Legislature(2017 - 2018)BUTROVICH 205
01/30/2018 03:30 PM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
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 | |
| SB8 | |
| SB154 | |
| SB130 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 8 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 154 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 130 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 130-VOTER APPROVAL FOR NEW TAXES
4:12:49 PM
CHAIR MEYER announced the consideration of SB 130. He disclosed
that he is the sponsor of the bill.
4:13:18 PM
CHRISTINE MARASIGAN, Staff, Senator Meyer, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, said the intent of SB 130 is to
require a vote of the people before a broad-based-individual-
income tax or statewide sales tax takes effect.
MS. MARASIGAN disclosed that there are four sections in the bill
and provided an analysis as follows:
Section 1
The section would be amended to include tax levied
under AS 43.98.020. The section makes a vote on taxes
subject to the same rules and limitations as ballot
propositions when it comes to contributions.
Section 2
Would amend AS 15.15.030 to direct the Division of
Elections' director to place a question on the
election ballot; this is essentially the kind of
language used when requiring an advisory vote.
Section 3
Amends AS 15.80.010(33) to include taxes; in that
section there are a series of definitions and there
are about 45 definitions in that section that the word
"taxes" is included under questions.
Section 4
Adds a new section to AS 43.98 to include Article 1A,
which is the language requiring any bill that the
legislature passes levying a broad-based individual
income tax or statewide sales tax or both to be
ratified by the people, and it specifies the statewide
election ballot in which the question on the bill
levying the tax is asked either a yes or no question;
essentially, it just requires that the legislation
that you would pass to levy a tax has to include the
instructions that requires the vote of the people upon
passage, so that would be written into whatever
vehicle used to tax.
MS. MARASIGAN summarized that SB 130 would put into statute that
any legislation levying a broad-based tax be ratified by a vote
of the people.
4:16:09 PM
She said Emily Nauman, legal drafter for the bill from
Legislative Legal Services, will address the committee. He noted
that Ms. Nauman also wrote a memo that explained why the
legislation is unconstitutional. She pointed out that while Ms.
Nauman raised the case for the legislation to be
unconstitutional, there are many ways that governments have
weighted the opinion of its people on taxes.
She revealed that the Anchorage municipality uses an advisory
vote on any tax increases, or the proposition process that may
alter or do away with a tax. She said according to a very
cursory survey by Legislative Research, Californians have voted
on 10 statewide sales-tax-related ballot measures since 1932: 4
defeated and 6 approved. Colorado has the Taxpayer Bill of
Rights (TABOR); they wrote that into their state constitution in
1992 and it had a simple premise, if lawmakers want to raise
taxes or issue a debt, they need to ask the voters for
permission. She pointed out that Washington state voters have
been asked on 11 separate occasions to adopt a state personal
income tax or corporate income tax, but the first vote in 1932
was the only one that was successful.
MS. MARASIGAN noted that not all taxes are voted down. She
disclosed that 22 states approved ballot measures in the
November 8 election that would provide more than $201 billion in
funding extension and new revenue for state and local
transportation projects. She opined that the November 8 vote for
funding ballot measures indicates that there is an appetite for
voting in taxes that people want to see, particularly for
transportation and roads.
4:18:15 PM
MS. MARASIGAN explained that the intention is to explore the
idea that the vote of the people should take place to enact new
income or sales taxes. She noted that voters are being asked to
approve budget timelines, spending caps, and per diem funding
spending. She asserted that having the Legislature consult the
people who "foot the bill" makes sense.
SENATOR EGAN asked why the committee is looking at the bill that
Legislative Legal Services is saying is unconstitutional.
CHAIR MEYER replied that Senator Egan's question is a good
question and noted that Legislative Legal Services will address
the committee during the meeting.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked Senator Egan to verify that Juneau votes
on sales taxes every five years. She recalled that Juneau's
citizens voted on a 1.5 percent sales tax.
SENATOR EGAN concurred with Senator Giessel and specified that
the tax is a little above 1.5 percent. He detailed that Juneau
has a permanent tax and citizens vote whether to extend the
sales tax.
CHAIR MEYER noted that Alaska's citizens vote on bonds all of
the time. He asked Ms. Nauman from Legislative Legal Services to
address the committee and comment on her memo concerning the
bill.
4:21:01 PM
EMILY NAUMAN, Attorney, Legislative Legal Services, Legislative
Affairs Agency, Juneau, Alaska, confirmed that she believes SB
130 is very likely if not certainly going to be found
unconstitutional by the Alaska Supreme Court. She referenced
previous discussions about other types of jurisdictions, other
states and some of Alaska's municipalities; however, she pointed
out that they all have different voting rules.
MS. NAUMAN specified that her concern with SB 130 is that a
state law is being enacted under the provision of Alaska's
constitution that binds the Legislature to act and pass bills in
a certain way. She stated that one of her main concerns,
although not in the constitution outright, is that the U.S.
Supreme Court has found for anytime that a legislature attempts
to bind a future legislature; in other words, SB 130 has the
effect of putting a requirement on all subsequent legislatures
for any tax that they want to pass.
MS. NAUMAN said Legislative Legal Services also has a concern
under the constitution, Article IX, Section 1, that the power of
taxation cannot be delegated; this is generally recognized as a
legislative power. She explained that her concern of leaving it
up to the people whether to enact a tax is a delegation of the
Legislature's power to tax and is a direct contradiction to
Article IX, Section 1.
She added that another concern is about using the proposed
structure for initiatives and referendums, something that is a
little more of a "muddy issue." She pointed out that the state's
constitution contemplates an initiative and referendum as the
two sorts of methods to bring a binding vote to the people about
something that is going to become law or a law that is repealed.
She detailed that the initiative and the referendum are really
fleshed out in the state's constitution; however, the state
constitution does not really have any space for the kind of vote
that originates from the Legislature.
She said her final concern is about the actual enactment. She
pointed out that there are several sections in the constitution
that talk about how and when a law or bill becomes a law;
specifically, Article II, Sections 14, and 16-18. She opined
that there are going to be some timing issues related to
enactment; for instance, normally when a bill becomes law is 90
days after approval by the governor or a veto is overwritten by
the Legislature, and that language is in the constitution. She
summarized as follows:
If we pass a tax bill that becomes law, but is delayed
in effect, that sort of structure really isn't
contemplated in the constitution and I have some
concerns about how that would be integrated as well.
4:24:41 PM
CHAIR MEYER asked how Colorado was able to get around the issue
with the U.S. Supreme Court.
MS. NAUMAN replied that Colorado passed a constitutional
amendment. She explained that the state through the constitution
can make the Legislature comply with whatever requirements they
would like. She pointed out that one way to make SB 130 legal
would be to rephrase it as a constitutional amendment. She
conceded that there are limitations or extra steps that are
required before a constitutional amendment resolution can pass;
however, she noted that she would not have a problem with
putting the requirement in the constitution for a vote of the
people before a broad-based individual income tax or statewide
sales tax takes effect.
CHAIR MEYER asked if there would be a problem with an advisory
vote.
MS. NAUMAN replied that advisory votes are non-binding; however,
she said she would still worry about the structure regarding how
the Legislature would get the advisory vote on the ballot, but
the issues could be worked out. She said one idea is to have an
advisory vote that requires the vote to take place before a tax
bill's effective date; however, that language would have to be
inserted into every single tax bill that passed.
4:26:52 PM
SENATOR EGAN pointed out that if a future legislature must pass
a tax, they could ignore or change the proposed legislation. He
asked Chair Meyer why he did not consider proposing a
constitutional amendment.
CHAIR MEYER concurred with Senator Egan and noted that he may
consider the option. He explained that his intent was to bring
the bill before the committee to address concerns. He said his
intent is not to move SB 130 out of committee until revisions
are made and the legislation meets Legislative Legal Services'
standards.
SENATOR GIESSEL noted that Ms. Nauman cited Article IX regarding
voter approval of tax and specified as follows:
The power of taxation shall never be surrendered; this
power shall not be suspended or contracted away,
except as provided in this article.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked to verify that if SB 130 is changed to an
advisory vote that Article IX, Section 1 would have to be
repealed.
4:28:41 PM
MS. NAUMAN answered no. She explained that the reason is an
advisory vote has no effect. She said the issue in front of the
committee is SB 130 would have the effect of leaving whether a
tax is enacted or not that was made by the people's vote rather
than by the Legislature. She summarized that because an advisory
vote has no effect, the advisory vote only informs the
Legislature and the Legislature would still be enacting the tax.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked if Article IX, Section 1 in the state
constitution would have to be repealed if the bill was amended
to constitutionally allow citizens to determine taxation.
MS. NAUMAN answered no due to the language that said, "Except as
provided in this article." She believed that a constitutional
amendment would be placed into Article IX.
CHAIR MEYER asked her to verify that a referendum to repeal an
income or sales tax passed by the legislative body is okay.
MS. NAUMAN answered correct. She explained that the state
constitution has the structure and place for a referendum and
that is the reason why a referendum is constitutional as opposed
to the structure SB 130 is exploring.
CHAIR MEYER asked a representative from the Alaska Division of
Elections to address the committee and inquired if the division
has any input or concerns about the bill.
4:32:04 PM
BRIAN JACKSON, Elections Program Manager, Alaska Division of
Elections, Juneau, Alaska, replied that SB 130 is straight
forward with the understanding that the division will have to
reanalyze the bill after it is reworked. He pointed out that the
legislation would place a question to the voters on a ballot
that would also force the division to put the information into
the official election pamphlet whereby the division would
require enough time to obtain information for translation into
Alaska Native languages.
SENATOR WILSON asked if there would be an additional cost
between an advisory vote versus going to the general voting
process.
MR. JACKSON replied that he did not know.
4:34:25 PM
CHAIR MEYER closed public testimony.
4:34:33 PM
CHAIR MEYER held SB 130 in committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB - 8 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 8 |
| SB 8 - Version A.PDF |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 8 |
| SB 8 - Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 8 |
| SB 8 - Support Letter Native Village of Afognak.pdf |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 8 |
| SB 8 - Support Letter Woody Island Tribal Council.pdf |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 8 |
| SB 8 - Fiscal Note Updated 2018.pdf |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 8 |
| SB 154 - Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 154 |
| SB 154 - Version D.PDF |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 154 |
| SB 154 - Sectional Analysis, ver D.pdf |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 154 |
| SB 154 - Invited-Expert Testimony Summary.pdf |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 154 |
| SB 154 - Fiscal Note DOA.pdf |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 154 |
| SB 154 - Fiscal Note DOR PFD.pdf |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 154 |
| SB 130 Sponsor Statement .pdf |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 130 |
| SB 130 Version A.PDF |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 130 |
| SB 130 Legal Memo 11.20.2017.pdf |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 130 |
| SB 130 Letter of Support NFIB.pdf |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 130 |
| SB 130 Fiscal Note DoE.pdf |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 130 |
| SB 154 - PickClickGive Flowchart.pdf |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 154 |
| SB 154 - PickClickGive Program Overview.pdf |
SSTA 1/30/2018 3:30:00 PM |
SB 154 |