Legislature(1993 - 1994)

02/23/1994 01:40 PM Senate JUD

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
                   SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE                                  
                       February 23, 1994                                       
                           1:40 p.m.                                           
  MEMBERS PRESENT                                                              
 Senator Robin Taylor, Chairman                                                
 Senator George Jacko                                                          
 Senator Dave Donley                                                           
 Senator Suzanne Little                                                        
  MEMBERS ABSENT                                                               
 Senator Rick Halford, Vice-Chairman                                           
  OTHERS PRESENT                                                               
 Senator Randy Phillips                                                        
 Representative Jerry Mackie                                                   
  COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                           
 SENATE BILL NO. 164                                                           
 "An Act relating to municipal incorporation, reclassification, and            
 HOUSE BILL NO. 4                                                              
 "An Act adding as an aggravating factor at sentencing that a victim           
 was elderly or disabled; and relating to failure to report harm or            
 assaults of the elderly or disabled."                                         
 SENATE BILL NO. 225                                                           
 "An Act relating to credits against certain insurance taxes for               
 contributions to certain educational institutions; and providing              
 for an effective date."                                                       
 SENATE BILL NO. 190                                                           
 "An Act relating to income withholding and other methods of                   
 enforcement for orders of support; and providing for an effective             
  PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION                                             
 SB 164 - See Community & Regional Affairs minutes dated                       
          3/30/93, 4/13/93, 4/20/93, 4/22/93 and 4/24/93.                      
 HB 4 -   See HESS minutes dated 4/21/93.                                      
 SB 225 - See Health, Education & Social Service minutes                       
          dated 2/2/94 and 2/4/94.                                             
 SB 190 - NO PREVIOUS ACTION.                                                  
  WITNESS REGISTER                                                             
 Darroll Hargraves, Chairman                                                   
 Local Boundary Commission                                                     
 333 W. 4th Avenue, Suite 220                                                  
 Anchorage, Alaska 99501-2341                                                  
   POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 164.                                        
 Dan Bockhorst, Staff                                                          
 Local Boundary Commission                                                     
 333 W. 4th Avenue, Suite 220                                                  
 Anchorage, Alaska 99501-2341                                                  
   POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 164.                                        
 Nancy Weller, Aide                                                            
 Representative Jerry Mackie                                                   
 State Capitol                                                                 
 Juneau, AK 99801-1182                                                         
   POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 4.                                      
 Carol Carroll, Aide                                                           
 Senator Jay Kerttula                                                          
 State Capitol                                                                 
 Juneau, AK 99801-1182                                                         
   POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 225.                                    
 Sherie Steele                                                                 
 Sheldon Jackson College                                                       
 801 Lincoln                                                                   
 Sitka, Alaska 99835                                                           
   POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 225.                                        
 Wendy Redman, Vice-President                                                  
 for University Relations                                                      
 University of Alaska                                                          
 910 Yukon Drive                                                               
 Fairbanks, Alaska 99775-2388                                                  
   POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 225.                                        
 Laraine Derr, Deputy Commissioner                                             
 Department of Revenue                                                         
 P.O. Box 110400                                                               
 Juneau, Alaska 99811-0400                                                     
   POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 190.                                    
 Mary Gay, Director                                                            
 Child Support Enforcement Division                                            
 550 W. 7th, 4th Floor                                                         
 Anchorage, Alaska 99501-3556                                                  
   POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 190                                         
 Terri Lauterbach, Attorney                                                    
 Legislative Legal Counsel                                                     
 Legislative Affairs Agency                                                    
 130 Seward Street                                                             
 Juneau, Alaska 99801                                                          
   POSITION STATEMENT: Drafted CSSB 190.                                       
  ACTION NARRATIVE                                                             
 TAPE 94-12, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 001                                                                    
  CHAIRMAN ROBIN TAYLOR  called the Judiciary Committee meeting to             
 order at 1:40.                                                                
 SENATOR TAYLOR introduced SB 164 (MUNICIPAL INCORPORATION-                    
 RECLASSIFICATION-DISSOLUTION), sponsored by the Senate Community &            
 Regional Affairs Committee chaired by SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS, and             
 invited him to testify.  SENATOR PHILLIPS deferred to DARROLL                 
 HARGRAVES, Chairman of the Local Boundary Commission.                         
 SENATOR TAYLOR announced there was a work draft for a committee               
 substitute for SB 164, and he called on MR. HARGRAVES, who                    
 introduced two members and a staff person present from the Local              
 Boundary Commission: TONI SALMEIER from Anchorage, FRANCES HALLGREN           
 from Sitka, and Commission Staff, DAN BOCKHORST.                              
 MR. HARGRAVES began by urging the legislature to pass the bill this           
 year, and he praised the hard work by sponsors and staff.  He                 
 explained the bill makes some technical amendments to the law that            
 are needed by the boundary commission and are detailed on pages 38            
 and 39 of this year's report from the commission.                             
 Number 058                                                                    
 MR. HARGRAVES reviewed the main provisions in the bill beginning              
 with (1) Establishes mechanism for first class and home rule cities           
 to reclassify as second class cities.  (2) Provides State oversight           
 concerning all municipal reclassification.  He gave some examples             
 of the need for this provision.  (3) Permits direct incorporation             
 of home rule cities and unified municipalities, and confirms that             
 home rule cities and home rule boroughs may be created through                
 merger and consolidation.  (4) Confirms the discretion of the Local           
 Boundary Commission in approving, denying or amending petitions.              
 (5) Confirms that the Local Boundary Commission has legislative               
 authority to adopt regulations for incorporation and dissolution.             
 MR. HARGRAVES explained it was vital to have the legislation                  
 because of events that will be coming forth in the next few months.           
 He called attention to the work draft, Section 22 on page 8, to               
 suggest a change to Sec. 29.06.520 by deleting TO ASSETS AND                 
 LIABILITIES. and leave the title as SUCCESSION.  He explained the     e    
 section dealt with quite a few "rights, powers, and duties."                  
 SENATOR TAYLOR asked for a motion to adopt for discussion purposes            
 the proposed committee substitute prepared by the Judiciary                   
 Number 104                                                                    
 SENATOR DONLEY asked for an assessment of the differences in the              
 work draft with the original SB 164.  MR. HARGRAVES asked that MR.            
 BOCKHORST from the boundary commission staff reference the changes.           
 MR. BOCKHORST explained the difference between the Judiciary work             
 draft and the CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 164(CRA) is the addition of              
 Section 22 on page 8.  He further explained Section 22 restores               
 some language that was in the statute in 1988, prior to a change in           
 the law that was to make it easier for certain dissolutions to                
 MR. BOCKHORST  continued to explain the powers, duties, rights had     d    
 been eliminated from the section, which, he thought created some              
 unintended circumstances, where the state or successor municipality           
 could be burdened with the responsibility of paying off debts, but            
 may not have the power, the right, or the duty to collect revenues            
 to pay those debts.                                                           
 SENATOR DONLEY questioned the difference between the powers and               
 duties when a municipality down grades from a first class to a                
 second class.  He asked if the municipality down grades, do they              
 keep the same powers, duties, and rights, and why would they down             
 MR. BOCKHORST explained Section 22 deals only with dissolution and            
 has nothing to do with reclassification from first to second class            
 SENATOR DONLEY suggested a municipality could dissolve and be                 
 recreated as a second class entity.  He thought the municipality              
 would be recreated with all of the rights, powers, and duties as              
 when they were a first class.                                                 
 Number 156                                                                    
 MR. BOCKHORST continued to explain Section 22 only applies to a               
 dissolution, and he reiterated the state of Alaska or another                 
 municipal government is going to be burdened with the assets and              
 MR. BOCKHORST claimed the language suggests, that if the State or             
 another municipal government is going to be burdened with the                 
 liabilities of a dissolved government, then the successor needs to            
 have the powers, duties, and rights owned by the former municipal             
 government in order to collect revenues and pay off the debts.                
 MR. BOCKHORST said reclassification was a separate issue, and under           
 current law, if a first class city wanted to reclassify to second             
 class status, there is no direct way to do so.  He used the cities            
 of Dillingham and Galena as an example of first class cities in an            
 unorganized borough, both operate school districts.  He said there            
 was an interest, because of the financial burden faced by the                 
 communities to provide schools, or to dissolve or reclassify into             
 second class status.  If they dissolved under the present system              
 the responsibility for education would be transferred to the State            
 of Alaska to be operated as a school district under the regional              
 education attendance area system.                                             
 SENATOR LITTLE said the city of Seldovia has been used as an                  
 example in the backup material, and she posed the hypothetical that           
 Seldovia has petitioned to dissolve.  If the Kenai Peninsula                  
 Borough refused to establish a service area to take care of the               
 services previously accepted by the city of Seldovia, she asked how           
 the bill would influence that situation.                                      
 Number 202                                                                    
 MR. BOCKHORST explained if, under Section 22, the Kenai Peninsula             
 Borough refused to act as a successor to a dissolved city of                  
 Seldovia, the law as it currently exists says all those assets and            
 liabilities will be transferred from Seldovia to the State of                 
 Alaska.  Without the language in Section 22, he further explained             
 the state gets saddled with debt without the assets to collect                
 taxes to pay for Seldovia's obligation bonds.                                 
 SENATOR LITTLE clarified that Section 22 would allow the state to             
 assume the rights, powers, and duties for Seldovia.  MR. BOCKHORST            
 said she was correct, and he further explained what happened when             
 these powers were eliminated in the 1988 law.  He said Section 22             
 was restorative language in the statute that existed previously.              
 In a discussion with MR. BOCKHORST, SENATOR LITTLE received some              
 historical information on the proposed changes and on the expressed           
 statutory authority for the state to continue to levy taxes                   
 previously levied by Seldovia.                                                
 SENATOR TAYLOR picked up on the hypothetical of Seldovia where the            
 borough succeeded to Seldovia's assets, and added the factors of              
 the borough having limited powers and Seldovia being a home rule              
 city with general powers.  He quoted SENATOR DONLEY'S question if             
 the borough would inherit through Section 22 those powers which it            
 doesn't otherwise have, or would it only be to the extent that it             
 impacts rights, powers, and duties needed regarding liabilities.              
 He gave the example of a police department in Seldovia and no                 
 police authority in the Kenai Peninsula Borough.                              
 There was a short discussion among the committee members with MR.             
 BOCKHORST on what Section 22 really says.  MR. BOCKHORST explained            
 in the dissolution process there would have to be a transition plan           
 prepared, and the borough would be required to establish a service            
 area to assume the powers and duties of Seldovia.                             
 Number 255                                                                    
 SENATOR LITTLE said she was hopeful Seldovia would not dissolve               
 SENATOR DONLEY asked SENATOR PHILLIPS whether he thought Section 22           
 was a good amendment, and SENATOR PHILLIPS said it was done in a              
 draft after leaving his committee.  SENATOR DONLEY also asked why             
 the provisions in Section 22 were taken out in 1988.                          
 MR. BOCKHORST thought it was because the Local boundary Commission            
 denied the petition for the dissolution of the city of Akiachak               
 using the law as written prior to the 1988 amendments.  He said, at           
 that time, REPRESENTATIVE LYMAN HOFFMAN prepared a series of                  
 amendments to eliminate what was perceived as road blocks causing             
 the commission to deny the petition for the dissolution of                    
 MR. BOCKHORST explained that Section 5 of the bill adopted by the             
 legislature in 1988 was intended to eliminate any question that a             
 successor to a dissolved municipal government would allow the State           
 of Alaska to contract with an Indian Reorganization Act village or            
 traditional council, but doing so would not grant any recognition             
 of governmental powers in the course of entering into a contract              
 between the State of Alaska and a village council.  He indicated a            
 copy of the text of the 1988 amendment was in the bill packet.                
 SENATOR DONLEY asked how the amendment addressed that concern,                
 which he considered a legitimate one.                                         
 MR. BOCKHORST thought the intention was to insure, for a native               
 village council, it would not be recognized as a governmental                 
 entity with governmental powers.  He explained Section 22 clearly             
 says the powers, right, and duties of a former municipal government           
 would only succeed to another municipality or to the State.  He               
 thought the intent by REPRESENTATIVE HOFFMAN was retained.                    
 SENATOR DONLEY now felt the legislation was acceptable, but asked             
 MR. BOCKHORST if he had talked to REPRESENTATIVE HOFFMAN.  He                 
 suggested, out of curtesy, it should have been done, since MR.                
 BOCKHORST was attempting to amend a bill written by a current                 
 Number 305                                                                    
 MR. HARGRAVES said he would pay close attention to SENATOR DONLEY'S           
 advice and would be visiting REPRESENTATIVE HOFFMAN'S office.                 
 SENATOR TAYLOR restated the amendment to delete on page 8, line 22            
 the words TO ASSETS AND LIABILITIES.  Without objections, so                
 SENATOR JACKO moved to pass CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 164(JUD) as                
 from committee with individual recommendations.  Without                      
 objections, so ordered.                                                       
 ADULTS) sponsored by REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MACKIE.  He noted the               
 addition of a committee substitute, and there was some discussion             
 as to whether it had been heard before.  SENATOR TAYLOR clarified             
 there was a companion bill, HB 3, dealing with those who care for             
 the elderly, whereas HB 4 relates to failure to report harm or                
 assaults on the elderly or disabled.                                          
 Number 350                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE MACKIE reviewed his sponsor statement explaining               
 that HB 4 would provide a consistent penalty of a class B                     
 misdemeanor for conviction for failure to report the harm of an               
 elderly or disabled person under these statutes.  It would also               
 require the court to report convictions to the appropriate                    
 licensing/regulatory entity.  Conviction of a professionally                  
 licensed person for failure to report a crime against an elderly or           
 disabled person could lead to disciplinary actions or sanctions.              
 SENATOR TAYLOR opened the meeting for questions and SENATOR LITTLE            
 asked REPRESENTATIVE MACKIE to explain the changes in the committee           
 substitute.  He deferred to his aide, NANCY WELLER.                           
 MS. WELLER explained the original bill was more comprehensive and             
 carried aggravating factors for the protection of the elderly, but            
 the Department of Law felt those protection were already covered              
 under aggravating factors presently in place.                                 
 There being no further testimony, SENATOR TAYLOR asked for the                
 pleasure of the committee.                                                    
 SENATOR JACKO moved to pass CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 4(JUD)(PROTECT              
 ELDERLY AND DISABLED ADULTS) from committee with individual                   
 recommendations.  Without objections, so ordered.                             
 COLLEGES) sponsored by SENATOR JAY KERTTULA and noted there was a             
 HESS committee substitute.  He called on CAROL CARROLL to testify             
 on behalf of SENATOR KERTTULA.                                                
 MS. CARROLL explained the bill, SB 225, would allow authorized                
 insurance and title insurance companies to credit their state tax             
 liability with an amount equal to donations they make to qualified            
 higher educational institutions now available to other corporations           
 within the State of Alaska.  She offered to answer questions.                 
 SENATOR JACKO referenced page 2 and asked if she was speaking about           
 two or four year institutions.  MS. CARROLL read lines 1 through 3            
 to answer his question which gave acceptance to two-year or four-             
 year colleges or universities.                                                
 SENATOR DONLEY clarified the credit was 50% up to $100 thousand and           
 then 100% for the next $100 thousand.  MS. CARROLL said he was                
 correct, and SENATOR DONLEY disagreed with the 100% credit language           
 because it would allow private citizens to allocate money instead             
 of the legislature.                                                           
 Number 409                                                                    
 SENATOR LITTLE gave an example of a credit union owing $100                   
 thousand in taxes, and instead, giving the $100 thousand to the               
 University of Alaska as a donation.  She asked for an explanation.            
 MS. CARROLL explained if a company has a tax liability to the state           
 and wanted to donate the whole $100 thousand, the company would               
 only be able to take a tax credit of 50% of the amount.  SENATOR              
 DONLEY also explained the company could give $150 thousand and                
 receive a credit for the $100 thousand.                                       
 MS. CARROLL noted in Section 2 stating "or 50% of the tax payers              
 liability, whichever is less," which, she said, would not allow a             
 100% in the case described by SENATOR DONLEY.  SENATOR TAYLOR                 
 explained the most such a company could receive would be 50% of               
 their total tax liability.  MS. CARROLL added, "as long as it is              
 not over $150 thousand."                                                      
 SENATOR JACKO asked if was open to use by the scholarships managed            
 by the Postsecondary Education Commission, but MS. CARROLL said the           
 provisions only apply to the three universities.                              
 SENATOR JACKO questioned the retroactive effective date.  MS.                 
 CARROLL explained it would give insurance companies the opportunity           
 to donate this year.                                                          
 SENATOR LITTLE asked why the bill was limited to certain insurance            
 taxes, and were there provisions for individuals to contribute to             
 the university under the legislation.                                         
 MS. CARROLL explained in statute this credit is already available             
 to anyone who pays a corporate income tax, oil production tax,                
 fishing taxes or mining taxes.                                                
 SENATOR TAYLOR opened the teleconference network and invited SHERIE           
 STEELE from Sitka to testify.                                                 
 Number 450                                                                    
 MS. STEELE identified herself as the Director of Development for              
 Sheldon Jackson College, and acknowledged MS. CARROLL had testified           
 to most of their points.  She reviewed a letter from KENNETH                  
 CAMERON D.M.D. acting president of Sheldon Jackson College in                 
 support of SB 225, in which he wrote, "The Alaska Income Tax                  
 Education Credit is an extremely useful tool for Alaskans because             
 it encourages mutually beneficial partnerships between industry and           
 higher education.  This tool allows colleges in the state to                  
 enhance and improve academic programs by having access to the                 
 funding necessary to implement quality education for Alaskans.  An            
 omission in the original legislation, namely the omission of                  
 including the insurance industry as a taxpayer group eligible to              
 participate in this most essential partnering incentive, can be               
 rectified by SB 225."                                                         
 SENATOR TAYLOR next called on WENDY REDMAN, Vice-President for                
 University Relations for the University of Alaska to testify.                 
 MS REDMAN explained the tax credit legislation passed several years           
 ago has proved very helpful to the University of Alaska, APU and              
 Sheldon Jackson in seeking private funds as one more tool to                  
 broaden the base of support, especially for the University of                 
 Alaska.  She said their campus raised close to $12 million over the           
 past two years, with the majority of the funds placed in endowments           
 that will provide benefits to students far into the future.  MS.              
 REDMAN said the tax credit legislation was responsible for about $1           
 million of the donations, but she claimed this was not lost revenue           
 to the state.  She urged the passage of the legislation and offered           
 to answer questions.                                                          
 SENATOR DONLEY asked if the fundamental law being amended has ever            
 been challenged?  MS. REDMAN said it has not.  SENATOR TAYLOR asked           
 if challenge had been anticipated, and MS. REDMAN said there was              
 some anticipation when it was first past.                                     
 SENATOR JACKO asked for details, and SENATOR DONLEY explained                 
 Article 7, Section 1 of the State Constitution says, "... no money            
 shall be paid from public funds for direct benefit to any religious           
 or any other private educational institution."  He claimed the                
 original bill denies the State income to the benefit of a private             
 educational institution and is unconstitutional.                              
 Number 505                                                                    
 MS. REDMAN told SENATOR TAYLOR it has never been challenged, and              
 she reviewed the discussion when the bill was first passed.  She              
 said REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG had a ruling based on information               
 from another state that "... when you're capturing revenue before             
 it hits the general fund, as apposed to after, therefore, it is not           
 general funds."  She said there were rulings on both sides of the             
 SENATOR TAYLOR acknowledged a letter from Dr. F. Thomas Trotter,              
 President of Alaska Pacific University in support of SB 225.                  
 SENATOR JACKO moved to pass CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 225(HES)                   
 (INSURANCE TAX CREDIT:GIFTS TO COLLEGES) from committee with                  
 individual recommendations.  Without objections, so ordered.                  
 sponsored by the Senate Judiciary Committee by request and invited            
 LARAINE DERR, Deputy Commissioner for the Department of Revenue, to           
 MS. DERR explained she had recently taken on the responsibility for           
 the Child Support Enforcement Division, but preferred to defer to             
 MARY GAY, Division Director, for a review of the bill.  MS. DERR              
 said the bill would bring the State statute into line with federal            
 requirements, and she introduced MS. GAY, who would be speaking on            
 the teleconference network from Anchorage.                                    
 MS. GAY explained SB 190 would amend Alaska State Statute 25.27.062           
 and bring the State into compliance with federal regulations.  She            
 also explained the Family Support Act of 1988 which requires the              
 State to enact laws and implement procedures for wage withholding.            
 Section 101 of the Family Support Act also requires that, effective           
 January 1, 1994, States implement immediate withholding in all                
 support orders initially issued in the State which are not being              
 enforced under Title IV-D.                                                    
 MS. GAY concluded by stressing that federal funding was contingent            
 upon this legislation.                                                        
 SENATOR TAYLOR announced a new committee substitute prepared by               
 TERRI LAUTERBACH, 8LS1001\K, 2/23/94, which incorporates the                  
 changes, the first one being the bond security requirement, and the           
 second, on page 2, line 3, where the Child Support Enforcement                
 Agency's (CSEA) responsibility is clarified.  SENATOR TAYLOR asked            
 his aide, KEVIN SULLIVAN, to clarify the sunset provision.                    
 Number 554                                                                    
 SENATOR TAYLOR asked MS. GAY if she had reviewed the committee                
 substitute before the committee, and she replied she had not.  MR.            
 SULLIVAN said a copy had been faxed to her office today.                      
 SENATOR TAYLOR reviewed the changes made by MS. LAUTERBACH, and               
 reminded the committee this was federally mandated legislation that           
 could affect the existence of the child enforcement agency, since             
 presently the cost of the agency from federal funding.                        
 SENATOR LITTLE clarified that if the bill is not passed, the State            
 would lose significant funds in promoting the collection of child             
 support payments, which directly affects the number of people on              
 welfare with the accompanying costs.  She thought it was important            
 the bill be put forward, and she questioned the removal of                    
 conflicting language within the bill.  SENATOR TAYLOR asked MR.               
 SULLIVAN to explain what has happened to the bill.                            
 MR. SULLIVAN explained to MS. GAY when he had received the bill as            
 well as the memo from MS. LAUTERBACH, and that it had been faxed to           
 her.  He suggested she send someone to find it, so all participants           
 would be looking at the same information.                                     
 MR. SULLIVAN told SENATOR LITTLE the question put before Legal                
 Services was whether it complied with federal requirements, and he            
 explained the research that went into the committee substitute.  By           
 sending the memo to the Child Support Enforcement Agency, he said             
 the committee was made aware of other federal requirements that               
 actually did speak to the bill with the exception of the sunset               
 provision.  He explained all of this contributed to the committee             
 substitute, which was then delivered back to MS. GAY, and he also             
 explained the reinsertion of the bonding requirements.                        
 MS. GAY spoke to the urgency of passing the legislation, not only             
 to fund the Child Support Funding Agency, but to protect the Aid to           
 Families with Dependent Children funding, which would amount to               
 half of $62 million provided by the federal government.                       
 Number 588                                                                    
 SENATOR LITTLE asked to have MS. LAUTERBACH explain the changes               
 being considered in the committee substitute.                                 
 MS. LAUTERBACH and SENATOR LITTLE discussed which version of the              
 committee substitute should be considered.  MS. LAUTERBACH                    
 explained the very latest version contained the bonding and                   
 security provisions, which were returned to the legislation, and to           
 take out the extension of the employer information program as                 
 passed in 1991.  MS. LAUTERBACH had discussed the legislation with            
 MS. GAY, who pointed out some regulations not previously seen by              
 MS. LAUTERBACH.                                                               
 TAPE 94-12, SIDE B                                                            
 Number 001                                                                    
 MS. LAUTERBACH explained the bonding and security provisions were             
 from even older regulations, and she had returned them to the                 
 legislation.  She further explained the changes in the repealer               
 relating to the employer information program were requested by                
 Judiciary staff.                                                              
 SENATOR LITTLE asked MS. LAUTERBACH and MS. GAY why the employer              
 recording provision were not returned to the bill, since the bill             
 deals exclusively with implementing the federal withholding                   
 requirements.  They all agreed the employer recording provision               
 worked well for the Alaska Child Support Enforcement Division by              
 returning money to AFDC.  SENATOR LITTLE suggested it would be in             
 the State's best interest to retain the program, but MS. GAY                  
 thought it might hold up passage of the bill, which she considered            
 SENATOR LITTLE asked whether the provision was controversial, and             
 both SENATOR TAYLOR and MS. GAY said it was.  MS. GAY explained the           
 federal government would probably require the continuation of the             
 program as far as reporting of all new hires, and their W-4 forms             
 to be matched with child support records.                                     
 SENATOR LITTLE said her preference was to leave the program in                
 effect, since she thought it was important to increase whenever               
 possible the collection of child support backlogs.                            
 MS. GAY said REPRESENTATIVE MARK HANLEY has a bill to reinstate the           
 provision, and SENATOR TAYLOR explained he had been told that SB
 190 was solely to bring the State into compliance with federal law.           
 He said he was only trying to present a pure bill, which would be             
 easier to defend on the floor of the Senate.                                  
 Number 043                                                                    
 After some discussion, SENATOR TAYLOR moved to adopt CS FOR SENATE            
 BILL NO. 190(JUD), previously identified as LAUTERBACH, 2/12/94.              
 Without objections, so ordered.                                               
 SENATOR LITTLE moved to pass CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 190(JUD)                  
 (ENFORCEMENT OF SUPPORT ORDERS) from committee with individual                
 recommendations.  Without objections, so ordered.                             
 There being no further business to come before the committee, the             
 meeting was adjourned at 2:35 p.m. by SENATOR TAYLOR.                         

Document Name Date/Time Subjects