HOUSE BILL NO. 370 "An Act relating to the issuance of state-guaranteed revenue bonds by the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation to finance mortgages for qualifying veterans; and providing for an effective date." JOHN BITNEY, LEGISLATIVE LIAISON, ALASKA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, spoke in support of the legislation. He explained that the legislation would provide authorization on the general election ballot for $500 million dollars in mortgage-backed, guaranteed revenue bonds through the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC). Alaska is one of five states that are able to take advantage of these tax-exempt bonds. The requirement for the state to capture the tax exemption is that the bonds must have an unconditional guarantee by the state in which the program is administered. The state Constitution requires that a guarantee of that nature have a vote of the people. The bonds are structured to only relate to the mortgages that the bond proceeds are used to purchase. The state's general obligation capacity would not be affected. Congress authorized the tax exemption in 1978 and 1979. Alaska was one of five states that issued bonds when the program was first made available. Congress subsequently closed the window in the early 1980's; those states that were in the program were grandfathered. The bond proceeds would be used to fund the Veterans Mortgage Program. To qualify, veterans would have to have been in active duty service prior to January 1, 1977 and not been discharged more than 30 years prior to the application date of their loan. There would be a diminishing pool of qualified veterans. This would be the fifth and last time that AHFC would anticipate coming before the legislature for this type of bond authorization. He pointed out that the bonds are well supported by the general public. Co-Chair Mulder questioned what would happen if the ballot issue did not pass. Mr. Bitney explained that AHFC would finish with the authorization from 1986, which is close to $50 million dollars; this would allow them to finish out the year. Co-Chair Mulder questioned if they would need to be on a statewide general election or could they be on a primary election. Mr. Bitney did not know. Co-Chair Mulder stressed that too many questions on the ballot may lead to the downfall of one of the questions and suggested that it may behooved the legislation to be on the primary ballot. Mr. Bitney clarified that the authorization is needed in the current year. In response to a question by Representative Lancaster, Mr. Bitney observed that there is a generous cap. He did not think that all of the authorization beyond the 30-year timeframe would be needed. There are bills pending in Congress, which could require additional authorization if passed. Co-Chair Mulder stressed that the ballot issue should be on the primary election where it would not be confused with any other ballot question. Representative Foster MOVED to report HB 370 out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. HB 370 was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with two previously published fiscal notes: REV #1 and GOV #2. RECESSED: The Committee Recessed at 4:00 p.m. TAPE HFC 02 - 99, Side A  RECONVENED: The Committee Reconvened at 4:45 p.m.