SENATE BILL NO. 201 am "An Act relating to charitable gaming online ticket sales and activities; relating to charitable gaming proceeds; and providing for an effective date." 10:35:43 AM SENATOR MIA COSTELLO, CHAIR, SENATE LABOR AND COMMERCE COMMITTEE, explained that the legislation would allow charitable gaming to be conducted online and for the ticket sales to be conducted electronically. The Senate had amended Section 3 of the bill to allow for online fundraisers to be conducted for the benefit of any country being invaded by another country. The change had been made in order to make it possible to hold online fundraisers for the people of Ukraine. Representative Wool recalled that there was another piece of legislation related to raffles and lotteries [HB 128] that had passed the House. He wondered how the two bills differed. Senator Costello responded that the two bills were identical apart from the aforementioned amendment in Section 3. Representative Wool understood that the amendment would apply to any country that was being invaded by another country and not just Ukraine. Representative Carpenter wondered if the states that bordered Mexico could be considered invaded and asked if a raffle could be held in Alaska for Arizona, for example. Co-Chair Merrick understood that HB 128 and SB 201 were identical apart from the amended Section 3. Senator Costello responded that she did not know the answer to Representative Carpenter's question. Co-Chair Merrick OPENED public testimony. 10:40:06 AM DEB MOORE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA PROFESSIONAL HUNTERS ASSOCIATION, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), spoke in support of SB 201. The bill would modernize the state's charitable gaming program and allow for more funds to flow into the state to support the non-profit sector. She highlighted that non-Alaskans would be able to participate in online raffles and would increase the likelihood of donations. The Alaska Professional Hunters Association (APHA) had attempted to organize a fundraiser to benefit Ukraine, however it was not permitted because statute prevented charitable funds from being used outside of the state. She indicated that the amended Section 3 of the bill would have allowed for the funds to be distributed to Ukraine. She was concerned about what would happen if the bill did not pass. 10:42:19 AM JOSHUA LEWIS, CHARITABLE GAMING OPERATOR, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), explained that he assisted non-profits in the state to raise funds for their missions. He spoke in support of the bill with the amended Section 3 but did not support any other amendments. He highlighted the important work of non-profits in the state and thought the bill would allow Alaskans to offer support to the organizations. He did not think the state and local governments could afford to support non-profit organizations. He thought online raffles and fundraisers were working. Representative Carpenter asked whether Mr. Lewis supported the amended Section 3 of the bill. Mr. Lewis responded that he supported Section 3 and the applicable amendment. 10:44:39 AM LOUIS CUSACK, SAFARI CLUB INTERNATIONAL ALASKA CHAPTER, CHUGACH (via teleconference), spoke in support of the bill. He relayed that a significant portion of Safari Club International Alaska Chapter's (SCIAC) funding came from charitable gaming in the form of raffle ticket sales. Alaska was often bombarded with interest groups from out- of-state and the bill would allow external groups to contribute to Alaska's economy through raffles. He relayed that SCIAC had organized a fundraiser that contributed over $291,000 of out-of-state fundraising dollars to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. The money had also qualified for federal matching dollars through the Pittman-Robertson Act. He thought that the bill leveled the playing field. He reiterated SCIAC's support of the legislation. 10:47:44 AM DAVID LAMBERT, CHARITABLE GAMING OPERATOR, FAIRBANKS (via teleconference), spoke in support of the bill. He supported about 35 non-profit organizations and emphasized how important the legislation was for the non-profit sector. He did not think the bill was controversial as written but was concerned that someone might "hijack" it and add controversial elements to it. 10:48:35 AM Co-Chair Merrick CLOSED public testimony. Co-Chair Merrick asked Ms. Colleen Glover to review the fiscal note. 10:48:58 AM COLLEEN GLOVER, DIRECTOR, TAX DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (via teleconference), reviewed the fiscal note from the Department of Revenue with control code QYqML. She indicated the note was changed from indeterminant to zero because it was difficult to discern whether the bill would change the amount of raffle activity. The raffle activity was a small component of state revenue but was significant for non-profits. Co-Chair Merrick invited Senator Costello to the table. 10:50:40 AM Representative Wool noted he had amended the companion bill HB 128 on the House floor. The amendment limited the number of raffle tickets available to prevent organizations from adding additional tickets to decrease individual odds and increase revenue. He wondered if the change would be amenable. Senator Costello deferred to her staff. 10:51:44 AM MELODIE WILTERDINK, STAFF, SENATOR MIA COSTELLO (via teleconference), understood that all of the existing raffle rules would apply to online raffle sales as well. She did not know if the amendment was necessary but did not see a problem with it as long as the non-profits were open to it. Representative Wool relayed that he had proposed the amendment specifically because the operation of online raffle sales was new and he felt the amendment was necessary for clarity. He asked if there were limits as to what a non-profit could spend the proceeds of a raffle on. He wondered if limits needed to be in statute. Senator Costello indicated that Section 3 as amended would sunset on July 1, 2024. She deferred to Ms. Glover for Representative Wool's question regarding spending limits. Ms. Glover responded that the acceptable uses for proceeds were listed in statute. The bill would change one of the existing limits that only permitted the proceeds to be used in-state to allow for out-of-state spending. 10:55:26 AM Representative Wool understood the intent to support Ukraine. He wondered what type of reassurance would be offered to prove that money raised to benefit Ukraine would actually be received by Ukraine. He asked if there were limits as to what the proceeds could be spent on or if it was at the discretion of the non-profit. Ms. Wilterdink noted that the language in Section 3 specifically required that the money be used to benefit the people of the affected country. She offered reassurance that the money would go to refugee causes and not for things like munition. Representative Wool thought the language seemed more open than Ms. Wilterdink's interpretation, but he would look at it more closely. Co-Chair Merrick reviewed the agenda for the following meeting. SB 201 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further consideration.