Legislature(2001 - 2002)
01/16/2002 01:38 PM House JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
January 16, 2002
1:38 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Scott Ogan, Vice Chair
Representative Jeannette James
Representative John Coghill
Representative Kevin Meyer
Representative Ethan Berkowitz
Representative Albert Kookesh
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Norman Rokeberg, Chair
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARINGS:
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
Bonnie Mehner - Anchorage
Arthur S. Robinson - Soldotna
H. Connor Thomas - Nome
- CONFIRMATIONS ADVANCED
PREVIOUS ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
BONNIE MEHNER, Appointee
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
2923 McCollie Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99517
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics.
ARTHUR S. ROBINSON, Appointee
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
35401 Kenai Spur Highway
Soldotna, Alaska 99669
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics.
H. CONNOR THOMAS, Appointee
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
PO Box 61
Nome, Alaska 99762
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 02-1, SIDE A
Number 0001
VICE CHAIR SCOTT OGAN, acting as chair, called the House
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting to order at 1:38 p.m.
Representatives Ogan, Coghill, James, Meyer, and Kookesh were
present at the call to order. Representative Berkowitz arrived
as the meeting was in progress.
CONFIRMATION HEARINGS
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
Number 0047
VICE CHAIR OGAN announced that the committee would consider
three appointees to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics:
Bonnie Mehner, Arthur S. Robinson, and H. Connor Thomas.
Number 0137
BONNIE MEHNER, Appointee, Select Committee on Legislative
Ethics, testified via teleconference. In response to the
question of why she wished to serve on the Select Committee on
Legislative Ethics, she said she viewed it as another way of
serving her community and anticipated that it would be a change
from what she usually does in her regular profession of real
estate. She noted that she is active in the community, and
while she had not anticipated the extent of the "hoops and
whistles" she would have to go through, she is willing to serve
on the committee.
VICE CHAIR OGAN noted that although ethics are not always
spelled out in the statutes, they are the "heart of the intent."
He surmised that Ms. Mehner might be asked to make some tough
judgment calls from time to time, adding that he assumes she is
aware of and comfortable with the inherent responsibility.
MS. MEHNER concurred.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH noted that he has reviewed Ms. Mehner's
resume, and that he is supportive of her appointment,
particularly in light of the fact that she graduated from Alaska
Methodist University, from which he, too, graduated.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES, after noting that Ms. Mehner's resume
indicated she attended 16 different schools while growing up,
asked how this experience influenced her.
MS. MEHNER said it was a positive experience, helping broaden
her as a person by exposing her to lots of different situations
and to people in different walks of life. She observed that
when a person moves around a lot as a child, he/she could grow
up either being open to new ideas or being shy.
REPRESENTATIVE MEYER recalled that when he was serving on the
Anchorage Assembly, Ms. Mehner served as the chair of the
Anchorage Arts Advisory Commission. He added that Ms. Mehner
represented that group very well, and he expressed confidence
that she would serve well on the Select Committee on Legislative
Ethics.
VICE CHAIR OGAN reminded members that signing the reports
regarding appointments to boards and commissions in no way
reflects individual members' approval or disapproval of the
appointees, and that the nominations are merely forwarded to the
full legislature for confirmation or rejection.
Number 0628
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES moved to report the nomination of Bonnie
Mehner to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics out of
committee. There being no objection, the confirmation was
advanced.
Number 0673
ARTHUR S. ROBINSON, Appointee, Select Committee on Legislative
Ethics, testified via teleconference. In response to the
question of why he wished to serve on the Select Committee on
Legislative Ethics, he said he envisions serving on the
committee as a good way to volunteer meaningful community
service on a part-time basis. He offered that the Select
Committee on Legislative Ethics carries out an important
government function and that he wanted to assist in this
process.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES noted that Mr. Robinson is an attorney and
surmised that as such, is probably used to cut-and-dried sorts
of situations. She said that she has always had the belief that
"we all really know what ethical behavior is, but we do need to
have somebody look over us." She asked Mr. Robinson whether he
thinks it true that in determining what's ethical and what isn't
for those in public service, it's not necessarily what is right
or wrong, but rather what has the looks of being right or wrong.
MR. ROBINSON, in response, said that in many instances (some of
which are addressed in the [Standards of Conduct] statutes), the
appearance of being ethical is as important as being ethical.
He added that certainly there might be times when questions will
arise regarding whether doing something or not doing something
will fall into the category of unethical conduct, or have the
appearance of doing so under some circumstances.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES, remarking that "it's kind of subjective,"
asked Mr. Robinson what he would use to base his decisions on.
MR. ROBINSON said that according to his understanding, work on
the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics involves two things:
one, making decisions based on complaints that a legislator or
legislative employee has done something unethical (which
requires investigating the facts and determining whether the
[Standards of Conduct] statutes have been violated; and two,
responding to inquiries from legislators [and legislative
employees] as to whether specific conduct would be unethical.
For the latter, the committee would review the question in light
of the statutes and past advisory opinions to formulate an
advisory opinion specific to the current question. Thus, he
surmised, his personal opinion would not have much to do with
any decisions the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics makes
as a whole regarding complaints since the committee is
constrained to matching the facts of any complaint with existing
statute. He also surmised that the same would be true of
advisory opinions even though these do not entail any
investigation; the committee would still be relying on statutes
and precedents to form advisory opinions.
Number 0965
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES posited that it is in the advisory opinions
where subjectivity could play a part; she suggested that in
looking to give advisory opinions, the Select Committee on
Legislative Ethics might need to be a little bit stricter with
regard to what is considered ethical behavior.
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ remarked that there is no prohibition
in the [Legislature's] ethical standards against engaging in
conduct that has the appearance of impropriety; because it's
only in the preamble, he added, it does not have any statutory
strength. He suggested that "perhaps that's one of the issues
we can cure later on down the road" by attaching more weight to
avoiding the appearance of impropriety.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES said it is her personal belief that in her
own personal behavior, she needs to avoid [conduct] that might
have even the appearance of being unethical.
VICE CHAIR OGAN pointed out that anyone who wants to get
reelected doesn't want to create the appearance [of
impropriety]; "ultimately the voters are who hold you
accountable," he added. He suggested that during election
season, a lot of the charges of ethics violations are simply
based on partisan politics instigated by people who would like
to see a person out of office. He asked, "How do you separate
the wheat from the chaff?"
MR. ROBINSON explained that if it is a complaint situation, the
main responsibility would be to investigate it to determine
whether the allegation has any substance to it based on real
facts. If the complaint cannot be substantiated, it does not
need to be acted on. He acknowledged that in the political
world, it can be hard to determine, sometimes, what's the "real
stuff" and what's not because of political maneuvering. He
reiterated that as a member of the Select Committee on
Legislative Ethics, he would be constrained to finding out what
is really going in terms of facts as a opposed to merely loud
allegations. Without facts, the committee would not be able to
support any recommendation against a legislator or legislative
employee.
VICE CHAIR OGAN noted that one of the aspects of having a
citizen legislature is that members occasionally change jobs,
and this can potentially raise conflict-of-interest questions.
Number 1273
REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ moved to report the nomination of
Arthur S. Robinson to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
out of committee. There being no objection, the confirmation
was advanced.
Number 1305
H. CONNOR THOMAS, Appointee, Select Committee on Legislative
Ethics, testified via teleconference. In response to the
question of why he wished to serve again on the Select Committee
on Legislative Ethics, he said that he enjoyed his first term
and that he is now familiar with how the process works. He
added that serving on the committee is an opportunity to provide
public service without an overwhelming time commitment. When
asked which of his prior-term experiences stand out the most, he
referred to potential conflict of interest issues, those that
have arisen in connection both with lobbyists and others who are
not lobbyists.
VICE CHAIR OGAN asked whether Mr. Thomas had any specific
recommendation for legislators regarding proper procedures for
clearing things with the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
He related that he has asked for advisory opinions over the
years.
MR. THOMAS said that the real heart of what the committee does,
according to his experience, is issue advisory opinions. He
continued:
"I think that's the opportunity that is provided for
feedback on things that may ... create an appearance
of impropriety; it may not be an actual violation of
the ethics code, but a person should be told that.
And the fact that they call and ask for an advisory
opinion -- I totally agree that that is really ... the
meat of what the committee does and should be doing,
because anytime you can avoid a complaint, you've done
a service.
VICE CHAIR OGAN recounted that he has actually observed the
press criticizing legislators for asking for an advisory opinion
on something, on the grounds that it implies that if a
legislator asks for an advisory opinion before doing an
activity, he/she must have a guilty conscience.
MR. THOMAS said he disagrees with that assumption. He added,
"It seems to me like the prudent thing to do."
Number 1510
REPRESENTATIVE MEYER moved to report the nomination of H. Connor
Thomas to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics out of
committee. There being no objection, the confirmation was
advanced.
ADJOURNMENT
Number 1528
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:00 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|