Legislature(2011 - 2012)HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/27/2012 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HJR16 | |
| HB250 | |
| SB30 | |
| HB224 | |
| HB302 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HJR 16 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 250 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 224 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 30 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 302 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE BILL NO. 302
"An Act repealing certain audit requirements for
entities receiving contributions from permanent fund
dividends."
3:43:43 PM
Co-Chair Thomas MOVED to ADOPT proposed committee
substitute for HB 302, Work Draft 27-LS1264\I (Kirsch,
2/23/12).
Co-Chair Stoltze OBJECTED for purpose of discussion.
KACI SCHROEDER-HOTCH, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE BILL THOMAS,
explained that the CS added new Sections 1 and 2. Section 1
clarified that the University of Alaska was required to pay
a $250 application fee to the Pick, Click, Give program for
every program or campus that was submitted. Section 2
outlined that the university should apply for the program
in a manner described by the department.
Co-Chair Thomas noted that the university had found a way
to not pay the application fee for the Pick, Click, Give
program in the past. The bill worked to treat applicants
equally and required all applicants to pay the $250 fee. He
discussed that there was a cost associated with running the
program.
Representative Doogan asked for more detail on the term
"university program."
Co-Chair Thomas noted that there were different programs
within the university system.
Co-Chair Stoltze suspected that there were elements of the
university that had more fundraising success than
individual campuses.
Representative Doogan wondered how much it would cost the
university if the fee was applied program by program.
Co-Chair Thomas explained that non-profit organizations
included in the program all paid the fee to the Department
of Revenue (DOR) to be listed as a recipient. He reiterated
that the goal was to treat all applicants equally.
Co-Chair Stoltze discussed the minimum barrier fee
requirement that had been set at $250 to show that an
entity was a serious fund-raiser. Ms. Schroeder-Hotch
responded in the affirmative.
Vice-chair Fairclough noted her support for the
legislation. She discussed that the university was included
in the drop down list in multiple areas. She clarified that
the university would be required to pay $250 to receive the
benefit of each of its advertising opportunities. She had
received multiple solicitations from the university in her
legislative and private email inboxes; somehow it had
figured out how to avoid paying the $250 fee that non-
profits were required to pay to the program.
3:48:43 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Work Draft 27-LS126\I was ADOPTED.
REPRESENTATIVE PAUL SEATON, SPONSOR, discussed that the
bill had been introduced because he had heard from a number
of small non-profits including the Seward Senior Center.
The center had a $260,000 budget; it had been participating
[in the Pick, Click, Give program], but audit costs were
$15,000 and it had only received approximately $8,000 in
contributions. The question that arose was whether the
audit was necessary for individuals to donate to a charity
that was required to be a 501(c)(3). The program required
entities to maintain their 501(c)(3) status, which involved
the completion of the lengthy Internal Revenue Service
(IRS) 990 form. There was a federal audit requirement that
kicked in if the entity received over $500,000 in federal
funds to distribute. There were multiple non-profits
throughout the state (Juneau Arts and Humanities Council,
Seward Senior Center, Ketchikan library, etc.) that had
difficulty with the $15,000 audit requirement and people
had challenges donating to the entities when they were not
included as non-profits on the Pick, Click, Give program
lists. There had been a common misperception that if an
entity did not appear on the program list that it was no
longer a non-profit organization.
Representative Seaton explained that the bill proposed to
delete the audit requirement for entities with annual
budgets above $250,000 in order to provide equity for
entities included in the program and to avoid confusion
about an organization's non-profit status. He opined that
that the mandatory annual IRS 990 form sufficiently
satisfied all the necessary requirements.
3:52:02 PM
JORDAN MARSHALL, SPECIAL PROJECTS MANAGER, RASMUSON
FOUNDATION, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), thanked the
committee for its support of the Pick, Click, Give program.
He reported that presently $1.59 million had been
contributed to the program since January 1, 2012 by more
than 17,000 Alaskans, which was higher than the prior
year's total; the program was on track to reach $2 million
in donations to the 400-plus organizations and university
campuses.
Mr. Marshall highlighted detail related to the program
filing fee requirement. Every organization that
participated paid an annual filing fee, which covered the
cost of basic administration of the program including
vetting the eligibility of applications, sending out
checks, managing the online donation form, and providing
technical assistance for non-profits wishing to enroll. The
campuses of the University of Alaska were the only
organization entities not paying the fee. The CS clarified
that all names on the program list for permanent fund
dividend charitable contributions were required to pay the
filing fee to help pay the costs associated with
administering the program.
Mr. Marshall clarified that the CS would allow each
individual campus program to elect to pay the filing fee to
be listed separately as a potential beneficiary. He added
that it would be a non-profit's prerogative to decide
whether to submit an application for inclusion in the
program.
Vice-chair Fairclough thanked Mr. Marshall for his work on
the program. She wondered why other non-profits might not
follow the example of the university and submit programs in
$250 increments in order to be listed more frequently on
the program list.
Mr. Marshall replied that each organization was only
entered into the database once, but they could appear in
several different categories depending on the search that
an individual conducted when making a donation. He
expounded that every organization only had one record, but
it could be found in numerous ways depending on which
search characteristics were applied. For example, a person
searching for organizations based in Fairbanks would find
each of the University of Alaska Fairbanks campuses and
rural campuses listed; the campuses would also appear if
the search was related to educational organizations.
3:57:44 PM
Vice-chair Fairclough referred to the Forget Me Not
children program that was housed within the Anchorage
Hospice program. She believed she had seen the various
campuses listed differently in the drop-down menu. She
thought the university was represented in more than just
one form. She wondered whether she needed to direct other
non-profits to start entering specific programs to the
list.
Mr. Marshall responded that each of the university campuses
were listed separately. Currently none of the programs were
listed in the Pick, Click, Give program. There were a
number of non-profits that listed a particular program as
their common name; each organization had an option to be
listed as their official name or a common name (e.g. Anchor
Arms conducted business as Safe Harbor Inn and was
typically listed as Safe Harbor).
Vice-chair Fairclough had heard several years earlier that
a $500 filing fee came closer to covering the program costs
than the current $250 fee. She wondered whether a $500 fee
would be more appropriate.
Mr. Marshall replied that when the filing fee had been
reset there had been a couple of years of data available to
establish the program's basic administration costs. The
$250 fee was a very good guess so that each organization
was making that much or more through the program while
paying for program costs. He relayed that to the best of
his knowledge $250 had been proved to be an excellent
number to enable DOR to carry out its work.
4:02:16 PM
MIKE WALSH, VICE PRESIDENT, FORAKER GROUP, FAIRBANKS (via
teleconference), thanked the committee for the opportunity
to speak on the legislation. He felt it was important to
discuss the purpose of the program audit requirement, but
the group did not have a position on the amount or removal
of the program audit requirement. He was very happy to hear
the update on the progress of the program. The initial idea
of the legislation was to help Alaskans decide where their
charitable dollars should be best spent. Another critical
piece of the bill was related to talking about the ability
of a non-profit to meet the IRS requirements of mission,
fiduciary responsibility, legal responsibility, etc.;
however, there had been no way to add an extra layer of
confidence for a donor. He furthered that the idea behind
the audit requirement was that it was an added level of
scrutiny, which allowed for an outside opinion on the
finances and general management principles of a non-profit
organization.
Dr. Walsh discussed that the reason for the audit
requirement was because donors wanted to have confidence
that an organization would spend their funds well (i.e.
being good stewards of the dollars and spending them in a
way that made the most of the money). He believed the audit
was also a very valuable tool for organizations whether or
not they took part in the Pick, Click, Give program; it was
valuable internally to help organizations track their
management and financial practices and to meet the needs of
external funders who were interested in management
practices.
4:07:31 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze CLOSED public testimony. He referenced the
zero fiscal note.
Co-Chair Thomas MOVED to report CSHB 302(FIN) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note.
Co-Chair Stoltze OBJECTED for discussion. He asked whether
there were any amendments.
Vice-chair Fairclough mentioned she would work with the
sponsor to determine whether one program could have
multiple donation streams. She understood that a donation
to the university as a whole could be used throughout the
university; however, a donation to a specific university
program could only be used for the particular program. She
believed other non-profits should be provided the same
opportunity if the university was allowed to list multiple
programs in the Pick, Click, Give list.
There being NO further OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
CSHB 302(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with one new zero fiscal note from
the Department of Revenue.
Co-Chair Stoltze discussed the schedule for the following
day.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| AFN Support Resolution.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 16 |
| HJR 16 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 16 |
| HJR 16 SHELDON JACKSON v. State.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 16 |
| HJR 16 SCOTUS Voucher.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 16 |
| HJR 16 Rethinking schools.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 16 |
| HJR 16 DC school article.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 16 |
| HB 250 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HB 250 |
| HB 250 -Energy Policy.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HB 250 |
| HB 250 - Supporting Letters.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HB 250 |
| HJR016-UPDATED NEW-OOG-DOE-2-27-12.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 16 |
| HB302 CS WORKDRAFT 27-LS126-I 2.23.12.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HB 302 |
| HJR 16 Response Memo to Rep Garapdf.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 16 |
| HJR 16 AK Const Conv pages 1512 to 1525.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 16 |
| HJR 16 Constit. Convention Proceedings pp. 1525-1529.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 16 |
| HJR16 Zelman v Simmons-Harrispdf.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 16 |
| HJR16 Sheldon Jackson College v State of Alaskapdf.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 16 |
| HJR16 Matthews v Quintonpdf.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 16 |
| HJR16-Alaska-K-12---School-Choice-Survey.pdf.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 16 |
| HJR 16 Additional Testimony.pdf |
HFIN 2/27/2012 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 16 |