Legislature(2009 - 2010)CAPITOL 17
02/12/2009 01:00 PM House TRANSPORTATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Alaska Transportation Finance Study | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION STANDING COMMITTEE
February 12, 2009
1:06 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Peggy Wilson, Chair
Representative Craig Johnson, Vice Chair
Representative Kyle Johansen
Representative Cathy Engstrom Munoz
Representative Mike Doogan
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative John Harris
Representative Max Gruenberg
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
Presentation: Alaska Transportation Finance Study
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
DENISE MICHELS, Mayor, City of Nome; President
Alaska Municipal League (AML)
Nome, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of the AML during the
presentation on the Alaska Transportation Finance Study.
CHRISTOPHER WORNUM, Principal
Cambridge Systematics
Oakland, California
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified and answered questions during the
presentation on the Alaska Transportation Finance Study.
JEFF OTTESEN, Director
Division of Program Development
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified and answered questions during the
discussion of the Alaska Transportation Finance Study.
PETER FREER, Staff Assistant/Project Manager
Alaska Municipal League (AML)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified and answered questions during the
discussion of the Alaska Transportation Finance Study.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:06:45 PM
CHAIR PEGGY WILSON called the House Transportation Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:06 p.m. Representatives Doogan,
Johnson, and Wilson were present at the call to order.
Representatives Munoz and Johansen arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
^Alaska Transportation Finance Study
1:06:57 PM
CHAIR WILSON announced that the only order of business would be
an overview of the Alaska Transportation Finance Study (ATFS).
She explained that the Alaska Municipal League would provide an
overview and the contractor will review the findings of the
study.
1:08:01 PM
DENISE MICHELS, Mayor, City of Nome, and President, Alaska
Municipal League, began her presentation by reading a statement
[original punctuation provided]:
Good afternoon, my name is Denise Michels. I serve as
the Mayor of Nome, Board President of the Alaska
Municipal League and Vice President for Community
Services Division at Kawerak. Within Kawerak I manage
the Indian Reservation Roads Program for the Bering
Straits Region. I was also honored to participate as
a Stakeholder for DOT's [2030] Long Range
Transportation Plan update.
The Alaska Municipal League represents the unified
voice of Alaska's municipalities to successfully
influence favorable federal and state legislation. We
also build censuses and partnerships with
organizations and the public to solve Alaska's
challenges.
Last year members of AML began discussing issues
regarding transportation and energy. We came up with
a plan to communicate, collaborate, and bring ideas to
help solve some of our transportation issues. AML
created a transportation ad hoc committee which
developed a transportation policy for the AML board's
consideration.
At our November annual meeting energy and
transportation were included in our priorities. The
membership adopted Resolution number 2009-12, urging
the Governor and the Legislature to capitalize long-
term transportation funding for Alaska.
The Highway Trust Fund ran out of money last fall, and
was re-capitalized with a general fund transfer, but
it's widely viewed as insufficient to fund state
highway programs at the same levels as the past. Re-
authorization of federal highway legislation, i.e.,
SAFETEA-LU, may shift funding away from rural states,
and move toward greenhouse gas reduction, transit and
congestion relief in the country's major metropolitan
areas. Both these factors will work against the
interests of Alaska. Alaska is one-fifth the size of
the U.S. and our transportation needs are great both
for rural and urban Alaska. The State of Alaska needs
to create a reliable option of transportation funding
to meet the unmet transportation demands.
In October 2008, the Alaska Municipal League (AML)
contracted with Cambridge Systematics, who specializes
in transportation finance analysis. They were tasked
to examine state transportation funding, trends in
transportation funding in other states, and changes
anticipated in federal transportation funding. Due to
the short timeline and limited funding for the study,
the primary focus is on surface transportation. We
did not fail to recognize the critical importance of
the marine and aviation components of the state's
transportation system, but simply to give us a place
to start. We understand that we must look at those
systems for a holistic approach to intermodal
transportation.
AML firmly believes that transportation and its
support systems are just the foundation for economic
development. The transportation systems must be safe,
reliable, efficient, cost effective and
environmentally sound, most important adequate funding
is required to meet these specifications.
We hope that this report will start the discussion
about how the State of Alaska will address the looming
shortage of highway funding for our transportation
system. We believe this report has information, data
and statistics for us to work together to consider
various funding options.
The consultant has been working for three months
through a series of reviews by our project steering
committee that consists of former DOT commissioners
Joe Perkins, Mark Hickey and Mike Burton; Former
Deputy Commissioner John MacKinnon; Tom Brigham former
Director of Statewide Planning; Dan Sterley with
CH2MHill; John Duffy, Borough Manager for Mat-Su;
Michael Catsi with SWAMC and AML staff. We are
pleased to have Chris Wornum, a Principal with
Cambridge Systematics, and project manager for the
Alaska Transportation Finance Study, here to present
the report. We welcome your thoughts and ideas, and
hope that today will be the start of a continuing
dialogue on transportation funding.
1:12:04 PM
CHRISTOPHER WORNUM, Principal, Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
explained that the report contains many statistics, but he
offered to summarize and provide the committee with a brief
synopsis of Cambridge Systematic, Inc.'s Alaska Transportation
Finance Study (ATSF) objectives. He asked to focus on three
points of the study. First, the study identifies that an
underinvestment exists in the state's infrastructure. He
offered to provide information based on studies prepared by
others since that topic was not central to this study although
the ATSF study did review the material. This study focuses on
the current risk in state of federal funding diminishing because
of the changes currently happening. However, federal funding is
more likely to diminish with the reauthorization of the federal
transportation bill, he opined. He related that given the
risks, and the state's dependence on federal funding, such that
roughly 75 percent comes from federal funding, that the study
seeks to provide some options to diminish dependence and to help
close the current gap between needs and revenues.
1:14:15 PM
MR. WORNUM reviewed the findings and recommendations addressing
the six questions posed by the AML. First, Cambridge
Systematics, Inc. (CSI) was asked to describe some of the
current transportation finance trends in the operating and
capital needs of the state. Additionally, CSI was asked to
identify the federal funding priorities and the changes in the
reauthorization of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), and
what effects the changes may have on Alaska.
1:14:50 PM
MR. WORNUM continued. The Cambridge Systematics, Inc. (CSI) was
asked to focus on transportation finance trends that rely more
on user fees, public-private partnerships, and other financing
tools used to leverage and match federal funds. He emphasized
that the CSI was asked to identify strategies that could address
transportation financing challenges. Finally, the CSI was asked
to examine funding options, examine new funding sources, and
offer ways those options could be used in a portfolio of funding
the state could develop.
1:15:35 PM
MR. WORNUM indicated he would like to focus on three topics.
First, he noted the underinvestment in the overall state
transportation network. He related that the state's economy is
highly dependent on resource extraction and traded industries,
or those industries that depend upon linkages to ports, rail,
air, and other ways to export their products. He related that
due to the intensity in the state in the traded industry sector,
Alaska's economy depends more than some states on
transportation. Additionally, the growth in the other
industries has become a way to offset declining oil production,
and to encourage economic diversification. Thus, there exists a
higher degree of concern than most states about adequate
transportation network service. Mr. Wornum remarked that Alaska
has some long term underlying conditions that make the
transportation network important to the quality of life.
1:16:44 PM
MR. WORNUM explained that CSI reviewed the "Let's Get Moving
2030: Alaska Statewide Long-Range Transportation Policy Plan
(February 2008), commonly referred to as the "2030 report",
which represents a comprehensive analysis of Alaska's needs. It
would appear that of the $1.1 billion annually needed to
maintain Alaska's highways and bridges, that roughly half is
unfunded. Adding in the Alaska Marine Highway System (AMHS),
the figure swells to $720 million per year, he stated. He
indicated that the backlog for life-cycle and routine
maintenance as of 2007 is $750 million. Additionally, the state
is roughly $104 million annually behind what is needed to
maintain the current conditions.
1:18:03 PM
MR. WORNUM stated that finally, for AMHS, of the $180 million
needed annually, the state only collects $44 million in revenues
to keep the system operational. He highlighted that none of
these findings takes into account maintenance on the transit
system's locally urban and rural roads, aviation, or adding any
capacity to handle additional growth.
1:18:43 PM
MR. WORNUM, in response to Chair Wilson answered that road
maintenance is included, but vessel replacement has been
included. He explained that the life-cycle costs for AMHS
include vessel replacement, just as on roadways, certain
components cycle through for replacement.
1:19:57 PM
MR. WORNUM explained that maintenance was not the major focus of
the study. He acknowledged that the 2030 report is a
comprehensive study with conservative assumptions. He explained
the major impetus of the Cambridge study, confirmed by
stakeholders, was that the continued dependence on federal
funding places Alaska at risk. He explained that past federal
policies are being examined more closely in Washington D.C. He
offered one measurement to determine the level of the state's
dependence on federal monies is to examine the level of spending
on transportation as compared to the gross state product. When
examining all states, Alaska falls in the top ten states in
terms of spending money on transportation infrastructure. This
includes maintenance and capital expenditures. He stated that
the average for surface transportation spending as a percentage
of gross state product (GS) is 1.55 percent and Alaska is close
to 2 percent [Figure 2.4]. However, when examining the net of
federal money that is spent, the state drops to average or
slightly below average. In terms of capital expenditures, for
building more transportation infrastructure then Alaska drops to
the lowest 4 percent. Thus, if federal monies decline, the
state's ability becomes severely constrained given the current
spending patterns.
MR. WORNUM stated that by examining the risks of the federal
funding declining and the Federal Highway Trust Fund (HTF),
which is the funding distributed to all states by formula
levels. He stated that the authorized program level through
2015 is flat as federal gas tax is forecasted to increase, but
fuel efficiencies for vehicles is improving, so despite that
overall vehicle mileage is up, the fund does not generate more
money. In fact, last year the HTF declined to the point that
the Congress funded $8 billion dollars as a one-year stop gap
funding. He offered that longer term fixes being discussed as
part of reauthorization all include a lower level of spending.
He opined the federal stimulus bill will help offset the problem
for approximately one year.
1:23:45 PM
MR. WORNUM stated that given the deficit and negative balance in
the HFT, he predicted that the reauthorization will not have
increases that the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st
Century - 1998 (TEA-21) and SAFETEA-LU. He said, "At least
that's what people that I work with in Washington D.C. are
telling us." He identified transportation reauthorizations
consisting of TEA-21 and the current reauthorization, SAFETEA-
LU, and projected that the next reauthorization is slated to go
into effect next year. He stated that of the donor states,
those states that contribute more to the HTF, that those states
received 90 percent in TEA21 and 92.5 percent in SAFETEA LU,
with projections of 95 percent in the next reauthorization. He
related that Alaska is the largest recipient, that it receives
more money than it contributes than any other state. He
concluded that the effect of the increasing donor share to other
states means that Alaska will stand to receive a lot less
funding.
1:25:02 PM
MR. WORNUM, in response to Chair Wilson, answered that the
number of square miles is not considered, although route miles
are considered. He surmised that the federal formulas undergo
enormous scrutiny.
CHAIR WILSON inquired as to whether any consideration is given
to the argument that Alaska is a young state and has only
received federal funding for 50 years, while some states have
received funding for over 150 years.
MR. WORNUM agreed that argument has entered into the debate. He
offered his belief that many good arguments can be made for
Alaska's current share of federal spending. He pointed out that
69 percent of land in Alaska is owned by the federal government;
and that Alaska has far flung communities with expensive marine
and aviation connections that other states do not have. He
indicated the Cambridge Study lists many of the conditions.
However, he stressed that the problem with the proposed
reauthorization is a change in value. He related that
transportation needs may be considered a utility rather than a
basic good. Thus, the basic notion is that instead of
transportation needs being considered as a benefit for the
entire society, it may be considered more as a utility, in which
users pay for a connection charge to gain access, plus an
ongoing rate for the supply of the good. He offered that many
roadways nationwide are completely capacity constrained and have
no way to build more capacity, and more and more pricing will be
added. While it is not a revenue source that is particularly
effective in Alaska, pricing is an emphasis in the Lower-48. He
opined that if the next reauthorization considers pricing,
Alaska will be at a competitive disadvantage. Additionally,
earmarks are likely to diminish, he stated. He projected that
states will be asked to be more self-reliant.
1:28:41 PM
MR. WORNUM pointed out the Lower-48 and Washington D.C.'s
perspective Alaska has an the enormous amount money parked in
the Alaska's Permanent Fund; Alaska has the lowest gas tax rate
in the nation; Alaska has no state income or sales taxes and is
the only state that does not have one or the other. He opined
these conditions put Alaska at a significant disadvantage to
compete for its share of federal funds.
1:29:25 PM
MR. WORNUM stated that the options the CSI considered includes
user fees, which range from instituting a toll to an increase in
the gas tax, or anything that assesses a price to a roadway user
that sends the signal that it costs the state more to provide
the service.
1:30:10 PM
MR. WORNUM, in response to Chair Wilson, agreed that the state
cannot impose a toll on an interstate highway. However, he
mentioned that may change as many bills have been introduced to
allow tolls. He related that many states have "hot lanes" which
are carpool lanes with a toll for single occupants who wish to
drive in the lane. He opined that the idea is to present a more
diverse portfolio, one that is not so dependent on a single
source of revenue, that is likely to be affected by the
volatility of the business cycle, one that has some pricing to
change behavior, as well as other criteria, such as yield,
reliability, and equity. He related that the ATFS includes
sources and tables in the report. He mentioned that the ATFS
examines the economic efficiency.
1:31:50 PM
MR. WORNUM pointed out that the proposals are intended to show
possibilities and yields in terms of the amount of money that
would be generated for transportation needs. He offered some
examples.
1:33:38 PM
MR. WORNUM related that option one would generate roughly $151
million annually or about 38 percent of the unfunded gap of $535
million identified in 2030 funding. Option one has five
components. First, an increase in the fuel taxes from 8 cents
per gallon (cpg) to 18 cpg, which is the national average.
Second, an increase in vehicle registration fees by 50 percent
would generate slightly les than $23 million annually. Third,
imposing a vehicle sales tax of .5 percent would yield about $10
million annually. Fourth, encourage jurisdictions statewide to
impose a .5 percent sales tax, which would yield about $30
million annually, and capitalize the Alaska Transportation fund
with $1 billion, which should earn approximately $50 million
annually.
MR. WORNUM reviewed option two, which would generate about $291
million annually or about 55 percent of the $535 million annual
gap. That scenario would raise the fuel taxes to 28 cpg and
index the rate to inflation, generating about $76 million
annually. Registration fees would double from $100 to $200
biannual fee, which would generate about $76 million annually.
The vehicle sales tax would be raised to 1.5 percent, which
would yield over $31 million annually. This option would
encourage local jurisdictions to impose a 1.5 percent sales tax,
which would generate about $50 million annually. Finally, again
capitalize the Alaska Transportation fund with $1 billion, which
should earn approximately $50 million annually.
1:35:25 PM
MR. WORNUM reviewed the third option, which would also generate
$291 million annually, but it would reduce the two sales taxes
and instead reinstitute the Local Service Roads and Trails
(LSR&T) fund. He detailed the scenario, explaining that it
would also increase fuel taxes to 28 cpg, would also double the
vehicle registration fees. This option would impose a vehicle
sales tax of 1.25 percent and a 1.25 percent local sales tax,
which would earn $26 million and $74 million annually,
respectively. This option would also capitalize the Alaska
Transportation Fund with $1 billion, which should earn
approximately $50 million annually. Finally, this option would
reinstitute the LSR&T program at about $20 million annually.
MR. WORNUM offered that other sources could also be considered.
He related that there is an enormous amount of ease in
collecting gas tax as opposed to collecting tolls.
1:36:56 PM
MR. WORNUM reviewed the gas tax since this tax has the potential
in Alaska. He surmised that it is very hard to understand the
retail cost for gasoline. He offered that CSI has performed
analysis in other states, have examined trends, and it is far
more complicated than it appears. He said that somehow a net
increase or decrease in gas tax results in a net increase or
decrease at the pump. He offered that CSI reviewed the data in
Alaska, and indexed it to August 2007, recalling that crude oil
prices peaked in June or July then fell rapidly. However, in
examining the national price of gas during that same period, he
said that it follows the trend pretty closely. He noted that
gas prices were already declining when the gas tax was
suspended. During that period, he offered that the national
average in fuel prices declined 21 percent, but Alaska only
declined 12 percent. He explained that this trend occurs in
many states such as Washington, New Mexico and Massachusetts.
It is difficult to see how changes in the gas taxes affect the
retail cost of gas, he opined. He explained that in economics,
that is considered a second derivative, such that the tax may
add to the overall cost of fuel, but it is not clear that it
changes the price at the pump. He further explained that this
is due to the complicated distribution system, the oligopolies
that control distribution, refinement, and shipping, with each
one affecting the price of gas.
1:39:35 PM
MR. WORNUM, in response to Representative Johnson, explained
that the CSI considered forms of innovative financing. He
responded that bonding requires a revenue source. He related
that some innovative measures put forward as part of a program
in SAFETEA that uses debt instruments that allow local and state
agencies to subordinate their public debt to private debt. He
referred to this type of debt instrument as public/private
partnerships which can be very effective, he opined. However,
the public/private partnerships do not pay for projects, but
advance the timing of the project so that it can be built sooner
rather than later. He said, "You are still stuck with the bill
and it still requires some source of money."
1:40:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DOOGAN related his understanding that even with
the current federal funding scheme the state is not receiving or
spending enough money on roads and bridges; and the likelihood
is that federal appropriations will shrink. And that "even if
we tax ferociously at all levels, we're still going to end up
with a gap between what we've got to spend and what's been
identified as what we should spend on roads and bridges in
Alaska."
MR. WORNUM agreed that was a fair summary of the CSI findings.
1:41:59 PM
MR. WORNUM, in response to Representative Johnson, that the list
of required projects came from the "Let's Get Moving 2030:
Alaska Statewide Long-Range Transportation Policy Plan (February
2008), commonly referred to as the "2030 Report." He
characterized the plan as a comprehensive plan of maintenance
and capital investment. In further response to Representative
Johnson, Mr. Wornum explained that the "2030 Report" is prepared
by a contractor for the DOT&PF.
1:42:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ asked which municipalities would contribute
30 percent of the funding and how the CSI would deal with areas
of the state that are not incorporated, with respect to the
70/30 plan.
MR. WORNUM explained that this is intended mostly for
jurisdictions that have the tax base and can contribute 30
percent, but that some unincorporated regions would not be able
to participate. He said, "so, not a silver bullet across
everyone."
1:43:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DOOGAN offered that he was unsure of how much
growth is built into the document. He inquired as to whether the
plan includes building a road to Nome.
1:44:04 PM
JEFF OTTESEN, Director, Division of Program Development,
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF),
answered that some new mega projects on the "2030 report" such
as the Juneau access road. He stated that the road to Nome had
not yet been identified. The vast majority of the roads
contained in the "2030 report" supplement roads that are grossly
under serving the population such as the roads in the Matanuska-
Susitna area.
REPRESENTATIVE DOOGAN offered his belief that it seems to him
that if Alaska cannot afford the road systems it currently has,
that perhaps it needs fewer roads. He inquired as to whether
any other alternative might allow the state to afford a
reasonable road system.
1:45:39 PM
MR. WORNUM acknowledged other states currently face the same
problem. He offered his belief that there are not any easy
solutions. He said that rural states face challenges to
maintain a network that was built during an economic upturn.
Some areas face challenges with congested urban roadways, and
adding roads is not an option. Additionally, rural communities
have long distances to travel and believe their economic
betterment depends on roads. He mentioned a huge area in the
middle of the country, and Appalachian states fit that category.
1:46:49 PM
MR. WORNUM related evidence supports that under some
circumstances, maintaining a road to a rural community will
allow the community to sustain or grow. However, some evidence
supports the idea that the communities will shrink. He offered
the question that some states ask themselves is whether they
need to spend money given that trend. He offered that these
states are establishing performance measures and criteria, to
determine when to stop investing in a roadway system and to
consider downsizing. He mentioned some solutions in urban
settings include intelligent transportation systems such as
light rail, pricing, carpooling that will reduce or better
manage demand. He emphasized that especially in the rural
context the cost encountered for per mile or per person served
is enormous.
1:48:17 PM
CHAIR WILSON recalled that she heard that a municipality cannot
sustain itself with a sales tax of 8 percent or higher. She
related her community already has a 7 percent sales tax. She
asked for clarification on whether the proposed taxes took into
consideration current sales taxes in Alaskan communities.
MR. WORNUM offered to review the data. He stated that he has
not heard of a magic limit for sales taxes. He offered that
some states collect more than 8 percent sales taxes. He offered
his belief that the effects become more acute when one community
imposes a sales tax and another does not. He opined that Europe
currently has a 33 percent value-added tax.
1:50:26 PM
MR. WORNUM, in further response to Chair Wilson, reiterated that
he was not familiar with an upper limit on sales taxes that a
community can absorb.
1:50:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ suggested that a tax might need to be a
state sales tax, since the state cannot force local
jurisdictions to tax themselves.
MR. WORNUM responded that he was not suggesting that the state
force communities to impose sales taxes. However, he stated
that a community might be inclined to vote for a sales tax if
the state offered an incentive to leverage state money. He
recalled this practice has been used in other states and the
projects funded are important to the communities. He opined
that a state tax is not as compelling to some voters.
1:51:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN inquired as to whether Washington D.C.
recognized transportation funding as a nationwide challenge.
MR. WORNUM agreed that the Washington D.C. understands the
magnitude of the issue. He related that Washington D.C. is
examining interstate costs and opined that the Congress would
like to delegate transportation costs to the state and local
level. He speculated that the direction seems to be for states
to do more to solve issues with the taxing and revenue raising
capabilities they have.
1:54:25 PM
MR. WORNUM, in response to Representative Johansen, explained
that the 18 cent per gallon gas tax has paid for most of the
interstate road systems. The HTF is the source for the funds
for the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956. The Federal-Aid
Highway Program (FAHP) is distributed to the states. He
indicated that a proposal to raise the gas tax by 10 cents per
gallon to recapitalize the HTF. He agreed that the
infrastructure in many states is mature, and offered that there
are compelling reasons for Alaska to receive a larger share of
federal funding. He said he was not certain how the argument
will hold up given that Alaska has opportunities to generate its
own revenue.
1:57:03 PM
MR. WORNUM, in response to Chair Wilson, stated that Washington
D.C. might understand that legislators cannot use the permanent
fund. However, he noted that Washington D.C., will notice that
Alaska is not taxing itself as other states.
1:58:19 PM
MR. FREER, in response to Chair Wilson, answered that he is not
certain if the AML Executive Director, Kathy Wasserman has had
discussions with other committee chairs, but offered that the
AML would be willing to bring the report to any committee.
1:58:51 PM
MR. FREER, in response to Representative Johansen, explained
that the Alaska Transportation Finance Study has been paid for
by diversified funding from the DOT&PF, the Matanuska-Susitna
Borough, the Municipality of Anchorage, the Association of
General Contractors (AGC). He related that additional funding
is being sought by other sources. In further response to
Representative Johansen, Mr. Freer answered that the report is
an AML report. He stated that the report lists a number of
options rather than recommendations. He offered that the AML
does not know what the right mix of funding will be to achieve
the goals of expanded state funding. He mentioned the AML
thought the proper forum for an adjudication of that would be by
the legislature.
1:59:44 PM
MS. MICHELS interjected that she received the CSI report last
week. She stated that the recommendations have not yet been
vetted by the AML, but that she plans to do so. She offered to
provide the committee with the results.
2:00:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN thanked Ms. Michels for hosting members
of the legislature in Nome.
2:00:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ inquired as to how much bonding authority
would be necessary for a fuel tax that generated $760 million
per year.
MR. WORNUM answered that a rough rule would be a factor of ten.
2:02:20 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Transportation Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:02
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| AK trans Fin Study (2).pdf |
HTRA 2/12/2009 1:00:00 PM |