ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
March 25, 2003
8:04 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bruce Weyhrauch, Chair
Representative Jim Holm, Vice Chair
Representative Nancy Dahlstrom
Representative Bob Lynn
Representative Paul Seaton
Representative Ethan Berkowitz
Representative Max Gruenberg
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CS FOR SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 4(STA)
Relating to Avalanche Awareness Month.
- MOVED HCS CSSCR 4(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 109
"An Act relating to the limitation on payment of state treasury
warrants; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 109(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 31
"An Act relating to initiative and referendum petitions; and
providing for an effective date."
- MOVED HB 31 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 5
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State of
Alaska relating to initiative and referendum petitions.
- MOVED HJR 5 OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: SCR 4
SHORT TITLE:AVALANCHE AWARENESS MONTH
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) GREEN
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
02/19/03 0221 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
02/19/03 0221 (S) STA
03/06/03 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BELTZ 211
03/06/03 (S) Moved CSSCR 4(STA) Out of
Committee
03/06/03 (S) MINUTE(STA)
03/10/03 0448 (S) STA RPT CS 3DP SAME TITLE
03/10/03 0448 (S) DP: STEVENS G, COWDERY, DYSON
03/10/03 0448 (S) FN1: ZERO(S.STA)
03/12/03 0479 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 3/12/2003
03/12/03 0479 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
03/12/03 0479 (S) STA CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT
03/12/03 0479 (S) COSPONSOR(S): HOFFMAN, DAVIS,
STEVENS G
03/12/03 0479 (S) PASSED Y19 N- E1
03/12/03 0480 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/12/03 0480 (S) VERSION: CSSCR 4(STA)
03/14/03 0531 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
03/14/03 0531 (H) STA
03/19/03 0595 (H) CROSS SPONSOR(S): LYNN
03/25/03 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 102
BILL: HB 109
SHORT TITLE:TREASURY WARRANTS/LAPSED APPROPRIATIONS
SPONSOR(S): STATE AFFAIRS
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
02/19/03 0248 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
02/19/03 0248 (H) STA, FIN
03/13/03 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 102
03/13/03 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/18/03 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 102
03/18/03 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/25/03 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 102
BILL: HB 31
SHORT TITLE:INITIATIVE/REFERENDUM PETITIONS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(s) WILLIAMS
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
01/21/03 0039 (H) PREFILE RELEASED (1/10/03)
01/21/03 0039 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
01/21/03 0039 (H) STA, JUD
03/04/03 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 102
03/04/03 (H) Heard & Held
03/04/03 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/25/03 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 102
BILL: HJR 5
SHORT TITLE:CONST AM: INITIATIVE/REFERENDUM PETITIONS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(s) WILLIAMS
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
01/21/03 0025 (H) PREFILE RELEASED (1/10/03)
01/21/03 0025 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
01/21/03 0025 (H) STA, JUD, FIN
03/04/03 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 102
03/04/03 (H) Heard & Held
03/04/03 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/25/03 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 102
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR LYDA GREEN
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as sponsor of SCR 4.
AEDENE ARTHUR, Cofounder
Backcountry Avalanche Awareness and Response Team
(Address not provided)
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SCR 4.
BOB JANES
Douglas, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SCR 4.
LINDA SYLVESTER, Staff
to Representative Bruce Weyhrauch
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 109 on behalf of the House
State Affairs Standing Committee, sponsor.
KIM GARNERO, Director
Division of Finance
Department of Administration (DOA)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions for the committee during
the hearing on HB 109.
RACHEL LEWIS, Unclaimed Property Section
Treasury Division
Department of Revenue
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Addressed questions on HB 109.
STEVE BORELL, Executive Director
Alaska Miners Association
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 31.
REPRESENTATIVE BILL WILLIAMS
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as the sponsor of HB 31 and
HJR 5.
VIRGINIA BREEZE, Elections Projects Coordinator
Division of Elections
Office of the Lieutenant Governor
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered question on HB 31 and HJR 5.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 03-29, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR BRUCE WEYHRAUCH called the House State Affairs Standing
Committee meeting to order at 8:04 a.m. Representatives Holm,
Seaton, Dahlstrom, Lynn, Berkowitz, Gruenberg, and Weyhrauch
were present at the call to order.
SCR 4-AVALANCHE AWARENESS MONTH
CHAIR WEYHRAUCH announced that the first order of business was
CS FOR SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 4(STA), Relating to
Avalanche Awareness Month.
Number 0111
SENATOR LYDA GREEN, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of SCR 4,
told the committee there have been an untold number of
[avalanche-related] tragedies in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough.
She related her personal knowledge of those affected by
avalanche tragedy and the efforts of people to increase
avalanche awareness. The proposed resolution would draw
attention to and honor those who begin an education program. In
response to a question by Chair Weyhrauch, she noted some areas
where "highmarking" occurs. She said people's efforts to expand
avalanche awareness have resulted in donations, funding,
networking, and educational videos and teaching guides.
Number 0393
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG began discussion of Amendment 1. On
page 2, line 1, after "November 2003", he suggested adding "and
each succeeding November".
CHAIR WEYHRAUCH proposed just saying "the month of November".
SENATOR GREEN concurred.
CHAIR WEYHRAUCH, in response to a comment by Senator Green, said
it wouldn't involve a [title] change. He clarified that
[Amendment 1] would change the language to read, "the Alaska
State Legislature proclaims the month of November as Avalanche
Awareness Month;".
CHAIR WEYHRAUCH announced that without objection, Amendment 1
was adopted.
Number 0545
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked if there were any plans to put
money towards avalanche safety.
SENATOR GREEN replied that it is such a huge issue, no amount of
money is enough; that she has tried to figure out if there is a
way to create a gathering point from which to extrapolate
information for avalanche awareness, but that it is such a
moving target, it is very difficult; and that she would attempt
to get funds into the program for this year.
Number 0730
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ said he has "run amendments the last
couple of years, trying to put money back in." He said former
Governor Knowles wanted an avalanche awareness program and
wanted to improve search and rescue. He noted that one of his
own amendments had been for $350,000, which would be
"barebones." He stated his understanding that [Alaska] had more
fatalities than any other state last year, not just per capita.
He said anything [the legislature] could do to make Alaska a
safer state would be great. He mentioned the efforts of
[former] Senator Halford and Representative Kerttula to put
money into [avalanche-related issues], but said that is a
piecemeal approach. He opined that some of the greatest
avalanche experts in the country are in Alaska and that their
knowledge should be used to develop a system that could be the
envy of all the mountain regions in the world.
Number 0818
AEDENE ARTHUR, Cofounder, Backcountry Avalanche Awareness and
Response Team, noted that as a Mom On a Mission (MOM) she also
speaks for the families who have lost loved ones in avalanches,
including the families of the 14 young people who were killed in
1999 in avalanches in Alaska. Ms. Arthur said it is very
difficult for most people to campaign when they have lost a
child. Testifying in support of [SCR 4], Ms. Arthur said she
thinks the amendment to make November avalanche awareness month
every year is wonderful. She added, "We do use this month to
promote avalanche awareness and education to all backcountry
travelers in the state of Alaska, with the intent of saving
lives and preventing injuries in avalanches."
MS. ARTHUR said the month has also been used to teach, in the
classroom, the importance of carrying and knowing how to use the
basic avalanche gear of beacons, probes, and shovels. She noted
that about 40 percent of people [caught by an avalanche] are
killed by the initial trauma. Regarding those who survive, she
said, "The only way you have of getting someone out and giving
them a chance to live ... is if you can find them quickly and
get them out with a beacon." She said a person has 15 to 20
minutes of air. After that time, if a search and rescue team
has to be called, it is usually for a body recovery.
Number 0990
MS. ARTHUR explained why this issue is so important to her and
her husband. They came to Alaska in 1968 with their three-year-
old daughter to teach. A son and another daughter were born,
and the family moved to Palmer in 1982, where they lived and
worked until retirement. Unfortunately, their son died in the
March 21 avalanche at Turnagain Pass, along with 5 other young
men, when a section a mile wide came down the mountain. Between
March and May of that year, 13 people in Alaska were lost. She
pointed out that it is not just people on snow machines that get
caught by avalanches. Victims have included people working,
hiking, skiing, and snowshoeing. Drivers in some areas can put
themselves in harm's way, too, she said, if the snow is
unstable.
Number 1178
MS. ARTHUR noted the typical profile of those who die in
avalanches across the United States as follows: male, educated,
experienced in their sport, in their 20s to 30s and, in Alaska,
into their 40s. Ms. Arthur told the committee that when her son
died, he was 29, had been married seven months, and left behind
over 80 family members. She said, "We mourn his loss just
exactly as if it was yesterday." She said one reason she works
hard on this campaign is so other mothers don't have to worry
about their children. She added that not only did she and her
husband lose their son that day, but his body wasn't found for
more than two months. Referring to a previous comment by Chair
Weyhrauch, Ms. Arthur said it's not just "highmarkers" who die;
it relates to the snow's stability and the underlying layer, but
a person can't always tell by looking. She opined that people
should be able to call to find out conditions from experts, just
as pilots do before they fly.
Number 1330
REPRESENTATIVE HOLM thanked Ms. Arthur for testifying. He told
her that his son takes helicopters up to teach skiing in the
Valdez area, and that his mother purchased an avalanche kit for
him. He asked Ms. Arthur if she is aware of a kit that's
available.
MS. ARTHUR answered that the beacon, probe, and shovel are the
basic avalanche gear to get people out if they get buried. She
said she was aware that other things have been developed. She
said her son had everything including a beacon, but still wasn't
found for two months because the avalanche was so huge. She
noted that Carl Skustad, a federal ranger in Girdwood, checks
snow conditions and "checks with people" and has set up a number
to call to find out current conditions at Turnagain Pass. She
thanked Senator Green and indicated that the small amount of
money "that got through" has been used to do "a tremendous
amount of things all over the state."
Number 1530
BOB JANES told the committee he has been a resident of Douglas
for 38 years, during which time he worked for the U.S. Forest
Service for 18 years and was involved in winter sports
administration, ski area development, avalanche awareness, and
"the whole arena of that outdoor recreation industry." He
thanked Representative Berkowitz for his remark regarding
funding, because he said he has a great deal of interest in that
subject. He said Ms. Arthur adequately covered "statistics and
issues." He told members he was testifying in support of [SCR
4] both as a concerned citizen and as a current volunteer board
member of the Southeast Alaska Avalanche Center in Juneau.
MR. JANES advised the committee that in the early 1980s, the
U.S. Forest Service was a lead agency in helping to develop and
operate a statewide avalanche warning system for Alaska. He
noted that it was an effort among 12 government agencies -
federal, state, and municipal - that was cooperatively funded,
managed, and developed. He said, "My job, at that time, was to
represent that agency in this effort." Mr. Janes opined that
[SCR 4] should help strengthen the awareness of the dangers and
risks involved with snow avalanches throughout Alaska. He also
voiced hope that it may be a step toward restoring operation of
a statewide avalanche warning system that would be fully capable
of meeting the needs of effective avalanche education, which is
currently ongoing. He noted, "The one missing element is
adequate forecasting methods." He said he is confident that an
adequate system could be restored for Alaska with the
restoration of a large cooperative effort.
Number 1748
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ moved to report CSSCR 4(STA), as
amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and
the accompanying fiscal note. There being no objection,
HCS CSSCR 4(STA) was reported from the House State Affairs
Standing Committee.
HB 109-TREASURY WARRANTS
CHAIR WEYHRAUCH announced that the next order of business was
HOUSE BILL NO. 109, "An Act relating to the limitation on
payment of state treasury warrants; and providing for an
effective date."
Number 1790
REPRESENTATIVE HOLM moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS), Version 23-LS0581\D, Kurtz, 3/24/03, as a work
draft. There being no objection, Version D was before the
committee.
Number 1843
LINDA SYLVESTER, Staff to Representative Bruce Weyhrauch, Alaska
State Legislature, presented HB 109 on behalf of the House State
Affairs Standing Committee, sponsor, noting that it was
introduced at the request of the Murkowski Administration. She
said it is an efficiency bill with a zero fiscal note, and seeks
to address inconsistencies in statute. The first relates to
state warrants, which is how the state makes payments to itself
and for contracts, for example. The other statute that the bill
addresses is the unclaimed property Act.
MS. SYLVESTER explained that [Version D] has "one slight
change." Currently, state warrants can be presented for payment
for up to two years, after which time they are turned over to
the general fund. She explained, "If the books have closed, ...
the departments have to do a separate appropriation." Referring
to a copy of the supplemental budget [HB 110] in packets and to
a tagged item on [page 9], she stated, "That item on the top is
how the ... Department of Administration presents these stale-
dated warrants for payment."
MS. SYLVESTER referred to a handout ["Stale Date Warrant Re-
Appropriation Request FY 2003-1"] that shows a list of payments,
some small. She remarked, "This is the cumbersome way that the
departments have to get these payments processed because of our
budgeting system." She explained that originally the intent was
to change the deadline to one year; however, at the request of
Representative Gruenberg, the limit was dropped to six months,
which makes it conform with the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC).
Number 1943
KIM GARNERO, Director, Division of Finance, Department of
Administration (DOA), testified as follows:
We in the Division of Finance pay vendors, grantees,
and employees for the State of Alaska. When our
warrants are not cashed within two years, the law
currently requires that the amount revert to the
general fund in a process know as stale-dating. When
those individuals whose checks were not cashed later
come forward and make their claim on uncashed warrants
known, a new appropriation is required before we can
pay them. Claims can be required to wait up to a year
before the appropriation is in place and payment can
be made. This is frustrating for both the claimant
and the state agency, which must track this process.
MS. GARNERO noted that this year's stale-date appropriation
totaled $44,917.00 for 20 warrants, "and you're looking at the
list." She continued as follows:
That ... fast-track supplemental that the governor
signed last week, ... those warrants have now gone out
the door. Already I've heard of another $24,000 in
stale-dated warrants we need to get into the next
appropriation cycle. The stale-date law has been in
place since the 1960s. In 1986, Alaska adopted the
unclaimed properties statutes in Title 34. The
legislative proposal before you today will shorten the
timeframe, as [Ms. Sylvester] said, and change the
handling of uncashed warrants to treat them as
unclaimed property.
The unclaimed property program is administered by the
Department of Revenue and actively seeks to match
rightful owners to their property. Treating uncashed
as unclaimed property will expedite payments to these
valid property owners.
MS. GARNERO noted that Rachel Lewis, administrator for the
unclaimed properties program in the Department of Revenue, could
answer questions on that program, whereas she herself could
address the current stale-dating process.
Number 2043
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked how many warrants the state
issues, what percentage are stale-dated "with two years, ... one
year, ... six months," and how that translates to "increased
money to the general fund."
MS. GARNERO replied that she doesn't know regarding total
warrants; however, in fiscal year 2002 (FY 02) 4,000 warrants
were stale-dated. In further response regarding the total of
money, she answered that she doesn't know, but will find out.
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ said, "And of that amount, 44,000
awards requested to be ..."
MS. GARNERO said, "Claimants came forward."
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ said he wants to know how much money is
being discussed and what happens when the date is accelerated.
He said he also wants to know how the six-month period compares
with what private individuals or entities would have "before
they can write things off."
MS. GARNERO responded, "I believe, through my discussions on the
UCC with Representative Gruenberg, that private enterprise is
six months on checks".
Number 2128
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he has had an interest in this
issue since 1986, when he introduced a bill to make state
warrants checks come under the UCC. He offered his belief that
the state should be up to date in this regard, since "everybody
in the world is under the Uniform Commercial Code." He referred
to AS 45.04.404 as the part of statute that specifies the time
period of six months.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said this problem was precipitated
because banks were having a lot of problems as a result of what
turned out to be an erroneous legal opinion from the Department
of Law. It was the state's position that its warrants weren't
negotiable instruments, which meant they could be dishonored and
not cashed, for a number of reasons. He said this issue went to
the Alaska Supreme Court. He mentioned National Bank of Alaska
v. Univentures and said that ultimately the supreme court agreed
that state warrants, under the Uniform Commercial Code in
AS 45.03.104(a), met the statutory definition of a negotiable
instrument and so would fall under the definition of a
negotiable instrument in the UCC. He continued:
As a result, the state was no longer permitted to
dishonor these checks. This had cause the banks of
this state horrendous problems, and they'd been in
dispute with the state for many, many years on this.
The exact contour of that decision have not yet been
determined; the state now recognizes these warrants as
negotiable instruments. And we - Ms. Garnero and I,
and the officials from the Department of Revenue -
over the weekend were trying to determine what the
legal implication would be to simply redefine checks
to include state warrants within the definition and
thereby bring these instruments totally under the UCC.
And that would have taken some time to do it.
Number 2260
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he was prepared to offer an
amendment; however, he mentioned discussions with Ms. Sylvester
and Ms. Garnero and the efforts they will make over the interim
to check on how other states do it, for example, and come back
to report to the legislature. [At that time], if language is
supported that would bring state warrants under the UCC, he said
he thinks that would be a good idea. He added, "But at the very
least, number one, this bill brings it within the six-month
period of the UCC and will make it much simpler and, number two,
instead of holding the money in the general fund, will bring it
under the uniform unclaimed property Act."
Number 2330
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked the difference between a warrant
and a check. He also asked if there is a procedure by which
someone who is unable to "cash" for six months subsequently is
able to do so.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG answered yes [to the second question].
He noted that another Act passed in the 1980s was the uniform
unclaimed property Act, which establishes an office in the
Department of Revenue and a regular procedure "for all kinds of
things." For example, if someone loses money and it is
transferred to the police department, that unclaimed property
goes to the Department of Revenue. He said, "It supplants the
old legal concept of escheat. We no longer have escheat in this
state and the other states that have adopted [the uniform
unclaimed property Act]. And you can literally come back
forever and get your money. And the state just holds it in
trust in the meantime." In response to Representative
Berkowitz's first question, he said, "That's what we're trying
to find out." He said that under the National Bank of Alaska
case, [warrants] are legally negotiable instruments.
Number 2422
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ surmised, "It's a synonymous term."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said yes, but opined that probably
there will be no difference. He offered his feeling that for
clarity, the legislature should enact a statute that says the
term "check" includes a warrant. He added, "But legally, under
this opinion anyway, they are negotiable instruments and would
then fall under the UCC."
CHAIR WEYHRAUCH remarked, "And that's what we're still trying to
work through."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG concurred. He said there just wasn't
enough time and [the administration] wants this bill on the fast
track. He added that he thinks [the bill] is a good idea.
Number 2451
MS. GARNERO said the UCC has many provisions. She said deciding
whether or not the state may be relinquishing rights under the
way it currently does business, by subjecting its warrants or
checks to the UCC, will take some analysis. She said that
analysis will be made as part of an overall business practice
analysis to replace statewide systems over the next few years.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested having some mechanism over
the interim to, if necessary, have some hearing and work with
the department on the issue, which will modernize the department
and provide the legislative framework that is needed.
CHAIR WEYHRAUCH recommended putting that in the form of a
request. He said he is open to that.
Number 2516
MS. GARNERO reiterated that she intends to find out the legal
difference between a warrant and a check. She said she does
know that the way banks are compensated for a warrant is
different from a checking account. She remarked, "We pay for
the warrants upon presentation to us; we do not maintain
balances in the bank like we do in our personal checking
accounts." She said this is what she always has been led to
believe is the difference between them.
MS. GARNERO, regarding Representative Berkowitz's question about
the general fund, said when "warrant stale-date" money does go
back to the general fund, it sits there until claimants come for
it and "we" give it an appropriation. When property goes to the
unclaimed property account, it sits in the general fund, too,
waiting for claimants to come forward. She said she doesn't
know if there will be more or fewer claimants. Ms. Garnero said
she thinks there will be fewer warrants that ever go through the
process because it's part of implementing the efficiencies,
which this legislation allows. She mentioned periodic reports
[of uncashed warrants] and canceling those warrants. She said
she knows they go back to the general fund if they are stale-
dated.
Number 2579
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ said, "It seems to me that if we're
getting the $45,000 ... or $50,000, roughly, per year, on a two-
year deal, I'd like to know ... how much really reverts and no
one ever claims a claim subsequently."
MS. GARNERO said she'd find out.
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ requested that she find out what the
numbers are for [the various time periods, as previously
stated].
Number 2604
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM noted that half of the ["Stale Date
Warrant Re-Appropriation Request FY 2003-1"] list is under the
same name.
MS. GARNERO explained that those are longevity bonus [items].
In response to a follow-up question, she said she doesn't know
why [the person listed had not cashed the warrants].
Number 2625
RACHEL LEWIS, Unclaimed Property Section, Treasury Division,
Department of Revenue, addressed Representative Berkowitz's
question regarding shortening the stale-dating to six months.
She pointed out that the shorter the period, the better the
chances are of locating people at their last-known address,
which results in fewer stale dates. She said she doesn't know
what [Ms. Garnero's] numbers will be, but, historically,
"through unclaimed property in all 50 states, almost all of them
are lessening the dormancy period of all kinds of unclaimed
property," including state warrants and government-issued
checks.
Number 2689
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked what the normal period of time is
under the unclaimed property Act for "the turning in of
unclaimed property."
MS. LEWIS answered that the statutory average is five years, but
there are items that are specifically addressed. For example,
bank accounts are seven years, while traveler's checks are
fifteen. Regarding government checks, Ms. Lewis mentioned at
least one year for abandonment. She also mentioned due
diligence and [a period of] between six months and one year for
unclaimed-property reporting.
Number 2735
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG highlighted a change from one year in
the original bill to six months in the proposed CS. He asked if
that would mesh with the unclaimed property Act or whether there
would be conflict.
MS. LEWIS replied that she doesn't see any conflict because "the
one year they would turn ... over to us." The six-month period,
she noted, is the working period "to streamline the paperwork to
come into unclaimed properties."
MS. GARNER added, "And that's to do the due diligence."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked, "Would you start your
advertising after six months, so you'd put these people on the
list when you publish it?"
MS. LEWIS said yes. She added that [those people on the list]
would also "go on the Internet." Responding to a comment by
Representative Gruenberg, she stated, "You'd be surprised ...
what kind of agencies end up with unclaimed property. ...
Sometimes the checks just never make it to them, and they have
no idea they ... never got a check."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG offered his assumption that under the
unclaimed property Act [or another Act perhaps], there is a
method of immediately getting that money to [the owner].
MS. LEWIS responded, "We've tried to address some of the better-
known agencies and banks and federal governments, you bet."
Number 2819
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ moved to report CSHB 109, Version 23-
LS0581\D, Kurtz, 3/24/03, out of committee with individual
recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being
no objection, CSHB 109(STA) was reported from the House State
Affairs Standing Committee.
HB 31-INITIATIVE/REFERENDUM PETITIONS
HJR 5-CONST AM: INITIATIVE/REFERENDUM PETITIONS
CHAIR WEYHRAUCH announced that the final order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 31, "An Act relating to initiative and
referendum petitions; and providing for an effective date,"
along with HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 5, Proposing an amendment
to the Constitution of the State of Alaska relating to
initiative and referendum petitions.
Number 2880
STEVE BORELL, Executive Director, Alaska Miners Association,
testified in support of HB 31, which he said makes minor but
important changes. In recent years, groups opposing mining,
harvesting timber, trapping, hunting, and other traditional
activities have used initiative petitions in several states to
place these items on ballots. He said these groups are in large
part funded by private, nonprofit corporations. The [question]
appears to be one of funding an issue that on the surface has
emotional appeal to the public, and the funding to fight the
issue is obtained through the foundations. Often the issues
being attacked have small, unorganized constituencies that can't
secure sufficient funding to inform the public of the other side
of the story, he asserted, and therefore the initiative passes.
He maintained that increasing the number of districts in which
signatures must be obtained, as proposed under HB 31, would make
it slightly more difficult for these interest groups to bring
issues to the ballot while not eliminating that opportunity;
this is especially important in Alaska where remote and rural
areas often have a very limited voice in the legislature.
Mr. Borell concluded by urging the passage of HB 31.
TAPE 03-29, SIDE B
Number 2997
REPRESENTATIVE BILL WILLIAMS, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor
of HB 31 and HJR 5, said times have changed with the advent of
computers and faxes; however, in remote areas such as those on
Prince of Wales Island, which does have faxes and Internet,
those people weren't able to sign any of the petitions going
around the state.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked if HB 31 allows a method for those
in remote areas to submit signatures for petitions via fax or
another manner beyond having to sign a book.
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS explained that the constitution
specifies that signatures have to be obtained from 10 percent of
those who voted in the last election and one from [each of the]
27 districts; it doesn't specify how the signature is to be
obtained. He said now there is daily mail and faxes that could
be used to provide signatures for these initiatives and
referendums. He characterized [this proposal] as exporting
democracy from the urban areas to the rural areas.
Number 2869
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON offered his understanding that signatures
that were mailed in or faxed in would be invalid. He asked if
there is a way to [obtain signatures] through the mail.
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS deferred to the Department of Elections.
CHAIR WEYHRAUCH related his understanding that HB 31 and HJR 5
are to be reviewed together. He noted that the next committee
of referral is the House Judiciary Standing Committee.
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS said he was going to request that the
House Judiciary Standing Committee review whether a
constitutional amendment is necessary. Representative Williams
mentioned that he has a letter from the Department of Law on
this matter saying that the department doesn't know whether
[signatures obtained via mail or fax are invalid] because there
hasn't been case yet.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG requested a copy of the aforementioned
legal opinion. He said he is very sensitive to the balance of
power in government and that this process is an essential part
of the balance of power. He related that he didn't want Alaska
to become a state in which there are lots of initiatives, which
is a confusing process for voters, but noted his reluctance to
pass constitutional amendments without a good reason.
CHAIR WEYHRAUCH pointed out that the committee packet should
include the entire constitutional history on this matter.
Number 2660
VIRGINIA BREEZE, Elections Projects Coordinator, Division of
Elections, Office of the Lieutenant Governor, answered
Representative Seaton's earlier question by clarifying that all
signatures on petition books have to happen [in person] at the
location of the petition book; nothing can be mailed.
Number 2631
REPRESENTATIVE HOLM moved to report HB 31 and HJR 5 out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes. There being no objection, HB 31 and HJR 5 were
reported from the House State Affairs Standing Committee.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at
9:00 a.m.