HB 309-APOC; CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS/REPORTING  8:04:15 AM CO-CHAIR HANNAN announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 309, "An Act exempting candidates for municipal office and municipal office holders in municipalities with a population of 15,000 or less from financial or business interest reporting requirements; relating to campaign finance reporting by certain groups; and providing for an effective date." 8:05:24 AM CO-CHAIR SCHRAGE moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 309, Version 32-LS0540\G, Bullard, 2/24/22, as a working document. There being no objection, Version G was before the committee. 8:05:50 AM The committee took an at-ease from 8:05 a.m. to 8:06 a.m. 8:06:50 AM CLAIRE GROSS, Staff, Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins, Alaska State Legislature, presented HB 309 on behalf of Representative Kreiss-Tomkins, prime sponsor. She paraphrased the sponsor statement [hard copy included in the committee file], which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: HB 309 seeks to remedy two issues that will make the Alaska Public Offices Commission more effective. HB 309 provides a campaign disclosure reporting exemption for smaller groups who don't intend to raise or spend more than $2,500 in a calendar year ($5,000 during an 18 month election cycle). The bill also exempts these groups from the electronic filing requirement for these reports. This is beneficial as smaller groups generally require much more APOC staff time and interaction because they are usually novices who are only interested in a single topic on a ballot, unlike ongoing groups that participate every year. A similar exemption already exists for judicial retention candidates and municipal candidates. HB 309 would also exempt smaller communities (population of 15,000 or less), from Public Official Financial Disclosure (POFD) reporting requirements. There is already a minimum population exemption for campaign disclosures, but none for a POFD filing. Many of the smaller communities who struggle with clerk turnover, connectivity, and regular mail service often find themselves at a disadvantage when it comes to timely notifications and filing. This results in disproportionate civil penalties for these rural areas where most, if not all, of their municipal officers are serving in a volunteer capacity. MS. GROSS pointed to conforming language in the bill and the effective date of January 1, 2023. 8:09:44 AM CO-CHAIR HANNAN noted the following individuals were available for questions: Heather Hebdon, Executive Director, Alaska Public Offices Commission; and Alpheus Bullard, the bill drafter from Legislative Legal Services. 8:10:00 AM REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked how many municipalities in Anchorage have populations under 15,000. 8:10:32 AM HEATHER HEBDON, Executive Director, Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC), answered that although she did not have the exact figure available at that moment, her estimate would be 25 communities. In response to a follow-up question regarding the need for HB 309, she explained that the smaller communities that struggle with "clerk turnover, connectivity issues, and mail service" are at a distinct disadvantage compared to those in urban issues that do not struggle with those issues. In these smaller communities, the vast majority are submitting forms manually and are serving in a volunteer capacity, and APOC finds it is continually penalizing them "for many things that are beyond their control." 8:12:47 AM REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND asked how the bill sponsor determined the number should be 15,000, and she named some [municipalities] that would qualify but would not be considered small or "without robust Internet." MS. GROSS answered that the number was derived as a result of talks with Ms. Hebdon, to whom she deferred. 8:14:01 AM MS. HEBDON proffered that the minimum threshold that exists under campaign disclosure currently is [municipalities] of 1,000 or more. She said the 15,000 captures [municipalities] that APOC was not necessarily concerned about, but it exists in statute in terms of [municipalities of 15,000 and up] that are required to file electronically. REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND told Co-Chair Hannan that she would like a list of [municipalities] with populations of 15,000 or less. 8:15:35 AM REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY questioned what "community" could encompass. MS. GROSS noted that she may have used the term "community" but what is being discussed are municipalities, which are defined under statute. 8:17:28 AM REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE observed he saw only five municipalities listed that are greater than 15,000, and he said he, too, would like a list. CO-CHAIR HANNAN clarified that the committee needs more information on who is impacted and what the bill is trying to fix, because there is concern by members not to make the bill too broad. She then point out that one of the exemptions created under HB 309 states that the municipalities under 15,000 in population would still be allowed to file electronically; they would not be required to do so. 8:19:07 AM REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND noted that the Alaska Municipal League has a directory of all the municipalities in Alaska, which includes population. She then asked if the provisions under the bill would apply to first-class cities or only to municipalities. CO-CHAIR HANNAN asked whether the legislation addressed regional educational attendance area (REAA) elections. 8:20:33 AM MS. HEBDON answered that the REAA elections are not regulated by APOC. She noted that currently municipalities are able to exempt themselves from POFD, and a vast majority have done so going back to approximately 1975. She offered her understanding that currently there are 30 municipalities and boroughs that fall under POFD regulations. Of those, 5 are over 15,000, so HB 309 would impact approximately 25 municipalities. CO-CHAIR HANNAN suggested Ms. Hebdon could provide how many of those municipalities that are "covered by it" and which ones "already exempted themselves from the disclosure law." MS. HEBDON said she would be happy to do that. 8:22:09 AM CO-CHAIR SCHRAGE asked about the motivation for the $2,500 cap. He asked if there are a lot of groups that raise less than that amount involved in elections. MS. HEBDON answered that the $2,500 was identified through currently existing statute related to municipal and judicial candidates that agree to raise less than $5,000 during a campaign cycle of 18 months or two years. She said, "So, this was an effort to try to make ... it equal for these smaller groups." She said APOC finds there are smaller groups that are interested in one election, one candidate or issue, and do not have major expenditures, and APOC spends considerable time assisting those groups because they are novices requiring a lot of attention. 8:23:40 AM REPRESENTATIVE PATKOTAK commented that his district, the North Slope Borough, has a population under 15,000, and he filed a POFD when he ran for assembly and had no issue doing so. He said the borough does not experience turnover of clerks. He asked where the language was in HB 309 which allows the option of continuing to file POFDs. He then pointed to the sponsor statement and noted that there is already "a minimum population exemption for campaign disclosures." He asked, "Are we mirroring that number with that 15,000 mark or is that a different number?" MS. GROSS deferred to Ms. Hebdon. 8:25:15 AM MS. HEBDON asked Representative Patkotak to confirm his first question as being whether municipalities exempted out of POFD under APOC could elect to "manage it themselves" and "require that their officials file POFDs or something similar." REPRESENTATIVE PATKOTAK responded yes. MS. HEBDON confirmed that is correct. She said she knew a few municipalities already doing so. Regarding Representative Patkotak's second question, she said the campaign disclosure threshold is a population of less than 1,000. REPRESENTATIVE PATKOTAK, regarding the idea of municipal office holders following POFD filing, asked whether, under HB 309, and considering the responsibility of APOC, that would "still be able to be something that could be accomplished on line." He added that he wanted to know whether that is something "that still can be accomplished with the way the bill is written, as far as online filing, if we do self-elect, and we do fall under that population threshold." MS. HEBDON said she does not know the answer and would have to think about the question further. REPRESENTATIVE PATKOTAK emphasized the importance of proper disclosure. 8:29:06 AM CO-CHAIR HANNAN announced that HB 309 was held over.