Legislature(2021 - 2022)BUTROVICH 205
02/11/2022 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY
Note: the audio
and video
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB23 | |
| SB119 | |
| SB129 | |
| SB118 | |
| SB31 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 118 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 23 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 31 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 119 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 129 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 31-PROHIBITING BINDING CAUCUSES
2:54:51 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 31
"An Act relating to binding votes by or for a legislator under
the Legislative Ethics Act."
[CSSB 31(STA) was before the committee. SB 31 was previously
heard on 5/10/21 and 2/2/22.]
2:55:07 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND noted members raised several questions at the last
hearing. He related that Mr. Anderson, the Select Committee on
Legislative Ethics administrator, was available for questions.
2:55:25 PM
SENATOR SHOWER said he would like to work with members on
amendments. He recalled Senator Kiehl asked whether SB 31 would
apply to more than procedural votes or the budget.
2:56:18 PM
SENATOR MYERS highlighted his only concern was enforcement
issues.
2:56:33 PM
SENATOR SHOWER offered to provide context for the bill. He
related that legislative leadership docked his staff's pay.
Since Mason's Manual or the Uniform Rules didn't address that
issue, his staff had no recourse. One goal of SB 31 is to
provide recourse if a member was stripped of their committee
chair or membership and their staff suffered financial losses.
2:57:59 PM
JERRY ANDERSON, Administrator, Select Committee on Legislative
Ethics, Legislative Agencies and Offices, Anchorage, Alaska,
offered to make general comments on the bill. He stated that he
did not find any changes to how parties would file complaints
under AS 24.60.170. The caucus process is silent in the
Legislative Ethics Act, and it was a product of precedent set
through the legislative process.
2:58:48 PM
SENATOR SHOWER recalled a felony penalty provision for a statute
that stated a person could not influence an elected official to
vote or prevent them from voting. However, this has happened
under a binding caucus. He said leadership threatened members
with direct action that affected legislators, their staff, and
their districts if they did not follow the caucus on procedural
or budget votes. He said he disagrees that leadership didn't
face the consequences for their threatening behavior because it
didn't violate any law. If a public member required someone to
vote a certain way, they could go to jail, but legislators are
not punished if they do the same thing.
3:00:11 PM
MR. ANDERSON responded that he had no further comments.
3:00:19 PM
SENATOR HUGHES asked for the penalty provisions for violations
of the ethics law. She recalled that penalties could be
financial or impose certain things. Second, the conduct in
question was not about being bribed for receiving a prerequisite
(perk), which would fall under criminal law. Instead, the bill
states that the person may not commit their vote. She wondered
how it would affect a legislator who voted a certain way in
exchange for a perk. She said she didn't have enough
information.
3:01:53 PM
SENATOR MYERS asked if this bill passed in its current form,
whether the penalty was an ethics violation or complaint or if
the bill should elevate the penalty to a felony.
SENATOR SHOWER responded that colleagues expressed concern that
the bill would impose a felony. He commented that it might not
be politically viable to elevate this behavior to a felony. He
related his goal was to establish a consequence for a binding
caucus that required another legislator to commit to vote for or
against a bill, appointment, veto, or another measure that may
come to a vote before a legislative body. He was unsure how to
address the issues related to a binding caucus other than to
pass the bill to prohibit a binding caucus explicitly.
3:03:59 PM
SENATOR KIEHL said the bill carves out an exception for certain
votes or informal polls in a caucus. He asked whether it would
apply to a formation of a caucus. Since he is not a member of
the majority, he has less staff and less pay for staff, which
the sponsor has highlighted as forbidden binding mechanisms. He
asked whether this bill would apply to the formation of a caucus
in the first place. He wondered whether the bill could be
interpreted to mean that minority members must have the same
resources as majority members.
MR. ANDERSON responded that the definitions used in SB 31 were
taken from open meetings guidelines. Those guidelines discuss
caucus procedures. He stated that some were included and others
were not. For example, political strategy is not part of the
open meetings guideline. Under AS 24.60.039(g)(1) "caucus" means
a group of legislators who share a political philosophy, or have
a common goal, or who organize as a group. He said if the
complaint met that definition, the Select Committee on
Legislative Ethics would consider it. If the committee found a
violation, it would go through the complaint process, including
issuing specific sanctions. He deferred to Mr. Klein to further
respond.
3:07:03 PM
NOAH KLEIN, Attorney, Legislative Counsel, Legislative Legal
Services, Legislative Affairs Agency, Juneau, Alaska, asked
Senator Kiehl to repeat the question.
3:07:16 PM
SENATOR KIEHL asked whether the bill would apply to the
formation of minority or majority caucuses since the sponsor
described the binding mechanisms, including fewer staff, pay
ranges, and committee chair assignments.
MR. KLEIN responded that the bill could apply to the formation
of caucuses if legislators were committing for or against a bill
or veto. He said if it occurs during the formation, it would not
be subject to the exception in paragraph (1).
3:08:57 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND held SB 31 in committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 23 Letter of Support - AGC.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 23 |
| SB 23 Letter of Support - Alaska Chamber.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 23 |
| SB 23 Letter of Support - RDC.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 23 |
| SB 23 Letter of Support - CAP.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 23 |
| SB 23 Letter of Support - Alliance.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 23 |
| RDC SB 23 Comment letter 2-11-22.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 23 |
| SB23 - Letter of Support - APF.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 23 |
| SB 119 SJUD Amendment G.2.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 119 |
| SB 129 SJUD Amendment O.5.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 129 |
| SB 129 SJUD Amendment O.6 as amended.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 129 |
| SB 23 Public Testimony through 2.12.22.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 23 |
| SB 118 SJUD Public Testimony.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 118 |