Legislature(2009 - 2010)CAPITOL 106

02/16/2010 08:00 AM STATE AFFAIRS


Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+= HB 241 DIVEST INVESTMENTS IN IRAN TELECONFERENCED
Failed To Move Out Of Committee
+ HB 292 GRANTS TO DISASTER VICTIMS TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
               HB 241-DIVEST INVESTMENTS IN IRAN                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
8:08:01 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LYNN announced  that the first order of  business was HOUSE                                                               
BILL  NO. 241,  "An Act  relating to  certain investments  of the                                                               
Alaska permanent fund, the state's  retirement systems, the State                                                               
of   Alaska  Supplemental   Annuity   Plan,   and  the   deferred                                                               
compensation  program for  state employees  in companies  that do                                                               
business  in   Iran,  and  restricting  those   investments;  and                                                               
providing for an effective date."                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
[Before the  committee was the  committee substitute (CS)  for HB
241, Version 26-LS0680\E, Kane, 2/8/10.]                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
8:08:41 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GATTO moved  to  adopt  the committee  substitute                                                               
(CS) for  HB 241, Version  26-LS0680\S, Kane, 2/15/10, as  a work                                                               
draft.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
8:08:54 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON objected for discussion purposes.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
8:09:04 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GATTO,  as  prime  sponsor of  HB  241,  directed                                                               
attention  to  a  memorandum  dated   2/15/10  [included  in  the                                                               
committee packet], which addresses the  changes that were made in                                                               
Version  S.   He  reviewed  the  changes,  which would  amend  AS                                                               
37.10.072 as  follows:   First, Version S  would delete  the word                                                               
"all"  from Section  1(d), to  guard against  misinterpreting the                                                               
statute  as   a  mandate  for   the  Department  of   Revenue  to                                                               
investigate every  publically traded company, as  opposed to just                                                               
those  companies  relating   to  Alaska's  investment  portfolio.                                                               
Second,  to eliminate  confusion  regarding  language in  Section                                                               
1(j)(1)(B)(v),  "gasoline and  related products"  was changed  to                                                               
"petroleum products".   Third, new  wording was added  in Section                                                               
1(j)(3), to more  clearly define "direct investment".   Under the                                                               
new language,  "direct investment" that  would be subject  to the                                                               
$20 million  threshold for  scrutiny "directly  and significantly                                                               
contributes  to  the enhancement  of  Iran's  ability to  develop                                                               
petroleum    resources,   military    equipment,   and    nuclear                                                               
capabilities".  Fourth,  a new provision was  inserted in Section                                                               
1(j)(9)(B),  to clarify  that,  for  the purposes  of  HB 241,  a                                                               
parent  company  is  only  responsible for  the  practices  of  a                                                               
subsidiary  or  jointly  owned  company   in  which  it  holds  a                                                               
controlling interest.   Representative  Gatto explained  that the                                                               
provision  was designed  to  address the  concern  that the  bill                                                               
could  be   broadly  read   to  include   any  dealings   with  a                                                               
"scrutinized  company" or  narrowly  read to  exempt any  company                                                               
that merely  formed a subsidiary  to administer its  interests in                                                               
Iran.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
8:12:13 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
THOMAS  REIKER, Staff,  Representative Carl  Gatto, Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature, in  response to  Representative Gruenberg,  said the                                                               
sponsor and his staff spoke with  the bill drafter to ensure that                                                               
there  were  no  issues  regarding federal  law,  that  the  bill                                                               
complies  with the  Iran  Sanctions Act  of 1996.    Much of  the                                                               
language in the bill came from that federal Act.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
8:13:02 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON removed  his  objection to  the motion  to                                                               
adopt  the committee  substitute  (CS) for  HB  241, Version  26-                                                               
LS0680\S,  Kane,2/15/10,  as  a  work draft.    [There  being  no                                                               
further objection, Version  S was before the committee  as a work                                                               
draft.]                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
8:13:30 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
JERRY   BURNETT,   Deputy    Commissioner,   Treasury   Division,                                                               
Department of Revenue,  stated that his job is  to administer the                                                               
investment policies  of the Alaska  Retirement Board  in relation                                                               
to HB 241.   He said he is not the fiduciary -  the board is, and                                                               
the  board   has  not   taken  any   position  on   the  proposed                                                               
legislation.  He said when, in  the past, the House State Affairs                                                               
Standing  Committee  considered  the  issue  of  divestment  from                                                               
Sudan, the  discussion was  about the  amount of  securities held                                                               
that would  "come under that definition,"  and it was in  the $13                                                               
million-range.   As of yesterday,  he reported, there  were close                                                               
to a billion dollars of  securities that would likely "fall under                                                               
this  list."    He said  that  is  out  of  $33 billion  that  is                                                               
invested.   About  half of  the department's  investments are  in                                                               
retirement  funds.    He  said  based on  the  types  of  current                                                               
investments,  he  expects "a  higher  percentage  of this  is  in                                                               
retirement funds than in the  other."  Mr. Burnett told committee                                                               
members  he wants  them to  know  the magnitude  of the  proposed                                                               
legislation:   approximately $750,000,000 of funds  might have to                                                               
be divested.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
8:15:27 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. BURNETT,  in response  to Representative  P. Wilson,  said he                                                               
cannot  predict  whether  or  not the  state  would  lose  money;                                                               
however, he noted that there  would be transaction costs involved                                                               
- about four cents per share of  stock.  He said, "If you look at                                                               
... an average share price of $20,  as an example, and you have a                                                               
billion dollars worth of stock,  you're looking at two-hundredths                                                               
of a  percent of the  cost of the  stock."  He  said it is  not a                                                               
huge  cost relative  to  the value,  but  potentially this  could                                                               
affect 5  percent of  the holdings of  the retirement  funds that                                                               
may match  the list  of companies provided  by the  bill sponsor.                                                               
Mr. Burnett stated, "Depending on  the size of our holdings here,                                                               
as you trade  anything, if you have  to do a forced  sale you may                                                               
not sell it  at the best time  ....  You might  lose some percent                                                               
of your value  as a result of  having to do a forced  sale."  Mr.                                                               
Burnett emphasized that he is  not to attempting to influence the                                                               
committee  one way  or  the  other, he  just  thinks the  members                                                               
should  have  an   idea  of  the  magnitude  of   what  is  being                                                               
considered.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
8:17:42 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. BURNETT,  in response to  Representative P. Wilson,  said the                                                               
proposed legislation gives the department  90 days to divest from                                                               
companies on the list.   He said this is a  doable timeframe.  In                                                               
response to Representative  Petersen, he said there  are over 400                                                               
matches spread  across 30 funds  the state manages.   In response                                                               
to a follow-up  question, he said he does not  recall which would                                                               
be the largest.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN surmised, "So, if  you say there's 400 of                                                               
them, and  we've got $900  million, chances  are we don't  have a                                                               
huge holding in any one particular stock."                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR.  BURNETT replied  that  the holdings  are  small because  the                                                               
state diversifies for a number of reasons.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
8:20:09 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO  said he understands  when Mr.  Burnett says                                                               
the state  could lose money;  however, asking whether or  not the                                                               
state will  lose money from  divesting is a  rhetorical question.                                                               
He  said it  may be  just as  likely that  the state  would avoid                                                               
losing  money  by  divesting  because "half  the  free  world  is                                                               
selling them."   He said  his point  is that divesting  should be                                                               
done for moral reasons.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
8:21:16 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. BURNETT relayed  that in December 2009,  the chief investment                                                               
officer wrote  to a number  of active fund managers  asking about                                                               
"holdings that they  had on this," because "we  perceive a market                                                               
risk from  holding stocks that  other people put on  their list."                                                               
He  said  Representative  Gatto is  correct  that  effects  could                                                               
happen  in  both  directions.    He reiterated  that  he  is  not                                                               
addressing  the good  or bad;  he is  just letting  the committee                                                               
know about the magnitude of the issue.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
8:22:57 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG   directed  attention  to   the  90-day                                                               
provision, which he  said does not give the managers  of the fund                                                               
permission to keep funds on the  list past 90 days.  He concluded                                                               
that  this means  "the only  thing this  prevents you  from doing                                                               
potentially from a financial point of  view is making money."  He                                                               
asked Mr. Burnett if he concurs.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR. BURNETT responded, "I think I agree with you on that."                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. GRUENBERG said  the provision would not  prevent the managers                                                               
of the fund  from losing money, because "you'd be  getting out of                                                               
it anyway,"  but if the  managers wanted  to keep the  stocks for                                                               
investment reasons, they could not.   He asked Mr. Burnett if the                                                               
managers of the  fund would prefer the provision  to require "due                                                               
deliberate speed" rather than a "hard and fast" deadline.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR. BURNETT said he  cannot speak to that issue.   He said if the                                                               
legislature  is serious  about doing  this,  some deadlines  will                                                               
have to  be put in  place.  In  response to a  follow-up question                                                               
from Representative  Gruenberg, he  opined that  90 days  is long                                                               
enough,  because  it starts  from  the  time  the list  would  be                                                               
finished, not from the time the bill would be signed.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
8:26:02 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN  asked Mr.  Burnett if  he looked  at the                                                               
list  and  recognized any  of  the  companies  as ones  that  are                                                               
currently doing business in Alaska.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
8:26:19 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  BURNETT answered  yes, but  said  he cannot  speak to  which                                                               
companies they  are, since  he does not  presently have  the list                                                               
with him.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN suggested that  the committee may want to                                                               
consider that  if the  state divests from  companies on  the list                                                               
that are presently doing business  within Alaska, those companies                                                               
may choose to pull out from the state.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
8:26:42 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON directed  attention to  language beginning                                                               
on page 2,  line 12, midway through line 16,  of Version S, which                                                               
read as follows:                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
          (c) The commissioner shall create and update                                                                          
     quarterly,  before the  first  day  of the  immediately                                                                    
     succeeding  calendar  quarter,  a list  of  scrutinized                                                                    
     companies.                                                                                                                 
          (d) The commissioner shall make reasonable                                                                            
     efforts  to investigate  publicly  traded companies  to                                                                    
     determine whether the company  is a scrutinized company                                                                    
     for the purposes of this section.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said  he had asked the  commissioner of the                                                               
Department of  Revenue to let him  know what kind of  time frame,                                                               
burden, or  investigative effort would  be involved, and  at what                                                               
cost.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
8:28:04 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
PATRICK GALVIN, Commissioner, Department  of Revenue, reported to                                                               
Representative Seaton that he was  advised from the Department of                                                               
Law  that the  current  standard would  allow  the Department  of                                                               
Revenue to rely upon primarily the  list and should not impose an                                                               
undue  burden in  complying with  the  standard.   He noted  that                                                               
since then,  the language  has improved  with the  elimination of                                                               
the word "all" in relation to publicly traded companies.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
8:28:52 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said a second  question he had asked was in                                                               
regard  to language  on page  2, line  6, of  Version S  - "other                                                               
business structure"  - and whether consideration  was being given                                                               
only  to stocks  of  a  publicly traded  company,  or  also to  a                                                               
situation  in which  Alaska  is  a partner  with  the company  or                                                               
provides tax credits to a company doing business in the state.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
8:30:21 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER GALVIN  replied that  the Department of  Law advised                                                               
that  a company  not on  the scrutinized  list doing  business in                                                               
Alaska would  not create  violation of bill,  but would  create a                                                               
question as  to whether the  intent of  the bill was  being fully                                                               
established.     He   acknowledged   that  is   a  concern   that                                                               
Representative Petersen just raised.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
8:31:14 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO  directed attention  to language on  page 2,                                                               
line 14, of Version S,  which states that the commissioner "shall                                                               
make   reasonable   efforts   to  investigate   publicly   traded                                                               
companies".   He asked  Commissioner Galvin  if he  considers the                                                               
investigation  of  the  lists currently  published  a  reasonable                                                               
effort or thinks the department  would also have to make separate                                                               
investigations.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
8:32:08 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER GALVIN said  the issue the Department  of Law raised                                                               
which  caused concern  is  that  the language  of  the bill  that                                                               
addresses  which companies  would  be on  the Alaska  scrutinized                                                               
list is  broader than compliance with  the federal law.   He said                                                               
because  the  bill is  an  amalgam  of  language from  the  Sudan                                                               
divestiture bill  and makes reference to  the federal divestiture                                                               
law, it creates  an additional standard beyond that  of a company                                                               
described in the  federal law.  He said  the proposed legislation                                                               
would  require further  investigation  beyond the  lists, but  he                                                               
said  he thinks  that  could be  addressed  through an  amendment                                                               
allowing  the identification  of  companies that  fall under  the                                                               
description of the  federal law as companies that  fall under the                                                               
Alaska scrutinized company list.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
8:33:36 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER GALVIN,  in response  to Representative  Gatto, said                                                               
if the  standard for determining  whether a company should  be on                                                               
the list  or not is  the same being  applied by others  states or                                                               
entities  in the  development of  their  list, then  it could  be                                                               
argued  that a  "reasonable inquiry"  would be  to examine  those                                                               
lists to  find the commonality.   He  reiterated that an  area of                                                               
concern would be if there is  a different standard for the Alaska                                                               
list.   In response to  a follow-up question  from Representative                                                               
Gatto,  he  restated   that  it  is  the   addition  of  language                                                               
apparently  from the  former Sudan  divestiture  bill which  goes                                                               
beyond the federal law.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
8:36:06 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE P.  WILSON directed  attention to  subsection (d),                                                               
on page 2, lines 14-17 [text  provided previously].  She said the                                                               
language  does  not  state  that  the  commissioner  may  make  a                                                               
reasonable  effort  to investigate  the  public  list that  other                                                               
states  have,  and  she  questioned   whether  it  would  make  a                                                               
difference to amend subsection (d).                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
8:37:23 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER  GALVIN responded  that he  does not  think that  is                                                               
really  the  issue  at  hand.     He  opined  that  the  proposed                                                               
requirement  obligating  the   commissioner  to  make  reasonable                                                               
inquiries and  allowing him/her  to utilize  existing lists  is a                                                               
reasonable approach  by which to  establish a standard  and allow                                                               
for a way  to comply with that standard.   He reiterated that the                                                               
issue raised by  the Department of Law could  be addressed either                                                               
by the  House State  Affairs Standing  Committee or  a subsequent                                                               
committee  of  referral,  to  identify the  federal  law  as  the                                                               
controlling aspect of that standard.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
8:38:14 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER  GALVIN, in  response to  Representative P.  Wilson,                                                               
said he does  not have a copy  of the bill with him,  but said it                                                               
is the  section of the  bill with the definition  of "scrutinized                                                               
company" which  needs to  be more  narrowly restricted  to simply                                                               
identify companies  that are out  of compliance with  the federal                                                               
law.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   P.  WILSON   noted   that   the  definition   of                                                               
"scrutinized company"  begins on page  4, line 24,  and continues                                                               
through page 5, line 1.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
8:39:18 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  BURNETT  pointed  out  that   the  definition  of  "business                                                               
operations" is  found on  page 3,  beginning on  line 12,  and he                                                               
offered his belief that that is  the portion of the bill language                                                               
that  was  imported  from the  aforementioned  Sudan  divestiture                                                               
bill.     He  recommended  that   the  committee   eliminate  the                                                               
definition   of   "business    operations"   and   identify   the                                                               
"scrutinized  companies"  as  those   engaging  in  any  and  all                                                               
business  [operations] that  are subject  or liable  to sanctions                                                               
under Public Law 104-172.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
8:40:48 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON  directed attention to language  on page 2,                                                               
lines 23-31, subsections (e) and (f), which read as follows:                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
          (e) The commissioner shall provide written notice                                                                     
     and  an  opportunity  to comment  in  writing  to  each                                                                    
     company identified  as a scrutinized company  under (d)                                                                    
     of this section.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     (f)  The commissioner  shall add  a company  identified                                                                    
     under (d)  of this section  to the list  of scrutinized                                                                    
     companies  not earlier  than  90  days after  providing                                                                    
     written notice  under (e) of  this section,  unless the                                                                    
     company demonstrates  to the commissioner that  it does                                                                    
     not  conduct or  have  direct  investments in  business                                                                    
     operations   in  Iran   that  exceed   the  $20,000,000                                                                    
     threshold  referred  to  in Public  Law  104-172  (Iran                                                                    
     Sanctions Act of 1996), as amended.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON asked  Mr. Burnett  if he  interprets this                                                               
language to  mean that even if  the department relies on  a list,                                                               
it would have to notify each  company in writing and give each an                                                               
opportunity to comment.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
8:41:42 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  BURNETT  said  he  believes the  department  would  have  to                                                               
identify a potential  list, notify the companies and  give them a                                                               
chance to respond, identify a  final list, and demand divestiture                                                               
from all  the fund  managers based  on that list.   He  said this                                                               
plan would  result in  divestiture from any  company on  the list                                                               
that is  part of the  fund, not any company  that is not  part of                                                               
the  fund.   He  stated,  "We  do  have  more companies  that  do                                                               
business in  Iran than Sudan,  for sure."  He  remarked, "There's                                                               
nothing that prevents  us from divesting from any  company at any                                                               
time if it's a good business decision."                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
8:43:00 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON stated his intention  is that the state may                                                               
abide  by a  list, while  still providing  due process  under the                                                               
Constitution of the State of Alaska to the companies involved.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
8:44:47 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER  GALVIN clarified  that  neither  the Department  of                                                               
Revenue nor the Alaska Retirement  Management (ARM) Board nor the                                                               
Alaska  Permanent   Fund  Board  would  have   the  authority  to                                                               
independently  implement a  divestiture  policy,  with regard  to                                                               
Iran, without  the statutory authority to  do so, which is  why a                                                               
bill, such as HB 241, would be  necessary to put in place an Iran                                                               
divestiture policy.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
8:45:55 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG asked  whether  there  is any  possible                                                               
legal argument  a company could use  to say it has  some right to                                                               
"some  kind  of  relief"  that  is granted  under  HB  241.    He                                                               
questioned  whether  it should  be  specified  in the  bill  that                                                               
companies would not have that right to a hearing, for example.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
8:47:57 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER GALVIN responded  that the issue is not  so much one                                                               
of  due process.   He  said this  is a  matter of  fairness.   He                                                               
opined that  if a company is  going to be identified  publicly as                                                               
being  unworthy  of  Alaska's investment,  the  state  owes  that                                                               
company the right  to say that the state got  the facts wrong and                                                               
to prove that the  company does not belong on the  list.  He said                                                               
he thinks  there may  [emphasis on "may"]  be some  exposure with                                                               
regard to  slander or liable  or some sort of  interference "with                                                               
their  other contractual  relationships" if  the proposed  law is                                                               
followed.   For that reason,  he said, it  is in the  interest of                                                               
the  state  to ensure  that  the  department has  provided  those                                                               
companies with  the opportunity  to clarify  whether or  not they                                                               
belong on the list.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG said  the board  of a  targeted company                                                               
may be concerned  about everybody dumping its stock.   He said he                                                               
hopes  that  the  bill   sponsor  seriously  considers  including                                                               
language  in the  bill that  would prevent  a company  from using                                                               
Alaska as a  forum to justify its actions and  not only delay the                                                               
process, but also "gum up the works in other states."                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LYNN  said, "They  could  challenge  that; we  can't  tell                                                               
somebody else what their rights are."                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  emphasized,  "We can  tell  them  what                                                               
their rights  are under this Act,  absolutely.  We do  it all the                                                               
time; we limit liability."                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
8:51:12 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GATTO   returned   to  the   comment   made   by                                                               
Commissioner Galvin that without  statutory authority, the boards                                                               
determining which stocks  to buy or sell would  have no authority                                                               
to make a policy regarding divestiture  from Iran, and he said it                                                               
is  understandable.   However, he  asked  if that  same board  of                                                               
directors,  upon observing  that those  companies on  scrutinized                                                               
lists  are "having  a  downward pressure  from  many states,  the                                                               
federal government, and  from other companies," would  be able to                                                               
make  a policy  without statutory  authority that  maintains that                                                               
those  stocks are  risky because  they  are more  likely to  lose                                                               
value than to gain value.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
8:52:17 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER GALVIN  said the answer,  in general, would  be yes;                                                               
if it  was determined  there would be  likely market  movement in                                                               
regard to certain stocks, the boards  could utilize that as a way                                                               
to  avoid companies  that have  that type  of risk  profile.   He                                                               
noted  that  beyond  the  Iran  divestiture  issue,  there  is  a                                                               
tremendous amount of other  movement towards divestiture policies                                                               
for a variety  of reasons that would have to  also be scrutinized                                                               
and evaluated to  determine whether they would  have a legitimate                                                               
impact on the market.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
8:53:50 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER   GALVIN,   in   response   to   a   question   from                                                               
Representative Gatto  as to whether the  federal government would                                                               
prohibit states from investing in  companies that invest in Iran,                                                               
offered  his understanding  that the  furthest U.S.  Congress has                                                               
gone in imposing divestiture is  in language that shielded states                                                               
from actions under prudent  investor requirements associated with                                                               
a Sudan  divestiture policy.   He said the language  stated there                                                               
was a safe  harbor for imposing a divestiture policy  that was to                                                               
be  protected under  federal law.   He  concluded, "I  guess it's                                                               
possible;   although  you   have   to   think  about   federalism                                                               
constitutional issues there."                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
8:55:15 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO  remarked that  the embargo with  Cuba shows                                                               
that   the  federal   government  has   the  ability   to  impose                                                               
restrictions on the whole country.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER GALVIN offered his  understanding that a requirement                                                               
similar  to that  for Cuba  is in  place for  Iran, which  is why                                                               
there is  no direct investment  by American companies in  Iran or                                                               
materials supplied from the U.S. to Iran.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
8:56:00 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LYNN stated his wish  to have any necessary amendments made                                                               
and a motion made to move HB 241 today.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
8:56:33 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON said  HB  241 proposes  a  sanction on  "a                                                               
company," and he  said he anticipates that to  be problematic and                                                               
asked the commissioner to comment.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LYNN said he wonders if  any other state has addressed this                                                               
question.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
8:57:47 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER   GALVIN  told   Representative   Seaton  that   the                                                               
department  did  utilize the  Department  of  Law extensively  in                                                               
developing  the  process  that  is  used  here,  because  it  was                                                               
borrowed  from  the   Sudan  divestiture  bill.     He  said  the                                                               
Department  of  Law  advised  that   the  Department  of  Revenue                                                               
include a  provision to  ensure it meets  its obligations  to the                                                               
companies that  may be on  the list.  He  said he does  not think                                                               
the department  specifically received  the conclusion  that there                                                               
was a  constitutional right to  due process; however, he  said he                                                               
thinks it  was an issue of  ensuring that the department  did not                                                               
expose itself  unnecessarily to claims  either of that  nature or                                                               
other violations  of their rights.   In response to  Chair Lynn's                                                               
question as to whether other  states have addressed this issue in                                                               
their divestiture legislation,  he said he is not  aware of other                                                               
states' processes  on this  issue.   He asked  Mr. Burnett  if he                                                               
knew of any other states that have addressed this question.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LYNN noted that Mr. Burnett shook his head no.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON  questioned if  not allowing a  company the                                                               
opportunity to change  would be removing the main  impetus of the                                                               
bill to have companies change their behavior.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LYNN  commented  that  he  does  not  think  the  proposed                                                               
legislation  is   directed  toward  changing  the   behaviors  of                                                               
different  companies,   but  rather  is  an   issue  of  national                                                               
security.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
9:00:15 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER  GALVIN  responded  that  the  whole  purpose  of  a                                                               
divestiture policy  is to keep  companies from  providing support                                                               
for  the targeted  country.   The  intent,  therefore, would  not                                                               
necessarily  be  to  do so  solely  through  divestiture  action,                                                               
because  a divestiture  of  stock does  not  directly affect  the                                                               
company itself.   It is  the act of placing  a company on  a list                                                               
and  putting it  up  for public  scrutiny as  a  company that  is                                                               
engaged in what  the U.S. considers to be  improper behavior that                                                               
is an attempt to motivate  that company's behavioral change.  For                                                               
that  reason,  he  said,   he  supports  Representative  Seaton's                                                               
comment  that if  the purpose  of the  proposed bill  is to  hold                                                               
companies  up to  that  kind of  scrutiny and  to  give them  the                                                               
opportunity to  change their  behavior and  prove they  should no                                                               
longer be  on the  list, then the  state should  probably provide                                                               
those  companies  with  the  means  for  "making  the  change  in                                                               
behavior effective for that purpose."                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
9:01:54 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG   said  he  thinks  the   committee  is                                                               
flagging  this  issue,  and  he   expressed  his  hope  that  the                                                               
department will  work with the  Department of Law to  ensure that                                                               
"this isn't  used as a forum  by these companies" and  to prevent                                                               
delays from injunctions.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
9:02:41 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GRUENBERG  stated   his   assumption  that   the                                                               
department would work  on an amendment related  to the definition                                                               
language.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER GALVIN confirmed that is correct.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
9:03:06 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  directed attention to language  on page                                                               
3, lines  9-10, which gives  the commissioner authority  to adopt                                                               
regulations  under AS  44.62 "to  carry out  the purposes  of the                                                               
section."   He  noted  that Sections  2  and 3,  on  page 5,  are                                                               
"directing  the  retirement boards  to  comply  with this."    He                                                               
stated   his  assumption   that  those   boards  currently   have                                                               
regulatory authority to  carry out the purposes  of this section,                                                               
and it  is not necessary  to put  similar language in  Sections 2                                                               
and  3 as  is found  in the  aforementioned language  on page  3,                                                               
lines 9-10.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
9:04:12 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. BURNETT responded as follows:                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     Regulations  are  to  ... carry  out  the  purposes  in                                                                    
     adopting  the   list.     The  ...   Alaska  Retirement                                                                    
     Management Board  and the Permanent Fund  are to follow                                                                    
     this  list and  divest.   They shouldn't  need specific                                                                    
     regulatory  authority   in  this   bill.     They  have                                                                    
     regulatory  authority for  their purposes  within their                                                                    
     statute,  so they  would be  able to  adopt regulations                                                                    
     under their general regulatory authority.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
9:04:56 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG directed  attention  to  Section 6,  on                                                               
page 6, which  would required notice by the Department  of Law to                                                               
the U.S.  Attorney General.   He remarked  that that  is unusual,                                                               
and asked why that requirement is in the proposed legislation.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR.  BURNETT  said he  is  not  certain  of  the answer  to  that                                                               
question.   Notwithstanding that, he  surmised that there  may be                                                               
something in federal law.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  asked  for   that  information  to  be                                                               
provided.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
9:07:24 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER  GALVIN, in  response to  Representative P.  Wilson,                                                               
said  he  does not  expect  the  companies  put  on the  list  to                                                               
respond, because,  in general,  they will not  want to  put their                                                               
activities and  involvement in Iran  up for public scrutiny.   He                                                               
stated, "Unless  ... we  have our  facts wrong,  and they  do not                                                               
have engagement in  the activities that led to  them being listed                                                               
by other states, I don't expect to hear back from the company."                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
9:08:09 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  PETERSEN stated  his belief  that the  purpose of                                                               
the proposed bill is not to  punish any of the companies in which                                                               
the state has  invested.  He said the reason  the U.S. Government                                                               
has, in  the past, put  sanctions on  another nation has  been to                                                               
effect change in that nation's behavior.   He opined that in most                                                               
cases that  has not been  very effective; however,  starting some                                                               
sort of military conflict might be a worse alternative.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
9:09:48 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO  directed attention  to language on  page 3,                                                               
lines 12-14, which read as follows:                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
          (1) "business operations"                                                                                             
             (A) means power production activities,                                                                             
     mineral extraction activities, oil-related activities,                                                                     
     or the production of military equipment;                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GATTO  noted   that  the   subject  of   mineral                                                               
extraction  appears  again on  page  4.   He  asked  Commissioner                                                               
Galvin if  it would  be helpful to  adopt a  conceptual amendment                                                               
that would delete  subparagraph (A) and the related  text on page                                                               
4.   He said he  does not want  to create additional  chores that                                                               
would require additional  personnel, but he wants  to ensure that                                                               
the list is observed.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER GALVIN  said that conceptually  "that does  bring it                                                               
closer to  alignment with ... the  federal Act and would  make it                                                               
easier to implement."                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
9:11:05 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. BURNETT suggested removing language  in Section 1, subsection                                                               
(j), paragraphs (1), and paragraphs (3) through (8).                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
9:12:52 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LYNN closed public testimony.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
9:13:01 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO  indicated his concurrence with  some of the                                                               
deletions recommended by Mr. Burnett.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
9:13:47 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO  moved to adopt  Conceptual Amendment  1, to                                                               
delete the language in subparagraph  (A), on page 3, lines 13-14,                                                               
and  the  language  on  page  4, lines  3-23.    There  being  no                                                               
objection, Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
9:14:33 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON  moved to adopt Conceptual  Amendment 2, as                                                               
follows:                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     On page 4, line 25:                                                                                                        
          Following "company"                                                                                                   
        Delete "engaging in any and all active business                                                                         
     operations that are subject or"                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON  explained,  "It  takes  us  back  to  the                                                               
federal list  and eliminates the burden  to investigate nonprofit                                                               
lists and other things."                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LYNN  asked  if  there was  any  objection  to  Conceptual                                                               
Amendment 2.  There being no objection, it was so ordered.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
9:15:53 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GATTO  moved  to  report CSHB  241,  Version  26-                                                               
LS0680\S,  Kane,  2/15/10,  as  amended, out  of  committee  with                                                               
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
9:16:16 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON  objected.   He said  there has  been mixed                                                               
information given.   For example,  he stated that there  has been                                                               
testimony purporting that weapons are  being supplied by Iran [to                                                               
terrorists], and  he said there  is no evidence to  support that.                                                               
Representative  Seaton  said  he  has heard  testimony  given  by                                                               
military  commanders before  the  U.S. Congress  via C-SPAN  that                                                               
Iran could be much more unhelpful  than it currently is.  He said                                                               
the Pakistani  side of  the border  is the  one that  has nuclear                                                               
weapons.  He stated, "The basis  for this bill is evidence that I                                                               
don't think  we have on the  table here."  He  emphasized that he                                                               
is not speaking  in support of Iran; he said  he has friends who,                                                               
15  years  ago,  barely  escaped  Iran.    Representative  Seaton                                                               
reiterated   that  he   thinks  the   committee  needs   accurate                                                               
information  in  order  to  determine   whether  to  support  the                                                               
proposed legislation.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
9:20:49 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said she does  not want the bill to pass                                                               
out  of committee  without  making  changes to  the  part of  the                                                               
proposed  legislation  addressing  the  responsibilities  of  the                                                               
commissioner.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
The committee took an at-ease from 9:21:57 AM to 9:22:48 AM.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
9:22:55 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON removed  his  objection to  the motion  to                                                               
report CSHB 241, Version 26-LS0680\S,  Kane, 2/15/10, as amended,                                                               
out  of   committee  with  individual  recommendations   and  the                                                               
accompanying fiscal notes.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GATTO withdrew  his  motion to  report CSHB  241,                                                               
Version 26-LS0680\S, Kane, 2/15/10,  as amended, out of committee                                                               
with  individual  recommendations  and  the  accompanying  fiscal                                                               
notes.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
9:23:49 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE P.  WILSON moved to adopt  Conceptual Amendment 3,                                                               
as follows:                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     On page 2, line 15:                                                                                                        
        Following "whether the company is a scrutinized                                                                         
     company"                                                                                                                   
          Delete "for the"                                                                                                      
          Insert "on a list of any of the states"                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     On page 2, lines 16-22:                                                                                                    
          Delete all material                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
9:24:50 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON  objected  for discussion  purposes.    He                                                               
offered  his understanding  that  a previous  motion resulted  in                                                               
making  a scrutinized  company one  that is  liable to  sanctions                                                               
under  federal law.   Adding  other states'  [lists], he  opined,                                                               
would increase the  burden of the commissioner  of the Department                                                               
of Revenue to "balance between different companies."                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked, "So,  we just need to delete that                                                               
whole section then?"                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO said, "We've already made..."                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  P.  WILSON  interjected,  "But  this  contradicts                                                               
that."                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO responded, "I don't see it that way."                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
9:26:00 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   PETERSEN  suggested   the  following   language:                                                               
"determine whether the company is on the federal list".                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON agreed that a  period could be placed after                                                               
"scrutinized company",  since that term has  already been defined                                                               
as a  company on the  federal list, and all  subsequent language,                                                               
as outlined in Conceptual Amendment 3, could be deleted.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
9:26:43 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. REIKER  related that there  is no federal list,  only federal                                                               
criteria  with which  companies  should be  scrutinized.   States                                                               
create  their own  lists  based  on that  federal  criteria.   He                                                               
relayed  that currently  Florida, Ohio,  and Utah  have the  most                                                               
expansive lists.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  P.   WILSON  maintained   her  motion   to  adopt                                                               
Conceptual Amendment 3.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
9:27:41 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON removed his objection.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GATTO asked  if the  word "scrutinized"  includes                                                               
the states' lists.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MR. REIKER responded yes.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
9:28:10 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GATTO  objected  to Conceptual  Amendment  3  for                                                               
clarification.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
9:28:23 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  P.  WILSON  restated   the  changes  proposed  in                                                               
Conceptual Amendment 3.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO  remarked that  it is  scrutinized companies                                                               
that  are on  the  list  of any  of  the  states; therefore,  the                                                               
inserted language in Amendment 3 is redundant.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON  said  he  does  not  think  it  would  be                                                               
redundant, because  among the language  that would be  deleted by                                                               
Conceptual Amendment  3 is paragraph  (1), which  lists nonprofit                                                               
organizations,  research firms,  and international  organizations                                                               
as sources for lists that could  be used by the commissioner.  He                                                               
said  Conceptual Amendment  3  would narrow  the  breadth of  the                                                               
issues that the Department of Revenue would have to consider.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
9:29:52 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG [nodded].   He offered his understanding                                                               
that "that's defined in Title I."                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
9:30:03 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON noted that  with Conceptual Amendment 3,                                                               
the language would read as follows:                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
          (d) The commissioner shall make reasonable                                                                            
     efforts  to investigate  publicly  traded companies  to                                                                    
     determine whether the company  is a scrutinized company                                                                    
     on a list of any other state.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  noted that the term  "state" is defined                                                               
in AS 01.10.060(13).                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GATTO  removed   his  objection   to  Conceptual                                                               
Amendment 3.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
9:31:13 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. REIKER  said it is important  for paragraph (1) to  remain in                                                               
the  bill.   He explained  that  other states  use two  nonprofit                                                               
organizations  and   two  research   firms  to   determine  which                                                               
companies  should  be on  the  list,  and although  Alaska  could                                                               
change  its list  to match,  "that could  be challenged,  because                                                               
they're using research firms and nonprofit organizations."                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
9:31:58 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LYNN   reminded  everyone   that  this  is   a  conceptual                                                               
amendment.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
9:32:08 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO  clarified that  the language that  would be                                                               
deleted through  Conceptual Amendment  3 would  include paragraph                                                               
(1).                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
9:32:38 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG interpreted  Mr.  Reiker's comments  to                                                               
mean that if two non-profit  organizations and two research firms                                                               
agree,  than  a  company  will  be  put  on  that  state's  list.                                                               
However,  he offered  a hypothetical  situation in  which another                                                               
state passes  a law that does  not use the same  procedure, which                                                               
means that  state could add a  number of companies [to  its list]                                                               
that  are not  on the  recognized list.   He  said that  could be                                                               
problematic.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
9:33:47 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   P.  WILSON   commented  that   she  thinks   the                                                               
commissioner is  smart enough to  not use  a list that  is wildly                                                               
erratic.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
9:34:01 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LYNN  asked   if  there  was  any   further  objection  to                                                               
Conceptual  Amendment  3.    No  further  objection  was  stated;                                                               
therefore, Conceptual Amendment 3 was adopted.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
9:34:12 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GATTO  moved  to  report CSHB  241,  Version  26-                                                               
LS0680\S,  Kane,  2/15/10,  as  amended, out  of  committee  with                                                               
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
9:34:29 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON objected.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
9:34:33 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  PETERSEN  said  although the  adopted  amendments                                                               
improved the  proposed legislation, he  does not think HB  241 is                                                               
quite ready to move.  He said  he would like to get feedback from                                                               
Legislative Legal and Research Services.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
9:35:18 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said  he told the sponsor  he would vote                                                               
to move the bill, but said he thinks it needs a lot of work.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LYNN,  in  response  to  a  question  from  Representative                                                               
Petersen, offered  his understanding that the  final committee of                                                               
referral for HB 241 is the House Finance Committee.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
9:36:38 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON said  he does  not think  the House  State                                                               
Affairs Standing  Committee should be sending  substantive issues                                                               
to  the House  Finance Committee  to  decide.   Another issue  he                                                               
pointed  out is  that while  the bill  proposes divestiture,  the                                                               
state would  still be able  to have  a partnership with  the same                                                               
companies.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
9:37:27 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO  said the proposed bill  has been thoroughly                                                               
reviewed  and   amended,  and   has  been   made  easy   for  the                                                               
commissioner;  it is  not  a  difficult bill.    He related  that                                                               
Secretary of  State Hillary Clinton has  said Iran is on  its way                                                               
to becoming a  military dictatorship.  He said he  does not think                                                               
anyone sitting  on the committee  would say that Iran  just wants                                                               
"some  peaceful  nuclear energy."    He  said he  cannot  support                                                               
sitting idly  and hoping that  things go  well "over there."   He                                                               
stated  that the  only  effect  of the  bill  would  be that  the                                                               
investments  that  may  earn  or  lose money  would  have  to  be                                                               
switched to other investments that could earn or lose money.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
9:40:08 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LYNN said  as co-sponsor of HB 241, he  thinks the proposed                                                               
legislation is both  practical and moral.  He  said the practical                                                               
basis  is  that  "they"  are apparently  involved  in  a  nuclear                                                               
weapons  program,  which  is  a  direct  threat  to  [the  United                                                               
States].   He said "they"  have threatened to  annihilate Israel,                                                               
and if an  attempt was made to  do so, the U.S.  would be dragged                                                               
into  the middle  of  World  War III.    Regarding  the issue  of                                                               
morality, Chair  Lynn said  everything he has  heard or  read has                                                               
shown that  "they" are taking  action that directly  affects U.S.                                                               
Troops in Iran.  He said he thinks  HB 241 is a small step toward                                                               
national security.   Chair Lynn  asked, "Would we be  having this                                                               
same discussion about divesting  investments in the railroad that                                                               
took Jews  to Auschwitz?"   He  said he thinks  this is  the same                                                               
basic issue.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
9:41:49 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
A roll  call vote was  taken.  Representatives  Gatto, Gruenberg,                                                               
and Lynn  voted in  favor of  reporting for  HB 241,  Version 26-                                                               
LS0680\S,  Kane,  2/15/10,  as  amended, out  of  committee  with                                                               
individual  recommendations and  the  accompanying fiscal  notes.                                                               
Representatives Seaton,  Wilson, and  Petersen voted  against it.                                                               
Therefore,  the proposed  committee substitute  (CS) for  HB 241,                                                               
Version  26-LS0680\S, Kane,  2/15/10,  as amended,  failed to  be                                                               
reported out of committee by a vote of 3-3.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to form a subcommittee.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO objected.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GRUENBERG  withdrew   the  motion   to  form   a                                                               
subcommittee.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
16 ohio divestment policy.pdf HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 241
17 florida divestment policy.pdf HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 241
18 Congressional Report- Iran Sanctions.pdf HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 241
19 state-by-state divestment laws.pdf HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 241
02 HB0241A.pdf HSTA 2/9/2010 8:00:00 AM
HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 241
04 sponsor statement HB 241.pdf HSTA 2/9/2010 8:00:00 AM
HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 241
05 sectional summary HB 241 Version R.pdf HSTA 2/9/2010 8:00:00 AM
HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 241
20 state-by-state scrutinized company lists.pdf HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 241
21 Louisiana Constructive Engagement Summary 02-2010.pdf HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 241
22 articles on recent iran developments.pdf HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 241
23 Louisiana Prohibited Nations Summary August 2009.pdf HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 241
01-B explanation of changes from 1st CSHB241 to 26-LS0680S.pdf HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 241
07 background info 1, HB 241.pdf HSTA 2/9/2010 8:00:00 AM
HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 241
08 background info 2, HB 241.pdf HSTA 2/9/2010 8:00:00 AM
HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 241
09 background info 3, HB 241.pdf HSTA 2/9/2010 8:00:00 AM
HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 241
14 HB241-REV-TRS-02-05-10 Iran Divestiture.pdf HSTA 2/9/2010 8:00:00 AM
HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 241
01 HB0292A.pdf HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 292
02 gov letter hb 292.pdf HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 292
03 HB0292-1-2-011910-MVA-Y.pdf HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 292
04 hb 292 statute history.pdf HSTA 2/16/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 292