Legislature(1995 - 1996)
04/23/1996 01:05 PM House CRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS
STANDING COMMITTEE
April 23, 1996
1:05 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Ivan Ivan, Co-Chair
Representative Alan Austerman, Co-Chair
Representative Kim Elton
Representative Al Vezey
Representative Pete Kott
Representative Irene Nicholia
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Jerry Mackie
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 256
"An Act relating to the offices of mayor and mayor pro tempore of
a second class city."
- PASSED CSSB 256(CRA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: SB 256
SHORT TITLE: SECOND CLASS CITY MAYOR
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) ADAMS BY REQUEST
JRN-DATE JRN-DATE ACTION
02/02/96 2281 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
02/02/96 2282 (S) CRA, STA
03/18/96 (S) CRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH ROOM 205
03/18/96 (S) MINUTE(CRA)
03/20/96 2805 (S) CRA RPT 4DP 1NR
03/20/96 2805 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DCRA)
04/02/96 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211
04/02/96 (S) MINUTE(STA)
04/03/96 (S) RLS AT 1:15 PM FAHRENKAMP RM 203
04/03/96 3042 (S) STA RPT 3DP 2NR
04/03/96 3043 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FN (DCRA)
04/15/96 3243 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 4/15/96
04/15/96 3244 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
04/15/96 3244 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING
UNAN CONSENT
04/15/96 3244 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME SB 256
04/15/96 3245 (S) PASSED Y20 N-
04/15/96 3251 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
04/16/96 3793 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
04/16/96 3793 (H) CRA, STATE AFFAIRS
04/23/96 (H) CRA AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124
WITNESS REGISTER
MARLA BERG, Legislative Assistant to
Senator Al Adams
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol Building, Room 417
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-3707
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided sponsor statement for SB 265.
DORIS BENDER
P.O. Box 711
Whittier, Alaska 99693
Telephone: (907) 472-2353
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 265.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 96-20, SIDE A
Number 0001
CO-CHAIR IVAN IVAN called the House Community and Regional Affairs
Committee meeting to order at 1:05 p.m. Members present at the
call to order were Representatives Ivan, Austerman, Elton and
Vezey; Representatives Kott and Nicholia joined the meeting at
1:10p.m. and 1:15 p.m., respectively. Representative Mackie was
absent.
SB 256 - SECOND CLASS CITY MAYOR
Number 0037
CO-CHAIR IVAN noted that committee packets for SB 256 contained a
copy of the bill, a zero fiscal note from the Department of
Community and Regional Affairs (DCRA), sponsor statements, support
materials, and the latest statutes. He called upon Marla Berg to
present the bill on behalf of the sponsor.
Number 0075
MARLA BERG, Legislative Assistant to Senator Al Adams, sponsor of
SB 256, explained that the bill would give voters in second class
cities the option of directly electing their mayor. Under current
law, the mayor is elected by and from the city council members, she
said. The bill did not change the powers, duties or qualifications
of the mayor.
MS. BERG referred to page 1, line 10, and said DCRA had recommended
that be changed from 30 days to 45 days in case there was a run-off
election between city council members. "And we think that's
probably a good idea," Ms. Berg said. She concluded, "Nobody would
have to exercise this option but it would give them the option to
do that if they want to."
Number 0163
REPRESENTATIVE AL VEZEY asked: "Why do we want to do this?"
MS. BERG explained, "The issue was brought to us by the City of
Savoonga. And it doesn't seem like there's really been a problem
there. They've elected the same mayor for most of the last 30
years. But the people there really wanted a chance to vote for
their mayor." She noted there were approximately 600 people in
Savoonga. Seven council members were elected, who then decided who
would be mayor. This would allow the people to vote for the mayor,
instead.
CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN noted that Representative Kott had joined the
meeting.
REPRESENTATIVE ALAN AUSTERMAN asked, "Does this just give the
option, so that the council can still appoint their mayor?"
MS. BERG replied, "If the city approved an ordinance to let the
people vote, then they would go ... this way. But otherwise, it
doesn't demand [that] second class cities do anything other than
what they're doing right now. It gives them an option."
Number 0281
CO-CHAIR IVAN stated his understanding that currently, the mayor
was elected from among the council members. This bill would
authorize one or more council members to run for the office of
mayor, with election being done by the community.
MS. BERG responded, "Right. Whoever on the council wants to run
for mayor."
Number 0372
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY said although he had no strong opposition to
SB 256, neither did he favor it. "We see in the parliamentary
system form of government the strength and weaknesses of electing
the chief executive from the body which they preside over," he
stated. "And it ... has a lot of advantages in terms of making
that body pull together and work, whereas if you elect a mayor
outside of that body, ... the cohesive process, that coming to a
consensus and electing one of yourselves as your presiding officer,
is lost."
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY suggested the process of electing one's own
officers created a much closer-working committee than did the
bicameral system. He commented that it was not easy being on a
city council for 600 people, saying "everybody expects you to vote
the way they want you to vote." He concluded the bill was creating
a separation of powers and he questioned whether that was conducive
to good local government.
Number 0521
MS. BERG reiterated that this provided an option, which they did
not expect many communities to take. "But we were very careful not
to change the qualifications, the duties, the powers of the mayor,"
she added.
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY understood the bill to add one person to the
city council. There was a separate position on the ballot for
mayor, and, as he read it, that person did not have to be a member
of the council.
MS. BERG reiterated that in order to run for mayor, a person had to
be a city council member.
Number 0688
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY denied that the bill said that. After the
mayor pro tem was chosen, there would be a special election for
mayor. He said the bill did not restrict how those candidates were
selected. He suggested the courts would not interpret the proposed
statute as prohibiting anybody from being on the ballot for mayor.
"Special election tells you, right off the bat, that we're not
talking about an elected body gathering together, making their own
rules, and electing their presiding officer," he said. "A special
election is you're throwing it out to the electorate."
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN suggested that with the prior sections of
Title 29, it might fall into place.
CO-CHAIR IVAN noted that Representative Nicholia had joined the
meeting.
Number 0828
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON referred to subsection (b), referenced at the
beginning of Section 1 (d), where it said, "Notwithstanding (b) of
this section". He said, "(b) of this section provided that the
mayor of a second class city is elected by and from the council."
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY responded, "And `notwithstanding' means that
regardless of what is said in section (b), they may do it this way
by ordinance. And then, it calls for a special election."
MS. BERG read from, AS 29.20.240, which said, "A member of the city
council is eligible to hold the office of mayor in a second class
city." She emphasized they had not changed these qualifications,
nor given the mayor veto power.
Number 0910
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY said, "If you had incorporated that into this,
I would agree with you. But I really believe that since this
statute actually precedes the one you just read, and since it is
calling for a special election, personally, if I was a judge, I
would be inclined to say ... this is superseding that requirement.
It's passed after the other one was passed. It is before that one
in the statutes. We have the `notwithstanding.'... If you amended
.240, then ... I'd agree with you. But you didn't."
MS. BERG emphasized that they had not wanted to amend AS 29.20.240.
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN referred to page 1, lines 10-11, and
suggested adding language so it would read something like, "Within
30 days after certification of a regular election, a special
election shall be held from the newly elected council for the
permanent mayor."
Number 1002
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY said although he did not disagree with
Representative Austerman's wording, he thought perhaps AS 29.20.240
should somehow be incorporated.
MS. BERG said Tam Cook, Legal Services Division, was of the opinion
that "if we didn't want to change the qualifications, duties, or
term of the mayor, what we should do is amend this section, leaving
the other sections as they are." She said the City of Savoonga
only wanted to change how they elected their mayor.
Number 1100
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON referred to line 6 and suggested
Representative Vezey's concern would be addressed by adding
language so it read, "provides that the mayor is elected, from the
council, by the voters rather than by the council."
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY agreed it clarified it. He asked if all
council members would be on the ballot as candidates for mayor.
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON said it allowed the council to make a decision
and broadened its choices. He guessed the council would say that
members wanting to run for mayor would have to file. Either way,
it would be outlined in the city ordinance.
Number 1208
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY said, "If we allow the council to select the
slate of candidates, they could very easily put one person on the
ballot. ... And if you put everybody on the ballot, you won't get
a majority." He asked what the bill wanted to accomplish.
CO-CHAIR IVAN responded, "First of all, we've already got the
council members elected by the voters in the community. And the
current statutes allow the council members to choose or elect one
of them from among themselves in the office of mayor. This
provision is trying to add another section, which is, if by
ordinance, if the council or the community would go through this
route, the candidates from the elected council could be all seven,
unless by ordinance they decide ... the maximum number of
candidates...."
Number 1298
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON acknowledged it was hard to second-guess.
However, he imagined the ordinance Savoonga would adopt would
establish procedures whereby council members who wished to be
candidates for mayor would file for the office. He thought having
seven people file would be unusual.
CO-CHAIR IVAN said he could understand that the mayor of Savoonga
might want to provide the opportunity for other people to run for
office.
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY asked what was to prevent the people of
Savoonga, if they were truly interested in electing their mayor,
from petitioning to become a first class city.
Number 1394
REPRESENTATIVE IRENE NICHOLIA expressed that it was good that
Savoonga wanted the people to elect their mayor. "I think it's far
better when you have the support of the community and that they're
involved in something like this," she said. "It gives them the
opportunity to talk to the people that are running and find out
what their goals are, rather than having it so closed, with just
the council...."
Number 1777
DORIS BENDER testified that as a resident of Whittier, she lived in
a second class city. "And I can see a lot of good in this if the
community wants it," she said. She recalled there was a mayor who
had been elected by and from the body, resulting in a "tangle for
11 months". Ms. Bender did not envision every council member
wanting to be mayor at one time and thought candidates should sign
up. She concluded by describing herself as a "champion nit-
picker".
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN offered a written amendment, which he
called Amendment 1. It read:
Page 1, line 10, following "Within":
Delete "30"
Insert "45"
Number 1574
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT objected for discussion and asked for the
rationale.
CO-CHAIR IVAN explained that it was an expansion recommended by
DCRA to allow time during run-off elections.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT withdrew the objection.
CO-CHAIR IVAN noted that, there being no further objection,
Amendment 1 was adopted.
Number 1623
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN offered a verbal amendment, Amendment2,
to page 1, line 6, adding after the word "elected", the phrase
",from the council," and leaving the rest as-is. He stated it
would read, "Notwithstanding (b) of this section, a second class
city may by ordinance provide that the mayor is elected, from the
council, by the voters rather than [by] the council."
CO-CHAIR IVAN asked if there was any objection to Amendment 2.
There being no objection, Amendment 2 was adopted.
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT stated he had thought the last amendment was
unnecessary. However, since it has already passed, it was fine
with him.
Number 1394
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA said she thought SB 256 was a good bill for
people in second class cities. She made a motion that SB 256, as
amended, move from committee with individual recommendations and
attached zero fiscal note.
REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN objected and stated, "I'm not totally sold
on this bill yet. I think at least one of my communities on Kodiak
has had a little bit of a problem with it. ... Moving it out of
committee does not necessarily mean that I'll vote for it on the
floor." He withdrew his objection.
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY said although he did not object to the bill
passing out of committee, he was not sold on it, either. "I think
we're going from a situation where we already have a city council
who every member of the city gets to vote for," he said. "And
these are not in districts. It's an at-large election. I just
don't think that we're improving the process of government at all
by throwing in this extra election process." He suggested instead
of having a mayor elected by consensus of the governing body, there
might now be a mayor, elected by a plurality of the people, who may
not be the person best suited to working with the body.
Number 1756
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON said he agreed with Representative Nicholia
that it was an opportunity to expand the options available to
people in second class cities. He said he also appreciated
Representative Vezey's comments. "Sometimes, I will vote for
somebody because they are a real - I think Doris [Bender] used this
term - a nit-picker, because I think ... there should be nit-
pickers on the assembly. I'm not sure I'd want one as a mayor,
though. ... And this allows the people to determine whether or not
they want a nit-picker for the mayor as well as somebody on the
assembly."
CO-CHAIR IVAN asked if there were further objections. There being
none, SB 256, as amended, moved from the House Community and
Regional Affairs committee.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to conduct, CO-CHAIR IVAN adjourned
the House Community and Regional Affairs Committee meeting at
1:37p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|