03/31/2014 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE

SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 21                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     Proposing amendments  to the Constitution of  the State                                                                    
     of  Alaska to  increase the  number of  members on  the                                                                    
     judicial council  and relating to the  initial terms of                                                                    
     new members appointed to the judicial council.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
9:09:18 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Kelly MOVED  to ask  unanimous consent  to RESCIND                                                                    
the committee's  previous action on  SJR 21. There  being NO                                                                    
OBJECTION, it was so ordered.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
9:09:35 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Kelly  MOVED  to   ADOPT  the  proposed  committee                                                                    
substitute  for SJR  21,  Work  Draft 28-LS1364\P  (Wallace,                                                                    
3\28\14) as  a working  document. There being  NO OBJECTION,                                                                    
it was so ordered.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
9:10:00 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Kelly  commented  that   what  the  committee  had                                                                    
previously voted  on was  to increase  the number  of public                                                                    
members  on  the judicial  council  in  order to  allow  the                                                                    
practical establishment  of more  regional diversity  on the                                                                    
council. Secondly,  because there were 3  public members and                                                                    
3 attorney members,  there were times when  those two groups                                                                    
had an  even split on a  nominee; the split put  the Supreme                                                                    
Court  Justice  in the  position  of  having a  conflict  of                                                                    
interest  as they  voted  with  one side  or  the other.  He                                                                    
explained that there were concerns  that justices could have                                                                    
an influence  on choosing colleagues  that would  agree with                                                                    
their  views. He  had discovered  that  the biggest  concern                                                                    
that people had with  the state's constitution regarding the                                                                    
judicial  council was  that the  attorney  members were  not                                                                    
required to  be confirmed  by the legislature;  however, the                                                                    
public members  had to go  through the  confirmation process                                                                    
just like the other state  boards. He thought that there was                                                                    
support  to  pass  the  resolution on  the  floor  with  the                                                                    
previous CS, but  that it made sense to  address the glaring                                                                    
concerns regarding  the attorney members of  the board being                                                                    
beyond the  scrutiny of elected  officials; he  offered that                                                                    
having the  attorney members be  beyond the scrutiny  of the                                                                    
legislature  did not  sit well  "our"  way of  life and  how                                                                    
almost every  other part of our  government and constitution                                                                    
worked.  He observed  that in  the  new CS,  the Alaska  Bar                                                                    
Association would still appoint  the 3 attorney members, but                                                                    
that the appointees would come  before the legislature to be                                                                    
confirmed. He added  there was also language in  the CS that                                                                    
addressed a quorum, but that  his staff would speak to those                                                                    
changes.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
9:13:09 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Meyer  wanted the  public to  be aware  that public                                                                    
testimony  would  not  be  taken   on  the  CS  because  the                                                                    
committee  had   already  taken  public  testimony   on  the                                                                    
previous version.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
9:13:49 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
HEATHER SHADDUCK,  STAFF, SENATOR  PETE KELLY, spoke  to the                                                                    
changes reflected  in Version P.  The first change  could be                                                                    
found on Page 1, lines 10 and 11:                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     The three attorney members and six non-attorney                                                                        
     members shall be subject to confirmation be a majority                                                                 
    of the members of the legislature in joint session.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Ms. Shadduck  noted that the  next change could be  found on                                                                    
Page 2, lines 2 and 3:                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     The judicial council shall act by a majority vote of a                                                             
     quorum of at least seven members and according to                                                                      
     rules which it adopts.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Ms. Shadduck explained that the  language had been change in                                                                    
order for a quorum to be more easily attainable.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
9:15:02 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Kelly noted  that  the 7  members  still kept  the                                                                    
committee's desire to not have  the Supreme Court Justice in                                                                    
the position of  having a possible conflict  of interest. He                                                                    
further  explained that  having  7 members  on the  judicial                                                                    
council,  instead of  6, removed  the need  for the  Supreme                                                                    
Court Justice to break a possible tie.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
9:15:32 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Ms.  Shadduck  stated  that  there  had  been  concern  that                                                                    
without  a  quorum  threshold, the  judicial  council  might                                                                    
conduct business  with only 2  members; however, it  was not                                                                    
the  sponsors' intent.  She pointed  out that  putting in  a                                                                    
quorum at a  higher threshold ensured that  all voices would                                                                    
be heard.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
9:16:12 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
NANCY MEADE,  GENERAL COUNSEL,  ALASKA COURT  SYSTEM, stated                                                                    
that the  Supreme Court had  not given her direction  on the                                                                    
confirmation of  attorney members  by the legislature.   She                                                                    
pointed out that the issue had  not been an oversight in the                                                                    
constitutional   convention;   there  had   been   extensive                                                                    
discussion  regarding  the  decision to  not  have  attorney                                                                    
members approved  by the legislature.   She stated  that the                                                                    
reasoning  of  the  constitutional   framers  was  that  the                                                                    
attorney  members  should  be  free  from  any  thinking  of                                                                    
whether a  nominee would be  acceptable to  the legislature,                                                                    
whether  republican   or  democrat.  She  opined   that  the                                                                    
constitutional founders  had wanted the attorney  members to                                                                    
be clear  of political  hurdles so  that the  bar membership                                                                    
could put  the best people  on the Judicial  Council without                                                                    
having the concern of whether  that person would pass muster                                                                    
in the legislative confirmation  process. She concluded that                                                                    
not  requiring  attorney  members  to be  confirmed  by  the                                                                    
legislature  was  not an  oversight,  but  was a  purposeful                                                                    
decision by the constitutional founders.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Ms. Meade  furthered that the  court opposed  the resolution                                                                    
because of  the imbalance  in the  number of  public members                                                                    
versus  attorney  members. The  concern  was  that with  the                                                                    
imbalance,  there  was   substantial  potential  for  public                                                                    
members  to  choose applicants  to  submit  to the  governor                                                                    
based   on  considerations   other   than  the   applicant's                                                                    
qualifications to  be a  quality judge.  She responded  to a                                                                    
previous question from Vice-Chair  Fairclough and noted that                                                                    
the Judicial Council did play  a large role in the retention                                                                    
of  judges  and not  just  in  the selection  and  screening                                                                    
process.  She explained  that the  Judicial Council  came up                                                                    
with  recommendations on  whether a  judge should  or should                                                                    
not be  retained and that  the information was  published in                                                                    
the  voter  information  pamphlet. She  explained  that  the                                                                    
council ascertained its opinion of  a judge by surveying law                                                                    
enforcement, court staff,  jurors, social workers, volunteer                                                                    
Court  Appointed and  Special Advocates  (CASA) workers;  it                                                                    
also conducted public hearings and  looked at a judge's case                                                                    
files, performance,  and records of reversal  on appeal. The                                                                    
court's concern was the threat  of retaliation for any judge                                                                    
that made  a decision  that was  contrary to  the governor's                                                                    
position.  She  did  not believe  that  the  resolution  did                                                                    
service to the Alaska Court System or Alaskans.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
9:21:41 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Kelly  asserted that the  bill dealt  with regional                                                                    
diversification  on the  Judicial  Council.  He pointed  out                                                                    
that the only  2 rural members that had been  on the council                                                                    
were  both public  members;  the last  rural  member was  in                                                                    
1987, from  Barrow; and the  one before that was  1961, from                                                                    
Kotzebue.  He  believed  that by  adding  the  extra  public                                                                    
members, the  governor would have the  opportunity to expand                                                                    
rural  representation.  He  suggested that  the  framers  of                                                                    
Alaska's  constitution had  made  an  oversight in  assuring                                                                    
adequate representation,  for all groups,  stretching across                                                                    
a  great expanse.  He asserted  that even  judges should  be                                                                    
held accountable by the public.  He warned that the judicial                                                                    
system  should not  become arrogant  in  believing it  could                                                                    
escape the scrutiny of the  people of Alaska. He likened the                                                                    
council  to  the  board  of  barbers  and  hairdressers  and                                                                    
believed that its members should be equally scrutinized.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
9:27:02 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Senator  Olson  thought  that having  more  members  on  the                                                                    
council would  increase the chances of  having rural members                                                                    
on  the board.  He  commented there  had  been two  judicial                                                                    
council  members from  his district,  but none  from Senator                                                                    
Hoffman's district.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
9:27:32 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Kelly MOVED  to  REPORT CSSJR  21(2d  FIN) out  of                                                                    
committee   with   individual    recommendations   and   the                                                                    
accompanying fiscal notes. There  being NO OBJECTION, it was                                                                    
so ordered.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CSSJR 21(2d  FIN) was REPORTED  out of committee with  a "do                                                                    
pass" recommendation and with  a previously published fiscal                                                                    
impact  note: FN1(GOV)  and  a  previously published  fiscal                                                                    
impact note: FN2(CRT).                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
9:27:51 AM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
9:32:10 AM                                                                                                                    
RECONVENED