Legislature(1993 - 1994)
04/21/1994 03:20 PM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 67 - MENTAL HEALTH TRUST AMENDMENTS
Testimony was presented by Tom Koester, Bruce
Botelho, and Dave Walker. CSSB 67 (2d Fin) work
draft "S" was adopted. CSSB 67 (2d Fin) was then
REPORTED OUT of committee with individual
recommendations. A $200.0 fiscal note from the
Dept. of Law, a $278.9 note from Dept. of Natural
Resources, a $331.7 note from the Dept. of Health
and Social Services, and zero notes from the Dept.
of Fish and Game and the Court System subsequently
followed the bill.
Co-chair Pearce directed that CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 67(FIN)
(Act amending provisions of ch. 66, SLA 1991, that relate to
reconstitution of the corpus of the mental health trust and
to the manner of enforcement of the obligation to compensate
the trust; and providing for an effective date) be brought
on for discussion and referenced CSSB 67 (2d Fin) (work
draft 8-LS0409\S, 4/18/94, Chenoweth). Co-chair Frank MOVED
for adoption of work draft "S." No objection having been
raised, CSSB 67 (2d Fin), "S" version was ADOPTED.
Co-chair Pearce asked that representatives of the
administration provide a brief overview of the new draft.
BRUCE BOTELHO, Attorney General Designee, Dept. of Law,
HARRY NOAH, Commissioner, Dept. of Natural Resources, and
TOM KOESTER, Contract Attorney for the Dept. of Law, came
before committee. Mr. Koester advised that changes between
the previous "Q" draft and the current "S" version consist
of:
Page 12, line 20 - The "Q" draft did not contain "or
interests."
Page 12, Sec. 17- Per language in the "Q" draft, the
bill only addressed lands tentatively approved or
patented to the state on or before the effective
date of legislation passed in 1978. However,
lands were tentatively approved or patented to the
state after that date. Under revised Sec. 17
language in the "S" draft, the bill now addresses
lands tentatively approved or patented to the
state under the Mental Health Enabling Act, both
before and after 1978.
Co-chair Pearce next noted a proposed Amendment designated
"S.1" and asked for comments from the administration. Mr.
Koester said that it is designed to ensure that lands the
state has conveyed to private third parties are the first
for which the trust receives compensation under the bill.
They would thus be the first to be "freed from the cloud of
this litigation." That is the intent of the amendment. It
also provides that lands conveyed by the state to
municipalities be the second lands freed from litigation.
It prioritizes release from litigation in favor of private
third parties first, municipalities second, and remaining
land removed from the trust third.
Co-chair Frank MOVED for adoption of Amendment S.1. No
objection having been raised, Amendment S.1 was ADOPTED.
Senator Kerttula referenced correspondence from David Walker
and read from the third paragraph:
The administration's proposal presented in Chenoweth's
work draft CS for Senate bill No. 67 (2d FIN) is not a
settlement. It purports to buy out the Trust by
funding the Mental Health program. It unfairly
characterizes the beneficiaries and is in fact
unacceptable to all the parties who represent
beneficiaries. It is unrealistic to think that the
measure would be accepted by the Plaintiffs or approved
by the court. Any negotiated settlement would be very
different from the proposition outlined . . . .
The Senator asked if the proposed bill would improve the
state's position. Attorney General Botelho voiced his
belief that the legislation would "measurably" improve the
state's position in court. He acknowledged the likelihood
of continuing litigation but stressed that the state has
sought to closely satisfy requirements in the 1985 supreme
court State v. Weiss decision calling for reconstitution of
the trust. The bill also satisfies the latest guidance from
Judge Greene at the superior court level.
DAVID WALKER, Attorney for Plaintiffs, Weiss et al,
concurred in comments regarding active, ongoing, settlement
negotiations and voiced his hope that they would come to
fruition. He stressed that a negotiated resolution would
look very different than SB 67. The proposed bill unfairly
characterizes the beneficiaries. Mr. Walker said he
strenuously disagreed with Attorney General Botelho about
the position in which it places the state. He stressed that
as currently structured, the proposed bill is unacceptable
to those representing plaintiff/beneficiaries in the
litigation.
Co-chair Pearce called for additional testimony on the bill.
None was forthcoming. The Co-chair noted recent arrival of
an additional fiscal note from the Dept. of Health and
Social Services and voiced her intent to move the bill this
date and follow up with appropriate fiscal notes shortly
thereafter. Co-chair Frank advised that he had asked the
Office of Management and Budget to review the late-arriving
note in terms of how it would fit into the spending plan.
Co-chair Frank MOVED for passage of CSSB 67 (2d Fin) and
requested unanimous consent. No objection having been
raised, CSSB 67 (2d Fin) was REPORTED OUT of committee with
individual recommendations. Co-chair Frank and Senators
Jacko and Sharp signed the committee report with a "do pass"
recommendation. Co-chair Pearce and Senators Kerttula and
Rieger signed "no recommendation." The following fiscal
notes were subsequently approved to accompany the bill:
Dept. of Law $200.0
Dept. of Natural Resources 278.9
Dept. of Health & Social Services 331.7
Dept. of Fish & Game 0
Court System 0
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 3:40 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|