03/20/2018 03:30 PM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s): Commissioner, Department of Administration; Personnel Board | |
| SB192 | |
| SB159 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | SB 159 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 192 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
March 20, 2018
3:29 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Kevin Meyer, Chair
Senator David Wilson
Senator Cathy Giessel
Senator John Coghill
Senator Dennis Egan
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARINGS
Commissioner - Alaska Department of Administration
Leslie Ridle
- CONFIRMATION ADVANCED
Alaska State Personnel Board
Al Tamagni
- CONFIRMATION ADVANCED
SENATE BILL NO. 192
"An Act relating to the confidentiality of voters' addresses;
and relating to the fees charged by the division of elections
for providing a copy of the state's master voter registration
list or a copy of the list of individuals who voted in an
election."
- MOVED CSSB 192(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 159
"An Act relating to disbursement options under the Public
Employees' Retirement System of Alaska and the Teachers'
Retirement System of Alaska for participants in the defined
contribution plan; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 192
SHORT TITLE: VOTING: ADDRESS CONFIDENTIALITY; FEES
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) MACKINNON
02/19/18 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/19/18 (S) STA, FIN
02/27/18 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/27/18 (S) Heard & Held
02/27/18 (S) MINUTE(STA)
03/20/18 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: SB 159
SHORT TITLE: PERS/TERS DISTRIBUTIONS
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
01/24/18 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/24/18 (S) STA, FIN
03/20/18 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
LESLIE RIDLE, Commissioner-Designee
Alaska Department of Administration
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as commissioner designee to the
Alaska Department of Administration.
AL TAMAGNI, Appointee
State Personnel Board
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the State
Personnel Board.
CHRISTINE MARASIGAN, Staff
Senator Meyer
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Explained the committee substitute for SB
192.
SENATOR ANNA MACKINNON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 192.
JORDAN SHILLING, Staff
Senator Coghill
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Reviewed an amendment for SB 192.
COMMISSIONER-DESIGNEE LESLE RIDLE
Alaska Department of Administration
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced SB 159.
KATHY LEA, Deputy Director and Chief Pension Officer
Division of Retirement and Benefits
Alaska Department of Administration
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 159.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:29:45 PM
CHAIR KEVIN MEYER called the Senate State Affairs Standing
Committee meeting to order at 3:29 p.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Wilson, Giessel, Coghill, Egan, and Chair
Meyer.
^CONFIRMATION HEARING(S): Commissioner, Department of
Administration; Personnel Board
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
Commissioner, Department of Administration
Personnel Board
3:31:04 PM
CHAIR MEYER announced the consideration of the governor's
appointees.
3:31:25 PM
LESLIE RIDLE, Commissioner-Designee, Alaska Department of
Administration, Juneau, Alaska, detailed her residency and
curriculum vitae to committee members. She noted that she was a
teacher for 6 years and served in the Alaska Legislature for 27
years. She disclosed that she has been in the Alaska Department
of Administration for three years and was appointed as
commissioner-designee when Sheldon Fisher moved to the Alaska
Department of Revenue as commissioner. She stated that her
previously noted experiences helped her to figure out how to
help constituents and Alaskans.
COMMISSIONER-DESIGNEE RIDLE said she liked the Alaska Department
of Administration because she liked how the department works for
the state and helps make things better for state workers so that
they can do the state government's mission. She added that she
likes what some of the department's outwardly-facing divisions
do in interacting with the state like the Division of Motor
Vehicles. She said she really likes the ability to help make
things move smoother for Alaskans and to serve Alaskans.
3:34:53 PM
She addressed goals set with the previous commissioner for the
department and explained that her intent is to continue the work
that she and former commissioner Sheldon Fisher had worked on
together. She detailed the department's goals as follows:
• Shared services;
• Office of Information Technology (OIT) consolidation;
• Reducing the department's lease footprints across the
state:
o $1 million in rent was reduced in FY2018 based on
consolidations and lease renegotiations.
• Working hard on healthcare, one of the department's biggest
expenditures;
• Working on the retiree plan and the active plan;
• Working with the Alaska Department of Health and Social
Services and the Alaska Department of Commerce, and
Economic Development on healthcare "as a whole."
She analogized that the department's projects are like babies
and her goal is to get them up to the toddler and middle school
stages, ultimately solidifying the projects so that they can
continue after her tenure.
SENATOR WILSON asked Commissioner-Designee Ridle to address her
continuity plans, specifically shared services. He noted that
shared services are a controversial issue that has been in
different iterations over the past six years. He inquired how
the department is working on the continuity of its plan
throughout departments and different administrations to provide
efficiency of state government.
COMMISSIONER-DESIGNEE RIDLE replied that the difference is the
structure of how things are done has changed. She opined that
the state's current budget situation has been an impetus in
combining services and reducing budgets.
3:38:38 PM
SENATOR WILSON asked if there is a continuity plan throughout
the departments if Commissioner-Designee Ridle were not the
commissioner.
COMMISSIONER-DESIGNEE RIDLE answered that continuity is her goal
whether she someone else is commissioner. She said creating
structure is important for continuity to make sure things are
put into a solid place.
SENATOR COGHILL asked Ms. Ridle to address her background in the
U.S. Senate and how her experience at the federal level could be
implemented administratively in the department.
COMMISSIONER-DESIGNEE RIDLE replied that she has worked in all
three levels of government: municipal, state, and federal. She
conceded that the municipal level of government was the best
because it was so fast. She pointed out that the federal
government has addressed shared services as well. She added that
the department has taken examples from the federal government
that includes the Lean and Kaizen methods for management
improvement.
3:42:29 PM
SENATOR COGHILL addressed Ms. Ridle's unique perspective because
she gets to be an administrative arm for a lot of different
people in various ways, both state employees and the public. He
asked how the department uses the Lean government training
process to help take the "Middle part of our government and put
it all to work at the front face of our government." He inquired
if the Legislature puts statutorial barriers up that hinders the
department.
COMMISSIONER-DESIGNEE RIDLE explained that the department uses
the Lean government training processes to get the groups
together to look at the barriers and address what is causing a
barrier. She admitted that a lot of barriers are self-imposed in
addition to regulation, state law and federal law barriers. She
provided examples of removing barriers in the Division of Motor
Vehicles (DMV) to improve customer service. She noted that
Kaizen methods were used to mine data to identify barriers and
attack problems. She revealed that the current year was the
first year that the department was able to ascertain from the
Office of Information Technology (OIT) as to how much the state
spends on technology. She asserted that change is not possible
without knowing what is currently being done. She emphasized
that state employees want to do a good job and being able to
allow them to look at the big-picture is helpful for their job.
She opined that state employees are excited when the department
assists with removing their barriers.
3:47:20 PM
SENATOR COGHILL pointed out that Ms. Ridle is facing an election
cycle for the upcoming year and plans must take in account what
can be done this year as well as what can be done beyond. He
addressed benefits and retirement as an enterprise that is
unique to a certain set of circumstances. He inquired if Ms.
Ridle believes that benefits and retirement is something that
should be within the administration or outside in a different
realm.
COMMISSIONER-DESIGNEE RIDLE agreed that retirement and benefits
is its own special thing in the department. She said the
retirement and benefits is huge with a lot of customers, federal
laws and state laws. She remarked that she did not know if
retirement and benefits should be taken out of state government.
She disclosed that she had worked with the previous commissioner
to "beef up" retirement and benefits. She disclosed that the
department hired more professional staff to address the "big
ideas" like a healthcare economist to better look at the state's
data. She emphasized that retirement and benefits need an
updated computer system to better serve customers. She opined
that the retirement and benefits savings can come from
streamlining, especially to the customer.
SENATOR COGHILL remarked about retirement and benefits and
asserted that bargaining for a third-party vendor has been no
small task in Alaska, something that has not been settled since
his tenure in the Legislature. He asked where the department is
with third-party vendors.
COMMISSIONER-DESIGNEE RIDLE replied that the department has
requests for proposals (RFP) out for healthcare travel,
pharmaceuticals, and claims. She explained that a different RFP
process is being used for third-party vendors called "Best
Value." She detailed that Best Value allows the department to
ask a lot of questions upfront prior to awarding an RFP. She
disclosed that in the past an RFP was awarded to a vendor and
then questions were asked as to how the program works.
3:53:40 PM
SENATOR COGHILL remarked that prequalifying questions will keep
the department out of court and out of arbitration.
COMMISSIONER-DESIGNEE RIDLE concurred.
CHAIR MEYER recalled that Commissioner Fisher had a study done
that showed combining all the different health providers into
one would save over $125 million. He asked if anything has been
done with combining health providers.
COMMISSIONER-DESIGNEE RIDLE noted that Chair Meyer was referring
to the Health Care Authority Study from 2017. She disclosed that
the department has started on a couple of recommendations from
the study that included travel and a pharmacy benefit for
Medicare eligible retirees. She added that the department has
asked for $750,000 in the budget for an actuarial study that
provides deeper data from the municipalities and school
districts.
CHAIR MEYER opined that $125 million is a lot of money in
savings. He asked if the various bargaining groups are providing
insurance to their employees.
COMMISSIONER-DESIGNEE RIDLE explained that Alaska Care covers
half of the employees, including the Legislature, courts, and
retirees; however, there are four health trusts that cover the
other half:
1. General Government Unit (GGU) and Alaska State Employees
Association (ASEA);
2. Labor, Trades and Crafts (LTC);
3. Public Safety Employees Association (PSEA);
4. Master, Mates and Pilots (MM&P).
3:56:54 PM
CHAIR MEYER reiterated that substantial savings to the state
could happen if the trusts were combined.
COMMISSIONER-DESIGNEE RIDLE explained that the report said
combining was feasible and noted that more savings could occur
if municipalities, boroughs and school districts were brought in
as well.
CHAIR MEYER said he hoped Commissioner-Designee Ridle's comment
on combining groups is something that she can assure the
committee that she will continue to seek and go after. He
addressed shared services and noted that topic has been
something that the Legislature has heard for a long time. He
noted his frustration that agencies function like separate silos
where they have their own information technology, communication
specialists, purchasing group, and human resources. He asked if
centralizing the support services would make sense.
COMMISSIONER-DESIGNEE RIDLE answered the centralizing OIT
addresses what Chair Meyer was referring to. She admitted that
departments may have been doing a great job for their
department, but sometimes to the detriment of the overall state.
She said the bigger picture with everybody working for one
entity while focusing on department missions would provide
"better eyes" on how money is being spent. She noted that
improved vendor management has resulted in vendors working with
one entity that results in the state buying one product at once.
She conceded that too many licenses are being purchased and that
things are allowed to expire. She emphasized that shared
services are happening with information technology and travel,
and accounts payable is next.
4:00:07 PM
CHAIR MEYER reiterated that his hope is shared services will be
a priority. He emphasized that the people that work for Ms.
Ridle are great, including the Alaska Public Offices Commission
(APOC). He pointed out that DMV has developed some innovative
services and "simple stuff" has been out-sourced. He noted that
license renewals can be done online which has resulted in
reduced lines at the main office.
SENATOR WILSON noted that Commissioner-Designee Ridle's resume
had gaps between her time with the Knowles and Mayor Begich
administrations and then her time between the Mayor Begich
administration and working as the deputy commissioner.
COMMISSIONER-DESIGNEE RIDLE noted that she had worked on a lot
of campaigns and did not include her campaign work.
SENATOR EGAN stated that he and his staff have found working
with Commissioner-Designee Ridle to be a pleasure and was happy
that the governor appointed Ms. Ridle as commissioner-designee.
SENATOR COGHILL opined that one of the nice things that the
state received from the federal government was the Alaska Land
Mobile Radio system (ALMR), something that Commissioner-Designee
Ridle gets to deal with. He admitted that the state does not
know what to do with ALMR. He asked Commissioner-Designee Ridle
to address ALMR.
COMMISSIONER-DESIGNEE RIDLE replied that she did not work with
ALMR during her time as deputy commissioner and will get back to
the committee.
SENATOR COGHILL detailed that ALMR was brought in by the
military during the Knowles administration. He said the state
has bought into a very expensive piece of machinery that it
cannot operate without the military. He suggested that
Commissioner-Designee Ridle review ALMR's history and get the
military back in with a partnership.
4:04:44 PM
CHAIR MEYER opened and closed public testimony.
4:05:38 PM
CHAIR MEYER announced that with no objection from the committee,
he read the following statement:
In accordance with AS 39.05.080, the Senate State
Affairs Committee has reviewed Ms. Ridle and
recommends the appointment be forwarded to a joint
session for consideration. This does not reflect
intent of any members to vote for or against the
confirmation of the individual during any further
sessions.
4:06:07 PM
At ease.
4:06:42 PM
CHAIR MEYER called the committee back to order. He announced
that the next confirmation hearing is to consider Mr. Al Tamagni
Sr. for the State Personnel Board. He asked Mr. Tamagni to
introduce himself and address why he would like to serve on the
board again.
4:07:05 PM
AL TAMAGNI, Appointee, State Personnel Board, Anchorage, Alaska,
provided his personal history and noted that he currently works
in the insurance industry. He said he has served on various
boards and has enjoyed his stay on the State Personnel Board. He
opined that his background in labor relations provides him with
the knowledge to offer input for certain advisory questions.
MR. TAMAGNI detailed that the board oversees the following:
• Approving personnel changes to the classified-unclassified
departments.
• Quarterly ethics reports from all state entities.
• Handling investigations on compliance of the governor and
lieutenant governor.
• Monitor state personnel rules.
He said the board has streamlined its operations over the last
four or five years. He noted that the board used to have four
meetings a year and currently has three a year or as needed. He
detailed that during meetings the board reviews all complaints.
He noted that the attorney general handles ethics complaints. He
said the board monitors replies from entities that questions
were raised to or corrections made for violations.
He summarized that he enjoys serving on the board and would like
to continue for another term.
4:11:56 PM
CHAIR MEYER disclosed that Mr. Tamagni has been involved in many
organizations in the Anchorage area and noted his service in the
military. He asked Mr. Tamagni how long he has served on the
Personnel Board.
MR. TAMAGNI replied that he has served for six years.
CHAIR MEYER asked Mr. Tamagni if he wanted to continue serving
on the board.
MR. TAMAGNI answered yes.
SENATOR WILSON asked Mr. Tamagni if the complaints the board
receives are more systemic issues or just one-time occurrences.
MR. TAMAGNI replied that complaint issues are dependent on the
situation.
SENATOR WILSON asked if the complaints are reoccurring on a
regular basis or sporadic.
MR. TAMAGNI answered that complaints are sporadic.
4:14:50 PM
CHAIR MEYER announced that no one has requested to testify. He
read the following statement:
In accordance with AS 39.05.080, the Senate State
Affairs Committee has reviewed Mr. Tamagni and
recommends the appointment be forwarded to a joint
session for consideration; this does not reflect
intent of any members to vote for or against the
confirmation of the individual during any further
sessions.
4:15:32 PM
At ease.
SB 192-VOTING: ADDRESS CONFIDENTIALITY; FEES
4:17:27 PM
CHAIR MEYER called the committee back to order. He announced the
consideration of Senate Bill 192 (SB 192).
SENATOR GIESSEL moved to adopt the committee substitute (CS) for
SB 192, version 30-LS1354\D as the working document.
CHAIR MEYER announced that without objection the CS for SB 192
was before the committee. He asked Ms. Marasigan to explain what
the CS does.
4:18:37 PM
CHRISTINE MARASIGAN, Staff, Senator Meyer, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, explained that the CS changes the
fee for the voter registration list to $100 per Senate district
and $1,500 for the state's entire voter registration list. She
disclosed that in committee discussion there was concern that
$1,000 was too much but as the sponsor pointed out there were
other states that charged even more. She noted that the
secondary concern addressed the $1,000 fee for an unaffiliated
person running for a local office that had to incur the higher
fee. She pointed out that the CS effectively addresses both a
local nonaffiliated person running for office who would only pay
$100 for a Senate district voter registration list, and then the
CS effectively ups the cost for a statewide voter registration
list for the State of Alaska.
CHAIR MEYER asked if the statewide voter registration fee would
be $1,500.
MS. MARASIGAN answered correct.
CHAIR MEYER summarized that the intent is to not prohibit
someone running for office to get the voter registration
information for their district but at the same time discourage
somebody from buying the whole state's voter registration list.
4:20:31 PM
CHAIR MEYER objected to the CS for discussion purposes.
SENATOR COGHILL asked for an explanation of the thought process
on the Senate district fee.
CHAIR MEYER replied the discussion went back and forth.
MS. MARASIGAN detailed the discussion as follows:
One of the interesting points of discussion came up
when a campaign is interested in obtaining a voter
registration list, a lot of times when running for
state House or a legislative seat, they are affiliated
with a party and they are able to obtain that
information through that affiliation; however, when
you have somebody who is running for a school board
seat or a borough seat, or a municipality seat, or a
city council seat, that sometimes that is larger than
a House district and might encompass several House
districts, in fact maybe encompass one or two Senate
districts, it was felt that by the $100 price point
that it still keeps it low enough where a fairly well
organized campaign should be able to obtain such a
list at that price.
SENATOR COGHILL said Ms. Marasigan made a good point.
4:22:15 PM
CHAIR MEYER removed his objection. He asked the bill's sponsor,
Senator MacKinnon, to comment on the CS. He noted that an
amendment was forth coming.
4:22:49 PM
SENATOR ANNA MACKINNON, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau,
Alaska, sponsor of SB 192, commented that the dollar amount
changes in the CS were certainly the committee's privilege as
well as any amendment brought forward. She asked to speak to the
bill after the new bill is offered.
4:23:47 PM
SENATOR COGHILL moved Amendment 1, [30-LS1354\D.1]:
A M E N D M E N T 1
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR COGHILL
TO: CSSB 192(STA), Draft Version "D"
Page 1, line 1:
Delete "relating to the confidentiality of
voters' addresses"
Insert "establishing the Alaska address
confidentiality program"
Page 1, line 5, through page 3, line 4:
Delete all material.
Page 3, line 5:
Delete "Sec. 4"
Insert "Section 1"
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 3, lines 16 - 28:
Delete all material and insert:
"* Sec. 2. AS 15.07.195(b) is amended to read:
(b) In addition to the information in (a) of
this section, the address of a voter participating in
the Alaska address confidentiality program established
under AS 44.23.100 - 44.23.104 may not be disclosed. A
voter who is not a participant in the Alaska address
confidentiality program may elect in writing to keep
the voter's residential address confidential and not
open to public inspection if the voter provides a
separate mailing address. However, notwithstanding a
voter's participation in the Alaska address
confidentiality program or [AN] election under this
subsection, a voter's residential address may be
disclosed to
(1) a watcher appointed under AS 15.10.170
and, in the case of a watcher appointed by an
organization or group sponsoring or opposing an
initiative, referendum, or recall group, authorized by
the director;
(2) an observer of a recount provided under
AS 15.20.440(b) by a candidate, political party, or
organized group having a direct interest in the
recount; or
(3) the subject of a recall election if the
voter voted in the recall election."
Page 4, following line 8:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 4. AS 44.23 is amended by adding new
sections to read:
Article 2. Alaska Address Confidentiality Program.
Sec. 44.23.100. Alaska address confidentiality
program. (a) The Alaska address confidentiality
program is established in the Department of Law. Under
the program, an individual who is eligible under this
section may use an address designated by the
department under AS 44.23.102 as the individual's own
address, designate the department to receive mail,
legal process, and voter registration or absentee
ballots on behalf of the individual, and provide that
the department forward the mail, legal process, and
voter materials to the individual's actual mailing
address. The department may not charge a fee to apply
for or participate in the program.
(b) An individual is eligible for the program if
the individual
(1) is a resident of the state and
(A) a victim, or a parent or guardian of a
minor child who is a victim, of stalking, domestic
violence, or sexual assault or a crime in another
jurisdiction with elements substantially similar to
stalking, domestic violence, or sexual assault, that
was reported to a criminal justice agency in good
faith; or
(B) has been granted, or has been granted
on behalf of a minor, a protective order issued or
filed under AS 18.65.850 - 18.65.870 or AS 18.66.100 -
18.66.180; and
(2) files a completed application under (c)
of this section.
(c) An individual may apply to the department to
participate in the program. The department shall
approve an application that is filed in the manner and
on the form prescribed by the department. The
application must contain
(1) the applicant's name;
(2) the applicant's actual residential and
mailing addresses;
(3) if applicable, identification of a
state or municipal agency that employs the individual
against whom an allegation of abuse against the
applicant or member of the applicant's household is
made;
(4) evidence satisfactory to the department
of the applicant's eligibility under (b)(1) of this
section; and
(5) a sworn statement by the applicant that
(A) the applicant resides or will reside at
a location in this state that is not known to the
individual or individuals who are the subject of a
report or order described in (b)(1)(A) or (B) of this
section;
(B) the applicant agrees not to disclose
the applicant's actual residential or mailing address
to the individual or individuals who are the subject
of a report or order described in (b)(1)(A) or (B) of
this section; and
(C) the applicant understands and consents
to the following attributes and requirements of the
program:
(i) a participant will be enrolled in the
program for a period of three years unless the
participant submits notice of cancellation under (vii)
of this subparagraph or is disenrolled under (ii) of
this subparagraph;
(ii) a participant is required to notify
the department when the participant's actual address
or legal name changes; if the participant fails to
notify the department under this subparagraph, the
department may disenroll the participant from the
program;
(iii) a participant is required to develop
a safety plan in consultation with department
personnel;
(iv) by participating in the program, a
participant authorizes the department to notify state
and municipal agencies and units of government that
the individual is a program participant;
(v) the department will notify a program
participant when the participant's three-year period
is about to expire under (i) of this subparagraph or
if the department is set to disenroll the participant
under (ii) of this subparagraph;
(vi) a participant who receives a
notification under (v) of this paragraph may timely
update the participant's information or may re-enroll
in the program within six months after the date the
department issues the notification;
(vii) a participant may discontinue
participation in the program at any time by submitting
a written notice of cancellation to the department;
and
(viii) a participant must certify the
department as the participant's designated agent for
service of process.
(d) Upon the filing of a properly completed
application by an eligible applicant, the department
shall certify the applicant as a program participant.
(e) The department shall adopt regulations
necessary to implement and administer AS 44.23.100 -
44.23.104.
Sec. 44.23.102. Use of designated address;
confidentiality. (a) The department shall provide each
participant with a designated address. A participant
may request that state and municipal agencies use the
address designated by the department as the
participant's address. When creating a new public
record, state and municipal agencies shall use the
address designated by the department as the
participant's substitute address, unless the
department determines that the
(1) agency has a bona fide statutory or
administrative requirement for the use of the
participant's actual address that would otherwise be
confidential under AS 44.23.100 - 44.23.104; and
(2) participant's actual address will be
used only for the statutory and administrative
purposes identified in (1) of this subsection.
(b) A participant may use the address designated
by the department as the participant's work address.
(c) The department shall forward all mail
received at a participant's designated address to the
participant's actual address and provide the notices
described in AS 44.23.100(c)(5)(C).
(d) At the request of a participant or a state
or municipal agency or unit of government, the
department shall provide to another person
confirmation of the participant's status as a program
participant.
(e) A state or municipal agency or unit of
government shall use a participant's address
designated under this section for official business
unless the use of the participant's actual address is
specifically required by statute. A state or municipal
agency or unit of government may request confirmation
from the department of an individual's status as a
program participant.
(f) A person who has received confirmation of an
individual's participation in the program under this
section may not
(1) refuse to use the address designated by
the department for the participant;
(2) require a participant to disclose the
participant's actual address; or
(3) intentionally disclose to another
person the actual address of a participant.
(g) Notwithstanding (a) of this section, a
participant shall provide the participant's actual
residential address for voter registration and voter
verification purposes under AS 15 and AS 29. However,
state and municipal officials and other persons to
whom the participant's actual address is disclosed
shall keep the address confidential, except upon court
order, and the address may not be disclosed under
AS 40.25.110 or 40.25.120.
Sec. 44.23.104. Definitions. In AS 44.23.100 -
44.23.104,
(1) "criminal justice agency" has the
meaning given in AS 12.62.900;
(2) "department" means the Department of
Law;
(3) "domestic violence" has the meaning
given in AS 18.66.990;
(4) "participant" means an individual
enrolled in the Alaska address confidentiality program
established in AS 44.23.100;
(5) "program" means the Alaska address
confidentiality program established in AS 44.23.100;
(6) "sexual assault" has the meaning given
in AS 18.66.990;
(7) "stalking" has the meaning given in
AS 18.65.870."
CHAIR MEYER objected for discussion purposes.
4:26:14 PM
SENATOR COGHILL noted that he had spoken with Senator MacKinnon
and they did not see eye-to-eye on his amendment; however, he
felt it was important to bring the topic up. He explained that
the bill "pulls the shade down" by taking addresses off just by
signing or checking a block. He conceded that the important
issue is about privacy, but the bill strictly changes privacy
regarding voter registration lists. He noted that the bill does
not address confidentiality more broadly.
He explained that the amendment is based on address
confidentiality programs in the United States. He disclosed that
the new program will be called the Alaska Address
Confidentiality Program (ACP) and the "meat" of the program is
addressed in section 4 of the amendment. He explained that the
program would broadly protect address privacy, even at the
municipal level. He specified that a person would be eligible if
the individual has been a victim of stalking, domestic violence,
sexual assault, or have been granted a protective order for
stalking. He detailed that an individual would apply to the
Alaska Department of Law. He noted that the program is modeled
after Montana law.
He disclosed that his thought was to first have confidentiality
for those that are most vulnerable, and the amendment starts
there by creating the program and defining eligibility. He said
an eligible applicant provides their address and makes a sworn
statement that their address is confidential. He summarized that
the program is a broad approach that addresses eligibility, the
application process, and how the Alaska Department of Law could
use an individual's address.
He revealed that he spoke with the Alaska Department of Law and
conceded that the Alaska Address Confidentiality Program will be
new to the department, but the program is not new in departments
of law. He explained that the Alaska Department of Law was
chosen because the department would most likely know who victims
of stalking are, domestic violence, sexual assault, and granted
protective orders.
SENATOR COGHILL summarized that the Alaska Address
Confidentiality Program is a new deal in Alaska. He opined that
the bill's sponsor believes his proposal is narrower than what
she would like, a point of view that he understands; however, he
believes that the research he has done, and the resulting
program would address the most vulnerable, first. He pointed out
that his proposal does not require conviction, just a sworn
statement and an application for the Alaska Department of Law.
4:29:38 PM
CHAIR MEYER noted that 39 other states have programs like
Senator Coghill's proposal. It is not a totally new proposal.
SENATOR COGHILL revealed that he talked with the Alaska Network
on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault (ANDVSA) and noted that
ANDVSA liked his approach. He conceded that ANDVSA would like
his proposal because they are the ones that are focused on
protecting the most vulnerable population. He asserted that his
proposal would be a real benefit to ANDVSA. He pointed out that
he did not propose the Alaska Address Confidentiality Program to
be exclusively for ANDVSA, but his proposal was a result of the
question that was posed by Senator MacKinnon's bill. He said he
was not a fan of doing what the bill's sponsor proposed and that
was allowing anybody that wanted to take their name off the
registered voters list. He emphasized that his proposal is a
good solution without going down the road that the road of
allowing anyone to take their name off the voter registration
list.
CHAIR MEYER asked if his address would be kept confidential if
he had a hunting and fishing license.
SENATOR COGHILL answered yes and noted his intent for broad
protection.
CHAIR MEYER asked if an address would be protected in property
tax and similar databases.
SENATOR GIESSEL stated that she had several questions because
the proposed amendment basically creates a new bill for
committee members to consider. She addressed page 3, lines 21-24
and asked if the amendment proposes a limited participation
period of 3 years.
SENATOR COGHILL answered correct.
SENATOR GIESSEL noted that on page 4, lines 3-6 that Senator
Coghill proposes that confidentiality would have to be renewed
and that the department would notify program participants when
to renew.
SENATOR COGHILL answered right.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked what would happen if a notification was
mailed to the wrong address where the individual that receives
the mail has bad intentions. She inquired why the
confidentiality requires renewal every three years.
SENATOR COGHILL replied that Senator Giessel posed a good
question that his office had considered as broadly as possible.
He noted that a protective order does not last forever and
commented as follows:
The very issues that they would apply for, stalking,
sexual assault, it would be the circumstances of life
would have to be rethought as we move along, and so it
would not preclude them from reapplying, but we didn't
want somebody's name on the rolls forever for a
protective order, that's all. I'm open to discussion
on that, but the way we saw it was that you were doing
it based on an affidavit, based on an event, a
stalking, a domestic violence, something like that,
and a protective order does have a time limit on it.
So, we thought we would go across a time frame that
was reasonable and for data that could be moved, three
years seemed reasonable. If you talk about voting
issues, that would go through at least one full voting
cycle, it would give databases a chance to get that
information, but it also gives somebody the chance to
go through the chapter of their life and if they
thought that chapter was not going to end, they get to
reapply.
4:33:16 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL replied as follows:
Interestingly I've been contacted by someone whose
entire family was murdered, more than three years ago,
and this person has great concern about the criminal
being released on parole and the ramifications of that
person's behavior. There are situations where three
years would be a tedious thing to have to keep track
of to renew.
She addressed page 3, lines 29-30 in the amendment regarding the
requirement to develop a safety plan in consultation with
department personnel. She asked if the noted department is the
Alaska Department of Law.
SENATOR COGHILL answered yes. He explained that the Alaska
Department of Law would hide an individual's address and
significant changes would have to be communicated with the
department.
SENATOR GIESSEL continued to address coordination with the
Alaska Department of Law as follows:
Page 5, line 2, "The Department of Law shall forward
all mail to the participant's designated address;"
then in the next under (d), "Shall provide to another
person confirmation of the participant's status as a
program participant." I'm not sure I understand what
is going on here. Why would you supply, I'm not sure
what the rational is?
SENATOR COGHILL replied as follows:
I think this is when you are reaching out to a
municipal that they would have access to that, sending
it to that party.
4:35:39 PM
JORDAN SHILLING, Staff, Senator Coghill, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, replied to Senator Giessel's query
as follows:
One thing to note is that Legislative Legal did a
fairly comprehensive nationwide look at how other
address confidentiality programs are structured. A lot
of the language here is the exact language that you
will find in those other 39 states and this is one of
those provisions.
He asked if Senator Giessel was referring to (d) on page 5.
SENATOR GIESSEL answered yes. She added that she intended to
address section (c) and (g) as well. She noted that the sections
reference providing the participants' actual residence address
for voter registration and voter verification, something that
she thought was the original idea of the bill's original
sponsor.
MR. SHILLING explained as follows:
Subsection (d) does not require that the address be
conveyed to a municipal agency; for example, it just
requires at their request that the person's
participation in the program is conveyed. For example,
there may be a municipal agency where a participant in
the program wants to interact with government in some
way and that requires that individual to give their
address and the individual may say, "Well, I'm part of
a program called ACP, I've actually got a substitute
address to provide in lieu of my actual physical
address," and I could have envisioned a scenario where
maybe the municipal agency was skeptical or said,
"Well, I've never heard of such a program or prove to
me that you get to use the substitute address." It
seems to me that subsection (d) would allow the
Department of Law or will require the Department of
Law to convey to that municipal agency that they are
in fact a part of the ACP program, you shall in fact
accept their substitute address.
4:37:42 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL reiterated that if someone is truly trying to
disappear, the section seems to be counter to that.
SENATOR COGHILL interjected and noted that an individual is
going to have electricity and gas bills. He specified that an
individual must show that they are in the ACP program to
preclude them from having their address published.
SENATOR GIESSEL read subsection (g), line 20 as follows:
Shall provide the participant's actual residential
address for voter registration and voter verification.
MR. SHILLING replied as follows:
I believe that is for the Division of Elections to be
able to determine if that individual is truly eligible
to vote, but the Division of Elections cannot have
that person's actual physical address on the voter
rolls. What you would see on the voter rolls is the
substitute address, but I think the Division of
Elections does truly need to know your actual address
in order to ensure that you are eligible to vote.
SENATOR GIESSEL pointed out that the amendment is a whole new
program and asked what the fiscal note might be.
MR. SHILLING replied that a fiscal note has not been developed
and commented as follows:
While it is new to Alaska as Senator Coghill said,
it's actually pretty common nationwide. We have had
some preliminary conversations with the Department of
Law and while they haven't developed a fiscal note to
my knowledge, they are working on that. I imagine that
there is some cost to comprehensively ensure that
these specially situated individuals have their
address purged from all publicly available databases.
CHAIR MEYER noted that the bill goes next to the Senate Finance
Committee where the fiscal note can be scrutinized.
4:40:02 PM
SENATOR MACKINNON commented as follows:
A bill is an idea and an idea is in front of you and I
appreciate and respect all of your perspectives on the
idea. The amendment before you is actually a bill unto
itself and not one that I had intended on carrying. We
did research this for over a year and a half and the
bar that we chose to place in our bill and for your
consideration as an alternate was a sworn statement
via a checkbox that would cost no money to the people
of Alaska to do that. A sworn statement is what you
are getting from the new bill, the amendment that is
being offered by Senator Coghill.
She asked the chair for some latitude because she has done some
research about the "balance of power" and the "need to know."
CHAIR MEYER asked if her request pertained to the amendment.
4:41:13 PM
SENATOR MACKINNON answered yes but noted that her commentary is
broad. She explained the limitations that the amendment will
impose on SB 192 as follows:
Senator Coghill posed the balance of the need to know
someone's address with the need for an individual to
determine whether they should be protected in some way
from someone.
I first went to the Department of Elections to look at
what their mission was, and the mission is to ensure
every eligible Alaskan has a meaningful opportunity to
cast a ballot and have their ballot counted and to
conduct sure and accurate elections.
To speak to a meaningful opportunity the amendment
before you limits the opportunity of the one family or
both families and a person that has emailed me to do
that, the person would not be able to qualify under
the "Coghill amendment," this is a person who has a
distressful situation happening with a family member
and does not want law enforcement involved, but wants
their data protected by the State of Alaska, they want
the opportunity to cast a vote in a meaningful way.
I went online, and I started searching about voter
privacy and who is actually doing studies in
universities across the world. The one that I'm going
to quote in a moment is by David Maass, dated February
29, 2016 and it is entitled, "Voter Privacy, What You
Need to Know About Your Digital Trail During the 2016
Election," and I did look at other resources too, but
under their section that says, "Public Information."
Many people think voter records are completely
private, so we have a constituency that is growing to
distrust the government that is elected to represent
them. By not allowing individuals the freedom to cast
a vote independently we lose trust with the people
that we've come to represent, and I understand that
campaigns use voter information to gather information
on citizenry and determine whether someone is likely a
voter, maybe likely to vote, that is why I think this
is relevant to this discussion.
A study by Colin Bennett from the University of
Victoria, Canada, "Surveillance and Society," people
are starting to look at whether we are actually in the
U.S. driving voters away from participating in the
process by what is attributed to the U.S. need-to-know
and micro-targeting that is dividing us into to niche
markets and avoiding the hard work of building
consensus and national vision. It arguably creates
parties and candidates that do not convey a general
ideological framework for governments but a series of
carefully focused groups that analyze key messages to
move people one particular direction.
We are helping to polarize American voters by these
micro-targeted singular messages to people, and in
fact, this is exactly what we don't want to do. We
expect as those that are out there asking for people's
vote to engage them in a process and provide a greater
opportunity to debate, but as we continue to
compartmentalize people into small boxes, we are
discouraging the public discourse, the public dialogue
in creating an opportunity to build American
democracy.
4:45:25 PM
SENATOR MACKINNON continued as follows:
Those were the broad statements that I wanted to make.
Personal data is increasingly captured and processed,
there are decisions where Facebook is right now under
fire for data breeches or sharing information with
technology companies that are mining and crosschecking
with other software platforms, individual
idiosyncrasies of everyone in America.
The amendment before you could be done simply with a
sworn statement. By involving law officers, we are
disenfranchising the group of voters that ask me to
come before this body and ask for change. We could do
it with a lower threshold and it is true that 39 other
states have similar concepts to what Senator Coghill's
amendment proposes. I wonder how many others have
constitutionally ensured victim's rights in their
constitution? Victim's rights have been honored by the
people of Alaska in a high regard, higher than any
other state, and on this issue we should lead.
I talked to members of the Network on Domestic
Violence and the Council on Domestic Violence because
we had one person I believe testify or in the room
listening from the network, and what I found was a
little bit sad in the sense that from my conversation
it felt like they wanted to protect the data too,
because they were using that data for campaign or
solicitations for support and other access, and why
that disappoints me is because I've had to rise above
my own personal need for information as a candidate to
come to you and ask you to allow individual voters to
choose to protect, to put up that "no trespass" sign,
to put up, "Please don't contact me about elections or
otherwise, but to respect my wishes."
The Alaska Department of Law can be a scary place for
people that have been stalked or otherwise want to
describe to rape crisis agency or domestic violence
shelter their personal stories. Speaking specifically
to what Senator Giessel said, you will be
revictimizing a person of sexual assault and domestic
violence every time they have to retell their story to
a new individual at the Department of Law to recertify
that indeed they can keep their information away from
those that they don't want to share it with. Senator
Coghill spoke very respectively about serving the
vulnerable first. The vulnerable don't always show up
for support or access and we are disregarding those in
this amendment.
The bill is in your hands, I will leave it to your
good judgement. I don't agree with the amendment, I
believe Alaska should lead on this issue. I understand
the balance of the need to know by the general
population on a voter base and the need for us as
government to reach members that elect us to serve
them.
4:48:43 PM
CHAIR MEYER remarked that it is never easy when there are two
very good and compelling cases. He asked if Senator Coghill had
any comments to make after hearing from Senator MacKinnon.
SENATOR COGHILL replied as follows:
The thing about the senator and I, we have so much in
common on focus, but we just are really strongly
diverted on one particular point on this and that is
the need or the access for the voter's registration
list to be available to those who choose to run for
office, that is probably one place where I feel very
strongly about this. It's like in democracy, you have
both a responsibility and you should have some
security. In many ways I so agree with the senator on
this issue but just for any cause pulling the "no
trespassing" sign up is not something at this point
I'm willing to do because all it does is put your foot
down on one place and it squeezes up in four others.
So, if we really wanted to protect people I wanted an
honest to goodness way to do that that showed that
there were some real issues, and I get if some people
are fearful, that they may not go to the Department of
Law, and that's sad that we live in a day where people
feel like the government is our enemy, I get that. The
reason for having the three-year look into this thing
is because the life circumstances do change and I've
known enough network people and enough advocates to
know that the re-victimization happens in very
different ways than just going for help, that going
for help is usually facilitated by people who want to
help people along their journey, so I don't feel that
that's a very big problem; but, in order to support
this bill I think looking at the confidentiality
program is probably the best way I can get behind the
bill and support it. I think the barrier of having to
buy the list is probably appropriate at that level and
that is an instant protection for those who would buy
the list probably for more nefarious reasons, but it
is true that the voter list is used probably more than
ever before, but when I look at what is going on with
Facebook or Google or almost any other database that's
available, even the grocery stores are, it's pervasive
in our society that we do have to be very careful, but
I don't know that [inaudible] this system out helps us
that much.
So, the ability to reach out to people to communicate
with them, I know it is worrisome, I get that, and I
feel like many times it is manipulative, I get that;
but, people have to be wise and discerning when it
comes to voting and I think the avenue for getting to
a broad range of people, unless there is a compelling
reason. So, I tried to find that compelling reason and
I just didn't buy the lower threshold, I just think
that the higher threshold is more important.
So, this is the senator's bill, I'm trying to add what
I think is my best value to it. I probably would lose
my support on the bill if I can't do something like
this because it's just too broad for me, so this is my
attempt in trying to help out along the way.
4:52:32 PM
CHAIR MEYER remarked that everyone would be surprised about the
personal data being used every time someone uses their Fred
Meyer card.
4:52:58 PM
CHAIR MEYER removed his objection to Amendment 1.
4:53:02 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL objected to Amendment 1.
CHAIR MEYER asked if Senator Giessel would like to address her
objection.
SENATOR GIESSEL specified that her objection relates to the
complexity of Amendment 1 and its three-year renewal process.
CHAIR MEYER agreed with Senator Giessel's early statement that
the amendment creates almost a separate bill.
SENATOR COGHILL pointed out that the bill does go the Senate
Finance Committee where the bill will receive another full
vetting. He emphasized that he did not want to stop the bill in
committee but tried to be productive and thoughtful for the
legislation to work for Alaska.
CHAIR MEYER explained that he allowed additional discussion
because he expects the same discussion to occur again. He said
he was somewhat bothered to pass the bill without a current
fiscal note but noted that the bill would go to the Senate
Finance Committee where the amendment's costs will be closely
analyzed.
CHAIR MEYER announced that an objection to Amendment 1 has been
maintained and asked for a roll call.
A roll call vote was taken. Senators Coghill, Wilson, Egan, and
Chair Meyer voted in favor of Amendment 1 and Senator Giessel
voted against it. Therefore, Amendment 1 passed by a 4:1 vote.
CHAIR MEYER announced that Amendment 1 has been adopted.
4:55:47 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL moved to report [CSSB 192(STA)], version 30-
LS1354\D as amended from committee with individual
recommendations and forth coming fiscal notes.
4:56:07 PM
CHAIR MEYER announced there being no objection, the motion
carried.
4:56:45 PM
At ease.
SB 159-PERS/TRS DISTRIBUTIONS
4:58:19 PM
CHAIR MEYER announced the consideration of SB 159.
4:58:56 PM
COMMISSIONER-DESIGNEE LESLE RIDLE, Alaska Department of
Administration, Juneau, Alaska, explained that SB 159 was a
straight forward bill that Kathy Lea, chief pension officer,
will discuss with the committee.
4:59:15 PM
KATHY LEA, Deputy Director and Chief Pension Officer, Division
of Retirement and Benefits, Alaska Department of Administration,
Juneau, Alaska, disclosed that the bill comes at the request of
the Alaska Retirement Management Board (ARMB). She explained
that the board is considering options for distribution from the
defined contribution plans that will enhance the retirement
readiness for members.
She referenced slide 2 in her presentation, "Proposed Change" as
follows:
• The Alaska Retirement Management Board (ARMB) must be able
to add or change distribution options easily and in a
relatively short timeframe.
• The proposal is to move disbursement options from the
Alaska Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) and the
Teachers' Retirement System (TRS) defined contribution
statutes into regulation to allow for a faster response to
participant needs.
• The ARMB unanimously approved the proposal.
She referenced slide 3, "The Issue" as follows:
• The PERS/TRS DCR (Tier IV) plans to use the statutes as the
plan document.
• Any changes to modernize options or to meet new Internal
Revenue requirements require a statutory change.
• Statutory changes can take several sessions to accomplish,
if at all.
• Meanwhile, participants' needs are not being met.
• This bill would give the DCR plans the same flexibility as
the supplemental benefits system (SBS) and Deferred
Compensation plans.
MS. LEA summarized that the bill will move the referenced
statutes into regulation, provide the board with more
flexibility to add, change or delete options. She noted that the
referenced flexibility already exists in the SBS and Deferred
Compensation plans where their statutes authorize the plan, but
they are governed by a plan document.
5:01:25 PM
She referenced slide 4, "PERS/TRS Need," as follows:
• The PERS/TRS DCR plans have vested employees who are
retiring and need help facing the challenges of retirement.
• The ARMB Defined Contribution Subcommittee is exploring
options that will help participants:
o Not outlive their retirement savings,
o Address purchasing power over time, and
o Protect against market uncertainty.
She commented as follows:
These are in the form of what's called a Qualified
Longevity Annuity Contract that addresses the
longevity risk when spending down a defined
contribution plan by deferring payment to age 80 or
85, a portion of the assets can be a maximum of
$125,000 or 25 percent of the assets of the account,
and it is to ensure that you don't out live your
assets; however, that type of a plan is not included
in the current statute.
Another type of withdrawal is a Guaranteed Lifetime
Withdrawal Option, and what this does is the
participant can elect to enter that anytime between 10
years prior to their retirement and they pay an
insurance premium and they insure their balance and
this deals with the uncertainty of how much money am I
going have to live on, because with that insurance
whatever is their highest balance during that tenure
period or beyond is what their monthly withdrawal
benefit is based on. So, it protects them from the
downside of the investments, but allows them to have
the benefit of the upside, this is also not an option
that is covered by the statutes.
MS. LEA explained that by moving the statutory requirements into
regulation, the public process will remain. She referenced slide
4, "Transparent Process for Change," as follows:
• Discussions regarding disbursement options are done in a
public forum during the selection process.
• Participants and groups representing participants will have
input during subcommittee and ARMB committee meetings.
• The process remains public and transparent but allows for
faster adoption of needed change.
• All interested parties are notified of any changes through
the regulation process.
She pointed out that when regulations are noticed, the notice
must be for 30 days. She detailed that the notices will occur in
newspapers and online on the department's website. She
emphasized that the change will allow for a faster process for
needed change. She summarized that approximately 60 days would
be needed to implement a change after ARMB adoption rather than
one or two legislative sessions.
5:04:28 PM
CHAIR MEYER asked if the bill will result in everything being
done by regulation rather than having to come before the
Legislature.
MS. LEA answered correct. She specified that the department
would proceed through regulation on the recommendation from
ARMB.
SENATOR WILSON asked if she knew the percentage of people that
retire and take their entire balance in a lump sum.
MS. LEA answered that she will get back to Senator Wilson with
an answer.
SENATOR COGHILL asked if the bill would provide departmental
regulatory authority and put ARMB in charge of policy makeup.
MS. LEA answered correct. She detailed that ARMB would make
recommendations for changes in options and the department would
do the regulations and public notice. She added that for
visibility reasons the Legislature would receive notice for all
regulations that the retirement system promulgates.
SENATOR COGHILL asked what the difference was in how the
supplemental benefit system management works outside of ARMB.
MS. LEA explained that the SBS works the way that the bill
proposes for the defined contribution retirement plan and added
that ARMB has oversight for those as well as the public
employee's deferred compensation plan.
SENATOR COGHILL pointed out that a practicing, working model
exists. He asked if there have been pushback issues.
5:07:07 PM
MS. LEA replied that she is not aware of any pushback items. She
said the department's intent is to improve the defined
contribution retirement plans and improving the options for
spend-down. She noted that the options can be added as soon as
ARMB approves them into the SBS plan.
SENATOR COGHILL explained that his first thought was the
Legislature would give up authority; however, he noted that
flexibility might be required for management purposes. He said
he has not heard of problems within the Legislature regarding
SBS. He continued as follows:
The other thing is in the management style, this will
probably fall into the question of diminished benefit
issues and as long as it is done through a management
to look out for the best interest of that particular
fund, is that how you get out of problem there?
MS. LEA replied that there would not be a diminishment of
benefits because the option is a dispersement, dispersement to
the participant is not being denied. She summarized as follows:
What we are doing is trying to add dispersement
options to them, but even if we in the future were to
take away a dispersement option, that still would not
be a diminishment of their benefit, they are still
allowed to take their whole benefit.
SENATOR COGHILL replied as follows:
I was searching for a way that it might happen, but I
just couldn't think of one, so it's just the options.
5:09:09 PM
SENATOR WILSON said he had a similar question on the
dispersement. He noted that there was a recent study showing
that in the PERS Tier IV options that most folks would not
receive enough to live upon. He asked if drawing down over a
longer period would still allow a person to accumulate more in
their savings. He inquired if the department has an actuarial
study or numbers on the stress test of the Tier IV program for
current retirees.
MS. LEA replied that the department has done analysis on the
PERS and TRS defined contribution plans. She detailed as
follows:
What our analysis showed was that if a participant was
participating in either social security or the SBS
that they would have sufficient means to have a
dignified retirement. The problem areas come in with
those groups that do not participate in social
security or SBS and that problem has been identified
and that is something that ARMB is also looking at as
well as the administration.
SENATOR WILSON asked her to verify that the bill does not
address the other need of giving more dispersement options.
MS. LEA answered as follows:
The plan is a little over 10 years old so it's hard to
say what it will be doing at the end of a career for a
person. What we are trying to do is put in place
options for those who are going to look at a lifetime
income from this at some point in the future. So, we
are trying to improve those options so that they have
more choices to address whether they feel it's a
longevity risk, a market risk at the time they retire,
or if they just want to take their money and do
something else with it.
SENATOR WILSON replied as follows:
I appreciate that, speaking as the only millennial
senator in the building and for other future staffers,
this is a concern for folks that would like to make a
career of any Tier IV governmental type of job. I do
recognize the concern and appreciate the different
options of looking at different strategies.
CHAIR MEYER asked if the bill only pertains to the defined
benefit plan.
MS. LEA explained that the bill only applies to the PERS and TRS
defined contribution plan. She specified that the other plans,
the defined benefit plans, already have guaranteed lifetime
benefits.
5:13:09 PM
CHAIR MEYER held SB 159 in committee.
5:14:14 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Meyer adjourned the Senate State Affairs Standing
Committee at 5:14 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Commissioner of Administration Leslie Ridle.pdf |
SSTA 3/20/2018 3:30:00 PM |
Confirmation Hearing |
| Personnel Board Al Tamagni.pdf |
SSTA 3/20/2018 3:30:00 PM |
Confirmation Hearing |
| SB 159 Tranmsittal Letter PERS and TRS.pdf |
SSTA 3/20/2018 3:30:00 PM SSTA 4/5/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 159 |
| SB 159 Version A.PDF |
SSTA 3/20/2018 3:30:00 PM SSTA 4/5/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 159 |
| SB 159 Hearing Request.pdf |
SSTA 3/20/2018 3:30:00 PM SSTA 4/5/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 159 |
| SB 159 DOA Presentation in SSTA 3.20.18.pdf |
SSTA 3/20/2018 3:30:00 PM SSTA 4/5/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 159 |
| SB 159 Fiscal Note.pdf |
SSTA 3/20/2018 3:30:00 PM SSTA 4/5/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 159 |
| CS SB 192 Version D.pdf |
SSTA 3/20/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 192 |
| SB 192 Amendment 1.pdf |
SSTA 3/20/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 192 |