Legislature(2019 - 2020)BUTROVICH 205
01/21/2020 03:00 PM House SELECT COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE ETHICS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SELECT COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE ETHICS
JANUARY 21, 2020
3:00 PM
Full Committee Meeting
3:15:24 PM
1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
Joyce Anderson called the meeting to order at 3:16 p.m. and
directed Jerry Anderson to conduct roll call.
Roll call
Senator Elvi Gray-Jackson
(Alternate for Senator Tom Begich)
Representative DeLena Johnson
Skip Cook
Conner Thomas
Joyce Anderson
Lee Holmes
Patrick FitzGerald (Alternate Public Member)
Deb Fancher (telephonic)
Quorum present.
Absent
Senator Tom Begich
Representative Louise Stutes
Senator John Coghill
Others present
Jerry Anderson
Jacqui Yeagle
Joyce Anderson relinquished the chair position to Lee
Holmes.
3:18:05 PM
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Lee Holmes entertained a motion to approve the agenda.
Conner Thomas moved to approve the agenda. There were no
objections. The agenda was approved.
3:18:28 PM
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Lee Holmes entertained a motion to approve the December 2,
2019 Full Committee Meeting Minutes.
Skip Cook so moved. Senator Elvi Gray-Jackson seconded.
Joyce Anderson said she thought it important that member
absences from committee meetings be included in the minutes
and asked that they be added to the December 2, 2019 Full
Committee Meeting Minutes.
There were no objections. The minutes were approved.
Lee Holmes entertained a motion to approve the December 2,
2019 House Subcommittee Meeting Minutes.
Senator Elvi Gray-Jackson announced she would be returning
to floor session at 3:35 p.m.
Representative DeLena Johnson left the meeting.
3:20:40 PM
4. PUBLIC COMMENT
Vikki Jo Kennedy expressed outrage that at a June 13, 2019
executive session retroactive per diem payment for
legislators was approved. She also reported that following
the meeting, she heard a senator say, "we sure don't want
the public to know about this." Vikki Jo Kennedy thanked
the committee for their time.
3:23:32 PM
5. REVIEW OF COMMITTEE RULES OF PROCEDURE
[Reference Section 2 Administrative Policies (a)
Authorizations]
Lee Holmes opened a discussion of the Rules of Procedure by
directing the committee's attention to Section 2(a)
Administrative Policies. He read the rationale, and
entertained discussion on the proposed revision.
Conner Thomas asked how the committee would proceed through
the proposed revisions. Lee Holmes answered that they would
review each of the proposed revisions and vote on them at
one time, and in the event of contention with any of the
proposed revisions, it could be removed by individual
motion. Skip Cook proposed approving each of the revisions
as reviewed due to the possibility of interruptions.
3:25:30
Lee Holmes responded that with the departure of
Representative DeLena Johnson, there was no quorum for
voting purposes. Holmes suggested that Skip Cook make a
motion when there was a quorum. Skip Cook acknowledged Lee
Holmes's suggestion.
Jerry Anderson asked to be recognized. Lee Holmes agreed.
Jerry Anderson said that he understood that house members
may return and had asked staffers to encourage house
members back to the meeting.
3:26:54
Representative DeLena Johnson returned to the meeting.
Lee Holmes asked Skip Cook if he wanted to make a motion to
vote on changing the language in Section 2(a)
Administrative Policies to reflect an increase in the
amount the chair is authorized to approve to $2,000 as
decided at the January 31, 2019 committee meeting. Skip
Cook so moved. There were no objections. The motion was
approved.
Representative Sara Hannan (Alternate for Representative
Louise Stutes) joined the meeting.
[Reference Section 2 Administrative Policies (b)
Communication]
Lee Holmes directed the committee's attention to Section
2(b) Communication and entertained discussion or a motion
about adding a reference to the Rules of Procedure, Section
9 Informal Advice. Conner Thomas moved. Senator Elvi Gray-
Jackson seconded the motion. There was no objection or
discussion; the motion was approved.
[Reference Section 2 Administrative Policies (e)
Compassionate Gift Approval]
Lee Holmes referred to the proposed revisions in the
Compassionate Gift Approval section and entertained
discussion. Deb Fancher asked the meaning of the word
"immediately" as used in the section. Lee Holmes referred
the question to Joyce Anderson. Joyce Anderson said that a
compassionate gift request needs to be looked at right away
but allowed that another word could convey that directive.
Deb Fancher said she understood the need to specify a
timeline and suggested using instead "as soon as possible"
or "within 24 hours."
3:31
Senator Elvi Gray-Jackson left the meeting.
Joyce Anderson said she was not sure the committee wanted
to define "immediately" because it would depend on the
timing of the request and the possible approval timeline,
but she was open to leaving that decision to the committee.
Conner Thomas asked if there had ever been a problem or
issue with the timeline for compassionate gift requests.
Joyce Anderson and Jerry Anderson responded to Conner
Thomas and both said that as far as they know, there had
never been a problem. Conner Thomas expressed his opinion
that using the word "immediately" was fine.
Jerry Anderson told the committee that the language in the
section should reference Advisory Opinion 19-06, not
Advisory Opinion 19-05. Lee Holmes noted that correction.
Lee Holmes entertained further discussion. There was no
discussion. Holmes entertained a motion to approve. Joyce
Anderson moved. There were no objections. The motion was
approved.
Jerry Anderson asked for clarification purposes if the
committee had voted to include or exclude the word
"immediately." Lee Holmes replied that per discussion by
Conner Thomas, the word "immediately" was included.
[Section 2 Administrative Policies (f) Internship Program
Approval]
Lee Holmes referred to the multiple proposed revisions in
Section 2(f) Internship Program Approval, read the
rationale, and entertained discussion. Joyce Anderson said
the directive to send the informational letter to
legislative offices was added following a discussion at the
August 2019 committee meeting. Holmes thanked Joyce
Anderson for the information and entertained further
discussion. There was no discussion. Lee Holmes entertained
a motion to approve. Skip Cook moved. There were no
objections. The motion was approved.
3:34:01
[Reference Section 2 Administrative Policies (h) Benefit
and Loan Annual Review]
Lee Holmes read the rationale for the proposal to delete
the word "mid" from the first sentence in Section 2(h)
Benefit and Loan Annual Review and entertained discussion.
There was no discussion. Lee Holmes asked for a motion.
Conner Thomas moved to approve. There were no objections.
The motion was approved.
3:35:11
Deb Fancher asked to be recognized. Lee Holmes consented.
Deb Fancher addressed the language in brackets on page 6:
"Grab your reader's attention with a great quote " and
asked for more information about it. Joyce Anderson
responded that she was not aware of that sentence and the
bracketed comment was removed. Deb Fancher thanked the
committee and thanked Joyce Anderson for her work on the
Rules of Procedure.
[Reference Section 10 Advisory Opinions (i)
Summary/Publication]
Lee Holmes directed the committee's attention to the
Summary/Publication section, read the rationale, and
entertained further discussion. There was no discussion.
Lee Holmes asked for motion. Skip Cook moved. There were no
objections. The revision was approved.
[Reference Section 11 Disclosures (h)(2) Late Disclosure
Fines-Unpaid Fines]
Lee Holmes directed the committee's attention to the Late
Disclosure Fines section, read the rationale, and
entertained discussion. There was no discussion. Lee Holmes
asked for a motion. Joyce Anderson moved. There were no
objections. The motion was approved.
[Reference Section 11 Disclosures (i)(1) Requirements After
Leaving Office or Employment with the Legislature]
Lee Holmes directed attention to the Requirements After
Leaving Office or Employment with the Legislature section
and entertained discussion. Joyce Anderson commented that
if approved, the provision would save both paper and
administrative time. Conner Thomas moved to approve. There
were no objections. The motion was approved.
[Reference Section 12 Education (b)(3) Training]
Lee Holmes directed attention to the training portion of
the Education section, read the rationale, and entertained
discussion. Representative DeLena Johnson questioned
whether there was a need to include direction to keep paper
training records on file. Lee Holmes directed the question
to Administrator Jerry Anderson. Jerry Anderson replied
that he was confident that accurate training records are
kept.
Lee Holmes entertained further discussion. There was no
further discussion. Lee Holmes asked for a motion.
Representative Sara Hannan moved to approve. There were no
objections. The motion was approved.
[Reference Section 14 Complaints (c) Legal Representation]
Lee Holmes directed attention to the Legal Representation
section and read the rationale. Conner Thomas said that the
proposed language does not mention verbal communication and
recommended modifying the language in (2) to "Verbal
communication shall be directed to the representative."
Joyce Anderson agreed with Conner Thomas's recommendations.
Representative Sara Hannan recommended replacing in (1) the
term "another person" with representative, which is the
term used in the following paragraph. Joyce Anderson
replied that "another person" is the language used in
statute.
Conner Thomas questioned sending correspondence to both the
subject and the subject's representative when the subject
desires that all communication be sent only to the
representative. Lee Holmes asked Jerry Anderson to respond
to Conner Thomas. Jerry Anderson replied that attorney
practice is to send correspondence only to the attorney.
Conner Thomas replied that his question was about a
situation where the subject directed the administration to
direct all communication to the representative. Jerry
Anderson replied that the committee had been clear that
communication should be directed to both the subject and
representative. Conner Thomas countered that he wondered if
that practice should continue. Jerry Anderson offered that
the committee might consider allowing communication only
with the attorney if directed to do so in writing by the
subject. Conner Thomas agreed the instruction should be in
writing.
Joyce Anderson expressed her opinion that communication
with the subject should continue in order to compensate for
an attorney's inability to act on the communication. Skip
Cook agreed with Joyce Anderson's comment. Representative
DeLena Johnson also agreed that communication should be
directed to both the subject and attorney. Lee Holmes
entertained further discussion. There was no further
discussion. Lee Holmes summarized the proposal to revise
the language to "Verbal communication shall be directed to
the representative." and entertained a motion. Conner
Thomas moved. There were no objections. The motion was
approved.
3:51
[Reference Section 14 Complaints (d)(2) Preliminary
Examination of Complaint]
Lee Holmes directed the committee to the revision in the
Preliminary Examination of Complaint section, read the
rationale, and entertained discussion. There was no
discussion. Lee Holmes asked for a motion. Joyce Anderson
moved. There were no objections. The motion was approved.
[Reference Section 14 Complaints (e)(1) Waiver of
Confidentiality by Subject of Complaint]
Lee Holmes directed the committee to the proposed revision
in the Waiver of Confidentiality by Subject of Complaint
section, read the rationale, and entertained discussion.
There was no discussion. Lee Holmes entertained a motion.
Representative Sara Hannan moved. There were no objections.
The motion was approved.
3:52
[Reference Section 14 Complaints (e)(2) Types of
Confidentiality Waivers and (e)(3) Waiver of
Confidentiality Before or After a Decision by the
Committee]
Lee Holmes directed the committee to the proposed revisions
in the Waiver of Confidentiality section, read the
rationale, and entertained discussion. Joyce Anderson
commented that adding the heading in Section 14 Complaints
(e)(2) makes clear the types of confidentiality waivers.
Joyce Anderson explained she added the heading in (e)(2) to
make clear the difference between the types of
confidentiality waivers and in (e)(3)(A) addressed
confidentiality waived prior to a decision by the committee
and how the committee will report subsequent executive
committee findings. Joyce Anderson said that Senator John
Coghill had expressed concerns about the committee making
decisions in executive session, which is not allowed on the
legislative level. The revision in Section 14 Complaints
(e)(3) is the result of her review of AS 24.60.170(f), that
says, " Committee deliberations and vote on the dismissal
order and decision are not open to the public or to the
subject of the complaint," which allows the committee to
vote in executive session and later in public session state
that the decision was by majority vote. Joyce Anderson said
that the proposed revision makes it clear that there is no
public vote, a question that arose in 2019.
3:56
Representative DeLena Johnson said that in her municipal
experience, an agreement could be reached in executive
session and then for the record in public session state the
agreement. Representative Johnson asked Joyce Anderson if
that process aligned with the proposed revision. Joyce
Anderson responded it did. Representative DeLena Johnson
confirmed that committee members were prohibited from
putting the vote on the record. Joyce Anderson confirmed
Representative DeLena Johnson's understanding and recalled
that in the early 2000s, a legislator had disagreed with a
complaint vote and the legislator wrote an addendum to the
complaint that clearly demonstrated disagreement with the
decision and that if in the future a legislator wanted to
do something similar that would be possible.
Conner Thomas commented that the committee does vote in
executive session and the decision is affirmed in public
session but individual votes are not put on the public
record. Joyce Anderson said the numerical results of the
vote are also not put on the record.
Deb Fancher reported there had been in her committee tenure
a vote taken in executive session at which time she had
been told that her vote would not become part of the public
record. Then later the committee members had to reveal how
they voted. Deb Fancher said that is why she thinks it
important to have this made clear.
Lee Holmes asked if there were more discussion. Skip Cook
moved to approve. There were no objections. The proposed
revision was approved.
4:02
[Reference Section 14 Complaints (e)(3)(B) Confidentiality
Waived after a Decision by the Committee]
Lee Holmes directed the committee to the proposed changes
in the Waiver of Confidentiality after a Decision by the
Committee section. Lee Holmes read the rationale and asked
if there were any discussion.
Joyce Anderson explained that section (e)(3)(B) focuses on
confidentiality waived after a committee decision. Lee
Holmes thanked Joyce Anderson for her explanation and
entertained discussion. There was no discussion and Lee
Holmes entertained a motion. Representative Sara Hannan
moved. There were no objections. The motion was approved.
4:04
Joyce Anderson advised that the next highlighted section
was moved to section (e)(1)(A) and required no action. Lee
Holmes agreed.
[Reference Section 14 Complaints (f) Response by the
Subject of a Complaint]
Lee Holmes directed attention to the Response by the
Subject of a Complaint section, read the rationale, and
entertained discussion.
Skip Cook said the rules do not address whether an
acknowledgement of receipt is verbal or written and
wondered how acknowledgement of receipt is documented. Lee
Holmes directed the question to Jerry Anderson, who
responded that he always requires written acknowledgment
via email or a signed certified mail receipt.
Conner Thomas said he had asked Jerry Anderson what action
he would take if acknowledgement was not received. Jerry
Anderson responded that he would take whatever additional
steps were necessary, including using a process server, to
ensure acknowledgment. Jerry Anderson added to Conner
Thomas's statement saying the he had never used a process
server but that he thinks it appropriate if other means
have failed.
Lee Holmes entertained further discussion. Joyce Anderson
asked the committee if adding the words "written
acknowledgement" was sufficient. Lee Holmes built on Joyce
Anderson's question by asking what type of written
acknowledgement was required.
Representative DeLena Johnson suggested using established
criteria and deferred to the rest of the committee. Lee
Holmes asked the attorneys on the committee if there was
legal precedent for acknowledgement of receipt. Conner
Thomas said that there is a legal process in litigation but
wondered if the committee wanted to limit the administrator
by requiring the legal process. Skip Cook recommended
changing the language to direct the administrator to
"obtain acknowledgement of receipt," which would allow for
a variety of communication methods.
Joyce Anderson said that she was aware of a time in which a
process server was needed in order to obtain
acknowledgement of receipt, and for that reason recommended
leaving it to the administrator to decide on a case by case
basis.
Representative Sara Hannan asked Jerry Anderson for a sense
of how often different methods of acknowledgement are used.
Jerry Anderson responded that he has received
acknowledgement by email and by signed certified mail
receipt.
Patrick FitzGerald stated that he understood the rules
would require acknowledgment of receipt by the subject and
representative if used and Joyce Anderson responded that
his understanding was correct.
Lee Holmes restated the proposed revision: The
administrator shall obtain acknowledgment of receipt of the
correspondence by the subject, and the subject's
representative if appropriate.
Skip Cook moved to approve. There were no objections. The
motion was approved.
4:12
[Reference Section 14 Complaints (h) Committee
Restrictions]
Lee Holmes directed the committee's attention to the
discussion item at the bottom of page 21: Should Ethics
staff be included in (h) Committee Restrictions and also
avoid ex parte communication with the listed parties? Lee
Holmes explained that the rules of procedure stipulate that
only committee members avoid such communication and
entertained discussion.
Hearing no discussion, Lee Holmes asked Jerry Anderson to
comment. Jerry Anderson replied that he strongly
recommending not restricting staff because staff need to
provide documents.
Lee Holmes entertained further discussion. Representative
Sara Hannan asked if the question was whether to include
staff in the ex parte communication restriction. Lee Holmes
replied affirmatively. Skip Cook asked who would provide
the documents if staff are restricted. Joyce Anderson
replied that it was included only as a discussion topic. No
action taken.
[Reference Section 15 Complaints-Investigations (a) Scope
of Investigation Resolution]
Lee Holmes said that as no motion was required, the
committee would move on to the proposed revisions in
Section 15 Complaints-Investigations. Lee Holmes read the
rationale, and entertained discussion. Conner Thomas
expressed his opinion that for consistency the same
language used in Section 14(f) addressing acknowledgement
of receipt should be used in Section 15(a).
Lee Holmes entertained further discussion. There was no
further discussion. Lee Holmes entertained a motion.
Representative Sara Hannan moved. Lee Holmes entertained
objections. There were no objections. The motion was
approved.
4:21
[Reference Section 15 Complaints-Investigations (b)
Investigative Plan]
Lee Holmes moved to the next proposed revision and
entertained discussion. Seeing none, Lee Holmes entertained
a motion. Joyce Anderson moved. There were no objections.
The motion was approved.
[Reference Section 17 Complaints-Decisions (a) Committee -
Meetings]
Lee Holmes directed the committee's attention to Section 17
Complaints - Decisions, read the rationale, and advised
using the same language as previously adopted in Section
14(f). Conner Thomas and Joyce Anderson agreed that
consistency throughout is desirable. Lee Holmes entertained
further discussion. There was no further discussion. Lee
Holmes entertained a motion. Conner Thomas moved. There
were no objections. The motion was approved.
[Reference Section 17 Complaints-Decisions (b) Public
Decisions and Orders]
Lee Holmes moved to the proposed revision in the Public
Decisions and Orders section and read the rationale. Joyce
Anderson advised modifying the language in (1) and she,
Skip Cook, and Conner Thomas collaborated in modifying the
proposed revision in (1) to: "After deliberations and vote
in executive session, pursuant to AS 24.60.170(f), the
committee will reconvene in a public session." Lee Holmes
entertained further discussion about the revisions in (1).
There was no further discussion.
Lee Holmes entertained discussion about the balance of the
proposed revisions in the Public Decisions and Orders
section. Skip Cook advised that the language in (3) should
be consistent with the language previously adopted
directing the administrator to obtain acknowledgement of
receipt by the parties listed and he added that he thought
there should be a colon after the media (the last word in
the paragraph). Joyce Anderson agreed with Skip Cook's
recommendation. Lee Holmes reviewed the modifications, "The
administrator shall obtain acknowledgement of receipt of
the Public Decision and Order by the subject of the
complaint or the subjects representative, Speaker of the
House and Senate President (or designated staff) and
complainant is required prior to informing the media:"
Lee Holmes entertained further discussion. There was no
further discussion. Lee Holmes entertained a motion. Skip
Cook moved. There were no objections. The motion was
approved.
Joyce Anderson advised revisiting the revisions made to
Section 14(3)(A)(2) Confidentiality Waived Prior to a
Decision by the Committee section, and for consistency,
modifying (2) to, "After deliberations and vote in
executive session, pursuant to AS 24.60.170(f), the
committee will reconvene in a public session." Joyce
Anderson moved. There were no objections. The motion was
approved.
Lee Holmes directed the committee's attention to the
proposed deletion of the paragraph at the top of page 25
and entertained discussion. There was no discussion. Lee
Holmes entertained a motion. Conner Thomas moved. There
were no objections. The motion was approved.
[Reference Section 17 Complaints-Decisions (c) Dismissal
Prior to Investigation]
Lee Holmes addressed the proposed revisions in (c)
Dismissal Prior to Investigation section, read the
rationale, and entertained discussion. There was no
discussion. Lee Holmes entertained a motion to approve.
Joyce Anderson moved. There were no objections. The motion
was approved.
[Reference Section 17 Complaints-Decisions (d) Dismissal
for Lack of Probable Cause]
Lee Holmes directed the committee's attention to the
proposed revisions in the Dismissal for Lack of Probable
Cause section, read the rationale, and entertained
discussion. There was no discussion. Lee Holmes entertained
a motion to approve. Skip Cook moved. There were no
objections. The motion was approved.
[Reference Section 17 Complaints-Decisions (e)
Determination of Probable Cause]
Lee Holmes moved to the proposed revisions in the
Determination of Probable Cause section, read the
rationale, and entertained discussion. There was no
discussion. Lee Holmes entertained a motion to approve.
Representative Sara Hannan moved. There were no objections.
The motion was approved.
[Reference Section 17 Complaints-Decisions (f) Annual
Summary Publication]
Lee Holmes directed the committee's attention to the
proposed revisions in the Annual Summary Publication
section, read the rationale, and entertained discussion.
There was no discussion. Lee Holmes entertained a motion to
approve. Conner Thomas moved. There were no objections. The
motion was approved.
[Reference Section 18 Complaints-Hearing Procedures (g)
General]
Lee Holmes addressed the proposed revisions in Section 18
Complaints - Hearing Procedures. He read the rationale then
entertained discussion. There was no discussion. Lee Holmes
entertained a motion to approve. Skip Cook moved. There
were no objections. The motion was approved.
[Reference Section 18 Complaints-Hearing Procedures (b)
General]
Lee Holmes moved to the proposed revisions in the Counsel
Representation at Hearing section. Joyce Anderson pointed
out that the language proposed for deletion had been moved
to Section 18 (a)(1).
[Reference Section 18 Complaints-Hearing Procedures (a)
Conduct of Hearing]
Lee Holmes then directed the committee's attention to the
proposed changes in the Conduct of Hearing section and
entertained discussion. Jerry Anderson noted the first line
of the paragraph following the rationale was inadvertently
deleted. Joyce Anderson read the missing text: The hearing
office will rule on whether a witness is to appear in
person or on .
Lee Holmes entertained a motion to approve. Skip Cook
advised modifying the first sentence of the section that
says, "The committee shall appoint " to, "The committee
chair shall appoint " in order to better align with the
intent in the last sentence, which he contended, would no
longer be needed. Lee Holmes responded that the
modification would authorize the chair to appoint a hearing
officer regardless of the committee's stance.
Representative Sara Hannan added her concern that there was
no appeal process in the choice of hearing officer. Skip
Cook advised looking at statute.
4:43
Patrick FitzGerald left the meeting.
Lee Holmes opined that the section seemed to be in line
with legislative committee chair authority. Representative
DeLena Johnson recommended deleting the last line and
modifying the first sentence to say, "The committee chair
may appoint." Skip Cook asked if rather than "may" it
should be "shall." Lee Holmes asked Jerry Anderson if the
word "shall" would make a hearing officer mandatory. Jerry
Anderson agreed that the expense of a hearing officer may
not be desirable. Joyce Anderson countered that the section
under discussion is part of the procedure after the
decision to hire a hearing officer takes place.
Lee Holmes read the sentence just before the sentence under
discussion: The hearing shall be in front of the
appropriate committee of the Select Committee on
Legislative Ethics and presided over by the chair of that
committee. Lee Holmes understood the next line would say,
"The committee chair may appoint an impartial Hearing
Officer to facilitate and expedite procedural aspects of
the hearing." Lee Holmes added that it is clear that the
chair presides and the chair may appoint.
Representative Sara Hannan asked if the committee chair can
serve as the hearing officer. Skip Cook replied
affirmatively and added that the committee had in the past
used administrative hearing statute procedures. Skip Cook
supported the use of the word "may" in the first sentence.
Patrick FitzGerald returned to the meeting.
4:46
Representative Sara Hannan concluded it was important to
say the committee chair's decision is final. Skip Cook
checked his understanding that the chair would decide if a
hearing officer is needed and who that hearing officer will
be. Lee Holmes agreed with Skip Cook's assessment. Skip
Cook stated that is out of line with past committee
practice; the decision to hire a hearing officer was made
by the committee. Conner Thomas agreed with Skip Cook. Skip
Cook opined that he did not want to put that responsibility
on the chair and recommended modifying the proposed
revision to "The committee may authorize the chair .
Joyce Anderson voiced agreement with Skip Cook's
recommendation and together they expressed the sentiment
that the committee makes the decision to hire a hearing
officer and the chair decides the hearing officer.
Representative DeLena Johnson iterated her understanding of
the difference between the responsibility of the committee
and that of the chair - the committee makes the decision to
appoint a hearing officer and the chair appoints the
hearing officer. Joyce Anderson replied that Representative
DeLena Johnson's understanding was correct.
Lee Holmes asked Jerry Anderson if the committee can act
outside of a formal meeting in choosing to hire a hearing
officer or in choosing a hearing officer. Lee Holmes
expressed his concern that a delay in the decision could
delay the public hearing. Jerry Anderson replied that by
the time a complaint is at the public hearing stage, the
process is involved and expressed his opinion that delay
would not be an impediment. Skip Cook added that the
committee is involved all along so they would know if the
situation were serious enough to hire a hearing officer and
he repeated his opinion that the decision to hire a hearing
officer belongs to the whole committee. Representative Sara
Hannan agreed that the whole committee should determine the
need for a hearing officer and the chair should determine
the identity of the hearing officer.
Skip Cook reiterated his suggestion to say, "The committee
may authorize the chair to appoint an impartial hearing
officer " Joyce Anderson advised dividing the hearing
officer section into two sections: one that says the
committee determines the need for a hearing officer and the
other defining the chair's authority. Representative DeLena
Johnson advised only modifying the last sentence to, "The
committee chair appoints the hearing officer and the
committee chair's decision is final." The committee
continued the discussion and reviewed for Representative
DeLena Johnson's benefit the process used in the most
recent public hearing.
5:08
Representative DeLena Johnson left the meeting.
Lee Holmes asked Jerry Anderson if it would be possible to
continue wordsmithing the section by email outside of the
meeting and then to distribute the final product to all the
committee members. Jerry Anderson replied that it would be
possible to proceed per Lee Holmes's proposal. Lee Holmes
entertained discussion of tabling the paragraph. There was
no discussion. The committee moved forward with the
understanding that Jerry Anderson would provide a first
draft, which would be sent to Joyce Anderson and Skip Cook
for review. When complete, the final product would be
emailed to all committee members for electronic approval.
[Reference Section 18 Complaints-Hearing Procedures (g)(6)
Teleconference]
Lee Holmes moved to the next proposed revision in the
Conduct of Hearing, Teleconference section, he read the
rationale, and entertained discussion. There was no
discussion. Lee Holmes entertained a motion. Representative
Sara Hannan moved. There were no objections. Lee Holmes
stated there was a hold on the vote.
5:13
[Reference Section 18 Complaints-Hearing Procedures (h)
Post-Hearing]
Lee Holmes directed the committee's attention to the
proposed revisions in the Post-Hearing section and reviewed
the rationale. Joyce Anderson said that the language in (2)
of the Post Hearing section should be changed as it was
changed in two previous sections to "After deliberations
and vote in executive session, pursuant to AS 24.60.170(f),
the committee will reconvene in a public session."
Lee Holmes entertained discussion. There was no discussion.
Lee Holmes deliberated whether the committee could vote on
the proposed revision under discussion or if the committee
would need to wait until there was a quorum. Lee Holmes
recommended waiting until that time to vote on all of the
remaining revisions.
5:15
[Reference Section 19 Complaints-Discovery]
Lee Holmes moved to the proposed title change in Section 19
Complaints - Discovery and read the rationale. Skip Cook
said that the section was confusing and needed re-working
and he recommended proceeding in the same fashion as in the
Hearing Officer section. Joyce Anderson said that she
agreed with the idea of sending out for review a re-draft
of the section but that she thought a committee discussion
was necessary before approval. Joyce Anderson also said
that she thought it was important that all committee
members vote by email on the Conduct of Hearing and Post-
Hearing sections and recommended adding discussion of the
Complaints-Discovery section to the next meeting's agenda.
Lee Holmes said the committee had voted on all proposed
revisions with the exception of the Conduct of Hearing,
Post-Hearing, and the Complaints-Discovery sections. He
said the proposed revisions in the Conduct of Hearing and
Post-Hearing sections would be voted on by email and the
Complaints-Discovery section would be on the next meeting
agenda. Conner Thomas asked if there was a possibility
there would be a quorum before the end of the day. Lee
Holmes replied that it might be possible and called for a
recess.
5:21:41 PM
RECESS
5:45
Lee Holmes called the meeting back to order.
Roll call
Representative Sara Hannan
(Alternate for Representative Louise Stutes)
Skip Cook
Conner Thomas
Joyce Anderson
Representative DeLena Johnson
Patrick FitzGerald (Alternate Public Member)
Lee Holmes
Deb Fancher (telephonically)
Quorum present.
Absent
Senator John Coghill
Senator Tom Begich
Representative Louise Stutes
6. CHAIR/STAFF REPORT
a. Informal Advice Staff Report
Jerry Anderson referred to the informal advice report in
the packet, noting the uniqueness of the questions that
were included, and advised the committee that their
comments were welcome.
Representative Sara Hannan asked for clarification about
the first question and answer.
May a legislator engage in fundraising activities
including solicitations for a local or municipal race
within 90 days during a special session?
No. The exception at AS 24.60.031(b)(1)(A) is only for
an election in which the legislator is the candidate.
The legislator is not a candidate in the local or
municipal race within 90 days in this instance. The
question involved fundraising activities for another
candidate.
5:48
Representative Sara Hannan noted that the answer begins
with "No" but the narrative suggests an exception for a
legislator who is not a candidate. Representative Sara
Hannan asked for clarification.
Jerry Anderson responded that the answer is no, however,
there is an exception to the general no fundraising rule in
AS 24.60.031(b)(1)(A), which did not apply in the situation
under review.
Representative Sara Hannan said her understanding was that
as an elected person she may not fund raise during a
session for herself or anyone running for a local or
municipal race.
Jerry Anderson affirmed Representative Sara Hannan's
understanding and referred to the language in AS
24.60.031(b)(1)(A).
Joyce Anderson suggested re-working the answer by moving
the third sentence before the second sentence and modifying
that sentence to say, "The exception is only in which the
legislator is a candidate."
Joyce Anderson commented that the first question on page
three should reference AS 24.60.105(c).
Joyce Anderson asked if the questions and answers would be
available to read online. Jerry Anderson responded
affirmatively, after they are approved and amended.
Joyce Anderson recommended adding a reference to AS
24.60.030(f), which refers to board memberships, to the
bottom of page two.
b. National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL)
Ethics Training
Lee Holmes reported that the National Conference of State
Legislatures (NCSL) had held two trainings in Juneau and
asked Jerry Anderson for comment.
Jerry Anderson reported that a total of 87 people attended
the training sessions, 58 in the morning and 29 in the
afternoon. Jerry Anderson also reported that response to
the training was highly favorable and that there is
interest in bringing them back for training in 2021.
Skip Cook said he thought the NCSL training was excellent
and that Jerry Anderson's use of the limited time allotted
to him was effective.
Joyce Anderson agreed with Skip Cook and added that she
liked that Jerry Anderson covered the ethics statutes
section by section.
Jerry Anderson said it was challenging to get through the
Legislative Ethics Act in 40 minutes and so he tried to
focus in on the parts most relevant to the attendees.
6:00
Senator Tom Begich joined the meeting.
c. COGEL Reports
Lee Holmes reported that Skip Cook, Conner Thomas,
Representative Louise Stutes, Representative DeLena
Johnson, and Jerry Anderson attended COGEL 2019. Lee Holmes
invited Jerry Anderson to comment.
Jerry Anderson opined that COGEL conferences get better
every year and it is reflected in increased attendance.
Exposure to the issues outside Alaska is beneficial for
Alaskans.
Representative DeLena Johnson expressed her opinion that
the conference was outstanding, speaker quality was high,
and the topics were relevant - all together one of the
better learning experiences she has had.
Conner Thomas agreed with Representative DeLena Johnson and
said that the sessions he attended were well presented and
extremely interesting.
Skip Cook agreed with Jerry Anderson that the quality of
COGEL conferences increases every year and recommended
committee members attend if the opportunity arises.
Joyce Anderson asked what the membership cost is now. Jerry
Anderson responded about $660. Joyce Anderson said that in
her opinion, it was well worth it.
6:08
5. REVIEW OF COMMITTEE RULES OF PROCEDURE - CONTINUED
Lee Holmes directed the committee's attention back to the
Rules of Procedure discussion. Lee Holmes reported that
during the break Skip Cook, Joyce Anderson, and Conner
Thomas had revised the hearing officer portion of the Rules
of Procedure. Lee Holmes directed Joyce Anderson to read
the revised language.
[Reference Section 18 Complaints-Hearing Procedures (g)
Conduct of Hearing]
Joyce Anderson read the proposed revision:
a. The committee may determine the need for an impartial
Hearing Officer to facilitate and expedite procedural
aspects of the hearing.
b. The committee chair shall compile a list of hearing
officers. The list will be provided to the committee
counsel and the counsel for the person charged or the
person charged. The counsels or the person charged may
submit recommendations to the chair for selection or
disqualification of any candidate. The committee chair's
selection of the hearing officer is final.
Lee Holmes thanked the committee members and entertained
discussion of the proposed revision. Senator Tom Begich
recommended a motion prior to discussion. Skip Cook so
moved. There was no discussion. There was no objection. The
motion was approved.
Lee Holmes reviewed two other proposed revisions not
approved due to lack of a quorum: (6) Teleconference in the
Conduct of Hearing section and (h) (2) in the Post-Hearing
section. Lee Holmes entertained a motion to approve.
Senator Tom Begich moved. Lee Holmes entertained discussion
on the proposed revision. There was no discussion. There
were no objections. The motion was approved.
Lee Holmes reminded the committee that the changes to the
Complaints-Discovery section were tabled until the next
meeting.
6:12:45 PM
7. OTHER BUSINESS
Lee Holmes asked Jerry Anderson if he wanted to attempt to
set a future meeting date.
Jerry Anderson responded that he was not aware of any
pending business so the meeting would only need to address
administrative matters and the balance of changes to the
rules of procedure.
The committee discussed possible future meeting dates.
Senator Tom Begich suggested that committee members inform
Jerry Anderson about known absences. Lee Holmes agreed and
asked Jerry Anderson if he would for discussion purposes
propose a time frame. Jerry Anderson suggested a three-
month time frame. Lee Holmes suggested a four-month time
frame and asked committee members to contact Jerry Anderson
with their known absences for February, March, April, and
May.
Lee Holmes invited discussion about other business. There
was none.
Senator Tom Begich moved to adjourn. There were no
objections. The meeting adjourned.
6:16:28 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| January 21 Full Committee Packet.pdf |
JETH 1/21/2020 3:00:00 PM |