03/31/2022 03:00 PM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB7 | |
| HB226 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 124 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 7 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | HB 226 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
March 31, 2022
3:12 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins, Chair
Representative Matt Claman, Vice Chair
Representative Geran Tarr
Representative Andi Story
Representative Sarah Vance
Representative James Kaufman
Representative David Eastman
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 7(JUD)
"An Act requiring the Department of Public Safety to publish
certain policies and procedures on the department's Internet
website."
- MOVED CSSB 7(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 226
"An Act relating to the compensation of certain public
officials, officers, and employees not covered by collective
bargaining agreements; increasing the salaries of certain
attorneys employed by the state; and providing for an effective
date."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 124
"An Act relating to filling a vacancy in the legislature by
appointment."
- BILL HEARING CANCELED
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 7
SHORT TITLE: STATE TROOPER POLICIES: PUBLIC ACCESS
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) GRAY-JACKSON
01/22/21 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/8/21
01/22/21 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/22/21 (S) STA, JUD
03/04/21 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/04/21 (S) Heard & Held
03/04/21 (S) MINUTE(STA)
03/11/21 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/11/21 (S) Heard & Held
03/11/21 (S) MINUTE(STA)
04/22/21 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/22/21 (S) Moved SB 7 Out of Committee
04/22/21 (S) MINUTE(STA)
04/23/21 (S) STA RPT 3NR 1AM
04/23/21 (S) NR: SHOWER, HOLLAND, COSTELLO
04/23/21 (S) AM: KAWASAKI
05/10/21 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
05/10/21 (S) Heard & Held
05/10/21 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/16/22 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/16/22 (S) Moved CSSB 7(JUD) Out of Committee
02/16/22 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/18/22 (S) JUD RPT CS 1AM 2DP 2NR SAME TITLE
02/18/22 (S) AM: HOLLAND
02/18/22 (S) DP: MYERS, KIEHL
02/18/22 (S) NR: HUGHES, SHOWER
03/08/22 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/08/22 (S) VERSION: CSSB 7(JUD)
03/09/22 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/09/22 (H) STA, JUD
03/17/22 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/17/22 (H) Heard & Held
03/17/22 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/31/22 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
BILL: HB 226
SHORT TITLE: PAY INCREASES FOR STATE ATTORNEYS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) JOSEPHSON
01/18/22 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/7/22
01/18/22 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/18/22 (H) STA, FIN
03/31/22 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR ELVI GRAY-JACKSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided introductory remarks, as the prime
sponsor of CSSB 7(JUD).
LISA RUSH
Alaska Black Caucus
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 7.
KASEY CASORT
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 7.
MICHAEL GARVEY
American Civil Liberties Union of Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 7.
CHRISTIANE ALLISON
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 7.
REPRESENTATIVE ANDY JOSEPHSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HB 226, as the prime sponsor.
ELISE SORUM-BIRK, Staff
Representative Andy Josephson
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced a PowerPoint presentation,
titled "HB 226 - Increase to Pay for State Attorneys," on behalf
of Representative Josephson, prime sponsor.
CATHERINE REARDON, Staff
Representative Andy Josephson
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
226.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:12:42 PM
CHAIR JONATHAN KREISS-TOMKINS called the House State Affairs
Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:12 p.m.
Representatives Tarr, Claman, Kaufman, Vance, Story, Eastman,
and Kreiss-Tomkins were present at the call to order.
SB 7-STATE TROOPER POLICIES: PUBLIC ACCESS
3:14:38 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the first order of business
would be CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 7(JUD), "An Act requiring the
Department of Public Safety to publish certain policies and
procedures on the department's Internet website."
3:15:02 PM
SENATOR ELVI GRAY-JACKSON, Alaska State Legislature, prime
sponsor of CSSB 7(JUD), summarized the legislation. She
explained that the bill would require that the Department of
Public Safety (DPS) publish on their website the department's
current policies and procedures related to the conduct of peace
officers employed or regulated by the department. The duty of
DPS, she said, was to ensure public safety within communities
and, as such, the public must be able to easily access the
current policies and procedures that require peace officers to
adhere to.
3:15:48 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS opened public testimony on CSSB 7(JUD).
3:16:15 PM
LISA RUSH, Alaska Black Caucus, expressed her support for SB 7.
She said studies had shown that public access to information
about how law enforcement agencies make critical organizational
decisions, and the outcomes of such decisions, had the potential
to increase public and organizational accountability and promote
trust between police and the citizens they serve. She argued
that effective police leaders must work to establish a culture
of transparency and accountability in order to build public
trust. She reiterated the Alaska Black Caucus's support for the
bill.
3:19:06 PM
KASEY CASORT stated her support for SB 7. She recalled the
death of Bishar Hassan, who was shot 12 times by Anchorage
police officers. The officers fired more than 21 shots and
failed to administer any medical help for several minutes while
Mr. Hassan was lying on the ground. She explained that the
information about that incident was gathered from dash cam
footage, which was released years after his death. She stated
that police brutality was a deadly problem in Alaska and
believed that the passage of SB 7 would initiate the bare
minimum to providing basic transparency around policing in the
state. She expressed support for the package of police reform
bills that were introduced by Senator Gray-Jackson [SB 1, SB 2,
SB 3, SB 4, SB 46, and SB 7] and urged passage of the proposed
legislation.
3:20:26 PM
MICHAEL GARVEY, Anchorage, Alaska, stated his support for SB 7,
which would further the objective of transparency, he said. He
pointed out that police officers interacted with the public
every day and were taxpayer funded public servants. For that
reason, he argued that the public should be allowed know their
standards of conduct and hold them accountable. He highlighted
the public's distrust and frustration due to the inability to
access police policy and records. He argued that SB 7 would be
a concrete step to counter that distrust.
3:22:24 PM
CHRISTIANE ALLISON recounted what she characterized as emotional
and mental torture that she endured from two Alaskan State
Troopers on January 23, 2009. She opined that there was little
transparency and less accountability among police officers. She
believed that the posting of public policies would empower the
public to seek accountability and urged the committee to pass
the proposed legislation to protect Alaskan citizens.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS requested further clarity on the incident
Ms. Allison endured.
MS. ALLISON explained that her daughter had passed away from a
household fall. She said the state made an accusation against
her husband based on a "junk science" theory, called "chicken
baby syndrome." She believed that in an effort to forcibly turn
her against her spouse, the troopers subjected her to graphic
photos of her child for four hours. She said the officers did
not allow her to leave the room until she agreed with their
record of events.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS closed public testimony on CSSB 7(JUD) and
invited final comment from committee members.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR thanked Ms. Allison for calling in and
reminding the committee that the system could work better in
times of difficulty, pain, and stress. She expressed her hope
that CSSB 7(JUD) would accomplish that.
3:27:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY emphasized the importance of continuing to
build and improve trust between the public and public safety
officials.
3:28:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN shared his understanding that the
department was already publishing its policies and procedures on
the website; for that reason, he was unsure of the bill's
necessity. He addressed the Village Public Safety Officer
(VPSO) provision in the bill, opining that there may be a gap in
the policy.
3:29:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN moved to report CSSB 7(JUD) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSSB 7(JUD) was
reported from the House State Affairs Standing Committee.
HB 226-PAY INCREASES FOR STATE ATTORNEYS
3:29:55 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the next order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 226, "An Act relating to the
compensation of certain public officials, officers, and
employees not covered by collective bargaining agreements;
increasing the salaries of certain attorneys employed by the
state; and providing for an effective date."
3:30:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ANDY JOSEPHSON, Alaska State Legislature, prime
sponsor, introduced HB 226. He paraphrased the sponsor
statement, which read in its entirety as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
The Alaska Department of Law, Public Defender Agency
and Office of Public Advocacy have struggled in recent
years to attract and retain attorneys. HB 226 provides
a much-needed boost in pay for these essential legal
personnel by raising pay rates for state employed
lawyers by 10 percent across the board.
The State, as an employer, is unable to compete with
salaries offered by the private sector and has even
started to lag other public sector employers in
compensation. Further aggravating this difficulty is
the fact that state lawyers fall into the
classification of "partially exempt" employees,
meaning they do not belong to a union and can only
receive pay increases at the behest of the
legislature. A pay increase for this employee class
has not taken place since 2015.
Factors that previously attracted attorneys to state
service like certain pensions or a chance for more
work life balance are no longer a reality. Lawyers
across state agencies are experiencing a higher-than-
average volume of work due to vacancies and this has
led to increased turnover. A lack of adequate
compensation and large workloads create a self-
perpetuating cycle of burn out and non-retention.
Our criminal justice system relies on prosecutors to
ensure that laws are being enforced and public
defenders to guarantee that low-income defendants
receive the representation they are entitled to.
Additionally, Department of Law attorneys deal with
litigation on varied and important topics like
consumer protection, oil tax disputes and child
support. Without quality pay we will not be able to
keep quality legal professionals working in the public
sector. HB 226 is a small and concrete step the
legislature can take to make employment as a state
lawyer more attractive and palatable to those in the
legal profession.
I urge your support for this measure. Please feel free
to discuss this issue with me in more detail.
3:41:14 PM
ELISE SORUM-BIRK, Staff, Representative Andy Josephson, Alaska
State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Josephson, prime
sponsor of HB 226, introduced a PowerPoint presentation, titled
"HB 226 - Increase to Pay for State Attorneys" [hard copy
included in the committee packet]. She began on slide 2, which
read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
WHAT HB 226 DOES-
.notdefSection 5 of the Bill is the Core
.notdefIncreases Pay for State Attorneys by 10%
.notdefAs Partially Exempt Employees this must be done
through statutory change
.notdefApplies to attorneys under AS 39.25.120(c)(3)
.notdef"attorney members of the staff of the Department
of Law, of the public defender agency, and of the
office of public advocacy in the Department of
Administration"
3:43:48 PM
MS. SORUM-BIRK skipped slide 3 and proceeded to slide 4, which
highlighted the aging attorney pool in Alaska. She explained
that the aging segment of attorneys would lead to a shortage of
lawyers in the state, ultimately threatening people's access to
justice.
3:45:56 PM
MS. SORUM-BIRK advanced to slide 5, which displayed graphics
from the annual 2021 salary report. The graphics illustrated
the median salary for prosecutors in anchorage in addition to
the recommended salary of $87,576.
3:46:38 PM
MS. SORUM-BIRK concluded on slide 6, which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
EXAMPLES OF OTHER SIMILAR JOB CLASSES TO CONSIDER
ADDING
.notdefPartially Exempt Legal Support Positions in
Department of Law
.notdefe.g. Associate Attorneys
.notdefAdministrative Law Judge Positions
.notdefWorkers' Compensation Adjudicators
3:47:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON shared that the administration had
indicated unequivocal support for increasing attorney pay.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN shared his understanding that the process
by which salaries were adjusted in statute was a slow and
cumbersome process. He asked how the process could simplified.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON deferred to Ms. Reardon.
3:49:56 PM
CATHERINE REARDON, Staff, Representative Andy Josephson, Alaska
State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Josephson, prime
sponsor, opined that the legislature could consider passing
legislation that provided flexibility through regulation or
other processes to make adjustments within the partially exempt
category of employees.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked which public officials would be
impacted by the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON answered attorneys in 39.25.120(c)(3),
which included attorney members at the Department of Law (DOL),
the Public Defender Agency, Department of Administration (DOA),
and the Office of Public Advocacy (OPA), DOA.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked why those positions were classified
as public officials, as opposed to "attorney" or "staff" within
a non-public official category.
3:52:42 PM
MS. REARDON shared her understanding that "public officials" was
the general term for different subsections of partially exempt
employees.
3:53:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE requested information on retention rates in
the Municipality of Anchorage. She asked whether the increase
in pay by 10 percent, or roughly $6,200, was lower than the
bonuses that were included in the subcommittee process.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON answered yes.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE requested a comparative analysis that
illustrated a scaled approach to salary increases. She agreed
that an increase of 10 percent was not enough.
REPRESENTAIVE JOSEPHSON conveyed that a 10 percent increase
would be in the $5 million range for all three agencies. He
agreed to follow up with the requested information.
3:59:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN directed attention to Section 1, which
detailed the new salary schedule. He inquired about the
reflected increase from current levels.
MS. SORUM-BIRK clarified that sections 1-3 would not make
changes to the current salary schedule, which was adopted by the
legislature in 2013. She directed attention to Section 2, AS
39.27.011(e), which reflected the updated salary schedule from
2014. She continued to note that Section 3 reflected the
updates from 2015. She reiterated that Sections 1-3 were
updating the salary schedule in Section 1 to reflect the current
reality, as opposed to increasing the salary schedule.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN recognized that the legislature should be
considering increases for other classes of state employees as
well. He pointed out that faced with current inflation rates,
the 10 percent increase would not go very far towards addressing
the hiring problems. He wondered whether the increase should be
greater and whether the effective date should be earlier.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON said those suggestions would be
considered friendly amendments.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS associated himself with Representative
Claman's comments and Representative Eastman's question
regarding flexibility within the executive branch.
4:03:51 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
[Chair Kreiss-Tomkins passed the gavel to Vice-Chair Claman.]
4:04:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked whether the state [attorney] salaries
would have to be increase by approximately 40 percent to be
reciprocal to attorney salary in the Municipality of Anchorage.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON answered yes.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE requested a comparative analysis of benefit
packages. She directed attention to Section 6, which stated
that Section 1 would apply to employees hired before, on, or
after the effective date. She asked why the sponsor worded the
language as such.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON deferred to Ms. Sorum-Birk.
MS. SORUM-BIRK said the intent was to ensure that all current
state attorneys in DOL, OPA, and the Public Defender Agency were
included.
4:08:15 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
[Vice-Chair Claman returned the gavel to Chair Kreiss-Tomkins.]
4:08:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON offered to follow up with the
information requested by Representative Vance.
4:08:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN recalled the DOL budget subcommittee
meetings that shared the starting salaries for attorneys in the
Washington Office of the Attorney General. He requested a
comparative analysis that included attorney salaries in
Washington and Oregon in addition to DOL and the Municipality of
Anchorage.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON acquiesced.
4:11:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN inquired about the effective date in
Section 5.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON was unsure whether the effective date
was a quick decision or a method "to coax the administration and
legislature into seeing the wisdom of the bill by not
implementing it too fast."
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN surmised that essentially, Section 5
would create a new effective date for Section 5; however, there
was no separate effective date clause to be voted on by the
legislature. He characterized it as "strange."
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON pointed out that the bill would take
effect July 1, 2022, per Section 9.
4:18:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR wondered whether a sunset provision was
considered by the bill sponsor as a mechanism to prompt the
reconsideration of the bill in five years, for example.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON said that had not been considered.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR remarked:
If we put the bonuses in this year, that would be the
FY 23, and then if this dovetails on the July 1, 2023,
then that would be the FY 24, so it should be a
seamless transition into this bonus then to pay raise.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON opined that it was drafted in a
seamless way; however, he expressed concern about what could
happen in a conference committee or by veto, which explained the
two-pronged approach.
4:20:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR opined that the FY 23 bonuses should match
the salary increase, so that in FY 24, attorneys would not
experience a pay cut even if that meant increasing salaries by
13 percent, for example, as opposed to 10 percent.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON agreed that Representative Tarr had
highlighted a reason to increase Section 5.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked whether someone from the bill
sponsor's office could calculate what percentage pay increase
would stabilize the bonus pay from FY 23 to FY 24.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON answered yes.
4:23:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY commented on the high turnover in OPA.
4:23:52 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN asked whether it would be simpler to
remove the bonuses entirely and make the effective date July 1,
2022, with a 25 percent pay increase.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON touched on the difficulty of turning a
bill into law. He indicated that it would depend on the
administration.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN recalled that in the DOL Budget
Subcommittee, the department repeatedly declined to answer where
they stood on the proposed legislation.
4:26:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked whether anyone had analyzed State of
Alaska employee salaries at the macro level.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON answered no. Nonetheless, he shared
his belief that this was a problem that stretched across
departments.
4:29:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY emphasized the importance of this issue for
all state employees. She expressed concern that a two-parent
household could not afford to let one parent stay at home with
the children on a current state employee salary.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that HB 226 would be held over.
4:32:08 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 4:32
p.m.