Legislature(1995 - 1996)
03/20/1995 01:40 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE BILL 32
"An Act relating to administrative proceedings
involving a determination of eligibility for a
permanent fund dividend or authority to claim a
dividend on behalf of another."
MELINDA GRUENING, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN, stated
that HB 32 would address a serious problem with the number
of appeals filed after an applicant is denied a Permanent
Fund Dividend (PFD), and the length of time that it takes to
process those appeals. She added, that processing such a
large number of appeals is costly as well as being unfair to
those who have a legitimate claim. Currently there are ten
permanent full time employees in the Permanent Fund
Division, yet there are still almost 10,000 appeals pending,
with no end in sight. In years prior to 1994, the
percentage rate of denials was significantly higher.
HB 32 would implement a $25 filing fee for individuals
protesting the denial of their PFD application. The
legislation would provide for a waiver of the fee for an
indigent individual who is a member of a family whose income
is equal to or less than the federal poverty guideline. The
filing fee would be refundable if the appeal is successful,
and non-refundable if the denial was upheld.
Representative Martin voiced his concern with appeals
submitted by military personnel and their families.
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN acknowledged that the military
concern had been addressed in other pending legislation. He
added that the established criteria used to determine
eligibility sometimes appears to be subjective. Discussion
followed between Representative Green and Representative
Martin regarding a person's intent when trying to determine
eligibility.
7
Representative Brown asked Representative Green if filing an
appeal time limit had been considered. Ms. Gruening stated
that it would be more reasonable to institute a deadline
filing date. She added, approximately 54% of the denials
are labeled by the Department as "bright-line" issues.
Tape Change, HFC 95-58, Side 1).
Representative Therriault recommended a "family fee"
consideration for military and/or education concerns.
Representative Green explained that consideration had been
made.
MICHAEL MCGEE, CHIEF, PFD OPERATIONS, PERMANENT FUND
DIVIDEND DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, noted that each
case is treated separately. Representative Martin asked who
would file for a child in a foster home. Mr. McGee advised
that the State Department of Health and Social Services,
Family and Youth Service Division, would be the responsible
party to file for the child. Each year, DHSS files about
2200 PFD cases.
Mr. McGee stated that the legislation would discourage
frivolous persons from filing an appeal, although,
legislative clean-up projects have exasperated the denial
system. He added that all applications containing missing
information were denied. There are certain policies being
implemented in DHSS that are eliminating some of the
problems with the PFD system. Mr. McGee concluded that with
the addition of a due date on appeals would create an unfair
situation for rural communities.
Discussion followed among Committee members regarding the
effective date of the bill. Representative Grussendorf
understood that it would be 90 days after passage of the
legislation. Representative Martin thought it would be July
1, 1995, the beginning of the new fiscal year. Mr. McGee
advised that administering the implementation would be
difficult and that it would create the need for a new
section to account for funds. Representative Mulder
recommended implementing the legislation on January 1, 1996.
Representative Brown commented that the correct language
would be technically challenging in order to provide this
calendar year's regulation inclusion. Representative Green
stated that he would be amenable to the change.
Ms. Gruening responded that appeals had been overturned
resulting from lack of information and are not considered
"frivolous". These are not the appeals addressed in the
proposed legislation. She stated that regulations could go
8
into effect at the beginning of the next cycle.
Representative Parnell MOVED a conceptual amendment adding
the language: "The appeal fee set forth in AS 43.23.015G
should take effect January 1, 1996". Mr. McGee advised that
language would provide the Department ample time to write
the needed regulations. Representative Brown MOVED a
"friendly" amendment that regulations be adopted in the 1995
calendar year. She pointed out that the Department
currently does not have the authority without the additional
language. There being NO OBJECTION to the "friendly"
amendment, it was adopted. There being NO OBJECTION to the
amended amendment, it was adopted.
Representative Parnell MOVED to report CS HB 32 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTIONS, it was
so ordered.
CS HB 32 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "no
recommendation" and with a fiscal note by the Department of
Revenue dated 2/13/95.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|