Legislature(1993 - 1994)
03/02/1993 03:00 PM House L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE LABOR AND COMMERCE
STANDING COMMITTEE
March 2, 1993
3:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Rep. Bill Hudson, Chairman
Rep. Joe Green, Vice Chairman
Rep. Brian Porter
Rep. Joe Sitton
MEMBERS ABSENT
Rep. Eldon Mulder
Rep. Jerry Mackie
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
*HB 160: "An act relating to the time for filing certain
civil actions; and providing for an effective
date."
MOVED FROM COMMITTEE
*HB 112: "An act relating to limited partnerships; and
providing for an effective date."
MOVED FROM COMMITTEE
HB 115: "An Act extending the termination date of the
Alaska Tourism Marketing Council; and providing
for an effective date."
CSHB 115(ITT) MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE
(* First public hearing.)
WITNESS REGISTER
REP. JOE GREEN
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
465-4931
Position Statement: Prime Sponsor of HB 160
RICHARD RITTER
American Institute of Architects
800 Glacier Hwy.
Juneau, Alaska 99801
586-1371
Position Statement: Spoke in support of HB 160
RICHARD CATTANAUGH, Vice President
Alaska General Contractors
8181 Old Seward
Anchorage, Alaska 99515
349-4561
Position Statement: Spoke in support of HB 160
DOUG GREEN
Alaska Professional Design
901 W. 29th Ave.
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
563-8474
Position Statement: Testified by way of teleconference in
support of HB 160
LEE HOLMES
Alaska Professional Design
2522 Arctic #200
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
276-0521
Position Statement: Testified by way of teleconference in
support of HB 160
GENE REHFIELD
American Society of Civil Engineers
137 Behrends Avenue
Juneau, Alaska 99801
465-6968
Position Statement: Spoke in support of HB 160
MIKE FORD
Legal Services
Department of Law
P.O. Box 110300
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0300
465-3428
Position Statement: Commented on HB 160
ART PETERSON, Attorney
Dillon and Findley Law Offices
One Sealaska Plaza, Suite 202
Juneau, Alaska 99801
586-4000
Position Statement: Supported HB 112
WENDY MULDER, Legislative Liaison
Department of Commerce and Economic Development
P.O. Box 110800
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0800
465-2500
Position Statement: Commented on HB 115 for the department
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 160
SHORT TITLE: LIABILITY OF DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION PROS
BILL VERSION:
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) GREEN,Phillips,Larson,
Hudson,Porter,Bunde,Vezey,Mulder,Kott,James
TITLE: "An Act relating to the time for filing certain civil
actions; and providing for an effective date."
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
02/17/93 362 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
02/17/93 362 (H) LABOR & COMMERCE, JUDICIARY
02/17/93 373 (H) COSPONSOR(S): VEZEY, MULDER
02/19/93 396 (H) COSPONSOR CORRECTIONS:PHILLIPS,
LARSON
02/19/93 397 (H) HUDSON, PORTER, BUNDE
02/19/93 397 (H) COSPONSOR(S): KOTT
03/02/93 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 112
SHORT TITLE: UNIFORM LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ACT UPDATE
BILL VERSION:
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) MOSES
TITLE: "An Act relating to limited partnerships; and
providing for an effective date."
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
02/01/93 199 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
02/01/93 199 (H) LABOR & COMMERCE, JUDICIARY
03/02/93 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 115
SHORT TITLE: EXTEND TOURISM MARKETING COUNCIL
BILL VERSION:
SPONSOR(S): LABOR & COMMERCE
TITLE: "An Act extending the termination date of the Alaska
Tourism Marketing Council; and providing for an effective
date."
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
02/03/93 213 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
02/03/93 213 (H) TRADE & TOURISM, LABOR & COMM,
FINANCE
02/18/93 (H) ITT AT 05:00 PM CAPITOL 102
02/18/93 (H) MINUTE(ITT)
02/18/93 (H) MINUTE(TRA)
02/24/93 442 (H) STA REFERRAL ADDED,FOLLOWING L&C
02/25/93 453 (H) ITT RPT CS(ITT) NEW TITLE 6DP
02/25/93 454 (H) DP: GREEN, SANDERS, NORDLUND,
MENARD
02/25/93 454 (H) DP: TOOHEY, JAMES
02/25/93 454 (H) -ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DCED) 2/25/93
03/02/93 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
03/02/93 (H) MINUTE(STA)
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 93-17, SIDE A
Number 000
CHAIRMAN HUDSON called the House Labor and Commerce
Committee to order at 3:16 p.m. on March 2, 1993. Members
present were Reps. Hudson, Green, Porter and Sitton.
HB 160: CERTAIN CIVIL ACTIONS
REP. JOE GREEN, PRIME SPONSOR of HB 160, testified that HB
160 proposes a "Statute of Repose" for legal action against
design and construction companies. The statute of repose is
similar to the statute of limitation in other lawsuits. The
sponsor believes that without a time limit to file legal
actions, design professionals and others in the construction
trade are subject to an indefinite and unfair period of
liability. Rep. Green further stated that poor maintenance,
improper operation, or alteration of a building can
adversely affect an original structure. He stated the bill
would not grant immunity, at any time, from injury or damage
as the result of gross negligence. (See attachment 1)
REP. HUDSON asked for questions from the committee. There
were no questions from the committee.
REP. HUDSON called for testimony from Richard Ritter.
Number 108
RICHARD RITTER, CHAIRMAN OF LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS FOR THE
ALASKA CHAPTER OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS,
supported the statements made by Rep. Green and commented
that of the 45 states with a statute of repose, 32 of them
have been adjudged constitutional. He further elaborated on
the costly burden on a firm when a claim is filed against
them, and provided specific examples.
Number 120
REP. HUDSON asked for examples of states that do not have a
"statute of repose."
Number 125
MR. RITTER responded they were Alaska, Alabama, Wisconsin,
Kentucky and New York. He also reiterated that 32 of the 45
states with a statute of repose have been tested in court
and were found constitutional.
Number 172
RICHARD CATTANAGH, VICE PRESIDENT, ALASKA GENERAL
CONTRACTORS, testified in favor of HB 160, stating that
under current law, contractors have unlimited liability for
any construction project that a company may undertake. He
said he believes the law is unfair, pointing out that the
statute of limitations for crimes such as vandalism and
murder have shorter statute of limitations.
MR. CATTANAGH further pointed out that there are many
professionals involved in a construction project and he
feels that it is unreasonable to leave the contractor solely
responsible if a claim is filed. He recommended that a ten
year statute of repose is too long.
Number 218
REP. HUDSON asked if Mr. Cattanagh participated in the
rewriting of this issue last year.
Number 220
MR. CATTANAGH responded no, the contractors had been
excluded from the bill. As a result, the contractors dealt
with the designing engineers and did not participate in
rewriting or redrafting the bill.
Number 233
DOUG GREEN testified via teleconference from Anchorage in
support of HB 160. He pointed out that a building itself is
a process which architects and contractors bring to
completion. At that time, the owner cares for, maintains,
improves or neglects that building, and at that point the
responsibility is transferred from contractor to owner.
Number 240
MR. GREEN also stated that HB 160 would not protect those
who are negligent or fraudulent within that process. In
addition, he said, passage of this bill would potentially,
over time, lower insurance rates.
Number 305
REP. PORTER asked Mr. Green if 10 years was too extreme.
Number 310
MR. GREEN said that some studies show that a lesser length
of time may be justified and would be interested if that
were proposed.
Number 319
REP. HUDSON asked what would be a lesser time and what is
the standard in other states.
Number 323
MR. GREEN said that the standard in most states is five to
eight years. In previous legislation in the Senate, the
Alaska Professional Design Council supported the seven year
"statute of repose."
Number 327
REP. GREEN explained that he was concerned that the shorter
length of time would increase the likelihood of court
intervention and/or if the amount of time was changed in the
bill, it may hinder its passage. His priority was to pass
the bill from committee and amend it at a later date if that
was deemed a reasonable length of time.
MR. GREEN agreed.
Number 341
LEE HOLMES testified from Anchorage on behalf of the ALASKA
PROFESSIONAL DESIGN COUNCIL in support of HB 160. He
reiterated comments made by Mr. Green. He also pointed out
that most claims are filed within 10 years. If the length
of time is longer than that, it poses a greater financial
and operational burden to the company because of the cost in
locating and maintaining documents.
Number 403
GENE REHFIELD testified on behalf of the ALASKA SECTION OF
THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS in support of HB
160.
Number 430
REP. HUDSON asked MIKE FORD from LEGAL SERVICES in the
DEPARTMENT OF LAW to come forward. He asked about the
question of the constitutionality of HB 160 and if this
issue had been before the Labor and Commerce Committee last
year. He also asked if there was a substantive change in
this bill.
Number 438
MR. FORD stated there were two changes: HB 160 expands the
group of people protected, and also increases the period of
time that a lawsuit can be brought against a company or
contractor.
REP. HUDSON asked if the time limit was seven years in last
year's bill.
MR. FORD said there were various versions, seven being the
most popular. He went on to say, if the committee adopts
the ten year provision, 3 percent of potential litigants
would be excluded. This is significant in terms of equal
protection analysis and who is being prohibited from
bringing lawsuit.
Number 456
REP. PORTER asked Mr. Ford if there was an equal protection
concern regarding who it was protecting by this legislation.
Number 460
MR. FORD said yes, and in addition, contractors had been
added to the list of those protected and felt that was
significant. He continued to say that there is significance
in the fact that liability laws have changed since the
Scales case and may give the court a different view on this
statute of repose.
Number 475
REP. PORTER moved that HB 160 pass out of committee with
individual recommendations and a zero fiscal note.
REP. HUDSON asked for objections. There were none, so HB
160 passed from the House Labor and Commerce Committee.
Number 478
CHAIRMAN HUDSON turned the meeting over to VICE CHAIR GREEN.
REP. GREEN announced that HB 112 would be heard next.
HB 112: UNIFORM LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ACT UPDATE
REP. CARL MOSES, PRIME SPONSOR of HB 112, gave a sponsor
statement. (see attachment 2). He said the bill would
remove the use of the long form in limited partnerships.
Number 509
ART PETERSON testified in support of HB 112. He informed
the committee that the long form was no longer necessary and
just does not work under modern use. He gave a brief
history of the issue and reiterated comments by the sponsor.
Number 560
(It was noted that Rep. Mulder joined the committee at 3:30
p.m.)
Number 563
REP. PORTER asked if the code revision commission committee
had anything to do with revising this law.
MR. PETERSON responded no and elaborated by noting the
particular professor who made a recommendation was also the
professor who helped the code revision commission on other
matters.
REP. PORTER asked if it could be assumed that the majority
of states also have this provision as outlined in HB 112.
MR. PETERSON responded that they do and referenced the fact
sheet in the bill packet. (see attachment 3)
REP. PORTER asked if this would change the information
available to the public.
Number 596
MR. PETERSON responded to Rep. Porter's concern by pointing
out that prospective investors and lenders of credit would
provide any needed information to the other in order to
expedite business transactions in a limited partnership. He
also pointed out that Section 20 of HB 112 requires the
corporation or organization to maintain all information
requested on the long form.
Number 609
REP. MULDER asked if this compared to Senator Rodey's SB 193
of last year.
MR. PETERSON said it did; HB 112 would fill in the gap left
by SB 193.
REP. MULDER asked if it was intentionally left out of the
bill last year.
MR. PETERSON said it was intentionally left out and was
inadvertently not picked up as Senate relations evolved
during the session.
Number 625
REP. SITTON made a motion to move HB 112 from committee with
individual recommendations and a zero fiscal note.
There were no objections, so HB 112 passed from the House
Labor and Commerce Committee.
CSHB 115(ITT): "An act deleting a requirement that certain
members of the board of directors of the Alaska Tourism
Marketing Council be substantially involved in a visitor or
recreation industry business; relating to the selection of a
presiding officer for the Alaska Tourism Marketing Council:
and providing for an effective date."
Number 639
REP. HUDSON gave a brief overview and explained that HB 115
was amended in the House International Tourism and Trade
committee to conform to changes made in the Senate companion
bill.
Number 645
REP. HUDSON then expressed the following: "I must mention
there is some contention in this field as it relates to the
Commissioner of the Department of Commerce and Economic
Development. He has approached me directly suggesting that
they would like to have the legislation entertain a shift in
the administrative overhead of the Alaska Tourism and
Marketing Council (ATMC) and to essentially do away with the
industries separate administrative escholon and place the
administration of this into the hands of the director of the
Division of Tourism. What that would do if we adopt this
bill in its current form would potentially put that at odds.
I don't believe we would necessarily have to change this law
in order to permit them to do that, and if that is going to
occur, it will occur at the budgeting end where they
literally take the administrative funds away from the ATMC.
The Finance Committee can modify the management of the ATMC
by simply budgeting the money into the Department of Tourism
rather than into the ATMC."
Number 680
REP. HUDSON continued: "We can do one of two things. We
can either sit on this or we can pass it and it can be dealt
with in the Finance Committee or State Affairs Committee.
We introduced this legislation in substantially the form
that the industry wants; the industry contributes heavily
towards this whole program here. As the chairman of this
committee, I suggest that we pass it out and let it be dealt
with ultimately in the Finance committee. It will be a
policy call that may involve a caucus decision."
Number 780
VICE CHAIRMAN GREEN asked for questions from the committee.
Number 785
REP. PORTER asked if the committee should send a letter of
concern. Rep. Porter aired a concern about the transferring
of administrative functions.
Number 801
In answer to Rep. Porter's question, REP. MULDER said that
there are a number of concerns regarding funding and
administrative functions by and for the tourism industry.
He further speculated on the concern of the commissioner of
the Department of Commerce and Economic Development.
Number 835
WENDY MULDER, LEGISLATIVE LIAISON FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE, testified on behalf of the commissioner and made
note that the commissioner was unable to join the Labor &
Commerce Committee. She clarified the concern of the
commissioner by saying that the commissioner wanted the
committee to know that it was a budgetary matter and felt
that the committee should be aware of that. She further
stated that the department is willing to go any direction
the legislature wishes the ATMC or the Division of Tourism
to go.
Number 864
REP. GREEN asked if funding was the driving force behind
what happens with the ATMC. He asked if it would create
confusion, and shouldn't there be an established place for
it.
Number 867
MS. MULDER explained that for budgetary reasons they would
bring the staff of the ATMC back into the Division of
Tourism. The ATMC would still have voting power over the
contracts, but administratively it would be handled in the
Division of Tourism.
Number 900
REP. HUDSON explained that because of the above stated
reasons, this bill should be moved on to the Finance
Committee.
Number 906
REP. PORTER aired a concern regarding the moving of
administrative functions of the ATMC to the Division of
Tourism. He further stated that he did not think that was a
good idea.
Number 926
JOHN LITTON, MEMBER OF THE TOURISM MARKETING COUNCIL,
testified in support of HB 112.
Number 937
REP. MULDER moved and asked unanimous consent that CSHB
112(ITT) move from committee with individual recommendations
and a zero fiscal note. There being no objections, it was
so ordered.
VICE CHAIRMAN GREEN adjourned the House Labor & Commerce
Committee meeting at 4:16 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|