Legislature(2023 - 2024)GRUENBERG 120

01/27/2023 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY

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.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
Heard & Held
Heard & Held
-- Testimony <Invitation Only> --
             HB 38-APPROPRIATION LIMIT; GOV BUDGET                                                                          
[Contains discussion of HJR 2.]                                                                                                 
1:05:12 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE  announced that the first  order of business                                                               
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 38,  "An Act relating to an appropriation                                                               
limit; relating  to the budget responsibilities  of the governor;                                                               
and providing for an effective date."                                                                                           
1:06:23 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE WILL  STAPP, Alaska State  Legislature, introduced                                                               
HB  38,  as  the  prime  sponsor.   He  paraphrased  the  sponsor                                                               
statement  [included  in the  committee  packet],  which read  as                                                               
follows [original punctuation provided]:                                                                                        
     One  of the  most  effective ways  to  ensure a  stable                                                                    
     economy is  to apply common sense  solutions to complex                                                                    
     problems.  An  effective  appropriation  limit  is  the                                                                    
     first  of  many  commonsense  solutions  that  is  both                                                                    
     uncontroversial and bipartisan.                                                                                            
     This is not a new revelation. The State of Alaska had                                                                      
     already identified the potential for overspending and                                                                      
     imposed  appropriation limits  in  1982. However,  that                                                                    
     decision  was  tied to  the  economy  of the  time.  An                                                                    
     economy that was approaching  peak oil production which                                                                    
     allowed for  a reasonable  limit that was  adjusted for                                                                    
     population and  inflation. The modern budget  of Alaska                                                                    
     has been  operating without an  effective appropriation                                                                    
     limit  for  nearly 40  years,  resulting  in less  than                                                                    
     meaningful  control of  our state  spending. HB  38 and                                                                    
     its companion resolution HJR 2  work together to create                                                                    
     a  constitutional and  statutory framework  for how  we                                                                    
     limit appropriations.                                                                                                      
     The  functional  cap  that is  being  proposed  uses  a                                                                    
     factor based  upon a five-year trailing  average of our                                                                    
     private  sector   economic  performance.  Specifically,                                                                    
     Real GDP  less government spending, which  measures the                                                                    
     value  produced  within   our  borders.  The  five-year                                                                    
     averaging  will  moderate  the effects  of  volatility,                                                                    
     leading  to  stability.  This   proposal  would  set  a                                                                    
     spending  cap  roughly  at  current  levels  and  would                                                                    
     include    a    constitutional    provision    allowing                                                                    
     flexibility in the case of unforeseen risks.                                                                               
     Our  Permanent  Fund  is a  tremendous  asset,  but  it                                                                    
     creates a risk  that Alaska will be  destined to become                                                                    
     a "financialized"  economy. Instead of  maintaining our                                                                    
     status as Alaskans that build,  add value, and produce,                                                                    
     we could become Alaskans  that wait and passively watch                                                                    
     the market  while hoping for the  best. A financialized                                                                    
     government that is funded  increasingly by some portion                                                                    
     of the  permanent fund will  grow to have little  to no                                                                    
     interest  in  the  private  sector.  A  spending  limit                                                                    
     tethered  to GDP  creates a  constructive  link to  our                                                                    
     private  sector and  ensures that  government does  not                                                                    
     outgrow  the  private  sector  that   it  is  meant  to                                                                    
     Spending  limit  reform  is one  of  very  few  subject                                                                    
     matters in which the  Comprehensive Fiscal Plan Working                                                                    
     Group   unanimously  agreed   to  be   necessary.  This                                                                    
     legislation seeks to follow  the recommendations of the                                                                    
     working group  by proposing  a structured  and flexible                                                                    
     appropriations  limitation   to  ensure   a  prosperous                                                                    
     future for Alaska.                                                                                                         
1:07:23 PM                                                                                                                    
The committee took a brief at-ease.                                                                                             
1:07:29 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE   STAPP  directed   attention   to  a   PowerPoint                                                               
presentation,  titled "GDP-Based  Spending Cap;  An Appropriation                                                               
Limit   Linking  Government   Spending  to   Alaska's  Productive                                                               
Economy"  [included in  the committee  packet].   He provided  an                                                               
overview  of  appropriation limits  on  slide  2, which  read  as                                                               
follows [original punctuation provided]:                                                                                        
     Structure of an appropriation limit                                                                                        
        o Exemptions List: Appropriations subject to the                                                                        
          limit The Appropriation Limit: Define the                                                                             
          calculation factor, starting point, growth rate,                                                                      
          and other limit mechanisms                                                                                            
        o Other: Capital projects or other specific                                                                             
     Current Appropriation Limit                                                                                                
        o Constitutional: Article IX, §16 (effective in                                                                         
        o Statutory: AS 37.05.540(b)                                                                                            
     Types of Appropriation Limits                                                                                              
     Proposed Appropriation Limit (HJR 2 / HB 38)                                                                               
1:08:44 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  STAPP reviewed  the current  constitutional limit                                                               
on  slide   3,  which  read  as   follows  [original  punctuation                                                               
     Constitutional: Article IX, §16 (effective in 1982)                                                                        
     "Appropriations  from the  treasury made  for a  fiscal                                                                    
     year shall  not exceed $2,500,000,000 by  more than the                                                                    
     cumulative  change,  derived  from federal  indices  as                                                                    
     prescribed by  law, in  population and  inflation since                                                                    
     July 1, 1981. "                                                                                                            
        o $2.5 B plus inflation and population growth since                                                                     
             • Calculation for FY 21 would be about $9.8                                                                        
      At least 1/3 of limit reserved for Capital Projects                                                                       
     and Loans                                                                                                                  
        o Can also break the limit for appropriations to                                                                        
          Permanent fund, capital projects if signed by                                                                         
          governor or approved by the voters, and a state                                                                       
          of disaster                                                                                                           
REPRESENTATIVE  STAPP  deferred  to Senator  Kaufman  to  provide                                                               
additional context on the bill.                                                                                                 
1:09:51 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR JAMES  KAUFMAN, Alaska  State Legislature,  prime sponsor                                                               
of  [SB  20],  the  companion   bill  in  the  Senate,  said  the                                                               
legislation  was  drafted to  create  a  more beneficial  process                                                               
control around  budgeting.  He  indicated that the purpose  of HB
38,  in combination  with HJR  2, was  to determine  a beneficial                                                               
percentage  of  the  private sector's  economic  activity,  which                                                               
would  represent  "responsible  spending."     He  believed  that                                                               
subtracting  government   spending  from  state   gross  domestic                                                               
product  (GDP) was  the most  "holistic"  expression of  Alaska's                                                               
economy.   He  indicated that  the statutory  limit, as  drafted,                                                               
would  cap  the  appropriation  limit  at  11.5  percent  of  the                                                               
calculated value.   The constitutional  amendment, as  drafted in                                                               
HJR  2, would  cap  the  statutory limit  at  14  percent of  the                                                               
calculated value.   He said the  two limits would work  in tandem                                                               
to create  a "high limit"  and an  operating limit.   He revealed                                                               
that  the bill  would  include a  five-year  trailing average  to                                                               
create stability  and smooth out overspending  when revenues were                                                               
up.  He described the graph  on slide 9, indicating that the gold                                                               
bars  reflected  spending affected  by  the  cap; the  blue  line                                                               
reflected the  statutory limit  proposed under  HB 38;  the black                                                               
line  reflected the  constitutional limit  proposed under  HJR 2;                                                               
and  red line  reflected the  current constitutional  limit.   He                                                               
reiterated that  the intent was to  determine beneficial spending                                                               
ratios  based on  Alaska's economic  activity averaged  over five                                                               
years to smooth  out "boom and bust" fluctuations.   He concluded                                                               
by  summarizing  the  spending  that  would  be  subject  to  the                                                               
appropriation limit.                                                                                                            
1:14:26 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTITIVE  STAPP  directed  attention  to  slide  10,  which                                                               
provided  a side-by-side  comparison of  spending subject  to and                                                               
excluded  from the  limit.   Slide 10  read as  follows [original                                                               
punctuation provided]:                                                                                                          
     Spending Subject to the Limit:                                                                                             
        o All UGF [unrestricted general fund] operating                                                                         
        o all UGF Capital Expenditures                                                                                          
        o Retirement Payments                                                                                                   
     Not Limited by this Proposal:                                                                                              
        o Permanent Fund Dividends                                                                                              
        o Appropriations to the Alaska Permanent Fund/ PCE                                                                      
          [Power Cost Equalization] Endowment                                                                                   
        o Appropriations to capitalize state retirement                                                                         
        o Direct spending on disaster declaration                                                                               
        o Proceeds of bonds approved by the voters                                                                              
1:15:37 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR VANCE invited questions from committee members.                                                                           
1:15:56 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE   EASTMAN  asked   whether  the   bill  would   be                                                               
functional without a constitutional  amendment.  Additionally, he                                                               
pointed  out  that the  current  statutory  limit was  habitually                                                               
ignored.   He questioned  whether the  bill sponsor  expected the                                                               
proposed limit to be treated differently.                                                                                       
1:16:21 PM                                                                                                                    
The committee took a brief at-ease.                                                                                             
1:16:33 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  KAUFMAN reiterated  that that  the bill,  in combination                                                               
with HJR  2, would set a  "high limit" and an  operational limit.                                                               
He confirmed that the bill  required the constitutional amendment                                                               
proposed under  HJR 2, its  companion resolution, to  function as                                                               
1:17:02 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY  inferred that  the statutory limit  could be                                                               
ignored whereas the constitutional limit  would be "the true hard                                                               
limit."  He asked whether that was accurate.                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE STAPP stated  that the goal was for  both limits                                                                 
the statutory limit  and the constitutional limit    to work hand                                                               
in hand.                                                                                                                        
SENATOR KAUFMAN pointed out that  exceeding [the statutory limit]                                                               
would require  a two-thirds  vote.   He said  the purpose  was to                                                               
implement  a  healthier  "bandwidth"  of capital  spending.    He                                                               
discussed  the boom-and-bust  sequences of  Alaska's economy  and                                                               
spending cycles.                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY  asked why the Permanent  Fund Dividend [PFD]                                                               
was excluded from the spending cap proposal.                                                                                    
SENATOR KAUFMAN  responded, "To avoid encroachment  into too many                                                               
areas."   He opined that  the dividend demanded its  own economic                                                               
and political solution.  He  suggested that a beneficial spending                                                               
cap  would act  as a  foundation  for solving  various issues  by                                                               
referencing  the private  sector  economy  and providing  capital                                                               
spending to build up the economy's capability.                                                                                  
1:20:43 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE GROH  pointed out  that the Fiscal  Policy Working                                                               
Group (FPWG)  had advocated for a  comprehensive and simultaneous                                                               
solution  to Alaska's  structural  deficit.   He  said  he had  a                                                               
number  of   questions  about  technical  aspects   and  how  the                                                               
statutory  and  constitutional spending  caps  would  fit into  a                                                               
comprehensive approach to resolving the deficit.                                                                                
1:22:49 PM                                                                                                                    
The committee took a brief at-ease.                                                                                             
1:23:49 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  GREY asked  whether  the  governor's FY24  budget                                                               
would fall underneath the proposed spending cap.                                                                                
1:24:01 PM                                                                                                                    
BERNARD  AOTO, Staff,  Representative  Will  Stapp, Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature,  shared   his  understanding  that   the  governor's                                                               
proposed budget would not fall under the spending cap.                                                                          
REPRESENTATIVE  GRAY sought  to confirm  that if  HB 38  had been                                                               
enacted, the governor would need to cut his proposed budget.                                                                    
MR.  AOTO  indicated that  if  enacted  by the  legislature,  the                                                               
governor would need to follow the statutory spending cap.                                                                       
1:24:52 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  GROH asked  why  the  legislature was  proceeding                                                               
with proposals for a statutory  and constitutional spending limit                                                               
when the  FPWG had recommended  a simultaneous  and comprehensive                                                               
1:25:25 PM                                                                                                                    
MATTHEW  HARVEY,  Staff,  Senator  James  Kaufman,  Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature,  responded  that  the  House was  free  to  consider                                                               
additional proposals.   He  added, "This  is the  proposal that's                                                               
currently in front of the body."                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GROH  referenced the  graphs on slides  6-7, which                                                               
reflected  the   history  of  Unrestricted  General   Fund  (UGF)                                                               
spending.   He explained that  he had  taken the liberty  to have                                                               
the graph updated and extended past  FY19.  He offered to provide                                                               
this information  to the  committee.  He  sought to  confirm that                                                               
the state was not in a period of a peak spending.                                                                               
MR.  HARVEY said  he  had  not had  the  chance  to consider  the                                                               
graphic shared by Representative Groh.                                                                                          
REPRESENTATIVE GROH confirmed that Alaska  was not in a period of                                                               
peak spending,  of which there been  multiple in past years.   He                                                               
asked whether,  based on  the graphic,  it appeared  that overall                                                               
spending in  addition to spending  on agency operations  were the                                                               
biggest issues in the state.                                                                                                    
1:29:10 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER pointed out  that the graphic referenced                                                               
by Representative Groh did not  come from the Legislative Finance                                                               
Division  (LFD),  Legislative Agencies  and  Offices.   He  asked                                                               
where it came from.                                                                                                             
REPRESENTATIVE GROH  explained that  in preparation  for hearings                                                               
on HB 38, he  had arranged and paid for the  work to be completed                                                               
before session started.  He noted  that he had showed the graphic                                                               
to Alexei Painter, Director of  LFD, who analyzed and agreed with                                                               
the information provided.                                                                                                       
1:29:59 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR VANCE said  she would allow some leniency today,  as it was                                                               
the  first meeting  of the  House  Judiciary Standing  Committee;                                                               
however,  she advised  members  to, in  the  future, arrange  the                                                               
sharing of documents  with her staff in advance.   She emphasized                                                               
the importance of citing sources of information.                                                                                
1:30:45 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  AOTO  returned  attention to  the  PowerPoint  presentation,                                                               
noting that he would be  covering the policy driven aspects while                                                               
Mr.   Harvey  would   cover  the   mechanical   aspects  of   the                                                               
MR. HARVEY  resumed the presentation  on slide 4,  which outlined                                                               
the  exemptions included  in  the  current constitutional  limit.                                                               
Slide 4 read as follows [original punctuation provided]:                                                                        
     "Except  for appropriations  for Alaska  permanent fund                                                                    
     dividends,  appropriations  of revenue  bond  proceeds,                                                                    
     appropriations  required  to   pay  the  principal  and                                                                    
     interest    on    general   obligation    bonds,    and                                                                    
     appropriations  of  money  received  from  a  non-State                                                                    
     source  in  trust  for a  specific  purpose,  including                                                                    
     revenues   of  a   public   enterprise   or  a   public                                                                    
     corporation of  the State that issues  revenue bond? No                                                                    
     other  appropriation in  excess  of this  limit may  be                                                                    
     made except  to meet  a state  of disaster  declared by                                                                    
     the governor as prescribed by law."                                                                                        
     Creates  exemptions   for  fund  sources  as   well  as                                                                    
     Current  limit  applies  to  all  UGF,  most  statewide                                                                    
     items, and some DGF items                                                                                                  
     Excludes  PFDs, bond  proceeds, debt  service payments,                                                                    
     non-State  sources   of  revenue,   public  corporation                                                                    
     revenues, and disaster declarations                                                                                        
     School  Bond Debt  Reimbursement is  excluded from  the                                                                    
MR.  HARVEY reviewed  the  current statutory  limit  on slide  5,                                                               
which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:                                                                          
     Enacted in 1986                                                                                                            
     Based on appropriations made in  a fiscal year, not for                                                                    
     a fiscal year                                                                                                              
        o Counts supplementals in the year appropriated,                                                                        
          not effective                                                                                                         
     Limits  spending growth  to  population plus  inflation                                                                    
     plus 5%                                                                                                                    
        o The use of both factors to calculate the limit                                                                        
         has caused the limit to outgrow effectiveness                                                                          
        o The timing of data for calculation of this limit                                                                      
          does not work well with the budget process. The                                                                       
          limit is not known before the annual budget                                                                           
1:33:39 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  HARVEY turned  to slide  6, which  provided a  graph of  UGF                                                               
spending history.   Key milestones and peak  spending periods, in                                                               
addition to  peak oil production,  were noted  on the graph.   He                                                               
continued to  slide 7,  which featured a  graph of  inflation and                                                               
population adjusted  UGF spending.   He  noted that  the existing                                                               
constitutional spending limit was  passed during the highest rate                                                               
of spending in Alaska's history.                                                                                                
1:35:01 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. AOTO  outlined the proposed  appropriation limit on  slide 8,                                                               
which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:                                                                          
     Calculated  by  subtracting  government  spending  from                                                                    
     historical   State  GDP   values   and  adjusting   for                                                                    
     Stability is  improved by  averaging these  values over                                                                    
     the previous full five fiscal years                                                                                        
     Constitutional   amendment,   as  drafted,   caps   the                                                                    
     statutory limit at 14% of the calculated value                                                                             
     Statutory  limit, as  drafted,  caps appropriations  at                                                                    
     11.5% of value                                                                                                             
        o FY22 appropriations were roughly $16 Million                                                                          
          below 11.5% of the calculated value (the                                                                              
          statutory limit)                                                                                                      
MR. AOTO described the graph  of the proposed appropriation limit                                                               
featured on  slide 9.  He  summarized the spending that  would be                                                               
subject to and excluded from the  cap on slide 10, which the bill                                                               
sponsor had  reviewed earlier.   He  concluded by  discussing the                                                               
benefits  of the  proposal on  slide  11, which  read as  follows                                                               
[original punctuation provided]:                                                                                                
     Effective and Reasonable                                                                                                   
        o This proposal would set the cap roughly at                                                                            
          current levels and would include a constitutional                                                                     
          provision for some flexibility in the case of                                                                         
          unforeseen risks                                                                                                      
     Stable and Predictable                                                                                                     
        o The 5-year trailing average creates stability,                                                                        
          smooths  out overspending  when  revenues are  up,                                                                    
          allows  government spending  to  fall much  slower                                                                    
          than  GDP  during poor  years,  and  the limit  is                                                                    
          known before the budget process begins                                                                                
     Private-Sector Focused                                                                                                     
        o Open the discussion to outcomes during the budget                                                                     
1:38:39 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  ALLARD, referring  to slide  11, highlighted  the                                                               
spending not limited by this  proposal, specifically the proceeds                                                               
of bonds approved  by the voters.  She asked,  "Is there a reason                                                               
you don't  want this  statute actually proposed  and voted  on by                                                               
voters as well with the 11.5 percent?"                                                                                          
MR. HARVEY  confirmed that the  proceeds of a  general obligation                                                               
bond  would not  be subject  to the  limit.   He explained  that,                                                               
because  general obligation  bonds were  ratified by  the voters,                                                               
the bill sponsor did not want  to limit the amount subject to the                                                               
appropriation limit.                                                                                                            
1:41:10 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON posed several  questions to be answered at                                                               
a  future  hearing.    He  asked how  GDP  was  figured  and  how                                                               
"trailing it  is to reality."   He  considered an example  of the                                                               
state granting a contract to a  private individual for a road and                                                               
surmised that  the contract would  be under the cap;  however, he                                                               
asked whether the money spent  by the contractor would be figured                                                               
into GDP.   He  asked whether the  state was  effectually "double                                                               
dipping" and artificially increasing the GDP with state money.                                                                  
1:42:02 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY  requested examples of other  states that had                                                               
implemented a spending cap based on GDP.                                                                                        
MR. HARVEY reported  that other states had  enacted spending caps                                                               
based on  economic indicators and  productive economy.   He noted                                                               
that  over  the  last  10  years, the  U.S.  Bureau  of  Economic                                                               
Analysis (BEA) improved its data  quality by renewing the process                                                               
for calculating  GDP.   He shared  his understanding  that states                                                               
had  been  successful  in  implementing  economic-based  spending                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE GRAY  sought to confirm  that Alaska would  be the                                                               
first to directly tie  a state spending cap to GDP  if HB 38 were                                                               
to pass.                                                                                                                        
MR. HARVEY answered yes.                                                                                                        
1:43:34 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  GRAY emphasized  his philosophical  concern about                                                               
this proposal.  He explained  that if [the legislature] wanted to                                                               
increase  spending to  stimulate the  economy during  a recession                                                               
that caused  a dramatic  drop in GDP,  the proposed  spending cap                                                               
would "tie [the state's] hands" and require larger cuts.                                                                        
MR. HARVEY responded by pointing out  that if Alaska's GDP took a                                                               
massive  hit, the  five-year trailing  average would  prevent the                                                               
spending cap  from being  severely impacted.   He  indicated that                                                               
the  five-year trailing  average would  effectually produce  lags                                                               
and leads in the spending cap compared to private sector growth.                                                                
1:45:39 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  GROH inquired  about the  difference between  the                                                               
exceptions proposed under [HJR 2] and HB 38.                                                                                    
1:46:54 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. HARVEY  directed attention to  Section 1 of the  bill, noting                                                               
that several  exceptions were being  added to those  listed under                                                               
AS  37.05.540(b):  appropriations   of  general  obligation  bond                                                               
proceeds;  payment of  principal and  interest on  revenue bonds;                                                               
appropriations  to  a  state  account or  fund  that  requires  a                                                               
subsequent appropriation from that  account or fund as prescribed                                                               
by  law,  which  includes appropriations  to  the  Constitutional                                                               
Budget Reserve (CBR) and appropriations  to capitalize the Alaska                                                               
Permanent Fund  and retirement funds; and  appropriations to meet                                                               
a state  of disaster declared  by the governor, as  prescribed by                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE GROH  noted that he shared  the concerns expressed                                                               
by Representative Gray.                                                                                                         
1:48:28 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR VANCE announced that HB 38 would be held over.                                                                            
1:49:01 PM                                                                                                                    
The committee took a brief at-ease.                                                                                             

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
HB 38 - Sponsor Statement.pdf HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 38
HB 38 - v.A.PDF HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 38
HB 38 - Sectional Analysis.pdf HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 38
HB 38 - HJR 2 Presentation 1.25.23.pdf HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 2/15/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 38
HB 38 - HJR 2 Research Appropriation Limit Data.pdf HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 2/15/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 38
HB 38 - HJR 2 Research GDP information 1.25.23.pdf HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 2/15/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 38
HB 38 - HJR 2 Reserach AG Opinion from 1983 1.25.23.pdf HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 2/15/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 38
HB 11 - Sponsor Statement- Family Violence.pdf HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 11
HB 11 - v.S (01-25-23).PDF HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 11
HB 11 - Sectional Analysis- Family Violence.pdf HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 11
HB 11 - Family Violence Presentation.pptx HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 11
HB 11 - Alaska Family Services Letter of Support.pdf HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 11
HB 11 - Letter of Support WISH.pdf HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 11
HB 11 - Alaska State Troopers Fiscal Note.pdf HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 11
HB 11 - Department of Administration Fiscal Note.pdf HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 11
HB 11 - Department of Corrections Fiscal Note.pdf HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 11
HB 11 - Department of Law Fiscal Note.pdf HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 11
HB 11 - Public Defender Fiscal Note.pdf HJUD 1/27/2023 1:00:00 PM
HB 11