04/02/2003 03:18 PM House L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE LABOR AND COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE
April 2, 2003
3:18 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Tom Anderson, Chair
Representative Nancy Dahlstrom
Representative Carl Gatto
Representative Norman Rokeberg
Representative Harry Crawford
Representative David Guttenberg
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Bob Lynn, Vice Chair
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 43(FIN)
"An Act extending the termination date of the State Medical
Board."
- MOVED CSSB 43(FIN) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 203
"An Act relating to the definitions of 'net income' and
'unrestricted net income' for purposes of calculating the
dividends to be paid to the state by the Alaska Industrial
Development and Export Authority; and providing for an effective
date."
- MOVED HB 203 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 13
"An Act declaring legislative intent to reject the continuity of
enterprise exception to the doctrine of successor liability
adopted in Savage Arms, Inc. v. Western Auto Supply, 18 P.3d 49
(Alaska 2001), as it relates to products liability; providing
that a successor corporation or other business entity that
acquires assets of a predecessor corporation or other business
entity is subject to liability for harm to persons or property
caused by a defective product sold or otherwise distributed
commercially by the predecessor only if the acquisition is
accompanied by an agreement for the successor to assume the
liability, results from a fraudulent conveyance to escape
liability for the debts or liabilities of the predecessor,
constitutes a consolidation or merger with the predecessor, or
results in the successor's becoming a continuation of the
predecessor; defining 'business entity' that acquires assets to
include a sole proprietorship; and applying this Act to the
sale, lease, exchange, or other disposition of assets by a
corporation, a limited liability company, a partnership, a
limited liability partnership, a limited partnership, a sole
proprietorship, or other business entity that occurs on or after
the effective date of this Act."
- MOVED HB 13 OUT OF COMMITTEE
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 184
"An Act relating to individual deferred annuities; and providing
for an effective date."
- MOVED CSSSHB 184(L&C) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: SB 43
SHORT TITLE:EXTEND STATE MEDICAL BOARD
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) OLSON
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
01/29/03 0074 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
01/29/03 0074 (S) L&C, FIN
02/27/03 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 211
02/27/03 (S) Moved Out of Committee
02/27/03 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
02/28/03 0293 (S) L&C RPT 5DP
02/28/03 0293 (S) DP: BUNDE, SEEKINS, DAVIS,
FRENCH,
02/28/03 0293 (S) STEVENS G
02/28/03 0294 (S) FN1: (CED)
03/06/03 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE
532
03/06/03 (S) Moved CSSB 43(FIN) Out of
Committee
03/06/03 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/07/03 0430 (S) FIN RPT CS 6DP SAME TITLE
03/07/03 0430 (S) DP: GREEN, WILKEN, TAYLOR,
OLSON,
03/07/03 0430 (S) STEVENS B, BUNDE
03/07/03 0430 (S) FN1: (CED)
03/20/03 0571 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 3/24/2003
03/24/03 0571 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
03/24/03 0571 (S) FIN CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT
03/24/03 0571 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING
UNAN CONSENT
03/24/03 0571 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME CSSB
43(FIN)
03/24/03 0571 (S) PASSED Y19 N- E1
03/24/03 0575 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/24/03 0575 (S) VERSION: CSSB 43(FIN)
03/26/03 0630 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
03/26/03 0630 (H) L&C
03/26/03 0630 (H) REFERRED TO LABOR & COMMERCE
04/02/03 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 203
SHORT TITLE:AIDEA DIVIDENDS TO STATE
SPONSOR(S): FINANCE
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
03/19/03 0586 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
03/19/03 0586 (H) L&C, FIN
03/19/03 0586 (H) REFERRED TO LABOR & COMMERCE
04/02/03 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 13
SHORT TITLE:SUCCESSOR LIABILITY FOR PRODUCT LIABILITY
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)ROKEBERG
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
01/21/03 0034 (H) PREFILE RELEASED (1/10/03)
01/21/03 0034 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
01/21/03 0034 (H) L&C, JUD
01/21/03 0034 (H) REFERRED TO LABOR & COMMERCE
03/28/03 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
03/28/03 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
04/02/03 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 184
SHORT TITLE:INDIVIDUAL DEFERRED ANNUITIES
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)COGHILL
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
03/10/03 0492 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
03/10/03 0492 (H) L&C
03/28/03 0671 (H) SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE INTRODUCED
03/28/03 0671 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
03/28/03 0671 (H) L&C
03/28/03 0671 (H) REFERRED TO LABOR & COMMERCE
04/02/03 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR DONNY OLSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as the sponsor of SB 43.
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAWKER
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 203 on behalf of the sponsor,
the House Finance Committee, of which he is a member.
MIKE BARRY, Chairman of the Board
Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA)
Department of Community & Economic Development
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke in opposition to HB 203, noting the
anxiety created in the bond market when AIDEA's statutes are
changed.
SARA FISHER-GOAD
Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority
Department of Community & Economic Development
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on HB 203, answered
questions on AIDEA's bond rating.
HEATHER NOBREGA, Staff
to Representative Norman Rokeberg
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 13, explaining the four
exceptions to product liability's being transferred to the new
owner when a company is sold.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN COGHILL
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As sponsor of SSHB 184, explained the need
for the bill and the two proposed amendments that reflect a
solution by national insurance commissioners.
JOHN GEORGE, Lobbyist
for the American Council of Life Insurers
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SSHB 184, explaining how life
insurance companies cannot pay the minimum 3 percent interest on
an annuity when it is cashed in, and how a national model
recently became available.
KATIE CAMPBELL, Life and Health Actuary
Division of Insurance
Department of Community and Economic Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions about SSHB 184.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 03-27, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR TOM ANDERSON called the House Labor and Commerce Standing
Committee meeting to order at 3:18 p.m. Representatives
Anderson, Dahlstrom, Crawford, and Guttenberg were present at
the call to order. Representatives Gatto and Rokeberg arrived
as the meeting was in progress.
SB 43-EXTEND STATE MEDICAL BOARD
[Contains discussion of HB 73]
CHAIR ANDERSON announced that the first order of business would
be CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 43(FIN), "An Act extending the
termination date of the State Medical Board." He noted that the
committee had considered and passed out earlier this session the
identical HB 73, extending the State Medical Board.
Number 0085
SENATOR DONNY OLSON, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of SB 42,
explained that the State Medical Board sunsets in 2003, which
triggers the legislative review of its operations and
activities. He'd introduced SB 43 to extend the board because
of its satisfactory performance in the recent past, its positive
legislative audit, and his own experience [as a former member of
the State Medical Board]. He said he expects the board will
increase its licensing activities in the near future to serve
the medical community's expansion and the retirement of its
senior professionals.
SENATOR OLSON noted several changes in the medical board over
the last several years, including the addition of a board member
who is a physician assistant (PA). He urged the committee to
pass CSSB 43(FIN) out of committee.
Number 0189
SENATOR OLSON, in reply to a question from Chair Anderson, said
the only change to SB 43 [as amended by the Senate Finance
Committee] was to reduce the board's extension from eight years
to four years.
CHAIR ANDERSON recalled the committee's discussion on HB 73 on
whether to extend the board beyond the typical four-year term.
He stated that legislators can request a legislative audit at
any time, and that an approaching sunset gives the legislature
the opportunity to observe and monitor the board's work.
Number 0274
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG asked if the committee wants to match
the [eight-year] termination date of HB 73.
SENATOR OLSON explained why he prefers the four-year extension.
With the addition of a physician assistant, the board now has
eight members. He said he feels that the new position
represents the PA licensees. The PAs have attended every board
meeting as members of the audience, closely watching the board's
work. With that kind of change in membership, he said, he
wanted to see how well the board is doing after four years.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG asked whether having an even number of
members would be a problem [in the case of tie votes].
SENATOR OLSON replied that both houses of the legislature have
an even number of members. Tie votes occur but are rare. The
eighth seat on the State Medical Board gives another
perspective. He said in rural Alaska many physicians especially
appreciate the mid-level professionals, who are such an
important part of fighting disease.
Number 0502
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM moved to report CSSB 43(FIN) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal note. There being no objection, CSSB 43 (FIN) was
reported from the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee
HB 203-AIDEA DIVIDENDS TO STATE
Number 0560
CHAIR ANDERSON announced that the next order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 203, "An Act relating to the definitions of
'net income' and 'unrestricted net income' for purposes of
calculating the dividends to be paid to the state by the Alaska
Industrial Development and Export Authority; and providing for
an effective date."
Number 0605
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAWKER, Alaska State Legislature, presented
HB 203 on behalf of the House Finance Committee, sponsor, of
which he is a member. He explained that the bill would give the
finance committee a tool to use in this year's budgeting
process. The Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority
(AIDEA) has a statutory requirement to pay a dividend to the
state each year.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER explained that last year, AIDEA's statute
was revised to reflect changes by the accounting profession in
preparation of financial statements and reports. However, he
said, one issue was not addressed - the accounting for asset
impairments. Per its policy, AIDEA must pay the State of Alaska
a dividend that is between 25 and 50 percent of its net income.
That dividend may not exceed AIDEA's unrestricted net income.
He explained that the legislature clarified the definitions of
"net income" and "unrestricted net income," setting the
parameters for the dividend. At that time, the legislature
defined income to exclude those items that were not part of the
authority's actual operating income, such as intergovernmental
transfers, capital contributions, and grant income. For
example, AIDEA's dividend to the state is an intergovernmental
transfer; [a past dividend] should not be [calculated into] the
net income for determining the [future] dividend.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER said the goal of last year's statutory
change was to make the accountant's presentation of net income
for the purposes of calculating the dividend the same as the
authority's operating income. He said the legislature did not
want to distribute more of the operating income than would be
appropriate or that would invade the restricted portions of the
funds, either capital or income.
Number 0831
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER explained that HB 203 further clarifies
the definition of income. When determining net income, HB 203
would exclude expenses already reported on financial statements
that resulted from impairment losses on AIDEA's development
projects. He explained that an impairment loss is a loss in
value of an asset that was purchased in prior years. Unlike a
current expense that takes cash out of the authority, an
impairment loss is a noncash entry in the books. Professional
accounting policy requires that impairment losses be recognized.
He said that because the recognition of impairment losses have
no effect on AIDEA's cash balance or on its true operating
income for a given year, the House Finance Committee wants
impairment losses excluded from the AIDEA's income for purposes
of determining the dividend.
Number 0922
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER testified that the House Finance Committee
is sponsoring HB 203 because under the current statute, AIDEA
will not have any statutory or defined income available for a
dividend for FY 04. In the past, this dividend has been about
$20 million a year - a substantial amount, given the current
financial situation. During the base year on which the state's
FY 04 dividend is calculated, AIDEA recognized significant
impairment losses on the Healy Clean Coal Project and on Alaska
Seafood International. The accountants and managers of AIDEA
analyzed these projects and decided they're not worth what AIDEA
paid for them, and the managers recognized that loss in the
financial statements. Again, he emphasized, this process did
not take cash or liquid assets.
Number 1030
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER explained that excluding impairment loss
from the calculation of income would make a $9 to $18 million
dividend available for use in the FY 04 budget. According to
the agency's annual report dated June 30, 2002, which is the
base year for calculating the FY 04 dividend, AIDEA has roughly
$789 million in unrestricted net assets. It has $356 million of
unrestricted cash and investments on hand, from which a dividend
to the state could be paid, he said. Had the legislature not
adopted the accounting changes last year, AIDEA would have had
income to pay a dividend in FY 04, he said. He asked members to
pass HB 203 on to the House Finance Committee, which can
determine whether to use this tool as part of the FY 04 budget
process.
Number 1110
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER noted that the committee will hear from
AIDEA that its board voted 100 percent against this bill. He
recalled that when the dividend legislation itself was passed,
the board was concerned about whether the dividend would rob
AIDEA of its ability to carry out its mission. He said the
state has a modest dividend formula in place, and it works. He
said it's good policy for AIDEA to be able to write down bad
investments made years ago, but it should not sacrifice the
statutory dividend to the state. He said AIDEA has the
operating income and cash available to pay the dividend.
Number 1191
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked what happened to the money that was
written off for bad investments. Does it exist anymore?
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER said he can't pass judgment on how AIDEA
manages its investments. He said this bill creates a fair
dividend policy.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO clarified that he wasn't asking for a
judgment on the investment; he was asking what happens when an
investment is written down.
Number 1270
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER replied that when managers determine that
the fair value of an asset is no longer represented by the
amount invested, then the amount of the asset is lowered. But
to keep the books balance, the transaction is shown as a loss or
a reduction in AIDEA's net assets.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked whether the purpose of HB 203 is to
make that definition.
Number 1322
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER explained that HB 203 states that those
impairment losses, those write-downs of money spent long ago,
are not included in the determination of net income for purposes
of the dividend. He referred to a spreadsheet in the bill
packet entitled "House Bill 203, AIDEA Dividends to State,
Calculations for Committee Presentation." The net loss for
AIDEA for the year ended June 30, 2003, was $72,506,000, he
explained. Included in the $72-million loss is $91,346,000
associated with valuation adjustments for the Healy Clean Coal
Project and the Alaska Seafood International. He said existing
statute looks at the decrease in net assets and bases the
dividend on that. The result is a negative number; there's
nothing to distribute.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER noted that HB 203 looks at those write-
offs of impaired assets that didn't take any cash out of AIDEA.
Adding that number back results in $18 million. Under the
current statute, the previous year's dividend of $17,500,000 is
added back in for a net income under HB 203 of $36,340,000. He
said this figure of $36 million represents how AIDEA truly
operated last year. Based on the $36 million figure, a 25
percent dividend would equal $9 million, and a 50 percent
dividend would equal $18 million.
Number 1467
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG asked whether AIDEA is still bound by
bonding authority, federal requirements, and other agencies
outside state government.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER reiterated that AIDEA must adhere to sound
accounting principles, including the reporting of accounting
losses. But, he said, these losses are not relevant to the
current capacity of AIDEA to pay a dividend to the state.
Number 1596
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER stated that he discussed these issues with
a bond counsel, who said that consistency is the overriding
issue in maintaining AIDEA's bond rating. He said he was told
that a stable business environment and consistent regulations
are critical. Representative Hawker agreed that this is a
change in law, but it is a clean up from last year's
legislation. He said the rating agencies in New York have
probably asked many questions about the Alaska Seafood
International and the ongoing value of these assets. That
factor (the discrepancy between value on the books and actual
worth) was inherent in the analysis performed by the bonding and
rating agencies prior to AIDEA writing it down. Bond rating
agencies are particularly thorough when they analyze companies,
he said.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER said he did not believe HB 203 would alarm
AIDEA's bond rating agencies. He said he anticipates a detailed
presentation by the bonding agencies to the finance committee.
AIDEA wrote off $91 million, and it won't pay a dividend as a
result of that write-down. He reported that he was told AIDEA
may write off additional money on Alaska Seafood International
next year, and may not pay a dividend in the following year.
Number 1722
REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD noted that AIDEA had funded Mark Air,
which went bankrupt. He asked if AIDEA treated both companies'
assets the same.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER said he wasn't able to answer that.
Number 1750
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked about the residual value of the
Alaska Seafood International.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER suggested the question be addressed to
AIDEA staff at the meeting.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG noted that the AIDEA [Balance Sheet for
June 30, 2002] shows the current assets of $121 million and
current liabilities of $14 million for a ratio of 9 to 1. He
asked if this is a healthy ratio.
Number 1813
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER clarified that he is appearing before this
committee not as an accounting official, but as a legislator.
He said he is pleased with the overall financial health and
condition of AIDEA. He said it's a strong, vibrant, vital part
of investing in business in Alaska.
Number 1835
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked about AIDEA's unrestricted net
assets of $789 million on the HB 203 spreadsheet.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER described that figure as the true
unrestricted net assets. He said AIDEA has some assets
restricted for debt service; the aggregate net assets are $792
million.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if the cash available was
$356,589,000.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER referred to the spreadsheet and noted that
the $356,589,000 figure consists of cash and cash equivalents,
investment securities - current, and investment securities -
non-current. He confirmed Representative Rokeberg's estimate
that $96 million of the $356 million are truly liquid assets.
Number 1901
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said the intent of the law allows the
legislature to receive income from AIDEA. He said it's apparent
from AIDEA's financial statements that it can afford to pay a
dividend now. But, he asked, what if there are further write-
downs on some of these assets; will AIDEA be unable to pay this
dividend in the future? He asked if the problem is self-
righting because the statutory formula for dividends is still
dependent on the net income, and HB 203 only changes the
description of net income.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER said it is clearly the latter. He
theorized that if AIDEA wrote off the entire balance of those
two assets, it would not affect last year's net income. AIDEA
still has the ongoing cash flow from other productive assets;
the more successful investments within AIDEA continue to produce
income.
Number 1954
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said HB 203 makes an adjustment in the
balance sheet, but it doesn't affect AIDEA's ability to make the
dividend payment or to be a viable entity. He summarized
Representative Hawker's position that HB 203 does not jeopardize
the ability of the corporation to operate or its financial
underpinnings.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER agreed to both points.
Number 2004
MIKE BARRY, Chairman of the Board, Alaska Industrial Development
and Export Authority, Department of Community & Economic
Development, said he disagreed with some of Representative
Hawker's characterizations about the board. He explained that
none of the current members were on the board in 1996 when the
legislature passed the dividend legislation. He said he has
been told that the board went on record as supporting the
dividend at that time.
MR. BARRY told members that his board favors the dividend
policy. He said AIDEA needs to represent to its financial
constituents - the bonding, business, and banking communities -
that it will be viable on the long-term basis. As he wrote in
his [April 1, 2003] letter [to the co-chairs of the House
Finance Committee], a lot of thought and dialogue went into the
dividend legislation. Until this year, it has worked very well,
he said.
Number 2060
MR. BARRY said he disagreed with Representative Hawker's
interpretation of the accounting changes that were made last
year. These accounting changes took AIDEA from one type of
government accounting to another type, but both of these
required a write-down of an asset when that loss is recognized
by the authority. He said there were no changes made last year
that would have affected the change proposed in HB 203. The
difference between AIDEA and a tax-paying, for-profit
corporation is that AIDEA is owned by the State of Alaska.
AIDEA officials occasionally raise funds in the bonding
community, not as a full faith and credit bonding agency of the
state, but as an agency that makes promises which must be
carried out based on AIDEA's assets, not based on other state
funds, other state assets, or the power of taxation.
Number 2119
MR. BARRY described the anxiety of a bond purchaser interested
in a 25-year investment who looks at the state's fiscal policy
and says, "They're running out of oil revenues. They have a
serious need for funds. Perhaps the legislature is going to
raid AIDEA for funds." He said that's why the dividend
legislation of 1996 is a proper and logical answer to that
anxiety. The proposed change [in HB 203] does not assure this
constituency that this is the final change, and the bill
demonstrates that the state needs money and that AIDEA can't pay
the dividend. Thus this changes the rules so the state can get
the money.
MR. BARRY agreed with Representative Hawker that HB 203 does not
damage AIDEA's health as a financial entity today. What it
does, he said, is raise the uncertainty that no one can answer
because the legislature always has the right and the authority
to appropriate funds from AIDEA. He implored the committee to
not [raise that uncertainty] for a $9 to $18 million dollar
dividend, when it could seriously damage the long-term program
of AIDEA.
Number 2218
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked whether Mr. Barry agreed that
HB 203 doesn't jeopardize financial ability to conduct financial
operation, but might raise the level of uncertainty in the bond
market.
MR. BARRY said yes.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked what AIDEA's current bond rating
is.
Number 2250
SARA FISHER-GOAD, Alaska Industrial Development and Export
Authority, Department of Community & Economic Development, said
she would provide the rating information in writing. It is an
"A" rating, with some differences between the rating agencies.
CHAIR ANDERSON suggested that since the AIDEA argument focused
on the long-term effects of this change in the bond market, it
would have been useful for AIDEA to come prepared with
information on AIDEA's current bond rating.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked Mr. Barry to provide an analysis
of what the net income figures would be under old the GASB
[Government Accounting Standards Board] rules.
Number 2295
MR. BARRY replied that the impairment charges would be the same
under either set of rules.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if the net income available for a
dividend would be similarly impaired.
MR. BARRY agreed that there would be no change to the impairment
[of assets] by adopting the GASB changes.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG clarified that [HB 203] allows an AIDEA
dividend payment to be made by changing the definitions of net
income and restricted net income.
Number 2316
MR. BARRY agreed. He clarified that it is not the board's
contention that the payment of the dividend of $9 million to $18
million would in any way impair AIDEA's bond rating. But he
said it will raise uncertainty as to future bond sales that
AIDEA may want to undertake. Because AIDEA officials are not
contemplating a bond sale tomorrow or next week, he said he
didn't think there would be any impact in the very near future.
MR. BARRY confirmed Representative Rokeberg's statement that
AIDEA has no plans to sell new bonds in the next six to nine
months. He said AIDEA was able to take advantage of the low
interest rate last year.
TAPE 03-27, SIDE B
Number 2381
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked about the two impairment losses.
MR. BARRY said the Healy Clean Coal Project has a [fair value]
of $56 million. As of June 30, 2002, Alaska Seafood
International has a [residual value] of $22,400,000, which
consists of the land and one of two buildings.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked about the $85-million bond issue
on the Healy Clean Coal Project.
Number 2336
MR. BARRY clarified that the Healy Clean Coal Project has been
shut down since 1999. The write-down occurred because the
original investment of $120 million in state funds and almost
$180 in federal funds was not producing any income and had no
prospect of doing so in the near future. He acknowledged that
the recognition of that loss did not affect the cash earnings of
the rest of AIDEA's assets. In AIDEA's case, between the state
and the federal government, nearly $300 million in cash was
invested, and it is gone.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if there are any other assets on
the books that AIDEA may be writing down in the near term.
MR. BARRY replied that AIDEA is currently demolishing an ore
concentrate building in Skagway. He said it's not a major
asset; it's valued on the books at $2 million. The building has
become a life-safety factor to the local community. AIDEA will
take a write-down on some aspect of it; some assets will remain.
He said the answer is yes, but he is not aware of anything
significant at this time.
Number 2243
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER said he believes AIDEA's testimony lends
credibility to the House Finance Committee's interest in
establishing a comprehensive dividend formula for AIDEA. He
urged the committee to pass HB 203 on to that committee.
Number 2191
CHAIR ANDERSON, noting that no other people wished to testify,
closed public testimony.
Number 2189
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO moved to report HB 203 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
note. There being no objection, HB 203 was reported from the
House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
HB 13-SUCCESSOR LIABILITY FOR PRODUCT LIABILITY
Number 2175
CHAIR ANDERSON announced that the next order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 13, "An Act declaring legislative intent to
reject the continuity of enterprise exception to the doctrine of
successor liability adopted in Savage Arms, Inc. v. Western Auto
Supply, 18 P.3d 49 (Alaska 2001), as it relates to products
liability; providing that a successor corporation or other
business entity that acquires assets of a predecessor
corporation or other business entity is subject to liability for
harm to persons or property caused by a defective product sold
or otherwise distributed commercially by the predecessor only if
the acquisition is accompanied by an agreement for the successor
to assume the liability, results from a fraudulent conveyance to
escape liability for the debts or liabilities of the
predecessor, constitutes a consolidation or merger with the
predecessor, or results in the successor's becoming a
continuation of the predecessor; defining 'business entity' that
acquires assets to include a sole proprietorship; and applying
this Act to the sale, lease, exchange, or other disposition of
assets by a corporation, a limited liability company, a
partnership, a limited liability partnership, a limited
partnership, a sole proprietorship, or other business entity
that occurs on or after the effective date of this Act."
Number 2164
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG, sponsor of HB 13, explained that
legislation similar to this bill passed the legislature last
year but was vetoed by the governor; the only controversial part
of that bill was the retroactive application of legal language,
but HB 13 does not contain that language. The bill sets forth
the standard business succession liability for the purchase of a
business and clarifies under what circumstances the new entity
remains responsible for the liabilities of the former owner. He
explained that the bill was referred to the committee because of
its economic impact on commerce. It overturns an Alaska Supreme
Court case that was inconsistent with [laws in] 48 other states.
He said making Alaska's business laws consistent with other
states' laws helps build a stable business environment.
Number 2083
HEATHER NOBREGA, Staff to Representative Norman Rokeberg, Alaska
State Legislature, explained that under HB 13, when a person
purchases a company, the person is not liable for the company's
previous mistakes and harm unless the person assumes those
liabilities. The new owner can be held liable for the previous
company's liabilities under four exceptions: (1) if the new
owner assumes the liabilities; (2) if [the purchase] was a
fraudulent attempt to avoid the liabilities; (3) if the purchase
was a consolidation or merger and the new company wouldn't be
harmed by assuming those liabilities; or (4) the new company is
in fact a continuation of the same company.
MS. NOBREGA noted that HB 13 relates to product liability, which
hadn't been [litigated] in Alaska before 2001, when the Alaska
Supreme Court made a decision on the law. She explained that
the supreme court recognized two exceptions: the "mere
continuation" of the business and the "continuity of
enterprise," a newer doctrine that has been rejected by most of
the jurisdictions that have looked at the issue. This bill
rejects that doctrine ["continuity of enterprise"] and adopts
the four general standards that are recognized by most courts in
the nation.
Number 2007
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG mentioned that the "continuity of
enterprise" theory has been rejected in the Restatement (Third)
of Torts. He said HB 13 adopts the [more] widely accepted rule.
He noted that the Alaska Supreme Court adopted this "continuity
of enterprise" provision that has been specifically rejected by
most other states. Representative Rokeberg reported that this
court case, [Savage Arms, Inc. v. Western Auto Supply Co.] has
been settled, and said retroactivity [is no longer an issue].
This bill is [prospective] so that Alaska's law is clear on the
subject of product liability when a company is purchased. He
explained that sometimes people who wish to file lawsuits
against corporations over product liability go "shopping" [for a
jurisdiction that has unusual] law. If Alaska had an unique
[interpretation of this provision], people might use Alaskan
courts to file these kinds of suits. He opined that businesses
laws should be uniformly applied throughout the United States.
CHAIR ANDERSON reminded the committee that the next referral is
the House Judiciary Standing Committee, where detailed legal
questions can be examined.
Number 1900
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM moved to report HB 13 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
note. There being no objection, HB 13 was reported from the
House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
HB 184-INDIVIDUAL DEFERRED ANNUITIES
CHAIR ANDERSON announced that the final order of business would
be SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 184, "An Act relating
to individual deferred annuities; and providing for an effective
date."
Number 1860
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN COGHILL, Alaska State Legislature, explained
that he sponsored HB 184 by request. His original bill simply
decreased the guaranteed interest rates on deferred annuities
from 3 percent to 1.5 percent. While he was drafting this bill,
however, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners
(NAIC) drafted model language to solve the problem with an
indexing tool. He said interest rates are so low that
[companies selling] annuities are [having trouble] with
solvency. This NAIC model language contains an index that
allows the companies to be solvent in times of low interest
rates, but it also guarantees the consumer a minimum rate of
interest.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL described two proposed amendments
[suggested by the Division of Insurance] to SSHB 184. He noted
that Amendment H.1 [labeled 23-LS0753\H.1, Ford, 4/1/03] is
consistent with the new model language. Amendment H.1 read:
Page 2, line 13:
Delete "an additional period"
Insert "additional periods"
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL noted that Amendment H.2 [labeled 23-
LS0753\H.2, Ford, 4/1/03] is a new section that changes the
effective date and actually gives time for an implementation
period. Amendment H.2 read:
Page 2, following line 29:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 2. The uncodified law of the State of
Alaska is amended by adding a new section to read:
TRANSITION PERIOD FOR ANNUITY CONTRACTS;
APPLICABILITY OF ACT. During the period that begins
on the effective date of this Act and ends on the day
before the date that is two years after the effective
date of this Act, this Act applies to an annuity
contract when the contract form for that annuity is
approved by the director of the division of insurance.
For an annuity contract not otherwise affected by this
section, this Act applies to annuity contracts
beginning on the date that is two years after the
effective date of this Act."
Renumber the following bill section accordingly.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL noted that he is bringing SSHB 184 to the
committee today for information, not necessarily for movement.
He said he is still digesting the changes in the bill. He
pointed out that Amendment H.2 has an implementation period.
Companies will have two years to rewrite their contracts, and
the Division of Insurance [Department of Community and Economic
Development] won't receive [a large volume of] newly revised
contracts all at once.
Number 1686
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM moved to adopt SSHB 184 as a work
draft. There being no objection, it was so ordered.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL noted that these amendments were brought
to his attention yesterday. He brought attention to NAIC
correspondence from NAIC in the information packet and said
staff from the Division of Insurance were present to answer
questions about the NAIC model.
Number 1596
JOHN GEORGE, Lobbyist for the American Council of Life Insurers
(ACLI), explained that ACLI is an insurance trade association
that writes life insurance and annuity products. In response to
a question by Representative Rokeberg, he said his clients who
sell annuities have a real problem. If a client decides to
terminate the agreement and get the money back, the law requires
a minimum 3 percent return on the money. That was set years ago
when interest rates were 14 and 20 percent, and no one foresaw
an interest rate as low as 3 percent; that figure was considered
rock bottom for consumer protection. However, times have
changed: interest rates have dropped substantially, and
insurance companies are not getting a 3 percent return on the
money. He likened it to asking a bank to guarantee 5 percent on
a savings account. Banks can't do that and stay in business, he
told members; banks would have to terminate savings accounts.
Number 1552
MR. GEORGE said the life insurance industry is deciding whether
to continue offering these products. Companies aren't on the
verge of insolvency, but this bill recognizes that for these
companies to survive over the long term, the [interest rate]
needs to be adjusted. The "simple fix" [in original HB 184,
before NAIC completed its work] was to lower the interest rate
[to 1.5 percent]. He said NAIC had been working for several
years to come up with this model. Therefore, he encouraged the
committee to use the national standard. He explained that a
number of other states adopted the 1.5 percent interest rate
with a sunset clause of one or two years, anticipating that the
matter would have to be revisited when NAIC produced its model.
He predicted that Alaska will be on the cutting edge because of
the timing of this legislation and the completion of the NAIC
model.
Number 1430
KATIE CAMPBELL, Life and Health Actuary, Division of Insurance,
Department of Community & Economic Development, responded to
questions from Representative Rokeberg. She said the goal of
Amendment H.2 is to allow a two-year transition; she could not
clarify whether the amendment accomplished that. She also said
that as she reads it, the amended language would be inserted
following line 29; then Section 2, with an effective date of
July 1, 2003, would be renumbered as Section 3.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked about the interest rate set on
page 2, line 8, "(A) the five-year constant maturity treasury
rate reported by the federal reserve".
MS. CAMPBELL replied that this index is a good choice because
the federal government will be issuing treasury [bonds] and the
index is representative of the current market.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG described [the index] as a "market
basket" of different maturities.
Number 1180
MR. GEORGE added that the index is similar to the investments
that insurance companies actually make.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked Ms. Campbell if she understood the
language in the NAIC-inspired amendment.
CHAIR ANDERSON noted that Ms. Campbell had nodded in agreement.
Number 1122
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG moved to adopt Amendment H.1 [text
provided previously]. There being no objection, it was so
ordered.
Number 1091
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG moved to adopt Amendment H.2 [text
provided previously]. There being no objection, it was so
ordered.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG reported a possible conflict of
interest: his stepson is the national sales manager for Liberty
Financial Corporation, which sells annuities.
CHAIR ANDERSON indicated he'd still like Representative Rokeberg
to vote.
Number 1050
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG moved to report SSHB 184, as amended,
out of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying zero fiscal notes. There being no objection,
CSSSHB 184(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
4:37 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|