01/24/2012 09:00 AM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SJR10 | |
| SB150 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SJR 10 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 130 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 150 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 136 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
January 24, 2012
9:01 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Bill Wielechowski, Chair
Senator Joe Paskvan, Vice Chair
Senator Kevin Meyer
Senator Cathy Giessel
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Albert Kookesh
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 10
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State of
Alaska relating to deposits to the constitutional budget reserve
fund from surplus oil revenue.
- HEARD & HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 150
"An Act relating to applying military education, training, and
service credit to occupational licensing and certain
postsecondary education and employment training requirements;
and providing for a temporary occupational license for qualified
military service members."
- HEARD & HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 130
"An Act establishing in the Office of the Governor an advisory
council for the preservation, restoration, and revitalization of
Alaska Native languages."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
SENATE BILL NO. 136
"An Act providing a tax credit for employing an Alaska veteran
that may be taken against a liability for the tax on corporation
income; and providing for an effective date."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SJR 10
SHORT TITLE: CONT. AM.: BUDGET RESERVE FUND
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) WIELECHOWSKI
01/17/12 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/6/12
01/17/12 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/17/12 (S) STA, FIN
01/24/12 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: SB 150
SHORT TITLE: MILITARY TRAINING CREDIT
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) WIELECHOWSKI
01/17/12 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/13/12
01/17/12 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/17/12 (S) STA, L&C
01/24/12 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
SAM GOTTSTEIN, Staff
Senator Bill Wielechowski
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the changes made in version D of
SJR 10 on behalf of the sponsor.
SCOTT GOLDSMITH, Professor of Economics
University of Alaska, Anchorage (UAA)
Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER)
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SJR 10 and answered
questions.
STEPHEN HAYCOX, Professor Emeritus of History
University of Alaska, Anchorage (UAA)
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SJR 10.
KENDRA KLOSTER, Staff
Senator Bill Wielechowski
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented SB 150 on behalf of the sponsor.
DIANE BARRANS, Executive Director
Post-Secondary Education Commission
Department of Education and Early Development (DEED)
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding SB 150.
MARK SAN SOUCI, Military Liaison
U.S. Department of Defense
Washington, D.C.
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 150 and answered
questions.
RIC DAVIDGE, President
Vietnam Veterans of America
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke in support of SB 150.
CHRIS CHRISTENSEN, Associate Vice President
State Relations
University of Alaska (UA)
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Shared the University's involvement with SB
150.
DON HABEGER, Director
Division of Corporations, Business, and Professional Licensing
Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development
(DCCED)
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions about licensing issues
regarding SB 150.
SARA CHAMBERS, Professional Licensing Program Coordinator
Division of Corporations, Business, and Professional Licensing
Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development
(DCCED)
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions about SB 150.
ACTION NARRATIVE
9:01:09 AM
CHAIR BILL WIELECHOWSKI called the Senate State Affairs Standing
Committee meeting to order at 9:01 a.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Giessel, Paskvan, Meyer, and Chair
Wielechowski.
SJR 10-CONT. AM.: BUDGET RESERVE FUND
9:01:22 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI announced that the first order of business to
come before the committee was SJR 10, a Constitutional Amendment
intended to ensure that the legislature continues to save during
times of surplus.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI reviewed the purpose of SJR 10. He said that
with a large projected surplus this fiscal year and next, now is
the time to talk about savings.
SENATOR PASKVAN moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute
(CS) for SJR 10, labeled 27-LS1091\D, as the working document.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI objected for discussion purposes.
9:02:43 AM
SAM GOTTSTEIN, staff to Senator Wielechowski, sponsor of SJR 10,
discussed changes made in version D. He said the first change is
on page 1, line 14; the words "in population" were removed to
keep the $6 billion threshold from increasing too rapidly. The
second change is on page 1, line 15; the words "on July 1" were
removed to allow time to calculate actual annual unrestricted
oil revenue. The third change is on page 2, lines 7-8; language
was added to ensure that the proposed amendment will not apply
to Permanent Fund royalty payments.
MR. GOTTSTEIN stated that Alaska has benefited from substantial
budget surpluses in recent years largely as a result of high oil
prices. Alaska has the greatest amount of savings in the nation
with about $16 billion in savings accounts and reserve funds.
Oil revenue, which makes up about 90 percent of the state's
revenue, is a non-renewable resource. Although Alaska depends on
a non-renewable resource, it is possible for the oil revenue to
be used like a renewable resource. If Alaska saves money now, it
will be in a better position to have oil wealth in the future.
He said the legislature is constitutionally required to develop
Alaska's resources to the maximum benefit of its people. This
includes managing resources for future generations.
MR. GOTTSTEIN maintained that existing savings accounts do not
save enough for the future. He described Alaska's three main
savings accounts: the Permanent Fund, the Statutory Budget
Reserve, and the Constitutional Budget Reserve. The Permanent
Fund is the largest of the accounts, currently valued at
approximately $39 billion. Dividends from the fund go to Alaska
residents each year, and the earnings from the fund have not
been used to fund public services. Putting more money into the
account would not count as a way to save for the state's future
budgetary needs.
MR. GOTTSTEIN continued to say that the Statutory Budget Reserve
(SBR), substantially smaller than the Permanent Fund, is
currently valued at approximately $2.6 billion. Since the SBR's
funds can be accessed by a simple majority, it is not likely
that this fund will sustain the state in the future.
MR. GOTTSTEIN related that the Constitutional Budget Reserve
(CBR) is considered Alaska's rainy day fund. Established in 1991
through a constitutional amendment, the CBR acts as a
stabilization fund. It was initially funded through settlements
with oil and gas companies, and the value of the fund has grown
from just under $600 million to approximately $10.3 billion
today. Under most circumstances the CBR requires a three-
quarters majority vote from both houses to access the fund for
general fund use. After taking out the money, the legislature is
obligated to pay it back, along with any non-appropriated funds,
at end of any given fiscal year. Both requirements keep the
legislature from appropriating money from the CBR unless it is a
necessary stop gap measure. In years of high oil revenue, there
is currently no automatic mechanism to appropriate additional
funds into the CBR. SJR 10 would change that. Through this
legislation, the constitution would ensure that the legislature
continues to save for the future.
MR. GOTTSTEIN continued that after reaching a threshold of $6
billion in unrestricted oil revenue for a fiscal year, SJR 10
provides that two-thirds of the remaining surplus would be
deposited into the CBR. The $6 billion threshold would be
adjusted annually for inflation. Unrestricted oil revenue
includes royalties, production taxes, corporate income taxes,
and property taxes for the oil industry. Unrestricted oil
revenue, for the purpose of this legislation, would not include
royalty payments to the Permanent Fund.
9:07:47 AM
MR. GOTTSTEIN addressed the potential fiscal impact of SJR 10.
He maintained that if this policy were in place today, Alaska
would have over $7.5 billion of unrestricted revenue for general
fund use and the ability to deposit over $1.475 billion into the
CBR this year, while maintaining a $600 million surplus. The
amount of the deposit would depend on the size of a given year's
oil revenue surplus. For example, for the next three years,
under current Department of Revenue projections, the state would
deposit over $800 million into the CBR.
MR. GOTTSTEIN stated that the goal of the legislation is to
create a framework for saving. The Department of Revenue has not
always been right about oil revenue projections. For example,
back in 2008, the department's forecast ended up 47 percent
lower than the prediction. Conversely, the department has also
estimated revenue to be substantially higher than what it
actually was. The goal of this legislation is not to deposit
more money into the CBR every year. The goal is to deposit money
into the CBR in years of high revenue surpluses.
MR. GOTTSTEIN concluded that it is not the sponsor's intent to
solve all of the state's fiscal problems with this legislation.
It is the first step toward managing a non-renewable resource,
such as oil wealth, like a renewable resource.
9:09:31 AM
SENATOR MEYER asked for clarification regarding the figure of
"two-thirds of the surplus after $6 billion."
MR. GOTTSTEIN explained that it is a policy call. The amount of
$6 billion has been adequate in the past. "Two-thirds" shows a
commitment to savings after obligations are met.
SENATOR MEYER speculated that the number could be changed.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI stressed that all figures used are policy
calls. Two-thirds is enough to meet financial obligations. In
years with large surpluses, one-third is enough for capital
projects and the remainder could go into savings.
SENATOR MEYER noted the bigger policy call is how best to
protect savings.
Chair Wielechowski replied that the bill was his attempt to
allocate savings for future generations, but he agreed that the
issue should be discussed further.
9:12:41 AM
SENATOR PASKVAN observed that the $2.6 billion in the SBR is
subject to access by a simple majority for immediate needs;
however, there is an overlying constitutional requirement to
save when there are excess dollars.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI recalled that when the CBR was established,
there was a desire to make it hard to access. He agreed that the
SBR is more accessible. He said he thought the people of Alaska
like having a savings account that is harder to get to.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked how long this type of plan would be in
effect, based on oil revenue forecasts. She also inquired if
changing the constitution would require a vote of the people.
MR. GOTTSTEIN affirmed that it would require a vote of the
people. He explained that under current projections, $800
million would be put into the CBR for three years. He added that
those projections are questionable due to many factors. He gave
a hypothetical example. The goal of the legislation is to create
a framework for years into the future.
SENATOR GIESSEL clarified that there would be a large surplus
for just three years.
MR. GOTTSTEIN agreed, under current projections. Projections are
fairly simple today, but the goal is to create a framework to
balance the highs and lows of revenue surpluses and deficits.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked how much interest the fund would accrue.
MR. GOTTSTEIN addressed the main account vs. the subaccount and
various scenarios. He said the earnings from the CBR would be
about a 4 percent rate of return in order to make sure the funds
are available immediately.
9:17:45 AM
SENATOR GIESSEL asked what the current rate of inflation was.
MR. GOTTSTEIN believed it was projected to be 2.5 percent for
this model.
SENATOR GIESSEL speculated that the profit would be about 1.5
percent.
MR. GOTTSTEIN agreed.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI pointed out that some people would prefer to
invest the CBR more aggressively. The bill is intended to be a
framework. There are 33 or 34 new exploratory wells on the North
Slope, as well as shale oil and heavy oil, not factored into
future oil projections. He predicted that there would be an
explosion of oil production on the North Slope in the next three
to five years and substantial new revenue to the state. He said
he would like to see that revenue put into savings.
9:19:52 AM
SCOTT GOLDSMITH, Professor of Economics, University of Alaska,
Anchorage, Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER),
testified as an individual, not as a representative of the
university. He read from the following statement:
I am here to testify in support of the two concepts
embodied in SJR 10 - a petroleum revenue spending cap
and a sweep of the surplus into savings to meet the
fiscal needs of future generations of Alaskans. If we
are careful and lucky, the pipeline will be carrying 1
million barrels a day in 2020 and activity in the oil
patch will be growing, generating more and more
petroleum jobs for the next generation of Alaskans.
Unfortunately that production will likely not be
generating the level of petroleum revenues we have
come to expect and depend upon.
Production of conventional oil, the basis for current
revenues, has been falling for more than 20 years and
that decline is projected to continue as the giant
fields are depleted. Heavy oil and shale oil may
supplant some of that decline, but because of high
unit production costs, neither will generate large
amounts of revenue. Likewise production from the OCS
might help to keep the pipeline operational, but
almost all its revenues will go to the federal
government. Commercialization of gas seems to be
permanently at least 10 years in the future-perhaps
more than ever today as the world is awash in low cost
natural gas.
We all recognize the need to save some current
petroleum revenues for the future, but how much saving
is enough? Our current strategy of putting away the
leftovers after the current budget is built is not the
answer. Rather, the answer pops out if we stand the
question on its head and ask, "How much of our
petroleum wealth can we afford to spend today?" This
is the right way to pose the question because, as we
all agree, our petroleum wealth is finite. The more
we spend today, the less will be left for the next
generation of Alaskans.
To answer the question of how much we can afford to
spend today, we need to figure out how much our
petroleum wealth is worth and we need to decide how
much of that wealth we should share with the next
generation of Alaskans. I have started to think about
both of those issues and my thoughts are in some of
the papers in the bill packet before you. Let me
summarize each.
I have estimated state petroleum wealth to be $140
billion. This consists of $55 billion of financial
assets derived from past petroleum revenues as well as
$85 billion in taxes and royalties on future
production. The $85 billion is the value of those
future revenues if we could bank them all today rather
than waiting for them to trickle in over the next
decades.
Then how should we share this $140 billion grubstake
among current and future Alaskans? One answer is to
take a page from the successful management of our
fisheries, where we restrict the current harvest to
maintain maximum sustainable yield. By doing that
future fishermen get the same harvesting opportunities
as current fishermen.
Applying that concept to our petroleum wealth, we
could harvest, or spend, $5.5 billion this year. That
amounts to about $7,000 for every Alaskan today and
would guarantee that every future Alaskan would get
the opportunity to spend an equal amount, $7,000
adjusted for inflation. Of course, this is just a
different way of saying treat the petroleum wealth
like a permanent endowment, or as the British would
say, never spend principle.
Is this a fair distribution? That is for all Alaskans
to decide. But it is a discussion that needs to occur
and this bill is a way to stimulate that discussion.
Capping spending from petroleum revenues has a number
of other positive features. It will reduce the FISCAL
BURDEN we are currently shifting to the next
generation of Alaskans by spending petroleum revenues
at a non-sustainable rate. It will force us to weigh
the benefits of increased public spending against the
cost of new taxes to pay for them. It will give the
governor and legislature a valuable tool to help
instill fiscal discipline where none exists today.
Of course many people will argue that putting our
wealth into saving is a mistake because that money is
not working for us and that the funds would be better
spent on investments to build our infrastructure,
particularly roads and energy projects. Without
getting into that discussion I would simple say there
needs to be a considered balance between those
investments and savings.
Saving for the future is never easy, as we all know
from personal experience. But high oil prices have
given us a second chance to do the right thing and we
should not let this opportunity slip. Several times in
the past we have taken the opportunity to create
vehicles for saving when revenues were high and today
we have the Permanent Fund, the Statutory Budget
Reserve, and the Constitutional Budget Reserve.
I think the best way to motivate the need to save more
is to look to Norway and its $300 billion Petroleum
Savings Account. Just as we have an oil production
goal of one million barrels in the pipeline in 2020,
we could and should have a savings goal of $100
billion by the year 2020. This bill is a first step
toward achieving that goal. Let's get to work to make
it happen. Thank you.
9:26:00 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI thanked Professor Goldsmith for his work.
SENATOR MEYER related that the Governor's current operating
budget is $8 billion and the capital budget is $1.8 billion with
additions probable. Under this legislation, he predicted cuts
totaling $4 billion would have to be made.
MR. GOTTSTEIN said he understood that the Governor had included
$2 billion to go into the SBR. He offered to get back to Senator
Meyer regarding the other $2 billion.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI pointed out that there were also matching
federal funds. He asked Mr. Gottstein if he listed unrestricted
oil revenue at $7.5 billion.
MR. GOTTSTEIN reported that current revenue projections are for
about $8.2 billion of unrestricted oil revenue for this year.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI noted that sometimes money budgeted for
savings gets counted as an operating number.
SENATOR MEYER agreed, but stressed that there would have to be a
reduction in order to arrive at the $6 billion figure.
9:28:53 AM
SENATOR PASKVAN requested a written copy of Professor
Goldsmith's presentation.
SENATOR GIESSEL noted she reads Professor Goldsmith's
publications. She inquired if he had looked for projected costs
for education and health care in the budget. She pointed out
that 50 percent of the budget is formula-driven, and that
pending national health care programs will significantly
increase it.
PROFESSOR GOLDSMITH said he hadn't looked at the most current
projections, but agreed it was a major concern.
SENATOR GIESSEL pointed out that Norway does not pay dividends
to its citizens from its permanent fund. She asked Professor
Goldsmith to comment on Norway's substantial personal income tax
rate of 50 percent.
PROFESSOR GOLDSMITH related that Norway's taxes were
significant, and essentially all petroleum revenues were
diverted into the permanent fund from which 4 percent is
withdrawn to help support the cost of government.
9:32:43 AM
STEPHEN HAYCOX, Professor Emeritus of History, University of
Alaska, Anchorage, spoke in support of SJR 10. He described his
theory of colonial economics as it applies to Alaska. He spoke
of the difficulties in addressing Alaska's long-term future and
thought SJR 10 would help. He recalled the periods of flush and
lean in Alaska's history. He called the CBR savings a
responsible step.
9:37:33 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI thanked Professors Haycox and Goldsmith and
closed public testimony.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI pointed out that the fiscal note shows a cost
of $1,500 to cover the cost of providing information about the
amendment in the Official Election Pamphlet for the 2012 general
election.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI stated that SJR 10 would be set aside.
SB 150-MILITARY TRAINING CREDIT
9:39:15 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI announced the consideration of SB 150.
Speaking as the sponsor, he explained that the bill would help
veterans get occupational and academic credit for military
training and work experience. The United States Department of
Defense has designated this effort as a top priority across the
nation and has already passed similar legislation in Washington,
Utah, Colorado, and West Virginia. Many other states have
introduced similar legislation.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI said a committee substitute (CS) for SB 150,
version E, was before the committee.
SENATOR PASKVAN moved to adopt CSSB 150, labeled 27-LS1117\E, as
the working document.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI objected for discussion purposes.
9:40:09 AM
KENDRA KLOSTER, staff to Senator Bill Wielechowski, sponsor of
SB 150, explained the changes in SB 150. Many of the changes are
at the request of various departments. The first change is on
page 2, lines 1-3; additional language was added stating a
"temporary license is issued to a board which is already
authorized to issue a temporary license". Previous language
would have required all boards to issue temporary licenses that
were not necessary.
MS. KLOSTER described the second change on page 2, lines 13 and
14; the expediting language was removed. Another change on page
2, lines 12-15, came from the United States Department of
Defense; the words "diploma or certificate" were added.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI requested an overview of the bill.
MS. KLOSTER explained that the United States Department of
Defense has been working on a national effort to help alleviate
the problem of military service members not receiving credit for
training received while they were in the service. As of June
2011 one million veterans were unemployed and the jobless rate
for post-911 veterans was at 13.3 percent. Young male veterans
experience an unemployment rate of 21.9 percent, according to
the Department of Defense. The goal is to assist military
veterans to find employment at a faster rate. It requires the
Department of Education to accept military education, training,
and service. It also requires the president of the University of
Alaska, the Alaska Commission on Post-Secondary Education, and
the Department of Labor to implement policies and procedures in
order to accept military credit. This is already being done at
the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, and the University of
Alaska, Anchorage, in some circumstances.
9:44:09 AM
DIANE BARRANS, Executive Director, Post-Secondary Education
Commission, Department of Education and Early Development
(DEED), offered to answer questions about SB 150.
SENATOR PASKVAN asked if DEED was supportive of recognizing the
diplomas issued by the military.
MS. BARRENS explained that the Post-Secondary Education
Commission has not taken a position on the issue. She said she
applauds the efforts of the committee to promote assessing and
providing credits for military education and training. It is
outside the norm of what the Post-Secondary Education Commission
does, which is more of a consumer protection entity.
9:47:03 AM
MARK SAN SOUCI, Military Liaison, Department of Defense,
Washington, D.C., spoke in support of SB 150. He thanked the
committee for taking up the bill. He read from the following
written testimony:
Mr. Chair and committee, thank you for this
opportunity to express Department of Defense support
for the veterans credit Senate Bill 150. My name is
Mark San Souci, Department of Defense Regional Liaison
for Military Families for the Northwest, working for
the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Military
Family and Community Policy. I'm sorry I can't be
there in person today, but hope to be able to visit
for future hearings on this issue.
First off, we thank you for sponsoring and considering
SB 150. Last year, with one million veterans
unemployed; with a post 9/11 unemployment rate of
13.3%; and an unemployment rate for 18-24 year old
veterans at 21.9%, the Department of Defense began
supporting efforts in the states to ask states to give
separating Service members credit, so that they may
not be held back from finding employment or finishing
a degree.
We are asking legislative leaders like you to
establish policies that ensure separating Service
members do not have to repeat requirements completed
during their military career to obtain academic credit
or an occupational license.
Last year, four states enacted new laws to help grant
our veterans credit towards licensing and/or academic
credit. So far for the 2012 session, there are 18
bills in 10 more states resembling the one before you
today that we ask you to support.
It is important to us that you know we are not asking
for direct licensure if it is not equivalent. In cases
where the regulatory agency or board determines
partial credit but it saves time and expense and helps
get them there, even if not completely, that is what
we seek. We only seek credit where credit is due.
A couple of other points to consider: You and I have
already paid for this veteran's training within the
Department of Defense schools and with years of
experience while serving our Nation with our federal
tax dollars. Also, the more credit given to a veteran
towards licensing or a degree or certification, the
more school slots can be made available to civilians,
especially in programs where there may be waiting
lists to get in.
This issue is now the top of the Top Ten Key Issues of
the Defense State Liaison Office. The Department of
Defense has many highly qualified schools which train
service members in a wide variety of skills and
occupations. The Department of Defense is also, right
now, working feverishly with the US Department of
Labor to link military occupations with
training/experience programs that most closely align
to private sector licensure requirements, while also
asking some state regulatory authorities in pilot
states like Washington, to review select military
occupations to determine whether the training and
experience are sufficient to render licensing in that
occupation.
As you very well know, Alaska is home to thousands of
veterans, and is a desired location for separating and
retiring military members when choosing where to live
after leaving the military. A 2010 Defense Manpower
Data Center Study reported that Alaska had 1,286
military separate or retire to Alaska in Fiscal Year
2010. At roughly 1,286 annually, and more to come with
draw-downs, we can expect that highly qualified ex-
military people will continue to enjoy Alaska's
quality of life, and many will continue to choose
Alaska when transitioning into civilian careers.
Finally, I'm frequently asked what other states are
doing in this area. In 2011, Washington state passed
two bills - one for medical occupations and one for
non-medical occupations, into law as of July 22nd.
Washington modifies the statutory chapters of 21
commercial occupations and 14 healthcare related
occupations. It is considered by us as Best Practice
legislation. Your bill is modeled after Washington
State and also would be a Best Practice. Washington
State's Department of Health and Department of
Licensing accepted this challenge in legislation last
year with 'zero' as fiscal notes, and they have the
demands of a big military state with over 6,000
veterans annually choosing to separate or retire from
the military and live there.
We ask this committee and this legislature in Alaska
to join the other ten states, rising now in session,
and considering this help for our veterans, along with
the four (WA, UT, CO, WV) that did it last year. Thank
you for taking up this issue so quickly, and for your
consideration. I stand by for any questions you may
have.
9:53:23 AM
SENATOR PASKVAN said he understood that about 1,300 military
personnel per year retired to Alaska and asked if those numbers
would change due to the pending "drawdown".
MR. SAN SOUCI termed the projections speculative, and he
suggested sticking with around 1,300 as the number.
SENATOR PASKVAN said he thought SB 150, a best practices
legislation, would make retired military personnel more
employable more quickly.
MR. SAN SOUCI agreed.
9:56:30 AM
RIC DAVIDGE, President, Vietnam Veterans of America, Anchorage,
Alaska, testified in support of SB 150. He thanked the committee
for considering the bill. He reported that the University of
Alaska is already embracing the idea of credit for military
training and experience. Some military personnel have better,
more current training than that found in some vocational
schools.
SENATOR GIESSEL wondered which occupations are impacted by the
legislation.
MR. SAN SOUCI offered to provide the committee with that
information. He read from a national list of occupations: air
conditioning mechanics, automotive repair, barbering, boiler
operators, contractors, cosmetologists, dental hygienists,
electricians, emergency medical services, harbor marine pilots,
home inspection investigators, license practical nurses,
nutritionists, dieticians, oil and solid fuel technicians,
personnel employment, professional planners, plumbers, private
security, radiologists, respiratory care, roofing, and
sanitarians.
10:00:30 AM
MS. KLOSTER addressed Senator Giessel's question. She gave an
example of a person in the nursing field who had difficulty
transferring her nursing experience in the service for credit.
SENATOR GIESSEL suggested the individual take the issue to the
University Board of Regents. She spoke of the difficulty of
credit transfer between university campuses.
MS. KLOSTER said that the university has accepted over 15,000
military credits, but a concern remains whether the credits can
be used for a degree program or just as electives. A system is
currently in place at UAF.
MR. SAN SOUCI offered to provide further information about
occupations covered under Washington State's new law.
SENATOR GIESSEL declined.
10:04:06 AM
CHRIS CHRISTENSEN, Associate Vice President, State Relations,
University of Alaska (UA), addressed Section 2 of the bill. He
emphasized that the university is committed to offering quality
educational experiences to active military veterans and their
dependents. He said G.I. JOBS, a magazine and web portal,
identified UAA and UAS as military-friendly institutions. Only
15 percent of all colleges and universities and vocational
schools received that designation.
MR. CHRISTENSEN agreed that transfer of credits is a big issue.
The university has extensive policies and procedures in place
for accepting credit, including military credit. The Board of
Regents has adopted a written policy that the campuses accept
and transfer as much credit as is appropriate to a student's new
degree and graduation requirements. All campuses have
established transfer credit policies designed to give maximum
credit for courses and training taken elsewhere, including in
the military. He said to keep in mind that a degree from an
institution is a representation to a potential employer and to
others that the holder has learned what the institution has
deemed important for the degree. He concluded that awarding
appropriate credit for military training is one of the
university's core responsibilities and a way to show commitment
to recruit and retain military students. The university is
working on a matrix which shows what each campus offers.
10:08:03 AM
MR. CHRISTENSEN explained that the credit transfer process is
managed at the campus level. All three campuses accept transfer
credit based on recommendations made by the American Council of
Education (ACE), which has an agreement with the Defense
Department to review military training and experience for the
award of equivalent college credit. The three university
campuses are also members of the Service Members Opportunity
Colleges (SOC), a consortium of about 1,900 colleges and
universities that enroll military veterans and dependents in
special degree programs. The purpose is to let service members
earn a degree, not just accumulate credits.
He related that UAA is currently accepting an average of about
51 credits for military veterans who have attended an accredited
military institution. He gave examples of the number of military
credits needed for specific degrees. Neither UAA nor UAF has a
limitation on the number of military credits accepted. UAF is
working on developing a minor based on typical military credits.
Last year, UAA awarded over 15,000 military transfer credits.
The university reflects prevailing social values in welcoming
and honoring the military.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the university has a position on the
bill.
MR. CHRISTENSEN responded that it would take a position shortly.
10:12:39 AM
SENATOR GIESSEL pointed out that the university is already
implementing the goals stated in the bill.
MR. CHRISTENSEN agreed that Alaska is fully on board with the
program and the bill probably addresses a bigger picture -
states that do not offer military credit. He did not know what
would really change in Alaska. He concluded that it might
address the perception of a problem.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI recalled many instances of students having
trouble with credit transfers.
MR. CHRISTIANSON agreed. He said there is an attempt to track
down such stories and solve the problems. He requested that the
committee let him know about credit transfer problems.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked if the university was advertising this
service.
MR. CHRISTENSEN replied he believed so. He said he had seen many
pages on the university's website.
SENATOR PASKVAN inquired whether SB 150 manifests a statewide
goal of best practices. He stressed the importance of having a
state goal.
10:17:58 AM
DON HABEGER, Director, Division of Corporations, Business, and
Professional Licensing, Department of Commerce, Community, and
Economic Development (DCCED), supported the intent of SB 150. He
voiced concern about Section 1 and the words "the department or
applicable board shall accept". The way it is written, DCCED
interprets it to mean that if the person has training that
cannot be determined to have met Alaska standards, then the
person receives licensure.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI said his staff had been working with the
department and will continue to do so. He asked for an
alternative to the problem language. He suggested his office and
the department continue to work together.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI addressed the fiscal note. He pointed out
that all other states have zero fiscal notes. He inquired if the
department expects the note to be zero, also.
10:22:12 AM
SARA CHAMBERS, Professional Licensing Program Coordinator,
Division of Corporations, Business, and Professional Licensing,
Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development
(DCCED), addressed the department's fiscal note for SB 150. She
spoke of what was needed to get the structure in place.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if there was more to do to zero out
the fiscal note.
MS. CHAMBERS agreed to work in that direction.
SENATOR PASKVAN agreed that the language "shall accept" in
Section 1 was important. He pointed to language on line 9 of
Section 1, "equivalent to some or all of the qualifications" and
explained that his expectation was that equivalent or better
military education, training, and service would be acceptable as
credit.
10:24:58 AM
MR. HABEGER said the problem is determining what level of
training is acceptable. Senator Paskvan suggested the language
is giving the university president wide latitude. He questioned
if the state should be setting a separate goal.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI suggested "shall accept relevant".
SENATOR GIESSEL spoke of outstanding healthcare providers. She
wished to illuminate the purpose of the regulation of 67
professions.
MR. HABEGER understood the regulations were for public
protection; an expectancy for standards of care within
professions.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI closed public testimony and set SB 150 aside.
10:28:51 AM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Wielechowski adjourned the Senate State Affairs Committee
at 10:28 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB150.Vietnam Veterans of America Support Letter.pdf |
SSTA 1/24/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 1/26/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 150 |
| SB150.Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SSTA 1/24/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 150 |