Legislature(1999 - 2000)
05/18/1999 10:40 AM House TRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION STANDING COMMITTEE
May 18, 1999
10:40 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Beverly Masek, Chair
Representative Andrew Halcro, Vice Chair
Representative Bill Hudson
Representative John Cowdery
Representative Jerry Sanders
Representative Allen Kemplen
Representative Albert Kookesh
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present.
OTHER MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Joe Green
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 135(FIN)(title am)
"An Act relating to metropolitan planning organizations."
- MOVED HCS CSSB 135(TRA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
(* First public hearing)
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: SB 135
SHORT TITLE: METROPOLITAN PLANNING AUTHORITY
SPONSOR(S): TRANSPORTATION
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
4/08/99 823 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
4/08/99 823 (S) TRA, FIN
4/15/99 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
4/20/99 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
4/20/99 (S) MOVED CS OUT OF COMMITTEE
4/21/99 985 (S) TRA RPT 2DP 1NR
4/21/99 985 (S) DP: WARD, HALFORD; NR: PEARCE
4/21/99 985 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DOT)
4/21/99 985 (S) FISCAL NOTE (DEC)
5/03/99 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
5/04/99 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
5/04/99 (S) MOVED CS (FIN) OUT OF COMMITTEE
5/04/99 (S) RLS AT 3:15 PM FAHRENKAMP 203
5/04/99 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
5/04/99 (S) MINUTE(RLS)
5/04/99 1220 (S) FIN RPT CS 5DP 4NR NEW TITLE
5/04/99 1220 (S) DP: TORGERSON, PARNELL, PHILLIPS,
LEMAN,
5/04/99 1220 (S) DONLEY; NR: GREEN, PETE KELLY,
WILKEN,
5/04/99 1220 (S) ADAMS
5/04/99 1220 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FN (DOT)
5/04/99 1220 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (S.FIN/DEC)
5/05/99 1249 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR AND 1 OR 5/5/99
5/05/99 1253 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
5/05/99 1253 (S) FIN CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT
5/05/99 1253 (S) AM NO 1 ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT
5/05/99 1254 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN
CONSENT
5/05/99 1254 (S) READ 3RD TIME CSSB 135(FIN)(TITLE
AM)
5/05/99 1254 (S) PASSED Y13 N6 A1
5/05/99 1254 (S) ELLIS NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION
5/06/99 1276 (S) RECON TAKEN UP - IN THIRD READING
5/06/99 1277 (S) PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y14 N6
5/06/99 1281 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
5/07/99 1222 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
5/07/99 1222 (H) TRANSPORTATION
5/17/99 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 17
5/17/99 (H) HEARD AND HELD
5/18/99 (H) TRA AT 10:30 AM CAPITOL 17
WITNESS REGISTER
DENNIS POSHARD, Legislative Liaison/Special Assistant
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities
3132 Channel Drive
Juneau, Alaska 99801-7898
Telephone: (907) 465-3904
POSITION STATEMENT: Reviewed concerns with SB 135.
TOM BRIGHAM, Director, Division of Statewide Planning
Division of Transportation & Public Facilities
3132 Channel Drive
Juneau, Alaska 99801-7898
Telephone: (907) 465-6984
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions.
BILL CUMMINGS, Assistant Attorney General
Transportation Section
Civil Division - Juneau
Department of Law
PO Box 110300
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0300
Telephone: (907) 465-2417
POSITION STATEMENT: Addressed the constitutional concerns of
SB 135.
SENATOR DONLEY
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 508
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-3982
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as sponsor of SB 135.
TIM ROGERS, Legislative Program Coordinator
Municipality of Anchorage
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that, in general, the Mayor of
Anchorage does not have any problems with
this year's proposal.
TOM CHAPPLE, Director
Division of Air & Water Quality
Department of Environmental Conservation
555 Cordova St.
Anchorage, AK 99501-2617
Telephone: (907) 269-7686
POSITION STATEMENT: Discussed air quality concerns.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 99-21, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR BEVERLY MASEK called the House Transportation Standing
Committee meeting back to order at 10:40 a.m. Members present at
the call to order were Representatives Masek, Halcro, Hudson,
Cowdery, Sanders, Kemplen and Kookesh.
SB 135-METROPOLITAN PLANNING AUTHORITY
[This is a continuation of the May 17, 1999 meeting which was
recessed to the call of the chair.]
CHAIR MASEK announced that the only order of business would be CS
FOR SENATE BILL NO. 135(FIN)(title am), "An Act relating to
metropolitan planning organizations." She noted that Senator
Donley had a new committee substitute (CS) for the committee, but
she wanted to first take testimony from those who wanted to testify
at yesterday's hearing on May 17, 1999. Chair Masek reminded the
committee that the motion to adopt the CS labeled LS0785\K,
Utermohle, 5/16/99 is still before the committee. She indicated
that discussion should be directed to Version K.
Number 0112
DENNIS POSHARD, Legislative Liaison/Special Assistant, Office of
the Commissioner, Department of Transportation & Public Facilities
(DOT/PF), clarified for the committee that "... 23 U.S.C. 134
states that an MPO is designated, by agreement, among the governor
and units of general purpose local government." Therefore, the
municipality and the governor must agree to changes in the
metropolitan planning organization (MPO) membership. He informed
the committee that Governor Hammond originally designated Anchorage
as an MPO in 1976. At that time the policy committee was
designated as the mayor, one municipal councilman or assembly
member, and the commissioner of highways. Later Anchorage was
designated as a non-attainment area for carbon monoxide. In 1978
Governor Hammond designated the Municipality of Anchorage as the
lead organization to develop and implement a plan for achieving air
quality standards. At that time, the Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC) and the Municipality of Anchorage, signed an
agreement which expanded the MPO policy committee by one municipal
assembly member as well as adding the commissioner for DEC. These
agreements remain effective. Mr. Poshard stated, "In addition, 23
C.F.R. 450.306 states, 'To the extent possible, the MPO designated
should be established under specific state legislation, state
enabling legislation, or by inner-state compact and shall have
authority to carry out metropolitan transportation planning.'"
However, the code does not require state legislators be represented
on the MPO nor does it require that the MPO be designated in
statute.
Number 0306
MR. POSHARD reviewed the current structure of the MPO policy
committee which consists of the Anchorage mayor, two assembly
members, the regional director of DOT/PF, and a representative from
DEC. The CS, Version K, would have the MPO policy committee
consist of four members designated by the municipality, one
Senator, one Representative, and one member appointed by the
governor as well as DEC having a nonvoting member. Mr. Poshard did
not believe it prudent, with Anchorage's air quality concerns, to
change the DEC position to a nonvoting status. He indicated that
Senator Donley addressed that matter yesterday, May 17, 1999.
Additionally, the CS does not specify how the municipalities'
representatives would be chosen. This is of concern because if
those chosen are from a specific area there may be vested interest
which would overshadow areawide interest. He indicated that may be
resolved if the legislation specified how the municipal
representatives are chosen.
MR. POSHARD noted that, last year, the Anchorage Assembly passed a
resolution in opposition to a similar bill, SB 259. From that
resolution he paraphrased the following:
WHEREAS, currently the municipality and the state have a
balanced and cooperative working relationship in the
development of transportation and air quality plans; and
WHEREAS, 23 U.S.C. 134 states that a metropolitan
planning organization is designated "by agreement among
the governor and the units of general purpose local
government;" and
WHEREAS, the municipality and the governor must agree to
any changes in the existing metropolitan planning
organization's membership, and it is unclear as to the
purpose and intent of the changes proposed in SB 259; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Protection Agency is in a
process of designating Anchorage as a serious
non-attainment area for carbon monoxide and DEC's
representation on the policy committee is an important
role; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the Anchorage Assembly resolves:
That the Anchorage Assembly opposes SB 259 which modifies
the membership of and the state's participation in a
metropolitan planning organization.
CHAIR MASEK inquired as to how this legislation, if passed, would
affect ongoing and future projects.
MR. POSHARD said that he did not believe this legislation, whether
passed this year or next, would have any affect on projects in
terms of holding up or moving along any projects. He indicated
that the bill is an attempt to improve communications between the
Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation Study (AMATS) and the
legislature as well as to provide the legislature more input into
the AMATS process. Those are laudable goals, however, the
legislation will not have any effect on projects in the short-term.
Number 0679
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO inquired as to the result of making the
legislative members of the MPO advisory members rather than
nonvoting members.
MR. POSHARD pointed out that last year's SB 259, as introduced,
only added two nonvoting members; one from the House and one from
the Senate. The department did not oppose that version of SB 259
and felt that it may have improved communications with the
legislature.
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN requested that Mr. Poshard explain the
formation of the transportation improvement plan (TIP) and the
state transportation improvement plan (STIP) as well as the timing.
He wondered if there would be difficulty in maintaining a quorum,
with two legislative members, since meetings would occur early in
the year while the legislature is in session.
MR. POSHARD deferred to Mr. Brigham who served on the technical
advisory committee for AMATS for six years. Mr. Brigham is also a
former Director of Transit for Anchorage.
TOM BRIGHAM, Director, Division of Statewide Planning, Division of
Transportation & Public Facilities, stated that typically the major
AMATS STIP amendments have occurred in the first quarter of the
year which coincides with the legislative session. Mr. Brigham
commented that we are working hard to have the STIP revisions
completed before legislative meetings for the sake of simplicity.
He said that AMATS will almost always follow the state. In other
words, the state will have a major STIP amendment which results in
AMATS having a TIP a month to two months later. He guessed that
the conclusion of that process would occur early in the legislative
session, in the first couple of months.
Number 0957
BILL CUMMINGS, Assistant Attorney General, Transportation Section,
Civil Division - Juneau, Department of Law, stated that the CS,
Version K, does not address the constitutional concerns. The
department believes that the legislation violates the separation of
powers doctrine and also represents dual office-holding which are
both prohibited by the constitution. Mr. Cummings noted that has
been the department's position with regard to the appointment of
legislators to administrative bodies for about the last 20 years.
He cited various such bodies in which the department has taken the
aforementioned position. He identified the following cases as
important to review: Bradner v. Hammond (ph), Warwick v. State
(ph), and Begich v. Jefferson (ph). There has been a definitive
legal interpretation on this matter from the supreme court. He
acknowledged that there may be examples of legislators sitting on
boards such as the Alaska Student Loan Corporation which was
mentioned at the May 17, 1998 hearing. "At the time that was
coming down, when that policy choice was made we said, 'This is
probably unconstitutional and you ought not to do it.' But we
don't make policy. All we can do is make very strong
recommendations." Mr. Cummings strongly recommended that the
legislation before the committee is unconstitutional.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO asked if the legislative members were
nonvoting members, would that violate the dual office-holding
provision.
MR. CUMMINGS said that such a structure would probably violate a
strict interpretation of the dual office-holding provision.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked how ex-officio status, such as is the
case for the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute, for the
legislative members would be interpreted.
MR. CUMMINGS said that he could not answer now because there are
some complexities that would need to be reviewed such as where the
agency lives and does this represent another office. Serving for
free does not have any bearing because the Alaska Constitution
prohibits a legislator from holding any other office or holding a
position of profit. Under this legislation, even with ex-officio
status, there would be a problem with regard to whether this would
represent another office.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO inquired as to when the prioritization at
AMATS occurs.
MR. BRIGHAM reiterated that the major amendments tend to fall in
the first quarter or third of the year, but AMATS meets year round.
Number 1227
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH commented that when there is concern
regarding constitutionality, one must review those who would be
willing to file an action to challenge the constitutionality. He
emphasized that a voting member may create a constitutional
challenge, but the odds of a challenge are lessened if the position
is advisory or ex-officio. That is the balance necessary.
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN asked if there are examples of state
officials serving on decision-making bodies for municipalities.
MR. BRIGHAM pointed out that AMATS would be such due to the DOT and
DEC representatives.
MR. CUMMINGS pointed out that the difficulty is that this is an
executive branch organization not a municipal organization and is
much different than the Hawaii situation.
SENATOR DONLEY, sponsor of SB 135, Alaska State Legislature, noted
that the reason Alaska's MPO is in the executive branch is because
it has never been placed in statute. Hawaii's MPO is in statute
and therefore, is not an executive branch organization. Senator
Donley turned to his CS which would retain DEC as a voting member
and add one Senator and one Representative as in the original
legislation. He clarified that the Senator and Representative
would be voting members. Senator Donley recommended that the total
membership for AMATS be increased to nine members in order to
maintain a majority vote of the local community representatives.
Therefore, five members would come from the local area. This
recommendation addresses the concerns regarding regional interests.
Under the present structure of the board this is also of concern,
but there is a safeguard since any final plan from AMATS must
return to the full Anchorage Assembly for approval. That would
continue under the proposed structure.
SENATOR DONLEY said, in response to Chair Masek, the Anchorage
Assembly has not yet taken a position on this issue and the
Anchorage Assembly chair did not think the matter would be before
the assembly before the end of session.
CHAIR MASEK said she believed it to be unfair for the Anchorage
Assembly not to be able to review this legislation.
Number 1520
SENATOR DONLEY commented that the vote last year on this matter was
very close. He recognized that the new assembly members have not
had the opportunity to review the pros and cons of this issue. He
noted that the final version of last year's legislation was not
opposed by the Mayor of Anchorage who seemed rather receptive to
that final version. Furthermore, this legislation has been
available since the beginning of the year. Senator Donley stated
that the main concern of maintaining local control was accomplished
by the Senate version. Therefore, he recommended increasing the
number of local members to five in order to maintain local control.
CHAIR MASEK asked if consideration had been given to the time and
cost involved in having voting legislative members on the
organization. Why should the number of members be increased?
SENATOR DONLEY clarified that it is important to increase the
membership, if the DEC member is to be maintained as a voting
member. Senator Donley said that he did not feel it to be
necessary, but if the department desires such that is fine.
However, maintaining local control would necessitate increasing the
membership by one in order to ensure that the city has the majority
of votes. With regard to the issue of timing, Senator Donley
pointed out that difficulty is solved by the last section of the
legislation which specifies that the TIP will be prepared by
January 15. He noted that Mr. Horn, Regional Director of DOT, told
him there is no technical difficulty with that. It would be easy
to anticipate the STIP allocation for AMATS and develop a
contingency plan whereby the last item on the list would not be
funded if there were not enough funds.
CHAIR MASEK reiterated her question regarding the reasoning behind
increasing the membership. She inquired as to why this is being
pushed forward, if it will not be in effect and no difference will
be experienced. Furthermore, Chair Masek expressed concern that
everyone has not been allowed time to testify.
SENATOR DONLEY stressed that this legislation would take effect and
would not stop any ongoing project or project next year. This
legislation would require legislative involvement in the process
next year. He also stressed that the legislation includes an
important provision requiring the TIP be provided by January 15.
This would alleviate the difficulty in determining the capital
budget when the TIP comes out in April or May.
Number 1721
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH suggested that everything, but the last
paragraph of this legislation should be deleted. The only concern
heard has been in regard to the legislature not receiving the
report in a timely fashion which would be covered by deleting all
material, except the last paragraph.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON understood that the CS would have the MPO
consist of four public members, a Senate member, a House member,
and an appointee from the governor. Representative Hudson
indicated support of having an uneven number of members on a body.
Furthermore, the original bill did not call for approval from the
majority of the members of the governing body of each municipality.
The CS before the committee includes that provision. He understood
that provision to place the House and Senate members under the
approval of the majority vote of the members of the governing body.
Therefore, the municipalities would have a voice in the appointment
of the House and Senate members.
SENATOR DONLEY agreed that the CS before the committee, Version K,
does do that. He clarified that under the CS before the committee
the body would consist of four members serving on behalf of the
municipality, a DEC member, a DOT/PF member, and two legislators
with approval from the local government.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON noted that body consists of eight members and
therefore, increasing the local membership by one would achieve an
uneven number of members, nine. Representative Hudson inquired as
to Senator Donley's opinion of the provision requiring local
approval of the legislative members.
SENATOR DONLEY stated, speaking only to the CS, that he disagreed
with requiring local approval of the House and Senate members. The
legislative members would be chosen from their caucuses who should
choose who represents them on the committee. Senator Donley
commented, "Constitutionally, the ultimate responsibility is ours
and not with them."
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY noted that three members of the House
Transportation Committee are not from Anchorage. In response to
the earlier question regarding why this legislation is necessary,
he informed the committee that almost every community council
meeting he has attended has had an issue that the public wants the
legislature to solve. Representative Cowdery emphasized the need
for the legislature to have a voice in AMATS.
Number 1985
TIM ROGERS, Legislative Program Coordinator, Municipality of
Anchorage, noted that he has not seen the CS. In general, the
Mayor of Anchorage had no problem with the proposal last year. Mr.
Rogers did not believe the Mayor has any problem with this year's
proposal, in general.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO commented that there have been concerns in
his area regarding AMATS meetings and notification of those
meetings. He asked if Mr. Rogers' office is working on ways to
improve the AMATS process to be more open.
MR. ROGERS agreed that there are always ways to improve, but he did
not have any specific areas. Mr. Rogers concurred with Senator
Donley's concern regarding the timing of the AMATS process and
noted that is under review.
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN said, in response to Representative Cowdery,
that he has been very involved in the community council arena.
Representative Kemplen served on the board of the Fairview
Community Council as well as being its Vice President and President
for a number of years. Furthermore, he stated that he is very
familiar with the municipal process with regard to the capital
budget improvements as well as the manner in which the
administration involves the community councils in developing their
projects. Representative Kemplen emphasized that the process does
work. For example, the street improvements in the Fairview
neighborhood result from the community council's participation in
the AMATS process. He acknowledged that AMATS is a bit
complicated, but it does work for community councils.
REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS stressed that although this may work for
Representative Kemplen's community council, it does not work for
Representative Sander's community council. The difficulty is not
solving a problem, but rather receiving information. The public
feels "something is going on" because the public does not know when
there are meetings. Representative Sanders commented that he has
been told to send those constituents to the meeting, but he doesn't
know the time, place, or subject of the meeting.
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY said that he appreciated Representative
Kemplen's comments, but pointed out that downtown Anchorage has all
the roads and such. However, the outlying areas do not. This
legislation is much needed for the overall area of Anchorage.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH commented that would be the same argument he
would use when comparing rural Alaska to Anchorage. Representative
Kookesh deferred to the wishes of the Anchorage members.
CHAIR MASEK informed the committee that it has before it a motion
to adopt a CS, Version K.
Number 2278
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON moved to withdraw his motion to adopt the CS,
labeled LS0785\K, Utermohle, 5/16/99. There being no objection,
the motion was withdrawn.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON moved to adopt the CS, labeled LS0785\M,
Utermohle, 5/17/99, as the working document before the committee.
He requested unanimous consent.
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN objected. From the discussion,
Representative Kemplen surmised that there appears to be some
disagreement with regard to how best to proceed. He pointed out
that there is no immediacy with this issue. Representative Kemplen
suggested that the committee form a subcommittee to review the
subject in more detail in order to develop a compromise to formally
present to the committee. Representative Kemplen withdrew his
objection.
SENATOR DONLEY explained that the CS, Version M, would restore the
DEC member to voting status which eliminates the argument
supporting the need for a fiscal note. Version M proposes eight
members, but Senator Donley suggested that the CS be amended to add
one more public member which would bring the total local membership
to five; thus, maintaining a majority of local votes.
CHAIR MASEK clarified for the committee that there being no
objection, Version M was before the committee.
Number 2471
TOM CHAPPLE, Director, Division of Air & Water Quality, Department
of Environmental Conservation, explained DEC's role on the
committee. The department must develop an air quality plan for the
state as well as Anchorage. A transportation plan is also
developed. The air quality plan and the transportation plan must
work hand-in-hand which is why DEC is involved in this committee.
He noted that the department had submitted a fiscal note.
TAPE 99-21 , SIDE B
MR. CHAPPLE clarified that Version M which restores the DEC
member's voting status eliminates the premise for the previously
submitted fiscal note.
Number 0020
MR. POSHARD commented that a total membership of eight, as
specified in Version M, is not workable. Generally, a committee
consists of an odd number of members. Mr. Poshard indicated that
DOT/PF would maintain its objection to the legislation; this is not
necessarily the manner in which to resolve the problems that have
been mentioned. Subsection (b) which specifies the date of receipt
of the report, may be helpful. Furthermore, making the legislative
members nonvoting members may alleviate the constitutional
concerns. Therefore, the department would probably withdraw its
objection to having legislators as members of a policy council. He
reiterated that the department did not oppose last year's SB 259
which merely added two nonvoting legislators. Mr. Poshard
specified that subsection (a) is the main objection.
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY understood Mr. Poshard to recognize that
there is a problem with the current system. He asked if Mr.
Poshard had a better solution for the local communities.
MR. POSHARD clarified that he was referring to the problems
discussed throughout the legislative committee process. The
concerns expressed by the House Transportation Committee are not
that different from those expressed throughout the process. The
two recurring points seem to be that the TIP is provided too late
to be of help in preparing the capital budget and that there is a
lack of communication between the policy council and the
legislature. Mr. Poshard believed that adding a nonvoting member
would improve communication and alleviate constitutional concerns
as well as timing constraints with the meetings during session.
Furthermore, subsection (b) which requires the TIP be submitted by
January 15 may alleviate the TIP problem.
Number 0156
REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY emphasized that the main problem has been
the local community council which feels frustrated with the
situation. They come to legislators for solutions and the
legislators can only refer them to others. This legislation
attempts to provide those folks with a voice in the process.
MR. POSHARD said that he did not know whether adding two voting
members would be any different than adding two nonvoting members,
in terms of the legislators affect on the process. The process
will remain the same in terms of the project development in
Anchorage.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH commented that it may be problematic to have
a legislative member sit on two bodies. He indicated the need to
address the legality question. Having nonvoting legislative
members would provide a dialogue between the legislative and
municipal branches which could resolve the problem. Representative
Kookesh believed that there should be more specific language with
regard to how the legislative member will be chosen. Perhaps, it
would be better for the Speaker of the House of Representatives and
the President of the Senate to choose their respective member for
the committee.
Number 0281
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON posed the following changes. He suggested
changing the total membership of the MPO from eight to five. Of
that five, he suggested that three be voting members designated by
the municipalities within the area. One voting member would be the
commissioner of DEC and one member would be appointed by the
governor. The legislative members, one from the House and one from
the Senate, would be ex-officio members. Subsection (b) would
remain. Therefore, there would be a small committee which would
have dominate membership from the municipality. The inclusion of
the DEC commission as a voting member would eliminate the fiscal
note and address the water and air quality concerns. The
ex-officio legislative members would alleviate the separation of
powers concerns.
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO stated that although the legislative members
are nonvoting members, the ultimate vote remains through
appropriations by the legislature as a whole. Representative
Halcro believed that Representative Hudson had a good idea.
SENATOR DONLEY said that the Senate would prefer that the
legislative members be voting members, but this would be better
than the current situation. Furthermore, the TIP deadline would
remain which is very important. He suggested that the legislative
members could be referred to as nonvoting members versus ex-officio
members.
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN commented that it seems to be a workable
compromise.
Number 0514
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON moved, after discussion and recommendations,
to adopt the following amendment, labeled Amendment 1, to Version
M:
Page 1, line 8
Delete "eight voting"
Insert "seven"
Page 1, line 8
Delete "Four"
Insert "Three"
Page 1, line 11, following "designee,"
Insert "one voting member appointed by the
governor,"
Page 1, line 11
Delete "three voting"
Insert " two nonvoting"
Page 2
Delete line 10
REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO asked if the committee wanted to specify who
would appoint the member from the House and the Senate.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON and CHAIR MASEK indicated the need to leave
the language as it is.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON moved that the committee adopt the
aforementioned amendment. He requested unanimous consent.
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN asked whether the language referring to the
member appointed by the governor should be more specific. He
wondered if the language should instead refer to the governor's
appointee as the commissioner of DOT/PF. The committee was of the
consensus that being more specific was not necessary.
Therefore, there being no objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
Number 0836
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON moved to report HCS CSSB 135, labeled
LS0785\M, Utermohle, 5/17/99, as amended out of committee with
individual recommendations and the zero fiscal notes. He requested
unanimous consent. There being no objection, HCS CSSB 135(TRA) was
reported from committee.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Transportation Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 11:48
a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|