Legislature(1993 - 1994)
03/12/1993 03:45 PM Senate JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
JOINT SENATE AND HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
March 12, 1993
3:45 p.m.
SENATE MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Robin Taylor, Chairman
Senator Suzanne Little
Senator George Jacko
SENATE MEMBER ABSENT
Senator Rick Halford, Vice-Chairman
Senator Dave Donley
HOUSE MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Brian Porter, Chairman
Representative Jeannette James, Vice-Chairman
Representative Gail Phillips
Representative Joe Green
Representative Jim Nordlund
Representative Carl Moses
Representative Ed Willis
OTHER HOUSE MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Jerry Mackie
HOUSE MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Pete Kott
Representative Cliff Davidson
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARINGS: Public Members of the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics
J. Alan Patterson
Kay Klose
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 93-25, SIDE A
Number 001
Chairman Robin Taylor called the Joint committees of the
House and Senate Judiciary Committee to order at 3:45 p.m.
to discuss the appointment and selection of two people to
the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics: MR. J. ALAN
PATTERSON and MRS. KAY KLOSE. SENATOR TAYLOR introduced the
Co-Chairman of the committee, REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER,
and the remainder of the House Committee members.
SENATOR TAYLOR invited J. ALAN PATTERSON to make an opening
statement.
MR. PATTERSON said he was impressed when he saw the
advertisement that our state had a system of accountability,
in which he believed. He realized he had placed himself in
an accountability position, too, and he thought it would be
a good opportunity for him to be involved in our state. He
believed he was qualified.
MR. PATTERSON was born in New Jersey, enjoyed sports, went
to college and seminary, married in 1958, had two children
by adoption, his wife works for the federal government, and
they love Alaska. He referred to his profile for additional
information.
Number 108
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN also referred to MR. PATTERSON's
profile in which he had noted he had seen scandal in public
office and had a law enforcement background. He asked MR.
PATTERSON'S opinion of most legislators, especially, since
he was from the East.
MR. PATTERSON left the East about 1957, but he gave his
candid opinion that most legislators are good people. He
said some legislators do not always use good judgement,
which, he thought, was where accountability was needed.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if Legislators should be held to
a higher degree of accountability than the average person,
and MR. PATTERSON said "absolutely." REPRESENTATIVE GREEN
then asked about those who were judging the Legislators, and
MR. PATTERSON said the accountability should be just as
high. He compared it to a minister being accountable to
parishioners in his church.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked him he had seen any of the media
review of some of the legislators, and he asked whether MR.
PATTERSON had formulated any opinions about the two most
notable charges in the press.
MR. PATTERSON said he had only read the press reports, and
he couldn't pass judgement without seeing and reviewing the
actual incidents.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN clarified that had no preconceived
opinions, and MR. PATTERSON described some media reports as
completely out of order.
Number 194
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER welcomed MR. PATTERSON to the
committee and asked him if he had read the ethics statute.
MR. PATTERSON said he had read it thoroughly but had not
studied it and wasn't sure what it was all about.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER explained he would be asked to look at
the ethics statute and judge the behavior that may or may
not be a violation of the standards in the statute. He
asked MR. PATTERSON if he could do that regardless of
whether he thought the provision of the statute was
appropriate, too lenient, or too severe - based on his own
standards.
MR. PATTERSON said his standards might vary from the
statutes, but he could not use his own standards. He
explained why he would not use his own standards.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES expressed appreciation at MR.
PATTERSON'S willingness to accept such an onerous job -
which she wouldn't want. She reviewed some of the problems
in using a new ethics law while being inundated with news
reports about a serious infraction that has been claimed.
She warned in such decision making, the press follows close
and asks numerous questions, and she wanted to know his
background in responding to the press - while being pressed
by the press.
Number 274
In answer to his experience with the press, MR. PATTERSON
said they had been confined to church reports on the
religious page, He reported no contact with any reporters
since his notification, but he thought he could say "no
comment" when necessary.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES asked when MR. PATTERSON was notified
and did he have any media contact since. He outlined his
calendar since he first heard from CHIEF JUSTICE MOORE, who
had asked him if he was interested in the appointment.
After he agreed, MR. PATTERSON said he received a call from
ERIC MUSSER from the House Judiciary Committee, and they
discussed what he could expect. Other than those contacts,
MR. PATTERSON had not talked to anyone.
REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND thanked MR. PATTERSON for his
interest, continued a line of questioning from
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN relating to scandals in public office,
and asked for examples. MR. PATTERSON mentioned the case of
SENATOR JACKO, but explained his thoughts had been more on
the federal government.
Number 377
REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND asked MR. PATTERSON if he had
personal knowledge of any scandals, and he mentioned only
being aware of the representative from Tok and former
GOVERNOR SHEFFIELD.
MR. NORDLUND asked him about his involvement in the
Republican party, and MR. PATTERSON indicated very little.
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS expressed her appreciation to MR.
PATTERSON for coming to Juneau for the meeting, and she
began her series of questions by asked him if he had spoken
to any member of the legislature about any aspect of his
appointment. He indicated he had not, and she asked MR.
PATTERSON if he had any problems with being away from his
church for any extended period. MR. PATTERSON outlined the
church services and the participation by other members of
the congregation. After some discussion, he said he might
have serious problems with being away for a month.
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS asked MR. PATTERSON why he wanted to
serve on the ethics committee. He thought the committee was
a terrific idea and described several scenarios involving
accountability for both the legislature and himself.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN quizzed MR. PATTERSON about an problems
he might have with the association of primarily females on
the ethics committee, and MR. PATTERSON indicated the
problems might be personality problems, but not sexual
problems. They discussed gender in his present and previous
jobs.
Number 484
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER made a statement to the committee
attesting to no criminal record for either MR. PATTERSON or
MS. KLOSE.
SENATOR LITTLE thanked MR. PATTERSON for volunteering to
serve on the ethics committee and asked how he would handle
issues where his faith might be a factor in an ethics
decision.
MR. PATTERSON explained he would stick with the law, but he
found no contradictions in the ethics laws with his faith.
He said they would be operating as a group, not under his
faith, but operating under the law of the State of Alaska.
SENATOR LITTLE asked MR. PATTERSON if he believed in the
existence of sexual harassment, and MR. PATTERSON said it
existed - both ways. SENATOR LITTLE asked if he had dealt
with people who had suffered from sexual harassment. MR.
PATTERSON was not aware of any, and he explained his wife
had been in the work place for many years without
experiencing any. He had, however, seen some in the work
place in previous years in other places.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked him a question about being lawful
and being ethical in relation to holding legislators to a
higher degree and asked for a hypothetical explanation as to
how he would be guided by the law.
Number 579
MR. PATTERSON reviewed the law in terms of there being a
"grey area" and gave the example of whether he should accept
the Alaska Airlines frequent flyer miles on his trip to
Juneau.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES referred MR. PATTERSON to an article
about a rape at the University of Fairbanks, which seemed to
have involved drinking and sex. They discussed areas where
drinking interfered with a person's decision making process.
MR. PATTERSON described incidents where people's inhibitions
had been reduced when inebriated and discussed his own
policy of limited drinking. She asked about his decision
making where alcohol is involved as to whether it was
ethical or not.
MR. PATTERSON indicated it was a difficult judgement, and he
listed some problems in deciding on the impairment of the
person who has been drinking.
SENATOR TAYLOR asked if there was a set of pastoral cannons
by which he abided, and MR. PATTERSON said there was.
SENATOR TAYLOR asked how violations of such cannons were
handled, and MR. PATTERSON explained the use of hearings,
courts, and judges, similar to the secular world. MR.
PATTERSON said he knew clergy who were prosecuted under
cannon law.
MR. PATTERSON explained how sexual or financial
improprieties were handled within the church.
Number 672
SENATOR TAYLOR asked MR. PATTERSON if there was a level of
conduct that might be based upon a person's employment or
occupation, and he listed some occupations - including that
of a legislator. MR. PATTERSON didn't think there should be
any difference. He thought every human should have
standards by which they live.
SENATOR TAYLOR also referred to the scandals noted in MR.
PATTERSON'S letter and asked what he defined as a scandal by
a legislator. MR. PATTERSON though guidelines were
involved, and a violation of these guidelines, could
constitute a scandal. They discussed ignorance of the law,
the notorious writing by the press, and the definition of
sexual harassment perpetrated by either a man or a woman.
Number 768
SENATOR LITTLE asked MR. PATTERSON how he would deal with
information to the ethics committee, and MR. PATTERSON
outlined how he would gather all possible information. He
said the federal government handled sexual harassment within
30 days. They discussed sermons on current and
controversial subjects, and the possible impact on his
congregation and his profession.
SENATOR TAYLOR asked MR. PATTERSON how he would deal with
confidential information that might be different from what
was printed in the press. MR. PATTERSON stressed he would
rely on trust.
MR. PATTERSON discussed with REPRESENTATIVE GREEN his
sensitivity clearance for information while working for the
U.S. Customs and for law enforcement agencies.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES asked MR. PATTERSON if he still wanted
to be on the ethics panel, and he said he did, but he would
probably have questions.
Number 857
SENATOR TAYLOR used the frequent flyer miles to wonder at
the level of purity that was required of those in public
office.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES explained the difference in federal and
regular tickets and told him to return and get his milage.
MR. PATTERSON explained he would ...
TAPE 93-25, SIDE B
Number 001
... need surgery due to a deteriorating eye problem and
would not be able to fly during a six week period. He was
concerned it might affect his attendance at meetings.
SENATOR TAYLOR closed the interview and thanked MR.
PATTERSON for his participation.
.......................
SENATOR TAYLOR introduced the next candidate, KAY KLOSE from
Petersburg, and invited her to give an opening statement.
MS. KLOSE opened her remarks by offering her counseling
skills, respect, compassion, objectivity, a sense of humor,
capability, and a comfort level with the job. She explained
why she thought the code of ethics was essential to maintain
cost effectiveness, efficiency, and trust in our government.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN noted that MS. KLOSE had two children
and asked if this would pose any problems for her. MS.
KLOSE didn't think it would be difficult to organize her
family to attend meetings. He then asked her if she had
ever suffered from sexual harassment, and MS. KLOSE
described her first job in Alaska as working in the fishing
industry as a deck hand on a fishing boat. She was sexually
harassed, but she was able to talk her way out of the
situation.
Number 101
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if it irritated her, and MS.
KLOSE said she used her sense of humor and being able to
negotiate.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES asked if she would expect a higher
standards of ethics from legislators than from deck hands.
MS. KLOSE said she would, and they discussed being a lone
female in a gathering of various occupations and her level
of expectations. MS. KLOSE said the critical factor in
defining sexual harassment would be whether the woman was in
danger of losing her job. Her sexual harassment was not so
defined.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES asked about her current employment, and
MS. KLOSE said she was presently at home. She was then
asked about her last job which dealt with a substance abuse
program.
Number 189
MS. KLOSE explained her involvement in prevention education,
writing grants to do programs in the schools, natural
helpers program, peer-counseling, an alcohol and drug
prevention curriculum, a drop-in center, an AIDS education
program, and a teen moms program.
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS expressed thanks to MS. KLOSE for
her participation and asked what brought her to Alaska. She
was attending college in California when she heard there was
money to be made in Alaska in the fishing industry. She had
enough money to get to Petersburg with $30 in her pocket,
worked on a fishing boat, graduated from college, and
returned to Petersburg to live.
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS asked if she had ever spoken to any
member of the legislature about her application,
appointment, or possible confirmation to the ethics
committee. MS. KLOSE said she had not. REPRESENTATIVE
PHILLIPS asked MS. KLOSE if she had any personal friends who
were legislators, and she did not.
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS asked MS. KLOSE why she wanted to
serve on the ethics committee. She replied she presently
had time to be involved and thought it was a very important
committee. REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS questioned her closely
about any aspirations for political office or any other
committee or commission, and MS. KLOSE said she had not.
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS asked if she ever had any dealings
with the press, and MS. KLOSE said, "not much." She was
asked what kind of a person she was to withstand the
tremendous barrage of harassment from the press. MS. KLOSE
said she did not answer any questions from the press after
the announcement of her appointment by the judge.
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS asked MS. KLOSE what kind of a team
player she was, had she read the ethics law, how she would
deal with confidential material, and withstand pressure to
make responses at every level of the investigation. MS.
KLOSE explained her previous job dealt with confidentiality.
Number 284
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER asked MS. KLOSE what motivated her to
work in the substance abuse area. She cited her ability to
work with young people, and being able to begin as a trainee
and work up to the director's position. He asked her
further questions, and she explained her interest in
prevention.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER asked her if she was aware that being
on the ethics committee would preclude any employment
position that involved seeking grant money from the state.
MS. KLOSE said she was aware, but it was not a problem.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER asked if she wanted to return to her
job, and MS. KLOSE explained she was an artist, and was
working at home in that field. She was also enjoying being
at home with her family.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN prefaced his question by noting that
MS. KLOSE was young and people of a different generation
might have different attitudes or conduct standards than
someone of her age. He asked, if she was judging someone,
would she hold someone his age accountable to a different
set of standards than someone closer to her age. MS. KLOSE
didn't think she would since she had friends of all ages and
treat them all the same.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN posed a hypothetical situation about
being the fourth female on the ethics committee, where the
decision is difficult to make, and with whom would she
discuss the problem - the other females, the whole group, or
make her decision independently. She indicated she would
work with the whole group.
Number 363
REPRESENTATIVE MACKIE thanked MS. KLOSE for placing her name
in nomination and reiterated the allegations made against
several legislators. He asked her if she had read accounts
in the newspaper or watched it on television. She had heard
about Jacko a little bit from other people, doesn't have TV,
and is suspicious of the written media as being biased. She
indicated she been out of the state during most of the media
accounts.
REPRESENTATIVE MACKIE asked her if she had any reaction or
formed any opinions to the information from other people,
and she said it didn't. He asked if she had a good
understanding of the ethics law, and posed a question about
a legislator getting a speeding citation, arrested for a
DWI, or a criminal complaint was filed against that
legislator. Would MS. KLOSE consider such actions
unethical? They discussed the ethics law in relation to
REPRESENTATIVE MACKIE'S question.
SENATOR TAYLOR assured MS. KLOSE there was no intent to trip
her up on the question, nor was there anything specifically
in the Code of Ethics concerning REPRESENTATIVE MACKIE'S
question.
REPRESENTATIVE MACKIE prefaced his question by describing
non-specific criminal complaints, and asked MS. KLOSE if she
thought the criminal act would be unethical in her own
opinion. MS. KLOSE indicated she would follow the Code of
Ethics. He asked if she could apply to a specific situation
what was in the ethics law in a fair manner, and MS. KLOSE
said she could.
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS noted MS. KLOSE had said she applied
for the job out of curiosity at the process, and she
expressed interest as to how MS. KLOSE found out about the
position. She said she read about it in the paper in
Petersburg. She was asked about her husband's occupation,
and MS. KLOSE said he was a contractor building homes.
REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND clarified she was nonpartisan in
party affiliation and asked if she had been politically
active at all.
Number 481
MS. KLOSE explained she was not politically active.
SENATOR TAYLOR shared information he knew MS. KLOSE through
activities involving legislative grants in a community he
has represented for the last 8 year.
SENATOR TAYLOR referred to her responses which indicated
there might be different level of ethical conduct and asked
how this could be applied to a citizen legislature. He gave
an example of the occupations of current legislators and the
different lives they lead. He asked MS. KLOSE how she would
apply such information in making decisions, and she
indicated it would be difficult.
MS. KLOSE asked if the legislators were involved in
developing the Code of Ethics, and SENATOR TAYLOR said, "
none too credit - but all were there."
MS. KLOSE then asked if the code was realistic, and there
was a resounding "no" from the legislators. SENATOR TAYLOR
described a joint meeting of the judiciary committees in
which a staff attorney presented several pages of problem
areas in the ethics code. He expressed concern that many of
the guidelines would be left up to the drafting by the
committee itself, and he outlined some of the problems
facing the committee in this.
MS. KLOSE thought their input was important in the
development of the code but also thought it was difficult to
reconcile all the problems. SENATOR TAYLOR opined not
enough guidelines had been given to the ethics committee
members in the code.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER followed with his comment that while
there was probably a difference of opinion on sections of
the ethics statute, the requirement is that it be read to
give meaning and application - whether there is agreement or
not. MS. KLOSE agreed she could follow the requirements he
stated.
Number 573
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked MS. KLOSE how she and her husband
determine who makes the decisions as to the management of
their home. MS. KLOSE said she and her husband negotiate to
agreement. He gave a scenario of a difficult situation with
a complex solution and asked if she would depend on her
husband for guidance. MS. KLOSE explained she didn't always
go to her husband for his input and a confidential issue
would be her decision alone. She said her most recent job
was like that, too.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN clarified that media reports would not
affect her decision, and she said she would use her own
independent judgement.
SENATOR TAYLOR used raillery from REPRESENTATIVE MACKIE to
make the point that behavior tolerated on a seine boat might
not be appropriate to a legislator here in Juneau.
After some addition questions, SENATOR TAYLOR thanked MS.
KLOSE for her attendance and closed the committee meeting.
There being no further business to come before the joint
committee, the meeting was adjourned at 5:10 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|