Legislature(1993 - 1994)

02/22/1993 01:40 PM JUD

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
                   SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE                                  
                        February 22, 1993                                      
                            1:40 p.m.                                          
  MEMBERS PRESENT                                                              
  Senator Robin Taylor, Chairman                                               
  Senator Rick Halford, Vice-Chairman                                          
  Senator George Jacko                                                         
  Senator Dave Donley                                                          
  Senator Suzanne Little                                                       
  MEMBERS ABSENT                                                               
  OTHERS PRESENT                                                               
  Senator Randy Phillips                                                       
  Representative Kay Brown                                                     
  COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                           
  SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 9                                                
  Relating  to an amendment to the  Constitution of the United                 
  States prohibiting  desecration of  the Flag  of the  United                 
  BILL SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD THIS DAY.                                       
  SENATE BILL NO. 56                                                           
  "An  Act  relating to  the  budget reserve  fund established                 
  under  art.  IX,  sec.  17,  Constitution  of  the State  of                 
  SENATE BILL NO. 113                                                          
  "An Act making a special appropriation to the constitutional                 
  budget reserve fund of certain  money obtained in settlement                 
  with  British Petroleum  America for resolution  of disputes                 
  over  taxes  arising  under  the state's  worldwide  unitary                 
  apportionment  income tax;  and providing  for  an effective                 
  BILL SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD THIS DAY.                                       
  SENATE BILL NO. 19                                                           
  "An Act relating to the crime of conspiracy."                                
  SENATE BILL NO. 64                                                           
  "An Act  relating to  civil liability  for workplace  safety                 
  inspections; and providing for an effective date."                           
  SENATE BILL NO. 49                                                           
  "An Act relating to preelection reports; closing the two-day                 
  reporting gap in those reports; setting the date of February                 
  15  for  filing  year-end   campaign  finance  reports;  and                 
  requiring reporting of zero year-end reports."                               
  SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 6                                                
  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  by   approval  of                 
  two-thirds of the votes cast on the proposed amendment.                      
  BILL SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD THIS DAY.                                       
  SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 8                                                
  Proposing amendments  to the  Constitution of  the State  of                 
  Alaska relating to capital projects and loan appropriations,                 
  and to the expenditure limit.                                                
  BILL SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD THIS DAY.                                       
  SENATE BILL NO. 56                                                           
  "An  Act  relating to  the  budget reserve  fund established                 
  under art.  IX,  sec.  17,  Constitution  of  the  State  of                 
  PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION                                             
  SJR 9 -  NONE                                                                
  SB 113 - NONE                                                                
  SB 19 -  See Judiciary minutes dated 2/19/93.                                
  SB  64 -   See  Labor &  Commerce minutes  dated  2/4/93 and                 
  2/9/93.          See Judiciary minutes dated 2/19/93.                        
  SB 49 -  See Senate State Affairs minutes dated 1/29/93.                     
           See Judiciary minutes dated 2/17/93 and 2/19/93.                    
  SJR  6  -   See  State  Affairs  minutes  dated 1/25/93  and                 
           See Judiciary minutes dated 2/17/93 and 2/19/93                     
  SJR 8 -  See State Affairs minutes dated  1/27/93.  See                      
           Judiciary minutes dated 2/15/93 and 2/19/93.                        
  SB 56 -  See State Affairs minutes dated 2/3/93 and 2/10/93.                 
  WITNESS REGISTER                                                             
  Ray Brown, Attorney                                                          
  311 Gulkana Avenue                                                           
  Anchorage, Alaska                                                            
    POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 19.                                         
  Dean Guaneli, Chief                                                          
  Criminal Division                                                            
  Department of Law                                                            
  P.O. Box 110300                                                              
  Juneau, Alaska 99811-0300                                                    
    POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 19.                                       
  James Baldwin, Asst. Attorney General                                        
  General Civil Section                                                        
  Department of Law                                                            
  P.O. Box 110300                                                              
  Juneau, Alaska 99811-0300                                                    
    POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed                                                
  ACTION NARRATIVE                                                             
  TAPE 93-16, SIDE A                                                           
  Number 001                                                                   
  Chairman Robin Taylor called the Judiciary Committee meeting                 
  to order at 1:40 p.m.                                                        
  SENATOR TAYLOR introduced  SB 49 (YEAR-END  CAMPAIGN FINANCE                 
  REPORTS) sponsored  by SENATOR  TIM KELLY  and SENATOR  DAVE                 
  DONLEY.    The bill  had been  previously  heard, so  it was                 
  decided to move it.                                                          
  SENATOR  HALFORD  moved  to pass  SENATE  BILL  NO.  49 from                 
  committee   with   individual   recommendations.     Without                 
  objections, so ordered.                                                      
  SENATOR  TAYLOR  returned  SB 19  (CRIME  OF  CONSPIRACY) to                 
  committee for additional testimony.  He noted  RAY BROWN was                 
  waiting on teleconference in Anchorage.                                      
  SENATOR  HALFORD  returned  to  a  previous  objection  from                 
  SENATOR DONLEY dealing with a  law enforcement officer being                 
  part of the  conspiracy, and he  referred to the version  in                 
  the  House  which  also  excluded   action  from  anyone  in                 
  cooperation with the police.  He said the House  bill had an                 
  affirmative defense,  and he read the  applicable paragraph.                 
  He also  said he would like  to hear from  someone in Public                 
  Safety as to why the law enforcement officials shouldn't  be                 
  excluded, as raised by SENATOR DONLEY.                                       
  Number 148                                                                   
  SENATOR TAYLOR invited RAY BROWN in Anchorage to testify.                    
  MR. BROWN  referred to  questions raised  by SENATOR  DONLEY                 
  about the second person being a police officer, and having a                 
  provision in  statute to specifically prohibit it.   He also                 
  referred to questions  from senators about the  propriety of                 
  having  a police  officer  being the  second  person in  the                 
  conspiracy,  and  he pointed  out  the problem  of  having a                 
  police officer  as the second  person in  a conspiracy,  was                 
  MR,  BROWN  explained entrapment  on  the federal  level was                 
  decided by a jury, but he said entrapment was a mixed bag of                 
  fact and law,  and initially  determined by the  court.   He                 
  described how an officer in Alaska could be in grave danger,                 
  and he pointed  to components in existing  statutes in Title                 
  MR. BROWN said all of the examples given at the last meeting                 
  on SB  19 are  addressed in  existing statutes, thus,  there                 
  would  be  no  fear  of  over-reaching  by  law  enforcement                 
  personnel.  He claimed  the outlying areas did not  have the                 
  control or quality  of training,  and the existing  statutes                 
  would  cover  all of  the  participants the  conspiracy bill                 
  would reach.                                                                 
  Number 225                                                                   
  MR.  BROWN  said  the bill  would  treat  all  players in  a                 
  conspiracy act identical, even the peripheral  participants,                 
  by nature of being near the conspiracy.  He claimed it would                 
  allow   tremendous   prosecutorial  over-reaching,   and  he                 
  described what he called the reality of the number of cases.                 
  He continued to  give his  opinions on fiscal  implications,                 
  jurisdictions,  attorneys  for  indigent defendants,  multi-                 
  defendant  conspiracy  trials, rural  trials, and  the Sixth                 
  SENATOR DONLEY asked MR. BROWN  for his definition of "overt                 
  Act," and MR.  BROWN explained  why he thought  it would  be                 
  difficult, but he thought  there should be an attempt  to do                 
  Number 285                                                                   
  SENATOR DONLEY read  his definition,  and MR. BROWN  thought                 
  his definition  was better  than leaving  it undefined,  and                 
  would address some of  the concerns.  They also  discussed a                 
  definition for "conspiracy," and MR. BROWN expanded into the                 
  problems with  escalating the  conspiracy.   He thought  the                 
  bill should be more clearly defined to prevent this.                         
  SENATOR TAYLOR called on MR. GUANELI to testify again.                       
  SENATOR HALFORD  asked for  some clarification  if the  only                 
  other person involved was a policeman, and he read a section                 
  from a previous conspiracy bill  relating to the involvement                 
  of police personnel  in the conspiracy.   He wanted to  know                 
  how the section  from the House  version would apply to  the                 
  legislation at hand.                                                         
  Number 368                                                                   
  MR. GUANELI agreed with SENATOR HALFORD'S concerns about the                 
  police involvement,  and explained the use  of investigators                 
  to gain evidence.  He thought it would undermine the case to                 
  prohibit the state from using the police officers to provide                 
  evidence of conspiracy, and he described the possible use of                 
  an undercover police officer to infiltrate the conspiracy.                   
  MR. GUANELI explained  what evidence would  be left for  the                 
  jury to make a decision, and he also explained how difficult                 
  it  might be for  the prosecution without  the assistance of                 
  the undercover officers.                                                     
  SENATOR HALFORD  asked about  the Governor's  bill, and  MR.                 
  GUANELI discussed  the related provisions in the  bills.  He                 
  said there  was no  prohibition in  the  Governor's bill  to                 
  having  a  police   officer  as  part  of   the  conspiracy;                 
  therefore, it would be allowed.                                              
  SENATOR DONLEY asked  about the prevention  of solicitation,                 
  and  MR.  GUANELI reviewed  present legislation  which might                 
  cover the problem.                                                           
  SENATOR TAYLOR led  a discussion with the  committee members                 
  and  MR.  GUANELI  on  organized  crime  rings, solicitation                 
  statutes, entrapment, complex issues of fact, interpretation                 
  of federal rules, and case law.                                              
  Number 471                                                                   
  SENATOR  HALFORD  decided not  to  move  the bill  until  he                 
  learned more about the Governor's bill.                                      
  SENATOR DONLEY offered three amendments,  the first being to                 
  define "overt act," from  the House Bill 343 from  1992, 'In                 
  this section, "overt  act in furtherance of  the conspiracy'                 
  means an act of  such character that it manifests  a purpose                 
  on the part  of the actor that  the object of conspiracy  be                 
  completed."  He  suggested it would  be inserted on page  1,                 
  line  8, following  the word  "conspiracy," to  CSSB 56,  8-                 
  LSO246\A, and explained reasons for his amendment.                           
  There was some  discussion among  committee members and  MR.                 
  GUANELI, before SENATOR TAYLOR moved  Amendment #1.  Without                 
  objections, so ordered.                                                      
  Number 506                                                                   
  SENATOR  DONLEY  proposed  a  second  amendment which  would                 
  address  communications on page  1, line  7, after  the word                 
  "activity,"  to  insert  "and  communicate that  agreement."                 
  SENATOR HALFORD expressed  his concerns about the  burden of                 
  proof.  They discussed the proposed amendment at some length                 
  in terms of a specific offense, agreement to the conspiracy,                 
  and proving intent.                                                          
  SENATOR DONLEY moved to  change the amendment to add  to the                 
  amendment, "... by words or other conduct."  SENATOR HALFORD                 
  had concerns that in a  multifaceted conspiracy, the defense                 
  would  argue  that unless  everyone  knew every  detail, the                 
  conspiracy wasn't complete.   MR.  GUANELI explained why  he                 
  didn't think it would be a  problem.  SENATOR DONLEY agreed,                 
  and still thought  an affirmative  act of communication  was                 
  Number 570                                                                   
  SENATOR HALFORD was not convinced ...                                        
  TAPE 93-16, SIDE B                                                           
  Number 001                                                                   
  ... there should be  an addition, since it might  be another                 
  standard that had to be proved.  SENATOR TAYLOR suggested an                 
  example  that might be applicable  to the standard.  SENATOR                 
  DONLEY  added  his  part  to   the  example  to  defend  his                 
  amendment.  There was a general discussion  on the amendment                 
  as it related to the conspiracy example.                                     
  SENATOR TAYLOR repeated SENATOR DONLEY'S amendment and asked                 
  if there was  objection to the  amendment.  SENATOR  HALFORD                 
  objected and the amendment failed.                                           
  Number 047                                                                   
  SENATOR DONLEY moved  to add on page 3, a  new subsection on                 
  line 4, "(h) In a  prosecution under this Section, it is  an                 
  affirmative defense  that in order to obtain the evidence of                 
  the commission  of a  conspiracy, a  public law  enforcement                 
  official,  or  a  person  working  in cooperation  with  the                 
  official,  agreed with the defendant to  engage in and cause                 
  the  performance of the  offense, and the  defendant and the                 
  law enforcement  official, or person  working in cooperation                 
  with the  official, are  the only  persons who  conspired to                 
  commit the offense."                                                         
  SENATOR  HALFORD  said  he  wasn't   going  to  support  the                 
  amendment, but suggested  a better place on  page 2, between                 
  (d) and (e), and he explained his reasons.                                   
  SENATOR  DONLEY asked to have the amendment replaced on page                 
  2, line 16,  with a new  subsection following (d).   SENATOR                 
  TAYLOR asked  for objection  on the  amendment, and  SENATOR                 
  HALFORD objected.  Motion failed on a 3 - 2 vote.                            
  Number 089                                                                   
  SENATOR DONLEY asked to retry the  motion using just the law                 
  enforcement officials,  and  SENATOR  TAYLOR  clarified  the                 
  amendment.  SENATOR HALFORD still objected to the amendment,                 
  and the amendment failed on a 3 - 2 vote.                                    
  SENATOR HALFORD moved to pass CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 19(JUD)                 
  as amended from  committee with individual  recommendations.                 
  Without objections, so ordered.                                              
  SENATOR  TAYLOR   returned  SB  64   (IMMUNITY  FOR   SAFETY                 
  INSPECTIONS)  to committee,  and  SENATOR  HALFORD moved  to                 
  adopt the CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 64 (8-LSO445\O, Ford, dated                 
  2/22/93) as a work draft.  Without objections, so ordered.                   
  SENATOR   TAYLOR  invited  SENATOR   DONLEY  to   offer  his                 
  SENATOR DONLEY quoted some testimony  previously on the bill                 
  about the interplay between the committee substitute and the                 
  health insurance proposal for health  insurance benefits for                 
  impacted, injured workers and their  families.  He explained                 
  how this  would  benefit the  families and  keep them  whole                 
  while they got back on their feet.                                           
  Number 129                                                                   
  SENATOR  DONLEY  proposed Amendment  #1 which  would provide                 
  medical coverage for  18 months for the injured  worker, who                 
  no  longer  receives  compensation,  and  he  explained  the                 
  SENATOR  TAYLOR  reviewed  the  Van  Biene case,  tort  law,                 
  additional   benefits,   litigation,   insurance   carriers,                 
  workers' compensation rights, and third  party liability. He                 
  explained why he was opposing the amendment.                                 
  SENATOR DONLEY  defended his amendment claiming  the Alaskan                 
  workers' compensation actually  saved money  in the face  of                 
  rising  costs elsewhere,  and  he  credited the  cooperation                 
  between labor and management.                                                
  Number 203                                                                   
  SENATOR TAYLOR  appreciated his comments, but  thought there                 
  had  been a hidden price to pay for bringing down the costs,                 
  one of which is the manner  in which the lawyers represented                 
  the  injured workers.                                                        
  SENATOR JACKO suggested Amendment #1  was "out of order"  if                 
  it didn't fit under the title, but SENATOR TAYLOR  preferred                 
  to vote on the amendment.   The amendment failed on a 3  - 2                 
  SENATOR  DONLEY  explained  why  he  would  like  to have  a                 
  discussion on "intentional misconduct standard," and SENATOR                 
  TAYLOR  initiated  a  question and  answer  exchange  on the                 
  subject with  SENATOR DONLEY,  who continued  to defend  his                 
  SENATOR DONLEY proposed  Amendment #2, inserting "  reckless                 
  or" at  the beginning of line 11, on  page 1.  His amendment                 
  was defeated on a 3 - 2 vote.                                                
  SENATOR HALFORD moved to pass CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 64(JUD)                 
  from committee  with individual recommendations.   There was                 
  objection.  The bill passed on a 3 - 2 vote.                                 
  SENATOR TAYLOR  introduced SB  56 (ADMINISTRATION  OF BUDGET                 
  RESERVE  FUND)  and  invited  REPRESENTATIVE  KAY  BROWN and                 
  SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS to review the bill.                                   
  Number 318                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE BROWN explained her work on  the legislation,                 
  which  would  address   what  money   should  go  into   the                 
  Constitutional   Budget  Reserve   Fund.     She   said  the                 
  legislation was approved by the voters in 1990, but she said                 
  there  had   been  a   struggle  to   interpret  the   term,                 
  "administrative proceeding."                                                 
  REPRESENTATIVE BROWN reviewed Section 1 in the State Affairs                 
  committee  substitute, which  deals with  what happens  when                 
  there  is termination  of  an administrative  proceeding for                 
  purposes of deciding where money should go into the fund.                    
  REPRESENTATIVE  BROWN  referred  the  committee to  page  2,                 
  subsection (b), which deals with money  that would arrive in                 
  the future as the  result of a proceeding and  would provide                 
  for an  agreement administering  money in the  future -  and                 
  would not be captured by the reserves.                                       
  REPRESENTATIVE BROWN  explained under what  conditions money                 
  could be spent from the reserves, and addressed in  language                 
  beginning on  page 2,  line 7.   She  said the  same sources                 
  would be examined  in one  year to determine  what would  be                 
  available for appropriation, and  she explained the language                 
  specifies  that  "Available  for  Appropriation"  does   not                 
  include  federal funds, money in the earnings reserve of the                 
  permanent  fund, or  money held  in trust  for  a particular                 
  REPRESENTATIVE  BROWN  quoted  the  bill  as  to  how  money                 
  available for appropriation  for the current fiscal  year is                 
  money  in  the  general fund,  including  money  from lapsed                 
  appropriations,  that  has not  been  appropriated  during a                 
  previous fiscal  year  during  any  fiscal year  or  to  any                 
  special fund or account.                                                     
  REPRESENTATIVE BROWN  discussed the  provisions under  which                 
  money from the Budget Reserve Account could be spent and the                 
  current  attorney  general's  opinion,  which would  prevent                 
  capture of specific funds in the account.                                    
  Number 373                                                                   
  SENATOR  PHILLIPS  gave  some  history  of  the constitution                 
  amendment passed  on the floor of the  House in 1990, and he                 
  stressed there was plenty of  public records and legislative                 
  intent that indicated all money from back taxes from oil and                 
  gas should be  placed in  the Constitutional Budget  Reserve                 
  Fund.    He  said   the  vote  was  70%  in  favor   of  the                 
  constitutional amendment,  and was  clearly the  intent that                 
  all the back  taxes should be  placed in the  Constitutional                 
  Budget  Reserve Fund  -  not by  the  interpretation of  the                 
  attorney general.                                                            
  SENATOR PHILLIPS  explained how and  why SB 113  would place                 
  the  money  from   the  latest   settlement  money  in   the                 
  Constitutional Budget Reserve Fund.                                          
  SENATOR HALFORD questioned  whether the bill dealt  with the                 
  existing $680 million settlement.                                            
  Number 408                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE BROWN claimed there was  more money at stake,                 
  listed some other settlements, and expressed her frustration                 
  at  their inability  to get a  clear understanding  from the                 
  administration as  to how much  money received should  be in                 
  the Constitutional Budget Reserve Fund.                                      
  REPRESENTATIVE  BROWN outlined  a  problem with  conflicting                 
  numbers between the Legislative  Budget and Audit Committee,                 
  with the  administration giving  a much  lower number.   She                 
  explained this was in addition to new money to come, and she                 
  suggested  the  legislation,  if made  retroactively,  could                 
  capture a great deal more money in the account.                              
  Number 452                                                                   
  SENATOR HALFORD said it was difficult to make an ideological                 
  argument, and delay the effective date.                                      
  REPRESENTATIVE BROWN  said it  was a  practical argument  in                 
  light of the position  by the administration not to  put any                 
  of the  settlement money in the budget  reserve account, and                 
  she discussed their efforts  to reinstate the interpretation                 
  by the legislature.                                                          
  SENATOR PHILLIPS  differed from REPRESENTATIVE BROWN in that                 
  he wanted to  make the legislation retroactive  as mentioned                 
  by SENATOR HALFORD.   He said REPRESENTATIVE BROWN had asked                 
  for  an audit,  which  the Budget  and  Audit Committee  had                 
  granted, to find out how much money is in the account.                       
  SENATOR TAYLOR  led a  discussion with  SENATOR HALFORD  and                 
  SENATOR PHILLIPS on the retroactive effective date, filing a                 
  suit,  vetoing  the  bill,  statute  law, Catch  22,  and  a                 
  possible Superior Court decision.                                            
  SENATOR  HALFORD  outlined  a scenario  that  could  put the                 
  legislature  on the  wrong side  of the  argument and  might                 
  precipitate a special session as accomplices in the wrong.                   
  SENATOR PHILLIPS  suggested passing  a resolution  directing                 
  Legislative  Budget  and  Audit  to  pursue a  lawsuit,  and                 
  SENATOR TAYLOR gave some  options that might deny  the money                 
  to the administration.                                                       
  TAPE 93-17, SIDE A                                                           
  Number 001                                                                   
  SENATOR TAYLOR thought  they might be  able to persuade  the                 
  governor  through resolutions,  legislation  such as  SB 56,                 
  over-riding possible vetoes,  or bring litigation.   He gave                 
  his preference as the retroactive clause, and expressed some                 
  concern at the generalized meaning of the words  "past due,"                 
  on page 1, line 10 and 13.                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE BROWN explained, under present statute, taxes                 
  are due  when the assessment notice  is sent, with a  60 day                 
  period where conferences can be requested, and she explained                 
  possible litigation for past due taxes.                                      
  SENATOR TAYLOR expressed  concern that sending out  a notice                 
  of  the  amount of  taxes due  is  an executive  function, a                 
  function abused in the past because there hasn't been proper                 
  Number 064                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE BROWN agreed  the auditors have a  great deal                 
  of  control  over  the  whole  process,  but  she  said  the                 
  legislature  was  barely  staying  ahead  of the  Statue  of                 
  Limitations  in   the  tax  collection   function,  and  she                 
  suggested a way to become more current on the audits.                        
  SENATOR TAYLOR suggested ways to motivate the administration                 
  by  changing the  Statute  of  Limitations.   REPRESENTATIVE                 
  BROWN suggested a course of action  for the coming year, but                 
  SENATOR HALFORD objected to the definition of "available for                 
  appropriation," because it is implied in the constitution.                   
  SENATOR  TAYLOR thought the only alternative  would be to go                 
  to  the   Supreme  Court   to  ask   for  some   definition.                 
  REPRESENTATIVE BROWN had some problems  with an opinion from                 
  the   Legislative    Counsel   limiting   access    to   the                 
  Constitutional Budget Reserve Fund.                                          
  SENATOR  TAYLOR  noted  representation  from  the   Attorney                 
  General's office, and asked  ATTORNEY GENERAL JAMES  BALDWIN                 
  if  he  wanted  to  testify  for  the  record,  since  there                 
  presently was not a quorum.                                                  
  Number 171                                                                   
  MR. BALDWIN wanted  to testify on a couple of points, and he                 
  gave his  view of  past legislative  history, including  the                 
  House  being  unhappy  with  the  interpretation   from  the                 
  Department of  Law.  He said they had  agreed to arrive at a                 
  legislative  definition, based  on  some research  from  the                 
  California Supreme  Court placing  heavy weight  on statutes                 
  interpreting a constitutional  amendment there.   He offered                 
  to  provide  the  committee citations  from  two  cases from                 
  California, which  allows constitutional  provisions by  the                 
  legislature to  legislate  in a  particular area.   In  this                 
  case, he thought there needed to be a sharper definition for                 
  some of the fuzzier concepts in the amendment.                               
  MR.  BALDWIN  said they  were  attempting to  work  with the                 
  Legislative Budget  and Audit Committee  to come up  with an                 
  approach to the  definitions.  He claimed their  opinion was                 
  correct   in   the    interpretation   of    "administrative                 
  proceedings," and  expressed pleasure at the  effective date                 
  as a compromise, which was clouded by  the British Petroleum                 
  MR. BALDWIN reviewed  the procedures for putting  money into                 
  the account and taking it out.   He expressed his preference                 
  for working on how the legislature take the money out of the                 
  account, and he  noted the key language  on page 2, lines  8                 
  through 16  and lines 11  through 14.  He  spoke of possible                 
  accommodations  in working  with REPRESENTATIVE  BROWN.   He                 
  criticized the bill for considering what isn't available for                 
  appropriations, as  a way of defining what  is available for                 
  MR. BALDWIN expressed some  fears in relation to  the Mental                 
  Health  Trust  Funds, and  SENATOR  HALFORD asked  about the                 
  Science and Technology  Endowment.   He said their  approach                 
  was not to  deplete the statutory funds before having access                 
  to  the budget reserve fund, but  he claimed they had a more                 
  positive approach.                                                           
  Number 261                                                                   
  MR. BALDWIN discussed  research material from media  reports                 
  and voter information,  and he  promised the committee  some                 
  wording to assist in changing lines 11 through 14 of page 2.                 
  SENATOR TAYLOR said he had no  further schedule on the bill,                 
  but would  like to have MR. BALDWIN'S  amendments before the                 
  end of the week to be circulated to the two prime  sponsors.                 
  He promised to bring the bill to committee for further work,                 
  and  he  wanted an  amendment  on  the effective  date.   He                 
  expressed appreciation to MR. BALDWIN for his work.                          
  SENATOR HALFORD  reviewed the  interpretation and  suggested                 
  there  was  more  room in  defining  "revenue  available for                 
  appropriation."  He  approved of the most  conservative view                 
  of the legislation.                                                          
  There  being  no   further  business  to  come   before  the                 
  committee, the meeting was adjourned at 3:32 p.m.                            

Document Name Date/Time Subjects