Court Opinion

ID: 9785728
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 22:16:48.907685+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:36:31.999758
License: Public Domain

CARPENETI, Justice,
dissenting in part.
I agree with all parts of the court's opinion except two dealing with the confinement clause. Under the same test that the court applies to conclude that the ASMI appropriations violated the confinement clause, I be-leve that the struck language in the appropriations for both the Valdez Therapeutic Treatment Program and Community Residential Center also violated the confinement clause. I join Justice Bryner's dissent concerning the former. As he persuasively shows, even merely descriptive language can cause mischief in the balance of powers between the legislature and the executive.
In my view, the struck language concerning the CRC appropriation is at least equally objectionable: In limiting the expenditures to facilities "not owned or controlled by municipalities,1 the legislature prevented the department from using this appropriation to contract with municipalities to provide CRC space. This language substantively changed the existing law that allowed the commissioner to contract with municipalities The struck language therefore inappropriately interfered with the discretion previously granted to the executive branch by substantive law.
The court says there is no confinement clause violation because, while AS 88.30.0831 authorizes the commissioner to contract with municipalities, "it does not require the commissioner to put municipalities on footing equal with private enterprise as potential providers of new CRC bed space." (Op. at 382, emphasis in original.) With respect, I do not believe that is the issue. The issue is whether the language amends existing law, and I believe it does: For purposes of this appropriation only, it repeals AS 83.30.031(e), which otherwise gives the commissioner the power to contract with municipalities. The language purports to take away from the commissioner a power she clearly enjoys under AS 83.30.03l(e). Thus, it violates the confinement clause. I would affirm the superior court's holding to that effect.
APPENDIX A
The appropriations at issue are as follows with the vetoed language struck out:
A. ASMI Appropriations
1. Chapter 98, Section 6, SLA 1997 (as amended)
Alaska-Seafood-Marketing having ] -are-located-outside-Alaslka-whose *386Range-21-on-the-state-salary-sechedule under-A§$-89.27.011; an amount equal to the unexpended and unobligated balance on June 80, 1997, of the fiscal year 1997 general fund receipts from the salmon marketing tax (AS 48.76.110), from the seafood marketing assessment (AS 16.51.120), and from the fishery resource landing tax (AS 48.77.011) is appropriated from the general fund to the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute for marketing Alaska seafood products during fiscal year 1998.
2. Chapter 100, Section 70, SLA 1997
keting _Insti having f 1 ] ; ide_Alas] j tas lassified ] -21-on-the-state-salary-sehedule under-A$-39.27.011; an amount equal to the unexpended and unobligated balance on June 30, 1997, of the fiscal year 1997 general fund receipts from the salmon marketing tax (AS 48.76.110) and from the seafood marketing assessment (AS 16.51.120) is appropriated from the general fund to the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute for marketing Alaska seafood products during fiscal year 1998.
3. Chapter 100, Section 47, SLA 1997
under-AS-39.27.01l,-and subject to the conditions set out in (b)-(d) of this seetion, the appropriation made by section 31, ch. 117, SLA 1996, page 58, lines 8-11, lapses into the general fund on June 30, 2000.
B. CRC Appropriation
Chapter 98, Section 39, SLA 1997
As one of the appropriations for the Department of Corrections, $310,000 was appropriated for "new community residential centers." The vetoed language at issue in this appeal immediately followed this appropriation:
[[Image here]]
C. Valdes Therapeutic Treatment Program Appropriation
Chapter 100, Section 74(a) SLA 1997
The sum of $400,000 is appropriated from the federal receipts crime funds to the Department of Corrections for a therapeutic treatment community program of up to 100 beds in Valdez where . lay Cexelust ¢ ment-eosts)-will-not-exceced-tho-state id R lay for rrectional institutions.

. AS 33.30.031 provides in relevant part:
(a) The commissioner shall determine the availability of state correctional facilities.... If the commissioner determines that suitable state correctional facilities are not available, the commissioner may enter into an agreement with a public or private agency to provide necessary facilities....
[[Image here]]
(e) The commissioner may enter into an agreement with ... a municipality of this state ... to provide a correctional facility....