HB 142-PFD ELIGIBILITY  4:19:36 PM CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 142, "An Act relating to eligibility for the permanent fund dividend." [Before the committee, adopted as the working draft on 3/29/22, was the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 142, Version 32-LS0491\W, Nauman, 3/28/22, "Version W."] 4:20:23 PM REPRESENTATIVE KEN MCCARTY, Alaska State Legislature, prime sponsor of HB 142, provided brief introductory remarks on Version W. 4:20:54 PM The committee took an at-ease from 4:20 p.m. to 4:24 p.m. 4:24:38 PM CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS moved to adopt Amendment 1, [labeled 32- LS0491\W.1, Nauman, 3/29/22], which read: Page 4, following line 7: Insert new bill sections to read:  "* Sec. 3. AS 43.23.008(e) is amended to read: (e) To determine whether an individual intends to return and remain in the state indefinitely, the department shall consider all relevant factors, including (1) the length of time the individual was absent from the state compared to the length of time the individual was physically present in the state; (2) the frequency and duration of voluntary return trips to the state during the past five years; (3) whether the individual's intent to return to and remain in the state is conditioned on future events beyond the individual's control; (4) the ties the individual has established with the state or another jurisdiction, as demonstrated by (A) maintenance of a home; (B) payment of resident taxes; (C) registration of a vehicle; (D) except as provided in (g) of this  section, registration to vote and voting history; (E) acquisition of a driver's license, business license, or professional license; and (F) receipt of benefits under a claim of residency in the state or another jurisdiction; (5) the priority that the individual gave the state on an employment assignment preference list, including a list used by military personnel.  * Sec. 4. AS 43.23.008 is amended by adding a new subsection to read: (g) An individual who is absent from the state for a reason permitted under (a)(1) or (2) of this section but who the department determines is ineligible because the individual voted or registered to vote outside the state regains eligibility for a permanent fund dividend if, during the qualifying year or the year immediately preceding the qualifying year, the individual (1) is physically present in the state at some time during the qualifying year; (2) registers to vote in the state or cancels the individual's voter registration outside the state; and (3) is otherwise eligible." Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Page 4, line 10, following "APPLICABILITY.": Insert "(a)" Page 4, following line 11: Insert a new subsection to read: "(b) AS 43.23.008(e), as amended by sec. 3 of this Act, and AS 43.23.008(g), added by sec. 4 of this Act, (1) apply to the permanent fund dividend 2023 qualifying year for the 2024 dividend year and thereafter; and (2) may not be applied to allow an individual to regain eligibility for a qualifying year before 2023." REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN objected for the purpose of discussion. 4:25:18 PM CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS deferred to Ms. Mackinnon, as the proposed amendment was drafted in communication with the Permanent Fund Dividend Division. 4:25:35 PM ANNA MACKINNON, Director, Permanent Fund Dividend Division, explained that Amendment 1 would allow students who accidentally voted out of state to correct that error and maintain eligibility for the Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD). REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN shared his understanding that it would be a crime for a student to vote in another state if he/she was still a resident in Alaska. He asked why the legislature should overlook that and allow the individual to qualify for the PFD. MS. MACKINNON explained that many students unintentionally register to vote in another state, unaware that it would make them ineligible to receive a PFD. 4:28:14 PM DIRECTOR MACKINNON, in response to a follow up question from Representative Eastman, said it would be a policy decision. She conveyed that many students and parents felt disenfranchised in these scenarios. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN believed that this situation highlighted an education issue in Alaska. He argued that the solution for accidentally committing a crime in another state was not to allow the students to maintain their PFD eligibility. Instead, he opined that the concern should be addressed through education efforts. 4:30:39 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE directed attention to Section 4 on page 2, lines 2-7, of Amendment 1. She asked whether the student, after registering to vote in another state in 2020, would lose eligibility in 2021 and regain eligibility in 2022. MS. MACKINNON pointed out that the effective date of 2023 would nullify Representative Vance's example. Nonetheless, she acknowledged that if the student met the criteria in paragraphs (1)-(3) of Section 4, the division could remedy the mistake. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE sought to clarify that a student who registered to vote in another state would lose eligibility for the dividend that year. MS. MACKINNON answered, "Correct." 4:33:51 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN expressed concern about paragraph (2) on page 2, line 10, of Amendment 1. He suggested that the language may encourage people to vote twice from two different states in the same election. DIRECTOR MACKINNON said that would never be the case, as the election timeline was different than the application period. Further, she explained that the division wouldn't become aware of this error until the student filed for the following year's dividend. 4:35:46 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN maintained his concern. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS tabled Amendment 1. REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN wondered whether the solution to the questions posed by Representative Eastman was contained in HB 66. 4:37:52 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN moved to adopt Amendment 2, [labeled 32- LS0491\W.2, Nauman, 3/29/22], which read: Page 3, line 19: Delete "(16), or (17)" Insert "or (16) - (18) [(16), OR (17)]" Page 3, line 27, following "(17)": Insert "serving as a volunteer for a religious or  charitable program;  (18)" Page 3, line 31: Delete "(4) - (16)" Insert "(4) - (17) [(4) - (16)]" Page 4, line 3: Delete "(4) - (16)" Insert "(4) - (17) [(4) - (16)]" Page 4, line 6: Delete "(1) - (16)" Insert "(1) - (17) [(1) - (16)]" Page 4, line 7: Delete "(4) - (16)" Insert "(4) - (17) [(4) - (16)]" Page 4, following line 7: Insert a new bill section to read:  "* Sec. 3. AS 43.23.008(b) is amended to read: (b) An individual may not claim an allowable absence under (a)(1) - (17) [(a)(1) - (16)] of this section unless the individual was a resident of the state for at least six consecutive months immediately before leaving the state." Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Page 4, line 10: Delete "applies" Insert "AS 43.23.008(a), as amended by sec. 2 of this Act, and AS 43.23.008(b), as amended by sec. 3 of this Act, apply" REPRESENTATIVE TARR objected. 4:38:00 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN explained that Amendment 2 would create an exemption for individuals serving as a volunteer for a religious or charitable program. 4:39:21 PM REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY opined that specifying religious and nonprofit organizations would open the bill up "to a lot of different things." He argued that it was a dangerous path to go down. DIRECTOR MACKINNON stated that Amendment 2 was a policy decision for the legislature. 4:40:41 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked how religious or charitable program would be defined. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN said he would look to the federal definitions for tax status and organizations that regularly send individuals overseas for periods of service. 4:41:30 PM REPRESENTATIVE TARR maintained her objection. 4:42:20 PM A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Eastman, Vance, and Kaufman voted in favor of the adoption of Amendment 2. Representatives Tarr, Story, Claman, and Kreiss-Tomkins voted against it. Therefore, Amendment 2 failed by a vote of 4-3. 4:43:01 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN moved to adopt Amendment 3, [labeled 32- LS0491\W.3, Nauman, 3/29/22], which read: Page 2, lines 19 - 20: Delete ", as determined by the Alaska Commission on Postsecondary Education," Insert "[, AS DETERMINED BY THE ALASKA COMMISSION ON POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION,]" Page 4, line 10: Delete ", applies" Insert "and AS 43.23.008(a), as amended by sec. 2 of this Act, apply" REPRESENTATIVE TARR objected. 4:43:07 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN explained that Amendment 3 would remove the Alaska Commission on Postsecondary Education's (ACPE's) adjudicatory role for determining the availability of comparable education programs in Alaska, per AS 43.23.008(a)(2). He shared his understanding that the commission was not fulfilling this requirement and did not see it as part of its mission. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether that was true. DIRECTOR MACKINNON said she had no knowledge of whether ACPE was fulfilling that provision. Nonetheless, she contended that it was a statutory requirement. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked Representative Story whether she had any insight on this matter. 4:44:56 PM REPRESENTATIVE STORY did not know the answer. She believed that the intent of AS 43.23.008(a)(2) was to provide consumer protection for students. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS said he was not necessarily opposed to Amendment 3; however, he suggested that ACPE should weigh in. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN suggested tabling Amendment 3 to a later bill hearing at which the commission would be present to testify. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS agreed. He announced that Amendment 3 was tabled. 4:47:18 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN moved to adopt Amendment 4, [labeled 32- LS0491\W.4, Nauman, 3/29/22], which read: Page 2, line 23: Delete "armed forces" Insert "uniformed services [ARMED FORCES]" Page 4, following line 7: Insert a new bill section to read:  "* Sec. 3. AS 43.23.008(f) is amended to read: (f) In [FOR PURPOSES OF (a)(7) OF] this section, (1) "family member" means a person who is (A) [(1)] legally related to the individual through marriage or guardianship; or (B) [(2)] the individual's sibling, parent, grandparent, son, daughter, grandson, granddaughter, uncle, aunt, niece, nephew, or first cousin;  (2) "uniformed service" means the Army,  Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, Space  Force, and the Commissioned Corps of the National  Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Public  Health Services." Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Page 4, line 10: Delete "applies" Insert "AS 43.23.008(a), as amended by sec. 2 of this Act, and AS 43.23.008(f), as amended by sec. 3 of this Act, apply" REPRESENTATIVE TARR objected. 4:47:26 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN explained that the intent of Amendment 4 was to include all members of the uniformed services in the exemptions section to allow those individuals to retain PFD eligibility. 4:48:52 PM REPRESENTATIVE STORY spoke in favor of Amendment 4. She emphasized the importance of recognizing these uniformed service members, the Commissioned Corps of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and Public Health Services in particular, as those individuals were often sent on long deployments. She reported that 15 Alaska residents served in the NOAA Commissioned Corps. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS noted that 231 Alaskans served in the Commissioned Corps of the Public Health Services. 4:50:52 PM CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS shared a personal anecdote. He asked whether a member of the Public Health Services Commissioned Corps who performed his/her residency in Maine followed by 20 years of service in Sitka would be able to claim dividend eligibility in Maine, if Maine had a dividend program. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN said, per his intent, the answer would be no. He clarified that the focus was a uniformed services member on deployment, as opposed to permanent station. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked what constituted deployment for NOAA and Public Health Services Commissioned Corps. REPRESENTATIVE STORY deferred to Ms. MacKinnon. 4:52:49 PM MS. MACKINNON said the terms of deployment were provided under the Universal Code of Military Justice. She pointed out that uniformed service members on deployment would also be subject to the 5-year rule, as it currently existed, the 72-hour rule, and the intent to return. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS repeated his question, asking what constituted deployment for the Commissioned Corps of the NOAA and Public Health Services. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN maintained his understanding that the legislature could borrow the federal definition of deployment. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS reiterated his interest in "nailing down" the definition. 4:55:07 PM REPRESENTATIVE STORY offered to follow up with the definition. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that Amendment 4 was tabled. 4:55:31 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE moved to adopt Amendment 5, [labeled 32- LS0491\W.5, Nauman, 3/29/22], which read: Page 1, line 1, following "eligibility": Insert "of active duty members of the armed  forces for the permanent fund dividend; relating to  the physical presence in the state requirement for  eligibility" CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS objected. 4:55:35 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE explained that the intent of Amendment 5 was to provide additional clarification of active duty members by requiring physical presence in the state for eligibility. REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY expressed his appreciation for the clarification offered in the proposed amendment. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS sought to confirm that Amendment 5 was a title change. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE answered yes. REPRESENTATIVE TARR highlighted the issue with conforming language, as Amendment 4 replaced "armed forces" with "uniformed services." 4:56:32 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE suggested that Legislative Legal Services could be authorized to make the appropriate conforming changes. 4:56:44 PM The committee took a brief at-ease. 4:57:09 PM CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS said he would provide Legislative Legal Services with the appropriate latitude for conforming changes when final action was taken. 4:57:47 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN opined that the significance of the proposed amendment was unclear. He asked what inspired Amendment 5. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE deferred to the bill sponsor. REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY said, "this bill, HB 142, is really talking about military or changes to uniformed services only." 4:59:11 PM CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked Ms. Nauman how the adoption of Amendment 1 would interact with the adoption of a title change amendment as embodied by Amendment 5. 4:59:58 PM EMILY NAUMAN, Deputy Director, Legislative Legal Services, Legislative Affairs Agency, shared her understanding that Amendment 5 would narrow the title to lock in the procedural intent of the bill. In response to Chair Kreiss-Tomkins' question, she indicated that authorizing Legislative Legal Services to making conforming changes would remedy any issues. 5:00:56 PM CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS removed his objection. There being no further objection, Amendment 5 was adopted. He announced that the bill would be held over.