SB 73-PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION/MILITARY WIDOW(ER)  9:10:00 AM CHAIR DYSON announced the consideration of SB 73. EDRA MORLEDGE, Staff, Senator Kevin Meyer, noted that there was a proposed committee substitute (CS) for SB 73. It allows a municipal property tax exemption for widows and widowers of military service members. She explained that version C is a result of concerns raised at the last hearing. SENATOR GIESSEL moved to adopt work draft CS for SB 73, labeled 28-LS0631\C, as the working document. MS. MORLEDGE referred to a memo from the Department of Law that answers all of the questions that were raised on April 1. She detailed the two significant changes in the CS. On page 1, line 13 through page 2, line 2, the following language was inserted: "or to a resident who is the widow or widower of a person who dies from a service connected cause sustained while serving as a member of the United States Armed Forces or as a member of the National Guard." This change addresses two major concerns. One concern was that there is no definition in Alaska statutes for the term "active duty" and the federal definition specifically excludes National Guard members. The term was deleted and National Guard members were specifically included. She explained that the change clarifies that the death must be service related, not a suicide, and not incurred off duty, such as from a car accident. The second change adds language on page 2, lines 12-13, to clarify that municipalities shall determine eligibility requirements and application procedures for this optional exemption. This language was inserted at the suggestion of Senator Coghill. The Fairbanks Northstar Borough voiced approval of the change, she said. MS. MORLEDGE said the sponsor anticipates a new zero fiscal note. 9:13:44 AM CHAIR DYSON related that the Municipality of Anchorage has commented that property tax exemptions can cause budget concerns. MARTY MCGEE, Assessor, Municipality of Anchorage, stated that Anchorage has no objection to the bill as currently written. He could not estimate the number of people that might qualify for the exemption under SB 73. CHAIR DYSON suggested that Mr. McGee provide a report after the fact. 9:15:14 AM JEFF MITTMAN, Executive Director, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Alaska, suggested a change to SB 73. He noted that the ACLU has provided written testimony. He referred to a court case where the Alaska Supreme Court decided that same sex couples should not be denied benefits provided by the state to married opposite sex couples. He also related that due to changes in military policies, families in same sex relationships should be treated the same as traditional families. He requested that the committee make a change to the bill to reflect those findings. 9:17:08 AM CHAIR DYSON requested clarification. He asked if the court rules in favor of the issue Mr. Mittman raised, whether it would cover all laws regarding married survivor benefits. MR. MITTMAN opined that legally that would be true, but practically it would be difficult, because often there is a lengthy litigation process to challenge the agency to follow the law. He stressed that an amendment would be required to prevent litigation. CHAIR DYSON commented that if the court rules in favor of the ACLU, it should notify the Office of the Attorney General, the Department of Law, and the Judiciary Committees for the purpose of writing a "clean up bill." CHAIR DYSON said he would request an opinion from the Department of Law. 9:20:52 AM SCOTT RUBY, Director, Division of Community and Regional Affairs, Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development, answered questions related to SB 73. He addressed the issue whether municipalities had the ability to make policies and procedures about how to enact this legislation. He explained that subsection (e) contains mandatory exemptions, but the way the bill is written, there is a subsection that contains an optional exemption. Subsection (f) gives municipalities some leeway on adopting policies and procedures. Subsection (g) to subsection (f) states that any exemption placed in (e) would be reimbursable by the state to municipalities, although it is subject to an appropriation by the legislature. In the recent past, the legislature has chosen not to fund those exemptions. SENATOR COGHILL spoke of the confusion between "030" and "050." He thought they were compatible. MR. RUBY explained that they are different variations of an exemption and have different parameters so the municipalities can choose which of those it prefers. SENATOR COGHILL predicted there would be a debate on each one of the areas. He concluded that 030 was broader than 050. 9:24:31 AM SENATOR DYSON voiced appreciation that the exemption is permissive. SENATOR GIESSEL moved to report SB 73, version 28-LS0631\C, from committee with individual recommendations and attached zero fiscal note There being no objection, CSSB 73(STA) moved from the Senate State Affairs Standing Committee .