HB 384 - ROAD DEVELOPMENT TASK FORCE CHAIRMAN HALCRO announced the first and only order of business as House Bill 384, "An Act establishing the Legislative Road Development Task Force; and providing for an effective date." The committee will be discussing CSHB 384(EDT), version 1-LS1452\H. Number 0038 REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG, Alaska State Legislature, came before the committee to present the bill. House Bill 384, he said, focuses on economic development, creating jobs, and opening up the state for future development. He recalls when the Pioneer Road Program was approved for the state which allowed for the establishment of communities that are now growing. It also opened up areas for settlement and economic development. The state, he said, should refocus on some of those types of "things." With the exception of the Whittier road and perhaps one other project near Skagway, the state of Alaska has not built any new roads per se other than lane miles for over twenty-five years. He finds that ludicrous on its face. He asked: How can the state expect to develop? How can the state expect to take advantage of its natural resources? How can the state expect to provide recreational activities and jobs for the children of the future without some type of true economic development? Everything else, he said, is lip service. As Representative Con Bunde says, "You can't make a living making trinkets." House bill 384, therefore, is one way for the legislature to establish a task force - the Legislative Road Development Task Force - to focus attention on roads. A minor fiscal note is attached. The cost should not exceed more than $11,000 to $12,000. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG continued. The task force's representation was discussed in the House Special Committee on Economic Development and Tourism to ensure that there is a cross-section of people from around the state. The only objection was that a representative of the environmental community is not a member of the task force. The environmental community, he stated, does not deserve a seat at the table, for when it comes to building roads they aren't stakeholders. They are only stakeholders when they want to stop roads, not build them. The legislative intent of the bill, he reiterated, is to build roads, not to stop them from being built. Number 0289 REPRESENTATIVE JOHN COWDERY stated when he first came to Alaska the big challenge was the Alcan Highway which, he noted, is now paved. He further stated that the state doesn't have to meet federal standards. A dirt or gravel road, for example, could be a consideration. Number 0349 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG noted that the state is allowed to construct roadways that don't meet the latest freeway standards. The state is able to build gravel roads and even one-lane roads where appropriate. He also believes that it's possible to build access roads into certain areas using federal dollars that do not meet the latest standards. He noted that some of the roads in the bill are for projects. For example, the proposed Donlin Creek Road is a few miles long which would go from a mining deposit to the Kuskokwim River, assuming that the ore mined would be barged down the river. Similarly, the state financed the road system to the Red Dog Mine [Kotzebue], and without it the mine would not have been feasible. He also commented that a road almost exists between Ruby and McGrath along a mountain top. The old timers didn't build roads in valleys filled with marsh, tundra and muskeg. They would build on the hill tops where soil conditions and drainage were better, and where there was less danger from avalanches. Number 0485 REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY pointed out that the Haul Road was a big player in North Slope oil production. He said, At that same time before that was happen, I happen to be working for the governor in the private sector. And when he got elected governor he suggested...I was a cat skinner, you know, I was a heavy equipment...He suggested getting a couple of cats and go to McGrath, you know. I went there and came back that we will have a road and then communities will spot up along the way, and that's how you open up country to the people. Of course, we never did that. I'd still like to do it too. I'm gonna support your bill. Number 0550 REPRESENTATIVE ALLEN KEMPLEN asked Representative Rokeberg why he is focusing on just roads as compared to a more comprehensive perspective. Why wouldn't the state want to consider increased ferry systems from Southcentral Alaska to Bethel, for example? In that way, the state could look at transportation as a whole and determine which option is more cost effective. He noted that the state is making a fairly significant investment in rural airports, and it may be more cost effective to maintain that investment rather than to come forward with an entirely new mode of transportation. Number 0694 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG replied the intent of the task force is to focus on one thing - roads. An intermodal study, he said, is interesting but it's not the intent of the bill. This is a "hip-pocket-back, cheap group of people" who are interested in one thing - the placement of road development in the state as a priority. It doesn't include railroads because Representative Jeannette James "does that." It doesn't include airports because they are well funded, as Representative Kemplen has indicated. The point of the bill is in fact for twenty-five years the state hasn't built any roads. Somebody, he said, needs to start championing road, and he thinks that it should be the legislature as a matter of public policy. Number 0780 REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN stated the environmental community is very interested in roads. They actively comment on any type of road project. It seems that if Representative Rokeberg is really interested in identifying road initiatives, that are doable and capable of getting through the system, he would want to have a task force that mirrors the interests of the community. The lack of a representative from the environmental community, he said, seems to be a red flag calling out to be blasted as biased. He asked Representative Rokeberg why he didn't include someone from the environmental community on the task force. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG replied he invites that type of criticism because the environmental community does not want to build roads. Why on earth would he want to invite anybody who wants to say no to something that he wants to say yes? The environmental community claims that they are stakeholders, but they are only stakeholders by the will that they can force themselves onto other people. He wants to sit at the table with a group of positive individuals not a bunch of naysayers and make compromises. The task force is strictly for the purpose of prioritizing and identifying road projects that would go to the public process, at which time, the environmental community would have more than adequate time to comment on the projects. He said, So why on earth do I want some jerk who is going to be officious and hold up a very efficient process by being a naysayer, nabob, nobody ... that has a decade long history of stopping development in the state? Now, why would I be so stupid to invite them to the table? Number 0966 REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN asked Representative Rokeberg whether he has the same thoughts in regards to municipal governments. He noticed that local governments are omitted from the list of participants on the task force. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG replied it's an issue of trying to find space for everybody without getting too unwieldy. It's also an issue of cost. He noted that the House Special Committee on Economic Development and Tourism added some members to the task force. He also noted that there is one public member. Representative Rokeberg further stated that the meetings would be public; in that regard, anybody is welcome to attend, including members of the environmental community. He feels like he has been victimized by the environmental community as a citizen of the state, which is why he feels so strongly and passionately about them in relation to the task force. Number 1038 CHAIRMAN HALCRO explained that the question of having a member of the environmental community on the task force was discussed in the House Special Committee on Economic Development and Tourism. It was felt that whatever comes out of the task force at the end of the day would be subject to a number of environmental impact statements, at which point, the environmental community would have a chance to "weigh in." Number 1067 REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY stated, on the other hand, if Representative Kemplen wanted to start a task force of environmentalists to build roads that would be fine. He further noted that the idea of putting a ferry into Bethel is a lot different than putting in a road to reach a mineral deposit outside of Bethel, which would also have the effect of opening up the area and developing communities. He cited Fort Nelson as an example of a town that started as a one-road-house until a mining company discovered copper in the area. The mining company abandoned their stakes because it was a low-grade copper, but a prospector came in and over staked their claims; it is now the largest tungsten deposit in North America. Number 1190 REPRESENTATIVE BILL HUDSON asked Representative Rokeberg whether the proposed amendment [Amendment 1] in the bill packet is going to be offered. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG replied he will ask the committee to offer it. CHAIRMAN HALCRO opened the meeting to public testimony. Number 1233 ART KOENINGER testified via teleconference from an off-net site in Chitina. He has several affiliations. He is a member of the volunteer fire department. He's an emergency medical technician. He's chairman of the Community Improvement Association. He's a member of the Prince William Sound-Copper River Regional Transportation Plan and Advisory Committee. He was at one time on the statewide Transportation Policy Advisory Committee. He has several concerns in relation to the bill. He does not want to be a nabob of negativity, but he has experience in Chitina with ill-advised public policies, and this bill undercuts the current regional and statewide planning process. MR. KOENINGER continued. The state transportation improvement plan, he said, is in place and working quite well to establish priorities. It's a multi-modal approach. This bill, on the other hand, is "roads for the sake of roads." It's very narrowly focused and unbalanced. Representative Rokeberg has made it clear that the intent of the task force is to only listen to certain points of view. MR. KOENINGER continued. He noted that roadless areas are important for subsistence economies, and are important to a lot of people. He's also concerned about promoting road construction when the state can't maintain the ones that they have now as the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities' budget continues to get cut. It's shortsighted, he said, to build more roads at this point without addressing these issues. Number 1382 CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked Mr. Koeninger whether he currently serves on the regional transportation commission. MR. KOENINGER replied, "Yes." It's an advisory committee, not a commission. The committee is working on the regional transportation plan. He wondered whether the bill would "hijack" the entire priority process. Number 1405 CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked Mr. Koeninger to identify some of the projects that the advisory committee is currently looking at. MR. KOENINGER replied the advisory committee has mainly focused on upgrading ferries. The advisory committee has also looked at alternatives for marine transportation, the Copper River Highway, and the railroad in their area. CHAIRMAN HALCRO stated it sounds like the advisory committee is mostly looking at improving transportation via sea rather than via inland routes. MR. KOENINGER stated the advisory committee is also addressing inland routes. It is also addressing airports. CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked Mr. Koeninger to indicate the last time a new major road project was completed in the state, apart from the road to Whittier. MR. KOENINGER replied the Haul Road. He further commented that the state is having a hard time dealing with the roads that it currently has. He noted that there is a group called the Alaska Citizens Transportation Coalition and suggested including a representative of the coalition as a member of the task force. It is a broad-based group comprised of environmentalists; the League of Women Voters; and various representatives of borough and city governments, Native village councils and corporations. The coalition has worked with the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities in several transportation conferences. Number 1530 CHAIRMAN HALCRO stated, to Mr. Koeninger, the sponsor has mentioned that the specific purpose of the bill is to create a road development task force to look at improving connections within the state via roads. In comparison, the advisory committee, as Mr. Koeninger indicated, is looking at all aspects of transportation, which may mean that roads don't get the focus that they need. Number 1562 REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON stated, to Mr. Koeninger, that the approach is to try to provide to subsequent legislatures an identification of roads that could lead to economic development, which is somewhat different than most other transportation forums in the state. He doesn't see the task force as interrupting citizen input in relation to transportation needs. In fact, all the task force is doing is trying to get a group of people throughout the state together who can lend expertise in looking at different roads for economic development. REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON continued. He offered an amendment to the proposed amendment [Amendment 1] to include a road from Juneau to Atlin, British Columbia. It has never been fully studied, he said, and the Tulsequah Chief Deposit is in the area; which, if developed, could create a lot of jobs in Southeast Alaska and throughout Canada. Number 1662 CHAIRMAN HALCRO stated, to Mr. Koeninger, some of the roads in the bill are not highways and byways; some are just basic points of connection between mines and transportation corridors. A perfect example is the Donlin Creek Road. It's 12 miles long and goes from a mine to a river. It could provide up to 400 full-time jobs, but it's a road that not very many people would advocate for. Number 1800 FRANK DILLON, Executive Vice President, Alaska Trucking Association, Inc., testified via teleconference from Anchorage. The fact that the association is listed as the first member designated to the task force doesn't mean that they were an instigator of the bill; it just means that is where they fell alphabetically, or with any luck it shows that when Representative Rokeberg was thinking of roads he thought of the association. Mr. Dillon further stated the association feels that HB 384 is a very important piece of legislation because it focuses on roads, similar to the way TRAAK [Trails and Recreation Access for Alaska] looks at the development of trails. MR. DILLON continued. The state doesn't have a department of highways anymore; the state has a department of transportation and public facilities which focuses on intermodal types of activities. In that way, the state has developed new ferries, new ferry routes, new airports, and hundreds of miles of new trails. But the state really hasn't developed any new roads. Mr. Dillon further stated that the association is excited about the potential development of the task force, and looks forward to being a part of it, for without surface transportation infrastructures of either rail, water or road there will not be economic development. And when looking at the potential developments in natural resources and tourism every single project requires surface transportation. He further noted that the airport and airfreight industry in Rural Alaska is extremely important, but it's also heavily subsidized by the federal government. If that subsidy disappears, a surface transportation connection between villages will become even more important. There are also a lot of winter routes that exist around the state that could be used as roads. There are individuals, for example, who regularly drive from Barrow to the connecting road system in the oil field and on into Fairbanks. He also understands that the suggested list of twenty roads in the bill are simply suggestions that came to the sponsor's mind. In other words, the task force would not be limited to those roads for considerations. The association, he said in closing, appreciates the idea in the bill. It's time to focus on the development of roads in the state. He doesn't believe that the task force would circumvent any of the processes currently in place; it would simply add a level of advocacy to the development of roads that most people in the state would welcome. Number 1960 REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN stated, Why couldn't the association and similar organizations take the lead in organizing a systematic study on the need for roads by raising support from their members? Why come to the legislature and ask to fund a study that deals specifically with one perspective? It seems more appropriate for an organization like the Alaska Trucking Association to take on the responsibility for this type of study rather than the legislature. MR. DILLON replied all of the money that the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities spends comes from motorists and truckers. The association provides service to those who want to transport items. He said, Whether it's the food that you're going to have for dinner tonight, the bed you sleep in, or the building you're in. Somebody with a truck moved that material to the location you're at, so that you can enjoy those types of things. We're a service industry. We feel that we make a contribution now that is significant to the transportation system. We provide the money that trails are built with; that bike paths are paved with; that, in fact, sidewalks are built with. And we believe that all those things are important, as well as airports, and as well as a marine transportation system, which we have advocated the expansion and the service levels increased down in Southeast Alaska. I don't think it's very fair to say that we should establish a reason for the state to build roads. Road building, I think, in almost any and every citizen's mind is one of those basic functions like fire protection and police that is a legitimate and required government service. Number 2090 DENNIS POSHARD, Legislative Liaison/Special Assistant, Office of the Commissioner, Department of Transportation & Public Facilities, came before the committee to testify. The department fully supports Representative Rokeberg's efforts to improve transportation and spur economic development, and should the bill pass, the department will participate in the process. The department prefers, however, that the task force look at transportation problems holistically. The department has already studied some of the transportation corridors, and has active studies of several of the proposals that are related to the ongoing area plans. The department is taking a holistic and scientific approach to the area plans. They are looking at transportation models that include capital costs, operation and maintenance costs, safety, cost-benefit ratios, demands, economic development, et cetera. The department hopes that the task force would not focus solely on roads, but broaden their focus to consider many of these things. The department is also concerned in relation to the cost of maintenance, for everyone knows that roads are expensive to maintain, and that over the last several years the department's budget has been cut. In the three years that he has been with the department, he cited, the budget has been cut over ten million dollars, most of which, has been in the maintenance area. MR. POSHARD continued. The department, he said, has held off in submitting a fiscal note in the hopes of getting a better handle on the cost of their participation. It's likely that it would be zero, and the department is assuming that their participation would be minimal. He noted that the department submitted a zero fiscal note last year when the legislature created the privatization task force, but it ended up costing several hundred hours of staff time and productivity. The department wants to avoid another situation like that without requesting funding. MR. POSHARD continued. The department doesn't want the task force to usurp the active area planning processes. In response to Representative Rokeberg's comments, he pointed out that TEA-21 [Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century] allows Alaska to use federal money for any road in the state. In response to the point that the state isn't building any new roads, the Administration is not opposed to new roads. In fact, the Administration includes new roads in the area plans and will probably continue to do so in the future. However, the Administration has definitely placed an emphasis on bringing existing roads up to the appropriate standards. For example, if a road is part of the National Highway System, the Administration has been trying to bring it up to national standards for width, grade and alignment. If a road is local, the Administration is trying to get it out of the mud and gravel it; or as traffic demand warrants, the Administration is trying to black-top it to minimize maintenance costs. MR. POSHARD continued. The Department of Transportation & Public Facilities is obviously supportive of solving transportation problems, especially ones that create economic development. Furthermore, the department occasionally shares Representative Rokeberg's frustration with the environmental community. The Whittier tunnel, for example, was litigated all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. However, the department feels that transportation problems should be solved by studying all possible solutions, not just by looking at one solution. Number 2360 REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN stated he remembers seeing maps of the state that included roads all over the place from fairly extensive studies done by the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities. He asked Mr. Poshard whether the legislation adds anything new to what has already been done, or whether there's a high probability that it would be a repeat of efforts already done by various individuals. MR. POSHARD replied some transportation corridors mentioned in the bill have been studied and some have not. He doesn't want to speculate, however, as to why some have been studied and why some have not been studied. It's probably a function of need, demand and funding. Number 2435 REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN asked Mr. Poshard to identify which roads have already been exhaustively studied by the department. MR. POSHARD replied that he has a write-up listing the studies that have been done. He does not consider it exhaustive or final, but he would be happy to finalize it and submit it the committee. Number 2462 REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY asked that Mr. Poshard share the studies with the new task force, so they don't have to "reinvent the wheel." MR. POSHARD stated the department fully plans to participate in that way. TAPE 25, SIDE B Number 0001 MR. POSHARD continued. The department plans to provide studies that they have done to date, as well as, provide a listing of the areas being considered in the current area plans. Number 0019 REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON stated the task force could stimulate some "deep thinking." For example, the House Special Committee on Utility Restructuring is realizing that electrical power cannot be shared between communities unless there is a road, for the most part. That, he said, is a big element of economic development whether it's a lodge for tourism or a mine, for they both need transportation and affordable electrical power. He further noted that affordable electrical power cannot come into any of the villages, that the state currently subsidizes at the rate of millions of dollars a year, unless there is some type of road between a hydropower source, for example. Number 0068 MR. POSHARD replied he's sure that is something that the task force would look at. The Department of Transportation & Public Facilities is looking at those kinds of "things" in their area plans from a cost-benefit standpoint. The department, however, has a limited amount of transportation dollars to invest every year. Number 0097 CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked Mr. Poshard what the last major road project was in the state. MR. POSHARD replied the Whittier road is the first one that comes to mind. Besides the Whittier road, it's either the Dalton Highway or the Parks Highway. REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON stated the last major road was the Copper River Highway. It was stopped, however, due to environmental lawsuits. MR. POSHARD stated the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities has focused on bringing the existing transportation corridors "up to snuff." The department has spent a lot of money, particularly in urban areas, on adding lanes to help the ever increasing traffic demands. Number 0145 CHAIRMAN HALCRO closed the meeting to public testimony. CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked Representative Rokeberg to explain Amendment 1, which reads as follows: Page 3, line 15, after Crooked Creek DELETE period after Crooked Creek and substitute ";" INSERT new subsection: "(21) Tonsina North Access Road" REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG explained that Amendment 1 was requested by a gentleman in the Kenny Lake area. [He did not indicate who the gentleman was.] It provides for a roadway over the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System. Representative Rokeberg further commented that the testimony today has indicated that the adding of a name to the list wouldn't preclude the task force from taking up other roadways. REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY stated, "Or deleting any of these." REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG replied the idea is to prioritize. The ultimate goal of the task force, he said, is to identify a handful of projects that might have viability, get behind them, and start the public process in an expeditious manner. He's very frustrated because for half of his life in the state there hasn't been a road built. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG continued. He further mentioned that Mr. Lampert (ph), a famous Anchorage pioneer, homesteaded the land in the Sears Mall area. Mr. Lampert (ph) and a friend took a D-9 cat from Gambell Street and headed west to cut what's now called Fireweed Lane. But before they got to what's now called Blueberry Lane they took a lunch break which included a few beers. He said, "So, if you ever drive down Fireweed Lane and there's a little lump in the road and you notice that it's a little off angle, that's why." The point is, that is the type of thinking that used to open land and develop countries. He said, I know that we need to be more cognizant of our environment - waters, our fisheries. The totality of the land that we need to husband. And believe me, I feel strongly about that also. But, on the other hand, I think we need to recapture a little bit of the pioneer Alaskan spirit and open up some of the country. Number 0290 CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked Representative Rokeberg whether he wants the committee to adopt Amendment 1, given the fact that the task force's purview would not be limited to the projects listed in the bill. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG replied, "That's fine." He just wanted to make it clear, for the record, that the task force is not limited to the roadways listed in the bill. REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked Representative Halcro whether he could amend Amendment 1 to include a new paragraph. It reads as follows: (22) a road from Juneau to Atlin, B.C. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG agreed to the change made by Representative Hudson. REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY made a motion to adopt Amendment 1, as amended by Representative Hudson. There being no objection, Amendment 1, as amended, was so adopted. Number 0342 REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN suggested adding a representative of the Alaska Citizens Transportation Coalition to the task force. As previous testimony has indicated, the coalition is composed of a wide variety of individuals, municipal officials, and the like who could contribute to the task force. CHAIRMAN HALCRO referred to page 2, lines 5-7, which reads as follows: (9) one public member jointly appointed by the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives who resides in a rural area outside the area that is directly connected to Anchorage by road ... [page 2, lines 5-7, of the bill]. CHAIRMAN HALCRO stated it might be helpful to have someone serve on the task force who is from a rural area that is not connected to Anchorage in order to give another impression. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked Chairman Halcro whether he's suggesting that the rural member should be deleted from the task force. CHAIRMAN HALCRO replied, "No." The rural member would remain. The language would read as follows: ... a member of the Citizens Transportation Coalition that lives in a rural area that is not connected to Anchorage by road. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked Representative Kemplen to advise the committee on whether the Alaska Citizens Transportation Coalition is a represented group. REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN replied he believes that the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities has had extensive dealings with the coalition. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG indicated that it might be good to have somebody who works with the coalition to act as an informal liaison. CHAIRMAN HALCRO stated a representative could indicate what the coalition is doing in relation to them being a parallel committee. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG commented that he doesn't have a problem with including a representative of the Alaska Citizens Transportation Coalition. Number 0536 CHAIRMAN HALCRO suggested the following language: ... who resides in a rural area outside of the area that is directly connected to Anchorage by road and serves on the Citizens Transportation Coalition. REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked Chairman Halcro whether the language "directly connected to Anchorage" is needed. CHAIRMAN HALCRO replied, "No." REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG stated the language should be so that a rural member is retained in order to maintain a broad representation. REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON suggested the following language: ... who resides in a rural area and is an active member of the Citizens Transportation Coalition. Number 0536 CHAIRMAN HALCRO offered the following amendment to page 2, line 6, of the CSHB 384(EDT), [Amendment 2] to read as follows: ... Speaker of the House of Representatives who resides in a rural area and is a member of the Citizens Transportation Coalition. CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked whether there is any objection to adopting Amendment 2. There being none, it was so adopted. CHAIRMAN HALCRO entertained a motion to move the bill from committee. Number 0557 REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY made a motion to move CSHB 384(EDT), version 1-LS1452\H, as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal note. REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN objected. He understands the purpose behind the task force, but it causes his some concerns. He said, When the legislature gets into taking an advocacy role for a narrow part of a narrow piece of public policy it winds up producing, from my observation, conflict and a stalemate. And the result is that the resources that were spent on that effort did not produce any significant return. So, the investment is not a wise investment, and there's an opportunity cost associated with any of those types of endeavors. The comments by the department [Department of Transportation & Public Facilities] that where they cited the example of the privatization task force where, even though they provided a zero fiscal note, hundreds of hours of staff work went into that effort. And, the product is what? Here were are close to the end of the second session and we're going to adjourn, where are the results? And that's the problem that, I guess, that I have is the lack of results from these types of initiatives. If you don't have a well-balanced approach to crafting public policy in a particular area you wind up with stalemate and it becomes a waste of the public's dollar. And, unfortunately, as I see this particular piece of legislation, I think, we're headed down that road. It's going to wind up being a waste of the public's money and I cannot support it. Number 0688 REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY stated if Representative Kemplen had spent more time at the privatization meetings, which were mostly held in his town [Anchorage], he would have a different attitude. The Governor, he noted, is going to adopt some of the "things" from that task force. He thinks before the session is over that there will be some legislation in relation to privatization. He doesn't think that the privatization task force was a waste of time, and it's not fair to those who volunteered to participate on the task force to say that what they did wasn't worthwhile. Number 0733 REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON commented the only tool and trade that legislators have is good judgement. Legislators are constantly dealing with brand new issues and trying to respond on behalf of their constituents. Good judgement is a product of good information. He sees the bill as a type of information tool, and at the present time, legislators do not have the type of information that is being called for in the task force. He doesn't see how this type of information is going to be harmful, as Representative Kemplen has indicated. Number 0793 REPRESENTATIVE VIC KOHRING stated this is a good bill, and he's looking forward to "firing up some D-9 cats and blasting some roads." Number 0804 CHAIRMAN HALCRO stated he shares Representative Kemplen's concern and frustration with special committees in relation to their effectiveness. But it's incumbent upon legislators to identify areas that may need a closer look. He cited the Joint Special Committee on Mergers was established last year by the legislature to look at the BP-Arco merger. The legislature didn't have to establish that special committee. They could have let the House Resources Standing Committee or the House Special Committee on Oil and Gas deal with the issue. But it was established because it was thought that "fresh eyes" were needed to look at the issue. This task force, however, is different. There would be substantial public input. The task force would provide some fresh eyes to take a look at a problem that would factor in economic benefits and the overall quality of life. He thinks that the task force is a good idea. Number 0881 REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN stated his real concern is that the task force is a role for the civic sector where it's proper for advocacy to be performed. For example, Commonwealth North Inc. has stepped forward and allocated resources for a fairly significant analysis of the state's fiscal dilemma. The organizations listed in the bill that make up the membership of the task force should join together in an advocacy type of coalition to analyze, promote, and advocate for roads. The results could then be presented to the legislature for review and acted upon. But for the legislature to be spending the public's money to advance a particular, narrow agenda seems to be reflective of special interest politics rather than public interest politics. CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked Representative Kemplen whether he still maintains his objection. REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN replied, "Yes." A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Kohring, Hudson, Halcro and Cowdery voted "yea." Representative Kemplen voted "nay." By a vote of 4-1, CSHB 384(TRA) so moved from the House Transportation Standing Committee.