Legislature(2011 - 2012)HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/01/2011 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB127 | |
| HB203 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 127 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 175 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 142 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 203 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
April 1, 2011
1:34 p.m.
1:34:31 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Stoltze called the House Finance Committee meeting
to order at 1:34 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bill Stoltze, Co-Chair
Representative Bill Thomas Jr., Co-Chair
Representative Anna Fairclough, Vice-Chair
Representative Mia Costello
Representative Mike Doogan
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative Les Gara
Representative David Guttenberg
Representative Mike Hawker (alternate)
Representative Reggie Joule
Representative Tammie Wilson
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Anne Carpeneti, Assistant Attorney General, Legal Services
Section, Criminal Division, Department of Law; David
Wilson, Sergeant, Alaska State Troopers; Representative
Mike Chenault, Sponsor; Tom Wright, Staff, Representative
Mike Chenault; Representative Mike Chenault.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Quinlan Steiner, Director, Alaska Public Defender Agency,
Department of Administration; Daniel Fauske, Chief
Executive Officer and Executive Director, Alaska Housing
Finance Corporation.
SUMMARY
HB 127 CRIMES INVOLVING MINORS/STALKING/INFO
CS HB 127(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with
accompanying new indeterminate fiscal note from
the Department of Administration and previously
published notes: FN 1 (DPS), FN 2 (LAW), FN 3
(ADM), FN 4 (COR), FN 5 (DHS).
HB 175 COURT APPEARANCES; ARSON; INFRACTIONS
HB 175 was HEARD and HELD in committee for
further consideration.
HB 203 IN-STATE NATURAL GAS PIPELINE FUND
CS HB 203 (FIN) was REPORTED out of committee
with a "do pass" recommendation and with new zero
impact fiscal note from the Department of
Revenue.
HOUSE BILL NO. 127
"An Act relating to the crimes of stalking, online
enticement of a minor, unlawful exploitation of a
minor, endangering the welfare of a child, sending an
explicit image of a minor, harassment, distribution of
indecent material to minors, and misconduct involving
confidential information; relating to probation; and
providing for an effective date."
1:36:24 PM
ANNE CARPENETI, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, LEGAL SERVICES
SECTION, CRIMINAL DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, explained
that the governor introduced HB 127 as part of his
initiative to reduce and eliminate the tragedy of domestic
violence and sexual assault. The bill strengthened some of
the laws addressing the crimes. The bill also updated
statutes to encompass new technological means of
victimization. The bill expanded the definitions in the
stalking law and raised the penalty for online enticement
of a minor to a Class B felony. The legislation raised the
penalty for unlawful exploitation of a minor to a Class A
felony for all offenders. The bill adopted a new provision
related to "sexting," classified as the intention to
specifically annoy or humiliate another person. The offence
would be a Class B misdemeanor if distributed and a Class A
misdemeanor if posted on a website that was accessible to
the public. She noted that the bill adopted two misdemeanor
offenses of misuse of confidential information. She
discussed that portions of HB 75 were included in HB 127.
DAVID WILSON, SERGEANT, ALASKA STATE TROOPERS made himself
available for questions from the committee.
1:42:24 PM
Representative Edgmon commented on the fiscal notes
attached to the bill. He asked about the bill's
requirements.
Mr. Wilson responded that most investigations would be
streamlined with an administrative subpoena. The
administrative subpoena would lessen the burden on state
resources. He mentioned one provision, which included the
protection of the victim in sexting incidents which also
had an effect on resources. He admitted that his
experience included investigation as opposed to budget
related issues.
1:46:48 PM
Representative Edgmon appreciated Mr. Wilson's testimony.
Co-Chair Thomas presented a hypothetical situation in which
teenagers circulate inappropriate pictures.
Ms. Carpeneti replied that a conviction for a sexting
offence required proof that the image's distributor had the
specific intent to annoy or humiliate the subject of the
photograph.
Co-Chair Thomas asked specifically about a case involving
two minors.
Ms. Carpeneti responded that the Division of Juvenile
Justice would handle cases involving minors.
Co-Chair Thomas wondered whether teenagers would be guilty
of a crime due to circulating pictures of an ex-boyfriend
or girlfriend around the internet.
Ms. Carpeneti replied that if evidence existed proving that
the person distributed the photo with intent to annoy or
humiliate the other minor they could be prosecuted for a
crime. She stated that adults were prosecuted in adult
court and minors in juvenile court.
Co-Chair Thomas wondered about the provisions in the bill
related to insurance and driver's licenses.
Ms. Carpeneti replied that the offences were correctible.
The bill would reduce the Class B misdemeanor to an
infraction.
Co-Chair Thomas was glad to hear that the crime was reduced
and that it was a correctible offence.
Ms. Carpeneti agreed.
1:51:00 PM
Representative Wilson wondered how the terms "annoy" and
"humiliate" were measured.
Mr. Wilson answered that offenders frequently admit the
intent. He discussed that other times, incriminating
language accompanied a photo. He also relayed that the
intent was sometimes difficult to determine.
Representative Wilson wondered whether the language used in
the bill was employed often in other legislation. She
commented on the difficulty presented when attempting to
measure the terms "annoy" and "humiliate."
Mr. Wilson responded that he was unaware of alternative
options for the terms.
Representative Gara wondered about Page 5 and the issue
related to time in custody. He recalled that a person could
be retained in custody before bringing them to a judge for
24 hours. He wondered about the expansion to 48 hours.
Ms. Carpeneti replied that the law required the state to
bring a person before a judicial officer in a timely
manner, and that would not change. She discussed that it
was related to the time a person was arrested and related
to the ability to locate and talk with the victim. She
believed it possible to locate and have conversations
within 24 hours typically; however, there were
circumstances that proved more difficult. She asked Mr.
Wilson to provide examples.
Mr. Wilson recalled investigations where enough evidence
was gathered to justify apprehending a suspect, yet the
timing for arraignment proved difficult because necessary
documents were not yet created. A delay to meet the
requirements of the statute could result in the better
outcome. He relayed that the need for a delay happened
infrequently.
Representative Gara wondered about legislative intent
allowing 48 hours only in certain circumstances.
Ms. Carpeneti replied that the administration would not
have a problem with the expressed intent.
2:00:39 PM
Vice-chair Fairclough wondered about letters in her
committee packet referring to constitutional issues. She
discussed 11.61.128 (a). She wondered whether the
department might speak to the constitutionality of the
legislation. She referred to a letter dated February 4,
2011 from the ACLU.
Ms. Carpeneti replied that the letters addressed a legal
challenge to the Alaska statute prohibiting distribution of
indecent materials to a minor. This legislation made minor
changes specifying the culpable mental state for the
offense. The section called into question by the ACLU had
since been removed from the bill. She recalled recent
motions for summary judgments submitted by both sides of
the issue along with a motion to remove it to state court.
Vice-chair Fairclough discussed 11.61.128 addressed
distribution of indecent material to a minor. She asked
when the change or modification occurred.
Ms. Carpeneti replied that modification occurred in 2010 to
add protections, but the section was since removed from the
bill.
Vice-chair Fairclough appreciated the Department of Law and
stood behind the law that the state and legislature passed
to describe the terrible events that might happen to
minors. She stated that her interest was to keep kids safe.
2:04:49 PM
Mr. Wilson discussed changes to 12.55.155, specifically
relating to the online exploitation of a minor sentencing
criterion. He relayed that the department investigated
crimes against children. He explained the difference
between reactive and proactive investigations.
Mr. Wilson discussed the administrative subpoena in depth.
He explained that the identification of the potential for
criminal activity utilizing email required the investigator
to contact the provider of the email service. The
investigator would then present the email service with a
request for information. A court process would then occur,
requiring a federal subpoena allowing the investigator to
obtain information regarding the location of a suspect. The
next step would be the application for a search warrant and
creation of a probable cause statement.
2:10:37 PM
Mr. Wilson continued to discuss the administrative subpoena
process. He explained the legal requirement for search
warrants. For urgent cases, the administrative subpoena can
streamline the process. The search warrant was always
required despite possession of an administrative subpoena.
Representative Gara expressed one remaining concern related
to the legislation. He discussed different types of
felonies and misdemeanors. He questioned the validity of
claiming that the legislation creates an atmosphere that is
"tougher on crime."
Mr. Wilson replied that the crimes involving online
enticement of minors occur if law enforcement does nothing
to stop them. The new legislation would act preventatively.
The offenders tend to operate in a serial nature. He
commented on the parody between the behavior of the
suspects enticing minors online and those who are actively
committing sexual abuse of a minor. The legislation allows
investigators to practice in a proactive manor.
2:15:38 PM
Representative Gara wondered whether the legislation
attracted concerns regarding fairness from the Public
Defender's Agency.
QUINLAN STEINER, DIRECTOR, ALASKA PUBLIC DEFENDER AGENCY,
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION (via teleconference), wondered
whether he had been referring to raising the penalties.
Representative Gara explained that he was wondering about
anything in general.
Mr. Steiner responded that there had been discussion about
Section 7 when the bill had been originally introduced. The
language had been changed and the agency's concerns had
been dramatically alleviated. He believed that the language
related to specific intent would reduce the ability for
harm. He expressed concerns that the change from 24 to 48
hours might allow the system to relax in its response
leading to additional time spent in jail.
Representative Gara discussed Mr. Steiner's first concern
related to a dating couple texting images back and forth to
each other. He wondered if the issue had been corrected.
Mr. Steiner believed that the specific intent language
corrected the problem.
2:20:38 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze wondered about the number of people he had
been required to defend that had accidentally viewed
pornography.
Mr. Steiner asked him to repeat the question.
Co-Chair Stoltze clarified that anecdotal information
provided that citizens occasionally "accidently" peruse
pornographic material. He wondered how many cases of this
nature were defended by the public defender.
Mr. Steiner asked if the question related to Section 7 of
the bill.
Co-Chair Stoltze stated that he had received reports of
these sorts of crimes.
Mr. Steiner offered to report back to the committee.
Representative Doogan wondered about Section 16 stating
"the commissioner may provide active supervision to a
person placed on probation for a misdemeanor offence." He
wondered if the statement was current law.
Ms. Carpeneti replied that current law provided that the
commissioner of corrections would provide probation
officers to superior court judges. She clarified that
people convicted of felonies receive active supervision on
probation. She stated that under the state's current
practices there was not active supervision of
misdemeanants. She explained that the idea was entirely
experimental.
Representative Doogan asked why the increased number of
supervised individuals was not reflected in the fiscal
note.
Ms. Carpeneti replied that the program was experimental
with a limited duration. She relayed that she did not have
information about the funding of the project.
Representative Doogan stated that he could not locate the
words "experimental program" in the legislation. He stated
that the legislation would allow the commissioner to
actively supervise misdemeanants. He expressed concern that
the practice might result in greater cost to the state.
Representative Doogan noted that Section 16 contained
information about subpoena power. He explained that he did
not approve of the notion that the Attorney General could
issue subpoenas. He asked about changes to the current law.
2:25:27 PM
Ms. Carpeneti replied that several problems were discovered
with the bill that passed last year. She admitted that
drafting the legislation regarding subpoenas provided new
experiences for herself and her staff. One problem noted
was that the prior bill did not allow the Attorney General
to have a designee. The reason for the potential subpoenas
was to retrieve the information from an internet service
provider quickly.
Ms. Carpeneti informed the committee that the second
problem involved the former bill specifying a particular
type of service; personal service by a law enforcement
officer or certified mail. She stressed that neither option
provided a fast investigation. The proposed statute allowed
service to be made in any manor authorized by law or
acceptable to the internet service provider. She added that
internet service providers accepted faxes for federal
subpoenas.
Ms. Carpeneti stated that the bill specified that a person
who served with an administrative subpoena had a right to
ask the judge to quash the subpoena prior to the time
allotted for response. She concluded that the proposed
legislation addressed those problems recognized in the past
proposition.
Representative Gara recalled legislation passed in 2010
regarding pornographic videos and minors. He asked if the
proposed legislation dealt with such material.
Ms. Carpeneti replied no.
Vice-chair Fairclough discussed the fiscal notes. She
believed that six was the total number of notes.
Ms. Carpeneti believed that the bill had four or five
fiscal notes.
2:29:31 PM
AT EASE
2:31:06 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Gara MOVED Amendment 1.
Representative Hawker OBJECTED.
Representative Gara MOVED to AMEND the Amendment to change
the word impracticable to impractical on Page one, Line 9.
Hearing no objection, the amendment was amended.
Representative Wilson wondered about a definition of the
words impracticable and impractical according to the
Department of Law.
Ms. Carpeneti believed that "impractical" was easier to
understand and that "impracticable" was more of a legal
term.
Representative Hawker discussed that his objection was
maintained. He believed that the amendment may muddy the
waters. He did not like the implication that the statute
said this
Co-Chair Stoltze agreed with Representative Hawker on the
practical implications. He believed it had been expanded to
increase flexibility.
Representative Gara explained that the amendment would
allow the extra right to retain a person for 48 hours, only
with reasonable measure to accomplish the process in 24
hours. He stated his preference to have the amendment in
the statute, potentially drafted as a conceptual amendment.
He did not agree with the idea of retaining a person,
presumed innocent, without a bail hearing for 48 hours,
unless absolutely necessary.
Co-Chair Thomas wondered what the department's position was
on the amendment.
Ms. Carpeneti replied that the department did not have
problem with the amendment. She explained that she would
prefer to have the amendment in legislative intent over
statute.
2:39:19 PM
Representative Doogan wondered whether a tracking method
existed to document the amount of time a person must wait,
whether it is 24 or 48 hours?
Ms. Carpeneti replied no. A method of collecting the
information required a study, which she was happy to do.
She noted that it was not uncommon for a defendant to be
too intoxicated for arraignment.
Representative Gara had to depart for a Resources meeting.
Representative Joule wondered whether an accompanying
letter of intent that might solve the problem.
Ms. Carpeneti responded that a letter of intent was
helpful.
Representative Joule responded in the affirmative.
Roll Call:
Nay: 7
Yay: 4
The MOTION FAILED (7 to 4).
2:43:00 PM
Representative Wilson asked about the length of study
required to produce valuable results.
Ms. Carpeneti responded that one year of knowledge would
typically deliver necessary data. She pointed out that she
was not an expert on statistical inquiries.
Representative Wilson wished to know if legislation was
effective.
Vice-chair Fairclough MOVED to report CS HB 127 (FIN) out
of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes.
Representative Doogan OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Doogan expressed concerns about "sentence
creep," which increased the amount of time spent in jail,
the amount of supervision and the expense.
Representative Costello stated experience with a case
related to sexual abuse of a minor.
2:47:41 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze shared concerns about sentence creep but
wanted to "sentence some creeps."
There were no further objections.
CS HB 127(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with
accompanying new indeterminate fiscal note from the
Department of Administration and previously published
notes: FN 1 (DPS), FN 2 (LAW), FN 3 (ADM), FN 4 (COR), FN 5
(DHS).
2:51:35 PM
AT EASE
2:52:57 PM
RECONVENED
HOUSE BILL NO. 175
"An Act relating to an appearance before a judicial
officer after arrest; relating to penalties for
operating a vehicle without possessing proof of motor
vehicle liability insurance or a driver's license;
relating to penalties for certain arson offenses;
amending Rule 5(a)(1), Alaska Rules of Criminal
Procedure, and Rule 43.10, Alaska Rules of
Administration; and providing for an effective date."
HB 175 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
HOUSE BILL NO. 203
"An Act establishing and relating to the in-state gas
pipeline fund; and providing for an effective date."
2:53:14 PM
Vice-chair Fairclough MOVED to ADOPT CSHB 203(FIN) (27-
LS0719\D, Kirsch, 3/29/11) as a working document before the
committee.
Co-Chair Stoltze OBJECTED for discussion.
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE CHENAULT, SPONSOR, discussed the new
CS. He explained that the legislation would establish an
instate gas pipeline fund in the general fund. The fund
would be managed and invested by the Alaska Gasline
Development Corporation (AGDC) according to the new CS.
Millions of dollars were invested in the idea of an instate
gas pipeline. The funding and departments have changed
multiple times throughout the planning process. He stated
that the bill allows for a simple manner of reviewing the
funds spent on the project.
Co-Chair Stoltze withdrew his objection to the adoption of
the CS.
Hearing NO further OBJECTION it was so ordered.
Representative Wilson wondered whether people could place
their permanent funds into the account.
Representative Chenault replied no. The option did not
exist, although he found the idea worthy of exploration.
Representative Wilson understood that many Alaskans in her
district expressed interest in the option.
Co-Chair Stoltze commented that the current configuration
of "Pick, Click, and Give" would not permit the option.
2:56:58 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze was anxious to find a mechanism to the
address gas shortages in Alaska.
Representative Chenault stressed the seriousness of the
issue. He discussed the future of Alaska's energy supply
and necessary jobs. He believed that a great investment was
warranted.
Vice-chair Fairclough discussed a pipe dream. She proposed
the idea of including the Alaskan citizens, by allowing
them to invest. She expressed interest in buying shares in
the ownership of an instate gasline.
Vice-chair Fairclough moved Amendment number 1.
Co-Chair Stoltze objected for discussion.
TOM WRIGHT, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE MIKE CHENAULT, discussed
that the amendment had been proposed by DOR for clarity. He
stated that Page 1, Line 8, following "lapses," means that
any funds that remain within the fund lapse back into the
general fund. He continued with Page 2, Line one following
"and," the language was changed to read "shall remain in."
Any interest accrued by the account should stay within the
fund or appropriated by the legislature back into the fund.
3:02:56 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze removed his objection.
Hearing no other objections the amendment was adopted.
Co-Chair Stoltze discussed the zero fiscal note.
Representative Chenault echoed the comments of Vice-chair
Fairclough regarding Alaskans making a personal investment
in the project for a guaranteed rate of return. He recalled
Alaskan companies that were also interested in the
potential investment.
Representative Hawker discussed that the legislation
allowed the AGDC the opportunity to open a bank account,
which was an important step towards assuring the
transparency of the corporation. He stressed the urgency of
the situation.
Representative Edgmon expressed support for the
legislation.
3:07:44 PM
DANIEL FAUSKE, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, ALASKA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION (via
teleconference), echoed the prior testimony and offered to
answer questions.
Representative Gara supported the legislation, but pointed
out the difficult future decision regarding the various
options for production of Alaskan natural gas.
Mr. Fauske noted the requirement of a report detailing the
analysis on the wide variety of options. The report was due
on July 1, 2011. He mentioned that results of the many
studies were expected to arrive. He preferred the larger
export line, but agreed that each potential project must be
properly vetted.
Co-Chair Thomas pointed out HB 152, a funding bill that
passed out of the committee a few years prior.
3:13:12 PM
Representative Guttenberg appreciated that the governor in
the 1950s had the foresight to make statements similar to
those made today. He viewed the gasline as a utility that
would provide great economic benefit to Alaskans.
Representative Wilson asked Mr. Fauske whether there were
other funding options that would be provided in July's
report.
Mr. Fauske responded in the affirmative. The report would
provide estimates, detailed analysis regarding recommended
financing strategies, analysis of the tax exempt financing,
and recommendations regarding fund equity positions.
3:19:15 PM
Representative Wilson stressed that the people of Alaska
would really like to be a part of the project.
Mr. Fauske believed that was a good suggestion.
Co-Chair Stoltze opened and closed public testimony.
Vice-chair Fairclough MOVED to report CS HB 203 (FIN) out
of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note.
CS HB 203 (FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with new zero impact fiscal note
from the Department of Revenue.
3:20:53 PM
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 3:20 PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB175 Sectional CS JUD.doc |
HFIN 3/22/2011 1:30:00 PM HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 175 |
| HB 175 Explanation of Changes CD JUD.doc |
HFIN 3/22/2011 1:30:00 PM HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 175 |
| HB 175 Sponsor statement CS JUD.doc |
HFIN 3/22/2011 1:30:00 PM HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 175 |
| 01 24 11 Chenault Transmittal LL1840 DVSA Bill.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
|
| APOA- CSHB 127 JUD.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
|
| HB 127 West Law AK Statutes LAW part 1.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
|
| differences in hb 127 and cshb 127 jud-Letterhead.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
|
| HB 127 West Law AK Statutes LAW part 2.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
|
| HB 127(JUD)-DOA-OPA-3-22-11.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
|
| Letterhead Sectional for CSHB 127_JUD_.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
|
| AGIA.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM HFIN 4/4/2011 8:30:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| AS 43.90.110.docx |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM HFIN 4/4/2011 8:30:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| AS 43.90.240.docx |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM HFIN 4/4/2011 8:30:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| AS 43.90.900.docx |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM HFIN 4/4/2011 8:30:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| HB 142 Fact Sheet.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM HFIN 4/4/2011 8:30:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| HB 142 Sponsor Statement NEW.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM HFIN 4/4/2011 8:30:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| HB 203 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 203 |
| HB 203 CS WORKDRAFT 27-LS071-D 03302011.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 203 |
| HB8 CS WORK DRAFT 27-LSOO52-B.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 8 |
| HB8-NEWFNLAW-CIV-03-18-11.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 8 |
| HB150 NEW FNCS(JUD)-LAW-CIV-03-25-11.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 150 |
| HB150 NEW FN(JUD)-DOC-OC-03-30-11.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 150 |
| HB 203 AS01.10.070.docx |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 203 |
| HB 203 AS 37.10.070 & 071.docx |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 203 |
| HB 203 AS 18.56.086.docx |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 203 |
| HB 203 Amendment & backup#1 Fairclough .pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 203 |
| HB203-NEWFN DOR-AHFC-03-28-11 In-State Gas Fund.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 203 |
| HB 127 Gara Conceptual Amendment 040111.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 127 |
| HB 127 Amendment #1 Gara.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 127 |
| HB 125 F.O.E. Letter.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 125 |
| HB 127(JUD)-DOA-OPA-3-22-11.pdf |
HFIN 4/1/2011 1:30:00 PM |
HB 127 |