Legislature(1999 - 2000)
05/05/1999 02:02 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
May 5, 1999
2:02 P.M.
TAPE HFC 99 - 118, Side 1
TAPE HFC 99 - 118, Side 2
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Therriault called the House Finance Committee
meeting to order at 2:02 p.m.
PRESENT
Co-Chair Therriault Representative Foster
Vice Chair Bunde Representative Grussendorf
Representative Austerman Representative Kohring
Representative J. Davies Representative Moses
Representative G. Davis Representative Williams
Co-Chair Mulder was absent from the meeting.
ALSO PRESENT
Dave Gray, Staff, Senator Mackie; Dawn Williams, Division of
Banking Securities and Corporations, Department of Commerce
and Economic Development; John Cyr, President, NEA-Alaska
TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE
Theresa Williams, Department of Law; John Cyr, President,
NEA-Alaska; Dave Gray, Staff, Senator Mackie; Dawn Williams,
Division of Banking Securities and Corporations, Department
of Commerce and Economic Development.
SUMMARY
HB 85 "An Act relating to licensure and professional
discipline of members of the teaching profession
and providing for related penalties; relating to
grounds for dismissal of a teacher; relating to
the Professional Teaching Practices Commission;
relating to limited immunity for procedures under
the Educator Ethics Act; making conforming
amendments; and providing for an effective date."
CSHB 85 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with
"no recommendation" and a zero fiscal note by the
Department of Education.
CSSB 93(FIN)
"An Act relating to the purposes of certain
businesses and corporations; relating to the names
of businesses and organizations; relating to the
registration under the Alaska Trademark Act of
marks that resemble the name of another business
or organization; and providing for an effective
date."
CSSB 93(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a
"do pass" recommendation and with a fiscal impact
note by the Department of Commerce and Economic
Development.
HOUSE BILL NO. 85
"An Act relating to licensure and professional
discipline of members of the teaching profession and
providing for related penalties; relating to grounds
for dismissal of a teacher; relating to the
Professional Teaching Practices Commission; relating to
limited immunity for procedures under the Educator
Ethics Act; making conforming amendments; and providing
for an effective date."
Representative J. Davies MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 1 (copy on
file). Co-Chair Therriault OBJECTED for the purpose of
discussion. Amendment 1 would add "person's" on line 19,
page 7. Representative J. Davies spoke in support of the
amendment.
THERESA WILLIAMS, DEPARTMENT OF LAW stated that the
Department of Law did not object to the amendment.
Co-Chair Therriault WITHDREW his objections to the adoption
of Amendment 1. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative Foster MOVED to report CSHB 85 (FIN) out of
Committee with the accompanying fiscal note.
Representative Williams referred to page 9. He questioned if
there were concerns regarding this section.
JOHN CYR, PRESIDENT, NEA-ALASKA expressed concern with
subsection (f) on page 9. He emphasized that the Commission
acts as a body and comes to decisions in a fair and
impartial manner. Subsection (f) gives administrators
another level of appeal that teachers do not have. He spoke
in favor of retaining an equal playing field.
Ms. Williams stated that the Department of Law does not have
a position on subsection (f). She noted that the language
was a 1968 concession to the Association of School
Administrators acknowledging that there are a majority of
teachers on the Commission.
There being NO OBJECTION, CSHB 85 (FIN) was moved from
Committee.
CSHB 85 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with "no
recommendation" and a zero fiscal note by the Department of
Education.
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 93(FIN)
"An Act relating to the purposes of certain businesses
and corporations; relating to the names of businesses
and organizations; relating to the registration under
the Alaska Trademark Act of marks that resemble the
name of another business or organization; and providing
for an effective date."
DAVE GRAY, STAFF, SENATOR MACKIE spoke on behalf of the
sponsor in support of the legislation. He explained that the
legislation was at the request of the Division of Banking,
Security and Corporations. He observed that there are three
different standards for names under which business entities
are allowed to file with the state of Alaska. The
legislation would apply the standard used in AS 10.50 and AS
32.05 "the name is distinguishable on the records of the
department (from all other entities filled)." He noted that
the Department of Commerce and Economic Development feels
that the legislation would allow the department to increase
their revenues.
Vice-Chair Bunde questioned if there would be any immediate
changes as a result of the legislation. Mr. Gray did not
think that the legislation would result in any immediate
changes and noted that there has not been any testimony in
opposition to the legislation. He stated that disputes would
be handled in the court. He did not know of any businesses
planning to make changes. He pointed out that the department
feels that the legislation will allow them to stay out of
disputes.
Representative Grussendorf asked for examples of conflicting
names.
Representative J. Davies questioned why the standard was
picked. Mr. Gray clarified that the department recommended
the standard.
DAWN WILLIAMS, DIVISION OF BANKING SECURITIES AND
CORPORATIONS, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT provided information on the legislation. She
explained that the standard of "deceptively similar" has
been changed to "distinguishable on the record." This allows
more entities to file with the state. "Distinguishable on
the record" is a less prohibited record. She gave examples
of disputes over names.
Representative J. Davies felt that the use of "deceptively
similar" would better protect the public. He observed that
several names are rejected each week on the grounds of
"deceptively similar".
Co-Chair Therriault questioned if the department or the
court would be left to determine the standard.
Representative J. Davies argued that more lawsuits would
occur under the change.
Ms. Williams noted that it is up to each business to check
to see if a proposed name is currently being used. Any
business can get a business license under any name. However,
if two businesses wish to use the same name it is up to them
to decide who uses the name. If they cannot decided then the
issue is resolved in court. If the Division receives a name
that is the same or deceptively similar the department
returns the request indicating that there is a name on file.
The business can then attempt to get consent from the entity
or chose another name. A key word can be added to change the
name. There is no requirement to register a business name.
Most names would be available with the statute change.
Representative J. Davies summarized that under the
legislation business would file whatever name they want. The
only remedy for existing businesses is to take someone who
uses the same name to court. Ms. Williams agreed and added
that distinguishable would allow more businesses to file.
She argued in support of the legislation and observed that
Silver Salmon Charters could be deceptively similar to
Silver Salmon Fishing.
Representative J. Davies estimated that the legislation
would result in a greater percentage of lawsuits between
entities out-side-of the state. Co-Chair Therriault felt
that the legislation would clarify the language and reduce
lawsuits. He noted that it would be easier to argue that a
name is "deceptively similar". Representative J. Davies
maintained that the legislation reduces the standards. He
stressed that additional lawsuits would occur between
entities. He emphasized that the state has provided a
filtering service to avoid private causes of action. He
reiterated that the standard is being reduced.
Representative Foster suggested that if entities are arguing
among themselves that they should take their arguments to
court and not utilize state resources.
Vice-Chair Bunde maintained that deceptively similar is a
judgement call. Ms. Williams agreed and emphasized the
difficulty of judging "deceptively". She referred to a
dispute over the Divisions decision that the "Wild Iris" and
the "Wild Iris Caf " were not deceptively similar. She
pointed out that "The Wild Iris" is distinguishable from
"Wild Iris Caf ".
Representative Austerman asked if a business could file as
"Custom Tours". Ms. Williams stated that there are several
businesses that have "custom tour" in their name. She stated
that she would have to look at the database to determine if
"Custom Tours" could be used.
Representative J. Davies observed that the department would
have to accept names that are distinguishable. Ms. Williams
reiterated that it would be up to the business to take the
other entity to court to prevent the use of a name that
would be deceptively similar to their name.
In response to a question by Vice-Chair Bunde, Ms. Williams
explained that under "deceptively similar" a business could
sue the state of Alaska if the department registered a name
that they felt was deceptively similar.
Vice-Chair Bunde pointed out that the statute is vague and
would allow suits against the state. He emphasized that
clarification of the statutes would prevent lawsuits against
the state. Ms. Williams noted that there could be a conflict
with businesses that are not registered with the state. She
gave the example of a business that has been in operation
for 20 years, but had not registered its name. If a new
corporation came into the state and registered the name it
would be up to the existing business to take the new entity
to court in order to protect their name. It is not up to the
state to determine who should be able to the use a name. It
is up to the state to register the use of names.
Representative Grussendorf expressed concern that the courts
would be tied up with cases over common names.
Ms. Williams clarified that "the" or "company" would not be
distinguishing or key words. "Charter" or "airlines" are
distinguishing words. She noted that under current statutes
the Wild Iris Caf would have to obtain permission to use
the name from the Wild Iris. If the legislation is adopted
the Wild Iris Caf could use the name without consent
because it would be distinguishable.
Co-Chair Therriault pointed out that there is a positive
fiscal note from the Department of Commerce and Economic
Development.
Representative Foster MOVED to report CSSB 93 (FIN) out of
Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
CSSB 93(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with a fiscal impact note by the
Department of Commerce and Economic Development.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 2:48 p.m.
House Finance Committee 6 5/5/99
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|