03/08/2024 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s):|| Select Committee on Legislative Ethics | |
| HB227 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SSCR12 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 338 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 227 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
March 8, 2024
1:06 p.m.
DRAFT
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Sarah Vance, Chair
Representative Jamie Allard, Vice Chair
Representative Ben Carpenter
Representative Jesse Sumner
Representative Andrew Gray
Representative Cliff Groh
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Craig Johnson
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
Joyce Anderson - Juneau
Skip Cook - Fairbanks
Rachel Kelly - Juneau
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
HOUSE BILL NO. 227
"An Act relating to liability of an electric utility for contact
between vegetation and the utility's facilities."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 338
"An Act relating to physician liability for gender transition
procedures performed on minors; and providing for an effective
date."
- BILL HEARING CANCELED
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 227
SHORT TITLE: ELECTRIC UTILITY LIABILITY
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) RAUSCHER
01/16/24 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/8/24
01/16/24 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/16/24 (H) ENE, JUD
01/23/24 (H) ENE AT 10:15 AM BARNES 124
01/23/24 (H) Heard & Held
01/23/24 (H) MINUTE(ENE)
01/25/24 (H) ENE AT 10:15 AM BARNES 124
01/25/24 (H) Moved HB 227 Out of Committee
01/25/24 (H) MINUTE(ENE)
01/26/24 (H) ENE RPT 4DP 3AM
01/26/24 (H) DP: BAKER, MCKAY, WRIGHT, RAUSCHER
01/26/24 (H) AM: SCHRAGE, ARMSTRONG, PRAX
03/06/24 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/06/24 (H) Heard & Held
03/06/24 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/08/24 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
WITNESS REGISTER
JOYCE ANDERSON, Appointee
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics.
SKIP COOK, Appointee
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics.
RACHEL KELLY, Appointee
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics.
CODY BENNETT, representing self
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on the appointees to the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics.
SHANNON GREEN, representing self
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointees
to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
ANDY CIZEK, representing self
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointees
to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
CHARLES PERRETT, representing self
Glenallen, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointees
to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
MARIANNE E BURKE, representing self
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointees
to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
CATHY HARRIS, representing self
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointees
to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
ARCHIBALD CAMPBELL, representing self
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointees
to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
PATRICK MARTIN, representing self
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on the appointees to the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics.
JACOB MAGOON, representing self
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointees
to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
CHRISTOPHER KURKA, representing self
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on the appointees to the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics.
JAMES SQUYRES, representing self
Deltana, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointees
to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
REBECCA HINSBERGER, representing self
Kasilof, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointees
to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
KEN HUCKEBA, representing self
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointees
to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
KEN GRIFFIN, representing self
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointees
to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
PAM GOODE, representing self
Deltana, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointees
to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
JACQUELYN GOFORTH, representing self
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointees
to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
JOSH FRYFOGLE, representing self
Mat-Su, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on the appointees to the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics.
LYNN ELLIOTT
American Property Casualty Insurance Association
Denver, Colorado
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 227.
MICHAEL ROVITO, Deputy Director
Alaska Power Association
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 227.
CHRISTIAN RATAJ, Senior Regional Vice President
National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies
Fort Collins, Colorado
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 227.
PHILLIP WEIDNER, representing self
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 227.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:06:14 PM
CHAIR VANCE called the House Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting to order at 1:06 p.m. Representatives Gray, Groh,
Sumner, Allard, Vance were present at the call to order.
Representative Carpenter arrived as the meeting was in progress.
^CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
^Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
1:07:09 PM
CHAIR VANCE announced that the first order of business would be
a confirmation hearing for the governor's appointees to the
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
1:07:38 PM
JOYCE ANDERSON, Appointee, Select Committee on Legislative
Ethics, testified as appointee to the Select Committee on
Legislative Ethics ("the ethics committee"). She explained that
she had been on the ethics committee since 2017 and served as
the ethics administrator from 2001 to 2014. She emphasized the
importance of the committee and highlighted her institutional
knowledge as a strength. She shared her professional
background, education, and qualifications, including government
work for the city of Minneapolis, Minnesota. She shared her
belief that her background and knowledge would be helpful in
transitioning the new ethics administrator into the position.
1:10:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked whether Ms. Anderson is currently an
officer for the League of Women Voters (LWV).
MS. ANDERSON answered yes.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked whether Ms. Anderson could remain
neutral while serving on both the LWV and the ethics committee.
MS. ANDERSON answered yes, she explained that the LWV is a
nonpartisan, deliberative organization that conducts a study and
requires full membership approval before taking a position on an
issue.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD questioned the length of Ms. Anderson's
most recent contract with the ethics committee.
MS. ANDERSON answered seven months.
1:12:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked whether Ms. Anderson is currently a
party to any lawsuits.
MS. ANDERSON answered yes. In response to a follow up question,
she explained that the lawsuit is against the Division of
Elections (DOE) in relation to the rejection of absentee
ballots. She explained that her absentee ballot was rejected
for including the wrong identifier and she was not notified of
the rejection util one month after the election. She said the
lawsuit is intended to encourage the State of Alaska to notify
voters of rejected ballots and to give them a chance to cure
them and correct the error.
1:14:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked, "So the ACLU [American Civil
Liberties Union] lawsuit League of Women Voters is you versus
the State of Alaska. Is that correct?"
MS. ANDERSON answered yes, she was among the parties listed in
the lawsuit.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked for Ms. Anderson's hourly rate while
working for the committee.
MS. ANDERSON declined to answer.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD reported that Ms. Anderson was paid $64.64
per hour. She asked who paid the hourly rate.
MS. ANDERSON deferred to the chair of the ethics committee.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked who approved the hourly rate.
MS. ANDERSON answered the full ethics committee.
1:15:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked why the terms of that contract were
not included in the minutes.
MS. ANDERSON said the contract was approved during an open
committee meeting, adding that she had not seen the minutes.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked whether Ms. Anderson was familiar
with AS 24.60.13, which in part, provides that a committee
employee, including a person who provides personal services
under a contract with the committee may not be a legislator, an
elected or appointed official of the state or local government
entity, an officer of a political party, a candidate for public
officer, or a registered lobbyist.
MS. ANDERSON acknowledged the statute.
1:16:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked whether Ms. Anderson was familiar
with AS 24.60.030, which in part, provides that a legislative
employee may not serve in a position that requires confirmation
by the legislature.
MS. ANDERSON said, "That's correct." She explained that per the
advice of outside legal counsel, she took a leave of absence.
She noted that the chief justice of the Alaska Supreme Court,
Peter Maassen, "okayed" the leave of absence.
CHAIR VANCE pointed out that the ethics committee minutes
indicate that Ms. Anderson was under contract during the leave
of absence; however, after further review, Ms. Anderson was a
State of Alaska employee with full benefits, which was not
disclosed. She asked why Ms. Anderson's status as a full
employee was not reflected [in the minutes].
MS. ANDERSON said she does not control what is approved or
discussed by the ethics committee. She deferred to the
committee chair.
1:18:41 PM
CHAIR VANCE pointed out that Ms. Anderson had been a public
member of the ethics committee, as well as an employee. She
asked how she was not aware of these conversations and
requirements.
MS. ANDERSON asked which requirements and regulations the chair
was referring to.
CHAIR VANCE read AS 24.60.135(f) and AS 24.60.030(f). If Ms.
Anderson was on contract getting paid as a legislative employee
until February 2024, she asked how she was also sitting as a
public committee member.
MS. ANDERSON said she was not a member of the committee during
that time period.
CHAIR VANCE asked when her reappointment was made.
MS. ANDERSON said after session had started.
1:20:37 PM
CHAIR VANCE asked when Ms. Anderson discussed her reappointment
with the chief justice.
MS. ANDERSON said, "I do not recall."
CHAIR VANCE asked whether an appointment was made to fill the
vacancy on the committee when she requested a leave of absence.
MS. ANDERSON stated that no one was appointed to fill the
vacancy.
1:21:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked whether the committee was supposed
to believe that after 20 plus years of experience, Ms. Anderson
had no idea of why the vacancy was not filled.
MS. ANDERSON restated that she does not speak for the committee.
She explained that after the passing of Jerry Anderson, she was
asked to step in as administrator. She reiterated that outside
legal counsel said it was appropriate for her to serve in the
role of acting administrator if she took a leave of absence from
the committee. She opined that the proper steps were taken.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked whether it was ethical to take a
leave of absence.
MS. ANDERSON said she felt it was appropriate because the
position of administrator could not be easily filled. She said
the committee asked her to fill the position due to her
experience.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked whether Ms. Anderson should have
decided whether she wanted to be an employee or a public unpaid
member.
MS. ANDERSON said she chose to be active administrator after a
leave of absence, so she did make a choice.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD remarked, "It seems to me [that] it was
being double dipped."
1:25:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY shared his understanding that the role of
acting administrator required a level of knowledge and expertise
that not many people possessed.
MS. ANDERSON replied in the affirmative.
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY sought to confirm that there was a very
short list of people that could fill that role of administrator
when Jerry Anderson passed away.
MS. ANDERSON answered yes.
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY said he appreciated Ms. Anderson's
willingness to step into that role and do the necessary work.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD pointed out that just because someone
passes away, it doesn't mean ethics should be violated.
1:27:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked whether Ms. Anderson obtained a legal
opinion about stepping in as acting administrator.
MS. ANDERSON answered yes, outside legal counsel was consulted
and indicated that a leave of absence would suffice.
CHAIR VANCE asked whether Ms. Anderson was ever part of the
hiring committee.
MS. ANDERSON answered yes.
CHAIR VANCE asked whether Ms. Anderson was acting as a
legislative employee or serving in the public position at the
time.
MS. ANDERSON said she was acting administrator at the time.
CHAIR VANCE questioned Ms. Anderson's efforts in finding a
replacement.
MS. ANDERSON described the committee's process, which included a
job posting, reference check, interview process, and the hiring
of a new ethics administrator.
1:30:51 PM
CHAIR VANCE asked whether there was any indication that Alaska
Statutes allow members to take a leave of absence and retain
their seat.
MS. ANDERSON deferred the question to the committee's outside
legal counsel.
CHAIR VANCE asked when Ms. Anderson met with the chief justice
regarding her appointment.
MS. ANDERSON said she did not recall whether it was December or
early January.
CHAIR VANCE asked whether Ms. Anderson had asked the chief
justice to hold off on issuing an appointment util after the
session convened.
MS. ANDERSON recalled that outside legal counsel had issued an
opinion regarding AS 24.60.130(g), and because the legislature
had delayed the consideration of appointees to May that year,
the committee was unable to meet during that time period. The
legal opinion indicated that if the appointment was made after
session started, that individual would serve until the
appointment was approved by the legislature or a replacement was
made. She offered to read the legal opinion.
1:34:44 PM
CHAIR VANCE said she found it interesting that Ms. Anderson was
highly familiar with this area of statute, but not the one
pertaining to payroll. She asked whether it was ethical for Ms.
Anderson to exploit a loophole in statute by waiting for the
chief justice to appoint her until after the start of the
legislative session.
MS. ANDERSON said this was an ongoing practice to allow the
committee to handle advisory opinion requests and address
complaints that were received without waiting 5 months from
January to the middle of May to operate. She opined that the
ethics committee did the appropriate thing.
CHAIR VANCE asked whether Ms. Anderson could see how it might
look unethical for a committee member on leave, getting paid by
the legislature, to lobby the chief justice for reappointment to
the committee.
MS. ANDERSON clarified that she did not lobby the chief justice
for reappointment.
1:38:41 PM
SKIP COOK, Appointee, Select Committee on Legislative Ethics,
testified as appointee to the Select Committee on Legislative
Ethics. He shared his professional background, education, and
qualifications. He said he was appointed to the committee by
Chief Justice Skip Matthews. He spoke to the changes in
administrators over time, adding that continuity is the reason
for his continued service. He opined that the ethics committee
serves an excellent purpose for the state that has been
demonstrated over the years. He added that when Joyce retired
as administrator and Jerry was hired, the committee decided that
Jerry needed help settling into the position and Joyce did that.
When Jerry suddenly died last summer, they decided to hire Joyce
[as acting administrator] after taking a leave of absence
because she knew the position. He said the process was done in
the open. In response to the prior question about Joyce's
hourly pay, he said the paygrade best suited Joyce's expertise
and was similar to her pay as an administrator. He added that
Joyce is one of the most ethical people he had ever met.
1:47:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD questioned Mr. Cook's political position
before he registered as nonpartisan.
MR. COOK said he had been nonpartisan for decades. He shared a
personal anecdote and said he was probably registered at one
time as a democrat.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked whether Mr. Cook signed the petition
to recall Governor Dunleavy.
MR. COOK answered in the affirmative.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked whether he was concerned that the
committee consists of one democrat, several nonpartisans who
were previously democrats, and no republicans.
MR. COOK said that did not surprise him one way or another.
1:50:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER recalled that Mr. Cook had stressed the
importance of continuity. He asked why length of time and
service is such an advantage.
MR. COOK opined that now, with a new administrator and a change
in public membership, continuity is critical.
1:53:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD pointed out that the combined time of Mr.
Cook and Ms. Anderson's service is 50 years. She spoke in favor
of term limits and expressed concern about partisanship on the
ethics committee. She asked how Mr. Cook could be nonpartisan
to political figures with different viewpoints.
MR. COOK stated that the committee's work has never been
partisan and would continue to stay that way.
CHAIR VANCE asked whether Ms. Anderson's leave of employment
created a perception of ethical issues.
MR. COOK answered no, he said Ms. Anderson's employment was a
contract that was configured by [Legislative Legal Services] and
the [personnel office.]
CHAIR VANCE said she understood that legal standards were
pursued; however, she the ethics committee must rise above legal
standards and consider ethical standards. She restated the
question, asking whether the situation created a concern from
the public's perspective.
MR. COOK answered no, adding "I think somebody is trying to make
it a public concern." He said this was no different than when
Ms. Anderson first retired, and Jerry came on board, and then
Ms. Anderson was hired on a contract. He acknowledged that Ms.
Anderson had not been a committee member at that time; however,
she wasn't committee member when she served as acting
administrator either.
1:58:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked whether the committee only finds
ethical violations of republicans.
MR. COOK answered no, party affiliation is never considered.
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked whether Mr. Cook could say with
certainty that democrats have been found guilty of ethical
violations by the committee.
MR. COOK answered no, not with certainty, as party affiliation
is not considered. He said there have certainly been complaints
made against both parties.
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY said, for the record, that his staff had
worked for a former democratic legislator who was found guilty
of an ethics violation.
2:00:44 PM
RACHEL KELLY, Appointee, Select Committee on Legislative Ethics,
testified as appointee to the Select Committee on Legislative
Ethics. She shared her professional background, education, and
qualifications, noting that she worked as an IT consultant for
an Alaska-based firm. She said she was volunteering to serve
because she wants to support the legislative process and to take
a more active role in her community. She said that she is an
analytical and process-oriented person two things that would
serve her well on the ethics committee.
CHAIR VANCE sought questions from committee members.
2:02:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD questioned Ms. Kelly's political
affiliation.
MS. KELLY said she is not registered with a party. In response
to a follow up question, she explained that she registered
republican when she was 18 years old and updated it several
years later.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked Ms. Kelley what "nonpartisan" means
to her.
MS. KELLY explained that she had registered as a republican
because her parents were registered republicans. She added that
it felt important for her to "make her own way."
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked whether Ms. Kelly's decision to
participate in the campaign to recall Governor Dunleavy was a
nonpartisan decision.
MS. KELLY said she based her decision on personal reasons, not
on his party affiliation.
2:03:46 PM
CHAIR VANCE asked about Ms. Kelly's approach to ethical
considerations.
MS. KELLY said she had never served in an ethical role. She
opined that she had a "good moral compass" and that her
analytical and data driven side would allow her to balance how
something feels with the information surrounding it.
CHAIR VANCE asked whether Ms. Kelly had ever filled out an
ethics report.
MS. KELLY answered no.
CHAIR VANCE asked Ms. Kelly to speak to the committee's
perspective in regard to fairness.
MS. KELLY expressed her hope that the committee's process is
dependable and repeatable. She added that she had not
considered partisanship with regard to the committee.
2:07:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked who referred Ms. Kelly to the chief
justice.
MS. KELLY said Judge Amy Mead. In response to a series of
follow up questions, she explained that she spoke with the chief
justice over the phone and informed the committee that the only
member she knew beforehand was Jerry Anderson.
2:09:16 PM
CHAIR VANCE opened public testimony on the appointees to the
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
2:09:46 PM
CODY BENNETT, representing self, testified on the appointees to
the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics. He expressed
concern that the committee lacked clear representation and
opined that the longevity of a particular candidate carries no
merit. He said he would like to see fresher faces on the
committee, because a "churning" of the group would offer new
perspectives. Ultimately, he requested that the committee
decline the appointments of Ms. Anderson and Mr. Cook.
REPRESENTATIVE ALLARD asked whether the ethics committee was
balanced and whether that could result in distrust.
MR. BENNETT, after looking at several recent decisions, pointed
out that a majority of ethics complaints had been made against
conservative voices. Recent history suggests that there is an
opportunity to help people feel that both sides are being
considered, he concluded.
2:15:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked how balance could be ensured on the
ethics committee.
MR. BENNETT said balance of [party affiliation] would be a
useful tool, adding that he would like to see a [republican] on
the committee at some point for better optics.
2:16:15 PM
SHANNON GREEN, representing self, testified in opposition to the
appointees to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics. She
said she was deeply concerned about the persecution of Christian
and pro-life legislators by the ethics committee, of which there
is a clear track record over the last 20 years. She opined that
the ethics committee should be fair, balanced, and above
reproach, adding that she objected to the confirmation of the
three appointees. She pointed out that there is no republican
member on the committee and said the public deserves a balance
of representation. At a minimum, she urged the committee not to
confirm the two long-term appointees [Ms. Anderson and Mr.
Cook].
2:18:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked whether any republican member would
balance the committee.
MS. GREEN said if she were hiring, she would be looking at the
appointee's background. She provided several examples of
optional qualifiers to consider, such as voting history,
education, and party affiliation. She remarked, "When you start
to lean heavy one way, you're talking into a mirror."
2:20:15 PM
ANDY CIZEK, representing self, testified in opposition to the
appointees to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics. He
opined that the committee needs new, unbiased blood. He
questioned a potential conflict of interest involving Senator
Hoffman and SB 140.
2:22:32 PM
CHARLES PERRETT, representing self, testified in opposition to
the appointees to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
He said there is an appearance of the ethics committee being
used as an attack dog against Christian conservative
republicans, citing cases involving Representative Eastman,
former Representative Christopher Kurka, Representative Vance,
and former Senator Lora Reinbold. He urged a "no" vote on all
three appointees.
2:24:53 PM
MARIANNE E BURKE, representing self, testified in opposition to
the appointees to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
She said she heard that Representative Eastman does not receive
equal treatment in the legislature and opined that a more
conservative, pro-life, heartfelt perspective is needed on the
ethics committee.
2:27:14 PM
CATHY HARRIS, representing self, testified in opposition to the
appointees to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics. She
pointed out that the committee lacked republican representation
and expressed concern about the "smoke and mirrors" in the
appointees' answers. She reported that since 2020, the ethics
complaints have targeted conservative Christians and requested
that the confirmation of all three appointees be rejected.
2:29:29 PM
ARCHIBALD CAMPBELL, representing self, testified in opposition
to the appointees to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
He challenged the idea that there is a form of honor and
nobility to the idea of being "nonpartisan;" further, he
characterized ideological conflict as essential. He questioned
whether all legislators' social media accounts are equally
monitored for polarizing opinions and suggested that the
confirmation of all three appointees be rejected.
2:31:49 PM
PATRICK MARTIN, representing self, informed the committee that
he was the executive director of the Alaska Right to Life and
testified on the appointees to the Select Committee on
Legislative Ethics. He referenced the appointees' participation
in the recall effort against Governor Dunleavy and questioned
their ability to be nonpartisan. He cited two ethics complaints
that he was a party to and found it inappropriate for the ethics
committee to have investigated a member of the public.
2:34:04 PM
JACOB MAGOON, representing self, testified in opposition to the
appointees to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics. He
referenced an article from The Alaska Landmine chronicling the
expulsion of a journalist from a fundraiser and urged the
committee to listen to the testifiers and vote "no" on all three
appointees.
2:36:16 PM
CHRISTOPHER KURKA, representing self, former state
representative, testified on the appointees to the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics. He expressed deep concern over
the left-wing (indisc.) of the legislative ethics committee. He
stated that public service on the committee is not supposed to
be platform for left wing activism and questioned whether
signing the petition to recall Governor Dunleavy is a new
qualification requirement for members. He shared his belief
that new blood is needed, and that the insular and circular
membership of the ethics committee must end.
2:37:28 PM
JAMES SQUYRES, representing self, testified in opposition to the
appointees to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics and
requested that the appointment of all three nominees be
rejected. He said the partisan committee had devolved into an
unethical, secret tribunal that had been weaponized into a form
of lawfare and used to skim unnecessary state funds. He opined
that baseless allegations force legislators to steer away from
representing their constituents and financially penalize them in
the form of legal fees in defense of ethics complaints that are
eventually thrown out.
2:39:19 PM
REBECCA HINSBERGER, representing self, testified in opposition
to the appointees to the appointees to the Select Committee on
Legislative Ethics. She expressed concern about the lack of
balance on the ethics committee due to the persecution of
Christian legislators. She opined that signing the petition to
recall Governor Dunleavy showed partisanship and opined that it
was time for Mr. Cook and Ms. Anderson to concede. She
requested new, conservative blood.
2:40:50 PM
KEN HUCKEBA, representing self, testified in opposition to the
appointees to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics. He
opined that statements of partisanship were used as a "badge of
obfuscation" to avoid scrutiny. He opined that the notion of
ethics and morals comes from Christian values and yet,
[Christians] are being "extorted" and the target of lawfare. He
pointed out that using ethics complaints to mute a
representative mutes thousands of citizens in turn. He
requested that the confirmation of all three appointees be
rejected.
2:42:49 PM
KEN GRIFFIN, representing self, testified in opposition to the
appointees to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics. He
requested that the confirmation of all three appointees be
rejected.
2:43:53 PM
PAM GOODE, representing self, testified in opposition to the
appointees to the appointees to the Select Committee on
Legislative Ethics and informed the committee that she is the
former staff of Representative Eastman. She opined that the
ethics committee is broken and does not act ethically or in the
best interest of Alaskans. She pointed out that Mr. Cook and
Ms. Anderson had served the committee for over 20 years and
urged them to take responsibility for the degradation and
weaponization of the ethics committee. Further, she shared her
belief that Ms. Kelly should not be appointed due to her signing
Governor Dunleavy's recall petition.
2:45:50 PM
JACQUELYN GOFORTH, representing self, testified in opposition to
the appointees to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
She asked why the ethics committee can use lawfare against
Christian, conservative legislators and urged the committee to
deny the confirmation of all three appointees.
2:47:21 PM
JOSH FRYFOGLE, representing self, testified on the appointees to
the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics. He opined that
protecting the identity of the accuser contradicts the purpose
of confidentiality and undermines the Open Meetings Act. He
expressed his disappointment in the lack of clear and timely
communication and said he planned to look into this issue
further.
CHAIR VANCE closed public testimony on the appointees.
2:49:23 PM
CHAIR VANCE stated that the House Judiciary Standing Committee
had reviewed the qualifications of the governor's appointees and
recommends that the following names be forwarded to a joint
session for consideration: Joyce Anderson, Skip Cook, and
Rachel Kelly, Select Committee on Legislative Ethics. She said
that signing the report regarding appointments to boards and
commissions in no way reflects an individual member's approval
or disapproval of the appointee, and the nomination is merely
forwarded to the full legislature for confirmation or rejection.
HB 227-ELECTRIC UTILITY LIABILITY
2:49:57 PM
CHAIR VANCE announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 227, "An Act relating to liability of an electric
utility for contact between vegetation and the utility's
facilities."
2:50:32 PM
CHAIR VANCE opened public testimony on HB 227.
2:50:50 PM
LYNN ELLIOTT, American Property Casualty Insurance Association,
testified in opposition to HB 227 because the bill lacked a
vegetation management plan. She opined that an improved
vegetation management plan unique to each co-op and situation
could re-balance the risk to the public with the cost of
implementation and limit liability. In addition, she
recommended adding a provision to allow utilities immunity from
a trespass claim if they identify a hazard and provide notice to
the landowner.
2:52:57 PM
MICHAEL ROVITO, Deputy Director, Alaska Power Association (APA),
testified in support of HB 227. He highlighted the ambiguity in
the law surrounding the application of liability when vegetation
from outside the right of way contacts power lines. This
ambiguity has led to costly lawsuits against utilities even when
the tree originates outside the right of way, he said, adding
that the bill would establish clear direction to the court if a
lawsuit were filed following damage caused by vegetation.
Importantly, he stressed that HB 227 would not prevent any party
from filing a lawsuit against a utility or insulate utilities
from liability. He added that electric utilities already
operate under robust vegetation management plans unique to their
service areas.
2:55:24 PM
CHRISTIAN RATAJ, Senior Regional Vice President, National
Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, testified in
opposition to HB 227. He stated that the overwhelming trend
nationally is to promote wildfire prevention and mitigation, not
granting legal immunity for any stakeholder. He shared his
understanding that nothing in the bill focuses on reducing
wildfire risk and would merely shift responsibility in liability
onto homeowners and businesses, thereby excusing the most
capable professionals from doing their part in prevention. He
spoke in favor of providing utilities conditional immunity.
2:58:34 PM
PHILLIP WEIDNER, representing self, testified in opposition to
HB 227. He characterized the bill as a "free pass" to electric
utilities and opined that the concept of immunity is a great
danger to citizens. He referenced the McKinley wildfires and
said if the bill were to pass, it would disenfranchise victims
and grant immunity to Matanuska Electric Association (MEA). He
said the legislature should not be in the business of granting
immunity to wrongdoers.
3:01:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked Ms. Elliott to speak to the increase
in homeowners' insurance if the bill were to pass.
MS. ELLIOTT said amending liability laws to financially shield
utilities would shift the burden from one entity to another,
thereby shifting the associated cost of losses resulting from
utility involved ignition to property owners. She stated that
if HB 227 were to pass, homeowners and small business owners
would face unintended consequences and adverse impacts.
3:02:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY asked why other states had not adopted
similar legislation.
MS. ELLIOTT said she was not aware of any other state that had
adopted this kind of immunity. She explained that in most
states, plaintiffs suing a utility for wildfire damage must show
that the utility acted with recklessness or negligence.
3:05:27 PM
CHAIR VANCE closed public testimony on HB 227. She announced
that the bill would be set aside.
3:06:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY, in response the assertion that the ethics
committee lacked a republican member, reported that the new
ethics administrator, Tamara Maddox, is a registered republican.
He listed Ms. Maddox's last five Alaska Public Offices
Commission (APOC) donations. In response the complaint about
the removal of Representative Eastman's staff, he further noted
that Representative Eastman's staff was removed from a "pro-
life, Christian, republican majority."
CHAIR VANCE clarified that Ms. Maddox is not a member [of the
ethics committee] and advised members to hold additional
comments on appointees until the joint session.
3:07:59 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at [3:08]
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SSCR 12 - v.A.pdf |
HJUD 3/8/2024 1:00:00 PM |
SSCR12 |
| Joyce Anderson - Leg. Ethics Committee Appointee.pdf |
HJUD 3/8/2024 1:00:00 PM |
|
| Dennis Cook Resume - Leg. Ethics Appointee.pdf |
HJUD 3/8/2024 1:00:00 PM |
|
| Rachel Kelly Resume - Leg. Ethics Committee Appointee.pdf |
HJUD 3/8/2024 1:00:00 PM |
|
| HB 227 - NAMIC Letter Testimony & Backup Doc..pdf |
HJUD 3/8/2024 1:00:00 PM |
HB 227 |
| HB 227 - APCIA Letter to HJUD (03-04-24).pdf |
HJUD 3/8/2024 1:00:00 PM |
HB 227 |
| SSCR 12 - EO 135 Letter - Commissioner Designee Muñoz (02-08-24).pdf |
HJUD 3/8/2024 1:00:00 PM |
SSCR12 |