02/26/2008 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB318 | |
| HB368 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 368 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 318 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
February 26, 2008
8:14 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bob Lynn, Chair
Representative Bob Roses, Vice Chair
Representative John Coghill
Representative Kyle Johansen
Representative Craig Johnson
Representative Max Gruenberg
Representative Andrea Doll
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 318
"An Act relating to the location of the convening of the
legislature in a special session; and providing for an effective
date."
- FAILED TO MOVE HB 318 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 368
"An Act modifying the limitations on political fund raising
during legislative sessions by candidates for governor or for
lieutenant governor, and amending the Legislative Ethics Act to
modify the limitation on political fund raising by legislators
and legislative employees during legislative sessions, to allow
legislators and legislative employees to accept certain gifts
from lobbyists within their immediate families, to clarify the
Legislative Ethics Act as it relates to legislative volunteers
and educational trainees, to reduce the frequency of publication
of summaries by the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics, to
revise procedures and penalties related to the late filing of
disclosures required by the Legislative Ethics Act, and to add a
definition to that Act."
- MOVED CSHB 368(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 318
SHORT TITLE: LOCATION OF SPECIAL SESSIONS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) GATTO
01/15/08 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/15/08 (H) STA, FIN
02/19/08 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/19/08 (H) Heard & Held
02/19/08 (H) MINUTE(STA)
02/21/08 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/21/08 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
02/26/08 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 368
SHORT TITLE: ETHICS: LEGISLATIVE & GOV/LT GOV
SPONSOR(s): STATE AFFAIRS
02/19/08 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/19/08 (H) STA, JUD, FIN
02/26/08 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE CARL GATTO
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor of HB 318, explained the
change made in Version E.
RICK VANDERKOLK, Staff
Representative Carl Gatto
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information during the hearing on
HB 318 on behalf of Representative Gatto, prime sponsor.
AL McKINLEY, SR., Member
Executive Committee
Grand Camp Alaska Native Brotherhood (ANB)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on HB 318, testified
regarding the cost of holding special sessions outside of
Juneau.
MIKE SICA, Staff
Representative Bob Lynn
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HB 368 on behalf of the House
State Affairs Standing Committee, sponsor, which is chaired by
Representative Lynn.
JOYCE ANDERSON, Ethics Committee Administrator
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
Legislative Agencies and Offices
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
368.
BROOKE MILES, Executive Director
Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
368.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR BOB LYNN called the House State Affairs Standing Committee
meeting to order at 8:14:54 AM. Representatives Coghill,
Johansen, Johnson, Gruenberg, Doll, and Lynn were present at the
call to order. Representative Roses arrived as the meeting was
in progress.
HB 318-LOCATION OF SPECIAL SESSIONS
8:15:02 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the first order of business was HOUSE
BILL NO. 318, "An Act relating to the location of the convening
of the legislature in a special session; and providing for an
effective date."
8:15:50 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL moved to adopt the committee substitute
(CS) for HB 318, Version 25-LS1303\E, Cook, 2/22/08, as a work
draft. There being no objection, Version E was before the
committee.
8:16:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CARL GATTO, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor of HB 318, noted that Version E incorporates a rule that
Juneau be considered the best location for a special session if
that special session is called within 30 days before the start
of a regular session or within 10 days after the day a regular
session ends. He relayed that the City & Borough of Juneau
(CBJ) wants to keep special sessions in Juneau. He said he has
heard the argument that moving the capital from Juneau will
devastate the economy of Juneau; however, he pointed out that
holding a special session outside of Juneau does not involve
moving the capital.
8:18:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO said one reason that Juneau is a terrible
place for a special session is because by the time legislators
are apprised of a special session, they have already given up
their housing and sent their cars back home, and although Juneau
would like to accommodate them, it can't, because the hotels are
booked because of tourist season. He stated that because two-
thirds of the population of Alaska lives within driving distance
of its two largest cities, it would be possible for many more
legislators to spend time at home with their families during
special sessions if those sessions were held in within that
population concentration. He related a personal story
illustrating his inability to be at home during a family crisis.
8:26:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO spoke of the isolation of many constituents
from their legislature, and the challenging weather conditions
that can make travel in and out of Juneau difficult. He
questioned extending the amount of time the legislature spends
in Juneau by holding special sessions in Juneau. He said a
constituent told him that people think all legislators in Alaska
are corrupt, which is why they like Juneau. He said that is a
reputation that is unearned.
8:30:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO, in response to Chair Lynn, indicated that
some votes may have been cast hastily in order for legislators
to finish business and leave town, which he said is sad.
8:32:53 AM
RICK VANDERKOLK, Staff, Representative Carl Gatto, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Gatto, prime sponsor,
responded to Representative Johansen by noting that the
reference to "interconnected state road system" was replaced
with "a location in the Railbelt area that includes Anchorage
and Fairbanks." In response to Chair Lynn and Representative
Gruenberg, he reviewed that the location description and the
previously noted 30-day/10-day rule are the two primary changes
made to the bill through Version E, and both those changes are
proposed in Section 3.
8:34:43 AM
MR. VANDERKOLK, in response to a question from Representative
Johansen, said the flight from Anchorage to Fairbanks is 45
minutes in length.
[MULTIPLE UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKERS noted that the flight from
Anchorage to Juneau is 22 minutes in length.]
8:35:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL, regarding accessibility, noted that
[specifying that a special session be held at a location in the
Railbelt area] "leaves out about 90 percent of the state" not on
a road system, which "in itself is not real conducive to
representation," and is not a fair requirement. She pointed out
that all the capitals in the nation are not in populated areas,
which means that those states' legislators have to travel back
and forth to meet. She said, "That's kind of what you sign up
for when you decide to be a legislator." She admitted that her
comment may sound emotionally unsympathetic, but offered
assurance that she is actually extremely sympathetic. She
explained that she married a man who chose a military career and
went on nine-month deployments, moving the family around 14-15
times, while she had a baby and took care of the upkeep of their
house on her own. She said, "But it came with the territory
because that's what he chose to do as a job. And I understood
that - didn't like it, but I understood it."
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL said it is difficult to argue with emotions,
and "many people have signed up for this kind of thing and it's
part of what they do." She said emotions overtake costs. She
asked, "How important is it that we get up and pack up
everything and go?" Representative Doll said the minimum cost
of moving the legislator out of Juneau is $75,000, which
includes "the $50,000 start-up [and] the [$25,000] per day."
That figure does not include the weeks of preparation for such a
move. She said it is legitimate to ask whether answering to
emotions is worth the cost involved.
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL said she is dismayed that there is a general
perception that everyone in the legislature is corrupt, but said
she thinks that same perception pertains to everyone in
Washington, D.C., as well, and that "that just comes with the
territory."
8:39:02 AM
CHAIR LYNN, in response to Representative Doll's remarks about
her husband, related that he has spent many years in the
military away from home. He commented on legislators'
expectations regarding service in regular and special sessions.
8:40:36 AM
AL McKINLEY, SR., Member, Executive Committee, Grand Camp Alaska
Native Brotherhood (ANB), related that he is a veteran of the
U.S. Army. He noted that he is a delegate to Central Council of
the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska (CCTHITA), where
he serves on a judiciary committee. He said he watches the
legislature on television throughout the day.
MR. McKINLEY said when legislators come to Juneau they are all
on per diem, which must be discontinued when they go home. He
said space is available already in Juneau, and the public, at no
cost to itself, can utilize the teleconference system around the
state to testify. He indicated that the costs involved in
holding a special session outside of Juneau would include the
move itself, staff per diem, and facilities rental for the
length of the special session.
8:46:20 AM
MR. McKINLEY noted that the last special session, which was held
in Anchorage, addressed the subject of oil. The only
information available from that special session was through the
newspaper, and sometimes staff writers for the paper can be
biased, he said. He expressed appreciation for the work that
was done during that special session on behalf of the best
interest of Alaskans.
MR. McKINLEY stated concern regarding the cost of holding a
special session outside of Juneau, and said, "It's the public's
money that we're talking about." He talked about money needed
in other areas, such as public education and public safety.
8:49:29 AM
CHAIR LYNN closed public testimony.
8:49:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON moved to report CSHB 318, Version 25-
LS1303\E, Cook, 2/22/08, out of committee with individual
recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL objected.
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Johnson, Roses, and
Lynn voted in favor of moving Version E out of committee.
Representatives Johansen, Gruenberg, Doll, and Coghill voted
against it. Therefore, CSHB 318, Version 25-LS1303\E, Cook,
2/22/08, failed to moved out of the House State Affairs Standing
Committee by a vote of 3-4.
HB 368-ETHICS: LEGISLATIVE & GOV/LT GOV
[Contains discussion of HB 109 and HB 408.]
8:51:17 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the final order of business was HOUSE
BILL NO. 368, "An Act modifying the limitations on political
fund raising during legislative sessions by candidates for
governor or for lieutenant governor, and amending the
Legislative Ethics Act to modify the limitation on political
fund raising by legislators and legislative employees during
legislative sessions, to allow legislators and legislative
employees to accept certain gifts from lobbyists within their
immediate families, to clarify the Legislative Ethics Act as it
relates to legislative volunteers and educational trainees, to
reduce the frequency of publication of summaries by the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics, to revise procedures and
penalties related to the late filing of disclosures required by
the Legislative Ethics Act, and to add a definition to that
Act."
8:52:05 AM
MIKE SICA, Staff, Representative Bob Lynn, Alaska State
Legislature, introduced HB 368 on behalf of the House State
Affairs Standing Committee, sponsor, which is chaired by
Representative Lynn. He said the proposed legislation would
make "some common sense changes" in ethics in campaign laws. He
said the changes have been recommended by the Select Committee
on Legislative Ethics ("the Ethics Committee"), as well as the
Alaska Public Offices Commission.
MR. SICA explained each section of the bill, as highlighted in
the sectional analysis [included in the committee packet], which
read as follows [original punctuation provided, with some
formatting changes]:
Sec. 1. Amends AS 15.13.072(g) to modify the location
where a candidate for governor or lieutenant governor
may not raise and spend campaign funds, changing it
from the "capital city" to the "municipality in which
the session is convened" when either house of the
legislature is in regular or special session.
Sec. 2. Amends AS 25.60.031(a) to modify the location
where a legislator or legislative employee who is a
candidate for the state legislature may not raise and
spend campaign funds, changing it from the "capital
city" to the "municipality in which the session is
convened" when either house of the legislature is in
regular or special session.
Sec. 3. Amends AS 24.60.080(a) to allow a legislator
or legislative employee to accept a gift worth $250 or
more in value from anyone in a calendar year; or
accept a gift of any monetary value from a lobbyist,
an immediate family member of a lobbyist, or a person
acting on behalf of a lobbyist if: "the gift is
unconnected with the recipient's legislative status
and is from a member of the legislator's or
legislative employee's immediate family."
Sec. 4 and 5. Amends AS 24.60.080 to restructure
language for the Legislative Ethics Act as it relates
to legislative volunteers and trainees.
Sec. 6. Amends AS 24.60.150(a) to allow the publishing
of official summaries of decisions and advisory
opinions by the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
on an annual basis versus a semi-annual basis.
Sec.7. Amends AS 24.60.260(c) to establish the fine
for a "willful" late filing to $100 for each day to a
maximum of $2,500. The fine remains the same at $2
for each day to a maximum of $100 for each late
filing. If the filing was "inadvertent," the maximum
fine is still $25.
Sec. 8. Amends AS 24.60.990(a) to include a definition
for "partisan political activity."
8:55:37 AM
MR. SICA, in response to a question from Representative
Gruenberg, directed attention to the definition of "immediate
family" - as shown in a handout in the committee packet
entitled, "Relevant Statutes for HB 368."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG observed that Sections 4 and 5 seem to
set up the language concerning legislative volunteers and
educational trainees "in a separate subsection." He asked for
an explanation.
MR. SICA deferred to Joyce Anderson.
8:57:31 AM
JOYCE ANDERSON, Ethics Committee Administrator, Select Committee
on Legislative Ethics, Legislative Agencies and Offices,
answered Representative Gruenberg's question as follows:
What we did was we're suggesting we divide those two
sections up, because the part that we're dividing
actually refers to what sections of the Ethics Code
that volunteers and trainees are covered under. And
so, we felt that it would be better to divide those
two sections up and make that clear.
MS. ANDERSON, in response to a follow-up question from
Representative Gruenberg, confirmed that the change is not
substantive, but simply for style and convenience.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked for further details regarding
Section 7.
8:58:24 AM
MS. ANDERSON responded as follows:
The Ethics Committee had an issue that had come up
during the interim last year. Basically what happened
was ... that legislators are now required to file
ethics disclosures after they leave office, within 90
days. And we had a former legislator who did not file
his ethics disclosure - refused to file his ethics
disclosures after two certified letters were sent out.
Actually I had a conversation with this legislator who
hung up on me. ... The Ethics Committee felt that
ethics disclosures are very much important - they are
a requirement of legislators and staff - and so, they
looked at the fact that the fine structure right now,
which has been in place for many ... years, ... [is]
$2 a day for a maximum of $100 dollars.
Well, this former legislator had two disclosures that
were not filed, which meant that the fine would have
been $200. The AG's office does not follow up on any
money owed to the government that's under $500
dollars. And so, the Ethics Committee did refer the
matter to the AG's office, because that was their duty
to do so, but they also wanted to look at the fine
structure. So, I did some comparisons with some other
states, and after discussion - I think there were two
committee meetings in which the committee discussed
this - they felt that there needed to be an added
section to the fine structure, which called for
"willful failure to file" and that the fine needed to
be hefty versus the $2 a day with the maximum of $100.
9:00:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG directed attention to the word "shall"
on page 5, line 13, and recommended using the word "may"
instead, because he stated his belief that judges should have
the authority, but not be required, to impose certain penalties.
MS. ANDERSON said she believes the Ethics Committee would be
amenable to that change.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said, "Because the inadvertence is a
'may' on line 11, this would simply track that."
9:01:56 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES said he likes the idea of using "may",
because it would give the latitude to "gradually enforce the
regulation and drop the hammer if you have to."
9:02:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt Amendment 1, as follows:
On page 5, line 13:
Delete "shall"
Insert "may"
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL objected for discussion purposes.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, in response to Representative Coghill,
confirmed that saying "may be $100" means the fine may be up to
$100.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL removed his objection to Amendment 1.
There being no further objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG added that Amendment 1 should be
conceptual, to allow the bill drafter to decide if other
language is appropriate.
9:03:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked how the bill sponsor arrived at
the definition of "partisan political activity" - as used in
Section 8 of the bill.
MR. SICA replied that a similar definition exists in other
statute, and the sponsor adapted it "to be more specific,
slightly, to this issue."
9:04:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL expressed discomfort over Section 8. He
said he may have to vote against the whole bill, but would
ponder the issue some more.
MS. ANDERSON, in response to a question from Representative
Coghill regarding Section 6, stated:
Basically, since I've been on board since 2001, we
have published annual publications. And it's an
official publication that goes out; you should have
received it in your office at the beginning of the
year. And what we've done since this statute was into
play: we now have a website ... [where] both
summaries of decisions regarding complaints and
advisory opinions are available .... The advisory
opinions are available through a searchable database,
and then I also put them in the newsletter that comes
out. So, basically this just becomes a publication,
the publication then goes to the House and the Senate,
and it's read into the journal.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said it seems like the legislature
addressed the issue of an annual report last year.
MS. ANDERSON said she does not remember that topic being part of
HB 109 last year, but she suggested that she and Representative
Coghill may have discussed the issue.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL, in response to Chair Lynn, explained his
issue with Section 8 is that the "differentially benefit or
harm" language is new to him. He reiterated his need to spend
time considering the language. He said usually the legislature
specifies which activity is good and which is not, but the bill
proposes to define ["partisan political activity"] as ["an
activity that is intended to deferentially benefit or harm"].
9:07:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL moved to adopt [Amendment 2], as follows:
On page 5, lines 17 and 18:
Delete all material
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG objected to ask if Representative
Coghill had meant to say lines 17-21. He recollected that Mr.
Sica had previously noted that the definition for "partisan
political activity" had been modified from elsewhere in statute
and asked Mr. Sica to cite the statute.
MR. SICA said the definition is found in AS 39.52.120(b)(6),
which read as follows:
(6) use or authorize the use of state funds,
facilities, equipment, services, or another government
asset or resource for partisan political purposes;
this paragraph does not prohibit use of the governor's
residence for meetings to discuss political strategy
and does not prohibit use of state aircraft or the
communications equipment in the governor's residence
so long as there is no charge to the state for the
use; in this paragraph, "for partisan political
purposes"
(A) means having the intent to differentially
benefit or harm a
(i) candidate or potential candidate for elective
office; or
(ii) political party or group;
(B) but does not include having the intent to
benefit the public interest at large through the
normal performance of official duties.
9:11:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL indicated that many aspects of Title 39,
pertaining to legislative ethics, and Title 24, pertaining to
administrative ethics, have been aligned. He stated:
It may be very different for somebody who is political
in nature, like we are, to differentially benefit or
harm, than it would be for [an] executive branch
member to differentially use their position within the
executive branch, because they're not inherently
political, while ... everything that we can be accused
of has political ramifications. So, before I'm
willing to put this definition in I want to ponder
that.
MS. ANDERSON, in response to a query from Representative
Gruenberg, said the phrase "partisan political activity" appears
in AS 24.60.030(a)(2), which specifies that a legislator or
legislative employee may not:
(2) use public funds, facilities, equipment,
services, or another government asset or resource for
a nonlegislative purpose, for involvement in or
support of or opposition to partisan political
activity, or for the private benefit of either the
legislator, legislative employee, or another person;
this paragraph does not prohibit
MS. ANDERSON continued:
The reason this is in here is that there have been,
prior to Representative Roses being on the committee,
a complaint that the Ethic Committee looked at. And
we looked at it in relation to partisan political
activity. And the discussion at the executive session
committee meeting regarding partisan political
activity included the fact that the press secretaries
for both the House and the Senate, for the
majority/minority, are considered partisan, because
they work for the majority or the minority - ... and
it happened to do with a press release at that time.
... The committee's debated two executive sessions
regarding ... [the meaning of] partisan political
activity .... And so, it has been an issue over the
time, and also in regard to advisory opinions that are
issued, because there is no definition in statute.
And so, ... what's happening is ... the Ethics
Committee is taking the particular factual situation
and looking at it in relation to the words "partisan
political activity", without having a definition to
follow regarding that.
... It has been a discussion ... since 2001, since
I've been on board. And so, I think it's important in
that aspect for the ... Ethics Committee itself to
have some guidance as to really what "partisan
political activity" means. And so, being that there
was a definition in the Executive Branch Ethics, we
took a look at that and then decided to make the
change out adding legislative action, [for] which we
do have a definition in this statute, under [AS]
24.60.990. So, that's little bit of background where
it's coming from.
9:14:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted the difference between the
executive and legislative statutes is that in the Executive
Ethics Act, the definition is contained within the paragraph
itself, so it only pertains to the one paragraph. He said,
"Here you wish to put it in the definitional section, which
means it will pertain to the entire Legislative Ethics Act." He
asked Ms. Anderson if she is quite certain that the term
"partisan political activity" occurs nowhere else in the Ethics
Act.
MS. ANDERSON replied, "This is the only section that uses the
... three words, 'partisan political activity.'" She noted that
there is a section in AS 24.60.134 - pertaining to prohibited
conduct by public members and committee employees and
contractors of the Ethics Committee - which uses the word
"partisan" only.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked, "If we put that in the general
definitional section, as you have it in the bill, would that
also be used to define the term "partisan" or ... the antonym
"nonpartisan" in 24.60.130(a)(1)?" In response to Ms. Anderson,
he clarified that if it is her wish that the terms "partisan"
and "nonpartisan" in "the other statute" be similarly
interpreted, then the terms should appear in the general
definitional section.
MS. ANDERSON responded, "Yes, I think it should be in the
general definition section."
9:18:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he offered Amendment 2 to generate
discussion. He spoke again about the legislature's role in
politics, and said everything the legislature does - both in
policy action and in the press - can be construed as political
activity. He said ethics laws, when used nobly, work, but the
problem occurs when those laws are used with less than noble
intent. He said the legislature puts "these things into
definitions," and then it puts people like Ms. Anderson "in this
really difficult position where a charge is made and they have
to go through these definitions" and make determinations
regarding whether or not an activity differentially benefits or
harms.
9:20:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL withdrew Amendment 2.
9:21:38 AM
CHAIR LYNN asked if Representative Coghill wished to remove all
of Section 8.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL answered yes.
CHAIR LYNN suggested that if Section 8 were deleted, then the
bill could possibly be moved out of committee, and the next
committee of referral, the House Judiciary Standing Committee,
on which three of the seven House State Affairs Standing
Committee members sit, could address the issue.
9:22:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL moved to adopt Amendment 3, as follows:
On page 5, lines 15-23:
Delete all language
CHAIR LYNN asked if there was any objection to Amendment 3. No
objection was stated; therefore, Amendment 3 was adopted.
9:22:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 4, to
replace "municipality" with "capital city" on page 2, lines 4,
12, 21, and 27.
9:23:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVES JOHNSON, ROSES, and GRUENBERG objected.
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL spoke to Conceptual Amendment 4. She quoted
the sponsor statement as reading, "...HB 368 makes common-sense
changes to the state's ethics laws concerning gifts to and from
legislators, legislative employees, and lobbyists who are
immediate family members." She said she believes that is the
intent of the bill and that it is not the intent of the bill to
raise up the issue of a potential capital move. Representative
Doll said a similar bill was heard in the House Judiciary
Standing Committee where "exactly this kind of language" was
removed because it diffused the purpose of the bill. She stated
that the bill should have one intent, not several.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG observed that Conceptual Amendment 4
would essentially strike Sections 1 and 2 of the bill.
9:25:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN said he thinks it is no secret that he
supports keeping the capital in Juneau, but the language in
question exists as a practical issue. Furthermore, he said
there are other bills that address the issue of the location of
the capital. He said, "I don't think the issue is in this bill,
but if other things happen, I think this needs to be there, so I
would respectfully oppose the amendment."
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON spoke to his objection. He said the
legislature can and has had special sessions outside the capital
city. He said he would not like to restrict the bill language
when it is entirely possible that future special sessions could
be held outside of Juneau.
9:26:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES spoke to his objection. He said if there
is a way to word legislation so that it does not require the
legislature to revisit it, he supports that. He said he thinks
the language of the bill is generic enough that by passing the
bill it will not matter where the session is held.
9:27:50 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG spoke to his objection. He said he
generally opposes the capital move; however, he said he opposes
Conceptual Amendment 4 "for the reasons of the previous three
speakers."
9:28:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL withdrew Conceptual Amendment 4.
9:28:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt [Conceptual] Amendment
5, which would incorporate into HB 368 the following language
from Section 1 of HB 408:
* Section 1. AS 11.56.130 is amended to read:
Sec. 11.56.130. Definition. In AS 11.56.100 -
11.56.130, "benefit" has the meaning ascribed to it in
AS 11.81.900 but does not include
(1) political campaign contributions
reported in accordance with AS 15.13 unless the
contribution is made or received in exchange for an
agreement to affect [ALTER] an elected official's or
candidate's vote or position on a matter the elected
official has, or the candidate on election would have,
the authority to take official action on; in this
paragraph, "official action" means advice,
participation, or assistance, including, for example,
a recommendation, decision, approval, disapproval,
vote, or other similar action, including inaction;
(2) concurrence in official action in
the cause of legitimate compromise between public
servants; or
(3) support, including a vote,
solicited by a public servant or offered by any person
in an election.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL objected.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG explained that it is often the case
that somebody is bribed, not to alter his/her position, but to
maintain his/her same position, and Conceptual Amendment 5 would
cover that possibility.
9:30:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON said that seems like an indefensible
position to have to prove that a person who does not change
his/her position was bribed to do just that.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG explained that the burden is on the
prosecution at all times to offer proof beyond a reasonable
doubt.
9:33:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said [Conceptual Amendment 5] is a
criminal issue being discussed in a civil bill. He indicated
that he had raised objection over the same issue in a bill in
the past. A person will have to be caught "agreeing to
something" whether or not that person changes his/her vote. He
stated, "Just for the fact that we're going into Title 11 on
this particular bill, I object." He said the use of the word
"affect" opens up "a whole new discussion on intent." He
encouraged committee members to vote against Conceptual
Amendment 5, and he said the issue could be addressed in the
House Judiciary Standing Committee.
9:34:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG withdrew [Conceptual] Amendment 5.
9:34:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG [moved to adopt] Conceptual Amendment
6, which would incorporate into HB 368 the following language
from Section 2 of HB 408:
* Sec. 2. AS 15.13.040(e) is amended to read:
(e) The report required under (d) of this
section must contain the name, address, principal
occupation, and employer of the individual filing the
report, and an itemized list of expenditures, with
expenditures paid for by debit or credit card itemized
individually, regardless of amount. The report shall
be filed with the commission not [NO] later than 10
days after the expenditure is made.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said it is not enough to report the
total spent; the report should include an itemized list of
expenditures, as it would if the expenses were paid for in cash
or with a check.
9:35:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON said he thinks credit card expenses are
already required to be reported itemized.
9:36:00 AM
BROOKE MILES, Executive Director, Alaska Public Offices
Commission (APOC), confirmed that under current law, debit or
credit card transactions must be itemized. She pointed out that
AS 15.13.040(e), which is referenced in Conceptual Amendment 6,
applies only to independent campaign expenditures. She stated,
"If it's felt that this needs to be added, that's fine, but it
should be put in all the sections regarding expenditures for a
candidate and groups." In response to a question from Chair
Lynn, she confirmed that she does not think [Conceptual
Amendment 6] is really necessary. In response to questions from
Representative Johnson, she confirmed that under current law,
everything must be itemized, including independent expenditures.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON concluded that Conceptual Amendment 6 is
superfluous.
9:38:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG withdrew Conceptual Amendment 6.
9:38:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG [moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment
7], which would incorporate into HB 368 the following language
from Section 3 of HB 408:
* Sec. 3. AS 15.13.074(b) is amended to read:
(b) A person or group may not reimburse
another person or group for a contribution made by
that person or group or make a contribution
anonymously, using a fictitious name, or using the
name of another.
9:39:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON objected.
MS. MILES said the amendment is not necessary, because APOC has
always considered and upheld that a repayment of a campaign
contribution includes a reimbursement for a campaign
contribution. She added, "It's currently illegal and it's
always been illegal."
9:39:45 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG withdrew Conceptual Amendment 7.
9:40:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG stated his intent to further explore
the idea behind [the withdrawn Conceptual Amendment 5].
9:41:15 AM
CHAIR LYNN told Representative Gruenberg that he is welcome to
request a hearing for HB 408 at any time.
9:41:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to report HB 368, as amended, out
of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB
368(STA) was reported out of the House State Affairs Standing
Committee.
9:42:38 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced the upcoming committee calendar.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at
9:42:59 AM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|