Thanks to a 2006 voter-approved change, Alaska statute has officially restricted legislators to a 90-day window to pass laws, approve a budget and get out of Juneau. However, lawmakers rarely abide by these statutory restraints and typically work right up until the longer 121-day constitutionally mandated limit.

State Sen. Cathy Giessel (R-Anchorage) wants to repeal the shorter limit with her Senate Bill 34. She claims that three months is just not enough time to do the people’s work. According to her sponsor statement, lawmakers have only abided by the 90-day limit three times in nearly two decades.

“It’s evident that the 90-day limit is insufficient for the Legislature to adequately address the state’s increasingly complex issues, including managing natural resources, balancing the budget, and tackling critical policy matters,” she argued. “Moreover, the 90-day limitation has caused confusion among the public. Many Alaskans expect the Legislature to adjourn within the 90-day window, as dictated by the ballot measure.”

In narrowly passing the ballot measure in 2006, supporters argued that shorter sessions would be more cost effective and would incentivize lawmakers to buckle down and tackle only the most necessary legislation, while curbing excessive laws. Supporters also maintained that a shorter session would allow more Alaskans to run for office without spending an extra month away from their jobs and families.

Nationally, roughly 30 states hold legislative sessions that are shorter than 120 days, and as many as 20 of those have sessions limited to 90 or fewer days. In most instances state lawmakers are able to abide by the shorter time frame, which means less expense to the various state budgets.

Today, the threat of extending the 90-day limit is occasionally used to pressure colleagues who depend on seasonal summer work to pay the bills.

In Alaska, that’s rarely the case as lawmakers approve extended and “special sessions,” which allow them to stay an extra month in Juneau where they accrue per diem and other expenses.

Critics have repeatedly noted that the Alaska Legislature often works very quickly right at the very end of the 121 day constitutional limit, demonstrating that they actually can get significant work done in a short period of time when facing a hard deadline.

Giessel, however, maintains that the voter-approved law is both a hindrance and a public relations problem.

“This disconnect between public expectation and legislative reality has led to public frustration, as extended sessions and special sessions become the norm, not the exception,” she stated. “It fuels unattainable expectations among the public, who expect lawmakers to conclude their work within a rigid timeframe, while in practice, the Legislature is often required to extend its sessions to meet its responsibilities.”

Back in 1984, voters initially approved a constitutional amendment to limit the legislative sessions to 121 days. That was in response to lawmakers working well into the summer, sometimes as long as five months. More than 75% of voters approved the 121-day limit.

Today, the threat of extending the 90-day limit is occasionally used to pressure colleagues who depend on seasonal summer work to pay the bills. In 2017, the Anchorage Daily News noted that by ignoring the 2006 law and extending the deadline to 121 days, some lawmakers are able to coerce certain colleagues to make a deal in order to close out the session and head home.

Roughly 10 years ago, Sen. Bill Wielechowski (D-Anchorage) proposed a bill that would have limited expense checks to lawmakers after the 90^th day of the session if they had failed to pass a fully funded budget. That proposal was roundly rejected and died in committee.

Click here to read Giessel’s proposed bill.

Click here to support Alaska Watchman reporting.