Legislature(2009 - 2010)BUTROVICH 205
03/17/2009 05:00 PM House RULES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB158 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| * | HB 158 | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE RULES STANDING COMMITTEE
March 17, 2009
5:04 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative John Coghill, Chair
Representative Bob Herron, Vice Chair
Representative Charisse Millett
Representative Mark Neuman
Representative Kurt Olson
Representative Berta Gardner
Representative Beth Kerttula
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 158
"An Act disapproving all recommendations of the State Officers
Compensation Commission relating to the compensation, benefits,
and allowances of state officers; and providing for an effective
date."
-HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 158
SHORT TITLE: REJECT RECOMMENDATION OF COMP. COMMISSION
SPONSOR(s): RULES
02/27/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/27/09 (H) RLS
03/17/09 (H) RLS AT 5:00 PM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
RICK HALFORD, Chair
Alaska State Officers Compensation Commission
Chugiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 158, presented the
findings and recommendations of the Alaska State Officers
Compensation Commission.
KARLA SCHOEFIELD, Deputy Director
Legislative Affairs Agency
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 158, answered
questions.
RICK KOCH, Member
Alaska State Officers Compensation Commission
Kenai, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided remarks during hearing of HB 158.
MIKE MILLER, Member
Alaska State Officers Compensation Commission
North Pole, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During hearing of HB 158, opined that
increasing legislators' salaries is the right thing to do.
ACTION NARRATIVE
5:04:49 PM
CHAIR JOHN COGHILL called the House Rules Standing Committee
meeting to order at 5:04 p.m. Representatives Coghill, Herron,
Olson, Neuman, Millet, Kerttula, and Gardner were present at the
call to order. Also in attendance was Representative Johnson.
HB 158-REJECT RECOMMENDATION OF COMP. COMMISSION
5:05:20 PM
CHAIR COGHILL announced that the only order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 158, "An Act disapproving all recommendations of
the State Officers Compensation Commission relating to the
compensation, benefits, and allowances of state officers; and
providing for an effective date."
CHAIR COGHILL announced that he doesn't intend on reporting HB
158 from committee today. However, he informed the committee
th,
that if the legislature doesn't act prior to March 28 the
Alaska State Officers Compensation Commission's recommendations
go into effect.
5:06:43 PM
RICK HALFORD, Chair, Alaska State Officers Compensation
Commission, began by relating that he agreed to serve on the
Alaska State Officers Compensation Commission ("Commission") in
part because he didn't act on the need to increase legislator's
salaries when he was a legislator. He reviewed the members of
the Commission. Mr. Halford explained that because this issue
is unique in the way in which statute treats it, the Commission
determined it would only make recommendations upon unanimous
support. He reviewed the process the Commission went through
that resulted in the preliminary recommendation. The
preliminary recommendation included raising the salary of the
governor, who declined to accept and thus that recommendation
was dropped. Increasing the governor's salary isn't as critical
as increasing legislators' salary schedule, which he
characterized as an emergency. He noted that a legislator's
salary is so low that the legislator qualifies for welfare as
the legislators' salary schedule is from 1991. Although the
long-term per diem is used by some to offset that loss, it's
subject to many problems with regard to public perception. Mr.
Halford clarified that it's not the Commission's intention to
restrict Legislative Council's ability to provide per diem. The
Commission only addressed per diem when the legislature isn't in
session and the legislator is at home. Mr. Halford then opined
that the salary of the board of directors, the legislators, of
the state should be higher than what's recommended. However, he
said he believes what was recommended is as high as possible at
this time. He noted that the Commission is ongoing and will
continue to review and provide recommendations. He opined that
legislators are worth an increase in salary as legislators deal
with "some of the toughest single-minded interests on the face
of the earth."
5:13:30 PM
CHAIR COGHILL remarked that [the legislature] tried to put this
issue at an arm's length from the political process while still
receiving public input. He asked if Mr. Halford felt satisfied
with the public input.
MR. HALFORD relayed that the Commission tried as best as it
could to obtain public input. Although there were few people
who were interested in coming to the public hearings, the public
testimony that was received was included in the report. To
date, the hearings have been beneficial because nothing elicits
more focus, he opined, than a legislative hearing.
5:15:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA related her belief that the Commission's
initial report seems to understand the inequity in the long-term
per diem. She highlighted that there are many legislators who
work hours that could be turned in for long-term per diem, but
choose not to do so. She inquired as to what the Commission
found regarding long-term per diem. She related that her sense
of the situation is that there are legislators who under collect
and legislators who actually worked the long-term per diem and
requested it, which results in an odd disparity in legislators'
pay.
MR. HALFORD related his belief that more often legislators are
under collecting long-term per diem. He opined that legislators
spend a lot of time responding to constituent matters.
Legislators are on-call continuously, which shouldn't be
changed. One of the problems in the past has been unreasonable
public expectations from a citizen legislature. He opined that
the expectations with regard to conflict of interest so limit
what a legislator can do that it's very difficult to support a
family and lead an average family life. "The vision of a
citizen legislature is different than the reality of today;
legislators are in session more than half the year when one
includes the weekends, special sessions, and etcetera. "It's
not a realistic expectation that people could serve for $24,000
a year and represent a full spectrum of the people of Alaska,"
he said.
5:19:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA surmised though that the Commission's
recommendations aren't suggesting that this change will result
in a full-time legislature.
MR. HALFORD clarified that nothing in the Commission's report is
intended to suggest having a full-time legislature.
5:20:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON requested that Mr. Halford reflect on
those opposed to the Commission's recommendations.
MR. HALFORD characterized this as an odd process, ratification
by inaction. He opined that the aforementioned is why it's
important to have a hearing even if the legislation isn't going
to be moved. Mr. Halford reminded the committee that over the
last 20 years, the other options have failed and thus no pay
raise has been instituted. Therefore, there have been good
people who couldn't afford to stay in the legislature for
various reasons.
5:22:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN opined that the federal per diem, upon
which the state's per diem is based, is a moving target.
Therefore, it's difficult for legislators to estimate their
costs. He asked if the Commission considered making
recommendations to Legislative Council [on the per diem].
MR. HALFORD said that the Commission considered making
recommendations to Legislative Council since it sets the per
diem, but chose to only address the out of session at-home per
diem. However, he clarified that it wasn't the Commission's
intention to limit Legislative Council's ability to pay mileage
or pay per diem if a legislator has to travel in district and
stay over night. Mr. Halford acknowledged that the federal per
diem for Juneau rises and falls, but noted that it is under the
purview of Legislative Council.
5:26:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN related his understanding that the federal
government uses different Cost of Living Allowance (COLAs).
Representative Neuman then opined that although there's nothing
wrong with getting paid a decent salary for a decent days work,
some legislators may put in more time and energy than others.
However, per the Commission's recommendations all legislators
will be paid the same.
MR. HALFORD acknowledged that the recommendations aren't
perfect. The Commission, he related, decided on a transparent,
simple system. He stressed his belief that more legislators are
under collecting rather than over collecting.
5:30:29 PM
KARLA SCHOEFIELD, Deputy Director, Legislative Affairs Agency,
explained that because the recommendations of the Commission
become law without action, the salary increase was included in
the FY 10 request. Therefore, passage of HB 158 would eliminate
that funding from the FY 10 budget. The increase for the first
year would only be for six months, and that salary increase
would be offset by taking a portion of the long-term per diem.
By the time the increase went into effect there would only be
two months left in the year. The following year there would be
a full year of the salary increase and more of the per diem is
taken away. Currently, about $810,000 is budgeted for long-term
per diem. Therefore, over the course of two years, there would
be an increase of $800,000 in the first year and $300,000 in the
second year for a total of $1.2 million.
5:31:50 PM
CHAIR COGHILL inquired as to the annual budget of the
legislators' salaries.
MS. SCHOFIELD answered that it would be $4.6 million. Ms.
Schofield then related that legislators' salaries, which haven't
changed since 1991, are equivalent to a range 5 on the salary
schedule. There are only three employees within the three
branches of government who are at range 5. Furthermore,
legislator's salaries aren't tied to the salary schedule any
longer and the legislators don't receive the COLA. Therefore,
in July when the COLA goes into effect for state employees,
legislators' salaries will no longer be able to be compared to
the state's salary schedule.
5:33:05 PM
CHAIR COGHILL surmised that the starting salary for an entry
level clerk at the Department of Health and Social Services must
be a range 8 or 10.
5:33:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT inquired as to what the range 5 jobs are.
MS. SCHOFIELD suggested that perhaps a high school student would
be paid to help out in an office.
5:34:39 PM
CHAIR COGHILL related his belief that the proposed salary
increase along with the elimination of the long-term per diem
"washes out the inequity question."
5:34:50 PM
MR. HALFORD pointed out that if one takes the average of every
legislator's per diem and added it to the current salary of
$24,000 it amounts to about $36,000. The difference in the
$36,000 plus benefits and costs for the 60 members is what the
fiscal note is based upon. The high side of per diem was
$46,000-$48,000. Therefore, even those collecting the most per
diem receive a slight bump by the change.
5:35:52 PM
RICK KOCH, Member, Alaska State Officers Compensation
Commission, reiterated the fact that all the actions of the
Commission were unanimously agreed upon.
5:36:58 PM
MIKE MILLER, Member, Alaska State Officers Compensation
Commission, echoed Mr. Halford's assertion that an increase in
legislator's salaries is the right thing to do. He opined that
increasing legislators' salaries is a critical step in obtaining
qualified individuals in the legislature.
5:38:00 PM
CHAIR COGHILL related his belief that the legislators who are
elected are qualified. However, he acknowledged that the lack
of salary has made it difficult for many people to seek office.
He then reminded the committee that he doesn't intend on moving
HB 158 from committee. If the intent is to reject the
Commission's recommendations, action must be taken on HB 158 by
th
March 28. At this point, there isn't enough support to reject
the Commission's report, he related. If that changes, the
committee will have to meet on HB 158 to report it out of
committee.
[HB 158 was held over.]
5:40:38 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Rules Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 5:40 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|