Legislature(2005 - 2006)BELTZ 211
03/22/2005 03:30 PM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SJR14 | |
| SJR8 | |
| SJR14 | |
| HB90 | |
| HB97 | |
| SB143 | |
| SB24 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SJR 8 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SJR 14 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 24 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 143 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 90 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 97 | TELECONFERENCED | |
4:23:52 PM CSHB 97(FIN)-OATHS; NOTARIES PUBLIC; STATE SEAL CHAIR THERRIAULT announced HB 97 to be up for consideration. He reminded members that they heard the Senate version at the same time that HB 97 was undergoing changes in the House Judiciary Committee. The decision was to wait for the House vehicle to come forward. SCOTT CLARK, Office of the Lieutenant Governor, reported that the House Judiciary Committee amended the bill to remove obstacles to electronic notarizations. The House Finance Committee then amended the bill to take into consideration a person convicted of a felony that didn't serve jail time. It also combined the two revocation sections and clarified that any decision to revoke a notary commission could be appealed. 4:25:31 PM CHAIR THERRIAULT remarked the House Finance Committee questioned why anyone convicted of a felony could act as a notary. MR. CLARK replied the ten-year waiting period was a compromise. CHAIR THERRIAULT asked if the lieutenant governor would have the power to permanently ban a notary who abused his or her notary power. MR. CLARK answered it's a technical problem with the current version of the bill. Currently a person loses the ability to apply for a future commission any time a commission is revoked. The House Finance Committee amended the bill to add the 10-year provision so if a commission is revoked, the notary must wait 10 years to reapply. A commission could also be revoked for technical reasons such as a notary that moved out of state. In that instance the person shouldn't have to wait 10 years to reapply if they were to move back to the state. The lieutenant governor proposed an amendment to further refine the concept of revocation. CHAIR THERRIAULT said he would sponsor Amendment 1. It proposes to differentiate between notaries whose commission was revoked because they moved from the state and notaries whose commission was revoked as a result of conviction for commission of a felony offense. MR. CLARK clarified the felony offense is a different section, but it's based on the same idea that a person with a felony conviction could have his or her commission revoked and he or she couldn't reapply for 10 years. SENATOR HUGGINS asked Mr. Clark to restate the explanation. MR. CLARK reiterated a notary commission could be revoked under the bill for several reasons. Revocation would occur for violation of the terms of the notary statutes or if a notary moved out of state. If the revocation occurred because the person moved out of state, he or she wouldn't have to wait 10 years to reapply after moving back to the state. 4:29:32 PM SENATOR HUGGINS restated the explanation. MR. CLARK said the amendment is to clarify the revocation process and not inadvertently penalize people. CHAIR THERRIAULT asked if revocation due to abuse of the notary power could preclude a person from reapplying for 10 years. MR. CLARK said yes. SENATOR HUGGINS said, "I thought they are precluded." ANNETTE KREITZER, Chief of Staff to Lieutenant Governor Loren Leman, clarified that they are precluded currently. The intent of Amendment 1 is to address those people who have not complied with the law. She pointed out that AS 44.50.068 (a)(2) and (3) lists the reasons for revocation and suspension. The Department of Law crafted the language in Amendment 1, which sorts out when a 10-year revocation would occur based on incompetence and malfeasance. That type of revocation is separate from someone who simply moved from the state and had his or her commission revoked. The latter could reapply after moving back to the state without waiting 10 years. SENATOR ELTON recollected there were no revocations when he worked in the Lieutenant Governor's Office. If a notary moved out of state the commission simply lapsed. He questioned how often revocations occur. MS. KREITZER acknowledged that the Lieutenant Governor doesn't currently have the power to revoke any commission. Anyone with a complaint must file under the Administrative Procedures Act. Last year notaries were included in the administrative hearing officer bill so if this legislation passes a hearing officer would hear appeals. Because some problems have come up relating to notaries, her office has looked at the specific issues very carefully as the bill was crafted. Complaints about notaries would come in one of two ways. First, the notary administrator in the Lieutenant Governor's Office would have direct dealings with notaries and would be aware of compliance or lack thereof. If a notary doesn't comply the notary administrator would determine whether a discipline letter is required. If compliance isn't forthcoming a suspension might occur. If the notary still doesn't comply then the Lieutenant Governor would have no option but to revoke. However, the notary would have the option of the administrative hearing officer appeal process. A second way that complaints would be generated is when a member of the public becomes dissatisfied and contacts the Lieutenant Governor's Office with a complaint. MR. CLARK said although serious complaints have been lodged, the current process doesn't allow the Lieutenant Governor's Office to follow up on those complaints. 4:34:55 PM CHAIR THERRIAULT moved Amendment 1 and noted that without objection it was adopted. A M E N D M E N T 1 Page 8, lines 17-19 Delete "may not, within 10 years before the commission takes effect, have committed acts for which a notary public commission may be denied or revoked under this chapter; and" Insert "may not, within 10 years before the commission takes effect, (i) have had the person's notary public commission revoked under AS 44.50.068(a)(2) or (3) or under the notaries public laws of another state; or (ii) have been disciplined under AS 44.50.068 or under the notaries public laws of another state if the disciplinary action prohibits the person from holding a notary public commission when the person applies for a commission; and" CHAIR THERRIAULT noted that electronic signature user groups had been contacted as he had requested. He questioned whether the Alaska Bar Association (ABA) had taken a position on the use of electronic signatures. MR. CLARK said he had contacted the ABA, but it didn't send a letter. However, his office had received several letters from outside notary organizations and notary law organizations. CHAIR THERRIAULT said the lobbyist for Wells Fargo didn't express any concerns and he hadn't sensed concern from any other organizations that rely on notaries. He recapped HB 97 extends the power to the Lieutenant Governor's Office to write regulations and use electronic notarizations, even though it has no immediate plans to do so. MS. KREITZER said that is correct, but she wanted to clarify that the bill deals with electronic notarizations. A separate law deals with electronic signatures. "I have confidence that whoever's in the Lieutenant Governor's Office when the technology catches up to it will be able to do this in a way that's going to benefit the business community," she said. With passage of HB 97 there wouldn't be need to return to the Legislature and ask for amendment. As previously discussed, one of the reasons this effort has failed in other states is because those Legislatures defined an electronic notarization too narrowly. HB 97 intends to remove the impediments. The Lieutenant Governor's Office would write the regulations and the Administrative Regulation Review Committee would review the regulations that are promulgated to ensure that they are fair. CHAIR THERRIAULT asked if person-to-person contact with a notary would be required when an electronic signature is used. MR. CLARK said that is required in the bill. The technical nature of the notary's signature is left open in this bill, but the signatory would have to be present and the notary would check the identification. "Nothing would change along those lines," he assured. CHAIR THERRIAULT drew attention to the positive fiscal note and asked for a motion. 4:39:35 PM SENATOR WAGONER moved SCS CSHB 97(STA), [amended \I version] from committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal note. There being no objection, it was so ordered.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|