Legislature(2013 - 2014)ANCH LIO Rm 220
08/23/2013 10:00 AM House LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
AUGUST 23, 2013
10:08 AM
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Mike Hawker, Chair
Representative Mike Chenault
Representative Max Gruenberg
Representative Craig Johnson
Representative Lance Pruitt
Representative Bill Stoltze
Representative Peggy Wilson
Senator Charlie Huggins
Senator Lesil McGuire
Senator Kevin Meyer
Senator Gary Stevens
MEMBERS ON TELECONFERENCE
Senator Peter Micciche, Vice Chair
Senator John Coghill
Senator Lyman Hoffman, Alternate Member
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Dennis Egan
AGENDA
EXECUTIVE SESSION
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
CONTRACT APPROVALS
OTHER COMMITTEE BUSINESS
SPEAKER REGISTER
Pam Varni, Executive Director, Legislative Affairs Agency
Curtis Clothier, Manager, Information Services, Legislative
Affairs Agency
Jessica Geary, Finance Manager, Legislative Affairs Agency
Juli Lucky, Staff to Representative Mike Hawker and
Committee Aide to Legislative Council
10:08:20 AM
I. CHAIR MIKE HAWKER called the Legislative Council meeting to
order at 10:08 a.m. in room 220 of the Anchorage
Legislative Office Building. Present at the call were
Representatives Hawker, Chenault, Johnson, Stoltze, P.
Wilson; Senators Huggins, Coghill (via teleconference),
McGuire, Meyer, Stevens, Micciche (via teleconference) and
Hoffman (via teleconference - alternate member).
Representative Pruitt joined the meeting immediately after
the call.
II. EXECUTIVE SESSION
a. Anchorage LIO
CHAIR HAWKER said that the first item before Council is the
procurement of additional Anchorage LIO facilities as the
lease on the current Anchorage facility expires May 31,
2014, with no lease extensions remaining. This is an in-
process financial negotiation and thus is necessarily
conducted in executive session.
10:10:41 AM
Senate President Huggins, acting Vice Chair, moved that
Legislative Council go into executive session under Uniform
Rule 22 (b) for the discussion of matters, the immediate
knowledge of which would adversely affect the finances of a
government unit.
CHAIR HAWKER noted that the following people were to remain
in the room or on teleconference for executive session: LIO
staff; AHFC staff, transaction consultants in this process;
Mark Pfeffer, a representative of the current landlord; and
Doug Gardner, Legal Services Director.
Representative Gruenberg joined the meeting at this time.
Legislative Council went into executive session.
Legislative Council came out of executive session.
12:12:35 PM
CHAIR HAWKER called the Council back to order following an
executive session to discuss financial contract
negotiations in process for the Anchorage LIO. He noted for
the record those members present after executive session:
Representatives Pruitt, Stoltze, P. Wilson, Johnson,
Chenault, Gruenberg, Hawker; Senators Huggins, Stevens, and
Coghill (via teleconference). He further noted that in a
previous Legislative Council meeting, the Chair was
authorized to pursue an amendment and extension to the
expiring lease for the current LIO facility in Anchorage.
The progress of the financial negotiations was discussed in
executive session and all of the results will become public
once the negotiations are completed. One item that came up
in executive session was the possibility that, in addition
to a long-term lease on the existing facility, the
Legislature would be interested in acquiring this facility
through a lease-purchase arrangement with the landlords
should the landlords be willing to pursue this and it was a
viable transaction for all.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON stated that the purpose of putting
this on the table is to give Legislative Council the
broadest opportunity to explore every option available to
the Legislature.
CHAIR HAWKER said that he personally felt it was an
appropriate avenue for Legislative Council to pursue.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON moved that Legislative Council
authorize the Chairman to research the possibility of a
lease-purchase agreement with the landlord concurrently
with the ongoing lease extension negotiations.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON repeated his motion at the request
of Representative Stoltze.
Senator McGuire re-joined the meeting at this time.
CHAIR HAWKER, in response to an objection by Representative
Stoltze, re-stated the question before Legislative Council.
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE said he was going to remove his
objection, that he supported this motion as it is fairly
broad and non-committal. He said he does not have buyer's
remorse but has renter's remorse. He said having more
options on the table might make him less uncomfortable. He
said he has received a lot of feedback from his
constituency on the decision made. He said he expressed
some reservations, his vote is his vote, he supported it
previously and he appreciates we are expanding the
possibilities whether or not it's something the current
owner is going to be interested in. More information will
be on the table and that's a good thing. He withdrew his
objection because it is a good step to expand the
discussion.
The motion passed with no objections.
CHAIR HAWKER thanked the members and said he appreciated
the ability to pursue the best opportunities for the
Legislature on a long-term basis.
He noted that Pam Varni, Executive Director for the
Legislative Affairs Agency, and Curtis Clothier,
Information Services Manager for the Legislative Affairs
Agency, were now present at the table to address the
following ministerial business of the Legislative Council.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a. June 7, 2013
SENATE PRESIDENT HUGGINS moved that the minutes from the
Legislative Council meeting on June 7, 2013, be approved as
presented.
The June 7, 2013, minutes were approved with no objections.
b. July 31, 2013
SENATE PRESIDENT HUGGINS moved that the minutes from the
Legislative Council meeting on July 31, 2013, be approved
as presented.
The July 31, 2013, minutes were approved with no
objections.
IV. CONTRACT APPROVALS
a. 2014 Microsoft Enterprise Agreement Renewal
CURTIS CLOTHIER, Information Services Manager for the
Legislative Affairs Agency, stated that before members was
the annual Microsoft Enterprise Agreement Renewal, which is
a contract that provides the Legislature Microsoft software
licensing; Tier II Support for any issues with Microsoft
products; as well as other advantages for the Legislature
and legislative employees, including the Home Use Program
where one can buy Microsoft products at reduced rates. This
is an agreement the Executive Branch entered into and the
terms of the agreement are passed on to the Legislative and
the Judicial Branches of government. Without it, we're not
allowed to use Microsoft products, such as the Windows
Operating System, the Microsoft Office Suite, all the
servers we operate - basically the Legislature's entire
infrastructure. The price we pay is a very reduced rate and
it's a good deal for the Legislature as a whole.
CHAIR HAWKER noted that this item was in the budget and
said that, effectively, what this motion accomplishes is
that Legislative Council reaffirms their commitment to the
Microsoft platform.
MR. CLOTHIER confirmed the Chair's statement and noted that
this is the second year of a three year contract and so
Legislative Council will do this again next year.
CHAIR HAWKER said he wasn't sure why Legislative Council
needed to approve something that was already in the budget
but they were happy to do it.
SENATOR HUGGINS moved that Legislative Council approve the
expenditure of $111,118.64 to En Pointe Technologies for
the Legislature's portion of the annual Microsoft
Enterprise Agreement.
The motion was approved with no objections.
b. Kodiak Office Space
PAM VARNI, Executive Director for the Legislative Affairs
Agency, said that per Legislative Procurement Procedures
sec. 160, which is Novation or Change of Name, a majority
of the members of a committee that approved a contract need
to approve any name change. The building in which the
Kodiak LIO is located was sold by Cherrier, King, and
Cherrier to Trident Seafoods Corporation. Legislative
Council is being asked to approve that name change for the
Kodiak lease as required by the procurement procedures.
SENATOR STEVENS commented that it was simply a change of
ownership. He said they were really satisfied with the
facilities and location.
SENATOR HUGGINS moved that Legislative Council approve the
name change of the landlord for the Kodiak Legislative
Information Office and Legislators' District Office space
from Cherrier, King, and Cherrier to Trident Seafoods
Corporation.
The motion passed with no objections.
c. Kotzebue Office Space
MS. VARNI stated that the Agency went out for a Request for
Information (RFI) for Kotzebue as the lease was due to
expire August 31, 2013. There were two responses, one from
the current landlord and the other from Baker Services. The
proposal from Baker Services best suits the needs of the
Kotzebue office. It is being presented to Legislative
Council for approval of a three-year lease term at an
annual lease amount of $30,067.20, with five one-year
optional lease renewals. She noted that Tina Strong,
Procurement Officer, was on teleconference to answer
questions.
CHAIR HAWKER asked that since there is a facility change,
had the proposal before Legislative Council been discussed
with the area Legislators who would be utilizing those
facilities.
TINA STRONG, Procurement Officer for the Legislative
Affairs Agency, responded that currently there are no
Legislators that have an office in the Kotzebue LIO, so she
has been working with the Kotzebue LIO and LIO Manager Sue
Cotter to bring forward this proposal, which has been
deemed as best meeting the needs of the LIO.
MS. VARNI, responding to a question from Chair Hawker, said
that the decision to maintain an LIO facility in Kotzebue
is a Legislative Council decision. She noted that there
used to be a Legislator who was from Kotzebue and there is
currently a Senator and a Representative who represent
Kotzebue. She said she can get more specific information
for the Chair regarding the use of the Kotzebue LIO. There
are currently 23 LIOs throughout the state and this site
ensures the Kotzebue community has a place to come in and
testify on legislative business. Noting that, she repeated
that whether an LIO should be opened or closed in a
particular community is a Legislative Council decision.
There are smaller LIOs that do not have a Legislator with
an office but there is a LIO presence and Legislators do
visit and use the facilities.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said that in her district there is
an LIO that is open only during session. It has no private
office space so she chose a different LIO for an office to
allow for private conversations with constituents.
CHAIR HAWKER noted that he wanted to have this discussion
on the record. As a Finance Co-Chair, he said his committee
received a lot of testimony out of the Kotzebue LIO during
budget hearings. It is a significant population and
regional hub for that area. At the end of the three-year
lease, Council can reassess the necessity of maintaining
that facility.
Chair Hawker noted for the record that Vice Chair Micciche
(via teleconference) and Senator McGuire had rejoined the
meeting.
SENATOR STEVENS said that, stating the obvious, we have a
remarkable operation in this state that most states don't
have due to our great diversity and that we are spread out
over such a large distance. The LIOs provide wonderful
access for the public; he has three in his district. He
said we should be very proud of the LIOs we have and if we
ever decide to close one, we should be very, very careful
about it because it will disenfranchise those people.
SENATOR HUGGINS moved that Legislative Council authorize
the chairman to enter into a lease agreement with Baker
Services for a three-year lease term with five, optional
one year renewals for the Kotzebue Legislative Information
Office for a cost of $30,067.20 per year, with yearly CPI
increases beginning in 2014.
The motion passed with no objections.
VICE CHAIR MICCICHE said he was sorry he didn't get the
Chair's attention before the vote. He said he is sure there
is a minimum community size for an LIO, but that he felt,
given the size of his district and many others, it is
imperative that folks in those larger district communities
feel represented.
V. OTHER COMMITTEE BUSINESS
a. Late Travel Reimbursement Request - Saddler
CHAIR HAWKER noted that Representative Saddler had
submitted a late travel reimbursement request for an amount
of $1048.06. Per his letter, this reimbursement request was
simply overlooked, which happens and requires Council
approval. He asked if the request being submitted for
approval was in proper form and order, and if it had been
reviewed and determined to be otherwise appropriate but for
the late filing.
MS. VARNI said that Accounting had done the calculations
and everything is in order.
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE said he was a little confused about
lodging and meals within one's own district while getting
per diem. He didn't know what the policies were and was a
little uncomfortable with this since he had participated in
some significant discussions with the Executive Branch on
appropriate per diem. He said he wasn't trying to pick on
Representative Saddler who is his neighbor and good
colleague. He wanted to know the policy regarding
collecting reimbursement for lodging and meals when
collecting per diem and when within one's own district.
MS. VARNI said that some Legislators rent out their homes
during session. Representative Saddler was receiving
session per diem, but if per diem is paid out whether he is
traveling to San Francisco or he is traveling back home, he
would be taxed on the additional per diem. She asked if
Jessica Geary, Finance Manager, was on teleconference to
further address the question.
JESSICA GEARY, Finance Manager for Legislative Affairs
Agency, stated that she just joined the meeting. She said
Ms. Varni was correct regarding Legislators who rent out
their house during session and have to stay in a hotel when
they return to their district. They do receive
reimbursement but are taxed on that reimbursement.
CHAIR HAWKER, addressing Ms. Geary, asked if the travel
reimbursement request for Representative Saddler had been
reviewed and found to be in appropriate order other than
the late filing.
MS. GEARY said yes, that was correct.
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE, in response to a comment by
Representative P. Wilson, stated for the record that no one
knows whether Representative Saddler had rented out his
house. He wanted to make it clear that if anyone had drawn
that conclusion based on previous testimony, no one knows
that to be the case.
MS. GEARY then said that on this particular travel
authorization, the meal per diem column was filled out and
that is not accurate. Representative Saddler would not be
receiving a meal per diem; it would just be the $221.76 for
lodging in addition to his air fare. She apologized for the
mistake for the record.
CHAIR HAWKER, with apologies to Representative Saddler,
tabled this item and asked the Agency to get back to
Representative Saddler and determine the propriety and
assurance that this is a correct reimbursement request.
b. Demonstrations at the State Capitol
CHAIR HAWKER said that, at the request of the Vice Chair
and at the behest of those who had communicated with him,
the next item was to be a discussion on demonstrations at
the State Capitol. He said members were aware during the
last session of the demonstration that, at the end of the
day, became an item of some controversy when there was
interference with the demonstrators. He said that Council
members would like to have some dialogue and further noted
that at the time of the controversy, he took executive
action and made a very emphatic statement of the
Legislature's support for constitutional rights of all
citizens, enacting a very emphatic executive policy to
address legislative employees in any manner that might
interfere with demonstrations at the State Capitol. He then
turned the floor over to Senate President Huggins with the
concurrence of Vice Chair Micciche.
SENATOR MICCICHE confirmed he had brought this issue to the
Council at the request of Senate President Huggins.
CHAIR HAWKER, in response to concern expressed by Senate
President Huggins about the length of the meeting, stated
that he would keep Council gaveled in as long as the Senate
President would like to continue and that the conversation
would not be compromised in any way, shape or form.
SENATE PRESIDENT HUGGINS said he appreciated this being an
agenda item. He said that he spoke with Speaker Chenault
about this request and believed Vice Chair Micciche was the
right person to whom to bring this request in terms of
chain of command. His motivation is about the Senate, about
the state, and about the country. He said what was
witnessed the first week of April 2013 was a bit of an
embarrassment at a minimum, and with that as a backdrop,
Chair Hawker produced on April 10, 2013, a memorandum which
was title "Interaction with Demonstrators" and it was
addressed to Legislative Agency Employees. He said that was
appropriate and well-done.
CHAIR HAWKER noted a copy of that memo was presently being
distributed to Council members as a reminder.
SENATE PRESIDENT HUGGINS said that the logical question
was, if this happened in early April, why is Council
discussing it in August. A sequence of events that was
important to recognize was that (1) there has been
additional information since the session; (2) we know how
things can be in the last couple of weeks in the
Legislature and that certainly wasn't the time to have this
conversation that he would ask Council to have now. There
is a process and there are a number of ways to address this
issue. For instance, in the Senate, a member asked Senate
President Huggins via memorandum to investigate this
incident. Some know better than he does that there isn't an
existing process whereby the Speaker requests of one of his
members to lead an investigation; thus the conversation he
believes is important to have today is one that involves
the Speaker of the House, the Chair of Legislative Council,
and the Vice Chair, and this is the most appropriate place
no matter how unwieldy it is. The public needs to be aware
that the Legislature is having this conversation or it
opens the door for a larger conversation to be determined
later.
He went on to say that the Legislature should learn from
this situation. He noted that in the Army there is such a
thing as an After Action Review where you talk about what
you just did and how the situation unfolded, the mistakes
made and what you might do differently. This process is an
educational tool. He said, ultimately, there should be a
line in the sand that says if you mess with this again, we
will decapitate you; the phrase "decapitating" being
figurative, if you will, to demonstrate the seriousness of
the action.
CHAIR HAWKER interrupted Senate President Huggins to note,
as previously discussed, that in personnel matters and
issues that may prejudice the reputation of an individual,
there is an executive session obligation to protect the
rights of those individuals. He was very concerned about
implications and trespassing into that area where Council
may prejudice the reputation, character or name of any
individual in this conversation.
SENATE PRESIDENT HUGGINS noted the names of those he knew
as part of the process and assured members that he would do
nothing other than note their names: Senators Dunleavy,
Dyson, and he had previously mentioned Rynnieva Moss,
Senator Coghill's Chief of Staff, as well as, Pam Varni,
Executive Director of Legislative Affairs Agency (LAA).
As a reminder, the locations involved were the Capitol and
the Department of Law facilities on the sidewalk, and
potentially involved government vehicles, some of which
were potentially Department of Law, some were potentially
LAA and Department of Administration. He said he would ask
each member to remind themselves that it doesn't matter
what the subject is; the one that would make his blood boil
the quickest would be somebody burning the flag but if he
looked out the window and saw that, he would immediately
look the other way because he wouldn't want his temperature
to go up, but they have the right to do that. It's
unfortunate, he thinks, but they have the right to do that.
He said he has listened to people hoot and holler outside
and some of it was distracting and you close the windows,
but they have earned that right. Some people have served
their country to preserve that right. A number of the
people involved that were demonstrating were from Mat-Su,
and some of the Legislators happen to represent them; he,
on behalf of the Senate, raised his hand and said to refer
them to him and he made an obligation to sit down in his
office to speak with those individuals. He told them he
would make every attempt to bring this before Legislative
Council to have this conversation if for nothing else than
for information.
He said that what is known is that some vehicles were
parked [in front of the demonstrators], as he previously
mentioned, and in the case of the Legislature, Capitol
Security was involved. He said there was some physical
contact that he wasn't proud to talk about. He said what
isn't as well-known is what the communication was that
caused all of this to happen. He said he told his Senate
members, the Speaker of the House and the Legislative
Council Chair when he was talking to them right after the
fact, he reiterated how important it was for people to be
able to do what was happening outside on the sidewalk. He
said he was disgusted that we, meaning people that work in
and about Juneau that were there, got involved in trying to
impede some of that; it is embarrassing at a minimum. He
said he has people that work for him, as does each
Legislator, that he turns to and tells "go do this" and
that is a bad deal for all of us; somebody that is on a
Legislator's payroll that is supposed to do what a
Legislator says, has now been sucked into some proposition
and that is a bad deal. Using government equipment, in this
case, vehicles, is a bad deal. He said he was leaving the
communications part to where it is.
The other factor is that an adjacent neighbor is the
daycare. He said to those who were concerned about the
demonstrators' signs mentioned the kids at the daycare
seeing certain images that they should choose a different
route to get to the daycare; if that doesn't work, we will
move the daycare. We're not going to move the Capitol and
we chose to put the daycare where it is. Another factor is
that the administration identified some people that were
going to be re-trained and there were some people in the
Legislature that the term "re-training" was involved. He
said he assumes that went perfectly and we won't see this
again. He said, ultimately, his concern is very simple:
there are some people that are going to be in the
Legislature longer than some of the rest of us and, if we,
in our own institutional knowledge, can learn from this,
not let it happen again and know how we can do it better
next time if we have to deal with it and that people
understand that it would be terminal to your profession if
it did. He said there are two categories of people
involved: Legislators who are elected and can't be fired,
and employees, which is a whole different deal.
He said he was perfectly comfortable with the April 10,
2013, memo, which is pretty succinct and appropriate. He
said he does not subscribe to that portion of a bible that
gives a prescriptive answer of how we do this; here's what
he does know, lieutenants don't make private mistakes. It's
one thing for a guy that is the Speaker of the House to
make a mistake in the normal course of doing business but
if you make a mistake that is not appropriate to your
station in life or where you're hired, that's a whole
different deal. That's why you have responsibility, that's
why you have subordinates, so you don't do what some people
must have done. He said with that he would rest his
commentary. He said he hopes no one in the room is
squirming because of what he said; it is heartfelt; it is
much stronger than he's stated it and he would use the term
shameful in some respects, but he feels much better that
we're having this conversation.
CHAIR HAWKER thanked Senate President Huggins for his well-
stated account. He then requested, in that it was important
to the context of the discussion, that his memo dated April
10, 2013, to Legislative Agency Employees be incorporated
into these minutes in its entirety. It is as follows:
Legislative Council Meeting 13 of 21
August 23, 2013 Minutes
Approved October 30, 2013
Chair Hawker further stated that he agreed with Senate
President Huggins' sentiment. At the time the event
occurred, he felt that it was appropriate to examine as
best one could to affirm the facts and circumstances,
without the benefit of investigatory experience or
authority, and recognize the circumstance occurred. He did
issue a very strong memo to all legislative employees to
emphasize a paraphrasing of the memo that basically says
"Unless it's an action to immediately preserve health, life
or safety, or to enforce law, municipal code or other
formal Legislative Council policy as part of official job
duties, no legislative employee will take any action that
intentionally interferes with a peaceful assembly,
including using any state equipment to shield visual images
from view." He added that "If an action is required to
perform necessary job duties that would cause interference,
the employee or supervisor directing that action is to
notify the Legislative Council Chair in advance of that
action."
He said he would respectfully argue that the Legislative
Council Chair is the Chief Administrative Officer of the
Legislature, in session and out of session; not a Presiding
Officer but a Chief Administrative Officer. He said that
the last paragraph [of the memo] is very important and does
get to Senate President Huggins' point about
communications, by policy: "Any legislative employee that
is asked or ordered to take an action in violation of this
policy by anyone with actual or apparent authority over his
or her job duties shall come to the Chairman of Legislative
Council or the Chairman of the Rules committee of either
body for approval prior to taking the action." The key
point is that when someone in a position of authority over
a subordinate orders a subordinate to do something that is
wrong and against policy, the policy is that they shall
bring that to the attention ultimately to the three leading
administrative policy makers of the Legislature. He said he
realizes it is an imperfect solution as we deal with all
laws, we cannot really legislate against an intentional
violation of this but we do have this in place which he
assures members that it was delivered with the warning that
should any violations of this occur it would be grounds for
immediate termination. He said he recalled having that
conversation very strongly with Ms. Varni as they were
considering what the issues were and, likewise, he did
personally have conversation with the Capitol Security
staff and he knows they also had conversations with the
Legislative Affairs Agency, and additional professional
training and education was provided for security personnel
in regards to execution of their necessary job duties. To
that end, and again while recognizing that it is not a
perfect solution, he believes they took what was the best
and right action, and what was possible to do at the time.
VICE CHAIR MICCICHE said he is one that is in the pool of
folks that, as are many members, was appalled at the
actions of April 2, 2013, and he appreciates the memorandum
that went out from the Legislative Council Chairman. He is
concerned that those that were currently employed received
that memorandum but his experience with policy is that it's
not carried forward into a new employee packet or similar
process and signed off on as many of those forms are signed
off on and could have a tendency to repeat itself in the
future. He requested at minimum that the memo be included
in a new employee packet with a signature sheet so that we
know that all Legislative Agency employees receive this,
not only in the past but as new employees come into the
Agency.
MS. VARNI said that Agency staff have a separate employee
handbook different from the political employees. It has all
of the Legislative Council policies in it. She said she can
have Skiff Lobaugh, the Human Resource Manager and who
updates the handbook, make sure that the policy is
included. That handbook is given to all of the new
employees so this will be added to the policy section.
VICE CHAIR MICCICHE moved that the memorandum be not only
added to the Legislative Agency employee handbook but it
also be distributed and signed by legislative employees as
well. He confirmed that he meant the memo should also be
included in the handbook of political staff after Chair
Hawker confirmed with Ms. Varni that the memo was addressed
to and sent to only Agency employees.
CHAIR HAWKER asked Ms. Lucky, a legislative political aide
and who is obviously quite familiar with the fine line of
the issues you are broaching, to comment on the Vice
Chair's suggestion.
JULI LUCKY, staff to Representative Mike Hawker and
committee aide to Legislative Council, stated that
legislative employees are required at the beginning of
every session and the beginning of every interim to sign a
form that says they have reviewed every single policy the
Council has and that they are in receipt of a handbook that
contains these policies. She said she would ensure that
this policy is included in the handbook. She cannot speak
for other employees but that she takes it very seriously
that she has read through the handbook and all of the
various policies that she is supposed to honor as a
legislative employee. This is obviously a policy decision
that the committee may make, but if this is seen as above
and beyond and more important than every other policy and
there is a desire to take it out and have somebody sign
that they have seen this one, that is a policy call that
can be made. She said she wanted to assure Vice Chair
Micciche that legislative employees are provided with a
copy of the policies and they do have to sign on the dotted
line that they have read and understand them every time.
VICE CHAIR MICCICHE, in response to a question by Chair
Hawker, said his goal is that there not be a recurrence of
what happened on April 2, 2013. He is happy to revise his
motion so that it states that the policy will be included
in the handbooks of both pools of employees.
CHAIR HAWKER, in response to a comment by Representative
Stoltze, said he heard someone explaining what the rules of
the road are currently.
MS. LUCKY said she wanted to inform Council for the record
that employees do sign every time they are rehired and they
do get rehired at the beginning of every interim and at the
beginning of every session.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON said that violating someone's
constitutional rights would be unethical. He suggested
including a statement of this nature in the ethics training
which everyone is mandated to take would also be
appropriate as well as including it in the handbook. It's a
very simple task of asking the ethics person to include
that in the mandatory training.
CHAIR HAWKER asked, as a procedural manner, that Vice Chair
Micciche withdraw his motion so that Ms. Lucky can craft a
written motion so there will be a written record of
whatever motion may be passed. That motion would be that it
is the policy of this committee that the policy outlined in
the April 10, 2013, memorandum is included in the LAA
employee handbook, the political staff handbook and, as
Representative Johnson suggested, in the Ethics manual.
VICE CHAIR MICCICHE agreed with that suggestion if it
captures the intent of his verbal motion. He withdrew his
motion.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he supported the amendment
and suggested that Joyce Anderson mention this at
orientation.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON said that as a member of the Ethics
Committee, he would make sure that happens.
CHAIR HAWKER, in response to a comment by Senate President
Huggins, asked if he had a preferred course of action.
SENATE PRESIDENT HUGGINS said that what hasn't been
discussed is process, is there something that could have
been done differently. He said he didn't mean an extended
memo, but so that we learn from what happened. He said that
it happened during this leadership's tenure after 50-plus
years of statehood and there is something wrong with that.
He said he didn't see a person around the table who
couldn't recite the points in the memo but we're asking
them to read it and sign it.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said she thinks that's why we have
a lot of the laws we have is because something happened
that shouldn't have happened and so there is a law that we
put in place to cover that. She said she feels that we're
looking at it, it happened, we dealt with it and now we're
going to make sure it doesn't happen again if we can, and
go on.
CHAIR HAWKER said he would emphasize that as the Chief
Administrative Officer of the Legislature as the Chair of
this committee, when he became aware of the circumstance he
discussed it with those that were allegedly involved in it,
we did send the security staff to additional training
specifically to be able to deal with such things in the
future and we made a very clear statement of determination
and clarity of policy to all of the legislative employees.
There will now be a motion in front of Council to formalize
that. He said he sincerely believes as Chairman of this
committee he did step up to policy, he knows he discussed
it with other members of leadership at the time and he
doesn't believe there was an absence of process.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON said the he agreed with Senate
President Huggins. He said that when you tag someone as an
at-will employee, that's an awful lot of power over that
individual. If, as a sitting member of the Legislature, you
say "do something," they are probably going to bend over
backwards to do it. It's almost like giving an illegal
order in the military. You are going to think really hard
and fast if the captain says go do something and you have
to go to a general to say what you've been ordered to do.
What we're doing is clarifying that if someone tells you to
step on someone's First Amendment right, that's an illegal
order and you should go to the proper authority
immediately. He said Legislators have a lot of power over
their employees and some people abuse it, others don't. He
agrees we shouldn't have to do this, but clarifying it as
being something that steps outside the realm of what you
can be asked to do is important.
SENATE PRESIDENT HUGGINS said he does not object to the
memo, the memo is a good idea; he is just frustrated with
the fact that we have to have a memo. Shame on us.
CHAIR HAWKER said sadly, why do we have to have a law that
it is against the law to kill someone.
SENATOR STEVENS said he appreciated the discussion.
Regarding the matter of the daycare, he said he doesn't
remember considering that it was right in the middle of the
[Capitol] Complex when it was installed there, but it
should have been considered. He said we can't control what
is going to happen in the future. There are a lot of things
in turmoil in this country and we could have the most
bizarre demonstration in front of the Capitol. We can't
control what may happen at the front door of that daycare.
Senate President Huggins brought up the idea of taking a
different route. He wanted to know if there was, in fact,
another way to access the daycare.
SENATOR MCGUIRE said that fact was one of the things
discussed in a Legislative Council meeting when this
occurred in April. She said they talked about the fact the
kids go [in front of the Capitol] where demonstrators are
but that certainly they could go behind. She said the next
question for all of us to think about because this is very
good to have these policies out there is do we ever want to
get to a situation where we're made aware of protests.
That's something that also came up and it doesn't have to
be today, but we might want to consider it at some point in
the future. Pam Varni and building staff and security had
put forward to previous Legislative Councils to try and
have some kind of policy surrounding the fact that there
will be people that will be expressing their First
Amendment rights, but where are they located and how does
that work with transportation issues and now, of course,
this issue with the daycare. She said she agrees with
Senator Stevens, and that we need to talk to the daycare
folks about making a different route. The next question
would be if there was some kind of circumstance where we
know when people were petitioning or not; and maybe not,
maybe that's their right as well.
SPEAKER CHENAULT said he personally does not care who is
out there protesting or demonstrating. They have the legal
right to do that. It doesn't matter to him. He will either
go in or go out and he can make that choice. We may need to
look into the issue with the daycare, but as adults, we
have the choice - there are other entrances to get into the
building without even knowing what's going on in front of
the Capitol. He said he understands Senator McGuire's issue
regarding finding out what's going on so people can make
their choice but we're not everyone's keepers either.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT said he doesn't know that we're going
to be able to dictate or understand anyone who's going to
be out there protesting. If we need to make a policy to
tell the daycare that they need to find other routes to go
than maybe we should come up with that, but they have the
right at any point in time to not tell us that they're
going to stand out there making noise, banging gongs,
waving signs, whatever. Maybe it needs to be a little bit
more fundamental. If this is a concern of ours, then let's
just make the decision to change something as opposed to
have some sort of watchdog out there warning us any time
that it happens.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said that Senator Stevens' comment
moved the conversation in a very important direction away
from the issue of First Amendment and whether people have a
right to demonstrate and whether there was any interference
with that, which was the thrust of what Senate President
Huggins was talking about, to an issue that is at least as
important. He said he would just call attention to what
happened at Oklahoma City to the daycare center that was in
that building and to the occupants. This [the
demonstration] was something that might have traumatized
some of the children, but that [Oklahoma City bombing] was
something that killed the children. Just the proximity of
that daycare center to a location that could be the scene
of a violent conversation is just something that is
chilling and he had not thought of that. These things do
happen and have happened in lots of places.
SENATE PRESIDENT HUGGINS said he would encourage us not to
worst-case scenario things because you can't build a vault
for everything. One thing that he would emphasize to each
of us that he doesn't support - there aren't going to be
any demonstration zones. With the Capitol, you've got 360
degrees. If you want to be out there on stilts, that's
okay, but don't ask him to support demonstration zones.
CHAIR HAWKER said he associated himself with those
comments.
SENATOR MCGUIRE agreed. She said she would like to hear if
Ms. Varni had any comments about directing daycare
personnel to use a different route. It might be the one
thing we could do that would prevent that continued
discussion. She said she doesn't think we can protect
against what Representative Gruenberg was talking about and
she would hope that would never happen.
MS. VARNI said that she didn't think that was necessary.
There are school buses that go right by the Capitol. We are
located in a city zone and there is just not another way.
People will be driving by, school buses will be driving by,
and it is a side street, so she doesn't think that is a
solution.
CHAIR HAWKER, on behalf of Senator Micciche, moved that the
Executive Policy outlined in the memorandum sent by the
Legislative Council Chairman to Legislative Agency
Employees dated April 10, 2013, be made official
Legislative Council Policy and be included in all
Legislative Employee Handbooks and incorporated in
mandatory employee ethics training.
CHAIR HAWKER, after some discussion about including Joyce
Anderson, Ethics Administrator, in the contact hierarchy,
pointed out that the policy states that employees must go
to Legislators in positions of administrative authority. He
then repeated the question for members.
The motion passed with no objections.
Chair Hawker, addressing Senate President Huggins, said
that it is an imperfect world, it is not intended to be a
solution to his concerns, but it certainly elevates the
initial response by his office into official Legislative
Council policy. He asked if there were further comments.
SENATE PRESIDENT HUGGINS expressed his appreciation to
everyone for listening to his frustrations. He said he
hoped we have all learned from this in our own way and
certainly wouldn't be one of those things that'd you'd want
him to support a reoccurrence of, because he will be
ruthless with anybody, he doesn't care who they are.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said, on a personal note, it's not
often that we, as professional politicians, feel deeply and
put our feelings on the record. He thanked the Senate
President for sharing that with us and said that it meant a
lot to him.
There being no further business before the committee, the
Legislative Council meeting was adjourned at 1:23 p.m.
1:23:27 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 2013.08.23 Agenda.pdf |
JLEC 8/23/2013 10:00:00 AM |
Agenda |
| IVa. 2014 Microsoft Enterprise.pdf |
JLEC 8/23/2013 10:00:00 AM |
|
| IVb. Kodiak Office Space.pdf |
JLEC 8/23/2013 10:00:00 AM |
|
| IVc. Kotzebue Office Space.pdf |
JLEC 8/23/2013 10:00:00 AM |
|
| Va. Late Travel Reimbursement.pdf |
JLEC 8/23/2013 10:00:00 AM |
|
| Vb. Memo re Demonstrations 2013.04.13.pdf |
JLEC 8/23/2013 10:00:00 AM |