Legislature(2011 - 2012)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
01/18/2012 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB104 | |
| SB89 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 89 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 104 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 104-MANUFACTURED HOMES AS REAL PROPERTY
1:34:42 PM
CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of SB 104 and noted
that this was the third hearing. Speaking as the sponsor, he
explained that the bill establishes a procedure to convert a
manufactured home to real property by affixing it to a permanent
foundation on land owned by the individual. This will afford the
homeowner all the benefits of home ownership, including better
mortgage interest rates. These conversions involve the Division
of Motor Vehicles, the Department of Natural Resources Recorders
Office and the banking industry, which accounts for the large
number of provisions in the bill.
He asked for a motion to adopt version D committee substitute
(CS).
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI moved to adopt CSSB 104, labeled 27-
LS0467\D, as the working document.
SENATOR COGHILL said he had no objection, but wanted to hear an
explanation of the differences between version D and the
original version [I].
CHAIR FRENCH announced that without objection, version D was
before the committee.
He explained the following changes in Section 27, relating to
recording affidavits related to manufactured homes:
Sec. 40.17.125(a) was modified so that the recorder's
office won't have to determine whether an affixation
or severance affidavit meets requirements under Sec.
34.85, which relates to how a manufactured home is
affixed to real property. Under AS 40.17.035, the
recorder's office cannot be tasked with determining
whether the contents of a document are legally
sufficient to achieve the purposes of the document;
instead, as clarified under the regulation, the person
submitting documents for recording must ensure that
the prerequisites for recording as established by
regulation and statute are met.
Sec. 40.17.125(b) received two minor changes in the
CS. The first modifies the action taken by the
recorder on the recording affidavit, changing "write"
to "place" on page 20, line 30, of the legislation.
This change reflects that the recording office no
longer writes on recorded affidavits - instead, they
affix bar codes that contain relevant information. In
addition, the original draft required an affidavit to
be recorded in land records; in the CS, Sec.
40.17.125(b) changes "in land records" to "the public
record," to match where the recorder files land
records today.
Sec. 40.17.125(c) in the original draft (version I)
was removed in the CS. This language required the
recorder's office to automatically send a certified
copy of the recorded affidavit to a person designated
on an affidavit. This doesn't match current recording
office procedures, which require an individual to
request and pay for certified copies of affidavits.
In regards to this last change, conforming amendments
were made to Sec. 34.85.060(12) and Sec. 34.85.120(7)
in Section 26 of the CS to remove references to the
automatic mailing of a certified affidavit. In
addition, Sec. 28.10.266(7) and Sec. 28.10.266(8) of
the CS, found in Section 16 on page 10 of the
legislation, were modified to ensure that an affidavit
complies with affixation requirements under Sec. 34.85
of the legislation.
Section 16, of the original draft required DMV to
notify a primary lienholder of completed conversion
procedures when the conversion involved cancelling a
manufacturer's certificate of origin or title. But
under Sec. 28.10.267, a conversion cannot take place
until a manufactured home is free and clear of all
liens and encumbrances. Because a primary lienholder
would never exist through a conversion procedure, the
lienholder notification provisions were replaced in
the CS with language that allows the applicant to
indicate one person, in addition to the owner, that
receives written acknowledgement of completed
conversions under Sec. 28.10.262-265. This change is
reflected in Sec. 28.10.262(c), 28.10.263(c),
28.10.264(d), 28.10.265(c), 28.10.266(12), of version
D.
1:40:16 PM
CHAIR FRENCH noted that George Ginsberg, outside counsel for
Wells Fargo; Patrick Green with Wells Fargo; Whitney Brewster
with the Division of Motor Vehicles; Vicky Backus with the DNR
Recorders Office; and Colleen Moore with the Alaska Department
of Law were available to answer questions.
CHAIR FRENCH closed public testimony.
1:42:03 PM
CHAIR FRENCH moved Amendment 1 and objected for discussion
purposes.
A M E N D M E N T 1
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR FRENCH
TO: CSSB 89( ), Draft Version "D"
Page 21, line 22:
Delete "2012"
Insert "2013"
Page 21, line 26:
Delete "2012"
Insert "2013"
Page 21, line 29:
Delete "2012"
Insert "2013"
He explained that the amendment brings the bill up to date since
it was held over one year. Finding no discussion, he removed his
objection. Hearing and seeing no further objection, he announced
Amendment 1 was adopted. He noted the letters of support from
Wells Fargo and the Alaska Bankers Association, which is
comprised of local banks including Alaska Pacific Bank, Denali
State Bank, First Bank of Ketchikan, First National Bank of
Alaska, Key Bank, Mt. McKinley Bank, and Northrim Bank.
1:44:01 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI moved to report CS for SB 104, version D as
amended, from committee with individual recommendations and
attached fiscal note(s).
SENATOR PASKVAN said he'll support the bill and believes it's
important for Alaskans to have the opportunity to obtain low
interest loans, but his concern continues to be that these loans
will be bundled and sold on the financial market. [In 1999 the
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act repealed provisions of the Glass-Steagall
Act,] and essentially removed the separation between investment
banking and commercial banking. In 2008 the world economic
system was nearly crushed due, in part, to loan bundling and the
issue of derivatives. He acknowledged that this bill wasn't the
place to address that concern, but that he favors a return to
Glass-Steagall provisions.
1:46:13 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI agreed with the previous statement. He
thanked the sponsor for bringing the bill forward and noted that
it will help many of his constituents. It will allow more
Alaskans to achieve the goal of home ownership and a host of
associated advantages.
SENATOR COGHILL thanked the sponsor for bringing the bill
forward, and noted that it had generated a great deal of
interest.
CHAIR FRENCH announced that without objection, CSSB 104(JUD)
moved from the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|