Legislature(2013 - 2014)SENATE FINANCE 532
03/10/2014 05:00 PM Senate FINANCE
Audio | Topic |
---|---|
Start | |
SB138 | |
Presentation by Enalytica: | |
SJR21 | |
SB191 | |
Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ | TELECONFERENCED | ||
= | SJR 21 | ||
= | SB 138 | ||
= | SB 191 | ||
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. 6:17:54 PM Co-Chair Kelly MOVED to ADOPT the proposed committee substitute for SJR 21, Work Draft 28-LS1364\O (Wallace 3/10/14) as a working document. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. HEATHER SHADDUCK, STAFF, SENATOR PETE KELLY, explained the change in the new CS and related that it could be found on page 2 on lines 1 and 2. She explained that the original version of the bill stated that the judicial council shall act by a concurrence of a majority of its members who were participating in a vote; this had been changed in the current CS to say that the judicial council shall act by a majority vote of a quorum of at least seven members. She added that this was the only change in the new version of the bill. 6:19:21 PM Co-Chair Kelly thought that the Alaska State Constitution was a very fine document, but like all things worldly it was not perfect. He offered that one of the things that the founding fathers of the constitution had gotten wrong was the judicial council wrong; their desire was to de- politicize it, but he felt that had not occurred. He recalled testimony that had indicated that it was very rare that the people's will as represented through non-public members on the judicial council was overridden; it was a rare occurrence. He clarified that four times in the last two years, public member who were appointed by the governor and confirmed by the legislature had been overridden by attorney members of the council who not confirmed by the legislature or appointed by any elected officials in the state; furthermore, the Supreme Court Justice, who was the tie break in these situations, would usually side with the attorney members to forward nominations to the governor. He noted that attorney members of the council had great power, but were not required to go through a confirmation hearing like other state board and councils. He thought something needed to be addressed in the constitution to prevent a tie from happening where public members were being overruled by people who had never stood before the public for confirmation. Co-Chair Kelly related that the resolution would increase the number of public members to six and keep three attorney members; it would also increase the required quorum to 7. Hew related that the addition of public members and the quorum of 7, there would never be a scenario where the public was against the attorneys and the justice had to break a tie against the people. He added that in Article 4, Section 8 of the state's constitution, it stated that appointments to the council should be made with due consideration to area representation and without regard to political affiliation. He offered that the problem was that there had been no real way to represent vast areas of the state with so few members and thought that the addition of the members would give the council a shot at regional diversity. He assumed that members had their packets a list of the public and non-public members of the council. He requested a brief AT EASE. 6:24:12 PM AT EASE 6:24:24 PM RECONVENED 6:24:29 PM Co-Chair Kelly noted that the state constitution stated that there shall be regional diversity on the judicial council. He noted that the attorney members were mostly from Juneau, Ketchikan, Fairbanks, and anchorage and there were never any rural members; there were a few non-attorney rural members, but the last two instances of that was in 1987 and 1916 before that. He did not think that anyone was trying to keep rural members off the judicial council, but that naturally, most of the attorney members would be from urban areas. He asserted that with the current number of members on the council, it could not maintain the regional diversity that the constitution called for. Co-Chair Meyer observed that there was a small fiscal note attached to the bill that was associated with having a larger judicial council. 6:26:25 PM Co-Chair Kelly MOVED to REPORT CSSJR 21 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. 6:26:42 PM Co-Chair Meyer questioned which version of the legislation Co-Chair Kelly had moved. 6:26:49 PM AT EASE 6:27:38 PM RECONVENED 6:27:45 PM Co-Chair Kelly MOVED to REPORT CSSJR 21 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. 6:28:07 PM CSSJR(FIN) 21 was REPORTED out of committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with previously published fiscal impact note: FN1(GOV) and with a fiscal impact note from the Alaska Court System. 6:28:11 PM AT EASE 6:29:19 PM RECONVENED
Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
---|---|---|
SFIN, enalytica, Mar 5.pdf |
SFIN 3/10/2014 5:00:00 PM |
SB 138 |
SJR21 work draft version O.pdf |
SFIN 3/10/2014 5:00:00 PM |
SJR 21 |
CS SB191 work draft version N.pdf |
SFIN 3/10/2014 5:00:00 PM |
SB 191 |