Legislature(1995 - 1996)
02/22/1996 01:41 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE BILL NO. 437
"An Act establishing the Judicial Officers Compensation
Commission; relating to the compensation of supreme
court justices, judges of the court of appeals, judges
of the superior court, and district court judges; and
providing for an effective date."
Representatives Brown and Parnell provided members with
Amendment 1 (Attachment 4). Representative Brown explained
Amendment 1. She noted that the first portion of the
amendment on page 2, lines 23 -25 restate qualifications for
membership on the Commission. She stressed that
qualifications would be more flexible. "An economist" was
changed to "one person with experience in economics",
"business executive" was changed to "one person with
experience in business", and "lawyer" was changed to "one
attorney licensed to practice law in this state".
ARTHUR H. SNOWDEN, II, ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA COURT
SYSTEM spoke in support of the first portion of the
amendment.
Representative Brown noted that the second part of the
amendment would amend the time an order changing the
compensation of a justice or judge would take effect. She
observed that the legislation states that an order would
take effect unless it is disapproved in its entirety in 60
days. She noted that the amendment would delete "within 60
days after" and insert "on or before the last day of the
legislative session." She maintained that the amendment
5
would allow a coordinated decision between disapproving
legislation and the budget. Representative Brown asserted
that if the Legislature did not act and the change of
compensation was not funded in the budget that the Alaska
Court System would have to absorb any costs associated with
the order in their budget. She stressed that the intent is
to make a decision, up or down, and coordinate the decision
in the budget.
Mr. Snowden emphasized that there would not be enough time
to include the change in compensation in the budget if it
was not approved prior to the end of session. He suggested
that 80 or 85 days would allow time to include this item in
the House Budget. He stressed the difficulty of adding
items to the budget late in the process.
Co-Chair Hanley referred to Amendment 2 by Representative
Brown (Attachment 5). He questioned if the order changing
the compensation was not specifically appropriated and the
Legislature fails to enact legislation disapproving the
order would the Alaska Court System absorb the change in its
budget.
Mr. Snowden stated that there would be an obligation to
provide the pay raise to judges. He stated that the raise
would be paid from the Alaska Court System's budget.
Co-Chair Hanley noted that the issue becomes an
appropriation choice. Mr. Snowden emphasized that without a
date for consideration of the appropriation "it is up in the
air".
Representative Brown stated that there should be a separate
appropriation.
Co-Chair Hanley suggested that Amendment 1 be divided.
Representative Brown MOVED to divide Amendment 1. There
being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. Representative Brown
MOVED to adopt Amendment 1A, amending page 2, lines 23 - 25.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative Martin spoke in support of providing the
legislature with the maximum amount of flexibility. He
stressed that salary raises for judges should be analyzed
with the total budget.
Representative Mulder suggested that "on or before the last
day of the legislative session" be inserted into Amendment 2
and "within 60 days after" be deleted.
Representative Navarre suggested that the order take effect
on the date of a separate appropriation to fund the
increase. He noted that two steps would be taken. First
6
the increase would be turned down if the legislature
disapproves the order. Secondly, the order would be turned
down if it is not included in a separate appropriation.
CHRIS CHRISTENSEN, STAFF COUNSEL, ALASKA COURT SYSTEM
explained that the Court has held that to be constitutional
there has to be a two step process. He noted that the Court
did not address whether the steps can run concurrently.
Mr. Snowden questioned if problems would occur from one
legislature binding another if both actions do not take
place in the same year. He emphasized that if the
Legislature does not disapprove of the Commission's
recommendations that the raise would be 12 months later.
(Tape Change, HFC 96-47, Side 2)
Mr. Snowden estimated that the Legislature will take as much
time as is given to act. Co-Chair Hanley questioned if a
bill disapproving the recommendations would be passed prior
to 90 days. He suggested that the most likely scenario is
that the decision will be made in the budget process. Mr.
Snowden asked the Committee to consider inserting 110 days
in order to allow the conference committee time to consider
the item. Representative Martin did not feel that this item
should be treated differently from other items. Co-Chair
Hanley stated that if the Legislature does not take action
then the Executive Director of the Alaska Court System will
argue that the item was approved because it was not
disapproved.
Representative Navarre expressed concern that on or before
the last day of the session would not allow adequate time
for the recommendations to be incorporated into the budget
if they are not disapproved. He noted that if an item is
not in either the House or Senate budget it cannot be added
in conference committee. He suggested that disapproval
should be by 90 or 100 days in order to allow time for a
budget amendment.
Representative Mulder MOVED to adopted amended Amendment 2:
"(c) An order changing the compensation of a
justice or judge takes effect unless a bill
disapproving the order in its entirety is enacted
into law on or before the last day of the
legislative session in which the order is
submitted to the legislature. Unless disapproved,
an order increasing the compensation of a justice
or judge is subject to funding through legislative
appropriation and takes effect on the effective
7
date of the first separate appropriation to fund
the increase."
Representative Navarre OBJECTED. A roll call vote was taken
on the MOTION.
IN FAVOR: Brown, Kohring, Martin, Mulder, Parnell,
Therriault, Hanley
OPPOSED: Navarre
Co-Chair Foster and Representatives Kelly and Grussendorf
were absent from the vote.
The MOTION PASSED (7-1).
Representative Navarre stated that salary recommendations
for the Legislature should be contained in similar
legislation. He noted the political nature surrounding
legislative salaries. He gave a brief history of
legislative salary levels. He suggested that the inclusion
of legislative salary recommendations in similar legislation
would allow for objective deliberation regarding fair
compensation. Representative Martin noted that the public
expects the Legislature to set salary levels for state
employees.
Representative Mulder MOVED to report CSHB 437 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes.
CSHB 437 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with "no
recommendation" and with a zero fiscal note by the Alaska
Court System, dated 1/30/96; and with a fiscal impact note
by the Office of the Governor.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|