Legislature(2021 - 2022)BARNES 124
02/14/2022 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB295 | |
| SB11 | |
| HB289 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 295 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 11 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 289 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 276 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 289-AK MARIJUANA INDUSTRY TASK FORCE
4:50:22 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that the final order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 289, "An Act establishing the Alaska marijuana
industry task force; and providing for an effective date."
4:50:30 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS opened public testimony on HB 289.
4:50:40 PM
BELINDA "DOLLY" PHELPS, stated she is a licensed [marijuana]
cultivator. She said she supports the introduction of HB 289
because the need for a state legislative marijuana task force is
long overdue and such a workgroup will offer solid
recommendations for change in the marijuana industry, especially
concerning the crippling tax structure that is being
experienced. She expressed her support of the hard work done by
the Alaska Marijuana Industry Association (AMIA) to get the bill
heard.
MS. PHELPS drew attention to Section [1(b)(6)] of the bill which
states that the AMIA shall choose three industry members for the
board, two of which must be AMIA members. She stated that this
is highly inappropriate because all licensees should have an
equal opportunity to participate on a state legislative task
force. Task force members, she continued, should be chosen
fairly and equally among the industries they represent based on
merit, not affiliation or membership with any certain club or
group. She said the members of the Marijuana Control Board
should choose the three industry representatives as this board
is by far the most qualified to do so. She suggested that the
language in Section [1(b)(6)] be changed to read, "three members
representing cultivation, manufacturing, and retail cannabis
businesses appointed by the Marijuana Control Board members, and
each of whom resides in a different judicial district".
4:52:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY inquired about the number of marijuana
associations existing in Alaska.
MS. PHELPS replied that there's one association, but she doesn't
know the number of members. However, she added, when talking
about a state marijuana task force to deal with the state's
marijuana industry, everyone in the industry should have the
opportunity for their voices to be heard without having to be a
member of a certain group or club.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked whether Ms. Phelps has a suggestion
for what the three "zones" would look like.
MS. PHELPS responded that the Marijuana Control Board is by far
the most qualified to choose from industry members around the
state who have put their names in the hat. She pointed out that
the Marijuana Control Board has firsthand information on an
industry member's merit related to comprehension of the industry
and whether the industry member has been operating several years
with no violations, payment of taxes on time, and no unpaid
taxes, thereby making them a good candidate for the task force.
4:54:16 PM
RYAN TUNSETH, Owner, East Rip, testified in support of HB 289.
He noted that East Rip is a marijuana [dispensary] business and
stated that taxation is the most divisive issue within the
industry as well as the most division issue that the [Marijuana
Control Board] must deal with. The tax is very broad in its
applicability and can potentially shape the landscape that the
industry will be in should federal legalization happen. There
has now been enough run time to do this technical deep dive.
While it is unknown what the exact answers are, it is known that
it's a problem and barriers have been run into with some of the
technical professionals and access to data through the
Department of Revenue. So, this really seems like a ripe-for-
discussion issue and very wise to support.
4:55:39 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS closed public testimony after ascertaining that
no one else wished to testify.
4:55:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NELSON moved to adopt Amendment 1, labeled 32-
LS1317\B.1, Radford, 2/12/22, which read:
Page 2, line 30:
Delete "and travel expenses"
Page 3, line 1, following "meet":
Insert "by telephone or other means of
communication that ensures all members participating
can hear each other during the meeting"
Page 3, following line 5:
Insert a new subsection to read:
"(f) A meeting of the task force may not take
place in person."
Reletter the following subsections accordingly.
4:55:56 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS objected for purpose of discussion.
4:55:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NELSON explained that, after conversing with the
bill's sponsor, Amendment 1 would move the task force's meetings
from in-person to online. It was heard in public testimony that
meetings are already occurring online, he continued, so the
$100,000 in travel cost in the fiscal note could be better used
somewhere else.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS invited the bill sponsor to comment.
4:56:36 PM
JOE HARDENBROOK, Staff, Representative Grier Hopkins, Alaska
State Legislature, replied that the sponsor has reviewed
Amendment 1 and based on conversations with Mr. Glen Klinkhart,
director of the Alcohol and Marijuana Control Office (AMCO) in
the Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development
(DCCED), it seems that this would not be a huge liability for
the task force moving forward.
4:57:11 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS removed his objection to the amendment. There
being no further objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
4:57:22 PM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ moved to adopt Conceptional Amendment [2],
which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
Page 2, line 10
Following "following"
Delete "12"
Add "13"
Page 2, line 24
Following "senate"
Delete "and"
Page 2, line 26
Following "representatives"
Delete "."
Insert "; and (9) a public health professional
appointed by the governor."
4:57:24 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS objected for discussion purposes.
4:57:26 PM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ explained that Conceptual Amendment [2] would
add to the marijuana industry task force a public health
professional appointed by the governor. This is similar to the
Marijuana Control Board that already has a public health member,
she noted. Since the committee has just eliminated travel, this
proposal would not add any fiscal note to the bill. She said it
is important that a public health member be a part of the
conversations as changes in policy are considered, given the
implications of marijuana use on public health.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS invited the bill sponsor to comment.
MR. HARDENBROOK responded that he doesn't know the sponsor's
opinion on Conceptual Amendment [2].
4:58:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NELSON said he understands the reason for a
public health professional on the Marijuana Control Board but
asked what the purpose would be of having a public health
professional on a marijuana industry task force that is supposed
to be looking at taxes.
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ answered that, without a public health
professional, there would be a lack of expertise in considering
the way that taxation impacts consumption. A public health
member would not be an opponent necessarily of the marijuana
industry, she continued, but it is known that there is a
correlation and sometimes causation between taxes and
consumption, so it is an important viewpoint to have expressed
on the [task force]. It would be one member out of thirteen and
would bring important expertise as the [task force] makes
recommendations to the full board.
4:59:38 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS removed his objection to Conceptual Amendment
[2].
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRAGE objected to Conceptual Amendment [2].
4:59:51 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Snyder, Fields,
Spohnholz, and McCarty voted in favor of Conceptual Amendment
[2]. Representatives Schrage, Nelson, and Kaufman voted against
it. Therefore, Conceptual Amendment [2] was adopted by a vote
of 4-3.
5:00:46 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY related that several people involved in
the cannabis industry in his district have voiced concern about
who is the [AMIA]. He said it's an interesting point in the
public comment of having assured zones [judicial districts] for
these people coming from the association. He said he has asked
people in his district about how many associations exist and it
is still a question out there and whether there needs to be
zones [judicial districts].
CO-CHAIR FIELDS commented that he heard those concerns too and
wondered if someone would do an amendment. He said his personal
view is that it's beneficial for the industry to self-organize
and take the time to represent itself through an organization,
so he is comfortable with that construct and moving the bill
forward as it is. If members of the committee are comfortable
with moving the bill forward, he continued, it can be seen how
it is treated in the House Finance Committee, but if members
want to change the construct the bill can be held to do that.
5:02:36 PM
MR. HARDENBROOK addressed Representative McCarty's concern. He
said the bill as written anticipates that there would be three
members of the marijuana industry appointed to serve on the task
force, two of which would be members of the Alaska Marijuana
Industry Association (AMIA). He explained that AMIA is similar
to the Alaska Cabaret, Hotel, Restaurant and Retailers
Association (Alaska CHARR), a statewide membership organization
for businesses that sell alcohol. Like CHARR, AMIA does not
represent all members of the industry, but it is the existing
statewide organization. As well, he continued, the bill as
written requires that one of the folks appointed by AMIA be a
non-member of AMIA. Additionally, those three appointees must
come from separate Alaska judicial districts, a requirement for
geographic diversity in representation.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY drew attention to page 2 of the bill,
lines 20-23, and noted that several people with whom he spoke
didn't know who the Alaska Marijuana Industry Association is and
were concerned that it was a select area of the state rather
than representing all the state. He explained he was wanting
assurance that the provision to reside in different judicial
districts is indeed the case.
5:05:17 PM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ moved to report HB 289, as amended, out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes. She further moved that the Alaska Legislative
Legal Services be able to make conforming and technical changes
as needed. There being no objection, CSHB 289(L&C) was reported
from the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 295 Follow-Up Information from CBPL 2.11.22.pdf |
HHSS 3/31/2022 3:00:00 PM HL&C 2/14/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 295 |
| HB 289 Letter of Support - GOOD Cannabis 2.14.22.pdf |
HL&C 2/14/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 289 |
| HB 289 Amendment #1 - Nelson 2.14.22.pdf |
HL&C 2/14/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 289 |
| HB 289 Conceptual Amendment 1.pdf |
HL&C 2/14/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 289 |