Legislature(2023 - 2024)SENATE FINANCE 532
05/09/2023 01:30 PM Senate FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB138 | |
| SB122 | |
| SB48 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 138 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 122 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 48 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
May 9, 2023
1:34 p.m.
1:34:05 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Olson called the Senate Finance Committee meeting
to order at 1:34 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Lyman Hoffman, Co-Chair
Senator Donny Olson, Co-Chair
Senator Bert Stedman, Co-Chair
Senator Click Bishop
Senator Jesse Kiehl
Senator Kelly Merrick
Senator David Wilson
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Senator Scott Kawasaki, Sponsor; David Dunsmore, Staff,
Senator Scott Kawasaki; Ken Alper, Staff, Senator Donny
Olson; Rena Miller, Special Assistant, Office of the
Commissioner, Department of Natural Resources; John Boyle,
Commissioner, Department of Natural Resources.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Chrstopher Constant, Chair, Anchorage Assembly, Anchorage;
Michael Garvey, ACLU of Anchorage, Anchorage; Carol
Beecher, Director, Division of Elections, Anchorage;
Jeannette Lee, Research Director, Sightline Institute,
Anchorage; Christy Colles, Director, Division of Mining,
Land and Water, Department of Natural Resources; Ashlee
Adoko, Executive Director, Office of Project Management and
Permitting, Department of Natural Resources; Helge Eng,
State Forester, Division of Forestry and Fire Protection,
Department of Natural Resources.
SUMMARY
SB 48 CARBON OFFSET PROGRAM ON STATE LAND
SB 48 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
SB 122 APPORTION TAXABLE INCOME;DIGITAL BUSINESS
SB 122 was HEARD and HELD in committee for
further consideration.
SB 138 ELECTIONS; VOTER REG.; CAMPAIGNS
SB 138 was HEARD and HELD in committee for
further consideration.
SENATE BILL NO. 138
"An Act relating to elections; relating to voters;
relating to voting; relating to the crime of unlawful
interference with voting in the first degree; relating
to campaign signs; relating to the reporting of
financial and business interests by certain municipal
officers and former officers and candidates for
municipal office; relating to the Redistricting Board;
and providing for an effective date."
1:34:16 PM
AT EASE
1:34:26 PM
RECONVENED
1:35:43 PM
SENATOR SCOTT KAWASAKI, SPONSOR, introduced the
legislation. He read from the Sponsor Statement (copy on
file):
Over 360,000 Alaskans voted in the 2020 election
making it the election with the greatest participation
in Alaska history. Yet 173,000 Alaskans were eligible
to vote or registered to vote but did not. Senate Bill
138 seeks to build upon the participatory success of
the 2020 election by strengthening the voter
registration system, tightening residency
requirements, paying postage for by-mail absentee
ballots, and requiring the Alaska Division of
Elections to offer absentee voters the option to fix
errors in their ballots. This bill facilitates
participation for those legally eligible to vote and
ensures the integrity of elections by updating
absentee ballot verification and curing.
Currently, voters are not notified of errors in their
absentee ballots until after the election is
certified. Over 7,500 ballots were rejected in the
2022 special primary election, a 4.55 percent
rejection rate. That's about 1/20 ballots. On average,
if we all in this room had voted by mail, the Division
of Elections would have rejected at least one of our
ballots without notifying us until it was too late.
Therefore, SB 138 establishes a ballot tracking system
and a ballot curing process. The ballot curing process
requires the Division to notify voters if the
signature on their ballot does not match the one on
their registration.
Other updates to the election system include:
• requiring the Division of Elections to count
absentee ballots starting at least seven days before
election day and beginning to release vote tallies at
8pm on election day,
• tightening and clarifying residency requirements for
voting in order to clean Alaska's voter rolls,
• replacing the witness signature requirement with a
signature verification system and requiring the
Division of Elections to ballot cure for signature
discrepancies,
• pre-paying vote by mail postage and allowing a
verifiable date sent (such as a USPS bar code), rather
than the post marked date, to serve as the date on
which the voter voted,
• making explicit what happens when someone votes
twice and maintaining that it is a crime to
intentionally vote more than once.
Voting rights are fundamental to American democracy,
which works best when eligible voters can participate
and have the freedom to choose our elected leaders.
Optimizing and strengthening our voting system ensures
that these freedoms and rights prevail.
I respectfully urge your support of SB 138. Please
reach out to my office with any questions.
1:39:37 PM
DAVID DUNSMORE, STAFF, SENATOR SCOTT KAWASAKI, discussed
the presentation, "SB 138, Omnibus Elections Bill" (copy on
file). He highlighted slide 2, "Signature Verification to
Protect the Integrity of By-Mail Ballots":
• Signatures on absentee ballot envelopes would be
compared to the voter's signature on file with the
division of elections.
• Signatures can be verified electronically, and
reviewers will be trained to identify handwriting
patterns to manually verify signatures.
• The Municipality of Anchorage has successfully
employed signature verification since 2018.
• Voters would have the opportunity to cure their
ballots if their signature cannot be verified.
1:40:47 PM
Co-Chair Olson queried the system for signature
verification in rural communities.
Mr. Dunsmore replied that currently absentee ballots were
reviewed at each of the five offices, which have
verification systems.
Mr. Dunsmore displayed slide 3, "Repeals the witness
signature requirement for by mail ballots":
• In the 2022 special primary election, 2,724 ballots
were rejected because of a missing witness signature
1.7 percent of all ballots cast.
• Witness signature rejections disproportionately
affected rural Alaska.
• In District 38, 10.9 percent of all ballots cast
were rejected for missing witness signatures.
• There is no indication of any misconduct with these
rejected ballots.
Senator Wilson queried the percentage of how many ballots
had some inaccuracies in other municipalities.
Mr. Dunsmore replied that the training in jurisdictions
require looking at specific features of handwriting.
Senator Wilson wondered whether the handwriting
verification would be done by individuals or artificial
intelligence (AI).
Mr. Dunsmore replied that most jurisdictions have a two-
step verification process with electronic scanning and then
training humans.
Mr. Dunsmore highlighted slide 4, "The witness signature
requirement provides no meaningful election integrity
protection":
• The Division of Elections has testified that they do
not have any way to verify that witness signatures
meet the statutory requirement that they be from a
person at least 18.
• The Division accepts as valid any mark made in the
witness signature portion of the envelope.
• The absentee by mail envelope does not even provide
space for the witness to print their name or provide
their date of birth.
Mr. Dunsmore displayed slide 5, "Creating a Ballot Curing
Process":
• Within 24 hours of receiving the ballot, the
Division mails a deficiency notice with curing
instructions.
• It the voter has a phone number on file, the
Division will call and text them as well.
• The voter returns the cure form confirming they
voted on the ballot with a copy of their ID and a
signature.
• The cure process may be done electronically.
• A properly cured ballot will be counted if it is
otherwise valid.
• If the voter responds that they did not vote the
ballot, it will be referred to the Attorney General.
1:44:59 PM
Mr. Dunsmore looked at slide 6, "A voter will be able to
cure their ballot and have it counted if it would be
rejected because:"
The voter did not sign the ballot envelope.
The voter's signature cannot be verified.
The voter did not provide an identifier that can be
verified.
Mr. Dunsmore addressed slide 7, "Ballot tracking system for
absentee ballots":
• The Division already offers ballot tracking and this
bill places it into statute.
• Voters can check the status of their ballot online
and see whether it has been counted or rejected.
• This bill requires a multifactor authentication
system to protect voters' privacy
Mr. Dunsmore looked at slide 8, "Voter Registration list
clean-up":
Reduces to two years the time for which someone not
voting or
updating their registration triggers a notice to
verify their registration.
Adds several indications of residency in another state
to the list of
factors that trigger notice.
Voters who do not verify their registration are moved
to inactive status,
and their votes will be counted, and their
registration reactivated if they
vote or request an absentee ballot.
Mr. Dunsmore addressed slide 9, "Allows voters who register
within 30 days of an election to vote":
Currently a voter must register in the state and
district in which they are voting 30 days before the
election.
This means an Alaska resident who moves within 30 of
the election might not be able to validly vote in any
district.
The Division already conducts same day registration
for presidential elections, but these votes are only
counted for president.
Voters registering within 30 days will only be able
to vote absentee, early, or questioned ballots which
will be reviewed to ensure the voter is eligible.
Mr. Dunsmore addressed slide 11, "Create a statutory
procedure for voters to cancel their registration":
Currently the Division of Elections will cancel a
voter's registration if they request, but it is not
required by statute.
Voters would be allowed to cancel their registration
in person or electronically.
The process for cancelling a registration would be
posted at polling places.
Mr. Dunsmore discussed slide 12, "Clarify rules for poll
watchers and ballot review observers":
Currently statutes only provide for observers for
political parties, initiatives,
referenda, and recalls.
This provision clarifies that candidates and ballot
question campaigns may
have observers.
Ballot questions include constitutional amendments,
judicial retention, bond
propositions, and advisory votes.
This bill also clarifies that campaigns may have
observers at all tables where
ballots are being reviewed within a counting center.
Mr. Dunsmore looked at slide 13, "Allow international
election observers at polling places and counting centers":
Only international organizations that the United
States belong to may have observers.
Observation missions must be invited by the U.S.
State Department.
International observers will not be allowed to make
challenges.
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in
Europe is the only organization the State Department
regularly invites to observe elections.
Mr. Dunsmore addressed slide 14, "Clear rules for
challenging ballot review decisions":
Currently it is unclear how long campaigns have to
file a challenge and campaigns often have to negotiate
this with the regional counting centers.
This bill requires regulations to explicitly address
the challenge process.
These regulations must allow at a reasonable time to
submit a challenge.
Senator Bishop wondered whether the third bullet on the
slide would be implemented through regulations.
Mr. Dunsmore replied in the affirmative.
Senator Bishop felt that there needed to be more
conversation about possibly putting the regulations into
statute.
Mr. Dunsmore discussed slide 15, "Stop special needs
ballots from being rejected because of mistakes by poll
workers or voter representatives":
Currently special needs ballots can be rejected
because of mistakes by poll workers or voter
representatives.
In the 2022 general election 8 percent of special
needs ballots were rejected, compared with only 1.3
percent of by mail ballots.
This bill would prevent special needs ballots from
being rejected if the meet the requirements for an
absentee ballot to be counted.
1:50:59 PM
Mr. Dunsmore pointed to slide 16, Repeal the requirement
for APOC to have offices in every Senate district":
Current law requires the Alaska Public Offices
Commission (APOC) to have offices in every Senate
district.
They have never had the funding level to meet this
requirement.
This bill replaces this requirement with a
requirement that they make reports available on their
website.
Co-Chair Hoffman asked which Senate districts were not able
to have APOC.
Mr. Dunsmore agreed to provide that information, but stated
that the only Senate districts with an APOC office were in
Juneau and Anchorage.
Co-Chair Hoffman queried the reason for the law.
Mr. Dunsmore replied that it was from a ballot measure
related to finance reporting.
Mr. Dunsmore addressed slide 17, "Creates a consistent
standard for when a voter votes more than once":
Currently, depending on how a voter votes multiple
times, they will have either one or counted or all
their votes will be rejected.
This bill clarifies that if a voter votes in person
and by another means, the in person vote shall count.
Otherwise, the first ballot to be reviewed shall be
the one that is counted.
Under no circumstances will a voter have more than
one vote counted.
Generally multiple voting is the result of honest
mistakes by voters with memory issues, but all cases
of multiple voting must still be referred to the
Attorney General.
Mr. Dunsmore displayed slide 18, "Risk limiting audits to
reduce the risk of certifying an incorrect result":
These audits take place after counting is completed
and before the election is certified.
Risk limiting audits are used in at least 16 states.
The Division shall develop statistical methods to
determine what results to audit.
Campaigns will be able to observe the audit process.
Mr. Dunsmore looked at slide 19, "Cybersecurity program":
Requires the division to adopt regulations for a
cybersecurity program to protect records from hackers.
The program will include cybersecurity training for
elections officials.
Mr. Dunsmore discussed slide 20:
Alaska's billboard law bans advertising along state
roads. In a 2018 settlement the state agreed not to
enforce this ban against political signs 32 square
feet or smaller on private property if the sign is not
in a highway right of way or displayed for
compensation.
This provision updates the statutes to codify these
settlement terms.
Mr. Dunsmore addressed slide 22, "Clarifies the Open
Meetings Act applies to the
Redistricting Board
The OMA requires public notice for meetings and that
decisions be made in public.
In two different redistricting cycles, courts have
ruled against the board's argument that it was not
subject to the OMA.
This will make it crystal clear in statute that the
board must follow the OMA.
Mr. Dunsmore looked at slide 23, "Clarifies the Open
Meetings Act applies to the Redistricting Board":
The OMA requires public notice for meetings and that
decisions be made in public.
In two different redistricting cycles, courts have
ruled against the board's argument that it was not
subject to the OMA.
This will make it crystal clear in statute that the
board must follow the OMA.
Senator Bishop queried the penalty for defacing, stealing,
or damage to a ballot box.
Mr. Dunsmore replied that the bill did not provide specific
penalties other than current law.
Senator Bishop queried the current law for destruction of
state property.
Mr. Dunsmore agreed to provide that information.
Mr. Dunsmore looked at slide 24:
This bill clarifies that a voter's residence is a
place where they have a definite, articulable, and
reasonable plan to return to whenever they are absent.
It also establishes that the presumption a voter's
registered address is accurate can be rebutted by
evidence that they reside at another location.
1:55:28 PM
Senator Kiehl queried more detail about the three-part test
as it relates to a plan to return to the state: "definite,
articulable, and reasonable plan."
Mr. Dunsmore replied that it would not change the current
presumption.
Co-Chair Hoffman queried the way to confirm the plan to
return to the state.
Mr. Dunsmore replied that the plan to return was within
current statute.
Mr. Dunsmore addressed slide 25, "Begin Scanning Absentee
Ballots 7 Days Before Election Day":
This bill will allow election results to be available
earlier by having the scanning of absentee ballots
begin seven days before Election Day.
Tabulated results will not be released until the polls
close at 8pm on Election Day.
Mr. Dunsmore looked at slide 26, "Adopt best practices for
reporting ranked choice voting results":
This bill adopts the national best practices
identified by Fair Vote:
Requires unofficial ranked choice tabulations be
released along with the unofficial first round
results.
Contains in tent that updated cast vote record
(CVRs) be released throughout the counting process, to
allow for independent verification of the results.
This will provide greater transparency and reduce
confusion about results.
Mr. Dunsmore looked at slide 27, "Allows voters to request
to continue to sign up to receive absentee by mail for
future elections":
The Division currently allows this for military and
overseas voters.
This bill would allow voters to continue to receive
by mail if they vote at least once every four years.
Every absentee ballot returned will continue to be
reviewed to ensure it is valid.
Senator Bishop wondered whether the second bullet would
preclude someone from requesting a ballot.
Mr. Dunsmore replied that a voter would remain eligible.
Co-Chair Hoffman felt that missing an election or two would
be a high standard for rural Alaska.
Mr. Dunsmore agreed to provide further information.
2:00:51 PM
Mr. Dunsmore pointed to slide 28, "Legalize voters
photographing their ballots":
It is currently illegal for voters to share photos
of their voted ballots.
This bill clarifies they may not share a photo of a
ballot to persuade someone within 200 feet of the
polling place.
Bans against ballot photos have been challenged as
potentially violating the First Amendment, although it
appears not court has issued a final ruling on that
issue.
Mr. Dunsmore addressed slide 29, "Codify language
assistance requirements":
Federal law requires the state to provide language
assistance for voting in certain languages.
Currently Alaska provides assistance in 10
indigenous languages and dialects as well as Spanish
and Tagalog.
This bill requires that voters be able to request
that election materials be mailed to them in any
language for which the state is required to provide
assistance.
Information about the availability of language at
polling where language assistance is available.
Co-Chair Hoffman felt that there were many instances that
showed that there was a cumbersome system for voting. He
felt that there needed to be a more streamlined approach
for access to voting.
Senator Kawasaki agreed.
2:05:15 PM
Co-Chair Olson wondered whether there was a way for all
registered voters to receive an absentee bill.
Senator Kawasaki replied that people in rural Alaska could
benefit from absentee voting. He stressed that he did not
want to limit someone from voting in person.
Co-Chair Hoffman believed that there were issues in his
district that he felt were adequately addressed, and felt
that the issue could be fixed on a larger scale.
Senator Wilson queried the process to ensure that a
person's ballot is counted.
Mr. Dunsmore replied that currently the division was not
required to send notification until after the decision.
2:11:09 PM
CHRSTOPHER CONSTANT, CHAIR, ANCHORAGE ASSEMBLY, ANCHORAGE
(via teleconference), spoke in support of the legislation.
2:20:10 PM
MICHAEL GARVEY, ACLU OF ANCHORAGE, ANCHORAGE (via
teleconference), spoke in support of the legislation.
2:23:32 PM
Co-Chair Olson OPENED and CLOSED public testimony.
2:24:20 PM
Mr. Dunsmore discussed the Sectional Analysis (copy on
file):
Section 1 is intent language for the Division of
Elections (division) to follow national best practices
for releasing ranked-choice voting results by
releasing preliminary tabulations and updated cast
vote records throughout the counting process.
Section 2 is a conforming section reflecting the
amendments made in sections 5-9 allowing voters to
register to vote within 30 days of an election.
Section 3 clarifies the residency requirements to
define a residence as a place where a voter has a
definite, articulable, and reasonable plan to return
to whenever they are absent. It also provides that the
presumption that a voter's registered address is
correct may be rebutted by evidence that the voter has
established residency at a different location.
Section 4 allows voters to submit an electronic image
of their signatures when registering to vote and
requires voter registration forms to require voters to
certify that they understand the state will notify
jurisdiction where they were previously registered.
Section 5 allows voters registering to vote to
designate a language to receive election materials in
from the languages that the Division of Elections is
required to provide language assistance in.
Section 6 states that a person registering to vote
within 30 days of an election, and who meets the
qualifications to register, may vote an absentee,
special needs, or questioned ballot for that election.
Section 7. states that a person who registers to vote
within 30 days of an election may only vote an
absentee, special needs, or questioned ballot in that
election and their ballot may not be rejected solely
because they do not appear on the official
registration list.
Section 8 states that if a person whose registration
was previously cancelled for inactivity reregisters to
vote within 30 days of an election, they may only vote
an absentee, special needs, or questioned ballot in
that election and their ballot may not be rejected
solely because they do not appear on the official
registration list.
Section 9 states that when a person registers to vote
in a new precinct within 30 days of an election, they
may only vote an absentee, special needs, or
questioned ballot in that election and their ballot
may not be rejected solely because they do not appear
on the official registration list.
Section 10 states that a person who is not already
registered to vote within 30 days of an election, they
may only vote an absentee, special needs, or
questioned ballot in that election and their ballot
may not be rejected solely because they do not appear
on the official registration list.
Section 11 amends the procedures sending notices to
verify voters are still residents to send notices to
voters who have not voted in two years or who have
evidence of establishing residency in another state.
Section 12 is a conforming section to remove language
that is addressed in Section 10.
Section 13 is a conforming section to reflect the
changes made in Sections 10 and 11.
Section 14 requires the director to develop a process
for voters to cancel their registrations and require
that instructions for how to cancel one's registration
be prominently posted at polling places.
Section 15 allows candidates and ballot question
campaigns to appoint poll watchers and ballot review
observers and allows campaigns to have observers
present at all locations where ballots or envelopes
are being reviewed in a precinct or counting center.
Section 16 allows international election observers to
be present at precincts and counting centers if they
are part of a mission of an international organization
of which the United States is a member and invited by
the U.S. State Department to observe the election and
provides that international election observers may not
question ballots or challenge ballot review decisions.
Section 17 repeals the requirement for the Alaska
Public Offices Commission to have offices in every
senate district.
Section 18 requires the division to provide language
assistance at polling places as required by federal
law and to post information at each polling place
about the language assistance available.
Section 19 prohibits displaying an image of a marked
ballot to persuade a voter within a polling place or
within 200 feet of the entrance to a polling place.
Section 20 requires that voters who have requested or
voted absentee ballots may only vote questioned
ballots at precincts unless they surrender their
absentee ballot to the poll workers for destruction.
Section 21 is a conforming section to remove language
that is made unnecessary by the amendments in Section
16.
Section 22 clarifies that it is not illegal for a
voter to share an image of their marked ballot if it
is not done to persuade another person.
Section 23 clarifies that precincts results reports
shall list the number of votes cast for candidates at
each ranking.
Section 24 requires the division to release unofficial
ranked-choice voting tabulations every day the
division releases updated election results.
Section 25 clarifies how the division should handle
ballots when a voter attempts to vote more than once.
If a voter votes in person at their polling place and
by another means, the in-person vote shall be the one
that is counted. If a voter attempts to vote multiple
times through absentee, special needs, or questioned
ballots the first ballot to be reviewed shall be the
one that is counted. The voter's
vote will only be counted if the division does not
determine the voter intentionally voted more than
once.
Section 26 requires the division to conduct risk
limiting audits prior to certifying election results.
Subsection (a) requires that risk limiting audits
take place after counting is completed and before
certification, and that they be designed using
statistical methods to limit the risk of
certifying an incorrect result.
Subsection (b) requires the director to adopt
regulations for risk limiting audits.
Subsection (c) allows candidates to have
observers witness the audits.
Section 27 requires that the division provide paid
return postage for absentee by-mail ballots, requires
absentee envelopes have a space for the date the voter
signed the ballot, prohibit absentee envelopes from
displaying a voter's party affiliation, and has a
conforming amendment to reflect the repeal of the
witness signature requirement in Section 21.
Section 28 provides that the division may not reject
an otherwise valid special needs ballot because of an
error by a poll worker or representative.
Section 29 repeals the requirement for a witness
signature for absentee by-mail ballots.
Section 30 provides that a by-mail ballot received
after the election without a postmark, or postmarked
after the date of the election, may be counted if it
has a U.S. Postal Service tracking barcode that verify
it was mailed on or before the date of the election.
Section 31 contains two provisions related to absentee
by-mail ballots.
Subsection (m) allows voters to register to
continue to receive absentee by-mail ballots for
future elections if they continue to vote at
least once every four years.
Subsection (n) allows voters to request absentee
by-mail ballots in any language for which the
division is required to provide language
assistance by federal law.
Section 32 requires the division to begin counting
absentee ballots at least seven days before the
election and to release the first tabulated results
when polls close at 8pm on Election Day.
Section 33 contains conforming amendments to reflect
the repeal of the witness signature requirement in
Section 21, the tracking barcode provisions in Section
22, and the signature verification provisions in
Section 26.
Section 34 requires signature verification for
absentee by-mail ballots.
Section 35 requires the division to adopt procedures
for challenging ballot review decisions by regulation
and that these regulations must provide at least 24
hours to submit a challenge.
Section 36 provides that ballots that are properly
cured under new AS 15.20.222 shall be counted during
the state review board process if they were not
previously counted.
Section 37 enacts two new sections of statutes:
New AS 15.20.221 requires the division to
establish a ballot tracking system to allow a
voter to track the status of their absentee by-
mail ballot.
New AS 15.20.222 provides for ballot curing for
absentee ballots.
• Subsection (a) requires the division to notify
voters if their signature cannot be verified,
there is no signature on the envelope, the voter
does not have a signature on file, or if the
voter did not provide a sufficient identifier of
the process to cure their ballot.
• Subsection (b) requires that these notices must
explain the need for a signature for verification
purposes and include a form for the voter to
provide their signature and copy of the
identification.
• Subsection (c) provides that a ballot may be
cured and counted if the voter returns the form,
confirms that they did in fact vote, and provides
a signature and copy of their identification.
• Subsection (d) provides that a ballot shall not
be counted, and the director will refer the
matter to the attorney general for investigation,
if the voter indicates they did not in fact vote
the ballot.
• Subsection (e) states that the division shall
update their records with the signature the voter
provides on the ballot curing forms.
Section 38 requires the division to provide secure
ballot drop boxes in municipalities with 20,000 or
more residents.
Section 39 clarifies that the return postage for
absentee by-mail ballots required by Section 19 does
not violate the prohibition on giving a thing of value
in exchange for a person voting.
Section 40 requires the Division to adopt a
cybersecurity program by regulation.
Section 41 provides that political campaign signs 32
square feet or smaller may be displayed on private
property along state roads outside of highway rights-
of-way.
Section 42 removes the requirement that reports filed
with the Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC) be
available at offices in every senate district and
requires that they be available on APOC's website.
Senator Bishop wondered about municipalities of 20,000 or
more.
Senator Kawasaki replied that the number was just "thrown
out there."
Senator Bishop felt that there could be a challenge to that
number.
2:30:51 PM
Mr. Dunsmore continued with the Sectional Analysis:
Section 43 clarifies that reports filed with APOC
shall be available at the commission's offices and on
their website.
Section 44 provides that in municipal elections, a
voter who was not registered to vote in the
municipality within 30 days of an election may only
vote an absentee, special needs, or questioned ballot
in that election and their ballot may not be rejected
solely because they do not appear on the official
registration list.
Section 45 makes technical corrections to the statutes
for public official financial disclosure for municipal
candidates and officials.
Section 46 requires Redistricting Board members to
file annual public official financial disclosures with
APOC.
Section 47 clarifies that the Redistricting Board is
subject to the Open Meetings Act.
Section 48 repeals several provisions:
• AS 25.10.170(b) providing for poll watchers and
ballot review observers for candidates in primary
elections, which is made unnecessary by the
amendments in Section 11.
• AS 15.20.203(i) requiring the division to mail
notices to voters whose ballots were rejected,
which is being replaced by the provisions of new
AS 15.20.222 created by Section 29.
• AS 15.20.203(j) requiring the division provide
a system for absentee voters to check the status
of their ballot which is being replaced by new AS
15.20.221 created by Section 29.
• AS 29.26.050(a)(3) requiring a voter be
registered in a municipality 30 days before a
municipal election in order to vote in that
election.
Section 49 is an applicability section stating that
the amendment in Section 31 to the definition of
"other thing of value" only applies to offenses
committed after the effective date of that section.
Section 50 allows APOC and the Division of Elections
to adopt regulations to implement the provisions of
this bill.
Section 51 provides an immediate effective date for
Section 41.
Section 52 provides an effective date of January 1,
2024 for the rest of the bill.
Senator Wilson noted some discrepancies and some missing
items, so felt that there needed to be a slower examination
of the bill.
Senator Kawasaki replied that he was willing to refine the
Sectional Analysis, and stressed that the details were
within the bill.
Mr. Dunsmore replied that he would verify that the
committee had the accurate sectional analysis for the
current bill version.
2:35:14 PM
Senator Bishop wanted to ask Ms. Beecher a question.
2:35:24 PM
CAROL BEECHER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ELECTIONS, ANCHORAGE
(via teleconference), introduced herself.
Senator Bishop asked whether the division could execute the
regulations in the bill.
Ms. Beecher replied that she was not certain, and noted
that it would need to change.
Senator Kiehl wondered whether a delegate could sign the
sheet for ballot watchers.
Mr. Dunsmore felt that it was reasonable.
Senator Kawasaki agreed.
Senator Wilson wondered whether the signature storing would
become a part of public record.
Mr. Dunsmore replied that it was not public information,
and the division was stored in their database.
Senator Wilson asked about the cyber-security information
at its cost.
Senator Kawasaki stated that the division should have a
cyber-security system in place.
2:40:10 PM
Ms. Beecher explained the fiscal note. She stated that the
division had a cyber-security program.
Senator Wilson queried the discrepancies in the amounts.
Ms. Beecher replied that beginning in FY 17, the operating
costs was decided in order to reduce volatility, so it was
split between two years.
Senator Wilson wondered whether the services should also be
the full amount for FY 24.
Ms. Beecher agreed to follow up.
2:45:46 PM
Senator Bishop asked for a restatement of the capital cost.
Ms. Beecher replied that the capital cost would be just
over $5 million.
Senator Bishop wondered how long the verification systems
are known to last.
Ms. Beecher replied that she did not know the lifespan of
those systems.
Senator Bishop wondered whether there had been contact with
other states about the systems.
Ms. Beecher replied in the negative and agreed to reach out
to other states.
Co-Chair Olson REOPENED public testimony.
2:47:32 PM
JEANNETTE LEE, RESEARCH DIRECTOR, SIGHTLINE INSTITUTE,
ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), spoke in support of the
bill.
Co-Chair Olson CLOSED public testimony.
2:50:15 PM
Senator Kiehl looked at Section 4, and remarked that the
penalty was extremely strong.
Mr. Dunsmore replied that he would do research related to
the issue.
Senator Kiehl felt that the penalty did not fit.
Co-Chair Olson stated that the amendment deadline was
Thursday at noon.
SB 138 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
SENATE BILL NO. 122
"An Act relating to the Multistate Tax Compact;
relating to apportionment of income to the state;
relating to highly digitized businesses subject to the
Alaska Net Income Tax Act; and providing for an
effective date."
2:52:25 PM
Senator Kiehl MOVED to ADOPT the committee substitute for
SB 122, Work Draft 33-LS0663\Y (Nauman, 5/5/23).
Co-Chair Olson OBJECTED for discussion.
2:52:57 PM
KEN ALPER, STAFF, SENATOR DONNY OLSON, discussed the
Summary of Changes (copy on file):
1) Amends Sec. 11(e), page 25 lines 9-12, clarifying
that public utilities and utilities that provide
telecommunications services would not be included
within the new "single factor allocation" method.
2:54:01 PM
AT EASE
2:54:54 PM
RECONVENED
Mr. Alper continued to discuss the Summary of Changes:
2) Amends Sec. 12, page 26 lines 1-5, adding new
subsections to clarify that an "entity" paying the 9.4
percent on their allocated Alaska income over $4
million would also include an LLC or any entity that
filed for federal tax purposes as a sole
proprietorship, partnership, S-corporation, or LLC.
2:56:56 PM
Co-Chair Olson wondered whether the Rules Committee
chairman was in favor of the committee substitute.
Mr. Alper replied in the affirmative.
Senator Bishop wondered whether the Department of Revenue
(DOR) would be available for questions at the next bill
hearing.
Mr. Alper replied in the affirmative.
Co-Chair Olson WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OJECTION, it was so ordered.
SB 122 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
SENATE BILL NO. 48
"An Act authorizing the Department of Natural
Resources to lease land for carbon management
purposes; establishing a carbon offset program for
state land; authorizing the sale of carbon offset
credits; and providing for an effective date."
2:58:24 PM
RENA MILLER, SPECIAL ASSISTANT, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER,
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, (DNR) addressed the fiscal
notes.
2:59:53 PM
CHRISTY COLLES, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF MINING, LAND AND
WATER, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (via
teleconference), introduced herself. She spoke to the
fiscal note related to the leases portion of the bill.
3:01:27 PM
ASHLEE ADOKO, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF PROJECT
MANAGEMENT AND PERMITTING, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
(via teleconference), spoke to the fiscal note.
3:03:02 PM
HELGE ENG, STATE FORESTER, DIVISION OF FORESTRY AND FIRE
PROTECTION, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (via
teleconference), spoke to the fiscal note.
3:05:12 PM
Senator Bishop wondered whether the there could be a shift
to defining it as DGF funds after the revenue began.
Ms. Miller replied in the affirmative.
Senator Merrick noted the two bills related to carbon. She
wondered which bill was more of a priority for the
administration.
Ms. Miller replied that the Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) would like both bills to have potential to generate
revenue.
3:07:11 PM
AT EASE
3:07:59 PM
RECONVENED
3:08:04 PM
Ms. Miller discussed the Sectional Analysis:
Section 1: Amends AS 36.30.850(b) to exempt the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) from following
the state procurement code when contracting with third
parties for purposes related to the carbon offset
program established in Section 6. Requires notice by
DNR if the department elects to use the procurement
code.
Section 2: Amends AS 37.05.146(c) to allow revenue
from carbon offset credit sales to be treated as
designated program receipts. This revenue would be
deposited into a new Carbon Offset Revenue Fund
established in Section 6.
Section 3: Conforming to Section 4. Amends AS
38.05.075(a) to exempt state land leases for carbon
management purposes from a requirement to award leases
to the highest bidder at public auction or by sealed
bid and related terms when competitive interest has
been demonstrated, as Section 4 establishes procedures
specific to the carbon management purpose leases.
Section 4: Adds a new section to AS 38.05 authorizing
DNR to lease state land to third parties for carbon
management purposes.
Proposed AS 38.05.081(b): Provides an application
process for a state land lease for carbon
management purposes.
Proposed AS 38.05.081(c): Sets a process for
deciding between applications for the same land;
an aggrieved applicant may appeal within 20 days
of a decision.
Proposed AS 38.05.081(d): Caps land leases for
carbon management purposes at 55 years and
requires the lease include performance
conditions. Requires DNR to terminate a lease if
the land is not being used for the approved
purpose or if the lessee fails to meet lease
requirements after a reasonable opportunity to
come into compliance.
Proposed AS 38.05.081(e): Specifies a lessee does
not receive a preference right to purchase the
leased land.
Proposed AS 38.05.081(f): Requires lease
compensation be designed to maximize returns to
the state and be a form of compensation set out
in AS 38.05.073(m).
Requires separate accounting of lease revenue and
allows the Legislature to appropriate the lease
revenue to fund the department's leasing program.
Proposed AS 38.05.081(g): Applies standard
provisions relating to sublease, assignment,
renewal and extension to leases for carbon
management purposes.
Proposed AS 38.05.081(h): Requires DNR to make a
best interest finding, which includes public
notice of a preliminary decision for public
comment, before issuing a state land lease for
carbon management purposes. A finding must
include the reasonably foreseeable effects a
project may have on the state or local economy
and the anticipated revenue to the state.
Proposed AS 38.05.081(i): Requires state land
leased for carbon management purposes to remain
accessible by the public, to the extent possible,
for generally allowed uses such as hunting and
fishing.
Proposed AS 38.05.081(j): Requires an annual,
public report to the Legislature on detailed
information about the carbon management purpose
leasing program.
Proposed AS 38.05.081(k): Defines "carbon
management" to include greenhouse gas mitigation
measures and non-geologic carbon sequestration
projects.
Section 5: Conforming to Section 4, amends AS
38.05.102 such that at the end of a carbon management
lease if the state moves to sell or long-term lease
those same lands, the carbon management purpose lessee
is not granted a preferential right.
Section 6: Adds a new article within AS 38.95
establishing the carbon offset program at DNR through
enactment of AS 38.95.400 - 38.95.499. Defines a
process for DNR to undertake carbon offset projects
and creates a fund to receive project revenues.
Proposed AS 38.95.400: Establishes the carbon
offset program and allows DNR to contract with
third parties to carry out the new program. Caps
commissions in contracts to no more than 30
percent of the revenue generated by the carbon
offset project the contract relates to.
Explicitly disclaims application of the carbon
offset program to activities of private
landowners.
Proposed AS 38.95.410: Requires DNR to adopt
criteria to evaluate carbon offset projects on
state lands; makes land generally available for
carbon offset projects; and ensures projects are
not undertaken on legislatively designated lands
without legislative approval or unless allowed by
law. Requires a written finding that a project is
in the best interests of the state before a
project is undertaken; caps project terms at 55
years; and requires land used for a project to
remain open to the public for access, hunting and
fishing and other generally allowed uses.
Proposed AS 38.95.420: Allows DNR to enroll
projects with a registry and requires DNR to
maintain certain project records.
Proposed AS 38.95.430: Creates the carbon offset
revenue fund to receive revenue from the sale of
carbon offsets. Funds could be used for purposes
of the carbon offset program and to pay program
administrative costs. Appropriations to the fund
do not lapse.
Proposed AS 38.95.440: Requires legislative
approval to execute contracts that exceed $10
million in costs. Provides the Legislature 45
days if already in session, or 45 days once in
session if not already in session, to act.
Proposed AS 38.05.450: Requires an annual, public
report to the Legislature on specific, detailed
information about the Carbon Offset Program,
including the entities engaged in a project,
revenues, and project status.
Proposed AS 38.95.499: Defines 16 terms related
to the new program.
Section 7: Adds a new subsection to AS 41.15.300
making land within the Haines State Forest Resource
Management Area eligible for a carbon offset project.
Section 8: Conforming to Section 7. Amends AS
41.15.315(d) allowing Haines State Forest Resource
Management Area lands to be managed for a carbon
offset project.
Section 9: Conforming to Section 7. Adds a new
subsection to AS 41.15.315 enabling amendments to the
Haines State Forest Resource Management Area
management plan to allow for carbon offset projects. A
plan must identify land appropriate for a carbon
offset project and a project must be consistent with
the management plan.
Section 10: Adds a new subsection to AS 41.17.200
authorizing lands within the State Forest system to be
used for carbon offset projects.
Section 11: Conforming to Section 10. Amends AS
41.17.220 so State Forest lands are managed under the
sustained yield principle, AS 41.17, a forest
management plan, and, as applicable, a carbon offset
project.
Section 12: Conforming to Section 10. Amends AS
41.17.230(a) to include carbon offset projects among
the forest uses a forest management plan must consider
and permit when compatible with the primary purpose of
State Forests.
Section 13: Conforming to Section 10. Adds a new
subsection to AS 41.17.230 enabling amendments to
State Forest management plans to allow for a carbon
offset project. Requires plans to identify land
appropriate for a carbon offset project and requires a
project be consistent with the plan.
Section 14: Disallows oil and gas production tax lease
expenditures for capital costs incurred for a carbon
management purpose lease or a state carbon offset
project.
Section 15: Sets an immediate effective date for the
bill.
3:11:36 PM
JOHN BOYLE, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES,
thanked the committee for hearing the bill. He stated that
carbon bills were important at DNR.
SB 48 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
3:13:55 PM
The meeting was adjourned at 3:13 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| a. SB138.Omnibus Elections sponsor statement 04-26-23.pdf |
SFIN 5/9/2023 1:30:00 PM SSTA 4/27/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 138 |
| SB138.Letters.pdf |
SFIN 5/9/2023 1:30:00 PM SSTA 5/2/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 138 |
| SB 138 draft powerpoint sfin.pdf |
SFIN 5/9/2023 1:30:00 PM |
SB 138 |
| SB 138 Public Testimony rec'd 050923.pdf |
SFIN 5/9/2023 1:30:00 PM |
SB 138 |
| SB 122 CS Summary of Changes - H to Y 5-9-23.pdf |
SFIN 5/9/2023 1:30:00 PM |
SB 122 |
| SB 122 work draft version Y.pdf |
SFIN 5/9/2023 1:30:00 PM |
SB 122 |
| SB 138 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SFIN 5/9/2023 1:30:00 PM |
SB 138 |