I'd like to call this meeting of the House State Affairs Committee to order.
The time is 3.18 on Tuesday, January 27th, 2026.
And we're here in room 120.
Please mute your cell phones today.
Members present include Representative St. Clair, Representative McCabe,
Representative Vance, representative Holland,
Representative Hymshoe, Vice Chair Story, and myself, Chair Kerrick.
We do have a quorum to conduct business, and I'd like to thank our record secretary, Cecilia Miller,
our moderators from the Juneau LAO, who I only know Zachary Lawhorn's name, but we do
have another individual there.
And our committee today is my staff Stuart Relay.
We have two items on our agenda, or three items, on the agenda today.
We're going to do our very best to manage time and get through them,
but just for committee members and for those listening.
a chance to ask questions of Alaska industrial development and export authority. Randy Raro here
regarding House Bill 124 plan to wrap that up in time for today to have some public testimony
and we will be able to come back both to Mr. Rarro and to the public
let questions go unanswered and then later this afternoon here House Bill 81 for a
reintroduction from Representative Nelson on marijuana conviction records
Representative David Nelson and finally as time allows today first hearing on
House bill 202 from representative Johnson designating a state vegetable
And we were able to get a presentation from Ada, which we are pulling up, and we'll just take a very brief at ease.
House State Affairs is back on the record and welcome to Executive Director Randy Raro of ADA and thank you very much for being here today and for your presentation.
Thank you, Adam Chair, members of the committee.
Next slide, or maybe I can advance it just with the, there we go, that's easier.
So, Madam Chair, members, I thought I'd start with an introduction to ADA.
We go back, our roots go
back to the Alaska Constitution Article 8.
which states the policy of the state of Alaska
is to develop its resources,
and those mining and mineral lands
are owned in common by all Alaskans,
so it's to benefit Alascans.
I look at it essentially as those lands
being held in trust for the benefit of all Alaska's.
The Alaska Statehood Act is another important part
of our background, I think, section six I.
Congress granted the state of Alaska the the largest land grant of any other state
and they included the mineral grants the subsurface deposits along with the
right to develop those deposits and the idea was that Congress wanted the
state to be successful able to generate revenue support itself and also create
Constitution and the Statehood Act that led into ADA.
ADA was created very quickly after statehood 1961.
So very quick within two years of state-hood,
ADA had been created by the legislature.
In 1967, there was another ADA bill
passed that basically forms our organic statutes.
And from that second legislature to today, those statutes have been modified from time-to-time, but largely held as originally written.
The legislature that created ADA in 67 was particularly worried about not only having enough financing for Alaskans and Alascan businesses to get started and develop resources and get their businesses up and running.
but they were particularly worried about the negative effects of unemployment
and poverty, especially in areas where those rates were extremely high,
rural Alaska other locations, and that concern is still on the books today
in our findings, AS448801082 and in that finding the legislature recognized
a particularly bad thing for Alaskans and the state as a whole.
Unemployment and poverty lead to a number of negative things, of course,
higher suicide rates, increased mental health issues,
homelessness, other educational, poor educational outcomes, et cetera.
And so those are the things the legislature was concerned about.
what is called not unemployment, but labor participation.
So unemployment doesn't take into account
persons who have just given up looking for work.
This chart, employment participation rate actually
measures people who just basically given
up and are not working.
For whatever reason, it could be a disability.
It could that there's simply no jobs available
in their communities.
Labor participation rate is roughly 65 percent, so almost one in three
Alaskans out of work. And it's an interesting, I always try to present this
statistic because I think it is a truer image of what's going on in
in Alaska in terms of employment. These people are
This slide talks about earning levels in Alaska and you can see that total wage growth is strongest in certain areas of the state where there is resource development, that's the North Slope, the Northwest Arctic Borough, and the FAR.
jobs being created where there is resource development,
North West Arctic borough, North Slope borough and then that same area where the
mancho mine is.
Ada's structure from the beginning, Ada was designed to be a
separate, have a lot of separation from
the legislature and the legislative process, as well as
separation, from state and state treasury,
viewed as. So, ADA is a public corporation, but it does have, under the statutes, a separate
and independent existence from the state of Alaska. And so, we're very different than
your average agency, Department of Commerce, the Department
of Military and Veterans Affairs, something along those lines.
So we were intentionally created to have a
separate existence, from
appointed by the governor, actions must be approved by a majority vote of the board.
ADA has to manage its assets and make decisions using a reasonable and prudent investor standard,
an objective standard. That's AS448060 and also ADA was given broad powers to implement those
with third parties and own property rights in those contracts.
ADA can use its credit to land and invest.
That's 190A.
190 A also points out that ADA is not a state agency as the term
is used in the Executive Budget Act.
Again, giving us separation from the state and the legislature
with one exception.
And that's ADA's annual operating budget.
is subject to legislative oversight and control.
And even though it is, our operating budget consists entirely of ADA receipts.
So there's no general funds in our Operating Budget, it's been like that, I think, for many decades.
So we're self-supporting, but there is still legislative over sight of the operating
Again, provide separation for ADA this time for its funds and revenue and receipts may not be considered to constitute money of the state and our real property, our leases, et cetera, are not considered property of
the State or owned by the States.
So again, there's a clear structure that was used by
the legislatures to give ADA separation.
And Mr. Arro, if we could just pause here of question representative McCabe.
Thanks, so Mr Arroy, as long as we're on the credit rating and
credit history and stuff, the last meeting we had when we introduced this bill.
We had some discussion about a previous downgrade to your bond rating or
credit rate in 2018 or 2019.
I looked into that a little bit and I think I know why it happened, but maybe you could flesh that out a
little for us and how much that credit rating actually means and why exactly you got downgraded to, was it a A or
I forget what it was down graded to.
Correct. Through the chair, Representative McCabe, we have also studied that.
And that downgrade was the result of a appropriation by the legislature of aid and receipts outside
of the dividend structure and outside of rules for a school roof, I think, in NOM.
And I believe the amount was roughly $2 million.
And because it was outside the statutes and the rules, for ADA, the rating agencies looked
You know, this is not the structure that supports the bond rating.
Bond buyers have always thought that if they bought bonds, you know they would be safe.
The assets pledged against,
you to support those bonds would not be at risk.
And so they viewed that as a significant issue and did issue.
I think it was at least a 20 basis point downgrade.
recently actually with bankers and investors where they said volatility in
the agency.
is more important to them than even the amount of money that you have.
So any change or any volatility that creates that,
and I think my discussion is specific to oil taxes and that sort of thing.
But the point was, is that investors and bond issuing entities and banks,
they all look at whether or not your...
Aida, your department is subject to the vagaries of the legislature because we struggle with
money, and so that dovetails what I found, in fact, I think it was representative Lincoln.
Anyways, we, the Legislature, took the money and created an issue with you, wasn't it?
Transparency thing it was the fact that we were sort of meddling in your fun in you're sort
of medleying in Your Bailey way because that right through the chair that's correct and we have a memo
from pfm our financial advisors on this issue that I could get into the chairs office if she'd
like to read that or if members would like To read it yeah it'd be great if we get that that'd
I think I actually had heard about that from a constituent
about the downgrade that Moody gave and brought it up,
but maybe I appreciate McKean looking into that more.
But what I had, heard was that
The downgrade had to do with lack of transparency,
and I don't know if it meant a lack
of transparency about that certain roof item,
why that got into the budget.
I'm not concerned with what's concerning about something
in general, so I know you can remember about
that, but also that it had said one of the downgrades was due
to ADA providing very limited information
on its loan program participants.
Through the chair, a representative story, I'm not aware of either of those concerns
being the cause of a downgrade.
I do have the older memo from our financial advisors that addressed this,
I think when it occurred, or shortly thereafter, that I could get into the members in the
chair's office that,
I
think, explains what happened.
Through the chair, thank you.
I would very much appreciate seeing that.
You're welcome.
Let's see, we have Representative Holland.
Did we other folks waiting?
I think just Representative Holland.
Right, Thank you through the Chair.
Want to follow up and this may require coming back
with some information later, but on 4488-205,
you mentioned in your slide nine
about the operating budget.
And in referencing that section, you know, the intent of that
section is compliance with the Executive Budget Act and the
limitation on the operating budget,
though is kind of the beginning where it then goes on to
provide an obligation of A to provide a annual review
of authority's assets to determine, quote, whether
all the assets in authority exceed the amount required to fulfill the purposes the authority is defined
there, which seems to be the very essence of this bill.
And so I'm curious to what degree that assessment is being done, and
what that looks like, it further in section two says that there'll be a report
available to legislature by January 10th with an accounting of all the assets.
I've certainly been through the annual report and I have been
through your financial report.
very tenths that is available to us to be able to review
that might allow us
to look more completely at 205 and what's going on
because I think it gets to the very essence
of much of this bill and would be very relevant
and perhaps it's already available
and I just need to grab it if you could help me with that.
Sure, through the chair,
Representative Hall and that report was filed
with the Senate and House clerks.
It is a available, I can also send it PDF email
to chair and the members.
That'd be helpful, thank you.
For sure, we'll make sure we get that
Please continue. Thank you sure
Madam chair legal challenges were brought almost immediately in
1961 62 to that structure that the legislature approved for ADA that gave its separation
and kept its assets from being considered assets of the state.
That case was to Armand versus Alaska State Development Corporation.
And in that case, the Alaska Supreme Court eventually found that the legislature
in the structure at the way it did and to give it the separation that it had given in
the mission that was given to create jobs and promote economic development. So challenges
to that structure were resolved within a year, I think, of the bill passing.
How has it been doing? What are we working on for future items?
We just received our best credit rating ever, AA+, there's only one other economic
development corporation in the nation that has that same rating so we're at the very top
among our peers and that rating will of course benefit us and Alaskans as we finance projects
with a frankly a better credit rate than the state of Alaska has. So we worked very hard at that.
last three years. We've resolved a number of issues that were outstanding with
ADA at the time. In 23, beginning of 23 and we've produced two record years in
a row of both gross income and net income. And that's led to this credit rating.
So, well, it's just three figures, a double A and a plus. A lot of work went
into obtaining that rating
We have a couple of questions here, Representative McCabe.
Thank you, Chair Carrick.
So Mr. O'Rarrell, that kind of brings up
in kind staying on the theme of the rating in bonds.
Have you evaluated how bad or if whether HB 124
could negatively affect the bond rating?
and or borrowing costs by increasing perceived political risk credit concentration or non-commercial decision-making
Through the chair and represent a McCabe we have some initial input from our financial advisors
PFM that would certainly result in a downgrade a significant downgrade
I'll have to pull their response and
Get that into the Chair and the committee members, but it definitely
Would have a serious effect on the credit rating
Yeah, follow when followed so
I'm going to shift gears a little bit here, but I think it's relevant because your credit
rating and what you can do is dependent on your
credit rating. So I know we have, and maybe you'll get to it,
but there's what's called a LPP. It's basically a small business loaner.
You're splitting the loan with a bank or guaranteeing the
loan of the bank. The way I understand it and certainly
don't have the business experiences. Representative Holland or some of
I'm interested to know if you have a list or if we can find a
list of all of the businesses, Representative Carrick had some of them on
the slide during the presentation of her bill, but all
of businesses maybe geographically that have participated or are participating
in this LPP and the risk to those businesses. Maybe you could comment on
if this bill should go forward and if you had it geographically or by zip code or even by district
so I'm sort of looking to find out how many in my district would be affected one way or the other
by this Bill but that would great. Through the Chair Representative McCabe I believe we can generate
a list of LPP loan participation program borrowers those are mostly small businesses under three
I believe there are hundreds of them if we were to look at loans that have been paid
off as well.
That would probably run into the several thousands of businesses.
It's one of our most popular programs and it actually makes up almost a quarter, I guess,
of the entire asset value.
Follow it.
Follow.
So, your entire asset value is a little bit over one point something billion one
point two one one something like that seven seven so a quarter of that
would already be above the 500 million that this bill
envisions. So you would obviously have to be divesting
yourself from some of those loans or selling them. I think
it's a 12 month period.
So, you'd have be selling off those loan kind of at a fire
sale to get yourself to fit in to getting to the fit into this
bill. If I if if I'm bigger in this right.
Through the chair, Representative McCabe, our loan portfolio does total over $500 million.
That includes some loans that we have in progress for companies like Ali S. Kim or
Hex Cook Inlet Fury, and to reduce our total asset value to a number such as 500 million,
LPP loan and in other loan that we have or part of that portfolio or
At least part it to get down to 500 million
But and then we other assets fixed assets, you know, we'd have to decide what to do with it
One more follow-up chair
One more, but then we're gonna move on. Okay. This is a big one
Okay, so I did a little bit further research and I don't necessarily think I'm not sure if they're under the LPP program
But the inlet gas utility loan, which is really really good loan for them
I think they still owe a hundred and thirty nine million dollars that loan was a 35 year loan
It has a 15-year forgiveness where they don't even have to pay interest or payment on the loan,
and that doesn't end until 2032. After 20-32, it's got a .25% interest. So obviously,
Aida had a really good, and I'm sorry, Inlet. I said Inlets, I am an interior.
with the interior gas utility to stand them up to get to the point where they could provide
cheap gas and heating to The Fairbanks area. They haven't even made a payment on this. 139
million is almost, you know, it's what, 20% of that 500 million. So you would most likely,
that would be one of the loans or one, You'd have to sell that at a fire sale to somebody
that interior gas utility would be seriously at risk
for some kind of a financial destabilization.
Through the chair, Representative McCabe, the IGU loan does have very favorable terms
for that utility.
It is allowing it to function and grow.
I think it keeps adding consumers and users, which is what we want.
It is a low performing loan, so to speak, in the sense that LPP loans run at a statutory rate of 6% IGU is far below that.
So, if we were forced to divest, we would be looking at, you know, what can we retain that's the highest performing of our portfolio and the IGE loan?
probably ranked toward the bottom of things we would try to keep if forced to simply because it's
it say low return loan. Thanks. Thank you for mentioning Fairbanks always appreciate it.
I love you guys to be nice and warm when it is 50 below.
Well I don't have natural gas so I'll copy at that. We have a couple more questions and then just
director Raro. I think we'll get through as many slides as we can before 4 o'clock. We do have
public testimony also noticed today and I'm always sensitive to the number of people that
try to do testimony. So when we hit about 4 to 4.05 we will probably pause wherever we're at on the
slides and then pick up on that later this week if schedules allow and make sure we get
a later date. I have Representative St. Clair then Holland and we'll go from there.
Through the chair I know that rep McCabe was asking questions about the fiscal
and financial impact on the along that same lines do you have an estimate if
you do this fire sale and I hate to use the term or the divest divestiture of to
jobs. Do we have? And I know if we don't have this, I
know that rep McCabe asked for, you know, kind of a in my
district type thing, what area would a divested sure would
look like for my constituents, etc. Or he was talking
fiscally, and I'm looking more along the lines of jobs, sure.
You can just ballpark it right now if you want, then we can
get closer to numbers later.
Sure, through the chair, Representative St. Clair, it's difficult to estimate the fiscal
impact of a force sale of divestiture, but it certainly would be significant.
I mean, a range from 30 to 50 percent probably isn't out of the realm of possibility as we
you know, to do so, and so there would certainly be losses, I think, running into the hundreds
of millions of dollars if we were forced to divest on a fast schedule. In terms of jobs,
impacts to jobs if had to divest, or did divest, significant numbers of LPP, individual small
business loans. Those borrowers are our ongoing customers. It's not unusual for them to come back
Barrow again from ADA as they expand. I think golden heart waste management might have been one of those
entities that we recently did some more lending with
So it's very common for them to come back in the future and borrow again
And if we've been of course if We've Been forced to divest that loan
They probably won't be coming back, you know to ADA
For another loan to grow to Grow further. So certainly a
I've asked a chair representative Holland
I'll skip it for now. Okay let's continue on there's a lot of good material in here.
Chair our FY 2025 annual report some numbers 67.4 million in statutory net income a record
Roughly 17 million in the dividend, although that number should be increased by roughly
6.5 million, which will represent half of our payment for our annual leases.
So 23. 5 million return to the state, roughly a, I guess a little over 30, 32% total.
amount paid back to the state. 512 million so far from ADA and cumulative
dividends and a credit rating we talked about already. Our net position is
growing and our dividend payments and I anticipate our
dividend payment to continue to increase based on the investments that
I think year with Hex Cook Inlet, Alias Kim, and the Wild Birch Hotel in Anchorage, those
total roughly 150 million and then we have some LPP program loans that will also add to it.
So you know those investments will all start returning and flowing into the statutory
net income and dividend payment to the state should increase.
We have a question here representative Holland. Yeah, thank you through the chair
I'm trying not to make this a kai question and try and keep it simple, but
as I understand it a does average rate of return is and this is from 1980 to
2021 is about 3.8% compared to the permanent fund. That's got a rate return about
9.4% so a pretty substantial difference rate have returned over the time and you know if we were to look at the
$1.7 billion asset base of ADA and look at it in a POMV lens,
which is now kind of the gold standard of what we look
at as a sustainable draw from the state's assets.
PomV on $0.1 billion would be a dividend to the
state of about $87 million.
down this year, despite Ada doing quite well this
year with a decrease from a $20 million dividend
to a 17 million dollar dividend.
So help me understand what looks like an incongruity
of the expectation.
of this asset and what we might see in terms of a dividend coming back to the
state. How is the dividend determined? And if there was a $67 million
statutory income, it meant that you've kept $50 million of that income? How did
we come up with $17 million? Why isn't it $87 million if we were to apply the
For the permanent fund, excuse me.
Sure, through the chair, Representative Holland,
by statute, the dividend is based on a 25% to 50% range
of net income.
The board is not allowed to deviate outside of that range.
And I believe I can add some flavor to this year's dividend amount being declared at what it was.
There was discussion by the Board of not only the dividend but the additional funds,
the 6.5 million that would flow through to the state treasury through the Anwar lease payments.
And there was also discussion about the mega projects, the large projects and the medium
and smaller projects that are in our pipeline that we need to fund.
And so, for example, performing 3D seismic in Anwar is estimated to run into tens of millions
of dollars.
on aid as resources and frankly that's not a bad thing to have a strong demand. We have everything
from geothermal projects in the Aleutians to hydro projects, in Juneau, to projects frankly
across the state. we're seeing a very strong interest in Alaska and developing energy and
resource projects which is a good thing for us and so I think based on all of the above
you know, the board felt like 17 million plus 6.5 was a fair place to land given the pressures
on ADA for financing other projects in our pipeline, as well as considering our loan program,
our demand for loans, other things. And so that's the mix of factors, I guess, that the
Any projects we have that produce as oil and gas, the return to the state isn't limited, of course, to
the dividend. Those projects produce royalties, production tax, and other things for the treasury.
And when we calculated one of the projects that is in oil & gas the cumulative return was around 23-24%
And so that's not counting the jobs and other things.
And, so, part of the question, I think, is how are you measuring the return?
And follow-up, please.
Follow-ups.
Good. Thank you for that.
And you've made some good points there.
I appreciate that, but I would like to.
Ask a little bit more pointedly, you know the 50 million dollars that you've hung on to and I realize there's a 50% max
So you don't that that's fine
But as I understand your balance sheet and i was trying to see if i've got it in front of me
There's i think around for maybe five hundred million
Dollars of liquid essentially cash assets just investments that are sitting there so from my standpoint at least on the surface looking at your
balance she
There's no shortage of cash and money available in ADA for the seismic projects for
the investments you're planning, the loans you are planning to make.
It would seem to me that you could have, if statutes allowed, have given us a 100%
dividend, all 67 million.
It's still been below a POMV.
and you would have, according to your balance sheet,
an incredible amount of wealth
to still do all the projects that are proposed.
So I understand you've layered your cash
out into a six-year plan of rotating investments,
but that's a decision to obligate it
as opposed to make it available.
Can you kind of clarify one more time
why you're not using the cash that you have
and have you had to hold on to all of the cache,
including under statues?
what you might have distributed to the state, even if we only went to a 50 percent number.
Sure. Through the chair, Representative Holland, there's a couple more, I guess,
what we would call takedowns from our gross or net assets. And one of those is what
we have in our project pipeline that we think is likely to be funded. We're still in the process
And that list totals probably into the billions of dollars of potential projects, so we do have a fair amount of
I guess liquid assets in the form of investments but we also have committed funds you know for
our projects that are still going forward. Those are projects
that have been funded by board resolution but the cash hasn't been dispersed yet because of
timing issues and then the next layer down that we look at is what's in our pipeline and what do
we think we'll need and in that category not every project will make it and we couldn't fund every
Frankly, but we do have some very strong projects across the board from geothermal to oil and gas to
lone
participations
hydroelectric projects, you know, we have a really large
pipeline, I guess of
And so we're trying to look forward to those, and we don't like to take applications in, of course, if we are going to end up not having the funds to fund that project.
So we were trying a balance, you know, probable, committed and some of these other categories of projects that could very easily swallow up our funds.
Thank you. I just wanted to note for the record that Representative Bynum recently joined us and is listening today
Next slide chair
This is our loan participation program some highlights
FY 2025
$46.4 million, ADA's participation was $34.7 million.
That's not an uncommon ratio.
We see roughly $75.25, and these are loans where Alaska banks have come forward to ADA
and said, you know, this business looks very promising, but they're a little light, perhaps,
and so would you blend your statutorily set six percent rate with our rate which is usually
a fair amount higher so that the loan will work, that loan would pencil out and
so we're happy to do that then like I say that forms a large part of our our current loan portfolio
so you can see those those loans are spread out across multiple regions of the state
We'd like to increase LPP loans and other loans in the Southwest region that's fairly
light there, but a very significant helpful program for Alaska's small businesses.
Would you have a 0% delinquency rate, which we're pretty proud of?
We work on the underwriting with the banks and programs working pretty well.
We do have a question on that last slide from representative McCabe. Thanks
Yeah, so it's actually on the previous slide, but it fits in this one as well. So
comparing the permanent fund to the to ADA is like comparing apples and snow machines in my opinion the Permanent Fund is designed to
do one thing, aid is not designed to return a bunch of money to us. We do get a dividend, yes,
and there is a portion of it, but really aid as designed for jobs, in my opinion. And that's
what the statute said. You're there to bring businesses up to fund businesses so that we have
jobs so they can put money into the economy by paying the people that have those jobs.
I was on the Ada Board, and I noticed this big influx of a company called Glenfarn and a big
construction project coming up that is going to need
hundreds of subcontractors that may not even be in existence right now. I
Might want to put a little bit of money aside or not pay out a great big dividend. This would be a business decision
In anticipation and needing the money to fund some of these contractors that are going to build out
whether it be Nana building man camps or
and
Would that be a fair statement is you said forward looking but maybe I want to flesh that out for people that
Are watching forward-looking would be hey?
We got this gas line. It looks like it might come to fruition. The federal government is happy
Maybe we should have some money available for
people in the state, business men in
the State, small businessmen in
the States that want to build
something to help with the pipeline
and make some money off of the
of pipeline as it goes forward.
Would that be kind of a fair statement?
Through the chair, Representative McCabe,
the board's certainly aware of
the project and we do get
updates on it fairly regularly.
And there are a number of
Ancillary projects that would tie into the line that we are aware of that could become
Real realized or realistic if the guy and once the lion goes forward
So we do watch that project. We do have
Interested parties, you know that wouldn't likely come to Aida for and these ancillary projects
So it is something we're thinking of when we you'll declare a dividend
And again, I would just add just briefly, when we do fund an oil and gas project, it
is probably the highest and best return to the state in the sense that the State not
only gets part of our return, a significant part, at least 25%, but it also gets all the
production taxes, royalties, property tax
that it would from another project.
So we can reach on our estimates,
we could reach 23, 24% rates of return combined.
Thanks, one follow up.
Thanks for the indulgence, I appreciate it.
I'm just trying to get this out there
for people that are watching,
because we've mentioned your balance sheet
and $101.7 billion assets under management,
but what we really haven't talked about
is how liquid is that?
If you had to, you know, I mean, could you do 100% dividend without having to liquidate some
of your loan portfolio or some of what the some
of the assets that make up. So I guess what I'm asking is $1.7 billion in assets to ADA is a whole
billion dollars in the PFD, right? I mean your assets are tied up in loans that you would have
to liquidate or somehow sell or monetize to get a big dividend into our hands.
Through the chair, Representative McCabe, it's true that ADA's assets at 1.7 billion contain roughly half a billion, even in just loans, outstanding or receivables, but we also have fixed assets that make up another fair chunk of that amount.
I guess I would say that when you hear the the 1.7 billion number that's an asset number not a cash number
We'll go representative Holland, I think we'll, go to slide 15 after that and then maybe stop at
Slide 16 if that sounds good mr. Raro today because then I, think it gets into some more specific projects after
That yes chair okay
So, Representative Hall.
Just a quick question.
I wish I had your financial statement.
Do you know what your cash balance on hand right now is?
Cash balance, on-hand right
now, is roughly $500 to $600 million.
So you could pay a $50 million dividend without liquidating
a single loan, was that correct?
We wouldn't have to liquidate alone or through the chair.
I'm sorry.
I just wanted to clarify that.
Line of questioning kind of made it sound like it's all tied up and
you do have about $500 million, which is a fair amount of cash.
Thank you.
I am sorry, Representative Holland.
It is fair enough cash, but as mentioned, we have both
committed funds that haven't left yet and a large pipeline of
particularly energy projects, geothermal, hydroelectric and others.
Appreciate the dialogue here, I think.
I just want to get back to go on to ride my snow machine.
Thank you very much.
I'm going to use apples to snow machines frequently now.
Yeah, if we can maybe hold questions till after slide 16 and then if
we have a burning last question, but we will have Mr.
his convenience as soon as possible.
Through the chair, slide 15 is two programs of ADA's funded by ADA that are actually
operated and ran out of the division of investments at the Department of Commerce.
This is the Rural Loan Fund and the Small Business Economic Development Fund, and we
are seeing a stepped up demand for these programs, especially the S-bed loan program.
We just recapitalized it with an additional $6 million and we anticipate that that may go
out fairly quickly due to pent-up demand and so we're keeping an eye on that program
to see if it needs even additional capital beyond that, but it's moving well right now.
projects that Ada has funded, everything from UConn Cusk
Aquim Health Corporation in Bethel, Tandonon Chief's Health
Clinic in Fairbanks, projects, frankly,
largely across the state.
So we are spread out from the shipyard in southeast, far
southeast all the way north to the slope, and then over
other locations. So we've got a fairly strong presence in the state.
I have a quick burning question. Okay. Representative Holland.
Thank you. I think it'll be quick when we come back to an answer if I need to be. But I'm jumping
from last year, note 10 indicates that there's, I think about $26 or $27 million that's
on the balance sheet for continued work on The Ambler Road Project, but the note indicates
that that contractor, that agreement runs out December 31st, 2025, and I just wanted
to confirm whether or not that has been renewed or whether it did expire.
Of this year of 26. Yes, sir. Okay. That's interesting. Thank you for that
And I apologize that we are gonna have to pause the slide deck here. I just want to make sure we get to
Testimony and if possible, we will
Have executive director Ouro back as early as Thursday
But thank you so much for being here and engaging in the dialogue. Thanks
At this time, we are going to open public testimony on House Bill 124.
We have, I believe right now, about 17 people online for public
testimony, so today we're going limit public
testimony to two minutes or less.
And it's my intention that as time allows after taking public
testimony today,
we will try to get to the other bills that are on our calendar.
So at this point, opening public
testimony.
unhoused by 124 and first in the queue at the Kodiak LIO is Alexis Quachka and I
apologize for mispronunciations. Please stay here.
I'm sure you did very well. Members of the committee, my name is Alex Quatchka. I grew up
in prayer bank so I've lived in Kodiack for the last 39 years.
I am 100% support of HB 124. This bill will merely put guardrails on idea,
I read through the success and failures of the idea today.
There are both.
This bill will not hinder that, but will mitigate the failures by being in line with
public interest and having accountability of, of
the money.
And you know, we're talking about money here.
You know they're asking for another 50 million.
They've given 849 million since the state has given idea.
849 million since 1981 to 23 and now they're asking for another 50 million so they are using
our money. We can get into the nuts and bolts that HB 124 will foster trust with the public
through transparency and accountability. The good old days are in the rear view mirror.
Lastly, I fully support HB 124.
I caution the legislature, as we move forward with development, we cannot repeat the same
mistakes made in the lower 48 in other countries.
We cannot expect to do the thing and get different results.
HB 124, accountability, transparency, public participation, these are not bad things.
Again, support HP 124, listening to the conversation.
Let's talk about that have our boats conversation. Maybe 500 million. It's not appropriate. I'm not in the minutia of the details of this
But on what's fought through the successes? Let get involved so there can be public
Participation accountability. Hey, thanks for your time
Thank you, mr. Quatchka
We're gonna go next to
Our offline folks we have Mary glaives in Juneau
Hi there, this is Mary Glaves.
Good afternoon, Chair and members of the committee.
I am speaking on behalf of The Alaska Chapter
of that country hunters and anglers.
We support House Bill 124
because Alaska deserves transparency, accountability,
and meaningful public input when public dollars
are used for large-scale development projects.
Hunters and Anglers rely on healthy fish
and wildlife populations.
and intact public lands and decisions that affect those resources must be made in the open with
diverse perspectives at the table. House Bill 124 strengthens public trust by improving oversight
of ADA, expanding board representation, and ensuring projects are elevated, not just for
financial return, but for their broader impacts on communities, public plans,
and long-term sustainability. This bill does not stop development. It ensures development is
well vetted and aligned with public interest. At a time when Alaskans are asking for more
accountability from public institutions, House Bill 124 is a reasonable and important step forward
and we urge your support. Thank you.
Thank You, Ms. Glaves. We're going to go next to John Gedecky in Fairbanks.
I operate a remote wilderness lodge in the Brooks Range and have done so with my family
for the past 50 years.
We're newcomers in a region that has over 10,000 years of human history still in existence
with the villages up and down the kayakuck and cobuk rivers.
13 years ago, Ada proposed Ambla Road and since that time, we have all attended numerous
meetings with federal and state agencies and occasionally Ada was there to.
And from our perspective, the focus seems to be on attracting poor and mining interests
and jobs that will go to folks primarily from out of state.
Communication of ADA has consistently been poor marked by a lack of transparency and
clarity around its financial plans, environmental impacts, strategic goals, and basic industrial
development rationale.
They don't respond to basic questions, but under their current structure, they don�t
have to.
They disawarded the contract from Annler Road and then rescinded it a day later when they
all the land. That's after 13 years of being in our area. When projects involve large scale
construction and hundreds of millions of dollars, in the case of Amla Road, most likely over a billion
dollars. Responsibility and transparency are essential. If the reason to avoid accountability
today is because you're worried about fire sales and loan changes, Apple and Snowgills,
imagine for a moment the cost of no accountability as Ada tries to outrun the free market in mining
and leaking the refuge in the decades to come.
This sounds very much like a 10 million pound oil
derrick on an ice road.
It's all good until it's
all bad and the whole thing tips over.
I live in a shadow of this proposal.
There's a lot of us that do.
And from our perspective,
what we hear across the Brooks range,
surrounding villages,
most all of Alaska from Sioux
Sydney to Homer.
The troubling lack of accountability
from this organization and that must change.
increased legislative oversight and approval are necessary and I strongly support House Bill 124.
It's just the first step, it's a bare minimum of accountability.
I'd also like to point out this bill does not eliminate ADA,
it doesn't ban development and it don't stop any of the current projects.
So I really question the ethics of anyone against this Bill.
It is the bare-minimum and appreciate that in Alaska. Thank you.
Thank you for testifying, Mr. Gedecky.
Hopefully I said it right the second time.
Susan Giorgette is next in Cotsabue.
Thank You.
My name is Susan Diorgiette.
I'm calling from Cotabie, Alaska.
I speak it for myself, but I've been very active
in a grassroots group.
We have here in the north of a started borough
called Protect the Cobuck.
Protected Coba is a forum for local residents opposed to the Ambla Road.
We represent at least 700 people who are current residents or tribal members of the Northwest
Arctic Borough.
I also support HB 124.
ADA is the entity seeking the permit to build a controversial Amble Road, my opinion
watching them operate on this project.
They are dismissive of public concern.
They try to buy off communities and people in the local area.
They lack transparency.
They promise the road would remain private
but have not provided any legal framework
for reassuring us on that.
The other road is deeply divisive in
the Northwest Arctic and I think no indication
that ADA recognizes or respects that
Instead, I hear them say that they will build the road one way or another regardless.
I agree with what others have said that ADA is not looking out for the good or for
the Alaska citizens, nor are they spending public money wisely.
They are mainly looking for out the resource industry and will run ship shot over the rest
of us in Alaska.
So, yes, ICE support HB 124, thank you.
We'll go now to David Lesley and Fairbanks.
Hello, can you hear me?
We can. Thank you.
All right. My name is David Leslie.
I am the board secretary for the Northern Alaska Environmental Center.
The Northern Center is here to protect Alaska's wildlife
waters and also ensure that we have ethical, responsible
development.
We believe that this House Bill 124 will lead Alaska
towards more responsible, ethical and properly done
involves people and their elected officials to allow for more accountability and transparency.
We are in support of having a seat of someone from an environmental advocacy organization.
It wants to make a highlight that it should be someone who is Alaska Native.
As Alaska Natives are the stewards of the lands and have been for time immemorial and to also
as Western sciences and essential to making decisions that impact the environment.
Having, I also want to mention the increase in the time period is incredibly important.
As 15 days, two weeks, if that were to happen, say, over the holidays or during the importance
if it's happening during hunting, various season, season that could really impact,
well, having only two weeks would be very detrimental to their ability to give comment
on these projects that can impact their way of life and their
ability live off the land. And of course, we support having extra oversight for
And the fiduciary responsibility is tied in with environmental responsibility and being
able to have data be subjected to the Alaska Public Records Act, as other state agencies
are, would also help provide transparency and accountability and make sure that any projects
that do move forward do get the largest benefit for Alaska's lands and people.
Thank you for your testimony. Let's go now to Jamie Clay's in Anchorage
This is Ron Yarnell
I live in Fairbanks Alaska. I've been leading wilderness trips through the book trains in 1971
I want to thank the House Act Affairs Committee and Representative Kerrick and Holland
for Spuncher and Nodifying Me.
I've been following it for the last several decades.
About 10 years ago, I attended a town hall meeting in Petals Eppensville
in the south of the Brooks Range about the Amber Road.
I have a cabin outside of Petels, and I noticed that their survey stakes
were on Evansville Land, where the proposed road at the time
was proposed across the Klayakk River.
I question data officials at this meeting about the survey stakes and they actually denied
that they had done the surveys.
Much later, Ada met with board members of Evansville Incorporated to seek permission
across the right to have a right-of-way across 70,000 acres of native owned private land.
And of course, they denied it.
This is a typical example of how Ada operates seeking permission after the fact and lying
For the personal investigations I discovered many of the ADA executives and board members
were also on the boards of same companies that received millions of dollars of contracts
from ADA.
At that time I started urging the state legislature to investigate ADA's massive amount of what
appears to be the corruption.
In further testimony for the State Legislature a year later, ADA actually lied before the
The Amber Road is not the only ADA, the ADA officials have lied about, there was another
situation in battles where the mayor was being pressured to take a 20,000 gallon fuel tank
for the city and managed it and they didn't want it because it was going to cost them
more money.
I mean, they already have people in town selling fuels, so why should they compete with them?
The mayor was also working for the Park Service at the time and basically her job was threatened
and she had to defend herself because of it is for pressure built to have her removed.
Another example is, it's an example of Ada trying to twist arms.
Another thing that Aidan needs to look and do is the report that Northern Economics has
done that Ada has refused to release.
It's important for the state legislature to see a full document, not the 16-page summary.
Thank you for this opportunity to testify and I support Health Bill 124.
Thank You.
Thank you, Mr. Yarnell. Thanks for calling in. That was Ron Yarrnell, by the way.
Now we'll go to Jamie Clay's in Anchorage.
Jamie Clays in In Anchorage, if you can hear us and possibly unmute.
We might just come back to you and see if we can catch you in a minute.
Let's move on to Maddie Halloran in Anchorage.
Hi, this is Maddi Hallarin. I'm calling in from Anchorage where I was born and raised.
Earlier today I was thinking about this bill and testifying for this hearing and I remember
the first time I heard about ADA which was 20 years ago.
I'm a freshman soccer player in high school here and learned that we were getting a new
sports complex on this new church property which we're supposed to have been a season processing
I looked it up today, and that project cost the state of Alaska $50 million.
ADA sold it in 2006 for $24.5 million, 20 years ago.
They lost half our money on a project that never created any long-term jobs,
like so many of their projects over the intervening years.
The leadership of ADA has obviously changed over these years,
but we're still seeing them putting millions of dollars.
and other high-risk projects, which lead me to believe that something needs to change
in how data is structured. So I am calling today to support HB 124.
Ada has spent millions of dollars in recent years on oil and gas leases and the art of
refuse that no oil company wanted. They have spent
millions on work for the proposed Amlet Road,
which could cost the state over a billion dollars to help foreign mining companies access
minerals. If private interests don't want to undertake risky projects the
Data maybe was created to operate separate from the state as we saw in the presentation earlier, but these are public dollars that they're spending and they should be held accountable to the public that's they serve.
I tried to speak to these concerns directly to data,
but they spend most of their board meetings discussing large projects in executive session that not accessible to public.
So I'm calling today because as an Alaskan, I am worried about the states fiscal crisis.
make whatever changes you need to make to
make sure it's fair. I want to
make that we're continuing to support
small businesses but also that
we are protecting our state's asset.
I think we can do that by increasing
oversight through some targeted changes
like within this bill.
I would also repeat what the previous
caller said.
and ask this committee to ask for the public release of the full report by Northern Economics
or maybe consider conducting your own investigation that's not able to be
edited or altered by ADA after the fact or influenced by fear-mongering about their best
future. Thank you so much for your time and I hope you all have a great day.
Thank You Miss Halloran. We will go now to Barry Whitehill in Fairbanks.
For the opportunity
Thank you, madam chair and the committee for
Allow me a chance as an individual to comment on House bill 124
I'm in support of House Bill 124 and I think the previous callers
abstract the visibility and transparency that it's lacking and
Basically, the protein that goes on my dinner table comes from the public lands that stretch
up into the Brooks Ranch.
I've been a residence for well over 30 years, and I have been fortunate to be able to provide
my family and friends with that protein, it has the opportunity to work in the subsistence
And, you know, I just know that the impacts of things like the Ambler Road will last
forward.
Eons to come, as you can tell, when you fly to battle, the Hickel Highway is etched into
the landscape.
with the cleanup endeavors from a project that goes east to west like
Ambler Road and I just hate to see the future generations be saddled with that
big burden. So again I'm in support of House Bill 124 and would like to say
more visibility on its behalf. Thanks. Thank you Mr. Whitehill. We will go
Now to Matthew Jackson in Anchorage.
Hello, my name is Matthew
Jackson. I was born and raised in
Ketchikan, Southeast Alaska.
And I currently live in
Anchorage, I'm here to support
House Bill 124.
I have tried to testify at ADA meetings into comments on ADA actions, and it's incredibly difficult.
And I honestly have found the agency to be pretty opaque and unresponsive to the public,
and I wouldn't even go so far to stay uninterested in what the Public thinks.
I think that this bill has several useful improvements to ADA, I like the idea of expanding the
board of the agency and making it more responsive to the legislature. I would also echo someone's
previous statement that tribal representation is important. ADA is trying to promote several
projects against the expressed resolutions and desires of tribes around the state and
I also think that in this time of state fiscal crisis, there are much better uses of these
public funds.
I think the proportion of out-of-state workers is at an all-time high almost a quarter of
all workers in the state of Alaska fly home to a different state after they're two weeks
on at a place like the North Slope or Red Dog or wherever they may be working, and that's
their approach to development is not actually creating as many jobs for year-round
Alaskans as they would like to claim. So the approach of aid is
not working and there's much better things we could do with all these funds
it's $600 million like pay for schools or existing infrastructure and I think
HB 124 is the step in the right direction so thank you for considering
this bill. Thank you Mr. Jackson for testifying. Let's go to
Andrea Fennaker in Anchorage.
My name is Andrea.
Hello, my name's Andrea, I'm calling to express my support for HP 124.
I actually think that the legislature is going farther in regulating ADA, but it's a great first step.
The culture that's been fostered by ADA's current structure has led to a complete lack of accountability and transparency.
A lot of people have mentioned over the years of engaging at board meetings.
or at least the 10 or so minutes that they let the public listen in on.
ADA has made a clear that
they don't care about public input and they
don t believe they need to.
In part because they do.
They only have to answer to the sole person who choose a board member
or, atleast, how they operate.
And so I think that the bill's attempt to change the structure of the board
nomination is really important to avoid future corruption.
And if they're not going to listen or represent us,
or register just can by offering meaningful oversight to
which I believe is what HB 124 goal is.
And it can say that they're using their own money,
but it's our money.
And that has been lots of reliable accounts,
but they are not using it responsibly,
or that are actually not meaningfully creating jobs.
And so having another set of eyes,
looking at the deal of room making
and looking up a project that's they take on,
would ultimately just need a better use of a lasting money
and I also wanted to echo.
I think they're not being paid as in those $250,000 for the Northern Economic Support
and then edited it for two years and just released a 16-page summary two
years later after paying even more money for Northern Economics to edit the report.
I just think that if they were as financially successful as they tried to convey,
they would have been excited to release that report in full two
years ago. Thank you again for allowing me to speak today. I
We iterate my support for reigning in ABA through HV124 and beyond. Thank you.
Thank You, Ms. Fenniger. We'll go now to Aspen Frick in Fairbanks.
Hi, my name's Aspyn and I'm calling some Fairbanks. I am calling to state my supports for HB124.
You know, has spent millions of Alaskan dollars on projects that fail with no public input or oversight.
ADA has lost $11.4 billion from the permanent dividend fund based on economic analysis done in 2022 by
NB Barker, LLC, Eric Simmons, and associates in ecosystem's LLC due to mismanagement of state funds.
The same report also found that ADA is more likely to lose money than it is to make money.
ADA's mission is, quote, promote, develop, advance economic growth and diversification
Alaska by providing various needs of financing and investments.
If this was a mission, and this state-run corporation has been given $301 million of
public money since 1980s, why are less than half of Aida's projects providing to the
U.S. economy?
Why did the last good year after year have some of the highest unemployment rates in
the country?
Why does the state have a deficit of over $1 billion?
All of this is because there's not enough oversight for a corporation that uses public
funds.
A fully supported term outlined in the bill that would give the public more input on what
AIDA does with our money.
It should not be using public money without supervision, especially given their track
record of leaking public funds, making poor investments, and their lack of transparency.
Thank you for considering this bill. I'm going to keep for your time.
Thank You, Ms. Frick, for
your testimony,
and we'll go now to Robert Sheldon in Talkeetna.
Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members of the committee. My name is Robert
Sheldon. The life long will ask,
and have parlayed that into facilitating economic and business development at the
high latitudes Norway, Iceland, Greenland, Canada, and yes, here in Alaska.
I work across private and public organizations, including the military.
I've served Alaskans during the past six governor administrations on various
boards and commissions requiring your legislative confirmation.
It was my distinct pleasure to serve on the eight award from 2010 to 2013.
If you want to stifle business, reduce partnering with the federal government and the military,
then restrict aid in its wall structure or capital. Put another way, impairing aid
in any way will have an immediate detrimental effect to all Alaskans of all lots of life
and in all areas of the state. Let's talk about that.
Many, many Alaska Small Businesses are great for benefactors of the loan purchase accreditation
program that without it, they may not have a loan at all in those business or court credits.
Alaska Suckers and Scarcity of Capital and that loan participation program makes sure
many businesses receive critical liquidity for projects and such.
which that gets me to my favorite self-designed bumper sticker, Alaska's
emerging economy settled with a mature bureaucracy and that makes business very
difficult here. I'm talking about stage of development where capital is
scarce due to low participation or attention of banks at all and basically
non-existent venture or private capital presence. It's not just about small
We advance many large-scale public bid projects serving
interior gas utilities when I'm very proud of.
We're not only reducing energy and use poverty there,
but also assisting the thing up the air
to reduce the wood for heat use.
We also finance the National Guard Armory and J-Bear
if consolidated services and provided synergies
from the state of Alaska and the Coast Guard,
which also improve the efficiency and readiness.
data acted as the issue of tech to get conduit revenue bonds for province health care and services,
supporting long-term care options and upgrade to acute care hospital.
We also renegotiated the cult, that red dog mind with tech, which you may not know this, but pays for a huge chunk of education funding in that entire region.
We expanded FedEx airport facilities,
which demonstrated to UPS they ought to do the same, and while a lot of similar traffic continues to grow there since.
It was so well demonstrated by SONX and ADA's participation, and we made certain that SATS
was established.
That 20-car act expanded financing tools for addressing the state's energy challenges.
This is renewables and everything, folks.
And finally, ADA provided a loan to ADA for the acquisition of this year-old to quote
court section of a transmission line for Homer what they're going to have rather late.
That's the cheapest power on the entire grid.
If it were not for ADA and my experience across the high latitudes and remember I work in
all these countries for governments, super national organizations and others, I am sadly
very comfortable in asserting that these projects would not have come to pass.
And remember, these efforts will get some from my time on the board from 2010 to 2013.
But public goods specifically indirects derived from ADA projects can be economically measured
that 3.8% long-term return cited earlier only measures a financial return and is probably
less far less than half the actual return. I will now end with exactly how I began and
pairing ADA in any way will have an immediate debt flow effect on Alaska into a whole walks
of life and in all areas of the state.
I don't think anyone here really wants to sign on for that. Please do not cook Alaska's
to another account which too will soon be devoured. Thank you.
Thank You Mr. Sheldon and we do have a question for you but I'm going to go through the rest of
the public testimony. We just have couple more people. If you are able to stay on that would be
great and if not no worries at all. Um we're going go now to Stanley Rogers in Fairbanks.
My name is Danny Rogers, and I'm a 26-year-old carpenter
in Fairbanks,
and i call in to offer my wholehearted support of House Bill 124.
As a person with respect to the land and the life that
is bestowed upon its people, I am tired of our state relying
completely on irresponsible,
extracted industries without regard to damaging a closet
to its sustainable resources.
It is impossible to know how many resources
have lots of temporary gains in mining and oil.
How much agriculture is now in the hospital to land poisoning?
And how many pounds of fish that have never spawned?
I'm also tired of hearing the excuse of job creation
as a reason to continue extractive industry
when we know the majority of the profit goes.
Out of state, and there's a hand to the few,
leaving Alaskans with a bus and economy
after a stolen code.
And I'll conclude with my recent re-eneration
of Vice Corps for House Bill 124.
Thank you.
I have Diola Erickson from Fairbanks.
Hi, good afternoon. My name is Doula Ericsson. I am from
Fairbangs.
I was born and raised in Southeast Alaska in Sitka, and I
lived up in Fairbank for the last decade or so.
I'm a lifelong born-and-raised Alaskan. And I just wanted to
call in.
And I wanted to say thank you to Representative Karrick for introducing and sponsoring this bill.
And, I want to give my support for this Bill.
ADA has been around for 58 years and they have not proven to the Alaska public that they are beneficial to us.
We have now been able to engage publicly and openly.
Communication has never been clear.
And this bill will provide some of the oversight that is much needed.
Like many of other testifiers who have gone before me,
I have also tried to engage with ADA on several different projects
that they have proposed and put forth and have been met with stonewalling,
like being pushed out from their meetings.
It's not an opening process, it's no clear, and it is not for the best interest of Alaskans.
And like was said before, we're the ones who are going to live with the consequences.
of whatever ADA does.
And I think if private industry has taught us nothing,
that they don't actually care about the benefit
of us as Alaska, or else we would have,
and we have fully funded schools,
we will have infrastructure that's not constantly failing,
we'll have programs that support our communities,
and don t have that.
And we're not emerging economy,
we've been extracted and used since.
statehood since before state hood.
The resources in Alaska have always been tapped
since contact.
So again, I support House Bill 1 in 24, and thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Erickson for your testimony.
We're gonna try one more time.
Jamie Klase in Anchorage,
just see if we can make sure to unmute yourself.
Jamie, if you are on a cell phone.
I mean, it sounds like she's brief at ease.
I just locked myself out of the eye.
House day affairs back on the record. Sorry. We had a quick tech issue
We have completed the public testimony that has signed up today online
I see no one in the room for public Testimony
Just as a note, we are going to leave public testimony open on House bill 124 until after Thursday's hearing
If folks would like to get in touch with any of our testifiers today
We would be happy to try to facilitate contact. I also want to let
Our testifiers today know who are still online that you can also submit your comments in
written testimony and tell others, too, if you would like, to house.state.affairs at
akledge.gov.
And we do have written testimony in members packets as well.
But we are, unfortunately, out of time on House Bill 124 today, so we're going to set
at a future hearing.
Thank you very much for being here.
Thank to our testifiers.
For the remaining time,
I'd like to go now to House Bill 81
and invite Representative Nelson, David Nelson
and staff Donna Pageup.
We had heard House bill 81
on marijuana conviction records last session
for a first hearing
We are bringing the bill back before us today for a reintroduction and committee questions.
Thank you, Representative Nelson.
And thank you Chair Carrick and members of the House State Affairs Committee for the record.
My name is David Nelson representing House District 18, which of course is joined based Elmendorf Richardson.
Government Hill and East Anchorage. I want to thank you all for the opportunity to represent House Bill 81 and act
Restricting the release of certain records of convictions and providing for an effective date
The bill really is an important step in providing an opportunity for people with low-level marijuana
Possessions convictions on their record to make a more significant economic impact in the state
Hardworking Alaskans are facing barriers to employment, housing, licensing, and volunteering,
leaving them less able to contribute fully to their communities.
According to an NCSL report, as of 2023, 28 states have legislation that applies specifically
to the record confidentiality of certain marijuana-related offenses.
to fill job openings, we shouldn't really be excluding individuals based on actions that are
no longer illegal. House Bill 81 would make certain marijuana possession convictions
confidential on basic background checks while keeping those convictions available for government
agencies and qualified people. Individuals who were 21 years or older at the time of the crime
possess one ounce or less of marijuana and were not convicted of any other crime in the same incident.
would be able to request the Department of Public Safety make those crimes on their record
confidential. This is not expunged nor does it remove the crimes from the record. The Department
of public safety would have until January 1, 2028 to edit their database and amend the records as
outlined in this bill.The Alaska court system as of May 2023 has already amended their court
Thank you representative Nelson forgot to mention that we were going to
Do public testimony on this bill today as well?
But we'll start with the committee members have questions. I
Will also note we do have Lisa Perrington our division of state services
Director at the Department of Public Safety online for questions as
Representative Holland right thanks through the chair. I'm just going back over my notes from the original introduction and this all I
Think sounds like it's a really valuable step, but just for clarification and to make sure I am fresh on this
These misdemeanors
I guess two parts one is I are these misdemeiners that are being made confidential
old state misdemeanors that were created back before we legalized marijuana, or is this addressing federal charges?
And I'm just trying to understand what's kind of the mechanics of this. Somebody applies for a job.
And assuming they don't have a felony, and they won't check off a felony box,
if an employer just on their own goes and does a quick search that this would not cause these
misdemeanor records to show up in that search. Um, if I kind of roughly on board with where
things are, how could you clarify that a little bit? Like, I think it's all make sense, but I just
need a refresher on the mechanics of what's going on here. Yeah. And through the chair to
and I can throw it over to Department of Public Safety if you'd like for more information,
but yes, this is for pre-legalization offenses, federal offenses. We can't necessarily do anything
about this because that's on the federal side, but I could throw over it to DPS for
Good afternoon. This is Lisa Parnchin, the Division of Statewide Services with a
Department of Public Safety, and I'm the Director for the division of state
white services. I apologize through the chair to Representative Collins.
I appreciate the question. Thank you. The information that would apply to this bill
The limitations, restrictions that are outlined in the bill
but only apply to the state convictions in a state's criminal history repository.
Thank you.
And I don't know if you mentioned this, Rep. Nelson.
I apologize if I missed it, but 35 other states have done this. Correct.
Yes, that's correct.
Do we have additional questions for the bill sponsor representative him shoot thank you chair character the chair representative Nelson
I asked this before so I'm just gonna ask it here on the record at a constituent who could not travel overseas to a particular
Country because of a marijuana conviction
His life would this help him to be able to travel and through the Chair to representative
Him shoot. I don't know the Pacific
Facts on that case, so there might be some external circumstances, but I would throw
whatever DPS just for more clarification on it.
Yeah, and it was a misdemeanor conviction that he had it wasn't he wasn t like selling or
or whatever would make it a felony at the time. It was 100% just caught smoking marijuana when it
Thank you to the chair. Again, Lisa Parmen with Alaska Department of Public Safety. I appreciate
the question. The limitations in this bill would restrict the Department
of public safety from displaying the conviction information specific to those
individuals who were 21 years of age or older at the time of the offense and the
And with those restrictions, the state law, under Alaska Statute 1262-160 is very specific
on when the information could be released or not.
And so this would be limited to what we refer to as an any-person report.
It is a name-based background check.
Questions for back on check for another purpose other than the one listed in this bill that information would still be released.
Okay, thank you.
I think I've just add myself to the queue here.
I I want to questions that has been asked on this Bill before is is it broad enough.
So we're talking about pre legalization under and outs possession misdemeanors and.
Or we should have a sense of how many people would be affected by this legislation.
Yeah, and thank you, Chair Kerrick. Right now, off of conversations we've had with DPS,
the number would range around 8,500 Alaskans.
That's great. I thought it was lower than that. That is good to hear.
Are there additional questions for the bill sponsor or DPS?
We're going to procedurally go through the motions here.
We are going open public testimony on House Bill 81.
I see no one online or in the room to offer public
testimony, so we will close House bill 81,
and just looking around the Room, we do?
No, I don't.
Briefities.
We don t have anybody for public, public desk.
for House State Affairs. So we did close public testimony. We didn't miss anybody.
We had to double check. And I'm just going to look around the room one more
time for additional questions on this bill that we
did here last year and we're having a second hearing today and I'll take one
more brief at ease here.
House State Affairs is back on the record so for House Bill 81 I am gonna set an
amendment deadline for Wednesday January 28th at 5 p.m. and we will take up this
legislation again on Thursday at our next hearing. Thank you so much to
Representative Nelson.
Thank You.
And we're gonna take one more brief at ease.
House State Affairs is back on the record.
We are unfortunately going to have to set House Bill 202
aside until a future hearing.
It is my intention to bring that bill up, though.
And with that, House state affairs
has concluded its work today.
As a reminder, on Thursday, January 29th at 3.15,
we have our next hearing,
please note that we do only have one hour
for the Thursday meeting.
The second hour will be lent to our Department of Administration budget subcommittee for their first meeting.
And at our hearing on Thursday, we will take up the following.
First, House Bill 81 on marijuana conviction records from Representative Nelson.
Then continued our consideration of amendments on House bill 133 payment of contracts from
And then finally, continued discussion and public testimony on House Bill 124.
It's going to be a busy hour.
And if nothing else before the committee today, we are adjourned at 4.54 p.m.