Legislature(2005 - 2006)BUTROVICH 205
05/03/2005 08:30 AM Senate JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB33 | |
| HB184 | |
| HB210 | |
| HB149 | |
| HB81 | |
| HB183 | |
| HB201 | |
| SB74 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 74 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 165 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 33 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 81 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 149 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 183 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 184 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 201 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 210 | TELECONFERENCED | |
CSHB 33(FIN)-EFFECT OF REGULATIONS ON SMALL BUSINESSES
8:44:11 AM
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS announced HB 33 to be up for consideration.
MR. MIKE PAWLOWSKI, staff to Representative Kevin Meyer
introduced HB 33. The bill is modeled on the Federal Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980, which saved small businesses over $17
billion last year in compliance costs. Several states have
instituted a version of HB 33. The administration and the state
chamber of commerce support the bill.
8:44:58 AM
SENATOR GUESS asked Mr. Pawlowski to explain the excluded list
on Page 3, lines 17-24.
MR. PAWLOWSKI said the exclusions on lines 18-20 are subject to
confirmation by the Legislature and made up of individuals who
represent the interest of industry. Lines 21-23 are a series of
statutory authority for the Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC).
8:47:32 AM
The Local Boundary Commission was outside the intent of the
sponsor. The issues related to Medicaid and Medicare cost
reimbursement regulations were removed saving the state a large
amount of money.
8:49:01 AM
Senator Charlie Huggins and Senator Gene Therriault joined the
committee.
SENATOR GUESS asked the reason the four agencies are detailed on
Page 4, lines 15-19.
MR. PAWLOWSKI responded the bill started with economic effect
then moved to the "govern the conduct" standard. They quickly
found an absurd amount of regulations and agencies. The primary
agencies listed narrow things down to a pilot program.
8:50:35 AM
SENATOR GUESS asked the reason for not including the Department
of Revenue.
MR. PAWLOWSKI responded the concern was largely based on taxing
and reporting requirements for taxes.
SENATOR GUESS asked the reason there was no sunset.
MR. PAWLOWSKI explained the four departments listed on Page 4,
lines 15-19 tell businesses how to conduct their business. The
agencies affected outside the Department of Community and
Economic Development (DCED), believe they can absorb the costs
within their agencies, which is why there are fiscal notes.
8:52:54 AM
SENATOR GUESS stated for the record there would be an
opportunity cost because a state employee will be performing an
extra duty.
MR. PAWLOWSKI clarified HB 33 only applies to new, proposed, or
regulations that are opened under the petition process.
8:54:31 AM
SENATOR FRENCH stated the model act calls for cutoff of 500
employees and HB 33 calls for cutoff at 100. He asked Mr.
Pawlowski the reason for the difference.
MR. PAWLOWSKI directed committee members to a list in their
packets, which is based on the employee size of the business.
The bill is tailored to the needs of Alaska.
SENATOR FRENCH asked the watchdog agency in charge of ensuring
the flexibility analysis is happening at the regulatory process.
MR. PAWLOWSKI answered DCED.
8:57:23 AM
MR. CHRIS KENNEDY, assistant attorney general, Department of Law
(DOL), testified he has been working closely with Representative
Meyer's staff. Governor Murkowski asked to exclude resource
development regulations from the bill at this time because of
the risk of delay.
8:59:36 AM
MR. KENNEDY continued HB 33 would not add much new process. The
intent is to restructure what the agencies are already doing and
impose a little structure to ensure that when considering the
regulations they are thinking specifically about the impact on
small businesses.
9:02:33 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS moved CSHB 33(FIN) from committee with
individual recommendations and attached fiscal note(s). There
being no objection, the motion carried.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|