Legislature(2007 - 2008)CAPITOL 120

04/25/2007 01:00 PM JUDICIARY


Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+= HB 225 POSSESSION OF WEAPON WHILE ON BAIL TELECONFERENCED
Scheduled But Not Heard
+ HB 217 TOURISM DISCLOSURES AND NOTICES TELECONFERENCED
Moved CSHB 217(JUD) Out of Committee
+ HB 207 STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRES AND SURVEYS TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
+= HB 213 CRIMES AT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SHELTERS TELECONFERENCED
<Bill Hearing Canceled>
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
+= HB 187 TOBACCO SALES VIOLATIONS TELECONFERENCED
Moved CSHB 187(JUD) Out of Committee
                    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
               HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                             
                         April 25, 2007                                                                                         
                           1:10 p.m.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Representative Jay Ramras, Chair                                                                                                
Representative Nancy Dahlstrom, Vice Chair                                                                                      
Representative John Coghill                                                                                                     
Representative Bob Lynn                                                                                                         
Representative Ralph Samuels                                                                                                    
Representative Max Gruenberg                                                                                                    
Representative Lindsey Holmes                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
All members present                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 187                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to holders of business license endorsements for                                                                
sales of tobacco products."                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED CSHB 187(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 207                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to questionnaires and surveys administered in                                                                  
the public schools."                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD AND HELD                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 217                                                                                                              
"An  Act relating  to required  onboard disclosures  and displays                                                               
about   tours,    flightseeing   operations,    other   shoreside                                                               
activities, and visitors bureaus;  and providing for an effective                                                               
date."                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED CSHB 217(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 225                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to misconduct involving weapons and bail."                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     - SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 213                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to an aggravating factor at sentencing for                                                                     
crimes committed at certain shelters and facilities."                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     - BILL HEARING CANCELED                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 187                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: TOBACCO SALES VIOLATIONS                                                                                           
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) JOHANSEN                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
03/12/07       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/12/07       (H)       JUD, FIN                                                                                               
03/26/07       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
03/26/07       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/26/07       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
04/18/07       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
04/18/07       (H)       -- MEETING CANCELED --                                                                                 
04/25/07       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 207                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRES AND SURVEYS                                                                                 
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) WILSON                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
03/19/07       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/19/07       (H)       HES, JUD                                                                                               
04/03/07       (H)       HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
04/03/07       (H)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
04/10/07       (H)       HES AT 4:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
04/10/07       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/10/07       (H)       MINUTE(HES)                                                                                            
04/12/07       (H)       HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
04/12/07       (H)       Moved CSHB 207(HES) Out of Committee                                                                   
04/12/07       (H)       MINUTE(HES)                                                                                            
04/13/07       (H)       HES RPT CS(HES) 2DP 2NR                                                                                
04/13/07       (H)       DP: CISSNA, WILSON                                                                                     
04/13/07       (H)       NR: FAIRCLOUGH, NEUMAN                                                                                 
04/25/07       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 217                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: TOURISM DISCLOSURES AND NOTICES                                                                                    
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) HOLMES                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
03/22/07       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/22/07       (H)       EDT, JUD                                                                                               
04/03/07       (H)       EDT AT 5:30 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
04/03/07       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/03/07       (H)       MINUTE(EDT)                                                                                            
04/10/07       (H)       EDT AT 5:00 PM BARNES 124                                                                              
04/10/07       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/10/07       (H)       MINUTE(EDT)                                                                                            
04/17/07       (H)       EDT AT 5:00 PM BARNES 124                                                                              
04/17/07       (H)       Moved CSHB 217(EDT) Out of Committee                                                                   
04/17/07       (H)       MINUTE(EDT)                                                                                            
04/18/07       (H)       EDT RPT CS(EDT) NT 4NR 2AM                                                                             
04/18/07       (H)       NR: JOHANSEN, LYNN, DOLL, NEUMAN                                                                       
04/18/07       (H)       AM: GATTO, KOHRING                                                                                     
04/25/07       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
DAVID SCOTT, Staff                                                                                                              
to Representative Kyle Johansen                                                                                                 
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided an explanation of the committee                                                                 
substitute for HB 187 on behalf of the sponsor, Representative                                                                  
Johansen.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REBECCA ROONEY, Staff                                                                                                           
to Representative Peggy Wilson                                                                                                  
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented HB 207 on behalf of the sponsor,                                                               
Representative Wilson.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
EMILY NENON, Director                                                                                                           
Alaska Government Relations                                                                                                     
American Cancer Society (ACS)                                                                                                   
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 207.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CARL ROSE, Executive Director                                                                                                   
Association of Alaska School Boards (AASB)                                                                                      
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 207.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE PEGGY WILSON                                                                                                     
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Sponsor of HB 207.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
JAY BUTLER, M.D., Director                                                                                                      
Central Office                                                                                                                  
Division of Public Health                                                                                                       
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS)                                                                                 
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided comments and responded to                                                                       
questions during discussion of HB 207.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
TAMMY GREEN, Deputy Director                                                                                                    
Central Office                                                                                                                  
Division of Public Health                                                                                                       
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS)                                                                                 
(No address provided)                                                                                                           
POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided comments during discussion of                                                                   
HB 207.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MARIE DARLIN, Coordinator                                                                                                       
AARP Capital City Task Force                                                                                                    
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 207.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
ANDREE McLEOD                                                                                                                   
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in opposition to HB 207.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MATT FELIX, Executive Director                                                                                                  
Juneau Affiliate                                                                                                                
National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, Inc. (NCADD)                                                                
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 207.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHIP THOMA                                                                                                                      
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  During discussion of HB 217, provided                                                                    
comments and responded to questions.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
STEVEN HITES, Owner                                                                                                             
Skagway Street Car Company, Inc.                                                                                                
Skagway, Alaska                                                                                                                 
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 217.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
ROBERT WYSOCKI, President & CEO                                                                                                 
Huna Totem Corporation                                                                                                          
Hoonah, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 217.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
DENNIS DeWITT, State Director                                                                                                   
National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB)                                                                              
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided comments during discussion of                                                                   
HB 217.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
JOSEPH W. GELDHOF                                                                                                               
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:    During discussion  of  HB  164,  provided                                                             
comments  as  one of  the  joint  prime  sponsors of  the  ballot                                                               
initiative pertaining  to cruise  ship taxation,  regulation, and                                                               
disclosure.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
JOHN DUNLAP, Manager                                                                                                            
Allen Marine Tours                                                                                                              
Sitka, Alaska                                                                                                                   
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 217, Version V,                                                               
and proposed amendments.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
FREDERIC DRAKE, Owner                                                                                                           
Snorkel Alaska                                                                                                                  
Ketchikan, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 217.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
ROB SCHEER                                                                                                                      
Great Alaskan Lumberjack Show;                                                                                                  
Experience Alaska Tours                                                                                                         
Ketchikan, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 217.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
RON PECK, President and Chief Operating Officer                                                                                 
Alaska Travel Industry Association (AlaskaTIA)                                                                                  
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 217.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
ALLAN TESCHE, Co-Owner                                                                                                          
G Street House Bed and Breakfast                                                                                                
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 217.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
JOHN FERGUSON                                                                                                                   
JC Penney Company, Inc.                                                                                                         
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 217.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
BRUCE BUSTAMANTE, President and CEO                                                                                             
Anchorage Convention & Visitors Bureau (ACVB)                                                                                   
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 217.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CLYDE (ED) SNIFFEN, JR., Assistant Attorney General                                                                             
Commercial/Fair Business Section                                                                                                
Civil Division (Anchorage)                                                                                                      
Department of Law (DOL)                                                                                                         
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Responded to  questions during discussion of                                                             
the proposed amendments to HB 217, Version V.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR JAY  RAMRAS called the  House Judiciary  Standing Committee                                                             
meeting  to  order  at  1:10:40   PM.    Representatives  Holmes,                                                             
Dahlstrom,  Coghill,  and Ramras  were  present  at the  call  to                                                               
order.   Representatives Lynn, Gruenberg, and  Samuels arrived as                                                               
the meeting was in progress.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
HB 187 - TOBACCO SALES VIOLATIONS                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
1:11:16 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS announced that the  first order of business would be                                                               
HOUSE  BILL NO.  187, "An  Act  relating to  holders of  business                                                               
license  endorsements  for  sales  of  tobacco  products."    [In                                                               
members' packets  were two proposed committee  substitutes for HB                                                               
187:   Version 25-LS0719\M, Luckhaupt, 4/23/07;  and Version 773-                                                               
07-0086 bil.doc, Drinkwater, 4/2/2007, (3:34 PM).]                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM  moved to  adopt the  proposed committee                                                               
substitute  (CS)  for  HB 187,  Version  25-LS0719\M,  Luckhaupt,                                                               
4/23/07, as work draft.  There  being no objection, Version M was                                                               
before the committee.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS offered a recap of  the progress made on HB 187 thus                                                               
far and the issues it has raised.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
1:14:17 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
DAVID SCOTT, Staff to Representative  Kyle Johansen, Alaska State                                                               
Legislature,  sponsor,   relayed  on  behalf   of  Representative                                                               
Johansen that  Section 1 of  Version M [still] stipulates  that a                                                               
hearing must  be held before  a business license  endorsement can                                                               
be suspended, and that Section  2 makes a hearing "meaningful" by                                                               
expanding the  evidence that the  administrative law  judge shall                                                               
consider.   He noted that in  using the term "meaningful,"  he is                                                               
referring  to the  Alaska Superior  Court  case, Holiday  Alaska,                                                             
Inc.  v. State  of Alaska,  wherein the  court indicated  that in                                                             
order  for  an  administrative  hearing  to  be  meaningful,  the                                                               
accused must be  granted the opportunity to  fully contest issues                                                               
of central importance.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MR. SCOTT indicated  that Section 3 of Version  M establishes new                                                               
subsections  (t),  (u),  and  (v)  to  AS  43.70.075.    Proposed                                                               
subsection (t)(1)-(5), he offered,  "basically creates policy for                                                               
license   holders  ...   to  comply   with  if   they  want   [an                                                               
administrative  law  judge]  to  even  consider  a  reduction  in                                                               
sentence."  Specifically, proposed  paragraph (1) stipulates that                                                               
a license holder must adopt  and enforce a written policy against                                                               
selling  tobacco  products  to  persons  under  the  age  of  19;                                                               
proposed  paragraph (2)  stipulates  that a  license holder  must                                                               
have  informed his/her  employees  of  applicable laws;  proposed                                                               
paragraph  (3) stipulates  that the  license holder  must require                                                               
his/her employees  to sign  a form  acknowledging that  they have                                                               
been  informed  of  and  understand  the  aforementioned  written                                                               
policy;  proposed  paragraph  (4)  stipulates  that  the  license                                                               
holder  requires his/her  employees to  verify, via  photographic                                                               
identification,  the age  of those  purchasing tobacco  products;                                                               
and proposed paragraph (5) stipulates  that a license holder must                                                               
establish and enforce  disciplinary sanctions [against employees]                                                               
for noncompliance.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MR. SCOTT,  in response to  a comment,  observed that there  is a                                                               
proposed  amendment  which  would  stipulate  that  a  period  of                                                               
suspension may not  be reduced to a period of  less than 10 days.                                                               
He  added  that  the  administrative  law  judge  will  have  the                                                               
discretion,  but  is  not  required,  to  reduce  the  suspension                                                               
period.  He then relayed  that proposed subsection (v) of Section                                                               
3 allows  the license holder  and the  department to agree  to an                                                               
informal disposition of suspension,  and allows the department to                                                               
reduce  the  period of  suspension  but  only  for a  first  time                                                               
offense.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   HOLMES  pointed   out,  though,   that  proposed                                                               
subsection  (u) stipulates  that  a reduction  in  the period  of                                                               
suspension  may not  be granted  more  than twice  in a  12-month                                                               
period for any one location.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS offered  his understanding that there  is a proposed                                                               
amendment addressing that point.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
1:19:23 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  RAMRAS made  a motion  to adopt  Amendment 1,  labeled 25-                                                               
LS0719\M.1, Luckhaupt, 4/24/07, which read:                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Page 4, following line 14:                                                                                                 
     Insert a new subsection to read:                                                                                           
          "(w) A period of suspension may not be reduced                                                                        
      under (t) or (v) of this section to a period of less                                                                      
     than 10 days."                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES objected for the purpose of discussion.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS offered his understanding  that Version M allows for                                                               
the possibility  of having  the period  of suspension  reduced if                                                               
the license  holder is  able to  bring forth  information proving                                                               
that he/she  complied with  proposed AS  43.70.075(t)(1)-(5), and                                                               
Amendment 1  merely stipulates  that a  period of  suspension may                                                               
not be  reduced to  a period of  less than 10  days.   He posited                                                               
that Version  M addresses  the issue of  due process  for license                                                               
holders,  while  Amendment  1  addresses  his  concern  that  any                                                               
suspension  period not  be  reduced to  less than  10  days.   He                                                               
added, "When  this bill goes  to the [House Finance  Committee] I                                                               
hope  that those  members do  not  go below  the 10-day  minimum,                                                               
because I think that stiff  penalties have contributed to curbing                                                               
minors consuming and purchasing tobacco."                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS,  in response  to a question,  pointed out  that the                                                               
language on page  1, line 11, of Version M  provides for a 20-day                                                               
suspension period [for a first offense].                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS  opined that endorsement holders  who have                                                               
done  nothing  wrong and  do  everything  stipulated in  proposed                                                               
subsection (t)(1)-(5) but  still have an employee  who chooses to                                                               
sell  tobacco to  a minor  are being  treated the  same as  those                                                               
endorsement holders that choose not to train their employees.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS pointed out that  all employers are culpable for the                                                               
actions of  the employees they  hire, and offered  some examples.                                                               
"At some point we have to draw the  line, and in this case, ... I                                                               
would  like to  draw it  around  ... being  firm on  making it  a                                                               
significant  penalty  [to]  conducting  commerce  if  you're  not                                                               
careful in  the people that  you hire and  the way that  they are                                                               
going to engage in tobacco sales," he added.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS again expressed  disfavor with the concept                                                               
of treating all endorsement holders the same.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES removed her objection.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS announced that Amendment 1 was adopted.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
1:26:29 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG made  a  motion to  adopt Amendment  2,                                                               
which read [original punctuation provided]:                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     1.   P. 2 - L. 25 delete:                                                                                                  
          "a hearing office"                                                                                                    
     and add:                                                                                                                   
          "an administrative law judge"                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  explained  that  the  language  to  be                                                               
deleted  should  instead  read, "a  hearing  officer",  and  that                                                               
Amendment  2 is  a technical  amendment acknowledging  that those                                                               
working  in  the office  of  administrative  hearings are  called                                                               
administrative law judges, not hearing officers.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  RAMRAS, noting  that there  were no  objections, announced                                                               
that Amendment 2 was adopted.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
1:27:14 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG referred  to  Amendment  3, which  read                                                               
[original punctuation provided]:                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     1.   P. 4 - L. 5 delete:                                                                                                   
          granted more than "twice"                                                                                             
     and add:                                                                                                                   
          granted more than "once"                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM made a motion to adopt Amendment 3.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS objected for the  purpose of discussion, and offered                                                               
his  understanding  that  Amendment  3  would  stipulate  that  a                                                               
reduction in  suspension may  be granted only  once within  a 12-                                                               
month period.  He then removed his objection.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  COGHILL objected  and asked  whether a  reduction                                                               
may only be granted once.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said no,  and concurred that a reduction                                                               
may only be granted once in a  12-month period.  He opined that a                                                               
license holder shouldn't  be able to break the law  and then seek                                                               
mitigation  of  the penalty  more  than  once during  a  12-month                                                               
period for any one location.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS concurred.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL removed his objection.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HOLMES  pointed  out  that  current  law  doesn't                                                               
provide  endorsement  holders  with  any opportunity  to  seek  a                                                               
reduction in the suspension period,  and added, "We are loosening                                                               
the tobacco laws.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  RAMRAS,  noting that  there  were  no further  objections,                                                               
announced that Amendment 3 was adopted.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
1:29:30 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  made  a  motion  to  adopt  Conceptual                                                               
Amendment  4,  which,  along  with  a  handwritten  change,  read                                                               
[original punctuation provided]:                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     Page 4, line 14                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     Add a new subsection to read:                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     (w)  conviction  for  a   violation  of  AS  11.76.100,                                                                    
     11.76.106,  or 11.76.107  by the  agent or  employee of                                                                    
     the person  who holds the business  license endorsement                                                                    
     is rebuttably presumed to constitute  proof of the fact                                                                    
     that  the   agent  or   employee  negligently   sold  a                                                                    
     cigarette,   a  cigar,   or  tobacco,   or  a   product                                                                    
     containing tobacco to  a person under 19  years of age.                                                                    
     The person  who holds the business  license endorsement                                                                    
     may overcome  the presumption by establishing  by clear                                                                    
     and convincing evidence that the  agent or employee did                                                                    
     not negligently sell a cigarette,  a cigar, or tobacco,                                                                    
     or a  product containing tobacco  to a person  under 19                                                                    
     years of  age in violation of  AS 11.76.100, 11.76.106,                                                                    
     or 11.76.107 as  alleged in the citation  issued to the                                                                    
     agent  or  employee.    The  presentation  of  evidence                                                                    
     authorized  by this  subsection does  not constitute  a                                                                    
     collateral attack  on the conviction described  in this                                                                    
     subsection.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS objected.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG explained  that Conceptual  Amendment 4                                                               
would  add a  new subsection  (w) to  proposed AS  43.70.075, and                                                               
offered that in the Holiday case, the court said:                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     In  order  to  satisfy due  process  requirements,  the                                                                    
     litigant must be given more  than just a hearing.  That                                                                    
     hearing must be "meaningful."   In determining "whether                                                                    
     a hearing  is a meaningful  one, [the court  is] guided                                                                    
     by 'considerations of fundamental  fairness.'"  Thus at                                                                    
     an administrative hearing  concerning the suspension of                                                                    
     a  driver's license  "the accused  must be  granted the                                                                    
     opportunity  to   fully  contest  issues   of  'central                                                                    
     importance' to the revocation decision."                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  opined that the same  principle applies                                                               
with   regard   to   [suspensions   of   tobacco   endorsements].                                                               
Conceptual Amendment  4 will clarify  that the employer  can also                                                               
rebut the  presumption of the  conviction that the  employee sold                                                               
the tobacco product to someone under the age of 19.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MR. SCOTT  relayed that the  sponsor is primarily  concerned with                                                               
correcting the lack  of due process in existing  law, and offered                                                               
his  understanding   that  the   sponsor  would  not   object  to                                                               
Conceptual Amendment 4.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS remarked that Conceptual  Amendment 4 seems to favor                                                               
the employer.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG concurred,  adding that  it favors  the                                                               
employer's due process rights.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS removed his objection.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS announced that Conceptual Amendment 4 was adopted.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
1:33:00 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG made  a  motion to  adopt Amendment  5,                                                               
which read [original punctuation provided]:                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     1.   P. 3 - L. 26 add:                                                                                                     
          ", 11.76-106, and 11.76-107"                                                                                          
     2.   P. 3 - L. 31 add:                                                                                                     
          ", 11.76-106, and 11.76-107"                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM objected.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG,   after  reviewing  the   language  in                                                               
Section  3  of  the  original   version  of  the  bill,  withdrew                                                               
Amendment 5.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS recapped the changes that were made to the bill.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
1:34:52 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL  moved to  report the  proposed CS  for HB                                                               
187, Version 25-LS0719\M, Luckhaupt,  4/23/07, as amended, out of                                                               
committee  with individual  recommendations and  the accompanying                                                               
fiscal  note.    There  being no  objection,  CSHB  187(JUD)  was                                                               
reported from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
HB 207 - STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRES AND SURVEYS                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
1:35:29 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS announced  that the next order of  business would be                                                               
HOUSE  BILL  NO. 207,  "An  Act  relating to  questionnaires  and                                                               
surveys  administered  in  the  public  schools."    [Before  the                                                               
committee was CSHB 207(HES).]                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
1:37:01 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REBECCA  ROONEY, Staff  to  Representative  Peggy Wilson,  Alaska                                                               
State    Legislature,   sponsor,    explained   on    behalf   of                                                               
Representative  Wilson  that  HB  207 will  change  the  parental                                                               
consent  requirements  in  schools  from active  to  passive  for                                                               
anonymous  surveys  only.     Active  parental  consent  requires                                                               
written  permission  to  participate   in  the  survey.    Active                                                               
parental consent overburdens the  school system and significantly                                                               
increases   costs  involved   in   conducting  student   surveys.                                                               
Research  and  experience  suggests  that the  vast  majority  of                                                               
parents  would consent  to their  children participating  in such                                                               
surveys.    Most  of  the research  indicates  that  failures  to                                                               
provide written  permission are driven  by apathy,  oversight, or                                                               
student error, not be parents'  refusal.  Many schools are unable                                                               
to  use  the data  they  collect  because  there are  not  enough                                                               
participants.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MS. ROONEY  explained that passive parental  consent notifies and                                                               
informs  the parents  about the  nature of  a survey,  and allows                                                               
parents  to refuse  to allow  their child  to participate  in the                                                               
survey.   School-based surveys continue  to be a  reliable method                                                               
for  gathering valuable  population-based  information on  youth;                                                               
this data  helps policymakers,  educators, program  planners, and                                                               
parents to  better understand important health  and social issues                                                               
that  affect   young  people's  chances  of   success.    Routine                                                               
standardized surveys  such as the  national and state  Youth Risk                                                               
Behavior Survey  (YRBS), which  is conducted  by the  Centers for                                                               
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),  track trends over time and                                                               
help  guide   and  evaluate   important  health   and  prevention                                                               
programs.   State and federal  grant programs that rely  on these                                                               
surveys  include programs  pertaining to  tobacco prevention  and                                                               
control; obesity prevention; heart  disease and stroke; diabetes;                                                               
safe  and drug-free  schools; other  substance abuse  prevention;                                                               
injury prevention  - including  violence and  suicide prevention;                                                               
human  immunodeficiency  virus  (HIV)  and  sexually  transmitted                                                               
disease (STD) prevention; and more.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MS. ROONEY  offered that the  overall statewide response  rate to                                                               
YRBS in 2005  was 55 percent, thus falling short  of the required                                                               
response rate  of 60 percent.   The state  was unable to  use the                                                               
data  or  publish  a  report   because  the  data  would  not  be                                                               
representative of  the high  school population.   When  the state                                                               
doesn't get  such reports,  it loses the  ability to  have timely                                                               
data  and track  trends over  time, and  is not  able to  compare                                                               
Alaska  data with  national  data during  the  same time  period.                                                               
Under the  bill, notification of  surveys and their  content will                                                               
still be  sent to  every parent  of a child  that is  a candidate                                                               
participant just  as occurred under  active parental consent  - a                                                               
parent will  have the option of  reviewing the survey and  how it                                                               
will  be   administered  before  it  is   actually  administered.                                                               
Therefore,  any   parent  who  doesn't  want   his/her  child  to                                                               
participate  will be  able to  opt out.   This  type of  parental                                                               
consent provides both protection  and flexibility for parents and                                                               
schools.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:41:29 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
EMILY  NENON,  Director,  Alaska Government  Relations,  American                                                               
Cancer Society  (ACS), relayed  that she is  very happy  that the                                                               
committee is hearing  HB 207, adding that the  ACS supports using                                                               
the  best  means  possible to  gather  health-related  data  from                                                               
Alaska's youth.   That health-related data is of  interest to the                                                               
ACS; as a science-based organization,  the ACS uses youth data to                                                               
assess the  challenges to  children's life-long  health patterns,                                                               
to set  goals and action plans  to meet those challenges,  and to                                                               
monitor the  success of its efforts.   There really is  no debate                                                               
over  the  value of  the  data  collected  in such  surveys,  she                                                               
remarked;  instead,  the  debate  centers  on  how  the  data  is                                                               
collected.   House Bill 207 has  been drafted in such  a way that                                                               
it retains the  key parent and student  protections of [existing]                                                               
statute.    In   addition  to  retaining  all   of  the  parental                                                               
notification  requirements,  it  also   makes  it  practical  for                                                               
schools to obtain  survey data.  In conclusion,  she reminded the                                                               
committee that the surveys are anonymous and voluntary.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
1:43:45 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CARL  ROSE,  Executive  Director, Association  of  Alaska  School                                                               
Boards (AASB), relayed  that the AASB advocates  for children and                                                               
youth, and assists local school  districts in providing a quality                                                               
education  with  an  emphasis   on  student  achievement  through                                                               
effective local governance.  The  ability of the AASB to identify                                                               
the  issues,   look  for  solutions,   and  measure   results  is                                                               
contingent upon  being able to  acquire the  information garnered                                                               
by these surveys.  There are  three programs the AASB is involved                                                               
in, and all are contingent  upon being able to gather information                                                               
through various surveys regarding  the attitudes and behaviors of                                                               
children and youth.  He  offered, "If you're making an investment                                                               
in  trying  to  get  communities   engaged  in  helping  kids  be                                                               
successful,  you'd like  to know  that  your efforts  ... can  be                                                               
validated  and that  progress is  being made."   He  concluded by                                                               
saying that the AASB supports HB 207.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  RAMRAS  offered  his  understanding  that  under  HB  207,                                                               
parental consent is required for  surveys that are not anonymous,                                                               
and that  a child can simply  decline to participate in  a survey                                                               
or his/her  parents may,  in writing,  deny permission  for their                                                               
child to participate.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. ROSE  added that  the parents'  written denial  of permission                                                               
must be submitted to the school principal.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN  offered his understanding of  the difference                                                               
between  active and  passive permission,  and  surmised that  not                                                               
many  notices given  to children  to  take to  their parents  are                                                               
returned.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR. ROSE  said that  the AASB is  trying to  access confidential,                                                               
anonymous information, but seeking  active permission can inhibit                                                               
obtaining that information.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
1:49:37 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE PEGGY  WILSON, Alaska State  Legislature, sponsor,                                                               
relayed  that the  College of  Nursing at  the University  of New                                                               
Mexico  Health Sciences  Center found  that when  active parental                                                               
consent is  required, parental  permission is  typically obtained                                                               
for  only 30-60  percent  of the  students;  in comparison,  when                                                               
passive  consent   is  used,  93-100  percent   of  the  students                                                               
participate.   Extensive follow-up  may result in  55-100 percent                                                               
of parents giving permission but  at a significant cost - $20-$25                                                               
per student.   She relayed  that according to  the superintendent                                                               
of schools  in Anchorage,  a lot  of money is  spent on  a yearly                                                               
basis   in   trying  to   obtain   permission,   but  even   then                                                               
participation is still too low.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS  observed that there  is no fiscal note  attached to                                                               
HB 207.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WILSON, in  response to  a question,  offered her                                                               
understanding  that  requiring  active  consent  results  in  the                                                               
exclusion of  minorities, of students having  problems in school,                                                               
and  of  students  already  engaged  in or  at  risk  of  problem                                                               
behavior.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
1:52:55 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
JAY BUTLER,  M.D., Director, Central  Office, Division  of Public                                                               
Health, Department of Health and  Social Services (DHSS), relayed                                                               
that the YRBS  is an epidemiologic surveillance  tool designed by                                                               
the CDC  and administered  in schools every  other year  by state                                                               
and  local  health  agencies  around the  country.    Alaska  has                                                               
participated  in the  YRBS since  1995.   Typically, the  YRBS in                                                               
Alaska  is  administered  to  students  in  42  high  schools  in                                                               
approximately  20  districts,  with   just  over  2,000  students                                                               
eligible to participate.   The YRBS asks students  about a number                                                               
of  health-related activities  that  those in  the public  health                                                               
field would like  to encourage such as seat-belt  and helmet use,                                                               
daily consumption  of fresh fruits and  vegetables, and exercise,                                                               
as  well as  a  number of  activities that  those  in the  public                                                               
health  field  would like  to  discourage  such as  tobacco  use,                                                               
alcohol use, drug use, and sexual activity.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
DR. BUTLER said that in the  field of public health, this data is                                                               
used to develop  and evaluate public health  programs designed to                                                               
help  keep kids  healthy  and help  them  become healthy  adults.                                                               
Student responses are  anonymous, and it's not  possible to trace                                                               
an individual questionnaire  back to any given student.   For the                                                               
YRBS  in Alaska,  a predefined  response  rate of  60 percent  is                                                               
required  for  statistical  validity.     The  2003  YRBS  survey                                                               
provided  representative data  but only  after considerable  time                                                               
and investment  in incentives, and  the overall response  rate in                                                               
2005  was only  55 percent  despite incentives  provided to  help                                                               
schools  offset the  additional administrative  burden associated                                                               
with  active  consent; as  a  result,  the  2005 survey  did  not                                                               
provide useful data.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
DR. BUTLER said that an  evaluation of YRBS data illustrates that                                                               
participation  rates have  been  greater in  areas using  passive                                                               
consent.   Of  the  roughly  45 states  across  the country  that                                                               
participate,  only  2  or 3,  including  Alaska,  have  statewide                                                               
requirements for  active consent.   House  Bill 207  won't change                                                               
the  ability  of  local  school districts  to  create  their  own                                                               
policies regarding consent  for student surveys.   He pointed out                                                               
that there  are advantages and  disadvantages to both  active and                                                               
passive   consent.       Active   consent    increases   parental                                                               
participation in the survey process  and ensures that consent has                                                               
been  based on  a  conscious decision  by  the student's  parent.                                                               
Additionally,  involvement  of   parents  could  build  community                                                               
support for  participation in the  survey process which  those in                                                               
the field of public health view as a methodological advantage.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
DR.  BUTLER  said  that  passive  consent,  on  the  other  hand,                                                               
improves participation rates and  can provide more representative                                                               
data; it  allows administration  of the survey  at less  cost and                                                               
with less  burden on  schools and  teachers.   Additionally, with                                                               
passive consent, it is [thought]  that nonparticipation is due to                                                               
parental objection to the survey,  not just that parents were not                                                               
made  aware  of the  survey  because  students didn't  bring  the                                                               
notice home.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
DR.  BUTLER,  in response  to  questions,  acknowledged that  the                                                               
subject matter  of some surveys  is considered sensitive  by some                                                               
parents,  and their  concern is  taken seriously.   The  proposed                                                               
switch to passive  consent is not meant to take  away the ability                                                               
of  parents  to  preclude  their  child  from  taking  a  survey.                                                               
Furthermore, there  is no attempt  to cover  up the content  of a                                                               
survey; in fact, the survey is  made available to parents if they                                                               
request it.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
1:58:41 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN  asked  whether the  surveys  ask  questions                                                               
about  sexual behavior,  sexual orientation,  and safe  sex.   He                                                               
noted that  some parents believe  that their children  should not                                                               
be exposed to such questions at school.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
DR.  BUTLER  offered  that  with  the YRBS,  the  nature  of  the                                                               
questions  posed   to  high  school  students   regarding  sexual                                                               
activity  are [preset].    There  is a  question  of whether  the                                                               
student has been  sexually active, and, if so,  how many partners                                                               
the student  has had,  and how  many the student  has had  in the                                                               
past three months; all these  questions includes an answer option                                                               
of, "I  am not  sexually active."   There is  also a  question of                                                               
whether the student, within the past  30 days, has been under the                                                               
influence  of  alcohol while  sexually  active,  and there  is  a                                                               
question of  whether the student  used any type of  birth control                                                               
or prophylactic  during sexual activity.   He said that  in terms                                                               
of  the YRBS,  he is  very comfortable  with the  wording of  the                                                               
questions; the  questions are in no  way leading and are  mild in                                                               
comparison to  the lyrics of songs  played over the PA  system at                                                               
schools.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL  surmised that the questions  are probably                                                               
fairly  well  crafted  to  address  today's  issues.    He  said,                                                               
however,  that because  of  the sensitive  nature  of the  issues                                                               
addressed  in such  surveys,  he would  rather  presume that  the                                                               
parent has the right to grant  permission and that the school has                                                               
to obtain  that permission.   He  acknowledged that  some parents                                                               
might be apathetic to the  surveys, and that some children simply                                                               
won't give  their parents the  notification and  parental consent                                                               
form, but there are other  parents who, if given the opportunity,                                                               
will say "no"  to allowing their children to  participate in such                                                               
surveys.   He indicated that he  doesn't want to assume  that the                                                               
non  return of  parental consent  forms  can be  attributed to  a                                                               
failure on  the part  of the  parents; instead  it may  simply be                                                               
that the parent is refusing to grant permission.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
DR. BUTLER said  that there have been studies  done regarding the                                                               
lack of response to parental consent forms.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:02:45 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
TAMMY GREEN, Deputy Director, Central  Office, Division of Public                                                               
Health,  Department   of  Health  and  Social   Services  (DHSS),                                                               
concurred  that  there  have  been   follow-up  studies  done  to                                                               
determine why parental consent forms  aren't returned, and a fair                                                               
amount of  those questioned said  they simply forgot to  fill out                                                               
the form.   These studies also determined that  given the choice,                                                               
those  parents  who  will  object   to  granting  their  children                                                               
permission to participate in a  survey will respond regardless of                                                               
whether  consent is  active or  passive.   Notwithstanding  these                                                               
studies, she offered,  there is no way to know  for sure, in each                                                               
case, why the parental consent form  was not returned.  It is the                                                               
school district's  responsibility, she opined, to  make sure that                                                               
parents are  informed about surveys  and are given the  chance to                                                               
look at  them; parents should never  feel that there has  been an                                                               
attempt by the school to hide anything about the surveys.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL opined  that if active consent  is not the                                                               
method used, parents will be left behind on this issue.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
2:04:54 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked whether  the parental consent forms are                                                               
provided in languages other than English.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS.  GREEN said  she is  not sure  but thinks  that they  are not                                                               
provided in other  languages, adding that she  will research that                                                               
issue further.  In response  to another question, she offered her                                                               
belief that under  the bill, parents must  be notified regardless                                                               
of whether the survey is anonymous.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS  observed that  the bill  is not  specific regarding                                                               
whether the required notification  must detail the subject matter                                                               
of a survey.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG offered  his  understanding that  under                                                               
existing statute,  a questionnaire  that inquires into  family or                                                               
personal affairs  may not be administered,  regardless of whether                                                               
the  questionnaire is  anonymous,  unless  written permission  is                                                               
first obtained  from the parent  or guardian, and that  under the                                                               
bill,  an  anonymous  questionnaire, regardless  of  the  subject                                                               
matter, can  be administered unless the  parent specifically says                                                               
that his/her child cannot participate.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS said he is  comfortable with switching to a passive-                                                               
consent  approach,  but wants  to  ensure  that schools  actively                                                               
pursue  notifying  parents  about   the  subject  matter  of  any                                                               
upcoming surveys.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  COGHILL indicated  that  his belief  is that  the                                                               
parent should  have to specifically grant  permission, each time,                                                               
before a  student is given a  survey regardless of whether  it is                                                               
anonymous.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG offered  his  understanding that  under                                                               
the bill, two weeks' notice  to the parent is required regardless                                                               
of whether the survey is anonymous.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  RAMRAS expressed  a desire  to  alter the  bill such  that                                                               
schools will  be required  to notify the  parents of  the subject                                                               
matter of  any upcoming  survey regardless  of whether  a passive                                                               
consent approach is used.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:12:03 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MARIE DARLIN,  Coordinator, AARP  Capital City Task  Force, after                                                               
relaying  that the  AARP has  submitted a  letter of  support for                                                               
HB 207, offered that the  AARP's membership includes grandparents                                                               
who  are very  concerned about  the issues  raised in  surveys as                                                               
those issues  relate to their  grandchildren.  She said  that the                                                               
type of information  garnered by surveys is  important, and noted                                                               
that the  question of how  to conduct  such surveys was  an issue                                                               
for the  Juneau school board even  in the '60s and  '70s when she                                                               
served on it.  She posited that  any school board is going to pay                                                               
very careful attention to notifying  parents about what questions                                                               
a   survey  contains.     This   bill  will   result  in   better                                                               
participation rates,  she indicated, and noted  that parents will                                                               
have two weeks notice to consider whether to withhold consent.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MS. DARLIN expressed hope that  any school district that adopts a                                                               
passive consent  approach will send out  a copy of the  survey so                                                               
that parents will  be aware of the questions that  will be asked.                                                               
It should be  the school board's responsibility,  rather than the                                                               
student's,  to  ensure that  parents  are  properly notified  and                                                               
informed about the types of  questions a survey contains and what                                                               
the resulting information will be used  for.  The issue is one of                                                               
getting  useful  information in  the  easiest  way possible,  and                                                               
allowing parents  the ability  to deny  permission would  seem to                                                               
take care of  their concern because even  then the responsibility                                                               
is given back  to the parents.  In conclusion,  she said that the                                                               
AARP supports HB 207.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
2:15:34 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ANDREE McLEOD said she opposes HB  207, and relayed that in 1999,                                                               
her son participated in a survey  without her being aware that he                                                               
was doing so; as a result  she went to the Anchorage school board                                                               
to try  to get  the policy  changed, but  because of  the funding                                                               
associated with such surveys, it  was really hard to get anything                                                               
accomplished at the  school-board level, and so she had  to go to                                                               
the state level to  get the law changed.  She  opined that HB 207                                                               
diminishes the  role of parents' interaction  in their children's                                                               
schools, adding, "We  need to maintain the  parents' authority in                                                               
their child's education, not less."  She  went on to say:  "I see                                                               
this as  a fundamental  issue of parents  versus schools  and who                                                               
has  the  right.    Parents  have  the  right  to  their  child's                                                               
experience in the  schools.  They own it.   And they give consent                                                               
to do certain things at the schools."                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MS. McLEOD  pointed out that the  YRBS is not only  given to high                                                               
school students, but to students  even younger.  She relayed that                                                               
back in  1999, she was  about 43 or 44  years old, and  that when                                                               
she  read the  YRBS to  see what  kinds of  questions were  being                                                               
asked, she found  that the numerous questions  regarding sex left                                                               
her, even at  the age of 44,  with the thought that  she ought to                                                               
be  having sex.    Such  surveys ask  a  lot  of questions  about                                                               
private family affairs, and, prior  to 1999, these questions were                                                               
being asked  of children  without their parents  knowing it.   It                                                               
was  a very  hard-fought battle  to get  that situation  changed,                                                               
particularly given  that funding issues  played a big part.   She                                                               
opined that passage of HB 207  will again result in violating the                                                               
parents'  role in  their children's  school experience,  and that                                                               
the bill actually goes against what its stated intent is.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:20:01 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MATT  FELIX,  Executive   Director,  Juneau  Affiliate,  National                                                               
Council  on Alcoholism  and Drug  Dependence, Inc.  (NCADD), said                                                               
that the  Juneau Affiliate of NCADD  depends a lot on  grants and                                                               
contracts, and  so is concerned  about the  lack of data  and the                                                               
lack of  accuracy in  the data.   Currently  there are  two major                                                               
surveys that  the NCADD  depends upon  to obtain  federal grants,                                                               
but one of  those surveys is not conducted in  Alaska because the                                                               
state doesn't use  passive consent and so it is  too expensive to                                                               
conduct; the data  that that survey gathers pertains  to drug and                                                               
alcohol  use, and  it  would be  great,  from his  organization's                                                               
perspective, he  relayed, to have that  data so as to  be able to                                                               
compare Alaska  with other states and  so as to be  able to apply                                                               
for  certain federal  grants.   Currently the  YRBS "is  the only                                                               
thing that we have" and its  accuracy is inadequate at this point                                                               
for use in  obtaining federal monies.  He added,  "I think we all                                                               
realize that  we do have a  serious problem ... with  [drugs] and                                                               
alcohol."    In response  to  a  question,  he said  he  strongly                                                               
supports HB 207.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR.  FELIX, in  response to  questions, offered  that the  survey                                                               
questions are  worded and the  statistics are gathered in  such a                                                               
way so  as to minimize the  margin of error, and  that funding is                                                               
one of the main reasons for seeking accurate data.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  relayed that  some of  his constituents                                                               
might  be intimidated  by having  to submit  a written  denial of                                                               
permission to  the school principal  as is required by  the bill,                                                               
and  questioned whether  the committee  ought to  alter the  bill                                                               
such that  it would be possible  to submit the written  denial of                                                               
permission to either the principal or the teacher.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MR. ROSE relayed  that the 53 school districts  in Alaska address                                                               
this  issue in  different fashions;  for example,  in some  small                                                               
communities,  the  school   districts  send  out  self-addressed,                                                               
stamped return  envelopes along with  the notice.   He mentioned,                                                               
however,  that  in  larger  communities there  are  a  number  of                                                               
children who  don't have parental  oversight, and so  each school                                                               
district has to address the  issue as appropriate, though smaller                                                               
school districts  can be  far more  flexible in  obtaining active                                                               
consent.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  RAMRAS, after  ascertaining  that no  one  else wished  to                                                               
testify, closed  public testimony on HB  207.  He then  asked the                                                               
sponsor to comment on the concerns raised thus far.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
2:27:21 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON  provided members  with a  copy of  a YRBS,                                                               
and noted that of the 99  questions asked, only 7 of them pertain                                                               
to sex.   She assured committee members that  the proposed change                                                               
in the law  is not about funding; instead it  is about prevention                                                               
and  about having  the  knowledge  that can  be  used to  protect                                                               
children.  Although there are  state programs that seek to combat                                                               
obesity and drug and alcohol  abuse, as examples, the state can't                                                               
do everything, and  the federal government is  willing to provide                                                               
funds if the data accurately reflects a need.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM said  that speaking as a  parent of four                                                               
and  a  grandparent  of  [soon-to-be four],  she  intends  to  be                                                               
involved  in  her  grandchildren's  schools,  and  asked  whether                                                               
volunteers could simply be used  to phone parents and remind them                                                               
to fill out  the active consent form.   She said that  she is not                                                               
so much concerned about the  subject matter of the questionnaires                                                               
as she  is about  a parent's right  to know what  is going  on at                                                               
school.  She  surmised that HB 207 could deprive  parents of that                                                               
right if they  are not made aware of surveys  that there children                                                               
are  being  asked to  participate  in.   Regardless  that  people                                                               
complain that it  is not the schools  or teachers' responsibility                                                               
to raise kids or discipline  them, teachers are often stuck doing                                                               
such things  anyway because they  care, but  as a parent,  she is                                                               
not expecting the state to do those things for her.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS indicated that CSHB 207(HES) would be set aside.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
HB 217 - TOURISM DISCLOSURES AND NOTICES                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
2:33:12 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS announced that the  final order of business would be                                                               
HOUSE  BILL  NO.  217,  "An  Act  relating  to  required  onboard                                                               
disclosures  and displays  about tours,  flightseeing operations,                                                               
other shoreside  activities, and visitors bureaus;  and providing                                                               
for  an  effective  date."     [Before  the  committee  was  CSHB                                                               
217(EDT),  and  included  in  members'  packets  was  a  proposed                                                               
committee  substitute  (CS)  for  HB  217,  Version  25-LS0696\V,                                                               
Bannister, 4/19/07.]                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  RAMRAS  relayed  that  he  has  a  potential  conflict  of                                                               
interest  because  of his  close  economic  association with  the                                                               
cruise  ship  industry,  and  that he  has  submitted  a  written                                                               
request  for an  advisory opinion  from the  Select Committee  on                                                               
Legislative   Ethics   regarding   his   participation   in   the                                                               
legislative process as it relates to HB 217.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS then turned the gavel over to Vice Chair Dahlstrom.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
2:35:01 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HOLMES  made  a  motion  to  adopt  the  proposed                                                               
committee  substitute  (CS)  for  HB  217,  Version  25-LS0696\V,                                                               
Bannister,  4/19/07,  as   the  work  draft.     There  being  no                                                               
objection, Version V was before the committee.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HOLMES, speaking  as  the  sponsor, relayed  that                                                               
HB 217  will   address  some  unintended  consequences   of  [the                                                               
recently   passed  ballot   initiative   regarding  cruise   ship                                                               
taxation, regulation,  and disclosure], specifically  with regard                                                               
to the  provisions pertaining to  disclosure; HB 217  proposes to                                                               
mitigate  those  unintended  consequences while  maintaining  the                                                               
ballot initiative's intent as described  in the voter information                                                               
pamphlet to provide for real  disclosure and consumer protection.                                                               
Version V  provides for disclosure  additional to that  which was                                                               
required by the ballot initiative.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES relayed that  Version V addresses the tours                                                               
that are  sold on board a  cruise ship, and requires  four levels                                                               
of disclosure.  When a tour is  being sold on board a cruise ship                                                               
by somebody who is aboard  the cruise ship, he/she must disclose,                                                               
both orally and  in writing, that the sale is  a paid promotion -                                                               
a  commission  is being  paid  -  and  that  there may  be  other                                                               
alternatives  available  at  the   port  of  call;  must  provide                                                               
information regarding  visitors bureaus  in the  ports of  call -                                                               
including the  physical address, web site  address, and telephone                                                               
number; and,  if the commission  exceeds 25 percent of  the total                                                               
sale price, must disclose that information as well.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HOLMES  said  Version   V  maintains  the  ballot                                                               
initiative's   requirements  that   all  of   the  aforementioned                                                               
information be disclosed both orally  and in writing and that the                                                               
written information  be in  14-point off-color  font.   Under the                                                               
language of the ballot initiative,  the only information that had                                                               
to be  disclosed was the  exact dollar amount of  the commission,                                                               
but the problem with  that is that one would be  able to use that                                                               
information to  calculate the tour's  actual price as  charged by                                                               
the  vendor,  and  this  puts tour  companies  at  a  competitive                                                               
disadvantage.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR DAHLSTROM  asked why  25  percent was  chosen as  the                                                               
threshold.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HOLMES explained  that 25  percent was  chosen as                                                               
being a  commission high enough  that the consumer would  want to                                                               
know about  it.  In  response to another question,  she clarified                                                               
that  under both  the ballot  initiative and  HB 217,  either the                                                               
amount of  the commission  or the percentage  of the  total price                                                               
the commission constituted  had to be disclosed;  that under CSHB                                                               
217(EDT), only  the fact  that the  percentage of  the commission                                                               
exceeded 33 percent  had to be disclosed; and  that under Version                                                               
V, only the  fact that the percentage of  the commission exceeded                                                               
25 percent has to be disclosed.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
2:43:07 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHIP THOMA,  after relaying that  he has been involved  in issues                                                               
related  to cruise  ships for  a number  of years,  said that  he                                                               
supports  Version V  of HB  217.   Version V  removes specificity                                                               
regarding  the amount  of commissions,  thereby  giving all  tour                                                               
vendors a  level playing field; he  opined that that is  what the                                                               
voters wanted.   He noted that  81,000 people voted "yes"  on the                                                               
ballot initiative,  which included disclosure provisions  for the                                                               
benefit of consumers - the passengers aboard the cruise ships.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR. THOMA relayed  that extensive testimony in  the House Special                                                               
Committee  on  Economic   Development,  International  Trade  and                                                               
Tourism indicated that  for at least one tour  vendor, 70 percent                                                               
of his shore excursion customers  "come to him" via the company's                                                               
web  site.    Thus,  Mr. Thoma  surmised,  the  current  problems                                                               
related to having sufficient disclosure  on the cruise ships will                                                               
be decreasing  as time goes  on because fewer passengers  will be                                                               
purchasing such excursions  while on board the cruise  ships.  He                                                               
characterized this  required disclosure  as good because  it will                                                               
give consumers more information.   He cautioned against providing                                                               
an exemption  from these disclosure  provisions for  those cruise                                                               
ship companies  that use private  docks, noting that most  of the                                                               
ports currently  being used by  cruise ships in Alaska  also have                                                               
private docks associated with them.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MR. THOMA, in  conclusion, said he supports Version  V, and urged                                                               
the committee to forward the legislation.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:46:27 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SAMUELS  asked  whether  other  entities  selling                                                               
shore  excursions   need  to   disclose  information   about  the                                                               
commissions they  receive or whether commissions  earned in other                                                               
industries need to be disclosed.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR. THOMA said  not to his knowledge, with the  exception of real                                                               
estate commissions.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SAMUELS characterized  the commission  disclosure                                                               
provision in  Version V  as being better  than what  was provided                                                               
for via  the ballot initiative,  but expressed  concern, however,                                                               
that  requiring  disclosure  about commissions  will  affect  the                                                               
marketplace in unintended ways.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. THOMA pointed out that  the disclosure provision in Version V                                                               
only  applies  to tours  sold  on  cruise  ships.   According  to                                                               
testimony  heard in  a prior  committee, he  relayed, the  cruise                                                               
ship, not  the tour vender,  determines what the  commission will                                                               
be.                                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SAMUELS  said  he  would  prefer  to  call  it  a                                                               
"markup" rather  than a commission,  and offered his  belief that                                                               
companies will  mark up the  price of  something as much  as they                                                               
can get  away with.  Referring  to the language in  paragraph (2)                                                               
of Section 1  - "other alternatives at different  prices and with                                                               
different  features" -  he  questioned  whether companies  paying                                                               
different  insurance premiums,  for example,  are really  selling                                                               
the same  product.  "How  much detail on  a business deal  do you                                                               
want to get involved with," he asked.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. THOMA said none.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SAMUELS  argued  that  that is  exactly  what  is                                                               
occurring  via  the  bill's disclosure  provisions,  adding  that                                                               
there can  be a  world of difference  between companies  and what                                                               
they  provide  even  if  they  are  seemingly  selling  the  same                                                               
product.   He expressed  disfavor with  the concept  of requiring                                                               
cruise ships to promote businesses they don't like.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MR.  THOMA  pointed  out  that  with  regard  to  the  commission                                                               
disclosure provision,  [only the fact  that a commission  is more                                                               
than  25  percent  of  the  total  cost  of  the  tour]  will  be                                                               
disclosed,  reiterating  that  this provision  only  pertains  to                                                               
tours sold on board cruise ships.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS reiterated his  argument that cruise ships                                                               
will be  forced to  advertise tour  companies they  don't approve                                                               
of.                                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MR. THOMA  offered his understanding  that cruise ships  won't be                                                               
required  to  advertise other  tour  companies,  merely that  the                                                               
cruise ships will be required  to disclose that other options may                                                               
be available.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES concurred with that summation.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SAMUELS   characterized  that   as  "advertising"                                                               
nonetheless.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:53:58 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
STEVEN  HITES, Owner,  Skagway Street  Car  Company, Inc.,  after                                                               
relaying  that his  company offers  sightseeing tours  in Skagway                                                               
and has been doing  so for 21 years, and that  over 40 percent of                                                               
his company's business  is "sold on the  ship," expressed support                                                               
for  HB 217.    Referring to  the language  in  paragraph (1)  of                                                               
Section  1 -  "that the  onboard sale  is a  paid promotion  by a                                                               
shoreside vendor" -  he offered his belief that  the intention of                                                               
this  provision  is  to  [promote]   disclosure  and  the  truth.                                                               
However,  he  pointed out,  the  truth  is  that the  term  "paid                                                               
promotion"  is  not correct:    "we  don't  pay the  cruise  line                                                               
anything, there is  no promotion, this is  actually confused with                                                               
an onboard  shopping program that  ... [existed prior];  the ship                                                               
is a  store, they buy wholesale  products from us and  pay us for                                                               
what ... they sell."   He suggested, therefore, that the language                                                               
be  changed to,  "that  the onboard  sale  is a  retail-wholesale                                                               
relationship between the vessel operator and shoreside vendor".                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
2:55:55 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS said he would  be introducing an amendment that will                                                               
address that  concern, agreeing that  the term,  "paid promotion"                                                               
is  inaccurate,  and offered  an  example  of a  retail-wholesale                                                               
relationship he was familiar with.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HITES  said   he  also  supports  having   the  language  in                                                               
paragraphs (2) and (3) of Section  1 remain the same because that                                                               
language accurately reflects the  relationship and the situation.                                                               
With regard  to paragraph (4) of  Section 1, he said  that if the                                                               
goal  is  to have  the  disclosure  be  truthful, then  the  word                                                               
"commission"  is not  really accurate  because  what is  actually                                                               
happening is  that a wholesale  product is  being marked up  by a                                                               
retailer,  and  although  that  markup  can  be  expressed  as  a                                                               
percentage  of  the  retail  price,  "the  '25  percent'  is  not                                                               
accurately  portraying the  universe  and the  marketplace."   He                                                               
went on to say:                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     I have  a tour  sold by  a major  cruise line  that has                                                                    
     early- and late-season sale pricing  offered ... in the                                                                    
     shoulder season ...  - both ... spring and  fall.  They                                                                    
     sell this  tour of mine  for 10 percent less  than they                                                                    
     do  in the  height of  the  season.   They lower  their                                                                    
     retail  price  to  move  more   of  my  product  -  I'm                                                                    
     basically a volume  seller of product to a  store.  The                                                                    
     result  is  that   they  sell  my  tour   for  what  is                                                                    
     essentially only a 10 percent  markup.  This is a fact.                                                                    
     Therefore,  my point  is,  I know  of  no other  retail                                                                    
     business  that  is  required by  Alaska  state  law  to                                                                    
     disclose the  percentage of a  retail markup.   Can any                                                                    
     of you  name one?  If  so, we are putting  an arbitrary                                                                    
     number  here.   If you  absolutely have  to, then,  for                                                                    
     heaven sakes  please make it  a number [that's]  as low                                                                    
     as possible because  the lower the number  the more you                                                                    
     disclose the truth, because  it's not that relationship                                                                    
     at all.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HITES then  referred to  the language  on page  1, line  8 -                                                               
"both orally  and in writing"  - and  said that thousands  of his                                                               
company's  sales are  made online,  and since  current technology                                                               
allows  tickets to  be  printed and  delivered  to the  passenger                                                               
without  him/her  ever  seeing   the  crewmember  delivering  the                                                               
ticket, it would  make more sense for the language  to be changed                                                               
to, "orally or in writing".                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS  indicated that there  is a proposed  amendment that                                                               
will address that specific concern.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MR. HITES,  in conclusion,  offered that time  is of  the essence                                                               
given that the  first cruise ship is scheduled to  come to Alaska                                                               
on May 5th,  opined that the legislature does have  a legal right                                                               
to amend  an initiative, and  asked that some  form of HB  217 be                                                               
passed from committee on to the House [floor].                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
3:01:27 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ROBERT WYSOCKI, President & CEO,  Huna Totem Corporation, offered                                                               
that  Icy  Straight   Point  is  a  private  port   -  a  private                                                               
destination on  private property where guests  disembark, embark,                                                               
and take most  of the tours on the corporation's  property.  This                                                               
is a very  different model than any other  Southeast Alaska port,                                                               
he  opined, adding  that only  one ship  at a  time docks  at Icy                                                               
Straight Point, all of the port's  assets are owned by Huna Totem                                                               
Corporation, and there  is no outside investment.  He  went on to                                                               
say:                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     We focus  a lot  on nature, culture,  and history  in a                                                                    
     different  way than  every other  port.   As a  private                                                                    
     destination, we had to invest  millions and millions of                                                                    
     dollars to create the destination.   Again, the port is                                                                    
     not the City of Hoonah -  it's Icy Straight Point - and                                                                    
     we had to invest heavily  in creating an attraction and                                                                    
     set of tours that would attract cruise guests.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MR. WYSOCKI said  that the only way the  corporation recovers its                                                               
substantial investment is through tour  revenue, and so it's very                                                               
critical that  the corporation experience  a very high  volume of                                                               
tourists, and  with substantial  enough margins,  in order  to be                                                               
able to  recoup its  investment and survive.   He  explained that                                                               
the ballot  initiative addresses  two points that  don't actually                                                               
apply to  the corporation:   one, there are no  independent tours                                                               
being  offered at  Icy  Straight  Point, and,  two,  there is  no                                                               
convention and  visitors bureau  there.   He then  mentioned that                                                               
this year, for  this project, the corporation will  bring in over                                                               
$1.5  million to  the community  of Hoonah;  with the  decline in                                                               
fishing and logging  revenues, the Icy Straight  Point project is                                                               
considered to be the economic engine of Hoonah.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. WYSOCKI relayed  that this coming year, it  is estimated that                                                               
over 15 percent  of all cruise ship passengers  that visit Alaska                                                               
will come  to Icy Straight  Point.  He  said that the  Huna Totem                                                               
Corporation   absolutely  supports   disclosing  to   guests  its                                                               
relationship with its  cruise partners - "they  are retailing our                                                               
wholesale product."  "Our cruise guests  are on lines that had to                                                               
take an extra risk with us  in marketing and carrying a port that                                                               
nobody  knew  about,"  he  added;  for  the  Icy  Straight  Point                                                               
destination, cruise  ship companies offer their  expertise and do                                                               
much  more marketing  on the  corporation's behalf  - "they  earn                                                               
every penny of their retail markup."   The community of Hoonah is                                                               
very supportive of Huna Totem Corporation's project.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR. WYSOCKI  explained that the  cruise ship lines  have verified                                                               
that the corporation  is offering a quality  product, is properly                                                               
insured,  will take  proper care  of their  passengers, and  that                                                               
passengers  will   have  recourse  should  something   go  wrong.                                                               
Economic  development in  rural Alaska  is very  challenging, and                                                               
those that are  willing and able to pursue  such development take                                                               
a substantial  risk and therefore  deserve to be able  to compete                                                               
fairly.    He opined  that  although  the  intent of  the  ballot                                                               
measure was  to provide  for community  involvement and  to allow                                                               
convention and  visitors bureaus to "spread  around" competition,                                                               
the  Huna   Totem  Corporation  is   in  an   entirely  different                                                               
situation.   In conclusion,  he asked  the committee  to consider                                                               
the concerns  of his corporation  as HB 217 proceeds  through the                                                               
process.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MR. WYSOCKI, in response to  questions, offered his understanding                                                               
that  although Icy  Straight  Point is  currently  the only  such                                                               
private  port -  private destination  -  another one  is "in  the                                                               
works" for Southeast Alaska.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS  indicated that there  is a proposed  amendment that                                                               
will address Mr. Wysocki's concern.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
3:08:27 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
DENNIS   DeWITT,   State   Director,   National   Federation   of                                                               
Independent Business  (NFIB), relayed  that the NFIB  supports HB                                                               
217 as  being better than  current statute, appreciates  the work                                                               
done  on  the  bill,  but  concurs  with  some  of  the  concerns                                                               
expressed earlier.   He opined  that it is important  that cruise                                                               
ships not  be required to  list the  names of other  tour vendors                                                               
that might  be offering similar  tours, and expressed  favor with                                                               
Version V's language  that requires a cruise ship  line to notify                                                               
passengers that  there might be  other alternatives  available at                                                               
different  prices  - not  that  the  other alternatives  will  be                                                               
available at  lower prices.  He  relayed that the NFIB  does have                                                               
concern,  however,  that Version  V  has  reduced the  commission                                                               
disclosure  threshold to  25 percent;  the NFIB  instead supports                                                               
the 33 percent threshold provided for in CSHB 217(EDT).                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MR. DeWITT opined that even Version  V of HB 217 is substantively                                                               
better  than  current law.    The  NFIB  is  anxious to  see  the                                                               
aforementioned amendment regarding  retail-wholesale language, he                                                               
said, adding that  he has never shopped with an  eye towards what                                                               
the  retailer's markup  rate is;  rather,  he shops  with an  eye                                                               
towards  what the  retailer's  retail price  ultimately  is.   He                                                               
offered  his  belief that  the  notion  that sharing  information                                                               
about  the  difference  between retail  and  wholesale  price  is                                                               
helpful  to  the  consumer  has not  been  substantiated  in  the                                                               
marketplace.  In conclusion, he too  said that time is of concern                                                               
given that the cruise ship season is about to start.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
3:11:46 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
JOSEPH  W. GELDHOF  relayed that  he is  one of  the joint  prime                                                               
sponsors of  the aforementioned  ballot initiative  pertaining to                                                               
cruise   ship  taxation,   regulation,   and   disclosure.     He                                                               
acknowledged  that  what  he  and   his  co-sponsor  intended  in                                                               
sponsoring the ballot initiative has  very little legal weight in                                                               
terms  of legislative  intent, adding  his belief  that the  only                                                               
legitimate legislative  intent that  the courts would  be looking                                                               
at would  be encompassed in  the initiative's  transmittal letter                                                               
to  the  lieutenant  governor.     Also  acknowledging  that  the                                                               
legislature has the  authority to amend a law  adopted via ballot                                                               
initiative,  he opined  that in  this  instance, the  legislature                                                               
should  change the  law  that  he helped  write  and  enact.   He                                                               
elaborated by  saying that the  shoreside vendors in  Alaska have                                                               
articulated a  concern which a  lot of  people who worked  on the                                                               
initiative believe  should be corrected.   How that  concern gets                                                               
addressed has been the source of  a lot of heated discussion, but                                                               
the  goal of  telling  Alaskans that  deliver flightseeing  tours                                                               
that  they don't  have  to  have the  cruise  ships disclose  the                                                               
commission that  they receive, or  the amount of  the commission,                                                               
is worthy of pursuing.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MR. GELDHOF  said that Representative  Holmes is to  be commended                                                               
for  working  through this  issue  and  coming  up with  what  he                                                               
characterized as  a realistic amendment  - a compromise -  to the                                                               
current law  that will work in  the real world.   He also pointed                                                               
out that the president of  Princess Tours, Charlie Ball, has been                                                               
helpful in attempting to marshal  support among those in the tour                                                               
industry with  various view  points, and  opined that  Mr. Ball's                                                               
views ought  to be  considered by the  legislature.   Mr. Geldhof                                                               
concurred  that  there  should  be  a  threshold  for  commission                                                               
disclosure, whether that  threshold is 10 percent  or higher, and                                                               
that there  should be  disclosure regarding  the fact  that there                                                               
are alternatives to  particular tours available.   On that point,                                                               
he suggested that convention and  visitors bureaus be responsible                                                               
for listing specific alternatives,  not the cruise ship industry.                                                               
He  also suggested  that  the committee  change  the penalty  for                                                               
violation from  $100 to $1,000.   Mr. Geldhof offered  his belief                                                               
that  Mr.  Ball would  accept  those  changes, and  concluded  by                                                               
saying that HB 217 needs to  passed and passed soon because local                                                               
tour vendors need the relief proposed by the bill.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS  indicated that he  disagrees with all  the concepts                                                               
embodied in the ballot initiative.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MR. GELDHOF, in  response to comments and a question,  said he is                                                               
not  sorry to  have  included the  disclosure  provisions in  the                                                               
ballot  initiative because  he believes  that  markets work  best                                                               
when there  is "as close as  we can come to"  perfect information                                                               
being  disclosed, and  that such  disclosure  is particularly  of                                                               
benefit to the consumer.   He added, "Our goal was  not to set up                                                               
an unworkable system that would punish  or harm ...; it was to at                                                               
least provide some information or  cue consumers that there was a                                                               
-  frankly,  in  some  cases,   based  on  my  knowledge  -  very                                                               
significant commission."  He offered that  if one were to look at                                                               
the mortgage-finance  industry, for example, one  would find that                                                               
the  federal  government has  required  some  form of  disclosure                                                               
regarding commission percentages.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MR. GELDHOF, in response to  a question regarding whether lawyers                                                               
should be required to disclose the  range of fees that they might                                                               
charge different clients, said:                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     I think  there are many  instances where - as  a matter                                                                    
     of good,  sound public policy  - consumers ...  need to                                                                    
     be  cued that  at the  point of  sale, the  transaction                                                                    
     costs are  very high.   And that's all we're  trying to                                                                    
     do, and I think Representative  Holmes has come up with                                                                    
     an  approach that  doesn't disclose  the commission  or                                                                    
     the amount; ... [this approach]  meets the needs of the                                                                    
     vendors,  here,  but provides  ...  sort  of perhaps  a                                                                    
     yellow  flag  in  some situations  that  maybe  there's                                                                    
     reason to  think that  you might  want to  shop around.                                                                    
     That's all we're saying.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN  pointed out that  as a licensed  real estate                                                               
broker, he is required by  law to disclose his commissions, which                                                               
are negotiable.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR DAHLSTROM,  noting that  constituents  have told  her                                                               
that to  alter the aforementioned  ballot initiative would  be to                                                               
ignore the  will of the people  and that the people  knew exactly                                                               
what  they  were voting  for,  asked  Mr.  Geldhof how  he  would                                                               
respond  to  constituents who  demand  that  the legislature  not                                                               
alter the aforementioned ballot initiative.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. GELDHOF  suggested that legislators  could simply  respond by                                                               
saying:                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
     We  have  preserved  the spirit  of  disclosure  -  the                                                                    
     requirements that  consumers are protected -  and we've                                                                    
     avoided  a situation  where ...  our local  venders may                                                                    
     have had  to disclose  information they  were reluctant                                                                    
     to [disclose  because it] ... may  have interfered with                                                                    
     their  contractual  relationships  or  their  financial                                                                    
     relationships with a very large industry ....                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
3:26:42 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
JOHN  DUNLAP,  Manager,  Allen Marine  Tours,  relayed  that  his                                                               
company  operates passenger  vessels throughout  Southeast Alaska                                                               
and employs  over 200  during the  peak of  the season,  and that                                                               
over  90  percent of  his  company's  customers are  cruise  ship                                                               
passengers.  He said he  believes that the disclosure language of                                                               
Version  V  meets  the  intent  of the  voters  better  than  the                                                               
language in  the ballot initiative,  adding that he  concurs with                                                               
some of  the points made earlier  by prior speakers.   He said he                                                               
supports passage of HB 217  and the proposed amendments that have                                                               
been referenced thus far.   In conclusion, he thanked the sponsor                                                               
for her work on the legislation.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
3:28:41 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
FREDERIC DRAKE, Owner,  Snorkel Alaska, said he  supports HB 217,                                                               
adding that  100 percent of  his customers have come  from cruise                                                               
ship shore  excursion sales.  He  mentioned that at one  point he                                                               
was employed by  a cruise ship line as a  shore excursion manager                                                               
and so he  is familiar with that aspect of  the industry as well.                                                               
His  company  really  relies  on the  cruise  ships'  ability  to                                                               
promote his company's tours, he said,  adding "we give them a net                                                               
rate we're happy  with, they go ahead and mark  it up to whatever                                                               
they want,  but I'm in  support of  that because they  go through                                                               
all the  marketing, they print  all the brochures, they  have web                                                               
sites, [and]  they handle all of  our sales."  In  conclusion, he                                                               
said that his  company supports HB 217 as being  a way to address                                                               
the problems with the ballot initiative.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
3:30:40 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ROB  SCHEER, Great  Alaskan  Lumberjack  Show; Experience  Alaska                                                               
Tours, said  he supports  HB 217,  Version V.   Referring  to the                                                               
commission  disclosure  threshold,  he  explained  that  for  his                                                               
company's various products, it took  about eight years to develop                                                               
a  price  structure  that  allowed   for  a  retail  markup  that                                                               
warranted  cruise  line  industry  support  of  venders  such  as                                                               
himself.  Therefore,  that provision of the bill  could give some                                                               
vendors  an   unfair  market  advantage   and  could   result  in                                                               
dissuading  passengers from  participating in  an excursion  just                                                               
because  there  is a  markup  in  price.    He said  he  supports                                                               
lowering the  commission disclosure  threshold to 10  percent and                                                               
notifying passengers that the tours  are being offered as part of                                                               
a wholesale-retail  relationship.   He surmised  that such  a low                                                               
threshold  would  be  triggered  for  almost  all  tours  and  so                                                               
wouldn't  create  an  unfair  advantage for  some  vendors.    In                                                               
conclusion, he thanked the sponsor for  her work on the bill, and                                                               
offered  his  belief that  the  tour  vendor industry  does  need                                                               
relief from the problems raised by the ballot initiative.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
3:35:04 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
RON PECK,  President and Chief  Operating Officer,  Alaska Travel                                                               
Industry Association  (AlaskaTIA), relayed  that over  80 percent                                                               
of  the  AlaskaTIA's membership  is  made  up of  visitor-related                                                               
businesses  with less  than 100  employees.   He  opined that  as                                                               
currently written,  the ballot initiative requires  disclosure of                                                               
confidential business information and  poses a significant threat                                                               
to a  single sector of the  tourism business.  He  indicated that                                                               
he  is in  support  of  HB 217,  adding  that  the AlaskaTIA  has                                                               
[adopted]  a  resolution   in  support  of  the   bill  as  well.                                                               
Referring to  page 1, line  13, he  suggested that the  word "or"                                                               
replace the  word "and",  because not  all visitors  bureaus have                                                               
"referral" offices on site at the  dock.  In conclusion, Mr. Peck                                                               
said  the AlaskaTIA  supports Mr.  Hites  comments regarding  the                                                               
wholesale-retail relationship,  and urges  the committee  to move                                                               
forward with the bill given that  the cruise ship season is about                                                               
to start.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
3:37:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ALLAN TESCHE, Co-Owner,  G Street House Bed  and Breakfast, after                                                               
noting  that  he sees  hundreds  of  out-of-state visitors  every                                                               
year,  many  having come  to  Alaska  on  cruise ships,  said  he                                                               
supports  HB  217.   He  suggested,  however, that  members  give                                                               
further consideration  to the word,  "orally" as used on  page 1,                                                               
line 8,  because a  number of  shore-based excursions  are booked                                                               
electronically  onboard  cruise ships,  and  so  to require  oral                                                               
disclosure might prove  cumbersome.  With regard to  the issue of                                                               
the commission  disclosure threshold, he  surmised that it  is up                                                               
to  the committee  to determine  what  percentage that  threshold                                                               
should  be,  and   that  the  original  purpose   of  the  ballot                                                               
initiative was  to provide passengers  with the  information that                                                               
there is  a markup  in the  price of the  tours being  offered on                                                               
board the ship.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. TESCHE  surmised that  the question  is whether  Alaskans and                                                               
small businesses  are better  off with  the original  language of                                                               
the ballot initiative  or with the language currently  in HB 217.                                                               
He  opined that  the initiative's  language will  pit shore-based                                                               
operators  against  each   other  because  confidential  business                                                               
information will be disclosed, and  will force passengers to base                                                               
almost all  their decisions regarding excursions  on price alone.                                                               
Currently  operators  of  shore-based  businesses  can  negotiate                                                               
private agreements with  cruise ship lines, but they  will not be                                                               
allowed  to do  so  under the  ballot  initiative's language,  he                                                               
opined, adding that  the language in HB 217  [Version V] requires                                                               
cruise ships to inform passengers that  a mark up in price exists                                                               
but  does  not  go  so  far  as  to  require  the  disclosure  of                                                               
confidential information.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR. TESCHE, in response to  the earlier question regarding how to                                                               
respond  to constituents  who think  changing a  law adopted  via                                                               
ballot  initiative   is  always  a  bad   thing,  suggested  that                                                               
legislators   could  respond   by  reminding   constituents  that                                                               
ultimately the legislature is required to  do the best job it can                                                               
in implementing the will of  the people and that the initiative's                                                               
sponsors  have  indicated  that  there  is  a  problem  with  the                                                               
initiative's  language.   In  conclusion,  he  surmised that  the                                                               
legislature is  going to solve that  problem in a way  that still                                                               
protects onshore operators, and again said he supports HB 217.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
3:41:45 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
JOHN  FERGUSON,   JC  Penney  Company,  Inc.,   opined  that  the                                                               
requirements outlined  in the ballot  initiative fly in  the face                                                               
of normal, free  market pricing, and sets a  precedent that could                                                               
infringe upon  all retail  operations in Alaska.   A  cruise ship                                                               
company is no  different than any other retail venue,  be it in a                                                               
shopping mall  or in an  open-air market; goods and  services are                                                               
purchased  at  the wholesale  market  and  resold at  the  retail                                                               
market   for  profit.     That   profit  margin   is  proprietary                                                               
information  that is  not disclosed  to  the public  or to  other                                                               
competitors in the industry, and  so to require the disclosure of                                                               
that  information destroys  the  market process  and usurps  free                                                               
trade and fair  pricing.  In conclusion, he said  he applauds the                                                               
legislature's  attempts,  via HB  217,  at  correcting the  flaws                                                               
embodied in the ballot initiative.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
3:43:39 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
BRUCE  BUSTAMANTE,  President  and CEO,  Anchorage  Convention  &                                                               
Visitors  Bureau   (ACVB),  after   speaking  a  bit   about  his                                                               
organization, relayed  that the ACVB  has passed a  resolution in                                                               
support of  HB 217  because it views  the disclosure  language of                                                               
the  ballot  initiative as  being  very  damaging to  Anchorage's                                                               
independent businesses,  both large and  small.  He  concluded by                                                               
saying that he appreciates the  sponsor's efforts to address this                                                               
issue, and urged passage of the bill.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR DAHLSTROM closed public testimony on HB 217.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
3:46:21 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  RAMRAS made  a motion  to  adopt Amendment  1, which  read                                                               
[original punctuation provided]:                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     P.2, L.2 Delete "25" insert "20"                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     P.2, L.5 Delete "25" insert "20"                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS  offered his  belief that  Amendment 1  will capture                                                               
all vendors,  putting them on  equal footing, and  still respects                                                               
the intent of the ballot initiative.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR DAHLSTROM objected for the purpose of discussion.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES said  she does not feel  strongly about the                                                               
proposed change, but wouldn't want to  go below a threshold of 20                                                               
percent.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR  DAHLSTROM removed her  objection, and  announced that                                                               
Amendment 1 was adopted.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
3:47:26 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS  made a  motion to adopt  Amendment 2,  which, along                                                               
with handwritten changes, read [original punctuation provided]:                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     P.1, L.8 - after "disclose" delete "both orally and in                                                                     
     writing" insert "orally or in writing at the point of                                                                      
     sale."                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  RAMRAS  said  that Amendment  2  will  address  situations                                                               
involving tickets  that are sold  on board ship via  the Internet                                                               
wherein  passengers never  speak with  the person  delivering the                                                               
tickets.   He  offered  his  belief that  Amendment  2 will  make                                                               
commerce easier  to execute  while still  respecting the  will of                                                               
the voters.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN objected for the purpose of discussion.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
3:48:33 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CLYDE   (ED)   SNIFFEN,    JR.,   Assistant   Attorney   General,                                                               
Commercial/Fair  Business  Section, Civil  Division  (Anchorage),                                                               
Department of Law  (DOL), opined that Amendment 2  makes sense in                                                               
that the language of the  current statute was intended to require                                                               
disclosure of  commissions or paid  promotions in an  oral manner                                                               
if the presentation  [for the product] was given orally.   And if                                                               
the  presentation  [for  the  product] was  only  provided  in  a                                                               
written  format,  then  it  would   make  sense  to  require  the                                                               
disclosure to be in writing as well.   It would not make sense to                                                               
require cruise  ships to have  someone waiting around  to provide                                                               
oral disclosure if  there never was an oral  presentation [of the                                                               
product].  He  mentioned that it would be his  job to enforce the                                                               
provisions of HB 217.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked whether it  would be sufficient to have                                                               
the written  disclosure regarding  commissions in the  same place                                                               
as  the  written  disclosure  regarding  visitors  bureaus.    He                                                               
questioned  how  one  would  prove   that  oral  disclosure  ever                                                               
occurred.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR. SNIFFEN surmised  that evidence of a lack  of oral disclosure                                                               
would  have to  come from  the consumers,  and acknowledged  that                                                               
confirming that an oral disclosure occurred can be problematic.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN pointed  out that  if consumers  didn't know                                                               
that  oral  disclosure  was  required,   they  wouldn't  know  to                                                               
complain.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES  opined that  if there is  written material                                                               
being presented, then  the disclosure should also  be in writing,                                                               
and  if the  presentation is  given orally,  then the  disclosure                                                               
should  also be  given  orally.   She said  she  doesn't want  to                                                               
create extra work for cruise ship staff.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN  suggested that  all disclosure should  be in                                                               
writing.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR DAHLSTROM  asked  Representative  Holmes whether  she                                                               
would  be  amenable  to  altering Amendment  2  to  specify  that                                                               
disclosure [occur in the same fashion as the presentation].                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES indicated that she would be.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN,  in response to a  question, reiterated that                                                               
the disclosure should be in  writing, and then, if someone wanted                                                               
to  provide oral  disclosure as  well,  that would  be fine,  but                                                               
written disclosure should be sufficient.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS  indicated that  he would  not be  in favor  of that                                                               
amendment to Amendment 2.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN  argued that  other information  must already                                                               
be disclosed in writing and so  there shouldn't be a problem with                                                               
requiring additional written disclosure.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN  expressed  an   interest  in  amending  the                                                               
language in the bill such that all disclosure occur in writing.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
3:55:17 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  COGHILL  surmised  that   Amendment  2  could  be                                                               
altered in that fashion.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS [although  no formal motion was made]  said he would                                                               
accept  an amendment  to Amendment  2 such  that Amendment  2, as                                                               
amended, would read:                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     P.1, L.8 - after "disclose" delete "both orally and in                                                                     
     writing" insert "in writing at the point of sale."                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
[Amendment 2 was treated as amended.]                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS  said he  is assuming  that if  a ticket  is slipped                                                               
under  the passenger's  stateroom  door,  the written  disclosure                                                               
would be as well.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN opined  that  the passenger  should see  the                                                               
written disclosure before the ticket is bought.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS said, "Unless you bought it online."                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN removed his objection.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR   DAHLSTROM  asked  whether  there   were  any  other                                                               
objections  to [Amendment  2,  as amended].    There being  none,                                                               
Amendment 2, as amended, was adopted.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
3:57:14 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  RAMRAS made  a motion  to  adopt Amendment  3, which  read                                                               
[original punctuation provided]:                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     P.1, L.8 after "future" insert "public"                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     P.2, L.11 Insert a new Sec. 2 to read "For the purpose                                                                     
       of this statute, a public port does not include a                                                                        
     private destination resort."                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES objected.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  RAMRAS  explained  that  Amendment  3  would  address  the                                                               
concern raised by Mr. Wysocki regarding Icy Straight Point.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HOLMES   said  she   would  be   maintaining  her                                                               
objection, and explained that although  she is sympathetic to Mr.                                                               
Wysocki's  concern, Amendment  3 would  exempt cruise  ships from                                                               
having  to  disclose anything  about  Icy  Straight Point.    She                                                               
characterized the  change proposed  by Amendment 3  as overbroad,                                                               
and  offered her  understanding that  Version V  already contains                                                               
language that will address Mr. Wysocki's concern.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS asked that Amendment 3  [be set aside].  There being                                                               
no objection, [the motion was left pending].                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
3:58:36 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES made  a motion to adopt  Amendment 4, which                                                               
read [original punctuation provided]:                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Page 2, line 12                                                                                                            
          Insert new section 2:                                                                                                 
               "AS 45.50.474(c) is amended to read:  (c)                                                                        
     Each violation  of this  section constitutes  an unfair                                                                    
     trade practice  under AS 45.50.471 [,  AND SHALL RESULT                                                                    
     IN  A   PENALTY  OF  NOT   MORE  THAN  $100   FOR  EACH                                                                    
     VIOLATION]"                                                                                                                
          Renumber as necessary                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR DAHLSTROM objected for the purpose of discussion.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES  explained that  Amendment 4  would address                                                               
another  unintended consequence  resulting from  the language  of                                                               
the  ballot initiative.   Prior  to  the adoption  of the  ballot                                                               
initiative,  violation  of  a  statutory  disclosure  requirement                                                               
constituted an unfair trade practice,  and the penalties for such                                                               
were already defined in statute,  but the initiative attempted to                                                               
attach a specific  penalty, and thus confused what  it applied to                                                               
and how it worked and actually  lowered the penalty.  Amendment 4                                                               
returns the statutory language of  AS 45.50.474(c) to what it was                                                               
before the ballot initiative was passed.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR  DAHLSTROM  questioned  whether, if  Amendment  4  is                                                               
adopted, it will take away the existing penalty.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR. SNIFFEN  said that  Amendment 4  is a  good amendment  from a                                                               
couple of  perspectives.  Concurring  that prior to  the adoption                                                               
of the ballot initiative, penalties  for violations of the unfair                                                               
trade  practices  Act were  already  statutorily  provided for  -                                                               
penalties ranging  from $1,000 to  $25,000 - he noted  that there                                                               
had been  some indication that the  ballot initiative's reference                                                               
to  a $100  penalty should  instead have  been a  reference to  a                                                               
$1,000 penalty.  Under Amendment 4,  just as under the prior law,                                                               
the  court would  have  the  discretion to  assess  a penalty  of                                                               
between  $1,000  and  $25,000  depending on  the  nature  of  the                                                               
violation.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR DAHLSTROM  removed her  objection, and  asked whether                                                               
there   were  any   further  objections.     There   being  none,                                                               
Amendment 4 was adopted.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
4:01:28 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES made  a motion to adopt  Amendment 5, which                                                               
read [original punctuation provided]:                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Page 1, lines 9 to 10                                                                                                      
          Amend to read:                                                                                                        
             "1) That the onboard sale results in a                                                                         
     commission paid by the shoreside vendor;"                                                                              
          Renumber as necessary                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR DAHLSTROM objected for the purpose of discussion.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES  explained that  Amendment 5  addresses the                                                               
confusion  resulting from  the  bill's current  use  of the  term                                                               
"paid promotion".                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL  offered his  understanding that  the term                                                               
"commission" also creates some confusion.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES, after acknowledging  that there is another                                                               
proposed  amendment  forthcoming  that addresses  that  language,                                                               
withdrew Amendment 5.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
4:02:47 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES made  a motion to adopt  Amendment 6, which                                                               
read:                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Page 1, line 5                                                                                                             
          Insert new section:                                                                                                   
               "AS 45.50.474 is amended to read:  (a) A                                                                         
     person may  not conduct a  promotion on board  a cruise                                                                    
     ship that  mentions or features  a business in  a state                                                                    
     port that has  paid something of value  for the purpose                                                                    
     of   having  the   business  mentioned,   featured,  or                                                                    
     otherwise  promoted, unless  the person  conducting the                                                                    
     promotion  clearly and  fully discloses  orally and  in                                                                    
     all written  materials used in  the promotion  that the                                                                    
     featured  businesses have  paid to  be included  in the                                                                    
     promotion.   If  the value  paid by  the business  is a                                                                
     commission of  more than  10% of  any single  sale, the                                                                
     disclosure  shall  also  state  that more  than  a  10%                                                                
     commission is  being retained by  the person  or entity                                                                
     making the  promotion, and that other  alternatives may                                                                
     be  available at  a port  of call;  and the  disclosure                                                                
     shall  provide the  address, Internet  website address,                                                                
     and telephone  number of any existing  visitors bureaus                                                                
     at each future  port of call.  All  such written notice                                                                
     of disclosure shall be in a  type that is not less than                                                                    
     14-point   typeface   and   in  a   contrasting   color                                                                    
     calculated to draw attention to the disclosure.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR DAHLSTROM objected for the purpose of discussion.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES  explained that Amendment 6  would put tour                                                               
sales occurring in  shoreside stores on the same  footing as tour                                                               
sales  occurring on  board vessels,  except  that the  commission                                                               
disclosure  threshold shall  be 10  percent.   In  response to  a                                                               
question, she  offered her understanding  that Amendment  6 would                                                               
not  affect  the  20   percent  commission  disclosure  threshold                                                               
established via Amendment 1 for onboard sales.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR DAHLSTROM  removed her  objection, and  asked whether                                                               
there   were  any   further  objections.     There   being  none,                                                               
Amendment 6 was adopted.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   COGHILL  noted   that  the   existing  statutory                                                               
language being added  to by Amendment 6 still  makes reference to                                                               
oral  disclosure,  and  suggested that  perhaps  some  conforming                                                               
changes might need to be made.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES acknowledged that point.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
4:04:24 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  RAMRAS made  a motion  to  adopt Amendment  7, which  read                                                               
[original punctuation provided]:                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
       P.1, L.9-10 Delete "paid promotion by a shoreside                                                                        
       vendor" and insert "retail/wholesale relationship                                                                        
     between the vessel operator and the shoreside vendor."                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HOLMES objected  for the  purpose of  discussion.                                                               
She  said  she  likes  Amendment 7  because  it  more  accurately                                                               
reflects the relationship that exists,  though it doesn't reflect                                                               
that money is being retained by the cruise line.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES  made a  motion to  amend Amendment  7 such                                                               
that  the  words, "that  results  in  a  percentage of  the  sale                                                               
retained  by the  cruise line"  would  be added  after the  word,                                                               
"vendor".  There being no objection, Amendment 7 was amended.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES  removed her  objection to Amendment  7, as                                                               
amended.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR  DAHLSTROM  asked  whether  there  were  any  further                                                               
objections.   There  being  none, Amendment  7,  as amended,  was                                                               
adopted.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
4:06:39 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS turned attention back  to Amendment 3 [text provided                                                               
previously], and said  that Icy Straight Point is  a private port                                                               
with  nothing else  available in  the  area; when  a cruise  ship                                                               
docks at Icy Straight Point, "it is the tour."                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   HOLMES   objected,   and   again   offered   her                                                               
understanding  that language  currently  in Version  V will  take                                                               
care of the concern raised  by Mr. Wysocki regarding Icy Straight                                                               
Point.   Specifically,  language on  page 1,  line 14,  says that                                                               
information   about   "existing   visitors  bureaus"   shall   be                                                               
disclosed; this language should  ensure that disclosure regarding                                                               
visitors  bureaus  shall  not  be  required  at  ports  where  no                                                               
visitors bureau exists.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MR. SNIFFEN concurred with Representative Holmes's summation.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS  pointed out that  even still a problem  could arise                                                               
for Icy Straight Point if the City  of Hoonah is deemed to be the                                                               
port of call.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN noted  that testimony  indicated that  there                                                               
might be  other private ports  established in the future,  and so                                                               
any exception carved  out for Icy Straight Point  would also have                                                               
to be applied to them.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HOLMES reiterated  her  belief  that the  concern                                                               
regarding  Icy  Straight Point  has  already  been addressed  via                                                               
Version V of the bill.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
4:09:34 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
A roll call  vote was taken.  Representatives  Coghill and Ramras                                                               
voted  in   favor  of  Amendment  3.     Representatives  Holmes,                                                               
Gruenberg,  Dahlstrom, and  Lynn  voted against  it.   Therefore,                                                               
Amendment 3 failed by a vote of 2-4.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR RAMRAS again declared a possible conflict of interest.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN  objected [thereby requiring Chair  Ramras to                                                               
vote].                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
4:10:43 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HOLMES  moved  to  report  the  proposed  CS  for                                                               
HB 217, Version 25-LS0696\V, Bannister,  4/19/07, as amended, out                                                               
of   committee   with    individual   recommendations   and   the                                                               
accompanying zero fiscal  notes.  There being  no objection, CSHB                                                               
217(JUD)  was   reported  from   the  House   Judiciary  Standing                                                               
Committee.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
ADJOURNMENT                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
There being no further business before the committee, the House                                                                 
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 4:11 p.m.                                                                 

Document Name Date/Time Subjects