Legislature(2001 - 2002)
04/16/2002 03:40 PM Senate STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SJR 13-CONST. AM: PERMANENT FUND
JOE BALASH, staff to Senate State Affairs, explained the proposed
committee substitute (CS) for SJR 13 differed considerably from
the original amendment proposed by the trustees. Rather than
describe all income as running into the fund itself and then
putting a limit on how much may be appropriated from the fund,
all income would be deposited into a separate earnings account.
Section 2, subsection (b), establishes that appropriations would
be made from the earnings reserve account. The purpose for doing
that was to maintain a strict distinction between the earnings
appropriations and the principal of the fund. Legal advice
indicated the prior language could be problematic in that it used
the word principal and restricted what principal could be used
for, but then allowed appropriations from the fund. Rather than
leave it an open question to be debated in court, they
established the separate earnings reserve account within the
fund.
A second change occurs on page 2, lines 2 through 4. The original
proposal relied on a five-year market value for the fund. The CS
adds a lag year so that when a governor is beginning to formulate
the budget in late November or early December, there will be hard
numbers as to how much of the permanent fund will be available
for dividends and other uses. The affect would be to reduce the
amount that would be available under the formula, but if the
assumptions of the trustees were correct, 8.25 percent on an
annual basis would result in about 4.5 percent being available
for appropriation each year.
Section 3 is a transition section. There was a legal question
about whether the earnings in the statutorily created earnings
reserve account within the fund would be protected under the
language proposed by the trustees. Rather than waiting for a
court challenge, they propose that the transition section would
transfer the amount in the statutorily created earnings reserve
into the constitutionally created earnings reserve thereby
protecting it and limiting its availability to the state.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked for further discussion on the lag year
because Senator Halford was somewhat concerned about the five
percent. However, when it all works together it reduces to a
little less than five percent.
MR. BALASH explained that the amount depends on the assumptions
made on whether the earnings amount would be 8 or 8.25 percent. A
reasonable estimate for a five-year moving average as proposed by
the trustees would result in 4.7 to 4.8 percent available for
appropriation. Depending on the actual returns, adding a lag year
would result in 4.5 percent to 4.7 percent being available for
appropriation. The higher the growth in each subsequent year, the
wider the gap would be over the course of the five years, which
would reduce the effective payout rate.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT said the transition section says that money
is placed in a category that makes just the five percent averaged
draw available. It's not available with a simple majority vote.
JIM KELLY, Director of Communications for the Permanent Fund
Corporation, said the board hadn't had the opportunity to
evaluate the proposed CS so he couldn't speak for the entire
board. However, the intent to maintain the prohibition against
spending principal as described by Mr. Balash is also the intent
of the board and it appears as though the language accomplishes
that intent. No problem was immediately apparent, but if a
question arose they could discuss it in the next committee of
referral.
There were no questions and no additional testimony.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT stated the bill would go to the Judiciary
Committee next and as a member of that committee, he intended to
continue to work with the trustees.
The Version R, Cook committee substitute (CS) was before the
committee. There were no amendments offered and there was one
$1,500.00 fiscal note. He asked for the will of the committee.
SENATOR DAVIS made a motion to move CSSJR 13(STA) and attached
fiscal note from committee with individual recommendations
(Version R). There being no objection, it was so ordered.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|