Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120

04/10/2018 03:15 PM STATE AFFAIRS

Note: the audio and video recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as
Download Video part 1. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
*+ HB 409 DMV ID CARDS & REGISTRATION FEES TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
+ SB 204 DISABLED VET PLATES:CHIROPRACTORS CERTIFY TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
+ SB 196 APPROPRIATION LIMIT TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
+ HJR 30 URGE U.S. SUPPORT OF REFUGEES TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
*+ HJR 41 CONST AM: PERMANENT FUND; POMV;EARNINGS TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
*+ "An Act relating to possession of marijuana; and TELECONFERENCED
relating to misconduct involving controlled
substances."
<Pending Introduction & Referral>
<Bill Hearing Canceled>
+ Approval of introduction of potential committee TELECONFERENCED
legislation
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
                    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
             HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                           
                         April 10, 2018                                                                                         
                           3:20 p.m.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins, Chair                                                                                   
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux, Vice Chair                                                                                     
Representative Adam Wool                                                                                                        
Representative Chris Birch                                                                                                      
Representative DeLena Johnson                                                                                                   
Representative Gary Knopp                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Representative Chris Tuck                                                                                                       
Representative Andy Josephson (alternate)                                                                                       
Representative Chuck Kopp (alternate)                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 41                                                                                                   
Proposing amendments to  the Constitution of the  State of Alaska                                                               
relating to the Alaska permanent  fund, establishing the earnings                                                               
reserve account,  and relating to appropriations  from the Alaska                                                               
permanent fund.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 409                                                                                                              
"An  Act relating  to identification  cards; relating  to vehicle                                                               
registration fee rates; relating  to changes of address; relating                                                               
to   driver's   license   fees;   and   relating   to   financial                                                               
responsibility for motor vehicles."                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
SENATE BILL NO. 204                                                                                                             
"An  Act relating  to special  registration  plates for  vehicles                                                               
owned by veterans with disabilities."                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 30                                                                                                   
Urging the United  States Congress to reaffirm  the commitment of                                                               
the United States  to promote the safety,  health, and well-being                                                               
of  refugees  and displaced  persons;  urging  the United  States                                                               
government  to  uphold  its   international  leadership  role  in                                                               
responding  to displacement  crises with  humanitarian assistance                                                               
and  to work  with  the international  community  and the  United                                                               
Nations  High  Commissioner for  Refugees  to  find solutions  to                                                               
conflicts and protect  refugees; and urging the  President of the                                                               
United  States  to continue  to  mitigate  the burden  placed  on                                                               
frontline refugee host countries.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 196(FIN)(EFD FLD)                                                                                        
"An Act relating  to an appropriation limit; and  relating to the                                                               
budget responsibilities of the governor."                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HJR 41                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: CONST AM: PERMANENT FUND; POMV;EARNINGS                                                                            
SPONSOR(s): STATE AFFAIRS                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
04/06/18       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/06/18       (H)       STA, JUD, FIN                                                                                          
04/10/18       (H)       STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 409                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: DMV ID CARDS & REGISTRATION FEES                                                                                   
SPONSOR(s): STATE AFFAIRS                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
04/05/18       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/05/18       (H)       STA, FIN                                                                                               
04/10/18       (H)       STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
BILL: SB 204                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: DISABLED VET PLATES:CHIROPRACTORS CERTIFY                                                                          
SPONSOR(s): EGAN                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
02/19/18       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/19/18       (S)       STA                                                                                                    
02/27/18       (S)       STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
02/27/18       (S)       Moved SB 204 Out of Committee                                                                          
02/27/18       (S)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
02/28/18       (S)       STA RPT  4DP 1NR                                                                                       
02/28/18       (S)       DP: MEYER, GIESSEL, COGHILL, EGAN                                                                      
02/28/18       (S)       NR: WILSON                                                                                             
03/07/18       (S)       TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                                                                     
03/07/18       (S)       VERSION: SB 204                                                                                        
03/09/18       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/09/18       (H)       STA                                                                                                    
04/10/18       (H)       STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HJR 30                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: URGE U.S. SUPPORT OF REFUGEES                                                                                      
SPONSOR(s): JOSEPHSON                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
01/24/18       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
01/24/18       (H)       CRA, STA                                                                                               
02/13/18       (H)       CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124                                                                              
02/13/18       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/13/18       (H)       MINUTE(CRA)                                                                                            
02/22/18       (H)       CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124                                                                              
02/22/18       (H)       Moved HJR 30 Out of Committee                                                                          
02/22/18       (H)       MINUTE(CRA)                                                                                            
02/27/18       (H)       CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124                                                                              
02/27/18       (H)       Adopted Fiscal Note                                                                                    
02/28/18       (H)       CRA RPT 3DP 1DNP 2NR                                                                                   
02/28/18       (H)       DP: KREISS-TOMKINS, DRUMMOND, PARISH                                                                   
02/28/18       (H)       DNP: TALERICO                                                                                          
02/28/18       (H)       NR: LINCOLN, SADDLER                                                                                   
04/10/18       (H)       STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
BILL: SB 196                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: APPROPRIATION LIMIT; BUDGET RESERVE FUND                                                                           
SPONSOR(s): FINANCE                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
02/19/18       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/19/18       (S)       FIN                                                                                                    
02/28/18       (S)       STA REFERRAL ADDED BEFORE FIN                                                                          
03/06/18       (S)       STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
03/06/18       (S)       Moved SB 196 Out of Committee                                                                          
03/06/18       (S)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
03/07/18       (S)       STA RPT  3DP 1DNP 1NR                                                                                  
03/07/18       (S)       DP: MEYER, GIESSEL, WILSON                                                                             
03/07/18       (S)       DNP: EGAN                                                                                              
03/07/18       (S)       NR: COGHILL                                                                                            
03/15/18       (S)       FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532                                                                      
03/15/18       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/15/18       (S)       MINUTE(FIN)                                                                                            
03/16/18       (S)       FIN RPT CS  6DP   NEW TITLE                                                                            
03/16/18       (S)       DP: HOFFMAN, MACKINNON, BISHOP, VON                                                                    
                         IMHOF, STEVENS, MICCICHE                                                                               
03/16/18       (S)       FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532                                                                      
03/16/18       (S)       Moved CSSB 196(FIN) Out of Committee                                                                   
03/16/18       (S)       MINUTE(FIN)                                                                                            
03/23/18       (S)       UPHOLD RULING OF THE CHAIR Y13 N5 E1 A1                                                                
03/23/18       (S)       UPHOLD RULING OF THE CHAIR Y11 N7 E1 A1                                                                
03/23/18       (S)       UPHOLD RULING OF THE CHAIR Y11 N7 E1 A1                                                                
03/23/18       (S)       UPHOLD RULING OF THE CHAIR Y11 N7 E1 A1                                                                
03/23/18       (S)       ENGROSSED                                                                                              
03/28/18       (S)       TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                                                                     
03/28/18       (S)       VERSION: CSSB 196(FIN)(EFD FLD)                                                                        
03/29/18       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/29/18       (H)       STA, FIN                                                                                               
04/10/18       (H)       STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REID MAGDANZ, Staff                                                                                                             
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins                                                                                          
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of HJR 41, co-presented                                                               
the legislation and answered questions.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
ROBERT ERVINE, Staff                                                                                                            
Representative Jennifer Johnston                                                                                                
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of HJR 41, co-presented                                                               
the legislation and answered questions.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
ANGELA RODELL, Chief Executive Officer                                                                                          
Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation (APFC)                                                                                        
Department of Revenue (DOR)                                                                                                     
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of HJR 41, answered                                                                   
questions.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CATHY SCHLINGHEYDE, Staff                                                                                                       
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins                                                                                          
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of HB 409, presented the                                                              
legislation and answered questions.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MARLA THOMPSON, Director                                                                                                        
Division of Motor Vehicles                                                                                                      
Department of Administration (DOA)                                                                                              
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:   During  the hearing of  HB 409,  answered a                                                             
question.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MICHAEL STANKER, Assistant Attorney General                                                                                     
Civil Division                                                                                                                  
Labor & State Affairs Section                                                                                                   
Department of Law (DOL)                                                                                                         
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:   During  the hearing of  HB 409,  answered a                                                             
question.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
PETER NAOROZ, Staff                                                                                                             
Senator Dennis Egan                                                                                                             
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the  hearing of SB 204, presented the                                                             
legislation.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ANDY JOSEPHSON                                                                                                   
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the  hearing of HJR 30, presented the                                                             
legislation.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR PETER MICCICHE                                                                                                          
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:   During the hearing of  SB 196, co-presented                                                             
the legislation and answered questions.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR NATASHA VON IMHOF                                                                                                       
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:   During the  hearing of SB  196 co-presented                                                             
the legislation and answered questions.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
3:20:52 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  JONATHAN KREISS-TOMKINS  called  the  House State  Affairs                                                             
Standing   Committee    meeting   to    order   at    3:20   p.m.                                                               
Representatives  Kreiss-Tomkins, LeDoux,  Birch, Johnson,  Knopp,                                                               
and Wool were present at the call to order.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
         HJR 41-CONST AM: PERMANENT FUND; POMV;EARNINGS                                                                     
                                                                                                                              
3:22:23 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  announced that the first  order of business                                                               
would be HOUSE  JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 41,  Proposing amendments to                                                               
the Constitution  of the State  of Alaska relating to  the Alaska                                                               
permanent fund,  establishing the  earnings reserve  account, and                                                               
relating to appropriations from the Alaska permanent fund.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
3:23:03 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REID  MAGDANZ,  Staff,  Representative  Jonathan  Kreiss-Tomkins,                                                               
Alaska  State Legislature,  advised that  this amendment  for the                                                               
Constitution  of  the State  of  Alaska  caps  the draws  on  the                                                               
Permanent  Fund (PF)  to  a sustainable  4.75  percent of  market                                                               
value  and it  prevents  ad  hoc draws  on  the earnings  reserve                                                               
account  (ERA), thereby,  preventing  any draws  above that  4.75                                                               
percent  threshold.   The amendment  maintains the  principal and                                                               
the ERA as  separate accounts and prevents any  spending from the                                                               
principal account.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
3:23:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ROBERT  ERVINE, Staff,  Representative Jennifer  Johnston, Alaska                                                               
State  Legislature, added  that HJR  41 represents  the consensus                                                               
point discussed around the legislature as  a whole, and it is the                                                               
beginning of a  conversation.  It appears, he  offered, that many                                                               
legislators  believe ad  hoc  draws  are a  bad  idea because  it                                                               
changes  the way  in which  the fund  is managed,  and the  state                                                               
needs some type of sustainable draw.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  BIRCH  asked  whether  there  is  a  reason  this                                                               
resolution cannot take place in  statute, noting the hurdle it is                                                               
to  get  anything  through  the  whole  constitutional  amendment                                                               
process.   Basically, he said, at  this point the $40  billion in                                                               
the fund  is fully fenced  off and is  constitutionally protected                                                               
via the  1976 public vote for  the PF.  He  further asked whether                                                               
there is  any reason the  legislature could not set  up something                                                               
similar if it  had the same net  result, and then work  to put it                                                               
into statute.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
3:25:30 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL referred to  Mr. Ervine's statement regarding                                                               
a consensus amongst the legislators  and asked whether those were                                                               
anecdotal  water cooler  discussions and  whether that  was "just                                                               
your vibe."                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. ERVINE answered that Representative Wool was correct.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  added that  another iteration of  this idea                                                               
is  where a  percent  goes  to the  dividends  and  a percent  is                                                               
available for appropriation  for public services.   He noted that                                                               
it could  be 50/50,  or 25/75, or  many different  versions, "and                                                               
just not even  going there and just starting with  the most basic                                                               
notion, which is, What is a sustainable draw of the PF?"                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
3:26:16 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL   referred  to   the  statement   that  this                                                               
legislation  would   prevent  ad  hoc   draws  out  of   the  ERA                                                               
constitutionally, but  yet there would still  be an ERA and  a PF                                                               
corpus.  He asked  the reason for not merging it  all into one if                                                               
there are no ad hoc draws out of the ERA.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR. MAGDANZ  responded that the  main effect for not  merging the                                                               
accounts is  that under  this amendment, the  $40 billion  in the                                                               
principal  that  Representative   Birch  mentioned  would  remain                                                               
untouchable  and un-spendable.    For example,  he  said, if  the                                                               
market suffered a significant  downturn immediately after passing                                                               
this  amendment,  that $40  billion  would  remain protected  and                                                               
would still be unavailable for spending under any scenario.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
3:27:15 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   WOOL  pointed   to  the   statement  that   this                                                               
legislation  would prevent  ad  hoc  draws out  of  the ERA,  and                                                               
therefore the ERA would simply be  the entity from which the 4.75                                                               
percent is  drawn.  He  surmised that  one is a  checking account                                                               
and the  other is a  savings account, but  if there are  no draws                                                               
from it,  it could  ostensibly be  looked at the  same.   He then                                                               
clarified that when he said, "no  draws," he meant other than the                                                               
4.75 percent.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR. MAGDANZ  offered a  hypothetical wherein  for the  next eight                                                               
years the  PF earned zero  returns, and if  5 percent a  year was                                                               
being drawn, the  ERA could potentially be drawn down  to zero by                                                               
maintaining a separate principal and  no money would be available                                                               
to draw.   Whereas,  if the  2 funds were  combined, it  would be                                                               
possible to draw 5 percent forever, he offered.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
3:28:25 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL said that under  that scenario, if the corpus                                                               
was  separate from  the principal  and the  ERA was  used up  for                                                               
"your  draw of  4.75 percent"  and the  earnings was  zero for  8                                                               
years, the  ERA would go  to zero and  "we couldn't tap  into the                                                               
principal.  Then you'd be the dilemma of, what do we do now?"                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR.  MAGDANZ replied  that Representative  Wool was  correct, the                                                               
state would  have to find the  money to fund its  budget from the                                                               
different sources.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
3:29:10 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP  asked whether that  is similar to  what the                                                               
state has  today wherein the  ERA is separate from  the principal                                                               
amount,  and the  corpus is  already protected  under the  Alaska                                                               
State  Constitution.   Other  than the  structured  draw at  4.75                                                               
percent, he said  that he does not see a  whole lot of difference                                                               
in what  is being proposed here,  other than to protect  it under                                                               
the Alaska State Constitution.  He  asked whether he was on track                                                               
with his statement.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MR.  ERVINE answered  that Representative  Knopp's statement  was                                                               
correct.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
3:29:56 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP noted  that it had been stated  that the ERA                                                               
is  subject  to   appropriation,  yet  Title  34   lays  out  the                                                               
structured  draw  and  inflation-proofing.     He  remarked  that                                                               
members  of  the  public  have argued  that  the  legislature  is                                                               
breaking its own  laws by not following its laws  and he somewhat                                                               
agrees in  that sense.  Mr.  Magdanz said that everything  in the                                                               
ERA  is  subject to  appropriation,  and  he asked  whether  that                                                               
statement evolved from a legal opinion or authority.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR. MAGDANZ  responded that that  statement means,  for instance,                                                               
this year  the legislature could,  with 21 votes, choose  to take                                                               
all of the  $16 billion in the ERA, put  it in the constitutional                                                               
budget reserve  (CBR), and  choose to  spend it  all in  a single                                                               
year.  This constitutional amendment  would prevent that scenario                                                               
from  taking  place,  and  "it  would  say,  really,  truly,  the                                                               
legislature can only spend 4.75 percent of market value."                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP asked that  if the legislature was following                                                               
its own  statutes right now,  it wouldn't  have that option.   He                                                               
asked  where it  read that  it  is all  subject to  appropriation                                                               
because the legislature does not  appear to be following the laws                                                               
it created a few years ago.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. MAGDANZ  responded that the  problem is that  the legislature                                                               
does not have to follow its  statutes when it comes to the budget                                                               
process.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
3:32:41 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH noted that a  couple of different terms have                                                               
been used  for the PF,  and the sponsor statement  indicates that                                                               
the  goal is  to prevent  un-sustainable spending  that threatens                                                               
the future value of the fund.   He opined that the $40 billion in                                                               
the  corpus  is pretty  well  fenced  off  without some  sort  of                                                               
constitutional  question  for  the  voters.    He  said  he  does                                                               
understand  the earnings  for the  1976 amendment  that basically                                                               
moved those dollars into the  general fund (GF) and asked whether                                                               
the corpus is threatened in any manner.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MR. MAGDANZ  answered that Representative  Birch is  correct that                                                               
the  $40  billion  attributed  to   the  principal  is  currently                                                               
untouchable.  The question to be  had with this amendment is that                                                               
the total fund value, including  the ERA, is roughly $66 billion.                                                               
The  difference between  those  2 numbers,  $26  billion, is  not                                                               
currently  constitutionally  protected.    This  amendment  would                                                               
protect all $66 billion currently in the PF, he explained.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
3:34:23 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  remarked that he  has been hearing  that the                                                               
legislature has not been following  the statute, breaking the law                                                               
with zero repercussions,  and that within the last  two years the                                                               
statutory formula  for the PFD has  not been followed.   He noted                                                               
that  the  governor   vetoed  it  a  few  years   ago,  then  the                                                               
legislature passed a  less than statutory formula,  and this year                                                               
it appears the legislature is on track  to do it again.  He asked                                                               
whether this is a common occurrence.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR. ERVINE offered  the current pertinent example  of the "90-day                                                               
limit" wherein the  voters of 2006 passed  an initiative limiting                                                               
the  legislature to  a 90-day  session, and  the legislature  has                                                               
"blown by it 8 of the last 10 years," he opined.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
3:35:44 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ANGELA  RODELL, Chief  Executive Officer,  Alaska Permanent  Fund                                                               
Corporation  (APFC), Department  of Revenue  (DOR), responded  to                                                               
Representative  Knopp's question,  and  advised  that the  Alaska                                                               
State  Constitution creating  the  PF is  "very  clear" that  the                                                               
amounts on deposit in the  fund will be used for income-producing                                                               
investments only,  the income of  which shall  go to the  GF, and                                                               
the legislature  has been given  the power of  appropriation over                                                               
the  GF.   That, she  explained, is  the mechanism  by which  the                                                               
legislature has the ability to  fully appropriate the ERA because                                                               
the ERA became  the repository rather than going  directly to the                                                               
GF.  The legislature, through  statute, created a sub-fund of the                                                               
GF that is the ERA, she further explained.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
3:36:48 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP  commented that there is  also "another sub-                                                               
account  of  that, we  required  to  put  in  50 percent  of  the                                                               
projected dividend payments  out of the ERA."  In  the event that                                                               
is the  case, he asked  why the  legislature put that  formula in                                                               
statute,  whether it  was "almost  recommended language"  but not                                                               
mandatory as far as the formula for the PFD payouts.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS. RODELL noted that she was not  here at the time of the debate                                                               
as to how the PF would be used  or how that income would be used.                                                               
She offered that  it is her understanding,  through the materials                                                               
she has read,  that part of it was to  "bifurcate that debate and                                                               
leave  that  debate  for  days  like  today,  which  is  why  the                                                               
constitutional language  for the  PF is  actually very  clean and                                                               
very simple."   This, she explained, was  the compromise achieved                                                               
through statute and  was in place up until  2016.  Interestingly,                                                               
one of the  historical observations she said that  she would make                                                               
is that  the statutory  language reads that,  "50 percent  of the                                                               
income available  for distribution  shall be transferred  for the                                                               
PFD  fund  program."   Except,  she  pointed  out, there  was  no                                                               
discussion  regarding what  was  to  be done  with  the other  50                                                               
percent of the  amount available for distribution was  to be used                                                               
for,  and   at  times  that  was   used  for  inflation-proofing.                                                               
Inflation-proofing is another  example of a statute  that has not                                                               
been fulfilled since  2016, and/or it was  appropriated back into                                                               
the  principal of  the  fund.   There  is  almost  $7 billion  of                                                               
additional  appropriations  outside   of  inflation-proofing  and                                                               
royalty deposits that  comprise the $40 billion of  the corpus of                                                               
the fund.  Therefore, she noted,  one might argue that 50 percent                                                               
is  the  amount  that  was  available  for  state  services  that                                                               
previous legislatures chose not  to appropriate, but rather leave                                                               
behind the buildup of the balance in the ERA.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
3:39:10 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP opined  that he had read  a legal memorandum                                                               
in the past which discussed  the powers of appropriation and that                                                               
is how "we got around that."  He  said that he was pretty sure he                                                               
did  not  support  this,  but he  would  support  the  inflation-                                                               
proofing in  the Alaska State  Constitution.  He noted  that when                                                               
he  asked why  the  legislature was  not inflation-proofing  this                                                               
year, he  was advised that  the fund  made 12 percent,  "we think                                                               
that's more than enough to  offset inflation-proofing."  He asked                                                               
Ms. Rodell's opinion on that advice.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS.  RODELL  answered  that  she  strongly  disagrees  with  that                                                               
advice.    The  principal  of  the account  only  gets  what  the                                                               
legislature  chooses  to  appropriate  back in,  outside  of  the                                                               
mandatory 25  percent.   Therefore, she  explained, all  of those                                                               
earnings are available  for appropriation, and none of  it - "not                                                               
one penny of it" - is  available to the principal of the account.                                                               
In  response  to  Representative Kopp's  earlier  comment,  under                                                               
Wielechowski v. State  of Alaska, [403 P.3d  1141 (Alaska 2017)],                                                             
there  was  a great  deal  of  discussion  as  to the  powers  of                                                               
appropriation on the ERA and  the requirement of an appropriation                                                               
for both  a dividend  and inflation-proofing,  she offered.   She                                                               
said the  decision had been  made in  2017 by the  Alaska Supreme                                                               
Court.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
3:40:48 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR   KREISS-TOMKINS   asked   whether    in   the   House   of                                                               
Representative  and Senate's  operating budgets,  either body  is                                                               
inflation-proofing this year.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MS.  RODELL responded  that the  budget  passed by  the House  of                                                               
Representatives  and  sent  to  the  Senate  includes  inflation-                                                               
proofing  of $942  million for  fiscal year  (FY)19, it  does not                                                               
include restoring  the inflation  proofing amounts  totaling $1.4                                                               
billion from FY16 through FY18.   The Senate Finance Committee is                                                               
discussing  the  current  committee   substitute  (CS)  in  which                                                               
inflation-proofing is not addressed, she said.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  noted that  within three  of the  last four                                                               
years, the  legislature has not  inflation-proofed but  this year                                                               
there  is inflation-proofing  within  the  operating budget  that                                                               
passed the House of Representatives.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
3:41:54 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP  offered that  the Senate  Finance Committee                                                               
moved  the  budget  out of  committee  today  without  inflation-                                                               
proofing, and that was his concern.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS commented, "Mine as well."                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
3:42:07 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH  commented, "Mine as  well."  He  noted that                                                               
the  PF board  has long  suggested  that a  percentage of  market                                                               
value  (POMV)  might  be  a  reasonable  approach  to  provide  a                                                               
predictable and  sustainable level  of revenue  to the  state for                                                               
whatever purpose.   There had been some discussion  around how to                                                               
structure a  POMV draw on a  reliable basis, on an  annual basis,                                                               
and  asked  whether Ms.  Rodell  had  experience in  other  large                                                               
funds.  He said he supports the  idea of a POMV but worries about                                                               
the  entanglement of  trying to  get  a constitutional  amendment                                                               
[passed],  and  how  to  get there  without  going  through  this                                                               
exercise.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS. RODELL opined that it  absolutely can be accomplished through                                                               
statute.   A number  of statutes have  been proposed  since 2015,                                                               
and HB  26 progressed  the farthest  in the  legislative process.                                                               
The challenge  legislators face  on the  statutory front  is that                                                               
statutes were followed completely for  35 years and were not open                                                               
for debate.  Even though,  she offered, legislators had been told                                                               
that  "this money"  was available  for appropriation,  they could                                                               
cut the  dividend, they could cut  inflation-proofing, that "this                                                               
is your  power under the constitution,"  it was done as  a matter                                                               
of  course and  there was  no questioning  about that,  she said.                                                               
She  opined  that the  concerns  being  heard about  a  statutory                                                               
solution versus a constitutional  solution, is the recognition of                                                               
the  legislature's power  of appropriation  and what  that means.                                                               
It means, she  explained, not appropriating for  anything that is                                                               
subject to  appropriation and instituting that  sort of political                                                               
dynamic  into those  things  that,  which in  the  past were  not                                                               
viewed as political.   From the standpoint of the  APFC, it would                                                               
appreciate  a solution  of any  kind at  this point  because this                                                               
"sort  of  ongoing   year  after  year,  not   knowing,  is  very                                                               
troubling."  In  the event there was consensus  around a statute,                                                               
she said  that she personally  believes legislators  would follow                                                               
the  newly created  statute.   Having said  that, she  offered, a                                                               
constitutional  amendment  provides a  level  of  comfort that  a                                                               
statute "just can't get us there."                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
3:45:35 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP reiterated that  he believes putting the PFD                                                               
or  the ERA  in  the  Alaska State  Constitution  is poor  public                                                               
policy.    He  described  the  Alaska  State  Constitution  as  a                                                               
framework of guiding principle,  not to enshrine everything "that                                                               
you think  needs to  be in  there."  Although,  he said,  he does                                                               
support  a  constitutional  amendment with  regard  to  inflation                                                               
proofing.   He noted that SB  26 does provide a  structured draw,                                                               
he  likes that  it  has  a three-year  component,  and since  the                                                               
future is unknown, he would like Ms. Rodell's opinion.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MS. RODELL  responded that she  found HJR 41  interesting because                                                               
it is very  simple, it is a draw, and  how the legislature spends                                                               
that draw  is entirely still open  for debate.  The  amount being                                                               
drawn out of  what the state has historically referred  to as the                                                               
PF, is set at 4.5 percent.   The three-year lookback is key to SB                                                               
26  being  successful  because  it  will  provide  the  necessary                                                               
information as to  whether it is being overdrawn and  if it needs                                                               
to be  reset, she advised.   She acknowledged that  the committee                                                               
is not speaking  to SB 26, but it has  a mechanism for inflation-                                                               
proofing  with a  recognition  of the  need  for some  inflation-                                                               
proofing  on the  principle of  the fund.   She  referred to  the                                                               
hypothetical  offered by  Mr. Magdanz  regarding  eight years  of                                                               
zero percent  and spent down  the ERA, "you still  wouldn't touch                                                               
the $40  billion."  Ms. Rodell  argued that that is  possibly why                                                               
there is  a need  to have  a mechanism  to move  some of  the ERA                                                               
periodically over into  the principal, some of  those earnings to                                                               
boost that  up.   She explained if  the goal is  to truly  try to                                                               
keep  that  limiter  in  there,  then that  is  how  to  continue                                                               
maintaining its purchasing  power.  In any  event, she explained,                                                               
this  constitutional amendment  makes  a simple  straight-forward                                                               
4.75 percent  draw, and it limits  it to the amounts  in the ERA.                                                               
The APFC can  support this type of  constitutional amendment, she                                                               
said.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
3:49:05 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  reminded the committee that  it recently saw                                                               
a version of  this bill that had  a 5 percent draw and  now it is                                                               
at  4.75 percent,  he  asked whether  something  had taken  place                                                               
within  the last  10 days  and what  will happen  in the  next 10                                                               
days.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS explained that the  version was a work draft                                                               
and  was  not put  on  the  record  because there  are  different                                                               
schools of thought as to what constitutes a sustainable draw.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MS.  RODELL  replied  that  the board  has  had  a  long-standing                                                               
resolution  in  place  supporting  5 percent.    Obviously,  4.75                                                               
percent is more sustainable than  5 percent because less is being                                                               
removed,  but that  percentage amount  is a  call for  the policy                                                               
makers, she said.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  KREISS-TOMKINS   added  a  comment  to   the  question  of                                                               
sustainability and advised  that he and his  staff recently spoke                                                               
with Greg  Erickson, former publisher  of the Budget  Report, who                                                             
is a staunch advocate of a 4 percent draw.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
3:50:28 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL noted  that  the  presenters initially  said                                                               
this was  a 4.75 percent  sustainable draw.  However,  he pointed                                                               
out, when  presented with the  hypothetical of 8 years  with zero                                                               
returns,  suddenly the  4.75 percent  may not  be sustainable  so                                                               
possibly  it   should  not   be  placed   in  the   Alaska  State                                                               
Constitution.   He offered that  no one expects zero  returns for                                                               
eight years, yet  that is why there is a  barrier between the ERA                                                               
and the principal.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS. RODELL answered  that it is important to  talk about doomsday                                                               
scenarios  in order  to create  an awareness  that the  future is                                                               
unknown  in terms  of investing  and markets.   In  terms of  the                                                               
stress analyses that APFC ran,  it believes that 4.75 percent and                                                               
5  percent are  reasonably sustainable  numbers for  draws.   She                                                               
opined  that the  three  year look  back  becomes an  interesting                                                               
question and she suspects that  if this happened, there will come                                                               
a time when  she is sitting in front of  the committee discussing                                                               
the balance in  the ERA, the performance of  the investments, and                                                               
whether  overdraws   will  potentially   occur  at   some  point.                                                               
Therefore,  she  advised,  part  of   what  is  helpful  in  this                                                               
constitutional amendment  is smoothing it  out, "out of 5  of the                                                               
last 6,  so you're really  creating a  long time period,  and the                                                               
effective draws  then end  up being  significantly less  than the                                                               
nominal draw of 4.75 percent or 5 percent."                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
3:53:16 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL noted  that  Ms. Rodell  commented that  the                                                               
APFC  would like  to  see  some type  of  structure "like  this,"                                                               
thereby removing the  uncertainty that APFC has  faced during the                                                               
last few years.   He asked whether it is  simply the anticipation                                                               
of a draw that puts the corporation on edge.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. RODELL referred  to her testimony a few weeks  prior when she                                                               
discussed what it means to  be prudent investors and advised that                                                               
it  means following  a formal  portfolio theory  that takes  into                                                               
account  distributions.    When  the board  assembles  its  asset                                                               
allocation and determines how to  invest the fund, it should also                                                               
take   into   account   the  distribution   requirement   except,                                                               
currently, it does not have  a distribution requirement, so it is                                                               
anything between  zero and 100  percent.  Therefore,  she pointed                                                               
out,  the board  tries  to successfully  manage  through that  in                                                               
order  to  deliver  maximum  returns  to  the  state  while  also                                                               
recognizing that the principal must  be protected and "not go all                                                               
in  on black,  as  they say."   She  explained  that having  this                                                               
structure in place will provide  the sideboards through which the                                                               
board can then  make very real determinations as to  how much can                                                               
be put into  illiquid investments like real  estate, like private                                                               
equity that generates the big returns.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
3:55:18 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL  noted  that  Ms.  Rodell  stated  that  she                                                               
preferred  a  constitutional formula  like  this,  as opposed  to                                                               
statutory because  statutes can  be ignored to  some extent.   As                                                               
far as  the structure  of the  fund itself,  (audio difficulties)                                                               
constitutional draw of  up to 4.75 percent, and he  would like to                                                               
see "it just one super fund," a true endowment.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  commented that "super funds"  are something                                                               
else.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL (audio difficulties)  consistent draw of 4.75                                                               
percent,  what   remains  in  the  fund   essentially  counts  as                                                               
inflation-proofing.   He continued, "And,  if you took  too much,                                                               
then  it wasn't  inflation-proofing, well  then you've  taken too                                                               
much.   And so, you have  a set fund  with a set draw  and that's                                                               
it.  And,  I know the answer  but I'm going to  ask anyway, would                                                               
that be your preference in the hierarchy of options here?"                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MS.  RODELL   answered  that  that   would  absolutely   be  "our                                                               
preference."                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
[HJR 41 was held over.]                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
            HB 409-DMV ID CARDS & REGISTRATION FEES                                                                         
3:57:24 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  announced that  the next order  of business                                                               
would be HOUSE  BILL NO. 409, "An Act  relating to identification                                                               
cards; relating  to vehicle registration  fee rates;  relating to                                                               
changes  of  address;  relating to  driver's  license  fees;  and                                                               
relating to financial responsibility for motor vehicles."                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
3:58:00 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CATHY  SCHLINGHEYDE,   Staff,  Representative   Jonathan  Kreiss-                                                               
Tomkins,  Alaska  State  Legislature,  advised that  HB  409  was                                                               
drafted  at  the request  of  the  Department of  Administration,                                                               
Legislative Finance  Sub-committee.  The legislation  updates and                                                               
streamlines the  statutes for greater efficiency  at the Division                                                               
of  Motor Vehicles  (DMV) and  addresses some  of the  identified                                                               
indirect  expenditures  in the  division.    He referred  to  the                                                               
fiscal note  [disbursed to the  members at the beginning  of this                                                               
hearing]  which estimates  that  the  legislation would  generate                                                               
revenue of approximately $815,000 per year.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
3:58:30 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  SCHLINGHEYDE presented  the sectional  analysis and  advised                                                               
that Section 1 was specifically  recommended by the Department of                                                               
Administration,  Legislative Finance  Sub-committee.   Section  1                                                               
standardizes the age  for senior citizen fee  waivers by changing                                                               
the age for a senior citizen identification card from 60 to 65.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS.  SCHLINGHEYDE  advised that  Section  2  allows a  person  to                                                               
authorize the  Division of Motor  Vehicles (DMV) to  update their                                                               
address  based  on  the  United   States  Postal  Service  (USPS)                                                               
database.  Currently, even when  the DMV realizes that an address                                                               
was set up and  updated at the post office, it  must mail to what                                                               
it knows  is the wrong address,  the mail then bounces  back, and                                                               
the DMV then reaches out to  the person.  This section allows the                                                               
DMV to mail to the correct current address.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS.  SCHLINGHEYDE  advised that  Section  3  removes the  vehicle                                                               
registration fee exemption for amateur  radio operators, which is                                                               
approximately 44 beneficiaries per year.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MS.  SCHLINGHEYDE   advised  that   Section  4  is   a  statutory                                                               
recommendation, it  is an  indirect expenditure  of approximately                                                               
$498,000  per  year.   Section  4  eliminates the  exemption  for                                                               
municipalities   and  gives   partial  exemption   to  charitable                                                               
organizations.  Therefore,  she explained, it would  be a partial                                                               
recovery of the indirect costs.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS.  SCHLINGHEYDE advised  that Section  5 sets  the fee  for DMV                                                               
Knowledge Tests at $5 and raises  the fee for DMV Road Tests from                                                               
$15 to  $25.  She  explained that  this would both  raise revenue                                                               
for  the  state  and  increase efficiency  at  DMV  by  hopefully                                                               
reducing the "no share rates,"  which is approximately 20 percent                                                               
for the  driving test.  The  current fail rate for  the Knowledge                                                               
Test,  which has  unlimited free  attempts,  is approximately  60                                                               
percent.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
4:00:03 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. SCHLINGHEYDE advised that Section  6 is statutory cleanup, it                                                               
is  various (indisc.)  and accident  reporting  thresholds.   The                                                               
thresholds  were  originally  set  the   same  for  DMV  and  the                                                               
Department of  Transportation &  Public Facilities  (DOTPF), that                                                               
the report  must be  set when  it is  $501.   The DOTPF  has been                                                               
updated and it  is now a $2,000 threshold, but  the DMV limit has                                                               
not been  updated or  adjusted for  inflation in  33 years.   The                                                               
threshold  is currently  set at  $501  and this  would raise  the                                                               
threshold to $2,000.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS. SCHLINGHEYDE explained  that that amount is  also in Sections                                                               
7-10, and 13, which is updating that threshold.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS.  SCHLINGHEYDE  advised  that  Section 11  adjusts  the  SR-22                                                               
requirement,  vehicle liability  insurance document  for a  high-                                                               
risk  insurance  policy.   People  are  required to  carry  SR-22                                                               
insurance after an accident or  traffic offense, and this section                                                               
requires the person to carry  SR-22 insurance for 10 years rather                                                               
than for a lifetime as that is an undue financial hardship.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS.  SCHLINGHEYDE  advised  that  Section 12  allows  for  a  new                                                               
installment payment  plan, rather than automatic  suspension of a                                                               
license  when the  license  is suspended  due  to an  outstanding                                                               
financial judgment.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MS. SCHLINGHEYDE advised  that Section 14 is  cleanup for Section                                                               
2, allows  updating DMV  with address changes  if the  person has                                                               
given  permission  to  DMV  to update  addresses  from  the  USPS                                                               
database.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
4:01:23 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  KREISS-TOMKINS noted  that  this legislation  is merely  a                                                               
starting  point,  it  is  an   amalgam  of  indirect  expenditure                                                               
recommendations  from the  Legislative Finance  Sub-committee and                                                               
the DMV recommendations.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL referred to  Section 11 regarding SR-22s, and                                                               
said he assumes it has little to  do with the DMV and is rather a                                                               
policy call because buying SR-22  insurance is between the driver                                                               
and the insurance company, and not the DMV.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. SCHLINGHEYDE answered that the  DMV statutes require proof of                                                               
financial responsibility  and the  driver must  submit a  form to                                                               
the DMV  showing the  SR-22 insurance was  purchased.   After ten                                                               
years,  this section  would eliminate  the requirement  to submit                                                               
that form to the DMV.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  advised that he  had to buy  SR-22 insurance                                                               
at one  point, but it  was for a shorter  period of time  than 10                                                               
years.  He asked whether it is  currently that if a person has an                                                               
accident, they must buy SR-22 insurance for life.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
4:02:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MARLA  THOMPSON,  Director,  Division of  Motor  Vehicles  (DMV),                                                               
Department   of  Administration   (DOA),  responded   that  SR-22                                                               
insurance is not  required, for most judgements, for  more than a                                                               
few years,  but some judgements  are for  a lifetime and  the DMV                                                               
wanted to change it to ten years.   She explained that it is "not                                                               
for a normal DUI SR-22 because that is normally five years."                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL  requested a  description  of  the level  of                                                               
infractions that would require lifetime SR-22 insurance.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MS. THOMPSON deferred to Michael Stanker, Department of Law.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
4:03:57 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MICHAEL  STANKER,  Assistant  Attorney General,  Civil  Division,                                                               
Labor & State  Affairs Section, Department of  Law (DOL), advised                                                               
that he  would have to  conduct additional research and  get back                                                               
to  the  committee  as  to  all  of  the  instances  where  SR-22                                                               
insurance  is required,  and for  the  length of  time for  those                                                               
different conditions.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
[HB 409 was held over.]                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
        SB 204-DISABLED VET PLATES:CHIROPRACTORS CERTIFY                                                                    
                                                                                                                              
4:05:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  announced that  the next order  of business                                                               
would  be  SENATE BILL  NO.  204,  "An  Act relating  to  special                                                               
registration  plates   for  vehicles   owned  by   veterans  with                                                               
disabilities."                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
4:05:52 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
PETER   NAOROZ,  Staff,   Senator  Dennis   Egan,  Alaska   State                                                               
Legislature,  advised   that  SB   204  was  drafted   to  return                                                               
chiropractors to the  list of people who  can authorize qualified                                                               
individuals  with   disabilities  to  receive   handicap  parking                                                               
placards  and  license plates.    The  Alaska Division  of  Motor                                                               
Vehicles offers several types of  disability parking placards and                                                               
license plates,  temporary and permanent,  which are  depicted on                                                               
the license  itself.  Until  2016, the DMV's process  allowed for                                                               
chiropractors  to be  among those  who qualified  individuals for                                                               
those plates and  permits.  In 2016, the  attorney general, after                                                               
reviewing  the  statutes   and  authorizations,  determined  that                                                               
chiropractors were not specifically  mentioned.  This legislation                                                               
rectifies  that  issue  in Section  1,  [AS  28.10.181(d)]  which                                                               
specifies the  types of chiropractors  listed in  accordance with                                                               
AS  08.20.   The sponsor  believes this  is a  good bill  for the                                                               
public-at-large,  he advised,  and individuals  with disabilities                                                               
who are  already under  treatment by  a chiropractor,  should not                                                               
have to pay for an additional visit to a medical doctor.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
[SB 204 was held over.]                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
4:09:29 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
The committee took an at-ease from 4:09 p.m. to 4:10 p.m.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
              HJR 30-URGE U.S. SUPPORT OF REFUGEES                                                                          
4:10:12 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  announced that  the next order  of business                                                               
would be HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION  NO. 30, Urging the United States                                                               
Congress  to reaffirm  the  commitment of  the  United States  to                                                               
promote  the  safety,  health, and  well-being  of  refugees  and                                                               
displaced persons; urging the United  States government to uphold                                                               
its international  leadership role in responding  to displacement                                                               
crises  with  humanitarian  assistance   and  to  work  with  the                                                               
international community and the  United Nations High Commissioner                                                               
for  Refugees   to  find  solutions  to   conflicts  and  protect                                                               
refugees;  and  urging the  President  of  the United  States  to                                                               
continue to mitigate the burden  placed on frontline refugee host                                                               
countries.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
4:10:16 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ANDY JOSEPHSON,  Alaska State Legislature, advised                                                               
that HJR  30 was inspired by  a Colony Middle School  student who                                                               
flew  to Juneau  during  the January-February  timeframe of  this                                                               
year, and they presented this  legislation to the House Community                                                               
and  Regional  Affairs  Standing   Committee.    This  resolution                                                               
expresses  concern, sympathy,  and  compassion  for refugees  and                                                               
displaced  persons.   Originally, the  sponsor focused  on Syrian                                                               
refugees, except  this resolution is  broader and is  designed to                                                               
reflect  this historical  moment,  the compassion  of the  Alaska                                                               
Legislature,  and Alaska's  concern for  folks who  are displaced                                                               
based upon civil strife.  For  example, he offered, their fear of                                                               
sexual   violence,   human  trafficking,   forced   conscription,                                                               
genocide, and  other horrible situations that  they may confront.                                                               
The  resolution   is  fairly   self-explanatory  and   given  the                                                               
circumstances in  Syria this week,  it is  unfortunately topical,                                                               
he opined.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
4:12:15 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  noted that  65,600,000 people  are displaced                                                               
worldwide   and  asked   Representative   Josephson's  sense   of                                                               
obligation the United States should attempt to absorb.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON  responded that this subject  came up in                                                               
the  House Community  and  Regional  Affairs Standing  Committee.                                                               
Some people  believe that  the United States  is not  fully doing                                                               
its fair share  given its resources and capacity,  and the burden                                                               
is held  more by Western Europe,  for example, than America.   He                                                               
explained that the  intent of this resolution was not  so much as                                                               
to get into that issue, as  to simply mark this moment in history                                                               
and  note that  the people  of Alaska  and their  legislators are                                                               
compassionate people, that  they are aware of the  crisis, and if                                                               
called upon "we  would certainly lend a hand."   He said, "Beyond                                                               
being   called  upon,   that  we   would  individually,   if  not                                                               
collectively, that we  would assert ourselves and  do whatever we                                                               
can do."                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
4:14:04 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   LEDOUX  asked   Representative  Josephson   what                                                               
exactly he  wanted to see  with respect to this  resolution, what                                                               
"are we not doing that you think we should do?"                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  JOSEPHSON answered  that  the resolution  directs                                                               
that the United  States government do what it  can in partnership                                                               
with  the  international  community,   that  it  work  with  non-                                                               
governmental organizations,  that it  mitigate the harm,  that it                                                               
use  its resources  the  best it  can, and  that  those sorts  of                                                               
things should continue and be re-enforced.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
[HJR 30 was held over.]                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
4:15:33 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
The committee took an at-ease from 4:15 p.m. to 4:16 p.m.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
        SB 196-APPROPRIATION LIMIT; BUDGET RESERVE FUND                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
4:16:28 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  announced that the final  order of business                                                               
would  be CS  FOR  SENATE  BILL NO.  196(FIN)(efd  fld), "An  Act                                                               
relating to  an appropriation limit;  and relating to  the budget                                                               
responsibilities of the governor."                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
4:16:39 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  PETER MICCICHE,  Alaska State  Legislature, pointed  out                                                               
that the sponsors  conducted some statewide polling  and he found                                                               
it interesting  the percentage of  people who support  a spending                                                               
limit.  He noted that the  high level of support was not specific                                                               
to party, region,  or demographic, and every region  was above 75                                                               
percent [of  the people polled].   The  state relies on  a single                                                               
commodity  to   fund  more  than   85  percent  of   the  state's                                                               
governmental  services,   and  although  the   operating  capital                                                               
budgets have been cut by over  $3 billion in the last four fiscal                                                               
years, the state  continues to draw from its  savings accounts to                                                               
fill the gap  between revenue and expenditures.   He advised that                                                               
this legislation  sets an appropriation  limit and referred  to a                                                               
chart  titled  "SB  196 Appropriation  Limit"  demonstrating  the                                                               
spending  limit  plotted in  a  couple  of  different ways.    He                                                               
explained  that the  top purple  line is  the existing  statutory                                                               
appropriation limit,  the red  line is the  actual spend.   There                                                               
are  two parallel  lines, the  blue  line is  deflating from  the                                                               
current  spend  back  to  around  1999, and  the  green  line  is                                                               
inflating at this appropriation limit trend through today.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR MICCICHE advised that the  chart demonstrates why this is                                                               
important, "we've gotten  back into this band and  had we avoided                                                               
getting  out  of  this  band, we  would  have  approximately  $15                                                               
billion  more in  saving right  now.   We  wouldn't have  reduced                                                               
dividends,  we  wouldn't  have  been  talking  about  broad-based                                                               
taxes,   and  we   have  would   have  been   delivering  quality                                                               
constitutionally protected services in the  meantime."  This bill                                                               
requires  the  legislature  to prioritize  state  spending  going                                                               
forward so  it does  not find  itself in  the same  situation, he                                                               
remarked.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
4:19:51 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR NATASHA  VON IMHOF,  Alaska State  Legislature, described                                                               
that Alaskans are living in  a "feast or famine" environment with                                                               
the primary  single source  of revenue being  oil.   Alaskans can                                                               
effectively live  in that  environment if  there is  control over                                                               
spending whereby the state's spending  does not necessarily match                                                               
the revenue that may  jump or fall over the course  of time.  She                                                               
noted that history has revealed that  the state had huge jumps in                                                               
revenue between fiscal years 2010  and 2014, that there have been                                                               
feasts and  famines in  the past.   Over the  last 25  years, she                                                               
pointed out, the  state put money into  the constitutional budget                                                               
reserve (CBR) and  borrowed from the CBR during the  times it was                                                               
necessary to  fund the  deficit.   She acknowledged  that between                                                               
the years 2010  and 2014, the state did not  control its spending                                                               
and the state  matched its spending to revenue;  and when revenue                                                               
started  falling in  2015 and  the state  could not  contract its                                                               
spending fast enough.  As a  result, she offered, to what Senator                                                               
Micciche stated, approximately $15 billion  was left on the table                                                               
by money  that was not  put into  savings during the  good years,                                                               
and additional money was removed  to cover large deficits because                                                               
the state  had large  budgets during  the falling  revenue years.                                                               
This legislation,  she related,  helps future growth  in spending                                                               
in order to avoid the big  jumps and big falls in spending, which                                                               
creates  much  anxiety  and  uncertainty   in  the  state.    She                                                               
explained  that   the  bill  grows   spending  over  time   in  a                                                               
predictable rate  based on what  most other states use,  which is                                                               
usually the  consumer price index (CPI)  for their state.   It is                                                               
an agreed  upon set of principles  that the entire bodies  of the                                                               
legislature  agree  to  set  their  budgets  on  each  year,  she                                                               
commented.      A   spending  cap   brings   predictability   and                                                               
sustainability  to   Alaska's  budget   process  and  is   a  key                                                               
ingredient in  a bi-annual  budget, which  is a  two-year budget.                                                               
She opined  that that will  avoid this type of  conversation with                                                               
pink  slips for  educators, and  so forth.   This  legislation is                                                               
meant  to  ease  the  anxiety   and  provide  predictability  and                                                               
sustainability, she described.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
4:22:42 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX advised that she  supports the concept of a                                                               
spending  limit  and  asked why  Senator  Micciche  believes  the                                                               
legislature  will adhere  to a  spending limit  because it  is in                                                               
statute,  any  more  than  it  has  adhered  to  paying  out  the                                                               
permanent fund  dividend (PFD)  according to  the formula  set in                                                               
statute,  for  example.    The   legislature's  track  record  in                                                               
following  the  statutes  is  sometimes   not  100  percent,  she                                                               
commented.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  MICCICHE responded  that the  Senate Majority  discussed                                                               
the fact that this is a test  and the real objective is that this                                                               
translates  into a  constitutional spending  limit.   He stressed                                                               
that the goal is to make sure it  is right, so it has a look back                                                               
and he is hesitant to  change the Alaska State Constitution until                                                               
it is somewhat time tested.   He commented that, "If we find that                                                               
we are successful ... so soon  after we pass statutory items that                                                               
the legislature  weighs in  on heavily  and heavily  supports, we                                                               
have a  tendency to stay  very close to that."   In time,  as the                                                               
new legislators  come in,  they are  not particularly  married to                                                               
that  past  statutory  structure.     Although,  he  opined,  the                                                               
legislature  has time  to  determine within  the  next two  years                                                               
whether  this  proves  to  be  the right  trend  of  spend  going                                                               
forward,   and  subsequently,   hopefully   there   would  be   a                                                               
constitutional amendment the people of Alaska would support.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
4:24:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH  commented that  he thinks "this  is great,"                                                               
and at the  municipal level there are tax caps  with some sort of                                                               
institutional limits  or boundaries  on spending.   He reiterated                                                               
that this is  good, it could possibly be modified  over time, but                                                               
it is helpful to have a road map on spending.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KNOPP  noted  that  he agrees  with  the  sponsor                                                               
statement  in creating  exemptions for  the payment  of permanent                                                               
funds,  capitol  projects,  state  debt obligations,  but  he  is                                                               
concerned about the  receipt supported services.   He pointed out                                                               
that the state  does not have diversified growth  funds (DGF) and                                                               
every  department  now  has receipt  supported  services.    This                                                               
legislation does  not appear to  cap receipt  supported services,                                                               
and over  the last couple  of years, almost every  department has                                                               
raised fees in one form or  another.  He asked whether that issue                                                               
should have "fallen  under unrestricted general fund  (UGF).  You                                                               
know  we've really  strayed I  think, from  what we  said is  not                                                               
general fund (GGF), but we're calling it GGF."                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  VON IMHOF  responded that  there were  discussions about                                                               
what  a spending  cap might  include, such  as, UGF  only or  all                                                               
state funds  including DGF and  other state funds.   The decision                                                               
was UGF  because it is  important to provide the  departments and                                                               
the  university with  flexibility  to raise  fees  and what  they                                                               
believe the market will bear.   President Jim Johnsen, University                                                               
of Alaska, stated on the record  that the University of Alaska is                                                               
subsidized by the  state more than any  other Western university.                                                               
In the event  the university decides to raise  tuition, the state                                                               
should allow  them to do so  and not necessarily be  stymied by a                                                               
spending  cap,  the  same  goes  for  hunting  fees  and  fishing                                                               
regulations.   There  is a  point where  market equilibrium  will                                                               
dictate whether a  price is too high, and it  is more appropriate                                                               
for the departments to retain that autonomy and flexibility.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
4:27:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  referred to the previously  described chart,                                                               
and when  Senate Micciche said  "we've left the band"  he assumed                                                               
that is  between the  parallel green line  and the  parallel blue                                                               
line, and the  red line is state spending.   He commented that it                                                               
looks like  "we're actually back in  the band the last  couple of                                                               
years."                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR MICCICHE  answered that Representative Wool  was correct,                                                               
the $15  billion that disappeared  is the difference  between the                                                               
blue line and  the red line when  the red line is  outside of the                                                               
two parallel lines.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
4:28:14 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL referred to the  statement that 85 percent of                                                               
Alaska's governmental  services rely upon a  single commodity and                                                               
advised that that statement is  probably no longer valid "and may                                                               
not be  for some time in  the foreseeable future."   He asked how                                                               
Senator Micciche would adjust that statement.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  MICCICHE replied  that he  did  not know  that he  would                                                               
because if a percent of market  value (POMV) passes, or any other                                                               
arrangement  that will  pay  the  state's bills,  it  is still  a                                                               
single  commodity generated  with the  escalation from  earnings.                                                               
He  related that  Representative Wool  was converting  production                                                               
from the past into funding for  the future, so "I don't know that                                                               
you've  moved outside  of that  band.   I think  you picked  up a                                                               
higher proportion  of that  band and  likely will  in perpetuity.                                                               
Particularly, if  we can  get an agreement  on what  our spending                                                               
should  look  like  today  and  how it  should  escalate  in  the                                                               
future."   The primary  point of the  chart is,  "with relatively                                                               
little  discomfort we  are back  in  that band."   Obviously,  he                                                               
advised, it is  doable because "as a team we've  done it together                                                               
with UGF spending.  If we  can maintain being within that band in                                                               
the  future, we  can avoid  those  spikes in  spending with  some                                                               
outlets for  things that when we  do have high revenues,  we have                                                               
the ability to  catch up on things like  deferred maintenance and                                                               
other projects that may be lagging at the moment."                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
4:29:51 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL surmised that  this legislation proposes that                                                               
the  $4.1 billion  will not  include capital  projects and  asked                                                               
whether  the  red  line  of   spending  also  follows  that  same                                                               
exclusion of  capital projects.   He  opined that  that is  a big                                                               
part of the deduction from FY14 through FY18, for example.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR MICCICHE  described that   this discussion is   apples to                                                               
apples on operating.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
4:30:23 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR   KREISS-TOMKINS  asked   whether  there   have  been   any                                                               
discussions  about  extending the  spending  cap  to the  capital                                                               
budget.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR VON IMHOF answered that  there have been some discussions                                                               
about a  potential waterfall  if oil  revenues or  other revenues                                                               
exceed  the spending  cap.   For example,  she advised,  what has                                                               
priority  on a  certain percentage,  or a  certain dollar  amount                                                               
when there are  competing interests, such as PERS  and TERS, debt                                                               
payments, repayment  to the constitutional budget  reserve (CBR),                                                               
capital,  possibly school  education,  building, matching  funds,                                                               
and things  of that nature.   Those discussions have  taken place                                                               
and "we  have not necessarily  landed on anything at  this point,                                                               
and we are open to feedback."                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  VON   IMHOF,  in   response  to   Representative  Wool's                                                               
question, advised that he is  correct that past oil revenues have                                                               
been a much  higher percentage of revenue, absent of  a POMV, and                                                               
it  still remains  the highest  or dominate  revenue force.   She                                                               
commented that one would argue that  even with a POMV, in its own                                                               
way it is from oil revenue in  its origin.  Moving forward, it is                                                               
believed that  starting with  a "4.1 UGF"  is realistic  based in                                                               
the world  market of what the  state can afford with  the current                                                               
oil  revenue, production,  and opportunities  through SB  21, the                                                               
oil  tax legislation.   She  related that  this is  realistic and                                                               
makes  sense  based  upon current  information,  but  as  Senator                                                               
Micciche  advised,  this is  a  trial  period with  a  three-year                                                               
lookback, and  at that time there  will be a determination  as to                                                               
whether  the rate  makes sense.   The  rate in  the Alaska  State                                                               
Constitution currently "is a little  high," it is both population                                                               
and CPI  and it is too  big of a  growth rate, it does  not work.                                                               
This  should  have  probably  been reviewed  20  years  ago,  she                                                               
offered.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
4:33:08 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  offered appreciation for the  statement that                                                               
the source of  revenue originally was oil, the  revenue went into                                                               
a fund,  the fund  is invested,  and the state  uses that  as its                                                               
number one source of revenue.   He surmised that it is not direct                                                               
oil revenue, but that  oil is on the fund.   He asked whether the                                                               
CPI takes into  account surging healthcare costs  that are higher                                                               
than inflation.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR VON  IMHOF advised  that that CPI  is everything  and the                                                               
Anchorage CPI is,  in essence, the statewide CPI.   Alaska is one                                                               
of the  few states  that has the  dominant city  representing the                                                               
state.  She  said that she has a 30-year  lookback available, and                                                               
advised that in  2016, the CPI range was negative  point one, all                                                               
the way  to approximately 4.6  in one given  year.  The  CPI does                                                               
fluxuate  when the  price of  oil and  the price  of housing  and                                                               
healthcare rises, but  then it goes down, and when  looking at it                                                               
over  time  it  is  "pretty  level and  our  numbers  work,"  she                                                               
advised.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
4:34:46 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  asked whether  there is  any other  sort of                                                               
idiosyncrasy in  the CPI  where there could  be a  CPI calculated                                                               
for Anchorage  that in any  way has a  large delta from  what the                                                               
sort of de facto statewide CPI would be.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR MICCICHE answered as follows:                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     So, a  very direct example  of that was right  went the                                                                    
     price of oil went from $107  a barrel down to $29.  You                                                                    
     are going  to see  an offset,  you are  going to  see a                                                                    
     state that  is used  to a very  high level  of revenue,                                                                    
     many more  high-paying jobs, rents  were up,  renting a                                                                    
     storefront, many materials were  at a much higher price                                                                    
     and suddenly you  had a revenue drop.   There are times                                                                    
     when there is  a lag, but considering it  is the actual                                                                    
     costs of the primary drivers  due to the cost of living                                                                    
     in Anchorage,  it generally catches up  in a relatively                                                                    
     short order.   The reason that capital  is excluded, is                                                                    
     because  you can  shut it  off like  a faucet,  like we                                                                    
     did.  That  is not our problem in spending.   It can be                                                                    
     a problem  in spending when you  are building community                                                                    
     centers in  the middle of nowhere  that, unfortunately,                                                                    
     have operating dollars  attached to them.   That can be                                                                    
     a problem.   But, as you saw in 2014  and 2015, we were                                                                    
     able to make that immediate  reduction.  You don't have                                                                    
     bodies  attached to  it, you  don't have  employees and                                                                    
     their  families attached  to it,  you don't  have their                                                                    
     healthcare  and their  retirement, and  all that  other                                                                    
     burden that's  so difficult to  reduce.  So,  UGF spend                                                                    
     in our  operating budget is  the key exposure  and that                                                                    
     is  what  made  this  so uncomfortable  over  the  last                                                                    
     couple of years.   And where, in my view,  we are still                                                                    
     not spending at  the place where we  should be spending                                                                    
     for a state of 740,000 people.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
4:37:19 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR MICCICHE pointed to the sectional analysis [contained                                                                   
within the committee packet] and offered to answer questions                                                                    
prior to the next hearing.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
[SB 196 was held over.]                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
4:37:46 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ADJOURNMENT                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
There being no further business before the committee, the House                                                                 
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 4:37                                                                  
p.m.                                                                                                                            

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
HB 409 Sponsor Statement 4.10.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 409
HB409 Sectional Analysis 4.9.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 409
HB409 ver D 4.6.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 409
SB204 Sponsor Statement 04.06.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 204
SB204 ver A 04.06.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 204
SB204 Fiscal Note ADM 04.06.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 204
SB204 Letters of Support 1 04.06.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 204
SB204 Letters of Support 2 04.06.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 204
SB196 Sponsor Statement v. O.A 4.2.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 196
SB196 Sectional Analysis v. O.A 4.2.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 196
SB 196 v. O.A 4.2.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 196
SB196 Summary of Changes v.O.A 4.2.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 196
SB196 Fiscal Note OMB 4.2.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 196
SB 196 - NFIB Support 4.2.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 196
SB 196 Graph 4.2.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 196
HJR030 Sponsor Statement 2.28.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/19/2018 3:15:00 PM
HJR 30
HJR030 ver D 2.28.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/19/2018 3:15:00 PM
HJR 30
HJR30 Fiscal Note LEG 4.9.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/19/2018 3:15:00 PM
HJR 30
HJR41 Sponsor Statement 4.9.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HJR 41
HJR41 Sectional Analysis 4.9.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HJR 41
HJR41 ver J 4.9.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HJR 41
HJR41 Fiscal note-LEG- 04.09.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HJR 41