Legislature(1993 - 1994)

03/25/1994 01:15 PM House JUD

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
               HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE                              
                          March 25, 1994                                       
                            1:15 p.m.                                          
  MEMBERS PRESENT                                                              
  Rep. Brian Porter, Chairman                                                  
  Rep. Jeannette James, Vice-Chair                                             
  Rep. Gail Phillips                                                           
  Rep. Pete Kott                                                               
  Rep. Joe Green                                                               
  Rep. Jim Nordlund                                                            
  MEMBERS ABSENT                                                               
  Rep. Cliff Davidson                                                          
  OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT                                                    
  Rep. Terry Martin                                                            
  Rep. Harley Olberg                                                           
  COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                           
  HB 47:    "An Act relating to primary elections and to the                   
            delivery of the primary ballots to persons making                  
            application for them when, by operation of                         
            political party rule, two or more primary ballots                  
            must be provided to the public."                                   
            CSHB 47 MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                     
  HB 518:   "An Act extending the termination date of the                      
            Board of Governors of the Alaska Bar Association;                  
            and providing an effective date."                                  
            MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                             
  SB 151:   "An Act providing for oil and gas exploration                      
            incentive credits for certain activities on                        
            certain land in the state; and providing for an                    
            effective date."                                                   
            CSSB 151 MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                    
  HB 367:   "An Act relating to the control of outdoor                         
            CSHB 367 MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                    
  WITNESS REGISTER                                                             
  REPRESENTATIVE TERRY MARTIN                                                  
  Alaska State Legislature                                                     
  State Capitol, Room 411                                                      
  Juneau, AK 99801-1182                                                        
  Position Statement:  Prime Sponsor of HB 47                                  
  JACK CHENOWETH                                                               
  Legislative Legal Counsel                                                    
  Department of Law                                                            
  130 Seward St.                                                               
  Juneau, AK 99801                                                             
  Position Statement:  Testified on HB 47                                      
  JOSEPH L. SWANSEN, Director                                                  
  Division of Elections                                                        
  Office of the Lieutenant Governor                                            
  P.O. Box 110017                                                              
  Juneau, AK 99811-0017                                                        
  Position Statement:  Testified on HB 47                                      
  PHILIP R. VOLLAND                                                            
  Alaska Bar Association                                                       
  211 H. St.                                                                   
  Anchorage, AK 99501                                                          
  Position Statement:  Testified on HB 518                                     
  KEN BOYD, Deputy Director                                                    
  Division of Oil and Gas                                                      
  Department of Natural Resources                                              
  P.O. Box 107034                                                              
  Anchorage, AK 99510-0734                                                     
  Position Statement:  Testified via teleconference on SB 151                  
  CARL MEYER                                                                   
  Income & Excist Audit Division                                               
  Department of Revenue                                                        
  P.O. Box 110420                                                              
  Juneau, AK 99811-0420                                                        
  Position Statement:  Testified on SB 151                                     
  REPRESENTATIVE HARLEY OLBERG                                                 
  Alaska State Legislature                                                     
  State Capitol                                                                
  Juneau, AK 99801-1182                                                        
  Position Statement:  Prime Sponsor of HB 367                                 
  CHRYSTAL SMITH                                                               
  Alaska Municipal League                                                      
  217 2nd St., Suite 200                                                       
  Juneau, AK 99801                                                             
  Position Statement:  Testified on HB 367                                     
  LYNN STANTON                                                                 
  HCR 64 Box 386                                                               
  Seward, AK 99664                                                             
  Position Statement:  Testified via teleconference on HB 367                  
  JERRY LUCKHAUPT, Attorney                                                    
  Legislative Legal Counsel                                                    
  Division of Legal Services                                                   
  Legislative Affairs Agency                                                   
  130 Seward St.                                                               
  Juneau, AK 99801                                                             
  Position Statement:  Testified on HB 367                                     
  DAVID KAMRATH, Legislative Assistant                                         
  Representative Harley Olberg                                                 
  Alaska State Legislature                                                     
  State Capitol                                                                
  Juneau, AK 99801-1182                                                        
  Position Statement:  Testified on HB 367                                     
  PREVIOUS ACTION                                                              
  BILL:  HB  47                                                                
  SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) MARTIN                                         
  JRN-DATE    JRN-PG                     ACTION                                
  01/12/93        43    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  01/12/93        43    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS, JUDICIARY,                        
  01/28/93              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                      
  01/30/93              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                      
  01/30/93              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                      
  02/04/93              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                      
  02/06/93              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                      
  02/06/93              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                      
  02/09/93              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                      
  02/11/93              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                      
  02/13/93              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                      
  02/18/93              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                      
  02/18/93              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                      
  03/02/93              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                      
  03/02/93              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                      
  03/04/93              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                      
  03/04/93              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                      
  03/05/93       540    (H)   STA RPT  CS(STA) NEW TITLE                       
                              3DP 4NR                                          
  03/05/93       540    (H)   DP: VEZEY, SANDERS, KOTT                         
  03/05/93       540    (H)   NR: ULMER, B.DAVIS, OLBERG,                      
  03/05/93       540    (H)   -FISCAL NOTE  (GOV)  3/5/93                      
  02/07/94              (H)   JUD AT 01:15 PM CAPITOL 120                      
  02/07/94              (H)   MINUTE(JUD)                                      
  03/25/94              (H)   JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120                      
  04/05/94      3119    (H)   JUD RPT  CS(JUD) NEW TITLE                       
                              5DP 1NR                                          
  04/05/94      3119    (H)   DP:  GREEN,KOTT,JAMES,PORTER,                    
  04/05/94      3119    (H)   NR:  NORDLUND                                    
  04/05/94      3119    (H)   -FISCAL NOTE (GOV) 4/5/94                        
  04/12/94              (H)   FIN AT 08:30 AM HOUSE FINANCE                    
  04/13/94              (H)   FIN AT 08:30 AM HOUSE FINANCE                    
  04/14/94      3425    (H)   FIN RPT  CS(FIN) NEW TITLE 2DP                   
                              5NR 2AM                                          
  04/14/94      3425    (H)   DP:  MARTIN, GRUSSENDORF                         
  04/14/94      3425    (H)   NR:  LARSON, HANLEY, HOFFMAN,                    
  04/14/94      3425    (H)   NR:  MACLEAN                                     
  04/14/94      3425    (H)   AM:  PARNELL, THERRIAULT                         
  04/14/94      3426    (H)   -ZERO FISCAL NOTE (GOV) 4/14/94                  
  04/15/94      3465    (H)   RULES TO CALENDAR  4/15/94                       
  04/15/94      3465    (H)   READ THE SECOND TIME                             
  04/15/94      3466    (H)   FIN  CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT                     
  04/15/94      3466    (H)   ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN                   
  04/15/94      3466    (H)   READ THE THIRD TIME  CSHB
  04/15/94      3466    (H)   PASSED Y37 N- E3                                 
  04/15/94      3467    (H)   EFFECTIVE DATE  SAME AS PASSAGE                  
  04/15/94      3530    (H)   TRANSMITTED TO (S)                               
  04/18/94      3750    (S)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  04/18/94      3750    (S)   STATE AFFAIRS                                    
  04/25/94              (S)   STA AT 09:00 AM BUTROVICH                        
                              ROOM 205                                         
  BILL:  HB 518                                                                
  SHORT TITLE: EXTEND ALASKA BAR ASSOCIATION                                   
  SPONSOR(S): JUDICIARY                                                        
  JRN-DATE    JRN-PG                     ACTION                                
  03/04/94      2608    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  03/04/94      2608    (H)   JUDICIARY                                        
  03/21/94              (H)   JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120                      
  03/21/94              (H)   MINUTE(JUD)                                      
  03/25/94              (H)   JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120                      
  BILL:  SB 151                                                                
  SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR                                 
  JRN-DATE    JRN-PG                     ACTION                                
  03/05/93       618    (S)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  03/05/93       618    (S)   OIL & GAS, JUDICIARY, FINANCE                    
  03/05/93       618    (S)   ZERO FISCAL NOTES (DNR, REV)                     
  03/05/93       619    (S)   GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER                    
  03/16/93              (S)   O&G AT 08:00 AM                                  
  03/16/93              (H)   MINUTE(O&G)                                      
  03/16/93              (S)   MINUTE(O&G)                                      
  03/23/93              (S)   O&G AT 05:00 PM BUTROVICH                        
                              ROOM 205                                         
  03/23/93              (S)   MINUTE(O&G)                                      
  03/30/93              (S)   MINUTE(O&G)                                      
  03/31/93      1002    (S)   O&G RPT  3DP 1DNP/AM                             
  03/31/93      1002    (S)   PREVIOUS ZERO FNS (DNR, REV)                     
  04/15/93      1418    (S)   JUD REFERRAL WAIVED    Y11 N9                    
  04/18/93      1468    (S)   FIN RPT  6DP 1DNP                                
  04/18/93      1468    (S)   PREVIOUS ZERO FNS (DNR, REV)                     
  04/18/93              (S)   FIN AT 01:00 PM SENATE FINANCE                   
  04/18/93              (S)   MINUTE(FIN)                                      
  04/18/93              (S)   MINUTE(RLS)                                      
  04/21/93      1613    (S)   RULES   3CAL 1NR   4/21/93                       
  04/21/93      1620    (S)   MOVED TO BOTTOM OF CALENDAR                      
  04/21/93      1633    (S)   READ THE SECOND TIME                             
  04/21/93      1633    (S)   AM NO  1     FAILED  Y9 N11                      
  04/21/93      1634    (S)   AM NO  2     FAILED  Y7 N13                      
  04/21/93      1634    (S)   ADVANCE TO THIRD READING FAILED                  
                              Y11 N9                                           
  04/21/93      1634    (S)   THIRD READING 4/22 CALENDAR                      
  04/22/93      1675    (S)   READ THE THIRD TIME  SB 151                      
  04/22/93      1675    (S)   PASSED Y14 N6                                    
  04/22/93      1675    (S)   EFFECTIVE DATES SAME AS                          
  04/22/93      1675    (S)   JACKO  NOTICE OF RECONSID                        
  04/23/93      1714    (S)   RECON TAKEN UP - IN THIRD                        
  04/23/93      1715    (S)   PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION                        
                              Y14 N6                                           
  04/23/93      1715    (S)   EFFECTIVE DATES SAME AS PASSAGE                  
  04/23/93      1717    (S)   TRANSMITTED TO (H)                               
  04/24/93      1508    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  04/24/93      1508    (H)   OIL & GAS, RESOURCES, FINANCE                    
  01/31/94              (H)   O&G AT 05:00 PM CAPITOL 124                      
  01/31/94              (H)   MINUTE(O&G)                                      
  02/02/94      2215    (H)   ADOPT AMENDMENT                                  
  02/02/94      2215    (H)   O&G RPT  3DP 2NR                                 
  02/02/94      2215    (H)   DP:  KOTT, G. DAVIS, GREEN                       
  02/02/94      2215    (H)   NR:  SITTON, OLBERG                              
  02/02/94      2215    (H)   -ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DNR) 2/2/94                   
  02/02/94      2216    (H)   JUD REFERRAL ADDED                               
  02/23/94              (H)   MINUTE(ECO)                                      
  03/04/94              (H)   RES AT 08:15 AM CAPITOL 124                      
  03/04/94              (H)   MINUTE(RES)                                      
  03/07/94      2641    (H)   RES RPT HCS(RES) 6DP                             
  03/07/94      2641    (H)   DP:  HUDSON, GREEN, JAMES,                       
  03/07/94      2641    (H)   DP:  BUNDE, WILLIAMS                             
  03/07/94      2641    (H)   -ZERO FISCAL NOTE (REV) 3/7/94                   
  03/07/94      2641    (H)   -PREVIOUS ZERO FISCAL NOTE                       
                              (DNR) 2/2/94                                     
  03/21/94              (H)   JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120                      
  03/21/94              (H)   MINUTE(JUD)                                      
  03/25/94              (H)   JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120                      
  BILL:  HB 367                                                                
  SHORT TITLE: PROHIBITED HIGHWAY ADVERTISING                                  
  SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) OLBERG                                         
  JRN-DATE    JRN-PG                     ACTION                                
  01/13/94      2052    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  01/13/94      2052    (H)   TRANSPORTATION, JUDICIARY                        
  02/23/94              (H)   MINUTE(ECO)                                      
  03/01/94              (H)   TRA AT 05:00 PM CAPITOL 17                       
  03/01/94              (H)   MINUTE(TRA)                                      
  03/11/94      2716    (H)   TRA RPT  CS(TRA) NEW TITLE                       
                              4DP 1NR                                          
  03/11/94      2717    (H)   DP:  VEZEY, G.DAVIS, HUDSON,                     
  03/11/94      2717    (H)   NR:  MULDER                                      
  03/11/94      2717    (H)   -ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DOT)                          
  03/12/94              (H)   MINUTE(ECO)                                      
  03/23/94              (H)   JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120                      
  03/25/94              (H)   JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120                      
  ACTION NARRATIVE                                                             
  TAPE 94-51, SIDE A                                                           
  Number 000                                                                   
  The House Judiciary Standing Committee was called to order                   
  at 1:15 p.m. on March 25, 1994.  A quorum was present.                       
  CHAIRMAN PORTER stated that the following bills would be                     
  heard:  HB 47, HB 518, SB 151, and HB 367.  He called                        
  Representative Terry Martin to come forward and introduce HB
  HB 47 - ABSENTEE BALLOTS - PRIMARY ELECTIONS                                 
  Number 019                                                                   
  REP. TERRY MARTIN, Prime Sponsor of HB 47, testified that                    
  the CS for this bill addresses many of the questions                         
  previously raised.  He then deferred to Jack Chenoweth from                  
  Legislative Legal Services to address the CS.                                
  Number 052                                                                   
  JACK CHENOWETH, Legislative Legal Services, testified that                   
  he has eliminated the requirement that multiple ballots be                   
  sent to applicants if the director or staff were not able to                 
  determine which ballot was proper and has in the long                        
  material being added from the middle of page 3 on to the top                 
  of page 4, laid out a team by which the director or his                      
  staff would make a determination as to which is the proper                   
  ballot and if, after going through all of this, it's still                   
  not possible, based on representation made by the applicant                  
  or records in the custody of the division, then and only                     
  then is the statutory ballot to be given.  He said they have                 
  also closed the window of opportunity to change party                        
  affiliation in the 30 day period preceding the primary.                      
  This conforms with the 30 day pre-general election                           
  requirement for party affiliation registration.                              
  Number 095                                                                   
  JOSEPH SWANSON, Director, Division of Elections, Office of                   
  the Lieutenant Governor, testified that they are very                        
  supportive of the bill and are proud of the work done on the                 
  Number 112                                                                   
  REP. PHILLIPS inquired whether just public radio would be                    
  used for an education campaign or would private radio also                   
  be used.                                                                     
  Number 115                                                                   
  MR. SWANSON responded that they have funding to also use                     
  private TV and private radio.                                                
  Number 118                                                                   
  REP. JAMES moved to adopt the Judiciary CS to HB 47.                         
  Number 119                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER, hearing no objection, adopted the CS.                       
  Number 120                                                                   
  REP. JAMES moved that CSHB 47 be moved from committee with                   
  individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal note.                     
  Number 138                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER, hearing no objection, declared CSHB 47                      
  moved from committee.                                                        
  Number 142                                                                   
  HB 518 - EXTEND ALASKA BAR ASSOCIATION                                       
  PHILIP VOLLAND, President of the Board of Governors of the                   
  Alaska Bar Association, testified in support of HB 517 and                   
  stated that HB 517 reflects the recommendation of the                        
  Legislative Budget and Audit Committee that the function of                  
  the Alaska Bar Association continue for another four years.                  
  He further testified that by statute, disciplinary,                          
  admission assessment, fee assessments, continuing legal                      
  education, pro bono services, all are designed to enhance                    
  public perception and their confidence in how attorney's                     
  serve the interests of clients.  The Budget and Audit                        
  Committee found that the bar fulfills this function                          
  effectively and at no cost to the state.  The board is able                  
  to function because of its power to assess fees against                      
  every lawyer in the state and those fees cover the                           
  activities of the board.                                                     
  Number 256                                                                   
  REP. GREEN inquired how the bar handles complaints that come                 
  before them and where these complaints originate.                            
  Number 270                                                                   
  MR. VOLLAND responded principally by complaints by clients                   
  or other lawyers.  The discipline council of the Bar                         
  Association has authority to bring action on his or her own                  
  based upon information the council may receive and that that                 
  happens occasionally.  But by and large most of the                          
  complaints are by either clients or other lawyers.  The                      
  council then works up a series of hearings depending on how                  
  significant the complaint may be.  Sometimes a complaint is                  
  disposed of by the lawyer agreeing to a private discipline.                  
  Other times it goes to a hearing committee, which is a                       
  committee composed of lawyers and members of the public.                     
  Lawyers can then appeal that and go to the Board of                          
  Governors which can act as an independent board hearing the                  
  same evidence and depending on the level of sanction, all                    
  significant discipline has to approved by the Supreme Court                  
  which can review the record entirely on its own.                             
  Number 295                                                                   
  REP. GREEN inquired if the bar's hammer is that if they call                 
  Johnson in and he doesn't show then the bar can make a                       
  pretty harsh recommendation.                                                 
  Number 300                                                                   
  MR. VOLLAND responded that they could.                                       
  Number 310                                                                   
  REP. PHILLIPS inquired whether all other states have a Board                 
  of Governors and when was Alaska's established.                              
  Number 315                                                                   
  MR. VOLLAND responded that Alaska's Board of Governors was                   
  established in 1955.                                                         
  Number 338                                                                   
  REP. NORDLUND inquired what the bar's response has been to                   
  the Legislative Budget and Audit report.                                     
  Number 345                                                                   
  MR. VOLLAND responded that some of the recommendations they                  
  agree with, but Audit found that one of their board terms is                 
  out of sync with the statutory rotation and the bar is                       
  taking action to change that.                                                
  Number 420                                                                   
  REP. NORDLUND inquired as to the recommendation that the Bar                 
  Association establish a toll free complaint line.                            
  Number 429                                                                   
  MR. VOLLAND responded that that recommendation was under                     
  review and the bar may very well adopt it.                                   
  Number 432                                                                   
  REP. GREEN recommended that the committee move HB 518 from                   
  committee with individual recommendations and accompanying                   
  zero fiscal note.                                                            
  Number 435                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER, hearing no objection, declared HB 517 moved                 
  from committee and next brought SB 151 before the committee.                 
  Number 441                                                                   
  SB 151 - OIL & GAS EXPLORATION CREDITS                                       
  REP. JOE GREEN, testified that SB 151 is a companion bill to                 
  HB 199, which was the exploration licensing bill; this being                 
  a companion bill in that it is another encouragement to get                  
  some sort of delineation, or discoveries in remote areas of                  
  the state.  This bill would allow the commissioner of                        
  Natural Resources to grant relief on taxes to a company or                   
  companies that spent money that would be acceptable to the                   
  commissioner as exploration dollars, up to a limit, against                  
  either their existing production taxes or against the                        
  development of something that they might find in the areas                   
  they are looking at.  I have for the committees review a                     
  handout which could help explain the differences between                     
  this tax incentive and an existing tax incentive program                     
  that has been on the books since statehood.  Rep. Green                      
  further testified that this bill applies to unleased state                   
  land and private land as well and does not just confine                      
  itself to taxes from state land.  The dollar limit under the                 
  current program is five million allowable per company for                    
  each operation.  The concept there is that five million is a                 
  pretty small amount in relation to the total program.  SB
  151 would have a sunset in ten years.  The concept there is                  
  to get some activity in a close time frame so that the time                  
  it takes from discovery to development would ensure the                      
  solvency.  The confidentiality provision in the existing                     
  credits is that a person can drill an exploratory well where                 
  there is unleased land around that well, he can request the                  
  commissioner hold the material confidential so it does not                   
  become a benefit to people who might bid on adjacent land.                   
  That provision has been in law for some time.  SB 151 puts a                 
  maximum cap of two years on the confidentiality provisions.                  
  This is a credit allowance and all the dollars have to be                    
  approved by the commissioner.  If this bill is passed there                  
  would be a maximum of fifty percent of the expenses, not to                  
  exceed five million, done on state land, and up to                           
  twenty-five percent of that done on private land.                            
  Number 573                                                                   
  REP. PHILLIPS inquired on page 2, line 30, section E, the                    
  amount of the exploration explained there is determined by                   
  the commissioner.  Is that a normal procedure, he asked, and                 
  how they will develop those guidelines as far as limits that                 
  normally occur?                                                              
  Number 580                                                                   
  REP. GREEN responded that the commissioner determines what                   
  is eligible and quite often, what is negotiated before hand                  
  is a situation like, "I'm going to go out and drill on this                  
  land and I'm going to have these kinds of costs."                            
  Number 582                                                                   
  REP. PHILLIPS inquired whether other states have these kind                  
  of incentive credits.                                                        
  Number 589                                                                   
  REP. GREEN responded that there are incentive credits in                     
  other states which are to a greater or lesser extent.  In                    
  Texas, they don't have the undrilled land that we do in                      
  Number 595                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER inquired as to whether, for the record, it                   
  could be explained the difference between the state benefits                 
  from drilling on and discoveries on private land verses                      
  state land.                                                                  
  Number 598                                                                   
  REP. GREEN responded that the benefit would be is that where                 
  they are adjacent, and the well is in close proximity, say                   
  within a lease of two by two square miles, there would be a                  
  significant interest to the state because the field might be                 
  large enough to extend on state land.  But in the other                      
  areas, let's say this is on Native land, but perhaps several                 
  miles from the nearest state border, it would be relative                    
  small value.  There would still be value because there would                 
  be an area you could tie seismic work to.                                    
  Number 626                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER inquired into the revenue differences to the                 
  state from producing on state land versus private land.                      
  Number 628                                                                   
  REP. GREEN responded we wouldn't have any royalties from                     
  private land.  We would have severance and ad valorem taxes.                 
  Number 630                                                                   
  REP. NORDLUND inquired as to what the credits that would                     
  apply towards payments and obligations, would that be for                    
  any obligations that might be due on that particular project                 
  or would it be overall taxes or obligations owed by the                      
  company to the state.                                                        
  Number 640                                                                   
  REP. GREEN responded that it could be either.                                
  Number 644                                                                   
  REP. NORDLUND responded that we are diminishing some of the                  
  resources available to the state to encourage companies to                   
  drill on private land.                                                       
  Number 647                                                                   
  REP. GREEN responded that that is why it is reduced to                       
  twenty-five percent as opposed to fifty percent.  This only                  
  means that the commissioner has the right to do this.  He                    
  could go as high as fifty percent, but he never has.                         
  Number 664                                                                   
  REP. NORDLUND expressed his concern regarding Natural                        
  Resources commissioners having discretion over the credits                   
  and whether the commissioner would have the best interests                   
  of the state in mind when granting credits.                                  
  Number 667                                                                   
  REP. GREEN responded that the commissioner must show cause                   
  why he would think that this particular case be granted                      
  Number 672                                                                   
  KEN BOYD, Deputy Director, Division of Oil and Gas,                          
  testified that Representative Green pretty much covered SB
  151 and he would respond to questions, if any.  He further                   
  added that the fifty million was a total over the life of                    
  the bill.                                                                    
  Number 691                                                                   
  REP. PHILLIPS inquired why there was a ten year sunset in                    
  this legislation.                                                            
  Number 700                                                                   
  MR. BOYD responded that the rationale was to try the program                 
  and see if it works and whether this type of incentive would                 
  lead to increased exploration.                                               
  Number 711                                                                   
  REP. PHILLIPS inquired about the two year confidentiality                    
  Number 713                                                                   
  MR. BOYD responded that right now on state land the                          
  confidentiality provision is guaranteed for two years.  At                   
  the end of that period of time a company can come in and ask                 
  for an extension of the confidentiality period.                              
  Number 732                                                                   
  REP. PHILLIPS responded that in light of the ten year sunset                 
  provision, the two year confidentiality provision was                        
  probably okay.                                                               
  Number 736                                                                   
  REP. NORDLUND inquired whether the fiscal note, which is a                   
  zero fiscal note that definitely has a fiscal impact, would                  
  actually result in a revenue loss to the state.                              
  Number 747                                                                   
  CARL MEYER, Income and Excise Division, Department of                        
  Revenue, testified that the fiscal note was put together on                  
  the basis that it would be difficult to determine what type                  
  of credit might be granted.  He further stated that there                    
  was no way to be absolutely certain what types of credits                    
  would be granted.  He felt that it would probably be around                  
  twenty-five million.  So the top would be twenty-five                        
  million, but it could in fact be less than that.                             
  Number 766                                                                   
  REP. NORDLUND felt that a cost/benefit analysis should be                    
  conducted to determine if the state comes out in balance.                    
  Number 775                                                                   
  REP. KOTT responded that while there is a cost to the                        
  exploration credit, there would be future revenue which                      
  would offset or balance out the cost.                                        
  Number 782                                                                   
  REP. GREEN further responded that even if you select an                      
  arbitrary number of wells, that still doesn't mean that                      
  there's twenty-five million at which fifty percent is                        
  applied.  It is still up to the commissioner to grant what                   
  he will.                                                                     
  Number 789                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER inquired whether any credit would be given                   
  if no oil was found.                                                         
  Number 793.                                                                  
  REP. GREEN responded that that was not necessarily true.  An                 
  oil company could drill a dry hole and still get credit if                   
  they have other producing activity.                                          
  Number 795                                                                   
  REP. PHILLIPS inquired whether the passage of SB 151 would                   
  positively further exploration in Alaska.                                    
  Number 799                                                                   
  REP. GREEN responded yes.  This is the kind of legislation                   
  that is more valuable to the industry than the number of                     
  dollars that are included.  It sends a very positive message                 
  that the state of Alaska is saying they truly want to                        
  compete for industry dollars, along with third world                         
  countries, etc.                                                              
  Number 810                                                                   
  REP. NORDLUND again expressed concern over a commissioner                    
  granting a credit without having the best interest of the                    
  state in mind.  He doesn't see this provision in SB 151 and                  
  that it would be appropriate to require that in this                         
  Number 820                                                                   
  MR. BOYD responded that it would be very difficult to                        
  mandate such a provision.  Our current state law has                         
  provided a benefit to the state, he said, but it is hard to                  
  substantiate it.  The benefit to the state is immediate                      
  because at the very least the state would gain valuable                      
  information as to the mineral content of the land.                           
  REP. NORDLUND inquired whether an oil company would drill a                  
  well anyway, even without an exploration credit.                             
  Number 846                                                                   
  Mr. BOYD responded that there is no way to determine whether                 
  they would or not.  But without SB 151, if they did, the                     
  state would not get the data on the land.                                    
  Number 853                                                                   
  REP. PHILLIPS informed the committee that during her last                    
  national Energy Council meeting, the energy minister for                     
  Alberta reported to our body that she had approved nine                      
  thousand last year alone and on her desk as of January 1,                    
  1994, she had application permits for ten thousand                           
  additional exploratory wells.  In the United States 569                      
  permits were offered for wells and in Alaska 11 were                         
  offered.  She felt SB 151 was bound to help.                                 
  Number 872                                                                   
  REP. NORDLUND informed the committee he didn't oppose this                   
  legislation, but he wanted some of his concerns addressed.                   
  Number 878                                                                   
  REP. KOTT motioned that CSSB 151 be moved from committee                     
  with individual recommendations and a zero fiscal note.                      
  Number 884                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER, hearing no objection, declared CSSB 151                     
  moved from committee.                                                        
  TAPE 94-51, SIDE B                                                           
  Number 008                                                                   
  HB 367 - CONTROL OF OUTDOOR ADVERTISING                                      
  REP. JAMES motioned that HB 367 be moved from committee.                     
  Number 013                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER felt there should be discussion on the                       
  REP. HARLEY OLBERG, Prime Sponsor of HB 367, testified that                  
  HB 367 would allow certain restricted exceptions to the                      
  state's limitations on outdoor advertising, thereby                          
  addressing the need for improved directional signage to                      
  accommodate the state's traveling public.  These changes                     
  would facilitate efforts by roadside businesses to direct                    
  motorists to available services and products.  In response                   
  to suggestions made by members of committees of both bodies                  
  last session, he wanted them to consider CSSB 367 today.  CS                 
  for HB 367 allows one new exception to the state limitation                  
  on outdoor advertising signs, displays and devices.                          
  Directional signs could be placed in zoned or unzoned                        
  commercial or industrial areas along the state highway                       
  subject to stringent restrictions.  The draft bill would                     
  also codify two existing DOT/PF programs in statute.  They                   
  are space leasing program and the tourist oriented                           
  directional signage program.  CS for HB 367 would help many                  
  small business owners while not negatively impact the                        
  scenery visible from Alaska's highways.  He strongly                         
  encouraged support for this bill and asked that a committee                  
  substitute be drafted, which would be version k.  The two                    
  changes in the CS are one, page 3, line 6.  He said it used                  
  to read business adjacent to the highway, and it has been                    
  cleaned up to say activities conducted on or abutting the                    
  leased property, and the other one on line 20 of page 3, a                   
  municipality may regulate directional signs allowed under AS                 
  19.25.105(a)(6) in a way that is more restrictive than AS                    
  19.25.105(a)(6) by an ordinance that is adopted after the                    
  effective date of this act.                                                  
  Number 126                                                                   
  REP. NORDLUND inquired what the problem is that necessitates                 
  this legislation.                                                            
  Number 129                                                                   
  REP. OLBERG responded that the problem is, along the                         
  highway, say between Tok and Glenallen, a mom and pop                        
  operation are not allowed to have any sign off of there                      
  directing people to their business.  This bill would allow                   
  them, within fifty miles of their operation, to place a                      
  maximum of up to four signs, with directions on them, on                     
  private property.  This allows for private property                          
  placement only.                                                              
  Number 183                                                                   
  REP. PHILLIPS remarked that along the Sterling Highway they                  
  have some taxidermists, and he bought a beautiful piece of                   
  property along the bluff of Cook Inlet, as well as a house                   
  as a museum/workshop for the tourists.  He put a beautiful                   
  hand crafted wood sign on his property along the highway,                    
  and was ordered to remove the sign.  The cost to an                          
  individual is astronomical as a result of a stupid law.                      
  Number 188                                                                   
  REP. NORDLUND expressed a concern that we could end up with                  
  a plethora of signs along the highway that would not be very                 
  attractive and he wanted to know what sort of limitations                    
  are in this legislation to prevent that from occurring.                      
  Number 201                                                                   
  REP. OLBERG responded that in his area of the state, the                     
  shear lack of private property would be the most effective                   
  Number 219                                                                   
  REP. PHILLIPS remarked that she is very much in support of                   
  this legislation and would encourage all committees to                       
  support this legislation.                                                    
  Number 249                                                                   
  CHRYSTAL SMITH, Alaska Municipal League, testified that the                  
  Municipal League has no problems with the concept of the                     
  bill, but has a problem with the municipalities being able                   
  to control the signs within their boundaries.  She felt that                 
  Representative Olberg's amendment was a back-door approach                   
  to solving the problem and she felt that a municipality                      
  should not have to open up their sign ordinances again to                    
  comply with this legislation.  She proposed that the bill be                 
  amended at page 3, line 20, stopping after AS 19.25.080 to                   
  19.25.180, which would say that you could enact ordinances                   
  that regulate signs that are more restrictive.                               
  Number 292                                                                   
  REP. JAMES remarked that in the Interior there are a lot of                  
  people who can't find where they are going and she felt the                  
  municipality should be just as interested as finding their                   
  Number 308                                                                   
  MS. SMITH responded that that was true, but the decision                     
  needed to be made in the local environment and if a                          
  municipality already had a sign ordinance that said x, y, z,                 
  that then they shouldn't have to go back into their                          
  ordinance because of a change in state law.                                  
  Number 322                                                                   
  LYNN STANTON testified via teleconference from Seward that                   
  she supports the bill as it is presently written.                            
  Number 332                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER inquired as to the applicability of the                      
  section relating to municipalities.  He asked if what was                    
  being said was that a municipality may have a more                           
  restrictive sign ordinance if they want.  He asked if there                  
  was any reason they have to adopt it after enactment of this                 
  Number 339                                                                   
  REP. OLBERG asked, if we exclude the municipalities from the                 
  more liberal provisions of this bill, can they then by                       
  ordinance take advantage of the exception granted?                           
  Number 363                                                                   
  JERRY LUCKHAUPT, Legislative Legal Counsel, Division of                      
  Legal Services, Legislative Affairs Agency, testified that                   
  what is trying to be attempted here is that we are allowing                  
  the municipalities to enact sign ordinances that are                         
  anything that they want.  They can be more restrictive than                  
  the state, they can do whatever they want, except in this                    
  area.  This new allowance for signs that the legislature is                  
  creating is that this is such a new area, no one's been able                 
  to enjoinder that and any previous sign ordinance to this                    
  that could be out there; they are saying this is something                   
  we want everybody to look at, including the municipalities.                  
  Any sign ordinances the municipality has enacted prior to                    
  this can never have engendered this possibility, because it                  
  wasn't out there.  It wasn't an option in Alaska.  The                       
  thought of this language is that if a municipality wants to                  
  be more restrictive in this particular area, because they                    
  haven't been able to consider this, any previous sign                        
  ordinance has not been able to consider this exception that                  
  is now there, and thus they would have to adopt a new                        
  section, not a new sign ordinance.                                           
  CHAIRMAN PORTER inquired whether a municipality had in place                 
  an ordinance that would preclude, and we are now voiding it                  
  and making them revisit it.                                                  
  Number 412                                                                   
  MR. LUCKHAUPT responded yes for this particular statute.                     
  Number 415                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER asked Chrystal Smith if she know of anybody                  
  that had this kind of restriction that this would fit under.                 
  Number 419                                                                   
  MS. SMITH responded that she was not sure.  She reiterated                   
  the point that municipalities that have sign ordinances                      
  regulate the size and type of sign within their boundaries                   
  and should not have to revisit their ordinances as a result                  
  of passage of CSHB 367.                                                      
  Number 433                                                                   
  DAVID KAMRATH, Legislative Assistant to Representative                       
  Harley Olberg, Prime Sponsor of HB 367, commented that this                  
  bill allows for criteria that a business must be at least                    
  twenty miles away and that seventy-five percent of the                       
  business receipts must come from tourists, so you are not                    
  going to have every business in town putting up signs.                       
  Another point to be made is that the zoned and unzoned areas                 
  along the rural highways, the only thing that is zoned or                    
  unzoned is where a business is located and in operation.  A                  
  business must be there, open, and must contact a property                    
  owner down the highway for permission to put a sign on their                 
  Number 452                                                                   
  MR. LUCKHAUPT remarked that this exception only applies to                   
  those areas that are zoned industrial or commercial.  This                   
  exception of allowing signs would not exist in those                         
  residential areas and other zoned areas.  Again, it only                     
  applies to interstate and primary highways within those                      
  municipalities.  So it doesn't apply to those roads that are                 
  not part of the interstate or primary system of this state.                  
  Number 468                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER remarked that he hopes that doesn't appear                   
  to be too adverse to those municipalities.                                   
  Number 477                                                                   
  REP. KOTT inquired as to what we have on the books at this                   
  time that would require those businesses who erected a sign                  
  to actually maintain the sign.                                               
  Number 491                                                                   
  MR. LUCKHAUPT responded that the exceptions and also the                     
  existing language for signs in statute require that they be                  
  erected and maintained pursuant to DOT's directions.  The                    
  DOT fights with people all the time about signs.  Jeff                       
  Otteson from DOT has been testifying on how DOT requires and                 
  maintains signs.  The DOT has in AS 19.25 dealing with                       
  offending signs and how they can be required to be                           
  maintained or taken down.                                                    
  REP. PHILLIPS moved the CS for HB 367, version K.                            
  CHAIRMAN PORTER, hearing no objection, moved the adoption of                 
  CSHB 367, version k.                                                         
  Number 553                                                                   
  REP. NORDLUND inquired what are the DOT requirements for the                 
  type, size and lighting.                                                     
  Number 567                                                                   
  MR. LUCKHAUPT responded that you have the requirements that                  
  the letters be a specific size relating to the speed limit                   
  associated with the road.  Also, if the road has a certain                   
  amount of traffic on it, the lighting has to be of a certain                 
  type.  The sign can be reflective, but it can't be                           
  reflective to the extent that it could blind certain                         
  Number 584                                                                   
  REP. GREEN inquired whether there was any provision in the                   
  bill that would require the mom and pop operation to remove                  
  the sign if they closed the establishment.                                   
  Number 589                                                                   
  Mr. KAMRATH responded that the DOT has the regulation                        
  authority to monitor that type of situation.                                 
  Number 607                                                                   
  MR. LUCKHAUPT responded that Section 19.35.150, existing                     
  law, provides that an advertising sign, display or device                    
  which violates the provisions of this chapter is a public                    
  nuisance and the department is required under that statute                   
  to give thirty days notice of an unconforming or illegal                     
  sign.  That would be a sign that doesn't meet these                          
  requirements or isn't maintained.  Thus, the DOT can order                   
  the removal of the sign, or after thirty days the DOT can                    
  remove the sign and charge the cost of removal to the owner                  
  of the property.                                                             
  Number 620                                                                   
  REP. KOTT inquired, if this statute were to be implemented,                  
  would we see signs like the Marlboro at Harley's bar one                     
  mile down the road type of signs.                                            
  Number 627                                                                   
  MR. LUCKHAUPT responded that we do put requirements on what                  
  the signs can advertise, on page 6.  It actually has to                      
  indicate the specific business and must provide directional                  
  information and is limited to those situations.                              
  Number 635                                                                   
  REP. OLBERG remarked that the sign must be for an individual                 
  business entity that is a significant interest to the                        
  traveling public.                                                            
  Number 644                                                                   
  REP. PHILLIPS motioned to move CSHB 367 from committee with                  
  individual recommendations and fiscal notes as indicated.                    
  CHAIRMAN PORTER, hearing no objections, declared CSHB 367                    
  discharged from committee.                                                   
  The House Judiciary Committee Standing Committee was                         
  adjourned at 2:40 p.m.                                                       

Document Name Date/Time Subjects