Legislature(2009 - 2010)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/02/2010 09:00 AM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB190 | |
| SB284 | |
| HJR16 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 190 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 284 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HJR 16 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
March 2, 2010
9:00 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Linda Menard, Chair
Senator Kevin Meyer, Vice Chair
Senator Hollis French
Senator Albert Kookesh
Senator Joe Paskvan
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 190
"An Act relating to biometric information."
- HEARD AND HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 284
"An Act relating to state election campaigns, the duties of the
Alaska Public Offices Commission, the reporting and disclosure
of expenditures and independent expenditures, the filing of
reports, and the identification of certain communications in
state election campaigns; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED SB 284 OUT OF COMMITTEE
CS FOR HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 16(L&C)
Relating to federal procurement preferences for small businesses
in the state that are owned and controlled by service-disabled
veterans.
- MOVED CSHJR 16(L&C) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 190
SHORT TITLE: BIOMETRIC INFORMATION FOR ID
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) WIELECHOWSKI
04/10/09 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/10/09 (S) STA, JUD
03/02/10 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: SB 284
SHORT TITLE: CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES
SPONSOR(s): JUDICIARY
02/19/10 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/19/10 (S) STA, JUD
03/02/10 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: HJR 16
SHORT TITLE: DISABLED VETERANS PROCUREMENT PREFERENCE
SPONSOR(s): GATTO
02/09/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/09/09 (H) MLV, L&C
02/24/09 (H) MLV AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
02/24/09 (H) Moved Out of Committee
02/24/09 (H) MINUTE(MLV)
02/25/09 (H) MLV RPT 6DP
02/25/09 (H) DP: KAWASAKI, OLSON, HARRIS, LYNN,
BUCH, GATTO
03/27/09 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
03/27/09 (H) Heard & Held
03/27/09 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
04/03/09 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
04/03/09 (H) Moved CSHJR 16(L&C) Out of Committee
04/03/09 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
04/06/09 (H) L&C RPT CS(L&C) 3DP 2NR
04/06/09 (H) DP: LYNN, COGHILL, OLSON
04/06/09 (H) NR: NEUMAN, HOLMES
02/17/10 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
02/17/10 (H) VERSION: CSHJR 16(L&C)
02/18/10 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/18/10 (S) STA
03/02/10 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR BILL WIELECHOWSKI
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 190.
JASON GIAIMO, representing himself
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 190.
BRENDA NATION
American Council of Life Insurers (ACLI)
Washington, D.C.
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 190.
JEFFREY MITTMAN, Executive Director
ACLU - Alaska
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 190.
MARILYN RUSSELL, President
League of Women Voters - Alaska (LWV)
Fairbanks, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 284.
MATT WALLACE, Executive Director
Alaska Public Interest Research Group (AKPIRG)
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 284.
JOHN PTACIN, Attorney
Civil Division
Labor/State Affairs
Department of Law
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information for SB 284.
KAREN SAWYER
Staff to Representative Carl Gatto
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HJR 16 for the sponsor.
RIC DAVIDGE, National Chairman
Economic Opportunities Committee for Vietnam Veterans of America
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HJR 16.
TIM WHEELER, National Director
Economic Opportunities
Veterans of Modern Warfare
Washington D.C.
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HJR 16.
ACTION NARRATIVE
9:00:34 AM
CHAIR LINDA MENARD called the Senate State Affairs Standing
Committee meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Paskvan, French, Meyer, Kookesh and Menard.
SB 190-BIOMETRIC INFORMATION FOR ID
9:01:22 AM
CHAIR MENARD announced the first order of business to come
before the committee would be SB 190.
SENATOR BILL WIELECHOWSKI, sponsor of SB 190, said the purpose
of SB 190 is to update an existing law, passed unanimously in
2004, to protect our privacy rights. The existing law outlaws
the collection, analysis or storage of a law-abiding person's
genetic information or DNA without his or her written consent.
Advances in DNA technology have been of benefit to society,
medicine and law enforcement but also hold the potential for
misuse. DNA is now only one form of biometric information and
emerging technologies further threaten our privacy rights.
Physiological characteristics, unique to an individual, can be
used to obtain information about people without consent. For
example, facial recognition technology can track a person
anywhere they go. He pointed out that Great Britain has cameras
set up and tracks citizens all over the country; most Alaskans
would find that offensive. Senator Wielechowski said he was
motivated to sponsor SB 190 after being approached by an
individual who was refused admittance to the state accountancy
licensing exam because he refused to submit to fingerprinting.
This man offered his driver's license, social security card and
passport but was told this was insufficient identification.
9:04:33 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said it is offensive to treat law-abiding,
privacy-loving Alaskans like criminals. Once scanned,
fingerprint data is often handed over to private data management
firms, some of which sell personal data sourced from multiple
public and private databases. Adding only "fingerprints" to the
existing law protecting our DNA, would still allow companies to
collect retinal scan information, facial characteristic
information or other private data. Thus, the term "biometric"
was used in drafting the law.
CHAIR MENARD said she understood that some of the data
management firms are in Europe or East Asia.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI replied that is correct.
SENATOR FRENCH asked how the practice of taking photographs is
differentiated from unauthorized collection of biometric
information.
9:07:16 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said a facial biometric system is made up
of three components: a camera, a software program that
recognizes face geometry such as placement of the eyes and nose
and a system capable of classifying all those elements to
differentiate between people.
9:08:23 AM
CHAIR MENARD opened public testimony.
JASON GIAIMO, representing himself, said two years ago he went
to take the final part of the CPA exam. He was refused entrance
due to a lack of proper identification, even though he presented
his driver's license, passport and more. Only fingerprints, in
addition to other ID, were sufficient. Through research, he
found the fingerprints would have gone into a database that is
transmitted over the internet to a foreign data-mining firm
called Choice Point. Choice Point is the largest supplier of
information to over 7,000 different companies including the IRS,
FBI and Department of Homeland Security. He said big business is
masquerading as security.
9:12:25 AM
BRENDA NATION, American Council of Life Insurers (ACLI), said
the ACIL's first concern is the broad definition of biometric
information particularly in Version P on page 3, lines 3-4: "an
individual's unique behavioral and physiological
characteristics". She said ACLI does not understand how to
comply with this broad definition when collecting information
about a person wanting to purchase life or long-term care
insurance. Life insurers are required under federal and state
privacy laws and regulations to obtain written consent from an
individual before obtaining their personal, non-public health
information. Those regulations include prohibitions on
disclosure and business exceptions that allow ACLI to serve
their customers. Exceptions are also found in the current
statutory definition of DNA analysis which allows life insurers
and others to collect and retain certain information to serve
customers.
She said ACLI's second major concern is that under AS
18.13.010(c), and SB 190, a person is allowed to revoke their
written consent at any time. She said what information SB 190
protects or does not is unclear. For example, would the
information included in a person's health history, held by a
doctor, be considered biometric information? Without the ability
for the insurer and the doctor to share information, paying a
long-term care claim could be problematic.
9:16:18 AM
Similarly, should a person revoke his consent, an insurance
issuer would not know what information is biometric and should
be removed from the file, making it difficult to comply with the
law. She said she provided two suggested amendments to Senator
Wielechowski regarding the definition of biometric information
that would alleviate ACLI's concerns with SB 190.
SENATOR PASKVAN said he expected that an insurance provider
tracks a member with a plan number and a participant number
rather than with biometric information. He asked Ms. Nation what
she means by using biometric information to track a person in
relation to a payment for a medical procedure.
MS. NATION said ACLI members do not use things like
fingerprints, hand geometry, voice recognition, facial
recognition or retinal scans. ACLI's concern with the definition
of biometric information is the piece that reads, "information
that is based on an individual's unique behavioral or
physiological characteristics". The language is so broad that it
could potentially encompass other health information.
CHAIR MENARD asked Senator Wielechowski if he feels the
definition of "biometric information" is too broad.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said the intent of SB 190 is not to exclude
necessary health insurance information but to protect people's
personal, private information against current and future
technologies.
9:20:03 AM
He said he would not object to taking "behavioral and
physiological characteristics" out of SB 190 if the committee is
concerned about the interpretation of those words.
SENATOR PASKVAN suggested that the assembly of data by others
and collecting that information scientifically or by computer is
the troubling aspect.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI reiterated that the intent of SB 190 is to
protect Alaskan's privacy and new technologies must be
considered. He said removing "behavioral and physiological
characteristics including" out of SB 190 might solve any
problems. He said he is happy to work with Senator Paskvan and
Senator Menard's offices and the insurance industry.
9:23:12 AM
CHAIR MENARD opened public testimony.
JEFFREY MITTMAN, Executive Director, ACLU, said ACLU is
generally supportive of the SB 190. ACLU has one concern: On
page 2, lines 11-12 of SB 190 would amend AS 18.13.010(b)(6) to
read "for background checks as permitted or required by state
statute or by federal statute or regulation". ACLU's concern is
that that exception is so broad that it completely encompasses
the rule. ACLU hopes to work with Senator Wielechowski or the
drafter to ensure that necessary checks are allowed but not
against an individual's consent or knowledge. If such a revision
were made, ACLU would fully support SB 190.
9:26:02 AM
CHAIR MENARD closed public testimony.
CHAIR MENARD announced she would hold SB 190 in committee to
clear up some of the questions that were discussed.
SB 284-CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES
9:26:38 AM
CHAIR MENARD announced the next order of business to come before
the committee would be SB 284.
SENATOR FRENCH, sponsor of SB 284, read the following sponsor
statement:
In the wake of the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling,
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the
Senate Judiciary Committee has worked to determine the
changes to Alaska's elections laws that will be
needed. Corporations have been banned from
participating in Alaska's elections prior to this
ruling. This means many of Alaska's laws regarding
disclosure and disclaimers simply do not apply to
corporations making independent expenditures to
support or oppose specific candidates in elections.
Testimony from Legislative Legal Services attorneys
and from the Alaska Department of Law indicated that
changes would be needed to Alaska's campaign laws, and
this bill was subsequently drafted to address the
concerns raised by the attorneys and by committee
members.
Senate Bill 284 amends state election laws to clarify
that corporations are covered by all applicable
reporting requirements. It expands communication
identification requirements to ensure accurate
reporting of top contributors, to require the approval
of the content by the principal officer of the
corporation, and to require statements in each
communication that its content has not authorized or
approved by the candidate. It also speeds reporting
requirements for communications expenditures in the
last nine days of the election so that expenditures
over $250 must be reported within 24 hours.
Recent opinion surveys show broad disapproval by
Americans across party lines for the decision reached
by the U.S. Supreme Court. In order to retain
Alaskan's trust in our system it is vital that
legislation be passed this year to ensure that
corporations spending money to influence elections are
at least required to disclose it in a timely fashion.
I urge you to support Senate Bill 284.
SENATOR MEYER said the U.S. Supreme Court ruling pertained to
corporations and unions. He asked why Senator French only
addressed corporations in his sponsor statement.
SENATOR FRENCH replied that was inadvertent. SB 284 defaults to
a definition of 'person' which under Alaska law encompasses
individuals, candidates, groups, non-group entities,
corporations and unions. The intent is to bring all players
under the same set of laws and rules.
9:30:03 AM
CHAIR MENARD asked how other states are reacting to the U.S.
Supreme Court ruling.
SENATOR FRENCH replied that states are hurrying to adopt new
disclosure and disclaimer laws prior to upcoming elections.
Alaska's Attorney General (AG) has issued an opinion that
largely endorses many requirements that SB 284 puts into place.
SB 284 has two main points: disclosure and disclaimer.
Disclosure means reporting to the Alaska Public Offices
Commission (APOC) what one is taking in and spending. Disclaimer
means putting a message on the communication itself saying who
paid for it. Under SB 284, the top five contributors to a group
that paid for a communication would have to list their
contributions.
9:32:17 AM
SENATOR MEYER asked if SB 284 would affect all corporations,
regardless of size.
SENATOR FRENCH replied yes.
SENATOR MEYER asked what the disclosure requirements are for the
corporations.
SENATOR FRENCH replied that on page 3, lines 7-12 require
disclosure of the candidate or the title of the ballot
proposition being supported or opposed and the name and address
of each officer or director, when applicable. On page 3,
paragraph 5, beginning on line 14, requires the name, address
and principal occupation and employer of an individual
contributor. If it is a group, non-group entity or corporation,
the name and address of the contributor and the name and address
of each officer and director of the contributor is required.
9:34:38 AM
SENATOR MEYER asked about the requirement for each officer and
director on Page 3, line 11. He provided an example of Carrs
Safeway contributing to a campaign to pass school bonds and
asked if Carrs Safeway would have to list all directors and
officers nationwide or just in Alaska.
SENATOR FRENCH replied that Carrs Safeway would have to list the
officers and directors of whatever subdivision gave the money.
He provided another example using BP. Whichever entity of BP
"writes the check", such as BP Alaska, BP National or BP
International, must list its directors and officers.
SENATOR MEYER asked how SB 284 would apply to unions.
SENATOR FRENCH replied that the U.S. Supreme Court decision and
SB 284 do not effect contributions to candidates. The Supreme
Court decision opened up independent expenditures for and
against candidates by corporations and unions. Corporations
still cannot give any candidate money but can support or oppose
candidates independently on TV, in print or radio.
SENATOR MEYER asked if there is a dollar amount.
SENATOR FRENCH responded no.
SENATOR MEYER asked what the Teamsters, for example, need to
disclose if they want to support a candidate.
SENATOR FRENCH replied that the Teamsters would have to disclose
the name and address of each officer and director of the entity
that wrote the check; for example, Teamsters Alaska Local 959.
9:37:46 AM
SENATOR MEYER asked Senator French to explain page 3, lines 13-
17, about the aggregate amount not exceeding $100. He asked why
all contributions, regardless of amount, aren't required to be
disclosed.
SENATOR FRENCH replied that the report of contributions must
contain the aggregate amount of all contributions made to the
person. For all contributions that exceed $100, the report must
include the date of the contribution and the amount contributed
by each contributor. An individual contributor's name, address,
principal occupation and employer must be listed. If a
corporation is contributing, the name and address of each
officer and director is required.
SENATOR MEYER said currently candidates can disclose all
contributions.
SENATOR FRENCH said candidates have to disclose all the
contributions and the name. Some candidates voluntarily add the
occupation and employer for all contributions and others wait
until the threshold is hit.
SENATOR MEYER asked if Senator French thinks SB 284 tracks the
current process.
SENATOR FRENCH replied yes.
SENATOR PASKVAN referred to page 3, paragraph 5, lines 13-17 and
asked for confirmation that a legal entity, such as a
corporation, would be required to divulge whether the employees
of that corporation are contributing or if the president alone
is utilizing its general funds.
9:40:56 AM
SENATOR FRENCH replied that Senator Paskvan's analysis was
correct.
SENATOR MEYER referred to Section 11 of SB 284 on page 5, line
23 which says "include a statement from the principal officer
approving the communication". He asked what Senator French
envisions as far as a statement from the principal officer.
SENATOR FRENCH responded that people are familiar with a
statement following a TV ad, such as, "I am Senator So-and-so,
and I approve this ad." He said the intention of SB 284 is to
make certain that voters hear from the principal officer or the
person bringing the advertisement forth.
SENATOR MEYER asked if a corporation's local presiding officer
in Alaska would be at the end of a TV ad or, for example, the
president of Conoco Phillips in Houston.
SENATOR FRENCH replied with an example: If Exxon Alaska made the
ad, Marty Massey would make the statement; if it's Exxon USA or
Exxon Global, whoever rules that particular domain would make
the statement. The same applies for unions. It helps establish
accountability.
SENATOR MEYER said he does not disagree but more than likely the
money came from Houston, London or Ohio. Corporations are so big
that you can get lost in the maze.
9:43:54 AM
SENATOR FRENCH said Senator Meyer is anticipating some of the
difficulties of the new landscape and SB 284 will not stay its
present form for long before more changes will be needed.
However, something needs to get on the books.
SENATOR MEYER said he feels full disclosure is always best.
CHAIR MENARD said she is concerned about the requirement that a
board of directors must report all names and asked if officers
and secretaries must be named.
SENATOR FRENCH replied yes.
CHAIR MENARD said doing so could be cumbersome. She asked if the
recording criteria for corporations is identical to the
statutory requirements for other non-corporate groups.
SENATOR FRENCH said the intention is to make them all equal.
9:45:51 AM
MARILYN RUSSELL, President, League of Women Voters - Alaska
(LWV) said LWV supports SB 284. The goals of a campaign system
should be: to ensure the public's right to know, to combat
corruption and undue influence, to enable candidates to compete
more equitably and to promote citizen participation in the
political process. The LWV was disappointed in the recent U.S.
Supreme Court decision and polls show that eight in ten
Americans oppose the decision to allow corporate political
spending. Alaska's campaign laws must be amended, before the
upcoming primary and general elections, to require full
disclosure of campaign contributions by corporations and labor
unions which are currently not covered under existing laws
regarding disclosure and disclaimer. Citizens should know who is
spending money supporting or opposing candidates and ballot
issues. The information should be available with the campaign
communication itself.
9:48:06 AM
MATT WALLACE, Executive Director, Alaska Public Interest
Research Group (AKPIRG) said getting something on the books to
mitigate undue spending in upcoming campaigns and elections is
critical. AKPIRG is encouraged to see that SB 284 would require
the same type of disclosure for independent corporate and union
spending that is currently required for campaign contributions
to candidates. AKPIRG wants citizens to know who is paying for
attack ads. AKPRIG supports decreasing the influence of big
money in politics, leveling the playing field, and giving
citizens a voice in the political process. AKPIRG is in strong
support of SB 284.
9:50:47 AM
JOHN PTACIN, Attorney, Department of Law, said his main client
is the Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC). He said Alaska
may not prohibit independent expenditures attenuated to
political speech outright. That changes the landscape of the
law. Currently some disclosure and disclaimer laws do apply to
corporations, labor unions and companies attempting to make an
independent expenditure in a candidate election. Other laws do
not apply because when legislation was passed, the legislature
did not contemplate corporations and labor unions making
independent expenditures in candidate elections. An AG
memorandum, issued about 10 days ago, determined that the true
source of funds is an issue for corporations, labor unions and
companies making independent expenditures in candidate
elections.
9:53:26 AM
SENATOR FRENCH asked Mr. Ptacin if anything in SB 284 is
inconsistent with the opinion put out by the AG's office.
MR. PTACIN replied that he does not find any inconsistencies
between SB 284 and the AG's memo.
CHAIR MENARD closed public testimony.
SENATOR PASKVAN said Senator French should be commended because
the change in the legal landscape following the January 2010
U.S. Supreme Court decision leaves potential for inequities in
the upcoming election. A legal entity such as a corporation or
union should stay out of the political debate if they don't want
to disclose or disclaim. Citizens have a right to know and SB
284 should be passed.
SENATOR MEYER said he agrees with Senator Paskvan. His only
concern is that SB 284 needs some cleanup so that unions or
corporations know the rules if they want to participate in the
passage of school bonds, for example.
9:56:11 AM
SENATOR MEYER moved to report SB 284 from committee with
individual recommendations and attached fiscal note(s). There
being no objection, the motion carried.
At ease from 9:56 a.m. to 9:59 a.m.
HJR 16-DISABLED VETERANS PROCUREMENT PREFERENCE
9:59:16 AM
CHAIR MENARD announced the final order of business would be HJR
16. [CSHJR 16(L&C) was before the committee.]
KAREN SAWYER, staff to Representative Carl Gatto, sponsor of HJR
16, said a service disabled veteran is a veteran who possesses a
disability rating letter issued by the Department of Veteran
Affairs establishing a service connected rating between 1 and
100 percent disability. A veteran-owned business means that same
veteran owns at least 51 percent of the business or stock or
performs management and daily business operations. The
procurement preference refers to the 2003 Veterans Benefits Act,
which strengthened a law allowing service disabled veterans to
go into business for themselves by bidding on federal contracts.
Three percent of all federally budgeted dollars were to be set
aside for these business, ensuring that small business in the
state owned by these veterans were able to received sole source
and restriction competition contracts for goods and services
used by the federal government. However, that has not been
happening.
HJR 16 urges the President to direct all federal agencies in the
state to fully comply with the 3 percent procurement preference.
HJR 16 also requests the house and senate small business
committees and committees on veteran affairs to hold joint
oversight hearings, in Alaska, into the refusal or failure of
these agencies to comply. According to the Small Business
Administration, which oversees the program, as of 2008 only 4
out of 24 federal agencies nationwide were meeting the goal.
10:02:51 AM
CHAIR MENARD opened public testimony.
RIC DAVIDGE, National Chairman, Economic Opportunities Committee
for Vietnam Veterans of America and In-state Council President,
Vietnam Veterans of America, and founding board member, Alaska
Veterans Business Alliance said U.S. Presidents have signed
executive orders and all agencies have been directed to put
together strategic plans showing implementation of the 3 percent
procurement preference. And yet, particularly in Alaska, the
procurement officers say they are too busy and this is too much
trouble. He said 300 service disabled veteran owned businesses
from Alaska are registered. These businesses are discouraged
about getting involved in federal procurement contracts in
Alaska which are often in the tens of millions of dollars. The
Army Corps of Engineers has made a significant effort and has
exceeded the 3 percent set-aside showing that it can be done.
10:05:40 AM
A state resolution, focused on the problem and calling for
oversight hearings, would bring needed attention to the problem.
TIM WHEELER, National Director, Economic Opportunities, Veterans
of Modern Warfare, Washington D.C. and board member, Alaska
Veteran's Business Alliance, said the Veterans Entrepreneurship
Act was passed nearly 11 years ago and is still not working. He
has attended many meetings, particularly with the Department of
Defense (DOD) in Anchorage, who told him the goals are being met
nationwide but nationwide goals were never met. Veterans who
want to go into business for themselves are disheartened. He
noted HJR 16 has no fiscal note asked for immediate passage.
10:08:30 AM
SENATOR MEYER asked Mr. Wheeler if other states have similar
resolutions.
MR. WHEELER replied yes but does not know which states off hand.
Several organizations are involved at a national level.
10:09:55 AM
CHAIR MENARD closed public testimony.
10:10:11 AM
SENATOR MEYER moved to report HJR 16 from committee with
individual recommendations and attached fiscal note(s).
CHAIR MENARD announced that without objection, CSHJR 16(L&C)
moved from the Senate State Affairs Standing Committee.
10:10:36 AM
CHAIR MENARD, seeing no further business to come before the
committee adjourned the meeting at 10:10 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|