HB 160-PROCUREMENT; CONSTRUCTION; CONTRACTS  1:21:54 PM CHAIR HOPKINS announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 160, "An Act relating to the state procurement code; establishing the construction manager general contractor procurement method; and providing for an effective date." 1:23:16 PM REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN moved to adopted Conceptual Amendment 1 to HB 160, which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: Page 2, line 5 Following "the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities may," Insert "through the competitive sealed proposal process" Page 2, line 10 Following "construction phase" Delete "through the competitive sealed proposal process" Page 2, line 11 Following "the department" Delete "shall" Insert "may" The committee authorizes the Legislative Legal Services division to make technical and conforming changes to the committee substitute for HB 160. 1:23:28 PM JOE HARDENBROOK, Staff, Representative Grier Hopkins, Alaska State Legislature, explained Conceptual Amendment 1 to HB 160. He said the amendment was available in the committee packet, with the second page showing how it is incorporated into HB 160. 1:25:34 PM MIKE LESMANN, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner, Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, explained how Conceptual Amendment 1 would improve HB 160. He explained that moving the words "through the competitive proposal sealed process" from page 2, line 10, to line 5 clarifies that the construction manager/general contractor (CM/GC) really starts with that competitive sealed proposal process and takes care of the phase of pre-construction services. He explained the change from "shall" to "may" would help the contracting community better understand the process. He deferred to Mike Lund for further explanation. 1:26:23 PM MIKE LUND, Regional Construction Engineer, Northern Region, Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, regarding the change from "shall" to "may" explained that the process is further clarified in [subsections] (b) and (c) as to when those actions would take place and related to whether or not costs can be negotiated. Further, he said "may" would provide protection for the owner or the State of Alaska in the event, for example, that a cost is negotiated but funding is not available to proceed with the construction contract. He said, "It provides an avenue for the State of Alaska or the Department of Transportation [& Public Facilities] to ... have an out even if we can still satisfy a fair negotiation of costs." 1:27:45 PM CHAIR HOPKINS opened public testimony on HB 160, as amended. 1:28:06 PM ALICIA SIIRA, Executive Director, Associated General Contractors of Alaska (AGC), stated that AGC supports having CM/GC as an additional tool in the toolbox. She said AGC represents over 600 members. She said CM/GC is a common and accepted alternative delivery project method of construction used in Alaska for over a decade. She asked that the committee remember that CM/GC is but one tool, and she asked for transparency and ample review when using it, in order to ensure the best value for the state. She stated that HB 160 would benefit the construction industry and the state by modifying procurement statutes to codify the CM/GC procurement process, thus allowing DOT&PF to use the process without having to submit an innovative procurement request with the Department of Law and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) or the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for each project. She stated, "This bill will modernize, clarify, and improve the state's procurement process and align Alaska with a majority of other states." Further, passage of HB 160 would allow the industry to participate in the development of a regulatory package to address concerns about consistency in the use of CM/GC on projects. She said AGC requests a seat at the table for this process. She noted that the association has compiled a list of best practices within Alaska and in other states that it looks forward to sharing with DOT&PF partners. She said AGC supports the amendments to HB 160 discussed earlier in this hearing. 1:31:15 PM SARAH LEFEBVRE shared that she works for a statewide contractor in its Fairbanks office and has been in the construction industry for over 23 years. She said passage of the proposed legislation would ensure that CM/GC would be applied more consistently and transparently. Putting the process in statute would allow DOT&PF to move forward in completing regulations and completing a handbook that has existed in draft form for a couple years. She said the construction community is excited about the possibility of additional infrastructure funds through the state from the federal level but is concerned that DOT&PF "may need some more opportunities in the future to move projects forwards," and having CM/GC as a tool will facilitate this. She closed by stating her support of [Conceptual Amendment 1] to HB 160. 1:33:04 PM CHAIR HOPKINS, after ascertaining there was no one else who wished to testify, closed public testimony on HB 160. 1:33:17 PM MR. LESMANN thanked the committee and staff for working on HB 160. 1:33:50 PM REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN moved to report HB 160, [as amended], out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal notes, and with authorization for Legislative Legal Services to make technical and conforming changes. 1:34:19 PM CHAIR HOPKINS objected for the purpose of taking the time to thank Mr. Lesmann for his service. He then removed his objection. There being no further objection, CSHB 160(TRA) was reported out of the House Transportation Standing Committee.