Legislature(1999 - 2000)
05/14/1999 02:15 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 14, 1999
2:15 P.M.
TAPE HFC 99 - 138, Side 1
TAPE HFC 99 - 138, Side 2
TAPE HFC 99 - 139, Side 1
TAPE HFC 99 - 139, Side 2
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Therriault called the House Finance Committee
meeting to order at 2:15 p.m.
PRESENT
Co-Chair Therriault Representative Foster
Co-Chair Mulder Representative Grussendorf
Representative Austerman Representative Kohring
Representative Bunde Representative Moses
Representative J. Davies Representative Williams
Representative G. Davis
ALSO PRESENT
Beth Havegig, Staff, Senator Wilkens; Margot Knuth,
Department of Corrections; James Armstrong, Staff, Senator
Donley; Catherine Reardon, Director, Division of
Occupational Licensing, Department of Commerce and Economic
Development; James Armstrong, staff, Senator Donley; Margot
Knuth, Assistant Attorney General, Department of
Corrections; Douglas Salik, Staff, Senator T. Kelly;
Catherine Reardon, Director, Division of Occupational
Licensing, Department of Commerce and Economic Development;
Mike Tibbles, Staff, Representative Therriault; Gail
Fenumiai, Election Program Specialist, Division of Election,
Office of the Lieutenant Governor;
TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE:
Paul Costello, Land Management Director, Fairbanks North
Star Borough; LARRY DIETRICK, Acting Director, Division of
Spill Prevention and Response, Department of Environmental
Conservation; Ardith Lynch, Attorney, Fairbanks North Star
Borough; Craig Tillery, Assistant Attorney General,
Environmental Section, Department of Law, Anchorage; Virgil
Norton, Kenai
SUMMARY
CSSB 11(JUD)
"An Act relating to good time credits for
prisoners serving sentences of imprisonment for
certain murders."
CSSB 11(JUD) was heard and HELD in Committee for
further consideration.
CSSB 51(L&C)
"An Act relating to barbers, hairdressers,
manicurists, and cosmetologists; providing that
the only qualification necessary for licensure as
a manicurist, other than payment of fees, is
completion of a class that is 12 hours in
duration, addresses relevant health, safety, and
hygiene concerns, and is offered through a school
approved by the Board of Barbers and Hairdressers;
and providing for an effective date."
HCS CS 51 (L&C) was REPORTED out of Committee with
"no recommendation" and a fiscal impact note by
the Department of Commerce and Economic
Development; and a fiscal impact note by the
Department of Environmental Conservation,
published date 3/26/99.
CSSB 110(RLS) am
"An Act relating to liability for the release of
hazardous substances involving certain property
acquired by a governmental entity; relating to
making a determination as to when a hazardous
substance release has occurred; relating to
liability of a party other than the party
responsible for the initial release of a hazardous
substance; and providing for an effective date."
HCS CSSB110 (JUD) was REPORTED out of Committee
with a "do pass" recommendation and with a zero
fiscal note by the Department of Transportation
and Public Facilities, published date 4/29/99.
HB 141 An Act providing for preferential voting in state
and local elections.
HB 141 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
NOMINATIONS TO THE ALCOHOL BEVERAGE CONTROL BOARD
No action was taken.
CS for SENATE BILL 110(RLS) am
"An Act relating to liability for the release of
hazardous substances involving certain property
acquired by a governmental entity; relating to making a
determination as to when a hazardous substance release
has occurred; relating to liability of a party other
than the party responsible for the initial release of a
hazardous substance; and providing for an effective
date."
BETH HAVEGIG, STAFF, SENATOR WILKENS testified on behalf of
the sponsor in support on SB 110. She read the sponsor
statement:
"This bill will assist municipalities in performing their
statutory duty to enforce liens for delinquent real
property taxes. Tax foreclosure is a mandatory process
leading to the taking of a tax deed that places the title
to a tax delinquent property in the municipality's name.
Some properties with delinquent taxes are contaminated.
Municipalities are concerned that they may be held liable
for pre-existing contamination of foreclosed land with
significant environmental remediation costs.
The federal Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) exempts by
definition state and local governments who acquire
property through "bankruptcy, foreclosure, tax
delinquency, abandonment, or similar means." However, the
state law which addresses liability for damage caused by
the release of hazardous substances, AS 46.03.822, does
not precisely mirror the federal law. SB 110 will amend AS
46.03.822 to ensure that federal and state laws are
similar in this respect. The municipality may therefore
have title to the contaminated property without
involuntary exposure to cleanup.
Changes in the Senate also recognized the need to extend
this courtesy to innocent third parties, which are not
directly responsible for contaminating the property they
have acquired. Subsection (m) clarifies state law to say
that a person who acquires a facility without knowledge of
prior existing contamination is not liable under AS
46.03.822 so long as they follow due diligence steps to
begin operations to contain and clean up the hazardous
substance."
Ms. Havegig responded to questions by Co-Chair Therriault.
She noted that section (m) only works if the person
undertakes "all reasonable inquiries into the previous
ownership and uses of the property consistent with good
commercial or customary practice in an effort to minimize
liability." The new owners must take steps of due diligence
at the time of purchase.
Representative Foster noted that a common citizen is not
liable as long as they follow due diligence. He questioned
if municipalities need to follow due diligence. Ms. Havegig
responded that municipalities would be responsible for due
diligence. Steps would have to be taken to assure that the
spill doesn't get any worse. The new owner would not be
responsible for passive leaching.
Representative Austerman asked if there was discussion on
making the provisions retroactive. Ms. Havegig stated that
there had not been discussion on providing a retroactive
clause.
ARDITH LYNCH, ATTORNEY, FAIRBANKS NORTH STAR BOROUGH
testified via teleconference. She explained that the
legislation addresses municipal ownership in two different
ways. In section (m) the municipality is in the same
situation that a private person would be in if they purchase
a piece of property. The municipality would still have to
use due diligence to clean up a hazardous substance.
Subsection (l) on page 2 deals with the limited issue of
when a municipality acquires a piece of property through
foreclosure. Foreclosure is a mandatory process that the
borough must conduct when someone is delinquent in his or
her real property taxes. In those cases the borough takes
title to the property and puts it on the market for sale.
The municipality is forced into the chain of title. The
municipality would be responsible for taking steps to
prevent additional obvious contamination.
Representative J. Davies noted that the municipality
effectively removes control of the land from the potentially
liable person when it forecloses. He questioned if the
municipality takes on liability to resolve the issue when it
removes the responsible person. Ms. Lynch acknowledged that
the municipality would have responsibility to take steps to
address leakage that is discovered after the borough took
possession of the title.
Ms. Havegig stated that "person" is defined to mean "any
individual, public or private corporation, political
subdivision, government agency, municipality, industry, co-
partnership, association, firm, trust, estate, or any other
entity whatsoever." She concluded that subsections (m) and
(l) could apply to municipalities. The issue is voluntary
vs. involuntary ownership.
In response to a question by Representative J. Davies, Ms.
Lynch acknowledged that there are property owners that feel
that the borough will not foreclose on property due to the
risk of liability. In some cases private businesses are
being operated on property without paying the property tax.
This puts their competitors at a disadvantage. She
reiterated that in the case of a foreclosure that the
borough is not voluntarily taking on the burden. The borough
should be liable for obvious problems such as leaking
batteries.
Representative Austerman questioned the definition of
"vessel" on page 2, line 17. Ms. Havegig noted that "vessel"
means every description of water craft or other artificial
contrivance that is used or is capable of being used as a
means of transportation on water, or that carries hazardous
substance for the purpose of incineration of the hazardous
substance.
CRAIG TILLERY, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, ENVIRONMENTAL
SECTION, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, ANCHORAGE testified via
teleconference. He clarified that vessel would also apply to
vehicles that have leaking batteries. He noted that the
legislation provides a municipality with immunity for
contaminates that are leaking on the property at the time
the property is acquired. Municipalities would be
responsible for addressing containers that are actively
leaking at the time the property is acquired.
VIRGIL NORTON, KENAI testified via teleconference. He
provided information on the legislation. He noted that he
worked with the Senate Judiciary Committee to add section
(m). He maintained that AS 46.03.822 imposes obligations on
property owners that discover contamination. He emphasized
that cost recovery liability should be directed toward the
person or the party that actually committed the act of
pollution. The responsible party is the party that first
released the contaminate into the environment. He observed
that the average person does not have the resources to
battle the Department of Environmental Conservation or the
Department of Law. He maintained that if the property owner
has incurred costs in acting responsibly that he should be
able to recover from the guilty party.
Co-Chair Therriault observed that there is a zero fiscal
note from the Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities.
Representative Foster MOVED to report HCS CSSB110 (JUD) out
of Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. There being
NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
HCS CSSB110 (JUD) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with a zero fiscal note by the
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities,
published date 4/29/99.
NOMINATIONS TO THE ALCOHOL BEVERAGE CONTROL BOARD
Co-Chair Therriault handed out information pertaining to
nominations to the Alcohol Beverage Control Board. He
observed that there would be a joint session to address
confirmations. He noted that members did not indicate a
desire to hold a meeting on the nominations.
CS FOR SENATE BILL 11(JUD)
"An Act relating to good time credits for prisoners
serving sentences of imprisonment for certain murders."
JAMES ARMSTRONG, STAFF, SENATOR DONLEY testified on behalf
of the sponsor in support of SB 11. He read from the sponsor
statement:
"Senate Bill 11 would reduce good time sentence
reduction by one-half for individuals convicted of first
and second degree murders.
Under Alaska statute 33.20.10, a prisoner is entitled to
a deduction of one-third of the term of imprisonment if
the prisoner follows the rules of that correctional
facility." Persons convicted of first and second degree
murder would be dropped down to sixteen and a half
percent.
Vice-Chair Bunde noted that correctional facilities use
"good time" as a bribe for good behavior. He questioned the
motivation for the legislation. Senator Donley decided to
introduce the legislation after being approached by families
of crime victims at a crime victims' memorial. Thirty other
states have implemented similar provisions. Some require at
least 85% of the sentence be served.
Co-Chair Therriault questioned if there is a problem under
the equal protection provision. Mr. Armstrong noted that the
original bill would have covered first and second degree
attempted murder or conspiracy to commit murder in the first
degree. These were removed. He did not think that there was
a problem with the current legislation.
Representative J. Davies observed that the state of Alaska
already has longer sentences than most other states. Mr.
Armstrong noted that the legislation targets the most
heinous offenders.
Co-Chair Therriault noted that the legislation is
prospective. It would not affect current convictions.
In response to a question by Representative Austerman, Mr.
Armstrong clarified that the legislation would provide
sentencing guidelines of 84.3 percent of sentence. Release
for good time is currently at 66.3 percent of sentence. The
Department of Corrections estimates that there will be a
fiscal impact to the state in the year 2008. Representative
J. Davies stated that the estimated impact is approximately
$1.2 million dollars.
Mr. Armstrong reviewed a handout demonstrating the affect of
SB 11 on the current prison population (copy on file). Vice-
Chair Bunde stressed that SB 11 "would make a life sentence,
truly a life sentence."
MARGOT KNUTH, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS provided information regarding the fiscal
impacts of SB 11. The legislation would increase sentences
for those convicted of murder 1 or 2. These sentences would
have an impact starting in the year 2008. If these sentences
had applied since statehood the accumulative impact would
have been $50 million dollars to the state in additional
incarceration time. She added that age 50 is considered old
in prison life. The medical component greatly increases from
age 50. There is no way to predict actual costs. She
observed that pace makers range in cost from $15 to $50
thousand dollars and gave other examples of the cost of
keeping elderly prisoners incarcerated. She emphasized that
once a prisoner reaches the age of 43 their recidivism rate
drops to 2 percent. The legislation moves release ages from
the 50's and 60's to 70's and beyond. She referred to an
article, "Should Elderly Convicts be Kept in Prison", which
was taken off the Internet (copy on file).
(Tape Change, HFC 99 - 138, Side 2)
Ms. Knuth acknowledged that there are a few prisoners that
receive relatively short sentences for murder 2, 15 - 20
years. She reiterated that the legislation will costly to
the state. She pointed out that shorter sentences are
generally accompanied by extenuating circumstances.
Vice-Chair Bunde questioned how SB 11 affects medical
parole. Ms. Knuth noted that there is a parole option for
medical circumstances, but emphasized that prisoners have to
be essentially a quadriplegic. Prisoners must be non-
ambulatory.
In response to a question by Representative G. Davis, Mr.
Armstrong stressed that the core of the legislation is that
murders should not be entitled to the same "good time"
release as other prisoners. Ms. Knuth pointed out that
Alaskans that are convicted of murder 1 or 2 serve on an
average 467 months. This is longer than other states that
have "truth in sentencing".
Co-Chair Therriault questioned the cost of the legislation
past the year 2008. Ms. Knuth responded that the cost would
increase ten fold every 10 years. In FY 2008 it would be $35
thousand dollars. In FY 2018 it would increase to $533
thousand dollars. The cost would be closer to $5 million in
FY 2028. This does not include geriatric costs. She added
that murder 1 and 2 have the lowest recidivism rates of any
criminal group. Sex offenders have poor recidivism rates.
Mr. Armstrong argued that there is an issue of public policy
versus the cost of the legislation.
CSSB 11(JUD) was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration
CS for SENATE BILL NO. 51(L&C)
"An Act relating to barbers, hairdressers, manicurists,
and cosmetologists; providing that the only
qualification necessary for licensure as a manicurist,
other than payment of fees, is completion of a class
that is 12 hours in duration, addresses relevant
health, safety, and hygiene concerns, and is offered
through a school approved by the Board of Barbers and
Hairdressers; and providing for an effective date."
DOUGLAS SALIK, STAFF, SENATOR T. KELLY testified on behalf
of the sponsor in support of the legislation. He explained
that the legislation changes "cosmetologist" to
"esthetician" in multiple locations in the statutes. The
legislation also requires a 12-hour hygiene class and a
temporary license for those taking the class. The Board can
add endorsement to the license for persons that complete an
advance manicurist class. Reciprocity would be allowed with
other states with similar classes. Senate Bill 51 also
changes an instructor's license to a dual instructor's
license. If further issues a temporary permit to persons
that are licensed to practice the profession in another
state. Students can have a permit to practice while they are
continuing to learn the profession.
In response to a question by Representative Foster, Mr.
Salik noted that persons that do not comply with manicuring
licensing requirements are guilty of a violation. "A person
who practices barbering, hairdressing, or esthetics
[COSMETOLOGY], or operates a shop, or operates a school of
barbering, hairdressing, or esthetics [COSMETOLOGY], or
teaches in a school of barbering, hairdressing, or esthetics
[COSMETOLOGY], without a license, temporary permit,
temporary license, or student permit and who is not exempt
under AS 08.13.120 or under AS 08.13.160(d) is guilty of a
class B misdemeanor."
CATHERINE REARDON, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL
LICENSING, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
provided information on the legislation. The Division of
Occupational Licensing provides staff support to the Board
of Barbers and Hairdressers. She observed that the Board has
supported licensing of manicurists. The Board recommended
changes to the name.
Co-Chair Therriault reviewed the accompanying fiscal notes.
He noted that the Division has requested $8.5 thousand
dollars for personal services and questioned the effect of
not funding this amount. Ms. Reardon responded that there
would be slower service in licensing. She noted that the
Division is requesting less than a quarter position because
they currently have a half-time position that can be
expanded. There is also $3 thousand dollars in the
Department of Commerce and Economic Development's fiscal
note that will be collected in fees and paid to the
Department of Environmental Conservation. The Department of
Environmental Conservation is requesting $3 thousand dollars
to cover the cost of writing the regulation.
Representative Foster questioned if the class can be taken
by correspondence. Ms. Reardon stated that the class could
be offered by correspondence if the private sector offers
the course. The legislation requires manicuring schools to
offer the 12-hour course.
Representative Foster expressed concern regarding the
ability for rural residents to meet the requirements.
Mr. Salik stated that it is the sponsor's intent to keep the
requirements at 12 hours to allow rural residents to
complete the training within a weekend.
Representative J. Davies expressed concern with the use of
"esthetics". Ms. Reardon explained that "cosmetologist"
refers to persons that specialize in skin care. She noted
that there is some confusion regarding the term. There is no
grandfather clause.
In response to a question by Representative Austerman, Mr.
Salik stated that there is concern regarding the use of
dental chemicals for manicures. The 12-hour health and
safety hygiene class would address this issue.
Ms. Reardon stressed that if there is a danger that everyone
should have the training. Representative Williams spoke in
support of a two-year grandfather clause. Mr. Salik spoke
against the inclusion of a grandfather clause.
Representative Grussendorf questioned if a problem exists.
Ms. Reardon did not know if a problem exists. Vice-Chair
Bunde stated that there is a problem on a national level. He
felt that there was a reasonable need for the class
requirement.
Ms. Reardon noted that an exemption was included for
communities of less than 1,000 people that are not within 25
miles of a community of more than 1,000. She observed that
the worker is also at risk.
Representative Austerman questioned if the legislation could
be permissive. Mr. Salik stated that it is the sponsor's
intent to assure that the safety and health of the public is
protected. Ms. Reardon noted that there is an optional
advance manicurist license. The 12-hour course is mandatory.
(Tape Change, HFC 99 -139, Side 1)
Representative J. Davies questioned if dangerous chemicals
used by manicurist are available to the general public. Ms.
Reardon did not think that there were state restrictions
relating to the use of chemicals.
Vice-Chair Bunde spoke in support of the legislation.
Representative Foster questioned the need for the
legislation. Representative Williams MOVED to report HCS CS
51 (L&C) out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal
notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
HCS CS 51 (L&C) was REPORTED out of Committee with "no
recommendation" and a fiscal impact note by the Department
of Commerce and Economic Development; and a fiscal impact
note by the Department of Environmental Conservation,
published date 3/26/99.
HOUSE BILL NO. 141
An Act providing for preferential voting in state and
local elections.
Work draft #1-LS0669\S, Kurtz, 4/19/99 was adopted on
4/20/99.
Co-Chair Therriault provided members with Amendment 1(copy
on file).
MIKE TIBBLES, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT explained
Amendment 1. Amendment 1 would insert on line 8, page 2 one"
and delete "candidates" and insert "one candidate for each
office." The amendment clarifies that only one write in
candidate per election can be marked as a preference.
Current law only allows for one write in candidate. The
amendment allows one write in candidate to be included in
the voter's preference.
Representative J. Davies stated that the sentence is
confusing. Co-Chair Therriault clarified that his motion
would be conceptual and that the drafter could further
clarify the language.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 2 (copy on
file.) Mr. Tibbles explained that the amendment came as a
request from the sponsor Representative Kott. Amendment 2
would delete "first choice" on page 3, line 3. He explained
that the language "first choice" would cause problems on the
second and subsequent round of tabulation.
GAIL FENUMIAI, ELECTION PROGRAM SPECIALIST, DIVISION OF
ELECTION, OFFICE OF THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR provided
information on HB 141. She clarified that after the first
round elimination the next candidate that intention would be
that the next candidate to be eliminated would be the
candidate with the fewest votes, not the first choice least
votes. She explained that after the first round, the
candidate with the fewest first choice votes would have
their second choice votes redistributed to the other
candidates. If no candidate receives a majority then the
candidate, in the remaining pool, that has the least number
of votes would be eliminated and their second choice votes
would be redistributed.
Co-Chair Therriault questioned if the language would be
clarified by the addition of "that tabulation". Ms. Fenumiai
responded that "accumulative" could be added.
Representative J. Davies summarized that the second choice
becomes a first choice. Ms. Fenumiai observed that if there
were five candidates and candidate number five had the least
first choice votes then they would be eliminated and their
second choice votes would be redistributed to candidates
two, three and four. The candidate with the least remaining
votes of these candidates would next be eliminated and their
votes redistributed.
Representative J. Davies recommended the addition of
"retabulated" or some other modifier.
KELLY SULLIVAN, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE KOTT provided
information on behalf of the sponsor. She noted that the
sponsor supports the deletion of "first choice" on the
advice of the Division.
Representative J. Davies MOVED to AMEND Amendment 2 by
adding, "retabulated" before "first choice". "First choice"
would remain in the legislation. There being NO OBJECTION,
it was so ordered.
There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment 2 was adopted as
amended. The new language read: "If no candidate receives a
majority of the retabulated votes, then the remaining
candidate with the fewest retabulated first choice votes
shall be declared defeated."
Representative J. Davies provided members with Amendment 3
(copy on file). Amendment 3 would add "for the offices of
President and Vice-President of the United States." He noted
that an Electoral College is used in the primary elections
for President and Vice-President of the United States. Ms.
Sullivan explained that the language was added to clarify
that the preferential vote would be used for all elections.
Representative J. Davies maintained that the system for
selecting the President and Vice-President should be a
nationally consistent process. Representative G. Davis
pointed out that the legislation pertains to the popular
vote not the Electoral College.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Davies, Grussendorf, Williams
OPPOSED: G. Davis, Austerman, Bunde, Mulder, Therriault
Representatives Foster, Kohring, and Moses were absent from
the vote.
The MOTION FAILED (3-5).
Mr. Tibbles reviewed the fiscal note. He noted that the cost
for the election is every other year and is not needed in
the first year. The fiscal note reflects $175 thousand
dollars for software redesign.
Ms. Fenuumiai responded that the fiscal note is inadequate
to allow the Division to implement the legislation
effectively. She added that the estimation for the software
redesign was based on the first draft of the legislation,
which did not contain the complex primary accounting
mechanism. She did not think that the funding would be
sufficient to get the programming enhanced. The remaining
reduced amounts in subsequent years are not adequate.
(Tape Change, HFC 99 - 139, Side 2)
Representative J. Davies questioned why second choice votes
are not counted. Co-Chair Therriault stressed that there
would be no reason to switch to a person's second choice
while their first choice is in the running. Representative
J. Davies expressed further concerns with the legislation.
He emphasized that it is difficult to anticipate the
consequences of the system. He recommended that the
legislation be held and discussed over the interim. He
expressed concern that a person could get elected that had
fewer first choice votes than another candidate did. He
maintained that the issue is the number of registered voters
that do not vote.
Representative Austerman felt that the legislation should be
in the form of a resolution. He emphasized that there should
be a vote of the people.
Representative Grussendorf spoke against moving the
legislation. He pointed out that no other state has
implemented the system for their elected officials. The
system is only being used by the New York School Board,
which is trying "to get out from under it."
Representative Williams noted that the Division of
Elections' fiscal note was reduced from $1.8 million dollars
to $175 thousand dollars. Co-Chair Therriault pointed out
that approximately $1 million dollars was included in the
Division's fiscal note for new Accu-Vote machines for every
voting location. The House Finance Committee fiscal note
does not fund this request. Representative Williams noted
the need to reduce additional spending.
Co-Chair Mulder recommended that the legislation be held for
further view.
Representative G. Davis asked for more information regarding
software needs. Ms. Fenumiai clarified that the current
system that is responsible for tabulating ballots cannot
accommodate the preferential voting system without
substantial modification.
HB 141 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 4:20 p.m.
House Finance Committee 13 5/14/99
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|