Legislature(2005 - 2006)BUTROVICH 205
04/28/2006 09:30 AM Senate JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB169 | |
| SB316 | |
| SB307 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 169 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 307 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 316 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 414 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 190 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
April 28, 2006
10:20 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Ralph Seekins, Chair
Senator Charlie Huggins, Vice Chair
Senator Gene Therriault
Senator Hollis French
Senator Gretchen Guess
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 169
"An Act relating to release of information in individual
workers' compensation records for commercial purposes."
MOVED CSSB 169(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 307
"An Act relating to a fee provided for in the rental agreement
for late payment of rent under the Uniform Residential Landlord
and Tenant Act."
MOVED CSSB 307(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 316
"An Act amending the Alaska Stranded Gas Development Act to
eliminate the opportunity for judicial review of the findings
and determination of the commissioner of revenue on which are
based legislative review for a proposed contract for payments in
lieu of taxes and for the other purposes described in that Act;
and providing for an effective date."
MOVED CSSB 316(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 414(RLS) am
"An Act relating to the interception of the private
communications of a minor."
SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 190(FIN)
"An Act relating to the purchase of alcoholic beverages and to
access to licensed premises; relating to civil liability for
certain persons accessing licensed premises; requiring driver's
licenses and identification cards to be marked if a person is
restricted from consuming alcoholic beverages as a result of a
conviction or condition of probation or parole and relating to
fees for the marked license; and requiring the surrender and
cancellation of driver's licenses under certain circumstances."
SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 169
SHORT TITLE: WORKERS' COMPENSATION RECORDS
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) THERRIAULT
04/11/05 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/11/05 (S) L&C
04/19/05 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 211
04/19/05 (S) Moved CSSB 169(L&C) Out of Committee
04/19/05 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
04/20/05 (S) L&C RPT CS 4DP NEW TITLE
04/20/05 (S) DP: BUNDE, DAVIS, ELLIS, STEVENS B
BILL: SB 307
SHORT TITLE: LANDLORD REMEDIES; LATE FEE
SPONSOR(s): LABOR & COMMERCE
02/23/06 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/23/06 (S) L&C, JUD
03/09/06 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 211
03/09/06 (S) Heard & Held
03/09/06 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/16/06 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 211
03/16/06 (S) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/28/06 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 211
03/28/06 (S) Heard & Held
03/28/06 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/30/06 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 211
03/30/06 (S) Moved SB 307 Out of Committee
03/30/06 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/31/06 (S) L&C RPT 2DP 1NR 2AM
03/31/06 (S) DP: BUNDE, STEVENS B
03/31/06 (S) NR: DAVIS
03/31/06 (S) AM: ELLIS, SEEKINS
04/19/06 (S) JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
04/19/06 (S) Heard & Held
04/19/06 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
04/25/06 (S) JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
04/25/06 (S) Heard & Held
04/25/06 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
04/27/06 (S) JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
04/27/06 (S) Heard & Held
04/27/06 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
04/28/06 (S) JUD AT 9:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: SB 316
SHORT TITLE: COURT REVIEW OF STRANDED GAS DECISION
SPONSOR(s): JUDICIARY
04/13/06 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/13/06 (S) JUD
04/19/06 (S) JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
04/19/06 (S) Heard & Held
04/19/06 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
04/20/06 (S) JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
04/20/06 (S) Heard & Held
04/20/06 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
04/21/06 (S) JUD AT 9:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
04/21/06 (S) Heard & Held
04/21/06 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
04/22/06 (S) JUD AT 9:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
04/22/06 (S) -- Continued from 04/20/06 --
04/25/06 (S) JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
04/25/06 (S) Heard & Held
04/25/06 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
04/26/06 (S) JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
04/26/06 (S) Heard & Held
04/26/06 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
04/27/06 (S) JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
04/27/06 (S) Heard & Held
04/27/06 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
04/28/06 (S) JUD AT 9:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
Heather Brakes, Legislative Aide
Staff to Senator Gene Therriault
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced SB 169
Paul Lisankie, Director
Division of Worker's Compensation
Department of Labor & Workforce Development
PO Box 21149
Juneau, AK 99802-1149
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to questions regarding SB 169
Kris Norosz, Government Relations
Icicle Seafoods
st
4019 21 Ave W
Seattle, Wa 98199
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 169
Jack Chenoweth, Attorney
Legal and Research Services Division
Legislative Affairs Agency
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding SB 316
Kevin Jardell, Legislative Director
Staff to Governor Frank Murkowski
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding SB 316
Larry Ostrovsky, Chief Assistant Attorney General
Oil and Gas Section
Department of Law
PO Box 110300
Juneau, AK 99811-0300
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding SB 316
Jane Alberts, Legislative Aide
Staff to Senator Con Bunde
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced SB 307
Robert Maier
Alaska Manufactured Housing Association
No address provided
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 307
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS called the Senate Judiciary Standing
Committee meeting to order at 10:20:06 AM. Present were Senators
Gene Therriault, Hollis French, and Chair Ralph Seekins.
CHAIR SEEKINS recessed the meeting to the call of the chair at
10:20:45 AM.
CHAIR SEEKINS reconvened the meeting at 12:46:21 PM. Present
were Senators Gretchen Guess, Charlie Huggins, and Gene
Therriault. Senator Hollis French will join the meeting shortly.
SB 169-WORKERS' COMPENSATION RECORDS
12:46:21 PM
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS announced SB 169 to be up for consideration.
SENATOR GENE THERRIAULT announced that committee aide Heather
Brakes would explain the basic issues of the bill.
SENATOR HOLLIS FRENCH joined the meeting.
HEATHER BRAKES, Staff to Senator Therriault, explained that SB
169 would amend the workers' compensation statutes to clarify
that the Division of Workers' Compensation may not release
personal information for commercial purposes. The Department of
Law has suggested additional language that is not in the bill as
of yet but the sponsor is putting that together. The additional
language would direct the Department of Labor and Workforce
Development to keep the records of injured workers secure.
12:50:37 PM
PAUL LISANKIE, Director, Division of Workers' Compensation,
Department of Labor and Workforce Development (DOLWD), testified
that SB 169 was a provision that was in SB 130 and passed last
year but was necessary legislation today due to a lawsuit that
received its opinion two weeks ago [O'Bryan Baun Cohen Kuebler
versus Paul F. Lisankie, Director of Division of Workers'
Compensation, Department of Labor and Workforce Development,
State of Alaska, John Does 1-10, Employees of the State of
Alaska].
MR. LISANKIE explained that the bill would exempt release of
certain individual information of injured workers that the DOLWD
requires them to file as part of getting their benefits. Over
the years the DOLWD has seen requests for lists of every person
who has filed for workers' compensation in the State of Alaska.
12:52:59 PM
Information can be used for good or ill depending on the intent,
he said. The Department originally suggested the statute use the
phrase "for commercial purposes" so that the worker wouldn't be
prevented an avenue of help in defending their claim. The court
opposes that language and so the Department has an amendment for
the committee to consider.
12:56:16 PM
SENATOR FRENCH asked whether the proposed amendment would
prohibit release of names of employees that work for the state.
MR. LISANKIE said he believed that since it's linked to the
employee file maintained by the Division of Workers'
Compensation that it would be limited and not that broad. He
understood that any medical record housed at the DOLWD that
contained personal information would not be subject to public
inspection except as laid out in paragraphs (1-2).
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Mr. Lisankie whether he discussed the
amendment with the DOL and whether it addressed the ambiguity in
the statute.
MR. LISANKIE said it would erase the ambiguity relating to the
phrase "commercial purposes."
1:00:24 PM
KRIS NOROSZ, Representative for Icicle Seafoods, testified in
support of the bill.
SENATOR THERRIAULT moved Amendment 1. Hearing no objections,
Amendment 1 was adopted.
SENATOR GRETCHEN GUESS moved CSSB 169(JUD) out of committee with
individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes. Hearing no
objections, the motion carried.
SB 316-COURT REVIEW OF STRANDED GAS DECISION
1:09:27 PM
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS announced SB 316 to be up for consideration.
SENATOR CHARLIE HUGGINS moved version L as the working document
before the committee. Hearing no objections version CS was
adopted.
CHAIR SEEKINS walked through the changes to each section.
Section 1 assures that the documents are a public record after
the commissioner of the Department of Revenue (DOR) gives public
notice. Section 2 affects AS 43.82.400 and says if the
commissioner develops a contract s/he should make preliminary
findings and a determination that the proposed contract meet the
long-term fiscal interest of the state and whether it meets the
requirements and purposes of the Chapter. Section 3 states that
30 days after close of public comment period the commissioner
shall prepare a summary.
1:13:11 PM
Section 4 affects AS 43.82.430(b) and is amended to read that
after the commissioner makes his determination he submits the
contract to the governor.
SENATOR HOLLIS FRENCH asked the reason for the change to that
section.
CHAIR SEEKINS responded it was more definite that the
commissioner first had to find that it was in the long-term best
interest. He could not submit the contract until that provision
was met.
1:15:05 PM
CHAIR SEEKINS Section 5:
Legislative authorization. (a) The governor may transmit a
contract developed under this chapter to the legislature
together with a request for authorization to execute the
contract. He continued reading the entire section.
1:17:34 PM
SENATOR GENE THERRIAULT noted that Section 5 was permissive on
the part of the governor.
CHAIR SEEKINS agreed and said it is not required.
SENATOR FRENCH commented that subsection (d) maintains the
legislative involvement.
Section 6, Judicial Review, is amended to emphasize that a
person may not bring a challenge until the contract is executed.
1:19:36 PM
Section 7 and 8 are effective dates and clean up, he said.
SENATOR FRENCH said Section 7 might be superfluous because the
bill is maintaining the DOR as the "legal flagpole to the
world."
CHAIR SEEKINS said Section 7 just eliminates the agency
decisions.
SENATOR FRENCH restated his point. Now that the bill keeps the
final findings and determination of the commissioner as the
thing that is challengeable, keeping subsection (c) in
harmonizes with the judicial review.
CHAIR SEEKINS announced a brief at ease at 1:23:11 PM.
1:32:15 PM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked the drafter of the bill to testify.
SENATOR FRENCH asked Mr. Chenoweth whether Section 7 belongs in
the bill.
JACK CHENOWETH, Attorney, Legal Services, said in 1998 the
determination that the final findings would be an final agency
action was included to indicate that is the point at which an
administrative adjudication may be commenced. The Legislature
added the requirement of legislative review. When that was
added, the final findings and determination language became
extraneous because the legislature's roll was postponed. That
was the reason that the administration was interested in
eliminating subsection (c) since the legislature had post review
responsibility.
MR. CHENOWETH said, "If you agree with the administration's view
of this then I think you probably do want to take out 430(c)
because you are still allowing for judicial review of a final
findings and determination."
1:36:04 PM
SENATOR FRENCH said he agreed with the administration about
moving the timing of the challenge but stated he is very
protective and concerned about restricting any rights that the
public has to bringing a challenge to the contract. He also
expressed concern over a separation of powers challenge brought
eventually to the legislature's authority to execute. He said he
wants to take a "belt and suspenders" approach so as to keep all
the rights in existence.
1:37:58 PM
MR. CHENOWETH responded the committee should make sure that in
leaving the authority in the law for someone to challenge the
final findings and determination, that they do so without making
it dependant on an action of the Legislature authorizing
execution of the contract.
SENATOR FRENCH asked him to explain the reason that is important
if it is only a matter of timing.
MR. CHENOWETH explained it has been a historical position from
the DOL that the Legislature has no roll in the determination of
what contracts should be executed. It was surprising that the
Knowles administration was willing to accept legislative action
to authorize the contract. His review of the dialogue indicated
that the commissioner of the DOR was comfortable with the
legislative authorization back in 1998 because the
administration realized that providing for payments in lieu of
tax [the principle element of the SGDA] was breaking new ground
in law.
In setting that out, the administration would be intruding upon
authority generally given to the Legislature to determine what
the tax policy of the state would be and how to spend the money.
Consequently the commissioner felt it was best to have the
Legislature aboard.
1:42:04 PM
SENATOR FRENCH said he is left wondering what to do with the
bill to maintain every possible legal challenge, as it exists
under the current law.
MR. CHENOWETH said leave 120 days to bring an action. That 120
days may be tied to execution of the contract but that execution
may or may not be on the basis of a legislative authorization
given by law.
SENATOR FRENCH said it sounds like that what needs to be done is
to have a buffer of time granted to the Legislature when they
are making their decision.
MR. CHENOWETH responded:
If the concern is the separation of powers-generated
objection to the Legislature having a role in all of
this, then the final findings and determination would
be the step preceding the governor's execution of the
contract. If that is the case you have a law in place
that says the judicial review should occur within some
period of time from execution of the contract without
making any reference to the legal authority for that
execution.
1:44:27 PM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked who would have the standings to bring a
constitutional challenge regarding separation of powers.
MR. CHENOWETH advised that there would be a wide variety of
potential claimants would have standing to proceed.
CHAIR SEEKINS said, "But if the governor doesn't challenge it,
he is the other branch of government whose powers have now been
violated by the requirement for legislative authorization to
execute the contract. Can John Q. Public bring that action?"
MR. CHENOWETH asked, "Who would be the defendant?"
CHAIR SEEKINS said, "I guess it would have to be the
Legislature."
MR. CHENOWETH said the Legislature can't get sued, even by the
governor. The person who raises the question of right and wrong
could be the Legislature or anyone else.
1:46:13 PM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked whether the requirement that the Legislature
execute the contract diminishes the powers of the governor
granted under the Constitution.
MR. CHENOWETH responded that it is a good argument and it seems
like something the Legislature has the right to do.
CHAIR SEEKINS said every portion of a law is severable and if
this portion of the law [43.82.435] was challenged in court and
found to be unconstitutional, that action would have to have
commenced within 120 days of the contract.
MR. CHENOWETH agreed.
1:48:08 PM
MR. CHENOWETH said the administration's argument is that the
responsibility for negotiation and execution of contracts is
wholly an administrative function under the separation of powers
and should be retained in the executive branch. That is the
starting point of the argument they would make if they were to
change to go forward without the benefit of legislative input.
SENATOR THERRIAULT said that is the only time the constitutional
issue rears its head: if the Legislature gives approval and the
governor then signs the contract.
1:50:31 PM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Mr. Chenoweth whether they need to specify
in statute that it is the decision that is appealable.
MR. CHENOWETH said yes but there is a question of placement with
relationship to the legislative review of the contract. He said
he shared the committee's concern that in the event the
Legislature refuses to approve the contract that the governor
would execute it anyway.
CHAIR SEEKINS suggested to avoid that perhaps they should state
in statute that if for some reason the legislative authorization
is found not to be affected that these findings and
determinations are then final agency decisions and independently
reviewable.
MR. CHENOWETH said, "Oh. Well. That is a way to do it."
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked whether it should to be so complicated.
He suggested the committee make sure they preserve the right of
the public to challenge and then "drag it to the end."
1:57:14 PM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Larry Ostrovsky to comment.
LARRY OSTROVSKY, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Department of
Law (DOL), said Mr. Chenoweth has more experience than he but he
speculated that the committee was on the right track.
SENATOR FRENCH said the question of "what the nature of the
challenge would be" is still unanswered given that the
Legislature has substituted its judgment for the judgment of the
commissioner in granting authority to execute the contract. He
said it is important to maintain the commissioner's final
findings and determination as the place where a person would
mount a challenge because he didn't think there was a
challengeable part to the final finding of the Legislature.
2:00:22 PM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Mr. Ostrovsky whether the committee should
change 43.82.440 to the final agency decisions and leave
subsection (c) in.
MR. OSTROVSKY responded that would not make any substantive
difference but said he'd be curious to hear what Mr. Chenoweth
would say.
MR. CHENOWETH commented that he was comfortable with what the
committee wants to do.
CHAIR SEEKINS said their primary objective is to put any
challenge at the end of the process and to clearly define what
happens if the process "goes kablooey."
SENATOR THERRIAULT clarified that the committee intended to
leave subsection (c) in and change the language in section 6 to
make reference to the final decision.
2:03:09 PM
SENATOR THERRIAULT moved Amendment 1. On page 4 modify the new
language on lines 6-7 to say "the final agency decisions under
430(c)." Hearing no objections, Amendment 1 was adopted.
SENATOR THERRIAULT moved Amendment 2.
24-LS1842\I.1
Chenoweth
A M E N D M E N T 2
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR THERRIAULT
TO: CSSB 316( ), Draft Version "I"
Page 1, line 6, following "enforceability":
Insert "extending to 90 days the period during which the
public and members of the legislature may comment on a proposed
contract under that Act;"
Page 2, following line 12:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 2. AS 43.82.410 is amended to read:
Sec. 43.82.410. Notice and comment regarding the
contract. The commissioner shall
(1) give reasonable public notice of the
preliminary findings and determination made under
AS 43.82.400;
(2) make copies of the proposed contract, the
commissioner's preliminary findings and determination, and,
to the extent the information is not required to be kept
confidential under AS 43.82.310, the supporting financial,
technical, and market data, including the work papers,
analyses, and recommendations of any independent
contractors used under AS 43.82.240 available to the public
and to
(A) the presiding officer of each house of
the legislature;
(B) the chairs of the finance and resources
committees of the legislature; and
(C) the chairs of the special committees on
oil and gas, if any, of the legislature;
(3) offer to appear before the Legislative
Budget and Audit Committee to provide the committee a
review of the commissioner's preliminary findings and
determination, the proposed contract, and the supporting
financial, technical, and market data; if the Legislative
Budget and Audit Committee accepts the commissioner's
offer, the committee shall give notice of the committee's
meeting to the public and all members of the legislature;
if the financial, technical, and market data that is to be
provided must be kept confidential under AS 43.82.310, the
commissioner may not release the confidential information
during a public portion of a committee meeting; and
(4) establish a period of at least 90 [ 30] days
for the public and members of the legislature to comment on
the proposed contract and the preliminary findings and
determination made under AS 43.82.400."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Hearing no objections, Amendment 2 was adopted.
2:08:41 PM
CHAIR SEEKINS noted that Senator Therriault's amendment was in
reference to a CS that no longer exists. He clarified that this
would amend section 4 to extend the public comment period to 90
days. It appears that the administration is allowed to establish
when that time frame begins. He asked Kevin Jardell whether the
intent was to start the public comment period the moment that
the contract was released.
KEVIN JARDELL, Legislative Director for Governor Frank Murkowski
testified that the intent was the public process to begin the
day the contract was released. A website would be launched that
would accept public comment and would provide for a period of
ongoing dissemination. The governor intends to hold the public
comment period for as long as the process takes to gather
thorough input from the public.
2:13:48 PM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked how the administration plans to decide when
the public comment window ends.
MR. JARDELL replied the administration would not know until the
process develops but they are allowed to extend the public
comment period. The governor would halt the public comment
period when it reaches the point that all the points have been
made.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked what happens if the governor doesn't get the
Legislature a contract after the close of the public comment
period.
MR. JARDELL said he did not know.
SENATOR THERRIAULT speculated there would be an ongoing process
responding to public comment as they come in. It is likely that
there will be a turnaround a few days directly after the close
of the comment period.
SENATOR GRETCHEN GUESS said the way the statute reads is that
the things to be done within that 30 days are the findings and
determinations, not the submitting of the contract.
2:16:44 PM
CHAIR SEEKINS said the way that subsection (b) reads since
amended states that the commissioner submits the contract to the
governor within 30 days.
SENATOR GUESS disagreed but said it didn't matter.
2:19:25 PM
SENATOR GUESS said, "We all hope we see a contract this year but
life is unpredictable and so we are creating a statute that
th
needs to go beyond us [the 24 Legislature]."
CHAIR SEEKINS announced a brief recess at 2:22:24 PM.
2:40:07 PM
CHAIR SEEKINS explained to the committee that Senator
Therriault's conceptual amendment needed re-crafting.
SENATOR THERRIAULT explained his amendment should be altered to
denote a 90-day comment period.
SENATOR FRENCH spoke in favor of the amendment. He said the PPT
bill was introduced 68 days ago and could drag out through the
end of session, indicating how long it sometimes takes to work
through a law this substantial.
CHAIR SEEKINS clarified that Amendment 2 would specify a 90-day
comment period. He moved to amend Amendment 2 to read 60 days.
He explained that in effect, the comment period would end up
with the equivalent of 90 days.
2:45:03 PM
MR. JARDELL commented on the amendment to Amendment 2. The
public process is critically important and so the administration
supports the 60-day period.
SENATOR GUESS clarified that when it comes back to the
Legislature in special session, they can take public comment b
but they can't change the contract. The ability to provide
feedback to the administration disappears and so it is a
different type of public contract. She said she was more
comfortable with the 90-day public comment period.
SENATOR HUGGINS and SENATOR THERRIAULT spoke in favor of the
amendment to Amendment 2.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Mr. Jardell whether the administration would
hold regularly scheduled public hearings during the process.
2:49:02 PM
MR. JARDELL said yes. It would be a series of meetings both in
communities and also using telecommunications.
CHAIR SEEKINS said, "After the public hearing process is done,
will it take you 60-days to get through the public hearing
process?"
MR. JARDELL hesitated to comment but speculated a 45-day period
would suffice to hit all the communities and do the entire
public process.
Hearing no further objections to the amendment to Amendment 2,
the committee adopted it unanimously. The committee adopted
Amendment 2 unanimously as well.
2:52:26 PM
CHAIR SEEKINS noted that Mr. Ostrovsky requested to comment on
page 3, lines 24-25.
MR. OSTROVSKY suggested that the committee consider adding
language to line 25 to add "to the extent a record or
information is not required to be kept confidential under AS
43.82.310, the material described in (1) of this subsection."
2:54:14 PM
SENATOR GUESS asked the practical application of the suggestion.
SENATOR HUGGINS moved Amendment 3. Page 3, line 25 add "to the
extent a record or information is not required to be kept
confidential under AS 43.82.310, the material described in (1)
of this subsection."
SENATOR FRENCH objected and commented 43.82.310 has six
subsections and it looks like subsection (f) differs from the
others. He asked Mr. Ostrovsky to comment.
CHAIR SEEKINS said as he understood 310(f), it was amended to
say that everything that is not proprietary becomes public
information.
MR. CHENOWETH agreed.
2:57:52 PM
Hearing no further objections, Amendment 3 was adopted.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked Mr. Chenoweth whether there was any
impairment of contract argument due to timing since the
committee moved the public comment period to the end of the
process.
MR. CHENOWETH responded the right to the contract argument would
be during the period of time that overlaps the 120 days in which
the appeals may be brought. There is a potential for impairment
but it would have to be action taken upon the contract that is
executed. He advised the committee that was an area of concern.
3:02:09 PM
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked for an amendment suggestion.
MR. CHENOWETH suggested the committee tie the concept outside of
43.82.435.
SENATOR THERRIAULT restated his concern. He said, "If we move
that public comment period to the end, what language do we need
just to make sure that they in fact can exercise..."
CHAIR SEEKINS moved Amendment 4. Conceptually speaking, add
language on page 4, end of line 9 stating, "under this chapter."
MR. CHENOWETH added that the committee would want to tie that
sentence to the contract.
3:06:51 PM
Hearing no objections, Amendment 4 was adopted.
SENATOR GUESS expressed concern that the governor could execute
a contract that the Legislature did not approve and that did not
meet the requirements of the Chapter. She asked whether there
was anything that would void the contract and give the
Legislature or anyone else the ability to take it to court
because it didn't line up to the statute. She said this goes
back to her point that the final findings and determination are
whether or not the proposed contract and amendment meet the
requirements of the Chapter.
CHAIR SEEKINS speculated that in that event, the very contract
would not meet the requirements under the law and would have to
be signed as a standard DNR contract.
MR. CHENOWETH said he has a different vision of the contract. He
said his vision of the contract would be one that covers the
things that are identified in the law, such as paying in lieu of
tax, timing and taking of royalty and local hire.
3:12:34 PM
SENATOR GUESS said as the statute reads now, the final finding
is only whether or not the contract does comply with state law,
not that it has to comply.
MR. CHENOWETH said that is why we have the enforceability
provision. It must serve the purpose of arguing a challenge.
3:14:43 PM
SENATOR GUESS said the enforceability clause under judicial
review goes back to 435 and if that gets thrown out in court on
separation of powers, then where are we with ensuring that a
contract actually meet the requirements of the statute.
MR. CHENOWETH responded if the legislative rolls falls out it is
still a question of whether the final findings are supportable.
SENATOR HUGGINS moved Amendment 5. Page 4, line 10, remove AS
43.82.435 and insert "this chapter."
3:19:20 PM
MR. CHENOWETH said he wanted clarification for the record that
the committee is doing this because of an ongoing concern that
the legislative authorization of 435 might be held not valid. He
said it establishes a good argument for the Legislature's roll
in the contract.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Mr. Ostrovsky to comment.
MR. OSTROVSKY said, "No comment."
CHAIR SEEKINS recessed the meeting to the call of the chair at
3:24:56 PM.
6:00:00 PM
CHAIR SEEKINS reconvened the meeting and asked for discussion.
SENATOR THERRIAULT moved to adopt version S as the working
document before the committee. Hearing no objections, the motion
carried.
SENATOR GUESS moved Amendment 1. Page 1, line 9, insert the
words "at least" between the words "to 60." Hearing no
objections, Amendment 1 was adopted.
SENATOR GUESS moved Amendment 2. Page 5, beginning of line 6,
insert "(a)". Hearing no objections, Amendment 2 was adopted.
SENATOR HUGGINS moved CSSB 316(JUD) from committee with
individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes. Hearing no
objection, the motion carried.
SB 307-LANDLORD REMEDIES; LATE FEE
6:07:16 PM
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS announced SB 307 to be up for consideration.
JANE ALBERTS, Staff to Senator Con Bunde introduced the bill and
informed the committee of a committee substitute (CS).
SENATOR GENE THERRIAULT moved version F as the working document
before the committee. Hearing no objections, the motion carried.
MS. ALBERTS said the CS contains new language, which makes it
possible for the landlord to issue a single notice or two
separate notices for failure to pay rent and failure to pay rent
fees. The judge would consider each aspect of the dispute during
one hearing. The CS does allow the tenant three more days to pay
the rent and the sponsor supports that.
6:09:09 PM
ROBERT MAIER, Alaska Manufactured Housing Association, testified
that version F gets the bill back to the original intent, which
is simplicity. He expressed support for the bill.
MS. ALBERTS advised that Ed Sniffen was online earlier in the
day and was prepared to testify in support of the bill.
SENATOR HOLLIS FRENCH opined the bill was a compromise between
the two ideas of a speedy hearing and the one hearing.
CHAIR SEEKINS closed public testimony.
SENATOR THERRIAULT moved CSSB 307(JUD) from committee with
individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes. Hearing no
objections the motion carried.
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Seekins adjourned the meeting at 6:14:13 PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|