HOUSE CS FOR CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 351(STA) An Act requiring the Alaska Public Offices Commission to accept documents by nonelectronic means, and specifying the manner of preparing the forms that are provided by the commission.   SENATOR LYDA GREEN, SPONSOR, explained that recently passed legislation regarding the Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC) inadvertently included the words, "upon request of the Commission" which gave the APOC authority to require electronic filing of election campaign records. She felt that this should be changed. Although all candidates would eventually turn to electronic equipment, the program would not be ready for at least two years. The bill has been narrowed to candidates for election and provides that the information may be printed legibly in dark ink on forms approved and filed by the Commission. She expressed a concern that forms be filed timely and be made ready for public review. She disagreed with the current emphasis that the information be immediately available to the public over the Internet. Senator Green pointed out the language that was changed on page 1, line 6, "The commission may request," and offered it for the Committee's consideration. Representative Joule asked if faxes would be an acceptable means of filing. Senator Green explained that filing may be by fax, mail or electronically. Vice-Chair Meyer voiced support for the bill because he had experienced software glitches in filing electronically during the past ten years. Representative Chenault asked if a candidate could still fax the reports under the proposed changes. Senator Green replied that under the current statute, if APOC requested it, a candidate could only transmit the information electronically. She felt that the APOC should waive the requirement for Representative Joule's district if a candidate didn't own a computer. She believed that candidates should be able to file in their accustomed manner. BROOK MILES, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA PUBLIC OFFICES COMMISSION (APOC), DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, stated that the APOC does not support the bill. The Commission views this reversal of the ability to request electronic filing as a serious impediment. TAPE HFC 04 - 106, Side B  Ms. Miles continued, stating that when the Legislature agreed to give the APOC electronic filing, it also reduced the Commission's budget by $100 thousand, which has resulted in a 20% reduction to its workforce. She pointed out that there is fewer staff to do a lot more work, and having electronic filing would change APOC's ability to conduct business, as well as inform the public of changes in the law. The fiscal note is Indeterminate because APOC does not know how many people will choose to file paper documents and how many will file electronically. Ms. Miles said that historically, never higher than 15% of all candidates have filed electronically. She said that without additional funding, the APOC would be unable to meet its mission. There would be significant delays in getting the information to the public in the 2004 State election, and the problem would be magnified in the 2006 gubernatorial election.   Vice-Chair Meyer asked if the APOC could scan or otherwise avoid retyping the information filed on paper. Ms. Miles affirmed that it would be possible to scan forms, but a relational database would not be possible if a picture is scanned in. Vice-Chair Meyer thought that candidates with multiple terms would prefer electronic filing because it is easier. Ms. Miles said the current program requires that the candidate fill out the campaign disclosure form electronically, but the new program is more interactive and "user friendly." Representative Fate asked if the program is operational, and commented that there were a lot of glitches in the upgraded filing software that led to him filing a couple of typed pages. Ms. Miles replied that the APOC will use a [indisc] by next summer, or at least in next year's municipal races. She said that it would be tested beforehand. Representative Foster MOVED to report HCS CSSB 351(STA) out of Committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. HCS CSSB 351(STA) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and one previously published fiscal impact note.