Legislature(2015 - 2016)CAPITOL 106
02/12/2015 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
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 |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB65 | |
| HB68 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 68 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 65 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 65-LEG./PUB. OFFICIAL FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
8:11:21 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the first order of business was HOUSE
BILL NO. 65, "An Act relating to the disclosure of financial
information by persons who are subject to the Legislative Ethics
Act and by certain public officers, public employees, and
candidates for public office."
8:12:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 65, Version 29-LS0070\E, Wayne, 2/5/15,
as a work draft. There being no objection, Version E was before
the committee.
8:12:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAWKER, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor, introduced HB 65 and explained the changes made in
Version E. He said Version E incorporated an amendment adopted
[during the House State Affairs Standing Committee's meeting on
1/27/15], which revised the filing date to May 15 from April 30.
Further, Version E incorporated work the sponsor did with
[Representative Keller] in order to add clarity in legislative
intent and better direction to the Alaska Public Offices
Commission (APOC) in its ability to grant a waiver to filers
with large client lists, such as doctors, lawyers, attorneys,
accountants, and engineers, so that those filers would not have
to disclose the details of the client list when there would be
"no enhancement of the public good by that disclosure." He said
both his staff and Representative Keller's staff worked with
APOC and Legislative Legal and Research Services to come up with
language that would be acceptable to everyone.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER thanked the sponsor.
8:13:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt Amendment 1, labeled 29-
LS0070\E.1, Wayne, 2/11/15, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Page 1, following line 4:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Section 1. AS 15.13.040(m) is amended to read:
(m) Information required under this chapter shall
be submitted to the commission electronically, except
that the following information may be submitted in
clear and legible black typeface or hand-printed in
dark ink on paper in a format approved by the
commission or on forms provided by the commission:
(1) information submitted by
(A) a candidate for election to a borough or
city office of mayor, membership on a borough
assembly, city council, or school board, or any state
office, who
(i) meets the requirements of (g)(1) - (3)
of this section; or
(ii) does not have reasonable access to the
technology necessary to file electronically; in this
sub-subparagraph, a candidate is considered not to
have reasonable access to the technology necessary to
file electronically if the candidate does not own a
personal computer or does not have broadband Internet
access at the candidate's residence; in this sub-
subparagraph, "broadband Internet access" means high-
speed Internet access that is always on and that is
faster than traditional dial-up access; or
(B) a candidate for municipal office for a
municipality with a population of less than 5,000
according to the latest figures of the United States
Bureau of the Census or other population data that the
Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic
Development determines is reliable [15,000]; in this
subparagraph, "municipal office" means the office of
an elected borough or city
(i) mayor; or
(ii) assembly, council, or school board
member;
(2) any information if the commission
determines that circumstances warrant an exception to
the electronic submission requirement."
Page 1, line 5:
Delete "Section 1"
Insert "Sec. 2"
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 3, following line 5:
Insert "(1) as may be allowed by an exemption
under AS 39.50.145;"
Page 3, line 6:
Delete "(1)"
Insert "(2)"
Page 3, line 7:
Delete "(2)"
Insert "(3)"
Page 3, following line 28:
Insert new bill sections to read:
"* Sec. 7. AS 39.50.050(a) is amended to read:
(a) The Alaska Public Offices Commission created
under AS 15.13.020(a) shall administer the provisions
of this chapter. The commission shall prepare and keep
available for distribution standardized forms on which
the reports required by this chapter shall be filed.
The commission shall print the forms provided under
this section so that the front and back of each page
have the same orientation when the page is rotated on
the vertical axis of the page. The commission shall
require that the information required under this
chapter be submitted electronically but may, when
circumstances warrant an exception, accept the [ANY]
information on paper if the information [REQUIRED
UNDER THIS CHAPTER THAT] is typed in clear and legible
black typeface or hand-printed in dark ink [ON PAPER]
in a format approved by the commission or on forms
provided by the commission; however, regardless of the
circumstances, a [AND THAT IS FILED WITH THE
COMMISSION. A] municipal officer for a municipality
with a population of less than 5,000 according to the
latest figures of the United States Bureau of the
Census or other population data that the Department of
Commerce, Community, and Economic Development
determines is reliable may [15,000 SHALL] submit the
information [REQUIRED UNDER THIS CHAPTER] either
electronically or typed or hand-printed in the manner
described in this subsection.
* Sec. 8. AS 39.50.145 is repealed and reenacted to
read:
Sec. 39.50.145. Participation by municipalities;
exemptions. (a) The municipal officers of a
municipality with a population of less than 1,000 are
exempt from the requirements of this chapter unless
the municipality elects to subject its municipal
officers to the requirements of this chapter. A
municipality with a population of less than 1,000 that
has elected to subject its municipal officers to the
requirements of this chapter may change that election
and exempt its municipal officers from the
requirements.
(b) A municipality with a population of 1,000 or
more may elect to exempt its municipal officers from
the requirements of this chapter. A municipality with
a population of 1,000 or more that has elected to
exempt its municipal officers from the requirements of
this chapter may change that election and subject its
municipal officers to the requirements.
(c) The question of election to be subject to, or
exempt from, the requirements of this chapter
(1) may be submitted to the voters by the
city council or borough assembly by ordinance or by
initiative election; and
(2) shall be decided by a majority of the
voters voting on the question at a regular election,
as defined in AS 29.71.800, or a special municipality-
wide election.
(d) If a municipality votes to terminate an
exemption, the municipality's municipal officers shall
be subject to the requirements of this chapter
beginning 30 days after the certification of the
election.
(e) Population of a municipality under this section
shall be determined based on the latest figures of the
United States Bureau of the Census or other population
data that the Department of Commerce, Community, and
Economic Development determines is reliable."
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES, for the purpose of discussion, objected
to the motion to adopt Amendment 1.
8:14:20 AM
JULI LUCKY, Staff, Representative Mike Hawker, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Hawker, prime sponsor,
offered information on Amendment 1. She said the sponsor's
office had received [recommended language for] Amendment 1 from
APOC and had been working on it for about a week. She explained
that time was needed to conform Amendment 1 to Version E. In
response to Chair Lynn, she confirmed there were "no surprises"
in Amendment 1.
8:15:30 AM
PAUL DAUPHINAIS, Executive Director, Alaska Public Offices
Commission (APOC), stated that Amendment 1 would do two things:
mandate that municipalities with populations of 5,000 or more
file electronically; and exempt those municipalities with a
population of less than 1,000. He said the change would bring
the campaign disclosure statutes into alignment with the public
official financial disclosure statutes, as well as take a burden
off of smaller municipalities.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER, in response to Chair Lynn, said he was
happy to accommodate APOC's request for Amendment 1.
8:18:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS asked for clarification on the
changes that would be made under Amendment 1.
MR. DAUPHINAIS said subject to other statutes related to
electronic reporting, those municipalities of over 5,000 would
file electronically and would no longer have to keep their paper
files or send them to APOC. Communities smaller than 5,000
would have the option to file electronically or on paper. He
stated, "My understanding when this was initially passed some
time ago, was that smaller communities have ... more difficulty
with Internet access, so there's a larger exception for those
communities under 5,000."
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS asked then if it would be accurate
to say that [under Amendment 1], communities of less than 5,000
would be allowed to file electronically as larger than 5,000
communities do.
MR. DAUPHINAIS answered yes, but reiterated that those smaller
communities could also choose paper filing.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS asked Mr. Dauphinais to clarify
that those communities larger than 5,000 already had the ability
to file electronically, but under Amendment 1 would be required
to do so.
MR. DAUPHINAIS answered that is correct.
8:21:40 AM
MS. LUCKY offered that a simple way to view the changes under
Amendment 1 was that communities under 1,000 would be totally
exempt from reporting requirements, but could opt back in.
MR. DAUPHINAIS interjected, "I thought I heard 5,000 as the
population, not 1,000."
MS. LUCKY continued by stating that under Amendment 1 there
would basically be no change for communities with populations
between 1,000 and 5,000; those over 5,000 would be required to
file electronically unless they need another exemption in
statute.
8:22:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS remarked that it seemed perfectly
reasonably to take away the option of paper filing from
communities with populations between 5,000 and 15,000, if that
is what those communities want and asked whether that is the
intent of the amendment,
MS. LUCKY deferred to Mr. Dauphinais for questions regarding the
intent of the amendment, but said she could speak to the
mechanics of it. Notwithstanding that, she opined that
communities with populations between 5,000 and 15,000 brought
this concern to APOC.
8:23:57 AM
MR. DAUPHINAIS confirmed Ms. Lucky was correct. He continued as
follows:
There are also opportunities for those communities, if
it is too difficult to file electronically, they can
file with paper, but this place is more of a
requirement to report electronically on those
communities between 15,000 and 5,000. As Ms. Lucky
stated, communities under 5,000 to 1,000, nothing's
really changed for them.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER clarified that he was comfortable with
Amendment 1 in that Mr. Dauphinais advised him the communities
that would be affected had requested the change.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS said the explanations that had
been provided made him comfortable with Amendment 1.
8:25:16 AM
CHAIR LYNN, after ascertaining no one further wished to testify,
closed public testimony.
8:25:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES removed her objection to the motion to
adopt Amendment 1. There being no further objection, Amendment
1 was adopted.
8:25:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to report CSHB 65, Version 29-
LS0070\E, Wayne, 2/5/15, as amended, out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
There being no objection, CSHB 65(STA) was reported out of the
House State Affairs Standing Committee.