Legislature(1993 - 1994)
05/06/1994 08:00 AM House STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
May 6, 1994
8:00 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Al Vezey, Chairman
Representative Pete Kott, Vice-Chairman
Representative Bettye Davis
Representative Gary Davis
Representative Harley Olberg
Representative Jerry Sanders
Representative Fran Ulmer
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SB 190: "An Act relating to income withholding and other
methods of enforcement for orders of support;
relating to medical support orders; amending
Alaska Rule of Civil Procedure 90.3(d); and
providing for an effective date."
MOVED FROM COMMITTEE WITH NO RECOMMENDATION
SB 357: "An Act relating to certain study, publication,
and reporting requirements by and to state
agencies; relating to certain fees for reports;
and providing for an effective date."
MOVED FROM COMMITTEE WITH DO PASS RECOMMENDATION
SB 70: "An Act establishing a loan guarantee and interest
rate subsidy program for assistive technology."
MOVED FROM COMMITTEE WITH DO PASS RECOMMENDATION
SB 228: "An Act relating to bail after conviction for
various felonies if the defendant has certain
previous felony convictions."
MOVED FROM COMMITTEE WITH DO PASS RECOMMENDATION
SB 377: "An Act relating to state agency fiscal
procedures, including procedures related to the
assessment and collection of certain taxes; and
providing for an effective date."
NOT HEARD
SB 365: "An Act amending, and repealing laws providing for
state agency functions and services related to
transportation and capital improvement planning,
workers' compensation, motor vehicles and motor
vehicle insurance, medical care for prisoners,
state building leases, and review and approval of
water and sewer systems, for the purpose of
reducing state government expenditures; and
providing for an effective date."
NOT HEARD
SB 376: "An Act relating to fees charged by state agencies
for certain services and to reimbursement for
expenses incurred by the state in providing
certain services; and providing for an effective
date."
NOT HEARD
WITNESS REGISTER
PHIL PETRIE, Operations Manager
Child Support Enforcement Division
Department of Revenue
550 West 7th
Anchorage, AK 99501-3556
Phone: 269-6800
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on HCSCSSB 190
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES
Alaska State Legislature
Alaska State Capitol, Room 418
Juneau, AK 99811-0460
Phone: 465-4457
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on proposed amendment to CSSB
190, Sponsor of HB 458
DARREL REXWINKEL, Commissioner
Department of Revenue
P.O. Box 110400
Juneau, AK 99811-0400
Phone: 465-2300
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on proposed amendment
to CSSB 190
KARL LUCK, Director
Division of Occupational Licensing
Department of Commerce & Economic Development
P.O. Box 110806
Juneau, AK 99811-0806
Phone: 465-2534
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on proposed amendment
to CSSB 190
JUANITA HENSLEY, Chief, Driver Services
Division of Motor Vehicles
Department of Public Safety
P.O. Box 20020
Juneau, AK 99802-0200
Phone: 465-4335
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on the proposed amendment to
CSSB 190
LINDA REXWINKEL, Program Budget Analyst
Division of Budget Review
Office of Management & Budget
P.O. Box 110020
Juneau, AK 99811-0020
Phone: 465-4694
POSITION STATEMENT: Addressed CSSB 357(FIN)
JAY HOGAN, Contract Employee
House Finance Committee
Alaska State Capitol, Room 502
Juneau, AK 99811
Phone: 465-6590
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HCSCSSB 357(STA)
EARL CLARK
Southeast Alaska Independent Living Center
9163 Parkwood
Juneau, AK 99801
Phone: 789-9665
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on HCSCSSB 70(STA)
ROXANNE STEWART, Staff
Senator Jim Duncan
Alaska State Capitol, Room 119
Juneau, AK 99811
Phone: 465-4766
POSITION STATEMENT: Addressed CSSB 70 for Senator Jim
Duncan, Sponsor
STAN RIDGEWAY, Deputy Director
Division of Vocational Rehabilitation
Department of Education
801 W. 10th St.
Juneau, AK 99801-1894
Phone: 465-6932
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on CSSB 70
SENATOR JUDITH SALO
Alaska State Legislature
Alaska State Capitol, Room 504
Juneau, AK 99811
Phone: 465-4940
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 228
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: SB 190
SHORT TITLE: ENFORCEMENT OF SUPPORT ORDERS
SPONSOR(S): JUDICIARY BY REQUEST
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
04/13/93 1336 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
04/13/93 1336 (S) JUDICIARY, FINANCE
02/23/94 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211
02/23/94 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/28/94 2987 (S) JUD RPT CS 3DP SAME TITLE
02/28/94 2987 (S) FN TO SB & CS PUBLISHED (REV)
03/15/94 (S) FIN AT 08:30 AM SENATE FIN 518
03/15/94 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/15/94 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/17/94 (S) FIN AT 09:30 AM SENATE FIN 518
04/06/94 3463 (S) FIN RPT CS 1DP 3NR SAME TITLE
04/06/94 3463 (S) LETTER OF INTENT WITH FIN
REPORT
04/06/94 3463 (S) FN TO CS PUBLISHED (REV, COURT)
04/06/94 (S) FIN AT 08:00 AM SENATE FINE 518
04/08/94 (S) RLS AT 00:00 AM FAHRENKAMP
ROOM 203
04/08/94 (S) MINUTE(RLS)
04/11/94 3555 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 4/11/94
04/11/94 3558 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
04/11/94 3558 (S) FIN CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT
04/11/94 3558 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING
UNAN CONSENT
04/11/94 3558 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME
CSSB 190(FIN)
04/11/94 3558 (S) (S) ADOPTED FIN LETTER OF
INTENT
04/11/94 3559 (S) PASSED Y17 N3
04/11/94 3559 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE SAME AS PASSAGE
04/11/94 3559 (S) Adams NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION
04/11/94 3567 (S) ZERO FN TO FIN CS PUBLISHED
(COURT)
04/12/94 3589 (S) FN TO FIN CS PUBLISHED (REV)
04/12/94 3589 (S) RECON TAKEN UP/IN THIRD READING
04/12/94 3589 (S) HELD ON RECONSIDERATION TO
4/13 CALENDAR
04/13/94 3642 (S) HELD ON RECONSIDERATION TO
4/14 CALENDAR
04/14/94 3679 (S) RETURN TO SECOND FOR AM 1
UNAN CONSENT
04/14/94 3682 (S) AM NO 1 MOVED BY TAYLOR
04/14/94 3682 (S) AM NO 1 ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT
04/14/94 3682 (S) AUTOMATICALLY IN THIRD READING
04/14/94 3682 (S) MOTION TO RETURN TO 2ND FOR
AM 2
04/14/94 3682 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 2 UNAN
CONSENT
04/14/94 3683 (S) AM NO 2 MOVED BY TAYLOR
04/14/94 3683 (S) AM NO 2 FAILED Y6 N13 E1
04/14/94 3684 (S) AUTOMATICALLY IN THIRD READING
04/14/94 3684 (S) MOTION TO RETURN TO 2ND FOR
AM 3
04/14/94 3684 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 3 Y12
N7 E1
04/14/94 3684 (S) AM NO 3 MOVED AND WITHDRAWN
04/14/94 3684 (S) AUTOMATICALLY IN THIRD READING
04/14/94 3685 (S) (S) ADOPTED FIN LETTER OF
INTENT
04/14/94 3685 (S) PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y19
N- E1
04/14/94 3685 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE SAME AS PASSAGE
04/15/94 3732 (S) COURT RULE CHANGE VOTE SAME AS
PASSAGE
04/15/94 3734 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
04/18/94 3540 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
04/18/94 3540 (H) STATE AFFAIRS,JUDICIARY,FINANCE
05/03/94 (H) STA AT 09:00 AM CAPITOL 102
05/03/94 (H) MINUTE(STA)
05/04/94 (H) FIN AT 08:30 AM HOUSE FIN 519
05/05/94 (H) FIN AT 08:30 AM HOUSE FIN 519
05/05/94 (H) STA AT 04:15 PM CAPITOL 102
05/06/94 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102
BILL: SB 357
SHORT TITLE: REQUIRED REPORTS OF STATE AGENCIES
SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
03/14/94 3193 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
03/14/94 3193 (S) STATE AFFAIRS, FINANCE
03/14/94 3194 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTES PUBLISHED
03/14/94 3194 (S) REV, DCED-2, ADM-5, DNR, DOE-2,
03/14/94 3194 (S) DOT, DPS-2, DEC, DMVA
03/14/94 3194 (S) GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER
03/30/94 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH RM 205
03/30/94 (S) MINUTE(STA)
04/06/94 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH RM 205
04/06/94 (S) MINUTE(STA)
04/07/94 3502 (S) STA RPT 1DP 4NR
04/07/94 3502 (S) ZERO FNS PUBLISHED (DCED, ADM,
REV, GOV)
04/07/94 3502 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FNS (DOE-2,
DCED-2,
04/07/94 3502 (S) ADM-5, DNR, DOT, DPS-2, DEC,
DMVA)
04/14/94 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518
04/21/94 (S) FIN AT 10:00 AM SENATE FIN 518
04/21/94 (S) RLS AT 02:15 PM FAHRENKAMP
ROOM 203
04/21/94 3836 (S) FIN RPT CS 6DP 1NR SAME TITLE
04/21/94 3837 (S) ZERO FNS TO CS PUBLISHED (DOT,
ADM)
04/21/94 3837 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FNS APPLY(DCED-3,
ADM-5,
04/21/94 3837 (S) DNR, DOE-2, DPS-2, DEC, DMVA,
REV, GOV)
04/22/94 3869 (S) RLS RPT 2CAL 2NR 4/22/94
04/22/94 3871 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
04/22/94 3871 (S) FIN CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT
04/22/94 3871 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN
CONSENT
04/22/94 3871 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME
CSSB 357(FIN)
04/22/94 3872 (S) RETURN TO SECOND FOR AM 1
UNAN CONSENT
04/22/94 3872 (S) AM NO 1 MOVED BY DUNCAN
04/22/94 3872 (S) AM NO 1 FAILED Y8 N11 A1
04/22/94 3872 (S) AUTOMATICALLY IN THIRD READING
04/22/94 3873 (S) PASSED Y14 N5 A1
04/22/94 3873 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE SAME AS PASSAGE
04/22/94 3940 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
04/27/94 3745 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
04/27/94 3745 (H) STATE AFFAIRS, FINANCE
05/05/94 (H) STA AT 04:15 PM CAPITOL 102
05/06/94 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102
BILL: SB 70
SHORT TITLE: ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY LOAN GUARANTEES
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S)DUNCAN, Ellis, Little, Taylor, Kelly,
Salo,Pearce,Leman,Rieger,Frank,Kerttula,Zharoff;
REPRESENTATIVE(S) Davies
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/27/93 170 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
01/27/93 170 (S) HES, LABOR & COMMERCE, FINANCE
02/10/93 322 (S) COSPONSOR: ELLIS
03/22/93 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH RM 205
03/22/93 (S) MINUTE(HES)
03/23/93 910 (S) HES RPT 5DP
03/23/93 910 (S) FISCAL NOTE (DOE)
01/25/94 (S) L&C AT 01:30 PM FAHRENKAMP
ROOM 203
01/25/94 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
01/28/94 2629 (S) COSPONSOR(S): LITTLE
02/22/94 (S) L&C AT 01:30 PM FAHRENKAMP
ROOM 203
02/22/94 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
02/23/94 2935 (S) L&C RPT CS 4DP SAME TITLE
02/23/94 2935 (S) FISCAL NOTE TO SB & CS
PUBLISHED (DOE)
03/10/94 3145 (S) FIN RPT 5DP (L&C)CS SAME TITLE
03/10/94 3145 (S) PREVIOUS FN (DOE)
03/10/94 (S) RLS AT 00:00 AM FAHRENKAMP
ROOM 203
03/10/94 (S) MINUTE(RLS)
03/10/94 (S) FIN AT 08:30 AM SENATE FIN 518
03/16/94 3243 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR AND 1 DO
PASS 3/16
03/16/94 3243 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
03/16/94 3243 (S) L&C CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT
03/16/94 3244 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN
CONSENT
03/16/94 3244 (S) COSPONSOR(S):TAYLOR,KELLY,SALO,
03/16/94 3244 (S) PEARCE, LEMAN, RIEGER, FRANK,
KERTTULA,
03/16/94 3244 (S) ZHAROFF
03/16/94 3244 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME
CSSB 70(L&C)
03/16/94 3244 (S) PASSED Y18 N- E1 A1
03/16/94 3244 (S) Taylor NOTICE OF
RECONSIDERATION
03/18/94 3276 (S) RECONSIDERATION NOT TAKEN UP
03/18/94 3278 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/21/94 2895 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
03/21/94 2895 (H) HES, STATE AFFAIRS, FINANCE
03/21/94 2916 (H) CROSS SPONSOR(S): DAVIES
04/19/94 (H) HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106
04/19/94 (H) MINUTE(HES)
04/20/94 3620 (H) HES RPT 4DP 1NR
04/20/94 3620 (H) DP: KOTT, G.DAVIS, TOOHEY,
B.DAVIS
04/20/94 3620 (H) NR: OLBERG
04/20/94 3620 (H) -PREVIOUS SENATE FISCAL NOTE
(DOE) 2/23
05/05/94 (H) STA AT 04:15 PM CAPITOL 102
05/06/94 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102
BILL: SB 228
SHORT TITLE: NO BAIL FOR FELONS W/PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) SALO,Little,Zharoff;
REPRESENTATIVE(S) Navarre
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/03/94 2453 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/3/94
01/10/94 2453 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
01/10/94 2453 (S) JUD, FIN
03/30/94 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211
04/05/94 3444 (S) JUD RPT 5DP
04/05/94 3444 (S) ZERO FNS PUBLISHED
04/05/94 3444 (S) (CORR, ADM-2, DPS, LAW)
04/13/94 (S) FIN AT 08:30 AM SENATE FIN 518
04/13/94 (S) RLS AT 04:10 PM FAHRENKAMP
ROOM 203
04/13/94 3623 (S) FIN RPT 5DP
04/13/94 3623 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FNS (CORR, ADM-2,
DPS, LAW
04/14/94 3665 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 4/14/94
04/14/94 3667 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
04/14/94 3667 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN
CONSENT
04/14/94 3667 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME SB 228
04/14/94 3668 (S) PASSED Y19 N- E1
04/14/94 3690 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
04/15/94 3458 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
04/15/94 3458 (H) STATE AFFAIRS,JUDICIARY,FINANCE
04/15/94 3529 (H) CROSS SPONSOR(S): NAVARRE
05/05/94 (H) STA AT 04:15 PM CAPITOL 102
05/06/94 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102
BILL: SB 377
SHORT TITLE: STATE AGENCY FISCAL PROCEDURES
SPONSOR(S): FINANCE
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
04/13/94 3633 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
04/13/94 3633 (S) FINANCE
04/13/94 3650 (S) FIN WAIVED UNIFORM RULE 23
04/14/94 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518
04/20/94 (S) RLS AT 06:45 PM FAHRENKAMP
ROOM 203
04/21/94 3839 (S) FIN RPT CS 6DP 1DNP SAME TITLE
04/21/94 3839 (S) FN TO SB & CS PUBLISHED (ADM)
04/21/94 3839 (S) ZERO FN TO SB & CS PUBLISHED
(REV)
04/21/94 (S) FIN AT 10:00 AM SENATE FIN 518
04/21/94 (S) RLS AT 02:15 PM FAHRENKAMP
ROOM 203
04/22/94 3870 (S) RLS RPT 3CAL 1NR 4/22/94
04/22/94 3876 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
04/22/94 3877 (S) FIN CS ADOPTED Y12 N8
04/22/94 3877 (S) AM NO 1 MOVED BY KERTTULA
04/22/94 3882 (S) QUESTION: AM NO 1 GERMANE?
04/22/94 3883 (S) AM NO 1 GERMANE Y17 N3
04/22/94 3883 (S) AM NO 1 ADOPTED Y14 N6
04/22/94 3883 (S) AM NO 2 MOVED BY DONLEY
04/22/94 3884 (S) AM NO 2 FAILED Y9 N11
04/22/94 3884 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN
CONSENT
04/22/94 3884 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME
CSSB 377(FIN) AM
04/22/94 3884 (S) PASSED Y16 N4
04/22/94 3885 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE PASSED Y17 N3
04/22/94 3885 (S) Pearce NOTICE OF
RECONSIDERATION
04/22/94 3885 (S) TAKE UP RECON ON SAME DAY
WITHDRAWN
04/22/94 3937 (S) RECON TAKEN UP SAME DAY Y18 N2
04/22/94 3937 (S) PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y16
N4
04/22/94 3938 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE SAME AS PASSAGE
04/22/94 3941 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
04/27/94 3746 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
04/27/94 3747 (H) STA, O&G, JUDICIARY, FINANCE
BILL: SB 365
SHORT TITLE: GOVERNOR'S OMNIBUS BILL
SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
03/24/94 3345 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
03/24/94 3345 (S) STA, FIN
03/24/94 3345 (S) FISCAL NOTES PUBLISHED
(DPS,ADM,DEC,REV)
03/24/94 3345 (S) ZERO FNS PUBLISHED
03/24/94 3345 (S) (DPS, ADM, GOV, DCRA, DOT)
03/24/94 3346 (S) GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER
03/30/94 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH RM 205
03/30/94 (S) MINUTE(STA)
04/06/94 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH RM 205
04/06/94 (S) MINUTE(STA)
04/08/94 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH RM 205
04/08/94 (S) MINUTE(STA)
04/08/94 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH RM 205
04/11/94 3553 (S) STA RPT CS 3NR 1DNP SAME TITLE
04/11/94 3554 (S) PREVIOUS FNS APPLY (DPS, ADM,
DEC, REV)
04/11/94 3554 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FNS APPLY
04/11/94 3554 (S) (DPS, ADM, GOV, DCRA, DOT)
04/14/94 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518
04/20/94 (S) RLS AT 06:45 PM FAHRENKAMP
ROOM 203
04/21/94 (S) FIN AT 10:00 AM SENATE FIN 518
04/21/94 (S) RLS AT 02:15 PM FAHRENKAMP
ROOM 203
04/21/94 3837 (S) FIN RPT CS 4DP 1NR 2DNP NEW
TITLE
04/21/94 3838 (S) FNS TO CS PUBLISHED
(S.FIN/DPS-2)
04/21/94 3838 (S) ZERO FNS TO CS PUBLISHED (DPS,
ADM,
04/21/94 3838 (S) DOT, DEC, LABOR, CORR, LAW,
GOV)
04/21/94 3838 (S) PREVIOUS FN APPLIES (DPS)
04/22/94 3869 (S) RLS RPT 2CAL 2NR 4/22/94
04/22/94 3873 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
04/22/94 3874 (S) MOTION TO ADOPT FIN CS
04/22/94 3874 (S) FAILED TO ADOPT FIN CS Y10
N10
04/22/94 3874 (S) MOVED TO BOTTOM OF CALENDAR
04/22/94 3916 (S) AM NO 1 NOT OFFERED
04/22/94 3916 (S) AM NO 3 MOVED BY PEARCE
04/22/94 3930 (S) AM NO 3 ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT
04/22/94 3930 (S) AM NO 2A MOVED BY DONLEY
04/22/94 3931 (S) AM NO 2A ADOPTED Y11 N9
04/22/94 3931 (S) RESCIND ACTION IN ADPTG AM 2A
Y11 N9
04/22/94 3932 (S) AM NO 2A FAILED Y9 N11
04/22/94 3932 (S) AM NO 4 MOVED BY RIEGER
04/22/94 3934 (S) AM NO 4 FAILED Y9 N11
04/22/94 3934 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN
CONSENT
04/22/94 3935 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME SB 365 AM
04/22/94 3935 (S) PASSED Y17 N3
04/22/94 3935 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE SAME AS PASSAGE
04/22/94 3935 (S) Taylor NOTICE OF
RECONSIDERATION
04/22/94 3935 (S) RECON TAKEN UP SAME DAY
UNAN CONSENT
04/22/94 3936 (S) PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y17
N3
04/22/94 3936 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE SAME AS PASSAGE
04/22/94 3940 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
04/27/94 3745 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
04/27/94 3746 (H) STATE AFFAIRS, FINANCE
BILL: SB 376
SHORT TITLE: STATE AGENCY FEES AND COLLECTIONS
SPONSOR(S): FINANCE
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
04/13/94 3633 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
04/13/94 3633 (S) FINANCE
04/13/94 3650 (S) FIN WAIVED RULE 23
04/14/94 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518
04/20/94 (S) RLS AT 06:45 PM FAHRENKAMP
ROOM 203
04/21/94 (S) FIN AT 10:00 AM SENATE FIN 518
04/21/94 (S) RLS AT 02:15 PM FAHRENKAMP
ROOM 203
04/21/94 3838 (S) FIN RPT CS 6DP 1DNP SAME TITLE
04/21/94 3839 (S) FISCAL NOTES TO SB & CS
PUBLISHED
04/21/94 3839 (S) (DPS-2, DEC, REV)
04/21/94 3839 (S) ZERO FN TO SB & CS PUBLISHED
(CORR)
04/22/94 3870 (S) RLS RPT 3CAL 1NR 4/22/94
04/22/94 3874 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
04/22/94 3874 (S) FIN CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT
04/22/94 3875 (S) MOTION TO ADVANCE TO 3RD RDG
WITHDRAWN
04/22/94 3875 (S) AM NO 1 MOVED BY FRANK &
HALFORD
04/22/94 3875 (S) AM NO 1 ADOPTED Y11 N9
04/22/94 3875 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN
CONSENT
04/22/94 3876 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME
CSSB 376(FIN) AM
04/22/94 3876 (S) PASSED Y16 N4
04/22/94 3876 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE SAME AS PASSAGE
04/22/94 3941 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
04/27/94 3746 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
04/27/94 3746 (H) STATE AFFAIRS, FINANCE
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 93-53, SIDE A
Number 000
CHAIRMAN AL VEZEY called the meeting to order at 8:02 a.m.
Members present were REPRESENTATIVES KOTT, SANDERS, G.
DAVIS, OLBERG, G. DAVIS, ULMER. A quorum was present.
HCSCSSB 190(STA) - ENFORCEMENT OF SUPPORT ORDERS
CHAIRMAN VEZEY opened HCSCSSB 190(STA) for discussion.
REPRESENTATIVE BETTYE DAVIS clarified the committee was
discussing version M, which was adopted at the last meeting.
REPRESENTATIVE FRAN ULMER questioned the word
"intentionally" which was added on page 14, lines 7 and 15.
She felt the word "intentionally" raises the standard of
proof. She believed the higher standard would make the
ability to levy the penalty for failing to comply with a
court order very difficult. She moved to remove the word
"intentionally" from page 14, lines 7 and 15.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY commented REPRESENTATIVE ULMER could make the
motion, or HCSCSSB 190(STA) could just be tabled.
REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS interjected she had the same
concerns as REPRESENTATIVE ULMER. Testimony from the Child
Support Enforcement Division (CSED) at the last meeting,
however, agreed that the use of "intentionally" was
acceptable language. She asked for CSED to speak on this
issue again.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY called Phil Petrie to the table.
Number 084
PHIL PETRIE, OPERATIONS MANAGER, CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT
DIVISION, answered questions on HCSCSSB 190(STA). He stated
CSED did agree to the insertion of the word "intentionally"
because it is an element of proof they normally have to
prove with an employer anyway. He noted a court would not
hold them responsible for their unintentional acts or if
they did not receive the withholding order; therefore,
"intentionally" will not cause CSED any difficulty. The
noticing process is extensive before the case is sent to the
Department of Law, therefore the attorney general would have
no problem trying to prove an employer intentionally did not
send the money to CSED.
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER removed her motion.
REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS submitted as an amendment, the
addition of HB 458, sponsored by Representative John Davies,
to HCSCSSB 190(STA).
CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked Phil Petrie to comment on the
amendment.
MR. PETRIE commented the CSED and Department of Revenue
supported HB 458. This action is pending in Congress in
some form to be part of the Child Support Enforcement tools
to be used. HB 458 would substantially improve collections
and allow CSED to reach people who are normally self-
employed, or otherwise employed, where CSED is not now
adequately reaching them. HB 458 provides incentive for
those people to come to CSED and establish a payment plan.
A list of occupations and occupational licenses are included
which would either be withheld or revoked for a period of
time, until such time as the obligors come to CSED and set
up a payment plan.
Number 175
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER asked if this would apply for all
obligors or only if they haven't made payments for some
period of time -- what the triggering is.
MR. PETRIE said, "It applies to all obligors with a
threshold of arrearages - those who are not making payments
and, I believe, the last copy of the bill that I saw had a
threshold of $5,000 or more in arrears, but (indiscernible).
If they were already under wage withholding, money was
coming in and there was an approved payment plan with the
division, then it's my interpretation that the bill would
not apply. It would apply to that portion of the population
that we're currently getting no payments from."
MR. PETRIE clarified that it was $2,500, not $5,000.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY called an at ease.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY called the meeting back to order at 8:17 a.m.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY inquired if the amendment was verbatim per HB
458.
Number 210
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES, Sponsor of HB 458, addressed the
amendment. He said the intent of HB 458 is to give CSED a
vehicle to get the attention of some independently employed
people. It uses the vehicle of occupational licenses. CSED
would prepare a list of those individuals who are
significantly in default, or $2,500 in more than a year in
arrears. To be out of default, it doesn't require that a
person pay up their entire indebtedness, it only requires
them to be on a regular payment plan. He explained the
experience of other states, that have instituted this type
of tool, was that about 80 percent of the people who owe
back child support payments pay up within the provisionary
period. The provisionary period in HB 458 is 180 days. He
noted HB 458 only applies to situations where a license is
being renewed or a license is being applied for for the
first time. A person applying for a license would be issued
a temporary license for the provisionary period. If they
came into agreement with CSED within that period, the
license would be made permanent. The process would be
similar in the case of a renewal. He said 180 days before
the license is to be renewed, they would be notified that it
would not be renewed if they did not come into compliance.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY questioned if $2,500 was a rather low
threshold. He mentioned some child support payments run
$1,100 a month.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES responded the federal threshold is
$5,000, therefore they felt a slightly lower amount would be
appropriate.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked if HB 458 impacted teaching
certificates.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES affirmed CHAIRMAN VEZEY.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY noted there had been comments made earlier
that HB 458 did not address the Alaska Bar Association.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY called a brief at ease.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES referred to page 6, subsection (ii),
of the amendment, where it states "Authorization for
Performing an Occupation Regulated under Alaska Statutes
Title 08." He believed they would fall under that section.
Number 289
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS observed AS 08. included a larger
list of occupations and commented he felt the amendment was
more palatable because of this. He did not want to single
out just a few occupations in the state.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES observed HB 458 covers all
occupational licenses.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked the committee to comment on the
threshold. He considered the amendment to be a "hammer"
which he would not want to see used lightly or unnecessarily
as a threat.
REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG agreed $2,500 was too low. He
suggested at least $5,000.
REPRESENTATIVE GARY DAVIS agreed with "the big hammer." He
has received calls about the complexities with CSED. CSED
has subpoena power, however each case has its own individual
problem. He felt criminals will always find another way to
hide their income. HB 458 affects those that work, whereby
taking their license so they cannot work influences them to
arrange a payment schedule with CSED.
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS estimated the legislature has dealt
with two or three bills this year to go after particular
segments of people who are not in compliance. He felt the
$5,000 threshold was better.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES stated he had no problem amending the
threshold. He believed the "hammer" would have to be used
properly. HB 458 addresses a large class of people which
CSED presently has a hard time with. The problem is a lot
of people, who are in arrears, are fearful that the amount
is so large they cannot handle it. HB 458 facilitates
communication between the obligor and CSED. He emphasized
it is in rare cases where the "hammer" actually gets used.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT referred to page 7, lines 8-11 of the
amendment, under licenses that are excluded - it does not
include a vessel license or licenses (indiscernible) 47.35
or a business license under 43.70. He asked Representative
Davies if he had any recollection as to what licenses were
being referred to.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES answered that in reference to the
vessel license, the issue there was that vessel licenses
obtained by a number of different individuals and so it
didn't seem to be a very well-defined tool, to go after a
particular individual. It was thought that the other routes
for identifying people would work in those cases,
particularly the permits, themselves. It was felt that was
a redundant requirement to go look at that and it wouldn't
be very effective. Under (ii), AS 47.35 pertains to foster
care, where the licenses are short term and situations not
productive to pursue. Under (iii), business licenses issued
under AS 43.70, many of the licenses are over the counter;
therefore CSED has many other checks in place which would
make rechecking these licenses redundant. Checking these
licenses would not be cost effective or worth the effort.
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS commented on the issue of foster
care, whereby they are able to take care of somebody elses
child, but not their own.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES pointed out that was not often the
situation. There are other vehicles for dealing with those
particular circumstances.
Number 422
REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS observed foster care payments should
be added because foster care payments are not considered to
be salary. They are reimbursed for the care they provide.
She believed it would be possible for a foster care provider
to be in arrears, because they may have another family to
tend to after. She pointed out not everyone in arrears on
payments are not necessarily undesirable people.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY responded he had believed foster care
payments could not be attached according to existing law.
REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS replied they would not be according
to the amendment.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY added a person with a foster care license,
however, could have their license attached under the
amendment.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES stated the HB 458 is product of
several deliberations with the departments and committee
meetings. CSED felt including foster care would pit one
child against another.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified the foster care license had been
exempted.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES noted it was done at the request of
CSED.
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS commented excluding foster care
licenses would provide for more foster homes.
Number 460
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked if there was any fiscal
application.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES answered the net return back to CSED
is in excess of $1 million a year. CSED estimates $6
million as the total collection. Two-thirds would go
directly back to the children, half of one-third would go to
CSED, and the other half of one-third would go to the
federal government.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY felt the question was if the fiscal note
would have to be revised by the committee if the amendment
passed.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES replied CSED expects the costs will be
covered through the increase of moneys they will receive
from the federal government the costs. Therefore, there was
no fiscal note.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY repeated his previous question.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT inquired if there were costs involved.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES answered yes, however, they will be
more than offset by the additional recovery of back
payments.
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER inquired if SB 190 had a Finance
referral.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY responded he had heard yesterday that the
Finance Committee was inclined to waive SB 190.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT interjected if the amendment was
adopted, the committee would have to request another fiscal
note from CSED.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES offered CHAIRMAN VEZEY the original
fiscal notes from HB 458. He felt updated fiscal notes
would be preferable.
DARREL REXWINKEL, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
joined the table to answer questions for the committee. He
stated he was just talking with Mr. Petrie and he did not
recall having a specific cost for the implementation.
However, he felt it did affect other agencies because they
would have to be supplying CSED with information. He
believed this was the reason other agencies provided fiscal
notes with their costs. He suggested the money should
perhaps go back to CSED, then they could RSA (Reimbursable
Services Agreement) the money back to the other agencies.
He questioned how the fiscal notes were put together.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY, in observing the Department of Education
fiscal note, stated he had the impression they expect the
legislature will let them hire extra people. Fish and Game
followed suit. He doubted the legislature would be inclined
to hire new people to administer this amendment.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES clarified CHAIRMAN VEZEY was examining
the fiscal notes from early on in the process. Revised
fiscal notes have not been attained since the meetings with
the various departments.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY stated the Department of Economic
Development's fiscal note indicated the addition of nine
positions.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES responded that that fiscal note
assumed they would have to deal with all over-the-counter
business licenses. That requirement has been removed
entirely. He felt the fiscal note was not valid.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT said he was concerned because if all the
fiscal notes were not zero, Finance Committee would have to
hear the bill. He recalled that the Finance Committee was
contemplating waiving HCSCSSB 190(STA).
CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified the two fiscal notes on HCSCSSB
190(STA) are zero, and had been adopted at the last meeting.
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER suggested the fiscal notes for the
amendment be zeroed because the committee had heard
testimony of a net benefit to the state of possibly $1+
million.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY noted CSED was asking for additional
personnel to administer the original program. The committee
merely decided they would not get any. He compared the two
positions the committee zeroed to the 15 positions
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER suggested. He said he was not opposed
to the change if the Department of Commerce & Economic
Development (CED) was available to testify.
Number 555
REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS explained the nine positions would
actually now be negative because certain business licenses
are not included.
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS commented there had been testimony
that HCSCSSB 190(STA) includes allowances for a temporary
license. The set up to operate this system, if not
currently in place, would require some additional work from
CED.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked if the amendment was not adopted,
what would be the effect on HCSCSSB 190(STA) or on the whole
system, based on Congress having pending legislation.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY responded HCSCSSB 190(STA) would bring Alaska
into compliance with federal laws and regulations. The
amendment, he did not believe, had any basis in federal law.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES pointed out the amendment would be a
significant tool for CSED to help them come into compliance.
The federal audit indicated one of the major shortfalls of
CSED is that they were not collecting enough, or fast
enough.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES referred to the fiscal note and stated
the impact needed to be worked out by Department of Revenue
(DOR) and the agencies, therefore any additional program
receipt authority ought to be given to DOR. Other impacted
agencies should receive their funds through an RSA
mechanism. He suggested zeroing the fiscal notes and having
DOR report back to Legislative Budget & Audit Committee for
the required program receipt authority.
Number 606
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS expressed that he had a problem with
the people who are excluded. He noted a personal example,
where people with business licenses who do pay their child
support are competing in the same realm against people who
do not. He did not think these people should be exempted.
Why should some people be different from the others.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES clarified the intent is to find an
appropriate tool to go after every case, not to give people
an exception. He noted there are other ways to go after
those people which would be more cost effective.
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS explained he was thinking of people
who have a business license, specifically printers.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES reiterated it would not be cost
effective to go after those with business licenses. There
are too many.
Number 647
KARL LUCK, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, stated he was
available to answer questions for the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS moved to adopt the amendment before
the committee for purposes of discussion.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked MR. LUCK what the impact on Division of
Occupational Licensing (DOL) would be. The DOL fiscal note
indicates the addition of nine positions.
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER added the business license provision
had been taken out, therefore the amendment was different
from what the fiscal note pertained to. She noted DOR could
go to LB&A with additional program receipts to handle the
increased work generated through the other departments.
MR. LUCK explained the reasons for the original fiscal note.
DOL operates only on program receipts and they can only
charge its operation to the licensees of all professions
based on the cost of regulating that profession. He
considered HB 458 outside of regulating a profession.
Therefore, they premised the program was a "stand alone
operation," which would not be covered by DOL's overhead or
staff. Separate accounting would be required to keep track
of the moneys going to DOR.
TAPE 94-53, SIDE B
Number 000
MR. LUCK continued.
MR. LUCK stated DOL felt if they withheld professional
licenses, there should be enforcement to make sure those
people are not operating without their licenses. The major
cost, he noted, was because DOL would be determining which
of the 44,000 people were theirs to deal with. Personal
identification would be important and time consuming,
therefore DOL requested additional positions for these
checks. DOL cannot mandate social security numbers in its
system. DOL was also tasked with notification, requiring
delivery in person or, as they believed, certified mail.
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS stated MR. LUCK indicated DOL was
being tasked with things it does not do now. He asked if he
was correct.
MR. LUCK answered absolutely. DOL does not have the excess
capacity of staff it their budget. He believed in the last
six years, there has been 13 additional licensing programs
added to DOL with zero staff increases in enforcement or
administration. Only two programs have been eliminated in
that time.
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS expressed concern regarding the
amendment. He cited the example of a fisherman with a
fishing permit, a 52-foot boat, employing four people who
all have families, and catching $3 million worth of fish a
year, paying taxes and supporting the economy. If his
permit is taken because he owes $7,000 back child support,
how does this serving the state of Alaska? How is the state
gaining on a situation like this?
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER felt the idea is just to suspend their
licenses until they agree to a payment schedule, not to
preclude their ability to make an income.
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS inquired what the procedures were
for suspending or issuing a temporary license. Are they in
place or would they require additional administrative
procedures.
MR. LUCK answered DOL would have to issue 150-day temporary
licenses, however, this would be a unique procedure under
this authority only. This would require coordination with
all the professions or a particular board that it involves.
Follow-up would be necessary because the boards have the
authority. He noted there are provisions in the amendment
which say the Administrative Procedures Act does not apply
to the revocation of the license, therefore, there would not
be a hearing. He emphasized the DOL licensing act states
the Administrative Procedures Act will apply.
Number 194
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked how many business licenses there
were in the state.
MR. LUCK answered at the end of the last fiscal year the
state had 66,000 business licenses and 32,500 professional
licenses. He estimated 100,000 possible matches.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked how many licenses there were
relating to boxing or wrestling.
MR. LUCK estimated less than 100. He noted many times those
licenses are issued almost on the sight, or at the event,
making it very difficult to ensure those people are not on
the list of 44,000.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY called for a recess at 9:05 a.m. The meeting
resumed at 9:12 a.m.
Number 232
JUANITA HENSLEY, CHIEF, DRIVER SERVICES, DIVISION OF MOTOR
VEHICLES (DMV), DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, commented on
the amendment to HCSCSSB 190(STA). She referred to page 6,
subsection (xiv) of the amendment, whereby DMV will withhold
the issuance of a commercial drivers license (CDL). Alaska
currently has approximately 25,000 commercial drivers and
their licenses are renewed every five years. DMV just went
through a process, in 1992, requiring every driver to be
issued a CDL who operates a certain size of vehicle. She
noted everyone in that category licensed within January of
1992 to March 31, 1992. This means 25,000 drivers will have
to be renewed every five years.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified within a three month period all of
them will be renewable.
MS. HENSLEY replied correct. Every five years DMV will have
a major impact because of these people. Unlike CED, DMV
requires the social security number on a CDL per federal
law. She noted the amendment mentions DOR will be sending
DMV an electronic media to update their records. DMV will,
however, be required to issue a temporary 150-day license to
those individuals in arrears. She emphasized DMV agrees
with the concept, however, it will impact DMV. Even if only
five percent of those 25,000 were in arrears, it would still
be a substantial increase on the DMV to handle the temporary
licenses.
Number 275
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER mentioned the commissioner of DOR is
envisioning a system, whereby he would RSA money to the
various impacted agencies to cope with the impacts. She
asked if this would be a viable way to help the DMV
workload.
MS. HENSLEY replied if LB&A actually follows through and
gives them the RSA, it would be viable. She said it depends
on whether they would be able to receive the program receipt
authority from LB&A. This is a major concern for DMV.
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS clarified she indicated the amendment
would apply to commercial drivers licenses only.
MS. HENSLEY answered yes, or school bus drivers.
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS asked if it was possible to apply the
program to all drivers licenses. He felt it would be cost
effective.
MS. HENSLEY answered DMV issues over 200,000 drivers
licenses and identification cards a year.
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS questioned the amount of people
delinquent.
MS. HENSLEY pointed out the issuance of the temporary
license would be very burdensome for DMV, however, it could
be done. Even with program receipts, it would still be
costly to the state because of the additional employees
necessary.
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS stated he favored the amendment, but
he wanted to see it all inclusive.
MS. HENSLEY observed a lot of people are going to be covered
by their professional licenses they have as well.
Number 312
REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS asked if she could add an amendment
to the amendment.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY answered REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS may.
REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS referred to page 7, subparagraph
(6), and moved to increase the threshold from $2,500 to
$5,000, which is the federal mandate.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY, hearing no objection, adopted the amendment.
Number 333
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT, moved to delete on page 7, subsection
(B), thereby allowing no exclusions, since HCSCSSB 190(STA)
was going to be heard in the Finance Committee.
REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS said HCSCSSB 190(STA) was waived out
of Finance.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY replied that was not technically correct.
REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS noted she had heard that it was
waived this morning.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified it would have to be waived in
Session.
REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG and B. DAVIS objected to the motion.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT felt the amendment should be all
inclusive.
REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG addressed his objection. He stated of
the 66,000 business licenses, an estimated 30,000-40,000
probably do not have a business attached. He explained that
in reality, most business licenses are for a purpose other
than conducting business. It would not be practical to
consider business licenses as drivers licenses.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES commented HB 458 has been through
three different hearings and (B) was the result of the
consultations among the various departments about what they
felt would be cost effective "in the large picture." The
overall attempt is the ability to withhold wages and to have
a zero tolerance, but doing it in the most cost effective
way possible.
Number 376
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT moved his amendment.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified REPRESENTATIVE KOTT's amendment was
to delete, on page 7, subsection (2), subparagraph (B)
including (i), (ii) and (iii).
CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked the committee secretary to call the
roll.
IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES SANDERS, KOTT.
OPPOSED: REPRESENTATIVES OLBERG, G. DAVIS, B. DAVIS,
ULMER, VEZEY.
The MOTION FAILED.
Number 390
REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG called for the question on the
amendment to HCSCSSB 190(STA).
CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked the committee secretary to call the
roll.
IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES OLBERG, B. DAVIS, ULMER.
OPPOSED: REPRESENTATIVES SANDERS, G. DAVIS, KOTT,
VEZEY.
The MOTION FAILED.
Number 400
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT moved to pass HCSCSSB 190(STA) from
House State Affairs with individual recommendations.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked the committee secretary to call the
roll.
IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES OLBERG, SANDERS, G. DAVIS,
B. DAVIS, ULMER, KOTT, VEZEY.
The MOTION PASSED.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified at last week's meeting the
committee adopted two zero fiscal notes with HCSCSSB
190(STA) and they will move out with the bill.
HCSCSSB 357(FIN) - REQUIRED REPORTS OF STATE AGENCIES
CHAIRMAN VEZEY opened CSSB 357(FIN) for discussion.
LINDA REXWINKEL, DIVISION OF BUDGET REVIEW, OFFICE OF
MANAGEMENT & BUDGET, addressed CSSB 357(FIN). She submitted
HCSCSSB 357(STA) for discussion and recognized three
changes. First, instead of amending the section with the
Athletic Commission, it repeals that reporting requirement.
Second, instead of amending the reporting requirement by
Department of Education concerning community schools
programs to a biennial report, it repeals the reporting
requirement on that statute. Third, it repeals the
reporting requirement by the coastal management program for
a biennial report.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY mentioned that the committee was discussing
Version J.
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER questioned page 6, Section 15, whereby
the requirement that the administration supply the
legislature with information about nonpermanent hires is
repealed. She expressed concern that those reports are the
only source of information for the legislature to indicate
whether or not the executive branch is doing nonpermanent
hiring. Without this information, the legislature would
lose control over hiring, particularly nonpermanent hires.
She noted the same subject came up when she chaired the Fish
& Game subcommittee.
MS. REXWINKEL replied she did not have an answer to
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER's question.
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER commented the cost of producing that
report is not significant to the state. Without control, it
presents a large window that agencies can use to do
nonpermanent hiring. She noticed Jay Hogan was present and
inquired if he would testify because he was knowledgeable
about this issue.
JAY HOGAN, CONTRACT EMPLOYEE, HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE,
addressed HCSCSSB 357(STA). He noted he had really examined
the provision REPRESENTATIVE ULMER was questioning. He was
present to comment about three provisions which House
Finance was particularly interested in.
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER stated she was inclined to delete
Section 15 so the legislature could continue to have that
information.
MR. HOGAN commented Section 15 deals with a subject that is
frequently of interest to the legislature. From personal
experience, he stated, Finance Committees frequently want to
know this type of information.
Number 499
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER moved to delete Section 15 from HCSCSSB
357(STA).
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS supported the motion.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked for a roll call vote.
IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES VEZEY, KOTT, ULMER, B. DAVIS,
G. DAVIS, SANDERS, OLBERG.
The MOTION PASSED.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY observed that the committee would have to
make sure the fiscal notes are correct for HCSCSSB 357(STA).
MR. HOGAN pointed out Sections 3, 4 and 5 were at the
request of the House Finance Chairman in some cases, and the
House Finance Committee in others.
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS clarified that Mr. Hogan expressed
leaving those sections alone.
Number 527
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS moved to adopt HCSCSSB 357(STA),
version J, as amended.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified the amendment was the deletion of
Section 15.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY called for a roll call vote.
IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES VEZEY, KOTT, ULMER, B. DAVIS,
G. DAVIS, SANDERS, OLBERG.
The MOTION PASSED.
(REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG and SANDERS left the meeting at 9:36
a.m.)
CHAIRMAN VEZEY called an at ease.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified CSSB 357(FIN), received from Senate
Finance, was transmitted with two zero fiscal notes. He
believed they were dated 4/21/94. The Senate State Affairs
Committee adopted 19 zero fiscal notes. He moved that the
committee concur with the Senate Finance Committee and adopt
the two zero fiscal notes. Hearing no objection, CHAIRMAN
VEZEY adopted the two zero fiscal notes from the Senate
Finance Committee.
(REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG rejoined the meeting at 9:39 a.m.)
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS moved to move HCSCSSB 357(STA) from
House State Affairs with individual recommendations and
accompanying fiscal notes.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY called for a roll call vote.
IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES VEZEY, KOTT, ULMER, B. DAVIS,
G. DAVIS, OLBERG.
ABSENT: REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS.
The MOTION PASSED.
CSSB 70(L&C) - ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY LOAN GUARANTEES
Number 579
CHAIRMAN VEZEY opened CSSB 70(L&C) for discussion. He
commented that the committee did have HCSCSSB 70, version X,
to consider.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT moved to adopt HCSCSSB 70 for purposes
of discussion.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY adopted HCSCSSB 70 for discussion. He noted
HCSCSSB 70 modifies the Senate version in a couple of ways.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY called an at ease.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY stated the changes could be found on page 3,
subsection (e). Subsection (e) was added. He explained the
fund will have $400,000 put into it before it operates,
thereby loans do have to be guaranteed by something very
tangible.
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER inquired why the amount was $400,000.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY answered, based on testimony he had heard,
$100,000 is a small program amount. Substantially larger
sums through federal law and private moneys are available
for this purpose. He felt if the state was going to set up
a program, $400,000 suggests that it should be a meaningful
program, rather than a small "pilot program."
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER asked if $400,000 is a reasonable
amount to achieve.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY repeated the sources of money. He felt
$400,000 would create a more meaningful program.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT interjected they had heard that
testimony in House HESS Committee.
Number 633
EARL CLARK, SOUTHEAST ALASKA INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTER,
commented on HCSCSSB 70. He stated according to the
Governor's Council on Disability and Special Education, he
symbolically represented 95,000 Alaskans who have at least
one permanent disability. He stated HCSCSSB 70 has been
proceeding through the legislature for the last two years.
HCSCSSB 70 is designed to allow the federal government to
transfer $100,000 to the state for guaranteeing loans. He
stated the loans themselves will be private loans with
banks, to be paid back by the individuals who need assistive
technology to help them become productive citizens in
Alaska. He emphasized the moneys HCSCSSB 70 refers to are
only used to guarantee loans, not to loan out. He stated,
nationwide, there is about a 4.2 default rate. With
$100,000 in the fund at a 4.2 default rate, it would take
about 20 years to exhaust the $100,000.
Number 665
ROXANNE STEWART, STAFF, SENATOR JIM DUNCAN, SPONSOR,
addressed HCSCSSB 70. She noted the house bill that was
discussed in House HESS was HB 139, sponsored by
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES.
(REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG left the meeting at 9:47 a.m.)
REPRESENTATIVE ULMER asked Ms. Stewart to comment on the
$400,000 amount.
MS. STEWART stated CSSB 70(L&C) did not specify a particular
threshold amount before loans could be made. She stated
$100,000 is available annually, possibly $200,000 from
federal sources. She felt $400,000 would be a potential
problem.
REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS inquired if the state was going to
make up the difference in the money, if the federal
government is guaranteeing $100,000.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified no general fund moneys would go
into the fund.
REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS observed that with HCSCSSB 70 it
would take four years for $400,000 to accumulate in it. She
was opposed to putting this bill on hold for four years.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY interjected he did not believe that would be
the case. He explained, from testimony received, there is a
minimum in federal intent to appropriate $100,000 a year
specifically for this program. He noted there are other
federal moneys appropriated every year that would be
available for this use. In addition, because of new laws
and regulations in federal banking practices, there is an
interest in the private financial community to participate
in this program to meet certain federal requirements.
REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS asked if these streams of funding
had been identified.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY responded there has been some public
commitment from private sources, however, some wish to
remain anonymous until the bill becomes law.
TAPE 94-54, SIDE A
Number 000
REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS asked MS. STEWART's opinion about
the change to $400,000.
MS. STEWART stated it may be a problem to come up with that
much money for a substantial length of time. She stated
Vocational Rehabilitation would be better to answer the
question.
STAN RIDGEWAY, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF VOCATIONAL
REHABILITATION (DVR), DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, answered
questions for the committee. He stated the assistive
technology program was authorized initially by Congress for
five years, and it has just been reauthorized for five
additional years. The state of Alaska receives
approximately $750,000 per year for technology. He
explained about $250,000 of that $750,000 is for staff, and
the other $500,000 is granted out to private nonprofits each
year. DVR was going to fund the loan program by taking 20
percent of that $500,000 per year, and putting it into the
fund for the next five years. The Community Reinvestment
Act has changed, however, and Key Bank and North Rim Bank
have both committed to participate in the fund. DVR is
uncertain of the amount. He noted another bank has agreed
to participate, but wishes to remain anonymous. He stated
the $400,000 change would create a waiting game over the
next 3-4 years. If DVR took more of the money they grant to
private nonprofits, they would be cutting off people's
access to get the loans. The bill has a zero fiscal note
mainly because the nonprofits DVR funds will be assisting
people, who are working and need loans, in processing their
loans through local banks. The whole process works
together. He encouraged the committee to go back to a lower
amount.
REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS moved to amend page 3, line 2, of
HCSCSSB 70, to read "$200,000."
CHAIRMAN VEZEY called for a roll call vote.
IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES G. DAVIS, B. DAVIS, ULMER,
KOTT.
OPPOSED: REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY.
ABSENT: REPRESENTATIVES OLBERG, SANDERS.
The MOTION PASSED.
(REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG returned at 9:52 a.m.)
CHAIRMAN VEZEY commented the committee would have to adopt a
modified fiscal note for HCSCSSB 70. He stated the blank
fiscal note for $400,000 would have to be modified to
$200,000. He asked for a committee member to move to adopt
the modified fiscal note reading $200,000.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT so moved.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY, hearing no objection, adopted the fiscal
note.
REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS moved to pass HCSCSSB 70(STA) as
amended from committee with accompanying fiscal note and
individual recommendations.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY called for a roll call vote.
IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES OLBERG, G. DAVIS, B. DAVIS,
ULMER, KOTT, VEZEY.
ABSENT: REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS.
The MOTION PASSED.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY recessed the meeting at 9:58 a.m. He stated
he had not expected the committee would take as much time as
they did on SB 190, therefore only SB 228 would be taken up
by the committee after the recess. He stated the other
items on the agenda would not be taken up today.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY resumed the meeting at 10:03 a.m.
SB 228 - NO BAIL FOR FELONS WITH PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS
CHAIRMAN VEZEY opened SB 228 for discussion.
SENATOR JUDITH SALO, PRIME SPONSOR OF SB 228, gave a brief
statement. She stated SB 228 passed the Senate unanimously,
and has HB 460 as a companion in the House. She explained
SB 228 adds to the list of crimes for which bail is denied
in Alaska. Currently, if a person is convicted of an
unclassified or a class A felony, following conviction,
pending sentencing or pending appeal, bail is not allowed.
SB 228 would add "stalking in the first degree, sexual
assault in the second and third degree, and sexual abuse of
a minor in both class B and class C" to the list of non-
bailable after conviction offenses. SB 228 does not deny
bail prior to conviction.
SENATOR SALO explained SB 228 stems from a case which
happened this past fall in Anchorage. A man who had a very
long "rap sheet" in both California and Alaska, was tried
and convicted of a felony count in Alaska and was sentenced.
While pending appeal, he was released on $5,000 bail. While
released, he sexually assaulted one woman, and raped
another. She was contacted by constituents who felt it was
not right that a criminal of his stature was out on the
streets. She emphasized SB 228 is legislation that citizens
of Alaska are looking for; it provides protection.
SENATOR SALO noted the statute citations on the second page
of SB 228 referred to the stalking, sexual assault and
sexual abuse she mentioned earlier.
Number 207
CHAIRMAN VEZEY noted Department of Law, Alaska State
Troopers, Office of Public Advocacy, the Public Defender
Agency and the Department of Corrections all have zero
fiscal notes.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT observed the fiscal notes also and
stated SB 228 did not appear to be too offensive. He
believed he had seen the bill in the Judiciary Committee
before.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY commented he believed a judge does not have
to grant bail if there is reason to think the person should
be denied. The system, however, is not perfect. He
questioned if the criminal justice system should really be
changed in this manner.
SENATOR SALO responded she agreed the mishap does not happen
often, however, it should never happen. For this reason,
the legislature has chosen to statutorily deny bail for
unclassified and class A felonies. This is to prevent
mishaps from soft-hearted judges or very good defense
attorneys.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified SB 228 does not deny bail to a
person accused of a crime. SB 228 denies bail after a
person is convicted.
SENATOR SALO affirmed CHAIRMAN VEZEY. She clarified in
unclassified and class A felonies there is limited bail,
however, SB 228 totally denies it following conviction. She
did not know in what way bail was limited prior to
conviction. She emphasized, because of the predominance of
sexual crimes in Alaska, they should be added to the list.
She noted the lives of those woman stated in the impetus for
SB 228 are changed forever. She expressed a considerable
amount of time had been spent with the Department of Law and
judicial experts who agree that to ensure the mishap does
not happen again, SB 228 is necessary.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY stated SB 228 is expanding existing statutes
to include class B and class C felony convictions, only in
the event that they have a prior class A or unclassified
conviction. He pointed out SB 228 does not include them if
they have a previous class B conviction.
Number 281
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT agreed. He commented there may be a
case, dealing with due process, that will not allow the
legislature to deny bail based on charges, prior to
conviction. He noted SB 228 is eliminating some of the
judges discretion.
(REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS returned at 10:12 a.m.)
CHAIRMAN VEZEY agreed bail could be increased, but it could
not be denied prior to being charged or prior to conviction.
He mentioned the only fiscal impact would be if a person had
to go to prison, while on appeal, and then the conviction
was thrown out. The state would then be out 1-2 years of
incarceration money, when the person could have been out on
bail.
SENATOR SALO directed the committee to the analysis included
with the Department of Corrections zero fiscal note. The
analysis states most reversals result in a reduction of
sentence, rather than absolutely eliminating it. They
overview the projected numbers of felonies that might be
overturned. She emphasized even if there was some time
served, Department of Corrections implies "it would sort of
be a wash."
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT moved to pass SB 228 from committee with
individual recommendations and attached zero fiscal notes.
CHAIRMAN VEZEY called for a roll call vote.
IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES VEZEY, KOTT, B. DAVIS, G.
DAVIS, SANDERS, OLBERG.
ABSENT: REPRESENTATIVE ULMER.
The MOTION PASSED.
ADJOURNMENT
CHAIRMAN VEZEY adjourned the meeting at 10:15 a.m.
BILLS NOT HEARD
CSSB 377(FIN)am - State Agency Fiscal Procedures
SB 365am - Governor's Omnibus Bill
CSSB 376(FIN)am - State Agency Fees and Collections
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|