Home Politics Assembly Beat: Anchorage Anchorage Assembly Passes AO-37 Repeal and Replacement, Threat of Mayoral Veto Lingers

Anchorage Assembly Passes AO-37 Repeal and Replacement, Threat of Mayoral Veto Lingers


assembly beat anchorage logo

The Anchorage Assembly took one more stab at preventing the referendum on Ordinance 37 (AO-37) — the controversial labor law passed in February of 2013 — from making it onto a ballot this November. Items need to be finalized by August 19, and Tuesday’s meeting was the last regular meeting before that deadline.

With the clock winding down, two actions ended up on the night’s agenda. The first was an outright repeal of AO-37, in its entirety, which would cancel the referendum. The second was AO-80, a compromise ordinance that sought to replace AO-37. The new proposal, authored by Assemblywoman Jennifer Johnston, has been the subject of ad hoc work group meetings, an assembly work session, and multiple revisions by Johnston and her colleagues, Assembly members Dick Traini and Elvi Gray-Jackson.

Unions made concessions on upward of 50 different provisions within the compromise legislation, but still maintained three major areas of concern. The dozen or so speakers who showed up to testify repeatedly recited the lopsided ratio of concessions endured by the unions, compared to areas they still felt needed further work. Freshman Assemblyman Bill Evans, who chaired the ad hoc committee to try and find areas of agreement, pushed back on the perception of unfairness leveled at the assembly.

“Would [the unions] be willing to trade the 46 items they agreed to for the one management rights provision that they don’t agree with?” Evans asked. “Not all these things are created equal. There are things that are of more significant importance than others. So saying that, you know, I agreed to 46 things but I only want three things is not exactly, necessarily, an even balance.”

“Sometimes a pound of feathers is different than a 13888612323_9b14877e53_zpound of lead,” Assembly Chair Patrick Flynn added.

The first source of contention centered around a provision, held over from AO-37, which exempts certain employees from collective bargaining. This includes non-represented, supervisory, and confidential employees, as well as information technology positions. The second hangup dealt with public employees’ right to negotiate over shifts, staffing, and equipment. The third concerned a provision that required assembly approval of personnel regulations, which, as written, would supersede contracts negotiated in good faith through collective bargaining.

The general consensus displayed by the compromise’s supporters on the assembly — and even some of the inevitable dissenters — was that it was a decent compromise, albeit not perfect. But as anyone involved with policy will quickly point out, there is no such thing as a perfect law. The best thing to aim for is a perfectible law, and many pointed to the flexibility afforded in the compromise package aimed at that end.

“The idea that code is set in stone, I hope, is not the message that we take away,” Assemblyman Bill Starr explained. “We need to modify the code so that it remains flexible. When it becomes a direct affront against employees themselves, that’s why I became so active. It’s also why I’ve voted for repeal now twice.”

Starr said they needed to reestablish trust, and criticized the process that lead to passage of AO-37, saying that the assembly “got left out.” He challenged Mayor Sullivan, adding that he would vote to override a veto. “I think it’s time to move on.”

“If we’re all a little bit unhappy, perhaps this is the right thing to do,” Assemblyman Paul Honeman said, voicing cautious support of the agreement.

Johnston, however, chose to spend her closing remarks heralding tech utopianism. She said she was inspired by a speech given by Terry Jones, the founder of Travelocity and the Chairman of the Board of Kayak.com, an online travel search engine. Jones recently spoke at an Anchorage Economic Development Corporation luncheon, which Johnston attended.

It’s a changing model. This is all a different model. [Jones’s] whole talk was how we have to be flexible, we have to be nimble, we have to be accountable, and we have to be adaptable. And he said that not necessarily that the business has gone away. We haven’t stopped reading but we don’t really have book stores anymore. We haven’t stopped traveling… but it’s not the travel agencies of the 1980s. We don’t necessarily stop listening to music, but we listen to iTunes, Spotify, and if none of you know what I’m talking about, you might ask somebody a little younger. Anyway, my point is, is government is the same. We have to be flexible, nimble, accountable, adaptable. Because it’s not the services that are changing in government. We still have the basic service we need to provide to the communities. But it’s the mode of how we provide it.

She also referenced Amazon’s lofty proposal of delivery-by-drones as a possible method of fire fighting in the future. The whole exchange was rather odd.

In the end, she concluded by stating her belief that, in assessing the language in the final version of AO-80, “we’re looking to go back to the future, and I’m not comfortable with it.”

Both the repeal of AO-37 and the compromise package were approved, in two separate votes, by a 7-4 margin. Assembly 13931874819_74a677dcaf_zmembers Amy Demboski, Jennifer Johnston, Bill Evans, and Ernie Hall dissented. The vote tallies, however, put each measure one shy of a veto proof majority. Mayor Sullivan has seven days to mull over such action, and did not immediately wield his pen (as he is generally wont to do). But he also did not back away from his controversial legislation.

Sullivan said that the process behind AO-37 could probably have been done better, but reiterated that multiple work sessions and ample — according to him — public comment were entertained. “We always knew we would be able to negotiate,” he said, pointing out that several contracts had been approved subsequently, adhering to the tenets of AO-37. “We were going to take a position of tough negotiation on behalf of the taxpayers of this community.”

It should be noted that AO-37 was suspended when the referendum was approved. The negotiations that led to those contracts did not require the law and did not benefit from its would-be mandate, calling into question the underlying necessity of the law in the first place.

Should the mayor issue a veto, the Assembly has preemptively scheduled a special meeting for August 12 at 6pm. Tonight’s votes present a dim forecast for the assembly’s chances of overriding it. The mayor, who is also running on the Republican ticket for lieutenant governor this November, will weigh his options. Should the measure remain on the ballot, the municipal clerk has estimated the costs to those same “taxpayers of this community” to be as high as $436,000.


  1. John, this is inaccurate: “Johnston, however, chose to spend her closing remarks heralding tech utopianism.” While Jennifer cited a number of tech examples common to our collective experience, she was not pointing to a utopia we should aspire to. Instead, Jennifer was drawing direct parallels to vast recent rapid changes in how services are delivered, and more importantly our expectations as citizens for how the Muni can do a better job at delivering services. I am a huge fan of both AK Commons and Assemblymember Johnston. As the city CIO, and a card carrying Tech Utopian, I strongly believe we can adopt proven tech to improve services to our citizens, AND have a great relationship with our employees. These goals are not mutually exclusive. (For your readers, Jennifer’s comments start at about 2:44 in the link below.)

    • Johnston suggested that Travelocity, Kayak.com, iTunes, Spotify, and Amazon drones somehow typified how to streamline labor union involvement out of the services municipal government provides. I appreciate Johnston’s insight and experience, but if she’s suggesting tech alternatives to justify labor laws, it would help her cause immensely if she could come up with a better, more concrete suggestion than replacing muni jobs — like emergency response workers — with a music sharing app.

      • We can agree to disagree. I don’t believe she was talking about streamlining labor out of Muni services; she clearly jumped up to the 30 thousand foot view, and was talking about the pace of change and the need for management to have more flexibility (adaptibility, etc.) as a foundational policy for the Muni, no matter who is in charge.

  2. How many fulltime jobs would $400k pay for? Geez……. Ballotopedia quoted Sullie as saying “Quite frankly, we don’t mind it going to the ballot. I think the people will agree with us.” I dare you to veto this Mr. Mayor! What’s more important to you’re legacy? This or winning in November…. Live up to your word. Let the people decide!!!

  3. Who tosses out a healthy meal today because you read about a chef who someday might prepare a fancier one? Ms Johnston has no plans, progress, or projected completion dates of her fantasies, yet she voted out our realtime world. Her plate is empty, and she voted to leave us nothing.