HB 6 - REMOVING A REGENT 2:12:10 PM CHAIR GATTO announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 6, "An Act authorizing the governor to remove or suspend a member of the Board of Regents of the University of Alaska for good cause; and establishing a procedure for the removal or suspension of a regent." [Before the committee was CSHB 6(EDC).] 2:13:06 PM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 6, Version 27-LS0027\T, Mischel, 2/25/11, as the working document. REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES objected for the purpose of discussion. 2:13:59 PM TED MADSEN, Staff, Representative Max Gruenberg, Alaska State Legislature, explained on behalf of the sponsor of HB 6, Representative Gruenberg, that back in 2007, a member of the Board of Regents of the University of Alaska was indicted on many counts of fraud and embezzlement of federal funds but refused to resign his position as regent, and so in addition to the Senate's beginning formal impeachment proceedings, a bill was introduced in the House that would have created a procedure by which to remove a regent. At that time, the Board of Regents didn't have such a procedure in place, and so was invited [by the House Judiciary Standing Committee] to adopt policies through which the Board of Regents could remove one of its own members, but it didn't do so then and has yet to do so. Specifically, HB 6 would allow the governor to remove a regent for good cause, and provides for the establishment of both a removal procedure and a suspension procedure, with both procedures complying with Alaska's Administrative Procedure Act (APA). He offered his belief that Section 1, which pertains to legislative findings and purposes, offers reassurance that the bill is intended to allow for the removal of a regent only for good cause, while also ensuring that the university remains insulated from politics. MR. MADSEN explained that Section 2's proposed AS 14.40.155(a) enumerates instances in which a regent may be suspended. Under Version T, though, proposed AS 14.40.155(a)(3) now says, "a probable cause determination of a knowing ethics violation under AS 39.52 that results in a complaint under consideration by the personnel board"; and proposed AS 14.40.155(a)(4) now says, "a verified complaint of malfeasance or nonfeasance in office described under (g)(4) of this section under consideration by the governor". These two changes in language address a concern that mere allegations could [result in suspension]. Also under Version T, proposed AS 14.40.155(a) now contains a paragraph (5) that says, "proceedings involving misconduct that is related to the regent's ability to serve as a regent under consideration by a professional or occupational licensing body". 2:19:00 PM MR. MADSEN explained that Section 2's proposed AS 14.40.155(b) provides [a regent facing an accusation by a governor seeking the regent's removal] an opportunity for a hearing and judicial review; that Section 2's proposed AS 14.40.155(c) allows a suspended regent to request a hearing to defend against the stated grounds for the suspension, or a hearing to have the suspension lifted; that Section 2's proposed AS 14.40.155(d) allows the governor to delegate the office of administrative hearings to conduct such hearings - such delegation is commonly done for hearings pertaining to many of the state's boards and commissions; that Section 2's proposed AS 14.40.155(e) states that the APA - AS 44.62.330 through AS 44.62.630 - shall apply to all proceedings under proposed AS 14.40.155; that Section 2's proposed AS 14.40.155(f) stipulates that among other things, a complete record of the removal proceeding shall be filed with the lieutenant governor's office; and that Section 2's proposed AS 14.40.155(g) defines the term, "good cause" as it would be used in proposed AS 14.40.155 to justify the removal of a regent. Under Version T, though, proposed AS 14.40.155(g)(5) now says good cause also means, "misconduct related to the regent's ability to serve as a regent and resulting in the revocation or suspension of a professional or occupational license issued under state law". MR. MADSEN, in conclusion, explained that Section 3 - the applicability section - stipulates that the bill would apply to all conduct and acts occurring before, on, or after the bill's effective date. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, in response to a question and speaking as the sponsor, explained that currently, the only way a regent could be removed would be via a formal impeachment proceeding conducted by the legislature. Such a limitation is neither practical nor responsible, given that the legislature meets for only part of the year, he opined. REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES referred to the language of proposed AS 14.40.155(g)(1) stipulating that "good cause" also means a violation of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act - AS 39.52 - and questioned whether that includes even minor violations of that Act. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said that as the sponsor of the bill, it's his intention that it would have to be a very major violation. Because the Board of Regents of the University of Alaska has been established by the Alaska State Constitution, a regent should not be removed except for a reason so serious that the person either cannot or should not continue to function as a regent. He mentioned that he would be amenable to altering proposed AS 14.40.155(g)(1) in order to ensure that that's really the case - perhaps by stipulating that it must be a serious violation, or a very serious violation. In response to a comment regarding proposed AS 14.40.155(g)(3) stipulating that "good cause" also means a conviction of a misdemeanor involving dishonesty, breach of trust, or the University of Alaska, he characterized such misdemeanors as very serious [for a regent to have committed]. 2:24:55 PM REPRESENTATIVE LYNN referred to proposed AS 14.40.155(g)(1), and suggested that perhaps it could instead be amended to stipulate only violations of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act for which a substantial penalty is assessed. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG indicated that he would be amenable to such a change as an alternative to his suggestion. In response to comments and a question, he offered his understanding that members' packets include a memorandum from the drafter defining a number of the terms used in proposed AS 14.40.155(g), and relayed that he would be amenable to holding HB 6 over. REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES said she wants to ensure that HB 6 complies with the sponsor's intent, that being that a regent would only be removed for a very serious reason. REPRESENTATIVE LYNN referred to proposed AS 14.40.155(g)(4)(B) stipulating that "good cause" also means malfeasance or nonfeasance in office, including an inability to serve, and opined that the length of that inability to serve should be specified. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG mentioned that he would continue to work on the bill in order to address members' concerns. CHAIR GATTO relayed that HB 6 would be held over [with the motion to adopt Version T as the working document left pending].