HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE May 6, 1994 8:00 a.m. MEMBERS PRESENT Representative Al Vezey, Chairman Representative Pete Kott, Vice-Chairman Representative Bettye Davis Representative Gary Davis Representative Harley Olberg Representative Jerry Sanders Representative Fran Ulmer MEMBERS ABSENT None COMMITTEE CALENDAR SB 190: "An Act relating to income withholding and other methods of enforcement for orders of support; relating to medical support orders; amending Alaska Rule of Civil Procedure 90.3(d); and providing for an effective date." MOVED FROM COMMITTEE WITH NO RECOMMENDATION SB 357: "An Act relating to certain study, publication, and reporting requirements by and to state agencies; relating to certain fees for reports; and providing for an effective date." MOVED FROM COMMITTEE WITH DO PASS RECOMMENDATION SB 70: "An Act establishing a loan guarantee and interest rate subsidy program for assistive technology." MOVED FROM COMMITTEE WITH DO PASS RECOMMENDATION SB 228: "An Act relating to bail after conviction for various felonies if the defendant has certain previous felony convictions." MOVED FROM COMMITTEE WITH DO PASS RECOMMENDATION SB 377: "An Act relating to state agency fiscal procedures, including procedures related to the assessment and collection of certain taxes; and providing for an effective date." NOT HEARD SB 365: "An Act amending, and repealing laws providing for state agency functions and services related to transportation and capital improvement planning, workers' compensation, motor vehicles and motor vehicle insurance, medical care for prisoners, state building leases, and review and approval of water and sewer systems, for the purpose of reducing state government expenditures; and providing for an effective date." NOT HEARD SB 376: "An Act relating to fees charged by state agencies for certain services and to reimbursement for expenses incurred by the state in providing certain services; and providing for an effective date." NOT HEARD WITNESS REGISTER PHIL PETRIE, Operations Manager Child Support Enforcement Division Department of Revenue 550 West 7th Anchorage, AK 99501-3556 Phone: 269-6800 POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on HCSCSSB 190 REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES Alaska State Legislature Alaska State Capitol, Room 418 Juneau, AK 99811-0460 Phone: 465-4457 POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on proposed amendment to CSSB 190, Sponsor of HB 458 DARREL REXWINKEL, Commissioner Department of Revenue P.O. Box 110400 Juneau, AK 99811-0400 Phone: 465-2300 POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on proposed amendment to CSSB 190 KARL LUCK, Director Division of Occupational Licensing Department of Commerce & Economic Development P.O. Box 110806 Juneau, AK 99811-0806 Phone: 465-2534 POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on proposed amendment to CSSB 190 JUANITA HENSLEY, Chief, Driver Services Division of Motor Vehicles Department of Public Safety P.O. Box 20020 Juneau, AK 99802-0200 Phone: 465-4335 POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on the proposed amendment to CSSB 190 LINDA REXWINKEL, Program Budget Analyst Division of Budget Review Office of Management & Budget P.O. Box 110020 Juneau, AK 99811-0020 Phone: 465-4694 POSITION STATEMENT: Addressed CSSB 357(FIN) JAY HOGAN, Contract Employee House Finance Committee Alaska State Capitol, Room 502 Juneau, AK 99811 Phone: 465-6590 POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HCSCSSB 357(STA) EARL CLARK Southeast Alaska Independent Living Center 9163 Parkwood Juneau, AK 99801 Phone: 789-9665 POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on HCSCSSB 70(STA) ROXANNE STEWART, Staff Senator Jim Duncan Alaska State Capitol, Room 119 Juneau, AK 99811 Phone: 465-4766 POSITION STATEMENT: Addressed CSSB 70 for Senator Jim Duncan, Sponsor STAN RIDGEWAY, Deputy Director Division of Vocational Rehabilitation Department of Education 801 W. 10th St. Juneau, AK 99801-1894 Phone: 465-6932 POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on CSSB 70 SENATOR JUDITH SALO Alaska State Legislature Alaska State Capitol, Room 504 Juneau, AK 99811 Phone: 465-4940 POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 228 PREVIOUS ACTION BILL: SB 190 SHORT TITLE: ENFORCEMENT OF SUPPORT ORDERS SPONSOR(S): JUDICIARY BY REQUEST JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 04/13/93 1336 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 04/13/93 1336 (S) JUDICIARY, FINANCE 02/23/94 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211 02/23/94 (S) MINUTE(JUD) 02/28/94 2987 (S) JUD RPT CS 3DP SAME TITLE 02/28/94 2987 (S) FN TO SB & CS PUBLISHED (REV) 03/15/94 (S) FIN AT 08:30 AM SENATE FIN 518 03/15/94 (S) MINUTE(FIN) 03/15/94 (S) MINUTE(FIN) 03/17/94 (S) FIN AT 09:30 AM SENATE FIN 518 04/06/94 3463 (S) FIN RPT CS 1DP 3NR SAME TITLE 04/06/94 3463 (S) LETTER OF INTENT WITH FIN REPORT 04/06/94 3463 (S) FN TO CS PUBLISHED (REV, COURT) 04/06/94 (S) FIN AT 08:00 AM SENATE FINE 518 04/08/94 (S) RLS AT 00:00 AM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203 04/08/94 (S) MINUTE(RLS) 04/11/94 3555 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 4/11/94 04/11/94 3558 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME 04/11/94 3558 (S) FIN CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT 04/11/94 3558 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN CONSENT 04/11/94 3558 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME CSSB 190(FIN) 04/11/94 3558 (S) (S) ADOPTED FIN LETTER OF INTENT 04/11/94 3559 (S) PASSED Y17 N3 04/11/94 3559 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE SAME AS PASSAGE 04/11/94 3559 (S) Adams NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION 04/11/94 3567 (S) ZERO FN TO FIN CS PUBLISHED (COURT) 04/12/94 3589 (S) FN TO FIN CS PUBLISHED (REV) 04/12/94 3589 (S) RECON TAKEN UP/IN THIRD READING 04/12/94 3589 (S) HELD ON RECONSIDERATION TO 4/13 CALENDAR 04/13/94 3642 (S) HELD ON RECONSIDERATION TO 4/14 CALENDAR 04/14/94 3679 (S) RETURN TO SECOND FOR AM 1 UNAN CONSENT 04/14/94 3682 (S) AM NO 1 MOVED BY TAYLOR 04/14/94 3682 (S) AM NO 1 ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT 04/14/94 3682 (S) AUTOMATICALLY IN THIRD READING 04/14/94 3682 (S) MOTION TO RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 2 04/14/94 3682 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 2 UNAN CONSENT 04/14/94 3683 (S) AM NO 2 MOVED BY TAYLOR 04/14/94 3683 (S) AM NO 2 FAILED Y6 N13 E1 04/14/94 3684 (S) AUTOMATICALLY IN THIRD READING 04/14/94 3684 (S) MOTION TO RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 3 04/14/94 3684 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 3 Y12 N7 E1 04/14/94 3684 (S) AM NO 3 MOVED AND WITHDRAWN 04/14/94 3684 (S) AUTOMATICALLY IN THIRD READING 04/14/94 3685 (S) (S) ADOPTED FIN LETTER OF INTENT 04/14/94 3685 (S) PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y19 N- E1 04/14/94 3685 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE SAME AS PASSAGE 04/15/94 3732 (S) COURT RULE CHANGE VOTE SAME AS PASSAGE 04/15/94 3734 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H) 04/18/94 3540 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 04/18/94 3540 (H) STATE AFFAIRS,JUDICIARY,FINANCE 05/03/94 (H) STA AT 09:00 AM CAPITOL 102 05/03/94 (H) MINUTE(STA) 05/04/94 (H) FIN AT 08:30 AM HOUSE FIN 519 05/05/94 (H) FIN AT 08:30 AM HOUSE FIN 519 05/05/94 (H) STA AT 04:15 PM CAPITOL 102 05/06/94 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102 BILL: SB 357 SHORT TITLE: REQUIRED REPORTS OF STATE AGENCIES SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 03/14/94 3193 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 03/14/94 3193 (S) STATE AFFAIRS, FINANCE 03/14/94 3194 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTES PUBLISHED 03/14/94 3194 (S) REV, DCED-2, ADM-5, DNR, DOE-2, 03/14/94 3194 (S) DOT, DPS-2, DEC, DMVA 03/14/94 3194 (S) GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER 03/30/94 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH RM 205 03/30/94 (S) MINUTE(STA) 04/06/94 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH RM 205 04/06/94 (S) MINUTE(STA) 04/07/94 3502 (S) STA RPT 1DP 4NR 04/07/94 3502 (S) ZERO FNS PUBLISHED (DCED, ADM, REV, GOV) 04/07/94 3502 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FNS (DOE-2, DCED-2, 04/07/94 3502 (S) ADM-5, DNR, DOT, DPS-2, DEC, DMVA) 04/14/94 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518 04/21/94 (S) FIN AT 10:00 AM SENATE FIN 518 04/21/94 (S) RLS AT 02:15 PM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203 04/21/94 3836 (S) FIN RPT CS 6DP 1NR SAME TITLE 04/21/94 3837 (S) ZERO FNS TO CS PUBLISHED (DOT, ADM) 04/21/94 3837 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FNS APPLY(DCED-3, ADM-5, 04/21/94 3837 (S) DNR, DOE-2, DPS-2, DEC, DMVA, REV, GOV) 04/22/94 3869 (S) RLS RPT 2CAL 2NR 4/22/94 04/22/94 3871 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME 04/22/94 3871 (S) FIN CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT 04/22/94 3871 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN CONSENT 04/22/94 3871 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME CSSB 357(FIN) 04/22/94 3872 (S) RETURN TO SECOND FOR AM 1 UNAN CONSENT 04/22/94 3872 (S) AM NO 1 MOVED BY DUNCAN 04/22/94 3872 (S) AM NO 1 FAILED Y8 N11 A1 04/22/94 3872 (S) AUTOMATICALLY IN THIRD READING 04/22/94 3873 (S) PASSED Y14 N5 A1 04/22/94 3873 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE SAME AS PASSAGE 04/22/94 3940 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H) 04/27/94 3745 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 04/27/94 3745 (H) STATE AFFAIRS, FINANCE 05/05/94 (H) STA AT 04:15 PM CAPITOL 102 05/06/94 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102 BILL: SB 70 SHORT TITLE: ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY LOAN GUARANTEES SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S)DUNCAN, Ellis, Little, Taylor, Kelly, Salo,Pearce,Leman,Rieger,Frank,Kerttula,Zharoff; REPRESENTATIVE(S) Davies JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 01/27/93 170 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 01/27/93 170 (S) HES, LABOR & COMMERCE, FINANCE 02/10/93 322 (S) COSPONSOR: ELLIS 03/22/93 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH RM 205 03/22/93 (S) MINUTE(HES) 03/23/93 910 (S) HES RPT 5DP 03/23/93 910 (S) FISCAL NOTE (DOE) 01/25/94 (S) L&C AT 01:30 PM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203 01/25/94 (S) MINUTE(L&C) 01/28/94 2629 (S) COSPONSOR(S): LITTLE 02/22/94 (S) L&C AT 01:30 PM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203 02/22/94 (S) MINUTE(L&C) 02/23/94 2935 (S) L&C RPT CS 4DP SAME TITLE 02/23/94 2935 (S) FISCAL NOTE TO SB & CS PUBLISHED (DOE) 03/10/94 3145 (S) FIN RPT 5DP (L&C)CS SAME TITLE 03/10/94 3145 (S) PREVIOUS FN (DOE) 03/10/94 (S) RLS AT 00:00 AM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203 03/10/94 (S) MINUTE(RLS) 03/10/94 (S) FIN AT 08:30 AM SENATE FIN 518 03/16/94 3243 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR AND 1 DO PASS 3/16 03/16/94 3243 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME 03/16/94 3243 (S) L&C CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT 03/16/94 3244 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN CONSENT 03/16/94 3244 (S) COSPONSOR(S):TAYLOR,KELLY,SALO, 03/16/94 3244 (S) PEARCE, LEMAN, RIEGER, FRANK, KERTTULA, 03/16/94 3244 (S) ZHAROFF 03/16/94 3244 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME CSSB 70(L&C) 03/16/94 3244 (S) PASSED Y18 N- E1 A1 03/16/94 3244 (S) Taylor NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION 03/18/94 3276 (S) RECONSIDERATION NOT TAKEN UP 03/18/94 3278 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H) 03/21/94 2895 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 03/21/94 2895 (H) HES, STATE AFFAIRS, FINANCE 03/21/94 2916 (H) CROSS SPONSOR(S): DAVIES 04/19/94 (H) HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106 04/19/94 (H) MINUTE(HES) 04/20/94 3620 (H) HES RPT 4DP 1NR 04/20/94 3620 (H) DP: KOTT, G.DAVIS, TOOHEY, B.DAVIS 04/20/94 3620 (H) NR: OLBERG 04/20/94 3620 (H) -PREVIOUS SENATE FISCAL NOTE (DOE) 2/23 05/05/94 (H) STA AT 04:15 PM CAPITOL 102 05/06/94 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102 BILL: SB 228 SHORT TITLE: NO BAIL FOR FELONS W/PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) SALO,Little,Zharoff; REPRESENTATIVE(S) Navarre JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 01/03/94 2453 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/3/94 01/10/94 2453 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 01/10/94 2453 (S) JUD, FIN 03/30/94 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211 04/05/94 3444 (S) JUD RPT 5DP 04/05/94 3444 (S) ZERO FNS PUBLISHED 04/05/94 3444 (S) (CORR, ADM-2, DPS, LAW) 04/13/94 (S) FIN AT 08:30 AM SENATE FIN 518 04/13/94 (S) RLS AT 04:10 PM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203 04/13/94 3623 (S) FIN RPT 5DP 04/13/94 3623 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FNS (CORR, ADM-2, DPS, LAW 04/14/94 3665 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 4/14/94 04/14/94 3667 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME 04/14/94 3667 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN CONSENT 04/14/94 3667 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME SB 228 04/14/94 3668 (S) PASSED Y19 N- E1 04/14/94 3690 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H) 04/15/94 3458 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 04/15/94 3458 (H) STATE AFFAIRS,JUDICIARY,FINANCE 04/15/94 3529 (H) CROSS SPONSOR(S): NAVARRE 05/05/94 (H) STA AT 04:15 PM CAPITOL 102 05/06/94 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102 BILL: SB 377 SHORT TITLE: STATE AGENCY FISCAL PROCEDURES SPONSOR(S): FINANCE JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 04/13/94 3633 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 04/13/94 3633 (S) FINANCE 04/13/94 3650 (S) FIN WAIVED UNIFORM RULE 23 04/14/94 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518 04/20/94 (S) RLS AT 06:45 PM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203 04/21/94 3839 (S) FIN RPT CS 6DP 1DNP SAME TITLE 04/21/94 3839 (S) FN TO SB & CS PUBLISHED (ADM) 04/21/94 3839 (S) ZERO FN TO SB & CS PUBLISHED (REV) 04/21/94 (S) FIN AT 10:00 AM SENATE FIN 518 04/21/94 (S) RLS AT 02:15 PM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203 04/22/94 3870 (S) RLS RPT 3CAL 1NR 4/22/94 04/22/94 3876 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME 04/22/94 3877 (S) FIN CS ADOPTED Y12 N8 04/22/94 3877 (S) AM NO 1 MOVED BY KERTTULA 04/22/94 3882 (S) QUESTION: AM NO 1 GERMANE? 04/22/94 3883 (S) AM NO 1 GERMANE Y17 N3 04/22/94 3883 (S) AM NO 1 ADOPTED Y14 N6 04/22/94 3883 (S) AM NO 2 MOVED BY DONLEY 04/22/94 3884 (S) AM NO 2 FAILED Y9 N11 04/22/94 3884 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN CONSENT 04/22/94 3884 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME CSSB 377(FIN) AM 04/22/94 3884 (S) PASSED Y16 N4 04/22/94 3885 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE PASSED Y17 N3 04/22/94 3885 (S) Pearce NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION 04/22/94 3885 (S) TAKE UP RECON ON SAME DAY WITHDRAWN 04/22/94 3937 (S) RECON TAKEN UP SAME DAY Y18 N2 04/22/94 3937 (S) PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y16 N4 04/22/94 3938 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE SAME AS PASSAGE 04/22/94 3941 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H) 04/27/94 3746 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 04/27/94 3747 (H) STA, O&G, JUDICIARY, FINANCE BILL: SB 365 SHORT TITLE: GOVERNOR'S OMNIBUS BILL SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 03/24/94 3345 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 03/24/94 3345 (S) STA, FIN 03/24/94 3345 (S) FISCAL NOTES PUBLISHED (DPS,ADM,DEC,REV) 03/24/94 3345 (S) ZERO FNS PUBLISHED 03/24/94 3345 (S) (DPS, ADM, GOV, DCRA, DOT) 03/24/94 3346 (S) GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER 03/30/94 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH RM 205 03/30/94 (S) MINUTE(STA) 04/06/94 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH RM 205 04/06/94 (S) MINUTE(STA) 04/08/94 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH RM 205 04/08/94 (S) MINUTE(STA) 04/08/94 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH RM 205 04/11/94 3553 (S) STA RPT CS 3NR 1DNP SAME TITLE 04/11/94 3554 (S) PREVIOUS FNS APPLY (DPS, ADM, DEC, REV) 04/11/94 3554 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FNS APPLY 04/11/94 3554 (S) (DPS, ADM, GOV, DCRA, DOT) 04/14/94 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518 04/20/94 (S) RLS AT 06:45 PM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203 04/21/94 (S) FIN AT 10:00 AM SENATE FIN 518 04/21/94 (S) RLS AT 02:15 PM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203 04/21/94 3837 (S) FIN RPT CS 4DP 1NR 2DNP NEW TITLE 04/21/94 3838 (S) FNS TO CS PUBLISHED (S.FIN/DPS-2) 04/21/94 3838 (S) ZERO FNS TO CS PUBLISHED (DPS, ADM, 04/21/94 3838 (S) DOT, DEC, LABOR, CORR, LAW, GOV) 04/21/94 3838 (S) PREVIOUS FN APPLIES (DPS) 04/22/94 3869 (S) RLS RPT 2CAL 2NR 4/22/94 04/22/94 3873 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME 04/22/94 3874 (S) MOTION TO ADOPT FIN CS 04/22/94 3874 (S) FAILED TO ADOPT FIN CS Y10 N10 04/22/94 3874 (S) MOVED TO BOTTOM OF CALENDAR 04/22/94 3916 (S) AM NO 1 NOT OFFERED 04/22/94 3916 (S) AM NO 3 MOVED BY PEARCE 04/22/94 3930 (S) AM NO 3 ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT 04/22/94 3930 (S) AM NO 2A MOVED BY DONLEY 04/22/94 3931 (S) AM NO 2A ADOPTED Y11 N9 04/22/94 3931 (S) RESCIND ACTION IN ADPTG AM 2A Y11 N9 04/22/94 3932 (S) AM NO 2A FAILED Y9 N11 04/22/94 3932 (S) AM NO 4 MOVED BY RIEGER 04/22/94 3934 (S) AM NO 4 FAILED Y9 N11 04/22/94 3934 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN CONSENT 04/22/94 3935 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME SB 365 AM 04/22/94 3935 (S) PASSED Y17 N3 04/22/94 3935 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE SAME AS PASSAGE 04/22/94 3935 (S) Taylor NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION 04/22/94 3935 (S) RECON TAKEN UP SAME DAY UNAN CONSENT 04/22/94 3936 (S) PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y17 N3 04/22/94 3936 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE SAME AS PASSAGE 04/22/94 3940 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H) 04/27/94 3745 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 04/27/94 3746 (H) STATE AFFAIRS, FINANCE BILL: SB 376 SHORT TITLE: STATE AGENCY FEES AND COLLECTIONS SPONSOR(S): FINANCE JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 04/13/94 3633 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 04/13/94 3633 (S) FINANCE 04/13/94 3650 (S) FIN WAIVED RULE 23 04/14/94 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518 04/20/94 (S) RLS AT 06:45 PM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203 04/21/94 (S) FIN AT 10:00 AM SENATE FIN 518 04/21/94 (S) RLS AT 02:15 PM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203 04/21/94 3838 (S) FIN RPT CS 6DP 1DNP SAME TITLE 04/21/94 3839 (S) FISCAL NOTES TO SB & CS PUBLISHED 04/21/94 3839 (S) (DPS-2, DEC, REV) 04/21/94 3839 (S) ZERO FN TO SB & CS PUBLISHED (CORR) 04/22/94 3870 (S) RLS RPT 3CAL 1NR 4/22/94 04/22/94 3874 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME 04/22/94 3874 (S) FIN CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT 04/22/94 3875 (S) MOTION TO ADVANCE TO 3RD RDG WITHDRAWN 04/22/94 3875 (S) AM NO 1 MOVED BY FRANK & HALFORD 04/22/94 3875 (S) AM NO 1 ADOPTED Y11 N9 04/22/94 3875 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN CONSENT 04/22/94 3876 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME CSSB 376(FIN) AM 04/22/94 3876 (S) PASSED Y16 N4 04/22/94 3876 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE SAME AS PASSAGE 04/22/94 3941 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H) 04/27/94 3746 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 04/27/94 3746 (H) STATE AFFAIRS, FINANCE ACTION NARRATIVE TAPE 93-53, SIDE A Number 000 CHAIRMAN AL VEZEY called the meeting to order at 8:02 a.m. Members present were REPRESENTATIVES KOTT, SANDERS, G. DAVIS, OLBERG, G. DAVIS, ULMER. A quorum was present. HCSCSSB 190(STA) - ENFORCEMENT OF SUPPORT ORDERS CHAIRMAN VEZEY opened HCSCSSB 190(STA) for discussion. REPRESENTATIVE BETTYE DAVIS clarified the committee was discussing version M, which was adopted at the last meeting. REPRESENTATIVE FRAN ULMER questioned the word "intentionally" which was added on page 14, lines 7 and 15. She felt the word "intentionally" raises the standard of proof. She believed the higher standard would make the ability to levy the penalty for failing to comply with a court order very difficult. She moved to remove the word "intentionally" from page 14, lines 7 and 15. CHAIRMAN VEZEY commented REPRESENTATIVE ULMER could make the motion, or HCSCSSB 190(STA) could just be tabled. REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS interjected she had the same concerns as REPRESENTATIVE ULMER. Testimony from the Child Support Enforcement Division (CSED) at the last meeting, however, agreed that the use of "intentionally" was acceptable language. She asked for CSED to speak on this issue again. CHAIRMAN VEZEY called Phil Petrie to the table. Number 084 PHIL PETRIE, OPERATIONS MANAGER, CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DIVISION, answered questions on HCSCSSB 190(STA). He stated CSED did agree to the insertion of the word "intentionally" because it is an element of proof they normally have to prove with an employer anyway. He noted a court would not hold them responsible for their unintentional acts or if they did not receive the withholding order; therefore, "intentionally" will not cause CSED any difficulty. The noticing process is extensive before the case is sent to the Department of Law, therefore the attorney general would have no problem trying to prove an employer intentionally did not send the money to CSED. REPRESENTATIVE ULMER removed her motion. REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS submitted as an amendment, the addition of HB 458, sponsored by Representative John Davies, to HCSCSSB 190(STA). CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked Phil Petrie to comment on the amendment. MR. PETRIE commented the CSED and Department of Revenue supported HB 458. This action is pending in Congress in some form to be part of the Child Support Enforcement tools to be used. HB 458 would substantially improve collections and allow CSED to reach people who are normally self- employed, or otherwise employed, where CSED is not now adequately reaching them. HB 458 provides incentive for those people to come to CSED and establish a payment plan. A list of occupations and occupational licenses are included which would either be withheld or revoked for a period of time, until such time as the obligors come to CSED and set up a payment plan. Number 175 REPRESENTATIVE ULMER asked if this would apply for all obligors or only if they haven't made payments for some period of time -- what the triggering is. MR. PETRIE said, "It applies to all obligors with a threshold of arrearages - those who are not making payments and, I believe, the last copy of the bill that I saw had a threshold of $5,000 or more in arrears, but (indiscernible). If they were already under wage withholding, money was coming in and there was an approved payment plan with the division, then it's my interpretation that the bill would not apply. It would apply to that portion of the population that we're currently getting no payments from." MR. PETRIE clarified that it was $2,500, not $5,000. CHAIRMAN VEZEY called an at ease. CHAIRMAN VEZEY called the meeting back to order at 8:17 a.m. CHAIRMAN VEZEY inquired if the amendment was verbatim per HB 458. Number 210 REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES, Sponsor of HB 458, addressed the amendment. He said the intent of HB 458 is to give CSED a vehicle to get the attention of some independently employed people. It uses the vehicle of occupational licenses. CSED would prepare a list of those individuals who are significantly in default, or $2,500 in more than a year in arrears. To be out of default, it doesn't require that a person pay up their entire indebtedness, it only requires them to be on a regular payment plan. He explained the experience of other states, that have instituted this type of tool, was that about 80 percent of the people who owe back child support payments pay up within the provisionary period. The provisionary period in HB 458 is 180 days. He noted HB 458 only applies to situations where a license is being renewed or a license is being applied for for the first time. A person applying for a license would be issued a temporary license for the provisionary period. If they came into agreement with CSED within that period, the license would be made permanent. The process would be similar in the case of a renewal. He said 180 days before the license is to be renewed, they would be notified that it would not be renewed if they did not come into compliance. CHAIRMAN VEZEY questioned if $2,500 was a rather low threshold. He mentioned some child support payments run $1,100 a month. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES responded the federal threshold is $5,000, therefore they felt a slightly lower amount would be appropriate. CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked if HB 458 impacted teaching certificates. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES affirmed CHAIRMAN VEZEY. CHAIRMAN VEZEY noted there had been comments made earlier that HB 458 did not address the Alaska Bar Association. CHAIRMAN VEZEY called a brief at ease. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES referred to page 6, subsection (ii), of the amendment, where it states "Authorization for Performing an Occupation Regulated under Alaska Statutes Title 08." He believed they would fall under that section. Number 289 REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS observed AS 08. included a larger list of occupations and commented he felt the amendment was more palatable because of this. He did not want to single out just a few occupations in the state. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES observed HB 458 covers all occupational licenses. CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked the committee to comment on the threshold. He considered the amendment to be a "hammer" which he would not want to see used lightly or unnecessarily as a threat. REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG agreed $2,500 was too low. He suggested at least $5,000. REPRESENTATIVE GARY DAVIS agreed with "the big hammer." He has received calls about the complexities with CSED. CSED has subpoena power, however each case has its own individual problem. He felt criminals will always find another way to hide their income. HB 458 affects those that work, whereby taking their license so they cannot work influences them to arrange a payment schedule with CSED. REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS estimated the legislature has dealt with two or three bills this year to go after particular segments of people who are not in compliance. He felt the $5,000 threshold was better. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES stated he had no problem amending the threshold. He believed the "hammer" would have to be used properly. HB 458 addresses a large class of people which CSED presently has a hard time with. The problem is a lot of people, who are in arrears, are fearful that the amount is so large they cannot handle it. HB 458 facilitates communication between the obligor and CSED. He emphasized it is in rare cases where the "hammer" actually gets used. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT referred to page 7, lines 8-11 of the amendment, under licenses that are excluded - it does not include a vessel license or licenses (indiscernible) 47.35 or a business license under 43.70. He asked Representative Davies if he had any recollection as to what licenses were being referred to. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES answered that in reference to the vessel license, the issue there was that vessel licenses obtained by a number of different individuals and so it didn't seem to be a very well-defined tool, to go after a particular individual. It was thought that the other routes for identifying people would work in those cases, particularly the permits, themselves. It was felt that was a redundant requirement to go look at that and it wouldn't be very effective. Under (ii), AS 47.35 pertains to foster care, where the licenses are short term and situations not productive to pursue. Under (iii), business licenses issued under AS 43.70, many of the licenses are over the counter; therefore CSED has many other checks in place which would make rechecking these licenses redundant. Checking these licenses would not be cost effective or worth the effort. REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS commented on the issue of foster care, whereby they are able to take care of somebody elses child, but not their own. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES pointed out that was not often the situation. There are other vehicles for dealing with those particular circumstances. Number 422 REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS observed foster care payments should be added because foster care payments are not considered to be salary. They are reimbursed for the care they provide. She believed it would be possible for a foster care provider to be in arrears, because they may have another family to tend to after. She pointed out not everyone in arrears on payments are not necessarily undesirable people. CHAIRMAN VEZEY responded he had believed foster care payments could not be attached according to existing law. REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS replied they would not be according to the amendment. CHAIRMAN VEZEY added a person with a foster care license, however, could have their license attached under the amendment. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES stated the HB 458 is product of several deliberations with the departments and committee meetings. CSED felt including foster care would pit one child against another. CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified the foster care license had been exempted. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES noted it was done at the request of CSED. REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS commented excluding foster care licenses would provide for more foster homes. Number 460 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked if there was any fiscal application. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES answered the net return back to CSED is in excess of $1 million a year. CSED estimates $6 million as the total collection. Two-thirds would go directly back to the children, half of one-third would go to CSED, and the other half of one-third would go to the federal government. CHAIRMAN VEZEY felt the question was if the fiscal note would have to be revised by the committee if the amendment passed. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES replied CSED expects the costs will be covered through the increase of moneys they will receive from the federal government the costs. Therefore, there was no fiscal note. CHAIRMAN VEZEY repeated his previous question. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT inquired if there were costs involved. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES answered yes, however, they will be more than offset by the additional recovery of back payments. REPRESENTATIVE ULMER inquired if SB 190 had a Finance referral. CHAIRMAN VEZEY responded he had heard yesterday that the Finance Committee was inclined to waive SB 190. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT interjected if the amendment was adopted, the committee would have to request another fiscal note from CSED. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES offered CHAIRMAN VEZEY the original fiscal notes from HB 458. He felt updated fiscal notes would be preferable. DARREL REXWINKEL, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, joined the table to answer questions for the committee. He stated he was just talking with Mr. Petrie and he did not recall having a specific cost for the implementation. However, he felt it did affect other agencies because they would have to be supplying CSED with information. He believed this was the reason other agencies provided fiscal notes with their costs. He suggested the money should perhaps go back to CSED, then they could RSA (Reimbursable Services Agreement) the money back to the other agencies. He questioned how the fiscal notes were put together. CHAIRMAN VEZEY, in observing the Department of Education fiscal note, stated he had the impression they expect the legislature will let them hire extra people. Fish and Game followed suit. He doubted the legislature would be inclined to hire new people to administer this amendment. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES clarified CHAIRMAN VEZEY was examining the fiscal notes from early on in the process. Revised fiscal notes have not been attained since the meetings with the various departments. CHAIRMAN VEZEY stated the Department of Economic Development's fiscal note indicated the addition of nine positions. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES responded that that fiscal note assumed they would have to deal with all over-the-counter business licenses. That requirement has been removed entirely. He felt the fiscal note was not valid. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT said he was concerned because if all the fiscal notes were not zero, Finance Committee would have to hear the bill. He recalled that the Finance Committee was contemplating waiving HCSCSSB 190(STA). CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified the two fiscal notes on HCSCSSB 190(STA) are zero, and had been adopted at the last meeting. REPRESENTATIVE ULMER suggested the fiscal notes for the amendment be zeroed because the committee had heard testimony of a net benefit to the state of possibly $1+ million. CHAIRMAN VEZEY noted CSED was asking for additional personnel to administer the original program. The committee merely decided they would not get any. He compared the two positions the committee zeroed to the 15 positions REPRESENTATIVE ULMER suggested. He said he was not opposed to the change if the Department of Commerce & Economic Development (CED) was available to testify. Number 555 REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS explained the nine positions would actually now be negative because certain business licenses are not included. REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS commented there had been testimony that HCSCSSB 190(STA) includes allowances for a temporary license. The set up to operate this system, if not currently in place, would require some additional work from CED. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked if the amendment was not adopted, what would be the effect on HCSCSSB 190(STA) or on the whole system, based on Congress having pending legislation. CHAIRMAN VEZEY responded HCSCSSB 190(STA) would bring Alaska into compliance with federal laws and regulations. The amendment, he did not believe, had any basis in federal law. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES pointed out the amendment would be a significant tool for CSED to help them come into compliance. The federal audit indicated one of the major shortfalls of CSED is that they were not collecting enough, or fast enough. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES referred to the fiscal note and stated the impact needed to be worked out by Department of Revenue (DOR) and the agencies, therefore any additional program receipt authority ought to be given to DOR. Other impacted agencies should receive their funds through an RSA mechanism. He suggested zeroing the fiscal notes and having DOR report back to Legislative Budget & Audit Committee for the required program receipt authority. Number 606 REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS expressed that he had a problem with the people who are excluded. He noted a personal example, where people with business licenses who do pay their child support are competing in the same realm against people who do not. He did not think these people should be exempted. Why should some people be different from the others. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES clarified the intent is to find an appropriate tool to go after every case, not to give people an exception. He noted there are other ways to go after those people which would be more cost effective. REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS explained he was thinking of people who have a business license, specifically printers. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES reiterated it would not be cost effective to go after those with business licenses. There are too many. Number 647 KARL LUCK, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, stated he was available to answer questions for the committee. REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS moved to adopt the amendment before the committee for purposes of discussion. CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked MR. LUCK what the impact on Division of Occupational Licensing (DOL) would be. The DOL fiscal note indicates the addition of nine positions. REPRESENTATIVE ULMER added the business license provision had been taken out, therefore the amendment was different from what the fiscal note pertained to. She noted DOR could go to LB&A with additional program receipts to handle the increased work generated through the other departments. MR. LUCK explained the reasons for the original fiscal note. DOL operates only on program receipts and they can only charge its operation to the licensees of all professions based on the cost of regulating that profession. He considered HB 458 outside of regulating a profession. Therefore, they premised the program was a "stand alone operation," which would not be covered by DOL's overhead or staff. Separate accounting would be required to keep track of the moneys going to DOR. TAPE 94-53, SIDE B Number 000 MR. LUCK continued. MR. LUCK stated DOL felt if they withheld professional licenses, there should be enforcement to make sure those people are not operating without their licenses. The major cost, he noted, was because DOL would be determining which of the 44,000 people were theirs to deal with. Personal identification would be important and time consuming, therefore DOL requested additional positions for these checks. DOL cannot mandate social security numbers in its system. DOL was also tasked with notification, requiring delivery in person or, as they believed, certified mail. REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS stated MR. LUCK indicated DOL was being tasked with things it does not do now. He asked if he was correct. MR. LUCK answered absolutely. DOL does not have the excess capacity of staff it their budget. He believed in the last six years, there has been 13 additional licensing programs added to DOL with zero staff increases in enforcement or administration. Only two programs have been eliminated in that time. REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS expressed concern regarding the amendment. He cited the example of a fisherman with a fishing permit, a 52-foot boat, employing four people who all have families, and catching $3 million worth of fish a year, paying taxes and supporting the economy. If his permit is taken because he owes $7,000 back child support, how does this serving the state of Alaska? How is the state gaining on a situation like this? REPRESENTATIVE ULMER felt the idea is just to suspend their licenses until they agree to a payment schedule, not to preclude their ability to make an income. REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS inquired what the procedures were for suspending or issuing a temporary license. Are they in place or would they require additional administrative procedures. MR. LUCK answered DOL would have to issue 150-day temporary licenses, however, this would be a unique procedure under this authority only. This would require coordination with all the professions or a particular board that it involves. Follow-up would be necessary because the boards have the authority. He noted there are provisions in the amendment which say the Administrative Procedures Act does not apply to the revocation of the license, therefore, there would not be a hearing. He emphasized the DOL licensing act states the Administrative Procedures Act will apply. Number 194 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked how many business licenses there were in the state. MR. LUCK answered at the end of the last fiscal year the state had 66,000 business licenses and 32,500 professional licenses. He estimated 100,000 possible matches. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked how many licenses there were relating to boxing or wrestling. MR. LUCK estimated less than 100. He noted many times those licenses are issued almost on the sight, or at the event, making it very difficult to ensure those people are not on the list of 44,000. CHAIRMAN VEZEY called for a recess at 9:05 a.m. The meeting resumed at 9:12 a.m. Number 232 JUANITA HENSLEY, CHIEF, DRIVER SERVICES, DIVISION OF MOTOR VEHICLES (DMV), DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, commented on the amendment to HCSCSSB 190(STA). She referred to page 6, subsection (xiv) of the amendment, whereby DMV will withhold the issuance of a commercial drivers license (CDL). Alaska currently has approximately 25,000 commercial drivers and their licenses are renewed every five years. DMV just went through a process, in 1992, requiring every driver to be issued a CDL who operates a certain size of vehicle. She noted everyone in that category licensed within January of 1992 to March 31, 1992. This means 25,000 drivers will have to be renewed every five years. CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified within a three month period all of them will be renewable. MS. HENSLEY replied correct. Every five years DMV will have a major impact because of these people. Unlike CED, DMV requires the social security number on a CDL per federal law. She noted the amendment mentions DOR will be sending DMV an electronic media to update their records. DMV will, however, be required to issue a temporary 150-day license to those individuals in arrears. She emphasized DMV agrees with the concept, however, it will impact DMV. Even if only five percent of those 25,000 were in arrears, it would still be a substantial increase on the DMV to handle the temporary licenses. Number 275 REPRESENTATIVE ULMER mentioned the commissioner of DOR is envisioning a system, whereby he would RSA money to the various impacted agencies to cope with the impacts. She asked if this would be a viable way to help the DMV workload. MS. HENSLEY replied if LB&A actually follows through and gives them the RSA, it would be viable. She said it depends on whether they would be able to receive the program receipt authority from LB&A. This is a major concern for DMV. REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS clarified she indicated the amendment would apply to commercial drivers licenses only. MS. HENSLEY answered yes, or school bus drivers. REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS asked if it was possible to apply the program to all drivers licenses. He felt it would be cost effective. MS. HENSLEY answered DMV issues over 200,000 drivers licenses and identification cards a year. REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS questioned the amount of people delinquent. MS. HENSLEY pointed out the issuance of the temporary license would be very burdensome for DMV, however, it could be done. Even with program receipts, it would still be costly to the state because of the additional employees necessary. REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS stated he favored the amendment, but he wanted to see it all inclusive. MS. HENSLEY observed a lot of people are going to be covered by their professional licenses they have as well. Number 312 REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS asked if she could add an amendment to the amendment. CHAIRMAN VEZEY answered REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS may. REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS referred to page 7, subparagraph (6), and moved to increase the threshold from $2,500 to $5,000, which is the federal mandate. CHAIRMAN VEZEY, hearing no objection, adopted the amendment. Number 333 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT, moved to delete on page 7, subsection (B), thereby allowing no exclusions, since HCSCSSB 190(STA) was going to be heard in the Finance Committee. REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS said HCSCSSB 190(STA) was waived out of Finance. CHAIRMAN VEZEY replied that was not technically correct. REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS noted she had heard that it was waived this morning. CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified it would have to be waived in Session. REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG and B. DAVIS objected to the motion. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT felt the amendment should be all inclusive. REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG addressed his objection. He stated of the 66,000 business licenses, an estimated 30,000-40,000 probably do not have a business attached. He explained that in reality, most business licenses are for a purpose other than conducting business. It would not be practical to consider business licenses as drivers licenses. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES commented HB 458 has been through three different hearings and (B) was the result of the consultations among the various departments about what they felt would be cost effective "in the large picture." The overall attempt is the ability to withhold wages and to have a zero tolerance, but doing it in the most cost effective way possible. Number 376 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT moved his amendment. CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified REPRESENTATIVE KOTT's amendment was to delete, on page 7, subsection (2), subparagraph (B) including (i), (ii) and (iii). CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked the committee secretary to call the roll. IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES SANDERS, KOTT. OPPOSED: REPRESENTATIVES OLBERG, G. DAVIS, B. DAVIS, ULMER, VEZEY. The MOTION FAILED. Number 390 REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG called for the question on the amendment to HCSCSSB 190(STA). CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked the committee secretary to call the roll. IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES OLBERG, B. DAVIS, ULMER. OPPOSED: REPRESENTATIVES SANDERS, G. DAVIS, KOTT, VEZEY. The MOTION FAILED. Number 400 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT moved to pass HCSCSSB 190(STA) from House State Affairs with individual recommendations. CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked the committee secretary to call the roll. IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES OLBERG, SANDERS, G. DAVIS, B. DAVIS, ULMER, KOTT, VEZEY. The MOTION PASSED. CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified at last week's meeting the committee adopted two zero fiscal notes with HCSCSSB 190(STA) and they will move out with the bill. HCSCSSB 357(FIN) - REQUIRED REPORTS OF STATE AGENCIES CHAIRMAN VEZEY opened CSSB 357(FIN) for discussion. LINDA REXWINKEL, DIVISION OF BUDGET REVIEW, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET, addressed CSSB 357(FIN). She submitted HCSCSSB 357(STA) for discussion and recognized three changes. First, instead of amending the section with the Athletic Commission, it repeals that reporting requirement. Second, instead of amending the reporting requirement by Department of Education concerning community schools programs to a biennial report, it repeals the reporting requirement on that statute. Third, it repeals the reporting requirement by the coastal management program for a biennial report. CHAIRMAN VEZEY mentioned that the committee was discussing Version J. REPRESENTATIVE ULMER questioned page 6, Section 15, whereby the requirement that the administration supply the legislature with information about nonpermanent hires is repealed. She expressed concern that those reports are the only source of information for the legislature to indicate whether or not the executive branch is doing nonpermanent hiring. Without this information, the legislature would lose control over hiring, particularly nonpermanent hires. She noted the same subject came up when she chaired the Fish & Game subcommittee. MS. REXWINKEL replied she did not have an answer to REPRESENTATIVE ULMER's question. REPRESENTATIVE ULMER commented the cost of producing that report is not significant to the state. Without control, it presents a large window that agencies can use to do nonpermanent hiring. She noticed Jay Hogan was present and inquired if he would testify because he was knowledgeable about this issue. JAY HOGAN, CONTRACT EMPLOYEE, HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE, addressed HCSCSSB 357(STA). He noted he had really examined the provision REPRESENTATIVE ULMER was questioning. He was present to comment about three provisions which House Finance was particularly interested in. REPRESENTATIVE ULMER stated she was inclined to delete Section 15 so the legislature could continue to have that information. MR. HOGAN commented Section 15 deals with a subject that is frequently of interest to the legislature. From personal experience, he stated, Finance Committees frequently want to know this type of information. Number 499 REPRESENTATIVE ULMER moved to delete Section 15 from HCSCSSB 357(STA). REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS supported the motion. CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked for a roll call vote. IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES VEZEY, KOTT, ULMER, B. DAVIS, G. DAVIS, SANDERS, OLBERG. The MOTION PASSED. CHAIRMAN VEZEY observed that the committee would have to make sure the fiscal notes are correct for HCSCSSB 357(STA). MR. HOGAN pointed out Sections 3, 4 and 5 were at the request of the House Finance Chairman in some cases, and the House Finance Committee in others. REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS clarified that Mr. Hogan expressed leaving those sections alone. Number 527 REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS moved to adopt HCSCSSB 357(STA), version J, as amended. CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified the amendment was the deletion of Section 15. CHAIRMAN VEZEY called for a roll call vote. IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES VEZEY, KOTT, ULMER, B. DAVIS, G. DAVIS, SANDERS, OLBERG. The MOTION PASSED. (REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG and SANDERS left the meeting at 9:36 a.m.) CHAIRMAN VEZEY called an at ease. CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified CSSB 357(FIN), received from Senate Finance, was transmitted with two zero fiscal notes. He believed they were dated 4/21/94. The Senate State Affairs Committee adopted 19 zero fiscal notes. He moved that the committee concur with the Senate Finance Committee and adopt the two zero fiscal notes. Hearing no objection, CHAIRMAN VEZEY adopted the two zero fiscal notes from the Senate Finance Committee. (REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG rejoined the meeting at 9:39 a.m.) REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS moved to move HCSCSSB 357(STA) from House State Affairs with individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes. CHAIRMAN VEZEY called for a roll call vote. IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES VEZEY, KOTT, ULMER, B. DAVIS, G. DAVIS, OLBERG. ABSENT: REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS. The MOTION PASSED. CSSB 70(L&C) - ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY LOAN GUARANTEES Number 579 CHAIRMAN VEZEY opened CSSB 70(L&C) for discussion. He commented that the committee did have HCSCSSB 70, version X, to consider. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT moved to adopt HCSCSSB 70 for purposes of discussion. CHAIRMAN VEZEY adopted HCSCSSB 70 for discussion. He noted HCSCSSB 70 modifies the Senate version in a couple of ways. CHAIRMAN VEZEY called an at ease. CHAIRMAN VEZEY stated the changes could be found on page 3, subsection (e). Subsection (e) was added. He explained the fund will have $400,000 put into it before it operates, thereby loans do have to be guaranteed by something very tangible. REPRESENTATIVE ULMER inquired why the amount was $400,000. CHAIRMAN VEZEY answered, based on testimony he had heard, $100,000 is a small program amount. Substantially larger sums through federal law and private moneys are available for this purpose. He felt if the state was going to set up a program, $400,000 suggests that it should be a meaningful program, rather than a small "pilot program." REPRESENTATIVE ULMER asked if $400,000 is a reasonable amount to achieve. CHAIRMAN VEZEY repeated the sources of money. He felt $400,000 would create a more meaningful program. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT interjected they had heard that testimony in House HESS Committee. Number 633 EARL CLARK, SOUTHEAST ALASKA INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTER, commented on HCSCSSB 70. He stated according to the Governor's Council on Disability and Special Education, he symbolically represented 95,000 Alaskans who have at least one permanent disability. He stated HCSCSSB 70 has been proceeding through the legislature for the last two years. HCSCSSB 70 is designed to allow the federal government to transfer $100,000 to the state for guaranteeing loans. He stated the loans themselves will be private loans with banks, to be paid back by the individuals who need assistive technology to help them become productive citizens in Alaska. He emphasized the moneys HCSCSSB 70 refers to are only used to guarantee loans, not to loan out. He stated, nationwide, there is about a 4.2 default rate. With $100,000 in the fund at a 4.2 default rate, it would take about 20 years to exhaust the $100,000. Number 665 ROXANNE STEWART, STAFF, SENATOR JIM DUNCAN, SPONSOR, addressed HCSCSSB 70. She noted the house bill that was discussed in House HESS was HB 139, sponsored by REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES. (REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG left the meeting at 9:47 a.m.) REPRESENTATIVE ULMER asked Ms. Stewart to comment on the $400,000 amount. MS. STEWART stated CSSB 70(L&C) did not specify a particular threshold amount before loans could be made. She stated $100,000 is available annually, possibly $200,000 from federal sources. She felt $400,000 would be a potential problem. REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS inquired if the state was going to make up the difference in the money, if the federal government is guaranteeing $100,000. CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified no general fund moneys would go into the fund. REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS observed that with HCSCSSB 70 it would take four years for $400,000 to accumulate in it. She was opposed to putting this bill on hold for four years. CHAIRMAN VEZEY interjected he did not believe that would be the case. He explained, from testimony received, there is a minimum in federal intent to appropriate $100,000 a year specifically for this program. He noted there are other federal moneys appropriated every year that would be available for this use. In addition, because of new laws and regulations in federal banking practices, there is an interest in the private financial community to participate in this program to meet certain federal requirements. REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS asked if these streams of funding had been identified. CHAIRMAN VEZEY responded there has been some public commitment from private sources, however, some wish to remain anonymous until the bill becomes law. TAPE 94-54, SIDE A Number 000 REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS asked MS. STEWART's opinion about the change to $400,000. MS. STEWART stated it may be a problem to come up with that much money for a substantial length of time. She stated Vocational Rehabilitation would be better to answer the question. STAN RIDGEWAY, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION (DVR), DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, answered questions for the committee. He stated the assistive technology program was authorized initially by Congress for five years, and it has just been reauthorized for five additional years. The state of Alaska receives approximately $750,000 per year for technology. He explained about $250,000 of that $750,000 is for staff, and the other $500,000 is granted out to private nonprofits each year. DVR was going to fund the loan program by taking 20 percent of that $500,000 per year, and putting it into the fund for the next five years. The Community Reinvestment Act has changed, however, and Key Bank and North Rim Bank have both committed to participate in the fund. DVR is uncertain of the amount. He noted another bank has agreed to participate, but wishes to remain anonymous. He stated the $400,000 change would create a waiting game over the next 3-4 years. If DVR took more of the money they grant to private nonprofits, they would be cutting off people's access to get the loans. The bill has a zero fiscal note mainly because the nonprofits DVR funds will be assisting people, who are working and need loans, in processing their loans through local banks. The whole process works together. He encouraged the committee to go back to a lower amount. REPRESENTATIVE B. DAVIS moved to amend page 3, line 2, of HCSCSSB 70, to read "$200,000." CHAIRMAN VEZEY called for a roll call vote. IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES G. DAVIS, B. DAVIS, ULMER, KOTT. OPPOSED: REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY. ABSENT: REPRESENTATIVES OLBERG, SANDERS. The MOTION PASSED. (REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG returned at 9:52 a.m.) CHAIRMAN VEZEY commented the committee would have to adopt a modified fiscal note for HCSCSSB 70. He stated the blank fiscal note for $400,000 would have to be modified to $200,000. He asked for a committee member to move to adopt the modified fiscal note reading $200,000. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT so moved. CHAIRMAN VEZEY, hearing no objection, adopted the fiscal note. REPRESENTATIVE G. DAVIS moved to pass HCSCSSB 70(STA) as amended from committee with accompanying fiscal note and individual recommendations. CHAIRMAN VEZEY called for a roll call vote. IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES OLBERG, G. DAVIS, B. DAVIS, ULMER, KOTT, VEZEY. ABSENT: REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS. The MOTION PASSED. CHAIRMAN VEZEY recessed the meeting at 9:58 a.m. He stated he had not expected the committee would take as much time as they did on SB 190, therefore only SB 228 would be taken up by the committee after the recess. He stated the other items on the agenda would not be taken up today. CHAIRMAN VEZEY resumed the meeting at 10:03 a.m. SB 228 - NO BAIL FOR FELONS WITH PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS CHAIRMAN VEZEY opened SB 228 for discussion. SENATOR JUDITH SALO, PRIME SPONSOR OF SB 228, gave a brief statement. She stated SB 228 passed the Senate unanimously, and has HB 460 as a companion in the House. She explained SB 228 adds to the list of crimes for which bail is denied in Alaska. Currently, if a person is convicted of an unclassified or a class A felony, following conviction, pending sentencing or pending appeal, bail is not allowed. SB 228 would add "stalking in the first degree, sexual assault in the second and third degree, and sexual abuse of a minor in both class B and class C" to the list of non- bailable after conviction offenses. SB 228 does not deny bail prior to conviction. SENATOR SALO explained SB 228 stems from a case which happened this past fall in Anchorage. A man who had a very long "rap sheet" in both California and Alaska, was tried and convicted of a felony count in Alaska and was sentenced. While pending appeal, he was released on $5,000 bail. While released, he sexually assaulted one woman, and raped another. She was contacted by constituents who felt it was not right that a criminal of his stature was out on the streets. She emphasized SB 228 is legislation that citizens of Alaska are looking for; it provides protection. SENATOR SALO noted the statute citations on the second page of SB 228 referred to the stalking, sexual assault and sexual abuse she mentioned earlier. Number 207 CHAIRMAN VEZEY noted Department of Law, Alaska State Troopers, Office of Public Advocacy, the Public Defender Agency and the Department of Corrections all have zero fiscal notes. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT observed the fiscal notes also and stated SB 228 did not appear to be too offensive. He believed he had seen the bill in the Judiciary Committee before. CHAIRMAN VEZEY commented he believed a judge does not have to grant bail if there is reason to think the person should be denied. The system, however, is not perfect. He questioned if the criminal justice system should really be changed in this manner. SENATOR SALO responded she agreed the mishap does not happen often, however, it should never happen. For this reason, the legislature has chosen to statutorily deny bail for unclassified and class A felonies. This is to prevent mishaps from soft-hearted judges or very good defense attorneys. CHAIRMAN VEZEY clarified SB 228 does not deny bail to a person accused of a crime. SB 228 denies bail after a person is convicted. SENATOR SALO affirmed CHAIRMAN VEZEY. She clarified in unclassified and class A felonies there is limited bail, however, SB 228 totally denies it following conviction. She did not know in what way bail was limited prior to conviction. She emphasized, because of the predominance of sexual crimes in Alaska, they should be added to the list. She noted the lives of those woman stated in the impetus for SB 228 are changed forever. She expressed a considerable amount of time had been spent with the Department of Law and judicial experts who agree that to ensure the mishap does not happen again, SB 228 is necessary. CHAIRMAN VEZEY stated SB 228 is expanding existing statutes to include class B and class C felony convictions, only in the event that they have a prior class A or unclassified conviction. He pointed out SB 228 does not include them if they have a previous class B conviction. Number 281 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT agreed. He commented there may be a case, dealing with due process, that will not allow the legislature to deny bail based on charges, prior to conviction. He noted SB 228 is eliminating some of the judges discretion. (REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS returned at 10:12 a.m.) CHAIRMAN VEZEY agreed bail could be increased, but it could not be denied prior to being charged or prior to conviction. He mentioned the only fiscal impact would be if a person had to go to prison, while on appeal, and then the conviction was thrown out. The state would then be out 1-2 years of incarceration money, when the person could have been out on bail. SENATOR SALO directed the committee to the analysis included with the Department of Corrections zero fiscal note. The analysis states most reversals result in a reduction of sentence, rather than absolutely eliminating it. They overview the projected numbers of felonies that might be overturned. She emphasized even if there was some time served, Department of Corrections implies "it would sort of be a wash." REPRESENTATIVE KOTT moved to pass SB 228 from committee with individual recommendations and attached zero fiscal notes. CHAIRMAN VEZEY called for a roll call vote. IN FAVOR: REPRESENTATIVES VEZEY, KOTT, B. DAVIS, G. DAVIS, SANDERS, OLBERG. ABSENT: REPRESENTATIVE ULMER. The MOTION PASSED. ADJOURNMENT CHAIRMAN VEZEY adjourned the meeting at 10:15 a.m. BILLS NOT HEARD CSSB 377(FIN)am - State Agency Fiscal Procedures SB 365am - Governor's Omnibus Bill CSSB 376(FIN)am - State Agency Fees and Collections