Legislature(2007 - 2008)CAPITOL 106
03/29/2007 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB171 | |
| HB179 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 179 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 171 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 171-ACCOMMODATE 90-DAY SESSION 8:08:51 AM CHAIR LYNN announced that the first order of business was HOUSE BILL NO. 171, "An Act relating to the terms of legislators, the date and time for convening regular legislative sessions, adoption of uniform rules of the legislature and to certain of those rules, the date for organizing the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee, and deadlines for certain matters or reports to be delivered to the legislature or filed; prohibiting bonuses for legislative employees; and providing for an effective date." [Before the committee was the committee substitute (CS) for HB 171, Version 25-LS0653\E, Cook, 3/16/07.] 8:08:54 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt the committee substitute (CS) for HB 171, Version 25-LS0653\M, Cook, 3/26/07, as a work draft. There being no objection, Version M was before the committee. 8:09:24 AM REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL, in response to a request from Chair Lynn, explained that Version M incorporated the amendment that moved the start dates of the legislature. He noted that that amendment had been offered by Representative Johnson at the last bill hearing. He said the first year of the two-year legislature would start [on the second Monday] in January, but the second year would begin in February. 8:10:53 AM REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1, labeled 25-LS0653\M.1, Cook, 3/28/07, which read as follows: Page 7, line 28: Delete all material and insert: "* Sec. 17. AS 24.05.150(b) is repealed. * Sec. 18. The uncodified law of the State of Alaska is amended by adding a new section to read: REINSTATEMENT OF LAWS IN UNAMENDED FORM. AS 18.65.085(b), 18.65.086(b), AS 24.05.080, 24.05.090, AS 24.08.035(a), 24.08.050, AS 24.20.171(a), 24.20.206, 24.20.311, AS 24.45.041(e), AS 37.07.040(7), 37.07.070, AS 37.10.050(c), AS 38.04.022(b), AS 38.05.027(b), and AS 39.05.080(1) shall read as they read on December 31, 2007. * Sec. 19. Sections 1 - 16 of this Act take effect January 1, 2008. * Sec. 20. Sections 17 and 18 of this Act take effect June 1, 2009." The Legal Services Division is directed to incorporate this amendment into CSHB 171(STA) in the form required by the Manual of Legislative Drafting. 8:11:07 AM REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON objected for discussion purposes. 8:11:14 AM REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL spoke to Conceptual Amendment 1. He said it would provide a sunset date, giving the legislature three years to "work the system under this law," at which point the system would be reevaluated. He noted that lines 6-10 [as numbered on the amendment] list the reinstatement of laws in unamended form. 8:12:29 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that Tamara Cook, the director of Legislative Legal and Research Services, is available to answer questions. He said the sunset date to which Representative Coghill referred would be June 1, 2009. He remarked that line 3, [as numbered on the amendment], would repeal Section 17, AS 24.05.150(b); however, he said he does not find that in statute or in the bill. He asked Ms. Cook for explanation. 8:14:38 AM TAMARA COOK, Director, Legislative Legal and Research Services, Alaska State Legislature, explained as follows: That is the initiated language that creates the 90-day session ..., and it actually does not appear in statute or even on the electronic database, alas, because the ... election was held so late and then the results certified so late that we were unable to get it printed in the statutes. But ... [AS] 24.05.150(b) is the initiated language that says the legislature shall meet for 90 consecutive days. 8:15:21 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG directed attention to the initiative in the committee packet, which read as follows: AN INITIATIVE Relating to a 90-day regular session of the legislature; and providing for an effective date. _______________ * Section 1. AS 24.05.150 is amended by adding a new subsection to read: (b) The legislature shall adjourn from a regular session within 90 consecutive calendar days, including the day the legislature first convenes in that regular session. * Sec. 2. This Act takes effect on the first day of the Second Regular Session of the Twenty-Fifth Alaska Legislature. 8:16:14 AM MS. COOK, in response to a question from Representative Gruenberg, confirmed that the constitution allows the legislature to repeal an initiative no sooner than two years after it becomes effective. She responded to a comment by Representative Gruenberg regarding Conceptual Amendment 1 as follows: The way it is drafted, it is an outright repeal; but it is an outright repeal that does not take effect for 2.5 years. So, the legislature, of course, could pass legislation to undue that which it has done before it takes effect. CHAIR LYNN expressed concern that there be nothing in Conceptual Amendment 1 that would "go against the will of the people as expressed in the initiative which established the 90-day session," and he asked Ms. Cook to confirm that there was not. MS. COOK responded, "Yes, for the period of the two years within which the legislature is restricted from repealing an initiative." 8:18:09 AM REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON removed his objection to Conceptual Amendment 1. There being no further objection, Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted. 8:18:21 AM REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL moved to adopt Amendment 2, labeled 25- LS0653\M.2, Cook, 3/28/07, which read as follows: Page 6, line 18: Delete "fifth [30TH] legislative day" Insert "30th legislative day in odd-numbered years and through the fifth legislative day in even- numbered years" Page 6, line 21: Delete "15th [45TH] legislative day" Insert "30th legislative day in odd-numbered years and through the 15th [45TH] legislative day in even-numbered years " Page 7, line 20, following "session,": Insert "or, following a gubernatorial election year, within the first 30 days after the legislature convenes in regular session," Page 7, lines 24 - 25: Delete "15 [30] days of the convening of the regular session" Insert "presentment deadline [30 DAYS OF THE CONVENING OF THE REGULAR SESSION]" 8:18:31 AM REPRESENTATIVE ROSES objected for discussion purposes. 8:18:37 AM REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL spoke to Amendment 2. He said it is an amendment requested by the administration. 8:19:19 AM JOHN BOUCHER, Senior Economist, Office of the Director, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), directed attention to [lines 16- 18], on page 6 of Version M, which read as follows: (1) requests by the governor for supplemental appropriations for state agency operating and capital budgets for the current fiscal year may be introduced by the rules committee only through the fifth [30TH] day; MR. BOUCHER said the administration is concerned that in the odd numbered years - those years in which the legislative session would begin in January - the timelines would be too tight to produce those [requests]. He said Amendment 2 proposes that in the odd numbered years, the requests could be submitted on the thirtieth day. MR. BOUCHER pointed out page 6, [lines 19-21], which read: (2) requests by the governor for budget amendments to state agency budgets for the budget fiscal year may be received and reviewed by the finance committees only through the 15th [45TH] legislative day. MR. BOUCHER said that timeline would also be tight in the odd- numbered years; therefore, Amendment 2 proposes that in those odd-numbered years, those requests be accepted on the thirtieth day. MR. BOUCHER said the fifth day of session following a gubernatorial election would also be a tight time frame by which the governor would have to have his/her appointments ready; therefore, Amendment 2 would move that deadline to the thirtieth day. 8:21:58 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG directed attention to a memorandum from Mr. Boucher to Representative Coghill, dated March 22, [2007], which he said describes the administration's reasons for requesting Amendment 2. 8:22:56 AM REPRESENTATIVE ROSES withdrew his [objection] to Amendment 2. There being no further objection, Amendment 2 was adopted. 8:23:10 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt Amendment 3, labeled 25- LS0653\M.1, Cook, 3/28/07, which read as follows: Page 3, following line 1: Insert a new bill section to read: "* Sec. 4. AS 24.05.180 is amended by adding new subsections to read: (c) The chair of a standing or special committee that meets during the interim to consider an introduced measure shall give at least 30 days' notice of the meeting. The notice must include the subject and number of the measure that will be heard. (d) A member of a standing or special committee may attend a meeting held by that committee during the interim telephonically or by teleconference. The member may vote on any question before the committee; however, the vote shall be conducted in such a manner that the public and other committee members may know the vote of the member who attends telephonically or by teleconference. (e) A standing committee may report a measure from committee during the interim. A committee member who is voting telephonically or by teleconference shall sign a copy of the committee report and indicate on the copy the member's recommendation. The member shall send the signed copy by facsimile or other electronic means to the committee chair. The member shall also mail the original signed copy to the senate secretary or the chief clerk of the house of representatives, as appropriate. The chair of the committee shall deliver the committee report and the facsimile copy to the senate secretary or the chief clerk of the house of representatives to be taken up when the legislature next convenes." Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG spoke to Amendment 3. He said it would allow the legislature to take its work to the people. He said the legislature should conduct its business during the interim, and he emphasized the importance of allowing legislators to participate remotely, because Alaska is such a big state. He noted that the language of Subsection (c) in Amendment 3 is problematic. 8:25:59 AM REPRESENTATIVE DOLL objected to Amendment 3. 8:26:08 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt Amendment 1 to Amendment 3, as follows: On page 1, line 5 [as numbered on Amendment 3]: Between "at least" and "day's notice" Delete "30" Insert "14" There being no objection, Amendment 1 to Amendment 3 was adopted. Subsequently, Representative Gruenberg mentioned that the amendment was necessary because 30 days is too long. 8:26:50 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, regarding [paragraph] (d) in Amendment 3 [as amended], noted that currently, both the Legislative Council and Legislative Budget & Audit vote on questions telephonically. He reviewed [paragraph] (e) of Amendment 3. He noted that a bill would not be able to go to the next committee of referral during interim, because it must first be read across the House floor during session. 8:31:16 AM MS. COOK, in response to a remark by Representative Johnson, stated: I don't believe you need to address the quorum issue in this particular amendment, because no committee can act without a quorum. In addition, in our Uniform Rules, ... the signature requirement on a committee report is that a majority of the full membership must sign that report. That rule is not altered by this amendment. Right now, I would observe that committees of the legislature, including standing and special committees, do conduct business by teleconference during the session, and they establish quorums by teleconference, with the presence of the individual who is attending electronically noted in the record. MS. COOK reviewed that currently, under the Uniform Rules as they've been interpreted, during the interim a committee member can attend a standing committee meeting via teleconference and vote on the adoption of a CS or the adoption of an amendment, but he/she could not vote to pass a bill out of committee outside of session. 8:33:03 AM REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked what changes would need to be made in order to allow [the next committee of referral to possess a bill passed out of the first committee of referral]. 8:33:45 AM MS. COOK said currently the way [Amendment 3, as amended] is written, the committee report would go back to the full House to be read across the House floor when it is next convened in session, which she said preserves the power of each individual House member to object to the committee report. Once the bill goes into the second committee, she pointed out, the opportunity to object is lost. She said there may be something to be gained by allowing bills to move on to the next committee of referral during interim without going to the House floor; that would be a policy call, and Amendment 3 could be the vehicle for such a change. 8:35:05 AM REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked if a bill can be "read across" during a technical session. 8:35:22 AM MS. COOK stated her belief that it is dangerous to introduce a bill during a technical session. She offered her interpretation of a technical session as one in which a quorum has not been established on the record. She continued: The constitution requires that each bill receive three readings. ... The act of introducing a bill constitutes the first reading. ... As we know, the legislature cannot conduct business without a quorum being present. Even though there is no vote required when the first reading is given, and therefore there is no motion made, and there is ... no record necessarily created of the lack of a quorum, if the issue came up, you would cast a potential doubt on the validity of the first reading of that bill. REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL recollected that in the past, committee reports have been read in technical session. He asked if there has been a ruling on that before. 8:36:44 AM MS. COOK responded: The direction in the constitution and in Mason's Manual is that the legislature conduct no business without a quorum, and accepting a committee report constitutes the conduct of business. And in that sense it's probably not appropriate. Nonetheless, the reading of a committee report and referring the bill to the next committee is somewhat different in that it ... does not have a constitutional dimension. The reading of the report is not one of the three constitutionally required readings that a bill gets. You don't go to second reading until ... the bill is returned to the floor from the [House Rules Standing Committee]. So, we don't have the constitutional cloud as a result of the practice of reading a committee report. Now, obviously, if the legislature is in technical session, and by definition or practice there is not a quorum present, that does not mean that a legislator could not attend and be available, and if that person objected to a particular committee report, that individual would have the right at that point to object to that report and, presumably, to place a call on the House. And at that point, technical session or no, the House would be obligated to get a quorum present and resolve the problem with the committee report. And for those reasons, it doesn't strike me as legally as serious a practice to read a committee report across as it does to attempt to introduce a bill. 8:38:23 AM REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he does not want committee reports read during technical session, but he has seen it done. He concurred that any one individual in the body of the legislature should be able to object to a committee report. 8:39:04 AM REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON stated that if there was some manner in which the right [to object to a committee report] could be preserved, while allowing the bill to move to the next committee of referral, he envisions the first day of the 90-day session commencing with a lot of committee work already completed. He said, "I see this as a way, in that second session, to hit the ground running." 8:40:12 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he would have no objection should the committee wish to take further steps [through Amendment 3, as amended]. CHAIR LYNN recommended that the committee hold off on that issue. 8:40:35 AM REPRESENTATIVE ROSES said he would object to [Representative Johnson's] idea, because it would be "skirting on the edge" of declaring a full-time legislature. He indicated that having all legislators together during session allows for a larger variety of views to be aired and considered than the opinions of a seven-member committee during the interim. He stated, "The other part that gives me a little bit of concern about this ... has to do with the amount of pressure that could be put on those seven committee members to try to get a bill pushed through in the interim that they probably would never have a chance to see in the light of day in full session." 8:42:31 AM CHAIR LYNN commented on the importance of observing body language and making eye contact, which can only happen when committee members are all sitting in a room together. 8:43:03 AM REPRESENTATIVE ROSES, in response to Representative Gruenberg, clarified that he has no objection to "Amendment 3, as amended." 8:43:40 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG clarified for the record that there is nothing in [Amendment 3, as amended] that would prohibit a committee from meeting "all together" to hear a bill, sign it in person, and transmit it to the clerk. He added, "That would be up to the chair." He stated, "This would simply allow the committee to take up a bill." 8:44:13 AM REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked that the committee abandon his idea and move on to discussion of Amendment 3, as amended. 8:44:28 AM REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said although he likes the idea of getting more done during the interim, he thinks it is important that everyone meet in the same room, because he does not want a situation to occur whereby some committee members are passing information to each other that the other committee members participating via teleconference cannot see. 8:46:29 AM REPRESENTATIVE ROSES reminded the committee of a recent bill heard that would make it illegal for a legislator to change his/her vote from outside influence. He said, "Without being under the watchful eye of everybody being present, it would be very difficult for somebody to either prove or disprove whether or not that occurred when there was nobody else able to see what was going on because they were doing it over the telephone." He summarized that the concept is not troublesome, but the implementation of it is. 8:47:53 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he does not want to withdraw Amendment 3 [as amended]. He said it would make it possible for constituents come to meetings in the interim in their home town; it would take the legislature to the people. He stated, "This is one of the first real steps we've taken to ease us conducting our hearings in a state that's one-fifth the size of the United States." 8:49:29 AM REPRESENTATIVE DOLL said she does not know how the legislature will conduct a 90-day session without this amendment. She removed her objection to Amendment 3 [as amended]. 8:51:26 AM REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON moved Conceptual Amendment 2 to Amendment 3 [as amended], to add "or other means" after the words "by mail". There being no objection, Conceptual Amendment 2 to Amendment 3, as amended, was adopted. 8:51:58 AM REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL stated his objection to Amendment 3 [as amended]. A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Johnson, Gruenberg, and Doll voted in favor of Amendment 3, as amended. Representatives Coghill, Roses, and Lynn voted against it. Therefore, Amendment 3, as amended, failed by a vote of 3-3. 8:52:56 AM REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL moved to report CSHB 171, Version 25- LS0653\M, Cook, 3/26/07, as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB 171(STA) was reported out of the House State Affairs Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|