02/21/2008 09:00 AM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB232 | |
| HB15 | |
| HB260 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 232 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 15 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 260 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
February 21, 2008
9:06 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Lesil McGuire, Chair
Senator Gary Stevens, Vice Chair
Senator Hollis French
Senator Lyda Green
Senator Con Bunde
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 232
"An Act authorizing the governor to delegate to the adjutant
general the authority to order the organized militia into active
state service and authorizing the payment of Alaska National
Guard called into active state service to fight wildfires at
rates of pay established for certain emergency fire-fighting
personnel; and providing for an effective date."
MOVED SB 232 OUT OF COMMITTEE
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 15(RES)
"An Act relating to participation in matters before the Board of
Fisheries by members of the board and to the definition of
'immediate family member' under the Alaska Executive Branch
Ethics Act as that Act applies to members of the Board of
Fisheries; and providing for an effective date."
HEARD AND HELD
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 260(STA)
"An Act relating to a State Officers Compensation Commission and
establishing how legislators, the governor, the lieutenant
governor, and executive department heads shall be compensated;
providing for an effective date by repealing the effective dates
of certain sections of ch. 124, SLA 1986; and providing for an
effective date."
HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 232
SHORT TITLE: NAT'L GUARD: COMMAND/ACTIVE SERVICE/PAY
SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
01/18/08 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/18/08 (S) STA, FIN
02/21/08 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BELTZ 211
BILL: HB 15
SHORT TITLE: BOARD OF FISHERIES CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) SEATON
01/16/07 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/5/07
01/16/07 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/16/07 (H) FSH, RES
03/14/07 (H) FSH AT 8:30 AM BARNES 124
03/14/07 (H) Heard & Held
03/14/07 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/19/07 (H) FSH AT 8:30 AM BARNES 124
03/19/07 (H) Heard & Held
03/19/07 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/21/07 (H) FSH AT 8:30 AM BARNES 124
03/21/07 (H) Heard & Held
03/21/07 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/23/07 (H) FSH AT 8:30 AM BARNES 124
03/23/07 (H) Moved CSHB 15(FSH) Out of Committee
03/23/07 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/27/07 (H) FSH RPT CS(FSH) 2DP 3NR 1AM
03/27/07 (H) DP: LEDOUX, SEATON
03/27/07 (H) NR: JOHNSON, HOLMES, EDGMON
03/27/07 (H) AM: WILSON
05/02/07 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
05/02/07 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
05/07/07 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
05/07/07 (H) Moved CSHB 15(RES) Out of Committee
05/07/07 (H) MINUTE(RES)
05/08/07 (H) RES RPT CS(RES) NT 6DP 3NR
05/08/07 (H) DP: SEATON, KOHRING, EDGMON, WILSON,
ROSES, GATTO
05/08/07 (H) NR: GUTTENBERG, KAWASAKI, JOHNSON
01/23/08 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
01/23/08 (H) VERSION: CSHB 15(RES)
01/25/08 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/25/08 (S) STA, RES, FIN
02/21/08 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BELTZ 211
BILL: HB 260
SHORT TITLE: STATE OFFICERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) DOOGAN
05/15/07 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
05/15/07 (H) STA, FIN
01/17/08 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
01/17/08 (H) Heard & Held
01/17/08 (H) MINUTE(STA)
01/19/08 (H) STA AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 106
01/19/08 (H) Moved CSHB 260(STA) Out of Committee
01/19/08 (H) MINUTE(STA)
01/22/08 (H) STA RPT CS(STA) 1DP 3NR 2AM
01/22/08 (H) DP: ROSES
01/22/08 (H) NR: JOHNSON, JOHANSEN, LYNN
01/22/08 (H) AM: COGHILL, DOLL
01/30/08 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
01/30/08 (H) Moved CSHB 260(STA) Out of Committee
01/30/08 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
01/31/08 (H) FIN RPT CS(STA) 2DP 2DNP 4NR 1AM
01/31/08 (H) DP: CRAWFORD, NELSON
01/31/08 (H) DNP: STOLTZE, KELLY
01/31/08 (H) NR: GARA, THOMAS, MEYER, CHENAULT
01/31/08 (H) AM: HAWKER
02/08/08 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
02/08/08 (H) VERSION: CSHB 260(STA)
02/11/08 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/11/08 (S) STA, FIN
02/21/08 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BELTZ 211
WITNESS REGISTER
MCHUGH PIERRE, Legislative Liaison
Department of Military and Veterans Affairs (DMVA)
Juneau AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented SB 232.
LYNN WILCOCK, Chief
Fire and Aviation,
Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
Fairbanks AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke in favor of SB 232.
CHRIS MAISCH, Director
Division of Forestry
Department of Natural Resources
Fairbanks AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke in favor of SB 232.
REPRESENTATIVE PAUL SEATON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 15.
CLEM TILLION
Homer AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke in favor of HB 15.
RICKY GEASE, Executive Director
Kenai River Sportfishing Association
Kenai AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke to HB 15.
JERRY MCHUNE
United Fishermen of Alaska
Juneau AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke in favor of HB 15.
BRYCE WRIGLEY
Alaska Farm Bureau
Delta Junction AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke in favor of an amendment to HB 15.
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE DOOGAN
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 260.
SENATOR KIM ELTON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke in favor of HB 260.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR LESIL MCGUIRE called the Senate State Affairs Standing
Committee meeting to order at 9:06:07 AM. Senators Green,
Stevens, Bunde, and McGuire were present at the call to order.
Senator French arrived soon thereafter.
SB 232-NAT'L GUARD: COMMAND/ACTIVE SERVICE/PAY
9:06:42 AM
CHAIR MCGUIRE announced the consideration of SB 232.
MCHUGH PIERRE, Legislative Liaison, Department of Military and
Veterans Affairs (DMVA), said SB 232 came about in 2004 when the
Alaska National Guard was fighting Alaska's extreme fires
alongside staff from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). There are two different
pay rates: one for emergency firefighters and one for active
duty guard members. The guard was making one fourth to one half
of what the others were making. The commissioner of DMVA told
the DNR commissioner, and he said, "We've got the money, let's
just pay them." But statute requires the state to pay active
duty rates, and Section 2 of SB 232 will change that. Section 1
"will allow a little more freedom for when there are other
events when the governor is not as available to be reached." Her
authority can be delegated to the commissioner of DMVA, who is
also an adjutant general of the Alaska National Guard. The
commissioner would be delegated to activate National Guard
forces for whatever the governor provides for, prior to the
situation.
CHAIR MCGUIRE asked if changing the statute to reflect this one
circumstance will cause a wholesale rate change.
MR. PIERRE said the bill only addresses wildfire fighting. The
rates are set by DNR and BLM and only when the National Guard is
called to action. It happens every summer, and guard people know
that [this pay] is not the norm. It is an exception for wildfire
fighting because of its danger.
9:09:29 AM
SENATOR GREEN asked if the National Guard gets the same
professional training as other firefighters.
MR. PIERRE said they are only called for specific duties that
they are capable of doing, like crew chief and helicopter pilot.
SENATOR STEVENS said he served as an army officer. A person in
the military doesn't have a choice when called. Firefighters can
choose not to work.
MR. PIERRE said that is true, but the guard is the last line of
defense. Private contractors are called first. When called,
guard leadership determines what specific job a member will do.
9:11:22 AM
SENATOR STEVENS said everyone can agree to equal pay for equal
worked, but he asked if the military gets benefits that the
other firefighters don't, like the use of the "PX."
MR. PIERRE said there are the benefits to National Guard
members, "however, through this legislation they'll be treated
just like any other wildfire fighter on the scene." This
includes worker's compensation and medical benefits. When they
get off of the fire, they will be treated just like they were in
the National Guard again.
SENATOR GREEN asked if the department gets compensated for the
use of the equipment.
LYNN WILCOCK, Chief, Fire and Aviation, DNR, Fairbanks, said
"They do get compensated basically for their costs of
[indecipherable] aircraft, and that is primarily what we're
talking about here is the National Guard Blackhawks and making
sure that the pilots and the support personnel that support
those helicopters receive equal pay." Commissioner Irwin
recognized it in 2004. The guard is extremely valuable and is
used after all civilian assets are used. They are also used
while waiting for workers to arrive from the Lower 48.
9:13:27 AM
SENATOR GREEN said she was noting the DNR budget "and it is
always amazing to read and see the figures of the set-aside cost
and then tack on the per hour cost." She wanted to make sure
DMVA was getting "a few bucks for their rental."
MR. WILCOCK said aviation assets are getting expensive, and the
guard is paid for their costs.
SENATOR BUNDE asked if the proposed $35 per hour is what a state
helicopter pilot would be paid.
MR. WILCOCK said the emergency firefighter rates are based on
the federal government rate for similar jobs, adjusted for
inflation each year. "That is a comparable rate for a pilot if
we were to hire that person as a pilot for the state of Alaska."
SENATOR BUNDE asked if a private pilot makes more.
MR. WILCOCK said he is not sure because that rate is established
by the company. But he expects it is more.
SENATOR BUNDE said fixed-wing pilots were paid $60 per hour 15
years ago, but he is not suggesting a raise for state employees.
9:15:28 AM
SENATOR STEVENS asked what happens if the guard is firefighting
and their services are needed elsewhere.
MR. PIERRE said a priority would remove them from the fire.
9:16:00 AM
CHRIS MAISCH, Director, Division of Forestry, DNR, Fairbanks,
said the commissioner of DNR supports equal pay for equal work,
and he is enthusiastic about the bill.
SENATOR BUNDE said some Alaskans "off the end of the road" say
they get no services, but with the cost of fires in remote
areas, "they get a substantial state service."
SENATOR STEVENS moved SB 232 from committee with individual
recommendations and attached fiscal note(s). There being no
objection, SB 232 passed out of committee.
HB 15-BOARD OF FISHERIES CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
9:17:58 AM
CHAIR MCGUIRE announced the consideration of HB 15. [Before the
committee was CSHB 15(RES).]
REPRESENTATIVE PAUL SEATON, Alaska State Legislature, said HB 15
expands the ability of the Board of Fish to do its job. Current
law requires members to declare a conflict of interest and
recuse themselves from discussion and voting if they, or a
member of their family, have a personal or financial interest in
a matter. This prevents them from using their expertise on the
board -- expertise they were appointed for. The board has seven
members. At least one member is recused in about 10 percent of
board proposals. Current law disproportionately affects rural
Alaska where fishing may be the economic mainstay. Any long-term
resident of Bristol Bay, for example, has numerous family
members involved in fishing. Currently, immediate family
includes parents, children, siblings, grandparents, aunts, and
uncles. This expansive definition means that a person in Togiak
with a fishing relative in Dillingham can't even discuss that
issue.
9:20:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said HB 15 changes the definition of
family to the same as is used in the legislature. So family
includes a spouse, domestic partner, or any child or parent in
the home that is a dependent. The bill sunsets in 2011 with a
required report to determine if it had the desired effect of a
useful system without conflicts of interest. He provided a
comparison of definition of family member and a list of the
recusals for several different boards.
9:22:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said the medical board has never had a
recusal. A surgeon will vote on a surgical question. It is being
applied so differently on other boards than the Board of Fish. A
charter vessel or commercial vessel is licensed to an area. In
Bristol Bay there may be 1,400 people with permits, but it is
not the entire state. The attorney general for the Board of Fish
has determined it very narrowly.
9:25:11 AM
CLEM TILLION, Homer, AK, said he supports the bill and doesn't
like the sunset. When he was in charge of appointing the board
for Walter Hickel, he appointed someone from Sand Point and
someone from Naknek - people on both sides. "They became great
friends because they both set in the hallway, unable to testify,
and they were the only ones who knew anything about it." He said
he has had proposals before the board that everyone was in favor
of, but having a missing board member made it impossible to get
the votes to do anything. The board was paralyzed even though
they were unanimous because people had to recuse themselves.
"What we did in the legislature is the right way to do it." Some
members might not want to vote, so they stretch the rules to
recuse themselves. That is a no vote, which isn't good when
their constituents wanted a yes vote. HB 15 is very much needed.
He said he appears before the board "quite frequently."
RICKY GEASE, Executive Director, Kenai River Sportfishing
Association, said he supports parts of the bill, like redefining
immediate family. In small communities the extended family
concept causes unnecessary recusals. Page 2, line 14, needs a
definition of "substantial," and if it is a dollar amount or a
percentage of income. One must be careful when allowing a person
with a financial interest to participate in board deliberations.
The Board of Fish gets information from the public through
testimony and committee work. There are various user groups
arguing over proposals, and there are significant allocative
decisions with financial implications. Allowing a member with a
financial interest to deliberate gives that group an unfair
advantage. Other groups may be left out of the deliberations. If
this bill is passed with the ability for a person with a
financial interest to deliberate, the board appointments will be
much more political. There are more than seven user groups in
the state, and all of the groups will want a member on the
seven-person board. That will add a lot of appointment pressure.
9:30:57 AM
SENATOR GREEN asked if there is a clear line separating
deliberations from receiving testimony.
MR. GEASE said the board first receives department reports, it
then takes public testimony, and then proposals will be put in
committees. Usually two to three board members will lead a
committee through the different proposals and go back and give a
report on where the public stood. Then the board goes into
deliberations, and it is important what questions are asked in
that process. The public is excluded, so some user groups may be
represented, and it can be perceived as an unfair advantage.
9:32:45 AM
SENATOR GREEN asked if it's OK for conflicted members to
participate in everything down to deliberations, and then they
should recuse themselves.
MR. GEASE said that is the current situation. If a person is
recused, he or she can pose as a member of the public and
provide information and testify. There might not be the ability
for the expertise to be used in the deliberative process, but it
can be shared with the board. But the deliberative mode could be
used advantageously from a user-group perspective.
SENATOR GREEN asked if Mr. Gease likes the redefinition of the
family member.
MR. GEASE said yes, that will reduce the number of recusals, but
if there is a direct financial conflict of interest, it would be
unfair for that member to deliberate and just be recused from
the vote. Proposals usually address allocations between user
groups. User groups will then press for a member on the board.
SENATOR GREEN asked if every member is able to freely talk and
contribute prior to deliberations, regardless of conflict.
9:35:26 AM
MR. GEASE said yes, up until the point where the board
officially takes up a proposal.
SENATOR GREEN asked if any member that anticipates a proposal
can share all of their information at that time.
MR. GEASE said that is correct. The deadline for proposals is
usually eight to twelve months ahead of time. So when preparing
for the board meeting, the members will have an idea of where
there will be conflicts of interest, "and they have plenty of
opportunity to provide their expertise and input into a proposal
if they are conflicted out" - just like any citizen.
SENATOR GREEN asked if the board has open discussions after
deliberations.
MR. GEASE said once the deliberative process starts, the public
input is limited, unless a proposal was tabled for further
consideration. Very few tabled proposals are taken up later. The
public doesn't have the chance to provide comments once the
board is deliberating. There may be amendments during the
deliberative process, he noted.
9:38:22 AM
SENATOR STEVENS asked about the board having so many recusals
that there are not enough votes to take action.
MR. GEASE said he has seen a couple times where members were
conflicted out, but often the board will vote unanimously. The
closer votes tend to be very allocative, and the vote might
swing to reflect financial connections. If a proposal really
makes sense, it will pass six or seven to zero. He spoke of
ethical problems. This bill will still put the board in the
position of not allowing somebody to vote, but it will allow
someone with a financial interest to deliberate when other
members of the public with an interest will not be able to.
9:40:13 AM
JERRY MCHUNE, United Fishermen of Alaska, Juneau, said his group
supports HB 15 as written. The bill has been around for ten
years, and recusal from voting was one of the compromises. It
swings both ways because conflict of interest can happen in any
party. "People sometimes bring it to the table just to try and
conflict people out." There are only seven board members, and it
is not just about Cook Inlet - board meetings occur around the
state. Crab experts have been conflicted out because they either
crewed or they owned a vessel, so they had to sit in the
audience and not say anything. If a question comes up, the
member can't say anything. Everybody should be able to
deliberate, and it is a good compromise. He supports the family
definition because he could have a second cousin in Bristol Bay
that he didn't even like, and he would be recused.
CHAIR MCGUIRE noted that Bryce Wrigley will speak about the
Board of Agriculture and Conservation.
9:42:25 AM
BRYCE WRIGLEY, Alaska Farm Bureau, Delta Junction, said that
when people are selected to represent an area or industry
sector, they need to participate in discussions. If there is a
conflict of interest, it is the member's duty to inform the
chair so the chair can rule on the ability to vote. But it is
important to participate in the discussion. HB 15 addresses a
similar problem on his board. When farmers are on the board,
they have been kept from discussion. It makes him wonder why
there is a board if members can only discuss things they do not
know anything about. He wants HB 15 to be amended to add the
Board of Agriculture and Conservation. All the legislators he
has spoken to said it sounds reasonable. He listed legislators
he spoke to about the topic.
9:45:12 AM
SENATOR GREEN moved Amendment 1, labeled 25-LS0114\K.2, Kane
2/21/08, as follows:
Page 1, line 1, following "the":
Insert "Board of Agriculture and Conservation and the"
Page 1, line 2:
Delete "board"
Insert "boards"
Page 1, line 3, following "the":
Insert "Board of Agriculture and Conservation and the"
Page 1, line 8, following "of the":
Insert "Board of Agriculture and Conservation and the"
Page 1, line 9:
Delete "a lay board"
Insert "lay boards"
Page 1, line 10:
Delete "board" in both places
Insert "boards" in both places
Page 1, line 11, following "participation in":
Insert "certain agricultural programs or in"
Page 1, line 13:
Delete "a new subsection"
Insert "new subsections"
Page 1, line 14:
Delete "(f)"
Insert "(g)"
Page 2, following line 6:
Insert a new subsection to read:
"(h) Notwithstanding any other provision of this
chapter, a personal or financial interest in a matter
arising directly from involvement of the member of the
Board of Agriculture and Conservation, or of the board
member's immediate family, and conducted under a lease,
permit, installment contract, or loan or purchase of land
under AS 03.10 or under AS 38.05 does not disqualify a
member of the Board of Agriculture and Conservation from
deliberating on a matter before the board. Before
deliberating, the member shall disclose the interest on the
record. If a conflict is determined to exist, the member
may not vote on the issue."
Page 2, line 8, following "the":
Insert "Board of Agriculture and Conservation and the"
Page 2, line 10, following "the":
Insert "Board of Agriculture and Conservation or the"
Page 2, line 16:
Delete "AS 39.52.120(f) is"
Insert "AS 39.52.120(g) and 39.52.120(h) are"
Page 2, line 19, following "RECOMMENDATIONS.":
Insert "(a)"
Page 2, line 20:
Delete "AS 39.52.120(f)"
Insert "AS 39.52.120(g)"
Page 2, line 24:
Delete "AS 39.52.120(f)"
Insert "AS 39.52.120(g)"
Page 2, following line 24:
Insert a new subsection to read:
"(b) The Department of Natural Resources shall review
AS 39.52.120(h), added by sec. 2 of this Act, and not later than
January 31, 2011, submit a report to the legislature that
compares the effect of that subsection on the rate of recusals
by members of the Board of Agriculture and Conservation in
matters that have come before the board and make a
recommendation regarding whether the effective date of the
repeal of AS 39.52.120(h), made by sec. 7 of this Act, should be
extended."
9:45:22 AM
SENATOR STEVENS objected to hear from Representative Seaton.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said he doesn't have an objection to the
amendment, but there is a difference "in these." He said the
current bill allows deliberation by a person who has a
participatory interest, like a sportfishing guide license or a
commercial fishing license, but not by a lobbyist or anyone who
is paid to be at the board, like an executive director of an
organization. People who are hired to promote a user group will
not be able to participate in that deliberation. There is quite
a difference between participatory interest and lobbying
interest. The one situation is a moral conflict, and the other
is serving the people that hired you. On page 2, line 2, HB 15
states that the interest goes as far as permit or license
holders. He doesn't see anything in Amendment 1 that changes
that, but he wanted to point it out. It was a delicate balance.
He didn't want a situation where everyone wanted their executive
director on the board so they could bring home the bacon. HB 15
doesn't open the possibility of hired lobbyists deliberating or
voting on the board.
9:48:51 AM
CHAIR MCGUIRE asked what that has to do with the amendment.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said this amendment has different language
pertaining to the Board of Agriculture, and he wanted to ensure
that the same language won't apply to the Board of Fish.
CHAIR MCGUIRE said she will set the bill aside and get an
opinion on Amendment 1.
9:49:49 AM
SENATOR FRENCH asked how many boards need this change.
SENATOR GREEN asked if the agriculture board has a similar
process for reviewing proposals as the Board of Fish.
MR. WRIGLEY said he was surprised that the Board of Fish knew
the issues several months ahead of time. That is not the case
with his board. His board has public comment at the beginning of
the board meeting, and once deliberations begin, other questions
come up. If someone is recused, there is no good way to get
information. He said they could get out of the deliberative mode
to discuss that issue and then go back in, but meetings can last
all day, and the on-line participants can't wait for the
possibility to speak again. The bill will allow discussion with
those who were appointed to represent an area or a sector, and
it allows the treatment of the issues once public testimony is
closed. But it does allow recusals from voting.
SENATOR GREEN asked if the public can weigh in after
deliberations begin.
MR. WRIGLEY said no.
SENATOR GREEN asked who is on the board from Mr. Wrigley's area,
Fairbanks, Palmer and Tok.
MR. WRIGLEY said there is not one from those four areas. The
farming seats are restricted to those who have an interest in
farming. Homer and Kodiak were represented in the past. Mt.
McKinley meats members were not allowed to speak to it, and yet
they were the only people who knew anything about meat. If you
have an interest in a certain sector, you're prevented from
discussing that sector. Consequently the only things you are
allowed to testify to or discuss are those things that you don't
have any knowledge about.
9:54:05 AM
SENATOR GREEN noted that there is no statewide participation on
the board. Her district is well represented.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said there is a technical amendment
regarding a statutory reference.
CHAIR MCGUIRE set HB 15 aside.
HB 260-STATE OFFICERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION
CHAIR MCGUIRE announced the consideration of HB 260. [Before the
committee was CSHB 260(STA).]
9:54:56 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE DOOGAN, Alaska State Legislature, said HB
260 re-establishes a compensation commission for the principle
officers of Alaska. There was a working compensation commission
in 1979, and Senator Elton was a public member. An attempt was
made to reestablish a similar commission in 1986, but it was
dependent upon a constitutional amendment that never passed. HB
260 has a repeal of that inactive commission. The bill provides
for five members with three public members, all appointed by the
governor. No member will have served in any of the offices that
the commission will consider for compensation in the previous
four years. It will be staffed by the Department of
Administration, and the fiscal note is $7,500. It will report
every two years. Recommendations by the commission will take
effect unless specifically rejected by the legislature. It would
require an appropriation so the legislature will get two looks
at "this provision." There are about 20 such commissions
throughout the country.
9:57:48 AM
SENATOR BUNDE asked if this would be like Congress where if the
legislature fails to vote no, the raise is automatic.
REPRESENTATIVE DOOGAN said no, because of the appropriation.
SENATOR BUNDE said Congress automatically gets a raise if the
commission recommends it so they can say, "the devil made me
take this money."
9:58:46 AM
CHAIR MCGUIRE said there is the overt rejection, but there is an
appropriation requirement. People wanted to move the capital and
because of the FRANK initiative "and other things," it ended up
being "the lack of an appropriation that ended up not
solidifying parts of that." If the intent is to have an
effective system of compensating lawmakers based on the
recommendations of this commission, "I have wondered whether
having the step of appropriating it might be the death of it."
REPRESENTATIVE DOOGAN said it could, but he couldn't find a way
to remove the legislative power of appropriation from the bill.
CHAIR MCGUIRE said to go upstairs to get some ideas.
REPRESENTATIVE DOOGAN said the legislature does have to
appropriate the money. He has tried to remove the legislature as
much as possible because he believes rational decision-making
comes from citizens without anything "on the table."
SENATOR BUNDE said to get citizen participation the money has to
come out of the earnings reserve of the Permanent Fund.
10:00:51 AM
SENATOR KIM ELTON, Alaska State Legislature, said he is not here
in the capacity of a senator, but he will speak to 30 years ago
when he served on a salary commission. The impetus for the
commission was a successful initiative that repealed an act that
raised salaries for legislators and created a very generous
retirement system. Commission members were appointed by the
governor. He doesn't remember if there were qualifications for
serving. HB 260 does have one condition. All of the members on
the old commission were from the private sector and did not hold
a state or municipal job. One problem was its scope of
authority; it reviewed the salaries of all elected officials
from governor, judges, and down to division directors. It wasn't
that burdensome on the commission, but it created issues in the
legislative branch when recommendations were made. "There were
so many different recommendations … that it created an
opportunity for so many legislators who disagreed with one
element to be displeased with the recommendation."
10:04:55 AM
SENATOR ELTON said the commission was abandoned and attempts to
resurrect one have not been successful. He thinks the notion
behind a salary commission makes sense, and this narrower one is
better than the previous commission.
10:05:47 AM
SENATOR STEVENS asked if a fair salary would have had an impact
on the ethical lapses that have occurred "in this building."
SENATOR ELTON said yes, but he can't quantify the extent. A
greater impact will be on the demographics of the body, and not
on its ethics. Most members are old white guys who have paid off
their homes. It is difficult for a younger person with house
payments and kids at home to leave their profession and serve.
This is his personal philosophy. The salary of an ethically-
challenged person might not matter. But he hopes that [higher
salaries] will change the demographics of both bodies.
SENATOR FRENCH said the bill is overdue. HB 260 doesn't say how
often the commission will meet. He wants the commission to look
at whether the state really has a citizen's legislature or not.
"We want to think we have that," but he can only think of a few
members who are able to hold on to their jobs. It is hard to do
something else while working at the legislature, and members end
up becoming a professional legislator over time.
10:09:09 AM
SENATOR ELTON said it is an important question, and there are
entities that could help answer that. The National Conference on
State Legislatures rates Alaska as trending toward a full-time
legislature. The commission could get that information easily
without listening to legislators.
SENATOR BUNDE asked if Representative Doogan sees this
commission recommending a full-time legislature. The part-time
one was established by the constitution. "There seems to be some
inconsistency between the fervor for a 90-day session and the
willingness of the public to support a full-time legislature."
10:11:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DOOGAN said it is a difficult question because
Alaska has a citizen legislature but they are all professionals
since they get paid to legislate. The question is if it is full
time or part time, which is quantifiable. The days and hours can
be measured. It is his hope that the commission would look at
the indicators of what is actually happening versus a theory of
what is happening, and make a recommendation based on that.
SENATOR BUNDE asked about long-term per diem for people who live
in Juneau. If flies in the face of the definition. Another term
may be more appropriate.
10:13:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DOOGAN said it is difficult to explain his long-
term per diem, whereby he gets paid when at home. He recommends
not calling it something that nobody else in the world would
call it. The IRS won't call it per diem, because it is taxed.
SENATOR BUNDE said he suspects that long-term per diem was
coined when there was smoke and mirrors. It is indeed a stipend.
10:15:59 AM
SENATOR GREEN wondered if it was coined for "out-of-towners."
When she heads into a town for a meeting, it's different.
Senator Stevens flies. Her previous district could take her from
Eureka to Talkeetna. A woman needs to take someone with her, so
she has to buy extra meals, and that isn't easy to claim. "It
wasn't designed for urban legislators as much as … out-of-
towners."
CHAIR MCGUIRE said "You face this dilemma where you actually are
working and most people who claim long-term per diem will spend
the whole day working on legislative stuff, and so if you don't
take it, then what do you do?" If it is taken, it is difficult
to explain. "We all know it's compensation for what you're
doing, but the name ends up being odd." She wants this
discussion to be used by the commission. Travel for people who
live outside the highway system creates some disparities. She
said the legislators with retirements think this job is
something to do later in life and shouldn't be paid full-time
salaries. She chairs and vice-chairs a nationwide group, and she
does it to put Alaska in a good light. She brings information to
Alaska. She loves her job, and she doesn't know how to do it
part time. Voices of people in their earning years should be
heard in this building. Gender comes into play, and she thought
of an option of allowing the choice to be a part-time or full-
time lawmaker. Some may want full-time legislators, and some may
not. She said to start calling a spade a spade. "We're not being
really direct about the amount of work that's done, what we're
paid for it, and how that ought to work."
10:20:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DOOGAN said his age-group (60 years old) is
vastly overrepresented. Everyone was happily surprised at
Alaska's participation in the [recent national presidential]
caucuses, and that happened because they felt they could make a
difference. He said if more people could do their public service
without having to abandon their private lives, there may be more
options come election time.
CHAIR MCGUIRE said no one believes that being a lawmaker should
be lucrative. It is public service, but should there be a basic
salary to pay bills?
SENATOR STEVENS said he likes the idea of a citizen legislature,
but he works almost everyday. It is not full time, but it
certainly isn't part-time work. The difference between a citizen
and professional legislature is how much a person gets paid.
10:24:21 AM
SENATOR BUNDE said the public often sees the legislature like
the fire department that is on call when someone has a problem.
That dichotomy will be difficult to change. Citizens only want a
full-time legislator when they need one. It is constitutional to
be a part-time body. This commission will be educational.
REPRESENTATIVE DOOGAN said a person called him when he was
running for election and asked why he wasn't in his office when
he dropped by. Representative Doogan told him that his job
wasn't full time. The man responded: "I don't want you to be
there full time, just when I come to see you."
CHAIR MCGUIRE held HB 260 in committee.
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair McGuire adjourned the meeting at 10:26:55 AM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|