Legislature(1997 - 1998)
04/23/1998 06:15 PM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
MINUTES SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE 23 April, 1998 6:15 p.m. TAPES SFC 98 # 138, Side A (000-592) Side B (592-000) Side B (589-523) CALL TO ORDER Senator Drue Pearce, Co-Chair, re-convened the meeting at approximately 6:15 p.m. PRESENT In addition to Co-Chair Pearce, Senators Sharp, Donley, Torgerson, Adams, Parnell and Phillips were present when the meeting was convened. Also Attending: MIKE GREANY, Director, Division of Legislative Finance and aides to committee members and other members of the Legislature. See Summary Information for list of those participating in public testimony. SUMMARY INFORMATION SENATE BILL NO. 229 "An Act making appropriations for the operating and loan program expenses of state government, for certain programs, and to capitalize funds; making appropriations under art. IX, sec. 17(c), Constitution of the State of Alaska, from the constitutional budget reserve fund; and providing for an effective date." SENATE BILL NO. 230 "An Act making appropriations for the operating and capital expenses of the state's integrated comprehensive mental health program; and providing for an effective date." SENATE BILL NO. 231 "An Act making and amending capital appropriations and reappropriations and capitalizing funds; and providing for an effective date." SENATE BILL NO. 292 "An Act making supplemental appropriations; making, amending, and repealing capital or other appropriations; making appropriations to capitalize funds; and providing for an effective date." The purpose of this meeting was to hear public testimony on the FY99 budgets. Co-Chair Pearce announced testimony would be limited to two minutes per speaker. She added that elevators to the Anchorage Legislative Information Office were out of order and arrangements were being made to accommodate those who were unable to use the stairs. She also added that written testimony would be accepted. Senator Sharp offered a motion to adopt the Senate Finance Subcommittee budgets closed to date along with Mission and Measures statements previously incorporated in SB 229 and SB 230 into HB 325 and HB 326 as the working draft Senate Finance Committee Substitutes for the operating budget bills. There was no objection and Co-Chair Pearce so ordered. Public testimony speakers were as follows: TOM BOUTIN testified in Juneau. His comments included stressing a need for budget discipline. In his opinion, if the Legislature had not adopted the strict budget it had in the last few years, State government would be unable to meet any of the ongoing and newly recognized fiscal needs. He further stated that if the budget plan as submitted by the Administration had been adopted, the budget reserve would be much smaller. He spoke of earlier Administrations and Legislative sessions and cuts he felt they should have made. He also spoke of oil revenues and rural representation, surmising that no Alaskan had a superior claim to state- owned resources. He advised that the Legislature was safe in having a plan in place and sticking to it. In general, he supported the budget cuts proposed by the Legislature. Senator Phillips commented that he was hearing similar sentiments from his constituents in Eagle River. FRED HILTNER, a primary school teacher, testified in Juneau. He voiced his support of increased funding for the Healthy Families Program. He spoke of the importance of early intervention. In his opinion, waiting for preschool to start developmental training and trying to remedy the effects of poor parent-child bonding and interaction was too late. He talked about the program saying it served parents as well as teens with newborns and worked with families with factors such as difficult childhood histories, lack of parenting information or skills, mental health issues, alcohol or drug use histories, violence, poverty or single parenting. He stressed the benefits of home visiting as preventing abuse, bonding activities, emotional support to new parents, education, ongoing screening, linkage to a primary health care provider, timely immunizations, building trusting relationships, teaching problem solving skills and referral to local services. He summarized by saying that increased funding was needed to allow for growth of the existing program. He warned that at-risk children needed support now. They could be served now, or spend money on them later in cost related to medical, educational, social and the criminal justice systems, he stated. Senator Donley told Mr. Hiltner that the Legislature had been investing more money into the Healthy Families Program over the years. He countered that the state was currently running a $700-800 million deficit and wanted Mr. Hiltner to suggest where funds should be shifted to accommodate this program. Mr. Hiltner responded that it was documented that preventative programs saved expenses later on. If there was the early intervention, he speculated there would be less need for the more expensive programs later in the child's life. He spoke of situations in his teaching experience where this was evident. Senator Donley argued that didn't help with the situation the Legislature was faced with today. Mr. Hiltner said he was not familiar with the entire budget and asked if Senator Donley saw a program more important than this. There was further debate between Senator Donley and Mr. Hiltner. Senator Donley's comments basically stated his support of this program countered with the Legislature's need for input on where other cuts could be made to accommodate the more important programs. Mr. Hiltner offered he would be willing to forgo some road-building infrastructure in favor of this program. Senator Adams suggested the Legislative salaries should be cut and the session shortened. He felt the question of where cuts should be made was unfair since Mr. Hiltner couldn't know the entire budget package. Senator Donley restated his desire to get suggestions from the public on where to reduce state spending. He restated his agreement with the witness on the importance of the Healthy Families Program. He criticized the Governor on his failure to make reduction recommendations. Senator Adams argued that the issue of revenue generation also needed to be discussed. Next to testify in Juneau was JERRY MCBEATH. He was a professor at the University of Alaska and spoke on behalf of the United Academics, which he explained was a new statewide organization of faculty. He addressed his comments to SB 229 and the issue of university funding. He referred to the House of Representative's agreement to adopt level funding and to increase that by $1.6 million, which would result in partial funding of employee contracts. He urged the Senate to do better and fund the regent's request of $171 million. He realized from earlier discussion that the committee was not considering this, or the Governor's request. Therefore he asked that the committee consider funding at the FY98 level plus full funding of employee contracts. He gave three reasons in support of this funding allocation. First, he believed that by doing so, the Legislature would be sending a message of support to students, who were dispirited at the continued program cuts and faculty, who were leaving to find better jobs elsewhere. He felt increased funding would improve moral and keep students and faculty from leaving. The second reason he gave was that it would be a signal to the world that this state did value higher education. He said he would like to go to conferences and be able to speak of the value his Legislature placed on higher education. The third reason he believed, fully funding employee contracts would constitute fair treatment of university employees. He spoke of other employee contracts that were to receive full funding and he wanted to see the same with university employees. He summarized by saying he had been at the university for 22 years and was strongly committed to it and the State Of Alaska. He realized there were some rough years ahead and felt the university needed messages of hope and support right now. VALERIE THERRIEN testified next in Juneau. She was the Legislative Chair of the Governor's Advisory Board on Alcohol and Drug Abuse. She requested the committee rethink it's cuts to the General Relief Medical program. According to Ms. Therrien, her group would be one of the groups hard hit by the reduction in funding down to zero. She said most if the beneficiaries in the program had been removed from Social Security Benefits as a result of federal changes. These participants had concerns about their medical conditions beyond their addiction disorders. By cutting this funding, it removed their safety net, she said. She warned that cutting the General Relief program funding would not stop the cost of treatment just shift it to the local communities and hospitals and those individuals with insurance who would therefore have to pay higher costs. Senator Parnell stated that Ms. Therrien was the first person to testify honestly on the issue and to say that the medical care was not cut off, just shifted. He felt that was an important clarification and that the shift was a policy call that the committee needed to wrestle with. Next to testify in Juneau was BRENDA KNAPP, member of the State Mental Health Board and also Executive Director of the Juneau Alliance for the Mentally Ill. Like Ms. Therrien, she came to speak in favor of General Relief Medical and urge its reinstatement. Specifically, she shared with the committee why the program was important for the people served at JAMI. According to Ms. Knapp, half of the participants were not eligible for Medicaid, and only some of those could be served with other resources. The GRM program offered some ability for psychiatric care and to cover the costs of medication and therefore could help keep some of the patients in the community, she shared. She spoke of the costs for outpatient medication versus the cost for inpatient treatment and housing. She added that these patients had other medical needs as well. The last person to testify in Juneau was MICHAEL BUTLER. He represented the Juneau Area State Parks Citizen Advisory Board and he described the group and its directive to promote, expand and protect the integrity of the parks. He spoke in support of funding for the deferred maintenance needs in the State Park's budget. He detailed the trails, cabins and other features needing upkeep and their state of disrepair. He talked about the importance of upkeep in preventing the need for complete renovation. The committee began hearing testimony from people from the Legislative Information Offices across the state beginning with Anchorage. Co-Chair Pearce announced that she would call upon the first three people signed up for Anchorage, then hear from the first two in Fairbanks and move around to the different sites hearing from one or two speakers until all sites had an opportunity to speak. She hoped this would avoid any one community from waiting until the very end to be heard. The Healy moderator interrupted asking that her site be heard after Fairbanks. Co-Chair Pearce noted the request but said she hadn't received any information on people signed up from Healy and that she would be calling on communities in the order their sign-up sheets were received. First to testify via teleconference from Anchorage was DWIGHT SMITH. He introduced himself as a physician and faculty member of the Alaska Family Practice Residency Program and also worked with Anchorage Neighborhood Health Center. He commented in support of the WAMMI budget, saying that only four states, including Alaska, had no medical schools and contracted out to another state for their medical students to be trained. He was concerned about Senator Donley's action to cut $240,000 from the WAMMI budget, which he felt would be totally devastating to the program. He referred to the House of Representatives budget actions and concerns about students trained by Alaska then going to other states. He stated Alaska had a 48 percent return rate, which was higher than average. Counting all WAMMI training, Alaska had a return rate of 80 percent, according to Mr. Smith. He spoke of HB 193, which would require graduates who did not return to Alaska to repay the state. Therefore, he felt the problem of repayment was answered and he wondered why the budget was now being cut. He continued by listing other benefits to the WAMMI contract with the University of Washington. These included faculty interaction. He stressed the need to watch out for the long-term affects of cuts to the WAMMI program. JIM PARKER testified via teleconference from Anchorage. He was the supervising attorney for Disability Law Center of Alaska and he described his agency. His organization was concerned about the proposed elimination of the GMR. He felt it was a vital part of the state. He stipulated the restrictions of the program to only cover the most necessary medical services. He shared the opinion of Ms. Knapp that many people would be in danger of institutionalization or need costly inpatient treatment if they did not have access to the GMR program. He pointed out that the process to obtain Medicaid coverage could take years and that many participants of his program were awaiting determination of Medicaid eligibility. For many of those people, the GMR program was their only way to obtain medical services during this period of time, he stressed. Finishing the first Anchorage teleconference round was ED WUSSELL. He was the president of Alaska Right to Life. He spoke against GRM spending for abortion services. He conveyed his intolerance of abortion and public funding for such. His organization supported the other services provided by the GMR program. He commented on public employees, saying he viewed them as public servants but had been unable to get straight answers from them relating to the use of GMR funds. He felt these employees were lying to the Legislature. The committee then heard testimony via teleconference from Fairbanks. The first to speak was MARIE SCHOLLE, chair of the Staff Alliance Governor's Council [undecipherable] and also vice president of the University Alumni Association. She testified in favor of the university budget, realizing that the Board of Regent's request seemed unrealistic at that point. However, she urged the committee to consider the Governor's request. She spoke to the importance of the university to the state. She also talked about the need for additional revenue sources for the university such as the earnings reserve account, capping the permanent fund, land endowments, endowments from the permanent fund or sales or income taxes. She stated that it was time for Alaskans to pay their own way. She felt the university should not be continually cut just so citizens did not have to pay taxes. PAT IVEY was next to testify via teleconference from Fairbanks. She spoke in support of full funding for the university. She described the effects of past budget cuts. This included retired faculty returning to teach classes on a volunteer basis, other classes disappeared and Ph.D. candidates unable to continue their schooling because they could not get a committee of major professors together. She urged the Senate to continue funding the university to the maximum extent possible. If the Governor's request could not be funded, she begged the salary increase to at least be funded. She requested the university employees be treated the same as other state employees. The committee then heard testimony from CHIEF CHARLIE FANNON via teleconference from the Mat-Su Legislative Information Office. He spoke as an advocate for the proposed Mat-Su Youth Detention Facility. He told the committee there were three law enforcement entities in the Mat-Su area; The City of Palmer, The City of Wasilla and the Alaska State Troopers and he said he was speaking on all of their behalf. Last year alone, the City of Wasilla arrested 299 kids and the closest youth detention facility was the McLaughlin Youth Facility in Anchorage, according to Chief Fannon. About three hours was required to transport and process the offenders, he said. He was concerned that the proposed Mat-Su facility would be cut from the budget. He stressed a real and pressing need for the facility shown by the loss of 900 patrol hours per year to the job of supervising and transporting the youths. He shared that the youths could not be incarcerated around adults and therefore required the separate handling procedures. In his opinion, the juvenile offenders who should be confined victimized the communities and would continue to do so because there was no room in the current facility. Reasons why the offenders could not be released to the community included liability, some of the youths were intoxicated, and the time of arrest was often at night. The McLaughlin Youth Detention Center was overcrowded he added. Healy was the next community to speak to the committee via teleconference. KIM GRAHAM went first and addressed her comments to funding for the Alaska State Troopers along the highway system. Currently only Nenana and Cantwell had a full-time trooper stationed there, according to Ms. Graham. She requested a trooper for Healy. She told the committee that Nenana had city police as well as the trooper. If cost prevented having a trooper in all three communities, she asked that the trooper currently stationed in Nenana be moved to Healy. Next to testify via teleconference from Healy was LINDA DINGBAUM. She also spoke in favor of funding for a state trooper in Healy, saying she was representing three other Healy residents who were unable to attend the meeting. She said Representative Jeannette James had said there had been funding for the position but because of a lack of housing, the position was never filled and the funds were withdrawn. Ms. Dingbaum felt housing should not be an issue since there was housing available and troopers in other posts were required to secure their housing. She spoke of increased population in the area during the summer in addition to many travelers passing through. She wondered if the reason there was no trooper assigned to Healy was because there was no Native base. If so, she argued that was discrimination. She said she didn't want to see the community continue to grow and become unsafe because there was no law enforcement. It was her understanding that Homer did not have a trooper until House Speaker Gail Phillips pulled strings and got a position stationed in her district. She indicated that other Healy residents would be faxing written comments in support of funding for a trooper position. Senator Donley shared that he was the chair of the Department of Public Safety budget subcommittee. Last year, the Legislature added $180,000 to the trooper detachment line item, which gave the executive branch additional funding for two additional trooper positions, he said. However he stated, the Administration diverted the funding to other expenses. This was the first he heard of a housing difficulty and he would have welcomed that information when the subcommittee addressed the matter of positions. He spoke of housing program receipts to alleviate concerns in other communities. He continued speaking on the proposed allocations to the department for FY99, which was higher than last year. The budget would allow for a 14 or 15 position increase and the department had the discretion where the troopers would be placed. He suggested members of the community bring their concerns to the DPS and gave them other suggestions as to how they could work to have the position assigned to Healy. The final person to testify via teleconference from Healy was SHIRLEY HAMMEL. As a restaurant owner, she told the committee of various arrests she had witnessed over the years. In her opinion, it took too long for a trooper to travel from Nenana or Cantwell to Healy when they were needed. She commented on the tremendous tourism growth due to the proximity to Denali National Park and the need for law enforcement to respond to highway accidents. Tape #138 Side B, 7:05 p.m. Co-Chair Pearce announced the committee would hear from three more people waiting in Anchorage. The Anchorage site was having difficulty and Co-Chair Pearce moved on to Fairbanks. The next teleconference testifier from Fairbanks was JUDY WILD-CURRY. She was the program manager for the Fairbanks Healthy Families Program and she spoke to the benefits of the program. Although this was a new program, she said positive affects were already apparent. She told the committee of a proposed study using a control group of families participating and families not participating in the program. She agreed that a control group would be beneficial, but she also felt that the limited resources were better utilized to provide home visitation services. She spoke of control group studies done in Hawaii and Arizona, which showed the importance of the program. She continued telling of the advantages participants realized such as a more nurturing home environment with more positive parent/child interactions and outcomes. These families had less physical punishment and less potential for child abuse and neglect. According to Ms. Wild-Curry, there were no confirmed cases of child abuse or neglect. She then talked about the high rate of abuse in Alaska and the National Institute of Justice study that linked child abuse and neglect to future juvenile and adult crime. She shared her expertise in working in this area. She summarized the need to pay a little for prevention now to avoid paying larger amounts later in terms of money spent and societal impact. She felt the Healthy Families Program was cost effective. RONNIE ROSENBERG testified next via teleconference from Fairbanks. Her comments were in support of restoration of funding for the GRM program. She told the committee she worked on a volunteer basis with many GRM beneficiaries. Without this program, she warned, people would not have access to medical care until it was too late. She gave examples of people suffering seizure disorders and diabetics. These people could be brought to the hospital only after they experienced seizures or were in a coma, but once recovered, would be released with no way to buy their medication. She offered that if the problem was that the Legislature did not want to fund abortion, or felt that the Administration had misused the funds, there were several mechanisms available that would not violate equal protection requirements. She gave an analogy to having a pimple and cutting off your head, because only 13 percent of the funding went toward abortion. She stressed that something needed to be done for the people who had already fallen through every safety net and were waiting up to three years for SSI determination. She detailed the reasons for the long delays in the Medicaid qualification, one being the lack of Social Security judge position in Alaska. She suggested using a portion of Permanent Fund earnings that would be deposited into the earnings reserve account to fund this program. Teleconference testimony was next taken from St. Paul. JOHN MERCULIEF, the city's manager, spoke in behalf of the St. Paul Harbor Improvement Project. He told the committee the community was impacted by the fisheries industry and that the city had taken steps to improve their infrastructure to meet the demands placed on the harbor. He stated that St. Paul had been the second largest contributor of fishery related taxes since 1991. However, the success of the harbor presented some challenges, he said. The original design did not anticipate the ongoing and growing need of more than 200 vessels coming and going. He stressed that the harbor facility was in need of improvement. Safety and infrastructure were at risk. He detailed the current facility operations and the planned improvements listing the funding already secured from the Army Corps of Engineers and proposed St. Paul matching funds. He continued speaking on the anticipated increased activities and revenues the improved harbor would generate for the state. The committee then heard from the remaining testifiers in the Mat-Su L.I.O. CAROL KANE, Associate Superintendent for the Wasilla School District and representative of the Greater Wasilla Chamber of Commerce spoke via teleconference. She read into the record a letter from the Chamber of Commerce in support of the Mat-Su Youth Detention Center. She also had a list of 15 signatures from members of different social service agencies also in support of the facility. She listed the agencies represented in the petition. The groups she represented felt the detention center was important for the wellbeing of their community. The final teleconference speaker from Mat-Su was PATRICIA HICKS. She told the committee she was a mental health consumer waiting for SSI benefits and that she relied on GMR to provide her medication and therapy. She agreed that the program should be regulated for pregnant women, but felt that other recipients should not be penalized. The committee returned to the Anchorage teleconference site to take testimony. JEFF GROSS [affiliation undecipherable - CEO of the Anchorage Neighborhood Health Center?] requested the reinstatement of the GRM program. As a community health center, his organization was responsible to provide health care to all persons in need and they were the largest primary care facility in Anchorage. He listed the number of employees and patients seen each year and told the committee abortions were not preformed in their facilities. He stated that many patients needed GRM, as it was their only entitlement for medical care. These were often the poorest and sickest patients. ALLISON MENDAL testified next via teleconference from Anchorage. She also testified in support of GRM. As an attorney, she had no vested interest in the program, but felt it was immoral for the Legislature to cut funding for the program, which benefited those, least able to defend themselves, access other resources or to campaign against the Legislators. She referred to other testimony about critical emergency needs being met but not ongoing treatment needs. She felt it was wrong to strike against the individuals needing services because of prejudice against women who got abortions under the program. She felt if the Legislator could not address the abortion issue directly, they had no business making decisions about the GRM program. Next to testify via teleconference from Anchorage was REBECCA EAMES, Chief of Field Services for the Division of Public Assistance. Her comments addressed the operating budget funding for the field component. She told the committee she was testifying on her own time because she was concerned about the proposed cuts to the Governor's request, which would eliminate staff funding. She spoke of the new program successes and reduced costs as well as the number of people who had obtained employment and moved off public assistance. Without funding for the staff positions, she said the division would be unable to do its job of moving people off public assistance. JOHN RILEY testified via teleconference from Anchorage. He was the Medical Co-Director of the Anchorage Neighborhood Health Center and spoke in favor of the GRM program. He described those covered by the program as earning less than $300 a month. He talked about the services provided. In his opinion, the primary benefit of the program was the medication and supply coverage because there was no other resource to cover the medications to stabilize and control conditions. If left untreated, these conditions had severe and life-threatening complications, according to Mr. Riley, and it was more cost-effective to prevent the complications than to shift the cost of dealing with the complications when the patients were hospitalized. He concluded saying that GRM was an important part of the safety net for the neediest of Alaskans. The committee then heard from JEREMY VERMILYEA via teleconference from Anchorage. He testified in support of full funding for the University of Alaska. As a U of A graduate and attorney, he felt there were many reasons why full funding was important and he listed a few. He speculated approximately 50 percent of Alaska residents were in some way connected to the university either as staff, student, alumni or relative of one of the above. The university was the development of the only true natural resource in Alaska, according to Mr. Vermilyea. He voiced concerns about sending students Outside to obtain their education, saying that three of five of them would not return to the state. He urged the need to look at university funding as an investment. He warned that if the investment was not made, the Legislature was not investing in the future of the state. He pointed out that the state was currently paying outside skilled workers to be employed in high-tech fields. These employees were then leaving with their earnings rather than reinvesting in the economy, he stated. The next person to testify via teleconference from Anchorage was KEVIN TRITT, the President of the Union of Students of the University of Alaska, Anchorage. He also supported full funding of the University. He did recognize however, with the intent of the Republican Majority to reduce the budget, that flat funding might be the best seen. He still wanted to encourage the Legislature to fund the negotiated union contract. He spoke of the trend of flat funding the university and no funding of the employee contracts. He said what was happening was a decrease every year in the amount of general fund support. He felt the cuts were directly impacting the academic offerings and services and also moral. He didn't think it was in the best interest of the state and the university to drive students Outside. He addressed the issue of alternative funding sources and said he didn't feel the matter had been seriously considered. He suggested income tax, endowment funds or the use of permanent fund dividends. He spoke to the political reality that until enough people complained about the cuts, the alternatives would not be considered. JOHN MORKAL then testified via teleconference from Anchorage in support of University funding. He served as a Senator with the Union of Students of the University of Alaska, Anchorage, was president of Phi Beta Chapter of Delta Kappa Epsilon, [and was also president of another organization, which was undecipherable]. He asked the committee whether underutilized graduate programs and maintenance of [undecipherable] development in the Fairbanks campus was as important as inadequately funded programs, which were operating at near capacity in the Anchorage campus. He next urged the committee to avoid using the permanent fund for any reason, particularly to boost the bottom line with an endowment for the university system. He suggested establishing a land trust and demand responsible development of the U of A lands and other resources available. The last person to be heard via teleconference from Anchorage in this round was MARY JONES-LEWIS. She introduced herself as a teen service worker for a home visitation program with the Healthy Families program. She told the committee she worked one on one with families that were having a hard time with everyday life in raising their kids in a health lifestyle. She stressed that if the program were cut, it would harm the trust and relationships with the participating families. She spoke about improvements she witnessed with families she had worked with. Senator Phillips, acting chair, called upon testifiers from Valdez to speak. There was no response from the Valdez site and Senator Phillips moved on to hear from Fairbanks testifiers. DAVID LEONE, Executive Director of the Resource Center for Parents and Children, testified via teleconference from Fairbanks. He referred to the various testimony heard during the meeting. He related the difficulties of determining the state budget with what each individual faced with their personal budgets. He counted 29 testifiers, all but three of whom testified in support of some social, human service or education need. To him, that said people felt compassionate with people who were having problems, whether they were poor, sick, mentally disabled, children, parents, etc. He realized this was an election year, but felt that taxes should be imposed to fund these programs. Next to testify was HOLLY ABSHIRE [phonetically spelled] via teleconference from Fairbanks. She spoke in support of full funding for the University of Alaska, Board of Regent's request, or at least the $3.5 million needed for the employee contracts. She talked about the importance of the university in her life. She felt the university had been responsible in making due with less by prioritizing its functions, streamlining and downsizing. She said it served the state well to provide education for its residents and also attract out of state students with quality education. The final person to testify via teleconference from Fairbanks was JOHN SLONE [phonetically spelled]. He told the committee he was an insulin dependent diabetic and had benefited from the GMR program. He detailed the damage caused by untreated diabetes and the two-year process it took before he was able to receive Medicaid benefits. The GMR program was the only way he was able to receive treatment and medication in the interim. Senator Phillips again called upon the Valdez site and then the Tok site with no response from either. He then called upon Kenai. JOANN HAGEN was first to testify via teleconference from Kenai. She spoke on behalf of the Kenai Public Health Center and described the services they provided and the facility they occupied. She told the committee they worked out of the basement of the Kenai City Hall, which the clinic had outgrown. She stressed that the crowded conditions were unsafe for clients or staff and were inaccessible for wheelchair bound patients. She urged the committee fund the new health center facility. The next person to testify via teleconference from Kenai was Mayor MIKE NAVARRE. He told the committee it would be receiving a copy of a resolution passed by the Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly in support of some of the initiatives proposed for use with the Medicaid funding. This included early intervention, child protection and extending insurance coverage for uninsured and underinsured. He also spoke in support of the Kenai Public Health Center. The City of Kenai would donate the land for the facility and the Kenai Peninsula Borough was considering the feasibility of establishing the health center and the hospital in one location, according to Mr. Navarre. He made further comments about the funding sources to operate the proposed facility and the inadequacies of the current facility. The final person to testify via teleconference from Kenai was KATHY SCOTT. She also spoke in favor of funding for the Kenai Public Health Center. She told the committee of a report she did under contract for the City of Kenai about the health center. She focused on potential OSHA liabilities of continued operation from the current facility and listed the many safety violations. She pointed out that the facility was not ADA accessible. Senator Phillips called upon people from Kodiak to testify. There was no response from the site. He then called upon MERRITT MITCHELL to testify via teleconference from Homer. He spoke on behalf of the University of Alaska as the holder of the statewide seat on the University of Alaska Alumni Board of Directors. He also sat on the Katchemak Bay Campus Community Advisory Council. He urged full funding of the University budget as well as funding for the employee contracts. He supported an income tax and use of the permanent fund to fund university functions. Also testifying via teleconference from Homer was RICH PATTON. He represented the Association of Site Councils of the South Peninsula Schools and he listed the makeup of the organization. He requested increased school funding for the Kenai Peninsula. He told the committee he would be faxing a petition of 300 signatures from parents asking for the school funding. Senator Phillips called upon the sites in Valdez, Kodiak, Tok and Anchorage with no responses. There was one person to testify via teleconference from Sitka, DEFIANCE GREGG. She told the committee she was a lobbyist for the poor. She spoke in favor of funding for the General Medical Relief program. Tape #139 Side A The committee resumed hearing from the Anchorage teleconference site. CONNIE MARKIS testified in support of the GMR program. SHARLENE LOCOSHONAS testified next via teleconference from Anchorage. She spoke of being a recipient of GMR benefits and the program's importance to her and others in financial crisis. She shared her experiences with vision services and medication provided under the GRM program. She said charities only covered some of the necessary services and couldn't be counted on to make up the difference. The committee heard statements from two people in Naknek. First was LYNN BENFIELD. As a commercial fisher, she spoke in favor of the Fish and Game advisory committee system, which she was a member of the local committee. She urged the committee to fully fund the advisory committee program and other ADF&G requests. She gave her opinion as to the importance of advisory committees in the regulatory process. She spoke of over 60 percent funding reductions to the department over the last 13 years. She stressed the importance and self-sufficiency of the commercial fishing industry The other person to testify via teleconference from Naknek was SUE ASPELUND. She was the Secretary of the Naknek/Kvelak Fish and Game Advisory Committee and spoke in support of funding for the advisory committee system. She also opposed cuts to the Board Support System of the Board of Fisheries and the Board of Game and told the committee of their importance. She concluded by voicing her support for funding of the Fish and Wildlife Service to adequately enforce the regulations. Senator Sharp advised that the Fish and Game Advisory Committees were being funded at the same level as the year before. The committee began hearing testimony from Dillingam, beginning with ROSE FISHER. She testified in support of the Dillingham Senior Assisted Living program. She shared experiences as the past director of the local senior center. She told of hardships of elders and their families whose care needs could not be met in the community. Organizations have been working to find economic ways to serve the needs of the elderly without resorting to sending them to Anchorage for long-term care, according to Ms. Fisher. She listed the groups involved in a task force. She urged the Legislature to consider the economic benefits of providing services to the seniors in Dillingham rather than sending them to hospitals in Anchorage. She referred to the economic hardships in the Bristol Bay area due to poor fishing and the suggestion that the senior housing project should receive a smaller share of the allocation. She didn't think that was fair to the elderly and the people who had worked hard on the project. JOYCE WOJCIEHOWSKI was the other person who testified via teleconference from Dillingham. She was a nurse at Naknek Hospital and worked for the Bristol Bay Health Corporation. She testified in support of the Healthy Families program. She felt there would be wonderful long-term benefits from the program. The committee returned to hearing testimony from Anchorage and KIRA MORRIS spoke next. She told the committee her experience with heart trouble. She suffered a heart attach, lost her job and had to rely on the GRM for her medical needs. She was concerned the program would be eliminated and stressed that if she did not receive the medications provided by GRM she would die. JENNY MURRY testified next via teleconference from Anchorage. She spoke on behalf of the American Cancer Society. She urged the committee to match the House of Representative's funding for tobacco control programs. She reminded the committee of the testimony heard last year in support of the tobacco tax. Of those testifiers, most supported the use of tax revenues for tobacco programs, according to Ms. Murry. She detailed the revenues generated and the percentage requested for tobacco control programs. She gave statistics of the medical consequences of smoking. Senator Phillips called upon the Mat-Su site to hear testimony. There was no response. Senator Phillips called upon GAIL SMITH to testify in person in Juneau. She spoke in favor of full funding for state parks. She had been involved in parks related organizations in Kodiak. She pointed out that state parks offered recreational opportunities for low income Alaskans. She applauded the efforts of the parks programs to absorb past cuts. The committee returned to hearing testimony from the Anchorage teleconference site. Next to speak was BONNIE LONG, Nurse Manager for the Municipality of Anchorage Health Department. She spoke in support of funding for the statewide immunization program. She told the committee that Alaska was ranked third worst in its immunization rates. She gave further figures. The Center for Disease Control provided the state with the necessary vaccines, according to Ms. Long. However, the CDC did not provide funding for staff. She stressed the need for the state to provide funding to implement the immunization program. She detailed some diseases and warned of their return to the state if the immunizations were not performed. The next person to testify was LAVON CUNNINGHAM. She was linked to the meeting off-line from an alternative site in Anchorage. She told the committee she was severely injured in an accident and lost her legs. She was in the application process for Medicaid services but had been told that in the meantime, her medication could be taken away with the elimination of the GRM program. She spoke of her financial difficulties and the fact that the accident was not her fault. Senator Donley asked if the injuries were a result of an auto accident and if the driver was uninsured. Ms. Cunningham replied that the driver was insured but that the insurance had run out. Senator Phillips called upon the Nome site without response. He called upon DEBBIE HUDSON to testify via teleconference from Anchorage. She was a volunteer court appointed advocate for abuse and neglected children. She urged support of funding for the Smart Start program. She felt funding was needed for more social workers as well as for the Office of Public Advocacy. She gave figures of the workloads of OPA employees. She warned that the state would pay dearly for not acting now. The committee heard from two more people via teleconference from Fairbanks. DIANE JOHNSON opposed cuts to Medicare. She referred to an emergency welfare program in place prior to the pipeline construction for people who were sick, injured or disabled. She said that since the end of that program, Alaskans had to leave the state for medical assistance. She said she knew people who had gone to jail in order to get medical help. She spoke against the providers of workers compensation insurance and the "religious right" who opposed publicly funded abortion. She said the state would need to construct orphanages to accommodate the unwanted children. Next to testify via teleconference from Fairbanks was ANDY HARRINGTON. He represented the Arctic Alliance. He was an attorney who represented clients in trying to obtain SSI benefits who meanwhile were served by the GRM program. He spoke of the difficulties and delays in getting Medicaid coverage and that the only source of medical services while waiting acceptance was GRM. He stated that taking away the program would remove the most vital part of the individual's medical needs. He felt this was especially true for non- native rural residents. He pointed out that determination for Medicaid qualification was contingent upon participation in the GRM program. In his opinion, if an individual was not on GRM, their chance for acceptance into the Medicaid program was almost nonexistent. He understood the goal to eliminate publicly funded abortions, but felt the entire program should not be made to suffer. Congress found a way to constitutionally prohibit Medicaid coverage of abortions, and Mr. Harrington felt the Legislature should be able to find a way also. LOUISE BRITTON was next to testify via teleconference from Anchorage. She told the committee she had worked with the Southcentral Foundation Native Health. She spoke to the Native Head Start program, which she said was essential to the Native children in Anchorage. She detailed specifics of whom the program served and the number of people involved. Dr. MADELEIN GRANT testified next via teleconference from Anchorage. She was an internist and came before the committee to advocate for her patients, many of whom were on the GRM program. She asked the committee to reinstate the program siting the lack of alternatives. She spoke of patients unable to pay for medication because they would not have money to buy food. She detailed the high costs of the medical services and said it was unfair to say the doctors should write off the expenses. She told the committee about some of the serious cases she handled and the expensive services required for treatment. She urged the committee members to think of someone in their lives who experienced serious medical conditions and were without insurance. Senator Phillips again called upon the remote sites with none responding. He then called upon ANNE GORE to testify via teleconference from Anchorage. She worked with disadvantaged populations. She urged each committee member to look at their attire and speculated that the value of their clothing was more than the $300 monthly maximum allowed for qualification into the GRM program. She stressed that without the services provided by the GRM program many people would die. VERGIL NORTON testified next from Anchorage via teleconference. He directed his comments toward SB 281 plus the budget. He was concerned about the Department of Environmental Conservation. He voiced concerns for the poorest of the poor. He felt money allocated for the DEC to clean up privately owned sites could be better spend on the GMR program. He continued sharing his opinions on the DEC. He said he was opposed to abortion. He spoke about a House committee hearing he attended relating to DEC. The next person to speak was JOHN CRAVEN, who spoke via teleconference from Fairbanks. He was a professor of physics at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, a member of the Geophysical Institute, chair of the UAF Faculty Alliance, president of the UAF Faculty Senate and a member of the UA System Government Council. He spoke about funding for the university. He told the committee that, students and faculty were trying to continue the business of learning despite the continued budget cuts. He talked about the high costs of administration. He also talked about the students as a natural resource for the state. Senator Donley asked what Mr. Craven's course load was and the number of students he taught each semester. Mr. Craven detailed his assignment to the Geophysical Institute and his part-time teaching status. He said he taught two courses a semester with a student count of about 30. SHAWNALEE WHITNEY testified next via teleconference from Anchorage. She was an assistant professor of communications and co-director of Forensics at the University of Alaska, Anchorage. She said in teaching communications, she taught students how to have a voice in the civic process. She spoke of frustrations in contacts with lawmakers and the inability to obtain adequate funding. She talked about the affects of the flat funding and the cuts the university had made to adjust. She said cultural aspects of the university were also very important, giving examples. Accreditation was threatened, according to Ms. Whitney. Senator Donley made comments about the Anchorage campus and the class load. He asked Ms. Whitney how many classes she taught and the number of students. She gave details about her contract to teach a certain number of classes in both subjects and gave an estimate of the total number of students. Senator Donley clarified that she had four classes with an average of 27 per class, which Ms. Whitney affirmed and expanded. Next to testify via teleconference from Anchorage was STEVEN JOHNSON. He was also a faculty member of the University of Alaska and a coach of the debate team. He voiced his support of funding for U of A. Tape #139 Side B, 8:40 p.m. Mr. Johnson summarized by sharing experiences of coaching the debate team. He had difficulty recruiting students to come the university and join the debate team because they didn't perceive the U of A as a viable option for their education needs. He stated that the best and brightest high school students in the state were going Outside to attend school. He told the committee this was their opportunity for leadership and referred to the McDowell study. The final person to testify before the committee was PATRICK WRIGHT, who spoke via teleconference from Anchorage. He was the chair of the Anchorage Fish and Game Advisory Committee. He voiced concerns over the proposed funding for the advisory committee system. He stated that members of the advisory committees were the grass roots of democracy. He detailed the activities of the committees and their associated costs. He said their budget was spent for the fiscal year and they had to cancel the next meeting because they could not pay the rent for the meeting space. He criticized the ADF&G commissioner for shifts in budget. He suggested that the advisory committees should be moved to the Boards and Commissions Section or the Department of Community and Regional Affairs. This concluded public testimony. Co-Chair Pearce announced the next day's meeting to close out the FY99 Operating Budget. The process would continue on Sunday with the consideration of amendments. ADJOURNMENT Co-Chair Pearce adjourned the meeting at approximately 8:45 p.m. SFC-98 (21) 4/23/98 pm
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|