Legislature(2001 - 2002)
03/27/2002 01:35 PM Senate CRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
March 27, 2002
1:35 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator John Torgerson, Chair
Senator Alan Austerman
Senator Randy Phillips
Senator Pete Kelly
Senator Georgianna Lincoln
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 314
"An Act relating to the taxation of mobile telecommunications
services by municipalities; and providing for an effective date."
HEARD AND HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 312
"An Act relating to enterprise zones."
HEARD AND HELD
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 135(JUD) am
"An Act relating to municipal fees for certain police protection
services and to a tenant's activities that result in the
imposition of those fees."
MOVED SCSCSHB 135 (CRA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
SB 312 - No previous action to record.
SB 314 - No previous action to record.
HB 135 - No previous action to record.
WITNESS REGISTER
Zach Warwick
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced SB 312
Pam La Bolle
President, Alaska State Chamber of Commerce
No address provided
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 312
Peter Freer
Department of Community and Economic Development
P.O Box 110800
Juneau, AK 99811-0800
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 312
Maridon Boario
Staff to Representative Gretchen Guess
Alaska State Capitol, Room 112
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HB 135
Nathan Johnson
Staff to Representative Gretchen Guess
Alaska State Capitol, Room 112
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 135
Tim Rogers
Municipality of Anchorage
P.O. Box 196650
Anchorage, AK 99519-6650
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 135
Dan Loring
No address provided
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 135
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 02-6, SIDE A
CHAIRMAN JOHN TORGERSON called the Senate Community & Regional
Affairs Committee meeting to order at 1:35 p.m. Present were
Senators Lincoln, Phillips, Austerman, Kelly and Chairman
Torgerson.
SB 314-MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATIONS TAX
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON announced HB 355 just came to the Senate so it
will overcome SB 314. Because HB 355 was not noticed for this
meeting, it would be heard at a later date in place of SB 314.
SB 314 was held in committee.
SB 312-ENTERPRISE ZONES
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON announced he didn't intend to move the bill
from committee that day, but he did want to hear it and determine
whether adjustments were necessary.
ZACH WARWICK, aide to Senator Therriault, explained that the bill
authorizes the governor to declare up to four enterprise zones
per year. It is designed to offer economic incentives for
businesses to locate within that area and hire people from that
area. The possible state and city/borough incentives are as
follows:
Local Incentives
· It reduces municipality's user or permit fees.
· Offers credits toward exemptions from property taxes.
· Offers flexibility in regulations like zoning, permitting
and exemptions from local ordinances.
· Offers lease or sale of the municipality's real property
within the zone as long as the property was not designated
for public use.
State Incentives
· 15 percent of the initial investment in the area would count
as a credit to state corporate income taxes.
· After a business operates in a zone for one year they would
qualify for a $500 corporate income tax credit for each new
employee hired.
These incentives would allow a company to invest in a certain
distressed economic zone of a city or municipality. In order to
get federal grants for federal economic zones there must be a
state or local economic zone program.
He pointed out that that they just learned there is a problem on
page 2, lines 5 & 6 that say, " 'eligible neighborhood
development organization' has the meaning given in
42U.S.C.5318(a)a." The problem arises within the code because it
states that in order to be an economic enterprise zone within the
state it must first be a federal economic zone. A change in
language would be necessary to deal with this problem.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON asked, "Why don't we just use ARDORs? (Alaska
Regional Development Organization)
MR. WARWICK wasn't clear about how ARDORs operate so he couldn't
answer the question.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON asked how an enterprise zone is operated. Is
there a general manager and who does the book work?
MR. WARWICK replied he thought it would be someone within the
city government but he wasn't sure.
SENATOR LINCOLN pointed out that the wording restricts enterprise
zones to urban areas rather than to the entire state. She didn't
believe the sponsor intended to exclude areas and was interested
in expanding the scope to include many Alaskan communities.
MR. WARWICK thought the bill was designed that way. There are
four designations allowed every year and each could last up to 20
years.
SENATOR LINCOLN reiterated her concern that current wording makes
rural areas ineligible.
MR. WARWICK didn't follow her interpretation.
SENATOR LINCOLN referred him to page 2, line 7-10.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON asked Mr. Warwick to confirm that was not the
intent.
MR. WARWICK responded it was not the intent to exclude rural
communities.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON stated they would review the wording.
SENATOR AUSTERMAN noted that Senator Drue Pearce worked on an
enterprise package several years age to encourage businesses to
come to Alaska. He asked whether that bill passed but was never
funded. He suggested that they check and see whether there would
be an inner tie between that piece of legislation and this.
Taking a business from one area and placing it in another because
the latter is a more depressed area doesn't help the growth of
Alaska. It simply satisfies the growth of one unit at the expense
of another. He expressed reservations about moving businesses
around Alaska rather than encouraging new businesses to come to
Alaska.
MR. WARWICK replied that the intent was to get more investing in
Alaska.
PAM LABOLLE, President of the Alaska State Chamber of Commerce,
testified in support of the legislation. It is their
understanding that it is to provide an incentive for business
development in depressed areas or communities. They feel that it
could enhance economic development opportunities throughout the
state.
She noted there is a British Columbia company that has developed
a process to use wood chips as fuel. There are many places in
Southeast that are depressed due to the faltering timber industry
and this type of operation could offer them an economic option.
She thought the impact of spruce bark beetle kill on the Kenai
Peninsula might be cushioned if they were to use this process on
those trees. "Legislation like this could help bring a company
activity like that into those parts of the state…"
PETER FREER, a local government specialist with the Department of
Community and Economic Development, has spent most of his career
working as a government specialist with Southeast communities and
is now managing economic development programs.
He looked at the bill recently and thought there might be an
issue related to a requirement for federal designation for
enterprise zones prior to a state designation being able to take
place. There is a provision for state designation of enterprise
zones and a submittal of those zones to the Secretary of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) for consultation among various
department secretaries before that designation is granted.
Many other states have enterprise zone legislation in place and
he could furnish examples of how others have use this legislation
to promote industry and business development within economically
distressed areas.
The federal legislation is not anti rural, but is primarily meant
to focus on urban areas that are distressed. However, he has
found instances of rural locations in New Mexico and other
western states where enterprise zones have been created and used
as an incentive to attract business.
It does appear as though there would need to be a federal
designation before the state designation took place. Another way
of doing this is for the state to make the designation and submit
it to the HUD secretary who consults with the Secretary of
Interior and several others and then the designation is made.
There are not a lot of these in the country but he did find the
section of the U.S. code that deals with enterprise zones. It
appears that the HUD secretary has the authority to designate up
to 100 enterprise zones across the country. He didn't know how
many are currently designated but is in the process of
determining the status of those designations.
Enterprise zones do appear to be very well used devices for
promoting economic development so clearly there may be benefits
to this type of legislation.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON asked whether he thought that consultation
with the HUD secretary would be enough to allow the federal tax
credit.
MR. FREER replied he would need to research that further before
giving a conclusive answer, but would be happy to continue to
look into it and provide any information he could to the
committee to clarify the issues.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON said he wanted to work on the bill, but he
knew there would be many questions. He asked Mr. Freer to discuss
Senator Lincoln's concerns regarding the rural issue.
MR. FREER replied there are several programs. The enterprise
program is actually a designation rather than a program. There
are programs within the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
such as Rural Development and The Champion Communities Program.
There are a number of communities in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta
that are still designated under this program. He would have to
check and see what has happened as a result of that designation
in those communities. The Metlakatla Indian Reservation is the
one federally designated empowerment zone currently in the state.
They received that designation as a result of the collapse of
their resource economies in fishing and timber and it has brought
them considerable benefits in the form of federal grants.
SENATOR AUSTERMAN asked whether there was anything stopping
communities from offering incentives to attract business.
MR. FREER replied municipalities have broad power under state law
and he thought they would have the authority to design local tax
incentives to attract business.
SENATOR AUSTERMAN asked what the enterprise zone does for the
municipality other than the two points listed above.
MR. FREER thought it might open the door to some federal
assistance but in what form and what amounts he wasn't prepared
to say.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON commented that federal law defines an eligible
neighborhood but doesn't address cities and boroughs.
SENAOTR LINCOLN asked members to be aware that federal
definitions are not necessarily the same as those used by Alaska.
It's important to be aware of the potential differences.
She supports the concept of the legislation, but doesn't want to
close any doors for anyone in any area of the state.
MR. FREER said he would be happy to provide examples where
similar programs have benefited rural areas. He acknowledged
Senator Lincoln's concern is valid and noted that seven of
Alaska's largest cities might be rural under a federal
definition.
SENATOR AUSTERMAN asked Mr. Freer whether he had read AS
44.33.311, which is how an enterprise zone has been defined.
MR. FREER replied he has not looked it up yet, but does have a
detailed definition of enterprise zones in federal law.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON asked whether there was a size restriction on
an enterprise zone.
MR. FREER replied a census tract is identified as the preferred
unit. He thought you could aggregate census tracts because other
states have done so. Alaska has 154 census tracts in its 27
census areas and the threshold population for a tract is 10,000.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON thought using the census tract would address
Senator Lincoln's concern. He then asked whether we could make
smaller units through state law.
MR. FREER said he would be more comfortable checking the federal
law to see whether subunits are allowed before giving an answer.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON replied they already determined they didn't
care what the federal requirements are because they could consult
directly with the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.
MR. FREER said the minimum size might be a requirement in the
state's establishment of the zones.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON asked Mr. Freer to work with his staff, Mary
Jackson, regarding the requested information.
He asked Mr. Warwick the status of the similar House bill and
whether is had been amended.
MR. WARWICK replied it was in House Finance and it had been
amended to the current Senate bill form.
There was no further testimony.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON held the bill in committee.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON called for a brief at-ease at 2:00 p.m. and
then called the meeting back to order at 2:05 p.m.
HB 135-EXCESSIVE POLICE SERVICES:FEES/ TENANCY
MARIDON BORIO, Staff to Representative Gretchen Guess, asked that
Nathan Johnson present the bill via teleconference.
NATHAN JOHNSON, Legislative Aide to Representative Gretchen
Guess, explained the bill was designed to enable municipal
governments to enact an ordinance to assess a fee for excessive
police visits. The fee is granted lien status against the
nuisance property. The municipality would have to define
"excessive" and make provisions to exempt property owners that
are taking prompt corrective action. They have also added a
provision to give the landlord grounds to evict a tenant for any
conduct or behavior that might result in a fee under the statute.
TIM ROGERS, Legislative Program Coordinator for the Municipality
of Anchorage, said the municipality supports the bill and there
is a letter in the packets from the deputy police chief for the
municipality giving some reasons for their support. Last year the
Municipal Assembly unanimously passed a resolution in support of
the bill. The civil abatement process is the only tool currently
available and it is lengthy, costly and requires going to court
to resolve the issue. This bill offers an intermediate step to
encourage landlords to take action to solve some of the crack
house problems they currently have.
DAN LORING from the Fairview Neighborhood district spoke in
personal support of the bill. It will help make improvements to
that neighborhood.
There was no further testimony on HB 135.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON asked for a motion to adopt amendment #1.
SENATOR LINCOLN said she met with Representative Guess to discuss
the amendment and she agreed to the changes.
SENATOR LINCOLN made a motion to adopt 22-LS0421\SA.1 Cook 2/5/02
as amendment #1. On page 1, line 14 "that involve" is deleted and
"unless the calls are reasonable justified or involve potential
child neglect," is inserted. On page 2, line 1, following
"11.41.270." insert "An ordinance adopted under this section
shall define 'reasonably justified' for purposes of this
subsection. (b)"
She wanted to ensure that in cases of potential child neglect
people weren't reluctant to call in a report because they didn't
want to risk imposition of a fine.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON thought the second part of the amendment was a
bit confusing.
MR. JOHNSON said he was a bit surprised and wished that
Representative Guess could speak to the change.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON reminded Mr. Johnson that Senator Lincoln met
with Representative Guess and she agreed to the changes. He then
asked him to state his objections for the record.
MR. JOHNSON said, there is a bit of a conflict because all calls
are probably reasonably justified. They aren't talking about
frivolous calls; there might be justified calls to the property
every day of the week. "What we're trying to get at is the fact
that the conduct of inhabitants is repeated and continuing to
such an extent that we're trying to reach the problem and get
some leverage for the community to abate or correct that
behavior." He's a bit confused by the intent of the amendment
because most calls are probably justified; they're after the
chronic problem. "With that said, I'll let the committee do their
will."
SENATOR LINCOLN replied this is the will of the sponsor.
CHAIRMAN TORGERSON asked for further discussion and there was
none.
There was no objection to the adoption to amendment #1.
SENATOR AUSTERMAN stated his support of the bill because in some
areas of the state it is well justified. It is a good concept.
His only concern was that some bars around the state have an
atmosphere that generates problems. In his community, bars are
very quick to call the police to try to control a problem before
it gets out of hand. He is concerned that this could be used
against those bars and might cause them to quit making calls
thereby exasperating the problem and leading to someone getting
badly hurt.
SENATOR AUSTERMAN made a motion to move CSHB 135 (CRA) from
committee with attached fiscal note and individual
recommendations.
There being no objection, CSHB 135 (CRA) moved from committee
with individual recommendations.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the
Community and Regional Affairs Committee meeting was adjourned at
2:15 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|