Legislature(1995 - 1996)
05/06/1995 01:42 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 FINANCE COMMITTEE
May 6, 1995
1:30 P.M.
TAPE HFC 95-115, Side 2, #000 - end.
TAPE HFC 95-116, Side 1, #000 - end.
TAPE HFC 95-116, Side 2, #000 - end.
TAPE HFC 95-117, Side 1, #000 - #530.
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Mark Hanley called the House Finance Committee
meeting to order at 1:42 p.m.
PRESENT
Co-Chair Hanley Representative Martin
Co-Chair Foster Representative Mulder
Representative Brown Representative Navarre
Representative Grussendorf Representative Parnell
Representative Kelly Representative Therriault
Representative Kohring
ALSO PRESENT
Robert Stalnaker, Director, Division of Retirement and
Benefits, Department of Administration; Karen Mahurin,
President, Kenai Peninsula Education Support Association,
Kenai; John Monhan, Superintendent, Iditarod School
District; Marilyn Rosene, Teacher, Dillingham; Judy I.
Murphy, Teacher, Barrow; Christina S. Barron, Teacher,
Barrow; Frank Smith, Barrow; Trena Richardson, NEA-Alaska;
Claudia Douglas, President, NEA-Alaska; Linda Moats, ACSA,
Juneau; Richard Kern, NEA-Alaska; Paul Jarvi, NEA-Alaska;
Rob Pfisterir, AEA, Anchorage; Senator Judy Salo; Belinda
Daniels, NEA; Don Hadley, NEA; Bruce Ludwig, AFL-CIO,
Juneau; John Cyr, NEA; Don Efferidge, Local 71; Dorothy
Wells, NEA-Alaska; Annalee McConnel, Director, Office of
Management and Budget; Rod McCoy, AEA, Anchorage; Richard
Barlow, Palmer.
SUMMARY
SB 148 An Act relating to a defined contribution
retirement plan for state employees.
CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld) was HELD in Committee
for further discussion.
SENATE BILL NO. 148
1
"An Act relating to a defined contribution retirement
plan for state employees."
BOB STALNAKER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF RETIREMENT AND
BENEFITS,
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION observed that the Department
had reviewed the impact of CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld) in
regards to the soundness of the state retirement system, as
required by AS 24.08.036. He noted that he was informed by
the actuaries that CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld) would not
adversely impact the retirement system. He stated that the
actuaries estimated that the employer contribution if all
employees were at the Tier III level would be approximately
5.5 percent of pay. The 5.5 percent contribution would be
reached over time as Tier I and Tier II employees are
retired and replaced by Tier III employees.
Representative Martin questioned the employee contribution.
Mr. Stalnaker noted that the employee contribution would be
set in statute at 5.5 percent for PERS and TRS. He added
that police officers would contribute 6.0 percent. The
current employee contribution is 6.75 percent for PERS and
8.61 percent for TRS. He summarized that while employer
contributions would be reduced, benefits would also be
substantially less.
ANNALEE MCCONNEL, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET,
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR gave a brief overview of events
leading to the introduction of SB 148. She noted that a
Retirement Incentive Program (RIP) for state workers, local
government workers and school district employees was
introduced by request of the Governor in HB 270. She noted
that Senator Rieger combined the RIP provision with a
defined contribution program, which was offered in SB 148.
She observed that the plan adopted in CSSB 148 (FIN) was
based on a proposal by the Administration. She noted that
the Administration is developing a defined benefit proposal
with the intention of bringing it forth during the 1996
legislative session. She stressed that the proposal has not
had full review within the Administration. She emphasized
that the legislation has not been reviewed by local
governments, school districts, the Retirement Board or labor
unions. She expressed concern that questions regarding the
proposal have not been reviewed. She emphasized that a
significant change to the retirement system, as represented
by CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld), should only be adopted after
all aspects of the proposal have been considered. She
cautioned that additional tiers could be required to correct
problems in the Tier III plan if sufficient review is not
given to the proposal. She recommended that work continue
during the interim and a proposal be brought forth at the
2
beginning of the next legislative session. She suggested
that the RIP provision could be used only where positions
would be eliminated so that new employees could be hired
with a revised proposal at a later date. She reiterated
that the impacts of CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld) have not been
sufficiently addressed.
MARILYN ROSENE, TEACHER, DILLINGHAM testified via the
teleconference network. She testified in opposition to CSSB
148 (RLS) am(efd fld). She expressed concern that qualified
teachers will not be encouraged to return to teaching. She
maintained that TRS and PERS are two of the strongest
systems created by the Legislature. She observed that
teacher turnover in rural Alaska is high. She noted that
individuals with experience and training would be retired
under RIP. She emphasized that teacher turnover impacts
students and programs.
JOHN MONHAN, SUPERINTENDENT, IDITAROD SCHOOL DISTRICT,
MCGRATH testified via the teleconference network. He
testified in opposition to CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld). He
emphasized that the State's retirement system helps to
attract qualified teachers and state employees. He urged
caution and recommended further review of the legislation.
KAREN MAHURIN, PRESIDENT, KENAI PENINSULA EDUCATION SUPPORT
ASSOCIATION testified via the teleconference network. She
spoke against CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld). She noted that
Kenai Peninsula employees, who only work 10 months a year,
will have to work 35 years to receive a 30 year retirement
credit. She stated that retirement equity is a top priority
for education support employees around the State. She
maintained that the legislation is regressive. She asserted
that the elimination of spousal health benefits is punitive.
She urged the Committee to hold the legislation for further
review.
JUDY MURPHY, BARROW testified via the teleconference
network. She spoke in support of the RIP provision. She
emphasized that RIP is a necessary management tool. She
recognized that retirement benefits provided by the state of
Alaska should be reviewed in order to reduce state
expenditures.
CHRISTINA BARRON, BARROW testified via the teleconference
network. She spoke in support of the RIP provision. She
stressed that schools are revitalized by the introduction of
younger and more enthusiastic personnel.
Representative Martin expressed concern that the State
realize its investment in its teachers.
3
Ms. Murphy maintained that retired teachers continue to work
with children in summer and other programs. She emphasized
that retired teachers continue to work with younger teachers
during in services.
FRANK SMITH, BARROW testified via the teleconference
network. He expressed concern that the fiscal ramifications
of the plan have not been adequately reviewed.
DOROTHY WELLS, NEA-ALASKA testified against CSSB 148 (RLS)
am(efd fld). She stressed that the state of Alaska has one
of the best retirement systems in the country. She stated
that she would "hate to see us go from having the best one
(teachers retirement system) to probably the worst one."
She noted that other states that have a 1.5 multiplier also
offer their teachers social security. She stressed that
teachers in Alaska do not participate in social security or
the Supplemental Benefits System (SBS). She stated that
teachers cannot retire with more than 100 percent of their
salary. She estimated that a teacher would have to teach 40
to 50 years of service to receive 100 percent of their
salary.
Ms. Wells observed that the retirement system was begun in
1955 before oil was discovered in the state of Alaska. She
stressed that TRS is 89 percent funded. She observed that
the purpose of the retirement system is to recruit and
retain competent, good teachers. She acknowledged that the
legislation may not inhibit recruitment of new teachers.
She maintained that the retention of teachers will be
affected.
Ms. Wells observed that under current law teachers can
retire after 20 years of teaching in the State or after 25
years of teaching in total. Benefits are calculated by
multiplying 2 percent times the number of years taught times
the three highest year salaries. Years taught after 1990 in
excess of 20 years can use a multiplier of 2.5 percent. A
teacher can retire after 20 years at 40 percent of salary
and after 25 years at approximately 50 percent of salary.
The legislation would drop the multiplier to 1.5 percent.
Teachers would be required to meet the 85 rule. The number
of years taught plus the teachers age must add up to 85.
Representative Martin stressed that a 10 percent COLA is
paid to teachers that stay in state. He asked if the State
can opt in or out of social security.
Mr. Stalnaker stated that public employers can no longer opt
in or out of social security. The State cannot opt in to
social security.
4
Representative Martin asserted that employees are better off
without participating in social security. Mr. Stalnaker
observed that the state of Alaska established SBS when it
opted out of social security. He estimated that most people
would agree that SBS coupled with PERS is superior to social
security. He emphasized that PERS provides many of the
services afforded by social security. He observed that
teachers do not participate in social security. School
districts do not participate in SBS.
ROD MCCOY, ANCHORAGE testified in opposition to CSSB 148
(RLS) am(efd fld). He stressed the importance of teachers.
He asserted that self respecting persons will not be
attracted to teach under the provisions of CSSB 148 (RLS)
am(efd fld). He observed that a 30 year teacher would not
have medical coverage for their spouse. He maintained that
the legislation is an insult to teachers and should be
placed in the trash.
BRUCE LUDWIG, ALASKA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, ALASKA
FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, AFC-LIO spoke in opposition to CSSB
148 (RLS) am(efd fld). He stated that the legislation is
two bills in one, one good and one bad. He spoke in support
of the RIP provision. He spoke against the PERS and TRS
portion of the bill. He observed that the legislation has
only been in review for a week. He asserted that the "only
thing driving that train was saving money." He stressed
that the retirement system has been built and fine tuned
over 40 years. He suggested that the legislation be held
and that school districts, municipalities and the State work
together to meet the needs of all the elements.
JOHN CYR, VICE PRESIDENT, NEA-ALASKA testified in opposition
to the legislation. He stated that he is a teacher at
Wasilla High School.
(Tape Change, HFC 95-116, Side 1)
Mr. Cyr maintained that the TRS system is sound and one of
the best in the United States. He alleged that it is
uncertain if the legislation will save the State money. He
maintained that the provision will have a negative impact on
the system. He noted the lack of agency and public input on
the legislation. He questioned if the authorization section
provides the RIP option for classroom teachers.
DON ETHERIDGE, LOCAL 71 testified in opposition to CSSB 148
(RLS) am(efd fld). He stressed that his union supports the
RIP provision. He stated that if RIP and the Tier III
provision remain together that they would not support
passage of CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld). He maintained that
the Tier III provision would not be fair to future
5
employees.
TRENA RICHARDSON, TEACHER, SOLDOTNA testified in opposition
to CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld). She pointed out that a
member of the Committee indicated that he did not know what
was in the legislation. She asserted that the legislation
needs more review. She urged members to hold the
legislation for further review.
CLAUDIA DOUGLAS, PRESIDENT, NEA-ALASKA testified that NEA-
Alaska strongly opposes CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld). She
maintained that CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld) would gut the
retirement system. She stressed that the plan is a divisive
way to deal with public employees and teachers of the State.
She alleged that CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld) is inequitable
and would be unfair to the children of the State. She urged
members to not pass CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld). She
clarified that the 10 percent COLA only refers to benefits.
She emphasized that the retirement system is actuarially
sound.
Mr. Stalnaker explained that the average funding ratio for
state pension plans is 85 percent. He observed that TRS is
at 89.6 percent and PERS is at 94 percent with the inclusion
of prefunded health insurance. He emphasized that no other
state prefunds health insurance. He stated that if the
state of Alaska retirement system was compared to other
states that it would be over 100 percent funded. He pointed
out that in 1990 a sound funding provision was passed to
guarantee prefunded cost of living increases to retirees.
He explained that the 1990 change recognized a large
unfunded liability. This provided for a second tier. He
noted that the unfunded liability is being reduced over 25
years. He observed that the funding ratio has been
increasing since 1990. He noted that earnings in 1994 were
low. The earnings assumption was also lowered in 1994. He
explained that these two factors caused the ratio to be
reduced from 92 percent to 89.6 in the past year. He
asserted that the State's retirement systems are among the
most sound in the country.
Representative Parnell noted that the unfunded liability is
estimated at $1 billion dollars by the year 2019. He asked
if the proposal will make the system more sound. Mr.
Stalnaker replied that the system will maintain its
soundness as long as the actuaries are free to recommend the
assumptions that should be adopted and to calculate the
employers contribution for each year. He stressed that the
unfunded liability should be compared to the value of the
assets. He observed that the funding ration is estimated to
increase to 96 - 97 percent for both systems. He emphasized
that a billion dollar unfunded mandate in the year 2019 will
6
be within 3 - 4 percent of 100 percent funding. He observed
that it is a conscious strategy not to over fund the system.
In response to a question by Representative Parnell, Mr.
Stalnaker stated that if the system contained only Tier II
employees PERS would run at approximately 10 percent a year.
The system is currently at 14 percent because of the Tier I
employees. He stressed that as long as the system is funded
at 10 percent it is sound. He clarified that the proposal
will lower the cost to the employer but not influence the
soundness of the system. He stated that the issue is what
is the fair benefit level for the cost to the employer.
In response to a question by Representative Mulder, Mr.
Stalnaker clarified that Tier I and II benefits will not be
affected by the Tier III proposal. He stated that the
employer/employee's contribution will change over time.
In response to a question by Representative Therriault, Mr.
Stalnaker restated that TRS employees do not receive any
social security or SBS benefits. He observed some districts
have 403 B plans. There is no requirement for the employer
to provide an alternative to social security aside from TRS.
Representative Grussendorf observed that spousal medical
benefits would not be provided to Tier III employees. Mr.
Stalnaker explained that Tier I employees receive full
health benefits for themselves, their spouse and their
dependents when they retire. Retired Tier II employees
under age 60 pay the full cost of medical benefits for the
first 5 years in PERS and the first 8 years in TRS or until
they reach age 65. The system would pay half the cost after
the 5 or 8 year period until the retiree is 65 years old.
At age 65 the system would pay the entire cost. Tier II
retirees would receive coverage for themselves, their spouse
and their dependent children. Tier III would pay health
insurance for the retiree only, paid by the system. Spousal
or dependent coverage could be purchased at the group rate.
LINDA MOATS, ALASKA COUNCIL OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
testified against CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld). She
emphasized that Tier III is the system that our children
will be hired and will retire under if CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd
fld) is adopted. She asked that all aspects of the
provision be investigated.
Representative Therriault asked how many categories of
employees can draw benefits after 20 years. Mr. Stalnaker
stated that teachers, police officers and fire fighters can
retire at 20 years, all others have to serve 30 years before
retirement.
7
In response to a question by Representative Martin, Mr.
Stalnaker stated that teachers can purchase up to 10 years
of outside services. He clarified that the 20 year-and-out
provision is only for teachers whose service is all in
Alaska. Teachers with outside service can retire at 25
years. There is no age limit on any of the year thresholds.
RICHARD KERN, NEA-ALASKA, BETHEL testified in opposition to
CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld). He observed that as a teacher
he is preparing students to become teachers in their
communities. He emphasized that the benefits that were
permitted to him as a non-member of the community will not
be available to those that were raised in the community. He
observed that a teacher will have to teach 30 years if they
begin teaching at 25 years old. He stressed that jobs in
rural communities are scarce. He emphasized that scarce
jobs will be kept an additional 10 years before being turned
over to other members of the community.
Representative Parnell emphasized that if overall state
spending is not reduced our children will not have the
opportunities that are available now.
Representative Therriault expressed concern that an
individual of the age of 44 or 45 should feel that they are
entitled to draw a retirement. Representative Mulder noted
that a teacher who began teaching at 25 years old could
retire at the age of 45 and begin receiving a benefit.
PAUL JARVI, TEACHER testified in opposition to CSSB 148
(RLS) am(efd fld). He stated that he is a 20 year teacher
who has retired at 40 percent of his salary. He viewed his
20 year retirement as an early retirement. He is currently
running a business in Ketchikan. He stressed that the
benefit package helps to keep people motivated and in public
jobs. He spoke against passage of CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd
fld).
Representative Kelly asked if Mr. Jarvi pays medical and
retirement benefits for his employees. Mr. Jarvi stated
that he has medical benefits and retirement for his full
time employees. He acknowledged that he cannot afford to
pay benefits which equal those he receives. Representative
Kelly stated that "most employees in the private sector
would kill for this horrible Tier III bill." He stressed
that the "party is over." He estimated that people in Tier
III would still be above the private sector.
In response to a question by Representative Martin, Mr.
Jarvi clarified that he receives a 10 percent COLA on
benefits for remaining in Alaska. He noted that he receives
8
approximately $1,800 hundred dollars a month. He stated
that he retired while he still had productive teaching
years. He said he would support a good retirement package
and teacher's rights over early retirement.
Representative Kohring stressed that the State is facing a
monster of a fiscal crisis. He reflected that members must
make tough choices.
(Tape Change, HFC 95-116, Side 2)
In response to a question by Representative Therriault, Mr.
Jarvi stated that he is 44 years old. Representative
Therriault stated that, in his opinion, Mr. Jarvi is not
retired. He stressed that his retirement has become a part
of his yearly income.
Representative Kelly maintained that teachers retire after
only 15 years of service when summer vacation is considered.
ROB PFISTERIR, PRESIDENT, ANCHORAGE EDUCATION ASSOCIATION
testified in opposition to CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld). He
maintained that the legislation sends a message to education
professionals that they are not valued. He asserted that
the State is not in an economic crisis. He maintained that
the State is in a priority crisis. He observed that the
state of Alaska is the 50th state in taxation. He
maintained that the State has refused to identify taxation
as a way of raising revenues that the State needs. He
stressed that education is the number one service that the
State should provide. He alleged that CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd
fld) would denigrate the retirement system. He asserted
that teacher's salaries are not high in comparison to the
salaries of other professionals in the State. He noted that
the average teacher makes $46.0 thousand dollars a year. He
observed that the system is operated by teachers'
contribution. He added that state and district
contributions have been reduced.
Representative Kohring noted the difficulty of prioritizing
funding. He acknowledged that education should be the top
priority. He requested that Mr. Pfister help identify areas
for reduction. Mr. Pfister stated that more money should be
directed to the classrooms.
Representative Mulder observed that the public would not
support the reinstitution of taxes. Mr. Pfister agreed. He
pointed out that in other states revenue increases as more
people come on to the job market.
Representative Therriault discussed the prioritization of
reductions in the Department of Administration. He
9
acknowledged that revenues will have to be raised but
emphasized that reductions will still have to be made to
fill the long term fiscal gap. He noted that the State pays
for many services that could be considered municipal or
county services. Mr. Pfister spoke to unintended
consequences. He cautioned against lowering the
professional standards for teachers.
SENATOR JUDY SALO spoke against CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld).
She maintained that the process was as much as a problem as
the bill itself. She observed that there was not sufficient
time to meet with affected employee groups. She added that
the Administration was unable to determine how much money is
saved and when the savings will begin. She questioned if
there are other options which would be less agrievous to
employees. She reiterated that teachers have never been
involved in SBS. She emphasized that job security and a
good retirement help to attract good people to the teaching
profession. She acknowledged that the proposal may be a
cost savings but cautioned that savings should be weighed
against the effect on attracting and retaining teachers.
She restated that to make a good decision the impacts must
be known. She maintained that teachers care about who will
follow them into the classrooms in the state of Alaska.
In response to a question by Representative Brown, Senator
Salo stated that there would be no savings for the next
several decades. She observed that a retiree would receive
$11.0 to $16.0 thousand dollars less annually. The
contribution rate would also be reduced. She emphasized
that the Committee should have the recommendation of the
TRS, PERS and Investment boards.
RICHARD BARLOW, MAT-SU testified in opposition to CSSB 148
(RLS) am(efd fld). He noted that he is a public employee.
He maintained that public employees are not over paid. He
spoke in support of the RIP provision. He emphasized that
RIP is a management tool. He expressed concern in regards
to attitudes toward public and school employees. He
stressed the importance of school and public employees.
In response to a question by Representative Mulder, Mr.
Stalnaker stated that projections were based on the
contribution rate as it represents the cost per person per
dollar. He noted that if the system was entirely composed
of Tier III employees, the employer contribution would be
5.5 percent for PERS. He explained that the savings would
be realized over time as Tier I and II employees are
replaced with Tier III employees. He estimated that some
savings would begin in 3 to 4 years and continue over 25
years.
10
Mr. Stalnaker clarified that the proposal was not the
Administration's recommendation. The administration had
been researching the proposal with the intent to work with
affected persons to see what was a reasonable change.
Mr. Stalnaker noted that the bill allows volunteer
participation. He explained that a school district,
University or public employer, other than the State, could
elect to participate. He stressed that actuarial work would
be doubled because assumptions would have to be formulated
for each of the two systems separately. He maintained that
this provision would be extremely costly. Representative
Parnell clarified that the Department of Administration's
fiscal note for $665.9 thousand dollars would be for a
mandatory Tier III. Mr. Stalnaker stated that it would cost
$200.0 to $300.0 thousand dollars to allow the optional
provision. He discussed the difficulties of setting up two
plans.
In response to a question by Representative Martin, Mr.
Stalnaker noted that the Division's annual report gives the
average retiree benefits over the past 10 years. He
observed that only 30 percent of employees eligible for
early retirement have taken the option.
In response to a question by Representative Brown, Mr.
Stalnaker reiterated that the fiscal note requirements have
been fulfilled. He restated that the soundness of the
system would not be affected as long as the actuarial can
continue to calculate the cost of the benefits in the term
of the employer contribution. He noted that the fiscal note
includes the impact on the employer's contribution rate with
demonstrations that the impact would be realized over time.
(Tape Change, HFC 95-117, Side 1)
Mr. Stalnaker stated that if benefits were cut in half the
employer's cost would be approximately half. The employer's
rate would be cut by more than half if the employee rate
stayed the same. He emphasized that the contribution amount
is also affected by state salary schedules. He clarified
that the total employer contribution rate includes PERS and
TRS for Tier I, II and III employees.
In response to a question by Representative Kelly, Mr.
Stalnaker stated that the purpose of the system is to help
the employer attract and retain employees. He observed that
if the effective date is March 31, 1996, to allow affected
groups to work with the Administration then there will be
new proposals next legislative session. If changes occur
after the effective date a Tier IV would be created. He
emphasize the need to include affected groups.
11
Mr. Stalnaker explained that a defined benefit plan pays for
benefits while the employee is working, so that it does not
become an obligation to future employees. He clarified that
Tier I, Tier II and SBS would not be affected.
Mr. Stalnaker stated that one employer contribution rate is
figured for all employees. The employer contribution for
all employees will be reduced as one rate as the ratio of
Tier II employees increase. The estimated 5.5 percent
employer contribution would include all employees still in
the system.
BELINDA DANIELS, NEA-ALASKA, ANCHORAGE testified in
opposition to CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld). She asserted that
the Committee did not have respect for what it means to be a
teacher. She emphasized the responsibility and amount of
energy that it takes to be a teacher. She maintained that
the legislation is short sided. She stated that PFD's could
be used to fund services. She stressed that the State must
invest in education and be respectful of those that provide
services.
DON HADLEY, NEA-ALASKA, TEACHER, DIAMOND HIGH SCHOOL,
ANCHORAGE testified against CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld). He
emphasized that there is no common retirement schedule for
20 year teachers. He observed that many factors influence a
teacher's retirement. He stated that he did not know many
teachers that had elected to retire after 20 years. He
emphasized that a 20 year teacher does not retire at 100
percent of salary. He noted that military personnel can
retire at age 38 if they enlisted at 18 years of age.
Mr. Hadley concluded that Alaska "is the first state in the
history of the United States that is going to the poor house
with billions of dollars in the bank."
Representative Martin referred to the State's investment in
its teachers. Mr. Hadley stressed that teachers spend money
to obtain additional degrees and hours. He pointed out that
teachers move up on their salary hours because they have
spent money and time for additional training. He
accentuated that the amount of tension and stress that is
placed on classroom teachers. He questioned the wisdom of
requiring teachers to work beyond their physical
capabilities. He stated that he has taught for 26 years.
Representative Parnell asked if the NEA-Alaska Board has
taken a position in regards to income taxes and using the
Permanent Fund for education purposes. Mr. Hadley stated
that the Board has not taken a stand on taxes. He clarified
that the Board has taken a position in favor of using the
12
Permanent Fund for educational purposes.
CSSB 148 (RLS) am(efd fld) was HELD in Committee for further
discussion.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m.
13
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|