02/09/2012 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB311 | |
| HB190 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 89 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HJR 33 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 190 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 311 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
February 9, 2012
8:11 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bob Lynn, Chair
Representative Wes Keller, Vice Chair
Representative Paul Seaton
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Pete Petersen
Representative Kyle Johansen
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Max Gruenberg
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 311
"An Act relating to certain information filed with the Alaska
Public Offices Commission; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 311(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 190
"An Act relating to the allowable absence for active duty
service members of the armed forces for purposes of permanent
fund dividend eligibility."
- HEARD & HELD
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 89(JUD)
"An Act clarifying that a legislator or legislative employee is
allowed to accept certain compassionate gifts; allowing
legislators and legislative employees who are representing
persons in an administrative hearing to contact hearing officers
and attempt to influence the outcome of the hearing if they are
professionals licensed in the state, and allowing legislators
and legislative employees who are not professionals licensed in
the state to contact hearing officers for the purpose of
influencing the outcome of the hearing in certain instances;
requiring the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics to maintain
a refrain from disclosure under the Legislative Ethics Act;
relating to the applicability of certain provisions of the
Legislative Ethics Act to certain legislative employees,
volunteers, and interns; establishing a seat for an alternate
public member on the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics;
clarifying the requirements related to participation by
alternate public members and alternate legislative members in
the proceedings of the committee; amending the definition of
'legislative employee' in the Legislative Ethics Act; and
repealing a procedure for appointment of alternate legislative
members."
- BILL HEARING RESCHEDULED TO 02/16/12
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 33
Urging the United States Congress and the President of the
United States to work to amend the Constitution of the United
States to prohibit corporations, unions, and individuals from
making unlimited independent expenditures supporting or opposing
candidates for public office.
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 311
SHORT TITLE: REPORTS TO APOC
SPONSOR(s): RULES
02/01/12 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/01/12 (H) STA
02/07/12 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/07/12 (H) Moved CSHB 311(STA) Out of Committee
02/07/12 (H) MINUTE(STA)
02/09/12 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 190
SHORT TITLE: PFD ALLOWABLE ABSENCE
SPONSOR(s): FEIGE
03/11/11 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/11/11 (H) STA, FIN
03/31/11 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/31/11 (H) Heard & Held
03/31/11 (H) MINUTE(STA)
04/12/11 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
04/12/11 (H) Heard & Held
04/12/11 (H) MINUTE(STA)
01/20/12 (H) SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE INTRODUCED
01/20/12 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/20/12 (H) STA, FIN
02/07/12 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/07/12 (H) Heard & Held
02/07/12 (H) MINUTE(STA)
02/09/12 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: On behalf of the House Rules Standing
Committee, sponsor, answered questions during the hearing on HB
311.
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAWKER
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Explained the changes made in the proposed
committee substitute (CS) for HB 311, Version 27-LS1233\D,
Bullard, 2/8/12, on behalf of the House Rules Standing
Committee, sponsor.
PAUL DAUPHINAIS, Director
Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing on HB 311.
JOAN MIZE, Acting Project Coordinator
Juneau Office
Alaska Public Offices Commission
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information during the hearing on
HB 311.
MICHAEL PASCHALL, Staff
Representative Eric Feige
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 190 on behalf of
Representative Feige, sponsor.
JOSEPHINE DAVIES
Bethel, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of herself to recommend
consideration of further allowable absences related to the PFD
during the hearing on HB 190.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:11:58 AM
CHAIR BOB LYNN called the House State Affairs Standing Committee
meeting to order at 8:11 a.m. Representatives Keller, Seaton,
Johansen, Petersen, and Lynn were present at the call to order.
Representative P. Wilson arrived as the meeting was in progress.
HB 311-REPORTS TO APOC
8:12:19 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the first order of business was HOUSE
BILL NO. 311, "An Act relating to certain information filed with
the Alaska Public Offices Commission; and providing for an
effective date."
8:12:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to rescind the House State Affairs
Standing Committee's action in reporting CSHB 311(STA) out of
the House State Affairs Standing Committee on 2/7/12.
8:13:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN objected for the purpose of discussion.
8:13:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA, on behalf of the House Rules Standing
Committee, sponsor, explained the reason behind the motion to
rescind. She indicated that while Representative Hawker's focus
was on electronic filing, she had encouraged the allowance of
paper filing. She further indicated that after hearing feedback
from the Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC) and legislators
who still file by paper, she has realized that the movement is
toward electronic filing and CSHB 311(STA) did not support that
movement. Representative Kerttula noted that there is a version
of the proposed legislation she hopes will be adopted, that
would still allow APOC to grant exceptions to those who are not
able to file electronically, and would allow a one-year grace
period, through a campaign cycle, to "bring everybody onto the
electronic filing."
8:15:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN removed his objection. There being no
further objection, HB 311, as amended, was before the committee.
8:15:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 311, Version 27-LS1233\D, Bullard,
2/8/12, as a work draft. There being no objection, Version D
was before the committee.
8:17:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAWKER, Alaska State Legislature, explained
the changes made in Version D, on behalf of the House Rules
Standing Committee, sponsor. He said under Version D,
electronic filing would be mandatory with two exceptions: the
exception already under statute wherein APOC may make exemptions
from electronic filing when it determines it is necessary to do
so; and a transition provision that would allow paper filing for
one more year, through the end of the current election cycle.
8:19:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER said Section 1 of Version D is consistent
with Section 1 of the original bill, in that it would ensure
that when imposing electronic filing, whatever form imposed by
APOC would be accessible on the APOC web site. It would also
ensure that a candidate is allowed to file electronically in a
manner that involves submitting data in the form of an
electronic spreadsheet or data file in a format prescribed by
APOC. He said the intent is to encourage APOC to create an
electronic filing mechanism that is easy for candidates to use
and tracks their use; however, if for any reason a candidate has
difficulty accessing the system through the web site, he/she
would be allowed to submit data via an electronic spreadsheet
approved by APOC, and APOC would then be able to take that data
and upload it into the commission's system.
8:21:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER, in response to Representative Johansen,
said the provision [in Section 1, paragraph (2)], allowing
filing in the form of an electronic spreadsheet, is a permanent
provision. In response to a follow-up question, he confirmed
that this provision would be available to all who file, whether
or not they apply for an exemption.
8:22:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER said AS 15.13.110 outlines what APOC must
disclose to the public, and Section 2 of Version D clarifies
that APOC would satisfy its requirement to publish information
filed by paper by posting a copy of that information via a
scanned image within two days after receiving it. He said the
two-day period is consistent with the reporting mandate in AS
15.13.040.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER said under current statute, the commission
must produce a summary of all filings within 30 days following
the election. He relayed that language in Section 2 of Version
D would change that to within 30 days of the filing of all
electronic reports. He said because of the speed of electronic
reporting, it should be available instantly. He said Version D
would maintain the current mandate that the commission must make
available, within 30 days of the election, summaries for reports
filed by paper.
8:30:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER directed attention to Section 3, which
read as follows:
*Sec.3.AS 15.13.110 is amended by adding a new
subsection to read:
(i) During a campaign period, the commission
may not change the manner or format in which reports
required of a candidate under this chapter must be
filed. In this subsection, "campaign period" means
the period beginning on the date that a candidate
files a declaration of candidacy under AS 15.25.030 or
a letter of intent under AS 15.25.105 and ending on
the date that a report must be filed under AS
15.13.110(a)(4).
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER said he supplied the committee with a
suggested amendment, [subsequently titled Amendment 1], which
would change the definition of "campaign period" on the second
sentence of subsection (i), in Section 3. He said the amendment
would simplify the bill by adding generic language that would
cover all campaign periods, rather than trying to inventory them
all; it would make the campaign period begin on the date each
candidate becomes eligible to receive campaign contributions and
end on the date the final report must be filed.
8:36:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER explained that even if two campaign
periods overlap for a particular candidate, he/she still cannot
raise money until 18 months before the General Election;
therefore, there would always be a window during which APOC
would be allowed to make changes.
8:39:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER stated that Section 4 would create a one-
year window, which would allow candidates to file by paper until
February 16, 2013. He said, "After that, we revert completely
to the electronic filing mandate that's actually been on the
books since 2007, but has not been enforced." Representative
Hawker said Section 5 is a protection clause, under which any
candidate who, during the current campaign cycle, files
electronically consistent with methods under Section 1 of the
proposed legislation or by a paper format approved by the
commission, will not be subject to a penalty for failure to
file.
8:42:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER stated a conflict of interest. He
explained that on 2/1/12, he filed statutorily required
disclosures via a spreadsheet format that had been acceptable up
to 12/29/11. He said he does not have the necessary computer
equipment in Juneau to legally avail himself of the electronic
system being imposed by APOC. He offered his understanding that
although he has requested an exemption from APOC, it is still
possible that he could be fined, and the proposed legislation
would protect him from being fined.
8:43:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER said Section 6 would make Sections 1-4
retroactive to 12/1/11.
8:44:34 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 8:44 a.m. to 8:46 a.m.
8:46:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER referred again to the suggested amendment.
8:47:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt Amendment 1, which read as
follows [original punctuation provided, with some handwritten
changes]:
Page 2, line 15, following "subsection":
DELETE "'campaign period' means the period
beginning on the date that a candidate files a
declaration of candidacy under AS 15.25.030 or letter
of intent under AS 15.25.105 and ending on the date
that a report must be filed under AS 15.13.110(a)(4)."
INSERT "'campaign period' means the period
beginning on the date that a candidate become eligible
to receive campaign contributions under this chapter
and ending on the date that a final report for that
same campaign must be filed."
8:48:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON objected and then withdrew her
objection.
CHAIR LYNN announced that there being no further objection,
Amendment 1 was adopted.
8:48:53 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER reiterated the effect of Amendment 1.
8:49:46 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA echoed the previous statements made by
Representative Hawker regarding the effects of HB 311.
8:50:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER, in response to a series of questions from
Chair Lynn, offered clarification of what would and would not be
changed under HB 311, Version D. In response to Representative
Seaton, confirmed that the bill addresses only candidate
filings; it does not address groups or non-group entities.
8:51:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN noted that the next reporting period for
legislators takes place in six months, and he asked if the bill
sponsor had considered adopting APOC's new system in conjunction
with the report that takes place 30 days prior to the August
primary. He ventured that in the next six months, he could
probably find enough time to learn the new system.
8:53:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA said she thinks the full cycle is less
confusing and gives everyone more time to adjust to the new
system.
8:54:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER added that there is nothing in HB 311 that
would prohibit a candidate from adopting the electronic filing
mechanism more quickly. He then emphasized that HB 311 is
nonpartisan legislation.
8:56:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN stated his belief in transparency of
politics. He asked if there had been any discussion with APOC
about the idea of changing to electronic filing in six-month's
time.
8:57:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA said no.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN questioned whether APOC needs time to
figure out an electronic system that it already has in place.
RESENTATIVE KERTTULA said she thinks the extra time would
benefit everyone involved. She said she thinks HB 311 is a good
compromise.
8:59:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN posited that although used as an example
of someone who still files by paper, Representative Gruenberg
and his staff have had training in electronic filing.
9:00:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said many times there are unintended
consequences in legislation. She said it is difficult for
legislators to "change gears" mid-session. She said the focus
during session should be on doing the right thing, and she
opined that HB 311 would relieve everyone's burden.
9:01:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER stated that at its last hearing of HB 311,
the committee had accepted a motion to attach a zero fiscal note
to the proposed legislation. He stated his assumption that the
zero fiscal note would apply, as well, to Version D.
9:02:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN said he would like confirmation for the
record that the intent of Version D is not to create any
loopholes by which a legislator could not file, but that
conversely, HB 311 would facilitate transitioning to the new
electronic system, which would make it easier for APOC to get
information out to the public in a much more timely manner.
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA answered that is correct.
9:03:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER reiterated that HB 311 is nonpartisan
legislation.
9:03:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER, in response to Representative Seaton and
Chair Lynn, confirmed that HB 311 would apply to both incumbents
and non-incumbent candidates.
9:04:26 AM
PAUL DAUPHINAIS, Director, Alaska Public Offices Commission
(APOC), first clarified that at the last hearing of HB 311, he
had testified on behalf of his position as executive director
and his staff, but not on behalf of the commission. He said the
commission has not had the time to read and deliberate upon the
changes made in Version D. He said the continued requirement to
scan documents that are filed on paper and get them up on APOC's
web site will hinder transparency to the public. He explained
that looking at scanned documents is like looking at a
photograph. He said, "It's difficult to compare; you are
requiring people to print out or make notes."
MR. DAUPHINAIS stated, "APOC did not change the requirements to
file electronically; in this case we changed the form that the
filing goes in on." He said the new system is currently ready
for use, and those who file using that system have more control
over their data, because the system will point out any errors
that are made. He said APOC does not have the time to do that
check for reports filed by paper.
CHAIR LYNN indicated that the problem is not the benefits of
electronic filing, but the timing of meeting the requirements of
the new system.
MR. DAUPHINAIS relayed that there has been considerable training
offered for the new electronic filing program, and he reported
that a fair number of people have already filed using the
program via "myAlaska." He said there are two computers
available for use in APOC's Juneau office, and he specified that
it is lawful for legislators to use those computers because they
belong to the public, not to the State of Alaska.
9:08:02 AM
MR. DAUPHINAIS confirmed Representative Hawker's previous
response to Representative Seaton that the bill applies only to
candidates. He offered his understanding that HB 311 would not
change the exemption for candidates of municipalities with
populations under 15,000.
CHAIR LYNN offered his understanding that Representative
Kerttula nodded her head in the affirmative.
9:08:50 AM
MR. DAUPHINAIS, in response to Representative Johansen,
confirmed that the year-end report is due 2/15/12 and the next
report is due 30 days prior to the primary election. In
response to follow-up questions, he indicated that APOC would be
able to adapt to Representative Johansen's previously stated
idea to make the shift to required electronic reporting in time
for the 30-day reporting deadline. He said APOC is ready to
take reports electronically and has training in Juneau scheduled
in February. He clarified his previous remark that APOC has not
had time to review Version D. He explained the reason he is
confident that the State of Alaska-owned computers at APOC can
be used by legislators is because they were purchased with the
intent that they be available for public use.
9:13:03 AM
JOAN MIZE, Acting Project Coordinator, Juneau Office, Alaska
Public Offices Commission, stated that because APOC is the
entity that requires the reporting, it has to provide the means
by which the reporting is done, including its computers.
9:13:48 AM
MR. DAUPHINAIS, in response to Representative Petersen, said the
Juneau APOC office operates Monday through Friday, from 8 a.m.
to 5 p.m., and, with notice, could arrange weekend hours. In
response to Representative Seaton, he said it is his
understanding that HB 311 applies to any candidates, not just
incumbents. In response to Chair Lynn, he said there are
public-use computers in APOC's Anchorage office, as well, but
not in its Fairbanks office or elsewhere.
9:15:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON offered her understanding that she
cannot do [campaign business] on any piece of equipment bought
with state money. She indicated that she received this
information from "our ethics person."
9:16:46 AM
MR. DAUPHINAIS said this issue is governed by AS 24.60. In
response to Chair Lynn, he emphasized that he does not speak on
behalf of the Legislative Ethics Committee.
9:17:11 AM
MR. DAUPHINAIS, in response to Representative Johansen,
confirmed that under campaign rules, any candidate is allowed to
purchase a computer and printer with campaign money and keep
that equipment once the campaign is over.
9:19:18 AM
CHAIR LYNN, after ascertaining that there was no one else who
wished to testify, closed public testimony.
9:19:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to report CSHB 311, Version 27-
LS1233\D, Bullard, 2/8/12, as amended, out of committee with
individual recommendations and an attached zero fiscal note.
9:19:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN objected. He said he would like the
committee to consider an amendment that would set the
requirement for electronic filing at the first 30-day report.
He noted that the House State Affairs Standing Committee is the
final committee of referral before the proposed legislation is
heard on the House floor. He said he has no problem giving
legislators a break in the electronic filing requirement
deadline, but thinks everyone can be prepared to file
electronically within six months. He reiterated his desire to
support transparency in politics by supporting legislation that
would get the reports out to the people in a more expedient
manner.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN maintained his objection.
CHAIR LYNN said he thinks Representative Johansen makes some
good points; however, he said he thinks it is appropriate to
move HB 311 out of committee to allow the full House to consider
it. He talked about the work the committee does in looking for
unintended consequences.
9:26:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said he agrees with Representative
Johansen's wish for transparency, and said he did not hear
Representative Johansen implying that anyone wants to hide
information.
9:27:57 AM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives P. Wilson, Seaton,
Keller, Petersen, and Lynn voted in favor of the motion to
report CSHB 311, Version 27-LS1233\D, Bullard, 2/8/12, as
amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and
the attached zero fiscal note. Representative Johansen voted
against it. Therefore, CSHB 311(STA) was reported out of the
House State Affairs Standing Committee by a vote of 5-1.
9:28:55 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 9:29 a.m. to 9:32 a.m.
9:32:31 AM
CHAIR LYNN noted that during the at-ease, his staff had
contacted the Ethics Committee Administrator, Joyce Anderson,
who confirmed that it is okay for all candidates to use APOC's
computers.
HB 190-PFD ALLOWABLE ABSENCE
9:33:02 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the final order of business was
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 190, "An Act relating to
allowable absences from the state for purposes of eligibility
for permanent fund dividends; and providing for an effective
date."
9:33:40 AM
MICHAEL PASCHALL, Staff, Representative Eric Feige, Alaska State
Legislature, presented HB 190 on behalf of Representative Feige,
sponsor. He noted that the proposed legislation had been heard
in 2011. He stated that the intent of the original bill was to
address an injustice pertaining to military personnel [who were
denied an allowable absence related to receiving a permanent
fund dividend (PFD)] after [being out of state] for 10 years,
even though members of Congress and their staff continue to be
qualified to receive a PFD beyond 10 years out of the state. He
said numerous legal issues were brought forth, and the bill
sponsor tried changing the 10-year limit to a 20-year limit
through a sponsor substitute. Subsequently, he said, discussion
with the Permanent Fund Division helped to formulate a committee
substitute, which would provide "a more effective way to deal
with the issue of allowable absences across the board."
9:35:26 AM
MR. PASCHALL gave a PowerPoint presentation entitled, "Permanent
Dividend Allowable Absences," as an explanation of how the
current law came to be. He said in 1982, allowable absences
were addressed through the definition of an Alaska resident, and
there were only five criteria. By 1997, he said, the criteria
had increased to nine, and the definition of residency referred
to AS 01.10.055. In 1998, he noted, the legislature made
significant overhauls to statute: the meaning of state resident
referred back to [AS 01.10.055]; allowable absences were
addressed in a separate section; the number of allowable
absences continued to increase; and the authority of the
commissioner [of the Department of Revenue] to adopt other
allowable absences was removed. He said there was also a
provision put in place that addressed those out of the state for
certain periods of time during single year, but not on an
allowable absence. He said the ten-year rule was also put into
place at this time. Mr. Paschall said his research did not
uncover any particular reason for the 10-year rule.
MR. PASCHALL pointed out a few changes made to the allowable
absences since 1998, including ["serving under foreign or
coastal articles of employment aboard an oceangoing vessel of
the United States merchant marine"].
9:39:37 AM
CHAIR LYNN said the spouses of military personnel often follow
the military members overseas. He offered his understanding
that "that" would cover the spouses, the military members, and
their minor children.
MR. PASCHALL confirmed that is correct.
9:40:27 AM
MR. PASCHALL continued with the PowerPoint presentation. He
said HB 190 would bring regulations into statute, which would
reduce subjectivity on the part of hearing officers. He noted
that there is a typographical error in the PowerPoint: [on the
first of ten pages labeled, "Allowable Absence After HB 190"],
"(c)" should read "(e)". He indicated that the only alteration
of the allowable absences was the removal of the 10-year rule.
MR. PASCHALL drew attention to the conclusion of the PowerPoint
presentation, regarding language provided by Legislative Legal
and Research Services to amend AS 43.23.008 by adding
subsections (e) and (f). That language, [in Version R, Section
2, on page 3, line 13, through page 4, line 14], read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
(e) After an individual has been absent from the
state for more than 180 days in each of the five
preceding qualifying years, the department shall
presume that the individual is no longer a state
resident. The individual may rebut this presumption
by providing documentation to the department that
establishes, by clear and convincing evidence, that
(1) the individual was physically present in
the state for at least 30 cumulative days during the
past five years; and
(2) the individual is a state resident as
defined in AS 43.23.095(7).
(f) To determine whether an individual intends to
return and remain in the state indefinitely, the
department shall consider
(1) the length of time the individual was
absent from the state compared to the length of time
the individual was physically present in the state;
(2) the frequency and duration of voluntary
return trips to the state during the past five years;
(3) whether the individual's intent to
return to and remain in the state is conditioned on
future events beyond the individual's control, such as
the financial circumstances of the individual or the
ability of the individual to find employment in the
state;
(4) the ties the individual has established
with the state or another jurisdiction, as
demonstrated by
(A) maintenance of a home;
(B) payment of resident taxes;
(C) registration of a vehicle;
(D) registration to vote and voting
history;
(E) acquisition of a driver's license,
business license, or professional license; and
(F) receipt of benefits under a claim
of residency in the state or another jurisdiction;
(5) the priority that the individual gave
the state on an employment assignment preference list,
including a list used by military personnel;
(6) whether the individual made a career
choice or chose a career path that does not allow the
individual to reside in or return to the state.
MR. PASCHALL pointed out that registering a vehicle in Alaska is
an indicator of someone's intent to live in the state, whereas
registering a vehicle outside of Alaska is not. In response to
Representative Petersen, Mr. Paschall opined that someone with
vehicles licensed in Alaska and another state is indicating
he/she is not likely to return to Alaska. He added, "It's all
the factors together that make the final determination."
9:45:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON questioned the rationale behind allowing
someone who takes voluntary employment outside of Alaska for 15
or 20 years to continuing receiving the PFD as a resident of
Alaska.
9:46:05 AM
MR. PASCHALL said he thinks Representative Seaton's question
ultimately leads to questioning whether there should be an
allowable absence, which is a decision that was made by the
legislature.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON clarified that whereas he can understand
exempting members of Congress who are elected by the public to
serve outside Alaska for extended periods of time, he is
uncomfortable [giving allowable absences to] people who make a
voluntary choice to leave Alaska for an extended period of time,
such as Congressional staff or someone who chooses to spend 30
years in the Peace Corps. He said, "I just want to know the
rationale behind eliminating at least a 10-year limit on that."
9:49:01 AM
MR. PASCHALL reminded Representative Seaton that the impetus for
the bill was the sponsor's becoming aware of an injustice
wherein those Alaskans serving out of state in the military did
not receive the same PFD-related exemption as members of
Congress and their staff received. He said all the exemptions
beyond the 10-year rule that are currently in place are for
individuals who choose career paths that take them out of the
state, including those Alaskans who choose to serve in Congress.
He said the sponsor is looking to establish procedure. He
continued as follows:
By taking this procedure that's been very, very
effective in regulation in reducing the number of
allowable absences over ... the years, by putting it
in statute it will be even more effective, and we were
able to tighten it just a little bit at the same time.
So, the actual number of people receiving PFDs on
allowable absences should probably decrease after the
five years.
9:50:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked for confirmation that the bill
would codify language that is currently in regulation.
MR. PASCHALL answered that that is basically correct, but some
modifications would be made, such as using the word "home"
versus "property".
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN said he shares Representative Seaton's
concerns regarding "the repealer," and said he would like more
discussion.
MR. PASCHALL stated that he agrees with the bill sponsor that HB
190 is a good way to deal with the current injustice among
classes of people, but said the policy discussion is the purview
of the committee.
9:53:25 AM
CHAIR LYNN reopened public testimony.
9:53:45 AM
JOSEPHINE DAVIES, testifying on behalf of herself, asked the
committee to consider further allowable absences. She shared
that in 2010, she was out of state for a couple of weeks past
the allowed 180 days to care for her father, who was
unexpectedly hospitalized and, at the same time, she was
hospitalized for an unexpected surgical procedure. She directed
attention to paragraph (6) of Section 1, on page 2, lines 10-13,
which addresses "providing care for a parent, spouse, sibling,
child, or stepchild", and she suggested that the language be
amended to include Alaska residents who leave the state to take
care of parents who are not from Alaska and to take care of in-
laws. Ms. Davies directed attention to paragraph (17),
subparagraph (C), on page 3, lines 10-12, which would allow:
(C) 45 days in addition to any
absence or cumulative absences claimed under (1)-(16)
of this subsection if the individual is claiming an
absence under (4)-(16) of this subsection.
MS. DAVIES said her daughter is getting married in 2012, and she
expects to go Outside for 30 days to help her daughter, in
addition to time spent helping parents. She said she would like
the committee to consider extending the 45 days to 90 days.
9:58:10 AM
CHAIR LYNN said HB 190 is primarily directed toward the
military, but said Ms. Davies' good points could be considered
in other legislation.
9:58:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN offered his understanding that under HB
190, language related to a 10-year cap would be repealed, and
that repeal would affect everyone, not just the military.
9:58:57 AM
MR. PASCHALL pointed out that according to the Permanent Fund
Division, of the 16,000 people that were given allowable
absences in 2010, the 10-year rule only applied to 187 people.
He stated, "It's not a large group of people receiving the PFD
for a long period of time under the allowable absence; they've
already been weeded out. And the belief is ... [that] having
this in statute will ... weed them out even better."
10:00:37 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that HB 190 was held over.
10:02:23 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 10:02
a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|