Latest news with #SenateBill183
Yahoo
09-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Dunleavy administration is blocking billion-dollar audit of oil tax disputes, legislators say
Sen. Elvi Gray-Jackson, D-Anchorage, speaks in the Alaska State Capitol on Wednesday, Feb. 5, 2025. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon) The Alaska Legislature is moving rapidly to pass a bill that would force Gov. Mike Dunleavy's administration to disclose reports that could show the state settling oil tax disputes for significantly less than what is owed. 'This bill shouldn't be necessary, but here we are today,' said Sen. Elvi Gray-Jackson, D-Anchorage and chair of the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee, in a Thursday hearing by the House Rules Committee. 'Either the Department of Revenue has already compiled the information requested in the special audit for its own use and is deliberately withholding it from the legislative auditor, or it has failed to do the basic work of calculating the tax, interest, and penalties assessed for each audit cycle,' she said. 'Frankly, I'm not sure which of those scenarios would be more troubling.' The Senate passed Senate Bill 183 on a 19-0 vote Monday. The House of Representatives could vote on it as soon as Friday. Dunleavy could veto it, allow it to pass into law without his signature, or sign it. If enacted, it would require the executive branch to disclose information 'in the form or format requested' by legislative auditors. Under the Alaska Constitution, the Legislature is responsible for overseeing executive branch operations, but since 2019, the legislative auditor has been unable to properly examine the part of the Department of Revenue that audits tax payments by oil and gas companies. 'In the past, the Department of Revenue provided the Legislature with organized summaries showing the total amount of additional tax, interest and penalties assessed for each annual tax cycle,' Gray-Jackson said. 'However, the department now claims it is only required to provide access to raw data, not to compile or categorize information in a usable format, as it had done previously.' Though legislators can examine raw data, they don't have the resources to process them. The change makes analyzing the executive branch's actions impossible, Gray-Jackson said. Legislators have written letters and asked for access, to no avail. 'Unfortunately, the issue remains unresolved, and the auditor still cannot complete this important audit, which concerns the oversight of billions of dollars in state oil and gas revenue,' she said. Until 2019, the first year of Dunleavy's administration, Department of Revenue tax auditors regularly published a memo summarizing total tax and interest assessed after its annual audit cycle. By combining that information with the amount paid in settlements, lawmakers and the public could see what share of assessed taxes and interest were being paid. Without the tax and interest information, it's not clear how oil companies' settlement payments compare with the original state assessments. Under the Alaska Constitution, the Legislature is responsible for overseeing executive branch operations, and the memo was part of that oversight. When the memos stopped, legislative auditors asked for them and were told that they were now confidential. At the time, members of the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee were so concerned that they commissioned a special audit of the executive branch's auditors. For five years, they've been unsuccessful. Members of the executive branch say they're not required to turn over compiled reports, only raw data. 'That interpretation overturns long-standing precedent,' said legislative auditor Kris Curtis, 'and it essentially limits the oversight by the Legislature. The fear is that state agencies from here on out will refuse to provide or compile data in any type format for future legislative audits.' Destin Greeley, an audit supervisor for the Department of Revenue, testified Thursday that providing what Curtis requested 'is creating this new work product that is very time-consuming and trying to put a square peg in a round hole for us.' Rep. Louise Stutes, R-Kodiak, said she doesn't understand why that suddenly became difficult for the Department of Revenue to do. 'I am not buying your story, and this is a huge red flag for me,' she said. 'When you've got hundreds of millions of dollars involved, I'm worried,' Stutes said. Legislative attorney Emily Nauman said she believes the new bill will resolve the ongoing dispute 'if the department complies with the law.' If not, she said, the topic could head to the courts. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Alaska Senate advances measure requiring greater oversight of oil and gas tax data
May 7—JUNEAU — The Alaska Senate on Monday unanimously advanced a measure requiring greater legislative oversight of the state's oil and gas tax collections. Since 2019, the Alaska Department of Revenue has declined to provide the Legislature's auditor with oil and gas tax data in the format requested. Lawmakers have been frustrated that they don't have a full picture of those tax collections that can total hundreds of millions of dollars per year. Senate Bill 183 would require agencies to provide tax information in the "form and format" requested by the auditor. The measure clarifies that failing to do so could incur a fine of up to $5,000. The Senate unanimously approved the measure on Monday, sending it to the House for its consideration. Kris Curtis, the Legislature's auditor, told lawmakers last week that the Department of Revenue audits oil and gas tax returns to ensure the state is getting all of the revenue it is owed. "When an underpayment is identified, this group sends an assessment letter to the taxpayer identifying additional tax due. This is referred to as tax assessments. A taxpayer may also be required to pay interest," she said. The information requested by the auditor includes additional taxes, interest and penalties paid by oil and gas companies each year. Between 2006 and 2011, the total tax and interest assessed by the Department of Revenue added up to $1.3 billion. Gov. Mike Dunleavy took office in late 2018. Curtis said the Department of Revenue stopped providing that information in the format requested around 2019. Instead, the agency has provided a "data dump" that lawmakers say is unusable. The Department of Revenue first said the requested data was confidential, despite being routinely provided in the past, Curtis told lawmakers. More recently, revenue officials have said they were not required by law to provide the data in the format requested, she said. That has led Curtis to issue "qualified" reports on the state's oil and gas tax collections, reflecting that incomplete information was provided. "Reluctance on behalf of the Department of Revenue to provide information from an audit perspective raises a lot of red flags," Curtis said in testimony on the bill. "And I have concerns from the audit perspective as to why. And I would like to help determine that, not just for you, but for the public." Before Monday's vote, Anchorage Democratic Sen. Bill Wielechowski said the Department of Revenue is responsible for reviewing oil and gas tax returns, and ensuring that the state of Alaska is receiving every dollar owed to it. He said the agency's refusal to provide "usable information" for the legislative auditor and lawmakers "sets a dangerous precedent" that could obscure future audits. "That's not theoretical. That's real money resulting from real audits, directly affecting the state's bottom line," he said. Aimee Bushnell, a spokesperson for the Department of Revenue, said by email Tuesday that "nothing is blocked" by the agency and that "legislative auditors have access to all information" on oil and gas tax collections. Bushnell said that previously, the legislative auditor created various tables based on data provided by the agency. But the auditor updated those tables around 2017, she said. The state agency "spent many hours trying to plug information" into those tables "that do not reflect how the tax system compiles and maintains its data," Bushnell said. Management at the state Tax Division determined there were more efficient ways to report the oil and gas collection data, she said. Additionally, it was "overly cumbersome" to compile the information in the format requested by the auditor, and "by producing these tables on a regular basis, we could not maintain taxpayer confidentiality," Bushnell said. Legislators have long been frustrated that the auditor is not getting the data in the format requested. Anchorage Democratic Sen. Elvi Gray-Jackson, chair of the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee, sent a letter in February asking that the Dunleavy administration "fully cooperate" with the legislative auditor. "If executive branch agencies can pick and choose what information to provide or what format, they can intentionally, or not, obstruct the Legislature's ability to perform independent oversight on behalf of the public, effectively hiding billions of dollars from public view," she said. SB 183 was supported by all senators present in Juneau on Monday. Wasilla Republican Sen. Mike Shower, the Senate minority leader, said he was initially concerned the auditor would be granted too much undue influence over the executive branch. But he said the measure does not expand the auditor's authority. Instead, it helps ensure the Legislature has "appropriate oversight and authority over the budget," he said. After passing the Senate, the bill now heads to the House, where it is being fast-tracked through the committee process. A first hearing has been scheduled on Thursday with two weeks left in the regular legislative session.
Yahoo
31-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Indiana considers ban on all marijuana advertising — not just billboards
All advertising for marijuana would be illegal in Indiana under an amendment adopted Monday. (Illustration by Leslie Bonilla/Indiana Capital Chronicle) Indiana lawmakers could ban all marijuana advertising within state lines, under an amendment adopted Monday in a transportation-focused committee. It goes beyond the billboard-specific prohibition taken in a Senate panel last week. Rep. Jim Pressel, R-Rolling Prairie, said his community is 'inundated' with billboards advertising illegal marijuana. The district is near Michigan, which has legalized it. But that's not all. 'My constituents, myself included, receive up to two — what would look like political mailers — a week advertising an illegal substance' at dispensaries in nearby New Buffalo, per Pressel. He chairs the House Roads and Transportation Committee. He commandeered Senate Bill 73, dealing with utility trailer sales, for an amendment outlawing the advertising of marijuana and other drugs on Indiana's list of Schedule I controlled substances. Indiana's attorney general could sue for injunctions, civil penalties of up to $15,000 and 'reasonable costs' incurred throughout the investigation and lawsuit. 'I've heard about (how) the First Amendment, I'm trampling on it. I don't believe that to be true,' Pressel told the committee. He cited a federal appeals court decision that, 'basically, if it's a criminal activity, you have no First Amendment right to advertise. That's my understanding.' The ban would take effect upon the bill's passage. Advertising from contracts entered into or renewed before the approval date would be exempt. The committee accepted the edits by consent. Pressel told reporters that the panel 'deal(s) with billboard issues all the time,' but acknowledged that his amendment would also affect mailers, truck adverts, television and more. It also has the potential to impact online activity. 'We're able to geofence a lot of different things. … So is it possible to geofence that out? I believe that it is, but can't confirm,' Pressel said. 'I haven't talked to those folks.' Pressel authored an additional amendment inserting tweaked towing regulations into Senate Bill 73. The proposal was advanced on a 12-0 vote. When opposition to a rural intersection safety measure erupted too close to the legislative session's first-half deadlines, its author promised he'd fix it — or kill it. Sen. Mike Crider, R-Greenfield, developed the measure after his friends' eldest son was killed in a crash along an uncontrolled intersection overgrown with tall corn. A thorough amendment, taken by consent Monday, appeared to ease concerns from farmers. Rural intersections sightline proposal to rack up edits Senate Bill 183 initially mandated large 'line of sight triangles' by uncontrolled intersections to be kept clear of crops, vegetation and other obstructions above 3 feet tall. Units of government would've sent landowners or renters notice for noncompliance. People involved in vehicle crashes resulting from blocked sightlines would've been able to sue for damages. An amendment replaced the triangle concept with a 'line of sight area.' That would be, at minimum, the 20 feet of road right-of-way extending on each side from the center line. The 3-foot rule would still apply for 55 feet along each road from the center of the intersection. If a local government decides a landowner or lessee isn't compliant, it would have seven days to send written notice through certified mail. The person or entity responsible for the land would have seven days after receiving notice to clear the sightlines. Otherwise, the local government could take 'corrective action' — and, if warned a second time or more for the same property, charge up to $500 per subsequent clearing. 'We have worked very diligently with stakeholders on … making sure that a traveling motorist doesn't have an obstructed view when they get to an intersection,' Pressel said. 'So, lots of time, lots of hours, have gone into this amendment.' An Indiana Farm Bureau representative said the edits had softened the group's opposition into neutrality. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
11-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Rural intersections sightline proposal to rack up edits
Rep. Jim Pressel, R-Rolling Prairie, said a rural intersections safety bill that some say curtails property rights will get changes. He is shown in committee on Monday, March 10, 2025. (Leslie Bonilla Muñiz/Indiana Capital Chronicle) Lawmakers are tapping the brakes on a bill taking aim at dangerously overgrown rural intersections. The legislation — sparked by tragedy — is now mired in liability worries. A House committee heard the bill Monday, but no vote was taken while lawmakers draft changes. Sen. Mike Crider, R-Greenfield, authored Senate Bill 183 after his friends' eldest son was killed. Riley Settergren was just 17 years old when he died in a 2017 crash along a corn-fringed Hancock County road. The driver of an agricultural sprayer pulled further into an intersection to see better and struck the pickup truck in which he was a passenger. 'Riley was killed instantly,' father Jay Settergren told lawmakers Monday. 'That should never have happened. These are preventable accidents.' The Settergrens established a foundation in their son's honor to aid local schools, athletic programs, families and more. But in 2019, it began producing signs cautioning drivers to watch out for farm machinery and coordinating their placement at dangerous intersections, often upon request. Jay Settergren said the signs are as far north as Crown Point and as far south as Jeffersonville, and even out of state. But, he said, 'We need to move to the next level, more than just asking everybody to watch out for one another.' Senate Bill 183 would apply to any agricultural land located alongside local road intersections without traffic signals. A landowner or renter would be required to maintain a 'line of sight triangle,' with two 55-foot legs stretching out from the intersection along each road and connected by a third leg. They'd have to keep triangles clear of crops, other vegetation, signs, fences, and other obstructions that are more than three feet high. Trees within a triangle would have to be trimmed to keep 'clear vision' for six feet above the road. Units of government would send landowners or renters notice if they're not compliant. And people involved in vehicle crashes resulting from blocked sightlines would be able to sue for damages. In his Senate committee, Crider exempted 'critical infrastructure' like utility poles; then, on the Senate's floor, he added the notification requirement. But it was only ahead of the chamber's Feb. 20 vote, he said, that opposition blew up. 'I find myself in the unenviable position of having a bill (that), all of a sudden, everybody hates,' Crider said at the time. He vowed to kill the measure unless he could resolve the complaints. Fellow Republicans argued the proposal unfairly singled out farmers, while others said they trusted Crider to make fixes. Two weeks later, Crider told his House counterparts that he's open to suggestions. Witnesses offered them. Adam Novotney, an associate director of policy engagement for the Indiana Farm Bureau, said the notice requirement was too vague and didn't include a timeline. He suggested certified mail as a method of notification. But no edits to the lawsuit provision would likely satisfy the agricultural group, per Novotney. He said liability should be based on a case's merits, not its 'automatic assignment' to a landowner. Some members have also asked if they'd get a break on their property tax assessments if the legislation bars them from planting crops close to intersections, Novotney said. 'I don't mean to mix those together,' he added. '… assessment is certainly the least of a concern compared to a human life. But I think those are considerations that that are going to be coming out if we do some serious amending of this bill to get it in a good place.' Chris Smith, deputy director for the Department of Natural Resources' Land Management Team, said the agency also has concerns. It owns about 380 properties around the state, including rural areas. DNR staff 'try to manicure as best we can,' Smith told the committee, but manpower is a challenge. And management areas for some of the state's 300 nature preserves 'run right up to' county roads. Committee chair Rep. Jim Pressel asked if reducing the bill's application from large triangles to right-of-way would resolve DNR's concerns; Smith said it would. Pressel, R-Rolling Prairie, withheld the bill from a vote. He told the Capital Chronicle it would be back in two weeks, at the earliest — along with some possible edits. The sightline triangles, he said, are 'probably not going to exist,' and the legislation's focus is expected to shift to right-of-way. 'You can't build in a right-of-way. Why should we allow weeds, trees, crops over three foot tall to exist in that right-of-way also?' Pressel said. 'And I think that's a really small thing to ask for everyone's safety. And I think that may be a simpler solution.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
