Legislature(1995 - 1996)

03/18/1995 10:05 AM STA

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
             HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE                            
                         March 18, 1995                                        
                           10:05 a.m.                                          
 MEMBERS PRESENT                                                               
 Representative Jeannette James, Chair                                         
 Representative Joe Green                                                      
 Representative Ivan                                                           
 Representative Brian Porter                                                   
 Representative Caren Robinson                                                 
 MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                
 Representative Scott Ogan, Vice Chair                                         
 Representative Ed Willis                                                      
 COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                            
 HB 130:    "An Act relating to agency review of public comment on             
            the adoption, amendment, and repeal of regulations;                
            relating to the examination of proposed regulations,               
            amendments of regulations, and orders repealing                    
            regulations by the Administrative Regulation Review                
            Committee and the Department of Law; relating                      
            to the submission to, and acceptance by, the                       
            lieutenant governor of proposed regulations,                       
            amendments of regulations, and orders repealing                    
            regulations; and requiring agencies to make certain                
            determinations before adopting regulations, amendments             
            of regulations, or orders repealing regulations."                  
            PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                            
 HB 163:    "An Act requiring an agency to provide compliance cost             
            estimates for proposed regulations, amendments, and                
            repeals of regulations under certain circumstances."               
            PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                            
 *HB 201:   "An Act relating to prisoner litigation,                           
            post-conviction relief, sentence appeals, amending                 
            Alaska Administrative Rule 10,  Alaska Rules of                    
            Appellate Procedure 204, 208, 209, 215, 521, 603, and              
            604, and Alaska Rules of Criminal Procedure 11, 33,                
            35, and 35.1; and providing for an effective date."                
            PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                            
 *HB 234:   "An Act relating to administrative adjudication under              
            the Administrative Procedure Act."                                 
            PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                            
 *HB 122:   "An Act authorizing payment of a portion of the motor              
            fuel tax on boats and watercraft as refunds to                     
            municipalities; and providing for an effective date."              
            PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                            
 *HB 226:   "An Act permitting the provision of different                      
            retirement and health benefits to employees based on               
            marital status."                                                   
            PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                            
 *HB 227:   "An Act clarifying a statute relating to persons who               
            may legally marry; and providing for an effective                  
            PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                            
 *HB 10:    "An Act relating to payment for emergency services                 
            responding to certain motor vehicle accidents."                    
            PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                            
 (* First public hearing)                                                      
 WITNESS REGISTER                                                              
 BRUCE CAMPBELL, Administrative Assistant                                      
 Representative Pete Kelly                                                     
 State Capitol, Room  513                                                      
 Juneau, AK  99891                                                             
 Telephone:  465-2327                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided information on HB 130                           
 DEBORAH BEHR, Regulation Attorney                                             
 Alaska Department of Law                                                      
 600 Court Building                                                            
 Juneau, AK  99801                                                             
 Telephone:  465-3600                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided information on HB 130 and HB 163                
 ROD MOURANT, Administrative Assistant                                         
 Representative Pete Kott                                                      
 Capitol Building, Room 432                                                    
 Juneau, AK  99801                                                             
 Telephone:   465-3777                                                         
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided information on HB 163                           
 LAURIE OTTO, Deputy Attorney General                                          
 Criminal Division                                                             
 Alaska Department of Law                                                      
 717 Court Building                                                            
 Juneau, AK  99801                                                             
 Telephone:  465-3428                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided information on HB 201                           
 TERESA WILLIAMS, Assistant Attorney General                                   
 1031 W. 4th Suite 200                                                         
 Anchorage, AK  99501                                                          
 Telephone: 269-5100                                                           
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Supported HB 234                                         
 REPRESENTATIVE CARL MOSES                                                     
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 Capitol Building, Room 204                                                    
 Juneau, AK  99801                                                             
 Telephone:  465-3764                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Sponsored HB 122                                         
 WILLIAM HUNTER, Bethel City Manager                                           
 Box 388                                                                       
 Bethel, AK  99559                                                             
 Telephone: 543-2087                                                           
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Supported HB 122                                         
 PAUL DICK, Juneau Operations Officer                                          
 Income and Excise Audit Division                                              
 Alaska Department of Revenue                                                  
 11th Floor, State Office Building                                             
 Juneau, AK  99801                                                             
 Telephone:  465-3691                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided information on amendments to HB 122             
 REPRESENTATIVE PETE KELLY                                                     
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 Capitol Building, Room 513                                                    
 Juneau, AK  99801                                                             
 Telephone:  465-2327                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Sponsored HB 226                                         
 RANDALL BURNS, Executive Director                                             
 Alaska Civil Liberties Union                                                  
 P.O. Box 201844                                                               
 Anchorage, AK 99520                                                           
 Telephone:  Not Available                                                     
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Opposed HB 226 and HB 227                                
 MIKE HUMPHREY, Statewide Director of Benefits                                 
 University of Alaska Statewide System                                         
 212 Butrovich Building                                                        
 University of Alaska                                                          
 Fairbanks, AK  99709                                                          
 Telephone:  474-7894                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Supported HB 226                                         
 PAUL EAGLIN, Associate General Council                                        
 University of Alaska Statewide System                                         
 202 Butrovich Building                                                        
 University of Alaska                                                          
 Fairbanks, AK  99775-5160                                                     
 Telephone:  474-7259                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Supported HB 226                                         
 MARK TUMEO                                                                    
 1324 Summit Drive                                                             
 Fairbanks, AK  99712                                                          
 Telephone:  457-6818                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Supported amendment to HB 226                            
 JENNINE WILLIAMSON                                                            
 2454 Killarney                                                                
 Fairbanks, AK  99709                                                          
 Telephone:  479-8242                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Supported amendment to HB 226                            
 SANDRA BOATWRIGHT                                                             
 3118 Chinook                                                                  
 Fairbanks, AK  99709                                                          
 Telephone: 479-7835                                                           
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Supported amendment to HB 226                            
 NANCY WINFORD                                                                 
 P.O. Box 80202                                                                
 Fairbanks, AK  99709                                                          
 Telephone:  479-7835                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Supported amendment to HB 226                            
 CINDY BOESSER                                                                 
 875 Basin Road                                                                
 Juneau, AK  99801                                                             
 Telephone:  789-1445                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Opposed HB 226 and 227                                   
 SUE HARGIS, Chair                                                             
 Southeast Alaska Gay and Lesbian Alliance                                     
 P.O. Box 21542                                                                
 Juneau, AK  99802                                                             
 Telephone:  586-2410                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Opposed HB 226 and 227                                   
 CAROL ANDERSON                                                                
 P.O. Box 22493                                                                
 Juneau, AK  99802                                                             
 Telephone:  None                                                              
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Opposed HB 226 and 227                                   
 TALMADGE BAILEY                                                               
 P.O. Box 34542                                                                
 Juneau, AK  99803                                                             
 Telephone:  790-2519                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Opposed HB 226 and 227                                   
 DANIEL COLLISON Vice President                                                
 Southeast Alaska Gay and Lesbian Alliance                                     
 P.O. Box 2146                                                                 
 Juneau, AK  99802                                                             
 Telephone:  789-5001                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Opposed HB 227                                           
 ROBERT STALNAKER, Director                                                    
 Division of Retirement and Benefits                                           
 Department of Administration                                                  
 6th Floor, State Office Building                                              
 Juneau, AK  99801                                                             
 Telephone:  465-4470                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Supported HB 226                                         
 MARY ALICE MCKEEN, Attorney                                                   
 212 West 9th Street                                                           
 Juneau, AK  99801                                                             
 Telephone:  586-4061                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Opposed HB 227                                           
 SHERRIE GOLL                                                                  
 Alaska Women's Lobby                                                          
 P.O. Box 22156                                                                
 Juneau, AK  99802                                                             
 Telephone:  463-6744                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Opposed HB 226 and 227                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG                                                
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 Capitol Building, Room 110                                                    
 Juneau, AK  99801                                                             
 Telephone:  465-4968                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Sponsored HB 227                                         
 REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES                                                    
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 Capitol Building, Room 422                                                    
 Juneau, AK  99801                                                             
 Telephone:  465-4457                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Sponsored HB 10                                          
 DAVID TYLER                                                                   
 Alaska Fire Chief's Association                                               
 1610 Hans Way                                                                 
 Fairbanks, AK  99709                                                          
 Telephone:  479-5672                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Supported HB 10                                          
 MARK JOHNSON, Chief of Emergency Services Section                             
 Department of Health and Social Services                                      
 431 N. Franklin, 3rd floor                                                    
 Juneau, AK  99801                                                             
 Telephone:  465-3027                                                          
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Supported HB 10                                          
 PREVIOUS ACTION                                                               
 BILL:  HB 130                                                                
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) KELLY,James                                     
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                      
 01/27/95       157    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/27/95       157    (H)   STA, JUD, FIN                                     
 02/14/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 519                       
 02/14/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/14/95              (H)   ARR AT 12:00 PM BUTROVICH ROOM 205                
 02/15/95       396    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): JAMES                               
 02/21/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 02/21/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/21/95              (H)   ARR AT 12:00 PM BUTROVICH ROOM 205                
 02/22/95              (H)   ARR AT 04:00 PM BELTZ ROOM 211                    
 02/22/95              (H)   MINUTE(ARR)                                       
 02/22/95              (S)   MINUTE(ARR)                                       
 02/23/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 02/23/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/09/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 03/16/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 03/16/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/18/95              (H)   STA AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 BILL:  HB 163                                                                
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) KOTT,Toohey,Kelly,MacLean                       
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                      
 02/08/95       272    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 02/08/95       272    (H)   STA, FIN                                          
 02/22/95       456    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): KELLY, MACLEAN                      
 02/28/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 02/28/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/09/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 03/16/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 03/16/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/18/95              (H)   STA AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 BILL:  HB 201                                                                
 SHORT TITLE: PRISONER LITIGATION AND APPEALS                                  
 SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR                                  
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                      
 02/27/95       488    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 02/27/95       488    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS, JUDICIARY, FINANCE                 
 02/27/95       488    (H)   3 ZERO FISCAL NOTES (LAW,CORR,DPS)                
 02/27/95       488    (H)   2 ZERO FISCAL NOTES (ADM)                         
 02/27/95       488    (H)   GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER                     
 03/07/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 03/07/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/14/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 03/14/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/16/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 03/16/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/18/95              (H)   STA AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 BILL:  HB 234                                                                
 SHORT TITLE: ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUDICATIONS                                     
 SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR                                  
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                      
 03/06/95       590    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 03/06/95       590    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS, JUDICIARY                          
 03/06/95       591    (H)   14 ZERO FISCAL NOTES(ADM,DEC,F&G)                 
 03/06/95       591    (H)   (DHSS, LABOR, LAW, DPS, DOT)                      
 03/06/95       591    (H)   (4-DCED, 2-DOE)                                   
 03/06/95       591    (H)   GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER                     
 03/08/95       665    (H)   ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DNR) 3/8/95                     
 03/14/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 03/14/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/16/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 03/16/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/18/95              (H)   STA AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 BILL:  HB 122                                                               
 SHORT TITLE: MARINE MOTOR FUEL TAX                                            
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) MOSES,Grussendorf,Mackie                        
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                      
 01/25/95       132    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/25/95       132    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS, FINANCE                            
 03/16/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 03/18/95              (H)   STA AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 BILL:  HB 226                                                                
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) KELLY,Rokeberg                                  
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                      
 03/03/95       565    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 03/03/95       565    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS, HES, JUDICIARY                     
 03/18/95              (H)   STA AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 BILL:  HB 227                                                                
 SHORT TITLE: DEFINING WHO MAY MARRY                                           
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) ROKEBERG,Kelly                                  
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                      
 03/03/95       565    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 03/03/95       565    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS, HES, JUDICIARY                     
 03/18/95              (H)   STA AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 BILL:  HB  10                                                                
 SHORT TITLE: PAYMENT OF COSTS OF DWI ACCIDENTS                                
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) DAVIES                                          
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                      
 01/06/95        23    (H)   PREFILE RELEASED                                  
 01/16/95        23    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/16/95        23    (H)   STA, JUD, FIN                                     
 03/18/95              (H)   STA AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 ACTION NARRATIVE                                                              
 TAPE 95-29, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 000                                                                    
 CHAIR JEANNETTE JAMES called the meeting to order at 10:05 a.m.               
 Members present at the call to order were Representatives James,              
 Green, Ivan and Robinson.  Chair James stated a quorum was                    
 HSTA - 03/18/95                                                               
 HB 130 - REGULATION ADOPTION PROCEDURES & REVIEW                          
 Number 028                                                                    
 BRUCE CAMPBELL, Administrative Assistant to Representative Pete               
 Kelly, presented a sectional analysis which outlined the                      
 differences in Version O of HB 130.  He stated Section 1                      
 clarifies the powers and the goals set by the legislature for the             
 Administrative Regulation Review Committee.  Section 2 has been               
 streamlined, deleting the thirty day time frame for the                       
 Lieutenant Governor's office to transmit pre-filed regulations to             
 the Administrative Regulation Review Committee.  Section 2 also               
 now specifies the reasons the Lieutenant Governor may return                  
 final draft regulations to an agency, including allowing the                  
 agency to respond to the Department of Law and the Administrative             
 Regulation Review Committee's comments.                                       
 Number 180                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN asked for a clarification of the                     
 Department of Law's role.                                                     
 MR. CAMPBELL answered there is not a full agreement between his               
 office and the Department of Law on what this means.                          
 CHAIR JAMES added the committee will be hearing from the                      
 Department of Law.                                                            
 Number 200                                                                    
 MR. CAMPBELL returned to the sectional analysis, stating there                
 were virtually no changes to Section 3.  Section 4 is a                       
 relatively new section which attempts to maintain consistency                 
 with Section 6 and to clarify the Department of Law's role in                 
 reviewing regulations for statutory consistency.  Section 5                   
 matches the 30-day period allowed the Regulation Review Committee             
 to the 30 days given the Department of Law.  He clarified it is               
 not a hard deadline, since it can be extended by the Department               
 of Law, but it allows the Lieutenant Governor to track                        
 regulations in the Department of Law and requires the Department              
 of Law to provide an expected time frame for its review of a                  
 complex regulation.                                                           
 Number 245                                                                    
 CHAIR JAMES inquired about who would file an order for repeal.                
 MR. CAMPBELL replied the Lieutenant Governor could file an order              
 for repeal.                                                                   
 CHAIR JAMES asked if this would include an order for repeal that              
 comes to the Lieutenant Governor from someone else.                           
 MR. CAMPBELL replied yes, this was part of the code throughout                
 the Administrative Procedures Act.                                            
 Number 261                                                                    
 MR. CAMPBELL said Section 6 clarifies some earlier confusion and              
 also exempts Board of Fisheries and Board of Game from providing              
 examples of economically feasible methods of complying with the               
 proposed regulatory action.                                                   
 Number 311                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE CAREN ROBINSON asked why the Boards of Fish and                
 Game are exempt, and why those boards were picked over other                  
 boards, for example the Board of Education.                                   
 MR. CAMPBELL replied, because they were more familiar with the                
 Board of Fish and the Board of Game, and those boards are                     
 recognized as having one of the most open and speedy public                   
 processes in the state since they need to respond quickly within              
 an applicable season.                                                         
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked if the State Board of Education                 
 might have similar needs, regarding students.                                 
 MR. CAMPBELL responded this was good input and could make an                  
 excellent amendment.                                                          
 Number 335                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN expressed concern about fishery allocations               
 being rejected by the Lieutenant Governor and agreed with                     
 exempting the Board of Fisheries.                                             
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON clarified she agreed the Board of                     
 Fisheries should be exempt; her concern was that perhaps other                
 boards should be exempt as well.                                              
 Number 361                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said as he reads the bill, if there is an                
 amendment to an existing regulation, the agency is required to                
 give an example of an economically feasible method of complying.              
 He asked if this meant a method for the public to comply, a                   
 method for all the users affected to comply, or a method for the              
 agency to comply.                                                             
 MR. CAMPBELL said it is intended to be an example of compliance               
 for the users and the impact upon them, not the agency's                      
 compliance.  He said the word "private" had been inadvertently                
 eliminated, but that the intent is to give examples of how the                
 individuals impacted by the regulation can comply.                            
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said he is still concerned with the agency's             
 ability to give an example that sufficiently covers how an                    
 individual might comply.                                                      
 MR. CAMPBELL gave an example of standards set for drilling mud in             
 an oil well; the agency could propose using "drilling mud XYZ"                
 and that example would show a product which had been analyzed and             
 met necessary requirements.                                                   
 Number 419                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked, using the same example, whether it                
 included economically viable alternatives.                                    
 MR. CAMPBELL replied the issue is to require examples of how                  
 compliance with a regulation can be achieved in an economically               
 feasible manner.                                                              
 Number 443                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said "economically" is a big, big area, and              
 he still was not clear on the meaning.                                        
 MR. CAMPBELL said regulations can become too specific and thus                
 cost too much, and this is not the legislative intent.                        
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said he still "saw a train wreck happening               
 Number 476                                                                    
 CHAIR JAMES said it appears to her that maybe there are some                  
 regulations where it is the intent of the legislature to be very              
 specific.  She asked if there is no economically feasible method              
 for compliance, would stating "there is none" be approved under               
 the language of the bill.                                                     
 MR. CAMPBELL answered "no."                                                   
 CHAIR JAMES asked if this meant every regulation written would                
 have to have an economically feasible method of compliance.                   
 MR. CAMPBELL answered "yes."                                                  
 Number 488                                                                    
 MR. CAMPBELL continued with the sectional analysis, stating                   
 Sections 7 and 8 are virtually unchanged; they just clarify                   
 constructional language making the added requirements of Section              
 6 exempt from emergency regulations.                                          
 Number 495                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN moved acceptance of CS for HB 130, Version               
 O, dated 3/17/95, as the work draft.  There were no objections.               
 Number 501                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON referred to the need for date changes on              
 Mr. Campbell's flow chart.  She asked why the entire power for                
 these decisions is given to the Lieutenant Governor and not the               
 Number 516                                                                    
 MR. CAMPBELL replied the Lieutenant Governor has traditionally                
 been the repository for regulations and they were not quite                   
 willing to break with that tradition.  He added if the                        
 legislature gave that power to the Governor, whose job is largely             
 that of delegating authority to commissioners, directors,                     
 regional managers, and others, then authority over regulations                
 would be delegated to an unelected official.  In addition, the                
 Governor cannot be expected to read all the regulations.  This                
 would bring the regulation process to a halt.  He agreed deciding             
 who has that authority it is an important issue, because the                  
 responsible party is authorized to create laws.                               
 Number 546                                                                    
 CHAIR JAMES said as she understand current statutes, final draft              
 approval is given by Department of Law.  She asked if the                     
 Lieutenant Governor refused to sign a regulation, would it go                 
 back through the Department of Law and what would happen to it                
 after that, under HB 130.                                                     
 MR. CAMPBELL replied it would go directly back to the adopting                
 agency, which would respond directly to the concerns of the                   
 Lieutenant Governor.  He added HB 130 is not attempting to be a               
 regulation reform bill; it is trying to codify some of the better             
 existing practices within the Administrative Procedures Act.  He              
 said there are larger goals and questions which need to be                    
 addressed with respect to the entire delegation of authority to               
 the Administrative branch, and he is interested in working on                 
 that separate from the small tasks which HB 130 is trying to                  
 Number 570                                                                    
 CHAIR JAMES returned to her question, stating currently the                   
 Department of Law's statutory attorney is the individual who has              
 the final say, and asking if HB 130 gives that final authority                
 instead to the Lieutenant Governor.                                           
 MR. CAMPBELL said the Department of Law would still have the                  
 authority to say "no," but the Lieutenant Governor would have the             
 authority to have his concerns addressed.                                     
 Number 582                                                                    
 DEBORAH BEHR, Regulations Attorney with the Department of Law,                
 discussed issues regarding the CS for HB 130.  She said the CS                
 made substantial improvement but she still had concerns.  She                 
 believes the bill is unconstitutional by delegating the power to              
 return regulations directly to the Lieutenant Governor, instead               
 of the delegating it to the Governor who could in turn delegate               
 it to the Lieutenant Governor, because the Constitution states                
 the Governor is the head of the Executive Branch.  Under HB 130,              
 if the Governor and Lieutenant Governor had a disagreement, the               
 Lieutenant Governor could continue to return regulations to state             
 agencies even though the Governor and the entire Cabinet thought              
 the regulations were in the public interest and followed the law.             
 MS. BEHR added HB 130 has no limit on the number of times the                 
 Lieutenant Governor can send regulations back; if there is a                  
 policy disagreement between a Commissioner and the Lieutenant                 
 Governor, the bill could continue being sent back an unlimited                
 number of times.                                                              
 MS. BEHR clarified her role, saying under existing law she may                
 not look for policy issues; she can only investigate whether                  
 regulations are legal, constitutional, and whether they follow                
 the process.  The Lieutenant Governor currently files regulations             
 and asks for briefings on regulations but has no role in policy               
 issues.  Policy issues are handled at the Cabinet level.                      
 MS. BEHR added the existing system has some checks and balances.              
 Regulations can be challenged in court for declaratory judgement              
 as arbitrary and capricious.  A less expensive way which the                  
 average person can use is to petition the state agency to look at             
 a regulation; this can even be done by letter, without hiring an              
 attorney, so there is no real cost.  Many people are not aware of             
 this petition process, which is in the Administrative Procedures              
 Number 621                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON inquired if the commissioners have a                  
 responsibility to respond to such a petition.                                 
 MS. BEHR replied the commissioner must either disapprove the                  
 petition or "set it on for notice" within 30 days.  If this is                
 not done, an attorney can bring a declaratory judgement to make               
 the commissioner take an action on the petition.                              
 Number 636                                                                    
 MS. BEHR continued, saying as she reads HB 130, the Boards of                 
 Fish and Game are exempt only from giving an example of an                    
 economically feasible method, which is a very small part of the               
 process.  The Lieutenant Governor could send regulations back at              
 any other point in the process, which would create "total chaos               
 in the fishing season."  If these Boards are to be exempted                   
 completely, HB 130 does not do that.                                          
 Number 651                                                                    
 MS. BEHR  discussed page 2, line 14, which refers to the                      
 Regulation Review Committee providing comments within 30 days.                
 This could make a mandate that the Board meet every 30 days; it               
 would be difficult to get a quorum during the summer and during               
 elections.  It might be more appropriate to state, "If they are               
 going to issue comments, they have to do it within 30 days."                  
 That would address her concern with the bill being so                         
 "open-ended, that they could provide comments for years."                     
 MS. BEHR referred to the next section which deals with returning              
 regulations to the Lieutenant Governor, reiterating it may be                 
 unconstitutional, and also she was concerned because some                     
 regulations cannot wait the full 30 days.                                     
 Number 679                                                                    
 CHAIR JAMES asked if the "emergency regulations" provision would              
 generally solve this problem when an answer is needed sooner than             
 30 days.                                                                      
 MS. BEHR replied she did not believe so, because the standards                
 for emergency regulations in Alaska require "the immediate                    
 preservation of the public health, safety, and welfare," and                  
 there is another section of the Administrative Procedures Act                 
 which says "emergencies are to rarely occur."                                 
 MS. BEHR mentioned she was confused because when a regulation is              
 disapproved by the Department of Law for legal reasons, they                  
 return it to the commissioner directly without giving it to the               
 Lieutenant Governor.  She could not tell whether HB 130 asks her              
 to do the disapproval letter then give it to the Lieutenant                   
 Governor and require him to return it, which seems to create                  
 extra paper work and delay; or if it would set up a situation                 
 where state agencies have a right to respond to legal advice by               
 the Department of Law which would set up a perception that legal              
 issues are a negotiation process.  She added the attorney general             
 is the chief legal officer in the state and has the final call on             
 whether something is constitutionally legal.                                  
 Number 703                                                                    
 MS. BEHR referred to page 3, lines 9 and 10, saying she had given             
 a drafted suggestion to the staff amending it to read "along with             
 the notice, send a copy of the regulation."                                   
 TAPE 95-29, SIDE B                                                            
 Number 000                                                                    
 MS. BEHR added the requirement for providing a transcribed,                   
 written record of testimony on regulations creates an added cost              
 and a time delay, which is contrary to an effort to reduce the                
 cost of state government.                                                     
 Number 024                                                                    
 MS. BEHR cited page 4, line 9, suggesting if the bill sponsor is              
 trying to create dialogue between the state agency and the public             
 on fiscal costs, then "fiscal costs" should be included.                      
 Requiring written responses to all oral comments would                        
 substantially add to costs.  She expressed concerns about lines               
 13 through 16 requiring an agency to weigh, evaluate, or                      
 otherwise utilize public comment that is nonfactual or an                     
 expression of preference; this would eliminate a great deal of                
 public input.                                                                 
 MS. BEHR referred to page 4, line 19, which requires a written                
 example of an economically feasible method for complying, stating             
 she fears this is an "open door for court suits."  She suggested              
 adding an exception for "good faith," or adding a prohibition                 
 against someone bringing suit based on the agency's example.  She             
 added some industries are on the cutting edge of scientific                   
 information and might come up with much better methods.                       
 Number 117                                                                    
 CHAIR JAMES called Mr. Campbell back to the table to respond to               
 Ms. Behr's comments.                                                          
 Number 130                                                                    
 MR. CAMPBELL said the bill sponsor's intent may not have been                 
 expressed well, in light of Ms. Behr's comments, and her                      
 suggestions would be incorporated.  Specifically, he stated on                
 page 4, lines 17-20, a definition of "economically feasible" is               
 Number 175                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN referred to page 2, the danger of "getting               
 into a loop" and the difficulty of getting a quorum in certain                
 seasons of the year.                                                          
 MR. CAMPBELL replied maybe the "shall" should be changed to                   
 "may," and the Regulation Review Committee should be given a time             
 limit for responding instead of a mandate to respond.                         
 CHAIR JAMES asked whether this change would mean if the 30 days               
 passed without a response from the Committee, the opportunity to              
 respond would be gone.                                                        
 MR. CAMPBELL said this was correct.                                           
 Number 200                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if the Committee did not respond                   
 within the 30 days, would this default be considered the same as              
 an acceptance.                                                                
 MS. BEHR responded that in order to avoid the Committee's lack of             
 response being interpreted to mean the legislature affirms a                  
 policy, the bill should say to the Committee, "If you are going               
 to comment, do it within 30 days."                                            
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if tape recordings would work in place             
 of written records of testimony, to save time and money.                      
 MR. CAMPBELL responded in the affirmative.  He added he                       
 recognized the need to more completely exempt the Boards of Fish              
 and Game.                                                                     
 MS. BEHR reiterated requiring written records of publicly-noticed             
 meetings creates additional cost and time delay.                              
 Number 240                                                                    
 CHAIR JAMES commented on her experience with the concealed carry              
 regulations.  She had several requests for written transcripts of             
 the public testimony; it would have been a massive amount of                  
 transcription, and she was anxious to get the regulations through             
 the process, so she settled for the tapes instead.                            
 Number 253                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON referred to placing limits on the number              
 of times the Lieutenant Governor could send regulations back,                 
 stating she agreed this would be a good idea.                                 
 MR. CAMPBELL agreed.                                                          
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON commented the bill sponsor would have to              
 determine what he thought would be a fair number, but she felt                
 strongly a limit needed to be stated in the bill.                             
 Number 290                                                                    
 CHAIR JAMES spoke to Mr. Campbell, stating a number of changes                
 had been discussed and requested by the State Affairs Committee.              
 She noted he had agreed to these changes, and requested he                    
 closely review the minutes of this meeting and, if the bill is                
 moved at this meeting, address these changes.                                 
 MR. CAMPBELL responded the changes and comments voiced today were             
 excellent, and part of a valuable process.  He stated he and the              
 bill sponsor were committed to address those points.                          
 Number 325                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN made a motion to move CSHB 130 from the State             
 Affairs Committee, with individual recommendations and attached               
 fiscal note, and with requested changes noted.                                
 Number 337                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON commented she would not stop the process,             
 but she believed the bill sponsor's intent was not achieved.  She             
 noted there is a desire to streamline the regulation process and              
 stop bad regulations, but HB 130 does not accomplish this; in                 
 fact it causes more problems than it solves.  She hopes, as the               
 bill moves on, it will be redrafted to achieve what everyone                  
 wants.  She added there is a long ways to go before that happens.             
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN agreed, declaring the bill is what he wants              
 from a State Affairs position, but from perhaps a legal position              
 it would need a lot of work, and the transcript of suggestions                
 made in this meeting will be valuable.  With that in mind, he                 
 would vote to move the bill.                                                  
 Number 365                                                                    
 CHAIR JAMES asked if there were objections to moving the bill.                
 There were none, so CSHB 130(STA) passed out of the State Affairs             
 HSTA - 03/18/95                                                               
 HB 163 - COMPLIANCE COST ESTIMATES REQUIRED                                 
 Number 386                                                                    
 ROD MOURANT, Administrative Assistant to Representative Pete                  
 Kott, presented a blank committee substitute work draft for HB
 163, 9-LS0661/C dated 3/16/95.  He reported the only change                   
 appears on page 2, lines 5 through 9, precluding an agency which              
 has prepared a cost compliance estimate in good faith from being              
 challenged in court.  Draft C was prepared based on concerns                  
 raised by Representative Porter.                                              
 Number 416                                                                    
 DEBORAH BEHR, Regulations Attorney for Department of Law, stated              
 the "good faith" provision to protect agencies from lawsuits is               
 very valuable, but it could create lawsuits unless the bill                   
 prohibits private parties from suing.  She expressed concern that             
 "costs" are not defined in the bill; it is unclear whether it                 
 includes indirect costs, overhead, and private costs to the                   
 customer.  She prefers the "example" choice in the previous bill.             
 She added the Boards of Fisheries and Game should possibly be                 
 excluded from being sued by private parties if the cost of state              
 government is to be cut.                                                      
 Number 466                                                                    
 MS. BEHR referred to page 2, line 3, saying it is too open-ended              
 and invites court suits.                                                      
 Number 472                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked Ms. Behr if she had considered how              
 to define "costs."                                                            
 MS. BEHR said she would talk to the Office of Management and                  
 Budget, and work with the sponsor.  She suggested the sponsor                 
 speak to the legislative auditor also.                                        
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked about also exempting the State                  
 Board of Education.                                                           
 MS. BEHR said she did not feel as strongly about the Board of                 
 Education because they can screen regulations before they go out              
 for public notice, whereas the Boards of Fish and Game have to                
 give public notice of every proposal.                                         
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked where an exemption for the Boards               
 of Fish and Game would fit in the bill.                                       
 MS. BEHR said a new Section (c) would have to be added reading                
 "for the purposes of this section, `State Agency' does not                    
 include the Board of Fish and the Board of Game."                             
 Number 500                                                                    
 CHAIR JAMES stated she would like to move this bill on to the                 
 Finance Committee with a request for the sponsor to address these             
 legal concerns.  She does not want the State Affairs Committee to             
 appear neglectful in addressing these legal issues, so she wants              
 assurance from the sponsor of HB 163 that appropriate amendments              
 will be presented to the Finance Committee.                                   
 Number 535                                                                    
 MR. MOURANT noted the concerns just expressed by Ms. Behr were                
 new to him.  He added her concerns do deal with financial issues,             
 and he will certainly call them to the attention of the Finance               
 Committee and work with Departments of Law, Management and                    
 Budget, and the co-sponsors of HB 163 in adopting appropriate                 
 Number 535                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON said she strongly wants the sponsor to                
 exempt the Boards of Fish and Game and to include a definition of             
 the cost of compliance.  She asked if the sponsor could do a                  
 sponsor substitute including these changes.                                   
 Number 576                                                                    
 CHAIR JAMES said she did not recommend doing a sponsor                        
 Number 576                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN said he felt comfortable the proposed changes             
 would be addressed in the Finance Committee.  He moved to accept              
 the CS, version C, as the working document.  There were no                    
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN made a motion to move CS HB 163(STA) from                 
 committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal                 
 note, with the understanding that concerns brought forth by the               
 State Affairs Committee would be addressed at the next committee              
 of referral.  There were no objections; therefore CSHB 163(STA)               
 was moved out of committee.                                                   
 Number 600                                                                    
 CHAIR JAMES called the meeting back to order after a short break.             
 HSTA - 03/18/95                                                               
 HB 201 - PRISONER LITIGATION AND APPEALS                                    
 LAURIE OTTO, Deputy Attorney General, Criminal Division,                      
 Department of Law, presented HB 201.  She explained the Criminal              
 Division, under her supervision, is comprised of District                     
 Attorney's Offices, the Department of Public Safety, and the                  
 Department of Corrections.  When Governor Knowles took office he              
 instructed her to find areas where she could cut back, and she                
 realized the area of corrections' litigations had seen a 20                   
 percent increase every year for the past 6 years.  In looking at              
 what other states had done, she discovered this has been a                    
 growing problem nationwide, with bored prisoners filing                       
 recreational litigation.  She added if "you or I" file a civil                
 suit, we pay filing fees and are at financial risk, whereas a                 
 prisoner is indigent, pays no filing fees, and is at no financial             
 risk.  Other states, New York being the first, have imposed                   
 minimal filing fees on prisoners, even if they are indigent.  New             
 York saw a 50 percent decrease in the number of cases filed.                  
 This is the first focus of HB 201.  It imposes a filing fee of 20             
 percent of the 6-month average monthly balance in a prisoner's                
 inmate account, thus creating a financial stake on the part of                
 the person filing a lawsuit.  She added HB 201 also requires a                
 signed statement that the suit is not malicious or frivolous or               
 brought in bad faith.                                                         
 Number 686                                                                    
 MS. OTTO continued, the second focus of HB 201 is to put some                 
 finality in judgments in criminal cases by stating requests for               
 post-conviction relief must be filed within two years of the date             
 of conviction or within one year after the conclusion of an                   
 appeal, and by placing a limit on the number of relief                        
 applications which can be filed in state court.  Throughout the               
 bill, she said, they have tried to balance prisoners' rights of               
 access to the courts in cases of legitimate need while getting                
 the state out from under the burden of having to respond to                   
 excessive petitions.                                                          
 MS. OTTO concluded that third, the bill puts a limit on sentence              
 appeals filed by prisoners, aiming at appeals the courts do not               
 usually accept, but which "clog up the system and cost a lot of               
 TAPE 95-30, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 000                                                                    
 MS. OTTO added if a prisoner tries to withdraw a plea before                  
 sentence, it is treated the same as in current law.  If a                     
 prisoner tries to withdraw a plea after sentencing, it is moved               
 into the time limits just outlined in the section on                          
 post-conviction relief applications.                                          
 Number 036                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN commented it sounded like a good bill, and               
 asked if a person convicted for 20 years could not request                    
 reduction of sentence.                                                        
 MS. OTTO replied if a person makes an agreement with the state to             
 plead guilty with the understanding the sentence cannot exceed 20             
 years, that person cannot file an appeal to have the sentence                 
 reduced to less than 20 years.                                                
 Number 084                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN made a motion to move HB 201 from committee              
 with individual recommendations and zero fiscal notes.  Hearing               
 no objection, the bill passed out of committee.                               
 HSTA - 03/18/95                                                              
 HB 234 - ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUDICATIONS                                        
 Number 096                                                                    
 TERESA WILLIAMS, Assistant Attorney General, testifying via                   
 teleconference from Anchorage, presented HB 234.  She stated the              
 bill is an effort to save time and money in Administrative                    
 Procedures Act (APA) adjudication.  It clarifies language in the              
 APA, changes the requirement for "registered mail" to "certified              
 mail," allows telephonic hearing, clarifies witness expenses,                 
 gives agencies discretion to allow reasonable types of discovery,             
 clarifies standards for burdens of proof, and sets time limits                
 for reconsideration petitions.                                                
 Number 204                                                                    
 CHAIR JAMES commented she appreciated the efforts to smooth out               
 the process and said she was sure there would be money saved as a             
 Number 210                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN referred to the "or" on page 3, asking, if a             
 party objecting to telephonic witnessing lived 31 miles away,                 
 would his objection be over-ruled.                                            
 MS. WILLIAMS replied no, personal participation could always be               
 required if telephonic participation would substantially                      
 prejudice the objecting party's rights.                                       
 Number 225                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON made a motion to move HB 234 from                     
 committee with individual recommendations and zero fiscal note.               
 Hearing no objection, HB 234 was moved out of committee.                      
 HSTA - 03/18/95                                                              
 HB 122 - MARINE MOTOR FUEL TAX                                               
 Number 235                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE CARL MOSES, Sponsor, presented HB 122, stating it              
 would provide a mechanism for distributing back to municipalities             
 a portion of marine fuel taxes for expenditures on water and                  
 harbor facilities.  Fifty percent of the collected tax revenue                
 would be distributed.  He commented that many coastal communities             
 depend on harbor facilities as the engine driving their economy;              
 HB 122 would provide assistance to local governments for                      
 development and maintenance of docks and harbors.                             
 Number 284                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE MOSES referred to this type of improvement in Cold             
 Bay in his district, made by taking money from Unalaska because               
 he considered Cold Bay a higher priority.                                     
 REPRESENTATIVE MOSES added that unless fishery money is allocated             
 in this manner, much of it will be given to the state of                      
 Washington.  He said this is overlooked when the legislature                  
 talks about economic development.                                             
 Number 335                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE MOSES said Alaska needs facilities for boats 60                
 feet and under.  In Norton Sound, for example, there was no place             
 to moor small boats last winter so the city had to lift them out              
 of the water for storage on the city dock, at much expense;  some             
 of the boats filled with water and were damaged anyway.  Bristol              
 Bay has a minimum of 500 boats sitting on the beach eight to ten              
 months a year.  These boats could fish in the Dutch Harbor area               
 if there were facilities to accommodate them.  He distributed                 
 three amendments.                                                             
 Number 400                                                                    
 WILLIAM HUNTER, Bethel City Manager, testified via teleconference             
 from Bethel.  He said HB 122 would provide revenues to maintain               
 their harbor area, and the city of Bethel supports the bill.                  
 Number 415                                                                    
 PAUL DICK, Juneau Operations Officer, Income and Excise Audit                 
 Division, Department of Revenue, said HB 122 would cause the                  
 Department of Revenue to share approximately 50 percent of                    
 current marine fuel taxes with municipalities.  Currently, they               
 collect $8.2 million a year in marine fuel taxes, so $4.1 million             
 would be shared to local municipalities and communities, which is             
 reflected in the fiscal note.  Motor fuel wholesalers would be                
 required to report their locations so income could be allocated               
 to the correct municipalities, and this would be an additional                
 reporting requirement.  An additional position would need to be               
 funded to track the fuel reporting.                                           
 Number 460                                                                    
 MR. DICK stated the Administration opposes this bill because of               
 the impact on revenues.  He added he had worked with the sponsor              
 on amendments.                                                                
 Number 470                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE MOSES asked the committee to adopt the three                   
 amendments he distributed.                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN requested a summary of the amendments.                    
 Number 485                                                                    
 MR. DICK responded that amendment number 1 changes language in                
 the bill to reflect the taxing of motor fuel, not boats.                      
 MR. DICK continued, amendment number 2 adds a new subsection on               
 page 1, line 2, after "municipalities" to clarify that the tax is             
 shared at the final point of sale.                                            
 MR. DICK said amendment number 3 also adds a new subsection on                
 page 3, line 14, to clarify tax revenue collected is also at the              
 final point of sale.                                                          
 Number 508                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN commented these amendments resolved his                  
 questions, and he made a motion to move all three amendments,                 
 numbered 1, 2, and 3, dated 3/17/95.  There were no objections.               
 CHAIR JAMES said she would do a committee substitute to reflect               
 these three amendments.                                                       
 Number 518                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN made a motion to move HB 122, as amended,                 
 from committee with individual recommendations and attached                   
 fiscal notes.  There were no objections, so HB 122 was moved.                 
 HSTA - 03/18/95                                                               
 HB 226 - REPEAL OF MARITAL STATUS PROTECTIONS                               
 HSTA - 03/18/95                                                               
 HB 227 - PROHIBIT SAME SEX MARRIAGES                                        
 Number 524                                                                    
 CHAIR JAMES noted there had been requests that House Bill 226 and             
 227 be heard together for the sake of time, and added she wanted              
 to hear all teleconference testimony today on both bills.                     
 Number 546                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE PETE KELLY, sponsor of HB 226, stated the Superior             
 Court recently decided unmarried couples are entitled to the same             
 employment benefits as married couples.  This decision was the                
 result of a broad interpretation in the Human Rights Act                      
 prohibiting discrimination based on marital status.  The court                
 concluded the University of Alaska violated this human rights                 
 directive when health benefits were refused to the unmarried                  
 partner of a University employee.  It is feared this decision                 
 will have a far-reaching impact as other agencies and finally                 
 private industry are sued for failing to recognize domestic                   
 partner status in their benefit packages.  Because the definition             
 of domestic partner is not grounded in contract and tradition as              
 is marriage, it is impossible to predict future relationships                 
 that would qualify.  Workers' benefit packages are targeted for               
 distribution to an unknown panoply of partners who are able to                
 attach themselves to state employees.  HB 226 attempts to reduce              
 the uncertainty employers face as a result of this court decision             
 and to close the door on a possible onslaught of domestic                     
 partnerships created solely to gain benefits under the court                  
 CHAIR JAMES asked if the sponsor statement on HB 227 should be                
 heard now.                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE KELLY said he had no objection to hearing                      
 testimony on the two bills together, but wanted HB 226 considered             
 separately.  He passed out a letter from the Human Rights                     
 Commission supporting HB 226.                                                 
 CHAIR JAMES requested the teleconference testifiers be brief and              
 invited written testimony by FAX.  She asked testifiers to                    
 specify which bill they are addressing.                                       
 Number 601                                                                    
 RANDALL BURNS, Executive Director of the Alaska Civil Liberties               
 Union, said the ACLU is opposed to HB 226 because he does not                 
 believe the concerns which Representative Kelly listed are                    
 legitimate.  Judge Greene's decision stated the University could              
 not discriminate on the basis of marital status in determining                
 which employees would receive additional compensation in the form             
 of third party health coverage.  The ACLU also does not believe               
 in allowing this discrimination and thinks the state should be                
 ashamed for considering HB 226.  He agreed with Judge Greene's                
 statement that "certainly unmarried heterosexuals have no more                
 claim to financial interdependence than unmarried homosexuals."               
 He also agreed with the statement at the end of her decision that             
 "this does nothing more than prohibit the University from using               
 marital status to determine whether or not to provide its                     
 employees with additional compensation in the form of subsidized              
 health care coverage for the employees' partners."  He added HB
 226 does nothing to solve the constitutionality of denying                    
 benefits to the partners of employees on the basis of marital                 
 Number 674                                                                    
 MIKE HUMPHREY, Statewide Director of Benefits for the University              
 of Alaska system, testified via teleconference from Fairbanks,                
 stressing the importance of the University designing a benefits               
 plans which meets the eligibility issues.  He stated the                      
 University believes HB 226 will help clarify these issues and he              
 supports the bill.                                                            
 Number 685                                                                    
 PAUL EAGLIN, Associate General Council employed by the University             
 of Alaska, testified via teleconference from Fairbanks in support             
 of HB 226.  He stated he represented the University of Alaska in              
 the Tumeo and Wattum v. University of Alaska litigation, and he             
 felt HB 226 was well-tailored to address the difficulty they ran              
 into in the litigation.                                                       
 Number 694                                                                    
 MARK TUMEO testified via teleconference from Fairbanks, referring             
 to an amendment distributed earlier by Representative Robinson.               
 CHAIR JAMES informed Mr. Tumeo the amendment had not been                     
 submitted yet, but he could testify on the amendment.                         
 MR. TUMEO said he was one of the litigants in the lawsuit Tumeo             
 and Wattum v. University of Alaska.  He asked the committee to              
 accept Representative Robinson's amendment.                                   
 TAPE 95-30, SIDE B                                                            
 Number 000                                                                    
 MR. TUMEO added HB 226 "guts the Human Rights Law of Alaska" and              
 sets a precedent allowing the majority to create special rights               
 for married individuals to be paid more than unmarried                        
 individuals.  He said Representative Robinson's amendment                     
 addresses Representative Kelly's stated concerns without                      
 discriminating on the basis of marital status.  States which have             
 adopted laws similar to Representative Robinson's amendment have              
 experienced no premium increases and only an average of .3                    
 percent increase in applicants.                                               
 Number 050                                                                    
 JENNINE WILLIAMSON testified via teleconference from Fairbanks,               
 encouraging the committee to accept Representative Robinson's                 
 amendment to HB 226.  She believes it is wrong to discriminate                
 against unmarried couples who are in long-term committed                      
 relationships.  She added if economics is the issue, there are                
 many other avenues to explore, such as "cafeteria-style benefits"             
 where all employees are compensated equally.                                  
 Number 087                                                                    
 SANDRA BOATWRIGHT testified via teleconference from Fairbanks,                
 supporting Representative Robinson's amendment, and stating any               
 couple in a long-term committed relationship should receive the               
 same benefits as married couples.                                             
 Number 102                                                                    
 NANCY WINFORD testified via teleconference from Fairbanks,                    
 stating HB 226 as currently written discriminates against people              
 who are not legally married and asking the committee to accept                
 the amendment which would help distinguish committed                          
 relationships from casual relationships.                                      
 Number 148                                                                    
 CHAIR JAMES noted the arrival of Representative Brian Porter.                 
 CINDY BOESSER read the following testimony written by her mother,             
 urging a no vote on HB 227.                                                   
 "HB 227, a bill opposing the possibility of two people                       
 of the same sex ever having the right to "marry" in                           
 this state, is aimed directly at gay and lesbian                              
 persons.  Since eventually the courts of this country                         
 are going to deal with this issue, it seems to me that                        
 the great state of Alaska has much more important                             
 things to do with its time and energy at this point                           
 than to hassle this question.                                                 
 "The thing which brings me to this hearing is that I                         
 see in this seemingly innocuous bill only the bare                            
 beginning of oppression of homosexual people in this                          
 state.  Bringing down what is referred to as the                              
 `Homosexual Agenda' is one of the misguided priorities                        
 of some people in this country right now.  Since that                         
 `agenda' is really only to be treated as equal persons                        
 before the law and therefore is totally consistent with                       
 the Constitution of this state and this country, I find                       
 it unthinkable that any citizen would want to deny                            
 equal treatment to any other citizen.                                         
 "I was born in 1925 and became a part of what I am                           
 ashamed to say was the "silent majority" when it came                         
 to Hitler's attempt to annihilate the Jews.  I feel the                       
 pain of my silence and the silence of most Americans at                       
 that time.  What has come to me as a renewed shock is                         
 the discovery that at the same time, Hitler was                               
 attempting to annihilate the homosexuals in his                               
 country, a fact which didn't make much news at the                            
 time.  I cannot stand by and let this new attempt by a                        
 vocal minority put a foot in that same door.  HB 227                          
 may be what some have called "not worth our time," but                        
 I see it as an insidious beginning which must be                              
 stopped in its tracks.                                                        
 "Mildred P. Boesser                                                          
 17585 Lena Loop                                                              
 Juneau, AK  99801"                                                           
 MS. BOESSER also read her mother's statement urging a no vote on              
 HB 226.                                                                       
 "This bill is another thinly disguised attack on                             
 homosexual persons and runs in tandem with HB 227.                            
 "HB 226 is saying that unless two people are "married"                       
 they cannot have the benefits that "married" persons                          
 enjoy, even though their commitment to each other is                          
 for a lifetime and they hold property in common.  This                        
 is a Catch-22 for homosexual persons, as they cannot be                       
 married, a fact that HB 227 would like to cast in                             
 "HB 226 discriminates on the basis of gender.  Don't                         
 waste the state's time and energy on a bill which is                          
 contrary to the law.                                                          
 "Mildred P.Boesser                                                           
 17585 Lena Loop                                                              
 Juneau, AK  99801"                                                           
 Number 207                                                                    
 MS. BOESSER next read a statement from Marsha Buck opposing HB
 "Madam Chair and Members of the House State Affairs                          
 "I am Marsha Buck, Chairperson of the Juneau PFLAG                           
 Chapter.  PFLAG stands for Parents, Families and                              
 Friends of Lesbians and Gays.  PFLAG is relatively new                        
 to Juneau and is one of more than 340 local PFLAG                             
 groups representing approximately 27,000 families of                          
 gay, lesbian and bisexual persons.  PFLAG promotes the                        
 health and well-being of gay, lesbian, and bisexual                           
 persons and their families through support, education,                        
 and advocacy to end discrimination and to secure equal                        
 civil rights.                                                                 
 "We are opposed to both HB 226 and 227 as currently                          
 "We are opposed to HB 226 because we feel that it                            
 illegally discriminates against our sons, daughters,                          
 and friends on the basis of their marital status, a                           
 discrimination that is clearly addressed by our Alaska                        
 Constitution.  Our daughters and sons, in their pursuit                       
 of happiness similar to your pursuit and to my own,                           
 enter into committed, long-term domestic partnerships                         
 and while in those committed partnerships are entitled                        
 to compensation, including health coverage for their                          
 dependents, that is equal to that received by persons                         
 in the domestic partnerships that we call marriage.  I                        
 would not come to you to seek special rights for my                           
 daughter, but am here today to insist upon the same                           
 rights for her as are legally available for dependents                        
 in other spousal situations.                                                  
 "My daughter's partner is working on her masters degree                      
 at a university in the Lower 48 in a state that is                            
 plagued by far greater financial concerns than our                            
 wonderful state.  My daughter simply had to present 2                         
 pieces of documentation from a list of 5 possible that                        
 showed financial dependency effective for at least 6                          
 continuous months in order to be covered under her                            
 partner's health insurance plan.  While my daughter,                          
 who already has her masters degree, was looking for                           
 work when they first moved to the university community,                       
 this coverage was crucial for her health and                                  
 well-being.  It would make me feel both sad and angry                         
 to think that she could not come home to Alaska where                         
 she was born and raised and be treated with the same                          
 equality and respect.                                                         
 "Thank you for your time and attention.  I look forward                      
 to hearing that HB 226 has been removed from further                          
 "Marsha Buck                                                                 
 8445 Kimberly Street                                                         
 Juneau, AK  99801"                                                           
 MS. BOESSER read testimony from Marsha Buck opposing HB 227.                  
 "Madam Chair and Members of the House State Affairs                          
 "I am Marsha Buck, Chairperson of the Juneau PFLAG                           
 Chapter.  PFLAG stands for Parents, Families and                              
 Friends of Lesbians and Gays.                                                 
 "We are opposed to HB 227.                                                   
 We are opposed to HB 227 because we feel that it                             
 illegally discriminates against our daughters and sons                        
 on the basis of gender.  As you are aware, it is all                          
 but impossible here in Alaska for our sons and                                
 daughters to pursue the happiness of actual marriage at                       
 this time, and yet you now propose to add a further                           
 layer of discrimination on top of that which already                          
 exists.  I am wondering if you have addressed important                       
 questions about the bill such as:                                             
 "What existing problem does this bill solve?                                 
 "How many couples who do not fit this bill's definition                      
 have requested marriage licenses?  How many have been                         
 denied licenses?                                                              
 "Would this bill take our state back to the way the                          
 Deep South was when it was illegal for African                                
 Americans and Caucasians to marry?                                            
 "Could this bill be interpreted to mean that same sex                        
 marriage is a crime?                                                          
 "As I listened to the recent campaign speeches and the                       
 promises at the outset of this Legislative session, I                         
 heard this Legislature vow to remove government from                          
 the personal lives of Alaskans and focus on public                            
 needs.  I heard promises to reduce government and only                        
 focus on what government really should be involved in.                        
 This bill does exactly the opposite!  It would be                             
 difficult to get much more involved in the personal                           
 lives of Alaskans than HB 227 proposes to do!  To give                        
 our daughters and sons an opportunity for the happiness                       
 that comes with both a legal and committed, long term                         
 relationship, I ask that you remove HB 227 from any                           
 further consideration.                                                        
 "Thank you for your time and attention.                                      
 "Marsha Buck                                                                 
 8445 Kimberly Street                                                         
 Juneau, AK  99801"                                                           
 Number 284                                                                    
 SUE HARGIS, Chair of Southeast Alaska Gay and Lesbian Alliance                
 (SEGLA), testified first on HB 226, urging the committee to stop              
 the bill and not pass it from committee because it sets up                    
 discriminatory practices in paying some individuals more for                  
 equal work just because they have entered into the only                       
 acceptable legal contract.  A spousal equivalency contract is                 
 also legally binding.  The state should have the option to pay                
 benefits to all who have entered into a contract, or none of                  
 those who have entered into a contract.  Just because IRS and                 
 other agencies discriminate based on marital status, this does                
 not give Alaska the right to discriminate upon that basis.                    
 MS. HARGIS testified in opposition to HB 227, stating it is not               
 in the best interests of the state of Alaska to rewrite the                   
 statute to clarify who may enter into a marriage contract.  HB
 227 will likely end up creating expensive litigation and is                   
 discriminatory on the basis of gender.  If HB 227 is intended to              
 prevent homosexual committed relationships, this statute revision             
 will not accomplish that.  The state has no business regulating               
 who may enter into civil contracts.                                           
 Number 369                                                                    
 RANDALL BURNS, Executive Director of the Alaska Civil Liberties               
 Union, testified again via teleconference from Fairbanks, in                  
 opposition to HB 227.  The ACLU sees no reason for the                        
 legislation.  In addition, HB 227 would open the state to                     
 expensive litigation.  To date, no state recognizes same-sex                  
 marriages, and Alaska is not at risk of this.  Mr. Burns asked,               
 "Why fix something that ain't broke?"                                         
 Number 402                                                                    
 CAROL ANDERSON testified in opposition to HB 226, stating it                  
 would amend the Human Rights Statutes to allow denial of benefits             
 to a person not legally married to the employee.  Health benefits             
 are a tangible and valuable part of an employee's salary, and                 
 married people in effect have higher wages than their single                  
 co-workers because their spouses are also covered by insurance.               
 This amounts to married workers being paid over $300 a month more             
 than single workers if they work for the state.  Judge Greene                 
 rightfully concluded this practice is illegal discrimination on               
 the basis of marital status.  Employers need to either drop                   
 insurance benefits for spouses of employees or extend those                   
 benefits to the non-married partners of employees.  HB 226 would              
 codify an illegal practice.  She added she supports                           
 Representative Robinson's amendment.                                          
 MS. ANDERSON urged the committee to take no action on HB 227 and              
 to let the current gender-neutral Alaska statute regarding                    
 marriage stand.                                                               
 Number 438                                                                    
 TALMIDGE BAILEY said many of the points he planned to cover have              
 already been covered.  He said, "We are told who we can go to the             
 prom with, who we can take to the office picnic, and it                       
 continues....People who do that derive their authority from                   
 institutions such as the state, so the state is the one who needs             
 to take the steps to right the wrong."                                        
 Number 470                                                                    
 DANIEL COLLISON, Vice President of the Southeast Alaska Gay and               
 Lesbian Alliance, testified in opposition to HB 226.  He recalled             
 a conversation with his father three years ago when he told his               
 dad he was gay.  Despite his apprehensions, his father and all                
 his siblings freely and abundantly extended their love and                    
 support.  He added he intends to marry in the future, and he                  
 knows his father and mother will extend to the man he chooses as              
 a partner all the same warmth and graciousness which they have                
 shown to all five of their other sons- and daughters-in-law.  He              
 asked, if the sex of his marriage partner is no concern of his                
 parents, how can it be the concern of the members of the State                
 Affairs Committee.                                                            
 Number 516                                                                    
 BOB STALNAKER, Director, Division of Retirement and Benefits,                 
 Department of Administration, testified in support of HB 226,                 
 stating it serves to support and certify the division's current               
 policy.  Under statute the state is required to provide health                
 insurance for employees' spouses and dependent children.                      
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked Mr. Stalnaker if his department had             
 any problems with her amendment which defines domestic partners               
 of employees and outlines rigid standards for contracts between               
 MR. STALNAKER replied he had read the draft and said it serves to             
 qualify a legal relationship, which marriage also does.  Absent               
 marriage and absent a spousal relationship, his department would              
 still interpret the law as they currently do, with traditional                
 Number 548                                                                    
 MARY ALICE MCKEEN stated she is an attorney, licensed to practice             
 law in Alaska since 1979, a mother of three, and happily married              
 since 1979.  She testified in opposition to HB 227 as an                      
 individual, with no formal affiliation.  She believes people                  
 should be able to choose whom they marry unless there is a                    
 compelling state interest in preventing it, for example with very             
 young people or people related by blood to a certain degree.                  
 Otherwise, it should be a personal choice, and the state has no               
 compelling interest in prohibiting same-sex marriages.  She                   
 believes same-sex relationships are as healthy as opposite-sex                
 relationships.  Homosexuality is no longer medically defined as               
 deviant, and prohibiting such relationships facilitates                       
 Number 615                                                                    
 CHAIR JAMES referred to Ms. McKeen's statement that there should              
 be some rules set down for marriage, prohibiting close blood                  
 relationships for example, because it could cause a problem in                
 the offspring.  She asked if some time in the future same-sex                 
 marriages were allowed, should close blood relationships still be             
 prohibited from marrying?                                                     
 MS. MCKEEN said there would be no offspring to be genetically                 
 harmed, but there might be other factors which could harm a child             
 whose parents are closely related.  She said if there would be no             
 legitimate state interest in preventing harm to the children, it              
 probably should not be prohibited.                                            
 Number 640                                                                    
 SHERRIE GOLL spoke for the Alaska Women's Lobby in opposition to              
 HB 226 and 227 and in support of Alaska's Human Rights laws as                
 they stand today.  She supported Representative Robinson's                    
 proposed amendment.  She added the court provided options in the              
 Tumeo case, giving eligibility for coverage only to those couples             
 who have a legal and financial responsibility for each other, and             
 suggesting couples in domestic partnerships could sign an                     
 affidavit substantiating an interdependent relationship.                      
 Number 690                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON reminded the committee that "spousal                  
 equivalent" exists even in the legislative ethics code.  She                  
 moved her amendment number 1.  There were objections.                         
 TAPE 95-31, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 000                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON said there are many reasons people enter              
 into a long-term relationship without marrying, and her amendment             
 would allow them to sign a contract and have the same benefits as             
 those who use the legal contract of marriage.                                 
 REPRESENTATIVE KELLY noted the amendment "takes HB 226 and makes              
 it go away" while letting the problems it addresses, stand.  He               
 said the amendment creates discrimination based on finances.                  
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON replied the amendment had five criteria,              
 not all dealing with money.                                                   
 Number 082                                                                    
 CHAIR JAMES called for the vote on amendment number 1.                        
 Representatives Green, Ivan, Porter and James voted no.                       
 Representative Robinson voted yes.  The amendment failed 4 to 1.              
 Number 097                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER made a motion to move HB 226 with                 
 attached zero fiscal note and individual recommendations.                     
 Hearing no objection, HB 226 was moved out of committee.                      
 Number 118                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG. sponsor of HB 227, informed the               
 committee that in 1974 the Alaska Reviser of Statutes, in an                  
 attempt to create gender-neutral language, changed the marriage               
 statute from the words "man and woman" to "person."  Former                   
 Representative Clem Tillion, Chair of Judiciary at the time, was              
 contacted, as was former Representative Genie Chance who                      
 championed "gender-neutralling" the statutes in Alaska; both                  
 confirmed there had been no testimony of any substance regarding              
 the change.  HB 227 merely returns the language to its proper                 
 form, as it appeared prior to the 1974 legislative session.                   
 Number 215                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG reported that circumstances generated by              
 Judge Greene's decision in the Tumeo-Wattum case in Alaska, as                
 well as the Behr v. Lewin case in Hawaii, have created a                    
 compelling state interest to take action now.                                 
 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said the Hawaii Supreme Court had made an             
 initial ruling that marriage licensing procedures in Hawaii                   
 allowed same sex marriages.  This created a fire-storm in the                 
 Hawaiian Islands, and Representative Terrance Tom introduced a                
 bill which says a marriage must include a man and a woman.  The               
 bill passed the Hawaiian Legislature in 1994.  The primary                    
 impetus in passage of the bill was to re-insert the legislature               
 into the development and passage of public policy; it was                     
 believed the Judicial system had usurped the legislature's power              
 in formulation of public policy.  Alaska's statutes are similar,              
 and could be similarly interpreted to allow same-sex marriages,               
 especially in light of Judge Greene's ruling.  He referred to a               
 footnote on page 15 in Judge Greene's decision which states, "The             
 University would have to show that same-sex marriages are                     
 prohibited in Alaska.  The Alaska Supreme Court has not been                  
 asked to decide whether Alaska's marriage statute allows for                  
 same-sex marriages....The University has provided no legal                    
 argument that such marriages are prohibited."                                 
 Number 255                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG concluded this is an open invitation to               
 generate a lawsuit in the state of Alaska.  This can be corrected             
 very simply by amending the statute to read "by one man and one               
 woman..."  The purpose and intent of HB 227 is to explicitly                  
 clarify who is eligible to marry and to prohibit same-sex                     
 marriages.  His intention is not to bring up a divisive issue,                
 but to stop a debate which could become divisive and expensive,               
 and to cut off potential lawsuits "at the pass."                              
 Number 270                                                                    
 MR. BURNS testified again via teleconference from Anchorage,                  
 asking Representative Rokeberg to explain for the record why he               
 is opposed to same-sex marriages.                                             
 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG replied there is a compelling state                   
 reason to maintain existing law that revolves around marriage and             
 domestic relations in Alaska, relative to the impact of economic              
 and other problems which could occur in matters such as child                 
 support, moral and legal obligations of primary breadwinners.                 
 The bill also makes a public statement about the importance of                
 family.  He believes the primary rationale in the legal contract              
 of marriage is to have children.                                              
 Number 312                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER made a motion to move HB 227 with                       
 individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes.  There were             
 no objections, so HB 227 was moved out of committee.                          
 HSTA - 03/18/95                                                              
 HB 10 - PAYMENT OF COSTS OF DWI ACCIDENTS                                    
 Number 325                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES, sponsor of HB 10, read his sponsor                
 "HB 10 is an act that requires DWI (Driving While                            
 Intoxicated) offenders convicted of causing a motor                           
 vehicle accident to pay for the costs of emergency                            
 services that respond to the accident.                                        
 "The problems and associated costs of driving while                          
 intoxicated are clear.  According to national                                 
 statistics, 43 percent of all fatal motor vehicle                             
 accidents involve alcohol.  According to the Department                       
 of Public Safety, 40 percent of all DWI arrests involve                       
 repeat offenders.  Furthermore, alcohol related                               
 accidents nationwide result in an economic loss of                            
 $46.1 billion per year, according to the U.S.                                 
 Department of Transportation, 1990.                                           
 "House Bill 10 attempts to address these problems in                         
 two ways.  First, as a deterrent to those who drive                           
 while intoxicated by raising the financial penalty for                        
 doing so.  By raising the financial burden to those                           
 breaking the law, HB 10 emphasizes the seriousness of                         
 the crime.  Second, this bill shifts the financial                            
 responsibility of the emergency services that respond                         
 to alcohol-related accidents from law abiding, tax                            
 paying citizens to the convicted DWI offender.                                
 "Three states, California, Indiana, and Kansas, have                         
 similar reimbursement laws."                                                  
 Number 348                                                                    
 DAVID TYLER said he and the Alaska State Fire Chiefs Association              
 strongly support the bill.  HB 10 can help them achieve their                 
 goals of reducing the loss of life in Alaska.                                 
 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES pointed out the CS, work draft 9-LS0060/F,              
 which changes page 1, line 7, by adding "if the convicted person              
 or the convicted person's insurer has not already paid the                    
 cost..." to deal with the insurance issue.  He also would like to             
 insert the word "reasonable" in front of "cost" on line 6.  He                
 added he had gotten approval from those in favor of the bill to               
 make these changes.                                                           
 Number 388                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN moved the amendment on line 6.  There were               
 no objections.                                                                
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN moved to adopt the CS version F, as amended,             
 as the working document.  There were no objections.                           
 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES pointed out letters of support in the                   
 packet from Mothers Against Drunk Drivers and the Alaska                      
 Municipal League.                                                             
 CHAIR JAMES thanked Representative Davies for submitting the                  
 bill, saying she thought it was a good bill.                                  
 Number 404                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN inquired about the definition of "emergency               
 medical technician,"  whether this would include community health             
 aides in rural communities.                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES said he was not sure.                                   
 MARK JOHNSON, Chief of the Emergency Services Section, Department             
 of Health and Social Services, said community health aides in                 
 Alaska are all trained initially as emergency trauma technicians,             
 and a large number of them have attained emergency medical                    
 technician certification.  If the bill only refers to "emergency              
 medical technician" it would not include every community health               
 aide.  He suggested that adding "emergency trauma technician"                 
 would include every health aide in Alaska.                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN said he would be interested in including                  
 "emergency trauma technician" in the bill language.                           
 CHAIR JAMES remarked on the difficulty of meeting concerns of                 
 both urban and rural areas in Alaska, stating legislation should              
 be in the best interest of the state as a whole.                              
 Number 428                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES said he would offer the addition of "health             
 aide" in the definition at the next committee.                                
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN said he would like to include all those                   
 "qualified, with a certificated license."                                     
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON made a motion to move CSHB 10 (STA) with              
 individual recommendations, and attached zero fiscal note.  There             
 were no objections.                                                           
 CHAIR JAMES adjourned the meeting at 2:00 p.m.                                

Document Name Date/Time Subjects