Legislature(1997 - 1998)
02/04/1997 05:09 PM House RLS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE RULES STANDING COMMITTEE
February 4, 1997
5:09 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Pete Kott, Chairman
Representative Irene Nicholia
Representative Al Vezey
Representative Gail Phillips
Representative Brian Porter
Representative Bill Williams
Representative Kim Elton
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
Continuation of January 31, 1997, meeting:
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
Decision H 96-02
PREVIOUS ACTION
No previous action to record
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 97-7, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIRMAN PETE KOTT called the House Rules Standing Committee
meeting back to order at 5:09 p.m. All members were present.
Number 0057
CHAIRMAN KOTT: We have a quorum to conduct business. We will
resume the hearing on the ethics case against Representative
Sanders. Just to recap -- last Friday when we concluded and went
into recess, it was the opinion of the Chair that this committee
rejected that the conclusions of the Ethics Committee regarding the
statutes that were in violation, that we did, however, concur that
there was a level of noncompliance - or at least noncooperation by
Representative Sanders - and we were at the point of addressing,
per the statute, whether or not sanctions are in order. Since
you've had the weekend plus one day to at least give this matter
additional consideration, we'll open it up at this point for
discussion. Representative Porter.
Number 0123
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think
where we were was at a point of, as you've mentioned, determining
what kinds of sanctions that the committee wants to recommend to
the full body and I have prepared a motion that kind of
incorporates everything that we've done to date and some
recommended sanctions. I think before I make the motion, I'd like
to say that as in any sanction, part of the sanction obviously
recognizes the actions of the person that is being sanctioned and
it also serves to give notice, if you will, to anyone else who
might be considering that kind of action or behavior.
Number 0189
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: And it is with that in mind that I make the
following motion. That the Rules Committee forward the following
recommendations to the full body of the House: That as to the
charges presented by the Ethics Committee, that Charge 1, Charge 2,
and Charge 3, which basically were the findings that Representative
Sanders violated AS 24.06.030(a)(2), (a)(5), and (b),
[AS 24.60.030(a)(2), (a)(5) , and (b)] that those findings not be
sustained; that the finding of the Ethics Committee that there was
a violation in terms of lack of cooperation in AS 24.61.070(k) be
sustained; and that the sanctions recommended to the full body by
this committee be the following: A thousand dollar fine to be paid
to the Legislative Affairs Agency; that Representative Sanders be
precluded from out-of-state travel for the calendar year of 1997;
that Representative Sanders take his office allowance account as
the nonaccountable personal income by the nonaccountable personal
income option; that Representative Sanders attend ethics training;
and that Representative Sanders post a copy of the ethics statutes
in his office for he and his staff. And for the information of the
committee, it's my understanding that the last three of these have
been accomplished already by the Representative.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Does that conclude your motion? There is a motion
before us. Is there objection?
Number 0338
REPRESENTATIVE AL VEZEY: Object.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Object for the purpose of discussion.
Representative Vezey.
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My first question
is, couldn't we just simplify it and say that we find that
Representative Sanders did not violate the Ethics Act? I mean, do
we -- necessary to have all the legalese in there?
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: I was just referring to the specific
charges and -- I'm not hung up on it, but ...
Number 0378
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY: I -- it just -- a comment. My other comment
I'd like to make is in the last three recommended sanctions, I
think can be categorized as a proverbial slap on the wrist which I
can't say is out of line. I do have a problem with recommending a
thousand dollar fine. You have to remember we've already found
that he wasn't guilty of a violation of the Ethics Act for which he
was drug through the legal system, and it kind of gets -- it may be
because of my experience as -- the last 25 years in dealing with
the legal system, but the idea that we have a system of justice
where you're innocent until you're proven guilty, is a total myth
in this country. That only applies to criminal law and it only
applies in cases where the court is obligated to furnish you with
an attorney. In matters involving civil or tort issues, the court
is not obligated to furnish you with an attorney and you are not
afforded the privilege of remaining silent.
Number 0483
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY: I determined a long time ago that the system
of law that dominants in this country is that you are innocent
until proven broke at which time you can only accept whatever plea
bargain that the court and the prosecuting agency will allow you to
accept. And this is a situation, I think, that Representative
Sanders was finding himself being railroaded into. If there is a
guilty party here, it is the legislature. We are the ones that
failed to enact a comprehensible Act for the Ethics Commission to
follow; we are the ones that failed to give a clear answer to
proposed guidelines, which (indisc.) strong (indisc.) opinion that
we have rejected those guidelines and sent them back. However, you
know, we did not vote on them - they died through lack of action.
You know, if we're going to find fault and blame here, it really
falls on the others of us equally as much as it does on
Representative Sanders. However, I also know that every day that
this goes on is like a porcupine quill in Representative Sanders'
side and he'd probably just as soon quit wrestling with that
porcupine. And it may be that he would gladly pay a thousand
dollars to see all this suffering end. I know, at a certain point
it sounds like a very cheap remedy. But I do have a problem that
I do think that his lack of cooperation was not in the interest of
this legislature, I do not think it reflected well on this
legislature, but then I can't fault him for taking that opossum
tactic, if you -- if you might wish -- but I do think that the
other members of the committee have also evaluated this and we're
not going to be able to come up with the solution that each of us
thinks is proper -- that it is -- whatever we recommend is going to
be a committee decision. And for that reason, if the other members
of the committee think that this is appropriate, I will concur.
But I do have an objection to the fact that we are recommending in
this motion a fine for a person that really had no choice in being
a part of this process.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Representative Porter.
Number 0643
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: Mr. Chairman, if -- if I may respond. I --
I agree with an awful lot of what Representative Vezey said. I
guess just a point of clarification, I do feel that it would be
inappropriate to say in the motion that he committed no violation
of the Ethics law because the -- the law that allows the committee
to consider cooperation actually goes further to say that - and I'm
quoting out of 24.60.165 -- no I'm not either -- I'm quoting out of
24.60.170(k),
"If the committee finds a violation or lack of
cooperation by the subject, the decision shall recommend
what sections -- what sanctions, if any, the committee
believes are appropriate."
I don't think that that says that the committee may only find lack
of cooperation if they find guilt, which they did, but we're not.
I think it does indicate a requirement to consider that there is a
different standard, and especially from a criminal case, that the
standard for legislatures should be that they cooperate with
investigations and as we've already found, that wasn't the case.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Further discussion? Representative Elton.
Number 0759
REPRESENTATIVE KIM ELTON: Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I'll begin by
saying I think the staff did an exceptional job on the first three
and one-half pages and it was only after that that I -- I began to
have a problem. I don't know what I'm going to do on the motion in
front of us. I mean, the motion in front of us reaffirms our
finding of Friday by -- if I understood the motion correctly -- by
reiterating that this committee did not find a violation in the
three items that were outlined by the Ethics Subcommittee.
Speaking to that portion of the motion, just very briefly -- I
mean, I still have a problem and I just want to reiterate the
problem that I have -- that defining a political straw poll as well
as defining a party convention a nongovernmental function is beyond
me. I mean, I do think that is -- those are two terms - political
straw polls and party conventions - are two terms that can define
what nongovernmental really is.
Number 0843
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON: I'm also -- just want to make it clear that
further back in the memo prepared by staff to the committee, that
-- it's on page 7 in the top paragraph -- I just want to point out
that it's true that as indicated, Representative Sanders at the
time in question, was not a declared candidate, was not engaging in
normal campaign activities, and had not even decided whether he was
going to run in the next election. I'd just like to point out as
all of us are aware, that whether or not you're a declared
candidate, whether or not you've made up your mind to be a declared
candidate, there is still an impulse to cover all your bases. And
-- and that is a political impulse. That is not a legislative
(indisc.--coughing).
Number 0894
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON: And then finally in -- in wrap up on my
comments on the motion, I'd just like to point out that we're
essentially finding something here that -- that even Representative
Sanders didn't find, and that is that there was no guilt as
charged. And I'd -- I'd just like to reread in the portion of the
minutes on page 19 where Representative Sanders did say,
"I must ask all of you to keep in mind that if this
Ethics Committee can spend twenty-four thousand to do
this to me over a seventy two dollar technical violation,
they can do it to anybody."
I mean, (indisc.) that he saw a technical violation. With those
comments, I think it's now going to be difficult for me to figure
out how to vote on this motion. Mr. Chair, just a quick question.
I'm assuming that with this motion before us, that this -- the
results of this motion will be the only thing forwarded to all
members of the House from the Rules Committee? There will not --
the Rules Committee will not forward the recommendation from the
Ethics Subcommittee?
Number 0961
CHAIRMAN KOTT: That's correct. It's my intent to forward the
recommendations from this committee, per the statute requirements,
to the full House. At that point, the full House can then accept,
reject or modify. Representative Porter.
Number 0980
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: Well, I was going to say I think that the
-- most certainly, that the recommendations of the Ethics Committee
are available to every member of the House and anyone that doesn't
have one can certainly get one from my office, if they so choose.
Number 0990
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: I had not crafted this motion with the idea
that I would create the dilemma that I can see I created. I would
not be opposed to splitting the motion, or amending the motion
really to just the sanctions, so that you can consider just the
sanctions, if you'd like, and then the vote on really the two other
issues -- finding of not sustaining the first three charges, of
sustaining the fourth -- your vote's on record on that.
Number 1022
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON: Mr. Chair, I -- I mean, I appreciate the
suggestion. I think -- I think it works not just for this
committee but I'd encourage the committee to think of doing -- of
keeping it separate for the members of the House because otherwise
-- this has been a confusing issue to those of us who have spent an
awful lot of time on it already. And -- and I mean, I'm just
concerned if we bundle the motion the way it's presented, that when
people try to assess what happened on the floor, they're not going
to be able to assess whether the nay vote was a nay because
sanctions were too strict, or was a nay vote because they didn't
believe that (indisc.) in the finding of innocence.
Number 1059
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: Mr. Chairman ...
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Representative Porter.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: With the permission of the committee then,
I would amend my motion to exclude the first two portions of the
motion -- basically that we repeat the motion that we had before
and that the motion would only contain a motion that we recommend
the following sanctions on our previous determination that
Representative Sanders was responsible - or the allegation of his
failure to cooperate was sustained - and then list the five
sanctions that I mentioned.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Does everybody understand the new motion? Is there
objection?
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: To the new motion.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: To the new motion.
Number 1113
CHAIRMAN KOTT: I'm gonna object just for the purpose of you
repeating the (indisc.) clarification the issue dealing with
posting of the statutes.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: The fifth recommendation was that
Representative post a copy of the ethics statutes in his office for
his staff.
Number 1145
CHAIRMAN KOTT: I wonder if you would consider a friendly amendment
to that - by posting a copy of the existing ethics statutes that
are related to failure to cooperate - in the office because that's
really what we are sanctioning here is the failure to cooperate and
posting all the statutes related to the ethics area would probably
not be self-serving.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: Well, that's a pretty limited (indisc.) --
that's a pretty limited posting. I don't think that -- I don't
think we're finding the staff guilty of not cooperating, we're
finding Representative Sanders and the thought may be there that
between three people on the staff and himself all of the inclusions
would be retained and future problems would be reduced.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: I'm a little more optimistic. I'm hoping there'll
be no future problems, but I'll withdraw my objection. Again, the
motion is before us to forward the (indisc.) mentioned sanctions to
the full House for Representative Sanders' failure to cooperate.
Is there objection?
Number 1221
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY: I'll object.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Representative Vezey.
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY: I won't repeat my -- my comments. I -- I
just -- I think -- I'm interested in hearing what the committee has
to say about these proposed sanctions. Only myself and
Representative Porter have commented -- well, I'm sorry,
Representative Elton has commented, but he was commenting about the
first part. I don't think he was commenting about the sanctions.
I do think that a thousand dollar fine is -- is really
inappropriate here. I'd say that there are three guilty parties -
the legislature in whole, the Ethics Commission was negligent in
not researching out the impact of a Presidential Primary on the
state of Alaska, and I -- I think that also Representative Sanders
was negligent - but I don't know that he should be singled out to
pay a fine.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Further comments? Representative Elton.
Number 1278
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON: Thanks, Mr. Chair. I find myself in the
awkward position of -- of being put in a position of agreeing with
the Ethics Committee wants and then disagreeing with them on the
matter of sanctions because -- because this -- and I think that the
thousand dollar fine portion is a significant change from what the
Ethics Committee itself recommended and -- and I guess it seems odd
that I am arguing that we listen to the Ethics Committee on the
finding of guilt and yet go further than what the Ethics Committee
recommends in the matter of sanctions. But -- but I do think that
- and I have said this before - that I think the violation of the
statutes that I found and one other member of this body found was
what -- what I would call a technical violation. The majority of
this committee didn't find it a violation at all but -- and I
certainly didn't find it an egregious -- an egregious violation.
And -- and because I assumed that the sanctions were attached to
that technical violation, I was comfortable with the sanctions as
they were. I do think that I'm -- I'm going to support the
sanctions as recommended in this motion simply because I think the
behavior -- the -- the question of lack of cooperation did send
this whole issue involving H 96-02 spinning somewhat out of control
and -- and so I think that the enhanced sanction with the fine in
this case may be appropriate.
Number 1375
CHAIRMAN KOTT: I certainly appreciate your comments. I somewhat
agree with what you articulated there. We do have the motion
before us to forward the recommendations of this committee, as far
as sanctions based on Representative Sanders' ability to cooperate,
to the full House. Are there further items of discussion?
Representative Vezey are you still maintaining your objection?
Number 1408
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY: Yes, I'd like a chance to vote.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Representative Nicholia.
Number 1417
REPRESENTATIVE IRENE NICHOLIA: Thank you, Chairman Kott. I just
have a question. It sounds like a blanket vote here -- I'm -- I'm
not sure -- are we going to be dividing all these different
sanctions? Are we going to vote on each one of them? Or are we
just going to vote on this as a blanket? I'm trying to figure out
what you're doing here.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: It's my understanding that the motion before us is
one that includes all the sanctions collectively. It is one motion
that addresses the sanctions that were identified by Representative
Porter. We are not dividing the question unless you wish to do so.
(Indisc.) we are taking them up as a whole.
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: Okay. Can you repeat those sanctions
real quickly?
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Representative Porter.
Number 1460
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: A thousand dollar fine to be paid to the
Legislative Affairs Agency. No out-of-state travel for calendar
year of 97. To take his -- he'd be required to take his office
allowance (indisc.) nonaccountable personal income option rather
than the accountable. Attending the ethics training that he did
attend, which is just merely giving him credit I think for that,
and the posting of the statutes in his office.
REPRESENTATIVE GAIL PHILLIPS: Which he has done, also.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: I think he has.
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: Just one more question.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Representative Nicholia.
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: One of the findings and sanctions was to
include the staff to go to the ethics training ...
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS: They did.
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: ... and they all did?
CHAIRMAN KOTT: It's my understanding they've already completed
that, as well.
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: Thanks.
Number 1512
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Further discussion? On the motion itself,
Representative Porter, did you have in mind any dates for
compliance? At least on the ones that would be subject to
(indisc.) date.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: About the only thing I could think of would
be the fine and I'm really not aware of his financial situation so
... I guess I would say that the sanctions must be completed by
the end of this session.
Number 1566
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Okay, so that's an amendment -- friendly amendment
to your original motion that deals with the thousand dollar fine to
be paid by Representative Sanders to Legislative Affairs by the end
of the current legislative session. Is there objection to that
friendly amendment? Is there objection?
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: None. I have a question. Through the
Chair ...
CHAIRMAN KOTT: You object for the purposes of a question ...
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: Well, okay ...
CHAIRMAN KOTT: ... on this matter or on another matter?
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: On another matter.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Okay, hearing no objection to the friendly
amendment then, it is adopted. Representative Nicholia.
Number 1584
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: Thank you, Chairman. The question I have
is can you explain why you didn't include the one sanction that
Representative Sanders must be stripped of any committee chair
positions he may hold?
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: I think that the fine supersedes probably
all of those recommendations and I don't draw any connections
between the sanction of his chairmanship -- or between his
chairmanship and the failure to cooperate. (Indisc.) doesn't
follow that that would be a logical sanction for failure to
cooperate.
Number 1621
CHAIRMAN KOTT: I think that was discussed at the last meeting that
there wasn't no nexus between that particular area of (indisc.)
particular committee and what we're finding him guilty of, if you
will. Further comments? Okay, there's a motion before us, there's
an objection. Would the committee secretary please call the roll.
COMMITTEE SECRETARY: Representative Vezey?
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY. No.
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: Just a minute could I ...
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Please void the roll. Representative Nicholia.
Number 1650
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: One more question. Did you go and check
the list of -- in making sure that all the members and staff
members of Representative Sanders was at the ethics training?
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Personally, I did not.
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: Okay, I guess maybe we should probably
amend that then, that if there are any -- any staff members that
hadn't taken the training, that they should.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: I think I'm happy with the motion the way
it is. If she'd like to make that motion, I would object.
Number 1680
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: Motion made.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Is that a motion?
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA responded affirmatively.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: So you have a motion to amend the existing motion
to include all members of Representative's staff to ...
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: Take that ethics training.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: ... participate in the ethics training. And there
is an objection?
Number 1693
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY: I want an inquiry. I thought that's what
the sanction said -- the motion before us said -- and the amendment
seems to be just restating it. The sanction said that
Representative Sanders and his staff will attend ethics training.
Number 1706
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Point of clarification. Representative Porter.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: The motion was that Representative Sanders
attend the ethics training. The question was asked whether his
staff had and I think that the answer to that, we guess, is yes.
But again, the Ethics Committee did not sanction the staff, so I
reject the idea of putting some sanction requirements on staff
people who are found guilty of nothing.
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: They -- they did write that in the
sanctions. It was included that the staff members attend ...
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: I'm rejecting that finding. If you want to
make the motion, go ahead.
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: I did. I made the motion.
Number 1736
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Okay, so there is an amendment to the motion that
would require Representative Sanders' staff to also participate in
the ethics training. There is an objection. Would the secretary
please call the roll.
COMMITTEE SECRETARY: Representative Phillips?
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS: No.
COMMITTEE SECRETARY: Representative Porter?
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: No.
COMMITTEE SECRETARY: Representative Williams?
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS: No.
COMMITTEE SECRETARY: Representative Elton?
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON: Yes.
COMMITTEE SECRETARY: Representative Nicholia?
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: Yes.
COMMITTEE SECRETARY: Representative Vezey?
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY: No.
COMMITTEE SECRETARY: Chairman Kott?
CHAIRMAN KOTT: No.
Number 1760
CHAIRMAN KOTT: The motion fails which brings us again back to the
original motion. There is an objection to the original motion.
Would the secretary please call the roll.
COMMITTEE SECRETARY: Representative Porter?
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: Yes.
COMMITTEE SECRETARY: Representative Williams?
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS: Yes.
COMMITTEE SECRETARY: Representative Elton?
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON: Yes.
COMMITTEE SECRETARY: Representative Nicholia?
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: Yes.
COMMITTEE SECRETARY: Representative Vezey?
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY: No.
COMMITTEE SECRETARY: Representative Phillips?
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS: Yes.
COMMITTEE SECRETARY: Chairman Kott?
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Yes. The motion was carried ...
Number 1790
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY: Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Representative Vezey.
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY: I'd like to change my vote from nay to yea.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Would the secretary please reflect that. I believe
that at the previous meeting we did also include a motion that was
related to the original sanctions -- or the original violations
statute that we rejected and that motion -- results of that vote
will also be forwarded in the minutes to the full House. I want to
thank everybody. Is there any further comments? Representative
Elton.
Number 1816
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON: Well, this is a (indisc.) especially
appropriate question I think for you, Chairman Kott, but do you
know when this will be scheduled for the floor?
CHAIRMAN KOTT: I anticipate no delay in bringing this before the
House as early as tomorrow - during the floor session would be most
appropriate in my opinion.
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON: I -- just a comment, Chairman Kott -- I
mean, I think that my concern I have with it going tomorrow is that
we were handed this packet early this afternoon -- like -- I can
tell you that even though I was familiar with a lot of it, it - it
was kind of intimidating to get back to my office at three in the
afternoon. I -- I think it may be a little bit intimidating to
many of the other members who haven't had - I was about the say the
privilege of sitting in with us through all this process - this is
an awful lot to give them and -- and ask them to come to the floor
prepared tomorrow. So, I'd ask of you to consider that and to
consider scheduling it perhaps for Friday to give the other members
who haven't been here an opportunity to get through all this.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Representative Williams.
Number 1876
REPRESENTATIVE BILL WILLIAMS: I know how intimidating it is, you
know, I think this has more or less put all of the legislature on
record and they certainly had the opportunity to be here or be on
Gavel to Gavel watching this. I -- I'd like to take care of this
as soon as possible, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Thank you for your comments, Representative
Williams. I would concur that certainly from the public's
perspective, they've had an opportunity to view the activity of
this committee over the last six or seven days. Everybody in this
body had an opportunity to participate in the audience, listen in,
or to view it on Gavel to Gavel in their offices. It's my
understanding that the minutes were on BASIS almost
on a daily basis, as I've conferred with House Records to ensure
that occurred. I think there's been ample opportunity for those
who wanted any kind of information regarding this matter. It is
not my intent to provide every member of this House a copy of the
minutes. The minutes are, again, on BASIS and in my opinion, I
agree with Representative Williams that we should go forward and
get this matter off our plate and get on to other business of the
state.
Number 1940
CHAIRMAN KOTT: We'll take a brief at-ease.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: ... reconvening at 6:10 and on page 10 you will
find essentially the sanctions that this committee recommended,
send forward to the full House and give you each a minute or two to
look them over.
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS: We should just sign one, though.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Ya, (indisc.) the original. Representative
Williams.
Number 1991
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS: Just for clarification, we are a
committee, you know, and what I've seen in the past with our
committees is just to sign a little sheet saying that we do pass or
don't pass ...
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: Just a regular committee pass out thing
that allows them to say amend or ...
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS: ... no rec or ...
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Well, we're gonna do this pretty much the same way
they do confirmations. You just sign - it's not an indication of
how you're going to vote on the floor, but you're signing off that
you concurred (indisc.) being forwarded.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: Are you (indisc.--paper shuffling) present
it?
CHAIRMAN KOTT: On the House floor? That would be up to
membership. (Indisc.) membership can accept, reject or modify the
recommendations by this committee. If -- Representative Elton.
Number 2045
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON: Mr. Chair, thanks. Just a point of
clarification on page 10. I'm assuming that on number 2 --
sanction recommended for number 2 -- before the end of the current
legislative session means the First Session of the Twentieth
Legislature and ... Okay.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Ya, I think that's an accurate assumption.
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS: In May of this year.
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS: That's what I assumed that to be ...
Number 2067
CHAIRMAN KOTT: To make this (indisc. - coughing), I would
entertain a motion then to move this report as written to the full
House for their consideration. And if you would like to indicate
next to your name whether or not you want to indicate a do pass, do
not pass, or amend, that's certainly your prerogative. If you want
to make a comment that's - that's certainly appropriate.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: But you want just one document with
everybody's signature?
CHAIRMAN KOTT: That's correct.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: Just one document? Okay. I would so move
then, Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Okay, there is a motion to move this document
forward to the full House. Is there objection? Seeing none, that
will be accomplished. I might also indicate on page 11 of the
document, the last paragraph does contain a provision whereby the
Rules Committee will forward an amendment -- an attachment to this
and that attachment will include any of the items of interest that
you feel is in need of being reviewed, so far as -- so far as we're
going to take a close look at the ethics statute -- so if you have
any recommendations that you would like to see included in this
attachment that will also be forwarded, please notify my office and
we'll make sure that it gets in there. Again, this is just an
attachment for the - for the House, to let them know we are looking
at certain issues and there were certain issues that have come to
our attention during the proceedings. And you do have a copy of
that attachment already -- the previous materials passed out. If
anybody needs a copy or it's been misplaced, please see my office
staff and we'll make sure you have a current copy.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: Do you want to use that one as the ...
CHAIRMAN KOTT: (Indisc.) the original, George. We'll use this one
as the original.
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON: (Indisc.) next to mine.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: I know it's an unusual process, but then again,
this is the first time we've had to dispense with this kind of a
matter. Representative Nicholia.
Number 2170
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: Chairman Kott, is that legal to attach
that to this? I mean, it seems like that wasn't what -- I mean, it
seems like the only thing that was really supposed to be in this
file was just -- the violation. Is that a normal procedure to
attach something like that to this or is it -- is it even legal to
do that?
Number 2188
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Well, certainly if it weren't legal, we wouldn't be
doing it.
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA: So, you did get a legal opinion on it?
CHAIRMAN KOTT: I'm fairly sure that we can attach an amendment or
an addendum, if you will, to this document which would then
indicate to the House that there were other issues - or at least
some of the issues that we've dealt with during the preceding seven
days or so - have been addressed and we believe they warrant
further consideration. Representative Porter.
Number 2209
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER: Mr. Chairman, I don't know if they're
already on the list but if they're not -- I think if we can't
obtain them, at least we should reference the compilation of
suggestions that the Ethics Committee itself has should be looked
at, also.
Number 2220
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS: They -- Mr. Chairman, they're meeting
this afternoon. They had a meeting for about two hours just on the
revisions they are going to start -- to put together to forward for
changes.
CHAIRMAN KOTT: Okay. If those -- if those are not available, it'd
be referenced that there are additional considerations forthcoming
from the Ethics Committee themselves, and what they believe are
important areas to clean up. I know they've been troubled with
many of the same kinds of things that we've been troubled with over
the last six - seven days.
Number 2242
CHAIRMAN KOTT: I want to thank everybody for your indulgence over
the last week. It's been tough. I know all of us spent a lot of
time reviewing the documents, reviewing the minutes in some cases,
and trying to understand the intent of the law. I appreciate
everyone that have devoted their time, and I might add that
everyone was in attendance throughout the entire hearing and it is
greatly appreciated. I think the public expects us to be here in
attendance and certainly we met that expectation. So, with that -
unless there are further comments - we will adjourn the Rules
Committee hearing on 96-02.
[Chairman Kott adjourned the House Rules Standing Committee at 6:17
p.m.}
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|