Legislature(2025 - 2026)ADAMS 519
04/09/2025 01:30 PM House FINANCE
Note: the audio
and video
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Adjourn | |
| Start | |
| HB23 | |
| HB10 | |
| HB73 |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 23 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 73 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 10 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE BILL NO. 10
"An Act relating to the Board of Regents of the
University of Alaska."
Co-Chair Foster relayed that HB 10 had two prior committee
hearings [March 10, 2025, and March 20, 2025].
1:45:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ASHLEY CARRICK, SPONSOR, briefly reviewed
the bill. She summarized that the legislation would add
one tenured faculty member to the University of Alaska
Board of Regents for a two-year term after a thorough
selection process. The addition of a faculty member would
help the Board of Regents advance its mission and provide
representation to this key stakeholder group.
Representative Tomaszewski asked whether she had any dialog
with the regents regarding adding the faculty member and
what their thoughts on the bill were. Representative
Carrick responded that she had spoken to several current
regents, and the opinions were "mixed." She offered that
the board was slow to make changes and were "reticent"
toward operative changes. She disclosed that some were in
support, some were neutral, and some were opposed to the
idea. Representative Tomaszewski asked if there had been
any letters of support or opposition from regents.
Representative Carrick answered that the board was
officially neutral towards the bill.
Representative Allard voiced that she had spoken to every
member of the board and maintained that the members did not
agree with the legislation.
1:48:30 PM
Representative Stapp asked if anything prohibited current
faculty members from being appointed to the board.
Representative Carrick replied that she did not think it
was restricted, but a faculty member had never been
appointed, and HB 10 rectified a longstanding stakeholder
input issue. The bill clarified that the legislature was in
support of faculty representation. She added that the same
idea had benefited the states that had adopted similar
provisions. Representative Stapp was curious why a faculty
member appointment had never happened. Representative
Carrick responded that typically a board of trustees or a
board of regents typically wanted the base of the governing
body to be members of the business and professional
community to promote workforce development. She expounded
that a board seat was competitive, and the term lasted for
8 years in Alaska. The legislation limited the faculty
member to a two year term, which was requested by the
faculty. They favored turnover to afford broader
representation from other campuses. She believed the longer
term was positive and created stability. Representative
Stapp asked if any other states mandated a faculty regent
via statute. Representative Carrick answered that there
were six state university systems that mandated a faculty
regent. The faculty regent was a full voting member and in
other states they were non-voting. The six states included:
Oregon, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Florida, Kentucky, and
Tennessee.
Representative Galvin appreciated the concept brought
forward around stakeholders being part of the decision
making. She asked about the process regarding the decisions
that must be made concerning faculty salaries.
Representative Carrick deferred the question.
1:53:35 PM
CADENCE CONNER, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE ASHLEY CARRICK STAFF,
responded that there was a thorough process related to
conflict of interest according to AS 39.52.220 a member of
the board or commission who was involved in a prohibited
matter may result in a violation. She read AS 39.52.110,
shall disclose the matter in writing and on the public
record to the designated supervisor and to the attorney
general." A regent would have to conform to statute
regarding a conflict of interest.
Representative Carrick interjected that a conflict would
likely happen very infrequently. The salary negotiations
took place outside of the Board of Regents. In addition,
the student regent was expected to recuse themselves of
issues like a vote that might cut their program. She
offered that potential for conflict issues existed and a
current robust process concerning conflicts also existed.
Representative Bynum wondered whether increasing the number
of members would change the requirement for a quorum and if
it would have caused quorum issues in past meetings.
Representative Carrick responded that typically, board
meetings were fully attended and there were rarely
absences. The board met infrequently and paid for travel to
the meeting. She deemed it unlikely that quorum issues
would arise.
Representative Johnson referenced the six states with
faculty regents, and she could not find that they had full
membership without restrictions. She interpreted that it
was due to a general recognition of concern with a faculty
member being a regent. She had concerns over the issue.
Representative Carrick answered that the six states she
listed were full voting members. She maintained that many
states had an ex-officio or non-voting faculty member(s).
She informed the committee that the structure of the board
looked radically different depending on the state. She
provided other states' examples. The trustee board in
Pennsylvania had 38 members and one full voting faculty
member that was elected by the board. House Bill 10
provided a robust process for appointment by the governor
and a robust process for conflict of interests.
1:59:11 PM
Representative Johnson asked if one of the states was
Oregon and pointed out that the governor appointed the
faculty member and decided if they had voting rights. She
reiterated that in many states a faculty member was not
equal to other members regarding voting rights.
Representative Carrick affirmed that Oregon was one of the
states she had listed.
2:00:21 PM
Co-Chair Schrage MOVED to report HB 10 out of committee
with individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal
notes.
Representative Allard OBJECTED.
Representative Tomaszewski maintained that he did not
support the bill. He commented on the conflict of interest
generated by the addition of a faculty member and
determined that it would be a burden for regents. He
believed that faculty had a way to have their voices heard
through existing processes.
Representative Bynum shared that he was unsure how he would
ultimately vote on the bill. He saw no harm in passing the
bill out of committee.
Representative Stapp had reservations about the bill but
would support moving it from committee.
2:02:49 PM
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Bynum, Johnson, Jimmie, Stapp, Hannan, Galvin,
Schrage, Josephson, Foster
OPPOSED: Tomaszewski, Allard
HB 10 was REPORTED OUT of committee with six "do pass"
recommendations, two "do not pass" recommendations, and
three "no recommendation" recommendations and with one
previously published fiscal impact note: FN1 (UA).
2:03:58 PM
Representative Carrick thanked the committee.
Representative Hannan and Representative Stapp made amusing
closing remarks.
2:04:53 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB073 Bill Summary version A, 2.5.25.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2025 1:30:00 PM |
HB 73 |
| HB073 Presenter List Version A, 2.5.25.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2025 1:30:00 PM |
HB 73 |
| HB073 Presentation Version A, 2.5.25.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2025 1:30:00 PM |
HB 73 |
| HB073 Sectional Analysis Version A, 2.5.25.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2025 1:30:00 PM |
HB 73 |
| HB073 Transmittal Letter Version A, 1.27.25.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2025 1:30:00 PM |
HB 73 |
| HB 23 ASCHR BFOQ memo FINAL 4.8.25.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2025 1:30:00 PM |
HB 23 |
| HB 23 ASCHR BFOQ memo FINAL 4.8.25.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2025 1:30:00 PM |
HB 23 |
| HB 73 CDSE Complex Care Res Homes 040825.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2025 1:30:00 PM |
HB 73 |
| HB 73 Responses to HFIN 4.10.25.Final.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2025 1:30:00 PM |
HB 73 |
| HB 73 Public Testimony Rec'd by 041525.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2025 1:30:00 PM |
HB 73 |