Legislature(2009 - 2010)CAPITOL 106
04/01/2010 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SCR14 | |
| SB261 | |
| SB215 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 420 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SCR 14 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 261 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 215 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 244 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 261-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL BD MEMBERS
8:33:52 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the next order of business was CS FOR
SENATE BILL NO. 261(L&C), "An Act relating to the membership of
the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board; and providing for an
effective date."
8:34:05 AM
SENATOR DONNY OLSON, Alaska State Legislature, introduced SB 261
as sponsor. He indicated that the effects of alcohol are more
devastating in rural Alaska, where social services, wellness
programs, and public safety are not sufficient. He stated that
SB 261 would offer another tool with which to address issues
related to alcohol abuse in small communities in rural Alaska.
Senator Olson explained that currently there are five members on
the state's Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Board, two of whom
must represent the general public, and SB 261 would require that
one of those public members is a resident of a rural area. He
said the idea is that a public member who is a resident of a
rural area would have a better understanding of how to address
the issues that exist in rural areas. Senator Olson said there
are 120 people in his community, and in the last six months the
community has experienced two tragedies. He said he sees SB 261
as a mean by which to "raise the profile to this problem in a
public forum" to "relieve some of the pain and suffering that
has already been out there."
8:36:21 AM
TIM BENINTENDI, Staff, Senator Donny Olson, Alaska State
Legislature, offered further information on behalf of
Representative Olson. He explained that the reasoning behind
the proposed legislation is that since the ABC Board addresses
issues related to bars, clubs, and retail operations, it would
be beneficial to have someone from a rural community, where
related problems are acute, to sit on the board. Currently, he
said, the appointment of someone from a rural community to the
board is discretionary.
8:38:47 AM
MR. BENINTENDI, in response to Chair Lynn, said the definition
for "rural area" is found in language on page 2, lines 5-11,
which read as follows:
(2) "rural area" means an area that is not
connected by road or rail to Anchorage or Fairbanks,
that has participated in a local option election under
AS 04.11.491, and
(A) is a city; or
(B) is an established village that is
located in the unorganized borough; for purposes of
this subparagraph, "established village" has the
meaning given in AS 04.21.080.
MR. BENINTENDI, in response to a follow-up question, said under
SB 261, the application process would be open to someone from a
"dry" village.
8:41:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO cited a sentence in Section 1, beginning on
line 8, which read as follows:
Two members of the board shall be persons actively
engaged in the alcoholic beverage industry, except
that no member may hold a wholesale license or be an
officer, agent, or employee of a wholesale alcoholic
beverage enterprise.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked, "So, we have pretty much ruled out
the wholesale, and so, where are we left with: retail?"
MR. BENINTENDI offered his understanding that the licensee would
be excluded, but said he imagines the other employees would
qualify.
8:42:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON observed that the aforementioned language
includes employees of wholesale alcoholic beverage enterprises.
8:42:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO then directed attention to the next
sentence, beginning on page 1, line 11, which read as follows:
No three members of the board may be engaged in the
same business, occupation, or profession.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO said he finds the use of the phrase "No
three" confusing.
8:43:41 AM
MR. BENINTENDI offered his understanding that the language is
written that way to ensure that all three public members are
"apart from the industry."
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO explained that he has trouble with the two
words, "No" and "three", being used together.
8:44:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO directed attention to the definition of
rural area on page 2, lines 5-11 [text provided previously]. He
offered his understanding that the language refers to
unorganized boroughs, and he asked if it is the sponsor's intent
to ensure "it is only an unorganized borough."
8:45:02 AM
MR. BENINTENDI said the sponsor's intent was [to include]
established villages inside or outside of a borough. He said he
would discuss the matter with the bill drafter.
8:45:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON pointed out that SB 261 proposes only a
couple changes to current law. Regarding Representative Gatto's
previous remarks about the phrase "No three", she offered her
understanding that it means no three members of the board may be
engaged in the same business, which would help the board keep
its perspective broad. Representative Wilson said she likes the
bill, and she characterized it as a first step in addressing a
problem.
8:46:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG directed attention to the term "city",
on page 2, line 8, and he cited the definition of "city" from AS
29.71.800 (4), which read as follows:
(4) "city" means a general law first or second
class city or a home rule city;
MR. BENINTENDI, in response to Representative Gruenberg,
confirmed that that is the definition the sponsor wishes to use
in SB 261.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested it may eliminate confusion to
reference that statute within the bill.
MR. BENINTENDI said he does not see a problem with that, but he
said he wants to talk with the bill drafter.
8:48:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, regarding "No three members", on page
1, line 11, said he interprets the phrase to mean that not more
than two members of the board would be allowed to be in the same
profession. In response to Mr. Benintendi, he offered his
understanding that "No three members" cannot mean three or less.
MR. BENINTENDI said he would discuss that with the bill drafter.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG emphasized the importance of clarifying
the bill sponsor's intent.
8:49:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG directed attention to language on page
2, lines 5-7, which would require a "rural area" to have
"participated in a local option election under AS 04.11.491".
He asked what the reason is for that requirement and whether
there are any such areas that would otherwise qualify under the
proposed bill.
8:51:18 AM
MR. BENINTENDI responded that he does not think anyone would be
excluded. He said several communities would qualify under two
and even three of the criteria set out.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said that would not be his
interpretation of the way the bill has been drafted, because the
conjunctive "and" follows, which means the definition of rural
area is an area that meets the criteria set out on page 2, lines
5-7 [text provided previously] and is a city or is "an
established village that is located in the unorganized borough".
[SENATOR OLSON nodded.]
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG questioned "why that's in there."
MR. BENINTENDI responded that the language is written thus to
focus on communities most in need.
8:53:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked what the purposed is of the
requirement that a rural area must have participated in a local
option election.
8:53:53 AM
MR. BENINTENDI answered, "It lends more to the community profile
than looking for individuals with specific experience."
8:54:19 AM
SENATOR OLSON said he would like to address some of the previous
questions of the committee. He said [the ABC Board] is
comprised mainly of people from metropolitan or established
first- or second-class cities. Regarding the local option
election, Senator Olson said it is important to have a member on
the ABC Board who has been involved in an election determining
whether a community will be "dry," "damp," or "wet." Regarding
the unorganized boroughs, he offered his understanding that
there are no cities in a borough that are not either a first- or
second-class city.
8:57:45 AM
SENATOR OLSON, in response to Representative Johnson, offered
his understanding that a community is assumed wet until it has
held a local option election that results in a majority of the
citizens voting to make the community dry.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON pointed out that an individual from a dry
community would be eligible to serve on the ABC Board, which is
responsible for administering liquor licenses.
8:59:09 AM
MR. BENINTENDI admitted to the possibility but questioned the
likelihood of that happening.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON suggested that the proposed legislation
should be changed so that those from dry communities cannot
serve on the board. He said the subject of alcohol in dry
communities should be addressed by law enforcement rather than
by an ABC Board member. He then suggested that the same should
apply to damp communities.
MR. BENINTENDI, in response to Representative Johnson, said
information is available regarding how many rural areas have
held local option elections, and he offered to find out what
that number is.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON expressed concern that the local option
election requirement may make the bill too narrow.
9:01:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON questioned the meaning of "not connected
by road". He explained that the Alaska Marine Highway is
considered a road when it comes to getting federal money for
Alaska.
MR. BENINTENDI replied that under SB 261, the Alaska Marine
Highway is "excluded from the definition of a road" so that
communities in Southeast Alaska could participate.
9:02:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN returned to the previous question about
"No three members". He directed attention to language on page
1, line 8, which states that two members of the board "shall be
persons actively engaged in the alcoholic beverage industry".
He posited that if all three public members were also from the
industry, that would stack the board with "industry-friendly
members."
CHAIR LYNN asked Senator Olson if he agrees.
9:03:09 AM
SENATOR OLSON responded, "It's already in statute - the three
members that are there - and so, that's not the constitution of
the bill." He said his interpretation is that it is advisable
to have diverse opinions on a board. He said his intent is to
further broaden the diversity.
9:03:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO questioned the use of the word "the", which
precedes "unorganized borough" on page 2, line 9. He asked if
the bill sponsor would like to pluralize "borough" or add "an"
before "borough".
MR. BENINTENDI explained that the language as currently written
is "a term of art" meaning all the areas of the state that are
not organized into a borough or municipality.
9:04:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO emphasized the importance of creating
language in the bill that is not open to misinterpretation. He
asked how "No three members of the board may be engaged in the
same business" would be interpreted if, for example, one of the
two members of the board that are required to be actively
engaged in the alcoholic beverage industry happen also to be
from a rural area.
MR. BENINTENDI said although he can see how the existing
language could be interpreted more than one way, the sponsor is
addressing only one of the three public member seats.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO reiterated the importance of being specific
within the bill language, so that the proposed bill is not
subject to interpretation.
9:06:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, regarding Representative Gatto's
previous question about the use of the phrase "the unorganized
borough", cited AS 29.03.010, which read as follows:
Sec. 29.03.010. Establishment.
Areas of the state that are not within the boundaries
of an organized borough constitute a single
unorganized borough.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, regarding the "No three members"
language, said he thinks Representative Gatto is correct that
the language is technically ambiguous. He indicated someone
could think that means that allowing four or five members of the
board to be engaged in the same business would be okay. He
suggested the language should read, "No more than two".
Representative Gruenberg referred again to the definition of
"city", which he had previously read, and he noted that the
definition pertains to a certain title in statute. He
recommended using the definition in SB 261 and referencing the
statute from which the definition came.
9:09:09 AM
SENATOR OLSON concurred, but asked the committee to focus on the
intent of the bill, not to rework existing statute. He said the
intent of the bill is to ensure that there is "a rural
perspective on the board."
9:10:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON stated that he supports the concept of
the bill, but is concerned that, for example, under SB 261 the
existing board member from Cordova would be excluded. He
explained that he is not certain that Cordova has ever held a
local option election. He said he would like the bill held over
in order to "give the board all the tools they need."
CHAIR LYNN said it appears the bill needs to be held for
amendments to be made.
9:12:48 AM
SENATOR OLSON encouraged the committee to look through the bill
with a fine-tooth comb, but reiterated his request that the
committee concentrate on the portion of statute that he has
proposed to change.
9:13:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO indicated that when working on one issue in
a proposed bill, a committee sometimes has the chance to change
related statute to avoid unintended consequences.
9:14:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON, regarding organized and unorganized
villages, asked if it is the intention of the bill sponsor to
exclude Nanwalek and Port Graham, for example, which are in the
Kenai Peninsula Borough. He offered his understanding that
those communities have not yet held a [local option] election.
SENATOR OLSON said he is not trying to exclude those
communities.
9:15:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON remarked, "We have so many organized
boroughs, and everything that's not an organized borough is in
the unorganized borough, and there's only one of them."
9:16:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said the part of the definition of
urban area concerning not being connected by road or rail is
taken from another statute. He urged the bill sponsor to
consider not excluding some communities just because they happen
to be on the road system. He said he would like to give the
governor as much discretion as possible to get a rural member on
the board.
9:18:30 AM
MR. BENINTENDI said communities on the road system are
considered to have better access to remedial services. He said
someone once asked if a person from Auke Bay, within the Juneau
Borough, could serve on the seat proposed by SB 261, but Mr.
Benintendi defined a community as that which has "25 or more
people who exist and operate as a social unit."
9:20:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he thinks the definition of rural
area needs further consideration. He stated, "Because Auke Bay
is part of the City & Borough of Juneau, so, we can substitute
City & Borough of Juneau for Auke Bay, because that's what we're
talking about. And that is an area that's not connected by road
or rail to Anchorage or Fairbanks, and it is a city."
MR. BENINTENDI responded that a person from Auke Bay could apply
for one of the other two general public seats, "just not the one
we're trying to define." He directed attention to the word
"and" on page 2, line 7, [previously highlighted by
Representative Gruenberg], and noted that the word is not "or".
He stated, "But ... it might be 200 communities in this state
that could take advantage of applying under the criteria we're
trying to establish." He said he would try to access more
accurate community population estimates.
9:21:23 AM
MR. BENINTENDI, in response to Representative Seaton, said
currently an applicant from Juneau could fill one of the other
two general public seats.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said he thinks the only exclusion for
Juneau is if the community has never held a local option
election. He then observed that Auke Bay is not excluded
because it is connected by road to Juneau; it is excluded
because it has not held a local option election.
MR. BENINTENDI confirmed that is correct.
9:23:41 AM
DALE FOX, President, CEO, Alaska Cabaret Hotel Restaurant &
Retailer's Association (Alaska CHARR), testified in opposition
to SB 261. He stated that the ABC Board serves an important
regulatory and licensing function in Alaska; it is a detail-
oriented board, which deals with "the minutia of alcohol laws."
Because of this, he expounded, the ABC Board is not the most
exciting board on which to sit, and recruiting members to serve
on it can be difficult. He said historically governors have
done a great job in ensuring a balance in representation on the
board. He said the board member from Cordova already "fits the
description of this bill." He said her name is Belen Cook, and
she works for the Native village of Eyak as a domestic violence
and substance abuse case manager, and is the chair of the annual
sobriety [conference]. He said Ms. Cook has three years left on
her term.
MR. FOX opined that SB 261 is not needed, because there is
already someone representing rural interest. He said some
people may suggest institutionalizing that representation, but
the bill would exclude any community on the road system, those
people in organized boroughs, and those communities that have
not had local option elections. He noted that the original bill
version's stipulation that there be a 4,500 population
requirement that would have excluded the Cities of Bethel,
Barrow, and Kodiak. He explained he is pointing that out in
case anyone is considering adding that back into SB 261. Mr.
Fox opined that SB 261, in its original and current form, is bad
public policy that would tie the hands of the governor.
9:26:41 AM
BRIDIE TRAINOR, Director, Bering Strait Suicide Prevention
Program, Kawerak, Inc., testified in support of SB 261. She
said the forum is grateful for the current diversity of ABC
Board members. She said Senator Olson has done a good job in
"representing the issues in rural Alaska." She concluded, "I
think that considerations regarding law enforcement versus ABC
are valid, but I hope that it will go through this session,
because it's desperately needed."
9:28:11 AM
MR. BENINTENDI, in response to Chair Lynn, confirmed that if SB
261 were passed into law, it would affect newly appointed board
members. He reemphasized that under SB 261, there would still
be two other seats that would serve "the applicants from Cordova
and other places."
9:28:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG directed attention to language in
Section 2, which read as follows:
*Sec.2. The uncodified law of the State of Alaska is
amended by adding a new section to read:
TRANSITION. The requirement that at least one
member of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board be a
resident of a rural area added in AS 04.06.020, as
amended by sec. 1 of this Act, first applies on the
date the first term of office of a board member who
represents the general public expires, and applies
thereafter.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG stated:
Since the testimony is undisputed that there is
somebody on the board currently who would meet the
requirements, … under … Section 2, that person would
simply continue and meet the requirements of this. Is
not that correct? They wouldn't have to put another
person on, because there's already somebody on the
board that meets [the criteria].
MR. BENINTENDI responded, "If the person fits the criteria and
the governor reappoints them, yes, sir."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG continued as follows:
Let us say the Cordova representative … is on the
board, and after the bill becomes effective, one of
the other two public member's terms expires. There
would … not have to be a change on the board, because
that person already meets the requirements of this.
MR. BENINTENDI responded:
If the definition that we have in this version holds
fairly much like it is, that local option thing may be
a preclusion. I'm not sure; I don't know the history
of Cordova. But it may be that they could continue or
it may be that one of the other seats would come in
under this bill, and then when that person cycles out,
the governor would be free to appoint outside of this
bill.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG responded:
But if that person from Cordova does meet the
requirements of this bill on that date, even though
her seat's not up, another … rural person would not
have to be appointed, because [the person from]
Cordova … would already meet the requirements of the
bill.
MR. BENINTENDI said, "I'm not sure. It doesn't state that, so I
guess that's a little Twilight Zone we'd need to address."
9:31:00 AM
SHIRLEY GIFFORD, Director, Alcohol Beverage Control Board,
Department of Public Safety, stated that the administration is
neutral with respect to the proposed legislation. She said
Governor Sean Parnell, and governors in the past, have focused
on obtaining a diverse group of people from across the state to
sit on the board. She said Ms. Cook, from Cordova, is doing an
excellent job representing rural Alaska. She offered her
understanding that under SB 261, Ms. Cook would not qualify to
sit on the board, and she opined that it would be a great loss
if Ms. Cook were to vacate the board. In response to a former
question, she related that there are approximately 108 local
option communities across Alaska. In response to Representative
Johnson, she listed the communities from which the current board
members hail and the expiration dates of their terms. In
response to a follow-up question, she confirmed that the first
available opening on the board will be in 2011.
9:34:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON, regarding Ms. Gifford's previous
statement that there are 108 local option communities, asked if
that means 108 communities that are either damp or dry, or if
that means the total number of communities that have ever held
local option elections.
MS. GIFFORD explained that there are five separate local
options: ban sale, community license only, ban sale and
importation, ban possession, and packaged or licensed only. The
aforementioned 108 communities are "scattered across the board"
in terms of which local option they fall under, she said. A
community that bans sale, importation, and possession is a dry
community, and is considered a local option community, while
"all the others who choose one form of local option or another"
are considered damp communities. A community that does not
choose any local option is a wet community.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON observed that the proposed legislation
does not address the communities that have selected local
option, but addresses communities that have ever had an election
for a local option. He asked if there are communities that have
held a local option election, but did not accept the local
option.
MS. GIFFORD said currently the board keeps count of the local
option communities and which options those communities have
elected. If a community voted down an option in an election,
that community would not be on the board's list, she said.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said he would like that information.
9:38:18 AM
CHAIR LYNN closed public testimony. He said he likes the
concept of SB 261, and he hopes the committee can make it work.
He indicated that he would be holding the bill for further work.
9:38:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said she does not see the need to hold
SB 261, because the sponsor has clearly stated, through the
language of the bill, what he would like the proposed
legislation to do.
9:39:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON said he disagrees, because he questions
the proposal to put someone from a community without a liquor
license on the board responsible for issuing liquor licenses.
He reiterated that that is a law enforcement issue, not a liquor
control board issue.
9:40:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN said he thinks one question that has
been answered is whether there would be enough communities to
qualify under SB 261. He said there may be additional
communities, and that information will be forthcoming. He said
he likes the intent of SB 261 and hopes the committee can get
questions answered and move along the process.
CHAIR LYNN reminded the committee that the sponsor of the bill
had said he had no problem with the bill being held over.
9:41:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON noted that the House State Affairs
Standing Committee is the only committee of referral that makes
policy, and he encouraged the committee to be expedient, but
also thorough.
9:42:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO reiterated that if the bill sponsor's
intent is to have one member of the board from a rural
community, then he would like that specified in the bill. He
said he does not have a problem with the language staying as is,
if that is the sponsor's intent.
9:43:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG recalled that Mr. Fox had testified
that it is difficult to get people to serve on the board, and
Representative Gruenberg suggested that the committee consider
giving some discretion to the governor if, for example, there is
no one readily available to fill a board seat. He then directed
attention to language on page 1, line 13, which specifies that
"at least one" of the public members of the board, "shall reside
in a rural area." He stated that there has, for the last few
years, been heavy migration from rural to urban areas. He said
if a person from a rural area who served on the board had to
move to an urban area, that rural seat would immediately be
vacated. He said the migration to an urban area may be just for
a short period of time, for example, to get medical treatment.
Finally, Representative Gruenberg echoed Representative Gatto's
previously stated concern regarding the use of "No three
members". He opined that that language is poorly drafted and
needs attention.
CHAIR LYNN confirmed that Representatives Johnson and Gruenberg
would be working with the bill sponsor.
9:46:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO said applications for board seats are sent
to the governor's staff, and that staff member must "govern
eligibility based on the law." Representative Gatto said if the
law is unclear, that could result in that staff member
disqualifying someone. He said the reason for spending so much
time on the bill language is to give clear directions to that
staff person whose assignment is to reject or accept applicants.
He predicted that if the bill language is made clear by the
House State Affairs Standing Committee, then SB 261 will pass
the House floor easily.
9:47:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON offered his understanding of the points in
the bill that had previously been highlighted as needing
clarification.
9:48:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON, in response to Chair Lynn, stated his
preference that a subcommittee not be formed, but rather that
the chair allow him to work with the bill sponsor to answer his
concerns.
CHAIR LYNN invited anyone else on the committee to contact the
bill sponsor to work out issues related to SB 261.
9:48:36 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that SB 261 was held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|