Legislature(2003 - 2004)
05/09/2003 02:00 PM Senate JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SJR 3-CONST AM: APPROPRIATION/SPENDING LIMIT
CHAIR SEEKINS announced SJR 3 to be up for consideration.
SENATOR DYSON, sponsor of SJR 3, said he served six years on the
Anchorage Assembly and saw a tax cap limit there work very
effectively. It allowed the tax revenues to expand as the
population and CPI expanded and allowed for voter approved
projects. The bill before them doesn't limit taxes; it limits
spending. It limits it to something like the same sort of thing
- the growth, inflation and the things that are outside a
general fund budget.
He received a proposed committee substitute from the
administration, version D, that significantly expands the list
of items that are not under the cap, but he wants the committee
to confine itself to discussing the appropriateness of a
constitutional cap and then send it on to Finance to hash out
the items.
CHAIR SEEKINS said he finds that there are 16 other states,
including Alaska, that already have an ineffectual
constitutional spending limit.
SENATOR OGAN said one loophole to get around a vote of the
people is through lease purchase options, which the Legislature
did previously with courthouses. He thinks there should be a
definition of a lease purchase, although he isn't sure this is
where it should be.
He is also concerned that the four percent per year is a little
high and wants some spreadsheets on what that would amount to
every year.
SENATOR DYSON said the D version outlines (instead of four
percent) an average of the CPI and population growth, which ends
up being, with a 2.5 percent population growth and a four
percent CPI, an expansion of 3.25 percent.
SENATOR FRENCH asked what effect it would have had on state
spending if this had been in place at the time of the state
constitution.
CHAIR SEEKINS said he is concerned about what they could do
constitutionally.
SENATOR DYSON argued that we have had a constitutional spending
limit in place since 1981 and it hasn't been challenged, but the
question is whether it's appropriate. His preference is that
they pass something like the A version and let the Finance
Committee deal with suggestions from the administration in the D
version.
SENATOR OGAN said he doesn't see language that repeals the other
constitutional spending limit, which hasn't been challenged.
SENATOR FRENCH pointed out that it's in the A version.
SENATOR OGAN said the existing spending limit is ignored. He
wonders whether future Legislatures will ignore it, if this is
put into law.
CHAIR SEEKINS said he would hold the bill for further
information and discussion. There being no further business to
come before the committee, he adjourned the meeting at 3:20 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|