Legislature(1999 - 2000)
05/13/1999 08:45 AM Senate C33
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 33-TASK FORCE ON PRIVATIZATION
CO-CHAIR HALFORD called the Conference Committee on SB 33 to order
at 8:45 a.m. Present were Senators Pearce, Elton and Halford, and
Representatives Brice, Ogan and Cowdery. CO-CHAIR HALFORD asked
Tam Cook to explain the differences between the final House and
Senate versions of SB 33.
TAM COOK, DIRECTOR OF THE DIVISION OF LEGAL SERVICES, pointed out
that, under the Uniform Rules, a conference committee is charged
with looking at amendments to a bill which she interprets to mean
the ways the bills differ from each other. She informed committee
members she would refer to CSSB 33(FIN) and identify the changes
made to that version by the House. On page 2, after line 6, the
House added the following statement: "there may be functions of
state government that should cease."
CO-CHAIR HALFORD asked if that language can be adopted by the
Conference Committee without any power of free conference. MS.
COOK said it can.
MS. COOK explained the second difference is that Sections 2, 3, and
4 of the Senate version, beginning on line 16 of page 2, make
substantive changes to the law. Corresponding sections are not
contained in the House version.
Section 5 of the Senate version designates the membership of an 11
member commission; the House version designates the membership of
a 15 member commission. MS. COOK clarified that the Conference
Committee can elect to adopt either the formation of an 11 or 15
member commission without requesting limited powers of free
conference.
CO-CHAIR HALFORD asked if limited powers need to be requested to
change the composition of the commission. MS. COOK answered if the
Conference Committee wishes to create a 13 member board, it will
need limited powers of free conference.
MS. COOK stated the House version does not designate that one
member be a representative of the labor unions (page 3, line 15).
She noted that a few of the members in each bill are identical,
however quite a few differ. She pointed out that determining
whether members are identical is a matter of substance rather than
paragraph numbering. The Conference Committee can retain the
members that are identical in each bill and then "mix and match"
from the others without limited powers of free conference. The
Senate version contains one local boundary commission member. The
House version membership differs in that it contains a rural bush
caucus legislator, a public member who represents a Native
corporation, a public member who represents a Native nonprofit
corporation, a member of the AFL-CIO, a member of the largest
public employees union, and one member from each minority caucus.
CO-CHAIR HALFORD asked if a request for limited powers of free
conference would cover any changes the committee wishes to make to
the number of members and composition of the commission.
MS. COOK said that is correct, and that if the Conference Committee
asks for limited powers as to the number of members and make up of
the commission, it could create an entirely new composition of
commission members.
MS. COOK noted another difference between the House and Senate
versions is per diem. The Senate version allows per diem and
travel expense reimbursement for the public members appointed by
the presiding officers. The House version permits per diem and
travel for all public members.
MS. COOK indicated that the House version specifies on page 4 that
the report identify state-funded functions that should be
eliminated as functions of state government. That provision does
not appear in the Senate version. The House version requires a
preliminary report due January 1, 2000, followed by a final report
due January 1, 2001. The Senate version requires that one report
be submitted on January 1, 2000. The repeal date of the commission
in the House version is January 1, 2001, while the Senate repeal
date is January 1, 2000.
CO-CHAIR HALFORD asked committee members whether they had any
questions of Ms. Cook.
Number 155
SENATOR ELTON asked if public members, for the purpose of per diem,
include the labor representatives and the representative of the
Alaska State Chamber of Commerce.
MS. COOK replied that a public member is not defined in either
version, however a statute is referenced that applies to boards and
commissions. She believes a public member, in this context, would
be a non-governmental employee who is appointed because of his/her
position in office. She clarified a legislator would not be
considered a public member, nor would a commissioner of a state
department. She thought that a representative of a state labor
union should be treated as a public member because even though that
person is a government employee, membership on this commission is
not part of their employment role. That person would probably not
be reimbursed by the State of Alaska for his/her participation on
the commission. She maintained that because the bill does not
contain a definition, the test would be whether or not the member
expects to receive a salary, per diem and travel expenses for
participation from the state.
CO-CHAIR HALFORD pointed out the area that the Conference Committee
needs limited powers of free conference for would be covered by a
statement on the powers and membership of the commission. He asked
if committee members were interested in requesting limited powers
of free conference for any other areas.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said he would like to make sure that the issue
of whether the commission should recommend which state-funded
functions of state government should be eliminated is addressed.
CO-CHAIR HALFORD noted that could be addressed by adopting the
House language, therefore limited powers would not be necessary.
CO-CHAIR HALFORD acknowledged that if a committee member from
either side wanted to move the entire composition of the commission
from the bill of the other side he or she could do so but it would
probably be a waste of time.
CO-CHAIR HALFORD asked Senator Ward, the sponsor of SB 33, to
discuss his opinion on the differences between the two versions
with committee members.
Number 214
SENATOR WARD said that he believes some of the work done by the
House made great improvements to the bill. He encouraged the
Conference Committee to retain the Senate's 11 member commission,
to designate a position for an Alaska Native to be appointed by the
presiding officers, and to support the provision that the report
disclose state-funded services that should be eliminated as
functions of state government. He recommended that the report due
date be January 1, 2000 because time is of the essence.
CO-CHAIR HALFORD asked for a motion to request of the presiding
officers limited powers of free conference on the number of members
and composition of the commission.
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY so moved. There being no objection, the
motion carried.
CO-CHAIR HALFORD announced a letter would be sent to the presiding
officers and that he would schedule a second meeting as soon as he
receives a response. He then adjourned the meeting at 9:00 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|