Legislature(2003 - 2004)
02/20/2003 01:45 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE BILL NO. 9
An Act relating to the registration of individuals who
perform home inspections; relating to regulation of
contractors; relating to registration fees for
specialty contractors, home inspectors, and associate
home inspectors; relating to home inspection
requirements for residential loans purchased or
approved by the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation;
relating to civil actions by and against home
inspectors and to civil actions arising from
residential unit inspections; and providing for an
effective date.
Vice-Chair Meyer MOVED to ADOPT the committee substitute,
#23-LS0029, Lauterbach, 2/19/03, as the version of the bill
before the Committee. There being NO OBJECTION, the
committee substitute was adopted.
REPRESENTATIVE NORM ROKEBERG outlined the changes made to
the committee substitute.
· Page 1, Line 6: Added language to the title reflecting
the repeal in Section 41 of the bill.
· Page 5, Line 27 & Page 6, Line 8: Added a requirement
that the home inspector put his registration number on
the pre-inspection contract, as well as the final
report.
· Page 10, Lines 12 & 13: Included exception to the
statute of limitations for intentional acts or gross
negligence by the home inspector.
TAPE HFC 03 - 22, Side B
Representative Rokeberg continued highlighting the changes
made to the committee substitute.
· Page 10, Line 15: Rewrote subsection © to be in the
affirmative. Only a party to the real estate
transaction, or someone who received written permission
to use the home inspection report could sue the home
inspector.
Representative Whitaker referenced Page 10(C), #2, and asked
if he should assume that would be the attorney for the
person who is a party to the transaction.
Representative Rokeberg explained that the provisions of the
bill assume that anyone that has the report must have a
written consent of the person that paid for it. There has
been a problem with the reports being 'passed' around to
various people. It is conceivable that the manner in which
the legislation is drafted, the report could be in
possession of that person and it would be 'legal'.
Subsequently, that is under appeal.
Representative Stoltze distributed a document, which had
been submitted by one of his constituents. (Copy on File).
Representative Joule referenced the letter in member's
packets from Husky Enterprises. (Copy on File). He noted
the statements on Page 2, indicating that the legislation
would drive the cost of home inspections up in rural Alaska.
Mr. Huss noted that construction in Anchorage, Fairbanks and
Juneau and other large cities would not be affected by the
legislation, as the municipal inspectors are 'exempt' from
licensing. He indicated that the legislation would only
target new construction in rural Alaska.
Representative Rokeberg advised that it was not his intent
to create higher costs for inspections; that process was
accomplished by not providing a board. He noted that the
costs of a bond would be $5,000 dollars. Representative
Rokeberg indicated that it is not inappropriate to add
inspectors to the contractor's licensure. The actual
licensure would cost $125 dollars per year. He added that
regarding the issue of continuing education, the bill does
provide the Division of Occupational Licensing draft
regulations as a form of communication. The bill is not
intended to avoid those costs and that the level of costs
for the licensure is small.
Representative Rokeberg addressed concerns with focusing.
It is true that local building code is enforced by the
building officials, however, are not enforced in all areas
of the State. The point is that the bill does exempt local
inspectors under municipal licensure. He pointed out that
Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) has supported the
bill since inception.
Representative Joule reiterated concerns voiced by Mr. Huss
of Husky Enterprises, noting how the legislation could
'drive' rural inspectors out of business. Should that
scenario happen, village areas would be faced with bringing
inspectors in from Anchorage to perform the inspections,
which would incur additional costs.
Vice-Chair Meyer asked if the costs to the State would be
recouped through the fees paid by the homebuilders.
Representative Rokeberg agreed and reiterated that there
would be no impact on the general fund.
Representative Foster MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #1. (Copy on
File). The amendment would delete "homebuilders" on Page 7,
Line 7, and insert "home building". Representative
Rokeberg acknowledged that the change was minimal.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was adopted.
Representative Foster MOVED to report CS HB 9 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
CS HB 9 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with zero fiscal note #1 by the
Department of Revenue, zero fiscal note #2 by the Department
of Law, zero fiscal note #3 by the Department of Labor &
Workforce Development, and fiscal note #4 by the Department
of Community & Economic Development.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|