most of the communities and municipalities around the
state have or are in the process of implementing this system which
provides the dispatcher with the automatic number and location
identification of the caller. He acknowledged that some of the
rural communities, particularly smaller areas that have dispatch
capabilities or rural highway areas outside major cities and
boroughs, should somehow find a way to benefit from enhanced 911
systems. He said this mechanism doesn't seem to be the way to do
that. He offered that some other type of legislation may be needed
to address those areas of the state. He said they would be willing
to work on that.
Number 594
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked what the surcharge was.
MR. JOHNSON answered that for communities over 100,000 people, the
charge was 50 cents per phone line; for those under 100,000 people,
the charge would be 75 cents.
Number 602
KEVIN O'LEARY, ANCHORAGE CHIEF OF POLICE, also responsible for the
Enhanced 911 System in the municipality of Anchorage (MOA),
testified via teleconference in support of SB 55. He stated the
cost in the MOA is a little in excess of $3,000,000 per year to
operate this system, they collect $883,000 year through the 50 cent
charges. The system that rural areas have in place, does have the
capabilities of handling statewide enhanced 911. If the state
chooses to do so, the cost would be for installation of additional
capacity in the computer and the tracking system. This system has
been installed in some of the major municipalities in the Lower 48
that are larger than the population of the entire state of Alaska.
Number 618
REPRESENTATIVE JERRY SANDERS asked how many phone calls were
handled each year.
CHIEF O'LEARY replied that the Anchorage Police Department handled
in excess of 700,000 calls to their dispatch center, of which
230,000 resulted in some type of police action. The fire
department handled between 12,000 to 15,000 runs and there were
approximately 26,000 emergency medical technician (EMT) runs.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG stated the system was costing the
municipality of Anchorage $3,000,000 per year and they were
collecting approximately $883,000. He asked Chief O'Leary what
the charge per phone line was, and what the 911 enhanced portion of
the $3,000,000 is.
CHIEF O'LEARY answered that it was 50 cents per line, but he didn't
have information on the cost for the equipment at this time.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG (Indisc.--end of tape)
TAPE 95-10, SIDE B
Number 000
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked again what the totality of the
enhanced 911 cost was.
CHIEF O'LEARY stated that it was hard to separate the enhanced
section, because it is part of the computer system that brings the
name and location of the caller into the computer at dispatch. He
explained there was one finite cost for all three functions with
police, fire and EMT.
Number 018
CHAIRMAN KOTT pointed out that since 911 benefits the city as a
whole, and fire and police protection are the central function of
government, why not pay for this system from the city's general
funds.
CHIEF O'LEARY stated this was the best way to pay for a system that
was ongoing in terms of expenditures. He added that they had
researched the laws in other states and discovered that Alaska was
one of the last states not to have this type of system in place for
a collection of a small fee to pay for the enhancement.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if they were raising more money than what the
system was costing.
CHIEF O'LEARY answered that the money raised pays for approximately
one-third of the total cost of running the system. This includes
the cost of the enhanced 911 equipment, the emergency operators and
dispatchers in various public safety access points hooked up to
this system.
Number 096
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS asked if there were actually 2,000 calls per
day coming in to the system in Anchorage.
CHIEF O'LEARY answered yes, but of that number, perhaps 25 percent
of those calls actually require some sort of police action.
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS replied that $3,000,000 divided by 780,000
calls equals $4.00 per call. He was astounded that 1 percent of
the people in Anchorage called 911 every day.
CHIEF O'LEARY stated those calls were not just 911 calls. The 911
systems track and trace phone calls coming into any telephone in
the dispatch center. In the event that an individual calls into a
business line and has some type of difficulty, the system would
still be able to trace that call.
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER commented that the initial estimate of
what the fee should be was at best, arbitrary. He stated he had
not heard anything indicating that this hasn't been a benefit to
communities.
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS asked if there was any reference to this
when they put the bill through a few years ago.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated that part of the ability of this
system is that a computer can display who is making the call. For
instance, the child who doesn't know where they live or the person
whose house is burning and they just forget they're at home as
opposed to the job. Sometimes these people forget to call 911, or
they sometimes call in on other numbers.
Number 111
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS asked about the anonymous informant that is
trying to help the police without getting himself in trouble.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER answered that it could apply to that.
Number 150
JEFF MORRISON, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES & LEGISLATIVE
LIAISON, DEPARTMENT OF MILITARY & VETERANS AFFAIRS, testified in
order to clear up a letter sent by General Lestenkof dated February
2, 1995, to Representative Kay Brown. The purpose of the letter
was simply to raise issues, not to take any stand or make
recommendations on the bill. There are some issues concerning
statewide 911 systems. The nature of the letter was to raise those
issues and that was all. He said he will be drafting a letter to
be signed by General Lestenkof and forwarded to Senator Torgerson
stating this and clarifying the issue.
CHAIRMAN KOTT pointed out that he had spoken to Mr. Harpring on the
matter, and he had stated the same.
Number 195
KEVIN KOCHLEIN, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY, MAT-SU BOROUGH, also the
Enhanced 911 Project Manager, testified via teleconference and
reiterated Chief O'Leary's comments that the borough was very much
in support of SB 55. The surcharge had allowed them to initiate
the process to get enhanced 911 services in the Mat-Su Borough. He
explained they have had a basic 911 system over the last few years.
The surcharge uses the additional funding over and above what is
locally generated from tax revenues to purchase the equipment and
the software and staffing to actually place enhanced systems on
line. He stated their enhanced system should be on line late
summer or early fall of next year. He stated that with Palmer's
contract for dispatch services, the entire cost of the system
should run approximately $850,000 this year. The surcharge would
generate approximately $190,000 from the surcharge.
In closing, MR. KOCHLEIN encouraged the movement of SB 55 through
the House.
LARRY TEAGUE, BUILDING INSPECTOR AND ZONING OFFICER, CITY OF
PALMER, testified that they were in support of SB 55. His only
comment was that they might consider Alaska Public Utilities
Commission (APUC) or some agency oversight if there was a concern
over the use of the 911 money.
Number 242
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER clarified that this system does not display
every incoming call to the police department. If a call comes in
directly to a detective's phone and it is determined that call is
a 911 call, it would be rerouted to the 911 Center. There is not
a display by every phone in the police department that calls up the
subscriber of the number.
CHAIRMAN KOTT submitted that they should place this with APUC.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked why the sponsor does not delete the
language, rather than extend the date.
SENATOR TORGERSON stated he did not see the state ever going back
and funding this amount of money being collected now. He stated it
was a good system working well and helps offset the costs of the
enhanced 911 systems, and just extending the date out would mean
repeating this again in a couple of years.
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON commented that this bill allows municipalities
to make their own decisions.
Number 297
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG pointed out that he supports Enhanced 911,
but as a legislator he objects to voting on something for which the
cost is not determined.
SENATOR TORGERSON commented that the enhanced system was part of
the mapping system. When called, the system would trace that call.
In the Kenai Peninsula Borough they took even the utilities, so
they were all using the same mapping system.
Number 320
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked Chief O'Leary if the Eagle River area is
complete and on line with the enhanced systems.
CHIEF O'LEARY stated there was a small lag time where they had a
problem with the specific address correction information, but this
had been corrected. If you live in Eagle River, Chugiak or Eklutna
it does come into their dispatch center.
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON made a motion to move SB 55 with attached zero
fiscal notes and individual recommendations out of committee.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if there was any objection. Hearing none, the
motion was passed.
HL&C - 02/27/95
HB 146 - SLED DOG RACE CLASSIC
BRYCE EDGMON, LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANT to REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD
FOSTER, stated that HB 146 was intended to give the Iditarod Race
an alternative method to raising funds. He stated that the siege
by animal rights activists has caused many corporate sponsorships
to withdraw their financial support. This, combined with the
removal of legislative funds has put the Iditarod in a precarious
position and threatens the future of the race.
MR. EDGMON stated that HB 146 creates a separate category in the
charitable gaming statutes that devises the sled dog classic
enabling the Iditarod Trail Committee to conduct a statewide
sweepstakes. The trail committee would sell raffle tickets to
contestants, both in Alaska and outside, for wagering on arrival
times both at the check points and into the finishing line in Nome.
He added, there is a minor change to tighten the title to make the
language exclusive to the Iditarod Sled Dog Race.
Number 378
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON asked why the sponsor felt it necessary to
change the title.
MR. EDGMON stated this was a technical change. The Senate version
has that same title, and they felt that the vote could go through
in its original form. Tightening this would make further assurance
that this was specifically for the Iditarod Race.
Number 388
REPRESENTATIVE GENE KUBINA disagreed with Mr. Edgmon. He felt that
the language within the legislation should be changed if they
wanted to tighten it.
MR. EDGMON explained that the category of sled dog race classics is
supported by Section 4. It defines sled dog race classic
pertaining to Iditarod Sweepstakes, operated and administered by
the Iditarod Trail Committee.
Number 420
REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY MASEK asked why this should be just for the
Iditarod when there are two major sled dog races in the state of
Alaska; the Yukon Quest being one of them. She explained that many
races in the state were in financial trouble, and that is why the
language should be changed so as not to focus on just one race.
MR. EDGMON commented that the charitable gaming issues are a
sensitive subject, and that many bills have not made it through the
legislature. He explained that Representative Foster's position in
introducing this bill is that the Iditarod Race represents the
state of Alaska. Certainly there are many regional races that
could stand to benefit from using this kind of mechanism, but if
they open this legislation up to other races, then they may as well
open it up to gaming activities for other organizations. He stated
the Iditarod Race is "The Last Great Race" and benefits the entire
state.
Number 452
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS observed that dog mushing is like baseball;
if you eliminate the smaller races, wouldn't you be left with a
hollow Iditarod Race. He stated that he would be more comfortable
supporting this if it covered sled racing as a whole and not just
the Iditarod.
MR. EDGMON brought up the Nenana Ice Classic which has raised a
large amount of money for worthwhile organizations. He stated the
Iditarod Race means a lot to the state of Alaska, and without a
mechanism to raise money, the future of the Iditarod is in peril.
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS asked if he felt that broadening the
legislation would hurt the Iditarod.
MR. EDGMON stated that broadening this legislation would hurt the
chances of this bill getting through.
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK stressed that accountability should be kept in
mind with any type of organization. She felt they shouldn't just
focus on the Iditarod, but they should look beyond that.
Number 489
REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA noted there had been mention of the Nenana
Ice Classic, and its restrictiveness because it existed before
1959. He didn't feel that you would want to have an Ice Classic in
every river. He summarized that he was sympathetic to this bill
and wouldn't want to expand it.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG recalled that there had been a Tanana Ice
Classic.
Number 509
STAN HOOLEY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, IDITAROD TRAIL COMMITTEE (ITC),
testified in favor of HB 146. He stated the Iditarod and its large
national sponsors had been the target of an ever-increasing amount
of negative and harmful publicity by various radical
(indisc.--coughing). He said they needed a way to diversify their
funding base. This past spring, the two remaining outside sponsors
announced that they wouldn't be renewing their sponsorship due to
various pressures. As a result, $300,900 disappeared from the race
budget this year, and an additional $190,000 will disappear next
year. He stated for the past six months, they have worked hard to
recoup those lost revenues. These revenues had made it possible
for the ITC to stage the caliber of race that Alaskans have come to
expect. Through international and national coverage, ITC has been
able to help the visitor industry. He concluded that the ITC
believes it vitally important to put a mechanism in place to insure
the long term financial stability of the race, and HB 146 does just
that. In a game of chance for prices, money would be awarded to
the closest guess of the winning time of the Iditarod. He stated
this measure is not a way to wager on the race, but a way to
predict the winning time. They felt that would do away with any
mischief or potential fraud. The economic impact report of 1992
indicated that the Iditarod attracted 16 percent of out-of-state
visitors during the fall, winter and spring seasons. Today, the
percentage is much higher than this. He mentioned that the
television coverage of the race has significantly benefitted the
visitor industry. Approximately half of the broadcast time
accentuated issues and images support tourism. He pointed out
they weren't saying that the Iditarod was a better race than the
others. The Iditarod has borne the brunt of these groups because
it's so visible.
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK asked if the Iditarod was supposed to be the
Last Great Race, the greatest in the United States, the world, why
were they undergoing so many financial problems. She further
stated the Humane Society issues had been brought up many years
ago. She asked why the committee doesn't work with the Humane
Society of the United States (HSUS). She also asked what the
relationship was with the villages along the trail.
MR. HOOLEY responded that as an organization, the ITC is forced by
large national sponsors to work with animal rights groups to
insulate them from being publicly attacked by these groups as well.
In their opinion, the various animal rights groups want to use this
event and the visibility that surrounds this event to more
effectively compete for a larger share of that multi-million dollar
pie that is donated to these groups annually. The HSUS manipulated
certain facts, arranged for exclusive interviews on Good Morning
America and were not dealing with the ITC in good faith. The ITC
didn't see the benefit of working with People for Ethical Treatment
of Animals (PETA)., International Society for Animal Rights (ISAR),
and HSUS. He stated this legislation is an attempt to return the
control of the race to Alaska.
MR. HOOLEY responded to the question of relationships with the
villages. He said that more of an effort would be put into
enhancing those relationships in the years to come. He stated they
were sensitive to the need of making this race more accessible to
the Native community. He said that this year there was only one
Native participating.
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK interjected that there weren't any.
MR. HOOLEY stated that Ramy Brooks is a Native and he strongly
objected to the media reporting that there weren't any Natives
participating. The ITC and the media heard about it. He explained
that as this race becomes more competitive, it becomes more
expensive to participate. People off the road system, be it in the
Native community or otherwise, find it very difficult to be a part
of this race.
TAPE 95-11, SIDE A
Number 000
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK noted that in the past few years she had
received correspondence and phone calls from villagers that were
negative towards the ITC. She clarified that the children playing
along the trail were finding discarded syringes from vaccinations
and garbage, and this was very disturbing to the villagers. She
asked what level of funding goes out to the cleanup effort. Also,
she said she hasn't seen much effort in putting any type of
education out to the Native communities.
MR. HOOLEY stated that an advisory council of leaders from around
the state was formed specifically to address key issues. One of
those was village relationships. He noted that this takes some
time to work through what specific actions should be taken. He
stated they had discussed trail cleanup some time ago. He asked
whether those complaints came subsequent to the 1994 race, and he
recalled that this was an issue in the 1993 race. He did not think
those were issues this past year.
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK stated that being a participant from 1990 to
1993, going through the check points and meeting the people, that
she still hears from them today.
Number 067
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked what kind of revenue would be brought in, and
how the moneys would be disseminated.
MR. HOOLEY said his organization would look at all the important
issues. Their ability to do all they should do, such as sweeping
the trail, is limited by the amount of money they have at this
point. They do have a line item plugged in this year specifically
for trail cleanup. They expect to make even more progress this
year than they did last year. He explained that they had not
worked out a specific plan for the sharing of the proceeds yet.
They are going to work with the Department of Revenue, Division of
Charitable Gaming, to establish something that makes sense. If the
Nenana Ice Classic sells over 250,000 tickets, the ITC feels that
it's not unreasonable to think that they couldn't sell 1 million
tickets given the right effort.
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON asked for a copy of the articles of
incorporation for the ITC.
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS asked if any members on the board of
directors were past or present mushers.
MR. HOOLEY indicated that of the ten member board, five of the
members were mushers. He didn't have the exact list in front
of him. He stated the board had been dominated by active members
of the mushing community. The current board has recognized the
need to balance this; as organization has become more of a
business, it is important that it be run like a business.
Number 196
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS compared the smaller races to farm teams in
baseball. He asked if most of the mushers in the Iditarod come
from these smaller races and work their way up. He stated that if
this is true, and they fail, won't the Iditarod run out of young
people working their way into the system.
MR. HOOLEY stated that the Iditarod certainly isn't the first race
that is run. There are specific qualifying procedures in which
individuals need to complete 500 miles to compete, and they do this
through the other races. He stated they had a great interest in
insuring that dog mushing, particularly mid to long distance
mushing, remain viable and healthy. The overall health of the
Iditarod translates directly back into how much interest people are
going to have in mushing.
Number 286
DAVE LAMBERT, PRESIDENT OF THE ALASKA DOG MUSHER'S ASSOCIATION
(ADMA), testified via teleconference that he was against HB 146.
He stated the gaming laws currently allow for sled dog classics.
The ADMA has a yearly classic on the Open North American Sled Dog
Race. The law allows for betting on finishing places and finishing
time. He said that at this time, it was legal to do parimutuel
betting in the state just as if you were doing it on horses. He
said the ADMA had talked about having a sled dog classic on the
Iditarod, but decided they didn't want to be associated with the
Iditarod. He stated that the last paragraph of the legislation
would bar any organization from having a sled dog classic, and the
Iditarod would be the one and only. He said the classics were a
viable fund raising tool for many organizations and villages. In
conclusion, he stated that if the trail committee wanted to have a
classic, they could do that legally now.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if he was opposed to having any betting on dog
racing now or would he agree to allow betting on other races.
MR. LAMBERT reiterated that it currently is legal to bet on
finishing places and finishing times in all dog sled races under
dog sled contests. He stated that this legislation would simply
bar anyone else from having a classic.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated it was his understanding that this
bill wouldn't change the kind of betting described by Mr. Lambert.
MR. LAMBERT stated that the parimutuel betting was a separate
issue. The sled dog classic and betting on finishing times, under
the regulation states "sweepstakes offered and administered by the
Iditarod Trail Committee."
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated this was under definition of sled dog
race classic. He assumed there was also a definition in the
statute of dog musher's contests. He stated this definition does
not seek to limit or expand that definition; therefore, if it were
legal it would continue to be legal.
MR. LAMBERT explained it covers that you can bet on the finishing
time, and the sled dog classic is betting on the finishing time.
Therefore, if you limit betting on the finishing time to the sled
dog classic through the Iditarod Sweepstakes, how does that allow
anyone else.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER replied that you could still do it under dog
musher's contests.
MR. LAMBERT then asked what was the purpose was of this
legislation.
Number 318
JOHN HANDELAND, MAYOR, CITY OF NOME, and MEMBER OF THE ITC,
testified via teleconference in support of HB 146. He commented
that during the last couple years, the attack by special interest
groups has resulted in severe financial hardship. He stated that
the board has been reviewing their operations and is making ongoing
operational change. As a short term solution for their crisis,
they've turned to state sponsors. With the elimination of the
controlling animal rights groups, many of the old sponsors in the
state increased their sponsorship. He didn't see how they could
continue to milk the instate sponsors. They feel that this
legislation is an opportunity to increase revenue. He stated this
wouldn't change the particular item with dog musher's classic. As
a separate provision under the definition of Alaska Statute
05.15.690, Subsection 11, this would be in addition to the statute,
similar to the Nenana Ice Classic. They believe that the Iditarod
has a year-round impact on the economy in Nome, as well as around
the state as a whole. Media coverage exports Alaska's name to the
world, which generates interest and intrigue; translating into
tourism throughout the state. He stated being the city at the end
of the trail, they have seen changes to the race organization. The
board made amendments for funding the cleanup of the villages.
They made rules requiring the mushers to take with them many of the
items previously disposed of in the villages. He stated they were
committed, as a board, to work on any problems that do exist and,
once again, to make this an event that all Alaskans can be proud
of. They would like to stand on their own without having people
from the Lower 48 dictate how they're going to operate.
EARL NORRIS testified via teleconference that he has been mushing
since 1946. He is considered the founder of the Anchorage Fur
Rendezvous and is a charter member of the Alaska Dog Musher's
Association in Fairbanks. He stated he was against HB 146. Dog
racing as a whole needs support. It shouldn't be limited to one
organization. He pointed out that he wasn't against the Iditarod;
he had competed in it.
Number 421
NATALIE NORRIS concurred with her husband, that the sport of sled
dog racing in Alaska does need help. All the races contribute;
therefore, she would like to have the last paragraph of the bill
changed to include other races.
CHAIRMAN KOTT stated that HB 146 would be held over until the next
committee meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the House Labor &
Commerce Committee, Chairman Kott adjourned the meeting at 5:15
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|