Legislature(2011 - 2012)HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/14/2012 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HCR24 | |
| HB170 | |
| HB250 | |
| HCR23 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HCR 23 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 170 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HCR 24 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 250 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
March 14, 2012
1:38 p.m.
1:38:37 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Stoltze called the House Finance Committee meeting
to order at 1:38 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 Reggie Joule
Representative Mark Neuman
Representative Tammie Wilson
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Michael Paschall, Staff, Representative Eric Feige; Sarah
Fisher-Goad, Executive, Alaska Energy Authority, Department
of Commerce, Community and Economic Development; Christine
Hess, Staff, Representative Reggie Joule; Chris Hladick,
City Manager, City of Unalaska; Representative Alan
Austerman; Representative Bob Herron.
SUMMARY
HCR 23 ALASKA ARCTIC POLICY COMMISSION
CSHCR 23(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with
a "do pass" recommendation and with one new
fiscal note by the House Finance Committee for
the Legislature.
HCR 24 STATE FOOD RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT GROUP
CSHCR 24(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with
a "do pass" recommendation and with one new zero
fiscal note from the Legislature.
HB 170 MUNI TAX EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN VOLUNTEERS
CSHB 170(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with
"no recommendation" and with a new zero impact
fiscal note from the Department of Commerce,
Community and Economic Development.
HB 250 EXTEND RENEWABLE ENERGY GRANT FUND
CSHB 250(ENE) was REPORTED out of committee with
a "do pass" recommendation and with one new
fiscal impact note from the Department of
Commerce, Community and Economic Development.
Representative Edgmon introduced individuals from his
district.
Representative Doogan pointed to a communication from a
constituent from Sitka who was a young girl in support of
education.
1:42:10 PM
Representative Doogan read the letter into the record (copy
on file):
Dear Representative Doogan,
My name is Virginia Pearson. I am six years old. I
live with my parents in Sitka. I go to Baranof
Elementary. I am in kindergarten with Mrs. Hendrick.
She is a good teacher. I love music class, and I am a
good singer. Please help my school.
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 24
Relating to the establishment and operation of a state
food resource development working group.
REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE, SPONSOR, discussed the
resolution. The passage of House Concurrent Resolution 24
calls of the governor to establish a state food resource
development working group with the primary goal of
producing more locally grown and harvested food items to be
consumed in Alaska, by Alaskans. In addition the resolution
calls on the governor to requests multiple departments of
his administration to work closely with the working group
and the independent Food Policy Council to increase the
production and consumption of local food items in Alaska.
Whether it is agriculture products, seafood or locally
produced meat, increased local food products will lead to a
healthier Alaska and enhance the economy of the entire
state. The importance and value of creating and maintaining
a robust supply of Alaskan food is why the resolution is
asking the governor to establish a state food resource
development working group to work with the Alaska Food
Policy Council to identify resources and set policies to
build a strong, sustainable healthy food system in the
state. In addition to creating the working group, this
resolution calls on the governor to request the departments
of his administration to work closely with the farmer's,
fisherman, cattle ranchers and shellfish growers to produce
more locally grown food products to consumption in Alaska,
by Alaskans.
Vice-chair Fairclough MOVED to ADOPT proposed committee
substitute for HCR 24, Work Draft 27-LS1383\B (Bannister,
3/12/12). There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative Gara MOVED to report CSHCR 24(FIN) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CSHCR 24(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with one new zero fiscal note from
the Legislature.
HOUSE BILL NO. 170
"An Act relating to municipal property tax exemptions
on residences of certain volunteer emergency services
personnel and the widows and widowers of volunteer
emergency services personnel; and providing for an
effective date."
1:45:57 PM
Vice-chair Fairclough MOVED to ADOPT proposed committee
substitute for HB 170, Work Draft 27-LS0562\T (Bullard,
3/12/12). There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
MICHAEL PASCHALL, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE ERIC FEIGE,
disclosed the Representative Feige was the Chief of the
Chickaloon Fire Department, and that Mr. Paschall was
Assistant Chief of the Rural Deltana Fire Department. He
discussed HB 170. He stated that the bill provided
incentives for recruitment and retention of volunteer
firefighters and emergency services volunteers.
Co-Chair Stoltze asked Mr. Paschall to discuss his
interaction with Representative Wilson.
Mr. Paschall explained that there were two significant
issues that were addressed in the last hearing on the bill.
He looked at page 1, lines 12 and 13. There was an
exemption added for taxes for service areas. Also, it was
unclear whether or not the exemption, if it was enacted by
a municipality, could be for less than $150,000. Therefore,
the language "up to $150,000" was added.
Co-Chair Stoltze noted there had been questions about
policy, but that significant technical issues were
addressed in the work draft.
Representative Gara wondered where the municipal option was
located in the work draft. Mr. Paschall pointed to page 1,
line 12, "may by ordinance be exempted."
1:49:10 PM
Representative Gara wondered why the municipalities were
not given the opportunity grant exemptions to firefighters
who were not volunteers. Mr. Paschall responded that the
purpose of the bill was to provide an incentive that might
entice someone to become a volunteer firefighter, emergency
services worker, or to retain an individual in either one
of those positions.
Representative Gara wondered whether there was a shortage
of volunteer firefighters. Mr. Paschall responded in the
affirmative. He elaborated that almost any fire chief in
the state would agree with him. He stated that there may be
situations and locations where there was not a shortage of
volunteer emergency workers. He pointed out that his
department's volunteer membership was at the highest it had
ever been, but when his department responds to a large
fire, they were short-handed.
Representative Gara felt that municipalities should also be
given the opportunity to incentivize paid firefighters. Mr.
Paschall replied that the intention of the bill was to
recruit volunteer firefighters, and did not object to the
option of including paid firefighters. Although, many paid
departments utilized a recall system in order to recall
paid firefighters in the event of a large fire.
1:53:53 PM
Vice-chair Fairclough noted that she had two sons that were
volunteer firefighters. She queried the estimated number of
volunteer firefighters in the state. Mr. Paschall responded
that the total number of volunteer firefighters in the
state was 4,000, which included volunteer emergency medical
services (EMS) providers that were part of a fire
department. He stressed that the records that were kept for
the fire departments included EMS volunteers. There were
approximately 250 fire departments, and 78 of those
departments were in municipalities that levy a property
tax.
Vice-chair Fairclough asked how many departments were in
the municipalities. Mr. Paschall answered that there were
78 municipal departments.
Vice-chair Fairclough queried the cost that would be
subtracted from the tax rolls. Mr. Paschall replied that
that information was not calculated for every department in
the state, because of the time associated with that
research. He stated that Legislative Research was contacted
for some information. However, the process to determine the
cost subtracted from the tax rolls would require examining
membership of each department and then digging through the
tax rolls for each municipality for every individual. Even
with that kind of research, the accuracy was not trusted
because of the name that the property ownership is often
listed under is often a spouse or other family member. He
stated that there was an analysis run in Girdwood, and
offered to provide that information.
1:56:50 PM
AT EASE
1:59:43 PM
RECONVENED
Vice-chair Fairclough queried the tax consequence of the
bill. She remarked that many middle class and middle aged
people were caught in the "crossfire" related to tax
exemptions, because that set of people were often dealt a
new tax burden of tax exemptions. She pointed out that
300,000 people in Anchorage may pick up the tax burden of
this proposed property tax exemption. She agreed that there
needed to be more volunteer firefighters in the state, but
remarked that the tax burden placed on municipalities
seemed heavy.
Representative Neuman looked at page 3, line 8. He
expressed concern regarding the payment of the fire
response pertaining to a fire that may take place over
multiple municipalities or boroughs. He specifically
wondered if the cost would be covered by the municipality
at a local controlled level. Mr. Paschall asked for a
restating of Representative Neuman's question.
Co-Chair Stoltze clarified that the question was related to
where the fire would be assessed: the fire service area,
the road service area, or the general taxation.
Mr. Paschall responded that the assessment would be on the
general taxation of the municipality.
Co-Chair Stoltze remarked that a municipality could, if it
had a fire service area, make it a policy that a volunteer
firefighter not be assessed up to $20,000 of the evaluation
of the fire service cost.
2:06:32 PM
Representative Wilson communicated that Fairbanks had a
$10,000 exemption for volunteer firefighters. That
definition of "volunteer firefighter" was provided by the
department fire chief. The fire chief that she spoke to
expressed discomfort, because he was made to determine the
difference between a "true volunteer" and "just volunteer."
Mr. Paschall responded that one standard across the state
might make it more difficult for rural areas to meet the
same standards as urban areas.
Representative Gara surmised, from Representative Wilson's
comments, that there must be an allowance in state law that
already granted an exemption. He wondered how the bill
changed the current law.
Vice-chair Fairclough read from state statute 18.15.250
"volunteer means that a person is an active volunteer of a
first responder service, a rescue service, an ambulance
service of a fire department that provides emergency
medical or rescue services as part of its duties." There
was no time requirement or additional requirement; the
person only had to be an active member.
Mr. Paschall responded to a question from Representative
Gara. He stated that there was a provision to allow
municipalities to exempt property tax up to either $10,000
or $20,000 under certain broad criteria.
2:10:20 PM
Vice-chair Fairclough remarked that the proposal was
"stackable" on other exemptions.
Representative Doogan felt that the problem with the bill
was the disallowance of inclusion of paid firefighters. He
remarked that once certain people were given financial
exemptions, the question was skewed regarding who would be
considered "volunteer." He stressed that once one person
applied for the exemption; everyone would want to apply for
the exemption. He felt that a determination of the full
cost of the proposal should be made. He was uncomfortable
with the bill as it was currently written.
Co-Chair Stoltze did not believe the cost could be
determined, because of the unknown pertaining to options of
the local governments.
Representative Wilson moved to amend the bill, page 1, line
13 insert the word "road" before the words "service areas."
Co-Chair Stoltze OBJECTED for the purpose discussion. He
explained that there were some areas in the state that were
considered unified road service areas.
Co-chair Stoltze removed his objection. There being NO
further OBJECTION, it was so ordered. Conceptual amendment
1 was ADOPTED.
Co-Chair Thomas told a personal story. He stated that he
spent four years on the borough assembly at a time when the
state was not paying the unfunded mandate. The borough
assemble sued the State of Alaska for not funding the
mandate. He furthered that during his first year in the
legislature, he proposed a bill that allowed the
municipalities to opt out in five years. He liked the idea
of exempting volunteers. He wondered if the volunteers
received any workers compensation if they were injured
during an emergency response.
2:17:31 PM
Mr. Paschall explained that workman's compensation in most
cases was provided by the volunteer departments.
Co-Chair Thomas had spoken to people from Unalaska, who
expressed concern regarding the tax burden placed on them.
Representative Neuman discussed complaints related to lack
of insurance. He hoped that the bill included the ability
for local control related to how benefits were dispersed.
He believed that the term "volunteer" was too broad. He
supported the legislation, but hoped for some expansion
regarding insurance and how a volunteer was defined.
Vice-chair Fairclough clarified that one of her boys was in
college and one was a volunteer firefighter. She pointed
out that volunteers were currently part of the training
ground for joining the firefighter's union setting. She
wondered if there would be less benefit by becoming a
unionized firefighter.
Co-Chair Stoltze WITHDREW objection to. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Work Draft 27-LS0562\T was ADOPTED as
amended.
Co-Chair Stoltze discussed the zero fiscal note from the
Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development.
Co-Chair Thomas MOVED to report CSHB 170(FIN) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CSHB 170(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with "no
recommendation" and with a new zero impact fiscal note from
the Department of Commerce, Community and Economic
Development.
2:24:03 PM
AT EASE
2:26:38 PM
RECONVENED
HOUSE BILL NO. 250
"An Act relating to the renewable energy grant fund
and recommendation program; and providing for an
effective date."
SARAH FISHER-GOAD, EXECUTIVE, ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
(AEA), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT, referenced the new fiscal note dated 3/14/12.
She stated that there was no adjustment with respect to the
funding that was required by AEA to manage the program. The
fiscal note reflected a general fund fiscal note, when the
program first passed under HB 152 in 2008. Subsequently,
AEA had received funding from the last and current fiscal
years to spend up to $2 million of miscellaneous earnings
from the fund to manage the program. The fiscal note had
been adjusted in order to have the funding source be the
Renewable Energy Fund, which was represented in the first
column. She remarked that both the general fund and general
fund miscellaneous earnings were reduced, so the Renewable
Energy Fund funding source was used in place. The remainder
of the fiscal note was for informational purposes only.
2:29:27 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze believed the program was effective and did
not want to involve too many bureaucrats.
Representative Edgmon wondered if the original intent of HB
152 was to take the administrative costs from the funds of
the program. Co-Chair Thomas responded in the negative,
because the goal amount of the program had not yet been
achieved.
Representative Edgmon wondered if $2 million would come
from the governor's budget for the program. Co-Chair Thomas
replied in the negative.
Ms. Fisher-Goad added that there were interest earnings
that had been credited to the fund. She noted that there
had been $8.3 million in earnings on the fund, and $3.2
million had been used through FY 12.
Representative Edgmon wondered if the administrative costs
would increase over time. Ms. Fisher-Goad replied that AEA
was currently content with the staffing levels to manage
the projects and program.
Representative Edgmon supported the legislation. He
expressed frustration related to processing and
administration of the program.
2:33:07 PM
Ms. Fisher-Goad replied that the agency had been sensitive
to the issue. She noted there was a certain amount of
discussion with grantees in the beginning of the process.
There had been about 70 projects in the past year and there
had been no delays related to staffing. She would be happy
to discuss any concerns for and from specific grantees.
Representative Edgmon was concerned that there would not be
enough staff for the program.
Co-Chair Thomas did not believe anyone had taken any money
out of the program.
Ms. Fisher-Goad replied that the agency had reallocated
work, and there was a new project manager to deal with new
projects in the railbelt. The agency was sensitive to the
issue and would like be conservative, but did not want to
be overstaffed coming in.
Representative Doogan had been an opponent of the program
since it had started, but was a supporter now.
Representative Gara asked for a comparison of the number of
employees at the start of the program and present day.
Ms. Fisher-Goad did not have the specifics on hand. She
explained that there had been a lot of new activity when
the program had started, and recently staffed up in areas
evaluating reimbursement requests to ensure that a thorough
job was done.
Representative Gara noted that inadequate staff could
create a time lag, but a larger staff could strongly
evaluate proposals in order to make calculated decisions.
Ms. Fisher-Goad replied that she was confident in the
technical staff, and felt that intense effort was made in
order to get grants out by August.
2:40:25 PM
Representative Gara spoke about a disappointment in the
past. He wondered whether the agency had sufficient staff
to support $50 million in projects properly. Ms. Fisher-
Goad replied that the first round, $453 million worth of
requests. She stressed that there were still many active
grants, so past money had not necessarily "disappeared."
Representative Gara remarked that the original $100 million
was not intended to be spent in one year, but used as
projects were evaluated. He furthered that $50 million a
year became $25 million a year. He felt that the funding
had disappeared, but the projects had not disappeared. Ms.
Fisher-Goad stated that when the $100 million was provided,
AEA went through an application process. Therefore, there
was no ability to only solicit for $50 million. The agency
only solicited funds based on the statutory program. She
pointed out that there were over $400 million worth of
requests. She did not feel there was a proper way to set
the money aside.
Co-Chair Stoltze asked if there was opposition to the bill.
Co-Chair Stoltze discussed the individuals available for
testimony. He CLOSED public testimony.
Co-Chair Thomas MOVED to report CSHB 250(ENE) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CSHB 250(ENE) was REPORTED out of committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with one new fiscal impact note
from the Department of Commerce, Community and Economic
Development.
2:46:34 PM
AT EASE
2:47:56 PM
RECONVENED
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 23
Establishing and relating to the Alaska Arctic Policy
Commission.
2:48:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REGGIE JOULE, SPONSOR, explained HCR 23. The
Alaska Northern Waters Task Force (ANWTF) was established
in 2010 to identify the opportunities and challenges of a
changing Arctic. Arctic Nations are anticipating the
development of northern shipping routes, mineral
extraction, oil and gas exploration, commercial fisheries,
and tourism. Some of this change has already started to
occur. The ANWT completed its final report on January 30,
2012. The report includes recommendations in six Arctic
policy areas: Governance, Oil & Gas Development, Marine
Transportation, Fisheries, Infrastructure, and Research.
The report is by far the broadest and most detailed
statement of Alaska's Arctic policy to date, yet much work
remains to fully expound upon all the diverse issues that
the Task Force brought forward. While the United States has
an official written Arctic Policy (National Security
Presidential Directive (NSPD)-66), Alaska does not. Most of
the other Arctic Nations and the Northwest Territories
already have established Arctic policies. As the
jurisdiction that makes the United States an Arctic nation
and as the only U.S. state that is home to Arctic
residents, Alaska needs an Arctic policy of its own. Alaska
needs to position itself now regarding the nation's Arctic
policy - Alaska cannot take that leadership role without
understanding what its own priorities should be. This is
especially critical considering the United States will be
chairing the Arctic Council from 2015-2017. The Arctic
Policy Commission will provide the legislature an
opportunity to remain engaged in the ongoing Arctic
dialogue and to help shape future Alaskan Arctic policy.
2:54:04 PM
Representative Costello appreciated the work that had been
done on the issue, and believed it would become more
important as time went on. She asked about the makeup of
the commission. Representative Joule responded that the
Northern Waters Task Force had 11 members. He stated that
municipalities, regional corporations, and conservancies
were represented. He explained that there was some
discovery, over time, which some representation was missing
from the commission. He remarked that industry; university
and research; and native tribes were missing from the
commission. Currently, the membership was at 16 members. He
stated that there was some trouble keeping the membership
small, because of the desire to have all interests
represented.
Co-Chair Stoltze pointed to page 3, lines 14 and 15. He
wondered whether it would be more appropriate to broaden
the language to "university" instead of the "University of
Alaska."
CHRISTINE HESS, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE REGGIE JOULE, would
be open to the idea.
Representative Joule felt that language should be broad
enough to include not only the University of Alaska, but be
open enough to find people who would meet the proper level
of qualification.
Representative Guttenberg felt it was important for the
state to lead the charge in the nation, because Alaska was
on the forefront of Arctic waters management. He
recommended inserting language stating that the commission
can meet as soon as the majority members are appointed. He
remarked that sometimes full membership was not present, so
the commission would not meet.
Representative Joule thought it might be helpful to leave
the language open enough to meet the level of
qualification.
Co-Chair Thomas did not see an environmental person on the
commission. He asked whether the language "or designee"
could be included in the legislation in the event that a
member would not be present.
3:00:46 PM
AT EASE
3:07:03 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Stoltze MOVED Amendment 1:
Page 3, delete language on lines 14-15.
Replace with new language
"One member representing an accredited university or
college in Alaska, who has a background in Arctic
science;"
Co-Chair Thomas OBJECTED for discussion.
Co-Chair Stoltze read the amendment aloud.
Co-Chair Thomas WITHDREW his objection. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 1 was ADOPTED.
Ms. Hess explained Amendment 2:
Page 3, line 20 add
(J) one member representing a statewide environmental
organization
(K) 4 alternates will be appointed
Co-Chair Stoltze asked whether it would be more appropriate
to say a member from the conservation community.
Ms. Hess adjusted Amendment 2 to read:
Page 3, line 20 add
(J) one member representing a statewide conservation
organization
(K) 4 alternates will be appointed
Representative Edgmon wondered if it would be more
appropriate to use the language "conservation community."
Representative Edgmon MOVED to AMEND Amendment 2. He
explained that the amendment would change the wording in
subsection (J) to read:
"one member representing the conservation community."
There being NO OBJECTION Amendment 2 was ADOPTED as
AMENDED.
CHRIS HLADICK, CITY MANAGER, CITY OF UNALASKA, testified in
support of HCR 23. He stated that there had been a great
reception at the Coast Guard briefing on the Northern
Waters Task Force. He believed the commission would work
well with the governor's office and the federal government.
He expressed that all Alaskans would be impacted by events
in the future related to shipping over the North Pole and
other Arctic areas. He believed the policy commission could
help work through the mountain of information regarding the
Arctic waters, and he appreciated the opportunity to
testify.
3:13:34 PM
Representative Edgmon explained that when he was chair of
the Fisheries Committee in 2009 built around Mr. Hladick's
contributions about this subject. He stated that there was
not a central point of contact for Arctic issues, and was
grateful that there was a continuation of multi-
disciplinary information.
Co-Chair Thomas CLOSED public testimony.
Representative Neuman supported the legislation. He had
been involved in two caucuses regarding Arctic issues. He
stated that there had been a move by President Obama to
create council that would have oversight or management on
all federal waters, and he believed it would subvert the
current public process. He declared that the ability for
Alaska to have a say would be critical to the state. He
stated that Commissioner Cora Campbell had sent two letters
to the federal government on the issue. The legislation
would give Alaska a voice in a big way. He felt that former
Attorney General Burns was correct in that the issue was
one of the largest that would impact Alaska in the upcoming
10 years.
Representative Doogan communicated that what was happening
in the Arctic was a very significant issue. He thanked
Representative Joule for his work.
Co-Chair Stoltze believed the process had been very
inclusive. He recognized the hard work that went into the
legislation.
Representative Gara commended Representative Joule for his
patience on the issue. He agreed that the issue was one of
the most important unaddressed issues. He could not say
that he agreed with various republican and democratic
presidents over the years.
3:23:49 PM
Vice-chair Fairclough stated that she and Representative
Joule met with individuals who had been assigned to start
implementing the Federal Ocean Counsel Policy. She stressed
that the Ocean Policy Counsel was a much different, and
critical issue in Alaska.
Representative Joule stated that the policy commission was
timely because the U.S. and Canada would be working very
closely over the upcoming four years. He opined that it was
amazing what outside people did not know about Alaska, and
the way that budget decisions were made. The legislature
was engaged and should remain engaged in the process.
Co-Chair Thomas noted that Southeast was part of Alaska.
Vice-chair Fairclough discussed the fiscal note 1 was
changed to make the committee a 17 member commission
instead of a 16 member commission.
Vice-chair Fairclough MOVED to report CSHCR 23(FIN) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CSHCR 23(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with one new fiscal note by the
House Finance Committee for the Legislature.
Co-Chair Stoltze discussed the schedule for the following
day.
ADJOURNMENT
3:32:54 PM
The meeting was adjourned at 3:32 PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Letters of Support HCR23.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HCR 23 |
| HCR23 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HCR 23 |
| HCR23 National Security Arctic Directive.PDF |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HCR 23 |
| HCR23 CAFP_brochure_PECA-eng.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HCR 23 |
| HCR23 ASRC, NANA Letter.PDF |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HCR 23 |
| HCR 23 LINKS to Backup Documents.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HCR 23 |
| Letter of Support Re State of Alaska HCR 23.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HCR 23 |
| HB250 DCCED-AEA- 031412-NEW Fiscal Note.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HB 250 |
| Letter to Rep.Doogan.pdf |
HFIN 3/14/2012 1:30:00 PM |
SB 171 |