Legislature(2019 - 2020)SENATE FINANCE 532
03/27/2020 09:00 AM Senate 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 |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB242 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 242 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SENATE BILL NO. 242
"An Act relating to tolling deadlines for actions by
state agencies; relating to income determinations for
purposes of determining eligibility for certain public
assistance programs; relating to forbearance from
action against borrowers who owe money on state loans;
relating to a temporary moratorium on certain mortgage
foreclosures, certain evictions from rental
properties, and disconnection of residential
utilities; and providing for an effective date."
11:48:28 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof read the title of the bill. She noted
that the committee had first heard the bill on March 26.
She relayed that the committee would be going through the
amendment process. She discussed the amendment process.
Co-Chair von Imhof requested that members withdraw any
amendments that might need further work rather than trying
to fix amendments at the table without the benefit of the
Legislative Legal Department.
Co-Chair von Imhof MOVED to ADOPT Conceptual Amendment 1:
This is a conceptual amendment. Legislative Legal is
directed to make any changes or deletions to the
suggested language, including technical, conforming,
or bill title changes.
Delete sections 2, 5 and 6
Where appropriate, insert a new bill section to read:
"FINANCIAL ASSITANCE TO ADDRESS HOMELESSNESS
DURING NOVEL CORONOVIRUS DISEASE OUTBREAK. For the
duration of the state emergency and for 30 days
thereafter, subject to appropriation, the Alaska
Housing Finance Corporation under AS 18.56.090 shall
provide financial assistance on a statewide, regional,
or community basis as necessary to address or prevent
homelessness caused by the disaster emergency."
Co-Chair von Imhof OBJECTED for discussion.
11:49:46 AM
JULI LUCKY, STAFF, SENATOR NATASHA VON IMHOF, informed that
she had summarized a list of the proposed amendments for
reference listed by topic (copy on file).
Ms. Lucky spoke to Conceptual Amendment 1. She noted that
there had been movement in the other body, and since most
of the language being considered was being put into
uncodified law, there were unknown consequences to passing
language that did not match provisions from the other side.
She furthered that for legal clarity, the sections in
question were being removed from the bill. She offered to
provide a copy of the bill that passed the House, and
provisions could be offered as floor amendments if changes
were needed. She suggested discussing the matter with the
Legislative Legal Department. She referenced a provision
regarding storage units.
Ms. Lucky spoke to the amendment. The second section
provided relief for the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation
(AHFC) homelessness program. The proposed amendment would
authorize AHFC to give out homelessness funds.
Ms. Lucky noted that there was an AHFC representative
online to answer any questions the members might have. She
assured the committee that she had worked closely with AHFC
and the legal department to ensure the language met the
committee's needs.
Co-Chair von Imhof asked if the committee had the language
from HB 241 to compare to the language in the proposed
amendment. She thought AHFC could speak to the matter.
Ms. Lucky stated the first part of the amendment took out
the duplicative items from HB 241. She thought AHFC could
address the second portion of the amendment.
11:54:29 AM
AT EASE
11:56:04 AM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair von Imhof stated that there were a couple of
different issues with Conceptual Amendment 1. She asked Ms.
Lucky to explain what had happened in the other body the
previous day and why the action affected the amendment.
Ms. Lucky recalled provisions similar to sections of SB 242
were put into SB 241. If the bills were both to pass, it
was unclear which similar (but slightly different) section
of law would take precedent. The bill was currently in the
possession of the House and she was unsure of how to
proceed. Upon consultation with the legal department, there
had been a recommendation to remove the sections in
question from SB 242; after which the Senate could consider
the provisions and accept or reject the amendments done in
the House. She believed the language would be provided as
part of the floor debate later in the afternoon when the
Senate debated a concurrence vote on SB 241.
Ms. Lucky reiterated that the Senate could vet the
information during the concurrence vote when SB 241 came
back to the Senate. She noted that the intent of the
amendment was to remove the duplicative provisions from SB
242 so that the Senate was not looking at the same sections
in two different pieces of legislation that were in
different stages of the legislative process.
Co-Chair von Imhof expressed understanding. She wanted to
ensure that if the Senate language was deleted it would not
be lost forever. She suggested looking at both pieces of
legislation to compare. She suggested splitting the
amendment in two parts.
Ms. Lucky specified that if the committee were to move any
sections of the bill, it was unclear what would happen with
the language, which was going into uncodified law and would
take effect at the same time as the other language added in
the House.
Co-Chair von Imhof asked if AHFC could speak to the
amendment.
11:59:54 AM
BRYAN BUTCHER, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, ALASKA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION, DEPARTMENT OF
REVENUE (via teleconference), stated that he had worked
with staff and believed the language in the amendment would
give AHFC the legal ability to respond to homelessness and
homelessness prevention activities as a result of the
crisis.
Co-Chair von Imhof wanted to bifurcate the amendment.
Ms. Lucky suggested deleting line 1 of the amendment.
Senator Wielechowski MOVED to AMEND Conceptual Amendment 1
to delete line 1. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so
ordered.
Co-Chair von Imhof MOVED to ADOPT Conceptual Amendment 1 as
amended. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
12:01:59 PM
Co-Chair von Imhof MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 2, 31-
LS1748\U.27 (Wayne, 3/27/20):
Page 4, line 31:
Delete "DEFINITION"
Insert "DEFINITIONS"
Page 5, line 1:
Delete "1 - 7"
Insert "1 - 8"
Page 5, line 1, following Act,":
Insert "(1) "financial hardship" means that a
person's liquid assets from any source, including
payments from the state or federal government because
of a state emergency or a state or national disaster
declaration relating to the novel coronavirus disease
outbreak (COVID-19), when combined, would be
insufficient to pay the reasonable cost of food,
housing, health care, and other goods and services
vital to the health and wellness of the person and the
person's spouse and dependents; in this paragraph,
"dependent" has the meaning given in AS 23.20.350(g);
Co-Chair von Imhof OBJECTED for discussion.
Ms. Lucky spoke to Amendment 2. She relayed that at the
previous meeting, members had been concerned at the lack of
definition for "financial hardship." Staff had since worked
with legal counsel on a definition that would include
consideration of funds that were available through Covid-
19. She acknowledged that members had not had much time to
consider Amendment 2. She read through of "financial
hardship" as outlined in the amendment. She detailed that
the bulk of the language came from what was outlined in
regulation, as there had been no definition in statute. The
only difference was that any aid given for Covid-19 would
be included in the determination of income for the period
in question.
Senator Wielechowski asked to discuss line 13 and the
definition of "reasonable."
Ms. Lucky thought the drafter of the amendment was
available to comment.
DAN WAYNE, LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL, LEGISLATIVE LEGAL SERVICES
(via teleconference), explained that he had not defined the
word "reasonable," which had a common understanding in the
dictionary. He thought there would always be different
interpretations of the word, and the word "reasonable" was
difficult to define.
Co-Chair von Imhof WITHDREW her OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 2 was ADOPTED.
12:04:57 PM
Co-Chair von Imhof MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 3, 31-
LS1748\U.24 (Wallace/Wayne, 3/26/20):
Page 3, line 31, following "Alaska":
Insert", except for the
(1) Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation;
(2) Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority;
(3) Alaska Municipal Bond Bank;
(4) Alaska Retirement Management Board; or
(5)Department of Revenue, treasury division"
Co-Chair von Imhof OBJECTED for discussion.
Ms. Lucky stated that Amendment 3 had been a request by the
Department of Revenue and would affect state loans. There
had been concern that leaving the entities listed in the
amendment in the bill would adversely affect the ability to
use the loans as investments. The intent of the committee
had been to protect Alaskans with loans for things such as
fishing boats and student loans.
Co-Chair von Imhof WITHDREW her OBJECTION. There being NO
OBJECTION, Amendment 3 was ADOPTED.
12:06:16 PM
Co-Chair von Imhof MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 4, 31-
LS1748\U.22 (Wallace/Wayne, 3/26/20):
Page 1, line 5, following "utilities;":
Insert "relating to state access to federal
education stabilization funds;"
Page 4, following line 28:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"*Sec.8. The uncodified law of the State of Alaska is
amended by adding a new section to read:
STATE ACCESS TO FEDERAL EDUCATION STABILIZATION
FUNDS. The governor shall apply to the United States
Department of Education for any emergency funding
available to the sate through the Education
Stabilization Fund under the requirements outlined in
the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security
Act, also known as the CARES Act, enacted into law by
the Second Session of 116th Congress. The governor
shall make any assurances that are required for the
state to receive the maximum federal funding
allocations allowable under the education
stabilization provisions of the CARES Act."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 5, line 1:
Delete "1-7"
Insert "1-8"
Page 5, line 12:
Delete "1-8"
Insert "1-9"
Page 5, line 13:
Delete "sec.9"
Insert "sec. 10"
Page 5, line 16:
Delete "Sections 2-9"
Insert "Sections 2-10"
Senator Wilson OBJECTED for discussion.
Ms. Lucky explained that there was a conceptual amendment
that would replace Amendment 4, and the newer version had
not made it into the members' packets. The amendment was
from a request from the University in order ensure that
federal funds could come through. She explained that the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had requested
clarifying language which was not in Amendment 4 as
proposed. She requested that Co-Chair von Imhof withdraw
Amendment 4.
Co-Chair von Imhof MOVED to WITHDRAW Amendment 4. There
being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
12:07:21 PM
Senator Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 5, 31-LS1748\U.23
(Marx/Wayne, 3/26/20):
Page 1, line 5, following "utilities;":
Insert "relating to purchase of seafood for
distribution;"
Page 4, following line 28:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"*Sec.8. The uncodified law of the State of Alaska is
amended by adding a new section to read:
PURCHASE OF SEAFOOD FOR DISTRIBUTION DURING NOVEL
CORONAVIRUS DISEASE OUTBREAK. The Department of
Commerce, Community and Economic Development is
encouraged to issue a request for proposal for the
purchase of Alaska seafood from the seafood industry
for distribution during the state emergency to food
bank and soup kitchens in the state, Alaska Native
regional corporations, and Alaska Native non-profit
organizations for distribution throughout the state."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 5, line 1:
Delete "secs. 1-7"
Insert "secs. 1-8"
Page 5, line 12:
Delete "Sections 1-8"
Insert "Sections 1-9"
Page 5, line 13:
Delete "sec. 9"
Insert "sec. 10"
Page 5, line 16:
Delete "Sections 2-9"
Insert "Sections 2-10"
Co-Chair von Imhof OBJECTED for discussion.
Senator Wilson spoke to Amendment 5. The amendment would
encourage the Department of Commerce, Community and
Economic Development (DCCED) to put out a request for
proposal (RFP) for purchase of seafood from the Alaska
seafood industry for distribution to food banks, soup
kitchens, Alaska Native regional corporations, and non-
profits during the state emergency. He explained that there
was canned salmon and frozen seafood available at any time
and at any volume. He thought the process would be easy and
would reassure the seafood industry that products would be
utilized. The intent was to mitigate any potential shortage
of food supply.
Co-Chair von Imhof noted that DCCED was available for
comment. She asked if the department had seen the
amendment.
Senator Wilson relayed that he had worked with the
department and the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute
(ASMI) to determine what products were available and other
details.
12:09:20 PM
SARA CHAMBERS, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF CORPORATIONS, BUSINESS
AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE,
COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (via teleconference),
thought the amendment fell outside of her purview.
Co-Chair von Imhof asked Senator Wilson to name the
individuals in the department that he had worked with.
Senator Wilson relayed that DCCED had issued a similar RFP
in January of 2014. He cited the purchase and the cost of
pollack fish sticks.
Co-Chair von Imhof asked if Senator Wilson had vetted the
amendment through various stakeholders that had not had an
issue with the amendment.
Senator Wilson answered in the affirmative.
Co-Chair von Imhof WITHDREW her OBJECTION.
Senator Bishop added that the amendment would serve as
"belt and suspenders" for food security.
There being NO further OBJECTION, Amendment 5 was ADOPTED.
12:11:02 PM
Senator Olson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 6, 31-LS1748\U.7
(Wayne, 3/26/20) (copy on file).
Co-Chair von Imhof OBJECTED for discussion.
Senator Olson spoke to Amendment 6. He explained that the
amendment would ensure that Alaskans would not be removed
from the Alaska Temporary Assistance Program if timed-out
during the middle of the public health emergency. The
amendment would also suspend the work requirements because
of the high unemployment that would result from loss of
tourism and fish processing. Additionally, the amendment
would suspend the summer reduction of benefits because of
the difficulty in finding work as a result of the public
health emergency.
Co-Chair von Imhof asked for comment from the Division of
Public Assistance.
12:12:05 PM
SHAWNDA O'BRIEN, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES (via
teleconference), had read the amendment and had the
opportunity to review the language earlier in the day. She
stated that the department had already implemented the
language in the amendment. She stated that the amendment
was not necessary to put the provisions in place.
Senator Olson MOVED to WITHDRAW Amendment 6. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
12:12:57 PM
Senator Wielechowski MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 7, 31-
LS1748\U.13 (Nauman/Wayne, 3/26/20) (copy on file).
Co-Chair von Imhof OBJECTED for discussion.
Senator Wielechowski spoke to Amendment 7, which he
described as a technical fix. He understood that under
existing law there was Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) "hold
harmless" language. The amendment would extend the language
so that people did not get kicked off of public assistance
or Medicaid due to the PFD that was passed in the Senate
version of the operating budget or any federal Covid-19
support.
Senator Hoffman asked if Senator Wielechowski was referring
to the federal payments.
Senator Wielechowski explained that the amendment would
extend hold harmless language to the additional revenue
from checks from the federal government or from the state
for a supplemental PFD.
Ms. O'Brien addressed Amendment 7. She had reviewed the
amendment and commented that the existing PFD hold harmless
statutes and provisions would be in effect for any
additional PFDs that would be issued by the state, and the
funds. The statutes would be used to accomplish what the
amendment proposed to put in place. She noted that the
department did not have clear guidance from its federal
partners as to how stimulus money would be interpreted for
programs that the Department of Health and Social Services
administered. Additional guidance would be needed in order
to know if the purpose of the amendment could be
accomplished. She recalled that most of the communication
with federal oversight agencies had indicated that there
was an intent to keep as many people on programs as
possible and to relax regulations and rules to allow for
increased eligibility during the emergency.
Co-Chair von Imhof asked Ms. O'Brien if the amendment could
potentially put the state in conflict with federal
guidelines.
Ms. O'Brien was concerned that the amendment might put the
state in conflict with federal guidelines, depending upon
how the language was crafted and what flexibility would be
given by federal partners.
Senator Wielechowski MOVED to WITHEDRAW Amendment 7. There
being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Senator Wielechowski relayed that he would continue to work
with the department to craft language that met its concerns
or to adopt a policy to ensure Alaskans would not lose
their eligibility for other assistance.
12:16:35 PM
Senator Olson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 8, 31-LS1748\U.14
(Wayne, 3/26/20):
Page 3, line 30:
Delete "agencies or programs"
Insert "agencies, programs, or public
corporations"
Co-Chair von Imhof OBJECTED for discussion.
Senator Olson spoke to Amendment 8. He explained that the
amendment would add language and clarified the section to
prevent defaults on state loans during the public
emergency. The language would also apply to public
corporations like the Alaska Commission on Postsecondary
Education (ACPE).
Co-Chair von Imhof stated that the Department of Law was
available to answer questions. She referenced Amendment 3,
in which the Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority (AMHTA),
Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation (APFC), and the Municipal
Bond Bank were exempted. She wanted to ensure that the
proposed amendment would not inadvertently do anything.
12:18:16 PM
CORI MILLS, SPECIAL ASSISTANT, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF LAW (via teleconference), understood
that if Amendment 3 and Amendment 8 passed, public
corporations would be added to the definition of "state
agency." She continued that Amendment 3 would still have a
list of exempted entities including APFC, AMHTA, the
Municipal Bond Bank, the Alaska Retirement Management
Board, and the Department of Revenue Treasury Division. She
added that Amendment 8 would include ACPE in the list that
would receive loan forbearance.
Senator Olson asked if Ms. Mills was indicating that state
public corporations such as ACPE did not interfere with the
other exemptions.
Ms. Mills stated that if both Amendment 8 and Amendment 3
passed together, specific public corporations and the
Treasury Division would be an exception from the definition
of "state agency", but any other public corporation of the
state would fall under the definition of "state agency" for
the purposes of the section, which meant the loan
forbearance provision would apply.
Senator Olson asked if Ms. Mills had a problem with the
amendment.
Ms. Mills did not oppose the amendment.
Co-Chair von Imhof asked if Ms. Mills could think of any
other corporation that would be inadvertently included and
have operations affected.
Ms. Mills brought up the Alaska Industrial Development and
Export Authority (AIDEA), which did certain types of loans;
as well as AHFC. She was not aware of other corporations
that would raise concerns. She knew the corporations on the
list had raised concerns. She acknowledged that Department
of Revenue had concerns, which she thought had been
addressed.
Co-Chair von Imhof asked if the amendment sponsor was most
concerned with student loans.
Senator Olson relayed that he had been a student and taken
a loan from ACPE. He remembered the experience and thought
of the institution particularly.
Co-Chair von Imhof asked if there was a way to amend the
amendment to specifically identify student loans, so that
there were not inadvertent consequences.
12:22:03 PM
AT EASE
12:26:30 PM
RECONVENED
Senator Olson MOVED to Amend Amendment 8 so that "public
corporations" was changed to "Alaska Commission on
Postsecondary Education and the Alaska Industrial
Development and Export Authority."
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. The Amendment
to Amendment 8 was ADOPTED.
Co-Chair von Imhof MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 8 as amended.
There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment 8 was ADOPTED as
AMENDED.
12:27:34 PM
Senator Wielechowski MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 9, 31-
LS1748\U.3 (Wayne, 3/26/20) (copy on file).
Co-Chair von Imhof OBJECTED for discussion.
Senator Wielechowski spoke to Amendment 9. He explained
that in current law, a teacher or public employee with a
defined benefit plan could continue earning service credits
for a period of longer than ten days of leave without pay
if absent due to an on-the-job injury or an occupational
illness. The employee would have to pay her or his
contributions. The amendment would allow teachers or public
employees with COVID-19 related absences of greater than
ten days keep earning service credits on the same terms.
12:28:27 PM
KEVIN WORLEY, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, DIVISION OF
RETIREMENT AND BENEFITS, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION (via
teleconference), addressed the amendment. He thought there
would ultimately be a cost via the amendment which would be
passed on to the state from the additional state
contribution. He mentioned a bill impacting the retirement
system, and a provision of statute (AS 24.08.036) related
to an analysis being performed. He asserted that the
department would not be able to get the analysis done in
time.
12:29:17 PM
AT EASE
12:31:44 PM
RECONVENED
Senator Wielechowski understood that under the proposed
amendment, the employees would cover the costs. He had
reached out to the department for clarification.
Senator Wielechowski MOVED to WITHDRAW Amendment 9. There
being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
12:32:14 PM
Senator Wielechowski MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 10, 31-
LS1748\U.6 (Wayne, 2/26/20) (copy on file).
Co-Chair von Imhof OBJECTED for discussion.
Senator Wielechowski spoke to Amendment 10. He explained
that the proposed amendment had been heard on the floor and
it had passed, after which it was taken out in the other
body. He had recently spoken to an out-of-state employee
who had been told to shelter in place and could not return
to Alaska without quarantining. He did not want people to
be economically pressured to ignore public health guidance
to travel home to receive Cost of Living Allowance (COLA)
benefits. He mentioned retirees. He summarized that the
amendment would give the Division of Retirement and
Benefits clear authority to give retirees with extended
Covid-related absences to keep their COLA allowance. He
thought it was the division's responsibility to look at the
totality of circumstances and ensure no one was gaming the
system.
Co-Chair von Imhof noted there were staff from the division
available to address the amendment.
12:33:59 PM
KATHY LEA, CHIEF PENSION OFFICER, DIVISION OF RETIREMENT
AND BENEFITS, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION (via
teleconference), spoke to Amendment 10. She specified that
the division already had a process in place in which it was
waiving any potential overpayments of COLA for any retirees
trapped outside of the state and could not return "timely."
She stated the department's process was streamlined and
would not force retirees into any kind of economic
hardship.
Ms. Lea continued to address the amendment. She mentioned
the waiver provision under AS 39.35.522 or AS 14.25.175,
which authorized the commissioner of DOA to waive any
overpayment. The provision would target only those
individuals that met the basic COLA requirement of the
intent to return to the state. She thought the amendment
was broader and did not require anyone to establish any
intent. She thought via the amendment, the state might
continue to pay COLA to individuals that had never intended
to return to the state within the 90-day period.
Senator Wielechowski stated that the intent of the
amendment was to say that those retirees outside the state
could retain the COLA allowance. He thought the department
was looking at the totality of the circumstances and
administering the law in the same way. He asked if the
department intended to do so for the remainder of the
emergency.
Ms. Lea answered in the affirmative. She stated that the
division was looking at the totality of borrowers'
circumstances, and it was asking for documentation that
established the intent to return to the state within 90
days. She discussed the criteria under statute and
specified that the division could waive any potential
overpayment of COLA with a waiver after receiving a ticket
stub or affidavit if the criteria were met.
Senator Wielechowski MOVED to WITHDREW Amendment 10. There
being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
12:37:00 PM
Senator Olson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 11, 31-LS1748\U.9
(Klein/Wayne, 3/26/20) (copy on file).
Co-Chair von Imhof OBJECTED for discussion.
Senator Olson spoke to Amendment 11, which pertained to the
moratorium on municipal foreclosures. He detailed that the
amendment would place a moratorium on municipal
foreclosures for failure to pay property taxes. The
amendment mirrored sections that banned foreclosures for
failure to pay mortgages, but also included a longer grace
period to extend after the emergency declaration period to
pay back taxes and any fees.
12:37:58 PM
NILS ANDREASSEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA MUNICIPAL
LEAGUE (AML) (via teleconference), understood the intent
behind the amendment. The AML had communicated with many
members and thought that the decision to foreclose should
be left at the local level. He explained that the process
for foreclosure was messy and lengthy, and required
governing bodies of municipalities to make a decision and
control how staff initiated foreclosures. He asserted that
often there were processes in place that had sometimes
included a one-year waiting period. He described the well-
established foreclosure process. He posited that local
governments were already making decisions in response to
the COVID-19 crisis, such as payment deferrals and utility
support. He thought local decisions should be left with
municipal leaders.
Senator Olson understood Mr. Andreassen's point. He stated
that all that the amendment would do was pause evictions.
12:40:34 PM
Senator Wielechowski understood that the amendment would
not stop a municipality from attaching a clerk's lien, but
only from foreclosing and evicting a person from a house.
Mr. Andreassen understood that the amendment would not
allow the municipality to enforce delinquent real property
tax liens. He considered that local governments needed
every tool in order to manage governing abilities including
budgets. He asked that the committee not take tools away
from local governments.
Co-Chair von Imhof thought it was generally in
municipalities' best interest to keep homeowners in their
homes, as eventually the homeowners would begin to pay
taxes again. If homes were vacant, the foreclosure process
would take some time, during which there was no tax income
received from homeowners. She understood Senator Olson's
position, but she thought Mr. Andreassen made sense in his
assertion that municipalities needed the tools.
Senator Olson agreed with Mr. Andreassen's position of
municipalities having local control.
Senator Olson MOVED to WITHDRAW Amendment 11. There being
NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
12:42:42 PM
Senator Wielechowski MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 12, 31-
LS1748\U.19 (Wayne, 3/26/20) (copy on file).
Co-Chair von Imhof OBJECTED for discussion.
Senator Wielechowski spoke to Amendment 12. He explained
that the amendment had previously passed the Senate floor
but had been taken out on the House side. The proposed
amendment had been done in 11 states. He described that
under existing law in most cases, there had to be witnesses
to sign in order to validate a will. He stated that the
amendment was brought to the Senate Democrats by a person
in the estate community. He thought it was a valid concern.
He was concerned that there would be many people that would
be faced with getting a will quickly within the next few
months. He was concerned that contested wills could
potentially clog the courts. He thought the proposed
amendment was a reasonable attempt to solve the issue.
Ms. Mills had reviewed the amendment. She shared that the
department had reached out to an estate attorney, and the
language in the amendment was a result of the conversation.
The department had no concerns with the amendment.
Co-Chair von Imhof WITHDREW her OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 12 was ADOPTED.
12:45:36 PM
Senator Wielechowski MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 13, 31-
LS1748\U.20 (Nauman/Wayne, 3/26/20) (copy on file).
Co-Chair von Imhof OBJECTED for discussion.
Senator Wielechowski spoke to Amendment 13. He explained
that the amendment would change the unfair and deceptive
trade practice law in the state to ban price gouging for
certain items. The items were listed in the amendment and
included food, medicine, medical equipment, fuel,
sanitation products, hygiene products, essential household
supplies, and other essential goods and services. He cited
that 38 other states had a similar bill. He noted that the
Governor of the State of Michigan had recently issued an
executive order to the same effect.
Senator Wielechowski continued to speak to the amendment.
He noted that price gouging was defined as being a price
over 10 percent of the price charged in the state in the
normal course of business before the declared state of
emergency. He cited that other states such as Arkansas,
California, Delaware, New Jersey, Utah, and the District of
Columbia had the same 10 percent standard. He referenced
stories about price gouging. He had heard that Amazon had
shut down 5,000 sellers because of price gouging. He had
not seen a serious incidence of price gouging in Alaska but
was concerned about the limited supply chains and thought
there was potential for a tremendous increase in cost.
There was an exception in the amendment in the case that
the increased cost was due to increased cost to the seller.
Co-Chair von Imhof noted that the Department of Law was
available to comment. She pointed out that the body had
contemplated a previous bill (HB 241, dealing with the
disaster declaration extension) in which there was a price-
gouging provision that was more stringent and used 5
percent as the threshold. She corrected herself to say that
the previous provision only applied to healthcare. She
thought there might be a little conflict with line 17 and
line 18.
12:48:53 PM
Ms. Mills spoke to Amendment 13. The department had
reviewed the amendment and had offered some language that
had been incorporated. She thought as the consumer
protection unit for the state, the department felt the
amendment provided additional tools to make sure that bad
actors did not take advantage during the COVID-19 crisis.
Co-Chair von Imhof asked to keep the threshold at 10
percent and perhaps address the number at a later time.
Co-Chair von Imhof WITHDREW her OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment 13 was ADOPTED.
12:50:13 PM
AT EASE
12:52:55 PM
RECONVENED
Senator Olson MOVED to ADOPT Conceptual Amendment 14:
This is a conceptual amendment. Legislative Legal is
directed to make any changes or deletions to the
suggested language, including technical, conforming,
or bill title changes, in order to accomplish the
intent.
INTENT OF THE AMENDMENT: Enact a moratorium on
evicting a person experiencing a financial hardship
from a storage unit for personal property during the
state of emergency. This would have gone in section 6
of the previous bill but that section was repealed by
conceptual amendment #1.
Co-Chair von Imhof OBJECTED for discussion.
Senator Olson spoke to Amendment 14, which would prevent a
person from losing a storage unit for failing to pay during
the public health emergency, particularly if under
financial hardship. He discussed the potential for
unprecedented levels of unemployment due to the public
health emergency.
Co-Chair von Imhof WITHDREW her OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Conceptual Amendment 14 was ADOPTED.
12:54:09 PM
Senator Wielechowski MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 15, 31-
LS1748\U.21 (Wallace/Wayne, 3/26/20) (copy on file).
Co-Chair von Imhof OBJECTED for discussion.
Senator Wielechowski spoke to Amendment 15, which would
suspend motor vehicle repossessions during the public
health emergency. Some creditors had voluntarily stopped
doing repossessions, while others had not. He discussed the
negative effects of losing one's vehicle. He noted that the
amendment would only be in effect during the health
emergency, and would not hold any penalties, late fees, or
interest.
12:55:22 PM
RYAN STRONG, ALASKA BANKERS ASSOCIATION (via
teleconference), stated that the association had not had a
chance to discuss the proposed amendment. He stated that as
a matter of course, banks in Alaska were not actively
repossessing any assets during the Covid-19 outbreak, and
that in concept the prohibition did not necessarily concern
him. He questioned the timeline in the amendment and did
not know how long the state's emergency declaration would
be in effect. He stated preference for a definitive end
date with a possibility for extension.
Co-Chair von Imhof pondered whether an emergency
declaration would continue to include social distancing and
thereby closure of restaurants and public gatherings, which
would affect the associated workers. She thought there was
concern that the emergency declaration could continue until
October, yet economic sanctions may not. She asked if there
was a way to amend the amendment to identify the
difference.
Senator Wielechowski thought there were good points made
and was open to a change to the amendment in the way that
Senator von Imhof suggested. He was happy to work with the
Alaska Bankers Association and try to come up with a date.
He thought September or November seemed reasonable. He
agreed to reach out to committee members and find common
ground.
Co-Chair von Imhof thought it was important not to
repossess vehicles during the emergency, especially if a
person had a personal hardship. She requested that Senator
Wielechowski talk with the bankers about a definition of
economic sanctions.
Senator Bishop wanted to work with the amendment sponsor to
continue the conversation with the Alaska Bankers
Association and share his ideas.
Senator Wielechowski MOVED to WITHDRAW Amendment 15. There
being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
12:59:06 PM
Senator Olson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 16, 31-LS1748\U.10
(Nauman/Wayne, 3/26/20) (copy on file).
Co-Chair von Imhof OBJECTED for discussion.
Senator Olson spoke to Amendment 16. He explained that the
amendment would prohibit the state from garnishing PFDs and
stimulus checks during the period of the disaster
declaration. The amendment would not affect child support
payments and taxes. He spoke to the unemployment due to the
statewide and local closures, and support for housing,
food, medicine, and other essentials. He explained that the
amendment would not affect any underlying debts or
judgements subject to garnishment. The amendment would
allow people to get the entirety of the PFD during the
emergency. He reiterated that the prohibition of
garnishment did not apply to child support or taxes.
Senator Wilson asked how the amendment would affect the
PFDs of prisoners, the funds from which went to the
Department of Corrections to offset incarceration fees.
Senator Bishop asked about the PFD's that were garnished
for victims of violent crimes.
Co-Chair von Imhof asked Ms. Mills to comment on the
amendment and address how the amendment might conflict with
existing law.
1:01:26 PM
Ms. Mills was not extensively familiar with garnishment of
PFDs. She mentioned the Violent Crimes Compensation Fund
and the PFD Crime Fund. She suggested that prohibiting
garnishments might lessen the amount of funds going to a
state agency such as the Violent Crimes Compensation Board
and others. She thought the committee might want to consult
with someone from the Permanent Fund Dividend Division or
someone from OMB to discuss how the money was moved.
Co-Chair von Imhof was concerned about receivers of child
support and the effect of the payer's funds being held
harmless.
Senator Olson thought the questions were fair. He addressed
how the garnishments related to incarcerates. He noted that
inmates PFDs were automatically taken. He addressed Co-
Chair von Imhof's question about child support, and thought
the issue was already covered with the amendment's
exception for child support.
Senator von Imhof noted that the exception was on line 15
of the amendment.
Co-Chair von Imhof pondered the will of the committee.
Senator Wilson had a hard time with the amendment. He
understood the intent but thought the language would waive
payouts from bad actors that had already gone through a
court of law. He OBJECTED for discussion.
Senator Olson disagreed. He thought the amendment would do
more good than the possible harm as perceived by other
members.
1:05:31 PM
AT EASE
1:06:21 PM
RECONVENED
Senator Olson MOVED to WITHDRAW Amendment 16. There being
NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
1:06:41 PM
Co-Chair von Imhof explained that upcoming Conceptual
Amendment 17 was a replacement for Amendment 4. She asked
her staff to address the amendment.
Ms. Lucky explained that Conceptual Amendment 17 was a
corrected version of the provisions in Amendment 4. She
understood that the uncodified language in the amendment
would be needed to ensure that the state could receive all
the federal funds that were due from the CARES Act.
1:07:35 PM
MILES BAKER, ASSOCIATE VICE-PRESIDENT, GOVERNMENT
RELATIONS, UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA, relayed that the
University had been tracking a fast-moving federal stimulus
bill that had been signed by the president in the previous
couple of hours. He spoke to a provision that dealt with
the Economic Stabilization Fund, which was approximately
$31 billion nationally. The portion of the funds that would
come to Alaska was in three parts: a discretionary fund for
the governor to use for education-related emergency grants,
a primary and secondary education relief fund, and a higher
education relief fund. The governor had to apply for the
funds and make assurances about the state's funding of K-12
education and the University. The University wanted to
maximize the federal dollars available to the state.
Co-Chair von Imhof MOVED to ADOPT Conceptual Amendment 17
(copy on file). There being NO OBJECTION, Conceptual
Amendment 17 was ADOPTED.
Co-Chair von Imhof MOVED to ADOPT Conceptual Amendment 18:
This is a conceptual amendment because it was not
drafted by legal services. Legislative Legal is
directed to make any changes or deletions to the
suggested language, including technical, conforming,
or bill title changes.
Senator Bishop OBJECTED for discussion.
Co-Chair von Imhof spoke to Conceptual Amendment 18. She
explained that the amendment had to do with removing
Section 7 of the bill, which concerned foreclosures of
property. She was concerned that most of the bank loans in
the state were purchased by the government agencies Freddy
Mac and Fanny Mae. The loans were purchased, bundled, and
then sold into secondary national markets. The loans were
then removed from banks balance sheets, which made space
for making new loans. She was concerned that Fanny Mae and
Freddie Mac could cease buying loans out of concern for the
state's moratorium provisions. She spoke about the increase
in refinancing due to low interest rates. She was worried
about being in conflict with what the federal government
was doing, and thought there could be unintended
consequences. She suggested working with banks to find some
agreeable language.
1:11:50 PM
Senator Bishop acknowledged that members were all trying to
do the best possible given the emergency. He thought
mistakes might be inevitable. He had full intention that
oversights would be corrected to maintain the wellbeing of
the state.
Co-Chair von Imhof thought it was critical for banks to
maintain functionality, and to continue with the ability to
lend with all sectors as well as have liquidity. She
understood that banks were pro-actively working with
customers.
Mr. Strong thought Co-Chair von Imhof's remarks had put it
well regarding uncertainty with how the provision might
conflict with Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. He relayed that
both the Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) had
already issued halts on foreclosures and could continue to
do so for the length of the health crisis. At present there
was a 60-day halt on foreclosures that he expected would be
extended. He believed that the CARES Act had extended the
forbearance period to work out mortgage payments with no
adverse credit reporting. He thought 90 percent of
mortgages in Alaska were owned by the GSEs. He was worried
that if such a proposal was rushed through on a state level
it would have unintended consequences. He mentioned an
exemption for vacant and abandoned properties, which were a
public nuisance.
1:14:49 PM
Senator Wilson had concerns about the entire bill, and was
worried that the bill would set up a society that would not
have responsibilities for months at a time. He had received
an email from a constituent that was a property owner and
landlord. He was concerned that landlords would not have
protection or a guarantee on mortgage payments. He thought
federal law would supersede state law. He was fine with the
current language in the bill to have a fair playing field
for all parties.
Co-Chair von Imhof asked if Senator Wilson did not agree
with the amendment and wanted to keep language that was in
the bill that prohibited foreclosure of large commercial
and residential loans.
Senator Wilson answered "both." He thought businesses were
in the same situation. He wanted to ensure there was a fair
playing field for all stakeholders. He was concerned about
property owners not being paid by renters. He was concerned
about foreclosures on commercial properties. He did not
think the amendment was equitable.
1:17:15 PM
Co-Chair von Imhof thought Section 7 was vague. She thought
that the section needed to be defined. She pondered adding
a section to talk about holding commercial properties
harmless. She thought more clarification was needed.
Senator Wielechowski agreed that Section 7 needed to be
tightened up. He mentioned a letter from Mr. Strong, on
behalf of the Alaska Bankers Association, which contained
three suggestions for amendments to SB 242 (copy on file).
He thought the suggestions in the letter were reasonable.
He pondered whether the bill defined a person as a natural
person. He considered that the intent was to protect people
from losing housing. He thought an exemption for vacant and
abandoned property was reasonable. He did not have an
objection to incorporating the items suggested by Mr.
Strong.
Co-Chair von Imhof thought personal residences were defined
differently than other commercial properties. She thought
Section 7 needed to be modified.
Senator Bishop agreed with Co-Chair von Imhof. He
reiterated that the federal government and state government
would not leave people hanging. He suggested there would be
four months of wage replacement coming.
1:20:25 PM
Co-Chair von Imhof discussed amending Conceptual Amendment
18 to modify Section 7 to incorporate the suggestions from
the Alaska Bankers Association including: redefine "person"
as a "natural person," exempt vacant and abandoned
property, and further define commercial and multi-family
property. She affirmed that she would continue to work with
the association. She asked Mr. Strong to comment on the
proposed amendment to Conceptual Amendment 18.
1:21:14 PM
Mr. Strong thought it would be an improvement to include
the changes mentioned by Senator von Imhof. He emphasized
that the banks of Alaska were not looking to foreclose on
homes or any property in the midst of the pandemic for a
variety of reasons. He explained that the banks were
working with many borrowers that were experiencing
hardship. He understood the purpose of the bill and was
willing to continue to work with the committee to develop
changes and avoid unintended consequences.
Co-Chair von Imhof did not have specific language for the
amendment beyond intent language of working with the banks
to continue the process. She stated she could set the
amendment aside for the time being.
Co-Chair Bishop discussed taking a recess.
Senator Wilson stated he was fine with the proposed
amendment to Amendment 18 and thought the committee could
consider the amendment when the bill was drafted for the
floor. He discussed the timing of the provisions.
Co-Chair von Imhof MOVED to WITHDRAW Conceptual Amendment
18. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Senator von Imhof stated she had intent to bring forward
another amendment that included the topics alluded to by
Senator Wielechowski.
Senator Wielechowski addressed Section 10 and Section 11 of
the bill, which was the repealer clause.
Senator von Imhof thought Ms. Lucky would be addressing the
topic.
1:24:04 PM
Ms. Lucky noted that there had not been an amendment to
address the effective date clause. The amendments had
different effective dates, and the committee needed to come
up with a date. She explained that because each section had
its own effective clause, there was no reason that there
could not be the appeal and annulment date. The dates would
only have to do with when the actual text would be repealed
or annulled. She suggested the committee could set a date
for February 2021. She had asked the legal team, which
indicated that a date of February 2022 would be appropriate
and possible. She reiterated that the date would not affect
how long any programs were in effect, but would affect how
long the words remained in statute. She suggested that
Section 10 and Section 11 receive an effective date of
February 1, 2022, which would allow any changes to happen
during session and allow ample opportunity for the language
to run out.
Co-Chair von Imhof MOVED to ADOPT Conceptual Amendment 19,
which would extend the repeal and annulment dates of
Section 10 to February 1, 2022; and extend repeal and
annulment dates of Section 11 to February 1, 2022.
There being NO OBJECTION, Conceptual Amendment 19 was
ADOPTED.
SB 242 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
Co-Chair von Imhof stated she would set the bill aside and
the committee would stand at recess.
1:26:35 PM
RECESSED
[Co-Chair von Imhof adjourned the meeting at 5:55 p.m.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 242 Amendment Packet 032720.pdf |
SFIN 3/27/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 242 |
| SB 242 AKBA_Response to SB242 moratorium on foreclosures_3.27.2020.pdf |
SFIN 3/27/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 242 |
| SB 242 Amendment 17 von Imhof.pdf |
SFIN 3/27/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 242 |
| SB 242 Amendment 18 von Imhof.pdf |
SFIN 3/27/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 242 |
| SB 242 Replacment Amendment 14 Olson.pdf |
SFIN 3/27/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 242 |