Legislature(2013 - 2014)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/26/2013 01:30 PM Senate LABOR & COMMERCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB52 | |
| SB55 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 52 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 55 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE LABOR AND COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE
February 26, 2013
1:33 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Mike Dunleavy, Chair
Senator Peter Micciche, Vice Chair
Senator Donald Olson
Senator Bert Stedman
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Johnny Ellis
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 52
"An Act providing that portable electronics insurance is not a
service contract; defining portable electronics insurance;
authorizing the director of insurance to issue a limited
producer license to a portable electronics vendor for the sale
of portable electronics insurance; and authorizing the employees
and representatives of a vendor to transact portable electronics
insurance."
- HEARD AND HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 55
"An Act relating to actions by insurers based on credit history
or insurance score."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 52
SHORT TITLE: PORTABLE ELECTRONICS INSURANCE
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) COGHILL
02/13/13 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/13/13 (S) L&C
02/26/13 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: SB 55
SHORT TITLE: INSURER'S USE OF CREDIT SCORES
SPONSOR(s): LABOR & COMMERCE
02/15/13 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/15/13 (S) L&C
02/26/13 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR JOHN COGHILL
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 52
KARI NORE, Intern
Senator John Coghill
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced SB 52 on behalf of the sponsor.
RYNNIEVA MOSS, Staff
Senator John Coghill
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information related to SB 55.
BRET S. KOLB, Director
Division of Insurance
Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions related to SB 52.
STEVE RICCI, Staff
Senate Labor and Commerce Committee
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced SB 55.
KENTON BRINE, Assistant Vice President and Northwest Regional
Manager
Property Casualty Insurers Association of America
Olympia, WA
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 55.
ELIZABETH MOCERI, Director
State and Legislative Affairs for Alaska
Allstate Insurance Company
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 55.
GARY STRANNIGAN
Liberty Mutual Group and Safeco Insurance
Seattle, WA
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 55.
CINDA SMITH, Senior Counsel
GEICO
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 55.
ALEX HAGELI
Property Casualty Insurers Association of America
Olympia, WA
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 55.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:33:19 PM
CHAIR MIKE DUNLEAVY called the Senate Labor and Commerce
Standing Committee meeting to order at 1:33 p.m. Present at the
call to order were Senators Olson, Micciche, and Chair Dunleavy.
Senator Stedman arrived soon thereafter.
SB 52-PORTABLE ELECTRONICS INSURANCE
1:33:53 PM
CHAIR DUNLEAVY announced the consideration of SB 52 and asked
for a motion to adopt the work draft committee substitute (CS).
SENATOR MICCICHE moved to adopt CS for SB 52, labeled 28-
LS0461\N, as the working document.
CHAIR DUNLEAVY objection for discussion purposes.
1:34:35 PM
SENATOR JOHN COGHILL, sponsor of SB 52, explained that the bill
provides more nimble insurance for portable electronic devices
and establishes a best practices rule for Alaska. He deferred
the detailed explanation to his intern Kari Nore.
1:35:49 PM
KARI NORE, Intern to Senator John Coghill, sponsor of SB 52
stated that this legislation seeks to bring structure to the
electronics insurance market and protect consumers. She
explained that homeowner's insurance does not necessarily cover
the theft of a portable electronic device, like a laptop
computer, from the homeowner's car or home. She offered to
provide a sectional analysis of SB 52.
CHAIR DUNLEAVY suggested she hit the major spots and the
committee would ask questions.
MS. NORE explained that a main point of the bill adds portable
electronics insurance to the list of insurances that are not
included under "service contract." Section 2 adds a new
subsection [AS 21.03.021(g)] to clarify that Title 21 does not
apply to a portable electronics manufacturer's warranty or
extended warranty. Section 4 adds a new paragraph (8) [to AS
21.27.150(a)] to allow the director of insurance to issue a
portable electronics limited producer license to a vendor that
sells or offers portable electronics insurance. The license
covers the vendor and employees for all locations in the state
where the vendor sells the products. The employees do not have
to be licensed as long as they are not compensated based on the
sale of insurance, the vendor has a training program, and the
vendor maintains a registry.
1:38:23 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE summarized that a business like ACS or Radio
Shack has the license to sell the insurance and employees of the
business can sell under that license as long as their
compensation isn't based on the sale of that insurance.
MS. NORE agreed. She continued to explain that Section 5 defines
portable electronics insurance, lists the materials that must be
presented to the consumer in writing, defines the procedure for
modification of the terms of the insurance, defines the
procedures to terminate the insurance, and lists the types of
devices that will be covered under portable electronics
insurance.
Section 6 provides an effective date of January 1, 2014 to allow
the Division of Insurance time to complete installation of a new
software program for data entry. This will prevent the bill from
having a fiscal impact.
1:39:51 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE described the legislation as timely, and noted
that Alaska will be the 44th state to adopt this legislation.
SENATOR OLSON questioned why the sponsor was bringing the
legislation forward if there were no complaints.
MS. NORE responded that the legislation was proactive and
anticipated what could be a problem in the near future.
SENATOR OLSON questioned the need to pass a law that addresses a
problem that doesn't exist now and because technology changes so
quickly, might not address an issue that arises in five or ten
years.
1:41:15 PM
RYNNIEVA MOSS, staff for Senator Coghill, said the sponsor has
been convinced that portable electronic devices are creating a
new industry in the insurance world and regulation is needed.
Consumers need to know if they are receiving coverage when they
purchase the produce or if they're paying for separate insurance
coverage. Because of nuances in this industry, the sponsor feels
regulation is justified.
SENATOR OLSON asked if states that have similar legislation have
had complaints from consumers.
MS. MOSS acknowledged that she didn't know and emphasized that
the intent is to protect the consumer.
SENATOR MICCICHE commented that replacing electronic devices can
be expensive and he would be interested in the product.
CHAIR DUNLEAVY asked if evidence from other states indicates
that in the future Alaska will need such a law and that the
sponsor was being proactive.
MS. NORE confirmed that the sponsor was preemptively introducing
the legislation to ensure consumer protection in the future.
1:44:54 PM
SENATOR OLSON asked what insurance companies think of this type
of legislation.
MS. NORE said she was not aware of any opposition to the bill.
MS. MOSS highlighted that vendors of insurance have objected to
the language on page 6, lines 10-16, because it requires
additional recordkeeping and paperwork. She explained that the
sponsor included the language to accommodate the division of
insurance, but the current director has indicated that he would
not object to removing the language. One company also raised
concern with existing statutory language on page 2, line 9,
relating to power surges. She said she wanted further
clarification before deleting that language, because it
addresses service contracts and the bill addresses portable
electronics insurance.
1:46:59 PM
BRET S. KOLB, Director, Division of Insurance, Department of
Commerce, Community and Economic Development (DCCED) offered to
answer questions.
SENATOR OLSON asked if the department supported the bill.
MR. KOLB answered that the department is supportive of SB 52.
CHAIR DUNLEAVY asked if he sees any issues with the bill.
MR. KOLB confirmed that he did not object to removing the
language on page 6. The division has sufficient authority to
provide needed protections so that language is redundant.
CHAIR DUNLEAVY removed his objection, and version N was before
the committee.
He stated that he would hold SB 52 in committee for further
consideration.
1:48:38 PM
At ease
SB 55-INSURER'S USE OF CREDIT SCORES
CHAIR DUNLEAVY announced the consideration of SB 55 and stated
that the bill would not move from committee today.
1:51:00 PM
STEVE RICCI, Staff to the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee,
introduced SB 55 speaking to the following sponsor statement:
[Original punctuation provided.}
Under current law (AS 21.36.460), an insurer writing
new personal insurance policies in Alaska may consider
a consumer's credit information to underwrite or rate
a policy. An insurer may consider the information at
renewal only if the consumer affirmatively requests
the continued use. Under current statute, "personal
insurance policies" include property/casualty
insurance policies purchased by individuals for
personal use, such as homeowner's coverage or motor
vehicle coverage. This does not include life, health,
disability or commercial property & casualty.
The authorization for the use of credit information
has been interpreted by the Supreme Court of Alaska
(Alaska Division of Insurance v. Progressive, 2007) to
require insurers to "strip-out" the impact of credit
information on premium when the policy renews. They
must also remove credit information for a policy after
two years; the duration of underwriting. Alaska is the
only state in the nation with these renewal-based
restrictions, which leaves many Alaskans with non-
competitive policies.
A survey of Alaska personal insurance policy writers
in 2009-2010 showed that the credit score restriction
has increased premium rates for many Alaskans by as
much as 42 percent. In some cases, credit information
has been shown by numerous studies as an accurate
predictor of risk. Risk assessment tools provide
insurers the ability to offer consumers lower rates.
Removing credit information has meant higher personal
insurance rates for many Alaskans.
MR. RICCI explained that the bill amends current statute to
allow insurers to use credit scores when renewing an insurance
policy. Under current law, an insurer may consider a consumer's
credit information when writing a new insurance policy, but not
at renewal. Section 2 deletes language from the definition of
"adverse action" and requires insurers to notify consumers if
they are negatively impacted by the use of their credit score.
He noted that the bill has a zero fiscal note.
1:53:30 PM
SENATOR OLSON asked why an insurer would use a consumer's credit
score to determine insurance rates.
MR. RICCI explained that credit is just one factor in the matrix
that insurance companies use to assess risk, and a number of
studies have shown that it is a good predictor of loss
potential.
SENATOR OLSON asked if other, more reliable predictors were
available.
MR. RICCI clarified that the credit score is just one tool;
experience, history, age, and other factors are also considered
to determine an insurance score.
SENATOR OLSON asked him to elaborate on the prohibition in
Section 1 against using an insurance score.
MR. RICCI clarified that based on a 2007 Alaska Supreme Court
decision insurers are only prohibited from using a credit score
when renewing a policy.
SENATOR OLSON asked what happens if somebody doesn't have a
credit score.
MR. RICCI deferred the question to Mr. Brine.
1:56:27 PM
KENTON BRINE, Assistant Vice President and Northwest Regional
Manager, Property Casualty Insurers Association of America,
Olympia, WA, said PCI is a national trade association that
represents about 38 percent of home and auto insurance policies
sold and maintained nationwide. The association has a variety of
carriers with wide experience using credit information.
He explained that Alaska has had a unique statute for more than
10 years. Like many other states, the statue allows insurance
companies to look at credit history when writing a new insurance
policy, but unlike any other state, it prohibits consideration
of that credit information when the policy renews. The law can
be interpreted in more than one way. Insurers recall that it was
the legislature's intent to allow the use of credit both for new
business and at renewal. However, the division of insurance and
some legislator's interpretation was that after two years that
information should be removed because the insurer would know the
policyholder and be able to use other rating criteria to take
the place of credit.
Insurers challenged the law in 2006 and a district court agreed
with the insurance industry. On appeal, the Alaska Supreme Court
ultimately overturned the decision.
MR. BRINE said the effect of the statute for many consumers has
been insurance rate increases for personal line policies, not
commercial, health, life or disability insurance.
CO-CHAIR DUNLEAVY asked if rates have increased because of
averaging.
MR. BRINE replied it has to do with how insurers use credit
information, and it's generally used to provide discounts to
people considered the best risks. A number of studies looking at
the use of credit information in insurance scores all conclude
that there is a strong correlation between a person's personal
financial history and their risk of filing insurance claims.
Insurers look at credit scores in order to price their products
as accurately as possible and match them with people according
to the risk they represent. In most cases, consumers' credit is
good enough that either their credit score will not affect them
or they will pay less for insurance because they represent a
better risk.
2:01:16 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN joined the committee.
MR. BRINE said that since most consumers benefit from the use of
credit scores, removing the good credit discount results in
higher insurance rates for those people. The people that benefit
are those that represent a higher risk; they pay less because
the people that represent a lower risk subsidize them. One side
result when somebody finds out their rate is going up is that
they look for insurance with another company. That creates churn
and disruption in the marketplace.
MR. BRINE related that when PCI conducted a survey of carriers
writing policies in Alaska it found that, of those reporting, 40
percent of personal auto policies and 30 percent of homeowner
insurance policies saw rate increases of between 11 percent and
20 percent as a direct result of losing the good credit
discount. The most significant increases applied to about one
quarter of auto insurance policyholders and about 40 percent of
homeowner policyholders for no other reason than that the
statute requires the removal of credit information and the
rerating of the consumer at renewal.
2:04:30 PM
He opined that the Alaska experience demonstrates the difference
between myths and realities of credit scoring. The myths include
the notion that credit has nothing to do with how a person
drives of whether their house is going to catch fire. However,
many studies show that there is a direct correlation between
risk and established patterns of living.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked if the court decision was the result of a
constitutional or statute issue.
MR. BRINE said the court based its decision on the statutory
language. The specific reference to two years is not in the
statute and was not addressed by the court. It was in a
regulation or bulletin from the insurance division that the
industry has abided.
MR. BRINE recapped that the use of credit information by
insurers saves money for most Alaska consumers and prevents
cross subsidization, which insurers believe is unfair to
consumers. A PCI survey has demonstrated that the Alaska statute
costs Alaskan consumers money. The statute also discourages
insurers from entering the Alaska market.
He said that SB 55 does not change existing safeguards in the
statute. It allows insurers to consider credit information when
renewing a policy and it clarifies the adverse action notice
provisions of the statute. Insurers would be required to send an
adverse action notice when the current rate is not as good as
the rate the consumer would have received if the insurer did not
look at credit.
2:10:16 PM
ELIZABETH MOCERI, Director, State and Legislative Affairs for
Alaska, Allstate Insurance Company, introduced herself.
GARY STRANNIGAN, Liberty Mutual Group and Safeco Insurance,
Seattle, WA, introduced himself.
SENATOR OLSON asked how an individual is treated if their credit
rating drops through no fault of their own.
MR. BRINE pointed out that an insurance score is usually a
combination of credit and other factors, and someone having an
anomaly probably doesn't mean that they'll immediately pay a
higher insurance rate. However, they might pay more if they're
in a group of people who suffered similar anomalies.
SENATOR OLSON asked how insurers compensate when the stock
market plunges and credit scores go down for a group of people.
2:13:06 PM
MS. MOCERI explained that insurers use credit factors to put a
consumer into a tier based on that underlying credit-based
information, but the insurer does not rerun the consumer's
credit again on renewal. The bill wouldn't change that, but
would allow the insurer to keep the discount that the consumer
already has. She said that 60 percent of Allstate's Alaska
customers have been affected by this, which has been expensive
and disruptive to the marketplace. She concluded that Alaska
isn't an attractive place for insurers because of the unique
interpretation on running credit on renewal of a policy
2:15:31 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE asked where in the bill it says credit won't be
rerun on renewal.
MS. MOCERI replied the bill doesn't mention anything that allows
an insurer to rerun credit.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked if it discourages an insurer from
rerunning a credit report.
MS. MOCERI reiterated that insurers can't rerun credit on
renewal and are required to strip-out the credit information on
renewal. SB 55 allows insurers to keep their customers in the
same tiers when the policy is renewed.
2:17:12 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE asked if this would make it significantly more
expensive for a young, struggling family to get insurance.
2:17:45 PM
MR. STRANNIGAN said that since 2008 people have been paying down
their debts and credit scores have gradually improved, on an
average basis, nationwide. He reiterated that studies support
that credit is an accurate predictor of risk and that people
establish patterns of responsibility. They don't partition the
responsible parts of their lives.
He highlighted that in Alaska 72 percent of Safeco's auto
insurance customers and 76 percent of their homeowner insurance
customers receive either positive or neutral treatment from
credit being included, but 80-85 percent receive an adverse
action notice. He emphasized that Alaska is a small, remote
market that has a unique statute that makes it very costly to
write insurance. He opined that SB 55 would go a long way to
drop barriers and enhance competition to the benefit of Alaska
insurance consumers.
2:23:22 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE asked if the bill would create a comparatively
more expensive market for people who are doing their best but
might not have the best credit score.
MR. BRINE opined that making it easier for carriers to write
insurance would be the single best help for families that are
having a difficult time. He also pointed out that the statute is
merely allowing something to continue that is already in place
for new policies. Insurance companies have to deal with
probability and statistics and they are looking for the best
tools possible to tie rates to anticipated behavior. The
information available suggests that credit information is among
the strongest predictors available for risk of loss.
SENATOR MICCICHE recapped that the answer is yes; insurance
companies are currently averaging and the law of basic economics
says that more expense will shift to lower income people with
lower credit scores.
MR. BRINE clarified that there is no correlation between low
incomes and lower credit scores.
SENATOR MICCICHE cautioned that insurance costs could go up for
people who are having difficulty maintaining their credit
scores.
2:27:29 PM
SENATOR OLSON asked what adjustment is made for people who try
to get insurance but don't have a credit history because they
pay cash for everything.
MS. MOCERI explained that the system describes those people as a
"no hit" and they get a neutral score. She added that an
insurance score is based on how the person manages what they
have rather than how much they have. Customers are given an
insurance score and placed in a tier. On renewal, 60 percent
lose their credit discount and they end up subsidizing customers
with greater risk. When good risk customers get a rate increase
they tend to change companies, whereas the higher risk customers
stay because they get a rate decrease. This inaccurate rating
affects the entire book of business and gives a higher expense
ratio, which in turn raises everybody's rates.
SENATOR MICCICHE expressed concern about the uninsured motorist
problem in Alaska and cautioned against doing anything to
encourage that number to increase. He suggested there may be
need for something like a SR-22 program or stripped barren
insurance policy for those who can no longer make it because of
a combination of their credit and insurance scores.
MS. MOCERI explained that Alaska has an assigned market risk
pool for people who do not qualify for auto insurance and it's
subsidized by the insurance industry. She emphasized that the
first factor in reducing the numbers of uninsured drivers is to
make insurance affordable and available. The industry feels that
Alaska would be a more attractive marketplace if it did not have
a court decision that was out of line with the rest of the
country and if it did modernize its regulatory system.
2:33:30 PM
CINDA SMITH, Senior Counsel, GEICO, said GIECO supports SB 55 to
allow credit to be used at renewal. She noted that the committee
previously heard that the current requirements result in some
policies receiving a higher rate and some undeservedly receiving
a lower rate and GEICO feels that is so fundamentally unfair
that it does not use credit even though it would benefit most
consumers. Additionally, requiring the waiver to be in writing
is burdensome.
2:35:05 PM
ALEX HAGELI, Property Casualty Insurers Association of America,
Olympia, WA, emphasized that the use of credit information at
renewal is not prohibited under Alaska law, but policyholders
have to ask for it to be used at renewal. He also pointed out
that a number of insurance companies disregard a lower rescore
when a policy renews because they want to keep the customer.
2:37:07 PM
CHAIR DUNLEAVY announced that he would hold SB 55 in committee.
He explained that he introduced the bill to explore whether it
was good public policy for some insurance consumers to subsidize
others.
2:38:28 PM
MR STRANNIGAN said that in light of Senator Micciche's questions
he thought it would be useful to know about a 2007 initiative in
the state of Oregon that would have banned insurers from using
credit for homeowner and auto policies. At the outset, 75
percent of voters wanted to approve the ban, but the initiative
failed when voters learned that people with good credit would be
subsidizing those with bad credit.
2:39:38 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Dunleavy adjourned the Senate Labor and Commerce Standing
Committee meeting at 2:39 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB52_Legislation_Summary.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB52_Sponsor_Statement.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB52_States_with_Similar_Legislation.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB52_Support_Letter_ATT.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB52_VersionA.PDF |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB55_Full_Text.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB 55 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Alaska_Credit.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Support Letter_GEICO.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Support Letter_LibertyMutal.PDF |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Support_Letter 1.msg |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Support_Letter.msg |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Support_Letter_Progressive.PDF |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Support_Letter_ReedElsevier.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Support_Letter2.msg |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Support_Letter3.msg |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Support_Letter3.msg |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Support_Letter4.msg |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Support_GeicoCorp.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB 55 Support_Letter_Progressive.docx |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_AK credit_One_Page_Analysis.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB055-DCCED-DOI-02-22-13.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Sponsor_Statement.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB52_Sectional Analysis_2.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB52_CS_Sectional_Analysis_VersionN.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB55_Support_Letter6.msg |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Support_Letter7.msg |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| CS_SB52_VersionN.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB55_Support_Letter8.msg |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Support Letter_CountryFincial.msg |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Support_Letter5.msg |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Support_Letter_StateFarm.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_CreditScore_QuartileData.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_CreditScore_QuartileData2.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB 55, CBIS NAMIC's written testimony.docx |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB52_Backup_Article1.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB52_Backup_Article2.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB52_Backup_Article3.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB55_Opposition_Letter.pdf |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |
| SB55_Support_Letter9.msg |
SL&C 2/26/2013 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/19/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 55 |