03/31/2016 09:00 AM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB144 | |
| SB171 | |
| SB194 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 194 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 171 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 144 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
March 31, 2016
9:01 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Bill Stoltze, Chair
Senator John Coghill, Vice Chair
Senator Charlie Huggins
Senator Bill Wielechowski
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Lesil McGuire
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 144
"An Act relating to relocation assistance for federally assisted
projects and programs; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED SB 144 OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 171
"An Act relating to the duties of the Department of
Administration; relating to payment of judgment against the
state; relating to pre-audit of claims; relating to travel costs
and travel outside the state; repealing authorization and
administration of the Department of Administration to make
advances to the University of Alaska; and repealing the United
States savings bond purchase plan."
- HEARD & HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 194
"An Act relating to a veteran's designation on an identification
card or a driver's license for Lao and Hmong veterans."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 144
SHORT TITLE: RELOCATION ASSISTANCE FOR FED. PROJ/PROG
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
01/19/16 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/19/16 (S) STA, FIN
03/17/16 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
03/17/16 (S) Heard & Held
03/17/16 (S) MINUTE(STA)
03/31/16 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: SB 171
SHORT TITLE: DOA PAYMENTS; REPEAL OTHER DOA DUTIES
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
02/05/16 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/05/16 (S) STA, FIN
02/18/16 (S) STA AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
02/18/16 (S) Heard & Held
02/18/16 (S) MINUTE(STA)
03/24/16 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
03/24/16 (S) Heard & Held
03/24/16 (S) MINUTE(STA)
03/31/16 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: SB 194
SHORT TITLE: LAO/HMONG VETERAN DRIVER'S LIC. & ID CARD
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) WIELECHOWSKI BY REQUEST
02/22/16 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/22/16 (S) STA, FIN
03/31/16 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
HEATHER FAIR, State Right-of-Way Chief
Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Addressed questions regarding SB 144.
SHELDON FISHER, Commissioner
Alaska Department of Administration
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided a sectional analysis of SB 171.
DANIEL GEORGE, Staff
Senator Bill Stoltze
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information on SB 171 and the
committee substitute for SB 194.
MYRON DOSCH, Controller
University of Alaska
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Addressed the managed travel program and
concerns regarding SB 171.
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel
Alaska Court System
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Discussed the Court System fiscal note and
concerns related to SB 171.
PASERT LEE, representing himself
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 194.
ARTHUR YANG, representative
Hmong-Alaska U.S. Special Guerrilla Unit Corporation
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 194.
PAMELA BEALE, Chair
Alaska Veterans Advisory Council
Alaska Department of Military and Veterans' Affairs
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 194.
BOB DOEHL, Deputy Commissioner
Alaska Department of Military and Veterans' Affairs
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 194.
VERDIE BOWEN, Director
Office of Veterans Affairs
Alaska Department of Military and Veterans' Affairs
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Addressed SB 194 and provided details
regarding the process for Hmong veteran honorable-service
designation.
BROOKE IVY, Staff
Senator Bill Wielechowski
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding SB 194.
ACTION NARRATIVE
9:01:35 AM
CHAIR BILL STOLTZE called the Senate State Affairs Standing
Committee meeting to order at 9:01 a.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Wielechowski, Coghill, Huggins, and Chair
Stoltze.
SB 144-RELOCATION ASSISTANCE FOR FED. PROJ/PROG
9:02:13 AM
CHAIR STOLTZE announced the consideration of SB 144. He noted
that the bill was previously heard in committee. He asked
Heather Fair from the Alaska Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities (DOT) if she recalled the questions posed to
her regarding issues from past DOT projects.
9:02:30 AM
HEATHER FAIR, State Right-of-Way Chief, Alaska Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT), Juneau, Alaska,
noted that DOT had submitted a response letter to the
committee's questions that were posed on March 17. She noted
that the committee asked numerous questions regarding historical
right-of-way acquisitions that may have impacted Alaskan
families and businesses. She detailed that some of the
information was specific to relocations in the Eagle River area
[circa late 1980s]. She noted that SB 144 focuses on relocation
assistance rather than acquisition. She summarized that some of
the challenges DOT faced were due to changing economic times.
CHAIR STOLTZE said the question posed to DOT was an example that
occurred during the state's last major economic downturn. He
said he was not trying to say that the state was going to have a
downturn, but admitted that a lot of the indicators signal the
possibility. He explained that there was a major federally-
funded state-participatory project in Eagle River at a time when
there was an economic downturn. The majority of property owners
had negative equity in their property and DOT was innovative in
trying to assist them. Many of the property owners were
relocated to other economically distressed, but physically sound
homes. He specified that the ability to relocate to other homes
was a mechanism that helped. He opined that the example he posed
was a dynamic that could possibly occur again due to a right-of-
way acquisition through eminent domain. He asked Ms. Fair if he
had left anything out from the Eagle River situation.
9:04:45 AM
MS. FAIR answered no. She said she believed that Chair Stoltze
covered the situation well.
CHAIR STOLTZE noted that the committee asked DOT about the Alano
Club. He detailed that the Alano Club was a civic organization
that was involuntarily moved and the club found themselves in a
similar situation regarding the cost of a new building. He noted
that the Alano Club had taken pride in eschewing all government
funding. He asked Ms. Fair if she could share additional
information on the Alano Club.
MS. FAIR explained that DOT did not have specific information on
the Alano Club due to the length of time that passed. She
concurred that the Alano Club was a community organization that
needed to be relocated due to a project. She pointed out that
the Alano Club was an example that dealt mostly with an
acquisition at a price differential between what was paid for
their property and an acceptable substitute property that they
could acquire. She pointed out that SB 144 assists in price
differentials and the new federal rules provide for a larger
differential between what was paid for the property that DOT
acquires and the new piece of property the owner acquires. She
reiterated that DOT was asking for the state to authorize DOT to
pay the higher maximums to Alaskan families and businesses.
CHAIR STOLTZE explained that Alano Club was ultimately made
whole through assistance in the capital budget rather than from
DOT. He asked Ms. Fair to verify that SB 144 has the mechanics
to assist on a relocation.
9:06:46 AM
MS. FAIR answered correct. She detailed that DOT has new
maximums and more available agreements with its funding
partners. She said DOT tries to find innovative ways to get
federal participation for higher unexpected amounts. She
summarized that DOT works on a case-by-case basis in addition to
working closely with its funding partners to assist so that no
one is in a worse position due to involuntarily relocation.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI noted that Section 6 in SB 144 makes the
act retroactive to October 1, 2014. He asked how much the
retroactive act would cost the state and who would be the
recipients of any retroactive payments.
MS. FAIR concurred that SB 144 has a retroactivity provision.
She explained that only a handful of affected parties to date
would be eligible for potentially higher amounts based on the
new maximums. She detailed that the state's share for the
retroactive payments were estimated to be about $12,000. She
summarized that very few folks have come into retroactive
eligibility.
9:08:40 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the October 1, 2014 retroactive
date was tied to a federal statute.
MS. FAIR answered yes.
CHAIR STOLTZE noted that the federal government's fiscal year
starts on October 1.
MS. FAIR answered correct.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked how many individuals would receive
the $12,000.
MS. FAIR replied that the retroactive provision effects more
than one party, but she did not know the exact number.
CHAIR STOLTZE remarked that tying in real-life circumstances
makes a piece of legislation like SB 144 more relevant. He
admitted that he hates to talk about economic depressions and
people being "upside down." He thanked DOT for their indulgence
and patience with the committee in fleshing out the legislation.
He summarized that no changes were made to the bill and the
committee thoroughly discussed the fiscal note.
9:10:16 AM
SENATOR COGHILL moved to report SB 144, [29-GS2709\A], from
committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal
note.
9:10:25 AM
CHAIR STOLTZE announced that without objection, SB 144 moves
from committee.
9:10:31 AM
At ease.
SB 171-DOA PAYMENTS; REPEAL OTHER DOA DUTIES
9:13:15 AM
CHAIR STOLTZE called the committee back to order and announced
the consideration of SB 171. He noted that the committee had
previously adopted the committee substitute (CS) as the working
document. He noted that the Alaska Department of Administration
(DOA) had four days to a week to look at SB 171 as well as the
University of Alaska and the Alaska Court System. He asserted
that the committee's intent was to have an open and deliberative
process. He revealed that two possible amendments were on the
table and people wanted to see them. He specified that he did
not want to offer amendments until after the committee had heard
from the Alaska Court System regarding their exclusion from the
bill.
9:14:15 AM
SHELDON FISHER, Commissioner, Alaska Department of
Administration, Juneau, Alaska, announced that he would walk
through the bill as currently structured to reflect some of the
original requests DOA made as well as some of the additions from
the committee.
He explained that Section 1 was part of DOA's original request.
He detailed Section 1 as follows:
Section 1 is really intended to adopt language which
reflects the way we currently do business.
Historically or at least at some point in the past,
these court actions would come to the Department of
Administration for processing. Today the clerk of the
court sends the judgement to the attorney of record;
that attorney of record will then work directly with
the department that is impacted by it to decide
whether it's appropriate to appeal that or to pay
that, unless this is an issue for the Department of
Administration. We are really not in the loop and so
it's really an intent to clean up the language to
reflect how we currently do business.
He specified that Section 2 was added by the committee to
mandate the University of Alaska use DOA's managed travel
program to make their travel arrangements. He stated that rather
than working directly with DOA, the University of Alaska would
leverage DOA's contract and establish their own arrangements
with carriers as well as a third party.
CHAIR STOLTZE specified that the committee's intent was to
increase the volume and the efficiencies and not to micro-
manage. He stated that the committee would be deferential to
DOA's suggestions to make the travel program work.
9:16:26 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked that Commissioner Fisher explain
DOA's managed travel program. He inquired how online travel
websites differed from the managed travel program. He inquired
if DOA needed a managed travel program.
COMMISSIONER FISHER explained that the managed travel program
was important because DOA negotiates savings with the carriers.
He detailed that DOA reaches out to Alaska Airlines and Delta
Air Lines on travel with any material amount of volume and
negotiate a concession.
CHAIR STOLTZE asked if a concession was negotiated for the
Anchorage to Juneau route.
COMMISSIONER FISHER explained that DOA gets a concession on the
Anchorage to Juneau route. He conceded that getting concessions
on noncompetitive carrier routes was tough. He asserted that the
savings from carrier concessions was more advantageous than from
online travel websites. He added that one of the challenges any
large organization has in managing travel is how to deal with
changes, particularly tickets from cancelled trips. He stated
that the centralized managed travel program allows DOA to reduce
costs and capture some opportunities.
9:18:33 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if DOA's managed travel program has
the ability to take advantage of sales. He noted that Alaska
Airlines has weekly sales as well as their Permanent Fund
Dividend (PFD) sale. He pointed out that conferences negotiate
hotel room rates, but travel websites have much cheaper rates.
COMMISSIONER FISHER answered yes and detailed that DOA
negotiated discounts off of its promotional rate during sales.
He revealed that DOA was doing an audit to confirm the savings
that the department believed it was receiving.
COMMISSIONER FISHER specified that DOA submitted a request to
make two minor changes to the definition of the managed travel
program. He detailed that the request asks that "approving and
reimbursing" be deleted. He specified that DOA's online managed
travel program was a research and purchasing system that does
not include approval or reimbursement.
9:20:16 AM
He explained that Section 3 was parallel to Section 2, but
rather than applying to the University of Alaska, the section
applied to the Alaska Court System. He said to DOA's knowledge,
the University of Alaska did not give any comment, but the
Alaska Court System did suggest that the managed travel program
would increase their travel costs. He set forth that DOA
believes that after analysis the savings that DOA negotiated
were an advantage to the state as compared to using miles. He
reiterated that the managed travel program also provides the
ability to track cancelled tickets and other travelers'
behavior. He noted that DOA received the Alaska Court System's
fiscal note the previous day. He stated that DOA did not
completely agree with the Alaska Court System's assumptions, but
DOA was not in a position to comment on the purported savings.
He admitted that the Alaska Court System did have a different
travel profile with extensive travel to rural locations and
disclosed that DOA's ability to negotiate savings on rural
routes was more limited. He said DOA would work with the Alaska
Court System to understand whether or not the managed travel
program has value to them.
9:21:49 AM
He detailed that Section 4 was DOA's original request. He noted
that there had been questions regarding Section 4 on why the
department would eliminate the need to audit. He set forth that
DOA's goal was not to change the notion of having adequate
financial controls over the payment system.
He explained that DOA was attempting to modernize the statutory
language to the department's financial system and the way it
does business. He revealed that the sections dated back to the
1950s when everything was brought centrally to DOA as part of
the process of processing an invoice for payment. He detailed
that DOA would look at the approval authority and then the
department would audit those as one of the steps to paying a
bill. He revealed that DOA currently uses the Integrated
Resource Information System (IRIS) to largely decentralize the
previous noted functions into a straight-through processing of
invoices; for example, a vendor goes online and wins a contract,
an administrator goes into the same system and places an order,
a purchase order is generated, after receiving the order a
receipt is recorded online and the invoice goes into an accounts
payable process where the payment is made by the same people who
are closest to the transaction.
COMMISSIONER FISHER summarized that Section 4 would allow DOA to
modernize the department's financial controls around processing
payments with the important elements of appropriate
authorization and segregation of duties so that people are not
both.
9:24:09 AM
DANIEL GEORGE, Staff, Senator Stoltze, Alaska State Legislature,
Juneau, Alaska, noted that the question of financial controls
was raised in a previous hearing on SB 171 and Commissioner
Fisher addressed the query with a letter that will be
distributed to committee members and be part of the legislative
record.
COMMISSIONER FISHER explained that Section 5 was added by the
committee and would require the central accounting system to be
placed on the website. He said DOA thinks that placing the
central accounting system on the website was appropriate and the
department had no concerns.
CHAIR STOLTZE announced that he would have to excuse himself to
address a bill in another committee.
9:25:08 AM
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL announced that he would chair the committee.
COMMISSIONER FISHER disclosed that DOA submitted a fiscal note
associated with Section 6. He stated that as a matter of
principal, DOA would embrace and agree with the requirements
established in Section 6. He detailed that Section 6 would
enhance disclosure and financial information for Alaskans to
have easier access.
He explained that there are two requirements in order for DOA to
meet the language in Section 6:
1. Purchase a software system.
2. Personal services are required to meet the schedule.
He specified that DOA started disclosing financial information
in 2008 in a fairly rudimentary way where PDF or Excel documents
were posted on a website. He noted that the state received a "C
grade" for transparency at the time, but the state currently
receives an "F grade." He explained that the current
transparency grade was due to increased expectations and
standards, not for a change in disclosures. He detailed that the
software licensing program would cost $81,000 a year. He said
DOA thinks the software would provide the search ability,
graphing capabilities and information that has become expected
by the public. He noted that the fiscal note includes the cost
of the software.
COMMISSIONER FISHER said the second requirement was personal
services to meet the schedule. He explained that the Division of
Finance was in the midst of implementing IRIS and DOA was
working on a human resources (HR) system module. He stated that
DOA cannot meet the schedule in Section 6 without additional
resources. He revealed that the combined cost for FY17 and FY18
would be approximately $460,000 and $463,000. He said after FY17
and FY18, the cost trails off to a couple of hundred thousand
dollars on a longer term basis.
9:28:26 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI noted that the governor said he was going
to be working on updating the system after the state received
the "F rating." He asked if the updating would use current
resources or has the governor put in a request for increased
resources.
COMMISSIONER FISHER explained that when DOA first launched IRIS,
the financial information that the department historically
disclosed was removed in order to facilitate getting the system
up. He added that DOA has returned to posting the financial
information. He detailed that the software DOA was talking about
has three modules and each module is roughly $28,000: one is for
expenses, on is for human resources, and one is for revenue. He
reported that DOA believes that moving from an "F rating" to a
"C rating" would be achieved by merely implementing the expense
module that would result in better interface that is more
searchable and graphical. He said DOA believes that the
department can absorb the $28,000 cost for one module within its
budget, but to go beyond with the required appropriation and
personnel information in addition to the added work would
require the additional [resources.]
9:30:56 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI noted that exactly the same provision went
through the Senate and House in 2008. He detailed that the
provision was highly vetted by both finance committees, but the
provision literally died on the last day of the session. He
pointed out that the exact same provision in 2008 had a zero
fiscal note, but DOA's current fiscal note was $400,000.
COMMISSIONER FISHER speculated that the 2008 implementation was
done by merely posting PDF or Excel files on a website. He
explained that the search ability and graphical interphases are
what is expected. He added that if DOA could take on the
additional work, then the bill would not be burdened with a
fiscal note; however, due to a combination of departmental cuts
and the IRIS launch, DOA cannot meet the schedule with its
current resources. He stated that he was willing to have a
conversation on what DOA could do with its resources with a
pushed out schedule; but, DOA was not in a position to schedule
the work without impacting the IRIS and human resources
projects.
9:33:37 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI stated that Commissioner Fisher was
obviously aware of the state's fiscal situation. He surmised
that the committee would try and lower the fiscal note as low as
possible. He asked that Commissioner Fisher meet with committee
members afterwards to address how to dramatically lower the
fiscal note.
COMMISSIONER FISHER replied that he would be happy to oblige
Senator Wielechowski's request.
SENATOR COGHILL asked when the IRIS project started, what was
the cost, and did DOA contemplate adding modules at that time.
COMMISSIONER FISHER replied that DOA did not contemplate adding
the modules as part of the IRIS project. He revealed that the
IRIS project was on time and on budget. He added that DOA should
start seeing increased benefits from the value of IRIS.
CO-CHAIR COGHILL asked that Commissioner Fisher address the
fiscal note.
9:35:37 AM
COMMISSIONER FISHER admitted that he did not think DOA could get
away from the software. He detailed that the fiscal note that
DOA proposes would implement the modules in three successive
years as follows:
1. July 1, 2017: expenditure module's transactions would be up
and functioning, FY17: $27,000.
2. January, 2019: employee-payroll module, FY18: $54,000.
3. 2020: revenue-transactions module, FY19: $81,000.
COMMISSIONER FISHER pointed out that the $81,000 starting in
FY19 would continue to be ongoing. He said DOA would work hard
to strive and beat the projected dates, but the department was
confident with its current resources that the changes could be
implemented. He believed that getting the expenditures up with
the new software module would move the state from an "F rating"
to a "C rating." He added that he was not proud of a "C rating,"
but a "C rating" was better than kind of being the worst in the
country. He added that the changes would move the state on a
path of improving going forward.
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL pointed out that the State Affairs Committee
was not the Senate Finance Committee, but the committee would
still have to deal with the fiscal note.
9:37:40 AM
COMMISSIONER FISHER reported that Section 7 and Section 8 were
originally submitted by DOA. He added that there was no longer a
"tourist class" designation and the language would be revised to
"lowest fare available."
He detailed that DOA was repealing some sections in Section 9.
He explained that DOA used to facilitate the purchase of U.S.
Savings Bonds by employees, but the federal government had moved
to an electronic system and the state no longer facilitates the
purchase of U.S. Savings Bonds.
He noted that a pending amendment would address sections that
minimize the fiscal note by pushing dates out. He added that
pushing the dates out could help DOA reduce the need for
personnel in the near term. He informed that DOA proposed some
amendments consistent with the fiscal note that the department
previously presented, but a broader conversation ought to occur
regarding the dates for a revised fiscal note.
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL asked Mr. George to address amendments that
Chair Stoltze proposed.
9:39:34 AM
MR. GEORGE explained that one of the amendments would extend the
implementation of the online checkbook by three months. He
detailed the date changes in sections 10 and 11 as follows:
1. Section 10: changes from October 1, 2016 to January 1,
2017.
2. Section 11: changes from October 1, 2017 to January 1,
2018.
MR. GEORGE stated that he believed Commissioner Fisher said the
date changes from the amendment more aligns with the
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). He noted that
committee members expressed a desire to know the statutes'
origin that were being repealed and their historical
significance when they were enacted. He explained that a
document was prepared by the committee that details the statute
information.
He said another document specifically addressed the repeal in
Section 9 of AS 37.10.088. He revealed that the bill that
enacted AS 37.10.088 dealt with putting the university system
under the Executive Budget Act and the Fiscal Procedures Act.
The bill was signed by Steve Cooper, House Finance chair at the
time about the importance of putting the university under the
state's fiscal management systems. He opined that the document
was timely given the other provisions that were added to the
bill in the CS regarding the university and the travel system.
He summarized that the committee has fiscal notes from DOA and
the Alaska Court System, but the university system did not
submit a fiscal note. He noted that the president of the
university system had submitted a letter to the committee.
9:41:37 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS remarked that he saw SB 171 as a bill from the
governor. He noted that had heard that the [online checkbook]
was down. He asked Commissioner Fisher to confirm that the
"checkbook" was consciously taken down and not due to a
malfunction to the system.
COMMISSIONER FISHER replied that the "checkbook" was taken down
during the IRIS implementation and the decision was conscious.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked if the "checkbook" was down for a period
of time for a malfunction.
COMMISSIONER FISHER answered that the only time DOA was aware
that the "checkbook" was down was the period after the IRIS
implementation due to the financial system having to be moved.
COMMISSIONER FISHER specified that DOA was making sure that
confidential information was not exposed.
SENATOR HUGGINS reiterated that the SB 171 was a governor's
bill. He pointed out that the state's enterprising agencies have
separated themselves over time further and further. He asked if
he was being unreasonable in requesting that in the spirit of
cooperation that something substantive be done while the
committee had the governor's bill.
COMMISSIONER FISHER answered no. He said there was nothing in
the bill that, as a matter of principal, DOA was opposed to. He
added that DOA even supported the issues around Section 6. He
asserted that DOA thinks that the issues around Section 6 was
exactly where the state should go and DOA would work with
Senator Huggins to find a way to get there.
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL opened public testimony.
9:44:40 AM
MYRON DOSCH, Controller, University of Alaska, Fairbanks,
Alaska, stated that his comments pertained to the language in SB
171 where the university would be required to use DOA's managed
travel program. He said in principal, the university does not
disagree with using State of Alaska contracts to garner savings
and efficiency. He pointed out that the bill's intent was to
save money and noted that the president for the University of
Alaska sent committee members a letter that detailed the
university's efforts over the last several years to decrease
travel. He detailed that the university has reduced travel by
$3.6 million or 20 percent since FY12.
He said the university respectfully requests for the opportunity
to evaluate and decide on the best options for its travel
program. He stated that the university believes that using the
State of Alaska contracts, specifically the negotiated
contracts, would be better for the university.
He opined that there were three pieces to the managed travel
program: negotiated contracts with the airlines; contact with a
travel agency, U.S. Travel, with the use of a booking-tool
interface; and travel expense management. He noted that the
university agreed with Commissioner Fisher regarding the
amendment to remove the words "approving" and "reimbursing" from
the travel expense management side.
MR. DOSCH disclosed that the university started a working group
in January 2016 to evaluate booking-tool options between the
state's booking-tool systems and some other third party. He
detailed that the evaluation would be based on the university's
needs. He revealed that a report was forthcoming within the next
month. He added that a legislative audit was going on for both
the state and the university as well.
He remarked that his concern pertained to the unintended
consequences that could occur if the language within the bill
stayed the same. He pointed out that one issue may occur if the
university was required to use the same corporate card system as
the State of Alaska. He noted that the university has existing
contracts for its corporate card. He added that connectivity may
be an issue if the university was required to use the state's IT
system.
He summarized that the university was on the same page with
regard to saving money. He declared that the university would
look at using the State of Alaska contracts. He reiterated that
the university would want the opportunity to evaluate the
booking-tool aspect, needs assessment, procurement process, and
the travel and expense reporting. He added that the university
would look at the state's system as well.
9:50:51 AM
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL commented that one of the questions would be
how to dovetail the managed travel program with the university.
He asked Commissioner Fisher if he had any comments.
COMMISSIONER FISHER answered no. He stated that DOA agreed with
Mr. Dosch's assessment on different financial systems regarding
different corporate cards. He said having the university manage
its own travel made sense by leveraging DOA's contracts. He set
forth that DOA would be pleased to work with the university to
explain how the program works and what they need to do to take
advantage of it.
SENATOR HUGGINS reiterated that SB 171 was a governor's bill. He
asked Commissioner Fisher to confirm his perception that there
was not a lot of connectivity between what he was reading in the
bill and the parties involved. He remarked that the maturation
was occurring at a slow rate.
9:52:35 AM
COMMISSIONER FISHER confirmed that SB 171 was a governor's bill,
but pointed out that the sections on travel were added by the
committee. He asserted that DOA did not have an objection to the
sections that the committee had added. He stated that DOA would
be happy to take the sections and work with the university to
ensure that the pieces fit together. He pointed out that the
sections that the most time was spent on were added by the
committee. He said DOA was trying to be responsive to the
committee's desire and the department supported the direction.
SENATOR HUGGINS responded that Commissioner Fisher's statement
made his point perfectly where the committee asking for
something has lots of ramifications. He asserted that his
preference 100 percent of the time was the university knows
what's best for them and DOA knows what best for the state from
the administration standpoint. He said integration should not be
left up to the people sitting in the committee to say, "We have
a good idea too," so that the committee was not spending an
inordinate amount of time to just integrate a system a little
bit. He set forth that processing tickets, but not proving them
was pretty simple and not rocket science. He requested that
travel management not be belabored for a long time if the number
of implications were not thought through.
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL commented that part of the committee's
process was trying to get the integration information in front
of everyone and testimony was important. He asked that the
Alaska Court System testify before the committee. He thanked the
university and noted their willingness to work, but admitted
that there were some "gears" that need to work together for the
integration to get done.
9:55:04 AM
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel, Alaska Court System, Anchorage,
Alaska, stated that her intent was to explain their fiscal note.
She said the Alaska Court System did a cost-comparison analysis
of using the state travel office versus the current system, and
they found that using the state travel office would cost the
Alaska Court System over $43,000 more.
She explained that the Alaska Court System travels differently
from what the executive branch does. She set forth that the
Alaska Court System has controls in place that provide better
travel-dollar value than using the state travel office. She
stated that the financial staff tries to ensure that the court
system was doing is most cost effective. She added that much of
the court system's travel was juror travel to remote locations
that are not covered by the state office. She informed that DOA
does have a contract with Raven Air where some juror travel
would be covered, but about two thirds would not be covered.
MS. MEADE detailed that the Alaska Court System was small with
only 750 employees and only 200 that travel with approximately
50 that travel more than once a year. She noted that a clerk may
travel once a year to a conference and judges may travel more
often to cover hearings in remote places.
She explained that the Alaska Court System does use the DOA's
programs for other things to be cost effective like supply
issues, leasing copiers and other things like that when using
IRIS; however, she reiterated that the court system confirmed
that their best travel value was attained without using the
state's travel office.
She disclosed that lower travel costs were attributed to the use
of PFD fares that were not covered by the state travel office,
charging all tickets through EasyBiz, and using the court's
Alaska Airlines Visa card. She detailed that the court system
was earning three air-miles for every dollar spent on Alaska
Airlines. She specified that tickets over $800 use the mileage
account to cover the difference above $800. She added that
people are required to go through the court system's sole travel
person.
She summarized that the fiscal noted detailed that the fees the
court system would pay the state travel office offsets almost
completely and almost an exact wash with what might be saved by
getting the negotiated Alaska Airlines fares. She remarked that
Alaska Court System's main impact was the $40,000 savings
realized from the mileage program.
10:00:04 AM
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL commented that the Court System has been very
frugal.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI pointed out to Commissioner Fisher that the
Alaska Court System may have a better plan than DOA.
COMMISSIONER FISHER reiterated that he was not prepared to talk
about the nuances of what the Alaska Court System does and how
it related to DOA. He said DOA believes that some of the court
system's assumptions were different than DOA's practice
experience. He pointed out that a change occurred during the
current year where PFD fares were included by the travel
management program. He remarked that he does not necessarily
disagree with anything that the Alaska Court System said. He
concurred that the court system had a different travel profile
with more trips to rural markets. He pointed out that rural
destinations were places that DOA did not have a lot of value to
add. He disclosed that DOA had found in its analysis that the
managed travel program does better with negotiated discounts
than miles. He said he would be pleased to review his remarks
and provide examples.
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL pointed out that the State of Alaska travel
budget was about $19 million with the court system at $1.7
million. He stated that he was surprised that the court system
could run the $1.7 million through a singular credit card.
MS. MEADE explained that the court system's credit card limit
was $50,000 and payments were made weekly. She admitted that
making weekly credit card statements may not be a realistic
option for the executive branch.
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL remarked that Ms. Meade's remarks provided a
good explanation. He said an amendment was on the table that may
include the university, but not the court system for the reasons
that Ms. Meade explained.
10:02:42 AM
MS. MEADE reiterated that the court system was able to confirm
that through comparison analysis that their own travel program
was more cost effective than DOA's managed travel program.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked if DOA's managed travel program tracked
individual travel that provided an alert if someone was
traveling too much.
COMMISSIONER FISHER explained that DOA did not necessarily
monitor whether a person was traveling too much. He specified
that DOA has a set of rules around fares; for example, booking
fares that were not the lowest-class fare would result in a
notice. He remarked that DOA does publically report travel by
the commissioners and the governor's office. He added that DOA
also provides departmental reports. He noted that unused ticket
notices were sent out on a regular basis as well.
10:04:44 AM
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL announced that SB 171 would be held in
committee. He added that two amendments to the bill would be
addressed the next time the bill was heard.
SB 194-LAO/HMONG VETERAN DRIVER'S LICENSE & ID CARD
10:05:16 AM
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL announced the consideration of SB 194.
SENATOR BILL WIELECHOWSKI, sponsor of SB 194, explained that the
bill would expand the eligibility for a veterans' designation on
state-issued ID cards and driver's licenses to include Hmong and
Lao veterans who served in support of American's interest during
the Vietnam era in what is known as the "secret war." He
continued as follows:
When it was discovered during the Vietnam war that
communist forces had entered Laos, the CIA covertly
recruited and trained over 35,000 Hmong soldiers to
defend U.S. military operations; these soldiers fought
to block the primary supply route of the North
Vietnamese army, gathered intelligence, supported
American military personnel, and rescued downed
pilots. During that conflict, the Hmong suffered
tremendous losses. The Hmong soldiers it is estimated
died at ten times the rate of American soldiers in the
Vietnam conflict. It is estimated that nearly 100,000
Hmong, including civilians, died during the "secret
war." After the war, the Lao government organized
against the Hmong for having assisted the United
States, interring tens of thousands and killing an
estimated 50,000 Hmong as retribution. Despite serving
honorably, Hmong veterans have waited many years to be
fully recognized and we have a veteran's designation
on our drivers' license. The plan is to work with the
Department of Military & Veterans' Affairs and DMV to
establish some sort of procedure that they can prove
that they served during the Vietnam War.
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL opened public testimony.
10:08:11 AM
PASERT LEE, representing himself, Anchorage, Alaska, testified
in support of SB 194. He explained that he was representing the
Hmong Alaska Community, Inc. and the Hmong American Veterans of
Anchorage, Alaska. He disclosed that the Hmong and Lao people
helped thousands of Americans throughout the Vietnam War on the
Ho Chi Minh Trail, Laos, and Vietnam. He stated that the Hmong-
Lao have been patiently waiting for 41 years to be acknowledged
for their sacrifice. He remarked that many Hmong-Lao veterans
have passed away and more will be gone if the waiting continued.
10:09:52 AM
ARTHUR YANG, representative, Hmong-Alaska U.S. Special Guerrilla
Unit Corporation, Anchorage, Alaska, testified in support of SB
194. He detailed that the Hmong were a special guerrilla unit
that served the United States during the Vietnam War. He set
forth that the Hmong deserved recognition for the great job they
did during the Vietnam War.
10:12:24 AM
PAMELA BEALE, Chair, Alaska Veterans Advisory Council, Alaska
Department of Military and Veterans' Affairs, Anchorage, Alaska,
testified in support of SB 194. She revealed that after polling
the members of the Alaska Veterans Advisory Council on SB 194,
the majority supported an act relating to the veterans
designation on the identification card or driver's license for
the Hmong and Lao veterans.
10:13:16 AM
BOB DOEHL, Deputy Commissioner, Alaska Department of Military
and Veterans' Affairs (DMVA), Anchorage, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 194. He stated that following the three previous
speakers was humbling. He revealed that 35,000 Hmong directly
supported U.S. forces and 20,000 were estimated to have
perished, a casualty rate not seen since the Civil War. He said
when the communists took over Laos after the war, all of the
Hmong were targeted for elimination by mass genocide or forced
exodus. He noted that some of the Hmong that testified earlier
were still black-listed and cannot return to their home country.
He set forth that the U.S. was their country now.
He detailed that the Hmong were the primary force that
interjected North Vietnamese supplies on the Ho Chi Minh Trail
and resupply routes through the jungle so heavy that air attacks
could not stop it. He remarked that the guns and ammunition the
Hmong destroyed were the ones that could not be used against
U.S. forces. He added that the Hmong were also the ones that
protected radio aid stations that were vital to U.S. bombing
inside North Vietnam.
He revealed that in coming from a rescue community, a personal
note, the Hmong would go and rescue downed U.S. airmen in places
deemed too dangerous to send U.S. forces in what was termed a
good mission, the Hmong would only lose 10 to rescue 1-American
airman.
MR. DOEHL disclosed that Brigadier General Hammond's father did
three tours in Vietnam and was stationed with units that were
known to have been supported by the Hmong; she has no doubt that
the Hmong efforts helped enable her father to return home and
that debt of gratitude is owed.
He set forth that on behalf of DMVA, General Hummel, and
himself, the committee's efforts were welcomed for recognizing a
group that suffered huge combat losses in Vietnam so that fewer
American veterans were killed in action (KIA) and missing in
action (MIA).
10:15:22 AM
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL asked if the bill would entitle Hmong
veterans to any other benefits that they were currently unable
to get.
MR. DOEHL answered no. He specified that the bill only allows
license plate and driver's license recognition. He noted that
Verdie Bowen would be able to detail Hmong veteran verification.
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL asked how verification would work.
10:16:22 AM
VERDIE BOWEN, Director, Office of Veterans Affairs, Alaska
Department of Military and Veterans' Affairs, Anchorage, Alaska,
explained that verification would be set up virtually the same
way as with the Alaska Territorial Guard members. He detailed
that individuals within the Hmong community would be designated
to verify an individual's service. The adjutant general for the
State of Alaska would sign the honorable service after
verification and a state equivalent to a "DD Form 214" would be
issued that could be used at DMV for a driver's license
designation.
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL commented that verification should be
credible and honorable.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI announced that he had a CS to bring before
the committee. He explained that the CS made small technical
changes.
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL asked Senator Wielechowski if he worked with
Chair Stoltze on the CS.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI answered yes.
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL asked that Senator Huggins move to adopt the
CS.
10:17:55 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS moved to adopt the CS for SB 194 as the working
document.
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL objected for discussion purposes.
MR. GEORGE announced that the CS was a State Affairs CS that did
go through the chair's office. He explained that the chair is
the only office authorized to order a State Affairs CS. He said
the CS was ordered and included changes which were brought
forward to the chair's office from the sponsor. He explained
that there was some needed cleanup to be done from the bill's
drafting.
He detailed that the CS makes two changes to the bill. He
pointed out that the bill's original version was a bit
duplicative in how veterans were described and two different
service dates were given. He stated that the significance of the
service dates was laid out with backup documents and
consolidated to read as follows:
Or a Hmong veteran or Lao veteran who served in
military operations in support of the United States in
the Kingdom of Laos between February 20, 1961 and May
15, 1975.
He specified that the broader service date definition goes back
to 1961 rather than the two dates which had a 1964 date that was
tied to the Gulf of Tonkin incident that led to the actual
declaration in the Vietnam War. He pointed out that the 1961
date was used by President Ford to define veteran's benefits for
the conflict and the CS would conform to federal U.S. code. He
added that the May 15, 1975 date was the fall of the secret
airbase that the CIA set up along with Hmong veterans. He noted
that the changes were repeated in Section 2 as well.
10:20:07 AM
He pointed out that the title which Section 1 amends was in
Title 18, Public Safety statutes. He disclosed that Title 18 was
a vestige when the Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) was in the
Department of Public Safety. He noted that the section reads on
page 2 as follows:
The department shall consult with Department of
Military & Veterans Affairs to determine the proof
necessary to show that a person is a Hmong veteran.
MR. GEORGE detailed that "department" was actually referring to
the Alaska Department of Administration (DOA) even though the
statute was in the Public Safety statutes. He revealed that the
governor's executive order in 1997 moved DMV to DOA and that was
the reason two different titles were effected. He explained that
the bill was specific to ID cards and driver's licenses.
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL removed his objection to adopting the CS. He
noted that Chair Stoltze asked that the bill be held in
committee.
10:21:32 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS stated that he encouraged Senator Wielechowski
to meet with him regarding the veteran's caucus that recently
met on coordinating activities. He asserted that he did not know
of anybody that objected to the bill, but noted that there may
be some reasons. He disclosed that he worked with the Hmong and
remarked that the Hmong were wonder people that did wonderful
things, but there were other people that were involved,
including the indigenous people of Vietnam that did the same
thing. He revealed that he served in the Vietnam War and had
scars from it. He said he was angry about some of the things
that he saw and referenced John Kerry and Jane Fonda as traders.
He asserted that his comments were not about himself and his
intent was to make sure what the committee was trying to do was
done correctly, accurately, and with dignity. He expressed that
the legislation should not be done because somebody was "our
neighbor." He said there was a lot of history and the whole
South Vietnamese army might be forgotten. He pointed out that a
whole bunch of Vietnamese people live in Alaska because of what
they did.
10:23:36 AM
BROOKE IVY, Staff, Senator Wielechowski, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, divulged that the DMVA was open to
broadening the language to include other foreign nationals that
may have fought on behalf of the United States overseas. She
stated that a further discussion could occur to address the
language to broaden the definitions within the bill.
SENATOR HUGGINS replied that he had spoken to Verdie Bowen with
DMVA. He noted that he held the same position as Verdie Bowen at
one time. He asserted that the intended recognition was a
process that could not be done on a Monday morning because
history was involved.
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL noted that he served in Europe rather than
Vietnam.
10:24:45 AM
VICE-CHAIR COGHILL announced that SB 194 would be held in
committee for further discussion.
10:25:00 AM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Vice-Chair Coghill adjourned the Senate State Affairs Committee
at 10:25 a.m.