Legislature(2007 - 2008)HOUSE FINANCE 519
01/23/2007 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Overview: Department of Revenue Budget | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
January 23, 2007
1:35 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Meyer called the House Finance Committee meeting to
order at 1:35:07 PM.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Mike Chenault, Co-Chair
Representative Kevin Meyer, Co-Chair
Representative Bill Stoltze, Vice-Chair
Representative Harry Crawford
Representative Richard Foster
Representative Les Gara
Representative Mike Hawker
Representative Reggie Joule
Representative Mike Kelly
Representative Mary Nelson
Representative Bill Thomas, Jr.
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Patrick Galvin, Acting Commissioner, Department of Revenue;
Dr. Michael Williams, Chief Petroleum Economist, Department
of Revenue; Jerry Burnett, Director, Administrative
Services, Department of Revenue; Gary Bader, Chief
Investment Officer, Department of Revenue; Cheri Nienhuis,
Petroleum Economist, Department of Revenue; Representative
Anna Fairclough
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
None
GENERAL SUBJECT(S):
^OVERVIEW: DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE BUDGET
The following overview was taken in log note format.
Handouts will be on file with the House Finance Committee
through the 25th Legislative Session, contact 465-6814.
After the 25th Legislative Session they will be available
through the Legislative Library at 465-3808.
TIME SPEAKER DISCUSSION
1:35:16 PM Co-Chair Meyer Introduced members of the House Finance
Committee.
1:37:22 PM PATRICK Summarized the responsibilities of the
GALVIN, ACTING Department of Revenue: the Tax
COMMISSIONER, Division, Child Support Services
DEPARTMENT OF Division, the Permanent Fund Dividend
REVENUE Division, and the Treasury.
1:39:24 PM Commissioner Introduced members of his management
Galvin team: Brian Andrews, Deputy
Commissioner working on Treasury
issues; Marcia Davis, Deputy
Commissioner, responsible for gas line
and tax issues; Jerry Burnett,
Legislative Liaison for the Department;
Gary Bader, Chief Investment Officer;
John Iverson, Director, Tax Division;
Dr. Michael Williams, Chief Economist
1:42:44 PM Commissioner Noted that the discussion would focus
Galvin on projected crude oil prices and
future projections, Petroleum Profits
Tax (PPT) status, revenue milestones,
and the investment situation.
1:44:35 PM DR. MICHAEL Introduced the topic of Crude Oil
WILLIAMS, Prices:
CHIEF
· The Department's official crude
ECONOMIST,
oil price forecast for FY 2007 as
DEPARTMENT OF
contained in the Revenue Sources
REVENUE
Book or RSB [page 97].
· The actual prices for FY 2007 for
the months for which we have data.
· The volatility of crude oil as
reflected in daily prices.
· The topics or drivers that are
causing volatility
Dr. Williams referred to a handout
entitled "Crude Oil Prices, State
Revenue & the PPT" (copy on file).
1:46:46 PM Dr. Williams Read from a prepared statement: "Let's
begin with the Department's official
price forecast for Alaska North Slope
crude oil or ANS. The chart presents
prices in dollars per barrel and the
vertical axis goes from $40 to $75.
The horizontal axis contains monthly
average prices beginning in June 2006
and running through May 2007. The
reason the data begin in June is
because oil prices and production in
June are the basis for royalty and
production tax payments in July - the
first month of Alaska's fiscal year."
"The green bars represent our forecast
prices and the dark blue line
represents actual prices. When we
prepared the forecast we had actual
prices for June, July and August - that
is the reason they match. Our crude
oil price forecast for FY 2007 is
$59.15 per barrel - which is the
average of the 12 months you see in the
chart. You will note we correctly
predicted prices declining; however, we
missed the exact trajectory.
Moving on to volatility, this chart
contains the daily price of ANS
beginning with June 1, 2006 and running
through January 18, 2007. You will
note there are some dramatic changes.
Prices increase almost 13% between June
13 and July 14, and then decline more
than 29% or $22 per barrel between July
14 and October 30. Thereafter, prices
increase 12% by December 15 before
declining another 20% by January 18.
What is causing these dramatic swings?
Will they continue?
To help you understand the causes of
these price changes, I am going to
discuss some key topics or drivers as I
call them. One must keep in mind that
the price of an item - any item - is
determined by the relative supply and
demand for the item in the market
place. Crude oil is a commodity that
is traded on electronic exchanges
worldwide."
1:47:48 PM Dr. Williams
"So what are the drivers? We will
begin with the demand for refined
petroleum products - things like
gasoline, jet fuel, diesel and heating
oil. Demand is one of the pillars that
determines price. In general, greater
demand for a good provides support for
higher prices. In the United States,
according to the American Petroleum
Institute, "… petroleum deliveries, a
measure of demand, fell by roughly 1%
to 20.6 million barrels per day [mbd],
down from 20.8 mbd in 2005, which was
1
below the 2004 level". The
International Energy Agency estimated
that world oil demand in the industrial
countries - countries like the US,
Japan and Germany - declined by 0.6% in
2006. However, global demand increased
due to the increases in Asia and the
Middle East. According to a Citigroup
analyst "We've entered that era on a
worldwide basis where demand is growing
2
more slowly." The recent declines come
at a time where there has been warm
weather, so the demand for heating fuel
has been reduced by weather.
Next, we look at another pillar that
helps determine price - the supply
side. In general, greater supplies of
a good [relative to demand] have a
depressing effect on price. Here we
see events that have offsetting
effects. The Organization of Petroleum
Exporting Countries or OPEC has
attempted to stem the price decline by
reducing their production. They
consciously reduced output in December,
October and September. They have
publicly stated that they might convene
a special meeting to discuss further
production cuts. You should also note
that Angola became a member of OPEC on
January 1, 2007.
Crude oil production in non-OPEC
nations has been increasing as has the
inventories of crude oil. With slowing
demand, the increase in non-OPEC
production has offset the declines by
OPEC. The result has been an increase
in inventories. According to the IEA,
crude oil stocks for the industrial
countries reached their highest level
in 20 years in May 2006 and continued
to increase for four of the next six
months."
1
Anchorage Daily News, "Demand for Petroleum Drops Second Year", January
20, 2007.
2
Ibid.
"Taken together we see a picture of
decreasing demand, increasing supplies
and increasing inventories. What is
causing demand to slow and non-OPEC
supplies to increase? A major factor
is high crude oil prices. High crude
oil prices translate to high prices for
refined petroleum products. These high
prices have an impact on consumption.
It has taken time for the impact to be
seen, but the recent consumption
statistics reflect the price effect.
On the supply side, the high prices
have led to large oil company profits,
which have in turn led to a drilling
and exploration bonanza world wide.
Companies are exploring and developing
resources around the world.
Geopolitical events also contribute to
price volatility. When Venezuela and
Bolivia talk nationalization, there is
an impact on the crude markets with a
perception of reduced supply and higher
prices. The fighting in Iraq, Russian
policy changes with regard to energy
development and other events all
influence crude oil prices."
1:52:48 PM Dr. Williams
"Please bear with me as I attempt to
tie much of this together to help you
understand the functioning of the
market. A key ingredient in all of
this is what people think the future
holds - their perceptions. If a
refinery operator believes demand is
strong and supplies are not forthcoming
[here you should think of 2004 global
oil demand growth of 3.4% followed by
supply disruptions caused by Hurricane
Katrina in 2005], that operator is
likely to purchase additional supplies
[remember, after 2004 there is limited
world wide spare crude oil production
capacity]. Now, multiply this by all
the refinery operators, airlines,
petrochemical plants and one sees
strong demand for crude oil, with the
different market segments bidding up
the price. Now throw in the financial
sector. Institutional investors see an
opportunity - they too believe demand
is increasing with limited supplies -
and they purchase derivatives - further
bidding up the price. This is
basically what happened in 2004 and
2005.
The year 2006 opened with people
believing [1] there was no price effect
that would dampen oil demand and [2]
there would be a nasty hurricane season
in 2006 that would reduce oil supplies.
With continued unrest in Iraq and
problems in the Russian oil sector,
this led to the steady increase of
prices that peaked in July. Thereafter
it became clear that the price effect
was working as demand for oil was
declining, and there were no supply
disruptions due to hurricanes. In
addition, warm weather reduced winter
heating oil demand. The IEA lowered
its demand estimate in September,
October, November and January [it was
unchanged in December].
On a very different but related topic,
the demand for corn has risen as the
demand for ethanol has increased and
corn prices are at 10 year highs.
While crude oil prices are declining,
financial investors still want to earn
a profit in commodities, so they may
move money to commodities other than
oil - such as corn. The recent freeze
in California has damaged the citrus
crop, so orange juice prices are likely
to increase. Perceptions: it may be
easier to make more money in orange
juice and corn than oil. Thus, we
could see additional money exit oil and
enter these other commodities. This
could amplify the downward trend in oil
prices.
In summary, when people's perceptions
change, they change their behavior.
The advent of computers and the
internet speed information worldwide
and a change in perception can very
rapidly translate to a change in action
and prices. It is people's perception
of future prices that causes them to
take action - they get their
information from television or the
internet and make their decisions -
whether hedging jet fuel purchases for
an airline, purchasing commodities for
an institutional investor, or betting
on price declines at a hedge fund.
With regard to prices, we did forecast
the price decline. Further, I believe
prices will remain volatile. Again, I
do not think the financial sector
causes the trends; I believe they
amplify the trends. In the short term,
there is possible price support from
the recent cold weather that could
stimulate the demand for heating oil.
Also, if OPEC does decide to further
reduce output, it can impact the
markets. The two key ingredients: the
supply-demand balance and people's
perceptions of the markets."
1:55:46 PM Dr. Williams
"Next, I want to turn to our fall
forecast revenue projections. These
can be found in the Revenue Sources
Book. I will review our projections,
highlight the importance of oil
revenues to Alaska, and describe some
basic analysis to give you an idea of
where we are today.
Our official forecast of General Fund
Unrestricted Revenue for FY 2007 is
$4.9 billion. Of the total, $4.3
billion or 88% comes from oil. I would
like to review the categories. The
first is Royalty revenue - this does
not include the 25% that goes to the
Permanent Fund or PF. You see we
project about $1.5 billion and this is
based on price, volume and the royalty
rate [about 12.5%]. Next is the
production tax - which is the new
Petroleum Profits Tax or PPT that
Commissioner Galvin will discuss
shortly. Our estimate is that it will
generate about $2 billion. The key
aspects here are production volumes,
price, costs and credits. Next on the
list is Income Tax which we project at
about $657 million. The drivers for
income tax include prices, production
and some factors our accountants refer
to as apportionment factors. It is
pretty complicated and I will not get
into the details now. We project about
$52 million from property taxes and
this is based on assessed value.
Monies from bonus, rents, etc. are
projected at about $51 million and the
recent lease sale in the Beaufort Sea
in October is the main reason for this
high number. Our projection for non-
oil revenue is about $580 million.
This includes many other categories
such as alcohol and tobacco taxes,
fines and forfeitures, licenses and
permits, investment income and other."
1:57:00 PM Dr. Williams
"As you can tell, oil revenue dominates
the Alaska revenue picture and crude
oil prices and crude oil production
volumes are the key factors in
estimating oil revenue. To see our
status on these two factors, I compare
our forecast with actual prices and
volumes for the fiscal year-to-date.
In this chart the vertical axis is
percent change. Our ANS crude oil
price forecast for FY 2007 that is
published in the RSB is $59.15 per
barrel. ANS crude oil prices through
January 18 average $61.81 which is
$2.66 or 4.3% above the forecast.
Regarding ANS crude oil production, our
volume forecast for FY 2007 in the RSB
is 739,618 barrels per day [b/d].
Through January 17 ANS crude oil
production averaged 722,845 b/d which
is 16,773 b/d or 2.3% below our
forecast. Since oil production in
Alaska is higher during the cooler
months, I expect our production volume
estimate will get closer to the
forecast as time goes on.
These conclude my remarks on crude oil
prices and the revenue forecast
published in the Revenue Sources Book.
I would now like to turn the floor over
to Commissioner Galvin who will discuss
the PPT."
1:59:16 PM Co-Chair Asked if $580 million in the non-oil
Chenault revenue stream is an increase or
decrease in revenue sources for the
state from the previous year.
1:59:52 PM Dr. Williams Responded that it is an increase of
less than 1 percent. He referred to
page 9 of the "Revenue Sources Book"
(Copy on File).
2:00:59 PM Dr. Williams Clarified that it is an increase of 2
percent because investment income has
doubled.
2:01:29 PM Commissioner Pointed to page 9 and stated that with
Galvin regard to the actual revenue sources,
the amount is relatively flat between
FY 06 and what is projected for FY 07
and FY 08. What changes is investment
income, thus resulting in a higher
number.
2:02:22 PM Co-Chair Meyer Noted that the price of oil can't be
controlled, but production can. He
questioned what is being done to curb
production decline. He inquired about
a production spike in 2012, as shown on
the graph on page 13 of the Fall 2006
Revenue Sources Book. He wondered
about current exploration and
incentives.
2:03:33 PM Commissioner Replied that exploration has been
Galvin heavier this year compared to recent
years. He referred to incentive
credits given for exploration and an
increase in exploration, both on the
North Slope and in Cook Inlet. He said
he expects several new off-shore fields
to be added to the projection forecast.
2:05:11 PM Co-Chair Meyer Concluded that in 2012 some additional
fields would come on line.
2:05:24 PM Commissioner Explained that development now in those
Galvin fields would lead to production in five
years.
2:05:42 PM Dr. Williams Referred to page 103 of the Fall 2006
Revenue Sources Book, where Liberty
field comes on line in 2012.
Commissioner Galvin described the make-
up of Liberty and the projection that
it could be on line in 2012.
Co-Chair Meyer asked about Shell's
holdings in the Chukchi Sea area.
Commissioner Galvin said there were
currently no leases in that area, but
there were a number of Shell leases in
the Beaufort Sea area. Co-Chair Meyer
noted that the gas pipeline will also
help production.
2:07:54 PM Representative Asked for an estimate of how much more
Gara revenue there would be absent the
pipeline shut down.
2:08:07 PM Dr. Williams Replied that estimates are not up to
date because some of the production is
still being shut in. Commissioner
Galvin added that the estimates are on-
going.
2:09:11 PM Representative Asked how Point Thompson might affect
Gara the production volume picture.
Commissioner Galvin replied that it may
take 10 to 13 years to go from
exploration to production. Dr.
Williams said Point Thompson could
occur without a gas pipeline and, in
this forecast, is scheduled to come on
line in 2017. The prediction is far
enough in the future as to not impact
near-term supplies. As a gas cycling
project it is feasible.
2:10:59 PM Commissioner Referred to page 6 of the handout
Galvin entitled "Crude Oil Prices, State
Revenue & the PPT". He addressed the
PPT True-Up Payment. Companies were
allowed to continue to make payments
under the previous tax program until
April 1, 2007, when they will have to
make the payment they should have made
during that time, less what they
actually did make under the previous
tax program. Based on forecasts,
payments should be a little under $1
billion and will be an indication as to
how well PPT is working.
2:13:16 PM Commissioner Noted that there would have to be some
Galvin adjustments made to PPT regulations,
which have not been finalized.
Companies are basing payments on what
those regulations may be. There are
two regulation adjustment packages set
up. The first one created draft
regulations and raised the issues of
the transfer of exploration credits,
clarification of lease expenditures,
overhead rates, ring fencing losses,
information reporting requirements, and
penalty provisions.
2:17:41 PM Commissioner Explained that the second process
Galvin requires final reviews by the
Department of Revenue's Director and
Commissioner, as well as by the
Department of Law and the Lieutenant
Governor's Office.
2:18:34 PM Co-Chair Meyer Asked about the status of PPT and what
the estimate of the surplus for 2007
might be given that production has
stabilized and prices are fluctuating.
Commissioner Galvin replied that the
process that generates the Revenue
Sources Book bi-annually would
determine that answer. He noted that
it would be premature to make an
estimate now. A better estimate will
be available in a couple months. Dr.
Williams said he expected it to be
available in April.
2:20:11 PM Co-Chair Meyer Noted that there is a lot of heavy oil
up on the North Slope. He wondered if
PPT and the 20 percent credit would
provide incentive to go after that oil.
Commissioner Galvin thought it was too
early to tell. That was one of the
primary objectives of the credit. Co-
Chair Meyer said the companies wanted a
40 percent credit. Commissioner Galvin
explained how it would be determined if
the credit is effective.
2:21:35 PM Dr. Williams Referred to page 85 where alternatives
are presented in the form of three
tables of potential revenues to the
state under different scenarios.
2:22:08 PM Vice-Chair Asked if the regulations revert to the
Stoltz effective date of April 1, 2006.
Commissioner Galvin replied that they
do.
2:22:35 PM Representative Noted the intent to put together the
Hawker best possible information to get to a
projection. He asked if April 1 is the
date for that. Dr. Williams said that
is when the new Revenue Sources Book
will be published. Commissioner Galvin
related the steps that go into
determining the forecasts and the
timeline for determining the final
number.
2:24:06 PM Representative Asked if that process will fit into a
Hawker 90-day session scenario. He predicted
that it would provide the information
to the legislature at the end of that
timeframe. Commissioner Galvin said
the information would be distributed as
it comes in, but the estimate would be
determined at the end of the time
period and still would be only a
projection.
2:26:07 PM Representative Pointed out that the true-up payment,
Hawker from April 1, 2006, to the end of
September 2006, - three calendar
quarters - is estimated to be close to
$1 billion more than under ELF.
Commission Galvin agreed. Co-Chair
Meyer said that with more production
that number would be even larger.
Commissioner Galvin added that if the
price or production goes up, that
number goes up.
2:27:53 PM Representative Wondered about the percent of increase
Hawker over ELF. Dr. Williams, referring to
the slide on Oil Dependency, thought it
would be doubled. He requested Cheri
Nienhuis to address that question.
2:29:27 PM CHERI Stated that the increase in FY 07 over
NIENHUIS, the ELF for a full fiscal year would be
PETROLEUM $1.2 billion. That includes the April
ECONOMIST, and May payments, as well. It would
DEPARTMENT OF double in about 5 quarters. Co-Chair
REVENUE Meyer asked when the fiscal year
started. Ms. Nienhuis said it starts
with production on June 1, which would
mean a payment on July 1.
2:30:46 PM Representative Asked what part of the 100 percent
Kelly increase relates to the progressivity
piece. Ms. Nienhuis thought about 10
percent.
2:31:20 PM Representative Thought that the oil companies'
Gara deductions would be seen at the end of
March. He wondered if the deductions
would be taken at the first tax
reporting period. Commissioner Galvin
said he would find out and get back to
Representative Gara. Representative
Gara wondered what the take would be if
the tax was based on a world average.
Commissioner offered to provide that
information.
2:33:04 PM Co-Chair Meyer Questioned the definition of world
average. Representative Gara responded
with a definition based on last year's
presentations. He pointed out that it
is up to the Department of Revenue to
determine that figure.
2:33:50 PM JERRY BURNETT, In response to a question from Co-Chair
DIRECTOR, Meyer, said that the Department of
ADMINISTRATIVE Revenue has been working with the
SERVICES, cruise ship industry regarding head tax
DEPARTMENT OF regulations. The expected gross
REVENUE revenue from the tax is $50 million.
He explained how the tax would be split
between the Department of Environmental
Conservation for the Ocean Ranger
Program, and local communities. Co-
Chair Meyer asked if the money could be
used for municipal revenue sharing.
Mr. Burnett said he could not answer
that question. Mr. Burnett explained
that the other two parts of the cruise
ship initiative that are important are
the tax on gambling and the corporate
income tax. The first returns will be
from 2007.
2:36:42 PM Co-Chair Meyer Noted that several people were added to
the department to deal with the cruise
ship initiative, so the $50 million
figure would be a gross number. Mr.
Burnett agreed. He clarified that $4
million goes to the Department of
Environmental Conservation for the
Ocean Ranger program.
2:37:00 PM Representative Pointed out that the initiative may
Hawker have conflicts with federal statutes
such as taxation of gaming, which may
pose the risk of authorizing Indian
gaming. Commissioner Galvin agreed
that it is a legitimate concern and it
is being looked into.
2:38:26 PM Representative Referred to corporate income taxes and
Hawker an international treaty argument
regarding taxing foreign registered
vessels at sea. Commissioner Galvin
responded that the department is
working with the Department of Law on
that issue. Representative Hawker
referred to Section 3, the conflict
with Marine Transportation Security Act
of 2002, which argues that the
designation of funds under the
initiative is in conflict with federal
law. He maintained that the initiative
is setting the industry up for a class
action lawsuit. Commissioner Galvin
emphasized the intent to avoid such
conflict of interest and lawsuit. He
reiterated that he is requesting legal
advice on the matter.
2:40:42 PM Representative Asked what criteria will be used to
Hawker evaluate this issue. Commissioner
Galvin said the individual merits of
the case should be looked at. The
likelihood of success and available
alternatives that would avoid the
exposure, yet fulfill the intent of the
initiative, will be evaluated. The
analysis of the issue should be
advanced so that the department can
present the information to the
legislature and assessments can be
made.
2:42:15 PM Representative Asked if the legal analysis would be
Hawker available for use within a 90-day
session limit. Commissioner Galvin
affirmed that the material would be
available.
2:43:08 PM GARY BADER, Provided members with backup material:
CHIEF "Department of Revenue, Treasury,
INVESTMENT Investment Function" (copy on file.)
OFFICER, He reviewed page 2 and noted that the
DEPARTMENT OF treasury: oversees $24.9 billion,
REVENUE manages the cash need of the state and
Alaska Retirement Management Board
(ARMB), manages the ARMB domestic fixed
income assets, manages the ARMB real
estate investment trust assets, and
manages three fixed income investment
options for the Alaska Student Loan
Corporation.
2:45:38 PM Mr. Bader Reviewed page 3, "Internally Managed
Portfolio Returns". He noted that the
Treasury manages several accounts
including: short-term fixed income,
intermediate term fixed income, broad
market fixed income, and ARMB fixed
income. He observed that the Treasury
has exceeded its target rates.
2:48:50 PM Mr. Bader Explained page 4, "Non-Retirement
Investment Returns - Annualized As of
September 30, 2006". He emphasized
that the Treasury does not manage
accounts for the PFD except to invest
the dividend amount for a short period
before distribution. There is a sub-
account in the Constitutional Budget
Reserve Fund (CBRF), which provides
authorization for a 5-year investment
horizon. This allows for a more
aggressive investment than with the
main account.
2:51:01 PM Representative Referred to the CBRF sub-account and
Hawker noted that discussions had occurred for
allowing investments of the entire CBR
in the same manner (managed for a 5-
year payout period.) He requested an
opinion from Mr. Bader on giving
greater investment authority.
2:52:02 PM Mr. Bader Could not answer the question at this
time.
2:52:47 PM Mr. Bader Reviewed page 6, "One Year Cumulative
Attribution Effects", a
characterization of the investment
pension funds and asset classes that
the pension funds invest in. He noted
that the retirement fund returns were
11.46 percent and benefited by
diversity. The manager effect and
asset allocation were positive.
2:54:57 PM Mr. Bader Reviewed page 7, "CAI Public Fund
Sponsor Database" which shows the range
of returns of public pension funds. He
noted that Alaska was near the top 8
percent of public pension funds ending
September 30, 2006. The state was in
th
the 67 percentile in the last 7 years.
2:56:28 PM Mr. Bader Spoke to page 8, "Pension Funds -
Cumulative Returns Actual vs. Target".
He observed that the TRS fund tends to
do a little better than PERS. Over
time, the gross returns have exceeded
actuarial returns. Returns over a 15-
year period were 9.01 percent; after
expenses they were 8.7 percent.
2:58:40 PM Co-Chair Meyer Provided an overview of the anticipated
House Finance Committee schedule,
points of order for running the
Committee smoothly and
teleconferencing.
3:04:42 PM Representative Mentioned the cell phone rules.
Hawker Discussion followed regarding conflict
of interest disclosure.
3:07:53 PM Co-Chair Spoke to the possibility of a 90-day
Chenault session and how it could be
accomplished.
3:08:33 PM LOUANNE Introduced staff members and informed
CHRISTIAN, the members of protocols of the
FINANCE Committee.
COMMITTEE AID
3:14:45 PM Representative Asked how to communicate with staff
Thomas members. Ms. Christian explained that
notes could be distributed through the
Finance Committee staff.
3:15:40 PM Co-Chair Meyer Added that meetings are also televised.
Ms. Christian stated that the boxes are
removed from the table for the
subcommittee meetings.
3:17:14 PM Co-Chair Meyer ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 3:16 PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|