HJR 1 - LIMIT LEGISLATIVE SESSION TO 90 DAYS Number 0422 CHAIRMAN GREEN announced the next bill to come before the committee was HJR 1, Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Alaska relating to the duration of a regular session. He asked Representative Rokeberg, prime sponsor, to introduce HJR 1. Number 0467 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG, Prime Sponsor, said HJR 1 is a straightforward resolution which limits the length of a legislative session to 90 days. He directed the committee's attention to the attached fiscal note which indicates a savings of as much as $1.5 million in staffing and other areas. He pointed out the information contained in committee members' packets indicates the vast majority of other legislatures meet for less than 120 days. He suggested this issue is important from his view of legislative reform and believes people of the state deserve a chance to vote on the issue. He is of the opinion the vast majority of the citizens of the state of Alaska would approve this measure. Among the reasons for this resolution is what he considers the myth of a citizen legislator and he believes this bill would help overcome that myth. CHAIRMAN GREEN said his concern was the legislature would still begin in January during the bad weather and he would almost prefer to move it another month to avoid the problem of getting in and out of Juneau. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG noted the constitution states the legislature shall convene in regular session on the fourth Monday in January, but allows for the month and day to be changed by law. The start date was indeed changed to an earlier date so that legislators could get home in time for harvesting and to plan for summer activities. However, he was of the opinion the fourth Monday should be re-examined and the legislature would be more readily able to convene on the fourth Monday with passage of this resolution. Number 0705 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ noted that Representative Rokeberg had indicated while testifying in the State Affairs Committee that he would be supportive of 100 days instead of 90. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG commented he prefers 90 days, but he doesn't have any strong feelings about 100 days. CHAIRMAN GREEN noted this bill allows the regular session to be extended one time for up to ten days and wondered if that was a result of a prior committee hearing. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said that language currently exists in the constitution. CHAIRMAN GREEN said he interprets this language as a regular session being 90 days and with a two-thirds vote an extension of 10 days. Number 0791 REPRESENTATIVE CROFT noted that some of the accompanying material discussed establishing a shorter session every other year and asked if that was done in some states. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said some states meet biennially, like Oregon and others like Washington that designates one year as a budget year and the other year in which bills can be introduced. He noted, however, that a number of the states that do meet for abbreviated sessions have interim activity. REPRESENTATIVE CROFT pointed out the Oregon legislature meets from January to late June which is essentially one month longer than Alaska's session, but Oregon meets every other year. He said that meeting once for a longer period makes as much sense to him as having two shorter sessions. CHAIRMAN GREEN remarked that another legislative bill had been introduced which called for a biennial budget, which sort of fits in with what Representative Croft was discussing. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG expressed skepticism about having a biennial budget because of oil prices and the forecasting that occurs in the spring. In his opinion, the budget needs to be looked at every year. CHAIRMAN GREEN asked Rick Urion to come before the committee to present his comments at this time. Number 0908 RICK URION, testifying on behalf of himself, said he is a firm believer this is one of the best things that could be done to improve the legislative arena. He recalled when the 120-day limit was first proposed, many individuals said it couldn't be done and those same people say that about a 90-day session. There is no doubt the legislative process will occupy whatever period of time allowed. He stated as a person who believes in a citizen legislature, HJR 1 will return this body back to a citizen legislature. He expressed confidence this issue would pass overwhelmingly if it was put before the voters of the state. CHAIRMAN GREEN inquired if, based on Mr. Urion's past experience as a legislator and now as a private businessman, he thought the passage of HJR 1 with the shorter session would broaden the field of legislative candidates. MR. URION said there was no doubt in his mind it would broaden the field. Legislators now have year-round staff in offices in their home districts which takes away a lot of the argument for not shortening the session. Number 1064 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ said, "On that though, don't you think that because it's not just permanent staff, but permanent bureaucracy, permanent administration, that we put ourselves as a legislature at a little bit of a disadvantage by now being around for that extra month?" MR. URION replied that's been one of the arguments over the years. He commented there are three branches of government and the other two branches will always be around for a longer period of time, regardless of what the time period is for the legislative session. The legislature has time during the interim to hold committee meetings, meet with their constituents, et cetera. Number 1113 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked if there was anything magical about 90 days. MR. URION replied it's three months; it's better than 100 days because then legislators would have to pay four months rent. Number 1155 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER made a motion to move HJR 1 from committee with individual recommendations and the attached fiscal note. Number 1168 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE objected. He said committee members are kidding themselves. The difference between taking time off from a real job for three months or four months is inconsequential. He has had discussions with legislators in other states that have shorter sessions and what it means is that a person is a full time legislator when not in session because all the committee work must be done prior to coming into session. With that in mind, he didn't see that Alaska would gain much with its geographic challenge in that a lot of money would be expended for legislators to travel to committee meetings during the interim instead of holding the meetings when all committee members are convened in one location. He agreed the public would vote for it, but the public will not be happy when there is no recognizable savings. REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said he didn't disagree there would be an increase in committee work during the interim with a 90-day session. However, he felt there would be a substantial amount of savings when comparing the cost of per diem for 60 legislators and keeping staff for an additional 30 days as opposed to no travel to any great extent except to a Legislative Information Office because during the interim the committee can't pass legislation from committee anyway and amendments can be done by teleconference. REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE said this may be premature, because he felt that within five years legislators wouldn't be meeting much face-to-face, but r REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ expressed concern that it may be difficult to recruit quality staff for a three-month time period. REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE suggested eliminating all interim staff if the committee is interested in saving money. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG referred to the fiscal note prepared by the Legislative Affairs Agency which reflected the savings in per diem and staff for a 30-day period. He took strong exception to the statement there would be no savings. Number 1430 CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if there was further discussion. Hearing none, he asked for a roll call vote. Representatives Croft, Porter, Rokeberg and Green voted in favor of moving the bill from committee. Representatives Bunde and Berkowitz voted against it. Therefore, HJR 1 moved from the House Judiciary Standing Committee by a vote of 4-2.