Legislature(2023 - 2024)DAVIS 106
03/29/2023 06:00 PM House WAYS & MEANS
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 | |
HB110 | |
HB142 | |
Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ | TELECONFERENCED | ||
*+ | HB 142 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+ | TELECONFERENCED | ||
*+ | HB 110 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 110-PERM FUND; XFER DIVIDEND PROG TO APFC 6:33:38 PM CHAIR CARPENTER announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 110, "An Act relating to the Alaska permanent fund; relating to permanent fund dividends and the dividend fund; transferring the dividend program from the Department of Revenue to the Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation; relating to the duties of the Department of Revenue; relating to the duties of the Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation; and providing for an effective date." 6:34:04 PM The committee took a brief at-ease. [Chair Carpenter passed the gavel to Vice Chair McCabe.] 6:34:37 PM CHAIR CARPENTER, as prime sponsor of HB 110, read the following sponsor statement [included in the committee packet], which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: For almost thirty years, Alaskans could count on their annual dividend checks as the state legislature followed the law that directed the dividend to be paid by a statutory formula. Since 2017, the permanent fund dividend has been subjected to the budget process, where the dividend competes with government spending and cutting the dividend often becomes the deficit reduction solution. HB 110 returns the permanent fund dividend to a statutory transfer and takes it out of the appropriation process. HB 110 ensures the growth of the permanent fund. HB 110 eliminates one of two potentially conflicting sections of statute that calculate income available for distribution from the permanent fund. The remaining calculation of income available for distribution from the permanent fund will be a five- year average of five percent of market value of the fund. HB 110 preserves Governor Hammond's vision of the dividend being the first call on the distribution from the fund. The first call on the distribution will be for the required payment of dividends of fifty percent of the POMV draw. HB 110 preserves the corpus of the permanent fund. After the required dividend payment, the remainder of the fifty percent POMV allowable draw, or the balance of the earnings reserve fund, whichever is less, will be available for government spending. HB 110 transfers the administration of the permanent fund dividend from the department of revenue to the permanent fund corporation. The dividend fund will therefore be transferred to the permanent fund corporation. While an amendment to Alaska's Constitution in needed to enable a constitutional dedication of income from the permanent fund, HB 110 makes the intent of the legislature to pay a dividend by statute clear. 6:36:57 PM KENDRA BROUSSARD, Staff, Representative Ben Carpenter, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Carpenter, prime sponsor, provided the sectional analysis of HB 110 [included in the committee packet], which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: Sections 1-21 Conforming language for the transfer of the permanent fund dividend program from the Department of Revenue to the Permanent Fund Corporation. Section 22 Removes the District Court's jurisdiction over review of the constitutionality of the dividend payment. Sections 23-28 Conforming language for the transfer of the permanent fund dividend program from the Department of Revenue to the Permanent Fund Corporation. Section 29 Amends Public Finance statute to eliminate one of two conflicting calculations for the income available for distribution from the permanent fund earnings reserve account. The income available for distribution from the account is five percent of the average market value of the fund (POMV) (permanent fund balance, including the earnings reserve fund) for the first five of the preceding six years. Section 30 Requires the Permanent Fund Corporation to make the annual permanent fund dividend payment without appropriations. The dividend amount is calculated as 50 percent of the amount available for distribution, or 50 percent of the five percent average POMV from Section 29 but shall never exceed the balance in the earnings reserve fund. Section 31 Conforms the Amerada Hess language that does not allow income from the settlement to be available for distribution for the dividend or general fund. Section 32 Allows the legislature to appropriate an amount from the earnings reserve account to the state general fund to spend on government. Section 33 Limits the combined total transfer from the earnings reserve fund to the dividend fund and to the general fund to the lesser of 5% POMV and the balance of the earnings reserve fund. Section 34 Conforms the mental health trust language that does not allow the net income from the trust to be available for distribution for the dividend or the general fund. Section 35-45 Conforming language for the transfer of the permanent fund dividend program from the Department of Revenue to the Permanent Fund Corporation. Section 46 Provides for a transition for the transfer of administration of the dividend program to the permanent fund corporation and transfers the balance of the dividend fund to the permanent fund on July 1, 2024. Section 47 Provides for an effective date of July 1, 2024. 6:39:27 PM The committee took a brief at-ease. 6:39:50 PM CHAIR CARPENTER, addressing the fiscal notes, pointed out the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) component 981 would allocate funds to the Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) division. He stated that transferring the permanent fund program from the Department of Revenue (DOR) to the Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation (APFC) would result in a reduction of $8.5 million in fiscal year 2024 (FY 24). He read the analysis to the fiscal note [included in the committee packet], which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: This bill transfers the duties of administering the Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) program from the Department of Revenue to the Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation (APFC). This includes determining the value of each dividend and the payment of each dividend. The bill also moves the Dividend Fund to APFC as a separate fund within the Corporation. This fiscal note assumes the Permanent Fund Dividend Division moves from the Taxation and Treasury appropriation to the Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation appropriation. He explained the second DOR fiscal note, OMB number 109. He said that there are asterisks in the space for FY 24, which represents that the figure is indeterminate. He read the analysis of the second fiscal note [included in the committee packet], which read as follows [original punctuation provided, with some formatting changes]: HB 110 seeks to make several changes to the state's permanent fund dividend program (PFD program). Among these is transfer of the management of the PFD program from the Commissioner of the Department of Revenue to the Executive Director of the Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation. This fiscal note pertains only to this element of HB 110. An important dynamic to understand is that the Department of Revenue is an integral part of the administrative enterprise of the State of Alaska. The Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation (APFC) is a quasi-public corporation that is almost entirely segregated from the State's administrative enterprise. As a division in the Department of Revenue, the Permanent Fund Dividend Division (PFDD) is reliant on certain services provided by multiple state agencies, including the Department of Revenue, Office of Information Technology, Division of Finance, Division of Shared Services, and the Criminal Investigations Unit. Removing PFDD from the State's administrative enterprise would require APFC to replicate the administrative infrastructure on which the PFD Division currently relies. While this is not an impossible transition project, it is a project that would require substantial resources, planning and care in project execution. APFC would need to create and provide IT, cybersecurity, accounting, and administrative support and infrastructure to PFDD. Since PFDD maintains the confidential personal and banking information of most Alaskans, the highest degree of care must be taken during the transition to ensure the information remains secure and its integrity maintained. At this time, APFC's assessment of the costs of this project are necessarily rough estimates, and therefore this fiscal note is indeterminate. To achieve any degree of accuracy in budgeting for the costs of such a project, APFC would likely need to procure a project manager experienced in major data and system transition and implementation. APFC estimates the cost of a project manager to scope this project and prepare a project plan would be approximately $100,000-$250,000. The following is a summary of projected costs that APFC can currently envision that would be in addition to the current budget of PFDD. IT Costs Replace Office of Information Technology Functions. PFDD currently budgets $200.0 Inter-Agency for OIT support services. APFC estimates incremental costs of $409.0 to add four new positions to cover all core IT services (user administration, helpdesk, cloud server administration etc.): $217.0 Personal Services. Two helpdesk positions (IT Specialist) needed to match a doubled workforce. $392.0 Personal Services. Two infrastructure positions (IT Specialist) needed to match a doubled workforce and manage the new workload in Azure and cloud administration. Licensing for SQL servers, Windows workload servers, M365 cloud Software as a Service licensing, Azure services and Data Storage. PFDD currently budgets $111.7 Inter-Agency to OIT for licenses and IT infrastructure. APFC estimates incremental costs of $109.0 Services. Network. PFDD currently pays $15.0 for network access. APFC anticipates a doubling of its current network cost from $12.0 to $24.0. This would represent a savings of $3.0. Horizon Virtual Desktop Interface licensing. APFC anticipates a doubling of its current costs. This would be an incremental cost of $90.0 Services. PFDD Workstations. APFC would add PFDD to its three-year refresh cycle. APFC estimates an incremental cost of $300.0 Commodities. PFDD Applications Security. PFDD has a number of applications: Dividend Application Information System (DAIS), Revenue Permanent Fund Information System (RPFI), and the ILINX imaging system. APFC would need to evaluate each application for security as well as determination whether to locate the application in the Microsoft Azure Cloud. APFC does not have a cost estimate at this time for this item. PFD Application Portal. PFDD currently relies on the OIT myAlaska portal to manage online applications and identity verification. APFC would need to replicate a secure and resilient portal to replace myAlaska. APFC does not have a cost estimate at this time for this item. PFDD Applications Upgrade. APFC anticipates a need for a rebuild of PFDD applications into a contiguous and agile ecosystem. A goal here is increased security, increased automation, improved PFD application processing time, and enhanced flexibility on PFD distribution. APFC does not have a cost estimate at this time for this item. Finance and Investment Costs Modifications to Accounting System. Consulting time will be required to export and import data files. APFC estimates one-time incremental costs of $20.0 Services. Align Accounting Positions for Management of the PFD Fund. Investment management of the PFD Fund would have to be done under a different asset allocation with separate reporting and tracking of expenses. The PFDD accounting positions would need to be aligned with the APFC accounting positions. APFC estimates an incremental cost of $50.0 Personal Services. Financial Audit. APFC would assume the responsibility to obtain an independent audit of PFDD and the PFD Fund. APFC estimates incremental costs of $75.0 Services. Other Costs Office Rent. APFC does not anticipate any changes to PFDD's Anchorage and Fairbanks office space. To the extent that removal of PFDD from the State's administrative enterprise requires relocation of PFDD out of the State Office Building, there may be incremental costs for rent, moving and office build-out. APFC does not have a cost estimate at this time for these items. 6:50:38 PM REPRESENTATIVE GRAY, having reviewed the second fiscal note, expressed the opinion that moving the PFD program from DOR to APFC would be extraordinarily difficult, expensive, and risky for the Alaska public. He questioned whether the proposed legislation could accomplish the intent without moving the program. CHAIR CARPENTER responded that dividends would continue to be paid from DOR; however, the bill would solve a political problem by stabilizing the way the state carries out dividend distributions. It would take the dividend out of the appropriation process and change the way the legislature manages the PFD program. He said that the proposed legislation would be moving the program "one step further away" from the legislature and the executive branch. He explained that this would be done by sequestering the fund under the purview of APFC. CHAIR CARPENTER said there are many unknowns in the fiscal note, and the "headspace" is about $8 million from the first fiscal note, which he explained would be the savings generated from DOR and available for the costs to move the permanent fund program to APFC. As to the costs above the $8 million, he said, this is currently unknown and will be unknown until the fund transfer is underway. He reiterated that the policy aim of HB 110 would be to solve the political equation by removing the PFD program from the legislative and executive processes and have the program be a function of APFC; thus, APFC would annually cut checks to Alaskans and the state. He pointed out that to carry out the change, there would need to be a constitutional amendment which repeals Wielechowski v. Alaska, 403 P.3d 1141, (2017). He spoke to the section of HB 110 which would remove jurisdiction of the lower courts. He said this would send the message that the PFD program issue needs to be solved without the legislative, executive, or judicial branch being involved. 6:55:16 PM REPRESENTATIVE GROH expressed the understanding that HB 110 would remove district court jurisdiction over the constitutionality of the dividend payments; therefore, lawsuits could only be held in the superior court. He questioned whether Section 22 of the proposed legislation would be a "messaging section." CHAIR CARPENTER responded in the affirmative, explaining that the constitution prevents the legislature from directing the superior court or supreme court on their jurisdiction. However, he said, Section 22 would be more than just "messaging," as it also conveys that no case could be brought into the lower courts against the state for how the state is managing the APFC dividend program. He offered that this would not likely happen; nonetheless, it would send a message from the legislature to the courts that all three branches of the government are separate from the PFD program and the legislature, "so that we stop fighting over that money." REPRESENTATIVE GROH referred to language within the sectional analysis which relates that APFC would be required to make the annual PFD payment without appropriations. He expressed the understanding of this intention; however, he pointed out that the sponsor statement relates that an amendment to the state's constitution is needed to enable a constitutional dedication of income from the permanent fund. He questioned whether the language is sending the wrong message, in that, the intent of what the legislature wants to do would require a constitutional amendment in order to require annual payments of dividends without legislative appropriation. CHAIR CARPENTER explained that a constitutional amendment would be presented both as a resolution and an accompanying bill, and this would constitutionalize and dedicate the PFD program outside of the appropriations process. REPRESENTATIVE GROH expressed concern that moving the PFD program from DOR and into APFC would confuse or divide the fund's mission by adding an additional function of paying PFDs to APFC. CHAIR CARPENTER related that members of APFC have indicated it would be a new role, but doable. 7:00:59 PM VICE CHAIR MCCABE announced that HB 110 was held over.
Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
---|---|---|
HB0110A.PDF |
HW&M 3/27/2023 6:00:00 PM HW&M 3/29/2023 6:00:00 PM |
HB 110 |
HB110-DOR-APFC-03-24-23.pdf |
HW&M 3/29/2023 6:00:00 PM |
|
HB110-DOR-PFD-03-24-23.pdf |
HW&M 3/29/2023 6:00:00 PM |
HB 110 |
HB 110 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HW&M 3/29/2023 6:00:00 PM |
HB 110 |
HB 110 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HW&M 3/29/2023 6:00:00 PM |
HB 110 |
HB0142A.PDF |
HW&M 3/29/2023 6:00:00 PM HW&M 2/26/2024 6:00:00 PM |
HB 142 |
HB 142 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HW&M 3/29/2023 6:00:00 PM HW&M 2/26/2024 6:00:00 PM |
HB 142 |
HB 142 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HW&M 3/29/2023 6:00:00 PM HW&M 2/26/2024 6:00:00 PM |
HB 142 |
W&M Foundation for Discussion Power Point 3.29.2023 Slide.pdf |
HW&M 3/29/2023 6:00:00 PM |