Legislature(2017 - 2018)
2018-11-07 Senate Journal
Full Journal pdf2018-11-07 Senate Journal Page 3241 SB 97 Message dated September 28 was received stating: Dear President Kelly: Under the authority of article II, section 17, of the Alaska Constitution, I have let the following bill become law without signature: HOUSE CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 97(FIN) am H "An Act relating to pension obligation bonds." Chapter 109, SLA 2018 [Effective Date: 12/26/18] Although I understand the necessary role of the Legislature in setting limits on the issuance of pension bonds, I am concerned that the approach taken in HCS SB 97(FIN) am H adds unnecessary steps to the bond issuance process and unnecessarily restricts the pension obligation bond limit. Neither of these legislative changes are needed, and they may hinder responsible and timely pension obligation bond issuance in the future. Responsible management of the State’s unfunded pension obligations is necessary to assure the State’s fiscal future and to meet our obligations to system beneficiaries. In 2008, the Legislature, through enactment of statutes allowing the issuance of pension obligation bonds, recognized that pension obligation bonds were one means to address and pay down unfunded pension obligations. Accordingly, the Legislature set up a rigorous structure to assure careful consideration of pension obligation bonds. However, with the changes in this bill, I am concerned that the process will be unduly hampered at no benefit to the state. First, this bill will require the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (through a subsidiary), the Alaska Pension Obligation Bond Corporation, the State bond committee, and the Alaska Municipal Bond Bank Authority, to submit a pension bond proposal to the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee for a 45-day period of review. 2018-11-07 Senate Journal Page 3242 I understand the Legislature may wish to have some formalized approval process for bond issuance. However, I am concerned that a 45-day review period is cumbersome and unlikely to be useful. Bonds can only be issued after rigorous financial vetting consistent with prudent financial management and stringent statutory obligations. The review period in the bill for the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee is unlikely to add anything to the considerations the State debt managers have not already considered. Additionally, the committee is given no standards under which to review a pension bond obligation offering. While it may be advisable to have some type of legislative input regarding a proposed bond offering, I hope to work with the Legislature to streamline the process, as the approach in this bill fails to strike the right balance of legislative oversight and recognition of bond market complexities. Second, the bill would reduce the pension obligation bond limit from the current $5,000,000,000 to $1,500,000,000 or a funding ratio of actuarial assets to accrued liability greater than 85 percent, whichever is less. This limitation, although likely spurred by good intentions and a goal of fiscal responsibility, presents two concerns. First, the limit of $1,500,000,000 may be unreasonably low, and second, the limitation based on actuarial assets to accrued liability could raise questions of interpretation and implementation. I believe there are better ways to develop an effective and helpful legislative review process. However, I also understand the Legislature’s desire, and proper role, in determining how we best address our unfunded pension liability. For these reasons, I have not signed HCS SB 97(FIN) am H, and have allowed it to become law without my signature. Sincerely, /s/ Bill Walker Governor