HB 71: DISSOLUTION OF NATIVE CORPORATIONS Number 659 LARRY LABOLLE, LEGISLATIVE AIDE TO REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD FOSTER, PRIME SPONSOR of HB 71, stated that a bill similar to HB 71 had passed the House the year before, but died in the Senate Rules Committee at the end of the session. He said that the bill would provide a one-year period for ANCSA (Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act) village corporations which had been involuntarily dissolved because they had not completed their biannual report, to be reinstated. He added that the corporations would have to pay all dues and fees as if they had been incorporated all along. MR. LABOLLE raised the question of why the corporations could not simply go out and reincorporate. He stated that, because they were the corporations which were originally set up under ANCSA, the reincorporation had to occur in order to allow for the continuation of property ownership and liability. He mentioned the summer fishing village of Hamilton, in Representative Foster's district, which had allowed its corporate status to lapse, and said that many similar village corporations existed in Southeast Alaska. Number 688 REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN asked how the state could ensure that corporations did not, in the future, allow their corporate status to lapse again. Number 692 MR. LABOLLE replied that it was his hope that village corporations would not allow their corporate status to lapse again. He said that Representative Foster would send out notices to corporations within his district, as well as to others of which he was aware, that needed to reincorporate, informing them of the one-year window in which they could do so. Number 705 REPRESENTATIVE JAMES understood that the reincorporation option was already available to corporations. She asked Mr. LaBolle what would happen if another corporation had used the village corporation's name during the period that the incorporation had been allowed to lapse. Number 717 MR. LABOLLE replied that a village would still have to reincorporate in order to pick up all of the corporate rights and responsibilities that existed for the ANCSA corporation. Number 724 REPRESENTATIVE JAMES asked if the corporations which had already reincorporated would be melded with those which had not. MR. LABOLLE replied in the affirmative. Number 728 REPRESENTATIVE GAIL PHILLIPS asked Mr. LaBolle why the similar bill had died the year before in the Senate Rules Committee. Number 730 MR. LABOLLE responded that the bill had been caught in the end-of-session time crunch. Number 744 REPRESENTATIVE JAMES understood that some corporations had been involuntarily dissolved, and later reinstated after fees had been paid, provided that no other corporation had taken their corporate name. She asked Mr. Monagle what the time limit for reinstatement was. Number 752 MIKE MONAGLE, SUPERVISOR, CORPORATE INFORMATION, DIVISION OF BANKING, SECURITIES AND CORPORATIONS, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (DCED), replied that a corporation had three years from the date of dissolution in which to be reinstated. Number 753 REPRESENTATIVE JAMES asked if some of the corporations covered by HB 71 had been dissolved for longer than three years. MR. MONAGLE replied in the affirmative. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN made a MOTION to MOVE HB 71 out of committee, with individual recommendations and a zero fiscal note. There being no objection, IT WAS SO ORDERED.