Legislature(1995 - 1996)

02/21/1995 08:04 AM STA

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
             HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE                            
                       February 21, 1995                                       
                           8:04 a.m.                                           
 MEMBERS PRESENT                                                               
 Representative Jeannette James, Chair                                         
 Representative Scott Ogan, Vice-Chair                                         
 Representative Joe Green                                                      
 Representative Ivan                                                           
 Representative Brian Porter                                                   
 Representative Caren Robinson                                                 
 Representative Ed Willis                                                      
 MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                
 COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                            
 HB 83:   "An Act relating to state implementation of federal                  
          HEARD AND HELD                                                       
 HJR 4:   Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State                
          of Alaska authorizing the use of the initiative to amend             
          the Constitution of the State of Alaska.                             
          HEARD AND HELD                                                       
 HB 44:   "An Act providing that a political use is not an                     
          authorized use of charitable gaming proceeds; prohibiting            
          the contribution of charitable gaming proceeds to                    
          candidates for certain public offices, their campaign                
          organizations, or to a political groups; providing that a            
          political group is not a qualified organization for                  
          purposes of charitable gaming; relating to what is a                 
          qualified organization for the purpose of charitable                 
          gaming permitting; and providing for an effective date."             
          PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                              
 HB 127:  "An Act increasing the minimum term of imprisonment for              
          assaults in the fourth degree committed against a police             
          officer, fire fighter, correctional officer, emergency               
          medical technician, paramedic, ambulance attendant or                
          other emergency responders."                                         
          HEARD AND HELD                                                       
 *HB 90:  "An Act changing the date that the legislature convenes              
          in the years following a gubernatorial election."                    
          PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                              
 *HB 30:  "An Act relating to a dress code for public schools."                
          HEARD AND HELD                                                       
 *HB 130: "An Act relating to agency review of public comment                  
          on the adoption, amendment, and repeal of regulations;               
          relating to the examination of proposed regulations,                 
          amendments of regulations, and orders repealing                      
          regulations by the Administrative Regulation Review                  
          Committee and the Department of Law; relating to the                 
          submission to, and acceptance by the lieutenant governor             
          of proposed regulations, amendments of regulations, and              
          orders repealing regulations; and requiring agencies to              
          make certain determinations before adopting regulations,             
          amendments of regulations, or orders repealing                       
          HEARD AND HELD                                                       
 (* First public hearing)                                                      
 WITNESS REGISTER                                                              
 REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT OGAN                                                     
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 State Capitol, Room 409                                                       
 Juneau, AK 99801                                                              
 Telephone: (907) 465-3878                                                     
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided Sponsor Statement for HB 83                     
 MOLLY SHERMAN, Volunteer                                                      
 Alaska Environmental Lobby, Inc.                                              
 P.O. Box 2215                                                                 
 Juneau, AK 99802                                                              
 Telephone: (907) 463-3366                                                     
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified Against HB 83.                                 
 JACK KREINHEDER, Senior Policy Analyst                                        
 Office of Management and Budget                                               
 P.O. Box A                                                                    
 Juneau, AK 99811-0102                                                         
 Telephone: (907) 465-4676                                                     
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided Information on HB 83                            
 TOM ANDERSON, Legislative Assistant                                           
 Representative Terry Martin                                                   
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 State Capitol, Room 502                                                       
 Juneau, AK 99801                                                              
 Telephone: (907) 465-3783                                                     
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided Information on HJR 4.                           
 JEFF PRATHER, Acting Director                                                 
 Department Of Revenue                                                         
 Charitable Gaming Division                                                    
 11th Floor State Office Bldg.                                                 
 P.O. Box 110440                                                               
 Juneau, AK 99811-0440                                                         
 Telephone: (907) 465-2229                                                     
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on HB 44                                       
 BRUCE CAMPBELL, Legislative Aide                                              
 Representative Pete Kelly                                                     
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 State Capitol, Room 513                                                       
 Juneau, AK 99801                                                              
 Telephone: (907) 465-2327                                                     
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on HB 127                                      
 TOM STEARNS, Major                                                            
 Deputy Director of State Troopers                                             
 5700 E. Tudor Road                                                            
 Anchorage, AK 99507                                                           
 Telephone: (907) 269-5641                                                     
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 127                           
 JOE DAMEKO, First Sergeant                                                    
 Division of State Troopers                                                    
 Department of Public Safety                                                   
 2760 Sherwood Lane                                                            
 Juneau, AK 99801-8545                                                         
 Telephone: (907) 465-4000                                                     
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on HB 127                                      
 VICTOR GUNN, Deputy Chief                                                     
 Fairbanks City Police                                                         
 656 7th Avenue                                                                
 Fairbanks, AK 99701                                                           
 Telephone: (907) 459-6500                                                     
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on HB 127                                      
 REPRESENTATIVE BETTYE DAVIS                                                   
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 State Capitol, Room 430                                                       
 Juneau, AK 99801                                                              
 Telephone: (907) 465-3875                                                     
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Sponsor of HB 90 and HB 30                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PETE KELLY                                                     
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 State Capitol, Room 513                                                       
 Juneau, AK 99801                                                              
 Telephone: (907) 465-2327                                                     
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Sponsor of HB 127 and HB 130                             
 PREVIOUS ACTION                                                               
 BILL:  HB  83                                                                
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) OGAN, Porter, Kohring, Toohey, James,           
 JRN-DATE      JRN-PG              ACTION                                      
 01/13/95        42    (H)   PREFILE RELEASED                                  
 01/16/95        42    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/16/95        42    (H)   WTR, STA, JUD                                     
 01/25/95       136    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): KOHRING, TOOHEY                     
 01/27/95       162    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): JAMES                               
 01/31/95              (H)   WTR AT 05:00 PM CAPITOL 408                       
 01/31/95              (H)   MINUTE(WTR)                                       
 02/03/95       242    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): KELLY                               
 02/08/95       268    (H)   WTR RPT  CS(WTR) 3DP 4NR                          
 02/08/95       269    (H)   DP: PHILLIPS, WILLIAMS, BARNES                    
 02/08/95       269    (H)   NR: KUBINA, G.DAVIS, MULDER, MACKIE               
 02/08/95       269    (H)   8 FISCAL NOTES (GOV, DCRA, F&G, DHSS)             
 02/08/95       269    (H)   (LAW, DPS, REV, DOTPF) 2/8/95                     
 02/08/95       269    (H)   9 ZERO FN (ADM, DCED, DOC, DOE, DEC)              
 02/08/95       269    (H)   (F&G, LABOR, DNR, DM&VA)  2/8/95                  
 02/08/95       269    (H)   REFERRED TO STA                                   
 02/14/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 519                       
 02/21/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 BILL:  HJR  4                                                                
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) MARTIN,Rokeberg                                 
 JRN-DATE      JRN-PG              ACTION                                      
 01/06/95        17    (H)   PREFILE RELEASED                                  
 01/16/95        17    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/16/95        17    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS, JUDICIARY                          
 01/26/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 01/26/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/07/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 02/07/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/09/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 02/09/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/14/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 519                       
 02/14/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/21/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 BILL:  HB  44                                                                
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) MARTIN,Rokeberg,Porter,Bunde,Green              
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                      
 01/06/95        32    (H)   PREFILE RELEASED                                  
 01/16/95        32    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/16/95        32    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS, JUDICIARY                          
 01/19/95        90    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): BUNDE                               
 01/26/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 01/26/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/07/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 02/07/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/09/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 02/09/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/10/95       321    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): GREEN                               
 02/11/95              (H)   STA AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 02/11/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/21/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 BILL:  HB 127                                                                
 SHORT TITLE: 120-DAY JAIL: ASSAULT ON OFFICERS                                
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) KELLY                                           
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                      
 01/27/95       156    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/27/95       156    (H)   STA, JUD, FIN                                     
 02/14/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 519                       
 02/14/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/21/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 BILL:  HB  90                                                                
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) B.DAVIS, Foster, MacLean, Mackie,               
 Nicholia, Elton, Finkelstein, Robinson, Davies, Kubina, James,                
 JRN-DATE      JRN-PG              ACTION                                      
 01/17/95        51    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/17/95        52    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS, JUDICIARY                          
 01/27/95       163    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): FOSTER, MACLEAN                     
 01/30/95       180    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): MACKIE, NICHOLIA                    
 01/30/95       180    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): ELTON, FINKELSTEIN                  
 02/01/95       210    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): ROBINSON, DAVIES                    
 02/01/95       210    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): KUBINA, JAMES                       
 02/03/95       242    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): TOOHEY                              
 02/09/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 02/09/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/14/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 519                       
 02/14/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/21/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 BILL:  HB  30                                                                
 SHORT TITLE: SCHOOL DRESS CODES                                               
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) B.DAVIS                                         
 JRN-DATE      JRN-PG              ACTION                                      
 01/06/95        28    (H)   PREFILE RELEASED                                  
 01/16/95        28    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/16/95        28    (H)   STA, HES                                          
 02/09/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 02/09/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/14/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 519                       
 02/14/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/21/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 BILL:  HB 130                                                                
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) KELLY,James                                     
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                      
 01/27/95       157    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/27/95       157    (H)   STA, JUD, FIN                                     
 02/14/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 519                       
 02/14/95              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 02/14/95              (H)   ARR AT 12:00 PM BUTROVICH ROOM 205                
 02/15/95       396    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): JAMES                               
 02/21/95              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 ACTION NARRATIVE                                                              
 TAPE 95-18, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 000                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES, Chairperson of the House State                
 Affairs Standing Committee, called the meeting to order at 8:04               
 a.m.   Members present at the call to order were Representatives              
 Ivan, Brian Porter, Caren Robinson, Ed Willis, Jeannette James, and           
 Scott Ogan.                                                                   
 The first item on the agenda was HB 83.  Chair James reminded the             
 committee that they heard the sponsor statement at the last meeting           
 and asked that the bill be revisited.                                         
 HSTA - 02/21/95                                                               
 HB 83 - REVIEW OF FEDERALLY MANDATED PROGRAMS                               
 Number 016                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT OGAN spoke on the CS for HB 83 and noted that            
 copies had been passed out to committee members.                              
 CHAIR JAMES called for a motion to adopt the CS as the working                
 REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER moved to adopt the CS, Version C, for             
 HB 83, which was from the World Trade Committee.   There being no             
 objection, it was so ordered.                                                 
 CHAIR JAMES noted that Representative Joe Green arrived.                      
 Number 055                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN explained the change in the CS; namely, that              
 the review process of federal mandates was changed from "annually"            
 to "once every four years."  This change would reduce the cost of             
 the mandate by 70 percent. Representative Ogan said he discovered             
 while studying this bill that there has never been a study as to              
 what federal mandates cost the state.  One study showed, however,             
 that the municipality of Anchorage alone will spend approximately             
 $430 million to pay for environmental mandates from 1991 to the               
 year 2000.  Representative Ogan suspects we will pay billions of              
 dollars on the state level in that same kind of time frame.  He               
 said there are currently 192 federal mandates in force against the            
 state, and he hopes this bill will be cost effective, and if                  
 passed, it will save the state money.  It will set up methods for             
 dealing with the costs, for negotiating with the federal                      
 government, and also for suing the federal government, if                     
 Number 101                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE CAREN ROBINSON said it sounds good in theory, yet              
 every four years the U.S. Congress passes laws, and from these laws           
 we get mandates.  The U.S. Department of Education has stated that            
 you must have certain laws regarding guns in schools, for instance.           
 The state government may or may not agree with the mandate, yet if            
 it comes from the federal government, not from the state level, it            
 would need reviewing.  Her concern was about what they would be               
 trying to accomplish doing reviews every four years, if it was to             
 make determinations about the costs to implement the mandates, or             
 to make recommendations about whether or not we should implement              
 the mandates.                                                                 
 Number 124                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN assured Representative Robinson that the intent           
 of the bill is to scrutinize the mandates and laws to determine if            
 they are constitutional under the Tenth Amendment of the U.S.                 
 Constitution.  That is the thrust of this bill.  He believes the              
 federal government is exceeding its authority, and he said we often           
 hear about how a certain law might work for different areas in the            
 lower 48 states, but also they are not applicable here.  The idea             
 is to scrutinize the mandates as litmus tests to see if they are              
 constitutional.   If they are unconstitutional then they can argue            
 with the federal government in court, if necessary, about their               
 authority to impose the laws on the state.  It will be up to the              
 Governor to decide whether or not to fight these mandates, and                
 different governors will surely take different approaches with it.            
 Number 169                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON agreed that federal laws cannot be changed.           
 The legislature can only control such things as mandates that the             
 state is currently accepting and following.  Every year there is              
 something put on us from the federal government, such as the helmet           
 law and the increase on the drinking age.  Many mandates have                 
 threats of losing federal dollars accompanying them, if the state             
 does not implement it by a certain date.  She asked if                        
 Representative Ogan perceives this bill as a means by which the               
 legislature could decide whether or not to implement the mandate,             
 or as a way to say the Governor should fight it.                              
 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said it was a fair analysis.  He mentioned a              
 situation the city of Anchorage experienced recently where they               
 refused to implement an environmental mandate.  It would have cost            
 the city $1 million to implement the mandate.                                 
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON concluded the bill calls for another                  
 report, or a review on a report; it doesnt force anybody to do                
 anything.  She only felt confused about the cost.                             
 CHAIR JAMES said there would be a cost for the review and a fiscal            
 note is attached.  She suspects if they determined that a                     
 considerable amount of money was required to implement a mandate,             
 then made a decision not to implement it, the savings would                   
 probably offset the cost of the evaluation.  She added there is no            
 sure way to identify those moneys; however, according to the                  
 information she has, many of the federal mandates cost the state              
 more to implement than the federal funds provided to the state for            
 Number 202                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN asked what affect it would have on                   
 mandates that come down during the interim period; for instance, a            
 mandate that came down three years ago and has been implemented for           
 these last three years.  He wondered if that would lose much of the           
 effectiveness of what this bill is trying to accomplish.                      
 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN agreed the bill might lose some of its                    
 effectiveness.  While studying the fiscal note they determined it             
 would be cost prohibitive to review the mandates each year.  On the           
 other hand, it might be prudent to build something into the bill to           
 allow for reviews on any new mandates that come in the interim.               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asserted that, while it would be a four year             
 cycle, an unacceptable mandate might come up within the first year            
 that should be reviewed.                                                      
 CHAIR JAMES inserted that she felt the Governor should be given the           
 message about an unacceptable mandate.  In fact, it is currently an           
 administrative option.  She said they could be doing that now.  HB
 83 merely declares that they will review mandates at least every              
 four years.  If a savings was truly recognized it would behoove the           
 Administration to review the mandates without being told that they            
 have to.                                                                      
 Number 240                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ED WILLIS inquired about how to distinguish between            
 the regional concerns versus the national interests.                          
 CHAIR JAMES said she suspects that every decision we ought to make            
 should be representative of both regional and national interests.             
 However, one problem with federal mandates is that although they              
 may apply to Los Angeles or New York, they may not apply to our               
 area.  A problem with federal mandates is that they can only do it            
 in one size fits all.  The question is, if the federal government             
 has the right to make decisions for Alaska based on problems                  
 relating to situations in other states.                                       
 Number 260                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE WILLIS asked if the review commission would take               
 each mandate individually, then make a ruling on it and say a                 
 particular mandate should not apply to Alaska.  He wondered how it            
 would work, in practice, when it reached the commission level.  He            
 was confused about how we would determine if we should let                    
 something go, because it is in the national interest, or because it           
 is a regional thing and they should leave us alone.                           
 Number 277                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN pointed out that there is a section in the bill           
 that covers new mandates, on page 2, line 30.                                 
  The commissioner of a department or head of another agency of               
 the executive branch authorized to develop a state program to                 
 respond to mandates contained in federal statute shall, with                  
 the assistance of the Department of Law, review the applicable                
 federal statutes, regulations, guidelines, and policies to                    
 determine whether the federal government has exceeded its                     
 constitutional authority to impose mandates on the state.  If                 
 it is determined that the federal government may have exceeded                
 its authority, the commissioner or agency head shall submit a                 
 written report to the governor and the house and senate                       
 judiciary committees setting out the basis for this                           
 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN added that there will be disagreements                    
 concerning what the federal government might do that is good for              
 the state, but whether or not it is constitutional, is the question           
 Number 300                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE WILLIS asked if part of the recommendation is that             
 they could file suit against the federal government, if the                   
 commission saw fit to do that.                                                
 CHAIR JAMES added that the Governor would be the one to file the              
 CHAIR JAMES had to leave for another meeting, so Representative               
 Ogan, Vice-Chair of the State Affairs Committee, took the Chair for           
 the rest of the meeting.                                                      
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN asked for testimony from Molly Sherman who had                
 signed up to testify.                                                         
 Number 335                                                                    
 MOLLY SHERMAN, Volunteer, Alaskan Environmental Lobby, and life               
 long Alaskan, testified against HB 83.  Ms. Sherman said they have            
 19 member agencies throughout the state, and there are almost 2,000           
 members.  Below is the written statement from Alaska Environmental            
 Lobby, Inc.                                                                   
  "The Alaskan Environmental Lobby strongly supports all                      
 endeavors that serve to give the people in Alaska                             
 opportunities to better manage all resources; human, physical                 
 and spiritual.  We feel there are many states' rights issues                  
 that must be addressed, if we are going to move with                          
 intelligence and consistency into the 21st Century.                           
  "We also believe, as does the sponsor of this legislation that              
 the state government should `scrutinize the extent and scope                  
 of authority asserted by the federal government' in many                      
  "There are many examples of federal mandates where the                      
 benefits to this state and its citizens, in economic, public                  
 health and safety terms, have been substantial.  Minimum                      
 drinking age, compensatory schooling, safe working standards.                 
 The U.S. Congress is not made up of raging environmentalists.                 
 They have not conspired to keep Alaska from using its                         
 resources, they are interested in the health and safety                       
 concerns of all its citizens.                                                 
  "It has been suggested that this legislation could save the                 
 state money.  We have been unable to determine how additional                 
 administrative costs, forays into litigation with the federal                 
 government and forfeiture of federally mandated monies will                   
 help Alaskas economy.  In a time when we all feel the need to                 
 be frugal and fiscally responsible HB 83 seems uncertain.                     
  "However, we feel that this can be done in less costly - in                 
 real administrative costs and potential litigation charges -                  
 and more efficient ways than those proposed in HB 83.  It is                  
 unnecessary to do this on statutory basis.  State agencies are                
 already capable of telling us when a program is unnecessary,                  
 over burdensome, overpriced and onerous.  A legislator with a                 
 specific concern is able to contact the specific agency and                   
 get all the pertinent information.  At a time when interagency                
 cooperation is stressed, this would seem a viable and                         
 efficient alternative."                                                       
 Number 383                                                                    
 JACK KREINHEDER, Senior Policy Analyst, Office of Management and              
 Budget in the Governors Office, offered some brief comments in                
 regard to HB 83.  He noted that the bill was amended in the House             
 Special Committee on World Trade and the State-Federal Relations.             
 The intent was to make the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)              
 the lead agency in the review of these federal mandates.  They                
 prepared a corresponding fiscal note for it.                                  
 After establishing that the CS had been adopted, MR. KREINHEDER               
 addressed some concerns his office had, and he asked the committee            
 to respond, as to whether those concerns were addressed in the CS.            
 He assured Vice-Chair Ogan that the Administration is supportive              
 and in agreement with the legislatures concerns about the issue of            
 federal mandates, and, in particular, unfunded federal mandates.              
 Nevertheless, they have concerns pertaining to the process this               
 bill requires of them, with countless numbers of federal                      
 requirements that could be interpreted as mandates, such as                   
 requirements to have EXIT signs in every public building.  The                
 concern is that an agency might have to review and write reports              
 about such issues as fire exit signs.  Mr. Kreinheder said he would           
 be glad to work with the committee on specific wording, but it                
 should be something to the effect of federal mandates having a                
 significant fiscal or policy program impact on the state of Alaska,           
 to allow their agency to use some common sense determination about            
 what is an issue, as opposed to routine public safety types of                
 Number 445                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked Mr. Kreinheder what happens now when            
 each department gets federal laws, which come to the state for a              
 determination.  Her question was if there are other reviews in the            
 other departments.                                                            
 MR. KREINHEDER responded there are two steps in the process.  The             
 first step happens before the enactment of these laws and                     
 requirements.  They keep close coordination between the Governors             
 Office in Washington, D.C., with John Katz and his staff who                  
 provide early warning on some of these requirements.  Presently,              
 they are tracking the various block grant proposals in Congress to            
 see how they might affect the state.  His office also works with              
 the Congressional Delegation on any input they wish to have into              
 those proposals.  The second step comes after these proposals are             
 passed.  Mr. Kreinheder said they continue to receive information             
 from the Washington office, but beyond that, he was not aware of              
 any formal reviewing process the departments are required to                  
 follow.  As far as he knew, it is largely up to the department as             
 to what kind of review process they would use for the mandates.               
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN said he would be happy to work with Mr. Kreinheder            
 on changing the language of the bill to avoid a major paper                   
 shuffle.  After all, the intent of this legislation is to                     
 scrutinize potentially unconstitutional mandates and those which              
 cost the state large amounts of money.                                        
 Number 476                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER commented that the legislature has contracted           
 with someone to perform basically the same function for the                   
 legislature that Mr. Katz is doing for the Administration.  With              
 the positioning of our Congressional Delegation it seems an                   
 appropriate time, in Representative Porters view, to try to                   
 intercede during the time the bill is being considered in Congress,           
 as opposed to after it has been completed.  He wondered if they               
 might consider some element of anticipation as opposed to response.           
 Number 489                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said that he would work with Mr. Kreinheder             
 to help get a CS ready for Judiciary along the lines discussed.               
 Representative Porter added that he should correct the motion he              
 made earlier to adopt CS, Version C.  The version they should have            
 adopted was Version F, dated 2/10/95.  With the permission of the             
 committee he said he would revise that motion.  There was no                  
 objection, so the motion passed.                                              
 Number 508                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said that since they adopted another CS they             
 would want to make a significant change in directions, pass the               
 bill out with a new fiscal note.  He asked if he was correct in               
 thinking it will be a significantly different product when it                 
 reaches the Judiciary Committee.                                              
 Number 514                                                                    
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN confirmed that there would be a significantly                 
 different product.                                                            
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN expressed concern that the committee will be             
 passing out a bill they know nothing about and would prefer they              
 hold it.                                                                      
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON said she understood that instead of doing             
 a sweeping review of federal mandates, they are trying to cut back            
 on the number of programs to look at.  They are looking at the                
 programs that have a more serious impact on the state, although she           
 was not sure who would determine what is serious and what is not.             
 Everything is the same except the numbers, or the types of programs           
 to review.                                                                    
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN supported Representative Robinsons view saying                
 they are merely cutting back the nonessential items to review.                
 Number 543                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN shared his views, but he needed to know what              
 kinds of changes are being made.  He understood they want to                  
 disregard the small, frivolous portions and key in on big costly              
 mandates; nevertheless, he would like to be more comfortable before           
 the bill is passed out of State Affairs.                                      
 Number 553                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said that in order to make HB 83 a                      
 comprehensive bill, it would be appropriate to recognize what they            
 do as a legislature, as an Administration, and as a state, is try             
 to influence legislation at the federal level before it is passed.            
 That mechanism might provide the heads up to activate this type               
 of review, if our efforts to stop it on the federal level fail and            
 the legislation passes.  To make this effective, we should do it              
 before the fact.  He agreed with Representative Green they should             
 probably work on the bill at the committee level rather than to               
 move it on.                                                                   
 Number 578                                                                    
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN decided that he would work with different people on           
 the committee to draft some amendments for the bill, so he would              
 hold HB 83 over and go on to HJR 4.                                           
 HSTA - 02/21/95                                                               
 HJR 4 - USE OF INITIATIVES TO AMEND CONSTITUTION                            
 Number 619                                                                    
 TOM ANDERSON, Legislative Assistant to Representative Terry Martin,           
 testified on behalf of Representative Martin who was unable to                
 attend the meeting.  He reviewed some previous discussion on HB 4             
 when the State Affairs Committee debated it, and reminded the                 
 committee there was discussion on increasing the percentage of the            
 vote.  He noted that Representative Green offered to submit an                
 amendment, which increases the voting of an initiative from                   
 majority to 55 percent.                                                       
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked someone to refresh her memory,                  
 because she only remembered voting to increase the percentage to              
 two-thirds.  Up to then, there had not been a new bill before the             
 committee that increased it to 55 percent.  If they were to change            
 it to 55 percent, they were, in fact, rescinding their original               
 motion to change it to two-thirds.  She stated that she objected to           
 the motion.                                                                   
 Number 635                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN mentioned offering an amendment after a                  
 lengthy discussion with Mr. Anderson about whether frivolous                  
 changes to the Constitution could be accomplished with a simple               
 majority vote.  The other side of the debate stated that if it                
 required three-fourths or two-thirds, there would never be a                  
 change.  Constitutions are living documents as we have seen by our            
 Federal Constitution, and there have been significant changes.  On            
 the whole, the changes have been good, and sometimes changes are              
 necessary.  His reason for suggesting 55 percent is to try to                 
 strike a balance of allowing the people to be heard when there is             
 a reason for change.  It is conjectural, if they wanted something,            
 that they could get two-thirds, but he feels reasonably sure they             
 could get 55 percent of the votes.                                            
 Number 661                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE WILLIS noted that he remains strong about a two-               
 thirds vote.  It is historically acceptable, and has been since the           
 beginning of the nation concerning the federal institution.  The              
 citizenry through the years has accepted it, and it is not                    
 impossible to accomplish change under the two-thirds provision.  He           
 said he will personally support the two-thirds vote.                          
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN responded to the debate by restating that the             
 democratic process is slow moving.  He would like to see some                 
 changes, and subsistence would be one change, and if they had a way           
 to take advantage of this legislation he said they would do it in             
 a heartbeat.  However, looking at the balance of state population             
 this would be democratic process to the majority, but not for the             
 folks on the other side who are being governed, too.                          
 MR. ANDERSON added that, currently, 18 states allow the initiative            
 process for amending of the constitution, and 6 more states allow             
 amending of the statutes in their process.  All of these states               
 require a majority.  He emphasized that none of these states have             
 this two-thirds - all of them are majority.  If it is passed in the           
 House and Senate, we would be the only state requiring two-thirds             
 out of almost half that have the initiative process.                          
 TAPE 95-18, SIDE B                                                            
 Number 000                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said officials are able to debate the issue              
 and understand what is being discussed, and then vote.  The problem           
 with requiring this of the general public is that often the public            
 is not aware; they dont listen to debate.  They expect their                  
 elected officials to go through that rigorous exercise.  He                   
 believes that is why a simple majority has been used so frequently            
 when dealing with the public, as opposed to higher standards for              
 elected official groups.  By adhering rigidly to the higher                   
 percentage he thinks we will not only grind exceedingly slow, we              
 may grind to a halt.                                                          
 Number 031                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON said in some ways, Representative Green was           
 advocating the two-thirds, because if there was a real need to                
 change the Constitution, which she agrees is sacred, it would be              
 the responsibility of the group who introduced the initiative to              
 educate enough people to get the two-thirds vote; also to convince            
 them it is in the best interest of the state.  This is so important           
 that she believes it should be a higher standard.                             
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said he did not intend to support the                   
 amendment.  He supported the two-thirds, because he thought it                
 would eliminate this bill.  He said he does not like the initiative           
 process.  In his opinion, if people are to vote on changes to the             
 Constitution, the legislature should go through the arduous process           
 of considering an amendment by two-thirds vote.                               
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN stated that an amendment was before the committee,            
 offered by Representative Green, to delete majority and insert                
 at least 55 percent.  He wondered if it was in error, since they              
 amended this to two-thirds.                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN objected, saying the document was amended once           
 and could be amended again.  In order to be precise, the amendment            
 should be voted down.                                                         
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON said her impression was that they had                 
 already changed it to two-thirds.  Therefore, the appropriate                 
 amendment should be to delete two-thirds majority and insert 55               
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said he would then recommend modifying his               
 amendment to delete two-thirds and insert at least 55 percent.                
 Vice Chair Ogan declared it so moved.                                         
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN requested a roll call vote.  REPRESENTATIVES                  
 PORTER, ROBINSON, WILLIS and OGAN voted against of the bill.                  
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN voted in favor of the amendment.                         
 Number 140                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON voted to hold the bill over in committee.             
 There were no objections, so the motion to hold the bill passed.              
 HSTA - 02/21/95                                                               
 HB 44 - GAMING PROCEEDS/DEFINE CHARITABLE ORGNS                             
 MR. ANDERSON stated that he was there to represent Representative             
 Martin, who could not attend; however, because of a subcommittee              
 conflict, Mr. Anderson gave it over to Representative Porter.                 
 Number 171                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated that the subcommittee met last week              
 and basically tried to amalgamate the two bills they had to                   
 consider.  The consensus of the committee succeeded in doing that             
 and came forward with this bill.  It does four things.  The                   
 committee excluded raffles from the consideration, when restricting           
 gaming proceeds.  As opposed to bingo and pull tabs, anyone buying            
 a raffle ticket can make an intelligent choice about who or what              
 they are supporting on an individual basis.  So, raffles are                  
 unchanged.  Another consideration was about who should have these             
 gaming permits.  They left in place those who currently qualify for           
 permits.  The intent was to get gaming proceeds out of politics, so           
 the bill provides, first, that political parties or political                 
 groups cannot have permits, and, secondly, they cannot receive from           
 those who do, the proceeds of gaming.  With assistance to that, the           
 bill provides that anyone with a license who also makes political             
 contributions, is prohibited from giving those proceeds to                    
 candidates or political parties or groups.  They must also report             
 to the Division of Gaming what their contributions are.                       
 Number 230                                                                    
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN said that he had calls from various people in his             
 district over the concern of 501-Cs losing their gambling permits.            
 He asked if this will affect them in any way.                                 
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER noted that the only people who had gaming               
 permits who now cannot are political parties, political groups, and           
 political candidates.                                                         
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN asked about the reporting methods that will be used           
 to keep from co-mingling funds.  His concern was if there is a                
 reasonable reporting method for groups that make political                    
 contributions; for instance, separate checking accounts.                      
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER explained that gaming proceeds have to be               
 maintained in a separate account.  Disbursements in that account              
 must be reported to the Division of Gaming.  If someone with a                
 permit has a net return of $50,000, the report has to show where              
 the $50,000 went.  The intent is for charity, so the disbursement             
 must be to charitable organizations or they risk being audited.               
 The expenses allowed before this bill came into existence are the             
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON said that once they passed this bill there            
 will probably be new regulations drafted that would set out those             
 parameters.  There are accounting rules on how you do not co-mingle           
 funds.  She thought they might need to ask the department.                    
 Number 301                                                                    
 JEFF PRATHER, Acting Director of Charitable Gaming, Department of             
 Revenue, came forward to answer questions about HB 44, and to                 
 explain the procedure used to record proceeds from gaming.                    
 Currently, they require all profits from gaming to be deposited in            
 a separate bank account.  Profits could be transferred from a                 
 gaming account to the organizations bank account, then donated to             
 politicians or political parties.  Consequently, they would have to           
 implement a regulation, which allowed the department to examine the           
 organizations operating accounts.  This was to assure that the                
 proceeds were not used for unintended purposes.                               
 REPRESENTATIVE WILLIS expressed curiosity about the percentage of             
 the proceeds that actually go to the charities compared to the                
 percentage used by the operators.                                             
 MR. PRATHER replied that the operators often do not report their              
 proceeds or fees to the department.  Fees and expense categories              
 such as rent, are hidden, and the department has not yet succeeded            
 in getting them to report what they are actually making.  In answer           
 to Representative Robinsons question about a fiscal note, Mr.                 
 Prather said there is a zero fiscal note.                                     
 Number 356                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON mentioned hearing from somewhere that the             
 Governor will be establishing a committee to research issues                  
 regarding the amount of money going to charities.                             
 MR. PRATHER verified that which Representative Robinson heard,                
 saying the Governor had established a charitable gaming task force            
 to investigate the money going into charities.  The first meeting             
 of the task force will be March 16, 1995, and a final report is due           
 to the Governor on May 16, 1995.                                              
 Number 361                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER shared a comment, saying that this is one               
 reason the subcommittee did not delve too deeply into the statute.            
 The committees mission was to preclude contributions going to                 
 politicians from gaming proceeds, which they succeeded in doing.              
 Number 376                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN asked for an at ease, and VICE-CHAIR OGAN                 
 allowed him a few minutes.                                                    
 Number 382                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER added for the record that the only people who           
 will be excluded from having a gambling permit are political groups           
 formed for the purpose of electing candidates.  Political                     
 subdivisions can retain their permits for raising funds for their             
 political entities.                                                           
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN pointed out that he received a letter from the                
 Alaska State Home Builders Association whose concern was that they            
 are 501-C and whether they would be ineligible to have charitable             
 gaming permits.                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said the original version of HB 44 limited              
 the people who would qualify to get a permit.  Except for political           
 parties, the subcommittee did not altered that.                               
 Number 408                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON said, for the record, she appreciated                 
 Representatives Ivan, Porter and James for their willingness to               
 take another direction on this bill.  She believes this takes care            
 of the concern about what most legislators felt, and about the                
 perception of politicians receiving gaming money.  She appreciated            
 the work the subcommittee did; it is now a better bill.                       
 Number 430                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN moved to accept the CS for HB 44, Version C,             
 LS023-3, as the working document.  There were no objections, so the           
 motion passed.  Then he moved that the committee move the CS for HB
 44, the charitable gaming bill, with individual recommendations and           
 fiscal note.  Hearing no objection, the motion passed.                        
 HSTA - 02/21/95                                                               
 HB 127 - 120-DAY JAIL: ASSAULT ON OFFICERS                                  
 Number 450                                                                    
 BRUCE CAMPBELL from Representative Pete Kellys staff came forward             
 to testify on HB 127 in Representative Kellys absence.  Mr.                   
 Campbell read the Sponsor Statement for HB 127, as follows:                   
  An act increasing the minimum term of imprisonment for                      
 assaults of the fourth degree committed against a peace                       
 officer, fire fighter, correctional officer, emergency medical                
 technician, paramedic, ambulance attendant, or other emergency                
 "It is the intent of this bill to enhance a serious tool for                 
 police officers and others on the front line.  It will                        
 increase the severity of punishment for acts committed against                
 a police officer while in the performance of official duties.                 
 "This bill sends a clear message to individuals that once the                
 police arrive the fight must stop.  Alaska is not sending in                  
 our `tag team blue' for the next round.  Expanding the fracas                 
 to include a police officer will result in jail time.                         
 "This bill also discourages an officer from `engaging in a                   
 fair fight.'  There is no reason for such a fight to continue,                
 and this bill makes that quite clear.                                         
 "Although initially intended as a tool for police, it has even               
 more meaning when applied to individuals with even less                       
 training or expectation of dealing with persons physically.                   
 Volunteers responding to a medical emergency, or fire, are                    
 neither equipped nor trained to handle assault or violence                    
 directed against their persons."                                              
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN announced that Tom Stern from the State Troopers              
 was on-line to testify.                                                       
 Number 470                                                                    
 MAJOR TOM STEARNS, Deputy Director, Alaska State Troopers,                    
 Department of Public Safety, testified via teleconference from                
 Anchorage in support of HB 127.  He voiced support from the entire            
 Division of State Troopers.  Colonel Godfrey had asked him to voice           
 the Division of State Troopers support of the bill.  The Colonel              
 had several conversations with public safety leaders across the               
 state, including Chief of Police, John Newell from Sitka, also the            
 President of the Alaska Association of the Chiefs of Police.  They            
 are very supportive of HB 127, as well.                                       
 Number 487                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN asked a question concerning the Village Public            
 Safety Officers.  He wondered if they fit under the  definition of            
 peace officer in HB 127.                                                      
 MAJOR STEARNS said they are not considered police officers and                
 would not fall under this; however, the department responds to                
 every assault on Village Public Safety Officers and makes arrests             
 for all assaults.  He said, to answer a question put by                       
 Representative Robinson, that it is departments position when they            
 charge someone with assault to bring it to the District Attorneys             
 Office.  Generally, the assault on an officer is prosecuted.                  
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN asked about the statistics on the amount of people            
 charged, per year, for this type of crime.  He also asked Major               
 Stearn if he thought this legislation would help.                             
 Number 508                                                                    
 MAJOR STEARNS said the department tracks assaults and there are               
 somewhere between 50 and 70 assaults on troopers lodged as                    
 complains annually.  He said he would hope this legislation will              
 help to reduce these crimes.                                                  
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER congratulated Major Sterns on his                       
 appointment, then confirmed with him that Village Public Safety               
 Officers (VPSO) are still considered peace officers.  He said the             
 bill defines peace officers, so they would be covered in the bill.            
 MAJOR STEARNS responded to Vice-Chair Ogans question, about the               
 difference between a fourth degree assault and a third degree                 
 assault, saying that fourth degree assault is a higher degree of              
 danger and threat by instrument.                                              
 Number 547                                                                    
 JOE DAMEKO, First Sergeant, Alaska State Troopers, Department of              
 Public Safety, came before the committee to testify about a statute           
 defining the various degrees of assault.  He said the general                 
 difference between third degree and fourth degree assault is that             
 the third degree assault is prosecuted as a felony.  It is usually            
 as a result of either a serious physical injury to the victim, or             
 that a dangerous instrument or weapon was used against the victim.            
 A third degree assault would also include an eminent fear of                  
 serious physical injury; for instance, if someone were to point a             
 gun at a person and threaten to kill them.  Fourth degree assaults            
 are generally the punching, kicking, and the scratches that police            
 officers often receive in the process of making an arrest.  He said           
 that assaults on peace officers are increasing, and most are                  
 alcohol related.                                                              
 Number 576                                                                    
 VICTOR GUNN, Deputy Chief, Fairbanks City Police Department, also             
 offered support of HB 127 by telephone.  He felt that higher                  
 penalties for assault will reduce attacks on police officers.                 
 Generally, people are aware that there is a minimum jail time for             
 assaulting a police officer, and it is far above what they would              
 get for assaulting an average citizen.  The theory applies to                 
 capital crimes committed against police officers or correctional              
 officers; if a person is willing to assault a representative of the           
 publics peace, think of what they would do to someone else.  That             
 is what he bases his testimony on.  An officer in uniform                     
 represents society, and when a person is willing to assault a                 
 police officer, he is willing to assault society.                             
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN shared that he is a fire fighter and they also get            
 into difficult situations.  He is glad to see fire fighters                   
 included in the bill.                                                         
 Number 648                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said he was pleased to make the motion to               
 pass HB 127 out of committee with individual recommendations.                 
 Hearing no objection, the motion passed.                                      
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON commented that she was for the bill and had           
 no objections; however, she did not want anyone under the illusion            
 that this bill will change anything.  Even so, it is a good policy            
 to change the law.                                                            
 HSTA - 02/21/95                                                               
 HB 90 - CONVENING LEGISLATURE AFTER GOV ELECTION                            
 Number 643                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE BETTYE DAVIS came before the committee with her                
 bill, HB 90.  She submitted the following position statement:                 
  "The Knowles Administration supports HB 90.  This bill would                
 shift the beginning date of legislative sessions following                    
 gubernatorial elections by one day, in order to avoid having                  
 the opening day of the session on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day.                
 "Although the legislature often meets on other national                      
 holidays in the midst of the legislative session, in this                     
 instance all that is required to accommodate the Martin Luther                
 King, Jr. holiday is to move the start of the session by one                  
 day every four years.  The Administration believes that this                  
 change would minimally impact legislature business, and would                 
 allow legislators, legislative staff and other state employees                
 to appropriately honor and celebrate the birth of this great                  
 civil rights leader.  In addition, this bill would result in                  
 some cost savings from a reduction in holiday overtime                        
 required to be paid to some employees who now must work on the                
  "Alaska is geographically far removed from the heart of the                 
 civil rights movement in which Martin Luther King, Jr.  Played                
 such an important leadership role.  Still, the rights of                      
 equality and freedom for all, which he advocated, are as                      
 central to the spirit of Alaska as to any state in the union.                 
 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS added that the fiscal note was included and              
 that it would mean a $5,570 savings to the state.                             
 Number 677                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON made a motion to move HB 90 out of                    
 committee with individual recommendations.  There was no discussion           
 and no objection, so the motion passed.  Vice-Chair Ogan added that           
 it was a good bill, and a good way to honor a good American.                  
 HSTA - 02/21/95                                                               
 HB 30 - SCHOOL DRESS CODES                                                  
 Number 699                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE BETTYE DAVIS, Prime sponsor of HB 30, said the bill            
 passed in other states, and she has received letters from students            
 about the right to choose what they wear.  Representative Davis               
 read one letter from a student in Togiak, Alaska, who wrote against           
 any mandate that told them what they could wear.  Many other                  
 students wrote letters against the bill, but after receiving more             
 information, most of the students understood the reason for the               
 TAPE 95-19, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 001                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN commented on the dress code issue, saying, if            
 students wore uniforms, it might make them targets for drive-by               
 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS had not heard of anything like that happening.           
 California passed the bill and the state of California is where               
 they could get that kind of information.  Drive-by shootings may              
 happen, but they normally are not caused by dress codes.  She                 
 thought it would instill pride, and it would also alleviate peer              
 pressure, especially for students from low income families and                
 people in villages.                                                           
 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN was pleased about the letter from the student.            
 The person was one of his constituents, and spoke of his position.            
 Number 110                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE WILLIS mentioned an informal dress code in his high            
 school days.  They wore light colored corduroy pants and all their            
 friends would sign their names on the pants.  The object was to               
 never let your mother get a hold of those pants to wash them.                 
 Mothers were the only targets, or rather, we were the only targets            
 for our mothers.                                                              
 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS said there are so many things children are               
 conscious of today that have to do with dress:  Designer clothes,             
 all which cost more than parents can afford.  There are also kids             
 stealing jackets and shoes.                                                   
 Number 142                                                                    
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN expressed that there was some questionable language           
 in the bill, primarily about the necessity of the health and safety           
 of students or teachers of a district.                                        
 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS answered that it could protect teachers, since           
 it would do away with colors and gang activity clothing being worn            
 in the inner-city.  There are problems in some districts.  In                 
 Anchorage, they are having some drive-by shootings, and gang                  
 fights.  They have identified many gangs.                                     
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN said he had a problem giving school boards the                
 authority to require their students to wear uniforms.                         
 Number 180                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS denied that the bill gives the school board              
 authority to mandate anything.  Rather, it will give the schools              
 themselves the authority if they choose it.  They cannot mandate              
 anything.  It is a choice to wear uniforms or not.                            
 Number 195                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON made a motion to move HB 30 out of                    
 committee with individual recommendations.  She said that it goes             
 to the HESS committee next, for another review.  After a short                
 recess, the committee decided the bill should remain in committee             
 for further consideration.  Representative Robinson retracted her             
 motion and moved that the committee hold HB 30 in committee.  There           
 were no objections, so the motion passed.                                     
 HSTA - 02/21/95                                                               
 HB 130 - REGULATION ADOPTION PROCEDURES & REVIEW                            
 Number 230                                                                    
 BRUCE CAMPBELL, Legislative Aide to Representative Pete Kelly,                
 spoke on behalf of Representative Kelly on HB 130.  HB 130 is one             
 of three bills on regulation reform, which matches with the other             
 bills quite well, even though all three were independently drafted.           
 He put a sponsor statement before the committee.                              
 Number 247                                                                    
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN spoke of another regulation reform bill now in a              
 subcommittee, saying the Chairperson expressed an interest in                 
 referring this bill to that subcommittee for review.  This is an              
 extensive bill.                                                               
 Number 285                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON said the Chair wanted the bill reviewed, as           
 a whole, in subcommittee to see how it fits in with the picture.              
 There are several options, and it might be that the subcommittee              
 will wish to create one bill to send through, or perhaps it will              
 decide to send one bill out and hold the other one.                           
 REPRESENTATIVE PETE KELLY arrived and gave a summary of what HB 130           
 is intended to accomplish.  He said this bill is different from the           
 other bill in the committee, and he could not be sure if they are             
 mergeable.  HB 130 is possibly a stop-gap measure for larger                  
 changes later.  It is a system that can be set in place now, since            
 it works with the present system.  It is tweaking of the system               
 rather than changing the system, or making a major or complete                
 change.  This bill attempts to reform regulations by doing two                
 things:  By empowering the Lieutenant Governor to do certain                  
 things, and requiring that he do certain things.  It also goes to             
 the regulation writing process and gives the agencies some                    
 guidelines while they are writing regulations.  HB 130 attempts               
 overall, to make elected officials accountable for the regulations            
 that are written.  Normally, legislators write the statutes, they             
 go to the Governor, then they go to the agencies where they are               
 written and then they are turned into regulations.  They are                  
 finally given to the Lieutenant Governor who has no choice but to             
 file those regulations whether they are good or bad.  HB 130                  
 attempts to put the legislature back in the loop of the regulation            
 writing process without infringing on any separations of power.               
 The Lieutenant Governor looks at the regulations and then has to              
 turn draft regulations over to the legislative regulation review              
 committee.  That committee makes certain recommendations, they can            
 call in expert testimony, they can weigh the public will through              
 hearings, then they can turn them back to the Lieutenant Governor.            
 The Lieutenant Governor can file the regulation or turn it back to            
 agencies if it is determined that the regulation is not acceptable.           
 It holds the official politically accountable.  At this point in              
 the process, if it is a bad regulation everyone is going to know              
 about it.  It is holding the Lieutenant Governor accountable, and             
 it gives the legislative review committee an opportunity to stop              
 bad legislation before it becomes law.                                        
 Number 398                                                                    
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN offered a suggestion to get some visuals, charts              
 and graphs to the subcommittee, and asked if Representative Kelly             
 objected to the committee sending his bill to the subcommittee.               
 Representative Kelly had no objection.                                        
 VICE-CHAIR OGAN adjourned the meeting at 10:06 a.m.                           

Document Name Date/Time Subjects