SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 19 Relating to the use of prototype designs in public school construction projects. CS FOR SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 19(HES) Relating to the use of prototype designs in public school construction projects. Senator Adams said he thought they had gone through the bill and that only amendments were going to be presented today. Co-chair Sharp indicated the bill had been previously heard and noted amendments in the file for consideration. (Tape #43, Side A switched to Side B.) Senator Gary Wilken was invited to join the committee. He indicated that there were two amendments and they were both fine with the sponsors. One amendment was from Senator Adams to strike "elementary" on page two of the bill; the other two were from Senator Torgerson and more clearly defined the bond reimbursement committee. They will help the bill. Senator Adams MOVED amendment #1, page two, line thirteen, to strike the word "elementary" and WITHOUT OBJECTION it was ADOPTED. Senator Torgerson MOVED amendment #2, which would better define what the bond council was as reflected in that portion of the legislation. Senator Donley asked what AS 14.11.014 and Senator Torgerson responded that there was a regular bonding committee that makes recommendations and sells bonds for the State of Alaska. It is made up of the Commissioner of Revenue, the Commissioner of Commerce and the Commissioner of Administration. It would direct that they would be required to make determinations as to Prototype Schools, but in further speaking with the sponsor, section 14.11.014 has a special committee within the Department of Education that is already designated to analyze existing prototype designs for school construction projects. It was the intent of the sponsor that this committee should be doing the review, not the general bond committee of the State of Alaska. (pause on tape) Co-chair Sharp announced that WITHOUT OBJECTION, amendment Senator Adams said this was a very good bill but the fiscal note should also be looked. There should be a presentation due to the fact that it is indeterminate and perhaps there would be problems on the floor. It is necessary to have the cost of something like this. What is seen as the cost of this and where would the money come from? Senator Wilken said he has not seen the fiscal note. They are trying to get more schools for their money. He noted the effort of Fairbanks to have prototypical schools. That has been extremely successful. There has been some money out of deferred maintenance effort set aside in order to explore the idea of having what conceptually are three elementary prototype schools that would be used by people around the State. One of the seven charges of the bond reimbursement committee that was put in place in 1984 was to evaluate the prototypical issue and bring to the Legislature a plan. He said he thought the deferred maintenance task force was a perfect opportunity to do that. Especially in travels through Kotzebue, Senator Adams district, he saw perfect application for prototypical schools; put three schools on a barge and build the same three schools in three different villages rather than starting from scratch. If ten percent is saved on every school that is one school free with ten. Senator Parnell noted that most everyone around the table agree with the concept of prototypes. He asked about page two, lines fourteen through sixteen, and quoted the following: "Further Resolved that the Governor is requested to direct the Department of Education to develop prototype school designs for schools in consultation with engineering and architecture design professionals..." and while the resolution does not have the force of law and he can ignore it, if it is being requested of him to direct DOE to develop prototype school designs in consultation with engineering professionals there is going to be some cost. He can be told how much to spend if there is a fiscal note. Otherwise next year the department can come before the Legislature for more money. He said he felt better direction was needed as to how much this was going to cost and what DOE's position is depending on what they are requested by the Governor. Senator Wilken responded that there was a meeting with the bond reimbursement committee at their quarterly meeting last week. He said he thought that group would be charged with the effort to develop the prototypical designs. They would quantify the cost and go to DOE because the bond reimbursement committee does not have the authority to spend money. DOE must spend it. The bond reimbursement committee would organized and ask for the appropriation. The group is made up of two legislators, two individuals from the Department of Education and three professionals. It is not dominated by DOE. There is some concern for the $3.9 million set aside for prototypical schools. There needs to be some oversight on how the money would be used and the bond reimbursement committee would provide just that. Senator Parnell said the Governor did not have to comply with direction to DOE because this is only a resolution and had no force of law. Senator Torgerson said the resolution was only reinforcing what was already in existing law which is currently being ignored. He quoted existing law under paragraph three of 14.11.014 "...to develop criteria for construction of schools in the State. Criteria developed under this paragraph must include requirements intended to achieve cost effective school construction." and then a subsection of that is: "...analyze existing prototypical designs for school construction." He said the difficulty in generating a fiscal note is not the cost of doing their job, which is clearly defined by statute, as to the savings to the State of Alaska if one design for all the schools was to be utilized. Co-chair Sharp indicated there was one individual on teleconference that would like to testify. Phillip Skilbred via teleconference from Fairbanks testified before the committee. He asked the committee to look at page two, lines twenty-eight through thirty-one. He said he felt that if statutory changes were to be made in order to implement the referred to program the alarms would go off in every office in Juneau. He felt the bill was loaded and corruptible beaurocracy. (There was very poor sound quality due to the fact that our bridge was not being used and miscellaneous conversation between members during the testimony taken.) Co-chair Sharp thanked Mr. Skilbred and the meeting continued. Senator Adams MOVED CSSCR 19 (FIN) with accompanying fiscal notes and WITHOUT OBJECTION it was REPORTED OUT with individual recommendations and an indeterminate fiscal note from the Department of Education.