Legislature(2015 - 2016)SENATE FINANCE 532
04/11/2016 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
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 | |
| SB101 | |
| SB201 | |
| SJR12 | |
| SB196 | |
| SB210 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 101 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 200 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 201 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SJR 12 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 196 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 210 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 12
Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State
of Alaska relating to the office of attorney general.
9:42:10 AM
Vice-Chair Micciche discussed FN 1, (OMB component 0) which
had no department appropriation or allocation and was a
zero fiscal note.
Vice-Chair Micciche discussed FN 2 (OMB component 21), for
the Office of the Governor, with an appropriation for the
Division of Elections. He specified that FN 2 was a zero
fiscal note from FY 17 through FY 22. The note assumed the
election would be an addition to the regular election on
the governor's cycle.
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked for explanation as to why there
was an OMB component number of zero, and a fiscal note from
the Legislative Affairs Agency.
JESSICA GEARY, FINANCE MANAGER, LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS (via
teleconference), relayed that she was asked by the sponsor
of the legislation to prepare a fiscal note. She had
prepared a zero fiscal note because the bill had zero
fiscal impact on the agency.
SENATOR BILL STOLTZ, SPONSOR, discussed the bill. He
specified that the bill was based on the premise of
providing a "people's lawyer," and that 43 other states
elected the attorney general. He stated that the primary
motivation was not to adhere to the practices of the rest
of the country, but rather to provide for a people's
lawyer. He wanted to put the matter before voters so they
could make the final decision.
Senator Olson referred to the formation of the Alaska
Constitution and pondered the discussion of the framers on
the topic of an elected attorney general. He recounted that
there had been strong proponents of not having an elected
attorney general, and the framers had considered the
Missouri Plan. He mentioned the Judiciary Committee and
Ralph Rivers [former territorial legislator and member of
the constitutional convention]; and wondered what
disagreement the sponsor had with the original rationale
and arguments of the Judiciary Committee.
Senator Stoltz agreed that the constitutional framers had
been the prevailing voice on the matter of choosing an
attorney general. He recalled that former Governor Bill
Egan, the chairman of the constitutional convention, had an
opposing view but had been in the minority. He continued
that the Missouri Plan applied to the selection of judicial
officers.
9:46:34 AM
Senator Olson thought the Missouri Plan had considered
matters in the Judiciary Committee, which had decided to
have the prevailing vote and have an appointed attorney
general.
Senator Stoltz thought that there had been a decision to
have a governor's appointment of the judiciary, with a
voter retention plan. The judiciary committee had also
dealt with the attorney general, and appointment had been
the majority view in the years of 1955 and 1956.
Senator Hoffman asked if the sponsor had any concerns that
there would be a qualified individual outside of the major
population centers. He thought everyone was well aware that
it would be difficult for people outside of major
metropolitan areas to get elected statewide.
Senator Stoltz mentioned former Governor Bill Egan, former
Governor Jay Hammond, as well as Governor Bill Walker as
examples of major elected officials from smaller cities
within the state. He thought the system had worked well in
spite of the geography of the state.
Senator Olson discussed historical gubernatorial elections
in which unique circumstances had contributed to the
victory. He remembered that there had been a split vote in
1974, and Jay Hammond had won.
Senator Stoltz recalled that Governor Hammond, when he won
the election in 1874, had beat every former Governor of
Alaska both through the primary and general election.
Vice-Chair Micciche MOVED to report SJR 12 out of Committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes.
SJR 12 was REPORTED out of committee with "no
recommendation" and with two previously published fiscal
notes: FN1 (LEG), and FN2 (GOV).
9:50:06 AM
AT EASE
9:52:38 AM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair MacKinnon noted that SB 200 [scheduled but not
heard], pertaining to mandatory physical activity in
schools, would be addressed in the afternoon meeting. She
detailed that the committee was waiting for a CS, and
wanted to share it with the sponsor prior to the bill
hearing. She recalled discussion from the previous day
regarding an exception if there was inclement weather or a
safety issue. The CS would address the exception, and the
committee was waiting for the sponsor to review the
language to see if it was acceptable.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 200 Public Testimony Nees.pdf |
SFIN 4/11/2016 9:00:00 AM |
SB 200 |
| SB 200 NEA Alaska Letter.pdf |
SFIN 4/11/2016 9:00:00 AM |
SB 200 |
| SB 210 Community Revenue Sharing Estimates.pdf |
SFIN 4/11/2016 9:00:00 AM |
SB 210 |
| SB 201 Responses to questions during SB 201 hearing SFIN 4.pdf |
SFIN 4/11/2016 9:00:00 AM |
SB 201 |
| SB 210 with $38.2 million vs Status Quo with $60 million.pdf |
SFIN 4/11/2016 9:00:00 AM |
SB 210 |