Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120

02/21/2018 01:00 PM JUDICIARY

Note: the audio and video recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as
Download Video part 1. <- Right click and save file as

Audio Topic
01:54:10 PM Start
01:54:38 PM Confirmation(s)
02:04:45 PM HB330
02:14:52 PM Confirmation
02:19:09 PM HB330
02:42:58 PM HB307
03:02:53 PM Adjourn
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
-- Delayed to 1:15 PM --
+ Confirmation Hearings: TELECONFERENCED
- Board of Governors Appointment
- Violent Crimes Compensation Board Appointment
<Bill Hearing Canceled>
-- Public Testimony --
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
Moved CSHB 307(JUD) Out of Committee
Heard & Held
          HB 330-DNR: DISCLOSURE OF CONFIDENTIAL INFO                                                                       
2:04:45 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN announced  that the next order of  business would be                                                               
HOUSE  BILL NO.  330,  "An Act  authorizing  the commissioner  of                                                               
natural  resources to  disclose  confidential  information in  an                                                               
investigation  or proceeding,  including a  lease royalty  audit,                                                               
appeal,  or request  for reconsideration  and issue  a protective                                                               
order limiting  the persons who  have access to  the confidential                                                               
CHAIR CLAMAN advised that this is  the second hearing of the bill                                                               
by the  House Judiciary Standing Committee  wherein the committee                                                               
had heard  a presentation  from Ed  King, Legislative  Liaison to                                                               
the Commissioner  of the Department  of Natural  Resources (DNR).                                                               
The  committee  had  asked   questions  related  to  confidential                                                               
processes within Department  of Revenue (DOR), and  Ken Alper and                                                               
Jenny  Rogers   are  available  to   testify,  together   with  a                                                               
representative   from   the   oil   industry,   Michael   Hurley,                                                               
ConocoPhillips Alaska.   He added that this  committee received a                                                               
2/16/18 letter  of opposition from  Lorali Simon,  Vice President                                                               
of External Affairs, Usibelli Coal Mine.                                                                                        
2:05:55 PM                                                                                                                    
KEN  ALPER,  Director,  Tax   Division,  Department  of  Revenue,                                                               
advised that, generally, HB 330  is for the Department of Natural                                                               
Resources  (DNR) as  it relates  to  its treatment  of a  private                                                               
company's information  in the  context of a  royalty audit.   The                                                               
manner  in which  DNR values  royalties is  based on  the highest                                                               
transaction of a given quantity of  oil, he explained, and if one                                                               
company is partners with a  second company and the second company                                                               
receives  a  higher price  for  its  oil,  the first  company  is                                                               
charged  a royalty  based on  what the  second company  received,                                                               
"the highest  of."   Therein lays the  problem, he  remarked, DNR                                                               
does not  have the ability to  tell that first company  about the                                                               
information DNR received from the  second company due to taxpayer                                                               
confidentiality, which  this bill would  remedy.   The Department                                                               
of Revenue Tax  Division holds similar rights within  its oil and                                                               
gas  production   tax,  wherein  there  are   multiple  partners,                                                               
multiple working  interest owners,  and for various  reasons, the                                                               
Tax  Division  might use  value  or  price information  from  one                                                               
company to impact how it might  be calculating tax in an audit on                                                               
another  company.     He  offered  his   understanding  that  his                                                               
testimony today was  simply to convey to the  committee that this                                                               
bill  represents a  similar authority  currently existing  within                                                               
the Department of Revenue.   He further offered that DNR requests                                                               
this  legislation  for  its internal  housekeeping  and  auditing                                                               
2:07:48 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  REINBOLD  asked  whether  he  was  aware  of  any                                                               
opposition to HB 330.                                                                                                           
MR. ALPER answered  that he was not aware of  any opposition.  He                                                               
advised that he did read the  letter from Usibelli Coal Mine and,                                                               
he pointed out,  he did not understand the letter  in the context                                                               
of DNR's  purpose and  intent regarding this  bill.   He stressed                                                               
the importance  of recognizing that  DNR and DOR are  not looking                                                               
to divulge confidential information to  the general public, it is                                                               
simply  about sharing  one  taxpayer's  information with  another                                                               
related taxpayer, within a fairly narrow constrained purpose.                                                                   
2:08:50 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD noted that  if tremendous investments had                                                               
taken  place  on  certain  pieces of  property,  there  could  be                                                               
concerns about  the private sector's  investments.  She  said she                                                               
"is amazed" that  Mr. Alper is not aware of  any other opposition                                                               
at all, with the exception of the Usibelli Coal Mine.                                                                           
CHAIR  CLAMAN injected  that Mr.  King  is the  better person  to                                                               
answer that  question because  it is a  DNR bill;  therefore, the                                                               
objections would go to DNR and not to the Mr. Alper.                                                                            
MR. ALPER  answered that Mr.  Hurley, ConocoPhillips  Alaska, may                                                               
also be  able to provide  some insight.   From the  Department of                                                               
Revenue's (DOR)  perspective, the key  piece is that  DOR already                                                               
has  this  authority   and,  to  his  knowledge,  it   is  not  a                                                               
controversial  authority.     He   advised  that   Jenny  Rogers,                                                               
Department  of Revenue  (DOR)  is available,  and  has been  with                                                               
DOR's production tax group for over  20-years and she may be able                                                               
to provide  historical reasons why it  may have been done  in the                                                               
past.   He described it as  "a lightly used authority,"  and that                                                               
it has not been used more than  a handful of times for a specific                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD  said that Mr.  Alper did not  answer the                                                               
question because she had asked ...                                                                                              
CHAIR  CLAMAN reiterated  that the  better person  to ask  is Mr.                                                               
2:10:24 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  asked that  if the department  already has                                                               
authority, why is the bill necessary.                                                                                           
MR. ALPER replied that this  is a Department of Natural Resources                                                               
(DNR)  bill  that is  seeking  a  similar authority  for  royalty                                                               
audits that the  Department of Revenue (DOR)  currently holds for                                                               
its tax audits.                                                                                                                 
2:11:06 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX surmised that  this authority allows DOR to                                                               
share one taxpayer's information with another taxpayer.                                                                         
MR. ALPER  explained that  DOR's authorities  are not  changed by                                                               
this bill,  DNR's authority  is being  changed wherein  DNR would                                                               
hold the  authority to share confidential  information within the                                                               
narrow  context of  an audit  or  an investigation,  specifically                                                               
where  one taxpayer's  information is  being used  to change  the                                                               
royalties paid by  another taxpayer.  For  example, the companies                                                               
may  be  affiliated in  some  manner,  and the  sharing  taxpayer                                                               
received a higher price for its  oil than the other taxpayer, and                                                               
that price is being used to  set the royalties owed by the second                                                               
CHAIR  CLAMAN suggested  that  some of  the  questions should  be                                                               
directed to Mr. King.                                                                                                           
2:12:22 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  KOPP surmised  that the  weighted average  of the                                                               
three highest  prices in  any one  field comes  into play  when a                                                               
producer contests  a royalty  owed.  Under  the audit  rules, DNR                                                               
establishes the  going price  point that  sets the  dollar amount                                                               
owed, which  is the  average of the  three highest  field prices.                                                               
He explained  that that is  the reason  everyone must be  able to                                                               
see  what the  highest  three  prices were  because  that is  the                                                               
process in determining the amount actually owed.                                                                                
MR. ALPER opined  that he believed that was  correct and deferred                                                               
to Mr. King.                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  CLAMAN noted  that  when this  process  occurs, it  occurs                                                               
within the context  of a protective order and it  is not publicly                                                               
available, this  process is  only within  the narrow  confines of                                                               
the audit proceeding.                                                                                                           
2:13:50 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN  asked whether questions  about protective                                                               
orders  would more  appropriate  for "this  speaker  or the  next                                                               
CHAIR  CLAMAN  advised that  questions  about  the context  of  a                                                               
protective order  should be  directed to  the Department  of Law,                                                               
and a representative is available.                                                                                              
MR.  ALPER  offered that  there  is  a similar  protective  order                                                               
structure within DNR's authorities under  AS 43.55.040 as to what                                                               
is contemplated here in this change in DNR statutes.                                                                            
          HB 330-DNR: DISCLOSURE OF CONFIDENTIAL INFO                                                                       
2:19:09 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN returned the committee  to HB 330, and asked Michael                                                               
Hurley, ConocoPhillips Alaska, to come forward and testify.                                                                     
2:19:49 PM                                                                                                                    
MICHAEL HURLEY, Director  of Government Relations, ConocoPhillips                                                               
Alaska, Inc., advised he was available to testify.                                                                              
CHAIR CLAMAN noted  that Mr. Hurley will answers  questions as to                                                               
how ConocoPhillips  Alaska participates  in the  protective order                                                               
process  and  its  perspective  on the  protective  orders.    He                                                               
stressed  that  Mr. Hurley  is  not  here  to offer  an  official                                                               
position of ConocoPhillips Alaska, as to this bill.                                                                             
2:20:18 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  EASTMAN asked  whether ConocoPhillips  Alaska did                                                               
not have a  position on this bill because it  had analyzed all of                                                               
the information  and decided to  not take a position,  or because                                                               
the company  is still analyzing the  bill and has not  had enough                                                               
time to calculate a position.                                                                                                   
MR. HURLEY  responded that the bill  has some good aspects  to it                                                               
with  some mildly  concerning  aspects for  the  company, and  it                                                               
decided to "let it take its course."                                                                                            
2:21:03 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX  requested  an  explanation  of  the  good                                                               
aspects  to the  bill, and  the  aspects that  gives the  company                                                               
MR.  HURLEY   responded  that  this   authority,  given   to  the                                                               
Department   of  Natural   Resources  (DNR)   to  provide   these                                                               
protective orders  themselves, is helpful  because ConocoPhillips                                                               
Alaska's goal  is to try and  pay its royalties when  they become                                                               
due.     He   related  that   the  authority   is  important   to                                                               
ConocoPhillips  Alaska  because,  although the  legislature  made                                                               
changes  last year  in  terms  of the  interest  rate charged  in                                                               
taxes, DNR still has an 11  percent interest rate that accrues on                                                               
unpaid  royalties.   Therefore, he  explained, if  DNR goes  six-                                                               
years before auditing  the royalty, or ten-years  before "some of                                                               
that stuff  is resolved," there  is a consequential  situation of                                                               
11 percent interest over ten-years.   That situation could triple                                                               
the amount  owed, yet the  company's goal is  to try and  pay its                                                               
royalties as close  to the correct amount as possible  as soon as                                                               
they  are  due.    This  legislation  is  another  tool  for  the                                                               
department   to  share   confidential   information  with   other                                                               
producers  to  determine  that average  price,  thereby  allowing                                                               
ConocoPhillips  Alaska  to pay  its  royalties  as accurately  as                                                               
possible when they are due.                                                                                                     
2:23:13 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  HURLEY  offered  concern  with   the  section  of  the  bill                                                               
regarding the  protective orders  because "other things  could be                                                               
included in that  kind of proprietary bucket of  things," such as                                                               
the geological  and geophysical information.   He  explained that                                                               
the geological and geophysical  information, within a competitive                                                               
industry  business  such  as   ConocoPhillips  Alaska,  is  "very                                                               
confidential" for  the companies.   Mr. Hurley pointed  out that,                                                               
as Mr.  King had  previously testified,  DNR uses  that authority                                                               
solely  in obscure  situations, and  he is  not aware  of any  of                                                               
those situations (audio difficulties).   On the whole, he opined,                                                               
the  legislation  is  positive  due to  the  benefits  it  brings                                                               
forward with  the existing protective  orders and, "it  should be                                                               
2:24:54 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX noted that the  purpose of the bill, as has                                                               
been explained, is  for royalty audits.  She referred  to HB 330,                                                               
[AS  38.05.020(b)(15), page  3, lines  25-30] and  noted that  it                                                               
appears to  be broader than  simply royalty audits  and suggested                                                               
limiting  the  language to  simply  read  "royalty."   She  asked                                                               
whether that narrowed  language would allay some  of the concerns                                                               
he had voiced.                                                                                                                  
MR. HURLEY answered in the affirmative.                                                                                         
2:25:51 PM                                                                                                                    
[CHAIR   CLAMAN  and   Representative   Reinbold  discussed   the                                                               
appropriateness of certain questions.}                                                                                          
2:27:09 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  REINBOLD asked  whether Mr.  Hurley was  aware of                                                               
any pushback, other than Usibelli Coal Mine, on this bill.                                                                      
MR. HURLEY answered, "No."                                                                                                      
2:27:25 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  EASTMAN   asked  whether  the   protective  order                                                               
process  could  be  misused where  confidential  information  was                                                               
somehow leaked to the public.   He further asked whether that was                                                               
a concern to Mr. Hurley and  whether instances in that manner had                                                               
taken place in the past.                                                                                                        
MR. HURLEY responded that he is  unaware of any instances of that                                                               
nature.   Especially,  he offered,  with the  type of  data being                                                               
discussed in  computing the royalty  amounts wherein  the average                                                               
of  the  three  highest  prices determine  the  amount  owed  for                                                               
royalty.    He related  that  he  does  not have  any  particular                                                               
concern  about the  other  pieces of  it,  and as  Representative                                                               
LeDoux  suggested, if  it were  limited solely  to royalties,  he                                                               
would be happier but "it's okay."                                                                                               
2:28:51 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  KOPP  surmised that  currently,  if  there is  an                                                               
appeal based on a tax  audit and ConocoPhillips Alaska disagrees,                                                               
the information is necessary to be  disclosed in order to come to                                                               
the correct  valuation in the law.   He asked whether  that means                                                               
(audio difficulties) now.                                                                                                       
MR. HURLEY answered  yes, and he explained  that currently, there                                                               
have been  situations where  ConocoPhillips Alaska  received some                                                               
of the information  through a court protective order.   This bill                                                               
allows  a simpler  process of  going  through the  commissioner's                                                               
office rather than  going to court with an  actual dispute before                                                               
"you get  there."  He reiterated  that the company's goal  is  to                                                               
make sure  it can  pay its  royalties in a  timely manner  at the                                                               
correct amount and not incur  those interest charges.  He pointed                                                               
out  that having  the  protective order  process  go through  the                                                               
commissioner's  office,  ConocoPhillips  Alaska  is  hoping  that                                                               
process will allow  DNR to make those averages  calculations on a                                                               
timelier basis  so the company can  pay the correct amount  as it                                                               
becomes due.                                                                                                                    
2:31:10 PM                                                                                                                    
PETER CALTAGIRONE, Assistant  Attorney General, Natural Resources                                                               
Section, Department of Law (DOL), was available for questions.                                                                  
2:31:19 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked  the severity of the  penalties if a                                                               
protective order, in this context, is violated.                                                                                 
MR. CALTAGIRONE asked, "The penalties to whom?"                                                                                 
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN  responded that  to whomever  violated the                                                               
structure of a protective order.                                                                                                
MR. CALTAGIRONE  asked whether Representative Eastman  was asking                                                               
about  a  producer  misusing otherwise  confidential  information                                                               
that  was contrary  to  the  terms set  forth  in the  protective                                                               
order, and what happens next.                                                                                                   
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN  answered yes,  and he asked  what happens                                                               
when the confidential  information is misused or  is disclosed to                                                               
an unauthorized party."                                                                                                         
MR. CALTAGIRONE advised that a  protective order should be set up                                                               
in  the  same  manner  as   the  confidentiality  agreements  are                                                               
currently  set up.    This, he  offered,  would provide  specific                                                               
rules  for  handling  the  information  as  to  who,  within  the                                                               
receiving  party can  handle the  information,  what purpose  the                                                               
information can  be used for,  and is extremely limiting  in both                                                               
of  those respects.   There  is also  language that  protects the                                                               
state  from  liability if  that  information  is misused  by  the                                                               
receiving  party.   In theory,  he  said, for  the company  whose                                                               
information is being disclosed, the  remedy is that it would have                                                               
to  pursue against  the receiving  party if  the receiving  party                                                               
misused that information somehow.                                                                                               
CHAIR  CLAMAN explained  that all  royalty and  other proceedings                                                               
are  confidential  proceedings,  at  least  until  such  time  as                                                               
someone starts  appealing it  up through the  court system.   The                                                               
administrative proceedings  within DNR  are all  confidential for                                                               
all parties, he reiterated.                                                                                                     
2:33:59 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN  noted a  concern raised  by at  least one                                                               
company,  that through  this bill,  the confidential  information                                                               
under   a  protective   order  could   become  available   to  an                                                               
adversarial  party.    He  asked  Mr.  Caltagirone  whether  that                                                               
concern was unfounded.                                                                                                          
MR. CALTAGIRONE  surmised that Representative  Eastman's question                                                               
was whether there  was a possibility that that could  happen.  He                                                               
responded that  it certainly  could happen,  except that  DNR, in                                                               
issuing  its protective  order, lays  out specific  and narrowing                                                               
circumstances under which the information  could be used.  In the                                                               
event  DNR had  reason to  believe  the terms  of its  protective                                                               
order had  been violated, it could  go to the superior  court and                                                               
seek the appropriate sanctions (audio difficulties).                                                                            
2:35:05 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  EASTMAN surmised  that  the  discussion is  about                                                               
civil sanctions  and a lawsuit  setting, except, he said  that he                                                               
envisioned  a situation  where an  anti-mining  group might  have                                                               
access to  this information,  misuse it  in some  manner, declare                                                               
bankruptcy  relatively quickly  and  have no  funds.   Therefore,                                                               
that party  would not have  much in the way  of a penalty  in the                                                               
type of  civil suit setting  being discussed.   He asked  to what                                                               
extent that  anti-coal mining group receiving  the information in                                                               
the  first place  could happen  through HB  330, and  whether Mr.                                                               
Caltagirone had considered that possibility.                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN asked  whether Mr. Caltagirone had  read the 2/14/18                                                               
letter  from Usibelli  Coal Mine  that Representative  Eastman is                                                               
MR. CALTAGIRONE  advised that he  has seen that letter  and asked                                                               
Representative Eastman to repeat his compound question.                                                                         
2:36:37 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN  asked whether there is  a mechanism under                                                               
HB  330 for  that  anti-mining  group to  obtain  access to  this                                                               
information and a lawsuit would be  the remedy.  He asked whether                                                               
there  was a  manner  in  which "they  could  get  access to  the                                                               
information," and if not, his question is moot.                                                                                 
MR. CALTAGIRONE  answered that he  is not fully versed  in mining                                                               
law as it is not his area of  practice.  However, he said, he did                                                               
speak  with a  mining  attorney  prior to  this  hearing and  his                                                               
understanding is that in  Representative Eastman's scenario, this                                                               
is information  the group may  be able to obtain  anyway, outside                                                               
of HB 330.   Although, he said  that he may be  incorrect, and he                                                               
would  like the  opportunity  to file  a  written response  after                                                               
researching the question because he did  not want to speak out of                                                               
2:38:43 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX   asked  Mr.   Caltagirone  that   if  the                                                               
committee  limited  the  new  section  [AS  38.05.020(b)(15)]  to                                                               
"royalty,"  whether  that  would   take  care  of  the  situation                                                               
presented by Ms. Simon, Usibelli Coal Mine.                                                                                     
MR. CALTAGIRONE  opined that  amendments were  recently submitted                                                               
regarding page 3,  line 25, clarifying that this  bill is related                                                               
to oil and  gas, which would alleviate any  concerns presented by                                                               
Osibelli Coal Mine.                                                                                                             
2:40:27 PM                                                                                                                    
ED KING,  Special Assistant, Commissioners Office,  Department of                                                               
Natural  Resources,  advised  that after  receiving  the  2/16/18                                                               
letter from Usibelli Coal Mine,  DNR contemplated an amendment to                                                               
rectify its concerns and he  offered to share that amendment with                                                               
the committee.                                                                                                                  
CHAIR  CLAMAN  advised Mr.  King  that  there are  deadlines  for                                                               
amendments so the committee members  would have an opportunity to                                                               
review the amendments  in advance.  He pointed out  that Mr. King                                                               
is coming  to the  committee now,  in the  midst of  the hearing,                                                               
with  a  potential  amendment  that the  committee  may  want  to                                                               
review.   He advised  Mr. King that  offering amendments  in this                                                               
manner is not  consistent with the manner in  which the committee                                                               
operates, and  because every member  of the committee  would like                                                               
to review the amendment, it would not be taken up today.                                                                        
2:41:59 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  asked whether members would  have a chance                                                               
to offer amendments.                                                                                                            
CHAIR CLAMAN answered, "Absolutely."                                                                                            
[HB 330 was held over.]                                                                                                         

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
Board of Governors of the Alaska Bar Appointment-William Gordon Application 2.21.18.pdf HJUD 2/21/2018 1:00:00 PM
Violent Crimes Compensation Board Appointment-Jeffrey Stubblefield Application and Resume 2.21.18.pdf HJUD 2/21/2018 1:00:00 PM
HB330 ver A 2.16.18.pdf HJUD 2/16/2018 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 2/21/2018 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 2/23/2018 1:30:00 PM
HJUD 2/26/2018 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2018 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/12/2018 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/14/2018 1:00:00 PM
HB 330
HB330 Transmittal Letter 2.16.18.pdf HJUD 2/16/2018 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 2/21/2018 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2018 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/12/2018 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/14/2018 1:00:00 PM
HB 330
HB330 Opposing Document-UCM Letter 2.21.18.pdf HJUD 2/21/2018 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2018 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/12/2018 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/14/2018 1:00:00 PM
HB 330
HB330 Fiscal Note DNR-DOG 2.16.18.pdf HJUD 2/16/2018 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 2/21/2018 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/9/2018 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/12/2018 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/14/2018 1:00:00 PM
HB 330
HB307 ver D 2.19.18.PDF HJUD 2/19/2018 1:30:00 PM
HJUD 2/21/2018 1:00:00 PM
HB 307
HB307 Sponsor Statement 2.19.18.pdf HJUD 2/19/2018 1:30:00 PM
HJUD 2/21/2018 1:00:00 PM
HB 307
HB307 Sectional Analysis ver D 2.19.18.pdf HJUD 2/19/2018 1:30:00 PM
HJUD 2/21/2018 1:00:00 PM
HB 307
HB307 Amendment #1 2.21.18.pdf HJUD 2/21/2018 1:00:00 PM
HB 307
HB307 Additional Document-Leg Legal Memo on Amendment #1 (D.1) 2.21.18.pdf HJUD 2/21/2018 1:00:00 PM
HB 307
HB307 Amendment #1 HJUD Final Vote 2.21.18.pdf HJUD 2/21/2018 1:00:00 PM
HB 307
HB307 Fiscal Note MVA-COM 2.19.18.pdf HJUD 2/19/2018 1:30:00 PM
HJUD 2/21/2018 1:00:00 PM
HB 307
HB307 Fiscal Note DPS-SWITS 2.19.18.pdf HJUD 2/19/2018 1:30:00 PM
HJUD 2/21/2018 1:00:00 PM
HB 307