03/03/2005 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HJR7 | |
| HB48 | |
| HB103 | |
| HB127 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HJR 7 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 48 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 103 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 127 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
March 3, 2005
8:02 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Paul Seaton, Chair
Representative Carl Gatto, Vice Chair
Representative Jim Elkins
Representative Jay Ramras
Representative Berta Gardner
Representative Max Gruenberg
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Bob Lynn
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 7
Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of Alaska
to correct obsolete references to the office of secretary of
state by substituting references to the office of lieutenant
governor.
- MOVED HJR 7 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 48
"An Act relating to a determination of costs attributable to
relocating the legislature or the state capital or of
constructing a new capitol building in the present capital city,
and to a determination of all costs of retaining the existing
capitol building and keeping the state capital and legislature
in the present capital city; relating to voter approval of
certain bondable costs; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 103
"An Act requiring an actionable claim against the state to be
tried without a jury."
- MOVED HB 103 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 127
"An Act relating to service in the peace corps and to service as
a diplomat in the United States Foreign Service as allowable
absences from the state for purposes of eligibility for
permanent fund dividends and to the period for filing an
application for a permanent fund dividend; authorizing the
Department of Revenue to issue administrative orders imposing
sanctions for certain misrepresentations or other actions
concerning eligibility for a permanent fund dividend and
providing for administrative appeal of those orders; and
providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HJR 7
SHORT TITLE: CONST AM: SEC. OF STATE REFERENCES
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) ANDERSON
01/21/05 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/21/05 (H) STA, JUD, FIN
03/03/05 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 48
SHORT TITLE: EXPENDITURE FOR CAPITOL CONSTRUCTION
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) STOLTZE, GATTO
01/10/05 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/7/05
01/10/05 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/10/05 (H) STA, FIN
02/22/05 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/22/05 (H) Heard & Held
02/22/05 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/03/05 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 103
SHORT TITLE: CLAIMS AGAINST THE STATE
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) KELLY
01/24/05 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/24/05 (H) STA, JUD, FIN
03/03/05 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 127
SHORT TITLE: PFD:PEACE CORPS/DIPLOMAT/SANCTIONS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) MCGUIRE
02/04/05 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/04/05 (H) STA, FIN
03/03/05 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
JON BITTNER, Staff
to Representative Tom Anderson
Alaska State Legislature
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HJR 7 on behalf of
Representative Anderson, sponsor.
REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As co-sponsor of HB 48, answered questions
from the committee.
BEN MULLIGAN, Staff
to Representative Bill Stoltze
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testifying on behalf of Representative
Stoltze, co-sponsor of HB 48, addressed the questions that had
arisen during the last hearing on the bill.
LEONARD DEAL
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of himself to state his
concern about the way HB 48 is written.
WIN GRUENING, Chair
Alaska Committee
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testifying on behalf of the Alaska
Committee, predicted that HB 48 may hinder genuine efforts to
improve Alaska's capital city.
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE KELLY
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as sponsor of HB 103.
HEATH HILYARD, Staff
to Representative Mike Kelly
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
103, on behalf of Representative Kelly, sponsor.
ROGER GAY
Big Lake, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testifying on behalf of himself, concluded
that HB 103 would not benefit the state.
DOUG WOOLIVER, Administrative Attorney
Administrative Staff
Office of the Administrative Director
Alaska Court System
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Explain the fiscal note to HB 103, on
behalf of the Alaska Court System.
REPRESENTATIVE LESIL McGUIRE
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as sponsor of HB 127.
JUSTIN BARBALACE
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of himself in support
of HB 127.
CAROLYN GRAY
(No address provided)
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of the Northern Alaska
Peace Corps Friends during the hearing on HB 127, and stated
that she thinks the bill would help increase the number of
people who apply for the Peace Corps.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR PAUL SEATON called the House State Affairs Standing
Committee meeting to order at 8:02:13 AM. Present at the call
to order were Representatives Gatto, Elkins, Gardner, and
Seaton. Representatives Ramras and Gruenberg arrived as the
meeting was in progress.
HJR 7-CONST AM: SEC. OF STATE REFERENCES
8:03:24 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the first order of business was
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 7, Proposing amendments to the
Constitution of the State of Alaska to correct obsolete
references to the office of secretary of state by substituting
references to the office of lieutenant governor.
8:03:25 AM
JON BITTNER, Staff to Representative Tom Anderson, Alaska State
Legislature, introduced HJR 7 on behalf of Representative
Anderson, sponsor. He reported that back in 1970, when the
legislature proposed a series of amendments to the Alaska State
Constitution that changed the name of the Office of Secretary of
State to the Office of the Lieutenant Governor, two references
to "Secretary of State" were missed. Those references appear in
Article 2, Section 5, and Article 3, Section 25. The proposed
resolution would correct that oversight and put the issue on the
ballot for a popular vote of the people.
8:04:30 AM
MR. BITTNER, in response to a question from Representative
Gardner, said he is not aware of anyone who is opposed to [HJR
7].
8:04:42 AM
CHAIR SEATON, after ascertaining that there was no one to
testify, closed public testimony.
8:05:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER moved to report HJR 7 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes. There being no objection, HJR 7 was reported out of the
House State Affairs Standing Committee.
HB 48-EXPENDITURE FOR CAPITOL CONSTRUCTION
8:06:45 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the next order of business was HOUSE
BILL NO. 48, "An Act relating to a determination of costs
attributable to relocating the legislature or the state capital
or of constructing a new capitol building in the present capital
city, and to a determination of all costs of retaining the
existing capitol building and keeping the state capital and
legislature in the present capital city; relating to voter
approval of certain bondable costs; and providing for an
effective date."
8:06:46 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE, Alaska State Legislature, as co-
sponsor of HB 48, indicated that, since the last hearing on the
bill, many questions arose. He deferred further discussion of
the bill to his staff.
8:08:16 AM
BEN MULLIGAN, Staff to Representative Bill Stoltze, Alaska State
Legislature, testifying on behalf of Representative Stoltze, co-
sponsor of HB 48, addressed the questions that had arisen during
the last hearing on the bill. First, regarding whether the
state would have any jurisdiction over a Juneau bond, for
example, he said, "The city is free to apply for a bond to pay
for a capitol building." Second, he provided definitions for
"capitol" - the building and "capital" - the city serving as the
seat of government. Third, regarding the meaning of "new," he
said there had been questions as to whether that would include
additions and renovations. He said that may be a matter for the
committee to adopt an amendment to defined the term.
8:09:40 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked who has the authority to negotiate terms for
lease agreements for buildings in the state, including a
capitol.
8:10:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE indicated that it would depend on the
cost of the building. He noted that some leases in the past
have been controversial.
8:10:50 AM
MR. MULLIGAN said he would look into an answer regarding at what
amount the legislature would become involved.
8:11:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE, in response to questions from
Representative Gardner, said he believes the bill, as currently
written, would require that any kind of restructuring of the
current use of the existing capitol that would involve partial
use of another existing building would have to go before the
voters, which is why his staff had suggested the committee may
want to amend the bill.
8:12:39 AM
CHAIR SEATON reopened public testimony.
8:12:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE clarified that [HB 48] is not about
moving the capital, but is the public's say about the cost of
building a capitol.
8:13:59 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked if Representative Stoltze has any suggestions
for amendment language.
8:14:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE responded that he respects the committee
process in perfecting a bill. He said, "This is certainly my
best stab at protecting the public's voice."
8:15:30 AM
CHAIR SEATON said he thinks the committee would agree that it
doesn't want to "have something that would constrain the
legislature from improving the capitol building." Furthermore,
he encouraged Representative Stoltze to provide the committee
with any "discrete language."
8:15:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE said, "I want flexibility, not
loopholes."
8:16:03 AM
LEONARD DEAL, testifying on behalf of himself, stated concern
about the way the bill is written. He offered his understanding
that the bill strongly weighs the costs - of either building,
relocating, or improving - "on the Juneau side." He opined that
the bill doesn't take into account what the majority of people
in Alaska really want.
MR. DEAL directed attention to [the bill title], which read as
follows:
"An Act relating to a determination of costs
attributable to relocating the legislature or the
state capital or of constructing a new capitol
building in the present capital city, and to a
determination of all costs of retaining the existing
capitol building and keeping the state capital and
legislature in the present capital city; relating to
voter approval of certain bondable costs; and
providing for an effective date."
MR. DEAL said his interpretation of "determination of all costs
of retaining the existing capitol building" is that it would
include the costs of remodeling. He noted that a capitol is
anywhere the legislature meets.
8:18:46 AM
MR. DEAL made some comments related to a capital move.
8:20:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE proffered that Mr. Deal is partially
speaking to another bill sponsored by Representative Norman
Rokeberg regarding "a competitive process" of capital location.
8:20:04 AM
CHAIR SEATON told Mr. Deal that that bill should be heard by the
committee in about a week, at which point, Mr. Deal would be
welcome to come back and testify on that issue.
8:20:47 AM
WIN GRUENING, Chair, Alaska Committee, noted that his committee
is an all-volunteer group dedicated to improving and enhancing
Alaska's capital city. He emphasized that the committee's
current mission is to be proactive, whereas many years ago, it
was more of a reactive mission - waiting for the next capital
move effort to surface. He stated that the citizens of Alaska
have repeatedly voted down efforts to move the capital. Mr.
Gruening offered a brief history of results of the committee's
proactivity. He said the impact of losing the capital would be
devastating to Juneau. He expressed the need to advocate for
the best and most technologically advanced facilities.
8:24:44 AM
MR. GRUENING said whether it's the proposed legislation or some
other proposal, some form of legislative approval will be
required and the cost would be known in advance. He stated,
"There is no need to amend the Frank Initiative to accomplish
this." He stated his belief that the legislature is required to
approve all leases in excess of $1 million. He predicted that,
unfortunately, HB 48 may hinder genuine efforts to improve
Alaska's capital city.
8:26:24 AM
MR. GRUENING, in response to a request from Chair Seaton to
conclude his testimony in the interest of time, stated that the
FRANK Initiative was never designed to be "used in this way";
rather, it's intent was to prevent the wholesale move of a
capital city without the electorate knowing the cost in advance.
He reminded the committee members that the legislature can, in
fact, evaluate and consider future proposals that will improve
the facilities, without unnecessary, time-consuming, and
expensive statewide votes.
8:27:18 AM
CHAIR SEATON closed public testimony.
8:27:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER said, when she was campaigning, one of
the themes brought to her attention was that people didn't want
to go to a vote over every little thing that is controversial.
She said constituents come to their legislators with feedback
and depend on them to address problems. Representative Gardner
stated that she doesn't think HB 48 is necessary. She indicated
that her constituents do not support a new capitol building.
8:30:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO suggested that changing a room is
renovation, while moving a building is beyond renovation. He
illustrated several examples ranging between those two actions.
Representative Gatto said the key question is: "Does the Frank
Initiative indicate that whenever we're going to spend a
significant amount of money involving the only capital that the
people of the state have, shouldn't they be entitled to a
voice?" He said he thinks the answer to that question is yes.
8:31:27 AM
REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS revealed that his constituents, although
they would enjoy having better access to their capital,
specifically told him, "Don't build a new one and don't spend
the money to move the one that we have." He said he likes his
office and the capitol building just as it is. He suggested
that there are more important concerns before the legislature,
such as the state's finances and the burden of the Public
Employees' Retirement System (PERS) and the Teachers' Retirement
System (TRS).
8:32:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE said he and co-sponsor Representative
Carl Gatto will "run the language proposals by members so we can
come before a committee at your convenience." He stated that
his primary goal is to "maintain the spirit of the Frank
Initiative." He indicated that he thinks most constituents want
to have a voice regarding the capitol building. He added, "The
way this Frank Initiative is marketed, I think folks think they
have the right to vote."
8:33:53 AM
CHAIR SEATON, regarding the concerns expressed relating to
limiting the scope of the bill so that it does not include
renovation or additions to the existing capitol building, asked
Representative Stoltze to provide the committee with language
addressing that concern.
8:34:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG reminded the committee that Avrum Gross
had testified at a previous hearing on HB 48 [on 2/22/05], at
which time he had promised to provide the committee with some
written legal comments. He said he would like to get those
comments as soon as possible.
8:35:04 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked all committee members to get those types of
comments to his office as soon as possible.
8:35:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG stated that [HB 48] "is a bill to
require a vote." He noted that there is a retroactivity clause,
and he questioned how a bill requiring a vote could be
retroactive.
8:36:04 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that HB 48 was heard and held.
HB 103-CLAIMS AGAINST THE STATE
8:36:22 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the next order of business was HOUSE
BILL NO. 103, "An Act requiring an actionable claim against the
state to be tried without a jury."
8:36:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE KELLY, Alaska State Legislature, as sponsor
of HB 103, noted that the proposed legislation would change a
state law back to its original form, wherein cases against the
state were tried by a judge, rather than a jury. He said the
state has a right to determine how it will be sued. He noted
that in [1975], at the request of the University of Alaska, the
original law was changed to provide for jury trials when the
state was sued. He opined that the use of a judge for trials
against the state would be more appropriate, and he said the
chief council of the university has been contacted and has no
objection to [HB 103].
8:38:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLY said some of the problems that have arisen
from the current law are that the state is seen as a "deep
pocket" and, thus, suits against the state may be taken more
casually than suits between parties other than the state. He
said HB 103 would not limit access to the judicial system or
limit the right to appeal. He stated his belief that HB 103
would provide adequate protections to those who would be
aggrieved against the state. Furthermore, he said he believes
the proposed legislation would reduce costs and increase
efficiency of the state's court system, while protecting against
awards by juries that seem "not to pass the laugh test."
8:39:43 AM
HEATH HILYARD, Staff to Representative Mike Kelly, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Kelly, sponsor,
directed attention to a document included in the committee
packet labeled, "Immunity." He noted that the first page of the
document addresses sovereign immunity, while the rest of the
document includes other types of immunities not pertaining to
the bill.
8:41:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLY, in response to a question from
Representative Gruenberg, said he thinks that sometimes judges
award greater liability and more significant recovery, while
other times juries do so.
8:42:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG stated his understanding that in many
cases people prefer to go to a judge rather than a jury, because
juries, in many cases, tend to render smaller verdicts than
judges.
8:43:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLY said he thinks the heart of HB 103 is the
issue of sovereign immunity.
8:44:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG remarked that it's tougher to get a
verdict in a jury trial than in a judge trial. He said there
are lots of strategic issues regarding when to go to a judge
versus a jury. He noted that some of those issues are mentioned
on the second page of the state's fiscal note [included in the
committee packet].
8:45:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLY responded that he has been visited by trial
lawyers in the state, and they have remained neutral. He
reiterated that the heart of HB 103 is to protect the state in
jurisdictions where "this may have been a problem." He
mentioned aviation and search and rescue. He noted that there
is a handout [included in the committee packet] showing samples
of jury awards in four different cases.
8:47:10 AM
ROGER GAY, testifying on behalf of himself, told the committee
that he is from Big Lake, Alaska. He said, "If you let the
state decide in favor of the state, you will forfeit the
presumption of fairness." He stated his belief that if "the
Miller Reach fire" had been tried by a judge, the state would
not have prevailed. He said, "The jury did not seem to be able
to separate their feelings of support for the fire fighters from
the obvious incompetence of the state's handling of the fires."
He posited that if the committee is trying to "tilt the scales
of justice in favor of the state," it might be better off
letting the jury make the decisions. Mr. Gay concluded that HB
103 would not benefit the state.
8:48:49 AM
DOUG WOOLIVER, Administrative Attorney, Administrative Staff,
Office of the Administrative Director, Alaska Court System, told
the committee that he worked together with Gail Voigtlander from
the Department of Law (DOL) to figure out that there are an
estimated four jury trials a year where the state is a
defendant, and each of those trials costs an average of $4,000.
He noted that that money would be saved if the trial had been in
front of a judge. Mr. Wooliver emphasized that the court has a
decades-old tradition of not supporting or opposing legislation
and does not support or oppose HB 103. He said he merely wanted
to explain the fiscal note.
8:50:49 AM
MR. WOLVER, in response to a question from Representative Gatto,
explained that the cost of a jury trial is explained in part by
the fact that jury trials typically take longer than court-tried
trials. He said the big savings is not getting rid of time, but
getting rid of the jury fees.
8:53:48 AM
CHAIR SEATON, in response to Representative Gruenberg, asked
that questions regarding the detailed interactions of the court
be taken up in the House Judiciary Standing Committee.
8:54:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO suggested that [HB 103] would put a single
person in the position of being "judge, juror, and executioner."
8:55:06 AM
MR. WOOLIVER said he supposes it would, but judge-tried trials
are a regular part of the system. He said, "The judge is the
fact finder in those cases, as opposed to a jury."
8:55:34 AM
MR. WOOLIVER, in response to a request from Chair Seaton to
clarify what an actionable claim against the state would be,
said [HB 103] would cover civil claims where the state is the
defendant.
8:55:52 AM
CHAIR SEATON closed public testimony.
8:56:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he was practicing law when the law
was changed in [1975], and some cases were better tried by
judges, while others were better before juries. He recommended
allowing the decision to be made on a case-by-case basis.
8:58:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER recommended being careful in reading the
previously mentioned sample jury awards, because the specifics
of the case are not provided.
8:59:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLY said the point made by Representative
Gruenberg about the sovereign maintaining the option of choosing
is not unusual in the U.S. He said, "It goes all the way from
very restrictive in the U.S. to actually quite permissive." He
reiterated that HB 103 would not take away the option for
appeal.
9:00:56 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said the legislature can decide which
types of cases a person can sue the state over and whether or
not there will be a jury. He said the national historical trend
has been to allow states to be sued by jury trials. He asked if
there are any other states that Representative Kelly is aware of
that have allowed a jury trial and then taken away that jury
trial after some time.
9:02:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLY said he doesn't know.
9:02:45 AM
MR. HILYARD said Article 2, Section 21, in the Alaska State
Constitution notes that a few state constitutions still prohibit
all suits against the state. He offered some history regarding
the law in question.
9:04:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG indicated that the case involving the
university [back in 1975] highlights his previous point that
defendants often want juries.
9:04:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLY urged the committee to pass HB 103 out of
committee.
9:05:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ELKINS moved to report HB 103 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes. There being no objection, HB 103 was reported out of the
House State Affairs Standing Committee.
HB 127-PFD:PEACE CORPS/DIPLOMAT/SANCTIONS
9:05:43 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the last order of business was HOUSE
BILL NO. 127, "An Act relating to service in the peace corps and
to service as a diplomat in the United States Foreign Service as
allowable absences from the state for purposes of eligibility
for permanent fund dividends and to the period for filing an
application for a permanent fund dividend; authorizing the
Department of Revenue to issue administrative orders imposing
sanctions for certain misrepresentations or other actions
concerning eligibility for a permanent fund dividend and
providing for administrative appeal of those orders; and
providing for an effective date."
9:05:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LESIL McGUIRE, Alaska State Legislature, as
sponsor of HB 127, stated that the proposed legislation would
reinstate allowable absences for Peace Corps volunteers, so that
they could receive the Alaska permanent fund dividend (PFD).
She said the allowable absence was eliminated for Peace Corps
volunteers in [1998]. Two years later, a constituent who had
been serving in the Peace Corps in Nigeria, spoke to
Representative McGuire about losing the PFD. Representative
McGuire spoke of the service that Peace Corps volunteers
perform, both to the Third World countries to which they are
signed and to the U.S. She said the woman who spoke with her
was a lifelong Alaskan who did not feel supported by her state.
9:08:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE McGUIRE noted that the other half of bill would
allow the Department of Revenue to administer penalties, which
she predicted would increase the number of fines that the
department is able to impose on those folks who have clearly
engaged in fraudulence. She said the penalties are all existing
legal terms; the intent is to give the department the power to
make the individual forfeit the PFD and to subject a fine on
that individual.
9:10:10 AM
REPRESENTATIVE McGUIRE explained that the reason for dropping
the fine from $5,000 to $3,000 is that "we know that we can
impose, administratively, a civil fine of $3,000, but there's
case law that indicates that we cannot for $5,000." She offered
further details. She noted that there currently are 42
[Alaskan] Peace Corps volunteers, and if the department is
allowed to impose sanctions for fraudulent PFD claims, that will
more than pay for those.
9:11:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE McGUIRE said some people don't like the dividend
itself, for various reasons, and she said there is a time and
place for that discussion. She noted that another concern some
people have expressed is in regard to creating more and more
exemptions to the PFD program, instead of keeping the dividend
for the "true Alaskans." Representative McGuire said she agrees
that the PFD should be given to true Alaskans and supports
ratcheting up the penalties for fraud. She indicated that the
Peace Corps is a recognized program that Alaskans have committed
to, not just some trip they take without an end date.
9:13:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE McGUIRE stated that there has been concern about
the 10,000-plus military personnel and their families who are
receiving [the PFD] - many of them who have not set foot in
Alaska for over a decade. She indicated that she is not trying
to take away from the service that the fine men and women give
in the military. She emphasized that those who join the Peace
Corps are also answering a call to serve, but on a different
level. Representative McGuire noted that President George W.
Bush, in a recent State of the Union address, made a call to
Americans to come back to the Peace Corps. She reported that
roughly 85 percent of the Peace Corps volunteers who have served
[from] Alaska have returned home, and they have a lot to offer
the state when they return. Many of them teach.
9:15:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER said she likes HB 127, particularly as it
pertains to the Peace Corps. She offered her understanding that
Peace Corps volunteers not only share information about "us"
with people around the world, but they bring back "a greater
understanding," and they do so at great sacrifice to themselves.
She stated her problem with the bill is in regard to the
inclusion of diplomats to the U.S. Foreign Service. She said
that, unlike the Peace Corps, those in the U.S. Foreign Service
have made a career choice, and they are paid much better and
receive benefits. Representative Gardner, in response to a
question from Chair Seaton, said she would like to know if the
sponsor would accept a conceptual amendment to remove the
language including the U.S. Foreign Service.
9:17:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE McGUIRE said Senator Fred Dyson had requested
that the U.S. Foreign Service be included. She offered her
understanding that there are currently 36 [Alaskans] in the U.S.
Foreign Service. She said that part of the bill is "less dear"
to her; however, it is worthy of discussion. She noted that the
Peace Corps volunteers were included in the exemptions from
1983-1998, whereas the diplomats have never been included.
9:18:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that "diplomat" may be a term of
art. He said a secretary, delivery person, or janitor who works
in the U.S. Foreign Service may not be included, but they should
be. He suggested that those who work in the United Nations, or
relief organizations, or Doctors Without Boarders are often in
harms way and could be considered.
9:20:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG directed attention to page 4, lines 13-
19, regarding regulations and application. He stated he is
quite sure that the Department of Revenue already has general
regulatory authority, and he said he is wondering why that
section of the bill is necessary.
9:21:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE McGUIRE said she wants to be careful and specific
regarding regulations. She indicated that [in this case] it is
better to give specific authority to the legislature to craft
regulations. Representative McGuire continued as follows:
I think we've entered into a very interesting and
potentially dangerous time in Alaska, over the last
decade, with respect to regulations: The folks that
are writing them are not elected; they don't ever come
back before the voters; there is virtually no recourse
for the folks who are impacted by them; the process is
convoluted, at best; and it is my personal opinion
that, as law makers, the more specific we can be about
the kind of regulations and the regulatory authority
that we want, the better off we are.
9:22:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG responded, "This doesn't require them,
it gives them discretion." He noted that the language read that
the "Department of Revenue may immediately adopt regulations
necessary"; therefore it is not necessary to change the
effective date.
9:23:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE McGUIRE revealed that "this" was a little bit
controversial in the beginning, because there was concern that
"all of a sudden, many Alaskans out there who may be ...
misrepresenting themselves would suddenly be subject to
penalties they hadn't been [subject to previously]." She added,
"So, we were delicate in the area."
9:24:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS said President George W. Bush talks about
"the armies of compassion," and he said he thinks Representative
McGuire is "right on the mark here." He stated his support of
[HB 127].
9:24:55 AM
CHAIR SEATON said an analysis was done last year on all the
categories of exemptions, and it was found that in the largest
categories, 83 percent of the people never returned to Alaska.
He noted that [last year's] House State Affairs Standing
Committee had discussed holding the PFD of qualified people who
leave Alaska for a period of time, which would mean that those
people would have to come back and reestablish their physical
presence in Alaska, at which time they would receive the
withheld dividends. He indicated that it would help ensure that
the highly motivated and trained people would have additional
motivation to return to Alaska.
9:27:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE McGUIRE indicated that she would be more than
happy to cosponsor legislation regarding that idea; however, she
warned that the legislature needs to be careful about putting
[someone's dividend money] into a trust without his/her consent.
She noted that the average number of Peace Corps volunteers has
not gone up over the years; it's about 35. She said the idea
that someone would volunteer for the Peace Corp and have the
incentive be a $900 check doesn't seem likely. Representative
McGuire said the Peace Corps volunteer is committed to two
years, whereas those in the military are there for varying
amounts of time, which brings up different concerns. She stated
her willingness to work with the committee to help ensure the
PFD goes to those whose intent is to return to Alaska.
9:31:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE McGUIRE, in response to a question from
Representative Gatto, said that a spouse or independent of a
Peace Corps volunteer who went with the volunteer would not
qualify for the PFD. She said there are only two exemptions to
that, which are for those in the U.S. Congress or Senate, and
for those in the military.
9:32:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE McGUIRE, in response to a question from
Representative Gatto regarding whether someone volunteering time
in Sri Lanka after the recent Tsunami wouldn't be just as
deserving of a PFD, noted that the person in Sri Lanka can
decide to go home whenever he/she wants, whereas the Peace Corps
volunteer has committed to two years.
9:35:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE McGUIRE, in response to questions from
Representative Gatto relating to diplomats, confirmed that the
term diplomat is defined, and she stated that dependents and
spouses of those in the U.S. Foreign Service would not be
included in the exemption.
9:36:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE McGUIRE, in response to questions from Chair
Seaton, said she remembered discussion from the previous year
regarding an exemption for those out of the state for medical
reasons, but she said she can't recall whether the dependents of
the person were included.
9:37:10 AM
JUSTIN BARBALACE, testifying on behalf of himself in support of
HB 127, told the committee that he is a Peace Corps volunteer
whose two-year commitment will begin in June of this year. He
said HB 127 would make it possible for him to pay his student
loans. He offered a brief history of the Peace Corps, and he
said the state should take the responsibility to support Peace
Corps volunteers from Alaska.
9:41:15 AM
MR. BARBALACE, in response to a question from Representative
Gardner, said Peace Corps volunteers' pay is based on the
average that a person in the country in which they are serving
makes.
9:41:39 AM
CAROLYN GRAY, testifying on behalf of the Northern Alaska Peace
Corps Friends, said she is a returned Peace Corps volunteer who
served in Panama and, after attending graduate school at
Stanford University, came back to Alaska to teach social studies
and Spanish for 26 years. She said she volunteers to assist the
Peace Corps in it recruiting and educational efforts. Ms. Gray
said recruiting has been a difficult process in Alaska since
1998. She said the group thanks Representative McGuire for
introducing HB 127, because she said she thinks it would help
increase the number of people who apply for the Peace Corps.
MS. GRAY noted, "Alaskan Peace Corps volunteers and diplomats
are part of our foreign policy." She said she thinks the Peace
Corps brings expertise back to Alaska. She said that poverty
problems are solved overseas, and if those problems are not
solved, they lead to general global unrest. Volunteers who
return to the state have knowledge of an additional language, as
well as other cultures, which can help in working with the many
types of groups living in Alaska.
MS. GRAY reported that the University of Alaska, for the first
time, has a Masters International program, in conjunction with
the Peace Corps. It was begun in the College of Rural
Development and the Natural Resources Management program. To be
part of the program, a person must be accepted into the Peace
Corps and by the University of Alaska, Fairbanks. The applicant
has to have a major that applies to forestry, rural development,
Alaska Native studies, business administration, natural
resources management, political science, economics, northern
studies, or a related field. She offered further details.
MS. GRAY said Peace Corps service was included as an allowable
absence until 1998. She said [the terrorist attacks of
September 11, 2001] brought home to Americans that "these
efforts are needed as part of their efforts in foreign policy,
which will lead to improvement in national defense, as well."
She indicated her support of HB 127.
9:45:44 AM
MS. GRAY, in response to questions from Chair Seaton, said those
in the university's program are still students under the
program; however, she doesn't think they are covered under the
student exemption.
9:46:20 AM
CHAIR SEATON suggested Ms. Gray check on that, because full-time
graduate students would qualify for an allowable absence. He
asked if Ms. Gray was testifying on the second part of bill, as
well, regarding those in the U.S. Foreign Service.
9:47:17 AM
MS. GRAY replied that she would personally be in favor of that,
"because it is equally important in terms of national defense."
9:48:16 AM
CHAIR SEATON closed public testimony.
9:48:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER [moved to adopt] Conceptual Amendment 1,
which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
Page 1, Lines 1&2;
Delete; "and to service as a diplomat in the United
States Foreign Service"
Page 3, Line 2
Delete "(15) serving as a diplomat in the United
States Foreign Service"
Instructions to Legislative Legal;
Make corresponding amendments and renumber accordingly
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER said she had also handed out a sheet
entitled, "Benefits of foreign service officers". She said it
"comes to the core of why I think the Foreign Service should be
handled differently than the Peace Corp." She reiterated that
people in the Peace Corp make a clear, long-term, defined
sacrifice, whereas those in the Foreign Service have made a
career choice. She offered further details. Representative
Gardner said she would not support allowing dividends for
Foreign Service workers.
9:50:12 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked if there was any objection to [Conceptual
Amendment 1]. There being none, Conceptual Amendment 1 was
adopted.
[HB 127 was heard and held.]
9:50:43 AM
CHAIR SEATON recessed to a call of the chair at 9:51:30 AM.
[The meeting was reconvened on Saturday, March 5, at 9:38 a.m.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|