Legislature(2005 - 2006)CAPITOL 17

04/25/2005 03:15 PM LABOR & COMMERCE


Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+= SB 137 EVICTING INSTITUTIONAL PROPERTY USERS TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
+ SB 139 OCCUPATIONAL BDS/AGENCIES TELECONFERENCED
Moved HCS CSSB 139(L&C) Out of Committee
+ SB 140 BAN INTERNET SPYWARE TELECONFERENCED
Moved Out of Committee
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
= HB 249 ENHANCED 911 SURCHARGES
Moved CSHB 249(L&C) Out of Committee
                    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
          HOUSE LABOR AND COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                         
                         April 25, 2005                                                                                         
                           3:45 p.m.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Representative Tom Anderson, Chair                                                                                              
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux                                                                                                 
Representative Bob Lynn                                                                                                         
Representative Harry Crawford                                                                                                   
Representative David Guttenberg                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Representative Pete Kott                                                                                                        
Representative Norman Rokeberg                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 249                                                                                                              
"An  Act  relating  to  enhanced  911  surcharges  imposed  by  a                                                               
municipality."                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED CSHB 249(L&C) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
SENATE BILL NO. 137                                                                                                             
"An Act  providing that  an institution  providing accommodations                                                               
exempt from  the provisions of  the Uniform  Residential Landlord                                                               
and  Tenant Act  may  evict tenants  without  resorting to  court                                                               
proceedings under AS 09.45.060 - 09.45.160."                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD AND HELD                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 139(L&C)                                                                                                 
"An  Act  relating  to  termination   and  oversight  of  boards,                                                               
commissions, and agency programs;  extending the termination date                                                               
of the Board of Marital and  Family Therapy; and providing for an                                                               
effective date."                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED HCS CSSB 139(L&C) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 140(JUD)                                                                                                 
"An   Act   relating   to  spyware   and   unsolicited   Internet                                                               
advertising."                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED CSSB 140(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 249                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: ENHANCED 911 SURCHARGES & SYSTEMS                                                                                  
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) HAWKER                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
04/04/05       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/04/05       (H)       CRA, L&C                                                                                               
04/12/05       (H)       CRA RPT CS(CRA) 3DP 2NR 1AM                                                                            
04/12/05       (H)       DP: CISSNA, OLSON, THOMAS;                                                                             
04/12/05       (H)       NR: LEDOUX, SALMON;                                                                                    
04/12/05       (H)       AM: NEUMAN                                                                                             
04/12/05       (H)       CRA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 124                                                                             
04/12/05       (H)       Moved CSHB 249(CRA) Out of Committee                                                                   
04/12/05       (H)       MINUTE(CRA)                                                                                            
04/22/05       (H)       L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17                                                                              
04/22/05       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/22/05       (H)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
04/25/05       (H)       L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
BILL: SB 137                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: EVICTIONS FROM UNIV. STUDENT HOUSING                                                                               
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) SEEKINS                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
03/08/05       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/08/05       (S)       L&C, JUD                                                                                               
03/22/05       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 211                                                                               
03/22/05       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/22/05       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
03/24/05       (S)       L&C AT 2:00 PM BELTZ 211                                                                               
03/24/05       (S)       Moved  SB 137 Out of Committee                                                                         
03/24/05       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
03/29/05       (S)       L&C RPT  3DP                                                                                           
03/29/05       (S)       DP: BUNDE, DAVIS, STEVENS B                                                                            
04/05/05       (S)       JUD RPT 3DP 1NR                                                                                        
04/05/05       (S)       DP: SEEKINS, THERRIAULT, HUGGINS                                                                       
04/05/05       (S)       NR: GUESS                                                                                              
04/05/05       (S)       JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
04/05/05       (S)       Moved SB 137 Out of Committee                                                                          
04/05/05       (S)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
04/12/05       (S)       TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                                                                     
04/12/05       (S)       VERSION: SB 137                                                                                        
04/13/05       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/13/05       (H)       L&C, JUD                                                                                               
04/22/05       (H)       L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17                                                                              
04/22/05       (H)       <Bill Hearing Postponed to 4/25>                                                                       
04/25/05       (H)       L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
BILL: SB 139                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: OCCUPATIONAL BDS/AGENCIES                                                                                          
SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF LEG BUDGET & AUDIT                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
03/09/05       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/09/05       (S)       L&C, FIN                                                                                               
03/31/05       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 211                                                                               
03/31/05       (S)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
04/05/05       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 211                                                                               
04/05/05       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/05/05       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
04/07/05       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 211                                                                               
04/07/05       (S)       Moved CSSB 139(L&C) Out of Committee                                                                   
04/07/05       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
04/08/05       (S)       L&C       RPT        CS              5DP                                                               
                         SAME TITLE                                                                                             
04/08/05       (S)       DP: BUNDE, DAVIS, ELLIS, SEEKINS,                                                                      
                         STEVENS B                                                                                              
04/18/05       (S)       FIN RPT CS(L&C)  4DP 1NR                                                                               
04/18/05       (S)       DP: GREEN, HOFFMAN, OLSON, STEDMAN                                                                     
04/18/05       (S)       NR: DYSON                                                                                              
04/18/05       (S)       FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532                                                                      
04/18/05       (S)       Moved CSSB 139(L&C) Out of Committee                                                                   
04/18/05       (S)       MINUTE(FIN)                                                                                            
04/20/05       (S)       TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                                                                     
04/20/05       (S)       VERSION: CSSB 139(L&C)                                                                                 
04/21/05       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/21/05       (H)       L&C, FIN                                                                                               
04/25/05       (H)       L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
BILL: SB 140                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: COMPUTERS & INTERNET                                                                                               
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) THERRIAULT                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
03/10/05       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/10/05       (S)       L&C, JUD                                                                                               
03/22/05       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 211                                                                               
03/22/05       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/22/05       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
03/24/05       (S)       L&C AT 2:00 PM BELTZ 211                                                                               
03/24/05       (S)       Moved  SB 140 Out of Committee                                                                         
03/24/05       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
03/29/05       (S)       L&C RPT 3DP                                                                                            
03/29/05       (S)       DP: BUNDE, DAVIS, STEVENS B                                                                            
04/07/05       (S)       JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
04/07/05       (S)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
04/08/05       (H)       JUD AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
04/08/05       (S)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
04/13/05       (H)       JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
04/13/05       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/13/05       (S)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
04/14/05       (S)       JUD       RPT      CS       3DP      2NR                                                               
                         SAME TITLE                                                                                             
04/14/05       (S)       DP: SEEKINS, HUGGINS, THERRIAULT                                                                       
04/14/05       (S)       NR: FRENCH, GUESS                                                                                      
04/14/05       (S)       JUD AT 8:00 AM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
04/14/05       (S)       Moved CSSB 140(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                   
04/14/05       (S)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
04/19/05       (S)       TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                                                                     
04/19/05       (S)       VERSION: CSSB 140(JUD)                                                                                 
04/20/05       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/20/05       (H)       L&C, JUD                                                                                               
04/25/05       (H)       L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
JOE MICHEL, Staff                                                                                                               
to Senator Ralph Seekins                                                                                                        
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented SB 137, on behalf of the sponsor,                                                                
Senator Seekins.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MICHAEL HOSTINA, Associate General Counsel                                                                                      
University of Alaska - Fairbanks                                                                                                
Fairbanks, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Offered information regarding the need for                                                                 
SB 137.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
TOM MAHER, Staff                                                                                                                
to Senator Gene Therriault                                                                                                      
Legislative Budget & Audit Committee                                                                                            
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented SB 139 on behalf of the sponsor,                                                                 
the Legislative Budget & Audit Committee that is chaired by                                                                     
Senator Therriault.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
PAT DAVIDSON, Legislative Auditor                                                                                               
Division of Legislative Audit                                                                                                   
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:     During  hearing  of   SB  139,  answered                                                               
questions.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
DAVID STANCLIFF, Staff                                                                                                          
to Senator Gene Therriault                                                                                                      
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:   Presented SB 140 on behalf  of the sponsor,                                                               
Senator Therriault.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
BENJAMIN EDELMAN                                                                                                                
(No address provided)                                                                                                           
POSITION  STATEMENT:     During  hearing  of   SB  140,  provided                                                               
information regarding spyware and  similar legislation from other                                                               
states.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR TOM ANDERSON  called the House Labor  and Commerce Standing                                                             
Committee  meeting  to  order at  3:45:07  PM.    Representatives                                                             
Anderson, LeDoux, Lynn, Crawford,  and Guttenberg were present at                                                               
the call to order.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
HB 249-ENHANCED 911 SURCHARGES & SYSTEMS                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
3:45:52 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR ANDERSON announced  that the first order  of business would                                                               
be  HOUSE  BILL  NO.  249,  "An  Act  relating  to  enhanced  911                                                               
surcharges imposed by a municipality."                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR ANDERSON  reminded the  committee that he  had held  HB 249                                                               
upon the request  of the Alaska Telephone  Association.  Although                                                               
there is  still analysis  [forthcoming], he  said that  he didn't                                                               
want to delay the legislation and  thus wanted to move HB 249 out                                                               
of committee.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
3:46:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN  moved  to  report  CSHB  249,  Version  24-                                                               
LS0853\F,  Cook,  4/21/05,  out   of  committee  with  individual                                                               
recommendations and  the accompanying fiscal notes.   There being                                                               
no objection,  CSHB 249(L&C)  was reported  from the  House Labor                                                               
and Commerce Standing Committee.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
3:46:58 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  ANDERSON,   in  response  to   Representative  Guttenberg,                                                               
explained  that the  committee had  been waiting  for the  Alaska                                                               
Telephone Association's  [analysis] regarding  the amount  of the                                                               
fee, $1.50  versus $2.00.  However,  he related that he  has been                                                               
told that  the association  doesn't want  to oppose  [the current                                                               
fee]  because it  would delay  the legislation.   In  response to                                                               
Representative  Lynn, Chair  Anderson  said that  HB 249  doesn't                                                               
have any other  committee of referral.   Chair Anderson indicated                                                               
that  if  there  are  any  problems,  the  legislation  could  be                                                               
addressed in the House Rules Standing Committee.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
SB 137-EVICTIONS FROM UNIV. STUDENT HOUSING                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
3:48:18 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR ANDERSON  announced that the  next order of  business would                                                               
be SENATE  BILL NO.  137, "An Act  providing that  an institution                                                               
providing  accommodations  exempt  from  the  provisions  of  the                                                               
Uniform  Residential Landlord  and Tenant  Act may  evict tenants                                                               
without  resorting  to court  proceedings  under  AS 09.45.060  -                                                               
09.45.160."                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
JOE  MICHEL,  Staff  to  Senator   Ralph  Seekins,  Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature,   informed  the   committee  that   Senator  Seekins                                                               
sponsored this legislation upon the  request of the University of                                                               
Alaska.    The  legislation  stems  from a  few  cases  in  which                                                               
disruptive students have used the  court system to stall eviction                                                               
from a  unit until a time  more convenient for the  student.  The                                                               
infractions of these students were  beyond what was allowed under                                                               
their  student  housing  contract.    Therefore,  the  university                                                               
needed  to remove  the  students from  the  housing before  their                                                               
disruptive behavior impacted other  students.  He explained, "The                                                               
Uniform Residential  Landlord and Tenant Act  (ULTA) was designed                                                               
to  alleviate  injustices  inflicted on  residential  renters  by                                                               
unscrupulous private  landlords."  The  State of Alaska's  Act is                                                               
taken  almost  verbatim  from  the   federal  act.    Mr.  Michel                                                               
specified that  the intent of  SB 137  is to fix  the discrepancy                                                               
between  the legislative  intent  of the  ULTA  and recent  lower                                                               
court   decisions  regarding   the   eviction   and  removal   of                                                               
individuals residing in residential  housing such as [dormitories                                                               
at a university].                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
3:50:00 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. MICHEL  then highlighted AS  34.03.330, which  specifies that                                                               
public service institutional entities  aren't compatible with the                                                               
heightened  protections designed  for  residential renters  under                                                               
ULTA.    Therefore,  these  larger  institutions  aren't  in  the                                                               
business  of   long-term  residential   housing  and   have  been                                                               
exempted.   For  example,  a hospital  shouldn't  be required  to                                                               
obtain a court order to remove  a patient who no longer needs its                                                               
services.  Furthermore, a student  expelled from school shouldn't                                                               
be able to  insist on remaining in student housing  until a court                                                               
order is obtained for his/her removal.   Mr. Michel noted that he                                                               
has   reviewed  the   university's  housing   policies  and   has                                                               
determined that  it's a  lengthy process  of reviews  and appeals                                                               
prior   to  eviction.     The   university  is   requesting  this                                                               
legislation because going to court is costly, he related.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
3:51:27 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  ANDERSON  said that  he  liked  the  idea behind  SB  137.                                                               
However, he inquired as to  whether SB 137 includes sideboards so                                                               
that an individual  who is treated unfairly would  have an avenue                                                               
for redress.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  MICHEL  answered  that  there  aren't  sideboards,  per  se.                                                               
However,  the contract  the individual  signs contains  rules and                                                               
specifications that the facility wouldn't be able to violate.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  ANDERSON  surmised  then   that  an  individual  could  be                                                               
evicted,  but  if that  individual  feels  that he/she  is  being                                                               
treated unfairly  he/she could seek  an injunctive relief  or sue                                                               
the [facility] on a contract basis.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
3:54:03 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN noted  that  he liked  the  idea of  getting                                                               
unruly students  out of  universities because  it isn't  fair for                                                               
someone  to  be disruptive  to  the  point of  impacting  others.                                                               
However, this  legislation would  also include nursing  homes and                                                               
thus  he asked  whether a  [disruptive] individual  with dementia                                                               
living in a nursing home could be evicted without a court order.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR.  MICHEL  answered  that technically,  institutions  [such  as                                                               
nursing homes]  could evict someone,  but there is a  contract by                                                               
which  the institution  must abide.   Mr.  Michel clarified  that                                                               
this is  already in  statute; the problem  has arisen  with lower                                                               
court  decisions  that  haven't  applied it  to  cases  involving                                                               
students living in the university dormitories.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
3:55:41 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN  said that  he  had  no problem  evicting  a                                                               
problem  student out  of  a university  dormitory.   However,  he                                                               
inquired as to  how those residents in a nursing  home who can be                                                               
very difficult can be protected.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
3:56:45 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MICHAEL HOSTINA, Associate General  Counsel, University of Alaska                                                               
- Fairbanks (UAF), opined that  there are a variety of safeguards                                                               
in place  for most university  students, hospital  residents, and                                                               
nursing home residents.  In the  case of a nursing home resident,                                                               
there are specific  laws as well as an ombudsman  for the elderly                                                               
to help safeguard  the rights of the patient.   He further opined                                                               
that most nursing  homes wouldn't think to resort  to an eviction                                                               
process  to remove  a patient.    The nursing  home would  simply                                                               
discharge the  patient.   However, if  the patient  objected, the                                                               
nursing home would have to  seek injunctive relief to enforce the                                                               
contract.  This  proposed law wouldn't change much  of that, save                                                               
that a  patient wouldn't be  able to  claim that an  eviction was                                                               
necessary.   He  noted that  the courts  could still  address the                                                               
merits of any injunctive action.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR. HOSTINA  informed the committee  that at UAF there  have been                                                               
one or two students who have  been dorm room lawyers with lots of                                                               
time on their  hands.  In those cases, the  students have a ready                                                               
argument that  the university  has to [go  through the   eviction                                                               
process].  In a couple of  cases with UAF, the courts agreed with                                                               
that argument.  Mr. Hostina  suspected that the university is the                                                               
major  beneficiary   of  this   legislation  because   the  other                                                               
categories   of   institutions   aren't  likely   to   face   the                                                               
aforementioned argument.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
3:58:44 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN  inquired as  to  the  difference between  a                                                               
discharge  and  an  eviction  for   a  patient;  either  way  the                                                               
individual is not residing in  the facility.  Representative Lynn                                                               
expressed concern that  perhaps SB 137 is casting too  large of a                                                               
net.  Therefore,  he asked if the legislation  could include some                                                               
protections  for  the  categories  beyond  those  addressing  the                                                               
university students.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
3:59:12 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  ANDERSON  urged  Mr.  Michel to  obtain  an  opinion  from                                                               
Legislative Legal and Research  Services on Representative Lynn's                                                               
concern.   However,  Chair  Anderson said  he  didn't think  that                                                               
there was any need to delay the bill.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX echoed  the same discomfort with  SB 137 as                                                               
did  Representative Lynn.   Therefore,  she said  she would  feel                                                               
more  comfortable  adopting  a conceptual  amendment  that  would                                                               
eliminate the [nursing homes and hospitals] from this proposal.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
4:01:01 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR ANDERSON related his understanding  that ULTA doesn't apply                                                               
to [a private] nursing home.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
4:01:35 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. HOSTINA  confirmed Chair Anderson's understanding,  and added                                                               
that  the university,  hospital, nursing  homes, and  prisons are                                                               
already  excluded from  ULTA.   However,  because the  university                                                               
provides housing, it  made for an easy argument for  a student to                                                               
say that he/she  must be evicted rather than  merely removed from                                                               
housing.  Although  he reiterated that he didn't  believe such an                                                               
argument  would  come  up,  he would  favor  addressing  it  with                                                               
respect  to institutions  beyond  the university.   He  specified                                                               
that SB 137 is merely requesting a clarification of ULTA.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
4:03:05 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR ANDERSON pointed out that  perhaps the confusion has arisen                                                               
from the text  in the sponsor statement that  specifies that this                                                               
legislation  would   apply  to   nursing  homes   and  hospitals.                                                               
Therefore, he suggested that it  would be appropriate to check on                                                               
this question with Legislative Legal and Research Services.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
4:03:35 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG  stated  that   ULTA  doesn't  apply  to                                                               
[hospitals  and  nursing homes]  under  AS  34.03.330(b)(1).   He                                                               
characterized the situation  that SB 137 is addressing  as one in                                                               
which rogue judges aren't enforcing the law.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
4:04:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG  clarified that  this legislation  is not                                                               
an  amendment  to  ULTA,  rather it's  an  amendment  to  actions                                                               
relating to real property.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. HOSTINA agreed.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG  further clarified  that SB  137, through                                                               
its  amendment to  actions relating  to real  property, makes  it                                                               
crystal clear to  the courts that [the  university shouldn't have                                                               
to go through an eviction process for a student].                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  ANDERSON asked  whether the  title of  the legislation  is                                                               
accurate.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG replied,  "It's  actually probably  more                                                               
than accurate because ... they're  providing the exemptions under                                                               
the  Landlord/Tenant  Act  ...  and that  they  can't  resort  to                                                               
proceedings under  the real  property to  make the  ... eviction.                                                               
They can't use a court action to recover possession."                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
4:06:10 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. HOSTINA,  in response  to Representative  Rokeberg, confirmed                                                               
that  [the university]  used  a trespass  action  rather than  an                                                               
eviction action.   He explained  that the ULTA  unlawful detainer                                                               
action  wasn't  used because  those  take  10-20 days  to  remove                                                               
someone from  housing.   In the case  of the  disruptive student,                                                               
the student  had went  through the  university's process  and the                                                               
university understood  the law to  mean that there was  no reason                                                               
to resort to forcible entry  and detainer action.  Therefore, the                                                               
university understood the  law to allow simple  notification of a                                                               
trespass and  an arrest  could ensue if  the student  insisted on                                                               
remaining.  However,  the courts disagreed and  insisted that the                                                               
university go through a forcible entry and detainer action.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
4:06:56 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG surmised then  that the university wished                                                               
to remove  the student  sooner than  under the  unlawful detainer                                                               
process because the student was  destructive to the population of                                                               
the dormitory.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR. HOSTINA agreed, and added  that generally these students have                                                               
been given  plenty of notice  regarding the need to  change their                                                               
behavior.   Even if the  student continues to be  disruptive, the                                                               
university provides  yet another process  such that he/she  has a                                                               
right of appeal within the  university if the individual believes                                                               
his/her constitutional  rights have  been violated.   The student                                                               
can  appeal to  superior court.   After  the aforementioned,  the                                                               
university doesn't  want to  have to go  through a  court process                                                               
for  an  eviction.    Mr.   Hostina  agreed  with  Representative                                                               
Rokeberg that  currently the ULTA  doesn't apply in any  of these                                                               
cases, this legislation merely clarifies  that the forcible entry                                                               
and detainer  action shouldn't be required  of those institutions                                                               
for the same reasons.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
4:08:26 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD  commented that  he is becoming  more and                                                               
more confused.  He expressed  concern because when his father who                                                               
was living  in a nursing  home was diagnosed with  Alzheimer, the                                                               
nursing  home  said  that  it didn't  take  care  of  Alzheimer's                                                               
patients.   Therefore, Representative  Crawford was told  that he                                                               
would  have to  find  another  residence for  his  father.   Upon                                                               
finding a  Veterans' Administration  hospital, his father  had to                                                               
wait until there  was an opening.  Fortunately,  in Louisiana his                                                               
father was  protected from being  evicted from the  nursing home.                                                               
He  asked if  this legislation  would provide  nursing homes  the                                                               
ability to  evict people in  the aforementioned situation  if the                                                               
Alzheimer  patient becomes  disruptive.   Representative Crawford                                                               
opined that it seems like there  are two different questions.  He                                                               
further  opined that  the committee  would  probably support  the                                                               
legislation  in   relation  to   cases  involving   a  disruptive                                                               
university student.  However, he  expressed interest in obtaining                                                               
more information on the appeals process.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  ANDERSON  related  his understanding  that  Representative                                                               
Crawford  was   interested  in   knowing  who   this  legislation                                                               
encompasses  and how  it  would  apply in  the  various types  of                                                               
institutions.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN  suggested limiting the legislation  to apply                                                               
only to student housing.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR ANDERSON  related his  belief that  the sponsor  wanted the                                                               
legislation to be more expansive than merely student housing.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
4:11:03 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  MICHEL reminded  the committee  that SB  137 isn't  changing                                                               
[Alaska's Landlord Tenant Act],  the legislation merely addresses                                                               
the  court decisions  [that are  incongruent with  the Act].   He                                                               
offered  to  obtain  information regarding  the  questions  asked                                                               
today.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
4:11:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG  pointed out  that  SB  137 changes  the                                                               
civil  procedures for  real estate  actions.   He suggested  that                                                               
perhaps, this legislation is too broad [as written].                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GUTTENBERG   acknowledged  that   the  disruptive                                                               
student  situations   have  been  problematic  over   the  years.                                                               
Therefore,  Representative  Guttenberg  inquired as  to  why  the                                                               
student housing  contract doesn't address the  ramifications of a                                                               
disruptive student in regards to his/her housing.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
4:13:17 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HOSTINA  answered  that  it  is  addressed  in  the  housing                                                               
contracts.    In   fact,  some  of  the   housing  contracts  are                                                               
terminable at will.   Still, the courts have  read such contracts                                                               
and  the Code  of Civil  Procedure under  Title 9  to require  an                                                               
eviction  to  recover possession  of  the  student housing  unit.                                                               
Therefore,  the  university  was arguably  prevented  from  doing                                                               
anything other than going to  court to recover possessions.  From                                                               
that  case  it  would  seem  that  it  doesn't  matter  what  the                                                               
contracts include, he opined.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
4:14:40 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  requested a copy  of the decision  in such                                                               
cases.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
4:15:42 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CRAWFORD referred  to the  following language  in                                                               
the sponsor  statement, which  read:  "A  hospital should  not be                                                               
required  to obtain  a court  order to  remove a  patient who  no                                                               
longer needs  its services."   He questioned  who decides  when a                                                               
patient no  longer needs its  services.   Representative Crawford                                                               
expressed  the need  to be  sure what  this legislation  actually                                                               
does.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
4:16:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR ANDERSON announced that SB 137 would be held over.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
SB 139-OCCUPATIONAL BDS/AGENCIES                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR ANDERSON  announced that the  next order of  business would                                                               
be  CS  FOR  SENATE  BILL  NO.  139(L&C),  "An  Act  relating  to                                                               
termination  and oversight  of  boards,  commissions, and  agency                                                               
programs; extending the termination date  of the Board of Marital                                                               
and Family Therapy; and providing for an effective date."                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
TOM MAHER,  Staff to Senator Gene  Therriault, Legislative Budget                                                               
& Audit Committee, Alaska State  Legislature, explained that CSSB
139(L&C) stems  from recommendations contained in  two reports by                                                               
the Division of Legislative Audit.   Section 1 of the legislation                                                               
extends  the sunset  date  of  the Board  of  Marital and  Family                                                               
Therapy from June  30, 2005, to June 30, 2010,  as recommended by                                                               
the  audit included  in the  committee packet.   The  legislation                                                               
also incorporates  recommendations from the audit  of the "Alaska                                                               
Sunset Process  and Selected Investigative  Issues".   Sections 2                                                               
and 4 of this legislation clarify  that for those boards that are                                                               
terminated,  the   transfer  of  authority  for   regulatory  and                                                               
disciplinary powers  to the Department of  Commerce, Community, &                                                               
Economic  Development (DCCED).   Although  DCCED has  assumed the                                                               
responsibility for  administering the regulated  occupation after                                                               
a board has  terminated, the statutes do not  clearly provide the                                                               
department the authority to do so.   Mr. Maher expressed the hope                                                               
that this change will address the uncertainty.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR. MAHER continued by pointing out  that Sections 3 and 5 change                                                               
the  standard  sunset  period  for   occupational  boards  in  AS                                                               
08.03.020(c) and  nonoccupational boards in AS  44.66.010(c) from                                                               
"not  to exceed  fours years"  to  "not to  exceed eight  years".                                                               
Increasing the  standard sunset period  allows for better  use of                                                               
audit staff,  committee time, and  makes the sunset  process less                                                               
consuming  for  boards  and  regulatory   agencies.    Mr.  Maher                                                               
highlighted that since Alaska's  sunset process has matured, most                                                               
of  the sunset  reviews  are less  about  eliminating boards  and                                                               
commissions and more about operational  performance.  In fact, 12                                                               
states have  either repealed or  suspended their  sunset process.                                                               
The  most  common standard  is  for  an  extension of  10  years,                                                               
although Alaska  and three other  states have maintained  a four-                                                               
year  extension standard.   He  noted that  the legislature  will                                                               
still be  able to set  whatever time limit it  deems appropriate,                                                               
regardless of this statutory change.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR.  MAHER specified  that to  focus on  operational performance,                                                               
this  legislation   requires  specific  analysis   of  efficiency                                                               
effectiveness  and  the  avoidance of  duplication  of  functions                                                               
during the  sunset review.  In  Section 6 two criteria  that must                                                               
be  considered during  the course  of  the sunset  review by  the                                                               
auditors is  added to statute.   "First, the extent to  which the                                                               
board,  commission,  or  agency   has  effectively  attained  its                                                               
objectives and  the efficiency  with which  it has  operated; and                                                               
second,  the extent  to which  the board,  commission, or  agency                                                               
duplicates the  activities of another governmental  agency or the                                                               
private  sector," he  said.   Therefore,  expanding the  criteria                                                               
assures   that  auditors   will   measure   the  efficiency   and                                                               
effectiveness  of the  entities under  review.   He informed  the                                                               
committee that  the Senate Labor and  Commerce Standing Committee                                                               
approved  an  amendment  offered  by  the  administration,  which                                                               
inserted the  language "all statutory  authority of the  board is                                                               
transferred  to  the  department"  in Section  2.    Furthermore,                                                               
Section  4,  which  further  defines   the  transition  of  board                                                               
regulation when a board is terminated,  was added.  He then noted                                                               
that there is  one fiscal note from the  Division of Occupational                                                               
Licensing  and  explained:   "passage  of  this legislation  will                                                               
incur no additional  cost, the outlying years of  the fiscal note                                                               
merely  show the  cost of  continuing this  board at  the current                                                               
level, as already included in the budget."                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
4:20:42 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR ANDERSON  surmised then that the  legislation maintains the                                                               
current  status  in  which  fees  cover the  cost.    He  further                                                               
surmised that the  legislation extends the board to  2010 and the                                                               
amendment  in  the Senate  merely  codifies  that the  department                                                               
takes over if a board sunsets.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR. MAHER agreed with the chair's understanding.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR ANDERSON noted that he  liked [paragraphs] (10) and (11) on                                                               
page  3 of  the legislation.    Those paragraphs  seem to  insert                                                               
missions and  measures to ensure  that the board,  commission, or                                                               
agency attains  its objectives  and does  so efficiently.   Chair                                                               
Anderson opined that  such isn't the case for any  other board or                                                               
commission renewal.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG pointed  out that  the paragraphs  would                                                               
apply to all boards and commissions.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
4:22:28 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG  turned attention to page  2, lines 13-                                                               
14,  which  transfer statutory  authority  of  the board  to  the                                                               
department.  Representative  Guttenberg related his understanding                                                               
that  after  an entity  sunsets,  the  language establishing  the                                                               
entity remains in statute.   Therefore, he surmised that the only                                                               
way  to prevent  the department  from administering  a commission                                                               
that  the  legislature  has  (indisc.)   is  through  the  budget                                                               
process.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
PAT  DAVIDSON,  Legislative   Auditor,  Division  of  Legislative                                                               
Audit, Alaska  State Legislature,  explained that currently  if a                                                               
board is sunset, the regulations  implementing the statute become                                                               
void because  the board is  given powers.  However,  the statutes                                                               
remain  and   thus  statutes  may   conflict  with   the  current                                                               
licensing.   For example,  statutes may  specify only  a licensed                                                               
professional  can   perform  a   certain  occupation,   but  that                                                               
occupation is no  longer being licensed.  Therefore,  there is no                                                               
effective mechanism  to totally  shut down  an occupation.   This                                                               
language  was intended  to place  the onus  on the  department to                                                               
make the statutory  changes that change it to  a regulation under                                                               
the division or alternatively  eliminating the licensing function                                                               
altogether.  She  highlighted that under current  statute it does                                                               
happen automatically.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GUTTENBERG  posed a  situation  in  which it's  a                                                               
commission without any powers, duties, and responsibilities.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. DAVIDSON replied, "To the  extent that there's any regulation                                                               
in place  that makes the  agency happen, those  regulations, when                                                               
the  board  sunsets,  are voided."    Therefore,  the  department                                                               
couldn't  necessarily  do  anything.    In  further  response  to                                                               
Representative Guttenberg,  Ms. Davidson  said that  a commission                                                               
without any written regulations would continue.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
4:24:58 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG  said that he didn't  entirely understand                                                               
Section 2 because  it would seem that  transferring the statutory                                                               
authority  of a  [sunset]  board would  keep  its regulatory  and                                                               
statutory scheme of enforcement alive.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
4:25:57 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR ANDERSON pointed out that this  is an extension to 2010 and                                                               
thus he surmised that if  the extensions continue, Section 2 will                                                               
never apply.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. DAVIDSON clarified that Section  1 is a stand-alone provision                                                               
that extends the Board of Marital  and Family Therapy.  The other                                                               
sections change the  licensing statutes overall.   In response to                                                               
Representative Rokeberg's  earlier question, Ms.  Davidson agreed                                                               
that  [Section 2]  would  allow the  department  to continue  the                                                               
regulation of  an activity.   However, there is not  an effective                                                               
way to  shut it down because  the statutes don't "go  away."  The                                                               
desire, she opined,  is to transfer the  authority of eliminating                                                               
the statutes [of  entities that have sunset] and  have a smoother                                                               
transition.  For  instance, according to statutes  one can't sell                                                               
eyeglasses  or   contact  lenses   without  being   a  physician,                                                               
optometrist, or  dispensing optician.  The  recommendation was to                                                               
change  the  Board  of Dispensing  Opticians  to  a  registration                                                               
process  while continuing  to allow  people  to sell  eyeglasses.                                                               
However, that result doesn't occur with a sunset.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   ROKEBERG   acknowledged   the   administration's                                                               
position in that it dislikes  boards and commissions.  Therefore,                                                               
he  said he  wasn't  sure  that he  agreed  with the  legislature                                                               
transferring  legislative authority  over boards  and commissions                                                               
to the administration.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GUTTENBERG  asked  if   the  result  of  the  new                                                               
language in Section  2 would be a case in  which the authority is                                                               
transferred to  the department, which  phases out the  entity and                                                               
the division brings forth cleanup language.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
4:29:35 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. DAVIDSON  replied, "In  general terms,  yes."   She explained                                                               
that the  goal is  to avoid statutory  conflict between  a sunset                                                               
board with no regulations while  a licensing requirement remains.                                                               
Therefore,  the agency  or  the department  would  take steps  to                                                               
introduce legislation  to either "shut down"  licensing or change                                                               
the  statutes.   She noted  that  it could  also be  done by  the                                                               
legislature.  However,  there is the need  for statutory changes.                                                               
"It's  just  that  the  sunset  is too  blunt  an  instrument  to                                                               
necessarily get to what that end goal is," she said.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG  pointed out  that although  it may  be a                                                               
messy process, it  has worked for 40 years.   He highlighted that                                                               
when an entity  is sunset, there is a wind-down  year in which to                                                               
address the entity.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD announced  that he's not in  favor of the                                                               
legislation  as it  is now.   Furthermore,  he recalled  that the                                                               
Board of  Marital and  Family Therapy  is one  of the  six boards                                                               
that House [legislation] attempts to extend.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
4:32:04 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  DAVIDSON clarified  that  the Board  of  Marital and  Family                                                               
Therapy wasn't included in that  legislation.  She explained that                                                               
the Legislative  Budget & Audit  Committee usually  addresses any                                                               
board extension that wasn't addressed near the end of session.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
4:32:44 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. DAVIDSON  informed the committee  that within the  audit, the                                                               
notion  of  combining  behavioral  health  boards  was  reviewed.                                                               
However,  the professional  counselors were  strongly opposed  to                                                               
combining  with  marital  and family  therapists.    Furthermore,                                                               
there had already been legislation  put forth to extend the Board                                                               
of Professional Counselors as a single entity.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG pointed  out that  in the  audit report,                                                               
the recommendation  was to change  extensions from four  to eight                                                               
years.  He inquired as to why eight years was chosen.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MS. DAVIDSON  said that many  factors were considered  when eight                                                               
years  was chosen,  including the  standard  extensions in  other                                                               
states.  While 10 years  is the most frequent extension standard,                                                               
past  practice has  shown that  double extensions  under Alaska's                                                               
current four-year  standard have  passed.  Ms.  Davidson reminded                                                               
the committee  that the eight years  is the number of  years that                                                               
an extension cannot exceed.   However, any legislator can request                                                               
a review of any governmental operation.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR ANDERSON  opined that four  years is an  appropriate amount                                                               
of time because it's not too extensive.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
4:35:19 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   LEDOUX,   recalling  Representative   Rokeberg's                                                               
earlier  comment,  inquired as  to  why  this process  should  be                                                               
changed after it has worked well for 20 years.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MS.  DAVIDSON informed  the  committee  that since  approximately                                                               
1980,  18  entities  have  been   terminated  and  23  have  been                                                               
reestablished.     The  "Guide  Board"  was   probably  the  most                                                               
problematic and was  a situation in which  the department stepped                                                               
in  to  regulate  the  occupation,   although  it  had  no  legal                                                               
authority to do  so.  Therefore, past practices  were reviewed in                                                               
an attempt to determine a way to smooth the process a bit.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
4:37:22 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR ANDERSON noted his desire to forward the legislation.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG  pointed out that the  legislature speaks                                                               
through not  acting some times,  which he indicated was  the case                                                               
in  relation  to the  "Guide  Board".    If this  legislation  is                                                               
adopted, then  the power to  regulate the profession is  given to                                                               
the governor  and it's taken out  of the hands of  the boards and                                                               
commissions and the legislature.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR ANDERSON  announced then that  he would  hold SB 139.   [SB
139 was taken up at the end of this meeting.]                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
SB 140-COMPUTERS & INTERNET                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
4:38:42 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR ANDERSON announced  that the final order  of business would                                                               
be CS FOR  SENATE BILL NO. 140(JUD), "An Act  relating to spyware                                                               
and unsolicited Internet advertising."                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
DAVID STANCLIFF,  Staff to Senator Gene  Therriault, Alaska State                                                               
Legislature, explained  that Alaska is  one of 10 states  that is                                                               
trying to provide a better  threshold for people to have recourse                                                               
when  their computer  has been  invaded  or rendered  inoperable.                                                               
Therefore,  the   legislation  before   the  committee   had  the                                                               
advantage  of reviewing  the  models  of 10  other  states.   Mr.                                                               
Stancliff  explained that  the  goal of  SB 140  is  to begin  to                                                               
unwind  the serious  web  with  spyware.   Beyond  the trade  and                                                               
commerce aspect of this legislation,  the more serious problem is                                                               
that  an expensive  investment, one's  computer, can  be rendered                                                               
useless.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
4:41:29 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
BENJAMIN EDELMAN  informed the  committee that  he is  a graduate                                                               
student working  on a degree  in economics at Harvard  after just                                                               
completing law  school.  He  noted that on  the side he  has been                                                               
testing  spyware writing  about what  he has  found.   He further                                                               
noted that he  has been honored by serving as  the expert in some                                                               
cases trying to "put a check  on spyware companies."  Mr. Edelman                                                               
agreed  with Mr.  Stancliff  that  there is  much  software on  a                                                               
typical PC, whether located in an office  or a home.  Some of the                                                               
spyware programs  track the user's  name, e-mail  address, credit                                                               
card  numbers, etcetera  while other  spyware  programs focus  on                                                               
advertising.    Although   the  later  would  seem   to  be  less                                                               
nefarious,  it has  turned out  to be  fairly profitable.   These                                                               
pop-up programs are  a large part of the spyware  problem and new                                                               
legislation  can address  that,  he opined.    However, there  is                                                               
legislation  already  in  place for  those  individuals  stealing                                                               
credit card numbers and thus there's  no need to pass yet another                                                               
law on that subject.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR. EDELMAN explained  that the pop-up companies  operate in what                                                               
seems to  be a gray  area.  In fact,  some courts have  said that                                                               
these  extra pop-ups  might be  legally permissible.   Therefore,                                                               
scores of companies have tried  to use pop-ups.  This legislation                                                               
puts an  end to  the aforementioned and  specifies that  it's not                                                               
fair  game.   He likened  a  pop-up advertisement  to one's  cell                                                               
phone  company playing  an advertisement  for a  specific airline                                                               
when one  used the phone  to call  another airline.   Mr. Edelman                                                               
said  that  although  some  courts  may  have  said  that  pop-up                                                               
advertisements  are acceptable  under existing  law, legislatures                                                               
have the right to say otherwise.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
4:46:11 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.   EDELMAN  turned   to  the   differing  approaches   various                                                               
legislatures have  followed.  California passed  legislation last                                                               
year  that's  now  under  consideration in  at  least  six  other                                                               
states.    California's  law specifies  about  a  dozen  specific                                                               
tactics that  are prohibited.   However, Mr. Edelman  opined that                                                               
California's approach  is quite  ineffective because  the tactics                                                               
prohibited aren't those used by  the largest, prominent, and most                                                               
profitable  companies  but  rather  those  tactics  used  by  the                                                               
"little guys  that we can't  even find."   In fact, not  much has                                                               
changed  for  the  better  since   the  passage  of  California's                                                               
legislation.    He  noted  that  there  a  couple  of  pieces  of                                                               
legislation  in  Washington,  D.C.,  that are  being  put  forth,                                                               
although they  too seem to  address infractions that  only impact                                                               
tens of  thousands of users  not tens  of millions.   He informed                                                               
the  committee  that  last  year  Utah  passed  legislation  with                                                               
important  similarities  to  SB  140.    Mr.  Edelman  noted  his                                                               
surprise   with  the   number  of   companies  presenting   false                                                               
information regarding what Utah's  legislation would do, although                                                               
there was  no legitimate basis  for the allegations.   Therefore,                                                               
he  sensed   that  software  companies  don't   like  governments                                                               
instructing them  with regard to how  they can do business.    He                                                               
opined that software  companies view their actions  on a computer                                                               
as  not having  a  basis  for any  government  oversight at  all.                                                               
However, he disagreed.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
4:49:43 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GUTTENBERG  asked  if  there is  another  way  to                                                               
address spyware.   He  asked if a  computer that  detects spyware                                                               
could then send a notice  to the spyware companies informing them                                                               
they are being charged for installation.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MR. EDELMAN  said that there's no  way to send such  a message to                                                               
the spyware company.   "Consumers just aren't in  a good position                                                               
to  impose   their  terms   on  the   makers  of   software,"  he                                                               
highlighted.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
4:52:32 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR ANDERSON, upon  determining no one else  wished to testify,                                                               
closed public testimony.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
4:53:10 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX  moved  to  report CSSB  140(JUD)  out  of                                                               
committee  with individual  recommendations and  the accompanying                                                               
fiscal notes.  There being no objection, it was so ordered.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
SB 139-OCCUPATIONAL BDS/AGENCIES                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  ANDERSON  returned the  committee's  attention  to CS  FOR                                                               
SENATE BILL  NO. 139(L&C),  "An Act  relating to  termination and                                                               
oversight of boards, commissions,  and agency programs; extending                                                               
the termination date of the  Board of Marital and Family Therapy;                                                               
and providing for an effective date."                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR ANDERSON  moved that  the committee  adopt Amendment  1, as                                                               
follows:                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     Delete Sections 2 and 4.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG  objected, and inquired as  to the reason                                                               
for deleting Section 4.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
4:54:11 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
TOM MAHER,  Staff to Representative Gene  Therriault, Legislative                                                               
Budget and  Audit Committee, Alaska State  Legislature, explained                                                               
that Section 4  [proposes the same thing -  to transfer statutory                                                               
authority of the board to the  department] as the new language in                                                               
Section 2.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG removed his objection.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
There being no further objections, Amendment 1 was adopted.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT  moved to report  CSSB 139(L&C),  as amended,                                                               
out  of   committee  with  individual  recommendations   and  the                                                               
accompanying fiscal  notes.  There  being no objection,  HCS CSSB
139(L&C) was reported from the House Labor and Commerce Standing                                                                
Committee.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
ADJOURNMENT                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
There being no further business before the committee, the House                                                                 
Labor and Commerce Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at                                                                  
4:55:06 PM.                                                                                                                   

Document Name Date/Time Subjects