HB 142-PFD ELIGIBILITY  3:05:26 PM CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 142, "An Act relating to eligibility for the permanent fund dividend." [Before the committee was CSHB 142(JUD).] 3:06:02 PM REPRESENTATIVE KEN MCCARTY, Alaska State Legislature, reintroduced HB 142, as the prime sponsor. He presented the sponsor statement [included in the committee packet], which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: Committee Substitute for House Bill 142 (CSHB 142) limits the Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) eligibility of active-duty military members to those who are physically stationed in Alaska only. This bill eliminates the allowable absence in AS 43.23.008(3)(A) of a member serving on active duty in the Military in the United State Armed Forces, and their dependents, stationed in another state or country. CSHB 142 specifies an allowable absence of a member serving on active duty in the U.S Military, who is stationed in the State of Alaska, but is, or has been, out of the state on deployment orders or a temporary duty assignment (TDY.) Future intent is a difficult thing to presume and define. Because of this, CSHB 142 also eliminates the allowable absence eligibility criteria listed in As. 43.23.008(e) that requires the Department of Revenue, Permanent Fund Division to consider factors that show an absent applicant's intention of returning to the state indefinitely in the future after a permanent change of station (PCS). Those considerations would no longer be included in determining eligibility of military service members, or their family members, who have moved out of state. It is the sponsor's intent that every eligible Alaskan who currently and physically resides in the state of Alaska receive a PFD. Alaskans serving in the Military, and their dependents, who have physically moved out of the state will no longer be eligible to receive a PFD until they return to, and reside in, Alaska once again. In 2018 the state dispersed 3,096 dividends to service members who were out of the state more than 180 days, who may or may not return someday, distributing over $4,900,00 out of state. CSHB 142 will ensure that Alaska PFD monies are reserved for Alaskans who currently and physically reside within the state of Alaska. 3:09:15 PM REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY deferred to the Permanent Fund Dividend Division (the division) to discuss some developments that occurred since the committee last heard the bill. 3:10:16 PM COREY BIGELOW, Operations Manager, Permanent Fund Dividend Division, expressed the divisions concern that the repeal language included in CSHB 142(JUD) could impact more than the intended group of Alaskans. He asked whether the committee would like to hear the specifics of this issue. REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN confirmed that he would like to hear the specifics. 3:11:31 PM MR. BIGELOW addressed the repeal of AS 43.23.005(f), which has two [paragraphs]: paragraph (1) authorizes the commissioner to waive the requirement of a(4); paragraph (2) speaks to individuals in the custody of the Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS). He recommended that paragraph (2) [AS 43.23.005(f)(2)] be excluded from the repeal language. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS sought to confirm that AS 43.23.005(f)(2) refers to individuals in the custody of DHSS in accordance with a court order; therefore, excluding that provision from the repeal language would preserve the commissioners prerogative to wave the durational residency requirement in order for such persons to qualify for the permanent fund dividend (PFD). He asked if that is accurate. MR. BIGELOW answered yes. 3:14:41 PM REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN sought to confirm that the divisions intent is to repeal AS 43.23.005(f)(1), thereby keeping AS 43.23.005(f)(2). MR. BIGELOW answered yes. 3:15:39 PM REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY clarified that his intent is not to repeal AS 43.23.005(f) at all. He proceeded to summarize the [proposed] changes to the bill in its current form. 3:17:53 PM REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN pointed out that both the division and the bill sponsor have conveyed suggested changes. He opined that this method of editing seems difficult. He recommended that the bill sponsor present a new CS that incorporates the desired changes. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS said hes open to that suggestion. He shared his belief that these statutes are poorly written and convoluted, which makes the process more challenging than it would otherwise be. He deferred to the division to innumerate its input. REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY agreed to this method. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS pointed out that AS 43.23.005(f)(2) had already been addressed by Mr. Bigelow. He invited Mr. Bigelow to continue relaying the divisions thoughts on the bill. 3:19:59 PM MR. BIGELOW obliged. He recalled that in addition to AS 43.23.005(f)(2), the division had conveyed concern about AS 43.23.008(e), which speaks specifically to determining an individuals intent. He acknowledged that determining a persons intent is difficult; however, the statute allows a benchmark, or a way to measure by requesting documentation to show that the individual has taken an action consistent with establishing or maintaining residency in Alaska. He explained removing the intent would potentially allow for more Alaskans to be determined as eligible for the PFD because the intent portion would no longer be required. He reiterated that the intent would be to broaden the pathway whereas currently, the bill would restrict the pathway for a specific group of individuals. 3:22:46 PM REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN sought to confirm that the divisions recommendation with respect to the bill is not to repeal AS 43.23.008(e). MR. BIGELOW confirmed. 3:23:10 PM REPRESENTATIVE TARR said she was having trouble finding AS 43.23.008(e). CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS read AS 43.23.008(e) as follows: to determine whether an individual intends to return and remain in the state indefinitely, the department shall consider all relevant factors including followed by a variety of factors. He reiterated that the statutes are rather long and unwieldy. 3:24:30 PM REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN inquired about the departments position on the repeal of AS 43.23.005(a)(4). MR. BIGELOW opined that the AS 43.23.005(a)(4) would be the ideal location to (indisc.) the language. REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN sought to confirm that for the purposes of the bill, AS 43.23.005(a)(4) should be repealed. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS shared his understanding that in order to fulfill the intent put forward by Representative McCarty, the divisions analysis is that repealing AS 43.23.005(a)(4) would be consistent with that intent. MR. BIGELOW confirmed that utilizing or potentially amending AS 43.23.005(a)(4) would be the bill sponsors best route for reaching his desired intent. 3:26:26 PM REPRESENTATIVE TARR questioned whether consolidating the individual allowable absences under AS 43.23.005(a)(4) would be the recommended method. MR. BIGELOW believed that amending the language on page 2, lines 8-11, would be the best way to achieve the bill sponsors desired intent. 3:28:42 PM CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS invited Representative McCarty to speak on how the intent of the bill evolved over the interim. REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY conveyed that the intent of the bill is to stop people who have left the state from collecting a dividend. He said currently, an individual can leave the state and depend on his/her intent to return to qualify for a dividend. He directed attention to page 2, lines 7-13, indicating that military members who are away on TDY or deployment should still receive a dividend; however, if a military member is moving to another base outside of Alaska, he/she should not longer be able to continue claiming residency. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether the sponsor had considered mirroring existing residency requirements for hunting and fishing residency licenses or other well-vetted, well- established residency thresholds for other definitions of state residency. REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY said he had inquired about residency as it pertains to elections. 3:32:21 PM CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS invited closing questions from committee members. REPRESENTATIVE TARR inquired about the provision pertaining to employment in the aviation industry and how that would be prioritized in relation to the military provision. REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY acknowledged that the primary intent of the bill is to address military members who moved out of state. 3:34:01 PM CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that CSHB 142(JUD) would be held over.