02/26/2007 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB117 | |
| HB102 | |
| HB117 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 102 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 117 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
February 26, 2007
1:09 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Jay Ramras, Chair
Representative Nancy Dahlstrom, Vice Chair
Representative Bob Lynn
Representative Ralph Samuels
Representative Max Gruenberg
Representative Lindsey Holmes
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative John Coghill
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 117
"An Act relating to proclamations issued by the governor calling
the legislature into special session."
- HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 102
"An Act relating to vacating lanes or slowing down for certain
vehicles stopped along the side of a road."
- MOVED HB 102 OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 117
SHORT TITLE: PROCLAMATION CALLING A SPECIAL SESSION
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) HARRIS
02/01/07 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/01/07 (H) STA, JUD
02/20/07 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/20/07 (H) Moved Out of Committee
02/20/07 (H) MINUTE(STA)
02/21/07 (H) STA RPT 6DP
02/21/07 (H) DP: JOHNSON, DOLL, COGHILL, GRUENBERG,
ROSES, LYNN
02/22/07 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/22/07 (H) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
02/26/07 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: HB 102
SHORT TITLE: PASSING STATIONARY VEHICLES
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) COGHILL
01/22/07 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/22/07 (H) TRA, JUD
02/15/07 (H) TRA AT 1:30 PM CAPITOL 17
02/15/07 (H) Moved Out of Committee
02/15/07 (H) MINUTE(TRA)
02/19/07 (H) TRA RPT 4DP
02/19/07 (H) DP: JOHNSON, DOOGAN, SALMON, NEUMAN
02/26/07 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
WITNESS REGISTER
TOM WRIGHT
House Majority Office
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 117 on behalf of the sponsor,
Representative John Harris.
KAREN LIDSTER, Staff
to Representative John Coghill
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 102 on behalf of the sponsor,
Representative Coghill.
McHUGH PIERRE, Director of Communications
Department of Military & Veterans' Affairs (DMVA)
Fort Richardson, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 117, expressed
concerns and suggested a change.
TAMARA COOK, Director
Legislative Legal and Research Services
Legislative Affairs Agency (LAA)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke as the drafter of HB 117.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR JAY RAMRAS called the House Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting to order at 1:09:33 PM. Representatives Samuels,
Holmes, Gruenberg, and Ramras were present at the call to order.
Representatives Lynn and Dahlstrom arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
HB 117 - PROCLAMATION CALLING A SPECIAL SESSION
1:10:00 PM
CHAIR RAMRAS announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 117, "An Act relating to proclamations issued by
the governor calling the legislature into special session."
1:11:01 PM
TOM WRIGHT, House Majority Office, Alaska State Legislature,
presented HB 117 on behalf of the sponsor, Representative John
Harris. He relayed that HB 117 would require the governor to
provide 30 days notice when calling a special session except
when it is called while the legislature is in regular or special
session, or it is called within one hour after the first house
has [adjourned] from a regular or special session, or it is
called under "a disaster declaration." He mentioned that a
representative from the Department of Military & Veterans'
Affairs (DMVA) has relayed to him that the department would
prefer to have both AS 26.20.040 - which pertains to emergency
powers of the governor - and the entirety of AS 26.23.020
included in the bill's exemption provision.
CHAIR RAMRAS expressed favor with the concept embodied in
HB 117.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS said that according to his understanding
of the bill, had it been in effect last year, only the last
special session - the Fourth Special Session of the Twenty-
Fourth Alaska State Legislature - would have required more
notice.
MR. WRIGHT concurred.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS also expressed favor with the concept
embodied in the bill.
1:14:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN moved to report HB 117 out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal note.
CHAIR RAMRAS relayed that the committee would be taking
testimony from the public first. [Although nothing was stated,
the motion was treated as having been withdrawn.]
[Technical difficulties with the teleconference equipment
resulted in public testimony being delayed.]
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he has concerns with the language
located on page 1, lines 7-8, that says in part, "within one
hour after the first house has adjourned"; this provision could
have a significant effect on the "end-game politics" of the
legislature, because one house could adjourn hours or even days
before the second house adjourns. He offered his belief that
the current language would require the governor to make a
decision on whether to have a special session before knowing
what language the final version of a particular piece of
legislation might contain. He indicated that the language on
page 1, lines 7-8, should instead say in part, "within several
hours after the second house has adjourned".
[Public testimony was again delayed as technical difficulties
continued.]
1:18:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM said she does not have a problem with
the bill as currently written, offering her belief that that
extra time won't make a difference.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS agreed, noting that if the governor calls
a special session after the first house adjourns, and then,
after the second house adjourns, if he/she feels it's necessary
to do so, the governor could either withdraw the call or expand
or reduce the call.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES pointed out that the language currently in
AS 24.05.100(a)(1) requires the governor to provide at least 15
days notice of a special session, regardless of the reason for
calling it and even if the proclamation is issued right at the
end of a session.
MR. WRIGHT clarified that although the governor is currently
supposed to provide 15 days notice of a special session
regardless of why or when it is called, the presiding officers
and membership have instead allowed a special session to start
immediately after a prior session adjourns because legislators
are already in town. He pointed out that the 15-day notice
requirement is simply a statutory requirement, whereas [the
Alaska State Constitution] provides that the governor may
convene the legislature whenever he/she wants.
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM reiterated her belief that the bill is
fine as currently written.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS remarked that if a special session is
called right after the first house adjourns, it sends a message
to the second house that it will need to address the subject of
the proclamation immediately.
MR. WRIGHT recounted that in the past the governor once issued a
proclamation right away after one house adjourned before [the
body as a whole passed] the capital budget.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES asked whether the bill will set up a
situation in which the governor, every year, automatically calls
a special session right after one house adjourns.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG agreed that such may occur because of
"the one hour provision." He indicated that although he likes
the concept embodied in the bill, the aforementioned language
has the potential to cause a lot of mischief. He reiterated
that he would prefer that the bill be changed to say in part,
"after the second house has adjourned".
MR. WRIGHT, in response to comments and a question, explained
that the words "within one hour after the first house has
adjourned" was inserted at the suggestion of the drafter, but he
is not sure why she preferred that language. He remarked that
if the governor resorts to automatically calling a special
session every year after the first house adjourns, the governor
will eventually incur the disfavor of the legislature. He also
pointed out that one body may "only be out for three days" if
the other body chooses not to adjourn within that timeframe.
The committee took an at-ease from 1:29 p.m. to 1:37 p.m. for
the purpose of allowing the teleconference equipment to be
repaired.
1:37:55 PM
CHAIR RAMRAS, noting that the teleconference equipment had not
yet been repaired, indicated that HB 117 would be set aside
until later in the meeting so that the public would still have
an opportunity to testify when the equipment was again
operational.
HB 102 - PASSING STATIONARY VEHICLES
1:38:33 PM
CHAIR RAMRAS announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 102, "An Act relating to vacating lanes or
slowing down for certain vehicles stopped along the side of a
road."
1:39:25 PM
KAREN LIDSTER, Staff to Representative John Coghill, Alaska
State Legislature, relayed on behalf of Representative Coghill,
sponsor, that HB 102 will provide greater protection for law
enforcement and emergency services personnel who are performing
official duties on single- and double-lane highways. Current
law says that on a highway with two or more lanes in the same
direction a driver approaching emergency vehicles performing
official duties shall vacate the lane closest to the emergency
vehicle or slow to a reasonable and prudent speed; this "or"
clause has made the enforcement of the current law very
difficult, she remarked, adding that the sponsor is seeking to
clarify the law and make it enforceable so as to protect law
enforcement and emergency services personnel who are out
performing duties on the highway. She mentioned that committee
packets include letters of support from the Department of Public
Safety (DPS), the Public Safety Employees Association, Inc.
(PSEA), and [the Alaska Association of Chiefs of Police
(AACOP)], as well as [several] zero fiscal notes.
CHAIR RAMRAS mentioned that he has seen police officers, after
pulling someone over to the side of the road, be passed by other
drivers driving in the closest lane or at unsafe speeds; HB 102
will put some teeth into the current law and provide law
enforcement and emergency services personnel with more
protection.
CHAIR RAMRAS, after ascertaining that no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on HB 102.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG referred to the term "impossible" as
used on page 2, line 2, and questioned whether the meaning of
that word would be encompassed under the term "unsafe", which is
also used on page 2, line 2. He suggested that that portion of
the bill could simply say in part, "prohibited by law or
unsafe". In response to a question, he posited that it is not
necessary to include the term, "impossible" in the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM expressed favor with the bill as
currently written.
CHAIR RAMRAS offered his belief that including the term,
"impossible" would enhance the protection afforded to police
officers and emergency services personnel, and thus he would
prefer to keep that term in the bill.
1:44:49 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM moved to report HB 102 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal
notes. There being no objection, HB 102 was reported from the
House Judiciary Standing Committee.
The committee took an at-ease from 1:45 p.m. to 1:52 p.m.
HB 117 - PROCLAMATION CALLING A SPECIAL SESSION
1:52:45 PM
CHAIR RAMRAS announced that as its last order of business the
committee would return to the hearing on HOUSE BILL NO. 117, "An
Act relating to proclamations issued by the governor calling the
legislature into special session."
1:53:14 PM
McHUGH PIERRE, Director of Communications, Department of
Military & Veterans' Affairs (DMVA), offered his belief that as
currently written, HB 117 has the possibility of restricting the
DMVA and the governor from moving forward right away in
situations involving either a natural disaster or a terrorist
attack on the state. He suggested, therefore, that if the bill
were altered such that it exempted both AS 26.20.040 and [the
entirety of] AS 26.23.020 from the bill's 30-day notice
requirement, it would help the DMVA respond more quickly should
either situation arise.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG argued, however, that in either
situation, a proclamation would only have to be issued under AS
26.23.020(k).
MR. PIERRE said he simply doesn't want the governor's authority
to call a special session dealing with a disaster or terrorist
attack hindered in any way.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG reiterated his argument, and pointed
out that under the governor's plenary powers, he/she may call a
special session for any reason, not just an emergency. He
suggested that the drafter should be asked about this issue.
1:58:36 PM
TOM WRIGHT, House Majority Office, Alaska State Legislature, on
behalf of the sponsor, Representative John Harris, said he
agrees with Representative Gruenberg's assessment; specifically,
AS 26.23.020(k)(2)(A) is the only place in [Title 26] that
pertains to calling a special session, and it says in part, "the
governor convenes a special session of the legislature within
five days after declaring the condition of disaster emergency or
within five days after providing a financing plan ...". Mr.
Wright, in response to a question, said that the other statutes
that Mr. Pierre spoke of don't really relate to the governor's
authority to call a special session.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG offered his understanding that [AS
26.23.020(k)] only authorizes funds to be spent under
subsections (h) and (i), and that AS 26.20.040 pertains to enemy
and terrorist attacks.
2:03:05 PM
TAMARA COOK, Director, Legislative Legal and Research Services,
Legislative Affairs Agency (LAA), speaking as the drafter of
HB 117, in response to a question, said that AS 26.23.020(k) and
AS 26.20.040 appear to focus on separate subjects, and that AS
26.23.020(k) even limits what the special session could be about
- that being for the purpose of allowing the legislature to
ratify a financing plan.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG offered his understanding that the goal
would be to give the governor broad authority to deal with the
aforementioned types of emergencies without waiting 30 days.
MS. COOK said that would go beyond the current subject of the
bill but could still be addressed.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG sought confirmation that the sponsor
would want to have that issue addressed.
MR. WRIGHT indicated that the sponsor would. He referred to AS
26.23.020(k)(2)(A), and said it seems pretty broad in that the
governor can call a special session within five days of
declaring a disaster regardless of whether a financing plan had
been provided to the legislature.
MS. COOK concurred, acknowledging that that provision pertains
to the power of the governor to make the expenditures ahead of
time and outlines that those expenditures must be ratified by
the legislature. If it is the wish of the committee, she
remarked, the reasons for providing only five days notice could
be expanded to deal with any disaster-related issue.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG offered his understanding that AS
26.23.020(h) and (i) - referred to in AS 26.23.020(k) - don't
pertain to terrorist activities.
MS. COOK concurred.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG surmised, then, that if the legislature
wants the governor to have the authority to call a special
session - without providing 30 days notice - for actions
unrelated to funding but pertaining to a terrorist attack, the
bill will have to be changed.
2:07:45 PM
MR. WRIGHT expressed an interest in seeing the language that
would effect such a change before agreeing to it, because it is
not the sponsor's intent to broaden the powers of the governor
beyond what they are now; currently the governor has the ability
to call a special session at anytime for any need, and the
question is simply how much notice must be given.
MS. COOK said:
I think the point of subsection (k) always was to
require that the governor call a special session if
the governor elected to make the expenditures, and to
require that the special session occur within this
short time period of 5 days unless, of course, the
legislature was already in session and had approved
the financing. So [subsection (k)] always was ...
more of a spear than a shield in that it said, "Look,"
to the governor, "you may spend the money, but if
[you] do, we need to ... [come into] session fairly
rapidly to deal with the situation." The other things
that can come up that may cause a governor to call a
special session have never had a special time period
such as [subsection (k)] does, [and] ... right now,
... the regular statute ... would have applied so that
the governor would be required by statute to give 15
days notice.
I will observe that despite that statute, we have a
fairly long recent history, now, of the governor
convening the legislature in special session without
complying with the 15 day notice when the legislature
has been in town anyway and therefore there was no
need to travel. And I believe the governor's position
is that the governor has a constitutional right to
convene a special session that cannot be limited by a
15 day notice ... particularly where there's really no
good logical reason for the 15 day notice. My guess
is that any governor confronted with a disaster
emergency would invoke that constitutional power and
convene the legislature in session with far less than
a 15 day notice, or even a 30 day notice if the
statute were to be changed.
2:10:30 PM
CHAIR RAMRAS said the committee wants to honor the sponsor's
intent with regard to providing a citizen legislature with as
much notice as possible, and doesn't want to mishandle AS
26.23.020(k).
MS. COOK surmised that the only reason that provision raises an
issue is that it happens to provide a different timeframe to
which the governor must adhere. In response to a question, she
said that all that is necessary is to clarify the public policy
decision regarding whether the legislature wishes to
particularly articulate various different areas that the
governor may have wherein he/she does not have to give [the
current] 15 day notice, just as only AS 26.23.020(k) does now.
She said that if it is the desire of the committee, she could
draft the language in the bill to allow for a 5-day notice
requirement for any matter coming up under AS 26.23.020 or under
AS 26.20.040, for example.
2:12:31 PM
MR. WRIGHT agreed with that suggestion.
CHAIR RAMRAS asked Ms. Cook to draft language to that effect.
MR. WRIGHT, in response to a question, pointed out that the
current language in AS 26.23.020(k)(2)(A) says in part, "within
five days", and surmised that a special session called under
that provision could actually start sooner than that.
MS. COOK - in response to a question regarding the language
located on page 1, lines 7-8, that says in part, "within one
hour after the first house has adjourned" - said that she was
attempting to ensure that individual legislators were not
inconvenienced by special sessions that they'd not had an
opportunity to plan for. She offered her understanding that if
legislators are in Juneau already and don't have to make travel
plans, that it was felt that that would be an acceptable
situation in which legislators could forgo the notice
requirement for a special session. The problem, she relayed,
pertains to what is to be done when one house has adjourned but
not the other. Should the governor be required to provide 30
days notice in that situation? Or should the governor be given
some time period within which he might reasonably notify the
legislators from the early adjourning house before they make
their way to the airport.
MS. COOK went on to say that there is no particular reason why
that phrase couldn't be deleted if the committee prefers that
the governor give 30 days notice unless he/she can issue a
proclamation while both houses are in session. In response to a
question she offered her understanding that the goal of the
legislation is to protect legislators from the inconvenience of
special sessions when they do not have enough notice to make
arrangements in their lives to travel down to Juneau - they may
need to make arrangements to deal with children, with business,
et cetera - and 30 days notice would make that process easier on
legislators than the current 15 days notice does.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG expressed concern that under the bill
as currently written, the governor might call a special session
before knowing whether a key piece of legislation is going to
pass. He indicated that he would prefer to have the language on
page 1, lines 7-8, say in part, "within one hour after the
second house has adjourned".
MR. WRIGHT relayed that such a change would be acceptable to the
sponsor.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS indicated that if he were already in
Juneau, he would rather just stay and go into special session
right away rather than having to come back 30 days later.
CHAIR RAMRAS, in response to comments, indicated that if the
language is changed as Representative Gruenberg is suggesting,
if one house adjourns early by three days or less, that house
may end up only being provided with notice equaling that amount
of time.
CHAIR RAMRAS, after ascertaining that no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on HB 117.
2:21:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to adopt Amendment 1, to
replace the word, "first" - on page 1, line 8 - with the word,
"second". There being no objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
[HB 117, as amended, was held over.]
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:21 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|