Legislature(2011 - 2012)HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/22/2012 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB279 | |
| HB56 | |
| HB216 | |
| HB264 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 56 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 216 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 253 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 264 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 302 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 279 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE BILL NO. 216
"An Act relating to deadlines in bills directing the
adoption of regulations and to the informative summary
required for the proposed adoption, amendment, or
repeal of a regulation."
2:35:05 PM
Co-Chair Thomas MOVED to ADOPT proposed committee
substitute for HB 216, Work Draft 27-LS0701\S (Bannister,
2/22/12).
Co-Chair Stoltze OBJECTED for discussion.
JOE MICHEL, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE, explained
that the CS made three changes to the original bill. On
page 2, line 8 the words "furnishes or otherwise provides
a," were inserted. Language had been removed from page 2
line 12 through 13 that stated "that is posted on the
Alaska online public notice system or furnished in an
electronic format under AS 44.62.190 (a)." On Page 2, lines
14 through 16 the following language had been inserted:
"however, if under AS 42.62.190 (a) the notice is
published in a newspaper or trade or industry
publication or is broadcast, this subsection does not
require that the brief description otherwise required
by the subsection accompany the publication or the
broadcast."
Representative Doogan asked for further explanation of the
insertion and deletion on page 2.
Mr. Michel deferred the question to Representative Peggy
Wilson.
REPRESENTATIVE PEGGY WILSON, SPONSOR, introduced her staff.
She clarified that the addition required the department to
provide a brief description of the regulation in layman's
terms; however, the description would be excluded from
newspapers, state publications, and radio announcements
because charges were incurred on a per word, per line, and
per minute basis respectively.
Representative Neuman thought that the point of the bill
was to provide the public with a better understanding of
the changes in regulations. He understood that there was a
cost, but believed the public should be aware of changes in
regulations that could potentially impact them.
Representative Peggy Wilson explained that the bill dealt
with two frustrations relating to the process of creating
or changing state regulations: (1) state agencies often did
not write regulations in a timely fashion. She relayed that
on occasion regulations had not been completed by the time
the scheduled effective date arrived. She cited an example
related to Alaska's Clear and Equitable Share (ACES) and
explained that the regulations had not been finished five
years after the legislation had been implemented;
therefore, producers were not clear on what was required
under the law and it had presented difficulty when looking
at a proposed oil tax law (HB 110) the prior year. The bill
would help legislators and members of the public to
understand what the changes to proposed regulations meant;
(2) the bill would ensure that all new regulations and
changes to current regulations would be accompanied by a
brief descriptive summary written in layman's terms. The
sponsor had worked with community members, legislators, and
the Department of Law to develop clear and concise
language. Section 1 specified that the deadlines for
adopting and amending or appealing regulations were set by
departments and agencies, which would be included on fiscal
notes. She relayed that agencies would be held accountable
for meeting the deadlines and would be required to report
to a regulations review committee if the deadline was
missed; they would also be required to set a new deadline.
2:42:48 PM
Representative Peggy Wilson discussed that state boards
that met infrequently would not be subject to the
regulation review committee requirement. She listed
agencies that were required to meet the deadlines due to
frequent interactions with the public and legislature: the
Alaska Housing Finance Corporation, the Alaska Industrial
Development and Export Authority, the Alaska Public Offices
Commission, and the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation
Commission. Language had been inserted in Section 2
specifying that the brief description was targeted at
emails and online notices. She reiterated that the bill had
removed the newspaper, trade or industry publications, and
broadcasting announcements from the requirements. She
expounded that a significant amount of communication
related to the issue was done via email and online.
Representative Peggy Wilson highlighted that Section 2
clarified that individuals could not take action against an
agency if they misunderstood the brief description that had
been provided. Sections 3 and 4 stated that the
requirements applied only to legislation filed after the
effective date of July 1, 2012.
Co-Chair Stoltze WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Work Draft 27-LS0701\S was ADOPTED.
Representative Neuman discussed that many members of the
public received their information about regulation changes
from the media. He cited a specific case in his district
related to changes to animal cruelty regulations. He
wondered how people would know whether they were in
compliance with the law or how it would impact them.
Representative Peggy Wilson responded that people would be
informed much like they were currently, given that
newspaper and broadcast announcements would be required to
specify where the description was located. She added that
unfortunately the bill did not solve the problem entirely
because some areas did not have internet access. She
thought that individuals without internet could potentially
contact their legislators to receive the description.
Representative Neuman surmised that the point of excluding
the brief description from newspapers, state publications,
and radio announcements was to save the departments money.
Representative Peggy Wilson replied in the affirmative. She
explained that the description could get lengthier
dependent upon the subject matter, which could become
expensive to publish. She explained that they had not been
able to determine the exact cost, but the goal was to keep
the cost to a minimum. She added that the departments
already articulated the intent internally and adding the
description to the public notices should be relatively
simple.
2:48:42 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze ClOSED public testimony.
Representative Doogan thanked Representative Peggy Wilson
for bringing the bill forward. He supported legislation
that made government business more accessible to the
public.
Representative Neuman believed that the intent of the
legislation was to ensure that the public was informed. He
was concerned that the departments did not have to provide
the description in print. He opined that the change was a
step backwards.
Representative Peggy Wilson reiterated that the departments
would be required to provide the description online and in
emails and that the exclusion only applied to broadcast
information due to costs. The goal was to provide the
public with a better understanding of any changes.
Representative Neuman supported the bill, but believed that
the information should be included in the broadcast
announcements and print media as well.
Representative Tammy Wilson asked for a brief description
between print versus email.
Representative Peggy Wilson replied that there were three
exceptions including, newspapers, trader industry
publications, and broadcast. The description would be
included in emails and in published documents sent by mail.
The goal was to save the state money by not requiring the
departments to pay for publishing the description.
Co-Chair Stoltze supported the legislation.
Representative Peggy Wilson responded that the bill would
have to go through the Senate as well and she would change
the bill if the Senate was receptive to the idea of
including the description in print media.
2:55:26 PM
Co-Chair Thomas MOVED to report CSHB 216(FIN) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
Co-Chair Stoltze discussed the zero impact fiscal note from
the Office of Management and Budget.
CSHB 216(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with one new zero impact fiscal
note from the Office of the Governor.
2:55:51 PM
AT EASE
2:56:36 PM
RECONVENED