HOUSE BILL NO. 301 An Act establishing the Knik Arm Bridge and Toll Authority and relating to that authority; and providing for an effective date. MICHAEL BARTON, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION & PUBLIC FACILITIES, explained that the bill would establish an independent authority to build and operate a toll bridge over Knik Arm. The authority would be able to receive federal money and issue revenue bonds to finance the toll bridge and its appurtenant facilities. The authority would design, construct, and operate the bridge and the facility. The authority would be a public corporation that would have a separate independent legal existence from the State. The revenue of the authority would not become part of the general fund and the property of the authority would be exempt from taxation. Commissioner Barton continued, the bill establishes a three- person board to govern the authority. The commissioners of the Department of Revenue and the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities would serve on the board, along with a member of the public, appointed by the Governor for a five-year term. Representative Kerttula referenced Page 3, Lines 4-6 and voiced concern with what could happen if the authority failed. If that occurred, would the Legislature retain only the power to pull back funding. TOM BOUTIN, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, explained that typically in stand-alone revenue bonds, if there are bonds, authorized by the Legislature, there would be a trustee who would have the ability to take over the entire facility and manage it under the worse case scenario. The bill would not have the State's moral or general obligation. Representative Kerttula asked if that was standard language. Mr. Boutin advised that any new debt would require further authorization. It is typical language for stand-alone revenue bond authority. Representative Kerttula referenced Page 3, Lines 21-23, which lists the powers. She inquired if "planned," meant, "developing". Commissioner Barton responded that was implicit. Representative Kerttula continued, Page 4, Line 6, asking what would happen if the State received "gifted" grants or authority. Commissioner Barton [inaudible]. Representative Kerttula noted concern with the language on Page 12, Lines 6-9, the exemption from local regulation. That language gives the authority complete exemption from land use planning, zoning and permitting power of any political subdivision. She asked what local communities felt about inclusion of that language. Commissioner Barton responded that the language was standard for a project of this size and stated that he did not know what the community thought about the verbiage. Representative Kerttula emphasized her concern with the zoning affect. Commissioner Barton added that the communities would each have a member on the board. Representative Berkowitz asked if there was a reason to rush into the activity of the proposed authority. Commissioner Barton responded that this could be an "investment for the future of Alaska". The authority could provide a focus and impetus to move the project forward. He noted that he anticipated process delays and that the legislation could help facilitate getting the crossing built. Representative Berkowitz noted concern with power of a bridge authority. He recommended moving more slowly as a legislative body and proposing a more modified version. Commissioner Barton commented that the authority will only have the power that the Legislature grants. Representative Berkowitz emphasized his concern with the composition of the board of directors on that authority. On Page 3, he noted questions regarding the "powers and duties of the authority" on real and personal property. He added that it is mentioned that the purpose of the authority is to advance the "economic development of the State". In creating an authority, there needs to be more time to develop the authority's mission. Commissioner Barton observed that it is important that "both ends of the bridge be involved". The impact extends beyond the influence of the actual bridge. HB 301 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.