Committee hears bill to require statewide public and community transit plan

Juneau — The House Community and Regional Affairs Committee held a hearing Feb. 27 on House Bill 26, a proposal from Representative Genevieve Mina to add a statewide public and community transit planning duty to the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) and to expand transportation planning to rural and remote Alaska.

"House Bill 26 seeks to modernize the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities duties to reflect the needs of Alaskans by broadening the study of transportation options across Alaska and improving the department's public engagement process," Representative Genevieve Mina, sponsor of HB 26, said in opening remarks.

The bill would (1) explicitly add public transit responsibilities to DOT&PF’s statutory planning duties; (2) expand the agency’s required study of alternative transportation modes to include rural and remote areas as well as urban areas; and (3) require development of a statewide public and community transit plan in coordination with public, tribal and community transit programs and local governments, the sponsor’s staff explained.

Why it matters

Proponents told the committee the change would help preserve and give statutory weight to transit planning activities the department already performs and would help communities compete for federal funding. Patrick Reinhart, executive director of the Governor’s Council on Disabilities and Special Education and a founding member of the Alaska Mobility Coalition, said transportation ‘‘continues to be 1 of the top issues that people with disabilities and seniors…are heavily dependent on.’’ Millie Ryan, president of the Alaska Mobility Coalition, said the measure would help expand access to jobs, medical care and other services for people who cannot drive.

What supporters and DOT said

Remington Purnell, staff to Representative Mina, described specific draft language: an amendment to AS 44.42 would add public, tribal and community transit programs to the department’s long‑range intermodal transportation plan duties, add rural and remote areas to the department’s study of alternative transportation, and add a new duty to develop a statewide public and community transit plan.

Andy Mills, DOT legislative liaison, told the committee that the department already performs most of the planning activities cited in the bill through its long‑range transportation plan, area transportation plans and an ongoing statewide transit plan. Mills said the bill’s fiscal note reflects DOT’s view that the agency is largely already doing the work and that the bill would, in effect, codify that existing practice so those planning duties persist through changes in leadership or federal policy.

Stakeholders raised implementation barriers

Witnesses and committee members described obstacles that they say have limited public and community transit development: complex grant application and reporting requirements, a shortage of new applicants for human‑service transit grants, and the lack of a recent statewide conference for transit providers that once allowed peer learning and vendor access. Reinhart told the committee that some newly available federal rural transit funds have been allocated to existing programs, leaving communities that want to start new services unable to access them immediately.

Questions from lawmakers

Committee members pressed for specifics. Representative Prox noted DOT’s fiscal note saying no change in operations and asked what the bill would accomplish beyond current practice. Mills repeated that DOT already must consider all modes under federal directives but said the bill’s purpose is to ensure transit is explicitly called out in state statute. Representative Hall asked whether the new statewide plan would have a set timeline; Mina and Mills said timelines are typically driven by federal program requirements (plans often run five, 10 or 20 years depending on the program) and that the bill deliberately does not prescribe a statutory schedule.

Lawmakers and witnesses also discussed how the Alaska Marine Highway System (AMHS) fits into transit planning. Mills said AMHS planning and operations are governed under a different statutory framework (AS 19.65) and that ports and ferry functions are planned under those authorities, though the department blends federal highway and transit funding when AMHS projects qualify. Several legislators urged clearer integration between local transit services and AMHS in coastal communities so ferries function as part of a cohesive transit system.

Next steps

Committee members did not take a vote on HB 26 on Feb. 27 and later set the bill aside to continue committee business. No amendments or formal actions on HB 26 were recorded in the hearing transcript. Representative Mina indicated staff were open to drafting amendments to clarify stakeholder inclusion and other details raised in questioning.