SENATE BILL NO. 101 "An Act amending the definition of 'disaster.'" This was the fourth hearing for this bill. Co-Chair John Torgerson noted that during the last hearing, the committee adopted CS Version "I" as a Workdraft. Senator Sean Parnell moved for adoption of Amendment #5. Co-Chair John Torgerson explained that it added an intent section to the bill to alleviate fear that the committee would change the way the Governor could receive federal funds. He stated that the bill did not do that, but the intent language was proposed to clarify the matter. Without objection, Amendment #5 was adopted. Senator Al Adams moved for adoption of Amendment #6. Co- Chair John Torgerson objected. Senator Al Adams explained the amendment would add the words, "an event including" to page 4 line 8. The reason for this addition was to ensure that FEMA funds would not be lost. Co-Chair John Torgerson spoke to objection, saying that there could be other interpretations to the language to suggest the disasters would not be limited to the list, but that others could be included. Amendment #6 failed to be adopted by a vote of 2-7. Senator Al Adams and Senator Pete Kelly cast the yea votes. There was discussion by the committee to clarify the status of the CS, past actions taken and the amendments proposed. Break 6:15 PM / 6:22 PM Senator Dave Donley moved for adoption of Amendment #7. Senator Al Adams objected. Senator Dave Donley explained that the amendment was mostly conforming language to make Section 2 work. It would give the Legislature an option not to convene a special session if the expenditure was over $5 million. It set up a method for the presiding officers to poll the members of the Legislature and receive written consent by the majority of the members of each body. It would make the provision of polling of Legislatures acceptable using telephonic facsimile, electronic mail or other means of written communication. Co-Chair John Torgerson referred to page 1 section 1 and noted the language stating that the proclamation of disaster could not last longer than 30 days unless extended by the Legislature by law. He wondered if there shouldn't be a conforming amendment to that provision also to possible allow for the extension to be made other than with a law or concurrent resolution. Senator Dave Donley countered that the existing law said a disaster could not last longer than 30 days without concurrent resolution. Therefore, the same problem existed under current law. Co-Chair John Torgerson responded that the current law intended that the Legislature would convene a special session and pass a law for the extension. Senator Dave Donley said the distinction between law and a concurrent resolution wouldn't be impacted by this because, unless it was determined that the current system was flawed and the special session law had been ignored, the CS would become consistent even thought it was inconsistent in current law. With the adoption of Amendment #7 there was a possibility it could become inconsistent again. Co-Chair John Torgerson said the bill drafters would be directed to ensure conformity. Senator Al Adams referred to page 2 line 1 of the Amendment explained that if that was done, funding could be approved for a disaster of over $1 million or, $5 million if the federal government declared it. It would also give the option to handle the funding through the legislative process. He asked the sponsor to comment. Senator Dave Donley said that would change the framework of the CS. Senator Al Adams said it would make it simpler to get access to the federal funds and to also implement Senator Dave Donley's polling method. Senator Dave Donley said the CS was intended to bring more accountability into the system. By inserting the "or" the Governor would be free to spend money without consulting the Legislature as long as the federal government declared the disaster. Senator Al Adams countered that the legislation shouldn't be made so tight that when there was a disaster, the state would be unable to respond. Senator Al Adams conceded that if the sponsor did not agree with the proposed amendment to Amendment #7, he would not offer it. Senator Dave Donley thanked him and declined the amendment. Without objection, Amendment #7 was adopted. Amendment #8 was brought before the committee. Co-Chair John Torgerson noted that page 2 lines 6-15 of the CS was deleted by Amendment #7 thus affecting the proposed changes in Amendment #8 to page 2 line 9 of the CS. ANNETTE KREITZER, staff to Senator Loren Leman, spoke to Amendment #8. She testified that no changes from Amendment Amendment #8. She told the committee that proposed deletions of, "26.23.300(c) and (d)" and insert of, "26.23.300(b) and (c)" in Amendment #9 was simply a function of what would happen on page 2 lines 22-26 of the CS. She quantified that this amendment was drafted as a result of committee discussions about how to go through the process. This would remove the $500,000 limit and provide specific expenditures of up to $1 million from the disaster relief fund. The qualifications would be, "to save lives, protect property and public health and safety or lessen or avert the threat of a disaster that posed a direct and imminent threat of sufficient severity and magnitude to justify state action." This language was taken from FEMA's definition of emergency. The next significant change was to page 3 line 7 of the CS, the limiting section of specific types of disasters allowable. It added "mitigate environmental damage" to the release of oil or hazardous substances. The next proposed change was to reduce the spending cap from $5 million to $3 million on page 3 line 8. She indicated that was a policy call for the committee to decide what figure it chose to use. Co-Chair John Torgerson interrupted asking that the amendment be divided. There was discussion as to where the division would occur. Co-Chair John Torgerson asked for clarification that the first portion of the amendment would delete the half million-dollar provision for smaller disasters and increase it to $1 million. Annette Kreitzer affirmed explaining that the reason for that change related to the definition of disaster and the committee's action to separate out certain disasters on page 3 lines 4-9 for specific treatment by the Legislature. Co-Chair John Torgerson noted that the $500,000 trigger was liberal and the definition was very broad so that it could encompass the smaller disasters. It had seemed an appropriate amount of money to fund the smaller events and this change would raise that amount and tighten the definition. Annette Kreitzer said that was correct and that it was a policy call for the committee. She noted the various discussions relating to the bill. Co-Chair John Torgerson asked if the $500,000 was in existing language. Annette Kreitzer answered that the $1 million limit was the existing language. Co-Chair John Torgerson thought the $500,000 limit was also in current statute. Co-Chair John Torgerson entertained a motion to divide the question. Senator Loren Leman moved for adoption of Amendment #8A. This consisted of all of page 1 and page 2 lines 1-10 excluding lines 3-5 of Amendment #8. Annette Kreitzer recommended including page 3 lines 21 and 22 of Amendment #8 noting that it was parallel language. Senator Loren Leman amended his motion to include that in Amendment #8A. Senator Al Adams said it was difficult to understand the amendment because it set different flooring levels relating to the $500,000 and $1 million limits. It also was difficult to understand what authority the governor would have at different flooring levels. He suggested a change of the word "possesses" to "poses". He then spoke to the concerns of only allowing relief for one flood per community. What would happen if there was a second flood and the state wanted to save lives and protect property and health? He then noted that the cost of most disasters was above $3 million for Alaska and he felt the $5 million limit should not be lowered. He complained about the definitions of the disasters asking why the list did not include disasters more likely to occur in Alaska. He would vote no on the amendment. Senator Lyda Green discussed the definition of disaster. She referred to current statute and its reference it made to US code. The definition included in the current amendment was nearly identical to the current statute. Therefore, this amendment would not depart from the definition, it just hadn't been followed in the past. Senator Al Adams rebutted that if that were the case, he would ask where was the definition of severe winter storms in the amended definition. Senator Sean Parnell read the amendment differently. As he understood, it would allow the Governor, without additional Legislative authorization, to expend funds for the purposes of saving lives, protecting property, etc. All this amendment would do was bring to light the immediacy of the impact to the people affected and give the Governor the ability to fund those disasters. It did not set dollar limits. Senator Loren Leman said Senator Sean Parnell was correct. Senator Loren Leman made technical amendment to the amended Amendment #8A to change "possesses" to "poses" on page 1 line 12 and page 2 line 8. Senator Al Adams still questioned what would happen in the case of a second flood. Was it the intent of the sponsor to prevent the state and federal government from assisting in the protection of lives and property. Co-Chair John Torgerson informed him there was another amendment that addressed the flood provision. It was not his intent to not allow assistance. He noted the two triggers of $5 million for the first flood and $1 million for the next flood. He detailed the provision. Co-Chair John Torgerson asked Annette to read the language with the amended Amendment #8A incorporated. She read into the record portions of the CS Version "I" as it would be amended. Senator Sean Parnell asked why, as a policy matter, did the committee want to get rid of the $500,000 provision. Annette subsection b the 500,000 . Annette Kreitzer responded that this amendment was drafted in the initial stages of the bill to reflect the feelings of the committee at that time. She realized that the feelings might have changed. Senator Sean Parnell liked the language but questioned the deletion of the $500,000. Co-Chair John Torgerson agreed saying it essentially raised the amount that the governor could expend and that it had worked fine in the past. Senator Sean Parnell asked if an amendment to delete page 1 lines 4 and 5 of Amendment #8 would affect the provisions on page 2 starting with line 22 of the CS Version "I". Annette Kreitzer suggested a conceptional amendment to direct the Division of Legal Services to conform the language to include the saving lives and property provision and retain the $500,000 provision. She gave detail. Senator Sean Parnell moved to conceptually amend the amended Amendment #8A. This would delete page 1 lines 4 and 5 of Amendment #8, and essentially retain the language on page 2 lines 22-26 of the CS Version "I" and leave the $500,000 trigger in the bill. Senator Al Adams asked if that would affect the change to renumber AS 26.23.300 as proposed on page 1 lines 1-3 of Amendment #8 and also addressed in Amendment #7. Annette commented that she saw it as a technical amendment to conform to the bill. Senator Sean Parnell stated his intent to have the bill drafters incorporate the necessary technical changes. The intent of his motion was to retain the language regarding the $500,000 provision. Without objection, the amended Amendment #8A was again amended. Senator Lyda Green moved to conceptually amend Amendment delete all of lines 24-26 of the CS Version "I" and be replaced with the language from page 1 lines 11-13 of Amendment #8. She read the proposed language into the record. Senator Sean Parnell questioned why the committee would do that with the $500,000 trigger when it was included with the $1 million trigger. He noted Senator Al Adams's point that there were other smaller events that the state may want to respond to. Senator Lyda Green responded that when declaring disasters, the standard must be consistent or there would be a risk of starting to assist in a disaster and the cost running above the $500,000. Senator Dave Donley understood this, if there was a small disaster and the cost rose above the $500,000 it would be pushed into the higher category and the additional restrains would be imposed. Senator Lyda Green commented. Tape: SFC - 99 #63, Side B 7:03 PM Co-Chair John Torgerson asked if the language should be inserted were intended by Amendment #8 rather than as proposed in the amendment to the amended Amendment #8A. Senator Dave Donley said that while there was a good argument for accountability, there was an outweighed argument for flexibility when the cost was below $500,000. By allowing that flexibility, the Legislature did not give up the greater accountability for the larger disasters. Senator Lyda Green asked for clarification of the restrictions between the $500,000 and $1 million dollar expenditures. There was discussion on the subsections affected. Co-Chair John Torgerson restated the amendment into the record. Senator Randy Phillips objected to the motion. Senator Loren Leman felt the committee should roll back and start over. He thought the committee had gotten off track with this amendment. Senator Lyda Green withdrew her motion to amend the amended Amendment #8A. Co-Chair John Torgerson noted that brought the committee back to Amendment #8A as amended. Senator Al Adams maintained his objection. He restated his earlier comments that the amendment was difficult to understand and the delegation of powers was also difficult to ascertain. He noted that this bill could not be amended to adequately satisfy all the member of the committee. Amendment #8A as amended was adopted by a vote of 8-1. Senator Al Adams cast the nay vote. Senator Loren Leman stated that he would not offer Amendment #8B. This consisted of page 2 lines 3-5 and lines 11-25 of Amendment #8. Senator Loren Leman moved for adoption of Amendment #8C. This consisted of page 3 lines 1-20 and the deletion of page 2 lines 3-5 and lines 11-25 of Amendment #8. Senator Lyda Green objected. Annette Kreitzer explained that the portion remaining (page 3 lines 1-20) spoke to the definition of disaster. This amendment would change the definition to make it similar to the FEMA definition of major disaster. She read the definition into the record. She added that she had checked with the National Weather Service to see how they defined prolonged cold temperatures. She learned that they defined a short period of cold a "cold snap" and a longer period of cold a "cold spell". The term, "prolonged extreme cold" came from the FEMA's reference to prolonged extreme heat. Co-Chair John Torgerson asked for clarification of the intent of the amendment. Annette Kreitzer responded that it was difficult for her to understand and that she was only able to determine the new language rather than what was deleted. She continued to detail the amendment. Co- Chair John Torgerson noted that it would actually delete the language down through line 8 of page 3 of the CS and replace the entire definition. Senator Gary Wilken asked for the rationale behind the elimination of "or clothing". Annette said clothing was considered property and was not listed separately under FEMA language. Co-Chair John Torgerson pointed out that the new definition would also eliminate avalanche. Annette responded that it was the intent of the amendment to stay within the FEMA language. However, she said the severe extreme cold provision was added and the committee could chose to add a provision for avalanche also. Senator Loren Leman moved to amend Amendment #8C to insert "avalanche" to page 3 line 12 after "mudslide" in Amendment Senator Lyda Green asked if other parts of the statute referred to the US code that defined natural disaster. She read the definition into the record. She felt the statute had to either conform to the federal code or eliminate any reference to it. Co-Chair John Torgerson said he would entertain an amendment to do so. Senator Al Adams asked if the statute reflected the US code, would that make it easier to get federal funding. Senator Dave Donley didn't think so. Senator Al Adams wanted to know what events might happen in Alaska that was not included in the definition. He had concerns about the elimination of potential events that might happen in the future. Co-Chair John Torgerson explained that the Governor could still spend up to $500,000 on them. If the Governor chose to declare the event a disaster, he could spend up to $1 million. Any amount more than that would then trigger the legislative special session component. Senator Lyda Green felt it should be called a "major" disaster. Break 7:24 PM / 7:40 PM Senator Lyda Green moved to amend Amendment #8C as amended. This would delete language on page 3 of the CS beginning with "resulting" on line 4 and ending with "damage," on line 7 and replace with different language, which she read into the record. Co-Chair John Torgerson offered a friendly amendment to the amendment to replace the language to be inserted with, "as defined in AS 26.23.900(2)". Senator Lyda Green accepted the friendly amendment. Co-Chair John Torgerson noted that this amendment would remove from the list of allowable disasters, epidemic, explosion and riot. If this was the will of the committee, he felt it should be noted in the record. Senator Lyda Green stated that was her intent. Without objection, the amendment to amend Amendment #8C as amended was adopted. Without objection, Amendment #8C as amended was adopted. Senator Randy Phillips moved for adoption of Amendment #9. Senator Al Adams asked how it compared to the changes made with Amendment #8. Co-Chair John Torgerson explained that this amendment would change the provisions regarding floods to pay $5 million once. If costs exceeded $5 million, the Legislature must approve expenditures using the polling method. If a second flood occurred in the same geographical area, the maximum amount allowed would be $1 million without Legislative approval. Senator Al Adams removed his objection. Without objection, Amendment #9 was adopted. JOHN SHIVELY, Commissioner, Department of Natural Resources testified. He said his office delivered a letter to the Senate Finance Committee that outlined the department's concerns about the affect of the bill, which he didn't think the committee intended. However, because of the funding procedure, he thought there would be consequences to the wildlife fire fighting services. In the past, the program was funded from the disaster funds with the department coming to the Legislature the next session with a supplemental request to replenish the fund. Under this bill, it would be necessary to declare a disaster and to request additional funds from the Legislature before they could be expended. Fire fighting costs over the last several years averaged over $11 million. Because the new bill set a $5 million limit, a special session would need to be called each fire season. He suggested a couple solutions. One was to pre-fund the fire fighting program. He felt that could be problematic for a number of reasons. Another solution would be for the Legislature to exempt some wild land fire fighting. That would allow the status quo by having the Legislative leadership approve the funds as needed. Another solution was to incorporate the polling of the Legislature to convene a special session. Co-Chair John Torgerson asked what was the current limit for spending on wildfires. Jon Shively responded that the initial limit was whatever the Legislature appropriated. Last year that amount was $3.5 million. When more was expended, the department requested money from the disaster relief fund. That fund usually was not sufficient, and a request was made to the Governor. The Governor then notified the Legislative leadership for approval for more funds to continue to fight the fires. He stressed that the costs constantly went over the initial appropriation. There was no limit for fire fighting as such other than the Legislative leadership deciding to refuse the request. Co-Chair John Torgerson corrected him saying that the Legislative leadership didn't approve additional funds, only declining to convene a special session, thus allowing the Governor to expend funds. Under the proposed bill, the limit would be raised to $5 million. Jon Shively countered that he did not interpret it that way. The spending limit was not the problem; it was the fact that there was no money in the fund. There was further discussion between Co- Chair John Torgerson and Jon Shively on the matter. Senator Al Adams asked if the Legislature would appropriate more money to the disaster relief fund. Co-Chair John Torgerson answered that chances were there would not be additional funds. Senator Al Adams stated that he felt more money should be appropriated. Co-Chair John Torgerson understood but noted that this bill would allow the Governor to use other funds for disasters without legislative authority. He stressed that prior to this bill, the Governor only had authority to expend up to $1 million. This bill would allow him to spend up to $5 million. Co-Chair John Torgerson noted that his office hadn't received the aforementioned letter from the Department of Natural Resources. It was determined there was no one present wishing to testify on the bill. Co-Chair John Torgerson announced he did not intend to move the bill from committee at this meeting. He would have a new CS drafted for the committee to review. He ordered the bill held in committee.