HB 157-APOC; REPORT REFERENDA/RECALL CONTRIBUTOR  3:36:02 PM CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 157, "An Act requiring the disclosure of the identity of certain persons, groups, and nongroup entities that expend money in support of or in opposition to an application filed for a state referendum or recall election; and providing for an effective date." CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS opened public testimony. After ascertaining the no one wished to testify, he closed public testimony. 3:36:46 PM CRYSTAL KOENEMAN, Staff, Representative Sara Rasmussen, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Rasmussen, prime sponsor of HB 157, stated that additional documents had been disbursed to the committee in response to questions from the previous bill hearing. She specifically referenced the flow chart, which outlined the various reporting requirements for candidates, initiatives, recalls, and referendums. 3:37:46 PM CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS welcomed questions from the committee. 3:38:29 PM MS. KOENEMAN, in response to Representative Kaufman, provided an overview of the flow chart on page 4 of the document titled, "Additional Info - Response to STA" [included in the committee packet]. She explained that for candidates, the expenditures and contribution tracking began when they declared their candidacy and paid the initial fee to the Division of Elections (DOE). Similarly, for initiatives, the expenditures and contribution tracking began when the initial application was properly filed with the lieutenant governor through DOE. For recalls, the expenditures and contributions began if and when a special election was called, which was the final step in the process. Lastly, for referendums, the expenditures and contribution tracking began when it appeared on the ballot of the first statewide primary, general, or special election held more than 180 days after adjournment of the legislative session at which the act was passed. Consequently, she pointed out that if the funding gathered for a recall or referendum was expended prior to certification, it would never be reported. 3:42:05 PM REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN, in reference to the last step of the referendum process, sought to clarify what "180 days after adjournment of the legislative session" meant specifically. MS. KOENEMAN said she was unsure. 3:43:28 PM HEATHER HEBDON, Executive Director, Alaska Public Offices Commission, explained that the process of getting a recall or referendum on the ballot was not overseen by APOC; therefore, she could not offer further clarity. MS. KOENEMAN surmised that it was at the end of the full legislative session. Nonetheless, she offered to verify with DOE. 3:44:30 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE, in reference to the flow chart, sought to confirm that the proposed legislation would move the reporting requirements from the final step to the first step for recalls and referendums. MS. KOENEMAN confirmed. She said the bill would align the reporting requirements for recalls and referendums with that of candidates and initiatives; therefore, the reporting would commence at the beginning. 3:44:59 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to the language on page 6, lines 15-16, which read, "(iii) a recall application under AS 15.45.480 or who file a recall application under AS 15.45.480;". He opined that the language appeared duplicative and asked why it was drafted in that way. MS. KOENEMAN explained that the language was referencing any group of two or more individuals who organized [for] the purpose of filing a recall or those who had filed a recall application. She noted that it was conforming language, as recommended by the drafters. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN questioned whether this language would apply to "anyone who files a group to put forward a recall application." MS. KOENEMAN answered yes. She expounded that any groups, non- group entities, individuals, persons, and etcetera that this language applied to would be subject to the modified reporting requirements. 3:47:40 PM MS. KOENEMAN, in response to a question from Representative Eastman, explained that current statute specified a threshold of $500. She elaborated that the reporting requirements would commence when the initiative, committee, person, group, or non- group entity received contributions exceeding $500 or expended more than $500. Additionally, she said there was a threshold of $5,000 for candidates. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether the bill sponsor had considered bringing the $500 threshold up to $5,000. MS. KOENEMAN said the bill sponsor was not interested in modifying the existing structure. She indicated that the goal was to align statutes so the requirements would be identifiable across the board. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS informed the committee that an amendment had come in after the deadline due to an administrative error. Given that the sponsor of the amendment was on the next committee of referral, he said his preference was not to consider the amendment. Nonetheless, he invited Representative Vance to highlight any themes or policy issues that members should be aware of, given that many of them would also be in the next committee of referral. 3:50:48 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE explained that she had spoken with the bill sponsor about adding municipalities to the statute, so that there would be consistent transparency statewide. She conveyed that municipalities could choose to follow statutory reporting requirements or not; therefore, this would not impose the requirements on a municipality that had not already elected to follow the statutory guidelines. She believed the amendment would merit a conversation. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS said he looked forward to potentially having that conversation in the near future. 3:52:21 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN opined that the bill would "[lump] a lot of things together into one basket." He shared his understanding that recalls were of a different nature because there had not been a successful recall from office. He believed that the reporting requirements for recalling a governor or lieutenant governor would not make sense for the recall of a local official, for example, because there were less resources available for those efforts. He indicated that he was hesitant to move forward with the proposed legislation. He concluded that citizens should be able to organize the recall of a local official without involving attorneys with deep pockets. 3:54:56 PM REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN inquired about the relative dollar amounts and questioned putting them in statute due to inflation. He believed that political issues related to money were associated with larger amounts than $500 or $5,000. Therefore, he suggested reconciling the financial thresholds to allow grassroots efforts to organize without being "bogged down" with higher level accounting. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS said he appreciated the legislation; further, he acknowledged the comments from Representatives Eastman and Kaufman, adding that there were good conversations to be had about the appropriate level of reporting and regulation for small, grassroot political efforts. 3:56:30 PM REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN moved to report HB 157 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. Without objection, HB 157 was moved out of the House State Affairs Standing Committee.