Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/14/2000 09:08 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
MINUTES
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
April 14, 2000
9:08 AM
TAPES
SFC-00 # 88, Side A and Side B
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair John Torgerson convened the meeting at
approximately 9:08 AM
PRESENT Co-Chair John Torgerson, Co-Chair Sean Parnell,
Senator Al Adams, Senator Dave Donley, Senator Lyda Green,
Senator Pete Kelly, Senator Loren Leman, Senator Gary
Wilken, Senator Phillips.
Also Attending: SENATOR KIM ELTON; REPRESENTATIVE FRED
DYSON; DAVE GREY, Staff, Senator Jerry Mackie; DARWIN
PETERSON, Staff, Senator John Torgerson; KEN FREEMAN,
Director, Resource Development Council (RDC), Anchorage;
CATHERINE REARDON, Director, Occupational Licensing,
Department of Community & Economic Development; PATTI
SWENSON, Staff, Representative Con Bunde; AMY ERICKSON,
Staff, Representative Lisa Murkowski.
Attending via Teleconference: DOUG GRIFFIN, Alcohol
Beverage Control Board (ABC), Anchorage; JANICE ADAIR,
Director, Division of Environmental Health, Department of
Environmental Conservation, Anchorage; KIT ROBERTS, Speech
Language Pathologist, Anchorage; MARY ELLEN BEARDSLEY,
Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law; JERRY KURTZ,
Alaska's Representative to the National Conference of
Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Anchorage; SHARON
YOUNG, State Recorders Office, Department of Natural
Resources, Anchorage; JOHN MCCABE, Legislative
Director/Legal Counsel, National Conference of
Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Chicago; CYNTHIA WEED,
Representative for Preston Gates & Ellis LLP, Seattle
SUMMARY INFORMATION
SB 261-PREVENTION OF NEEDLE & SHARPS INJURIES
CS SB 261 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "do
pass recommendation and with a zero fiscal note by the
Department of Health and Social Services.
SB 280-COMMON CARRIER LIQUOR LICENSE
The bill was SCHEDULED and not HEARD in Committee.
HB 105-LICENSING SPEECH PATHOLOGY/AUDIOLOGY
The Committee heard from the sponsor's office, the
Department of Community & Economic Development and an
Anchorage speech pathologist. The bill was HELD in
Committee for further considerations.
HB 239-UCC SECURED TRANSACTIONS
The Committee heard testimony from the bill's sponsor,
various members nationally from the National Conference of
Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. The bill was HELD in
Committee for further consideration.
HB 255-HOME RULE COMMUNITIES
The Committee heard testimony from the bill's sponsor.
Following discussion, the bill was HELD in Committee for
further consideration.
HB 361-FEES FOR STATE SERVICES
Following discussion with the director of the Resource
Development Council, the Committee passed CS HB 361 (FIN)
out of Committee with a "no recommendation" and with a
fiscal note by Department of Environmental Conservation.
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 261(HES)
"An Act relating to needle stick and sharps injury
protections and the use of safe needles by health care
facilities and health care professionals; relating to
the vaccination of health care workers against
diseases transmitted by bloodborne pathogens; and
providing for an effective date."
Co-Chair Torgerson introduced the new committee substitute
for SB 261, work draft #1-LS175\K, Cramer, 4/14/00.
SENATOR KIM ELTON explained the changes made to the work
draft, providing a definition of "work practice controls"
and a "front line health care worker". Additionally, the
work draft provides further detail regarding the
exceptions. The details have been taken mostly from
California regulations.
Senator Elton noted that he had worked in collaboration
with Senator Pete Kelly and that the changes would enhance
the bill and provide some assurances for health care
workers. He pointed out that the bill would establish a
protocol in how the State handles federal mandates.
In response to Senator P. Kelly, Senator Elton explained
the federal compliance directive. He advised that the U.S.
Congress is currently working on similar legislation as
before the Committee. A compliance directive could be
amended since there is further work provided by
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).
Senator Adams MOVED that the work draft version "K" be the
document before the Committee. There being NO OBJECTION,
it was adopted.
Senator Leman voiced concern with the impacts of the
legislation on health care facilities throughout the State.
He questioned if the legislation would create further
burdens in attempting to meet OSHA requirements.
Senator P. Kelly interjected that some hospitals and
clinics already have these procedures in place. The
legislation clarifies that if you do have it already in
effect, the legislative requirements would not need to be
adopted.
Co-Chair Torgerson questioned the fiscal impact.
Senator Elton commented that the changes made would not
effect the fiscal impact. The money note should have been
updated to a zero fiscal note.
Senator Adams MOVED to report CS SB 261 (FIN) out of
Committee.
Senator P. Kelly OBJECTED for a brief at-ease.
Senator Phillips noted a conflict of interest and asked to
refrain from voting.
Senator Adams WITHDREW the MOTION to move the bill from
Committee. There being NO OJBECTION, the bill was before
the Committee for discussion.
Senator Leman stated that the small clinics would be
required to meet the OSHA requirements. He MOVED an
amendment to Page 6, deleting Line #21; Line #24, the title
would be "Exemption for Small Employers" and Line #27,
would delete "until January 1, 2003". That action would
guarantee that it would take a positive move from a future
legislature to reinstate the requirements.
Co-Chair Torgerson recommended that Section 2, Line #21 be
left in the bill.
Senator Elton pointed out that the net effect of the
amendment would not exempt the smaller clinics from using
sharp needle devices. However, the effect would exempt
smaller clinics from having a front line health worker
involved in the process determing what devices would work
best for each patient. It would exempt the small clinics
from maintaining a sharp needle used by health care
workers. He emphasized that under the proposed
requirement, the small clinics would be have the same
requirements as a hospital, however, the only difference
would be that the front line health care worker would not
be involved in determining which device should be used.
Senator Leman stated that the small clinic could still do
that, however, the mandate would be removed.
Senator Adams OBJECTED to the proposed language change.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Leman, Wilken, Kelly, Green, Donley,
Parnell, Torgerson
OPPOSED: Adams
Senator Phillips abstained from voting.
The MOTION PASSED (7-1).
Senator Adams MOVED to report the amended CS SB 261 (FIN)
out of Committee with individual recommendations and with
the accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION,
it was so ordered.
CS SB 261 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with a zero fiscal note by the
Department of Health and Social Services.
SENATE BILL NO. 280
"An Act relating to licensing common carriers to
dispense alcoholic beverages; and providing for an
effective date."
DAVE GREY, Staff, Senator Jerry Mackie, stated that the SB
280 speaks to the common carriers beverage dispensary
licenses being modified as requested by Alaska Airlines.
He noted that each of the 89 carriers in the Alaska
Airlines fleet are required to purchase a liquor license.
Alaska Airlines has requested that the Legislature review
the issue and offer legislation to reduce the fees which
they suffer in the public interest. If the proposed bill
becomes law, Alaska Airlines will still pay more in fees to
Alaska than it pays in any other state.
DOUG GRIFFIN, (Testified via Teleconference), Director,
Alcohol Beverage Control Board (ABC), Anchorage, testified
that Alaska Airlines had approached the ABC Board last
summer regarding the issue. Alaska Airlines has shown that
they want to be responsible and not caught up in any kind
of non-licensing bind. The Board recognizes that only a ¼
of Alaska Airlines fleet is operating in the State of
Alaska at any given time. The ABC Board does not have a
position on the concern at this time. The Board has worked
with the airlines regarding the concern.
Mr. Griffin recommended providing an average of the number
of aircraft flying in the State and using that as the
applicable number. He added that the ABC Board has done
everything that they could do administratively to ease the
paper work burden.
Mr. Griffin pointed out that the fiscal note does indicate
a loss of revenue. In terms of fairness, the Board
believes that the loss of revenue would level the playing
field in this situation.
Co-Chair Torgerson stated that he supported taking a
"higher" number average, perhaps taking from a
determination of the summer flights. He asked if any
cruise ship lines would fall under the guidelines of the
bill.
Mr. Griffin replied that current drafting of the bill would
not affect any of the cruise ships.
Co-Chair Torgerson stated that the bill would be HELD in
Committee for further consideration and determination of
the high number.
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 361(FIN)
"An Act relating to charges for state services;
requiring that fees levied by resource agencies for
designated regulatory services be based on the actual
and reasonable direct cost of providing the services,
except in the case of certain negotiated or fixed
fees; relating to negotiated and fixed fees of
resource agencies; relating to invoices for designated
regulatory services; establishing a petition process
regarding fees charged by resource agencies for
regulatory services; and providing for an effective
date."
TWO AT EASES: 9:15 and 9:50 - both for five minutes.
DARWIN PETERSON, Staff, Senator John Torgerson, explained
the changes between version "K" and the new version "M",
#1-LS1299\M, Kurtz, 4/13/00 of the bill. On Page 5, Lines
11-18 of version "K", the language was deleted in version
"M"; Page 6 of version "K", subsection "B" was deleted in
version "M". He added that on Page 6, subsections "C" and
"D" would go into effect July 1, 2001, however, subsection
"A" would go into effect July 1, 2002.
Mr. Peterson continued, Page 8, subsection 3, Line 14, will
not include travel. Mr. Peterson commented on how the
changes would decrease the fiscal note.
Senator Adams asked why license fee costs were increased
through the legislation.
KEN FREEMAN, Director, Resource Development Council (RDC),
Anchorage, noted that the fiscal note incorporates a
permanent invoicing system necessary for the agency to trim
costs. That would be a one-time expenditure. The fiscal
note also provides funding for Department of Environmental
Conservation to write regulations in conjunction with the
water program. Additionally, there will be a slight
reduction in the amount of money collected from program
receipts.
Co-Chair Torgerson asked if RDC supported the committee
substitute.
Mr. Freeman replied that they did support the committee
substitute. He interjected that the elimination of
invoicing to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) was
a change that RDC "could live with". He added that the
"delayed implementation" would work well for the agency, as
it would focus them to deal with only one program at a
time.
Senator Adams MOVED to adopt the work draft version "M" as
the document before the Committee. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was adopted.
JANICE ADAIR, (Testified via Teleconference), Director,
Division of Environmental Health, Department of
Environmental Conservation, Anchorage, offered to answer
questions of the Committee.
Senator P. Kelly MOVED to report CS HB 361 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it
was so ordered.
CS HB 361 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "no
recommendation" and with a fiscal note by Department of
Environmental Conservation.
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 255(CRA)
"An Act relating to cities incorporated under state aw
that are home rule communities."
REPRESENTATIVE FRED DYSON advised that HB 255 was intended
to allow an existing second class city, or unincorporated
area, to form a "home rule community" government structure
under State law. The city or area would be allowed,
through the charter system, to flexibly define its scope of
governing powers and services to meet specific area needs.
Currently, all home rule governments are required to meet
strict financial auditing requirements, provide land-use,
zoning and platting services and constitute their own
school district. The proposed bill would remove these
requirements allowing smaller communities to share in the
strength and flexibility of the charter system while
avoiding some of the red tape. The goal would be greater
self-determination and a more locally relevant government
structure.
Senator Wilken stated that it was a puzzle to him why there
are so many options for State government. He acknowledged
that the framers of the State Constitution intended for the
State to organized. However, Senator Wilken pointed out
that most of the State does not want organized government
but still wants funding for their school district education
needs. If the people in the second class cities and
unorganized areas want to govern themselves, they should be
responsible for picking up their educational funding costs.
Senator Wilken recommended that the bill not pass from
Committee until discussion regarding that concern had been
undertaken.
Senator Adams observed that there are some places in the
State that cannot pay for their educational needs, as they
do not have a tax base. One of the things that the
Legislature could do would be to determine if there is
natural resource money earned in rural Alaska which could
be given to those areas in the State to pay for education
costs. The Alaska Constitution indicates that the State of
Alaska must provide education. All people need to be taken
care of even when they are not organized.
Co-Chair Torgerson advised that the legislation would be
HELD in Committee for further consideration.
Tape: SFC - 00 #88, Side B 8:32 AM
SENATE CS FOR CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 105(L&C)
"An Act providing for the licensing of speech-language
pathologists; relating to fees paid by audiologists
and speech-language pathologists; and providing for an
effective date."
PATTI SWENSON, Staff, Representative Con Bunde, explained
that Alaska was one of six states that does set out
requirements for licensure of State Language Pathologists
(SLP). HB 105 would establish requirements for that
licensure. She indicated that the legislation would
protect consumers from fraudulent practitioners, who could
emotionally and financially harm a client due to improper
service delivery. Also, licensure would make it easier to
obtain reimbursement from insurance companies.
Co-Chair Torgerson asked the reference made on Page 2,
Section 3.
CATHERINE REARDON, Director, Occupational Licensing,
Department of Community & Economic Development, replied
that section was written in order to define that
audiologists and speech pathologists would be considered
the same for the purposes of fee setting.
In response to Co-Chair Torgerson, Ms. Swenson explained
that persons contracted who come to Alaska have been
licensed in another State. The legislation would allow the
Department of Education and Early Development to establish
the standard. That standard is usually set at a master's
level.
KIT ROBERTS, (Testified via Teleconference), Speech
Language Pathologist, Anchorage, noted that it was her
understanding that when contract Speech Pathologists work
for the schools that the standards established by the
Department of Education and Early Development must be
followed, which means at least a masters degree. Since the
State Board of Education has already set the standard for
the schools, the contracted SLP's would fall under the
regulations established by the Board of Education. Ms.
Roberts understood that while under contract, the "law of
the land" must be followed.
Co-Chair Torgerson foresaw a "loop hole" in the
legislation. He voiced his hesitation.
Ms. Roberts reiterated that the standard for the Department
of Education and Early Development is a masters degree.
Most of the districts that contract are the Bush areas.
She believed that the Bush areas would be required to
follow the same rules as the cities.
Co-Chair Torgerson stated that the bill would be HELD in
Committee for further consideration.
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 239(FIN)
"An Act relating to the Uniform Commercial Code;
relating to secured transactions; amending Rule 79,
Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure; and providing for an
effective date."
AMY ERICKSON, Staff, Representative Lisa Murkowski,
commented that HB 239 was first introduced in Alaska in
1962 and was then revised again in 1972. The draft before
Committee members represents the first comprehensive draft
in over 25 years. She advised that those times and
technology have changed. She noted that there are many
reasons that Revised Article 9 should be adopted in Alaska:
· Technology
· Volume
· New Collateral
· Certainty of perfection
· New Liens
· Clarification of Rules
· Consumer Impact
· Commitment to Uniformity
Ms. Erickson emphasized that the legislation would bring
st
Alaska into the 21 century in how it handles consumer
credit transactions. There is an effective date of July
st
1, 2001, which would give the agency time to educate
itself to determine how it will work. The attempt to
standardize transactions by Article 9 is imperative for
business in Alaska.
Senator Phillips stated that he was leery of the proposed
legislation and requested names and address of those that
support it.
MARY ELLEN BEARDSLEY, (Testified via Teleconference),
Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law, Anchorage,
stated that she liked the bill and would answer any
questions of the Committee. She emphasized that the
st
legislation would bring Article 9 into the 21 Century and
would help both lenders and debtors.
Co-Chair Torgerson asked if any substantial changes would
be made to the way that business is currently being done.
SHARON YOUNG, (Testified via Teleconference), State
Recorders Office, Department of Natural Resources,
Anchorage, offered to answer any questions of the
Committee.
Co-Chair Torgerson requested further explanation of the
fiscal note, which indicates a loss of revenue for the
State.
Ms. Young commented that the concept of the legislation was
to centralize the filing in the Uniform Commercial Code
(UCC) office in Alaska. Under the current code, there is
UCC Central filing and also UCC filing throughout all the
recording districts around the State. At this time, the
spread is about 50/50. The declining revenues shown,
represent the decrease attributable to the gradual
elimination of dual filings over the transitional period.
Decreasing revenues are expected until all filings have
been transitioned to UCC Central, or lapsed.
JOHN MCCABE, (Testified via Teleconference), Legislative
Director/Legal Counsel, National Conference of
Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Chicago, remarked that
his company was the origin of the proposed legislation,
revision of Article 9. Current Alaska law is based on the
last version of Article 9, put forth in 1972. The effort
is to prepare Alaska business and financial institutions to
do a better job of dealing with secured financing in Alaska
and the rest of the country.
Secured financing is very important economically. The bill
addresses the economic function within the United States
and the economic lack of function throughout the rest of
the world. He noted that a secure transaction would not be
changed, however, would address personal properties. Most
of Article 9 is not engaged in determining that
relationship but rather by agreement between the parties.
Secured creditors have priority over unsecured creditors.
For the most part, with most collateral, security interest
occurs when that financing base is filed in the Central
office in Alaska.
Mr. McCabe testified that the legislation would expand the
scope for new kinds of collateral for secured financing.
It would provide a better and simpler filing system that
would be electronically friendly. It would provide better
remedies for secured creditors and secured debtors
throughout the transactions. He admitted that the secured
financing area was complicated, however, reiterated that
much of the bill provides for simplification of current
practices. He urged passage of the legislation.
Senator Leman asked the impact on small business.
Mr. McCabe replied that many representatives had been
involved in the study process of creating these guidelines.
There were representatives from many small businesses and
financial institutions. Small business in the United
States already has the benefit of secured financing. That
is one of the reasons that we have an economy which
generates spontaneous economic activity. The bill will not
injure small business in any way. It will enhance credit
opportunities for everyone.
CYNTHIA WEED, (Testified via Teleconference), Preston Gates
& Ellis LLP, Seattle, spoke to the unintentional
consequences of the legislation. She noted that as a firm,
Preston Gates and Ellis, had participated in the drafting
and the implementation of the legislation. She agreed that
it would add substantial benefit in the area of consumer
credit. However, one of the unintended consequences would
be the transfer by governmental organizations.
Under the existing Article 9, transfers by the State in
local government organizations were exempted out of the
coverage. Most loans to general government are unsecured
loans. When the State or Municipality of Anchorage borrows
money, they do that from a general obligation pledge as
unsecured loans.
Co-Chair Torgerson recommended that Ms. Weed submit a draft
of the language that her office would like to see
reinserted.
Ms. Weed replied that they would like to see the current
language with the exempt transfers by State and local
government. Under existing law, adding language would
qualify for a transfer under AS 45.09.104, subsection 12.
In the existing statute, there is an exemption for
transfers by a government or governmental subdivision or
agency. She stressed that they would like to see that
language replaced in the new draft.
Co-Chair Torgerson noted that his office would work on that
request.
Ms. Weed confirmed that her company would support passage
of the legislation with that modification.
Co-Chair Torgerson referenced Page 121, Line 18.
Ms. Weed agreed that language could cause consternation in
the municipal bond market. It would be monumental to go
back and find all the outstanding bonds and refile those.
She agreed that would be a clause which could provide a
substantial problem for the Alaskan municipalities. If not
excluded, there would be many outstanding bondholders who
could be at-risk with no longer having secured revenue
bonds.
JERRY KURTZ, (Testified via Teleconference), Alaska's
Representative to the National Conference of Commissioners
on Uniform State Laws, Anchorage, acknowledged that this is
a good bill and would improve everyone's position.
In regard to reduction of State revenue, Mr. Kurtz stated
that it is important to undertake dual filing given the
uncertainties of the existing law. The lost funds are
revenue that both large and small business will not have to
pay. It is important to recognize that the bill will
protect bank money and the power of small business who sell
credit and take the secured interest back.
Mr. Kurtz pointed out that the law firm represented by Ms.
Weed is the only party that has voiced any concerns with
the proposed legislation. He noted that the Alaska State
Bond Counsel does not object to the legislation. He
questioned what portion of the State Ms. Weed was
representing.
Co-Chair Torgerson stated that the bill would be HELD in
Committee for further consideration.
ADJOURNED
Senator Torgerson recessed the Senate Finance Committee
meeting at 3:47 AM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|