SB 245-PERS BENEFITS FOR HARBOR OFFICERS    CHAIR GARY STEVENS announced SB 245 to be up for consideration and recognized Senator Elton. SENATOR KIM ELTON, sponsor of SB 245, refreshed members' memories by telling them that he gave a brief introduction to the bill at the end of a previous meeting and he had two points to add. SB 245 seeks to acknowledge the new and special duties harbor officers have particularly since 9-11. He noted that, "What this bill does isn't that different than the way we treat other port officers." For instance, the port police at Anchorage airport are members of this same bargaining unit. The duties and requirements are essentially the same except that harbors are dealing with boats and ships rather than airplanes. This bill would affect 54 people statewide and all are employees of political subdivisions of the state. In Juneau and Kodiak nine harbor officers would be involved and in Sitka the number would be eight. Other communities all have fewer officers than that. He noted that in some of the communities the harbor officers are police officers as well so they wouldn't be affected since they're already covered under statute. CHAIR GARY STEVENS wanted to be clear that the additional costs would be borne by the various communities involved; this wouldn't be a state responsibility. SENATOR ELTON said that is correct, the costs would be borne by the employee and the municipality. The fiscal note reflects no state costs, but the addendum recognizes that there are costs that would be borne by municipalities. The harbor officers' contribution rate would be adjusted as well. SENATOR BERT STEDMAN asked if there was any fiscal information available from affected cities and boroughs. SENATOR ELTON replied page two of the fiscal note reflects fiscal information from Juneau and Anchorage and although it doesn't have site-specific information, costs could be roughly extrapolated. SENATOR STEDMAN noted that there would certainly be substantial benefits to the harbor officers and this legislation would make it easier for municipalities and cities to attract and retain employees. However, he wanted to get more information on the fiscal impact to the affected communities. Having spoken at length to the finance officers in Ketchikan and Sitka regarding the PERS and TRS under funding he realizes that they are already faced with a possible step increase of as much as 5 percent. With that in mind, he wanted to hear more about their comfort level on this. Although he didn't have any fundamental objection to the benefit package, municipalities are clearly running out of room to maneuver. SENATOR ELTON responded that Senator Stedman's initial comments were the compelling reason for him to introduce the legislation. Given the fundamental duties of a harbor officer, and the way they have changed especially in communities that are now ports of call for major cruise ships - the fundamental duties have shifted dramatically." He said he would be happy to work with the Senator to get the desired information. He further reasoned that because of the fiscal note the Finance Committee would scrutinize the bill closely. CHAIR GARY STEVENS deemed Senator Stedman's request reasonable and said he would hold the bill. SENATOR GUESS remarked that the bill had already been held for a year. CHAIR GARY STEVENS opened public testimony. TIM ACKERMAN, Juneau harbors officer, testified in support of SB 245. He advised that he has been employed in the harbor department since 1988 and his range of duties and responsibilities have changed considerably over the years particularly with the new homeland security requirements. They coordinate efforts with the Coast Guard, police department, fire department and the FBI. KEVIN RICHIE, Alaska Municipal League, agreed with the sentiment that communities should be a part of the discussion. He said he spoke with the Division of Retirement and Benefits about the potential impacts, but the leagues policy statement is, "if things increase the cost to local governments and retirement system, that it's not a good thing for the retirement system." He said it's ironic that it's a municipal bill, but it's in a system that's controlled by the state. Another good municipal question, he said, is why do firefighters, police officer, and teachers have a 20 and out system? Partly it is to attract and retain qualified people and presumably because firefighters and police officers have a higher level of danger in their jobs. However, he said he believes that a number of municipal jobs are dangerous and used assessors and librarians as examples. He said he wasn't trying to minimize the dangers in law enforcement and what harbor officers do, but he questioned how they fit in the whole scheme. CHAIR GARY STEVENS asked about the opportunity for communities to opt in or opt out. MR. RICHIE said that would be a minimum for a municipality. LARRY SIMMONS testified via teleconference from Kenai in opposition to the bill. He made the point that the PERS system is seriously under funded and municipalities are on the hook. Furthermore, he took issue with the definition of harbor officer and said that the harbor officer duties in Kenai don't compare to a police officer's duties. MATT CLARK, Homer port and harbor employee, testified via teleconference on behalf of the Homer harbor staff and personnel in support of SB 245. He outlined the hazardous situations they encounter on a daily basis. Some of the hazards include oil spill clean up, pumping out boats with hazardous material aboard, putting out fires on boats, responding to a capsized or sinking boat and generally being the first responders in emergency situations. CHAIR GARY STEVENS asked Senator Elton if he had any interest in exploring opt-in or opt-out as a possibility for municipalities. SENATOR ELTON carefully said, "if it is an interest of the committee's and that is the way the bill moves, it's an interest of mine." He crafted the bill the way he did because these officers are owed the same recognition that other first responders and public safety officers are given. The examples given by the harbor officer from Homer made the concept very real. His preference would be to not go that route. With regard to the testimony offered by Mr. Richie, he said he didn't think it is fair to characterize the duties of a harbor officer with those of a librarian. Second, in many communities, harbors are an enterprise function as they are in Juneau. Therefore, the costs incurred would be transferred to the harbor users. That is a significant difference, he asserted. "The concept we use here is no different than the concept we used when we added dispatchers to the peace officer retirement system. Dispatchers, of course, are an extremely important provision of public safety services, but I would note that their jobs are probably less hazardous than the job of a person who is actually in harbors." Of course he said he was willing to talk if committee members disagree with his approach. SENATOR STEDMAN said, "I disagree with the concept of possibly adding or allowing an expansion of this particular benefit because of either costs and or just feel philosophically that they don't have the risk level like a peace officer has. I don't have any problem with that." SENATOR ELTON said he looked forward to working with the Senator to quantify "on a micro level" the costs to communities. CHAIR GARY STEVENS suggested that everyone would learn more about funding of harbor offices when they do a little research and talk to the communities. SB 245 was held in committee.