Legislature(2013 - 2014)SENATE FINANCE 532
03/12/2014 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
Audio | Topic |
---|---|
Start | |
SB77 | |
HB231 | |
Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ | SB 98 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+ | SB 105 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+ | SB 77 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+ | HB 231 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+ | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL NO. 231 "An Act eliminating the Department of Revenue's duty to register cattle brands." 9:39:18 AM REPRESENTATIVE MIKE CHENAULT, presented HB 231. He stated that the bill was fairly basic and was a piece of repealing legislation. He reported that bill would remove AS 44.25.0203, which required the Department of Revenue (DOR) to register cattle brands. He referenced a report in members' packets from Legislative Research Services (copy on file) and reported that prior to statehood, all duties associated with the registration of cattle brands had resided in the old territorial Department of Finance; those duties had been since assumed by DOR. He noted that the report from legislative research indicated that the duties of recording cattle brands were delegated through statute to the Division of Agriculture. He stated that by removing the statute, the bill helped clarify that cattle branding resided within the Division of Agriculture and not DOR. He added that DOR had not been registering brands for a number of years and thought that the legislation was a way of cleaning up the state's statutes. He noted that the statute was not currently needed or used in Alaska and that it was the legislators' responsibilities to eliminate statutes as new ones were added. Co-Chair Meyer agreed that it was nice to take some statutes off the books before new ones were added; he thought that the state was a little behind in doing this, but that the legislation represented a good start. 9:43:13 AM Vice-Chair Fairclough referenced the report by Legislative Research Services and stated that it appeared as though $42 was collected in 2013 through fees; she guessed that it cost more than that amount to print the book of cattle brand registrants. She wondered if the fees should cover the cost of printing the book. TOM WRIGHT, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE MIKE CHENAULT, responded that the sponsors had looked at that aspect. He noted that registering cattle brands had an initial cost of $2 with an additional cost of $1 per year after that. He reported that the book had a cost of a little over $2 per copy to publish and that in the end, it was kind of a losing proposition. He acknowledged that the money was not a significant amount and that one specific group of cattle owners would like to see the fees go up; however, the bill was simply a repealer and that issue should be addressed through the Division of Agriculture. Vice-Chair Fairclough wondered if it was required that the book of cattle brand registrations be published in a printed format. She inquired if the book could be digitized so that the state was not spending money in the negative for something that although was valuable to a limited group of people, was not being paid for by fees. Representative Chenault responded that it could be a consideration. Senator Bishop inquired if there had ever been an issue with cattle rustling in Alaska. Representative Chenault replied that to his knowledge, there had never been an issue in the state with cattle rustling. 9:46:32 AM Senator Olson noted that he came from an area that had a fair amount of marking of animals, particularly with Reindeer and inquired if the bill would affect any other species besides cattle. Mr. Wright responded that it did not and added that there were brands in the book that coincided with reindeer branding; however, all the bill did was remove the duty to register cattle brands from DOR statutes. If the bill passed, the Division of Agriculture would still retain authority and jurisdiction over brands on any animal. Senator Olson further inquired if there would be any change to the Division of Agriculture's authority regarding the branding of animals. Mr. Wright replied in the negative. 9:47:30 AM Co-Chair Meyer observed that the bill had a zero fiscal note. Co-Chair Meyer CLOSED public testimony. Co-Chair Meyer discussed the committee's upcoming agenda. HB 231 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further consideration. 9:49:10 AM AT EASE 9:49:18 AM RECONVENED
Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
---|---|---|
DNR Email-Brand Books.pdf |
SFIN 3/12/2014 9:00:00 AM |
HB 231 |
Research-Cattle Branding.pdf |
SFIN 3/12/2014 9:00:00 AM |
HB 231 |
Sponsor Statement-HB 231.pdf |
SFIN 3/12/2014 9:00:00 AM |
HB 231 |
CS SB 77 (RES) Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SFIN 3/12/2014 9:00:00 AM |
SB 77 |
SB 77 Supp Letter TedSpraker 20140204.pdf |
SFIN 3/12/2014 9:00:00 AM |
SB 77 |
SB 77 Spraker support 2.pdf |
SFIN 3/12/2014 9:00:00 AM |
SB 77 |