Alaska Legislature: House Finance, 4/2/26, 9am

Alaska News 234 min

Source

Alaska Legislature: House Finance, 4/2/26, 9am

videoAlaska News

Articles from this transcript

12:36
Speaker A

Good morning.

12:38
Speaker A

I'm going to go ahead and call this meeting of the House Finance Committee to order.

12:41
Speaker A

Let the record reflect that the time is currently 9.08 a.m. on Thursday,

12:45
Speaker A

April 2,

12:46
Speaker A

2026.

12:47
Speaker A

No rest for the Finance Committee.

12:50
Speaker A

It seems like we were just here a few hours ago.

12:53
Speaker A

Present today we've got Representative,

12:55
Speaker A

let's see here, I know Representative Bynum is online.

13:00
Speaker A

We've got Representative Stapp.

13:03
Speaker A

Courtier Shragi, Courtier Josephson, uh myself, uh Courtier Foster, uh Representative Hannan, Representative Tomaszewski, Representative Galvin, Representative Jimmy, and let's see here.

13:20
Speaker A

And so just a reminder, folks can mute their cell phones. Um we have two items on the agenda this morning. That's House Bill one thirty three, that's payments

13:30
Speaker A

of contracts by Representative Henshoot.

13:33
Speaker A

We'll be taking public testimony on that bill,

13:35
Speaker A

and then we'll review the fiscal notes and set the bill aside.

13:39
Speaker A

Then we'll take up amendments for House Bill 91,

13:42
Speaker A

that's the marijuana tax bill,

13:44
Speaker A

by Representative Carrick.

13:46
Speaker A

And if it's the will of the committee,

13:49
Speaker A

we'll see if the committee is interested in moving the bill.

13:57
Speaker A

Uh starting off with House Bill 133, Payments of Contracts, I'd like to invite up uh Representative uh Himshoot as well as her staff, Ms Ella Lubin.

14:06
Speaker A

And if you could both put yourselves on the record. If you could give us uh a brief, a recap of the bill and then we'll go to public testimony and if time permits uh we'll take more detailed questions after we go through public testimony.

14:22
Speaker A

Um and then we'll be reviewing fiscal notes also after public testimony. So with that uh Representative Himshoot.

14:32
Speaker A

Thank you Chair Foster. And I wanna express my deepest gratitude to the entire committee for being here this morning. I know you had a very late night. So thank you for um hearing this bill this morning. Um House Bill 133 is basically a um

14:47
Speaker A

Prompt payment parity bill, what we're asking in this bill is for the state of Alaska to be the good business partner that we are to private contractors who complete public works projects.

14:58
Speaker A

So it sets a thirty day payment time line for um non-profits, municipalities and tribal entities.

15:08
Speaker A

And I'm happy to take any questions.

15:12
Speaker A

Okay, thank you. I think we've got everything covered on the recap, but I think we're going to jump right into public testimony.

15:19
Speaker A

And just a reminder,

15:21
Speaker A

if folks would like to submit written testimony,

15:23
Speaker A

they can do so by emailing us at house.finance at akleg.gov.

15:32
Speaker A

And one more time, that's house.finance at akleg.gov.

15:40
Speaker A

So let's see here. I might start here in the room with anyone who'd like to testify.

15:47
Speaker A

I am seeing, let's see, I think we've got a number of people that are marked as testimony, but I think they are with departments. I'm trying to get to the folks who I do not think are with departments.

16:01
Speaker A

In the room, it looks like I've got Brenda Stanfill. I've got

16:07
Speaker A

Let's see here.

16:10
Speaker A

I think maybe that might be the only person. If anyone else is interested in, okay, we do have another person. Okay, perfect.

16:17
Speaker A

Okay,

16:18
Speaker A

so that's why I wanted to check.

16:19
Speaker A

So maybe first if we could have Ms.

16:21
Speaker A

Brenda Stanfill come up and put yourself on the record. And I'm going to go ahead and open public testimony on HB 133.

16:28
Speaker A

Thank you so very much for being here and if you could put yourself on the record.

16:32
Speaker A

Thank you. Brenda Stanfield. I'm the executive director of the Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault. I appreciate the opportunity to testify today on this very critical issue for our nonprofits across the state.

16:45
Speaker A

Our Alaskan nonprofits depend heavily on state and federal grants to provide the services requested of them by their communities.

16:51
Speaker A

And in addition to these state and federal grants,

16:53
Speaker A

they do fundraising from their communities to ensure there are enough funds to operate at the levels necessary to meet the needs.

17:00
Speaker A

And while this fundraising is helpful,

17:02
Speaker A

it's also hard, and in many communities where economies are depressed,

17:05
Speaker A

the fundraising may generate only a small amount of money.

17:09
Speaker A

Fundraising dollars are the only dollars that can be kept by a nonprofit to build a reserve bank to be able to sustain themselves during a time that state and federal pass-through funds are not timely received.

17:20
Speaker A

Many nonprofits need every fundraising dollar they get to provide the services each year, so many nonprofits do not have a reserve bank of money to be able to carry them when grants and funds are delayed.

17:32
Speaker A

When the state enters into a grant agreement with a nonprofit,

17:35
Speaker A

the expectation is that those services began at the time the grant award begins.

17:39
Speaker A

When no advance or timely reimbursement is received, this means the nonprofit does not have the funds to pay the staff who are already employed and they're providing the services.

17:48
Speaker A

Prior to becoming the director of the network,

17:50
Speaker A

I was with a nonprofit in Fairbanks for 25 years.

17:54
Speaker A

Delays in payments and advances began in 2018.

17:57
Speaker A

The department we were funded through was going through changes. The name was

18:00
Speaker A

They were unable to get the grant set up for payment to be issued. I began providing services on July one, and when I had still received no payments in September and had exhausted all of my reserves, I was forced to set up a line of credit to make the payroll. A line of credit charges interest for each day that line of credit is used. It charges a fee to set it up, and it charges a yearly fee to keep it in place. None of the set-up fees, the annual fees or the interest fees are an allowable expense to a grant.

18:00
Speaker E

changed to the Department of Justice.

18:26
Speaker A

grant.

18:27
Speaker A

So I had to use fundraising dollars to pay this added expense created from the state's lack of payment. What I found out through that experience is that when we got the commissioner of that department involved in the issue, they were able to work with the department to set an expectation of how advances and payments were to work. And after setting that expectation,

18:45
Speaker A

the staff of that department have continued to ensure timely advances and payments.

18:49
Speaker A

This really is a matter of how departments prioritize their work, and by passing H.B. 133 you are letting all departments know that the expectation is timely payments.

18:58
Speaker A

I believe the same thing that happened with the department I spoke of will happen statewide, and there will not be interest payments, there just will be a prioritization of getting payments out timely, and this issue will be corrected. I urge you to support and pass H.B. 133. Thank you.

19:13
Speaker A

Great, thanks very much. Do we have any questions of the committee?

19:16
Speaker A

I don't see any. And so with that, thank you very much. Uh Repesentative Boehner, can you hear us okay, by the way?

19:25
Speaker B

No, sorry, sir. Just a moment.

19:30
Speaker A

Okay.

19:30
Speaker A

Yes, Co-Chair Foster,

19:31
Speaker A

thank you.

19:31
Speaker A

Oh great, thank you. I just wanted to make sure that if you had any questions, we could also hear you. So thanks for joining us, being on the line with us. And next we've got Mr.

19:42
Speaker A

Sander I believe it's

19:46
Speaker B

Shyvens.

19:47
Speaker A

Oh, Shyvens. Thank you very much. Looks like we had made a little bit of a different spelling on here. Also you're listed as Fairbanks, so I'm guessing you've flown in or maybe not.

19:56
Speaker B

Oh, Juneau.

19:58
Speaker A

Oh.

19:58
Speaker A

Okay, oh great.

19:59
Speaker B

Yeah.

20:00
Speaker A

Okay,

20:00
Speaker A

Absolutely. Can

20:00
Speaker A

well

20:01
Speaker A

you hang

20:01
Speaker A

thanks

20:01
Speaker A

okay?

20:01
Speaker A

for thanks for joining us and if you could put us on the record, and we can hear you great.

20:04
Speaker A

Absolutely. So my name is Sandro Scheibens. I'm here to testify in support of House Bill 133. I'm the CEO of Wassman and Associates. We've got 35 staff and we provide IT consulting. You may have heard of a system called BASIS. We worked on that system in the past and many other systems for the state. So we provide IT consulting services.

20:26
Speaker A

I'm also the managing partner of the Alaska IT Group,

20:28
Speaker A

a group of Alaska businesses that provide IT consulting services in the state. So pretty much all the contracts we have have a 30-day payment clause that we perform work on for the state of Alaska. And it was in the fall of last year that I was in Sitka for a conference where Representative Himschoot was talking about House Bill 133 when that caught my attention because

20:53
Speaker A

one of the agencies was 5 months late in payments. As Tessa just mentioned, we too have staffing needs. Of course, people need to be paid timely. About 80% of my cost is staffing cost. And so it's very important for us to get timely payment from state agencies. We absolutely recognize that state agencies are oftentimes understaffed themselves and they

21:17
Speaker A

Hmm.

21:17
Speaker A

run behind on a variety of activities. So there's never been

21:22
Speaker A

any feelings or bad will. We never blame the agency. But I do think House Bill 133 will really help encourage agencies' timely payments. I think all contractors from state need that. We've got Alaska staff, Alaska interests, and yeah, we'd like to get paid on time. So I hope House Bill 133 makes it, and we appreciate your support.

21:47
Speaker A

Thank you very much. We've got a question, Representative Hannon.

21:50
Speaker A

Thank you, Co-Chair Foster. Mr. Scheibens, I want to just reprise so that it's clear on the record. You're a private sector, for-profit IT company.

21:59
Speaker A

Correct.

22:00
Speaker A

And follow up,

22:01
Speaker A

Follow.

22:01
Speaker A

many of your clients though are the kinds of clients

22:07
Speaker A

that are described in the bill. They are non-profits, they're local governments, they're tribal entities who've gone to the private sector, asked for a contract for work for services instead of expanding their bureaucracy, and your private sector bet business has to have lengthy delays in receiving the contracted obligations from those because they're not getting the payment from the state.

22:33
Speaker A

Correct.

22:34
Speaker A

I think it's both. My understanding is House Bill 133 is for all contractors, not just for nonprofits.

22:40
Speaker A

Okay. And uh

22:40
Speaker A

Okay.

22:42
Speaker A

And—

22:42
Speaker A

Follow up?

22:43
Speaker A

Follow-up?

22:43
Speaker A

Thank you. I would uh emphasise working on the I_T_ systems for all government entities like our basis systems, if we're looking for upgrades, if we can't have contractors doing that for us on a regular basis, doing our updates,

23:00
Speaker A

keeping us current, we all become non-functional. Um and expecting the private sector to function without prompt payment

23:09
Speaker A

You know, when we talk about working like private sector, well, at most private sector, you're charged interest if you can't pay on time. If I can't pay my visa bill, if I can't make my mortgage payment, I have additional fees. So um thank you for sharing. And thank you for continuing to live in the district, not moving to Fairbanks.

23:30
Speaker A

Of course.

23:31
Speaker A

Of course.

23:32
Speaker A

That makes this nicer.

23:33
Speaker A

We wish you would though.

23:36
Speaker A

Okay.

23:37
Speaker A

Thank you very much for your testimony.

23:40
Speaker A

Next we're

23:40
Speaker A

Okay,

23:41
Speaker A

going to go to the,

23:41
Speaker A

Foster.

23:41
Speaker A

oh, yes, Representative Bynum.

23:45
Speaker A

Thank you. I had a quick question for the gentleman that just testified.

23:49
Speaker A

Okay, go ahead.

23:52
Speaker A

Thank you. Thank you very much for being here today, sir.

23:55
Speaker A

I was just wanting to know from your perspective of where you currently are versus where maybe you've been in other roles.

24:06
Speaker A

Your relationship with working with the state with grants and or working with the state through contracts,

24:14
Speaker A

do you see any difference in the terms of those contracts and how the agreements are set up for payment?

24:23
Speaker A

Mr. Scheibens?

24:24
Speaker A

Do you expand on difference?

24:26
Speaker A

Because I'm not sure what the difference is referring to.

24:30
Speaker A

Representative Bynum?

24:33
Speaker A

Yes, thank you.

24:34
Speaker A

So we have a lot of grants that the state will put out, and so we are basically,

24:40
Speaker A

you know, have a nonprofit or an organization where they're going to get a grant from the state to perform some kind of an activity.

24:48
Speaker A

And then the state also does contractual work where they solicit for work to be done, and then the company comes in and they sign a contract.

24:58
Speaker A

If you experience that there's a difference between the states engaging in those two separate activities in the terms of the agreements that are in place.

25:10
Speaker A

So my experience is primarily through— I mean, the way my company gets paid is through contracts, not through grants. But having worked on a variety of grants-related systems for the state, is they typically, they're managed very differently, and there's a lot more stipulations in grants I've seen than typically is the case in— I think contracts are simpler.

25:36
Speaker A

Should

25:37
Speaker A

the This

25:37
Speaker A

follow-up?

25:37
Speaker A

follow-up?

25:38
Speaker A

So

25:41
Speaker A

So when we talk about the grant part of it, is there ever a desire from the grantees to want to put language in their applications or in their grants that would have a term of payment from the state?

25:57
Speaker A

I think my predecessor is better at speaking to that because he's on the nonprofit side,

26:02
Speaker A

but I...

26:04
Speaker A

I would like to say yes because, like, I mean, there must always be payment terms specified in any type of contract or grant agreement, so I'd like to believe yes.

26:17
Speaker A

Okay.

26:18
Speaker A

Thank you very much for your time.

26:19
Speaker A

Thank you.

26:20
Speaker A

Thank you.

26:20
Speaker A

Okay, Representative—

26:22
Speaker D

Actually,

26:22
Speaker A

rep.

26:22
Speaker D

Actually, I do have a question, if I may.

26:23
Speaker A

Sure, Representative Gelvin.

26:24
Speaker D

I feel like you're a great one to ask these questions of because you have such an open,

26:29
Speaker D

vast experience with both sides of this discussion and equation. And I think that's what we're trying to get at. So I just wanted to ask you, whether you're a grantee or a contractor of the state,

26:43
Speaker D

would you expect the...

26:45
Speaker D

funds to be delivered to you at in in a way that was promised on either side or do you think there should be more flexibility if it's one or the other?

26:58
Speaker A

Mr. Scheibens?

26:58
Speaker A

In comparing grants and contracts?

27:00
Speaker D

Yes.

27:03
Speaker A

I

27:04
Speaker A

Again, I think I really want to refer to my predecessor because she's more on the nonprofit side, but what I hear her say and what my own experience is I mean, we have staffing payment needs.

27:15
Speaker A

Right?

27:16
Speaker D

Oh

27:16
Speaker A

So we need money and, and cash flow is everything. And so what you typically carry as a business is at least 1 month of cash for— you get paid a month later than, than you have to pay your staff already.

27:29
Speaker A

So you always have a cash reserve build up that's equivalent to about a month of work that you perform.

27:36
Speaker A

Okay.

27:36
Speaker A

On the moment the agencies go 30 days behind, now you need 2 months, 3 months, 4 months.

27:42
Speaker A

And so banks don't typically lend you money past 60 or 90 days. So you have this weird issue where things that are 30 or 60 days late are fine, but as soon as it turns 60 or 90 days, it becomes really problematic as a business. And I think that's— I don't see how a nonprofit would be different. I mean, they

28:02
Speaker A

Hmm.

28:02
Speaker A

may have some means of fundraising, but you're going to have the same issue as any business.

28:07
Speaker D

Thank you. That clears it up for me. Thank you very much.

28:10
Speaker A

Okay. Thank you so very much, Mr. Scheibens. Next up, calling in from the Kodiak LIO, we have Mr. Pat Branson. If you can state your name and affiliation.

28:22
Speaker A

Good morning,

28:23
Speaker A

Health Finance Chair Foster. This is Ms. Pat Branson,

28:27
Speaker A

and I'm a board member of the Four Acre Group and retired CEO of the Senior Citizens of Kodiak who operate the Kodiak Area Transit System and who also provides much needed home and community-based senior services to people in Alaska over 60 years of age.

28:44
Speaker A

I've spoken through directly with public transit and human service.

28:48
Speaker A

providers.

28:50
Speaker A

To get information on delays with grant agreements,

28:53
Speaker A

reimbursement processing and payments,

28:56
Speaker A

Department of Transportation and Department of Health grant agreements and late payments from these state departments have caused multiple issues with non-profits being able to continue to provide valuable services to Alaskans of every age.

29:11
Speaker A

After speaking with several transit providers across the state, not just in one area, this is what I

29:17
Speaker A

What I have found what's not working with prompt reimbursable payments being made for services that have already been provided.

29:24
Speaker A

Grant agreements are continuously delayed and being loaded and finalized into the black cap system that DOT uses.

29:32
Speaker A

For one transit DOT provider,

29:34
Speaker A

the grant extended from 2008-25 to the FY26 grant agreements were delayed and this amendment was not completed until September of 2025,

29:47
Speaker A

more than 60 days into the new fiscal year. So the provider could not submit reimbursable documents to DOT causing cash flow issues.

29:58
Speaker A

With the department

29:58
Speaker A

The—

29:59
Speaker A

with the Department

30:00
Speaker A

With health and senior service providers,

30:01
Speaker A

reimbursements are not the same process. It's not reimbursable for receiving grant payments, but those grant payments have been delayed.

30:10
Speaker A

At the beginning of the fiscal year when amendments are made and the payments are not made until after quarterly reports have been reviewed and then the payments have been submitted.

30:23
Speaker A

This is how delays have affected nonprofits, whether they provide services under DOT or the Department of Health.

30:31
Speaker A

statewide.

30:32
Speaker A

Late payments mean cash flow issues across the board.

30:35
Speaker A

Payroll is not met for some executive directors.

30:39
Speaker A

One nonprofit had struggles with utility shutoff notices.

30:43
Speaker A

Vendor payments are delayed.

30:45
Speaker A

One nonprofit has one half million dollars outstanding in receivables.

30:51
Speaker A

Shutdowns are threatened and not being able to continue services to some of the most vulnerable Alaskans.

30:57
Speaker A

Federal audits are affected and when told what can be done with these delays and non-payment, some providers have been told to take out of line of credit.

31:06
Speaker A

Passing House Bill 133 brings parity to nonprofits,

31:10
Speaker A

municipalities, and tribal organizations and allows nonprofits to continue to provide valuable services to all Alaskans and respectfully puts nonprofits in the same arena as for the for-profit entities in receiving timely payments.

31:27
Speaker A

It's the right thing to do, and thank you for the opportunity to testify on this important bill.

31:34
Speaker A

Thank you very much, Ms.

31:35
Speaker A

Branson.

31:36
Speaker A

I don't see any questions. And so next we're going to go over to Ms. Stephanie Bergland calling in from Anchorage, if you can state your name and your affiliation.

31:50
Speaker A

Hello, thank you co-chairs and members of the committee.

31:53
Speaker A

I'm Stephanie Bergland, the CEO of Thread, Alaska's statewide child care resource and referral organization.

31:59
Speaker A

THREAD is a 40-year-old nonprofit,

32:01
Speaker A

primarily a direct service organization,

32:03
Speaker A

and our largest sources of funding come from partnership with the State Department of Health and Department of Education and Early Development.

32:10
Speaker A

THREAD strongly supports House Bill 133.

32:13
Speaker A

While we work very closely with the state and are thankful for the partnership,

32:17
Speaker A

the grant process,

32:19
Speaker A

namely timely payments,

32:20
Speaker A

has been a longstanding problem impacting consistent and reliable early care and education support services.

32:26
Speaker A

Threat encounters significant delays and uncertainty surrounding payments from the state.

32:31
Speaker A

Over the last five years, it's been the exception,

32:33
Speaker A

not the norm,

32:35
Speaker A

that Threads grants and contracts are processed and paid on time.

32:38
Speaker A

Threat is a strong nonprofit business but needs reliable payment processes to ensure consistent and timely service delivery.

32:45
Speaker A

Over all, these issues disrupt and delay services needing to be completed in a shortened period and fully spent by June 30th.

32:52
Speaker A

The issue also affects thread clients.

32:54
Speaker A

Of the nearly 380 child care small businesses,

32:57
Speaker A

most are enrolled in the child care assistance program relying on state assistance payments to support their operations and business expenses. State child care assistance payment is paid as a reimbursement and has been inconsistent.

33:10
Speaker A

Child care programs work on very tight margins and need reliable reimbursement payments.

33:14
Speaker A

Payment delays put the sustainability of these child care programs at risk,

33:18
Speaker A

compromising the high-quality services they provide to families every day.

33:21
Speaker A

I strongly urge you to prioritize the passage of House Bill 133. Thank you.

33:26
Speaker A

Great, thank you, Representative Galvin.

33:29
Speaker B

Thank you. Thank you through the chair. Thank you very much, Ms.

33:33
Speaker B

Berglund, for being here this morning. And last night I shared some data around how many child care programs have closed.

33:44
Speaker B

Do you think that late payments may have played some role in the thin margins that

33:53
Speaker B

These organizations are already dealing with in terms of these closures.

33:59
Speaker A

Ms. Bergland.

34:03
Speaker A

Through the chair,

34:04
Speaker A

thank you, Representative Galvin.

34:06
Speaker A

Thank you for highlighting that.

34:07
Speaker A

Yes, we do have documentation and letters from child care programs that have closed.

34:14
Speaker A

Mainly,

34:14
Speaker A

you may recall the large local chain.

34:18
Speaker A

that we had here in the Anchorage and Eagle River area,

34:23
Speaker A

the Bright Beginnings,

34:26
Speaker A

and they very specifically noted that the inconsistency of late payments was one of the reasons that caused all five of their locations to permanently close.

34:38
Speaker A

So we have heard that anecdotally from others,

34:40
Speaker A

but have that documented from a few,

34:42
Speaker A

and it does contribute to the thin margins I mentioned.

34:45
Speaker A

Thank you.

34:46
Speaker A

This is for your question.

34:47
Speaker B

A follow-up, please.

34:48
Speaker B

Miss

34:49
Speaker B

Berglund,

34:49
Speaker B

if you would please send that to the committee, uh, for this bill so that we can have it on public record,

34:57
Speaker B

I think that would be helpful.

34:59
Speaker B

Uh, well, uh, I think what you just shared with regard to the documentation from comments given to you by Bright Beginnings, I think is what you said,

35:11
Speaker B

I think that would be helpful if you could please include that.

35:18
Speaker A

Thank you, I will.

35:18
Speaker A

Thank you.

35:18
Speaker A

I will.

35:19
Speaker B

Thank you.

35:19
Speaker B

Thank you.

35:20
Speaker A

Okay, thank you very much for your testimony.

35:22
Speaker A

I don't see any other questions. So next we're going to go over to Brittany Burkett calling from Fairbanks if you can state your name and your affiliation.

35:32
Speaker A

Hi,

35:32
Speaker A

Hi, good morning,

35:33
Speaker A

Mr.

35:34
Speaker A

Chair.

35:34
Speaker A

My name is Brittany Burkett. I am from Fairbanks and I'm representing Presbyterian Hospitality House.

35:39
Speaker A

I have been with Presbyterian Hospitality House for over 10 years and I have seen when the state follows up and pays or reimburses for the services we provide accurately and in a timely manner and I've seen when it hasn't and when it hasn't done that it has been incredibly stressful for the providers and then as well as us providing services for the youth.

36:04
Speaker A

I am in support or we are in support of House Bill 134.

36:07
Speaker A

33 due to the past experiences we've had with ASO not paying promptly and accurately as well as their currently grants that we typically receive have been reduced by over 75 percent right now the system is working and it's at least for us in our capacity and that is

36:30
Speaker A

Wonderful and it's honestly a relief and I think with the passing of House Bill 133 it will continue to have this extended working so that we can continue to provide these services for the youth and the families that we serve.

36:45
Speaker A

Ultimately I think if there's a continuation of services not being reimbursed in a timely manner,

36:53
Speaker A

sadly that's just going to trickle down into the...

36:57
Speaker A

You can say I believe that all these nonprofits serve.

37:00
Speaker A

Thank you.

37:02
Speaker A

Okay, Representative Hannon.

37:04
Speaker B

Thank you, Co-Chair Foster.

37:05
Speaker B

Ms. Bergen, I'm unfamiliar with the Presbyterian Hospitality House.

37:10
Speaker B

Could you just briefly describe what your agency or organization does?

37:17
Speaker B

the size and scope of its services.

37:19
Speaker A

Ms. Berkey.

37:20
Speaker A

Ms. Bergen?

37:20
Speaker A

Yeah, yes, absolutely.

37:23
Speaker A

Thank you.

37:24
Speaker A

So Presbyterian Hospitality House,

37:26
Speaker A

we're a residential treatment facility for severely emotionally disturbed youth.

37:30
Speaker A

We provide residential services to youth in the Anchorage-Watson area as well as here in Fairbanks.

37:38
Speaker A

We have a therapeutic treatment home and foster care homes in all across the state and we currently have

37:49
Speaker A

I would say upwards of 100 youth in our care and we are continuing to grow the need for services for these youth for this young men and women are needed.

38:03
Speaker A

We also have a program that we call Transition Independence for youth 18 to 22 to assist in youth that have previously been institutionalized or don't have the support of their home and community in the transition.

38:16
Speaker A

transitioning to adults where they can be out in the community and provide assistance one-on-one with with our direct care staff in terms of navigating public transportation or getting a job or working with public assistance so that they can have the support that they may not have in their home and community from our providers and so that they can be successful adults.

38:39
Speaker A

We have that program here in Fairbanks as well as in Wasilla.

38:45
Speaker A

Representative Pannen.

38:46
Speaker B

Thank you, Co-Chair Foster.

38:49
Speaker B

I am so sorry I did not recognize the scope and critical nature of the services that you provide.

38:56
Speaker B

Thank you for doing that.

38:57
Speaker B

You are one of the few programs serving kids in a residential way.

39:05
Speaker B

Boy, if we didn't have you,

39:07
Speaker B

I bet our corrections budget would continue to grow.

39:10
Speaker B

So thank you for continuing to provide services so vital for our at-risk kids.

39:18
Speaker A

Thank you. Thank you for your testimony.

39:19
Speaker A

Thank you.

39:20
Speaker A

Thank you.

39:22
Speaker A

Thank you for your testimony. I've got here also Ms.

39:24
Speaker A

Kaylee Morton, also with the Presbyterian Hospitality House.

39:28
Speaker A

Did you— I think you're calling from Fairbanks. Were you also wanting to testify, Ms. Morton?

39:35
Speaker A

Sure, I could just co-sign to what Brittany has also said, if you would like.

39:41
Speaker A

Um, I'll go ahead.

39:42
Speaker A

Go ahead.

39:44
Speaker A

Okay, my name is Kaylee Morton,

39:46
Speaker A

as stated.

39:47
Speaker A

I'm the billing director here at Presbyterian Hospitality House.

39:51
Speaker A

We are working with the most precious community members throughout Alaska.

39:54
Speaker A

Without our services,

39:55
Speaker A

these children could be left in dire and unsafe situations,

39:58
Speaker A

where the chairwoman...

40:00
Speaker A

add that our corrections budget would indeed continue to grow.

40:05
Speaker A

Asking providers to hold the financial burden for services already rendered longer than 30 days affects the services we provide.

40:13
Speaker A

Providers should not have to worry about if and when they may be reimbursed, but how can we grow,

40:20
Speaker A

protect,

40:21
Speaker A

and care for the communities we are serving.

40:24
Speaker A

PHH at one time had 1.2 million dollars in outstanding payments.

40:29
Speaker A

This is unacceptable.

40:31
Speaker A

Services were rendered and were not reimbursed in a timely manner or even consulted as to when payments would be made. With the unavoidable liability of subsidizing the state,

40:41
Speaker A

PHH was unable to hire new qualified staff,

40:44
Speaker A

grow our programs. We were enforced to change program location,

40:49
Speaker A

pull funds from reserves from other funding and caused a delay in our expansion and our new building.

40:58
Speaker A

That's affecting the care and the growth of the community we serve.

41:02
Speaker A

Upon learning that grant funds have diminished dramatically,

41:06
Speaker A

PHH is deeply concerned about how we are going to absorb that loss and still provide quality care for this fragile community.

41:14
Speaker A

We are looking at a 61.5 decrease in our grants.

41:21
Speaker A

For example, a grant we have is currently at $99,000. It will decrease.

41:27
Speaker A

decrease to $24,000.

41:30
Speaker A

However,

41:31
Speaker A

PHH has not seen catastrophic demise at the hands of late reimbursement.

41:37
Speaker A

PHH did have to absorb a smaller agency in Kenai that had suffered the fate of late payment.

41:44
Speaker A

We are watching providers close their doors.

41:48
Speaker A

Close their doors or limit services due to late or no payments while the communities we serve grow and continue to need services and support.

41:57
Speaker A

Thank you so much.

41:59
Speaker A

Thank you, Ms.

42:00
Speaker A

Thank you, Ms. Morton. I don't see any questions. And so next,

42:04
Speaker A

lastly, I believe we have Kyan Reeve calling in from Ketchikan. If you can state your name and your affiliation.

42:15
Speaker A

Yes, good morning, Honorable Chair and members of the committee.

42:18
Speaker A

Thanks for your service. My name is Kyne Reeve, the transit director down here in Ketchikan. I'm testifying in support of House Bill 133.

42:27
Speaker A

This bill addresses a real ongoing problem,

42:29
Speaker A

delayed payments from the state.

42:32
Speaker A

In Ketchikan,

42:33
Speaker A

transit is an essential infrastructure.

42:35
Speaker A

Last year, we delivered over half a million rides,

42:38
Speaker A

playing a big role in keeping our economy moving, and a lot of our system was recognized nationally.

42:42
Speaker A

nationally is the Community Transportation Association of America's small system of the year.

42:46
Speaker A

So we are a high performing system,

42:48
Speaker A

but we are operating within a funding structure that's just not functioning predictably and or sustainably.

42:54
Speaker A

Since about 2018,

42:56
Speaker A

we've experienced grant agreements delayed for many months at a time, reimbursements taking many months after submission,

43:04
Speaker A

and capital projects stalled for years due to administrative delays.

43:08
Speaker A

In some cases, funds have lapsed, even been lost to our state due to these delays.

43:13
Speaker A

For example, this year, our operating agreement wasn't executed until eight months into the fiscal year,

43:18
Speaker A

so we couldn't even request reimbursement during that time.

43:21
Speaker A

So this is really a funding issue. It's a timing issue.

43:24
Speaker A

And I do want to mention one key point as well.

43:26
Speaker A

The state of Alaska provides zero state match for rural transit, one of the few states in our nation that do not fund transit, yet the state controls the timing of federal funds.

43:35
Speaker A

That leaves local governments and nonprofits fronting the costs and carrying the cash flow burden.

43:40
Speaker A

HB 133 helps correct that by requiring timely payment, clear communication, and accountability,

43:46
Speaker A

and ensures that funds move when they're supposed to so services can...

43:50
Speaker A

This can continue without disruption.

43:51
Speaker A

We strongly support the bill down here,

43:53
Speaker A

and I thank you so much for your time.

43:55
Speaker A

Great.

43:55
Speaker A

Great, thank you very much, Mr.

43:56
Speaker A

Reeve. I don't see any questions of the committee.

43:59
Speaker A

Is there anyone?

44:00
Speaker A

Go ahead, Chair Foster.

44:01
Speaker A

Yes,

44:01
Speaker A

go ahead.

44:03
Speaker A

Oh, thank you, Co-Chair Foster.

44:05
Speaker A

Thank you through the chair to Mr.

44:08
Speaker A

Reeve.

44:09
Speaker A

Thank you very much for testifying, sir,

44:11
Speaker A

as Representative Bynum here.

44:13
Speaker A

I just wanted to say appreciate you bringing your perspective to the committee and the hard work that you guys are doing here in the community and keeping the transit system operational. So just want to say thank you for taking your time to testify today.

44:29
Speaker A

Thank you so much.

44:31
Speaker A

Thank you so much for observing.

44:33
Speaker A

Thanks for all you do. We sure appreciate it.

44:35
Speaker A

Thank you very much, Mr.

44:36
Speaker A

Reeve.

44:36
Speaker A

And is there anyone else in the audience who would like to testify?

44:40
Speaker A

Seeing none,

44:41
Speaker A

is there anyone else online who would like to testify?

44:47
Speaker B

We just got a council,

44:48
Speaker B

we just called in.

44:49
Speaker A

Oh, we have somebody else who just called in.

44:56
Speaker A

I believe Ramey Matyshevsky is here to do the fiscal notes for maybe DNR, I believe.

45:04
Speaker A

So yes, I'm seeing a head nod,

45:06
Speaker A

so I think that's the case.

45:09
Speaker A

And I don't believe there's anyone else who would like to testify, but if somebody else calls in here.

45:16
Speaker A

Actually, we'll close public testimony for now and we can always come back to this when we bring the bill up later.

45:22
Speaker A

So I'm going to go ahead and close public testimony on H.B. 133.

45:29
Speaker A

And just a reminder, if anyone would like to submit public testimony via email, they can do so by emailing us at house.finance at akleg.gov.

45:42
Speaker A

And so with that, do we have any other questions for the sponsor before we move on to, or actually,

45:53
Speaker A

let's see, we've got fiscal notes.

45:55
Speaker A

I was going to jump over to the next bill, but we've got quite a few fiscal notes. Actually, we've got 10 departments and 15 fiscal notes.

46:03
Speaker A

So we'll jump right into it here.

46:07
Speaker A

So first up we have the Assistant Commissioner for the Department of Health, Ms. Pam Halloran, and it looks like uh we have uh six fiscal notes if you could uh put yourself on the record. Thanks for being here today and um go ahead and

46:24
Speaker A

Describe the fiscal notes.

46:25
Speaker B

Okay, good morning. Uh Co-chair Foster, for the record, Pam Halloran, Assistant Commissioner for the Department of Health. We have a number of fiscal notes, they're all money notes, so I thought if with your permission I would do a quick overview of our methodology that we utilise in det in determining these notes, um and just to say that these numbers reflect our reality and they surely do not reflect where we want to be as a department. So

46:51
Speaker B

So, and in building our fiscal notes, we used a methodology where we did request positions for some of our divisions,

47:02
Speaker B

but if the penalties as we calculated them from invoice date to payment date applying the methodology in the bill, if it was less than the cost of the position,

47:11
Speaker B

then we requested money that would comprise of the penalty based on actual.

47:17
Speaker B

uh data from F_Y_ two thousand twenty five. So for three divisions we requested a position. We believe that interest would be a G_F_ only expenditure. So we wouldn't be able to use our federal fund sources to pay for fines and penalties. So that's why for some of our divisions it was much more beneficial to pay for a position to make sure that in the future we can pay timely

47:42
Speaker B

and leverage those federal dollars that way.

47:47
Speaker B

So with that, I will s

47:50
Speaker A

Let's see here. Representative Galvin.

47:54
Speaker A

Thank you, I appreciate you allowing me to ask a question about her very general statement, which I think I wanna make sure I understand y you're I think

48:04
Speaker A

being as transparent as possible here, and I appreciate that, but I d I just wanna make sure I heard you properly that um

48:13
Speaker A

This is representing the reality,

48:15
Speaker A

but not necessarily where you want to be is what I heard.

48:20
Speaker A

And by that, I just want to make sure we all understand here at the committee that they are really working hard in that department.

48:31
Speaker A

And unfortunately,

48:32
Speaker A

we couldn't hear,

48:34
Speaker A

I would just say for my own perspective,

48:38
Speaker A

it would have been nice to hear.

48:41
Speaker A

Five years ago, four years ago, three years ago,

48:44
Speaker A

two years ago, that there's some struggles in terms of having enough people power to process these,

48:52
Speaker A

whether they're grants or contracts or whatever it is, getting them out soon enough.

48:57
Speaker A

And so I just want to acknowledge that,

48:59
Speaker A

that I think many of us at the table, whether it's Snap or anything else, we're here to support you and make sure that you're aware that had you.

49:09
Speaker A

had the department made the ass I think that we've, all of us in a bipartisan way, have been there to um make sure you get your needs whether it's computers or people. And um so I just wanted that to be on the record.

49:23
Speaker B

Sure.

49:23
Speaker A

Thank you.

49:23
Speaker A

And we also have a comment from Representative Hannan or a question?

49:26
Speaker B

A question. Thank you, Coach Chair Foster. Ms. Halloran, I'd asked you about this uh when you were last here, so I wanna know if in developing these fiscal notes, you've taken to account the

49:36
Speaker A

the accounting positions and payroll services that are coming back to the department or are these based on the status and staffing you have now? Um so because if the budget and approvals go through you're going to have some accounting people return to your department, so.

49:56
Speaker B

Alright.

49:56
Speaker A

Ms. Halloran?

49:57
Speaker B

Alright. Through the chair, Representative Hannon, that's a

50:00
Speaker A

It's a very good question. The department will receive a total of 5 positions from Shared Services Alaska. We've actually requested 2 more. We plan to put one in every single one of our divisions, and we plan to put one within our fiscal section. We— these fiscal notes did not take that into effect. These fiscal notes were based off of actual data from FY25.

50:26
Speaker A

So they don't take into effect those positions.

50:30
Speaker A

Hmm.

50:30
Speaker A

We do not believe that the positions, when they went over to Shared Services Alaska, those positions are trained in a single function.

50:41
Speaker A

So

50:41
Speaker A

they're— so those positions are coming to us knowing how to process purchase cards, or they know how to process travel or invoices.

50:50
Speaker A

They're not coming fully trained, so there's going to be a transition period.

50:54
Speaker A

Shared Services of Alaska is working on training those staff and giving them exposure to all things before they send them to us, but they're still going to need to practice those things.

51:04
Speaker A

So we, we don't anticipate that will be an immediate

51:08
Speaker A

fix right out of the gate for us.

51:10
Speaker A

Representative Hannon, follow-up.

51:11
Speaker A

Follow-up. Um thank you, Chair Foster and Ms Halloran. With that, uh can I deduct or deduce that some of these where you're saying you'll need more staffing we're actually already covering those if our budget for Department of Health and that redistribution of shared services back to the agencies comes through. Not that they're

51:35
Speaker A

double accounted for because you have to d give us a fiscal note based on how you are staffed currently, but we have in our proposed budget

51:46
Speaker A

Mm-hmm.

51:46
Speaker A

uh approved in I think all departments subcommittee reports in the operating budget those shared services redistribution of staff. And granted there'll be a learning curve for everybody. But can I deduce that much of this fiscal note

52:00
Speaker A

The staffing will already be coming to you when

52:04
Speaker A

within a fiscal year should be up on step to do those jobs.

52:07
Speaker D

Ms Halloran.

52:08
Speaker A

Through the chair, Representative Hannin, thank you for the question.

52:12
Speaker A

Partially. In our fiscal notes, the positions we have requested are accountant threes, because in the accounting technicians that are coming to us in shared services Alaska,

52:23
Speaker A

they're actually

52:25
Speaker A

You know, paying the invoices within the accounting system. Accountant three's handle our very complex financial situation that we're in. The department has over two hundred federal programs and those programs have to be managed within the accounting system in a very specific way.

52:45
Speaker A

So these accounting technicians, by the answer is yes, I hope so.

52:50
Speaker A

But also the accountant threes are going to be the ones that are balancing the budgets and putting the money where we actually need it to be when we need to pay our vendors so we can pay them timely.

53:01
Speaker A

Thank you.

53:01
Speaker A

Thank

53:01
Speaker A

Okay.

53:01
Speaker A

you.

53:02
Speaker A

Okay, and it looks like you've got six fiscal notes. And so if you'd like to go ahead and kick it off.

53:10
Speaker A

For the appropriation behavioral health, the allocation is behavioral health administration.

53:11
Speaker A

Yes.

53:17
Speaker A

The control code is ILKOR.

53:26
Speaker A

Was that correct?

53:26
Speaker A

I haven't done this for a while. Moving on to the next fiscal note. The appropriation is healthcare services. The allocation is Medical Assistance Administration. The control code is MWHFW.

53:27
Speaker A

Okay.

53:43
Speaker A

And maybe on the first fiscal note, if you could just walk us through uh the impact of that. So I see there's um services uh if you could just

53:51
Speaker A

Absolutely.

53:52
Speaker A

uh maybe describe each fiscal note.

53:54
Speaker A

Moving back to the fiscal note, the first fiscal note for the Division of Behavioral Health, Behavioral Health Administration.

54:01
Speaker A

This division

54:07
Speaker A

on average is taking 46 days to pay its invoices, at least in FY25.

54:14
Speaker A

That didn't account for a position, so we requested $57,500 to cover the penalties.

54:22
Speaker A

Okay.

54:23
Speaker A

Also,

54:24
Speaker A

No.

54:24
Speaker A

I'm so sorry, I just want to note that we also have with us Representative Moore. Thanks for joining us, Representative Moore.

54:30
Speaker A

We have a question on that first fiscal note, Representative Josephson.

54:34
Speaker F

Thank you, Mr.

54:35
Speaker F

Chairman.

54:37
Speaker F

Ms.

54:38
Speaker F

Halloran, A.C. Halloran, so you're saying rather than asking for a body in this section within behavioral health to make this work, you just will pay a fine?

54:52
Speaker F

Is that the approach?

54:54
Speaker A

Through the chair, Representative Josephson,

54:58
Speaker A

that is what we're doing in this fiscal note.

55:00
Speaker A

A position would have cost more general fund than paying the fines.

55:05
Speaker A

So that's the methodology that we used for this particular fiscal note. We were considering the fiscal situation and choosing the lower dollar figure on the general fund spend.

55:19
Speaker F

Boy, that seems like a lose-lose.

55:22
Speaker F

Thank you.

55:24
Speaker A

I think there might be more questions for Representative Hannon.

55:27
Speaker A

Thank you, Co-Chair Foster.

55:29
Speaker A

Ms. Halloran, though, I'm going to go back to my original line of questioning,

55:32
Speaker A

which would, so let's presume in the first fiscal year of implementation, it's going to take a while to train that person and you're accruing fines.

55:39
Speaker A

But after a year, they're now up on step,

55:43
Speaker A

the systems are in place, and in the second year,

55:47
Speaker A

this would not be an ongoing cost because now we have caught up.

55:51
Speaker A

caught up with our backlog, and we are on a regular basis training and staff to a position that we're able to pay in a timely fashion.

55:59
Speaker A

From if things go well, that's the intention and plan, correct?

55:59
Speaker A

From—

56:04
Speaker A

Ms. Halloran?

56:05
Speaker A

Through the chair, Representative Hannon,

56:07
Speaker A

we absolutely want to pay all of our invoices on time. We built our fiscal notes based on FY 25 and what we know now.

56:18
Speaker A

Representative Galvin.

56:20
Speaker A

Thank you, Co-Chair Foster.

56:23
Speaker B

Was there any consideration when you were walking through this, and I understand where your mindset was, but in your kind of going over this, I'm wondering if the multiplier effect of paying fines and what would that, how would that affect these multiple organizations who were now either not able to deliver their services for a period of time, perhaps losing staff?

56:50
Speaker B

aft.

56:50
Speaker B

And but I think more importantly some of them even closing down as I've just heard which shocked me. Um and what that multiplier effect then would mean to the whole of all of this body of work right.

57:04
Speaker B

And I I know you are aware of what I'm talking about, um even if it becomes lawsuits and how much more expensive all of this would be if we end up unfortunately

57:14
Speaker B

you know, not delivering a service that is super critical. Um just wanted to hear your thoughts on that.

57:22
Speaker A

Ms. Halloran.

57:23
Speaker A

Through the chair, Representative Galvin, um I should probably go back to the methodology that we used to build our fiscal notes.

57:29
Speaker B

Mm-hmm.

57:30
Speaker A

Um at the time we built the methodology we s we cho chose the entire arena of our invoice date to payment date. So the invoice date to payment date

57:42
Speaker A

is reflects our entire arena. So that is payments to the telecom companies. That is payments to contracts. It only just recently did we integrate our grant system into IRIS. And so those, that data specifically to non-profits is not truly reflected in our fiscal notes. It's the data of all, our entire arena, anything in our accounting system that has an invoice date and a payment date.

58:08
Speaker A

In regard to our granting agencies,

58:13
Speaker A

What I can say and what I ha wish I had said last time I was here in front of you in regard to this fiscal note is that I would love to know. I know that they're afraid to call, but I would love to know if we're not paying them timely. Because we can fix things, we can I can nudge and I can prod from my seat. And I um so the situations that I heard this morning from our testifiers was very alarming to me.

58:40
Speaker A

Our grants are advanced. And so if we I realize that there's a time that it takes for them to do a report for the prior quarter and have that report approved before we can send the next quarter advance.

58:52
Speaker A

But if there's problems,

58:53
Speaker A

I just I

58:55
Speaker A

Please, I would like our nonprofits to call me and let me know.

58:59
Speaker A

Representative

58:59
Speaker A

Thank you.

59:00
Speaker A

Gelvin.

59:00
Speaker B

Thank you. I'm not sure if there is a system by which you are able to track how the timing is going along.

59:09
Speaker B

There must be some system because you have a sense of what the annualized interest rate might be versus having a body there,

59:19
Speaker B

a person there to do the work.

59:22
Speaker B

I hope that there's a system wherein someone could report to you what's happening.

59:28
Speaker B

I mean, it could be that they've lost hope, I guess, that they're going to get a response. I'm not sure.

59:34
Speaker B

But I know that you're busy and likely overwhelmed. And perhaps this is becoming more of a snowball effect as it.

59:44
Speaker B

continues to grow, I'm not sure. But I've wondered my question is what is your system by which somebody you're keeping track of

59:53
Speaker F

Hmm.

59:53
Speaker B

the timeliness of these payments?

59:56
Speaker A

Ms. Halloran,

59:57
Speaker A

through the chair, Representative Galvin.

1:00:01
Speaker A

Being that our grant system was just interfaced with the IRS system just within the past month,

1:00:08
Speaker A

Okay.

1:00:09
Speaker A

I'm just getting access to that data and I will have access to that data and I will watch.

1:00:15
Speaker A

I will roll that in. Last hearing I spoke about the scorecards that I'm doing for divisions now where they have eyes every month on their timely payment or non-timely payment and they're appreciating that so they can.

1:00:27
Speaker A

coach their staff and they can work with their staff and find those gaps. So we're trying to f find transparency within the department, but we also now have access to new data specific to grants.

1:00:38
Speaker A

Thank you.

1:00:39
Speaker A

Okay, representative Stout.

1:00:41
Speaker A

Thank you, Co-chair Foster. Through the Chair to Ms. Halloran, thank you for being here. I am probably going to be a little less polite than Co-chair Josephson was about the fiscal note. The fiscal note says

1:00:58
Speaker A

Hey, it's just cheaper for us to pay interest than pay you on time. And I think I won't speak for the sponsor or the staff, the sponsor, but I believe the objective is the bill is to sufficiently motivate the department to to pay its bills on time. That's why there's a penalty.

1:01:14
Speaker A

So my question to you is if I make the penalty uh thirty five percent interest rate, is that sufficiently motivating you to submit a fiscal note of how you would actually deliver?

1:01:24
Speaker A

of the payments to contractors and vendors on time. Is it a cost based motivation? 'Cause when I see a fiscal note that says it's cheaper for me just to pay penalties, um I feel like maybe the incentive structure of the bill is not adequate through the chair.

1:01:40
Speaker A

Through the chair, Ms. Halloran?

1:01:42
Speaker A

Through the chair, Representative Stout, if, if the penalty was higher, you would likely very much see a position on the fiscal note as opposed to interested.

1:01:53
Speaker A

Yeah, follow-up, Mr.

1:01:54
Speaker A

Co-chair.

1:01:54
Speaker A

Representative Stahl.

1:01:54
Speaker A

And, you know, I'll kind of reiterate my feelings on the bill.

1:01:58
Speaker A

I—

1:02:01
Speaker A

we shouldn't need a bill.

1:02:03
Speaker A

To pay our vendors on relatively time and you know that's different in the private sector Sometimes it's net 30 sometimes it's net 60 sometimes it's net 90 obviously the state of historically has been net 30 with most of our other vendors and I want to do what is

1:02:19
Speaker A

required to help you guys

1:02:22
Speaker A

pay more reliably, more consistently, and ideally on time. And I really do not want to vote for a bill that puts a law in saying I need to pay bills on time.

1:02:32
Speaker A

I really do not want to do that.

1:02:34
Speaker A

And I'm just going to reiterate,

1:02:36
Speaker A

it's just, I understand that it's cheaper to pay interest than it is to hire somebody,

1:02:45
Speaker A

but I just think that's a terrible message that we're sending to our vendors.

1:02:50
Speaker A

Um and I hope that maybe uh before this bill leaves the committee we we'll get a fiscal note that says, hey what what do we actually need to resource to kind of do those things. Thank you.

1:03:02
Speaker A

Okay, thank you. Ms. Halloran, any comments before we move on to the next? None.

1:03:06
Speaker A

I don't see any other questions. So I think that's the first fiscal note. If we can move over to the next one which is the Medical Assistance Administration.

1:03:07
Speaker A

Okay.

1:03:15
Speaker A

We're moving on to the health care services appropriation. The allocation is Medical Assistance Administration. Control code is MWHFW. This fiscal note is $136,200. Again, we're not asking for a position

1:03:33
Speaker A

because it was less GF to pay the interest than to request a position.

1:03:39
Speaker A

The division is currently paying their invoices on an average of 39 days.

1:03:50
Speaker B

Coach here, Foster.

1:03:51
Speaker A

Representative Bynum.

1:03:54
Speaker B

What was the fiscal note number?

1:03:58
Speaker A

The OMB component number is 242 with a control code of MWHFW.

1:04:11
Speaker B

Thank you.

1:04:12
Speaker A

Okay. And next we've got a question, Representative Sharkey.

1:04:17
Speaker A

Thank you, Coach Foster.

1:04:19
Speaker B

So when I, I mean, these, the, both the first fiscal notes, uh the first fiscal note and the second fiscal note are both Department of Health, and if you add up the fees that we're saying or that we should be paying because they're cheaper than a position, it the the fees become more than a position. Wh what prevents us from hiring someone and being able to process payments in both these allocations?

1:04:39
Speaker A

Ms. Halloran?

1:04:44
Speaker A

Uh through the chair, Representative Schroge.

1:04:47
Speaker A

We didn't consider that adding,

1:04:49
Speaker A

I mean doing the d the the sum we we did our fiscal notes by division. You have a very good point

1:04:56
Speaker A

that we could circle back and we could look at the overall cost and look at positions at the department level.

1:05:01
Speaker B

Follow-up?

1:05:02
Speaker A

Follow-up.

1:05:03
Speaker B

Yeah, thank you. Just going through, I mean there's another

1:05:07
Speaker B

appropriation that also has a forty thousand in fees, we'll get there in a moment, but just it it would be nice to have maybe these fiscal notes reconsidered by the departments, because to representative Stapp's point, the point is to pay timely and it just doesn't make sense to me that we would pay more than a position in fees across these different appropriations and still not pay timely. So thank you.

1:05:31
Speaker A

Representative Tomaszewski.

1:05:32
Speaker C

Yes, thank you, co-chair. So within this department, how many vacancies for this particular— who would do this work? How many vacancies do you have?

1:05:44
Speaker A

Ms. Halloran?

1:05:49
Speaker A

Uh through the chair, Representative Tomaszewski, I would have to get back to you on that. I don't know exactly the vacancy factor. I know that they've been recruiting and they've had significant turnover, but I can't give you the exact number at this time.

1:06:02
Speaker C

Yes. So for each— follow-up. Follow-up.

1:06:02
Speaker A

Okay.

1:06:06
Speaker C

For each of these, I would like to see and consider how many vacancies you have in these divisions that would be processing this paperwork, and I think that is pertinent to the discussion here. So yes, I would like to get that information. Thank you.

1:06:26
Speaker A

Through the chair, we would be happy to follow up.

1:06:29
Speaker A

Okay, next

1:06:31
Speaker A

fiscal notes.

1:06:32
Speaker A

The next appropriation is the Division of Public Assistance. The allocation is Public Assistance Administration. The OMB component number is 233. The control code is O_M_T_D_M_ This fiscal note is in the amount of $162,500.

1:06:52
Speaker A

We're requesting one position here. The Division of Public Assistance is processing its invoices based on FY25 data on an average of 65 days.

1:07:03
Speaker A

Okay.

1:07:05
Speaker A

Moving on to the Division of Public Health,

1:07:08
Speaker A

allocation Public Health Administrative Services,

1:07:12
Speaker A

OMB component number 292, control code

1:07:18
Speaker A

I

1:07:20
Speaker A

IWUL. Is that first one an I?

1:07:23
Speaker A

I think so.

1:07:24
Speaker A

The total dollar amount is $162,500 for the Division of Public Health. We're also requesting a PCN. Public Health is paying its invoices on average in FY25, an average of 33 days.

1:07:45
Speaker A

Moving on to the Division of Senior and Disability Services. The allocation is Senior and Disability Services Administration. The OMB component number is 2663.

1:07:57
Speaker A

The division is requesting $40,700.

1:08:02
Speaker A

Within the Senior Disability Services in FY25, they paid their invoices on an average timeline of 45 days.

1:08:09
Speaker A

Representative Tomaszewski.

1:08:11
Speaker C

I miss the control number code on that fiscal note.

1:08:14
Speaker A

Ms Halloran.

1:08:15
Speaker A

ISXKG.

1:08:21
Speaker A

I think that's ISXKG.

1:08:24
Speaker A

Oh, yes sir.

1:08:26
Speaker A

Thank you.

1:08:28
Speaker A

Okay,

1:08:28
Speaker A

apologies.

1:08:28
Speaker A

Next fiscal notes.

1:08:32
Speaker A

Moving on to the Departmental Support Services, Administrative Support Services,

1:08:37
Speaker A

OMB component number 320.

1:08:40
Speaker A

The control code is UNCP. We're asking for a position here at $162,500 for the Department Support Services. They have an average payment timeline in FY25 of 98 days.

1:09:01
Speaker A

Representative Tomashevsky.

1:09:03
Speaker C

Thank you, Co-Chair Foster. That seems like a significantly higher average in days of getting those contract invoices paid. Is there a particular reason for that?

1:09:15
Speaker A

Ms. Halloran?

1:09:17
Speaker A

Through the chair,

1:09:18
Speaker A

Representative Tomaszewski, yes, there has been significant turnover, 100% turnover within the department support services administrative group. There's currently one vacancy, but all staff are brand new within the past 6 months.

1:09:32
Speaker A

Jesus.

1:09:35
Speaker A

This data was for last year, and so that doesn't really help explain that situation, does it? So—

1:09:42
Speaker C

Follow-up. I think it does actually give quite a bit of insight. I mean, if you had 100% turnover of that, did you just tip the building up and drop them all out at the same time, or what happened there?

1:09:57
Speaker A

The reason why, through the chair, representative

1:10:00
Speaker A

Tom Laskowski,

1:10:00
Speaker A

the reason why I'm second guessing my response is that we've had turnover in the current fiscal year.

1:10:05
Speaker A

So the pro and the data that we built our fiscal note off of was the prior fiscal year.

1:10:11
Speaker A

And so and so we did, there was not a turnover problem. The turnover problem is related to this fiscal year,

1:10:18
Speaker A

the data is built on last fiscal year.

1:10:21
Speaker A

So, so there was still a problem with the division of support services.

1:10:26
Speaker A

that we're looking at resolving.

1:10:28
Speaker A

I can't speak to exactly what the contributing factor was except for overall staffing capacity,

1:10:39
Speaker A

very complex financial structure within the department are both contributing factors. Department support services

1:10:48
Speaker A

InRate is responsible for a number of budget components, all the contracts and payments related to information technology,

1:10:56
Speaker A

public affairs,

1:10:58
Speaker A

the office of rate review,

1:10:59
Speaker A

our quality assurance group.

1:11:01
Speaker A

So they do that work on top of running a very complex interdepartmental chargeback mechanism for inter and intradepartmental chargeback. So there's a significant body of work.

1:11:17
Speaker A

we have addressed some of that in FY26. We've added an accounting sh position to this unit. Um we have new staff they're coming on board they're learning their job. Things are looking better.

1:11:32
Speaker A

A follow-up.

1:11:32
Speaker A

Follow-up.

1:11:33
Speaker A

Follow-up.

1:11:33
Speaker A

Follow-up.

1:11:33
Speaker A

So you know the private sector, um when someone doesn't perform they just they just um

1:11:41
Speaker A

are gone.

1:11:43
Speaker A

Do you, in your department, are you able to, I mean if you see gross incompetence on a employee,

1:11:52
Speaker A

are you able to remove that person from their position or is there something holding you back from maybe releasing those who are not performing?

1:12:04
Speaker B

Is

1:12:04
Speaker A

We

1:12:04
Speaker B

that one?

1:12:04
Speaker A

Yeah, through the chair, Representative Foster, we have a unit within the Department of Administration Division of Personnel called Employee Relations that we work very closely with when we have performance issues with our employees. And there is a structure for that, a tiered structure that takes us through different letters and different weights that we can manage. But we would, in those situations, we would consult

1:12:30
Speaker A

with our, with the Department of Administration. Follow-up.

1:12:34
Speaker A

Follow up, follow up. So it sounds like a lengthy and complicated process to work through those types of issues.

1:12:41
Speaker A

Do you find that a difficult process to go through?

1:12:45
Speaker A

Is it, I mean, do you have good resolutions when you get to the end of those processes?

1:12:51
Speaker A

Ms. Halloran?

1:12:52
Speaker A

the chair representative Tomaszewski it's

1:12:55
Speaker A

It it it does feel lengthy sometimes,

1:12:58
Speaker A

but it's important to give the employees every opportunity to be successful.

1:13:03
Speaker A

So we start with what's referred to as a letter of instruction where it clearly is not a punitive document. It doesn't go into the employee's record and it basically clarifies our expectations and allows us to to reiterate our expectations and set a timeline to see improvement.

1:13:22
Speaker A

Then at that point we can move on to higher level disciplinary action. But it's important to give the employee every opportunity to succeed.

1:13:31
Speaker A

Okay, just a quick follow-up.

1:13:32
Speaker A

Representative

1:13:33
Speaker A

Tomaszewski.

1:13:33
Speaker A

Kind

1:13:33
Speaker A

of

1:13:33
Speaker A

changing gear

1:13:34
Speaker A

on the 98 days. So your contract invoices were paid within 98 days. What does the contract say when you're dealing with a vendor, you have a contract?

1:13:46
Speaker A

You're saying in this fiscal note says it's paid within an average of 98 days.

1:13:52
Speaker A

What does the contract say that those services are supposed to be paid for?

1:13:56
Speaker A

Is there a timeline?

1:13:57
Speaker A

What timeline do we have in your current regulations?

1:14:03
Speaker A

Ms. Hellerin?

1:14:06
Speaker A

There are current regulations, and I believe they're 30.

1:14:11
Speaker A

Days.

1:14:13
Speaker A

So that is a net 30 on this particular—

1:14:15
Speaker A

Right. There is Section 3705.285 for payment for state purchases.

1:14:24
Speaker A

Quickly scanning this document, it says 30 days after receipt of proper billing.

1:14:30
Speaker A

Okay, thank you.

1:14:31
Speaker A

Okay. Any further questions on this fiscal note? And let's see here. I think— does that—

1:14:39
Speaker A

that is the last of the fiscal notes, Ms. Hellerin. Any further questions for Ms. Hellerin before we move on to the next?

1:14:46
Speaker A

Appreciate you being here. Thank you so much. And so with that, I do want to take a quick, not an at ease, but just a moment to check with the Committee, we have—

1:15:00
Speaker A

we've got 15 fiscal notes, so we just dispensed with 6 of them. So we have a little ways to go on this bill, but we do have another bill up today, and that is HB 91, the marijuana tax bill. And we do have 8 amendments for that. Our allotted time this morning was from 9 to 10 a.m., so I was hoping to at least get through the fiscal notes. My question to the committee is, are folks— do they have other commitments

1:15:26
Speaker A

and they need to leave, in which case we would try to maybe take up the bill this afternoon, or would people like to power through and try to do both this bill and the amendments on the marijuana tax bill?

1:15:40
Speaker A

Mr. Chairman, I'm free.

1:15:42
Speaker A

I'm free for you.

1:15:43
Speaker F

Okay,

1:15:44
Speaker A

Okay.

1:15:44
Speaker A

Okay, and if folks just happen to think of something, pass me a note. We won't decide, I guess, right now, but

1:15:50
Speaker A

maybe as soon as we get through the fiscal notes. Representative Tomaszewski.

1:15:53
Speaker A

Co-chair, it looks like we're missing quite a few folks.

1:15:57
Speaker A

Yeah, Representative Bynum and Moore, are you still online?

1:16:03
Speaker G

Yes, Co-chair Foster,

1:16:04
Speaker G

I am here.

1:16:05
Speaker A

Okay, and Representative Moore, are you there?

1:16:10
Speaker H

Good afternoon.

1:16:11
Speaker A

I am here present.

1:16:12
Speaker F

Okay.

1:16:13
Speaker F

I was just doing a survey of the committee to see if folks were able to stay through amendments for the next bill or do folks have other commitments or either of you able to stay on for

1:16:27
Speaker F

the next bill?

1:16:31
Speaker G

Co-Chair Foster,

1:16:32
Speaker G

this is Representative Bynum.

1:16:34
Speaker G

I'll make myself available for whatever's necessary.

1:16:39
Speaker B

Co-Chair Foster,

1:16:40
Speaker B

I'm also available for whatever is necessary today.

1:16:43
Speaker F

Okay.

1:16:44
Speaker F

Sounds like we're going to try to power through and get through the amendments on the next bill this morning.

1:16:48
Speaker F

So with that, next up in terms of fiscal notes for this bill,

1:16:54
Speaker F

HB 133,

1:16:55
Speaker F

we've got Military and Veterans Affairs Legislative Liaison Ms.

1:16:58
Speaker F

Angela LaFlamme, if you could please come up and put yourself on the record and walk us through your fiscal notes.

1:17:09
Speaker A

Thank you. Good morning. For the record,

1:17:09
Speaker A

Thank you.

1:17:11
Speaker A

Angela Flam,

1:17:12
Speaker A

Legislative Liaison for Department of Military and Veterans Affairs.

1:17:16
Speaker A

I'm hoping you got my amended fiscal note over the weekend. I didn't see it online,

1:17:20
Speaker A

but I'm looking at control.

1:17:22
Speaker A

Allocation for Homeland Security and Emergency Management fiscal note with control code MREDWD. Sorry.

1:17:31
Speaker F

That's what we have.

1:17:32
Speaker A

Okay. Awesome.

1:17:33
Speaker A

So just as a note,

1:17:34
Speaker A

this fiscal note was amended to reflect the correct fund source.

1:17:39
Speaker A

When I updated the fiscal notes from 25 to 26,

1:17:44
Speaker A

I didn't catch that.

1:17:45
Speaker A

So it's actually instead of previously showing for general fund mental health.

1:17:50
Speaker A

Health budget,

1:17:51
Speaker A

it's actually CIP receipts for one of those lines.

1:17:54
Speaker A

So in our fiscal note,

1:17:56
Speaker A

we are requesting four additional staff as part of our grants administration section within the division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management due to the way that we process disaster response grants and federal grants that we receive from a variety of federal entities.

1:18:16
Speaker I

And I can, I'm happy to answer questions or go through anything additional.

1:18:19
Speaker F

Okay, representative Hannon.

1:18:21
Speaker A

Thank you, co-chair Foster.

1:18:23
Speaker A

Ms.

1:18:23
Speaker A

Laflame, how many grants administrators do you currently have in that department?

1:18:28
Speaker I

Thank you. Through the chair, Representative Hannon,

1:18:31
Speaker I

we have seven currently in the grants administrative section,

1:18:35
Speaker I

no vacancies, and one supervisor that is over that section as well as the administrative support.

1:18:42
Speaker I

section within the division.

1:18:45
Speaker F

Follow

1:18:45
Speaker I

Oh,

1:18:45
Speaker F

-up?

1:18:45
Speaker A

and in the redistribution of shared services,

1:18:50
Speaker A

are you getting back some accounting people and would they be able to serve in the grants administration positions?

1:18:57
Speaker I

Thank you through the chair Representative Hannon.

1:19:00
Speaker I

The Department of Military and Veterans Affairs was not part of shared services prior to this due to our master cooperative agreements with

1:19:09
Speaker I

With the National Guard so many of our all of our accounting positions have been in our department and we are not getting any back

1:19:17
Speaker J

And for

1:19:18
Speaker A

Follow-up.

1:19:18
Speaker A

So it seems to me in the quick at-the-table math,

1:19:24
Speaker A

it is a 50% increase in your grants administration office.

1:19:31
Speaker A

And I am just wondering

1:19:34
Speaker A

if you believe this is really a 50% increase in your workload, because the grant is already there, so, you know, the department before you chose to give us details about

1:19:45
Speaker A

how long it takes them to pay them. I understand that much of yours is federal grants coming in and then distributing. So is there a substantial backlog from the feds to you that creates this 50% increase?

1:20:00
Speaker A

increase in the workload for that distribution.

1:20:03
Speaker A

Thank you. Through the chair, Representative Hannon, we do get compounded with processing grants depending on how many disasters are going on at the same time.

1:20:13
Speaker A

We prioritize payments to individuals through our individual assistance programs when we have disasters,

1:20:20
Speaker A

and that creates cascading effect for other grants. The way that the legislation is written,

1:20:26
Speaker A

it's a process that is required when you receive a payment request.

1:20:30
Speaker A

It doesn't clarify that that request.

1:20:31
Speaker A

That request must be fully complete.

1:20:34
Speaker A

We have many of our grants are very complex and require a lot of documentation for federal reimbursement. And that's typically what takes a long time to process and make sure that we have a complete package.

1:20:46
Speaker A

Before that,

1:20:47
Speaker A

we can take that to the federal agencies to request reimbursement for that.

1:20:53
Speaker A

Okay, Representative Tomaszewski.

1:20:55
Speaker A

Yes, thank you.

1:20:56
Speaker A

So do you have an average

1:21:01
Speaker A

of how long it takes to pay your grants? I don't see it in this

1:21:11
Speaker A

fiscal note like I saw in the previous fiscal notes. Do you have averages?

1:21:15
Speaker A

Yes,

1:21:16
Speaker A

averages?

1:21:16
Speaker A

thank you.

1:21:18
Speaker A

Representative Tomachewski through the chair,

1:21:20
Speaker A

we don't.

1:21:21
Speaker A

We,

1:21:22
Speaker A

because of the way that we process and prioritize depending on what's happening at any given time,

1:21:27
Speaker A

that was more information than I could kind of tease out of my team right now with ongoing disaster response that we're doing right now.

1:21:35
Speaker A

So we just had to have a best guess of we know that we're.

1:21:39
Speaker A

We know that we do not pay within a 30-day time period depending on how many grants we're processing at the same time.

1:21:48
Speaker A

A follow-up follow-up? Do you have an estimate?

1:21:50
Speaker A

Is it like four months or I mean, or is it just like, well,

1:21:54
Speaker A

we get it in a month and a half?

1:21:56
Speaker A

You can kind of get a feel of.

1:21:58
Speaker A

Yeah, through the chair represented to Hamacheski, it really depends on the type of grant that we're paying.

1:22:04
Speaker A

As I stated,

1:22:05
Speaker A

our individual assistance grants are going to be prioritized and we try to get those out the door as quickly as possible.

1:22:11
Speaker A

It's not typically the payment process that takes.

1:22:14
Speaker A

takes a long time. It is that sort of documentation and making sure that everything is recorded properly before we can submit that payment for processing.

1:22:24
Speaker A

So that's why it's kind of hard to tell how long some are going to take longer than others based on how many times we have to go back and forth to make sure that we have all the proper documentation before that payment can actually be submitted for processing,

1:22:39
Speaker A

if that makes sense.

1:22:40
Speaker A

And follow up.

1:22:41
Speaker A

And so do you, I imagine you probably keep pretty good track of the people that are working on these grants.

1:22:49
Speaker A

Do you have key performance indicators that you...

1:22:53
Speaker A

have built in to make sure that everybody's doing what they're supposed to be doing and when you find some that maybe are lacking do you have a disciplinary set of standards that you go through and do you have an ability to release those who are not really performing or maybe not able to perform to do the jobs that they have

1:23:20
Speaker A

Thank you through the Chair Representative Tomachewski. We do, we follow the same.

1:23:26
Speaker A

employer relations guidelines for classified positions within our department and so if there were issues it depends on where an employee is at within the hiring and a process being brought into a position so depending on the range of the position there's a probationary period if we and issues can be addressed within that period and if

1:23:52
Speaker A

If we do not meet a certain level of expectation at the end of that period,

1:23:56
Speaker A

that person can be let go.

1:23:59
Speaker A

Once that person becomes a permanent employee,

1:24:01
Speaker A

there are additional ways to address disciplinary issues.

1:24:06
Speaker A

However,

1:24:07
Speaker A

that does become more lengthy due to working through the union process and making sure that everybody is cared for.

1:24:15
Speaker A

Thank you.

1:24:16
Speaker A

Thank you. Okay. Next up, I've got Representative Galvin and then staff. Representative Galvin. Thank you, Co-Chair Foster.

1:24:20
Speaker A

Thank you um co-chair Foster through the chair. Uh thank you for being here and thank you for your important work. And it sounds like you're doing it very much on a shoestring during the big disasters where all of a sudden you're flooded. And I appreciate that you're prioritising the individual disbursements first very much. What I don't really have a picture of, because I'm not in your shoes, is the organisations that are also serving the individuals, I imagine,

1:24:45
Speaker A

imagine are the ones who are perhaps getting delayed payments because their paperwork, if you will,

1:24:52
Speaker A

is much more extensive to work through,

1:24:56
Speaker A

or maybe that you just simply don't have enough staff at that given surprise point.

1:25:02
Speaker A

And so my question is,

1:25:04
Speaker A

if you would give us a sense of

1:25:07
Speaker A

who the organizations are who may not be receiving payments within,

1:25:12
Speaker A

let's say, 30 days and what those organizations are offering during a post-emergency time, if you could paint that picture a bit.

1:25:27
Speaker A

Absolutely, for the record, Angela Lamb through the chair,

1:25:30
Speaker A

Representative Galvin.

1:25:32
Speaker A

It can depend.

1:25:33
Speaker A

So in a disaster response and recovery situation,

1:25:39
Speaker A

we're typically going to be working with the local municipality,

1:25:43
Speaker A

city,

1:25:43
Speaker A

community government.

1:25:46
Speaker A

They're typically going to be the ones who are going to be receiving those grant dollars from the state in a disaster response situation.

1:25:56
Speaker A

Most people understa most most organisations understand that these our grant programs are primarily reimbursable and if it does become a federal disaster that does add extra layers of complexity to that process and so

1:26:14
Speaker A

There are some grants that we have that nonprofits or non-governmental organizations are eligible for.

1:26:23
Speaker A

Certain ones,

1:26:25
Speaker A

there's criteria laid out for that on who's eligible for some of those grants,

1:26:29
Speaker A

but they're all federal pass-through grants.

1:26:31
Speaker A

And so again,

1:26:32
Speaker A

that process for reimbursement, it's reimbursable and typically requires a lot of paperwork and a lot of times.

1:26:40
Speaker A

Those are going to be towards the bottom of processing when we're doing active disaster recovery response.

1:26:46
Speaker A

Follow-up. Follow-up.

1:26:48
Speaker A

Thank you. So when I think about Halong and Murdoch and other ones where all of a sudden you're flooded with the work and

1:26:56
Speaker A

I appreciate, again,

1:26:57
Speaker A

the immediate disbursement to the individuals. I also appreciate why AML would care about this bill because it's asking a lot. Although for those munis or larger organizations that have a reserve,

1:27:13
Speaker A

then they likely can float for a bit.

1:27:16
Speaker A

My question is,

1:27:18
Speaker A

is there an organization that comes in to help you with some of this work at this time?

1:27:24
Speaker A

I'm I it would make sense to me that there may be if there's a federal disaster that they could come in and help you with the processing of this work but I I don't know what that entity would be and I just wondered if that's possible in lieu of or in addition to the extra fte's that you're asking for here.

1:27:46
Speaker A

Thank you through the chair representative Galvin.

1:27:49
Speaker A

I mean we do work with FEMA but they have their own processes that you know in managing things so I don't there are organizations that we work with on a contract basis so like you know

1:28:03
Speaker A

Yes.

1:28:03
Speaker A

for example for sheltering we have a contract with Red Cross and they you know manage their processes and are the experts in certain things so

1:28:14
Speaker A

I don't know that there would be an organization or contracting.

1:28:18
Speaker A

We do have contracts with some entities who can do some of the work for us,

1:28:24
Speaker A

especially when it's like damage assessment type things, but not really the actual processing of those payment requests or reimbursement requests.

1:28:33
Speaker A

Okay, thank you.

1:28:34
Speaker A

Representative Stout.

1:28:37
Speaker A

Oh, thank you, Co-Chair. Okay, I'm trying to kind of mentally think of the mechanics of this disaster management system you have through the chair. So I guess my first question is how long is just the federal process on doing a grant, and

1:28:58
Speaker A

is that affected by our current timeline? So for example, if I say you have a 30-day payment to a vendor, and you're getting federal money, maybe we have to match and there's a pass-through, what is the actual processing time on that, and does it affect our ability to pay promptly? Through the chair.

1:29:18
Speaker A

Thank you through the chair, Representative Stapp. So

1:29:23
Speaker A

Our applications for reimbursement submitted to FEMA don't have a timeline.

1:29:29
Speaker A

So we have a certain period of time that we have to submit those to FEMA,

1:29:32
Speaker A

but there's not a certain period of time where FEMA turns around and pays us for those.

1:29:37
Speaker A

So that's sometimes why we have.

1:29:40
Speaker A

disasters

1:29:40
Speaker A

Yeah.

1:29:41
Speaker A

open for multiple

1:29:42
Speaker D

Yeah.

1:29:42
Speaker A

years.

1:29:43
Speaker D

Yeah, follow-up, Mr.

1:29:44
Speaker D

Kachur.

1:29:44
Speaker A

Follow-up?

1:29:45
Speaker D

So on that, so you're submitting this, so let's say we submit the paperwork to FEMA, we want to do this, and they just don't get back to us. Are you going to be penalized under this bill for not having a deliverable? Through the chair.

1:29:58
Speaker A

Um thank

1:30:00
Speaker A

you through the chair representative staff there is language in the current bill that does state that it's payment within 30 days of receipt of the federal funds but there is a portion of the legislation that also allows for a penalty if a entity is not notified within eight days of their payment request

1:30:26
Speaker A

that then interest can be accrued at that point and that would be the concern that we wouldn't be able to process applications or payment requests within eight days to meet that notification that there may be a delay in payment.

1:30:41
Speaker A

Okay.

1:30:42
Speaker A

Uh, follow-up, Mr.

1:30:43
Speaker A

Co-Chair.

1:30:43
Speaker A

Follow-up?

1:30:43
Speaker A

And I apologize if this was just asked a moment ago.

1:30:47
Speaker A

I was trying to read the statute book regarding the existing contractual payments.

1:30:51
Speaker A

Are you subject to that?

1:30:53
Speaker A

um through these disaster grants already through the chair.

1:30:56
Speaker A

Through the chair representative staff, yes. All of our contracts and every— all of our payments within the department are subject to the regular 30-day payments.

1:31:07
Speaker A

Um in thought?

1:31:09
Speaker A

Follow-up.

1:31:09
Speaker A

And apologize if it was asked a moment ago too. Have you been paying a lot of interest on those payments through the chair?

1:31:19
Speaker A

um through the chair representative staff now.

1:31:20
Speaker A

Through the chair, representative staff, no.

1:31:22
Speaker A

Okay. Alright. Um thank you.

1:31:22
Speaker A

Okay.

1:31:23
Speaker A

All right. Thank you.

1:31:25
Speaker A

Okay. Any further questions for Ms. LaFlamme? Seeing none, thank you very much.

1:31:32
Speaker A

The next fiscal note that we have is— let's see here— from the Department of Family and Community Services. The senior policy advisor is Chrissy Vogli. If you could put yourself on the record and walk us through the fiscal note.

1:31:51
Speaker A

Good morning. My name is Christy Vogeli. I'm the Senior Policy Advisor for the Department of Family and Community Services.

1:31:57
Speaker A

The fiscal note I have in front of me is for our departmental support services OMB component number 3305, control code NRG08.

1:32:08
Speaker A

Yes, let's

1:32:09
Speaker A

And

1:32:09
Speaker A

do it now.

1:32:09
Speaker A

let's see here. I think, just make sure everybody's got that. I think we're okay. And so go ahead.

1:32:16
Speaker A

Wonderful.

1:32:17
Speaker B

Wonderful. So we have a zero fiscal note.

1:32:19
Speaker B

Currently, the average length of time it takes for us to issue payments is 10 days.

1:32:23
Speaker B

So we feel that the 30-day deadline is well above what we currently do and we don't anticipate any costs.

1:32:31
Speaker A

Great.

1:32:32
Speaker A

Uh go ahead, Representative Galvin.

1:32:34
Speaker A

Yes, I would love it if you would please write that instructional manual. And thank you, thank you, thank you. I know it's so hard for many of the different departments we're hearing from. I'm not belittling the work that they're doing. They're doing very hard work, but golly gee, it's time to celebrate when we're seeing government

1:32:56
Speaker A

on time, and so I'm just so grateful. Thank you. Thanks for some good news today.

1:33:02
Speaker A

Woohoo!

1:33:03
Speaker A

Any other questions?

1:33:06
Speaker A

Seeing none, thank you very much.

1:33:07
Speaker B

Thank you.

1:33:08
Speaker A

Also with the Department of Family and Community Services, we've got Ms. Hannah Lager. And— oh no, we don't. Okay.

1:33:17
Speaker A

Is she online? Maybe she is online, I believe.

1:33:21
Speaker A

And she's Commerce.

1:33:23
Speaker A

Okay.

1:33:23
Speaker A

I've read

1:33:24
Speaker A

Hello.

1:33:24
Speaker A

Oh, my script is a little off today.

1:33:27
Speaker A

Ms.

1:33:28
Speaker A

Honolager,

1:33:28
Speaker A

I know that you're with Commerce.

1:33:31
Speaker A

Oops,

1:33:31
Speaker A

now the script was right.

1:33:33
Speaker A

If you could go ahead and put yourself on the record.

1:33:37
Speaker A

Perfect.

1:33:37
Speaker C

Perfect, thank you. For the record,

1:33:39
Speaker C

my name is Hannah Lager. I'm the Administrative Services Director for the Department of Commerce,

1:33:42
Speaker C

Community,

1:33:43
Speaker C

and Economic Development.

1:33:44
Speaker C

Our fiscal note is for component number 1028,

1:33:48
Speaker C

control code E-L-C-A-W.

1:33:51
Speaker C

It is a zero fiscal note. We,

1:33:53
Speaker C

of course, endeavor to pay all contracts on time and grant payments,

1:33:57
Speaker C

current averages under 18 days for those.

1:34:01
Speaker A

Okay, do we have any questions of the committee representative Galvin?

1:34:05
Speaker A

I'm just not sure if you can hear me clapping, but I am, and I'm saying thank you.

1:34:10
Speaker A

Good news again.

1:34:11
Speaker C

Thank you.

1:34:12
Speaker A

Okay, thank you for your presentation of the fiscal note.

1:34:15
Speaker A

Next, we'll move over to the Department of Labor,

1:34:20
Speaker A

and it looks like that is Mr.

1:34:23
Speaker A

Dan DiBartolo. If you could put yourself on the record.

1:34:29
Speaker F

Yes, thank you, Co-Chair Foster and members of the committee.

1:34:32
Speaker F

My name is Andy Bartolo.

1:34:33
Speaker F

I'm the Administrative Services Director for the Department of Labor and I am referring to a fiscal note for OMB component number 340 for Commissioners Office Administrative Services that is control code QB as in boy,

1:34:50
Speaker F

E as in Edward V as in Victor G.

1:34:52
Speaker F

Our department has a zero fiscal note.

1:35:00
Speaker F

My costs that I explained in the analysis section were based on if this bill was in effect in FY25 when I looked at our average aging of our contracts over contract payments,

1:35:12
Speaker F

we are at just about 34 days.

1:35:14
Speaker F

We were just missing the mark.

1:35:16
Speaker F

for the 30 that this bill targets.

1:35:21
Speaker F

And so I indicated that honestly we can make internal adjustments to make sure that we're under 30. We are indeed having shared services positions coming back into the department and we're reworking some of our processes to ensure that everything flows cleanly.

1:35:41
Speaker F

The other part of this is of course granting.

1:35:44
Speaker F

I if indeed we were to face any kind of future penalty or interest related to grant dollars we would pay that out of general funds out of this component within commissioners office administrative services the reason being is many of our grants are federal and we can't pay obviously use federal dollars for penalty and interest however my goal is to just ensure that we are noticing award at the beginning

1:35:46
Speaker F

I—

1:36:13
Speaker F

beginning of the fiscal year and then after we notice award for those grants that once payment is requested as this bill indicates that we are hitting within the 30-day target and we believe that it's absolutely achievable by the time this bill is enacted.

1:36:31
Speaker A

Okay,

1:36:31
Speaker A

Okay, thank you very much. I don't see any questions,

1:36:34
Speaker A

so appreciate your being here.

1:36:37
Speaker A

And next up we have, let's see, I think the rest of— well, actually, we've got two.

1:36:44
Speaker A

Before we go to Mr.

1:36:46
Speaker A

Anderson, DNR, we've got Remy Matushowski,

1:36:50
Speaker A

if you could put yourself on the record.

1:36:56
Speaker C

Good morning, Co-Chair Foster.

1:36:59
Speaker C

For the record,

1:37:00
Speaker C

my name is Randy Matyszewski. I'm the legislative liaison for the Department of Natural Resources.

1:37:06
Speaker C

The fiscal note I'm presenting today is for OMB Component Number 424.

1:37:10
Speaker C

The control code is WVWHX.

1:37:15
Speaker F

The support services division does not anticipate a fiscal or operational impact with the implementation of this bill,

1:37:22
Speaker F

and we expect to have our policies implemented and finalized within 180 days of the passage.

1:37:27
Speaker F

We currently routinely hit the 30-day mark on this bill, so we don't anticipate any impacts.

1:37:34
Speaker A

Okay, thank you.

1:37:36
Speaker A

I don't see any questions from the committee,

1:37:38
Speaker A

so thank you for presenting that.

1:37:40
Speaker A

Next we've got Department of Public Safety,

1:37:42
Speaker A

it's Diana Thornton.

1:37:48
Speaker C

Hello, this is Diana Barton, Administrative Services Director for the Department of Public Safety,

1:37:53
Speaker C

and I am speaking to fiscal note control code CYFOZ for OMD component 525 for the appropriation statewide support for Administrative Services.

1:38:13
Speaker C

The Department of Public Safety does not expect a cost to this bill.

1:38:19
Speaker C

It doesn't create any new programs in the department or create any new enforcement activities.

1:38:25
Speaker C

We are currently averaging about 10 days for our payments and we don't see any concerns with compliance as well.

1:38:35
Speaker A

Okay, Representative Hannon.

1:38:39
Speaker A

Thank you Chair Foster. Um Ms Thornton, does the Alaska Council on Domestic Violence Network grants comes through the Department of Public Safety?

1:38:50
Speaker C

Through the Chair, Representative Hannan, yes they do.

1:38:54
Speaker A

Follow?

1:38:54
Speaker A

Representative Hannon.

1:38:55
Speaker A

Um

1:38:56
Speaker A

Your testimony regarding this fiscal note is incongruent with testimony we've heard from the recipients of those grants, that they on a regular basis receive substantive delays in receiving those grants.

1:39:12
Speaker A

Can you help me reconcile that?

1:39:14
Speaker A

Ms. Thornton?

1:39:17
Speaker C

through the chair representative Hannon we can have delays at the beginning of the grant cycles usually this is due to the possibility of a back and forth between the department and the grantee if there is not the beginning of the year paperwork the deliverables what's expected of the grantee provided to the department so occasionally that

1:39:44
Speaker C

process to ensure that the grantee has provided to the department that report or that report but that set of deliverables and that it meets the requirements for

1:40:00
Speaker A

for the for the grant funding there also can be times when the federal funding that is backing some of those awards is delayed through the federal appropriation process

1:40:16
Speaker A

Follow up.

1:40:19
Speaker A

So Ms.

1:40:19
Speaker A

Thornton are those just the first quarter payments then for a grant year that would be delayed?

1:40:27
Speaker A

Through the chair,

1:40:29
Speaker A

Representative Hannon,

1:40:30
Speaker A

yes,

1:40:30
Speaker A

that is usually for the first part of the year.

1:40:33
Speaker A

They are rarely late on throughout the course of the year.

1:40:37
Speaker A

One more follow

1:40:38
Speaker A

One more follow

1:40:38
Speaker A

-up.

1:40:38
Speaker A

The only—

1:40:39
Speaker A

oh,

1:40:39
Speaker A

go

1:40:40
Speaker A

ahead

1:40:41
Speaker A

Ms.

1:40:41
Speaker A

Thornton.

1:40:42
Speaker A

Oh,

1:40:42
Speaker A

go ahead Ms. Thornton.

1:40:42
Speaker A

I'm sorry.

1:40:43
Speaker A

I did just want to add that occasionally when we have been short-staffed.

1:40:48
Speaker A

There have been delays of payment because of just turnover and ensuring that the programs have the oversight necessary. So I shouldn't say that there's never been delays,

1:41:01
Speaker A

but those delays were most consistently due to staffing.

1:41:06
Speaker A

We are currently fully staffed.

1:41:08
Speaker A

Thank you, Chair Foster.

1:41:11
Speaker A

Ms. Thornton, in general,

1:41:14
Speaker A

On a grant cycle, especially within the Alaska Domestic and um Council on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, how many new grantees are you receiving in a year? Um because it seems to me that most of the agencies that are those grant recipients and delivering those services,

1:41:32
Speaker A

they've been doing it for a period of time. I don't see a lot of new uh domestic violence programs and shelters being stood up on a

1:41:40
Speaker A

The annual basis.

1:41:45
Speaker A

Through the chair,

1:41:46
Speaker A

Representative Hannan, we have 88 grants that we administer annually,

1:41:50
Speaker A

and I don't know that there are new programs coming in on a regular basis. I believe that they are consistently the same grantees.

1:42:04
Speaker A

expectation at the beginning of the year is that the grantees will provide those summaries of their deliverables in order for us to issue those first payments.

1:42:20
Speaker A

Okay, I I am thank you uh Chair Foster and Ms Thornton. I'm just a little frustrated because it it just doesn't seem to be matching the reality and I would think that an agency that is annually um dependent on your grants is going to I I mean everybody has a learning curve, but they know what kind of reporting they're required to submit to you to get their money. They're describing that they are sometimes having

1:42:49
Speaker A

not getting their uh first grant until September, um you know so almost through the first quarter and um it's just a little frustrating, but thank you for having a zero fiscal note.

1:43:05
Speaker A

Okay, and thank you very much, Ms. Thornton. Next up, Mr. Anderson, Rudy Anderson, if you could come up and walk us through the remaining fiscal notes.

1:43:30
Speaker A

Good morning.

1:43:30
Speaker B

Thank you for the record. Rudy Anderson, staff to Representative Foster. Today I will be presenting the rest of the fiscal notes that are all zeros. We worked with the department to try to get individuals and these ones weren't able to get someone here today. I will be starting off with the Department of Administration, centralized administrative services,

1:43:53
Speaker B

Office of Procurement, Property Management, OMB component number 3291,

1:44:01
Speaker B

control code PNJNT.

1:44:09
Speaker B

This is a zero fiscal note.

1:44:10
Speaker B

The Office of Procurement and Property Management does not anticipate any fiscal or operational impact impacting them by this bill.

1:44:24
Speaker B

Next fiscal note, Department of Fish and Game,

1:44:29
Speaker B

statewide support services, administrative services,

1:44:35
Speaker B

OMB component 479,

1:44:39
Speaker B

control code TEGVQ.

1:44:46
Speaker B

Fish and Game has submitted a zero fiscal note.

1:44:50
Speaker B

Citing that Fish and Game has the staff capacity to issue contractual payments and that this bill would not increase current operations.

1:45:03
Speaker B

The final fiscal note that I will be presenting today is

1:45:06
Speaker B

the Department of Law,

1:45:10
Speaker B

Department of Law

1:45:12
Speaker B

administration, administration and support,

1:45:15
Speaker B

administrative services, OMB component 2164,

1:45:22
Speaker B

control code

1:45:26
Speaker B

PQ— excuse me, QGZH0.

1:45:34
Speaker B

This is also a zero fiscal note. The department

1:45:38
Speaker B

states that they don't anticipate any fiscal or operational impact due to this bill. Mr. Chairman, that wraps up the final zero fiscal notes presented.

1:45:48
Speaker A

Okay, do we have any questions for Mr. Anderson? Seeing none, thank you very much. I had intended to set an amendment deadline, but I'd like to call up Representative Hemmschutz, and I think you are

1:46:04
Speaker A

thinking about maybe making some changes, so Representative Hemmschutz.

1:46:11
Speaker A

Thank you, uh Co-Chair Foster and again to the committee, it's um the it's a there's a lot to this bill. So uh

1:46:29
Speaker A

Thank you. I was just uh confirming. Um so to the committee, one suggestion that we have for this bill that I think could be helpful is to delay the effective date, give departments more time knowing that the bill is passed, this will become the law, but here's some time to to get your thirty two days down to thirty or whatever it takes.

1:46:51
Speaker A

We also would entertain the idea of having a report in the first year.

1:46:56
Speaker A

So

1:46:57
Speaker A

moving the effective date out but requiring a report back in a year from departments to see how close we are to being able to comply with the thirty days. So those are suggestions that I think could um

1:47:11
Speaker A

I I wanna be really clear. I don't think there's underperformance in our departments. I think there's a number of contributors to why we have the situation we have. I'm looking for a solution to the situation, not blame for why we are where we are. Um also I wanna emphasise this is an issue that spans multiple administrations. This is not something that is under the current administration. This has been this way for some time. I wanna change how Alaska does business. I want us to be good partners.

1:47:39
Speaker A

with the folks we do business with, that's the purpose of the bill. So I'm not, I'm hoping we can find a path that gets to that end goal with the least possible pain on the way there.

1:47:52
Speaker A

What we were thinking, so we've got maybe two options. What we were thinking is if you were interested in or are doing a CS to incorporate the changes,

1:48:02
Speaker A

or we could still set the amendment deadline which was going to be for Wednesday,

1:48:08
Speaker A

April 8th.

1:48:10
Speaker A

Um and that might be the quicker way because if we do the C_S_ then you gotta come back for that. Then you set the amendment deadline. If we set the amendment deadline now and then incorporate those changes through amendment, it might keep things um on track and so but up to you, you might have other thoughts um do you have a preference?

1:48:28
Speaker C

I would welcome doing this through amendment, provided the amendments are

1:48:33
Speaker C

not not massive and I'm happy to work with every office if you have ideas on this bill please talk to us we're we're we're here and happy to work on it

1:48:43
Speaker A

Okay, Representative Hannan.

1:48:45
Speaker A

Thank you, Chair Foster.

1:48:47
Speaker A

I'd just like to clarify the improvements and suggested amendments that you've given us.

1:48:54
Speaker A

Was the delayed implementation date a full year or six months?

1:49:00
Speaker A

Through the chair, a full year or even a full 2 years with a report in 1 year.

1:49:07
Speaker A

So 1 year for departments to let us know what actions they have taken and how close they are getting, understanding that this will be law in 2 years.

1:49:20
Speaker C

Okay.

1:49:21
Speaker A

Okay.

1:49:22
Speaker A

Thank you. I guess I

1:49:26
Speaker A

Mr Chairman, it it seems to me uh some of the departments have been very transparent in describing the challenges and difficulties, but I believe have on the horizon with the department of health, for instance, some of that shared services, redistribution of staff, request for a couple positions, retraining, um you know, that the department with the

1:49:51
Speaker A

the biggest hurdles or the more fumbles, however we want to describe it, but their transparency and optimism to move forward.

1:50:00
Speaker A

I would like to echo Representative Stapp's earlier statement,

1:50:06
Speaker A

it's a shame that we're having to discuss a bill to do things that should be our standard operating procedure.

1:50:17
Speaker A

If we can't, having having a law so it says we must do it and if we're doing it for general contractors at DOT then we certainly should be doing it for treatment programs that are dealing with our most vulnerable Alaskans and I I would be happy to work with the

1:50:41
Speaker A

sponsor to draft a couple of amendments to to do that so that we're not hammering people but we are articulating the goals that we are setting and reaching compliance in the next fiscal year.

1:50:53
Speaker A

Okay, I've got that. Did you want to comment? Otherwise we'll go to Representative Hemmschuh.

1:50:58
Speaker A

Just a quick comment. I think the timeline that I've laid out is extremely generous and that would be the outside timeline that I'd be looking at.

1:51:06
Speaker A

Okay.

1:51:06
Speaker B

Okay, thank you.

1:51:07
Speaker A

I've got Representative Galvin and then Representative Stapp.

1:51:12
Speaker B

Yeah. Thank you, Co-Chair Foster,

1:51:15
Speaker B

through the chair, to represent Himshewt. I really actually appreciate you bringing this bill forward.

1:51:22
Speaker B

I think it's probably been one of the more impactful conversations we've had on an issue in the state this year.

1:51:29
Speaker B

I have a couple of things.

1:51:31
Speaker B

I honestly don't know where I'd be at on your bill ultimately because I just,

1:51:37
Speaker B

I have a fear,

1:51:38
Speaker B

two things.

1:51:39
Speaker B

First fear I have is is

1:51:41
Speaker B

this department, even if the delayed admint uh because it's been happening for a long time. We'll just come to the finance table and say, hey, you need to give me five million dollars for a supplemental request for all the fees that I didn't rec incurred, and then people will just say, sure, we're going to give you five million dollars, and then they have no incentive to actually fix the

1:52:01
Speaker B

Delay payments. Yeah, I mean, I just I don't believe the government is motivated like a normal person would be because it's not the money is not their own money, right? As long as they can come here and just get checks from people,

1:52:14
Speaker B

there's not an incentive for them to try to fix the problem. The second thing is regarding

1:52:23
Speaker B

Community assistance, you know, we appropriate community assistance to municipalities.

1:52:27
Speaker B

And like that's, we are giving them money, and then maybe we don't give the money on time. It just seems a little weird that would you find ourselves for not giving them money that we're giving them on time.

1:52:39
Speaker B

And obviously so I guess if I were to offer any type of amendment, it would probably relating to if a municipality is receiving a direct state appropriation, we probably

1:52:48
Speaker B

We shouldn't I mean, I hate to sound mean, but we're giving them money, they should appreciate that we're giving them money and they shouldn't expect a fine in the event that we pay them forty days of money that we're giving them rather than thirty, uh through the chair, thanks.

1:53:05
Speaker A

Representative Hemmschulte.

1:53:06
Speaker A

Thank you. Through the chair, I would just again emphasise the money that municipalities receive from the state, I don't think they perceive that as a gift; rather I think they perceive that as um necessary funding for services they deliver that we don't.

1:53:22
Speaker A

Okay, do we have any other comments, questions, Representative Galvin?

1:53:25
Speaker B

Hmm!

1:53:25
Speaker A

Thanks. I just wanted to offer another perspective,

1:53:29
Speaker A

Co-Chair Foster. To me, government is people.

1:53:33
Speaker A

We are representing people.

1:53:36
Speaker A

Our job is to make sure that we are motivated to make sure the people are getting the people's needs. That is our job.

1:53:45
Speaker A

And I still believe in it. I still believe in it. I do have doubts. I get the doubts.

1:53:50
Speaker A

But that's why we're here at the table to help come together and clean up where we're messy and not performing efficiently.

1:53:58
Speaker A

And I think that at least this bill sends the signal that we're working toward that. We're working toward a better government.

1:54:05
Speaker A

And I don't want to wipe it out or blow it up because I do think that.

1:54:12
Speaker A

This work toward a common good is worth it, and this is a great start to that conversation.

1:54:19
Speaker A

So thank you. I appreciate it, Representative Himschew.

1:54:22
Speaker A

Okay, Representative Josephson.

1:54:24
Speaker D

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, Representative Himschute, this might be arguably more appropriate offline,

1:54:25
Speaker D

Thank you, Mr.

1:54:26
Speaker A

Chair.

1:54:32
Speaker D

but I sort of feel like saying it online.

1:54:34
Speaker D

I think you've made the moral case and the economic case.

1:54:39
Speaker D

I don't think you really have an opponent in the fight at this point. It's just a concession at the point. If you don't have a Senate companion, I would push for this amendment deadline and get this to the floor as soon as you can. We can— I'm still a little bit

1:55:04
Speaker D

puzzled by the power of legislators and committee majorities to edit or reform fiscal notes. It's there, it's just seldom used. But certainly the other body will want you to have the smallest fiscal notes possible because that's just a known

1:55:25
Speaker D

fact.

1:55:27
Speaker D

But I would hate to see you have to— I don't want you to seek too much accommodation with the executive branch. I think all of the branches are fine, but if you're— You're winning the race and I think you should just keep pushing.

1:55:46
Speaker A

Representative Himschuh?

1:55:47
Speaker A

Um through the co-chair uh to

1:55:50
Speaker A

Co-chair Josephson, Senate Bill 129 is awaiting a hearing in Senate Finance,

1:55:56
Speaker A

so we do have a companion on the other side. But I concur with your thoughts that let's, yeah, let's go forward with this.

1:56:05
Speaker A

Thanks.

1:56:07
Speaker A

Okay, I don't see any

1:56:08
Speaker D

Co-chair

1:56:08
Speaker A

other

1:56:09
Speaker D

Foster.

1:56:09
Speaker A

Representative Bynum.

1:56:12
Speaker C

Thank you, Co-Chair Foster. Through the chair,

1:56:14
Speaker C

thank you, Representative Hemmschuh, for bringing this forward.

1:56:16
Speaker C

I did have a couple items that I would like to work with you on in the next couple days on this bill, if that would be okay.

1:56:24
Speaker A

Representative Hemmschuh?

1:56:25
Speaker A

Through the co-chair,

1:56:26
Speaker A

always happy to work with any member.

1:56:29
Speaker A

Okay, real good. I think we will go ahead and stick with setting amendment deadline of Wednesday, April 8th. If you do have any, if you could get those to either Ms. Helen Phillips or my staff, Mr. Brody Anderson. We do have another bill. We have been going for 2 hours. Representative Hemmschulte, thank you very much for being here this morning. And we do have another bill up, that is HB 91, the marijuana tax bill. I would like to take a break for 5 minutes.

1:56:55
Speaker A

We've been going for about 2 hours. Let folks get some coffee, stretch your legs. So we're going to take an ease at 10:53 AM.

2:09:54
Speaker A

Okay, I'm going to go ahead and call House Finance back to order at 11:06 AM.

2:10:00
Speaker A

Just checking in.

2:10:01
Speaker A

I know that folks are still dispersed a little bit, but just checking online.

2:10:06
Speaker A

Representative Bynum and Representative Moore,

2:10:09
Speaker A

are you still online?

2:10:12
Speaker A

Representative Foster,

2:10:14
Speaker A

Representative Biden standing by.

2:10:16
Speaker A

Oh, great.

2:10:17
Speaker A

Oh, great. Okay.

2:10:17
Speaker A

Yes, I'm here.

2:10:18
Speaker A

Thank you.

2:10:19
Speaker A

This is Representative Moore.

2:10:20
Speaker A

Okay,

2:10:21
Speaker A

thank you very much.

2:10:23
Speaker A

And I think we have a couple members that are still out, and so I am going to speak slowly and we do have up next, it's House Bill 91,

2:10:36
Speaker A

that is the marijuana tax bill by Representative Carrick, just to do a recap in terms of the work that we've done on this bill.

2:10:46
Speaker A

We've heard the bill three times. We've taken invited and public testimony.

2:10:51
Speaker A

We reviewed the fiscal notes.

2:10:54
Speaker A

Eight amendments were submitted for the bill.

2:10:58
Speaker A

And so if I could have Representative Carrick as well as her staff,

2:11:02
Speaker A

Mr.

2:11:03
Speaker A

Stuart Relay,

2:11:04
Speaker A

if you could please come to the table.

2:11:08
Speaker A

And I am actually going to also announce that we have available four questions. We're going to do a brief recap and then just want to let folks know that we have available four questions.

2:11:21
Speaker A

Mr.

2:11:22
Speaker A

Kevin Richard,

2:11:23
Speaker A

Director of Alcohol and Marijuana.

2:11:25
Speaker A

Marijuana Control Office, this is MCO, and also Bailey Stewart,

2:11:30
Speaker A

Chair of the Marijuana Control Board,

2:11:32
Speaker A

so they're available for questions after we do our recap.

2:11:35
Speaker A

And then we're going to go into amendments.

2:11:38
Speaker A

And again, we have eight amendments.

2:11:42
Speaker A

And I think we've got almost everybody here.

2:11:46
Speaker A

And maybe if my staff could just check on anybody else who might be.

2:11:52
Speaker A

Not here,

2:11:53
Speaker A

but Representative Carrick,

2:11:57
Speaker A

if you'd like to give us a brief recap of the bill before we head into amendments.

2:12:02
Speaker A

Certainly, Mr.

2:12:03
Speaker A

Kocher,

2:12:03
Speaker A

thank you and members of the House Finance Committee for hearing House Bill 91 again today.

2:12:09
Speaker A

For the record,

2:12:10
Speaker A

Ashley Carrick representing West Fairbanks. And as a brief recap of House Bill 91,

2:12:16
Speaker A

in essence, this bill transitions from the current $50 per ounce excise tax on marijuana products to $12.50 per ounce. And then after a period,

2:12:28
Speaker A

that excise tax is fully repealed.

2:12:31
Speaker A

repealed and is replaced with a six percent sales tax and there are a few other just policy related reforms in the current version of the legislation before you mr. chair I will spare members the details as we have heard this bill several times

2:12:51
Speaker A

Okay,

2:12:52
Speaker A

thank you very much.

2:12:53
Speaker A

Before we head into amendments,

2:12:54
Speaker A

does the committee have any questions for these bill sponsor?

2:12:59
Speaker A

Okay, seeing none, I'm just going to take a brief at ease to make sure we've got our full complement here, so we'll be at ease at 11.09 a.m.

2:16:18
Speaker A

Okay, House Finance back on record at 11.12 a.m. I believe there may be a few questions and so now is a good time to go ahead and ask those. Representative Galvin, do you have a question?

2:16:31
Speaker A

Thank you. If I may,

2:16:33
Speaker A

my question, co-chair,

2:16:35
Speaker A

is, I guess, to the maker of this bill.

2:16:39
Speaker A

I've been.

2:16:40
Speaker A

I received a letter, I think since the last time we chatted from the name on this letter is Ryan Tenseth.

2:16:47
Speaker A

And I guess I just want to ask you a general question. This is around his concerns that

2:16:57
Speaker A

Well, really what it makes it sound like to me is this is a really tough thing to fix and there's not a lot of agreement among growers or sellers and there's concerns around the other products that perhaps are not being addressed.

2:17:10
Speaker A

And I have a very general question.

2:17:13
Speaker A

Their worry was 6% is not going to make people happy, a 6% tax on retail.

2:17:23
Speaker A

And I guess I'm trying to, as someone who hasn't looked at this as an economist for years,

2:17:31
Speaker A

I don't know or understand that market versus the black market,

2:17:36
Speaker A

right?

2:17:37
Speaker A

So we're trying to create a safe environment to uphold the law where Alaskans can purchase marijuana legally.

2:17:47
Speaker A

purchase a product that isn't somewhat regulated so that we're all safe things like that and and I appreciate that and my understand the bonus to Alaskans when we passed long ago this being legal was that we thought we'd be able to pay for other programs from the tax that would not only

2:18:11
Speaker A

uphold a system that would have quality control, but would also uphold a system that gave a little extra for educational purposes and for kids and for rehab and things like that. So I I think that Alaskans are very appreciative of that concept and I don't think they want to see it get blown up.

2:18:33
Speaker A

And I guess that what we're seeing and I'm please correct me if I'm wrong.

2:18:39
Speaker A

is that the the way we have the taxation on the growers is making it difficult for the price to stay competitive with the black market.

2:18:51
Speaker A

First,

2:18:52
Speaker A

let me ask if that's correct.

2:18:55
Speaker A

Representative Kerr.

2:18:56
Speaker A

Through the co-chair to Representative Galvin for the record,

2:18:59
Speaker A

Ashley Kerr, West Fairbanks representative.

2:19:03
Speaker A

It's hard to answer your question without going into the entire philosophy and history behind House Bill 91,

2:19:09
Speaker A

which

2:19:09
Speaker A

Okay.

2:19:09
Speaker A

we have talked about in the past. But broadly speaking, right now, as the current structure stands,

2:19:17
Speaker A

the industry

2:19:19
Speaker A

broadly speaking,

2:19:20
Speaker A

does not believe that they are competitive with the black market that

2:19:24
Speaker A

Okay.

2:19:24
Speaker A

exists in the state.

2:19:26
Speaker A

And the intention behind the governor's task force on marijuana from a couple of years ago,

2:19:31
Speaker A

as well as my intention in bringing forward the current version of the bill,

2:19:35
Speaker A

which was introduced in the previous legislature, is to put downward pressure on the black market by creating a more sustainable industry that can grow over time.

2:19:45
Speaker A

Thank you. And through the chair, follow-up?

2:19:48
Speaker A

Representative Galvin.

2:19:51
Speaker A

When we ended up passing a tax,

2:19:56
Speaker A

it didn't get all the way through, I think. And there's

2:19:58
Speaker A

I think, and there's

2:20:00
Speaker A

That, but the prior study,

2:20:03
Speaker A

and I know it's been years later, at that time um uh six percent would tax, which is what I see in this bill, was at the time roughly half of what the national average is of those states who have taxation. Is that still roughly accurate?

2:20:25
Speaker A

Through the co-chair to Representative Galvin,

2:20:28
Speaker A

I don't know for sure, but I roughly believe that that is an accurate statement.

2:20:33
Speaker A

We do have, with this legislation,

2:20:37
Speaker A

should it be enacted at a six percent sales tax, we would have a very low tax rate compared to other states with legalized marijuana sales.

2:20:44
Speaker A

So that would be true.

2:20:49
Speaker A

Okay, I think I'm going to just let it rest at that. This is a complicated.

2:20:54
Speaker A

Measure or study in economics. Thank you.

2:20:57
Speaker A

r rec

2:20:58
Speaker B

Representative Kerr.

2:20:58
Speaker A

If I might, Mr.

2:20:59
Speaker A

Co-Chair, just in general to Representative Galvin. Um

2:21:03
Speaker A

Yes.

2:21:04
Speaker A

It is a very complicated question that's before this committee.

2:21:08
Speaker A

I think the amendments today will show some of the challenges with juxtaposing the needs of the industry to actually exist in this state legally and to thrive in this state ideally,

2:21:19
Speaker A

and the need to support the revenue that comes in from this source. So it's a juxtaposition between those two things. And I think

2:21:30
Speaker A

That is the crux of the question,

2:21:32
Speaker A

and I personally believe that House Bill 91 is not necessarily the bill that makes one entity perfectly happy.

2:21:39
Speaker A

It makes most entities a little bit unhappy and ultimately is the balance that I believe we should strike going forward.

2:21:49
Speaker A

But again,

2:21:50
Speaker A

I am happy to defer to the will of the bodies and continue listening to all the stakeholders involved.

2:21:58
Speaker A

Thank you.

2:21:59
Speaker A

Okay, Representative Josephson.

2:22:01
Speaker A

Yes, uh good morning. Uh thanks for your patience um Representative Carrick, I know you know a lot now about uh a non-profit contracts. Um my question for you is the Labor and Commerce Committee, or State Affairs Committee,

2:22:16
Speaker A

rather, uh decided that um

2:22:23
Speaker A

Let me see if I can find this here.

2:22:29
Speaker A

trying to regain my train of thought.

2:22:33
Speaker A

Well first let's talk about the the tracking issue in on page two at lines 12 to 17.

2:22:41
Speaker A

Does the industry prefer tracking by stock or plant or does it prefer this broader tracking by

2:22:54
Speaker A

As I see it in my mind's eye,

2:22:56
Speaker A

a sort of table of plants.

2:22:58
Speaker A

So through the co-chair representative Josephson, again we're going to see this issue come up in the First Amendment today,

2:23:05
Speaker A

but this issue has been addressed through regulation since the introduction of the bill.

2:23:11
Speaker A

Through regulation they have established batch tagging, which is the preference of the industry. It's the standard in the agriculture industry generally.

2:23:19
Speaker A

So the per crop tagging that was required previously was seen as very punitive on the industry and not actually improving public safety.

2:23:27
Speaker A

But again,

2:23:28
Speaker A

that issue has been addressed,

2:23:29
Speaker A

and so the recommendation from our office is to remove this section from the bill.

2:23:35
Speaker A

Okay, follow-up?

2:23:35
Speaker A

Follow-up?

2:23:36
Speaker A

I recall the other issue.

2:23:37
Speaker A

Why was the committee,

2:23:39
Speaker A

or a sponsor of an amendment at least adopted by the committee, why was it intrigued by the idea of giving as little as $6 million to the public education fund? Given that it's a $1.2 billion fund, why was $6 million meaningful to it?

2:23:56
Speaker A

Representative Kirk.

2:23:57
Speaker A

Uh through the co-chair to Representative Josephson. So previously before that committee work that

2:24:03
Speaker A

portion of revenue generated from the industry was going just to UGF.

2:24:07
Speaker A

So the idea was to designate that portion that was going towards UGF to the Public Education Fund.

2:24:16
Speaker A

And there were some technical challenges with the way that amendment was passed that we became aware of after the committee process.

2:24:22
Speaker A

However,

2:24:23
Speaker A

that was the will of that committee at the time.

2:24:31
Speaker A

I don't have anything more.

2:24:32
Speaker A

Okay, further questions?

2:24:35
Speaker A

Seeing none, we'll go ahead and jump right into the amendment process.

2:24:39
Speaker A

And the first amendment is by Representative Schrage.

2:24:44
Speaker A

Thank you, Co-Chair Foster.

2:24:46
Speaker A

I'll move amendment number 1.

2:24:46
Speaker A

I'll object for purposes of discussion.

2:24:48
Speaker A

Representative Schrage.

2:24:50
Speaker A

Thank you, Co-Chair Foster.

2:24:52
Speaker A

Amendment 1 is a little bit meaty, so bear with me as I walk everyone through it.

2:24:58
Speaker A

We just talked about the first part of the amendment. This first part deletes Section 2 of the bill, which is related to the marijuana plant tagging. This is no longer needed, as the sponsor stated, as this has been dealt with through regulation. And I believe this would also remove about a quarter million in implementation costs, $250,000. Next, this amendment corrects, as we were just talking about, the designation

2:25:25
Speaker A

of 25% of marijuana tax revenue for education funding. It was drafted incorrectly in the prior committee,

2:25:32
Speaker A

and so this next part corrects those drafting errors.

2:25:38
Speaker A

This amendment also deletes Section 16 of the bill, which requires the Department of Revenue to establish tax collection facilities in each judicial district.

2:25:47
Speaker A

Removing this section would eliminate $3 million in implementation costs. I think it's generally viewed as something that would be very nice to have but is probably not feasible at this time.

2:25:58
Speaker A

And then lastly, this amendment deals with effective dates, making a number of changes. First, repealing the repealer for the existing marijuana excise tax, moving it from January 1, 2026 to January 1, 2028.

2:26:15
Speaker A

Next, on the marijuana sales tax,

2:26:17
Speaker A

the effective date goes from January 1, 2026 to January 1, 2028, same as the last prior part.

2:26:24
Speaker A

And then for the rest of the bill,

2:26:25
Speaker A

it moves it from July 1, 2025 to July 1, 2026.

2:26:31
Speaker A

Altogether,

2:26:32
Speaker A

these changes provide for an 18-month transitionary period between when the excise tax reduction and the start of the sales tax

2:26:40
Speaker A

occurs. This was recommended by the Marijuana Task Force, from which the bill originates, and the Alaska Marijuana Industry Association is also supportive of the extended timeline. And that's the amendment.

2:26:52
Speaker A

Okay, thank you. We've got Representative Josephson.

2:26:54
Speaker A

A question for my colleague,

2:26:57
Speaker A

Co-Chairman Schrage.

2:27:00
Speaker A

You said that you've suspended with Section 2 of the bill.

2:27:06
Speaker A

uh on the marijuana inventory tracking because it's done in regs, but I'm just trying to figure out

2:27:13
Speaker A

if I don't see the harm in leaving that there so that the tracking would be reformed and moved to a basically a crop rather than a plant.

2:27:26
Speaker A

Is it did you delete that in this amendment merely because you thought the regs covered the issue?

2:27:31
Speaker A

A

2:27:32
Speaker A

Coachman

2:27:32
Speaker A

coach your

2:27:32
Speaker A

just froggy.

2:27:32
Speaker A

Chair Josephson, for your information, this amendment was brought forward on behalf of the bill sponsor, and so I'll turn to the bill sponsor for further explanation.

2:27:40
Speaker A

Okay.

2:27:41
Speaker A

Representative Carrick.

2:27:42
Speaker A

Thank you through the co-chair to Representative Josephson.

2:27:46
Speaker A

Removing this section deletes a lot of the fiscal impact of the bill and I'm not entirely sure how the reg process works currently with the per crop tagging versus per batch tagging but it's already been implemented and it's as I as I have heard it problem is resolved essentially it was one of the first problems that was brought forward to me as I was researching.

2:28:11
Speaker A

how to craft this legislation, but I don't feel that the inclusion of this language is necessary at this time.

2:28:18
Speaker A

Follow-up.

2:28:19
Speaker A

Follow-up. I just would like to note that we also have available for questions Mr. Brandon Spanos, Acting Director of the Tax Division.

2:28:26
Speaker A

Representative Josephson.

2:28:28
Speaker A

I guess uh Representative Carrick, I'm surprised that there's any fiscal impact by section two. It should be that it's

2:28:39
Speaker A

I know so little about the industry, but that this reduces fiscal impact because you're looking at a table. I mean, we've all been in greenhouses and bought plants, flowers and the like,

2:28:55
Speaker A

and you're looking at a table rather than dozens and dozens of individual plants.

2:29:02
Speaker A

So I think that's already less expensive,

2:29:05
Speaker A

is it not?

2:29:07
Speaker A

Representative Carrick.

2:29:08
Speaker A

Through the co-chair to Representative Josephson,

2:29:12
Speaker A

I would have thought the same thing,

2:29:14
Speaker A

but there were a couple of fiscal notes on this bill originally that I raised my eyebrows at.

2:29:20
Speaker A

This was one of them. If we go back to that fiscal note relating to the costs.

2:29:29
Speaker A

The division suggests that there would be an annual subscription hosting fee costs for ongoing development,

2:29:37
Speaker A

training,

2:29:38
Speaker A

maintenance.

2:29:41
Speaker A

I would have to, you'd have to ask the division why they prepared a fiscal note for $250,000 to complete those services. I would concur with you from my

2:29:56
Speaker A

also relatively moderate experience in the industry.

2:30:00
Speaker A

that it doesn't seem like this should generate a fiscal note, but

2:30:04
Speaker A

here we are.

2:30:07
Speaker A

Okay, follow follow-up. And then most of this amendment I don't find concerning.

2:30:07
Speaker A

Okay, follow up, follow up.

2:30:15
Speaker A

I think an 18-month transition is longer than necessary, but I guess what I've learned is that it's going to be same same.

2:30:24
Speaker A

In terms of revenue,

2:30:25
Speaker A

now it clearly wouldn't be exactly the same saying,

2:30:29
Speaker A

but it's the best guess of the experts.

2:30:32
Speaker A

But I still don't understand,

2:30:36
Speaker A

I'm told there's utility in having some of the dollars fall into the treasury,

2:30:43
Speaker A

and I just don't understand.

2:30:49
Speaker A

why they're going to the public education fund,

2:30:52
Speaker A

but it's a policy call.

2:30:53
Speaker A

Perhaps you have a thought on it.

2:30:55
Speaker A

Representative Kirk.

2:30:56
Speaker A

Thank you. Through the co-chair to Representative Josephson.

2:30:59
Speaker A

Initially when this legislation was drafted, I didn't change any of the way revenue was actually designated.

2:31:06
Speaker A

My intention in putting forward this legislation is to address the industry issues relating to the tax collection and a few other policy issues.

2:31:16
Speaker A

The House State Affairs Committee,

2:31:18
Speaker A

which I do chair,

2:31:19
Speaker A

had felt pretty strongly that the 25% that's not currently designated revenue should go towards public education.

2:31:28
Speaker A

And ultimately,

2:31:29
Speaker A

I feel that that's a policy call that I'm willing to accept.

2:31:35
Speaker A

I would probably personally prefer that this go towards strictly UGF given that our challenges in funding are not limited to public education but I'm also perfectly comfortable with the decision of the committee.

2:31:50
Speaker A

I have nothing more.

2:31:51
Speaker A

Okay, in the queue I've got Representative Stapp and then Tom Szefsky,

2:31:54
Speaker A

Representative Stapp.

2:31:55
Speaker B

Thank you, good chair.

2:31:59
Speaker B

I don't even know. I'm glad we're going to delete Section 2 in the amendment because I have no idea what the heck any of that means. Plants over 8 inches and how that would generate a fiscal note. We're not going to tag the big plants, but we're going to tag the small plants. Seems very backwards. But my real question here, Section 3, to the maker of the amendment, I look, obviously I know the intent, the amendment is to reduce the fiscal note, but I will say where I live, our

2:32:28
Speaker B

growers and sellers of marijuana, they got to drive in their vehicles down the parks with bags of cash

2:32:35
Speaker B

to deposit them in Anchorage.

2:32:37
Speaker B

So I agree with you in the 10th Amendment. I'm just going to oppose it because I just want people to know that like the— it can't cost $3 million to take a bunch of money from people. Okay. Like they're trying to give us money. And the fact that you know, these folks are carrying massive sums of cash and driving down the highway 400 miles to deposit them in Anchorage is ridiculous. And that's all I have to say.

2:33:03
Speaker A

Representative Tomaszewski.

2:33:08
Speaker A

Thank you, Co-Chair Foster.

2:33:10
Speaker A

So, yeah, I'm in agreement to not have designated funds coming out of this. We shouldn't be designating where these proceeds go.

2:33:21
Speaker A

I think it causes

2:33:24
Speaker A

issues whenever you try to modify or do anything with the bill in the future, the law in the future. It just creates problems that we shouldn't be having to address.

2:33:40
Speaker D

'Kay, uh representative Galvin.

2:33:44
Speaker A

Representative Galvin, thank you. I think I'm going to add to this conversation now, although I do have an amendment later that directly does speak to this. So I may differ a bit because I'm looking historically at our passage of this bill originally back in House Bill 91, which was created in 2014-15. There was intent language that the MET fund was for 50% to go toward

2:34:12
Speaker A

after-school programs and 50% toward prevention items. And so I do have an amendment about that. I do think it's important because when Alaskans said yes, make marijuana legal, I believe that many voted yes because they thought that Alaska would be able to put some funds into kids.

2:34:38
Speaker A

I do think that was part of the reason they voted yes and into prevention.

2:34:45
Speaker A

So I just want to make sure to add that to this conversation, that there was— there is a little bit of history that I think represents

2:34:55
Speaker A

where Alaskans stood. Maybe they stand differently now.

2:34:59
Speaker A

But as you know, I tend to try to speak to or for children and parents looking after children, and certainly prevention areas as well.

2:35:10
Speaker A

And protective factors are key in our ensuring that we do not end up on the other side of wellness. And so

2:35:21
Speaker A

some of the pieces that these dollars were going toward in our communities were building protective factors. And I'll talk about that later at the amendment time, but I want to make sure to insert this since you're talking about an education fund or any sort of intentional language where— which directs the revenue.

2:35:44
Speaker A

Representative Carrick.

2:35:45
Speaker A

Thank you, Co-Chair Foster. I just wanted to

2:35:48
Speaker A

perhaps remind the committee members that currently marijuana revenue goes to 3 places. Marijuana revenue is currently designated 50% to the Recidivism Reduction Fund. That primarily funds things like reentry services.

2:36:06
Speaker A

25% currently goes to the Marijuana Education and Treatment Fund, or the MET Fund. This primarily funds things like After School Network programs.

2:36:16
Speaker A

And then the remaining 25% currently is just UGF funds. And so when we talk about current revenue and revenue under this legislation,

2:36:27
Speaker A

I just want to remind members that we do have money directly going towards education services through the MET fund. And in this bill version before us,

2:36:38
Speaker A

we do have that remaining 25% directed towards the public education fund.

2:36:42
Speaker A

And so that there is money going towards education through the revenue from the marijuana industry.

2:36:50
Speaker A

Okay, Representative Josephson.

2:36:55
Speaker A

So my staff, and I sometimes think of this as if these are trials, and my former staff was tax director and he would testify.

2:37:09
Speaker A

That he worked on this issue of the vaults, as I call them, and that the fiscal node is legitimate.

2:37:18
Speaker A

He believes that the acting director,

2:37:20
Speaker A

Mr.

2:37:21
Speaker A

Spanos,

2:37:21
Speaker A

would explain that it's a legitimate cost. And he notes that there's no tax division presence in Fairbanks. You'd have to staff,

2:37:30
Speaker A

I guess,

2:37:31
Speaker A

someone there. So...

2:37:34
Speaker A

Um if folks wanna query Mister Spanos or Mister Alpert, I think that's what the t the testimony would be.

2:37:42
Speaker D

Representative Kirk.

2:37:43
Speaker A

Thank you, Co-Chair Foster. Uh to Representative Josephson, I also wanna note that what's being deleted here with amendment one in section sixteen is the establishment of three new collection facilities. So one would be in Fairbanks, there would be another in Nome and another in Bethel. And so I also

2:38:00
Speaker A

concur that in this case the implementation costs are legitimate.

2:38:05
Speaker A

They would have to stand up a new office with new employees.

2:38:09
Speaker A

So it's my belief that those are legitimate costs whether they total three million dollars or not might be questionable,

2:38:17
Speaker A

but just want to note that this is not just standing up a new collection facility in Fairbanks. It would be three new facilities with personnel costs.

2:38:27
Speaker A

Representative Hannan.

2:38:29
Speaker A

Um thank you Co-Chair Foster. On that issue of new collections, and I don't actually doubt that it would cost the Department of Revenue to do it, but I am wondering, and I do know that we have one um licence uh c uh

2:38:50
Speaker A

producer here in the audience, and I am wondering if I could

2:38:55
Speaker A

have them at I want to know from their perspective having because that cash carrying to Anchorage on a regular basis and for people from Southeast, it's not driving down the parks, it's getting on a plane with a hand carried bag full of cash on a regular basis. They have cr you know they have employees that now are carrying cash on a regular basis. And whether

2:39:21
Speaker A

from

2:39:22
Speaker A

the impacted purveyors whether it's worth that cost, the f you know trying to balance the fiscal note I think it it's real to have those secured facilities stood up and having tax revenue collectors there and cash management is a a time consuming thing. But if the goal is to make sure that we've got timely taxes being done, whether it's worth it in that fiscal note, um both politically do we have the support to go forward with it, if we

2:39:51
Speaker A

have that big of a fiscal note, but to the industry who this I believe the goal when this was proposed in the original

2:40:00
Speaker A

bill was to make it so that pain of the taxes was less burdensome.

2:40:06
Speaker A

Mm-hmm.

2:40:07
Speaker A

Representative Carrick.

2:40:08
Speaker A

Co-chair Foster to Representative Hannon. I will just note that this is something I've strongly advocated for in the bill because it's what I'd heard a lot from producers.

2:40:18
Speaker A

However,

2:40:18
Speaker A

this overall,

2:40:20
Speaker A

it was seen as a nice to have in the context of passage of a tax reform bill.

2:40:26
Speaker A

And, you know, I would support it to the extent that the fiscal note was something I believed would make it through.

2:40:34
Speaker A

this body and the other body in a timely fashion because the necessity of having tax reform in this industry cannot be overstated and so I ultimately believe that removing this while I would love to see it happen is meant to help.

2:40:51
Speaker A

streamline the bill to its essential function,

2:40:54
Speaker A

which is tax reform.

2:40:56
Speaker A

Mr. Reilly.

2:40:57
Speaker B

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For the record, Stewart Reilly, staff for Representative Carrick. One thing I think is important to note about this conversation about tax collection facilities: currently marijuana taxes are collected on a monthly basis. House Bill 91 changes that so it's quarterly. So yes, folks would have to travel with

2:41:18
Speaker B

bags, with duffel bags of cash, but it would only be four times a year in comparison to twelve times a year.

2:41:26
Speaker C

Right.

2:41:27
Speaker F

Representative Hannig, would you like to add to that?

2:41:28
Speaker A

Thank you. Uh to me

2:41:28
Speaker A

Thank you.

2:41:33
Speaker A

that increases the risk to the courier,

2:41:35
Speaker C

Mm-hmm.

2:41:35
Speaker A

right, 'cause now they got four times as much cash. So although it reduces the regular routineness of it, uh

2:41:45
Speaker A

We've had much discussion about black marketer, there's been black market discussion.

2:41:50
Speaker A

We have not seen here in Alaska, but if you read the news in other states, some of the concern, and I don't want us to create a situation where we are setting up businesses to be the target of criminal activity over the cash stores they now have to have, 'cause now they've got a store

2:42:11
Speaker A

cash per quarter, and it's in theory a fairly high volume. So that's um yeah. I mean and I appreciate in an effort to get the bill through if it reduces uh the fisc by reducing the fiscal note and reforming the tax we can still come back to standing up tax depositaries, but I just don't know um from the industry itself

2:42:34
Speaker A

whether for them that is a vital piece of going forward and

2:42:37
Speaker A

Turning to quarterly payments reduces the number of times you've got to drive or you've got to get on a plane, but it also exposes you to greater risk of being a target of theft, armed robbery.

2:42:52
Speaker D

Representative Tomaszewski.

2:42:56
Speaker A

Oh, thank you Co-Chair Foster.

2:42:57
Speaker A

Yeah, I was just going to comment on that also. Now, instead of one month's bag of cash, you've got, you know,

2:43:07
Speaker A

three months. What's the size of these duffel bags they've got to carry? Bags of cash. Quarterly amounts. That does maybe cause a little bit of safety concerns for those individuals.

2:43:22
Speaker D

Representative Schrage.

2:43:24
Speaker D

Thank you just for clarity on this uh topic in front of us right now. Th there's no requirement that you pay quarterly. You could still choose to pay monthly if you're a very high volume cultivator or retailer, you could still make your trips as frequently as you wanted, but maybe your slope smaller volume, uh you could choose then have a little more flexibility to make those payments quarterly, is that right?

2:43:45
Speaker B

Hmm.

2:43:46
Speaker A

Representative Carrick, thank you.

2:43:47
Speaker A

Thank you, through the Co-Chair to Representative Schrader.

2:43:49
Speaker B

Erk!

2:43:49
Speaker A

That's correct. And also the quarterly payments was a strong priority for folks in the industry as well.

2:43:57
Speaker B

Okay.

2:43:57
Speaker A

And just going back to Representative Hannon's earlier comment as well through the Co-Chair, I do not disagree with any of those arguments. I believe it is a priority as well. It is not nearly the level of priority in talking with producers that

2:44:12
Speaker A

that the tax reform is.

2:44:14
Speaker A

And there is also hope from the industry that with potential federal legalization, online payments will make this a relatively non-issue in the future.

2:44:24
Speaker A

So I think there is also some outstanding hope for that to take place.

2:44:29
Speaker A

And ultimately,

2:44:30
Speaker A

this was something in talking with folks that there was some comfort in removing at this time.

2:44:39
Speaker H

Before I go to wrap up, any further questions?

2:44:42
Speaker H

Seeing none, Representative Froggy, anything in closing?

2:44:46
Speaker D

Uh not not too much. Happy to carry this amendment on behalf of the bill sponsor. I was happy to do so after uh reviewing the amendment uh just uh in response to some of the discussion on it uh as a reminder, already in the bill is the diversion of funds uh towards education. This is just a clean-up of what was already in the bill, so not really a policy choice that's in this amendment on that uh portion. And then in terms of the tax collection sites,

2:45:12
Speaker D

I th I think uh everyone recognises that having to transport large sums of cash is a problem. Uh three million dollar fiscal note is also a problem. And I think uh as was just discussed by the Bill's sponsor, a kind of middle ground is maybe to have the the quarterly payment option for those that ch would like uh to make less frequent trips and we see industry support of that. And I think yeah, we're trying to recognise that you need to find some balance in all this.

2:45:40
Speaker D

this. And ultimately, you're absolutely right, Representative Keric, that the real solution of this is federal policy change and allowing for this industry to utilize banking services.

2:45:51
Speaker D

That is the real solution to this challenge.

2:45:55
Speaker D

Lastly, in terms of the eighteen month period, I I think is representative Josephson accurately stated it's uh a kind of net neutral and if that's what the industry is looking for here, I I'm happy to support that. So looking forward to hopefully having the support of the membership. Thank you.

2:46:12
Speaker H

Okay. I am going to lift my objection to Amendment Number 1. Is there any further objection?

2:46:18
Speaker A

Uh

2:46:18
Speaker H

Representative Josephson, do you object?

2:46:22
Speaker A

Well, I if I might just for a moment, I'll object.

2:46:27
Speaker H

Okay. Representative Josephson.

2:46:31
Speaker A

I'm torn because in the great scheme of things, I don't think this is a really troublesome amendment. It's just that I think that we could

2:46:49
Speaker A

do somewhat better. And I'm trying to think about how other amendments fit into it.

2:47:00
Speaker A

And so that's what I'm weighing at the moment. And I'm a little

2:47:05
Speaker A

still confounded by this public education fund provision

2:47:09
Speaker A

because no one's told me what that's for.

2:47:18
Speaker A

Yeah, I think I'd like a roll call on it.

2:47:21
Speaker H

Okay. Representative Stapp, would you like to make any comments?

2:47:26
Speaker A

Question.

2:47:27
Speaker H

Question's been called. Okay. With that, Madam Secretary, if you could please call the roll on Amendment Number 1.

2:47:36
Speaker A

Representative Hannan.

2:47:37
Speaker A

Yes.

2:47:38
Speaker A

Yes.

2:47:39
Speaker A

Representative Tomaszewski.

2:47:40
Speaker A

Yes.

2:47:42
Speaker A

Representative Moore.

2:47:45
Speaker K

Yes.

2:47:45
Speaker A

Yes.

2:47:46
Speaker A

Representative Stapp?

2:47:47
Speaker B

No.

2:47:49
Speaker A

Representative Galvin?

2:47:51
Speaker I

Yes.

2:47:51
Speaker A

Yes.

2:47:52
Speaker A

Representative Jimmy?

2:47:54
Speaker K

Yes.

2:47:54
Speaker A

Yes.

2:47:55
Speaker A

Representative Bynum?

2:47:59
Speaker K

Yes.

2:47:59
Speaker A

Yes.

2:48:01
Speaker A

Representative Josephson?

2:48:02
Speaker A

No.

2:48:03
Speaker C

No.

2:48:04
Speaker A

Representative Schrage.

2:48:05
Speaker A

Yes.

2:48:05
Speaker B

Yes.

2:48:06
Speaker A

Representative Foster?

2:48:08
Speaker A

Yes.

2:48:08
Speaker C

Yes.

2:48:09
Speaker A

Eight yea, two nay.

2:48:12
Speaker H

So on a vote of 8 yea, 2 nay, Amendment Number 1 has been adopted.

2:48:17
Speaker H

So with that, we will now move over to Amendment Number 2. Representative Josephson.

2:48:21
Speaker A

I move Amendment 2.

2:48:22
Speaker H

I'll object for purpose of discussion. Representative Josephson.

2:48:25
Speaker A

Chair Foster,

2:48:26
Speaker A

I may very well withdraw this amendment. Principally, what I'm trying to determine is

2:48:41
Speaker A

As I understand it

2:48:44
Speaker A

that

2:48:48
Speaker A

I'm thinking about the order of these amendments.

2:48:50
Speaker A

We've not yet adopted a change to the MET fund highlighting the need for uh or an emphasis on after school care. Is that correct?

2:49:01
Speaker A

As later amendments do.

2:49:04
Speaker H

The representative character.

2:49:05
Speaker A

Thank you through the co-chair to Representative Josephson. That is correct.

2:49:09
Speaker A

There is a later amendment which clarifies, I think is the correct word here,

2:49:16
Speaker A

the designation of MET funds provided through marijuana revenue.

2:49:21
Speaker A

And that would be conflicting with the current amendment.

2:49:26
Speaker H

Representative Josephson.

2:49:27
Speaker A

Mr.

2:49:27
Speaker B

Mr.

2:49:28
Speaker A

Chair,

2:49:28
Speaker A

I'd like to roll Amendment 2 to the bottom of the pile.

2:49:30
Speaker H

Okay, we'll roll Amendment 2 to the bottom.

2:49:34
Speaker H

With that, Representative Josephson, I'm— let's see.

2:49:38
Speaker A

Yes, I move Amendment 3.

2:49:40
Speaker H

Uh representative Josephson I'll object for purpose of discussion.

2:49:46
Speaker H

Representative Josephson.

2:49:47
Speaker A

Yes, this would change just that portion of Amendment 1 and the underlying bill in that it would restore the 25% that is designated to the public education

2:50:00
Speaker A

fund back to UGF.

2:50:06
Speaker A

I've heard the six million dollars described as a rounding error to a 1.2 billion dollar fund called the Public Education Fund.

2:50:18
Speaker A

And I've been told that the tax division,

2:50:22
Speaker A

and I'm not entirely sure why,

2:50:26
Speaker A

but that it may have

2:50:28
Speaker A

some interest in,

2:50:30
Speaker A

it would certainly be tracking these taxes because that's what it does,

2:50:35
Speaker A

but there would be some administrative benefit to it by keeping money in the UGF pipeline,

2:50:43
Speaker A

so to speak.

2:50:44
Speaker A

So this would undo the public education fund portion and return it to the existing law.

2:50:52
Speaker A

Okay,

2:50:52
Speaker A

OK, thank you.

2:50:53
Speaker A

Thank you. I'd like to get the sponsor,

2:50:55
Speaker A

bill sponsor's thoughts on Amendment Number 3. Representative Carrick.

2:50:59
Speaker A

Thank you, Mr.

2:51:00
Speaker A

Co-Chair.

2:51:00
Speaker A

To Representative Josephson, I'm neutral on this amendment.

2:51:05
Speaker A

I am torn because the original version of the bill that I had introduced had the same designations for the revenue as the current structure,

2:51:15
Speaker A

and I supported putting it in that way.

2:51:20
Speaker A

the committee which I chair and that this bill first was in, House State Affairs, wanted to designate the remaining twenty five percent and they have made some great arguments for why they would like to do that. Um ultimately I defer to the will of the committee.

2:51:36
Speaker A

Okay, Representative Steffen and then Gelvin. Representative Steffen.

2:51:39
Speaker B

Yeah, I'm, I think I'm going to go 2-0 here on Co-Chair Josephson with amendment votes. I don't think I have a fund

2:51:48
Speaker B

that is specifically entitled the Public Education Fund currently in existence. I have a foundation formula, I have a higher education fund. Typically when I read those in statute, they are specified in the thing about what they are. At least Rep. Galvin is nodding her head yes, so I am certainly open to be wrong, but I think on principle

2:52:14
Speaker B

The Constitution says we don't have subfunds. I mean, all funds are subject to appropriation by the legislature unless there's some court kind of restriction or something like that. And we should probably just kind of keep it that way. So I'm going to be in support of this amendment. Thank you.

2:52:31
Speaker A

Okay, Representative Galvin.

2:52:33
Speaker A

Thank you. Um without getting into the fund situation which years ago we used to always put in a full year in that fund and then I think it got maybe diminished and then I think the Senate senateside Senate Finance passed a bill very recently.

2:52:51
Speaker B

through them to um reinstate a public education fund, it sounds like. So we'll see where that goes. That said, um I am I am going to support this amendment. And the reason for me is that we just went through the fiscal notes and one of them was very large and um it makes sense to me to make some room in the U_G_F_ um to perhaps uh cover that. So that's where my thinking is, it's not

2:53:18
Speaker B

Not that I want to take anything away from education or kids certainly, but um there's another portion of this that we'll get into later uh with regard to the met and I do want to clarify that but uh anyhow I do support this amendment. Thank you.

2:53:34
Speaker A

Okay, further discussion on Amendment Number 3?

2:53:38
Speaker A

Seeing none, I will remove my objection. Is there any other objections to Amendment Number 3?

2:53:47
Speaker A

Seeing none, Amendment Number 3 has been adopted.

2:53:51
Speaker A

And so with that, Amendment Number 4, Representative Tomaszewski.

2:53:55
Speaker A

I move Amendment Number 4.

2:53:56
Speaker A

Object.

2:53:57
Speaker A

Okay, Representative Tomaszewski.

2:53:59
Speaker A

Simple amendment just completely deletes the sales tax on this, on this bill. I think we can understand what that does.

2:54:10
Speaker A

Okay, Representative Steffen.

2:54:12
Speaker B

So

2:54:15
Speaker B

just a question for the sponsor. The way I read the amendment is it does indeed delete the sales tax from the bill. But it also leaves the current repealers in the bill. Page 7, lines 8. So it leaves the repealers of the existing

2:54:36
Speaker B

Chapter 61 excise tax on marijuana. So my understanding of the amendment is yes, you are deleting the sales tax, but you're also leaving the repeal of Section 43-61010, which is the entirety of the marijuana section, which I believe, and then maybe somebody can

2:54:56
Speaker B

tell me I might be wrong, I believe you're basically making zero tax on marijuana if you were to adopt this amendment. That's how I read it.

2:55:03
Speaker A

Oh.

2:55:03
Speaker A

Well, thank you for telling me that now. We've moved the amendment, and I am certainly open to an amendment of my amendment to delete that line as well.

2:55:17
Speaker A

Thank you.

2:55:18
Speaker A

Representative Sell.

2:55:20
Speaker D

Yeah, I want to go ahead and make it because I support the deletion of the sales tax.

2:55:26
Speaker D

Just so I think it's relatively simple. It would just be conceptual to delete the repealers. Is that sufficient or do I— for everyone to understand? So we would—

2:55:38
Speaker A

I

2:55:40
Speaker A

Yeah, I think— yeah, I think I'll take that as a motion.

2:55:43
Speaker D

Yeah, I'll make a conceptual amendment to

2:55:49
Speaker D

I'm going to say delete the repealers. So basically remove

2:55:54
Speaker D

all language from lines 6— excuse me, lines 7 and 8 of page 7 of the bill. I think that's the appropriate way to do that. In the event that the

2:56:10
Speaker D

underlying amendment passed, we're just reverting to status quo through the chair.

2:56:16
Speaker A

Okay. I think

2:56:18
Speaker A

I think if this does pass, then it'll be subject to conforming and technical changes by Ledge Legal. But just want to check in with Representative Carrick and Mr. Stewart-Relay. Do you have any comments on this conceptual amendment number 1 to amendment number 4?

2:56:36
Speaker A

Um Mr.

2:56:37
Speaker A

Co-Chair, thank you.

2:56:38
Speaker A

I'm trying to ascertain with this conceptual amendment if the ultimate effect would be a $50 an ounce or a $12.50 an ounce excise tax,

2:56:48
Speaker A

because as you'll recall, there's transitional language such that we would go from $50 to $12.50 an ounce and then ultimately repeal both.

2:56:56
Speaker A

So I might look to see if either the maker of the motion or another committee member can help me figure this out.

2:57:04
Speaker A

Ouch, the conceptual amendment effect.

2:57:07
Speaker A

Any thoughts, Representative Statt? If we need to take it at ease, we can certainly do that.

2:57:11
Speaker D

I think we probably just— I mean, if we just adopt the conceptual, and then I think the underlying might not be super popular, Mr. Co-Chair. That would be my guess.

2:57:20
Speaker A

I think you're right.

2:57:21
Speaker D

Okay.

2:57:22
Speaker A

Let's go ahead and I'm going to remove my objection on the conceptual amendments. Is there any seeing no objection conceptual amendment has been adopted that takes us to the main amendment number four as amended and any further discussion representative Josephson.

2:57:40
Speaker A

Yes.

2:57:42
Speaker A

Yes, Mr. Chair, Representative Carrick. So the effect of the conceptual amendment just adopted is that there is a wholesale tax at $12.50 an ounce for all product. That's the entire tax. Is that your understanding?

2:57:58
Speaker A

Representative Carrick.

2:57:59
Speaker A

Through the co-chair to Representative Josephson, I'm

2:58:02
Speaker A

actually not entirely sure if where we land with that conceptual amendment,

2:58:07
Speaker A

but I will just say for my perspective in either case I will oppose this amendment because if we're leaving it at $50 an ounce ultimately we're not actually changing anything about the current tax structure and if we're going to $12.50 an ounce we are significantly diminishing the revenue from this industry such that the

2:58:27
Speaker A

funds which had currently impacts through revenue would be very significantly affected. So I I would oppose it neither case, but I'm actually not entirely sure where where we've been left.

2:58:38
Speaker A

Representative Josephson.

2:58:39
Speaker A

Yeah, uh i Representative Kerrick, your last statement begs an important question. You just said that if we're at twelve fifty for life uh perpetuity essentially, that's how we must think about these things, that we would have a serious diminution of revenue.

2:58:55
Speaker A

But I believed, or I thought,

2:58:57
Speaker A

that 6% was largely supposed to mirror $1,250,

2:59:02
Speaker A

certainly within a few million dollars.

2:59:05
Speaker A

So does it or doesn't it?

2:59:07
Speaker A

Representative Kirk.

2:59:08
Speaker A

Representative Kirk.

2:59:09
Speaker A

Through the co-chair to Representative Josephson, it all depends, I think, is the tricky and not quite clean answer here.

2:59:20
Speaker A

Ultimately, it goes back to what the governor's task force had recommended,

2:59:24
Speaker A

what the research had shown about what the impact would be of a transition to a sales tax versus an excise tax.

2:59:30
Speaker A

It may be roughly the same in revenue.

2:59:33
Speaker A

There might be some deviation. It's very hard to say for certain.

2:59:39
Speaker A

However, I would just note that one of the impetuses for the original bill is to move away from an excise tax um as a solution for some of the challenges in the cultivation industry. And so I I you know in either case I still maintain opposition here.

2:59:54
Speaker A

Could I have a brief at ease?

2:59:55
Speaker D

Sure.

2:59:56
Speaker A

Sure. We're going to take a brief at ease at 11:56 AM.

2:59:59
Speaker A

Okay.

3:08:48
Speaker A

Okay, I'm going to call House Finance back to order at 12:05 PM. And, um, Representative Stapp, I, I had heard maybe you might want to restate your conceptual amendment.

3:09:00
Speaker A

Yeah,

3:09:00
Speaker A

okay. Yeah,

3:09:00
Speaker A

thank you, uh, Co-Chair Foster. Just for the record, um, conceptual amendment is to keep the, uh, wholesale tax at 12.5.

3:09:11
Speaker A

Okay, thank you. So that's the clarification of the conceptual amendment, and we are on the

3:09:16
Speaker A

Amendment 4, and I think we left off at Representative Josephson asking for an at ease. Did you want to ask any questions, Representative Josephson?

3:09:26
Speaker A

I don't. I won't be supporting the amendment.

3:09:28
Speaker A

I

3:09:28
Speaker A

Okay.

3:09:28
Speaker A

don't have any questions.

3:09:29
Speaker A

Okay. Uh,

3:09:31
Speaker A

Representative Tomaszewski, would you like to wrap up?

3:09:34
Speaker B

Certainly. Thank you, co-chair. So this amendment simply removes the sales tax portion, the retail sales tax portion of this, and maintains the 12.5% excise tax as the standard going forth.

3:09:52
Speaker B

And so hope you will support the amendment.

3:09:57
Speaker A

Okay, thank you. And I will

3:10:00
Speaker A

I maintain my objections. So Madam Clerk, if you could please call the roll.

3:10:04
Speaker A

Representative Galvin.

3:10:06
Speaker A

No. Representative Stapp.

3:10:08
Speaker A

Yes.

3:10:09
Speaker A

Yes.

3:10:09
Speaker A

Representative Hannan.

3:10:11
Speaker B

No.

3:10:11
Speaker A

Representative Jimmy.

3:10:13
Speaker B

No.

3:10:15
Speaker A

Representative Bynum.

3:10:20
Speaker A

Yes.

3:10:20
Speaker B

Yes.

3:10:21
Speaker A

Representative Tomaszewski.

3:10:23
Speaker A

Yes.

3:10:23
Speaker A

Yes.

3:10:24
Speaker A

Representative Moore.

3:10:27
Speaker A

Yes.

3:10:28
Speaker A

Representative Schrag.

3:10:29
Speaker D

No.

3:10:29
Speaker A

No.

3:10:30
Speaker A

Representative Josephson?

3:10:31
Speaker D

No.

3:10:32
Speaker D

No.

3:10:33
Speaker A

Representative Foster?

3:10:34
Speaker A

No.

3:10:34
Speaker A

No.

3:10:36
Speaker A

Four yea, six nay.

3:10:37
Speaker A

So on a vote of four yea to six nay, Amendment Number 4 has not been adopted. That next takes us to Amendment Number 5. Representative Josephson.

3:10:47
Speaker D

I move Amendment 5.

3:10:49
Speaker C

Objection.

3:10:49
Speaker A

Representative Josephson?

3:10:51
Speaker D

Mr. Chairman, I move an amendment to my amendment conceptually.

3:10:56
Speaker D

At line 2 of the amendment, I would, by conceptual amendment, add—

3:11:03
Speaker D

delete 6 and add 7.

3:11:05
Speaker A

Is there any objection?

3:11:07
Speaker A

Hearing none, conceptual amendment number one to amendment number five has been adopted. Representative Josephson.

3:11:14
Speaker D

Okay uh I

3:11:14
Speaker A

Okay.

3:11:18
Speaker D

I'm not a student of this industry. I didn't support the initiative in 2014.

3:11:23
Speaker D

I suspect that as a matter of policy and economics, it was the proper vote, I guess, on the initiative in 2014 was yes, even though I voted no. And that's pretty obvious. It's a ubiquitous practice and

3:11:47
Speaker D

may even be a net gain for the public to enjoy marijuana.

3:11:53
Speaker D

The concern I have is that what I'm told and what the data suggests is that at its peak, when growers were reporting bud worth,

3:12:07
Speaker D

well,

3:12:09
Speaker D

they were reporting bud that was taxed at the $50 per ounce.

3:12:14
Speaker D

The state reaped $30 million in revenue. When they began to not report that because of economic hardship, apparently the state was reporting $25 million in revenue. And what I'm told is that this bill would result in something perhaps even less than $20 million in revenue.

3:12:37
Speaker D

And I think that

3:12:41
Speaker D

that's insufficient.

3:12:52
Speaker D

Mr. Chairman, can I—

3:13:00
Speaker D

the intent of my conceptual— can I go back to my conceptual amendment to make sure it was done properly?

3:13:04
Speaker A

Sure. Representative Josephson.

3:13:05
Speaker D

The intent was to not have a 6% sales tax but to have a 7% sales tax. Is that what the committee understood?

3:13:12
Speaker A

Mm-hmm.

3:13:12
Speaker A

That was my understanding.

3:13:13
Speaker D

All right. Okay. Um so going back to uh the amendment as amended, I think that um as

3:13:24
Speaker D

I understand it,

3:13:25
Speaker A

Mm-hmm.

3:13:25
Speaker D

uh the

3:13:27
Speaker D

The intent of the revenue from 2014 was to help with recidivism funds and re-entry programs,

3:13:35
Speaker D

marijuana education and treatment,

3:13:37
Speaker D

and the rest to UGF.

3:13:39
Speaker D

And this creates a tax hole.

3:13:42
Speaker D

But I think the thing that was most compelling to me was the dialogue this morning that Rep.

3:13:47
Speaker D

Galvin had with the sponsor.

3:13:51
Speaker D

What we learned and the sponsor agreed was that this tax was among the lowest in the states that have legalized marijuana.

3:13:58
Speaker D

And I suspect at seven percent it's still among the lowest. And um my rough math suggests that this would bring us back to uh the sort of revenue we're accustomed to. Now, undoubtedly the industry will dislike that, but they have other benefits in this bill, um principally that they're not of course this was done I guess regulatorily.

3:14:26
Speaker D

They're not having to track every stock.

3:14:29
Speaker D

They are no longer having to deal with, I guess, a cumbersome wholesale tax ultimately in about a year and a year and a half.

3:14:39
Speaker D

And so they get some wins out of this bill as it is.

3:14:44
Speaker D

And so that's why I'm offering Amendment 5 as amended.

3:14:48
Speaker A

Okay.

3:14:48
Speaker B

Okay.

3:14:50
Speaker A

Representative

3:14:50
Speaker B

Foster?

3:14:52
Speaker A

I'll put you in the queue,

3:14:54
Speaker A

Representative Bynum. I've also got Representative Stapp,

3:14:56
Speaker B

Thank

3:14:56
Speaker A

Representative Tom

3:14:56
Speaker B

you.

3:14:57
Speaker A

aszewski, and I want to start off by asking the sponsor, Representative Carrick, your thoughts on Amendment Number

3:15:03
Speaker A

5 as amended.

3:15:04
Speaker A

Thank you, Mr.

3:15:05
Speaker A

Co-Chair, and just again for the record,

3:15:06
Speaker A

Ashley Carrick representing West Fairbanks.

3:15:09
Speaker A

I just want to say in regards to Amendment number five, as well as the amended Amendment number four that we just had,

3:15:16
Speaker A

I really appreciate where both sponsors of these amendments are coming from.

3:15:20
Speaker A

And I would comment that the fact that we've conceptually amended both today really gives a sense for this committee of how difficult it is to strike a balance.

3:15:30
Speaker L

on this issue.

3:15:31
Speaker L

On the one hand, the previous amendment was trying to strike the balance more in favor of the marijuana industry,

3:15:38
Speaker L

and the amendment before us is trying to strike a balance more in favor of additional revenue for the program served by the marijuana revenue stream.

3:15:48
Speaker L

Ultimately,

3:15:48
Speaker L

I don't support changing the tax structure in this bill because it is my belief, putting this bill forward, that we struck

3:15:56
Speaker L

struck that balance as adequately as possible.

3:15:59
Speaker L

That does not mean that everybody is happy about that balance,

3:16:02
Speaker L

but I don't want to change that balance.

3:16:06
Speaker L

And I do defer to the will of the committee ultimately and respect where both amendments are coming from.

3:16:12
Speaker A

Okay, thank you. In the queue I've got Representative Bynum, Steph Tomoszewski and Galvin, Representative Bynum.

3:16:20
Speaker B

Thank you, Co-Chair Foster,

3:16:22
Speaker B

and just for clarification,

3:16:24
Speaker B

the conceptual Amendment 1 to Amendment 5 was to change line 2 from a 6 to a 7, is that correct?

3:16:32
Speaker A

I believe it was changing line two from a s Oh, he's got it, okay, you've got it correct. Sorry. Go ahead, Representative Bynum.

3:16:40
Speaker B

Thank you. I know no comments at this time until we get back to the underlying amendment.

3:16:46
Speaker D

We're on it, we are.

3:16:47
Speaker A

Uh we are on the underlying amendment. Representative Bynum.

3:16:52
Speaker B

Until we get back to the main amendment,

3:16:55
Speaker B

as amended,

3:16:56
Speaker B

if that passes.

3:16:57
Speaker B

Thank you.

3:16:58
Speaker A

Yes,

3:16:58
Speaker A

Yes, we have passed,

3:16:59
Speaker A

we have adopted the conceptual amendment,

3:17:01
Speaker A

so we are on the main Amendment Number 5 as amended.

3:17:07
Speaker A

Did you have a comment,

3:17:08
Speaker B

Yes.

3:17:08
Speaker A

Representative Bynum?

3:17:10
Speaker B

Yeah,

3:17:11
Speaker B

Yeah, overall,

3:17:11
Speaker B

thank you, Co-Chair Foster.

3:17:13
Speaker B

Apologize,

3:17:14
Speaker B

I didn't realize that the objection had been removed for that.

3:17:18
Speaker B

But since we're back to the amended Amendment 5,

3:17:21
Speaker B

I will probably side with the bill sponsor on this one and not be in support. Thank you.

3:17:30
Speaker A

Okay, next up—

3:17:31
Speaker B

I have some comments as well, Co-Chair Foster. Put me in the queue, please.

3:17:35
Speaker A

Sure, okay, I've got Representative Stapp, Tomaszewski, Galvin, and Moore. Representative Stapp.

3:17:35
Speaker A

Sure.

3:17:39
Speaker D

Thank you, Co-Chair Foster.

3:17:41
Speaker D

I appreciate the member from Anchorage, Co-Chair Jostin for offering the amendment.

3:17:45
Speaker D

I am going to be a no.

3:17:47
Speaker D

I actually did not vote for the initiative either for a lot of reasons.

3:17:51
Speaker D

I think in my town we did it locally first and it passed.

3:17:57
Speaker D

astonishing level of percentage.

3:17:59
Speaker D

I think I was uh the fifteen percent of people who did not support it uh in our borough or something like that. It was pretty overwhelming. But um I'm a good Republican and I don't like taxes, so if the option is to have lower taxes, um I'm gonna go on that. And also I would say regarding um taxes and other jurisdictions, the point of the bill I think is to make the industry competitive and even if we are a lower tax uh jurisdiction

3:18:24
Speaker D

Because of the cost structure of the industry, and we want this industry to grow,

3:18:30
Speaker D

lowering the taxes is beneficial irrespective of how we compare to other churches just by the cost structure. So I'll be under on the amendment,

3:18:38
Speaker D

thank you.

3:18:38
Speaker A

Okay. Next up I have Representative Tomoszewski.

3:18:44
Speaker A

Thank you, Co-Chair Foster.

3:18:46
Speaker A

So I'm going to speak against this amendment.

3:18:49
Speaker A

This is a massive tax increase, I think, in my opinion.

3:18:56
Speaker A

We're going from

3:18:58
Speaker A

an excise tax which brought in a certain amount of revenue, and we're moving that down and increasing this sales tax, which I think is going to generate a much larger amount of revenue.

3:19:13
Speaker A

You have to understand that on the retail side of this equation, you have a lot of value-added products that will be affected by this sales tax.

3:19:26
Speaker A

And I believe, if my memory serves me right, the whole discussion with the marijuana board and everything else was around 3% would actually be a sales cut and 6% would be sales neutral to increase. And so that's why the growers and the

3:19:52
Speaker A

retail folks wanted to settle

3:20:00
Speaker A

on a 3% sales tax. So I think this at 7, it's way out of line. I think in fact that it'll increase revenue immensely. And you know I think 3 would be a better

3:20:19
Speaker A

rate for both the retailers. So I would actually like to

3:20:27
Speaker A

propose an amendment and change on line 3, the 7 to 3. So line 3, delete 7 and add 3.

3:20:45
Speaker A

Objection.

3:20:45
Speaker A

Okay, we have a conceptual amendment to change line 3

3:20:45
Speaker A

Object.

3:20:50
Speaker A

from 7 to 3 and we have an objection from Representative Josephson.

3:20:55
Speaker A

Further discussion? Sorry.

3:20:58
Speaker B

Call the question.

3:20:59
Speaker A

Okay.

3:21:00
Speaker A

Call the question. Question's been called.

3:21:02
Speaker A

Could I speak on my amendment?

3:21:04
Speaker A

Sure. Representative Tomaszewski.

3:21:05
Speaker A

Thank you. So like I just stated before,

3:21:09
Speaker A

the discussions around this increase, or this new tax,

3:21:13
Speaker A

really wanted to fall on a neutral ground where they weren't, or actually a tax cut is what they needed. The cost of doing business.

3:21:27
Speaker A

In Alaska,

3:21:28
Speaker A

we don't even need to compare that with other states.

3:21:31
Speaker A

I mean, as far as tax rates, you can't you can't compare their tax rates and our tax rates when you're looking at the cost in industry and what it takes to actually.

3:21:42
Speaker A

make this industry affordable.

3:21:46
Speaker A

We have some of the highest energy costs, we have some of the highest electrical costs,

3:21:51
Speaker A

and those are very much affected by the growers and the retail. That has a huge effect on this industry,

3:22:02
Speaker A

and moving it to even six, I think, is out of line as far as what

3:22:09
Speaker A

what we,

3:22:10
Speaker A

what has been discussed in the past. And so really...

3:22:19
Speaker A

If you do not want to crush this industry out of existence,

3:22:23
Speaker A

I mean, let's think what happens.

3:22:26
Speaker A

Okay,

3:22:26
Speaker A

you move this to seven,

3:22:27
Speaker A

you're going to crush this industry,

3:22:29
Speaker A

they're going to be failing,

3:22:31
Speaker A

and when, like the sponsor of the original bill has stated, when federal law catches up with a lot of these state laws that have legalized this,

3:22:41
Speaker A

we are going to have an influx in out of state.

3:22:48
Speaker A

uh manufacturing that is going to flood our market here in alaska and you will essentially crush all of the businesses in the state and and i don't want to crush all the i don't want our tax dollar our our our

3:23:03
Speaker A

Alaskan dollars going to Colorado or going to California to support their industry,

3:23:10
Speaker A

we want to keep our industry here if that is what the will of the people have spoken when they voted for this and to put this sort of a tax on our industry is really inconceivable. So please support moving this to three because I think really.

3:23:30
Speaker A

That honestly,

3:23:31
Speaker A

with the value-added products,

3:23:33
Speaker A

is going to be an increase in overall revenue.

3:23:37
Speaker A

So please support the amendment.

3:23:40
Speaker A

Okay, I've got Representative

3:23:41
Speaker A

Point

3:23:41
Speaker A

of information. Point of information.

3:23:44
Speaker A

Point of information,

3:23:45
Speaker A

Point of information,

3:23:45
Speaker A

Representative Bynum.

3:23:49
Speaker D

Was there a motion to call the question on Conceptual Amendment 2 to Amendment 5?

3:23:57
Speaker D

I thought I heard somebody trying to end the debate.

3:24:02
Speaker A

There was a call, there was a request for calling the question,

3:24:08
Speaker A

but I didn't see an objection when we allowed for the sponsor of the amendment to make his comments.

3:24:18
Speaker A

Um, and so with that, um, we've got Representative Tomczewski. I think we've got some questions. Representative Karik would like to make a comment and Representative Schragi, Representative Karik.

3:24:30
Speaker A

Thank you, Co-Chair Foster,

3:24:31
Speaker A

and I really do appreciate this discussion. I just wanted to note a couple of things.

3:24:37
Speaker A

Co-Chair Josephson asked earlier what the net effect would be of a 6% sales tax versus the current $50 excise tax per ounce.

3:24:46
Speaker A

And we did just triple check some numbers on that.

3:24:51
Speaker A

Again,

3:24:51
Speaker A

there is some variability in that,

3:24:53
Speaker A

but I just wanted to note that the net effect would likely be somewhere close to revenue neutral of shifting from a $50 excise tax to a 6%

3:25:03
Speaker A

percent sales tax.

3:25:03
Speaker E

tax.

3:25:04
Speaker A

Anything beneath that would likely be a decrease in revenue and anything above that would likely be an increase in revenue pending the impact on the industry,

3:25:14
Speaker A

which I think could be excessive if you were to go much higher.

3:25:17
Speaker A

I also just wanted to note for information,

3:25:20
Speaker A

Mr.

3:25:21
Speaker A

Co-Chair, that the previous version of this legislation,

3:25:24
Speaker A

which effectively did exactly the same thing,

3:25:28
Speaker A

except that it was a 7% sales tax instead of a 6% sales tax.

3:25:32
Speaker A

sales tax,

3:25:33
Speaker A

as it's currently in the underlying bill,

3:25:35
Speaker A

was voted on favorably by every member of this committee when it passed the House,

3:25:43
Speaker A

and that was House Bill 119 in the previous legislature. So at a seven percent sales tax, it passed nearly unanimously through the House. There were three dissenting members at that time, and every member that was a member of that previous legislature currently on this committee did vote for a seven percent sales tax.

3:26:00
Speaker A

Okay, thank you. I've got Representative Schrage, Representative Hannon, and Representative Galvin. Representative Schrage.

3:26:09
Speaker A

Thank you. Co-chair Foster, a couple points. You know in terms of the tax rate, I understand the concern on the industry. I think

3:26:19
Speaker A

If you just want to support industry, then go to no taxes. But I think the reason we have taxes associated with this in the first place is because when this was initially passed by voters there was a recognition that with legalisation comes maybe a proliferation of use and some societal ills. And it it's important that we're able to address those and remediate those and that's why there's a tax. And I think

3:26:43
Speaker A

We

3:26:43
Speaker A

W we wanna make sure that as we support this industry and to the extent that there are negative impacts of it that we're supporting our community and having an ability to address those concerns. So I I don't think it's um

3:26:57
Speaker A

I think we can get too focused on tax is bad, business good, and I think we need to recognise that y you need to take a wider lens with all this.

3:27:09
Speaker A

On the sponsorship statements on the conceptual amendment, I guess I'm feeling a little spicy this afternoon now, but

3:27:16
Speaker A

Hmm.

3:27:16
Speaker A

um it w it was brought up that we can't compare tax rates across states because the cost of business is so much more here and yet we do that all the time when it comes to student education funding and we compare what we spend per student in other states and I just think that uh

3:27:33
Speaker A

We should be consistent. Same thing when it comes to tax dollars going to other states. And I'll just leave it there. Thank you.

3:27:39
Speaker A

Okay. Also I'd like to note that we do have Emily Nauman online from Ledge Legal. Next up on conceptual amendment number 2 to amendment number 5, we've got Representative Hannon and then Galvin. Representative Hannon.

3:27:52
Speaker D

Thank you, Chair Foster, and I'm gonna speak in opposition to conceptual amendment number two. Um

3:27:59
Speaker D

And especially some comments that the sponsor of that conceptual amendment made which is uh as we look forward and potential loosening of federal regulations and competition from out of state, that's exactly why we need to have a t a sales tax because currently our only tax is at our growers and cultivators. So as products

3:28:28
Speaker D

that might be developed in another state are brought in and sold at our state, they

3:28:33
Speaker A

Oh.

3:28:33
Speaker D

would be untaxed. So a sales tax is the way that we capture that value added product and that out-of-state competition coming in. Otherwise only our growers. And now they are competing with a lower tax rate from another state including its transportation, but those product developments, whether it's vapes or gummies or

3:28:55
Speaker D

or whatever, we should be capturing that as a sales tax. And I think the six percent sales tax is the appropriate rate. So I am going to oppose the reduction to a three percent.

3:29:08
Speaker A

Okay, Representative Galvin.

3:29:11
Speaker B

Thank you. I too oppose the reduction to the 3% for many of the reasons that you've already stated. I'm going to add a couple of other comments to this that I don't think have been said before yet.

3:29:25
Speaker B

We tax tobacco at $2 for each pack of 20 cigarettes.

3:29:35
Speaker B

I'm just saying,

3:29:36
Speaker B

and I know that one representative here understands that a lot.

3:29:40
Speaker A

Yes, we do.

3:29:41
Speaker B

And we also tax a gallon of beer.

3:29:45
Speaker B

We tax a six-pack. We tax 12 ounces of beer at various amounts between $0.20 and $0.35. We tax hardcore liquor.

3:30:00
Speaker A

that's greater than 21% alcohol at $5.60 a gallon.

3:30:08
Speaker A

We've made a decision as a community for those particular products, and yet we're trying to go to almost zero here for marijuana. And I want to say I do appreciate that.

3:30:26
Speaker A

The maker of this amendment is trying to keep everyone happy,

3:30:30
Speaker A

trying to keep the businesses afloat. And this is a question about what will keep them afloat. But I bring this up because I think it helps us ground on,

3:30:41
Speaker A

you know, the reality that consumers do expect to pay something at the register. And I don't think they would be.

3:30:53
Speaker A

hugely surprised to see a a six percent tax um that I think this maker of the bill came up with. Um and I was one of the ones who voted for this in the past, uh when we as a legislature were trying to find a balance. In fact I think I may have amended it up to a six percent. Um

3:31:18
Speaker A

And so I want to make sure we're finding that balance.

3:31:22
Speaker A

I did back then, like I said, a little study on where we were comparatively.

3:31:28
Speaker A

What we don't know, a big delta that we don't know about is what is the volume of sales?

3:31:36
Speaker A

We don't have a certainty on that.

3:31:38
Speaker A

We know that a lot of it is from outsiders who come in on cruise ships.

3:31:43
Speaker A

We know that there are a lot of Alaskans who come in to buy their products,

3:31:48
Speaker A

and we don't know how many and we don't know how much. So this is a little bit of a, you know.

3:31:54
Speaker A

A policy call that I'm going to lean in on the maker of the bill who has done a deep research and we've heard from Department of Revenue as well,

3:32:04
Speaker A

it looks like overall we're not going to get rich as a state from marijuana.

3:32:11
Speaker A

It's just one of those things that's not going to bring us in a big pot of money,

3:32:15
Speaker A

if you will.

3:32:18
Speaker A

That said, I don't want to drive out what we know is a safer product out of business. I'm going to say one more personal story, and that is I remember my grandpa driving from Arizona in

3:32:37
Speaker A

the middle of the city out to buy a product so that he wouldn't have to pay taxes.

3:32:43
Speaker A

It was a big deal to him to get to the reservations to do that.

3:32:48
Speaker A

And then at some point he said, oh, you know what, I'm just going to pay the taxes.

3:32:55
Speaker A

And I think he may have smoked a little less because he didn't like the cost of tobacco at that point.

3:33:01
Speaker A

And so, I mean,

3:33:02
Speaker A

that's what happens sometimes.

3:33:04
Speaker A

I don't want to drive out the industry,

3:33:06
Speaker A

but I also want to be careful to find a balance that takes care of all the reasons that it is legal presently.

3:33:14
Speaker A

So I thank you for the opportunity to have this discussion. Thank you for making an amendment to help us think through about what.

3:33:21
Speaker A

the proper balance is and this is a tough one and I will be voting against lowering it to three percent thank you

3:33:29
Speaker A

Representative Moore?

3:33:30
Speaker A

Representative Moore.

3:33:35
Speaker A

Can you guys hear me? Sorry.

3:33:36
Speaker A

Yes, we can.

3:33:37
Speaker A

Uh, yes, we can.

3:33:39
Speaker A

Okay,

3:33:40
Speaker A

Okay, excellent.

3:33:40
Speaker A

Thank you. Through the co-chair,

3:33:43
Speaker A

uh, thank you, Co-Chair Foster.

3:33:46
Speaker A

Um, through the co-chair, are we still on the conceptual amendment or are we on the actual amendment?

3:33:50
Speaker A

Yeah, we're on conceptual amendment number two.

3:33:54
Speaker A

Okay,

3:33:55
Speaker A

Okay, I'm going to hold my comments until we're back to the amendment.

3:34:01
Speaker A

Thank you.

3:34:02
Speaker A

Okay, thank you, Representative Jimmy.

3:34:06
Speaker A

Thank you, Court Chair Foster.

3:34:07
Speaker A

I just wanted to have a better understanding with amendment number five and the conceptual amendment.

3:34:13
Speaker A

These are adding taxes on more, but is it also from what I understand we pay local sale people pay local sales tax when they're purchasing marijuana, is that correct?

3:34:26
Speaker A

Representative Carrick.

3:34:28
Speaker A

Thank you through the co-chair to Representative Jimmy.

3:34:30
Speaker A

So just to be super clear,

3:34:32
Speaker A

the current conceptual amendment number two would ultimately, if passed,

3:34:37
Speaker A

have a 3% sales tax rate,

3:34:39
Speaker A

and that would be additive to local sales tax.

3:34:43
Speaker A

So

3:34:43
Speaker A

somebody's paying 5%, then you add another 3%?

3:34:47
Speaker A

That's correct,

3:34:47
Speaker A

yes.

3:34:48
Speaker A

Okay.

3:34:50
Speaker A

I don't support any of these amendments.

3:34:53
Speaker A

So thank you.

3:34:56
Speaker A

Okay.

3:34:58
Speaker A

Representative Tomaszewski, and wrap up on amendment. Representative Stout.

3:35:02
Speaker A

Oh, thank you, Co-Chair. I just— for people online and anyone to— I just want to

3:35:10
Speaker A

reiterate that the amendment we have would reduce the 7% to 3%. So that's what we're talking about. And I would also say to my colleague, co-chair Sharagi, I support the amendment. I do. And as a general philosophy, I do believe business is good and taxes are bad, though not in all cases. But I would also say regarding education, I think it is important to

3:35:37
Speaker A

look at all cost structures. Like, so that's a very fair argument. I don't think that Alaska is a very more expensive place to do business. I'm supporting the amendment to cut the rate because the issue, unlike with tobacco,

3:35:51
Speaker A

is really you have two types of markets. You have a legitimate market, legitimized market, and you have basically a black market, right? And because one is paying a cost and the other is not paying,

3:36:04
Speaker A

lowering the tax rate allows the

3:36:08
Speaker A

people who are legitimately businesses to be competitive. I personally believe the bill and the excise, all that at a personal level, I think it's just an enforcement issue that's not even dealt with in the bill. I think the real problem you have in the marijuana industry is the state of Alaska is not enforcing people who are operating illegally.

3:36:27
Speaker A

And I think if you go crack down on those people,

3:36:30
Speaker A

you will probably see a recovery in the industry.

3:36:34
Speaker A

But because that's not germane, thank you for letting me stray. I'm going to go back. I support the conceptual amendment to lower the tax rate from 7 to 3. Thank you.

3:36:42
Speaker D

Thank you.

3:36:43
Speaker A

Representative Tomaszewski, wrap up.

3:36:46
Speaker A

Thank you, Co-Chair Foster. Yes, to reiterate this conceptual amendment number two, uh is to in fact lower the tax rate from seven the retail tax rate from seven to three.

3:37:01
Speaker F

Um,

3:37:02
Speaker F

we,

3:37:03
Speaker F

uh, I've, I've heard, uh, quite a few arguments on why we shouldn't do that, but, um, just to push back a little bit on those,

3:37:10
Speaker F

uh,

3:37:10
Speaker F

we were talking about,

3:37:11
Speaker F

um,

3:37:12
Speaker F

well, when other states start importing,

3:37:15
Speaker F

uh,

3:37:16
Speaker F

their products, then, then we'll be getting more money, but, you know, it's kind of, you kind of look at that like.

3:37:25
Speaker F

Like we're looking at the natural gas that we have in Alaska,

3:37:28
Speaker F

right?

3:37:29
Speaker F

Do we want to import and send our dollars out of state to other countries or other states? Or do we want to utilize the resources that we have here and maybe export those to other states and actually gain some money for the state of Alaska?

3:37:47
Speaker F

I heard the topic of well, we tax tobacco at a different higher rates.

3:37:55
Speaker F

Well,

3:37:55
Speaker F

generally tobacco isn't grown in Alaska.

3:37:58
Speaker F

And so we're not, we will probably never be able to compete with the tobacco producers because we just don't have that climate here.

3:38:08
Speaker F

And I also heard the comment that

3:38:13
Speaker F

You know, we may not get rich.

3:38:16
Speaker F

The state may not get rich with the taxes,

3:38:19
Speaker F

you know.

3:38:21
Speaker F

I don't think that's the idea to get rich,

3:38:24
Speaker F

but,

3:38:26
Speaker F

you know, we certainly could get poor if we start sending all of our discretionary income to other states because their tax policies and their businesses are able to compete at a higher or at a better rate for themselves. So, you know.

3:38:46
Speaker F

Right now, this is somewhat of an experiment,

3:38:49
Speaker F

and we're erring on the side of really high taxes, I believe,

3:38:55
Speaker F

for this industry.

3:38:57
Speaker F

And when we err at the side of a high tax...

3:39:03
Speaker F

I think we can possibly be setting them up for failure.

3:39:07
Speaker F

And so with that, I think we really need to consider a lower tax rate and this amendment will do that. It will lower it from seven to three.

3:39:18
Speaker F

That's what the most of the industry that I have spoken to has settled on.

3:39:23
Speaker F

That's what they feel comfortable with.

3:39:25
Speaker F

And I think we should support what they have.

3:39:30
Speaker F

um agreed to and so with that i would look forward to your vote

3:39:37
Speaker A

Okay, thank you. I'm going to maintain my objection and so with that, Madam Clerk,

3:39:42
Speaker A

we are on amendment number two,

3:39:44
Speaker A

conceptual amendment number two to amendment number five to reduce the tax from 7 to 3 and if you could please call the roll.

3:39:55
Speaker A

Representative Tomaszewski.

3:39:57
Speaker A

Yes.

3:39:58
Speaker A

Representative Hannon.

3:39:59
Speaker A

No.

3:40:00
Speaker A

Representative Bynum.

3:40:05
Speaker A

Yes.

3:40:05
Speaker A

Yes.

3:40:07
Speaker A

I'm sorry, could you repeat Representative Bynum?

3:40:12
Speaker A

Yes.

3:40:13
Speaker A

Thank you.

3:40:15
Speaker A

Representative Moore.

3:40:18
Speaker A

Yes.

3:40:19
Speaker A

Representative Galvin.

3:40:20
Speaker A

Yep.

3:40:20
Speaker A

Yeah.

3:40:22
Speaker A

Sorry.

3:40:23
Speaker A

I'm going to answer that one for us all, if I could,

3:40:26
Speaker A

Sorry,

3:40:26
Speaker A

or do we need to—

3:40:26
Speaker A

I avoided it.

3:40:27
Speaker A

The answer is no.

3:40:31
Speaker A

Representative Jimmy?

3:40:32
Speaker B

I said no.

3:40:39
Speaker B

I said no.

3:40:42
Speaker A

Okay, thank you. Representative

3:40:42
Speaker B

What?

3:40:43
Speaker A

Stapp?

3:40:43
Speaker B

We would,

3:40:43
Speaker B

Yes.

3:40:44
Speaker B

what just happened? I'm confused.

3:40:45
Speaker B

I think we need to void the roll.

3:40:47
Speaker A

Yeah, well we'll go ahead and void the roll.

3:40:49
Speaker B

It's a simple

3:40:49
Speaker A

ro

3:40:49
Speaker B

people, really simple straightforward.

3:40:51
Speaker A

We're going to go ahead and void the roll. So the vote is on conceptual amendment number 2 to amendment number 5, and that is to reduce the tax from 7% down to 3%. So, Madam Clerk, if you could please call the roll.

3:41:06
Speaker A

Representative Stapp.

3:41:07
Speaker B

Yes.

3:41:07
Speaker B

Yes.

3:41:08
Speaker A

Representative Jimmy,

3:41:09
Speaker A

no.

3:41:11
Speaker A

Representative Thomaszewski,

3:41:12
Speaker B

Yes.

3:41:12
Speaker B

Yes.

3:41:14
Speaker A

Representative Hannan,

3:41:15
Speaker B

No.

3:41:15
Speaker B

No.

3:41:16
Speaker A

Representative Bynum,

3:41:19
Speaker C

Yes.

3:41:20
Speaker A

Representative Galvin,

3:41:21
Speaker B

No.

3:41:23
Speaker A

Representative Moore,

3:41:26
Speaker C

Yes.

3:41:26
Speaker A

Yes.

3:41:28
Speaker A

Representative Schraggy?

3:41:29
Speaker F

No.

3:41:29
Speaker B

No.

3:41:31
Speaker A

Representative Josephson,

3:41:31
Speaker B

No.

3:41:33
Speaker A

Representative Foster,

3:41:34
Speaker A

No.

3:41:34
Speaker A

No.

3:41:36
Speaker A

4 yea, 6 nay.

3:41:38
Speaker A

And so on a vote of 4 yea to 8 nay, amendment— conceptual amendment number 2 to amendment number 5 has not been adopted. That takes us back to the original amendment, which is Representative Josephson's

3:41:50
Speaker L

Uh.

3:41:50
Speaker B

Chair Foster.

3:41:51
Speaker A

Representative Galvin.

3:41:52
Speaker A

Thank you. I think what you might have said accidentally was 4 yeas and 8 nays.

3:41:58
Speaker A

You're right.

3:41:59
Speaker A

I think you meant 4 to 6, just for the record.

3:42:01
Speaker A

Thank you. 4 to 6. So on a vote of 4 to 6,

3:42:06
Speaker A

conceptual amendment number 2 has not been adopted. That takes us back to the original amendment. And Representative Moore, you said you had comments when we came back to the main amendment.

3:42:18
Speaker G

Co-chair Foster,

3:42:18
Speaker G

just to be really clear, it's the original amendment as amended by conceptual amendment 1.

3:42:24
Speaker A

Thank you, which is the 7%.

3:42:26
Speaker B

Yes.

3:42:27
Speaker A

And so with that, Representative Moore.

3:42:31
Speaker A

Yeah, thank you, co-chair Foster.

3:42:34
Speaker A

Appreciate everybody being here today.

3:42:37
Speaker A

I just wanted to speak for this amendment.

3:42:40
Speaker A

I will be in opposition.

3:42:42
Speaker A

I think that the marijuana industry is, you know, the intent of the bill is to keep Alaska competitive and when taxes are too high, we push consumers back to the black market and we make it harder and harder for legal businesses to survive.

3:43:00
Speaker A

A balanced tax structure to support small businesses, it protects jobs,

3:43:04
Speaker A

it ensures the state actually collects sustainable revenue.

3:43:08
Speaker A

And if we want to regulate the state in a capital market,

3:43:10
Speaker A

we need to make sure it can compete.

3:43:13
Speaker A

So I am in opposition of this amendment,

3:43:16
Speaker A

and I hope that there is support to vote on a no vote today.

3:43:22
Speaker A

Thank you.

3:43:24
Speaker A

Okay, thank you.

3:43:24
Speaker A

Further discussion on the main motion

3:43:28
Speaker A

as amended,

3:43:29
Speaker A

seeing none,

3:43:31
Speaker A

Representative Josephson,

3:43:33
Speaker A

would you like to wrap up?

3:43:34
Speaker B

I would love to.

3:43:36
Speaker B

Okay.

3:43:40
Speaker B

So the first thing is, and I was a history major.

3:43:45
Speaker B

That's what I know and love. I was not an economics major.

3:43:49
Speaker B

The current tax is paid.

3:43:52
Speaker B

from the cultivator. So I'm thinking of almost like something that looks like a one acre small farm. Could be a quarter acre.

3:44:00
Speaker B

That's what my mind envisions. And no doubt that tax is passed on to the consumer in the same way that a retail or sales tax is passed on to the consumer. And I understand that parallel.

3:44:17
Speaker B

But I view this tax, a sales tax,

3:44:21
Speaker B

as ultimately liberating mostly the wholesale cultivators and falling administratively but also factually on just the consumer.

3:44:34
Speaker B

And I just find it hard,

3:44:36
Speaker B

particularly given,

3:44:37
Speaker B

for example, the comparison to the alcohol tax, to think that

3:44:43
Speaker B

I'm not going to buy if something is a dollar a unit,

3:44:47
Speaker B

I'm not going to pay a dollar seven for that unit, but I might pay a dollar six.

3:44:53
Speaker B

I I just I don't get that. Now there's clearly a breaking point that shifts me to the putative black market.

3:45:02
Speaker B

That's my way of saying yes there's a black market, but it's it's always spoken of as this behemoth.

3:45:10
Speaker B

And there's no way to know.

3:45:14
Speaker B

The member from North Fairbanks, Salcha, I think, etc.

3:45:20
Speaker B

I could have the Salcha part wrong,

3:45:22
Speaker B

but Rep.

3:45:22
Speaker B

Tomoshevsky said that this tax is way out of line.

3:45:27
Speaker B

And what we've heard is it's absolutely not way out of line.

3:45:31
Speaker B

And the sponsor, and I appreciate her honesty on this, what I take from it is she's just.

3:45:38
Speaker B

trying to help.

3:45:40
Speaker B

She's not, her thumb is not on any particular scale and I appreciate that. But she notes, and I was there on the floor, that the vote was thirty seven to three,

3:45:50
Speaker B

and I checked and I think it was carried by representative Sumner, he voted in the affirmative.

3:45:56
Speaker B

House bill one one nine, you see the number seven in section twelve of that bill. I looked it up just now.

3:46:04
Speaker B

The difference between 6% and 7% is arguably a percent,

3:46:08
Speaker B

obviously, but it's a relative increase of 16.67%. And now when we look at the revenue,

3:46:16
Speaker B

that should mean $4.167 million more.

3:46:23
Speaker B

So my rough calculations suggest that 7% might bring the state.

3:46:31
Speaker B

No one knows how behavioral will be shifted,

3:46:35
Speaker B

for sure, but it might bring the state $4.167 million more,

3:46:39
Speaker B

which brings us back to rough parity with where we are,

3:46:46
Speaker B

but still provides the industry with some clarity and gets us out of this position where Bud is called trim.

3:46:57
Speaker B

And then there are some, I think, other benefits as well in the bill.

3:47:05
Speaker B

So, you know, the other thing is I'm

3:47:10
Speaker B

sure if I had the voter pamphlet from 2014 in my hand, we all know what we're talking about,

3:47:16
Speaker B

we run little...

3:47:19
Speaker B

ads, if you will, for our campaigns in the voter pamphlet, and I'm sure in there it would say vote for this initiative,

3:47:26
Speaker B

but there's going to be revenue to fund these other programs.

3:47:30
Speaker B

I suspect strongly that's what it said.

3:47:33
Speaker B

And the

3:47:38
Speaker B

bill has hazards the chance of creating a hole in those programs.

3:47:43
Speaker B

Is it a massive hole?

3:47:45
Speaker B

No, it's not a chasm.

3:47:47
Speaker B

But it's going to need to be backfilled if the programs will be sustained at their current level.

3:47:54
Speaker B

And so I think given all of those factors,

3:47:57
Speaker B

and as we saw in the previous legislature, it was in the waning days, I think it was May of 24,

3:48:06
Speaker B

2024,

3:48:07
Speaker B

House Bill 119, 37 members said 7% is fine.

3:48:12
Speaker B

Including, if it wasn't a committee bill,

3:48:15
Speaker B

it was largely representative Sumner's bill.

3:48:18
Speaker B

So I support the amended amendment.

3:48:22
Speaker A

Okay, thank you.

3:48:24
Speaker A

And so with that, I believe the objection is maintained.

3:48:31
Speaker A

The objection is maintained and so we are voting on amendment number five as amended by conceptual amendment number one and so with that madam clerk if you could please call the roll

3:48:44
Speaker A

Representative Moore.

3:48:48
Speaker A

Yes.

3:48:48
Speaker A

Yes.

3:48:49
Speaker A

Representative Hannan?

3:48:51
Speaker B

No.

3:48:51
Speaker B

No.

3:48:52
Speaker A

Representative Galvin.

3:48:55
Speaker K

No.

3:48:56
Speaker A

Representative Stapp.

3:49:00
Speaker B

No.

3:49:00
Speaker A

No.

3:49:01
Speaker A

Representative Tomaszewski?

3:49:04
Speaker A

No.

3:49:05
Speaker A

No.

3:49:06
Speaker A

Representative Bynum?

3:49:09
Speaker A

No.

3:49:10
Speaker A

No.

3:49:11
Speaker A

Representative Jimmy?

3:49:11
Speaker A

Representative Jimmy?

3:49:12
Speaker B

No.

3:49:12
Speaker A

No.

3:49:13
Speaker A

Representative Josephson?

3:49:14
Speaker G

Yes.

3:49:15
Speaker B

Yes.

3:49:16
Speaker A

Representative Schragi?

3:49:17
Speaker A

Representative Schraggy?

3:49:18
Speaker B

Yes.

3:49:19
Speaker A

Representative Foster?

3:49:21
Speaker A

No.

3:49:21
Speaker A

I'm sorry,

3:49:22
Speaker A

I've got to void the roll.

3:49:24
Speaker A

I'm so sorry.

3:49:26
Speaker B

She voted the wrong

3:49:26
Speaker A

way.

3:49:27
Speaker B

way.

3:49:27
Speaker A

Yeah, I figured that was going to be the case. Madam Clerk, if we could void the roll. And

3:49:34
Speaker A

again, just to clarify what this amendment does, is

3:49:39
Speaker A

Oops.

3:49:40
Speaker A

it changes what's currently in there at 6% and increases the tax to 7%.

3:49:48
Speaker B

A Mr

3:49:49
Speaker A

And

3:49:49
Speaker B

Mr. Chairman?

3:49:49
Speaker A

Representative Josephson?

3:49:49
Speaker A

Representative Josephson.

3:49:50
Speaker B

Just as a teaching moment, and I don't mean to sound patronizing,

3:49:54
Speaker G

Mm-hmm.

3:49:55
Speaker B

but my understanding is if someone misvotes in their mind,

3:50:00
Speaker A

The vote is cast and then they can seek for reconsideration or rescission. But the vote itself should not be interrupted because one in their mind believes they've misvoted. Isn't that the protocol?

3:50:14
Speaker A

You can do that. I know also on the floor

3:50:18
Speaker A

it's typical to ask if anybody would like to change their vote from yay to nay or nay to yay. So that's another way we could do it.

3:50:23
Speaker A

so that's another way we could do it. It's a little less formal here in finance,

3:50:25
Speaker A

It's a little—

3:50:29
Speaker A

less formal here in finance. And so, but the way that you're suggesting is absolutely an avenue.

3:50:36
Speaker A

So with that, for now we'll go ahead and void

3:50:38
Speaker A

Yeah.

3:50:39
Speaker A

the roll,

3:50:39
Speaker A

and Madam Clerk,

3:50:41
Speaker A

if you could please call the roll on Amendment Number 5,

3:50:44
Speaker A

which has been amended by Conceptual Amendment Number 1.

3:50:49
Speaker A

Representative Bynum.

3:50:54
Speaker A

No.

3:50:54
Speaker A

No.

3:50:56
Speaker A

Representative Galvin.

3:50:58
Speaker D

No.

3:50:59
Speaker A

Representative Jimmy.

3:51:00
Speaker D

No.

3:51:00
Speaker A

No.

3:51:01
Speaker A

Representative Tomaszewski.

3:51:03
Speaker A

No.

3:51:03
Speaker A

No.

3:51:04
Speaker A

Representative Moore.

3:51:07
Speaker A

No.

3:51:08
Speaker A

Representative Stapp.

3:51:09
Speaker C

No.

3:51:09
Speaker A

No.

3:51:10
Speaker A

Representative Hannan?

3:51:11
Speaker F

No.

3:51:11
Speaker A

No.

3:51:13
Speaker A

Representative Schraggy?

3:51:14
Speaker A

Yes.

3:51:14
Speaker A

Yes.

3:51:15
Speaker A

Representative Josephson.

3:51:16
Speaker A

Yes.

3:51:16
Speaker A

Yes.

3:51:17
Speaker A

Representative Foster.

3:51:19
Speaker A

No.

3:51:21
Speaker A

2 yea, 8 nay.

3:51:23
Speaker A

And so on a vote of 2 yea to 8 nay,

3:51:25
Speaker A

Amendment Number 5, as amended, has not been adopted.

3:51:30
Speaker A

We've been here for almost 4 hours. What I'd like to do is allow folks to take a lunch break before our next meeting, which is in 45 minutes. We do have 4 more amendments— that's 6, 7, 8, and then Number 2 is rolled to the bottom. So we do have 4 amendments to come back to.

3:51:46
Speaker L

Yes.

3:51:46
Speaker A

What I'd like to do is we can take this up under bills previously heard at our 1:30 meeting. We'll stick to our schedule and we'll come back to the university

3:51:57
Speaker G

Hmm.

3:51:57
Speaker A

presentation

3:51:58
Speaker A

on their capital budget requests as well as deferred maintenance. So we'll do that first and then we'll come back to this bill, which is House Bill 91.

3:52:08
Speaker A

Mr.

3:52:08
Speaker A

Representative

3:52:08
Speaker A

Co-chair?

3:52:09
Speaker A

Representative Kerr.

3:52:09
Speaker A

Thank you, Mr. Co-chair.

3:52:12
Speaker A

I might like to just request if it's possible to complete the amendments, as I do have to chair committee which includes a number of members' bills.

3:52:23
Speaker A

Mr. Chairman,

3:52:24
Speaker A

we can work around it either way, but I just—

3:52:27
Speaker A

Representative Josephson.

3:52:29
Speaker A

Thank you. If it's helpful,

3:52:30
Speaker A

at least one of my amendments will not be offered by me.

3:52:34
Speaker A

Okay.

3:52:34
Speaker A

So we're down to one,

3:52:35
Speaker A

I'm

3:52:35
Speaker A

maybe two

3:52:36
Speaker A

seeing

3:52:36
Speaker A

amendments.

3:52:36
Speaker A

I'm seeing some multiple head shaking.

3:52:41
Speaker A

I think sitting here for 4 hours, folks are going to get hungry, and then we have to go right back into our 1:30

3:52:46
Speaker H

So

3:52:46
Speaker A

meeting.

3:52:46
Speaker H

yeah.

3:52:47
Speaker A

So

3:52:47
Speaker H

Yeah, but

3:52:47
Speaker A

Representative Hannan.

3:52:49
Speaker A

Mr. Chairman, and I apologize to the sponsor and running one, but we were here till 11:30 last night, have been here for— we've been on point and I think

3:52:59
Speaker A

we've had—

3:53:03
Speaker A

we are seeing the fumbles because we are fried and we just need to take a breather.

3:53:09
Speaker A

All right. I agree.

3:53:10
Speaker A

So we could push on through,

3:53:11
Speaker A

but we're going to make fumbles in those plays.

3:53:13
Speaker A

So I think it is—

3:53:16
Speaker A

Thank you. I agree.

3:53:18
Speaker A

And so...

3:53:19
Speaker B

And I agree.

3:53:19
Speaker B

I'm sorry.

3:53:20
Speaker B

And I'm really quick on the record.

3:53:22
Speaker B

I want to be I want to apologize to co-chair Josephson and that was not my intent to do things out of.

3:53:29
Speaker B

out of protocol or out of line and I do apologize for that.

3:53:33
Speaker B

I'm exhausted for sure.

3:53:36
Speaker A

So I'd like to underscore the—

3:53:37
Speaker A

No worries.

3:53:37
Speaker A

we were here till 11:30 last night. We just sat here for 4 hours, and so we want to kind of take a breather. And so let's go ahead and we're going to adjourn this meeting, and then we're going to take this bill up under bills previously heard when we come back to our 1:30 meeting.

3:53:52
Speaker A

So with that, we're going to be adjourned at 12:50 PM. Thank you.