HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE April 7, 2000 2:30 P.M. TAPE HFC 00 - 109, Side 1 TAPE HFC 00 - 109, Side 2 TAPE HFC 00 - 110, Side 1 CALL TO ORDER Co-Chair Therriault called the House Finance Committee meeting to order at 2:30 p.m. PRESENT Co-Chair Mulder Co-Chair Therriault Representative Foster Vice Chair Bunde Representative Grussendorf Representative Austerman Representative Phillips Representative G. Davis Representative Williams Representative J. Davies and Representative Moses were absent from the meeting. ALSO PRESENT Representative Brian Porter; Representative Norm Rokeberg; Mike Tibbles, Staff, Representative Therriault; Representative Andrew Halcro; Jonathan Lack, Staff, Representative Halcro; Paul Grossi, Director, Division of Workers' Compensation, Department of Labor and Workforce Development; Guy Bell, Director, Division of Retirement and Benefits, Department of Administration; Barbara Sue Roth, Private Rehabilitation Counselor, Juneau. TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE Chancy Croft, Attorney, Anchorage; Willy Van Hermert, Anchorage; Kevin Dougherty, Attorney, Anchorage; Margorie Linder, Anchorage; Charles W. Coe, Anchorage; Ron Johnson, Kenai; Sharon Boyd, Anchorage SUMMARY HB 207 "An Act relating to the registration of persons who perform home inspections; and providing for an effective date." CSHB 207 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with "no recommendation" and with a new fiscal impact note by the Department of Community and Economic Development. HB 277 "An Act relating to payment of retirement benefits for subsequently reemployed retired members of the teachers' retirement system." CSHB 277 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with fiscal impact note by the Department of Administration, published date 2/15/00. HB 320 "An Act approving the application for and acceptance of a grant of certain federal land by the Alaska Railroad Corporation; approving the conveyance of the entire interest in the Whittier DeLong Dock and associated uplands, tidelands, and submerged lands by the Alaska Railroad Corporation; relating to use and disposition of the Whittier DeLong Dock and associated land; and providing for an effective date." CSHB 320 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with a zero fiscal note by the House Transportation Committee for the Department of Community and Economic Development. HB 419 "An Act relating to the weekly rate of compensation and minimum and maximum compensation rates for workers' compensation; specifying components of a workers' compensation reemployment plan; adjusting workers' compensation benefits for permanent partial impairment, for reemployment plans, for rehabilitation benefits, for widows, widowers, and orphans, and for funerals; relating to permanent total disability of an employee receiving rehabilitation benefits; relating to calculation of gross weekly earnings for workers' compensation benefits for seasonal and temporary workers and for workers with overtime or premium pay; setting time limits for requesting a hearing on claims for workers' compensation, for selecting a rehabilitation specialist, and for payment of medical bills; relating to termination and to waiver of rehabilitation benefits, obtaining medical releases, and resolving discovery disputes relating to workers' compensation; setting an interest rate for late payments of workers' compensation; providing for updating the workers' compensation medical fee schedule; and providing for an effective date." HB 419 was heard and HELD in Committee for further consideration. HCR 22 Establishing the Joint Special Committee on Ways and Means as a joint committee of the legislature. CSHCR 22 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with a new zero fiscal note by the Legislative Affairs Agency. HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 22 Establishing the Joint Special Committee on Ways and Means as a joint committee of the legislature. Co-Chair Mulder MOVED to ADOPT proposed committee substitute, work draft 1-LS1515\K, dated 3/31/00. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER, SPONSOR testified in support of the legislation. He observed that given the amount of time left in the current legislative session that it is doubtful that the legislature will be able to formulate a complete, total fiscal plan for the revenue side of the fiscal gap. The resolution asks that the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee look at the issues and formulate a report so that the next legislature can "hit the ground running and be in a position to formulate a plan that can take the state of Alaska into the future." The legislation would not preclude the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee from adding or developing additional items. Vice Chair Bunde observed that the report would be due on January 5, 2001. Representative Austerman expressed support for the legislation, but emphasized that he would like to see something accomplished in the current year. Co-Chair Mulder MOVED to report CSHCR 22 (FIN) out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. CSHCR 22 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with a new zero fiscal note by the Legislative Affairs Agency. HOUSE BILL NO. 207 "An Act relating to the registration of persons who perform home inspections; and providing for an effective date." Co-Chair Therriault provided members with Amendments 1 - 6 (see below). MIKE TIBBLES, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT provided information on Amendment 1: Page 6, line 5: After "without" Delete "alleging and' Mr. Tibbles observed that the language was confusing and explained that the drafter indicated that the language was not needed. Representative Phillips MOVED to ADOPT. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 2: Page 2, line 7: After education of" Insert licensed' Page 4, line 15: After "licensed' Insert 'or registered" Page 4, line 18: After 'inspector' Insert 'or associate home inspector' Page 4, line 20: After "license" Insert "or registration" Page 6, line 1: After "applicant' Insert "for licensure' Page 6, line 4: After 'license' Insert "or registration' Page 6, line 21: After "licensee' Insert "or an associate home inspector" Mr. Tibbles explained that the amendment adds technical changes to make the legislation consistent. It adds language where either a license or registration is required. Representative Rokeberg questioned if "or an associate home inspector" was necessary. Mr. Tibbles explained that the language is needed to clarify the reference to a licensee or an associate home inspector on line 13. The amendment would make the two sections consistent. There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment 2 was adopted. Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 3: Page 3, line 26: After "AS 08.57.060." Insert "No license may be reinstated if the license has been lapsed for more than five years." Mr. Tibbles explained that AS 0.8.01.100(d) provides that an individual with a license that has lapsed for more than five years may not reinstate the license. The legislation contains procedures for an individual who has a lapsed license for more than two years but does not specify what happens after five years. The amendment would address licenses that have lapsed for more than five years. Representative G. Davis observed that the amendment does not preclude an individual from obtaining a new license. Co- Chair Therriault agreed that a person whose license has lapsed for more than five years would not renew their license; they would have to get a new license. Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 4: Delete "or' Page 7, line 14, following 'premises;": Insert "or (C) by the home inspector in an administrative or judicial proceeding in which disclosure of the home inspection report is relevant to resolution of the legal issues in the proceeding;" Representative Rokeberg observed that an inspector could not expect to get written permission or consent from a client that to issue a copy of the report to the inspector's attorney if the client was suing the inspector. The amendment was intended to address the issue. Representative Rokeberg recommended the Amendment be amended: (c) by the home inspector in which disclosure of the home inspection report is relevant to resolution of the legal issues. Co-Chair Therriault observed that an inspector that is being sued by his client needs the ability to give his defense attorney a copy of the report. Mr. Tibbles did not discuss the amendment with legal counsel. Co-Chair Therriault WITHDREW Amendment 4 in order to allow it to be redrafted. Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 5: "(8) certified to demonstrate that a building complies with the thermal and lighting energy standards required by AS 46.11.040 and is performing only activities that are authorized under that certification." Mr. Tibbles explained that the amendment was drafted to address individuals that provide energy-rating certification. The amendment clarifies that that they would not be required to acquire a license. The issue was based on the definition of home inspector. Co-Chair Therriault recalled concerns by Representative J. Davies that the legislation would sweep in energy raters. The Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) certifies most of the energy raters; builders can also be certified. Representative Rokeberg spoke in support of the amendment and noted that it is not the intent to cover energy raters, which are trained and handled separately. There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment 5 was adopted. Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 6. Amendment 6 would change the sunset provision from 2004 to 2003. The amendment was drafted in response to concerns by Co-Chair Mulder. Mr. Tibbles stated that it was his understanding, based on a conversation with Catherine Reardon, Director, Division of Occupational Licensing, that everyone would need a license or a transactional license by July 2001. Representative Rokeberg spoke in opposition to the amendment. He noted that fees are on a biannual basis. Co- Chair Therriault pointed out that there would be a wind down year. There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment 6 was adopted. Co-Chair Therriault reintroduced Amendment 4. Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 4. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. RON JOHNSON, KENAI testified via teleconference. He expressed concerns with consumer protections. He pointed out that there are a large number of educational programs available on the Internet. He maintained that the report is being construed as a warranty or guarantee. He stressed that it should be viewed as a snap shot of the property; it is not evidence of future problems or a warranty. He pointed out that the state of Connecticut's application fee is only $40 dollars and the biannual renewal is $200 hundred dollars. In response to a question by Representative Grussendorf, Mr. Johnson stated that his understanding of the intent of the legislation is to control an industry and allow the state to retaliate on behalf of the public if there is harm. He pointed out that if a home inspector says that the foundation of a building is fine and then two weeks later there is water running in under the foundation that the harmed consumer has no recourse. Representative Rokeberg disagreed with statements by Mr. Johnson. He emphasized that the visual inspection of the foundation by a home inspector is only "visual". The home inspector cannot be responsible. Liability would only occur if he omits a defect or should have been aware of some anomaly. The consumer protection is the ability to revoke the license to do business or to fine the inspector. Representative Foster MOVED to report CSHB 207 (FIN) out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal note CSHB 207 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with "no recommendation" and with a new fiscal impact note by the Department of Community and Economic Development. HOUSE BILL NO. 277 "An Act relating to payment of retirement benefits for subsequently reemployed retired members of the teachers' retirement system." Vice Chair Bunde provided members with proposed committee substitute, work draft 1-LS1202\I, Cramer, 4/4/00 (copy on file). He noted that the proposed committee substitute was the work of the Subcommittee and the sponsor. JONATHAN LACK, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO reviewed the proposed committee substitute. He observed that the original legislation allowed all retired teachers to return to work and receive retirement and pay benefits at the same time. The committee substitute requires that each school district demonstrate a need in an area or discipline before rehiring a teacher. Teachers would not necessarily return at their retirement level. The emphasis of the bill is to address teacher shortages. Representative Phillips questioned if the Department of Education and Early Development would verify the need. Mr. Lack responded that the committee substitute provides that individual school districts would adopt a policy. The Department of Education and Early Development would not be involved. He noted that the subcommittee's intent was that individual school districts report to the Teacher's Retirement System (TRS) in order to track costs. (See letter dated April 7, 2000 to Co-Chair Therriault from Representative Halcro, copy on file.) There is a 2003 sunset clause. REPRESENTATIVE ANDREW HALCRO explained that the intent of the legislation is to address the shortage of teachers and provide and incentive for retired teachers to stay in the state. There are 8,000 retired teachers living outside of Alaska, many of which are teaching in other states. Representative Austerman clarified that a retired teacher could receive full benefits and a negotiated salary at the same time. Mr. Lack affirmed and explained that school districts would need to negotiate contract terms for rehired teachers. Hire would not be made unless the school district approved the terms. Representative Foster expressed appreciation for the legislation and referred to a letter by Dr. John A. Davis, Superintendent, Bering Strait School District (copy on file.) He questioned if issues raised by Dr. Davis were addressed in the committee substitute. Mr. Lack pointed out that Dr. Davis supports the legislation and noted that several of the issues were addressed. He noted that Dr. Davis expressed support for two-year contracts. He explained that the decision was made to remain with one-year contracts, to slowly review the process. He argued that working teachers should pay into a retirement system. Representative Grussendorf spoke in support of the legislation. Vice Chair Bunde pointed out that federal law requires that rehired teachers be under a retirement system. He stressed that it would be difficult to set up contributions to Social Security for a small number of teachers. Co-Chair Therriault noted that Representative Halcro's letter of intent was not adopted and suggested that it be redrafted and submitted to the full body during floor session. Representative Austerman acknowledged that there is a teacher shortage. He felt that the legislation would be a band aide and questioned if the legislation is the right answer. He noted that the fiscal impact would fall on the state since school districts are supported by the state. He noted that school funding has not increased with inflation over the last 10 - 15 years. Co-Chair Therriault noted that the hiring process is controlled by the school district. Representative Halcro acknowledged that the legislation is a band aide but emphasized that it is a needed band aide. (TAPE CHANGE, HFC 00 - 109, SIDE 2)    Representative Austerman clarified that there is a sunset clause on page 2, line 28. Vice Chair Bunde noted that the laws of supply and demand remain. He stressed that a raise in salary would increase applicants. Co-Chair Mulder MOVED to ADOPT work draft 1-LS1202\I, Cramer, 4/4/00. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. GUY BELL, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF RETIREMENT AND BENEFITS, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION provided information on the fiscal note. He observed that the department submitted an indeterminate fiscal note. The cost to TRS will depend on the amount of teachers that are rehired. He pointed out that controls were placed on the legislation. A reporting requirement was added. He stated that the department could determine if the legislation results in a cost savings after the fact. Co-Chair Mulder MOVED to report CSHB 277 (FIN) out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. CSHB 277 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with fiscal impact note by the Department of Administration, published date 2/15/00. HOUSE BILL NO. 419 "An Act relating to the weekly rate of compensation and minimum and maximum compensation rates for workers' compensation; specifying components of a workers' compensation reemployment plan; adjusting workers' compensation benefits for permanent partial impairment, for reemployment plans, for rehabilitation benefits, for widows, widowers, and orphans, and for funerals; relating to permanent total disability of an employee receiving rehabilitation benefits; relating to calculation of gross weekly earnings for workers' compensation benefits for seasonal and temporary workers and for workers with overtime or premium pay; setting time limits for requesting a hearing on claims for workers' compensation, for selecting a rehabilitation specialist, and for payment of medical bills; relating to termination and to waiver of rehabilitation benefits, obtaining medical releases, and resolving discovery disputes relating to workers' compensation; setting an interest rate for late payments of workers' compensation; providing for updating the workers' compensation medical fee schedule; and providing for an effective date." PAUL GROSSI, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT testified in support of the legislation. He observed that the legislation was an agreement between labor and management. The legislation provides something for both sides. It provides needed benefit increases; benefits have not been increased for 12 years. He gave examples of items that received rate increases: permanent-partial impairment benefits, minimum and maximum compensation, and widows' and orphans' benefits. The calculation for overtime payment is included for the determination of a compensation rate. The retraining stipend was increased from 60 percent to 70 percent of the expendable wage. Mr. Grossi noted that the legislation also includes provisions requested by employers. The legislation simplifies the waiving of retraining benefits. It clarifies what benefits are due during the retraining process. The legislation also clarifies the two-year timeframe allowed to request a claim. It allows 30 days to pay medical bills, changes the interest rate to 2 percent above the prime. It would simplify the summary process for obtaining reasonable medical releases and provide annual update for the usual and customary fee schedules. The legislation is a compromise, but it is fair and provides a needed increase in benefits. Mr. Grossi reviewed fiscal notes. He noted that the Department of Labor and Workforce Development's fiscal note of $6.0 thousand dollars covers the annual update for the fee schedule. The Department of Administration covers increased state cost. CHANCY CROFT, ATTORNEY, ANCHORAGE testified via teleconference in opposition to the legislation. He noted that the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee proposed that the director propose increases to straighten out the legislative inequities. He maintained that the legislation does not meet the LBA audit committee goal. He maintained that what is provided to injured workers is inadequate and provided at a terrible cost of other rights. He referred to section 4, page 4: "An employee may not be considered permanently totally disabled so long as the employee is involved in the rehabilitation process under this chapter." He maintained that the statute would prevent an individual from receiving permanent total disability even if they are receiving no benefits. He recommended that the language be changed to disallow permanent total disability status only if the employee is receiving full rehabilitation benefits. Mr. Croft discussed section 5, page 4. The amount paid for rehabilitation is changed from $10 thousand dollars to $13.3 thousand dollars. He acknowledged that this is an increase of 33 percent, but emphasized that it does not keep up with the 40 percent increase in the cost of living increase. He suggested that this be raised to $20.0 thousand dollars. Mr. Croft spoke against section 7, page 5. An injured worker would be allowed to waive all rehabilitation benefits without board approval. He pointed out that rehabilitation benefits could amount to as much as one-half of an injured worker's benefits. There is no way to change the waiver. He suggested that injured workers could be taken advantage of through this section. Mr. Croft reviewed sections 11 and 12. Injured workers could be provided with a relief to sign in order to allow adjusters to obtain information. The type of information that an adjuster can obtain is not specified. This would penalize workers without a penalty to unscrupulous adjusters. He recommended that a 50 percent penalty be added to an injured worker's compensation in the event that an adjuster seeks inappropriate information. Mr. Croft discussed section 13, page 8. He suggested that the period of time for the dismissal starts when an employer files a petition to dismiss a claim and the worker does not request a hearing within two-years. Mr. Croft referred to section 15, page 9. He noted that the increase in the maximum compensation rate would be 120 percent of the average weekly wage. The current average weekly wage is $635 dollars. The maximum wage by would be increased $62 dollars. The minimum would be raised by $154 dollars to $168 or 9 percent. This is less than 75 percent of the minimum wage. He suggested that the minimum and maximum amounts should be increased by 19 percent to $226 or $1,000 dollars a week. Mr. Croft discussed section 17. Partial permanent impairment was increased to $177,000 dollars from $135,000 dollars. He noted that the LBA audit recommended an increase to $190,000 dollars. He maintained that injured workers are being shortchanged. He noted that the average Alaskan at the age of 30 working for 30 years would receive less than 30 percent of their actual loss through the legislation. He noted that there is no provision to change the compensation rate if the board decides that it is unfair. In response to a question by Vice Chair Bunde, Mr. Croft reiterated that most states require waiver of rights by workers to be validated by their boards. He noted that if an adjuster has the authority to withhold benefits that the worker could be starved into agreement and would be disadvantaged. Injured workers can currently agree to waive their rights with approval of the board. Representative Grussendorf expressed concern with sections 7 and 11. Mr. Croft stressed that section 7 takes away the board's review of an agreement. He maintained that the section allows for waiver of benefits. The board has to determine if it is in the best interest of the employee. Representative Grussendorf agreed that section 11 could be viewed as a threat to an employee. WILLY VAN HERMERT, WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMITTEE OF ALASKA, ANCHORAGE testified via teleconference in support of the legislation. He felt that a two-year time frame was adequate. He stressed that the maximum wage of $700 dollars th is the 7 highest rate in the United States. He maintained that the minimum wage does not come into play. Another issue important to labor, the death benefit, was increased to 100% of the spendable amount. Alaska will have the highest death benefit of any state. Mr. Hermert spoke to the "waiver". He pointed out that injured workers have to sign a form indicating which benefits would be given up. Mr. Hermert stressed that the legislation was negotiated in "good faith" and is an improvement over the current system. KEVIN DOUGHERTY, ALASKA LABORERS UNION, ANCHORAGE testified via teleconference. He noted that he served with the ad hoc committee and reviewed the committee's makeup. (TAPE CHANGE, HFC 00 - 110, Side 1).  Mr. Dougherty stressed that the legislation is balanced and noted that it represents a 7.7 - 10 percent increase for the employer industry. He pointed out that the bulk of the increases are going to death benefits. Mr. Dougherty continues his review of the legislation. He noted that benefits were raised. He observed that the ad hoc committee used different CIP amounts. He observed that the legislation resolved all the issue, which could be jointly agreed upon and maintained that the bill is a stride forward. Representative Grussendorf asked about "injured worker" rehabilitation rights. Mr. Dougherty stated that under the current law that an employee cannot waive his rights without the board's approval. He acknowledged that the process would be changed and pointed out that the form would contain information to protect the employee's rights. Representative Grussendorf stated that he is still uncomfortable with the provision. MARGORIE LINDER, VOCATIONAL EDUCATION COUNSELOR, ANCHORAGE testified via teleconference in opposition to section 7 (R). She spoke against the waiver provision. She stressed that compensation is complex and that workers need extensive information before a waiver is indicated. She reviewed the benefits. She presented a hypothetical case with a 5 percent permanent partial impairment rating (PPI). Under the proposal each point is worth $1,770 dollars. The weekly benefit would be $500 a week for 17.7 weeks. The worker would also be eligible for $13,300 for tuition, books and supplies. After the initial 17.7 weeks the worker would be eligible for .014K benefits worth $450 a week for 84.3 weeks or $37,935 dollars. A worker who accepts an adjuster's offer of a permanent injury payout of $8,850 dollars in lieu rehabilitation would lose $51,200 dollars worth of benefits if they did not return to work. She stressed the cost to the state for public assistance if the worker is not rehabilitated back into the workforce. She stressed that the proposal would allow an injured employee that does not understand what would be lost to waive their benefits. CHARLES W. COE, ATTORNEY, ANCHORAGE testified via teleconference. He expressed concerned that the minimum compensation rate received by injured workers is below the minimum wage. He noted that many workers receive unemployment benefits that are not factored into their wage. He noted that people cannot live on the minimum compensation rate without being on public assistance. Mr. Coe discussed the waiver provision. He recalled that, in 1988, insurance companies were attempting to get injured workers to sign waivers, which would give up their rights to rehabilitation, in order to receive lump sum payments of their PPI rating. As a result, the board required waivers to be approved. He noted that people sign waivers because they need the money immediately. He maintained that workers cannot double collect. He asserted that insurance companies are trying to get the state to adopt a system that allows injured workers to give up their vocational rehabilitation rights. He noted that individuals that give up their vocational rehabilitation rights through the insurance companies often end up at the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation. He stressed that the state of Alaska is paying for the rehabilitation of individuals that should be supported by their insurance companies. Mr. Coe added that the statute of limitation clause would be difficult to enforce. He concluded that the legislation would be a burden on injured workers. He noted that injured workers are a growing group. SHARON BOYD, ANCHORAGE testified via teleconference. She noted that she is an injured worker. She spoke in support of extensions. She spoke against blanket releases. DON ETHERIDGE, AFL-CIO, JUNEAU testified in support of the legislation. He maintained that the legislation is a fair compromise. In response to a question by Vice Chair Bunde, Mr. Etheridge noted that they are aware of the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee audit. He noted that portions of the report are included in the legislation. Representative Grussendorf questioned if the Ad Hoc Committee spoke to attorneys. Mr. Etheridge noted that Kevin Dougherty, Attorney, Anchorage was on the Committee. BARBARA SUE ROTH, PRIVATE REHABILITATION COUNSELOR, JUNEAU spoke in support of the legislation. She stressed that the state of Alaska has a good program. She observed that the current law states that funds are paid as services are rendered. She observed that there are injured workers that do not want the services. She emphasized the difficulty of working with people who do not want services. She emphasized the importance of raising the compensation rate. HB 419 was heard and HELD in Committee for further consideration. (TAPE CHANGE, HFC 00 - 110, SIDE 2)  HOUSE BILL NO. 320 "An Act approving the application for and acceptance of a grant of certain federal land by the Alaska Railroad Corporation; approving the conveyance of the entire interest in the Whittier DeLong Dock and associated uplands, tidelands, and submerged lands by the Alaska Railroad Corporation; relating to use and disposition of the Whittier DeLong Dock and associated land; and providing for an effective date." Co-Chair Therriault observed that CSHB 320 (FIN) was MOVED from Committee on 4/6/00. He explained that the title for CSHB 320 (FIN) needs to be tightened to encompass an amendment to disallow a sole source contract for the DeLong Dock. Vice Chair Bunde MOVED to RESCIND the Committee's action in reporting CSHB 320 (FIN) from Committee. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to ADOPT a conceptual amendment to tighten language disallowing a sole source contract. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. Co-Chair Mulder MOVED to report CSHB 320 (FIN) out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. CSHB 320 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with a zero fiscal note by the House Transportation Committee for the Department of Community and Economic Development. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 4:55 p.m.