Legislature(1993 - 1994)
03/27/1993 08:00 AM STA
* first hearing in first committee of referral
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HCR 8: COMMITTEE MEETINGS: NOTICE AND ACTION Number 141 REPRESENTATIVE JIM NORDLUND, PRIME SPONSOR OF HCR 8, restated his reasoning for introducing the resolution. He stated HCR 8 is designed to clarify how bills are introduced and then acted upon in committees. He stated the resolution would eliminate the confusion over jurisdiction of the five day and Thursday reporting rules by eliminating the five day rule. He stated under the current system, the five day rule could be suspended, while the Thursday rule could not, and that is where the confusion appears to be starting. Number 224 REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG stated he could eliminate all the confusion over when a bill might fall under the five day rule, but not the Thursday reporting rule. He stated the easy way to end the confusion was to eliminate Saturday meetings. Committee members and staff cheered the suggestion. The committee chair did not. Number 242 CHAIRMAN VEZEY believed there was a need to clarify when a legislative week starts, as well as when a bill should be scheduled. Number 272 REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND chose Thursday as the deadline because it would give members a four day notice for Monday meetings. CHAIRMAN VEZEY asked why a five day "rolling" notice would not work. REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND explained that would force the public and staff to check the schedule every day, as opposed to weekly. Number 305 REPRESENTATIVE OLBERG liked the clarification being made under HCR 8, and expressed his support for the resolution. Number 321 CHAIRMAN VEZEY preferred to see the committee defer action on HCR 8 so he and others might work on some sections. He preferred a Friday deadline notice. REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND also wanted to see some changes made, specifically in reference to the wavier of the Thursday rule, which he said could be built into section one of HCR 8. Number 372 CHAIRMAN VEZEY noted the time of 10:07 a.m. and asked the committee if it wanted to continue. Members indicated they did. Number 375 REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND went on to explain section two of HCR 8 which not only allows full participation of representatives during a teleconference, but also allows committee members to sign a recommendation even if they did not attend the meeting. Number 414 CHAIRMAN VEZEY was opposed to such a provision, because if it was made too easy for someone not to attend a meeting, they would not. He also opposed allowing members to vote via teleconference, saying it would make it harder for committees to get a physical quorum in a room. Number 428 REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND stated his intent to make it easier for members to get to their home districts while continuing their legislative work. He said teleconference votes would make it far easier for rural members to do that. Number 447 REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND then outlined section three of HCR 8, saying he believed any legislation introduced by a committee should be done at the will of the majority of that committee. He said the practice is generally being followed now, but that it should be put into the rules. Number 458 CHAIRMAN VEZEY noted the time and suggested the committee defer action on HCR 8. Number 470 VICE CHAIR KOTT wanted to look closer at the provisions in section two of HCR 8. Number 500 CHAIRMAN VEZEY had concerns over the requirement of a majority introducing bills. VICE CHAIR KOTT agreed. He felt it ought to be the majority of a quorum, not the majority of the committee. He stated such a standard could give the minority the ability to effectively shut a committee down. He also felt HCR 8 needed to be changed if it was to be passed by the Senate. ADJOURNMENT CHAIRMAN VEZEY noted the time and adjourned the meeting at 10:19 a.m.