HB 461-LEGISLATIVE DISCLOSURES 9:58:23 AM CHAIR SEATON announced that the last order of business was HOUSE BILL NO. 461, "An Act relating to disclosure to the Alaska Public Offices Commission of information about certain income received as compensation for personal services by legislators, public members of the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics, and legislative directors subject to the provisions of law setting standards of conduct for legislative branch officers and employees; and providing for an effective date." 9:58:24 AM REPRESENTATIVE ELKINS moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 461, Version 24-LS1656\Y, Wayne, 4/7/06, as a work draft. There being no objection, Version Y was before the committee. 9:58:47 AM REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER, as sponsor of HB 461, addressed the changes made in Version Y, which were in response to the committee's concerns stated during the last hearing. She said one concern had been in regard to the meaning of personal services. She stated that the phrase, "personal services" is defined not only as consulting or contract work, but also as employment. Thus, if a legislator is employed by someone and, as a result of that employment, receives a W2 form, then that employment would also have to be described under Version Y. She added, "It previously had to be disclosed, but now we have to say what it is." 9:59:58 AM CHAIR SEATON said he thinks that was one of the main issues that was discussed at a prior hearing on HB 461. He said, "I don't think that was the intent of your bill." He asked, "Have you been able to work out that issue yet?" 10:00:04 AM REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER answered yes. She clarified, "The existing language using 'personal services' meets my desire as well as [the Alaska Public Offices Commission's (APOC's)] understanding of what the intent is, which is that all income should be disclosed with some description, not just consulting or contracting ...." Representative Gardner said if the income is earned as a result of a job for which a person is licensed, for example a pilot or hairdresser, than that could be enough description in and of itself. REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER said another question that had been addressed was whether a person would have to state how many hours he/she intends to work. She offered her understanding that APOC had a problem with that, because of its concern about reporting what has happened. She said her own concern is that "you can have income for work you're going to do over a course of time - some of which you've already done and some of which maybe you haven't." She said she thinks APOC is now comfortable with retaining the language, shown on page 2, [beginning on] line 11, which read: (B) the approximate total number of  hours that have been spent or will be spent performing  the services; and  REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER noted that Chair Seaton had questioned the issue of dividend income and wanted that to be included. She said that language is on page 2, [beginning on] line 4, and read as follows: as to a dividend received from a limited liability  company as compensation for personal services,  REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER noted that the language on page 2, lines 14-16, "IF THE SOURCE OF INCOME IS KNOWN OR REASONABLY SHOULD BE KNOWN TO HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST IN LEGISLATIVE, ADMINISTRATIVE, OR POLITICAL ACTION", was not fully understandable and not meaningful to APOC, thus, it would be deleted. She explained, "When you accept money, as a legislator, you don't always know whether the source of that money may, during the time of your service, come before the legislature in any way." 10:03:07 AM CHAIR SEATON asked if the issue regarding employment being included within the definition of personal services had been resolved. 10:03:18 AM REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER answered yes. She said that is in current definition and is both recognized and understood. 10:03:32 AM BROOKE MILES, Executive Director, Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC), confirmed that personal services would include regular employees of a company, as well as people who receive compensation on a contractual basis. She said that in discussions with Representative Gardner's staff, APOC was "set at ease with respect to that." She said, if a person's job title was not descriptive enough, a person who is a regular employee would have the option of attaching his/her job description. She reminded the committee that APOC's primary concern with the original version of HB 461 was that it may not have a "bright enough line about who would be required to provide some additional description outside of" [his/her job title alone]; however, she said APOC is feeling much more comfortable about the language in Version Y. MS. MILES expressed particular appreciation for the deletion of the aforementioned language [on page 2, lines 14-16]. She said, "If a person indicated that they had more than $5,000 of employment, but didn't show the amount, our only really clear guideline to request an audit was if we knew the company retained a lobbyist, because of course the lobbying law is within our purview as well." She said that subjective language was confusing both to the filer and to the public. She concluded, "If the intent is that legislators are held to this higher level of disclosure - in that [if] their personal services ... are more than $5,000 they also disclose the amount - how much simpler to just have that stated plainly in law?" 10:07:09 AM MS. MILES, in response to a question from Chair Seaton, said APOC does not see any further problems in the bill. Furthermore, she stated for the committee's knowledge, "Once a CS of this nature is read across the floor, we would be revising our fiscal note to a zero fiscal note." 10:07:43 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to report CSHB 461, Version 24- LS1656\Y, Wayne, 4/7/06, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB 461(STA) was reported out of the House State Affairs Standing Committee.