Assembly leaves accountability to legislators

MAT-SU -- The Mat-Su Borough Assembly wrangled with a resolution Tuesday that some say would have added a level of local accountability to actions taken by the state Legislature.

The resolution was ultimately defeated unanimously, but its intent displayed a note of skepticism held by some on the assembly toward the Legislature.

Borough Mayor Tim Anderson said the resolution had been requested by members of the Alaska Municipal League. The text of the resolution was taken directly from a sample from AML. The resolution requests the Legislature to pass legislation making it necessary for fiscal notes be attached to legislation detailing how the legislation will affect communities around the state. Anderson said it's not the first time such a resolution had been discussed at AML meetings.

"This has been around AML for years," Anderson said. "They want legislators to have to identify the fiscal impacts [of legislation]."

AML Executive Director Kevin Ritchie said a similar practice was once in place at the state level. That practice, he said, had a few flaws and, when it sunsetted five years ago, there was little pressure to resurrect it. And, he said, communities didn't feel the need to request upfront how much legislation would ultimately affect their communities and taxpayers until recently.

Assembly member Talis Colberg said he believed the legislation would prove constrictive.

"I don't think this is a productive measure," Colberg said. "It makes people who have hard enough jobs at the legislative level have an even more awkward position … and it adds a level of awkwardness to a relationship that is not the best already with our local delegation."

Colberg added that, because there was nothing binding about the resolution, forwarding it to the Legislature, where it's not likely to be acted on, would do little but damage those relations further.

Ritchie, Wednesday, said there is rising support among legislators and other Alaska communities for municipal fiscal notes. He added that it's not an attempt to skirt an ongoing discussion between local governments and the legislators who represent them. It's a way of arriving at one common number people can agree on -- or disagree over -- relating to legislation.

"There really needs to be one acceptable number that comes out," Ritchie said. "The logic behind it is so clear, we're one of the few states who don't provide a local fiscal note."

According to the Book of States, a book published by the Council of State Governments, Ritchie said, Alaska is one of eight states that doesn't have a procedure for attaching local fiscal notes in place.

"State and local government are two sides of the same coin," Ritchie said. "To not have a process like this just doesn't make sense."

Anchorage, he said, was one of the first communities to pass the legislation, and it's scheduled for discussion in several other communities. Although Ritchie said he may have been able to breathe more life into the resolution had he been present at Tuesday's assembly meeting, he said each community must choose for themselves how they'd like to address the issue.

Assemblywoman Mary Kvalheim noted that, even if the Legislature were to put the request into effect, in her experience at the Legislative Information Office, fiscal notes were often too vague to count on.

"Having watched fiscal notes for years, it really doesn't mean anything," Kvalheim said.

Assemblyman Bill Allen suggested using the current method of finding information -- talking with local legislators.

"If we pass this, I'm not a gambling man, but I would bet that it would be dead on arrival when it gets [to Juneau]," Allen said. "I would urge you not to pass this … I think [legislators] would see it as a nuisance piece of legislation from us."