Legislature(1995 - 1996)

03/09/1996 10:03 AM STA

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
txt
             HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE                            
                         March 9, 1996                                         
                           10:03 a.m.                                          
                                                                               
                                                                               
 MEMBERS PRESENT                                                               
                                                                               
 Representative Jeannette James, Chair                                         
 Representative Joe Green                                                      
 Representative Ivan Ivan                                                      
 Representative Brian Porter                                                   
 Representative Caren Robinson                                                 
                                                                               
 MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                
                                                                               
 Representative Scott Ogan, Vice Chair                                         
 Representative Ed Willis                                                      
                                                                               
 COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                            
                                                                               
 HOUSE BILL NO. 532                                                            
 "An Act relating to determination by executive branch agencies of             
 the costs of reviewing, adopting, amending, and repealing                     
 regulations."                                                                 
                                                                               
      - PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                
                                                                               
 HOUSE BILL NO. 348                                                            
 "An Act requiring that all official interviews with children who              
 are alleged to have been abused or neglected be videotaped or                 
 audiotaped."                                                                  
                                                                               
      - PASSED CSHB 348(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                  
                                                                               
 * HOUSE BILL NO. 359                                                          
 "An Act relating to the appointment and confirmation process for              
 members of certain boards, commissions, and similar bodies;                   
 relating to terms of certain appointees; and providing for an                 
 effective date."                                                              
                                                                               
      - PASSED CSHB 359(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                  
                                                                               
 * HOUSE BILL NO. 372                                                          
 "An Act relating to liquor licenses issued to a restaurant or                 
 eating place; and providing for an effective date."                           
                                                                               
      - PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                
                                                                               
 HOUSE BILL NO. 368                                                            
 "An Act relating to election campaigns, election campaign                     
 financing, the oversight and regulation of election campaigns by              
 the Alaska Public Offices Commission, the activities of lobbyists             
 that relate to election campaigns, and the definitions of offenses            
 of campaign misconduct; and providing for an effective date."                 
                                                                               
      - PASSED CSHB 368(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                  
                                                                               
 HOUSE BILL NO. 317                                                            
 "An Act relating to election campaigns, election campaign                     
 financing, the oversight and regulation of election campaigns by              
 the Alaska Public Offices Commission, the activities of lobbyists             
 that relate to election campaigns, and the definitions of offenses            
 of campaign misconduct; and providing for an effective date."                 
                                                                               
      - HEARD AND HELD                                                         
                                                                               
 HOUSE BILL NO. 401                                                            
 "An Act authorizing the issuance and sale of revenue bonds to fund            
 public wastewater systems, nonpoint source water pollution control            
 projects, including solid waste management systems, and estuary               
 conservation and management projects; authorizing the use of the              
 Alaska clean water fund to pay and secure the bonds and to pay                
 costs related to issuance and administration of  the bonds;                   
 authorizing certain measures to secure payment of the bonds; and              
 amending Alaska Rule of Civil Procedure 3."                                   
                                                                               
      - PASSED CSHB 401(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                  
                                                                               
 (*First public hearing)                                                       
                                                                               
 PREVIOUS ACTION                                                               
                                                                               
 BILL:  HB 532                                                               
 SHORT TITLE: COSTS OF ADOPTING REGULATIONS                                    
 SPONSOR(S): STATE AFFAIRS                                                     
                                                                               
 JRN-DATE      JRN-PG            ACTION                                        
 02/28/96      2912    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 02/28/96      2913    (H)   STA, FINANCE                                      
 03/07/96              (H)   STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 03/07/96              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/09/96              (H)   STA AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
                                                                               
 BILL:  HB 348                                                               
 SHORT TITLE: VIDEO/AUDIOTAPE INTERVIEW OF ABUSED MINOR                        
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) JAMES, Therriault, Kelly, Toohey                
                                                                               
 JRN-DATE      JRN-PG            ACTION                                        
 05/13/95      2173    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 05/13/95      2174    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS, HES, JUD, FINANCE                  
 08/26/95              (H)   STA AT  1:00 PM                                   
 08/26/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 01/08/96      2383    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): KELLY, TOOHEY                       
 01/23/96              (H)   STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 01/23/96              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/10/96              (H)   STA AT  2:00 PM CAPITOL 102                       
 02/10/96              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/07/96              (H)   STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 03/07/96              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/09/96              (H)   STA AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
                                                                               
 BILL:  HB 359                                                               
 SHORT TITLE: APPOINTMENT PROCESS FOR BDS & COMM'NS                            
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) PORTER, Green                                   
                                                                               
 JRN-DATE      JRN-PG            ACTION                                        
 12/29/95      2360    (H)   PREFILE RELEASED                                  
 01/08/96      2360    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/08/96      2360    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS, JUDICIARY                          
 03/07/96              (H)   STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 03/07/96              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/09/96              (H)   STA AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
                                                                               
 BILL:  HB 372                                                               
 SHORT TITLE: RESTAURANT LIQUOR LICENSES                                       
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) ROKEBERG, B.Davis, Brown                        
                                                                               
 JRN-DATE      JRN-PG            ACTION                                        
 12/29/95      2363    (H)   PREFILE RELEASED                                  
 01/08/96      2363    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/08/96      2363    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS, LABOR & COMMERCE                   
 01/10/96      2405    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): BROWN                               
 03/07/96              (H)   STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 03/07/96              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/09/96              (H)   STA AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
                                                                               
 BILL:  HB 368                                                               
 SHORT TITLE: ELECTION CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM                                 
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) JAMES                                           
                                                                               
 JRN-DATE      JRN-PG            ACTION                                        
 12/29/95      2362    (H)   PREFILE RELEASED                                  
 01/08/96      2362    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/08/96      2362    (H)   STA, JUDICIARY, FINANCE                           
 01/25/96              (H)   STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 01/25/96              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 01/30/96              (H)   STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 01/30/96              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/01/96              (H)   STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 02/01/96              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/29/96              (H)   STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 02/29/96              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/05/96              (H)   STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 03/05/96              (H)   MINUTES(STA)                                      
 03/09/96              (H)   STA AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 BILL:  HB 317                                                               
 SHORT TITLE: ELECTION CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM                                 
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) FINKELSTEIN                                     
                                                                               
 JRN-DATE      JRN-PG            ACTION                                        
 04/21/95      1427    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 04/21/95      1427    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS, JUDICIARY, FINANCE                 
 01/08/96      2358    (H)   SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE INTRODUCED-REFERRALS           
 01/08/96      2358    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS, JUDICIARY, FINANCE                 
 01/25/96              (H)   STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 01/25/96              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 01/30/96              (H)   STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 01/30/96              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/01/96              (H)   STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 02/01/96              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/29/96              (H)   STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 02/29/96              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 03/05/96              (H)   STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 03/05/96              (H)   MINUTES(STA)                                      
 03/09/96              (H)   STA AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
                                                                               
 BILL:  HB 401                                                               
 SHORT TITLE: REVENUE BONDS: WATER & WASTE PROJECTS                            
 SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR                                  
                                                                               
 JRN-DATE      JRN-PG            ACTION                                        
 01/08/96      2378    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/08/96      2378    (H)   CRA, STATE AFFAIRS, RESOURCES, FINANCE            
 01/08/96      2379    (H)   2 ZERO FISCAL NOTES (REV, DEC)                    
 01/08/96      2379    (H)   GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER                     
 02/20/96              (H)   CRA AT  1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                       
 02/20/96              (H)   MINUTE(CRA)                                       
 02/21/96      2829    (H)   CRA RPT  4NR                                      
 02/21/96      2829    (H)   NR:  ELTON, AUSTERMAN, KOTT, IVAN                 
 02/21/96      2829    (H)   2 ZERO FISCAL NOTES (DEC, REV) 1/8/96             
 03/09/96              (H)   STA AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
                                                                               
 WITNESS REGISTER                                                              
                                                                               
 BARBARA COTTING, Legislative Administrative Assistant                         
    to Representative Jeannette James                                          
 State Capitol, Room 102                                                       
 Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182                                                     
 Telephone:  (907) 465-3743                                                    
  POSITION STATEMENT:   Provided explanation of committee substitute           
 for HB 348.                                                                   
                                                                               
 WALTER GAUTHIER, Member                                                       
 Guardians of Family Rights                                                    
 P.O. Box 2246                                                                 
 Homer, Alaska 99603                                                           
 Telephone:  (907) 235-2809                                                    
  POSITION STATEMENT:   Provided testimony on HB 348.                          
                                                                               
 JAMES BALDWIN, Assistant Attorney General                                     
 Governmental Affairs Section                                                  
 Civil Division                                                                
 Department of Law                                                             
 P.O. Box 110300                                                               
 Juneau, Alaska 99811-0300                                                     
 Telephone:  (907) 465-3600                                                    
  POSITION STATEMENT:   Provided testimony on HB 359.                          
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG                                                
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 State Capitol, Room 110                                                       
 Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182                                                     
 Telephone:  (907) 465-4968                                                    
  POSITION STATEMENT:   Sponsor of HB 372.                                     
                                                                               
 TOM MCGRATH                                                                   
 1207 West 36th Avenue                                                         
 Anchorage, Alaska 99503                                                       
 Telephone:  (907) 562-8730                                                    
  POSITION STATEMENT:   Provided testimony on HB 372.                          
                                                                               
 PAT FULLERTON, Chairman                                                       
 Spenard Community Council                                                     
 616 West 34th Avenue, 412                                                     
 Anchorage, Alaska 99503                                                       
 Telephone:  (907) 563-1156                                                    
  POSITION STATEMENT:   Provided testimony on HB 372.                          
                                                                               
 DOUG GRIFFIN, Director                                                        
 Alcoholic Beverage Control Board                                              
 550 West 7th Avenue, 350                                                      
 Anchorage, Alaska 99501                                                       
 Telephone:  (907) 277-8638                                                    
  POSITION STATEMENT:   Provided testimony on HB 372.                          
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE DAVID FINKELSTEIN                                              
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 State Capitol, Room 424                                                       
 Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182                                                     
 Telephone:  (907) 465-2435                                                    
  POSITION STATEMENT:   Provided testimony on HB 368 and HB 317.               
                                                                               
 KATHY ASHBY                                                                   
 1835 West 15th Avenue                                                         
 Anchorage, Alaska 99501                                                       
 Telephone:  (907) 278-2302                                                    
  POSITION STATEMENT:   Provided testimony on HB 368 and HB 317.               
                                                                               
 KEITH KELTON, Director                                                        
 Division of Facility Construction and Operation                               
 Department of Environmental Conservation                                      
 410 Willoughby Avenue, Suite 105                                              
 Juneau, Alaska 99801-1795                                                     
 Telephone:  (907) 465-5180                                                    
  POSITION STATEMENT:   Presented HB 401.                                      
                                                                               
 ACTION NARRATIVE                                                              
                                                                               
 TAPE 96-32, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 0000                                                                   
                                                                               
 The House State Affairs Committee was called to order by Chair                
 Jeannette James at 10:03 a.m.  Members present at the call to order           
 were Representatives Green, Ivan, Porter, Robinson and James.                 
 Members absent were Representatives Ogan and Willis.                          
 HB 532 - COSTS OF ADOPTING REGULATIONS                                      
                                                                               
 The first order of business to come before the House State Affairs            
 Committee was HB 532.                                                         
                                                                               
 CHAIR JEANNETTE JAMES announced 16, $0 fiscal notes were just                 
 received from the various agencies.  One department thought there             
 might be a $15 thousand to $17 thousand cost to produce the final             
 report, but it was willing to absorb it into the normal budget                
 process.  She thanked the Administration for its cooperation.  She            
 called HB 532 a simple bill, and announced she would like to move             
 it from the House State Affairs Committee today.                              
                                                                               
 Number 0139                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER moved that HB 532 move from committee             
 with individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes.  Hearing           
 no objection, it was so moved from the House State Affairs                    
 Committee.                                                                    
                                                                               
 HB 348 - VIDEO/AUDIOTAPE INTERVIEW OF ABUSED MINOR                          
                                                                               
 The next order of business to come before the House State Affairs             
 Committee was HB 348.                                                         
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES called on Barbara Cotting, Legislative Administrative             
 Assistant to Representative Jeannette James, to explain the                   
 committee substitute.                                                         
                                                                               
 Number 0301                                                                   
                                                                               
 BARBARA COTTING, Legislative Administrative Assistant to                      
 Representative Jeannette James, explained the changes to the                  
 committee substitute, CSHB 348(STA) (9-LS1187/G).  She referred the           
 committee members to page 1, line 12, "(1) one person from the                
 department;" and explained the word "department" referred to the              
 Department of Health and Social Services.  She referred the                   
 committee members to page 2, line 21 - 22, and explained the                  
 following language was added for clarification, "unless the nature            
 of the investigation clearly indicates otherwise; and."                       
 Furthermore, she explained on page 2, lines 27 - 28, a redundancy             
 was omitted.  The bill was accompanied by a $0 fiscal note from the           
 Department of Public Safety.  The Division of Family and Youth                
 Services (DFYS) also promised a $0 fiscal note.                               
                                                                               
 Number 0399                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN asked if the millions of dollars were gone           
 from the original fiscal note?  He further asked Ms. Cotting if she           
 had actually seen the $0 fiscal note from DFYS?                               
                                                                               
 MS. COTTING replied Diane Worley, Director, Division of Family and            
 Youth Services, would probably bring the fiscal note with her.  She           
 would be here shortly.  She was running late today.                           
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES called on the first witness via teleconference in                 
 Homer, Walter Gauthier.                                                       
                                                                               
 Number 0412                                                                   
                                                                               
 WALTER GAUTHIER, Member, Guardians of Family Rights, explained the            
 Guardians had four branches in Alaska, and more were being                    
 organized.  It was organized specifically because of the abuse of             
 families by agencies.  He stated the agencies were case load                  
 driven.  Therefore, without a case load, they did not have a budget           
 or a job justification.  He said there was no check and balance in            
 the system, and it was based on hearsay.  The Guardians demanded              
 videotaping of all interviews in their entirety to provide a check            
 and balance to the system.  He objected to the changes in the                 
 committee substitute.  The Guardians preferred the Senate version             
 to the House version.                                                         
                                                                               
 Number 0603                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN IVAN asked Mr. Gauthier why he did not trust              
 the agencies and the formation of a work group?                               
                                                                               
 Number 0643                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. GAUTHIER replied the agencies involved were case load driven.             
 Therefore, they did not have a budget unless there was a case load.           
                                                                               
                                                                               
 Number 0703                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN thanked Mr. Gauthier for his time.                        
                                                                               
 Number 0708                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE CAREN ROBINSON moved to adopt CSHB 348(STA) (9-                
 LS1187/G), as a working document.  Hearing no objection, it was so            
 adopted.                                                                      
                                                                               
 Number 0736                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON moved that CSHB 348(STA) move from the                
 committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal                 
 notes.                                                                        
                                                                               
 Number 0769                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN objected for discussion purposes.  He said he             
 understood the need for CSHB 348(STA) but was not comfortable with            
 the committee substitute because of native children who did not               
 speak the English language.  He wanted some protection for the non-           
 English speaking children and families and suggested using a                  
 translator, when necessary, for example.  He announced he would not           
 hold the bill today, however.                                                 
                                                                               
 Number 0834                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES replied the testimony was pointed at DFYS.  She                   
 explained the bill was a management agreement between four                    
 departments - the Department of Public Safety, The Department of              
 Education, the Department of Law, and the Department of Health and            
 Social Services.  There was more protection because of the variety            
 of agencies involved.  The public would be able to participate in             
 the memorandum of agreement process as well.  She said she                    
 understood the concerns of Representative Ivan, but felt they were            
 being met in the bill.                                                        
                                                                               
 Number 1030                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN removed his objection.                                    
                                                                               
 Number 1041                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN wondered if the force of the four departments            
 would inhibit the indigenous community from coming forward with               
 their concerns.                                                               
                                                                               
 Number 1087                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES replied the community would not be talking to the four            
 departments, but rather the memorandum of agreement made by the               
 four departments.                                                             
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN wondered if that was really a true concern of            
 the indigenous community before discussing the issue further.                 
                                                                               
 Number 1110                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN replied he was concerned about the strong force           
 the four departments represented that a family would have to face,            
 whether native or non-native.                                                 
                                                                               
 Number 1142                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES replied the intent of CSHB 348(STA) (9-LS1187/G) was to           
 agree upon a method to conduct an interview through a management              
 agreement.                                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 1175                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN asked if the right to an attorney was                     
 infringed?                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES replied the right to an attorney was not infringed.               
                                                                               
 Number 1194                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON said CSHB 348(STA) (9-LS1187/G) did not               
 change any laws.  It created a standard policy for accountability.            
 It had been done in the past.  She explained the bill was a safety            
 net.  The bill also called for the best and most effective method             
 to safeguard the child.                                                       
                                                                               
 Number 1314                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES reiterated it was a written agreement between agencies.           
                                                                               
 Number 1381                                                                   
                                                                               
 MS. COTTING announced Diane Worley, DFYS, was present.  The $0                
 fiscal note had been forwarded already to the House State Affairs             
 Committee.  Furthermore, she explained the Indian Child Welfare Act           
 superseded state policy for further safeguards.                               
                                                                               
 Number 1403                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN said he would shut-up now.                                
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES stated hearing no further objection, CSHB 348(STA) (9-            
 LS1187/G) was so moved from the House State Affairs Committee.                
                                                                               
 HB 359 - APPOINTMENT PROCESS FOR BDS & COMM'NS                              
                                                                               
 The next order of business to come before the House State Affairs             
 Committee was HB 359.                                                         
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES called on the sponsor of HB 359, Representative Brian             
 Porter.                                                                       
                                                                               
 Number 1462                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER explained HB 359 was an attempt to take the             
 politics out of the presentment and appointment process.  It was              
 based on a lawsuit of which an incoming Governor tried to replace             
 a commission member of the Alaska Public Utilities Commission                 
 (APUC).  The lawsuit was still on-going.  Therefore, the bill                 
 attempted to prevent that from happening again as-well-as to                  
 prevent the confirmation process from being circumvented.  The                
 Administration had some concerns about the original bill resulting            
 in the committee substitute before the committee members today.  He           
 asked James Baldwin, Department of Law, to come forward and discuss           
 the concerns of the Administration.                                           
                                                                               
 Number 1575                                                                   
                                                                               
 JAMES BALDWIN, Assistant Attorney General, Governmental Affairs               
 Section, Civil Division (Juneau), Department of Law, said he came             
 here today wearing two hats due to his long tenure with the                   
 Department, and his position of advising the Office of the Governor           
 regarding appointments.  The bill addressed the issue in a fair and           
 even manner.  There were going to be differences because the                  
 Administration represented different branches of government and               
 within each branch there were different attitudes.  The changes in            
 the committee substitute did not restrict the Governor's or the               
 Legislature's prerogatives.  The Administration was strongly                  
 opposed to the original version.  The majority of those issues had            
 been resolved in the committee substitute, however.  The issues               
 were based on the philosophical changes of different                          
 administrations creating disagreements for certain appointments.              
 The disagreements were usually for boards and commissions that                
 carried a salary and a term limit such as the Alaska Public                   
 Utilities Commission (APUC).  The first litigation case was                   
 mentioned by Representative Porter as a result of a disagreement.             
 The case, he explained, was now in the Supreme Court.  The main               
 issue was the propriety of the presentment process.  Presentment              
 was presumed or impled to have occurred when it was a necessary and           
 an important step in the appointment process according to the                 
 Administration.  He explained, so far, the superior court judge had           
 agreed with the Administration.  Furthermore, he commented the                
 attitude of a governor changed depending on where he was in the               
 term.  According to the Office of the Governor it was not a problem           
 anymore because it had passed that point.  It was now a problem for           
 the next governor.  He agreed the issue needed to be resolved,                
 however, because it was a continuing problem.  The bill therefore,            
 made presentment an important part of the process.  Moreover, it              
 defined an "interim term," to end at the beginning of a session.              
 The individual could then be reappointed for the remainder of the             
 session, if confirmed.  If the individual was not presented at the            
 beginning of the session, he was dismissed.  This, he alleged,                
 would solve the legal problem, but it created an administrative               
 problem for the Office of the Governor.  He commented                         
 Representative Porter was concerned about a governor removing an              
 appointee during the interim, for example, for reasons other than             
 cause.  He said that was not a major concern of the Administration,           
 however, because the Governor had to stand behind his appointments            
 and conduct himself in good faith.  Furthermore, it created a heavy           
 administrative burden.  He cited approximately 1,275 seats were               
 subject to the confirmation process, and according to the bill they           
 were due on March 1, followed by a reappointment presentation                 
 period to the legislature.  Mr. Baldwin said the spirit behind the            
 bill was to address appointments in the regular session.  The law             
 suit contended that the legislature could imply that an appointment           
 had been presented.  It appeared to be an administrative act only.            
 The language needed to be clarified.  He referred the committee               
 members to page 4, line 12 and suggested adding, "`each' governor             
 shall present to the legislature the names of the people                      
 appointed," so that a governor did not have to present the                    
 appointments of his predecessor.  He further explained there were             
 sections of the bill that made conforming amendments for boards and           
 commissions required by existing law to present a confirmation.               
 According to the Alaska State Constitution it was not necessary,              
 however.  He explained, there had been a long standing disagreement           
 between the legislature and the Governor over the interpretation of           
 the Alaska State Constitution addressing the confirmation of                  
 certain boards and commissions.  The legislature had enacted bills            
 that created boards and commissions and made the members subject to           
 the confirmation process.  The Administration said it was                     
 unconstitutional because of the laws on the books.  The                       
 Administration still did not support that notion even though the              
 bill contained conforming amendments.                                         
                                                                               
 Number 2114                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER explained the conforming amendments were                
 consistent to prevent additional problems in the statutes.                    
 However, he understood it would not solve the on-going debate                 
 between the Administration and the legislature concerning the                 
 interpretation of the Alaska State Constitution.                              
                                                                               
 Number 2159                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES commented the issue needed to be resolved through a               
 court decision.                                                               
                                                                               
 Number 2207                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. BALDWIN cited the 1976 case of Bradner v. Hammond.  He                  
 explained based on the decision of the case, the legislature                  
 decided to make the deputy commissioners subject to confirmation.             
 It was challenged further, however, and determined the legislature            
 could not extend its confirmation to any office other than what was           
 expressly provided for in the Alaska State Constitution.  The                 
 constitution stated it had to be a regulatory, a quasi-judicial, a            
 principal department head, or a board that was a principal                    
 department head to be subject to the confirmation process.  The               
 legislature went its own way, however, and cited the Railroad                 
 Corporation as an example.  However, even though the Administration           
 and the legislature had disagreed at times, those that made it                
 through were usually signed by the Governor, which should not be              
 implied as a matter of law that it was required.                              
                                                                               
 Number 2285                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES asked if the boards and commissions conformed to in the           
 bill were advisory in nature?                                                 
                                                                               
 Number 2290                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. BALDWIN replied many were not strictly advisory.  He cited the            
 Railroad Corporation as an example.  It was not a principal                   
 department head, a regulatory, or a quasi-judicial board.                     
 Furthermore, the conforming amendments in the bill amended the                
 Historical Commission.  He wondered why a confirmation was                    
 necessary.  It was not within the magnitude required by the Alaska            
 State Constitution.  He further cited the Royalty Oil and Gas                 
 Development Board.  The Board merely advised the legislature                  
 regarding oil contracts.  He again wondered why a confirmation was            
 necessary.                                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 2333                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER replied some appointments were made and not             
 submitted to the confirmation process.                                        
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN replied it was a "mixed bag."  He cited the              
 Royalty Oil and Gas Development Board members had never been                  
 confirmed.                                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 2345                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES wondered about the public state corporations.                     
                                                                               
 Number 2361                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. BALDWIN explained, historically, the drafters of the Alaska               
 State Constitution were tired of so many boards and commissions               
 that balkanized state government.  The Alaska State Constitution,             
 therefore, was put together to confirm the central officer, and not           
 put together with the intention of the powerful public                        
 corporations.                                                                 
                                                                               
 Number 2413                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER commented the next committee of referral for            
 the bill was the House Judiciary Committee.  He said it would be              
 more appropriate to discuss these issue in that committee.  He                
 asked the committee members to consider moving it forward today.              
                                                                               
 Number 2433                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN asked Mr. Baldwin to clarify the word                     
 "balkanization."                                                              
                                                                               
 MR. BALDWIN replied it meant to segregate or divide.                          
                                                                               
 Number 2434                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES agreed with Representative Porter that the legal                  
 aspects of the bill should be reviewed by the House Judiciary                 
 Committee.  Furthermore, she believed the confirmation process                
 served an important purpose.  It was the only place the public                
 could listen to the confirmation hearing.  Therefore, she supported           
 more confirmation hearings rather than less as long as it did not             
 interfere with the operations of the government.                              
                                                                               
 TAPE 96-32, SIDE B                                                            
 Number 0060                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if there were any witnesses to testify             
 today on HB 359?                                                              
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES replied, "no."                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 0065                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN commended Chair James for confining the                  
 activity of the House State Affairs Committee to its described                
 functions.                                                                    
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN moved to adopt CSHB 359(STA) (9-LS1242/G) as             
 a working document.  Hearing no objection, it was so adopted.                 
                                                                               
 Number 0093                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN asked Mr. Baldwin to explain subsection (4) on            
 page 5.                                                                       
                                                                               
 Number 0109                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. BALDWIN replied subsection (4) specified the duration of an               
 interim appointment.  The appointment would last until the first              
 day of the next regular session unless confirmed.  Upon                       
 confirmation, the appointee would hold the office for the full                
 statutory term limit.  However, if the appointee was not confirmed            
 or continued, reappointment was not possible.                                 
                                                                               
 Number 0151                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER called the subsection a safeguard so that the           
 Governor could not skip the process.                                          
                                                                               
 Number 0158                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON wondered if anyone had ever introduced                
 legislation to review boards and commissions that did not fit                 
 within the Alaska State Constitution that were believed to need               
 legislative confirmation.                                                     
                                                                               
 Number 0174                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. BALDWIN replied not from the Governor's side.  He could not               
 recall working on a bill of that nature.  The issue was looked at             
 frequently, however.                                                          
                                                                               
 Number 0191                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked Mr. Baldwin how many boards and                 
 commissions violated the Alaska State Constitution?                           
                                                                               
 Number 0197                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. BALDWIN replied seven to eight.                                           
                                                                               
 Number 0203                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON further asked if those boards and                     
 commissions fit under the corporations?                                       
                                                                               
 Number 0211                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. BALDWIN replied the big corporation that was subject to the               
 confirmation process was the Railroad Corporation.  The Governor              
 disagreed but signed the bill anyway.                                         
                                                                               
 Number 0238                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN moved that CSHB 359(STA) move from the                   
 committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal                 
 notes.  Hearing no objection, it was so moved from the House State            
 Affairs Committee.                                                            
                                                                               
 HB 372 - RESTAURANT LIQUOR LICENSES                                         
                                                                               
 The next order of business to come before the House State Affairs             
 Committee was HB 372.                                                         
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES called on the sponsor, Representative Norman Rokeberg.            
                                                                               
 Number 0350                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG thanked the Chair for hearing the              
 bill today.  He said it was a simple bill because it repealed a               
 current law.  He stated, for the record, he did not have a vested             
 interest in the bill.  He said he had a personal friend that was              
 interested in the bill, Michael Gordon, owner of Chilkoot Charlie's           
 in Anchorage.  He reiterated he did not have an economic interest             
 in the beverage industry right now, only friendships.  He did have            
 experience, however, in the industry.                                         
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG explained the Spenard Community Council               
 brought this issue to his attention.  The Council passed a                    
 resolution asking that taverns be repealed.  He cited the reasons             
 were due to a disproportionate large number of drinking                       
 establishments in the Anchorage Spenard area, and to the impact of            
 alcohol on society.  He further said he wanted the opportunity to             
 right a wrong.  Senate Bill 87, passed last year, established                 
 taverns.  He explained the bill was sold to the members of the                
 House of Representatives under the "Cyrano's" law.  Cyrano's                  
 Bookstore Cafe and Office Center was allowed under exception to               
 sell liquor.  The statute allowed for 10 percent of restaurant or             
 eating places to apply for an exemption from the 50 percent food              
 provision to create a tavern. The current statute also did not                
 allow for entertainment after 9:00 p.m.  He said HB 372 had an                
 economic impact as well.  The beverage dispensing license was                 
 valued and purchased on the secondary market for up to $450,000 in            
 the Anchorage area in the peak of the 1980's.  Now, there was no              
 value in a restaurant license because of the decline in the                   
 economy.  House Bill 372, therefore, allowed for competition that             
 was not there before creating an economic impact.  He further said            
 the sobriety movement in the state was another reason to repeal the           
 current statute.  Moreover, the Anchorage Municipal Assembly                  
 originally supported HB 372 until a member asked for a voter                  
 reconsideration upon which it failed.  The member who asked for a             
 voter reconsideration had failed to disclose to the Anchorage                 
 Municipal Assembly he had applied for a restaurant license and                
 failed to disclose his 2.5 percentage ownership in a restaurant.              
 He suggested it needed to be further reviewed.  He asked the                  
 committee members to take a favorable look at the bill.  The next             
 committee of referral was the House Labor and Commerce Committee.             
 He said it was a good bill and he asked again for the support of              
 the committee members.                                                        
                                                                               
 Number 0826                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON wondered if Cyrano's could continue to                
 operate under HB 372.                                                         
                                                                               
 Number 0839                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG replied it would not be able to sell beer             
 or wine without meeting the restaurant 50 percent requirement.  He            
 said the bill would not close the establishment, however.                     
                                                                               
 Number 0859                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN replied it could sell more sandwiches, for               
 example, to meet the 50 percent requirement.                                  
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON replied that was a good point.                        
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG wondered if Cyrano's had even applied for             
 an exemption.  He reiterated the bill would not put anybody out of            
 business.                                                                     
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON wondered if the exempted establishments               
 would be able to continue to operate until they were shut down.               
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG replied Cyrano's had applied, but had not             
 received it yet.                                                              
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES called on the first witness via teleconference in                 
 Anchorage, Tom McGrath.                                                       
                                                                               
 Number 0911                                                                   
                                                                               
 TOM MCGRATH said he supported HB 372.  He explained Cyrano's was              
 not exempt under the law now.  The menu had been expanded to cover            
 the 50 percent requirement.  He said many of the Senators and                 
 Representatives did not know about the exemption provision in SB              
 87.  The exemption created the possibility of 15 taverns in                   
 Anchorage.  He cited there were 117 liquor licenses in Anchorage,             
 while the state law only allowed 77.  This was due to a grandfather           
 provision.  House Bill 372, therefore, would correct a wrong and              
 improve the quality of life in Alaska.                                        
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in                  
 Anchorage, Pat Fullerton.                                                     
                                                                               
 Number 1073                                                                   
                                                                               
 PAT FULLERTON, Chairman, Spenard Community Council, said the abuse            
 of alcohol had been a problem in the Spenard area for many years.             
 He said he was a recovering alcoholic and was about to celebrate              
 his 7th year of sobriety.  Moreover, the current law allowed the              
 establishment of what he called a "cheap" bar.  He wanted to see it           
 repealed so that it did not add further to the proliferation of the           
 liquor license.                                                               
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in                  
 Anchorage, Doug Griffin.                                                      
                                                                               
 Number 1201                                                                   
                                                                               
 DOUG GRIFFIN, Director, Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, said the            
 previous testimony was an accurate description of what the current            
 bill allowed by Representative Rokeberg and the Spenard Community             
 Council.  He did not support HB 372, however.  He assumed the                 
 legislature knew what it was doing when passing the original bill             
 by including the exemption provision.  Moreover, he reminded the              
 committee members, the local governing bodies would have to approve           
 these licenses so safeguards did exist.  The original bill did not            
 create a separate type of license due to over licensing based on              
 population quotas, for example.                                               
                                                                               
 Number 1357                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES asked Mr. Griffin if there had been any exempt licenses           
 distributed?                                                                  
                                                                               
 Number 1370                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. GRIFFIN replied, "yes."  He cited Legal Pizza and Railway                 
 Brewing Company in Anchorage, and the Chandalar Inn in the                    
 Matanuska-Susitna Borough.  There were several in the process as              
 well.                                                                         
                                                                               
 Number 1485                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES thanked Mr. Griffin for his testimony.  She was                   
 concerned about the establishments caught between the two laws.               
 She was concerned about the economic impact as a result of the                
 establishments changing their business.  She suggested a                      
 grandfather provision.                                                        
                                                                               
 Number 1569                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON said she was also concerned about the                 
 establishments caught between the two bills and supported a                   
 grandfather provision.  She was not opposed to moving the bill                
 forward, however.                                                             
                                                                               
 Number 1620                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER explained many establishments tried to                  
 circumvent the intent of the law allowing beer and wine with dinner           
 by offering potato chips as food, for example.  He said he was not            
 aware of the exception provision last year when he voted in favor             
 of the legislation.                                                           
 Number 1696                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES commented she had fond memories of taverns in                     
 Washington and Oregon where she grew up.  She was not negative                
 towards taverns.                                                              
                                                                               
 Number 1760                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said the state of Washington distinguished              
 between taverns and cocktail lounges.  The cocktail lounges fell              
 under the restaurant requirements similar to Alaska's.                        
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES announced to Frank Smith in Barrow that HB 348 had                
 already been moved from the House State Affairs Committee.  She               
 asked for his testimony in writing for the record.                            
                                                                               
 Number 1885                                                                   
                                                                               
 FRANK SMITH thanked the Chair.  He said he would submit his                   
 testimony in writing for the record.                                          
                                                                               
 Number 1910                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN commented he did not have fond memories of               
 taverns because they attracted individuals that liked to drink too            
 much where he grew up in Wisconsin.  He would support anything to             
 reduce that.                                                                  
                                                                               
 Number 1979                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES reiterated her biggest concern were for the                       
 establishments that might fall through the cracks.                            
                                                                               
 Number 2059                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG explained he was working on a potential               
 amendment to address her concern.  He did not want to disrupt the             
 commerce of the state.  He pledged the issue would be reviewed in             
 the next committee of referral - the House Labor and Commerce                 
 Committee.                                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 2109                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN stated he was also concerned about the                    
 establishments that would be affected by this bill.                           
                                                                               
 Number 2137                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG explained he was a good friend of the                 
 father of Richard Sassary, who wrote a letter against HB 372.                 
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES wondered if friendship was taking Representative                  
 Rokeberg a long way with this issue.                                          
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG replied, "no."  He just knew a lot of                 
 people in Anchorage.                                                          
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON stated, for the record, she grew up in                
 Texas.                                                                        
                                                                               
 Number 2198                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER moved that HB 372 move from the committee               
 with individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes.  Hearing           
 no objection, it was so moved from the House State Affairs                    
 Committee.                                                                    
                                                                               
 HB 368 - ELECTION CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM                                    
 HB 317 - ELECTION CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM                                     
                                                                              
 The next order of business to come before the House State Affairs             
 Committee was HB 368 and HB 317.                                              
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES called on Representative David Finkelstein to explain             
 the committee substitute.                                                     
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES announced she wanted to move the bill forward today.              
                                                                               
 Number 2381                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN moved to adopt CSHB 368(STA) (9-LS1348/C) as             
 a working document.  Hearing no objection, it was so adopted.                 
                                                                               
 Number 2413                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE DAVID FINKELSTEIN explained the comparison chart               
 distributed to the committee members.  The first column contained             
 the provisions in the current law, the second column contained the            
 provisions in the initiative, and the third column contained the              
 provisions in the committee substitute (9-LS1348/C).  The major               
 provision were:  contributions from individuals, contributions from           
 parties, contributions not from individual (i.e. corporations,                
 unions), contributions from groups of individuals, lobbyists, when            
 money can be raised, personal use of campaign funds, carry forward            
 of campaign surpluses, out-of-state contributions, independent                
 expenditures, public funds, serious violations, civil penalties,              
 and power to enforce.                                                         
                                                                               
 TAPE 96-33, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 0063                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN wondered where a party was defined.                      
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES replied that would be addressed in the proposed                   
 amendments.                                                                   
                                                                               
 Number 0470                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES complimented Representative Finkelstein for his work on           
 the comparison chart.  She explained there were two definitions of            
 a political party presented.  She liked the first definition.  The            
 second definition would include all organizations affiliated with             
 a political party in the contribution limits.  She was concerned              
 about the organizations that did not want to be a part of the party           
 and remain a group.                                                           
                                                                               
 Number 0518                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN concurred with her support for the first                 
 definition.  He stated the second definition would cause confusion.           
                                                                               
 Number 0603                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER moved to adopted Amendment 1 (9-                        
 LS1348/C.1/B).  No one objected, but the discussion continued.                
                                                                               
 Number 0626                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked if the amendments had been presented            
 to the initiative movement, and wondered which political party                
 definition he supported.                                                      
                                                                               
 Number 0640                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN replied there really was not a lot of              
 difference between the two definitions.  The key question was who             
 determined who was a subdivision, and both definitions defined it             
 as 3 percent of the total votes casted.  He stated the                        
 differentiation between a subordinate unit and other units was                
 artificial.  All the groups out there should have a choice of                 
 joining the party, or being their own group, and both definitions             
 allowed that.  A differentiation was not intended in the                      
 initiative, however.                                                          
                                                                               
 Number 0765                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said the first definition allowed a clear               
 separation between the groups that were not traditional party                 
 subgroups.  Furthermore, it would allow the differentiation between           
 the subgroups of the parties and the affiliated groups of the                 
 parties.                                                                      
                                                                               
 Number 0821                                                                   
 CHAIR JAMES explained the concept of the district and state central           
 party committees.   A coordination of the contribution limits was             
 necessary amongst all the subordinates, therefore, a centralized              
 decision making process was needed.  She called it an unwieldy                
 situation.                                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 1026                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN said everyone agreed that the affiliated           
 groups should have a choice, and both definitions allowed that                
 choice.  It was more obvious, however, in the second definition               
 under subsection (C).  According to the first definition it was               
 necessary to be subsumed within the party.  He was afraid the first           
 definition would be interpreted to preclude some groups from                  
 becoming part of the party if they wanted to.  The second                     
 definition gave the choice under subsection (C).                              
                                                                               
 Number 1076                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES said she did not read the definitions the same as                 
 Representative Finkelstein.  A political party according to the               
 second definition did not have the option to be a group, but only             
 a political party.                                                            
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN replied he interpreted it differently.             
 There was nothing that mandated it in the second definition.                  
 Subsection (C) read, "an organization that, by virtue of the rules            
 or bylaws of the organized group of voters qualifying as a                    
 political party under (A) of this paragraph, is affiliated with the           
 political party."                                                             
                                                                               
 Number 1126                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER replied subsection (C) did not give the party           
 the ability say "yes" or "no" to that.                                        
                                                                               
 Number 1134                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN replied according to subsection (C) it             
 was up to the rules of the party.                                             
                                                                               
 Number 1144                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES responded the only choice for a person to be a group              
 was for the party to disassociate with them.  It was not in the               
 best interest of either Parties to cut the life-line.                         
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN replied, according to that                         
 interpretation, both definitions achieved the same thing.                     
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES asked if there was further objection to Amendment 1.              
 Hearing none, it was so adopted.                                              
 Number 1179                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN wondered about lobbyists contributing in their            
 own district.  He said lobbyists lived mostly in Anchorage and                
 Juneau.                                                                       
                                                                               
 Number 1247                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES replied it was a perception issue.  The general public            
 did not want a lobbyist to give money to anybody, but he also had             
 a general right as a citizen of a district to contribute to his               
 district.  It was a constitutional issue as well.  Furthermore, it            
 was not a problem for one that did not have a lobbyist in his                 
 district.                                                                     
                                                                               
 Number 1343                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON stated most lobbyists would probably agree            
 with a total ban on giving money.                                             
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES agreed with Representative Robinson.  Lobbyists felt              
 obligated to give money in order to do business again.                        
                                                                               
 Number 1388                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER moved to adopt Amendment 2 (9-LS1260/F.2).              
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES asked Representative Finkelstein to explain the                   
 amendment.                                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 1403                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN explained Amendment 2 was a technical              
 and conforming amendment.  It removed "50 percent" in current law             
 and inserted "33 1/3 percent" for the support or opposition of a              
 candidate and the inclusion of the candidates name as part of the             
 group.  This was based on a recommendation from the Alaska Public             
 Offices Commission (APOC).                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES stated hearing no further objection, Amendment 2 was so           
 adopted.                                                                      
                                                                               
 Number 1454                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER moved to adopt Amendment 3 (9-LS1260/F.3).              
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES asked Representative Finkelstein to explain the                   
 amendment.                                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 1466                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN explained Amendment 3 was a technical              
 amendment.  It removed unnecessary language.  It did not affect the           
 content, however.                                                             
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES stated hearing no further objection, Amendment 3 was so           
 adopted.                                                                      
                                                                               
 Number 1488                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER moved to adopt Amendment 4 (9-LS1260/F.4).              
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES asked Representative Finkelstein to explain the                   
 amendment.                                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 1500                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN explained Amendment 4 was a technical              
 amendment.  An individual could make a contribution to a political            
 party as well as a group.                                                     
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES stated hearing no further objection, Amendment 4 was so           
 adopted.                                                                      
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES explained Amendment 2 - 4 should read CSHB 368(STA) and           
 not CSSB 191( ) as expressed in the draft amendments.                         
                                                                               
 Number 1626                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON moved that CSHB 368(STA) (9-LS1348/C) move            
 from the committee with individual recommendations and attached               
 fiscal notes.  Hearing no objection, it was so moved from the House           
 State Affairs Committee.                                                      
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES announced she would attached a $0 fiscal note.                    
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES apologized to the teleconference testifiers for not               
 calling on their testimony.  She suggested they submit a written              
 statement for the record.                                                     
                                                                               
 Number 1770                                                                   
                                                                               
 KATHY ASHBY responded via teleconference in Anchorage that it would           
 be futile.  She only suggested that to make us feel better.                   
                                                                               
 Number 1818                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES replied it would become part of the record with a                 
 statement explaining the circumstances.  She apologized again.                
                                                                               
 MS. ASHBY said she felt very disaffected by the whole procedure.              
 She felt betrayed.  The information the committee members were                
 discussing today did not match the information at the Legislative             
 Information Office (LIO) in Anchorage.                                        
 CHAIR JAMES apologized to Ms. Ashby again.  She announced she would           
 personally forward information to her and personally notify her of            
 the next time the bill would be heard.                                        
                                                                               
 HB 401 - REVENUE BONDS: WATER & WASTE PROJECTS                              
                                                                               
 The next order of business to come before the House State Affairs             
 Committee was HB 401.                                                         
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES called on Keith Kelton, Department of Environmental               
 Conservation, to present the bill.                                            
                                                                               
 Number 1900                                                                   
                                                                               
 KEITH KELTON, Director, Division of Facility Construction and                 
 Operation, Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC),                    
 explained HB 401 was by the request of the Governor.  It was a bill           
 that would benefit all the communities in Alaska.  He asked the               
 committee members to look at the bill and not at who introduced the           
 piece of legislation.                                                         
                                                                               
 Number 1910                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES replied the assumption that the bill would not be                 
 looked favorably upon because it was introduced by the Governor was           
 not true.                                                                     
                                                                               
 Number 1919                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. KELTON replied, "I stand corrected, Madame Chairman.  I                   
 apologize."                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. KELTON said the DEC had been operating a loan program for                 
 building wastewater facilities throughout the state for the last              
 seven to eight years.  Prior to that the federal government                   
 financed a grant program under the Clean Water Act.  In 1987 the              
 federal government eliminated the grant program and substituted it            
 with a loan program.  The demand for the loans had been steadily              
 increasing while the state general funds had decreased.  Therefore,           
 the grants were less available.  The DEC was interested in                    
 developing an alternative funding source for communities that had             
 the ability to borrow money and had a dedicated revenue stream to             
 repay the loans.  The problem currently was that the loan fund was            
 demanded in excess of the supply of money available.  Therefore,              
 the DEC introduced legislation to allow the Department to leverage            
 the remaining corpus of the loan fund and allow for increased                 
 dollars to be available for the loans.  To date, Alaska had a good            
 track record for repayments, not one late payment.                            
                                                                               
 MR. KELTON referred the committee members to a chart prepared by              
 DEC.  He explained the Alaska Clean Water Fund (ACWF) was                     
 capitalized by federal grants representing about $80 million.  Of             
 that $80 million, $50 million had gone out as low interest loans to           
 the various Alaskan municipal projects.  One year after completion,           
 payments were made back including the principal and interest to the           
 ACWF.  The interest rate fluctuated with the municipal bond index,            
 currently at 3.55 percent.                                                    
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if the bond was tax free?                          
                                                                               
 MR. KELTON replied it was tax exempt.  Furthermore, HB 401 created            
 a bond redemption fund to pay for the bond issuance cost                      
 administered through the State Bond Committee including the                   
 Department of Revenue, Department of Administration, and Department           
 of Commerce and Economic Development.  The Senate amended the bill            
 to include a $15 million limit of bonds sold each year, and a total           
 cap of $150 million.  He reiterated the bill was to provide a                 
 revolving fund mechanism for the incorporated communities that had            
 a dedicated revenue source for repayments.  Anchorage was the big             
 participant, but communities such as Craig and Homer, for example,            
 had applied for a loan.  The program included wastewater and solid            
 waste, but not drinking water.  There was legislation at the                  
 federal level to address a drinking water program, however.                   
                                                                               
 Number 2378                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN wondered if the investor was investing in the            
 program and not in the individual location.                                   
                                                                               
 Number 2394                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. KELTON replied the investor was putting his money into the pot.           
 The Department had to follow an intended use plan on an annual                
 basis.  The plan used a criteria rank system to determine which               
 projects would rank at the top, if it exceeded the amount of money            
 available.                                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 2440                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if the criteria ranking system was based           
 on need, the ability to repay, or a combination of the two?                   
                                                                               
 Number 2447                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. KELTON replied the first concern was based on need.                       
 Environment and health were also considered, for example.  The                
 ability to repay was looked at after everything else was                      
 considered.                                                                   
                                                                               
 Number 2475                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN wondered if energy was a concern in the rural            
 areas.                                                                        
                                                                               
 TAPE 96-33, SIDE B                                                            
 Number 0000                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. KELTON said the rural areas were eligible to apply.  The                  
 additional cost would make it more difficult for it to come up with           
 a revenue matching source, however.  He did not expect it to be               
 widely used in the rural areas of the state.                                  
                                                                               
 Number 0022                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES asked if it was a 50 percent match?                               
                                                                               
 MR. KELTON replied it was strictly a loan.                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES asked if a community could get a loan for an entire               
 project?                                                                      
                                                                               
 MR. KELTON replied, "that's correct."                                         
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES further wondered if a community could get a grant and             
 apply it towards the loan.                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 0035                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. KELTON replied, "that's exactly right, Madame Chairman."  The             
 Department could mix and match with the loan program in any ratio.            
                                                                               
 Number 0129                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN moved to adopt Amendment 1 (9-GH2014/A.1).                
                                                                               
 Number 0135                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN objected for discussion purposes.                        
                                                                               
 Number 0144                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. KELTON explained Amendment 1 was a technical amendment.  It was           
 based on a suggestion by the Department of Revenue.  The bill was             
 written in conjunction with the Department of Revenue and the                 
 Department of Law.  The bill would impact the Department of Revenue           
 due to the bond.                                                              
                                                                               
 Number 0184                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN removed his objection.                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES stated hearing no further objection, Amendment 1 was so           
 adopted.                                                                      
                                                                               
 Number 0186                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN moved to adopt Amendment 2 (9-GH2014/A.2).                
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN objected for discussion purposes.                        
                                                                               
 MR. KELTON explained Amendment 2 was based on a suggestion by                 
 Senator John Torgerson for greater legislative control.  The                  
 Department of Environmental Conservation agreed with the amendment.           
                                                                               
 Number 0238                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN removed his objection.                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES stated hearing no further objection, Amendment 2 was so           
 adopted.                                                                      
                                                                               
 Number 0246                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN moved to adopt Amendment 3 (9-GH2014/A.3).                
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN objected for discussion purposes.                        
                                                                               
 Number 0255                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. KELTON explained Amendment 3 modified eligibility.  The Senate            
 believed a state agency should not be part of the eligibility                 
 process.  Therefore, the amendment deleted "state agency" and                 
 inserted "other qualified entity."  The amendment was based on the            
 recommendation of Senators Fred Zharoff and Lyman Hoffman.  The               
 amendment also defined "other qualified entity" to include a                  
 municipality and those terms used in 33 U.S.C. 1383.  The                     
 Department of Law, the Department of Revenue, and the Department of           
 Environmental Conservation supported the amendment.                           
                                                                               
 Number 0328                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN removed his objection.                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES stated hearing no further objection, Amendment 3 was so           
 adopted.                                                                      
                                                                               
 Number 0337                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER wondered if the suggestions by the Anchorage            
 Water and Wastewater Utility (AWWU) were considered.                          
                                                                               
 Number 0348                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. KELTON replied the Anchorage Water and Wastewater Utility had             
 removed their amendments.  The amendments were considered earlier             
 when it appeared the bill would not receive a hearing.  The                   
 amendments were to simplify the bill for further support.                     
                                                                               
 Number 0379                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER wondered if the Anchorage Water and                     
 Wastewater Utility supported the bill.                                        
                                                                               
 MR. KELTON replied the AWWU definitely supported the bill.                    
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES replied the people in her district were interested in             
 the bill, but were concerned about the payback.                               
                                                                               
 Number 0398                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. KELTON explained two out of the three concerns that Anchorage             
 had were addressed in the amendments adopted today.                           
                                                                               
 Number 0420                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN mentioned the problems associated with                   
 wastewater treatment such as hepatitis.  He was still concerned               
 about the lack of energy to support the projects in the rural                 
 areas.  Otherwise, he was in full support of HB 401.                          
                                                                               
 Number 0442                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN moved that CSHB 401(STA) move from the                   
 committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal                 
 notes.  Hearing no objection, it was so moved from the House State            
 Affairs Committee.                                                            
                                                                               
 MR. KELTON thanked the committee members.                                     
 Number 0497                                                                   
                                                                               
 ADJOURNMENT                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIR JAMES adjourned the House State Affairs Committee meeting at            
 12:38 p.m.                                                                    
                                                                               
                                                                               

Document Name Date/Time Subjects