Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/17/2000 03:33 PM House L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE LABOR AND COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE
April 17, 2000
3:33 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Norman Rokeberg, Chairman
Representative Andrew Halcro, Vice Chairman
Representative Lisa Murkowski
Representative John Harris
Representative Tom Brice
Representative Sharon Cissna
Representative Jerry Sanders
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 169
"An Act relating to including the costs of expansion activities
and political activities in rates of electric cooperatives."
- MOVED CSHB 169(L&C) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 169
SHORT TITLE: ELEC.COOPS:EXPANSION & POLITICAL ACTIVITY
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
3/31/99 625 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
3/31/99 625 (H) URS, L&C
4/28/99 (H) URS AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 120
4/28/99 (H) SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
5/05/99 (H) URS AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 120
5/05/99 (H) SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
3/15/00 (H) URS AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 120
3/15/00 (H) -- Meeting Postponed to 3/22 --
3/22/00 (H) URS AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 120
3/22/00 (H) Heard & Held
3/22/00 (H) MINUTE(URS)
3/29/00 (H) URS AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 124
3/29/00 (H) Heard & Held
3/29/00 (H) MINUTE(URS)
3/31/00 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
3/31/00 (H) <Pending Referral>
4/05/00 (H) URS AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 120
4/05/00 (H) <Bill Postponed To 4/12>
4/12/00 (H) URS AT 9:00 AM CAPITOL 120
4/12/00 (H) Moved CSHB 169(URS) Out of Committee
4/12/00 (H) MINUTE(URS)
4/13/00 3111 (H) URS RPT CS(URS) 4DP 1NR
4/13/00 3111 (H) DP: HUDSON, ROKEBERG, GREEN, KOTT;
4/13/00 3111 (H) NR: COWDERY
4/13/00 3112 (H) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DCED)
4/14/00 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
4/14/00 (H) Heard & Held
4/14/00 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
4/17/00 (H) L&C AT 3:30 PM CAPITOL 17
WITNESS REGISTER
JEFF LOGAN, Staff
to Representative Joe Green
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 214
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information on behalf of sponsor of
HB 169.
NORM STOREY, General Manager
Homer Electric Association
3977 Lake Street
Homer, Alaska 99603
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 169.
BERNIE SMITH, Commissioner
Regulatory Commission of Alaska
Department of Community and Economic Development
1016 West Sixth Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 169.
ROBERT BEANS, Chairman
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative Association, Inc.
4831 Eagle Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 169.
TUCKERMAN BABCOCK, Manager of Government and Strategic Affairs
Matanuska Electric Association
163 East Industrial Way
Palmer, Alaska 99645
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 169.
GEORGE KITCHENS, President
Golden Valley Electric Association
758 Illinois Street
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 169.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 00-51, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIRMAN NORMAN ROKEBERG called the House Labor and Commerce
Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:33 p.m. Members present
at the call to order were Representatives Rokeberg, Halcro,
Harris and Sanders. Representatives Murkowski, Brice and Cissna
arrived as the meeting was in progress.
HB 169-ELEC.COOPS:EXPANSION & POLITICAL ACTIVITY
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG announced that the first order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 169, "An Act relating to including the
costs of expansion activities and political activities in rates
of electric cooperatives."
Number 0050
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 169, Version I [1-LS0766\I, Cramer,
4/17/00], as a work draft. There being no objection, it was so
ordered.
Number 0076
JEFF LOGAN, Staff to Representative Joe Green, Alaska State
Legislature came forward on behalf of Representative Green,
sponsor of HB 169 to explain the changes in Version I. In
response to committee members' comments and public testimony at
the last hearing, a number of changes had been made to the bill.
The first change is on page 1, line 4, Section 1: The statute
cited has been changed to AS 10.25.010 from AS 42.05.381. This
reflects the suggestion of Nan Thompson, chair of the Regulatory
Commission of Alaska, that the language more appropriately
belongs in AS 10.25, which is the section of the statute dealing
with the relationship between cooperatives and their members.
The sponsor and his staff concur, and have moved the language to
a different [statutory] title. He noted that subsections (1),
(2) and (3) are essentially the same as they were in the previous
version.
Number 0222
MR. LOGAN called attention to subsection (4), which now says,
"received approval of a majority of the cooperatives' board of
directors for including the cost of expansion activity in rates."
This changes the focus of decision making from a pre-approval of
members to simply an approval of the majority of the board of
directors. "That is where such decisions are made anyway, but it
just doesn't say that anywhere in the statutes," Mr. Logan
explained. He added that Representative Green thought that if
the co-op members were advised in advance that there would be a
meeting to discuss the use of rate monies for these types of
[expansion] purposes, that would give co-op members plenty of
opportunity to address their board.
Number 0296
MR. LOGAN pointed out that comparable changes are made on page 2,
lines 2 through 12, concerning political activities. However,
the definitions sections needs some help from the committee. On
page 2, line 14, subsection (1), is the definition of "expansion
activity." The title of the bill reflects the inclusion of
telephone cooperatives, and that was inadvertently omitted from
this definition. The drafter had advised him that if someone
were to move a conceptual amendment that telephones be included,
it could be taken care of as a House Labor and Commerce committee
substitute (CS).
Number 0391
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO made a motion to adopt conceptual Amendment
1 to Version I: on page 2, line 15, eliminate the word
"electrical" before the word "service", and insert "or telephone"
before the word "cooperative"; and on line 16, delete the word
"electric". There being no objection, it was so ordered.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG reminded Mr. Logan of a suggestion the chairman
had made in the House Special Committee on Utility Restructuring
about adding expansion outside a certified service area to the
expansion definition. He asked if that would be redundant.
MR. LOGAN said he remembered that suggestion.
Number 0493
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO said he has heard some concern about money
for expansion activities being taken from the cooperative's
operation and maintenance funds. He asked if that had been
discussed.
Number 0550
MR. LOGAN said it had been discussed briefly in the House Special
Committee on Utility Restructuring, where there had been a brief
explanation of the difference between "rate monies" and "margin
monies." The rate monies are those allowed to be collected for
the services the utility provides. But, in fact, the utilities
are allowed to collect a small portion above and beyond the cost
of operating the utility. That additional amount goes into what
are known as "margin monies," the savings account, as it were.
"We acknowledged that there could still be a use of margin monies
to perform some of these activities, but it was the rate monies
that are reviewed more stringently by the commission," Mr. Logan
recalled.
Number 0493
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO said he just wanted to make sure that the
question had been addressed in the previous committee, because
he had heard some concerns that "it's not only that you
[utilities] are using rate payers' money for political activity
or expansion, but you [utilities] are diverting those dollars
from operation and maintenance, [away] from providing a stable
source of electricity or telephone service."
MR. LOGAN commented that he hoped if there were a street light
out at the playground, it would be repaired before the next ad
was placed in the paper.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG said there had been testimony in the last
committee about an existing statute that prohibited political
activity on the part of the cooperative. He wondered if HB 169
would override that.
Number 0692
MR. LOGAN explained that the current prohibitions are found in AS
15.13.074, and they relate to candidates.
[CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked an indiscernible question.]
MR. LOGAN said he did not believe so, and that it was only that
they could not advocate for a candidate, which was in the
original version of the bill. Identified political activity
means an activity intended to advocate for a candidate or make a
contribution to a candidate or political party. Those were both
already covered under AS 15.13.074 and 3 AAC.50.500, so those
have been removed.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked, "You have removed those from the bill?"
MR. LOGAN responded, "We have removed the duplication from this
bill. Those prohibitions are still in the statute and regulation
I cited."
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked, "Shouldn't we put that in here, that any
political activity be subject to those provisions?" He said he
thought it would cause confusion if there were one section that
says political activity is permitted and then another section of
statute prohibits it.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG declared a brief at-ease beginning at 3:46 p.m.
The meeting was called back to order at 3:47 p.m. Chairman
Rokeberg noted that Representatives Brice and Murkowski were now
present.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG noted that there were two people on the
teleconference line, and he asked if both of them had Version I
of the bill.
Number 0824
NORM STOREY said they did not. They had heard some of the
discussion, but despite staff efforts earlier in the day, they
had not received copies.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked if they were at the Legislative
Information Office (LIO), and Mr. Storey confirmed that he was
one of two participants at the LIO office in Wasilla, and they
did not have a copy. [Arrangements were made to transmit one
immediately.] Chairman Rokeberg observed that the bill had been
radically changed, so they needed to see the new version before
they could make any comments.
BERNIE SMITH, Commissioner, Regulatory Commission of Alaska
(RCA), confirmed that he had a copy. He testified by
teleconference from Anchorage, explaining that he was sitting in
for RCA chairperson Nan Thompson. He agreed that Version I of
the bill is radically different. He said:
It took quite a bit of the recommendations that we had
put together, and I think it is appropriate. I guess I
would probably see if we could add a little bit more
definition to 'expansion activities,' but other than
that, I think it would work for us. We have no
problems with it.
MR. SMITH answered a question that Representative Halcro had
asked, saying the RCA would still regulate the rates if they came
to the RCA in a rate case. But if they came under the margins,
the RCA would not have jurisdiction over that.
Number 0971
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG said that was the point he was getting at with
Mr. Logan - the rate structure area exclusive of the margin area.
He wondered, "Is that what you are referring to?"
MR. SMITH said that is correct.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked, "So it's currently prohibited to charge
in your rate base for any political activities?"
MR. SMITH said that is correct, although it would be a little bit
better definition to refer to AS 42.05.381 and include political
activities and lobbying in amending that particular section.
"That gives us a little bit more 'oomph' to do away with the
lobbying and the political activity," he said. "So it just adds
a little bit more power to us to define those two items."
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG told him that a couple of lobbyists sitting in
the room had "just about had a heart attack" when he said that,
and Mr. Smith humorously remarked that that was good for them.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG confirmed that the section cited was AS
42.05.381. Then he asked Mr. Smith if he had any suggestions
regarding expansion activities.
MR. SMITH said he did not.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG declared a brief at-ease at 3:52 p.m. to give
those who had just received a copy of the new Version I to read
it.
The meeting was called back to order at 3:56 p.m.
ROBERT BEANS, Chairman, Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
(AVEC), serving some 51 villages throughout Western Alaska, came
forward to testify on HB 169. He asked if it would be possible
to have some time to digest this new language, and perhaps AVEC
would come back in favor. He said, "We are electric board
members. We have in place in AVEC a system which is fair to
everybody, a system where all of our 6,500 members have an
opportunity to voice their concerns through a process." He said
AVEC is cognizant of all the rules and regulations governing
cooperatives. He asked for a chance to "at least digest this new
language to see if we can come to an agreement."
Number 1202
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG restated that this version is radically
different, saying he thinks it is a much improved version of the
bill. He said he appreciated Mr. Bean's request, but added,
"This thing has a long way to go anyway, so you should have more
than adequate time to digest it. But having indigestion down
here at this time of year is not uncommon."
Number 1235
NORM STOREY, General Manager, Homer Electric Association, offered
that Version I leaves him a bit in question. He said:
We are speaking of regulating the electric cooperatives
of this state to include in some ways divulging
information to the public that could be critical in
terms of strategies to provide future service and
economic service to our consumers by (indisc.) a
strategy to either expand or to complement the services
we provide today.
I have some concerns with that in terms of giving
notice to rate payers. I think the commissioner
commented on things that today we know is not included
like political activities into our rates, and those
non-electric costs are obviously not includable in our
rates. However, this new bill seems to speak to the
fact that we have to advise the members that a portion
of the rates would be used for expansion activities and
then later on in the bill addresses receiving approval
of a majority of the cooperative's board of directors.
If that was in reverse, it would certainly be
friendlier to our concerns, and that is that our board
of directors has to by a majority vote move to pass
rate changes and tariffs today. No activity is allowed
until that is done and rates are not affected until
such time as the RCA actually takes action and approves
that filing. So there is process there already in
place. If I read this correctly, it could mean that we
would have to go out and advise the members that we
were going to use portions of future rates to do
expansion activities and later charge them into the
rates. So that's a little confusing to me and we don't
understand that.
We have difficulty with the legislature getting
involving in directing the electric utilities only in
this regard. Each time I sit with a private sector
utilities I understand fully their need to keep
information confidential to go out and market and do
different things they need to make their business
successful, which is to sell their service.
It may be that the maker of this bill or staff could
explain how (1) and (4) on page 1, lines 7 and 14,
relate to one another and what we're really looking at
here in terms of requirement by law. My concern is
understanding when does the co-op have to go out an
advertise to let its members know that it is
considering activities that might cause rate increases,
and exactly what does it means in terms of priority.
Number 1445
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG said, "Mr. Storey, you mentioned something
else. You said you couldn't understand one for the other?"
Number 1463
MR. STOREY answered:
Normally, if we were going to conduct business, we
would go to our board of directors, we'd get approval
for whatever the activity is, and we would go out and
we would seek to complete that activity or that
strategy. That sometimes is done well in advance of
any actual change. At some point, there may be a
business activity that results in a success or a
conclusion and money was spent, it would be later that
it would be considered going into rates.
At that time, the board of directors would have another
opportunity to approve the rate filing that would then
have to be sent to the RCA for final approval before we
could actually affect a rate change. So my question
is, if this were to become a law, would we as a
cooperative be required to advise the members in
advance that we may be spending money that would come
out of rates before we start any activity, or would it
be a subsequent event that would occur after or before
the board makes the decision to do a rate filing that
would include those monies spent in the rate.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG told Mr. Storey that he was going to offer an
amendment that says nothing in this section is to be construed to
be contrary to the AS 42.05.381 [sub]section (a) provisions.
That might help clean some of that up.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG also asked Mr. Storey and Mr. Babcock to be
aware that the committee amended the subsection (e) definition of
expansion activities to include both telephone [and electric
utilities].
Number 1574
TUCKERMAN BABCOCK, Manager of Government and Strategic Affairs,
Matanuska Electric Association, testified by teleconference from
the Mat-Su (Matanuska-Susitna) Legislative Information Office
(LIO). He asked whether or not - either under the definition of
expansion activity or political activity - enterprises such as
Chugach Electric's going into the Internet business and buying
Internet companies, or Chugach Alaska's bid submitted to purchase
Enstar Natural Gas last year would be covered under having to
advise members before committing several hundred million dollars.
Number 1620
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG said he thinks one could construe this to say
that the activities of an electric cooperative (indisc.), because
that is what the definition says, but it is not entirely, 100
percent theirs to (indisc.). In other words, enterprise
activities outside the realm of their typical electric
cooperative activity might be looked upon as something that needs
to be cleared up to make sure there is no ambiguity.
Number 1665
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO said he would interpret it on page 2 under
the definition of expansion activity. He said, "You are
intending to attract customers to the cooperative from another
public utility."
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG said that was his opinion, too.
Number 1696
MR. LOGAN apologized, saying that after the hearing on Friday
there had been a flurry of activity between Representative
Green's office and the drafter's in trying to come up with
something that would be acceptable to the committee. He said:
Somehow a simple phrase was left out, and it might help
satisfy Mr. Storey's [concern]. That is on page 1,
line 7, after the words "advised its members," we had
intended to have the phrase "in advance". The intent
was if the cooperative was not going to go out and get
permission from its members because it used rate money
for these purposes, that at least the board would have
to vote on it, and before that vote, the members would
know that there would be an issue on this that they
could come to the board and make their comments known.
So, I think if we say, "advised its members in advance
that a portion of the rates would be used for expansion
activities" -- and then, in subsection (4), it says
that a majority of the cooperative board of directors
has to vote to do so. In that manner, it allows the
members of the cooperative to be properly noticed that
this type of discussion is going to take place, and
they can go down to the local meeting hall and make
their feelings on the subject known.
Number 1759
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked, "Wouldn't 'in advance' apply to all of
them?"
MR. LOGAN said it could. He stated:
We took it that if it advised its members in advance
that subsection (2) would follow, that they would also
know how much, and we would expect that sub[paragraph]
(3) would be a policy adopted by the board that might
not be included in every notification, but we thought
it would be adopted by the board as an operating policy
of the cooperative, that everyone would know that. If
the board was considering a use of rate moneys, that
might be controversial to some of the members.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked, "Wouldn't you do that in advance?"
MR. LOGAN said yes.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG asked, "Wouldn't you have to get the approval
of the board in advance to do anything?"
MR. LOGAN replied, "I would think that, as a priority, you would
have to."
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG said, "So I think that both (c) and (d), you'd
have to have advance approval on all - (1), (2), (3) and (4) -
would you not?"
MR. LOGAN said yes.
Number 1835
MR. BABCOCK said he appreciates some of the changes with respect
to trying manage a business enterprise and to figure out
reimbursements on the (indisc.) scale. He stated:
It is a more workable method of advising members and
giving them an opportunity to comment on any sort of
expansion activity. I do appreciate that. My question
relates to (indisc.). Last year Chugach Electric
Board, in executive session, met to discuss a bid of
hundreds of millions dollars in stock.
I don't see that this bill would have done anything to
protect cooperative members in that case from having
hundreds of millions of their own in their equity
committed to expansion in a non-electric, cooperative
environment. I'm not sure whether or not the intention
of the sponsor was only to allow the members to comment
when you're (indisc.) electric service or whether you
would also want members to be able to comment if you're
going to commit the resources of their co-op towards
some other business purchase.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG wondered what the MEA [Matanuska Electrical
Association] would like to see.
MR. BABCOCK replied that MEA would like to see the bill
considered over the interim. The other question that concerns
MEA is the definition of "political activity". He said:
We understand and appreciate the political side, but
the policy position is a little troubling to us on two
counts. One, despite Commissioner Smith's
recommendation that the utilities not be allowed to
make any comments on policy positions, ... my main
observation is this: We donate a lot of money to Boys
and Girls Clubs and school sporting events and those
sorts of activities in our community, in Eagle River,
in Palmer, Wasilla, and Talkeetna, and we would like to
be able to continue to do that. And we're just not
certain whether or not those are prohibited under the
definition of "political activity". It does not appear
to be that they're ... prohibited, and I just want to
confirm that interpretation meets with the sponsor.
MR. LOGAN specified that the sponsor's position is that if it is
an expenditure approved by the duly-elected members of the board
of directors of MEA, then it is something they should be able to
do. It is not the intent of this legislation to stop that kind
of activity.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG commented that it is a public relations
activity and has nothing to do with political activity.
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said, "Unless, of course, it's supporting a
tee-ball team whose team's name is the anti-IBEW/MEA team."
Number 1991
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO referred to a letter from Mr. Babcock dated
April 13, 2000 (included in the bill packet), in which he
defended the decision to spend money to purchase Chugach
Electric. The letter states that 59 percent of the MEA supported
the decision. Representative Halcro wondered if that was 59
percent of those who responded or 59 percent of the total
membership base.
MR. BABCOCK answered that it was 59 percent of all those who
voted in the election, not 59 percent of the total membership
base.
Number 2037
GEORGE KITCHENS, President, Golden Valley Electric Association,
testified via teleconference from Fairbanks. He had received a
copy of Version I of HB 169 just recently and was not sure if he
has anything meaningful to add that afternoon. He indicated he
was still somewhat concerned that the bill, even with the
modifications, still targets electric and telephone cooperatives.
It does not impact others who might try to compete and does not
preclude them from doing expenditures of the type anticipated in
the bill to capture market shares in their areas. He said:
We're still getting back to the form where the
cooperatives, in general, represent the democracies and
that our members, just like in state government,
represent board members to represent their interests in
the management of the cooperatives.
Number 2128
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG made a motion to adopt conceptual Amendment 2:
to add ", in advance" after "members" on page 1, line 7, and to
add ", in advance" after "cooperative" on page 2, line 3. He
said the intent is to advise the members in advance before any of
these activities can occur. There being no objection, conceptual
Amendment 2 was adopted.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG made a motion to adopt conceptual Amendment 3
on page 2, lines 19 and 20, as follows:
(f) nothing in this section shall be construed to
negate AS 15.13.074 or AS 42.050.381(a).
He clarified that AS 42.050.381(a) is the rate-making power which
says that the rate may not include an allowance for costs of
political contributions or public relations. He added:
My point here, with this conceptual amendment, is to
say, "Whatever you do here with political activities,
you can't overcome the rate-making power found in
Chapter 42, which is existing law, or Chapter 15, which
is for campaign election law." Just so we say we can
do it here in this context. My intention with the
conceptual amendment is to not override existing
statutes in other areas of the law.
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI asked what the first statute was that
was referenced.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG explained that the first statute was AS 15.13.
He reiterated that he did not want to override the existing
statutes. He asked if there was objection to the adoption of
conceptual Amendment 3. There being no objection, conceptual
Amendment 3 was adopted.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG moved conceptual Amendment 4:
*Sec. 3. Providing for an immediate effective date.
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI asked why an immediate effective date is
needed.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG indicated he had heard some rumors. He asked
Mr. Logan whether he knew the reason.
MR. LOGAN answered that in the flurry of drafts going back and
forth, the sponsor had intended to include an immediate effective
date in the bill. In further response to Chairman Rokeberg, he
said he was not aware of any other reason.
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE wondered what those rumors were.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG said, "I don't really know. I just heard some
scuttlebutt."
MR. LOGAN indicated there were no rumors in the sponsor's office
that were being responded to. The sponsor simply wanted to get
consumers protected as soon as possible, which is the reason that
he wanted the immediate effective date.
Number 2350
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO wondered if an effective date needed to be
provided for in the title.
CHAIRMAN ROKEBERG answered, "That's why it's a conceptual
amendment." He asked if there was any objection to conceptual
Amendment 4. There being no objection, conceptual Amendment 4
was adopted.
MR. LOGAN stated that all the conceptual amendments are
consistent with the sponsor's intent in offering the bill.
Number 2393
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO made a motion to move HB 169, Version I, as
amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the
attached fiscal note. There being no objection, CSHB 169(L&C)
moved out of the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Labor and Commerce Standing Committee meeting was recessed to the
call of the chair at 4:25 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|