Legislature(2005 - 2006)BUTROVICH 205
02/07/2006 08:30 AM Senate JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Confirmation Hearing: Public Defender – Quinlan Steiner | |
| Confirmation Hearing: Select Committee on Legislative Ethics – Dennis “skip” Cook | |
| Confirmation Hearing: Select Committee on Legislative Ethics – Lindsey Holmes | |
| Confirmation Hearing: Select Committee on Legislative Ethics – Herman G. Walker, Jr. | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
February 7, 2006
8:47 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Ralph Seekins, Chair
Senator Charlie Huggins, Vice Chair
Senator Gene Therriault
Senator Hollis French
Senator Gretchen Guess
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
Confirmation Hearings:
Public Defender
Quinlan Steiner
CONFIRMATION ADVANCED
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
Dennis "Skip" Cook
Lindsey Holmes
Herman G. Walker, Jr.
CONFIRMATIONS ADVANCED
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
None to report
WITNESS REGISTER
Mr. Quinlan Steiner
No address provided
POSITION STATEMENT: Confirmation Candidate
Mr. Dennis "Skip" Cook
No address provided
POSITION STATEMENT: Confirmation Candidate
Ms. Lindsey Holmes
No address provided
POSITION STATEMENT: Confirmation Candidate
Mr. Herman G. Walker, Jr.
No address provided
POSITION STATEMENT: Confirmation Candidate
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS called the Senate Judiciary Standing
Committee meeting to order at 8:47:45 AM. Present were Senators
Hollis French, Gene Therriault, Gretchen Guess, Charlie Huggins,
and Chair Ralph Seekins.
^Confirmation Hearing: Public Defender - Quinlan Steiner
Confirmation Hearing: Public Defender - Quinlan Steiner
8:48:13 AM
Chair Ralph Seekins welcomed Mr. Quinlan Steiner and asked him
to introduce himself and to describe his background and
qualifications for the position that he is seeking.
MR. QUINLAN STEINER, governor's appointee for public defender,
noted he was raised in Alaska, graduated college at Seattle
University, and graduated from law school at Lewis and Clark
College in 1998. Prior to law school he volunteered at the
public defender agency. During law school he worked as an intern
at the public defender agency and after law school moved to
fulltime. He said he moved quickly into appeals where he has
been working ever since. During that time, he has conducted
trials, misdemeanor felony, and handled a traveling calendar for
St. Paul Island. As an appellate attorney, he has handled
everything from misdemeanors to complicated, unclassified felony
cases.
8:50:34 AM
The public defender agency has 13 offices statewide and
approximately 80 attorneys. They handle appointed cases for
indigent clients in criminal matters, child in need of aide
matters, as well as juvenile delinquent proceedings and mental
health commitment proceedings. One challenge that the agency
faces is meeting constitutional obligations due to lack of
resources in the budget. He offered to answer questions.
8:50:59 AM
SENATOR GRETCHEN GUESS asked Mr. Steiner to speak about the
management challenges in the agency.
MR. STEINER noted the biggest challenge is management of
information, particularly with ensuring that they are providing
the level of service they are constitutionally obligated to
provide. He changed the management structure to ensure he has a
close view of what is actually going on in the agency. He put
supervisors in charge of the entire caseload under them,
including the caseload of the attorneys who work for them. He
increased the training and currently is attempting to implement
an information database management system.
8:52:15 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Mr. Steiner the challenges the agency has
experienced retaining attorneys.
MR. STEINER said the agency loses a lot of lawyers in the first
five years. After five years, attorneys tend to stay for the
long run. A big driver is salaries and workload. The salaries
are below what the public sector pays and the workload tends to
be significantly higher.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked for a comparison of salaries.
MR. STEINER said the starting salary for an attorney is
generally $45,000. In comparison, starting salary for the
private sector attorney is between $55-75,000.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Mr. Steiner to describe a typical applicant.
8:54:12 AM
MR. STEINER noted that person would be fresh out of law school.
The agency does have more training to offer than in the private
sector, as well as experience. He is currently trying to expand
the training program to increase the quality level of
applicants. An entry-level lawyer could try as many as a dozen
misdemeanor cases the first year.
SENATOR CHARLIE HUGGINS asked Mr. Steiner whether he felt he
would be at a disadvantage in his position due to lack of recent
trial experience.
MR. STEINER responded he worked primarily in appeals where he
spent all of his time reviewing what trial attorneys do and
making judgments about the issues and the judicial decisions at
the trial level. He has appointed a deputy public defender that
has a tremendous amount of trial experience to manage the
supervisors of each office to compensate for his lack of trial
experience.
8:56:08 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS said he has heard prosecutors proclaim that they
work harder than public defenders. He asked for a response.
MR. STEINER opined that prosecutors have a tough job and
defenders have a different job. Public defenders spend a lot of
time with their clients, which is a time-consuming process as
the system is not easy for the average client to understand.
SENATOR HOLLIS FRENCH asked Mr. Steiner to describe his
relationship with prosecutors in Alaska and to describe his role
in management conflict between the two agencies.
8:58:22 AM
MR. STEINER said he met with [Deputy Attorney General] Susan
Parkes and [District Attorney] Bob Linton to facilitate a
relationship. Both agencies work hard to do a good job for the
State of Alaska and the mission for both is important. He said
he tries to facilitate that idea on a management level.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked what it would take to handle the workload of
the public defender agency.
MR. STEINER said more resources in the form of attorneys,
support staff, investigators and paralegals.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked the amount of employees, other than
attorneys, that the agency employs.
MR. STEINER said 60.
9:01:56 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked the process he went through to be appointed
to the position.
MR. STEINER informed the committee that he sent an application
to the Alaska Judicial Council (AJC), which was followed by a
bar poll. The results were forwarded to the AJC, where he had an
interview. His name was passed to Governor Frank Murkowski and
he interviewed with the head of the Department of
Administration. He was appointed following the interview.
SENATOR GENE THERRIAULT asked him to clarify the teaching he
listed on his resume.
MR. STEINER said he taught specifically on criminal procedure,
which encompassed the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the
Constitution of the United States.
9:03:04 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS announced that the committee has concluded the
interview. He voiced support for getting public defender case-
management under control.
CHAIR SEEKINS announced a brief recess at 9:03:52 AM.
^Confirmation Hearing: Select Committee on Legislative Ethics -
Dennis "Skip" Cook
Confirmation Hearing: Select Committee on Legislative Ethics -
Dennis "Skip" Cook
9:08:44 AM
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS asked Mr. Skip Cook to describe his
background and the reason he desires to hold the position on the
Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
MR. DENNIS "SKIP" COOK said he was born and raised in Fairbanks,
Alaska and has lived there all his life except for time spent
away at school. He attended MIT and Northwestern University. He
came back to Alaska in 1963 and managed the mandatory borough
election. He moved to Juneau and worked as director of the local
affairs agency, assisting boroughs and municipalities. He then
went back to Fairbanks to manage the Centennial Expedition in
1967 and then went to law school. He moved back to Fairbanks in
1970 and has practiced law since then.
9:11:22 AM
He was appointed to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics
in 1997 or 1998 and has served since then. There has been much
turnover on the Committee and so the main reason he aspires to
continue serving is to establish continuity. He enjoys the work,
the statutes are complex, and the questions that come before the
Committee are interesting.
The primary purpose of the Committee is one of education. Much
of the work is offering informal advise to legislators and
legislative employees as to how the code has been interpreted to
apply. The advisory opinions are more formal where they offer
advise in advance of a situation and then there are the cases
where the Committee is called upon to adjudicate a complaint.
He said the Legislature was wise to establish the Committee and
to establish it with such a diversity of people.
9:13:40 AM
Mr. Cook offered to continue serving on the Select Committee on
Legislative Ethics.
SENATOR CHARLIE HUGGINS asked Mr. Cook to give an overview of
how he came to be on the Committee.
MR. COOK said he got a call from Chief Justice Matthews who
described the Committee. He expressed an interest and that was
it.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked whether he knew the Chief Justice prior to
the phone call.
MR. COOK said yes, but not well.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked his feelings about diversity of the
Committee.
MR. COOK said during his experience they have always had a
diverse group.
9:15:35 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS asked the number one challenge of the Committee.
MR. COOK said it was trying to deal with a law that has complex
language and ambiguity. Over the years, the statute has been
difficult.
SENATOR GENE THERRIAULT asked Mr. Cook whether his involvement
with the Rotary Club was coming to a close.
MR. COOK admitted he has been on the road a lot lately but is
back and does not plan to travel much for a while.
9:17:18 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Mr. Cook to explain what makes the statute
so complex.
MR. COOK said conceptual and definitional questions that were
undefined in statute have been difficult to work with. Some have
since been defined by amendments in legislation and that has
helped. At times the Committee has had to define things and take
a position, which sets a precedent.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked whether a definition by the Committee has a
force of law.
MR. COOK said it would have a force of precedent.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked whether the statute is as easy to follow as
a flowchart.
Mr. Cook responded that they have developed some good flowchart
illustrations, such as how a hearing process works.
9:20:05 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Mr. Cook to describe the training a member
would receive.
MR. COOK said the staff generally trains Committee members.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked him to describe the normal complaint
process.
MR. COOK explained first committee members are notified of the
complaint and that they need to meet. They first decide whether
there is probable cause and a violation of the Ethics Code. If
so, they proceed to the investigative phase and give notice to
the person whom the complaint was lodged against. Next would be
the discovery phase and then the hearing.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked whether there would be a finding of probable
cause prior to the investigation.
MR. COOK said there could be a limited investigation if facts
determine whether there is probable cause.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked whether the Committee is required to
maintain confidentiality.
MR. COOK said yes, mandated by statute.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Mr. Cook to identify all of the persons
required to maintain confidentiality.
MR. COOK admitted that has been unclear. The complaint starts a
file in the Legislative Ethics Office and is confidential. The
statute is not clear on whether the complainant must keep the
complaint confidential.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked whether an informal opinion would have a
binding effect on the person that asked for one.
MR. COOK said no. Normally when a person asks for an informal
opinion they receive informal advise and it provides protection
since they did ask.
9:27:17 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS noted AS 24.60.170(l) says "...except to the
extent that the confidentiality provisions are waived by the
subject of the complaint, the person filing a complaint shall
keep confidential the fact that the person has filed a complaint
under this section as well as the contents of the complaint
filed."
MR. COOK said that was recently changed.
CHAIR SEEKINS asserted current law says the person filing the
complaint must retain confidentiality.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked Mr. Cook to describe the discussions
the Committee has had in regards to the issue of confidentiality
by the complainant. He further asked whether the Committee has
discussed how to prevent themselves from being used as a
political tool.
9:29:30 AM
MR. COOK admitted that is a problem in the sense that the
Committee can't sustain being bombarded with complaints of a
strictly political nature. It is a fairly complex process to go
through the complaint-to-decision procedure but the Committee
must recognize a person's right of free speech.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked the percentage of complaints filed with no
merit to proceed forward.
MR. COOK responded twenty five percent.
9:32:09 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked whether there should be a penalty when a
complainant violates the ethics law.
MR. COOK said the penalty would be up to the Legislature.
9:34:38 AM
SENATOR GRETCHEN GUESS asked Mr. Cook to clarify the difference
between the percentage of claims with no merit and those that
are politically motivated.
MR. COOK said many times people bring a complaint where they
believe a violation occurred but it actually hasn't.
SENATOR GUESS asked whether a legislator could ask the Committee
to investigate an accusation for the purpose of clearing their
name.
MR. COOK said they could request an advisory committee.
9:36:36 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS asked the point where the information becomes
non-confidential.
MR. COOK said the subject could waive confidentiality and
dismissals are also public. Other than that, the point is at
"probable cause."
SENATOR HUGGINS asked the length of time it takes for a
complaint to reach the public process.
MR. COOK responded many things affect that, including whether or
not the committee has a quorum. Campaign periods affect when the
Committee can accept complaints. It is sometimes difficult to
get members together and it is a complex matter to get the
process started.
9:40:05 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS asked whether he thought a period of
confidentiality was unreasonable.
MR. COOK said no, but if the statute were read that a person
couldn't say a word to anyone without having the complaint
thrown out, it would be hard to imagine that any person wouldn't
mention the issue to another. He speculated that confidentiality
could be carried too far.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked whether he would be more comfortable if the
statute said, "...knowingly and intentionally publicly disclosed
or caused to be publicly disclosed..."
MR. COOK said it would be hard to imagine a person not
mentioning the issue to anyone.
9:43:45 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS said his intent was that public disclosure should
not be allowed.
MR. COOK said the Committee was very troubled by the case that
was cited on television because it was very public and very
political.
9:45:41 AM
SENATOR HOLLIS FRENCH reminded the members of the First
Amendment and its powerful history with unanimous US Supreme
Court rulings with respect to the degree of protection that
public officials can expect once they take office. He also
voiced support for Mr. Cook.
CHAIR SEEKINS noted the administrative ethics code is easier to
follow than the legislative ethics code.
MR. COOK agreed.
9:48:25 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked the basis and reason the Committee would
spend additional money to hire an attorney to provide a legal
opinion.
MR. COOK advised members the Committee has previously sought
advice from legislative affairs and then determined there was a
conflict for adjudicated proceedings. The primary duty of
legislative staff attorneys is to advise the legislators, which
would create a conflict with the Committee's duties (if they
were advised by the same attorney) and so outside counsel would
be sought.
SENATOR GUESS asked Mr. Cook how Committee members have dealt
with conflicts of interest and asked whether there were
guidelines to follow.
MR. COOK reported he could not remember a time while on the
Committee that he had to recuse himself because he knew the
subject of complaint. There have been times when Committee
members have had to recuse themselves of a case due to the
subject matter.
9:53:29 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked him whether he has ever been on the opposite
legal side from people that he knew.
MR. COOK said yes.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked the two things that would make the process
more effective and heighten the confidence level of the people
of Alaska.
MR. COOK suggested a major re-write of the statute so that it is
more understandable. Another thing would be to find a way to let
people know that the Committee is there for public educational
use.
9:56:44 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Mr. Cook whether there was a penalty for
making a Bar complaint public.
MR. COOK said he did not know.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked whether the Alaska Supreme Court gets
involved in the Bar rules.
MR. COOK said he thinks so.
CHAIR SEEKINS announced a brief recess at 10:02:04 AM.
^Confirmation Hearing: Select Committee on Legislative Ethics -
Lindsey Holmes
Confirmation Hearing: Select Committee on Legislative Ethics -
Lindsey Holmes
10:05:21 AM
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS announced the next candidate for
confirmation. He asked Ms. Lindsay Holmes to give a brief
description of her background and the reason she desires to
serve on the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
MS. LINDSEY HOLMES introduced herself and testified that she was
born and raised in Anchorage and i a lifelong Alaskan. She went
to law school at the University of Chicago and then accepted a
clerkship at the Alaska Supreme Court. Following that she worked
in private law practice for a few years in real estate and
energy law. She is currently working in a project management
firm and is not practicing law.
MS. HOLMES said her interest in the Committee goes back to
parental influence. Her mother was one of the original members
of the Public Office Commission. She was raised with a strong
sense of belonging in the community and being involved in the
community and government. She further noted her belief that it
is for the good of the public to have a clear set of rules and a
solid committee to help people interpret those rules.
10:07:58 AM
SENATOR CHARLIE HUGGINS asked her to describe the process for
getting appointed to the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
MS. HOLMES said she received a call at home from Chief Justice
Bryner a month ago. He told her about the Committee and asked
whether she would serve. She agreed to be appointed and then
submitted a resume and disclosure forms.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked Ms. Holmes how she knew the Chief Justice.
MS. HOLMES said she knew him professionally and also went to
school with his children.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked her opinion of how an average person would
be appointed to the Committee.
MS. HOLMES explained that the Committee offers a link on their
website with detailed instructions on how to apply. The
Committee also solicits applications and letters of interest.
10:10:45 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS expressed an interest in the Committee having
diversity and equal opportunity.
SENATOR GRETCHEN GUESS noted she gives links and information to
her constituents via her website. She asserted it was one of the
many roles as a legislator to inform constituents of a wide
variety of boards and community involvement opportunities. She
also noted for the record that Ms. Holmes' mother and her own
mother were friends.
SENATOR GENE THERRIAULT asked Ms. Holmes to speak about her
involvement with the Nature Conservancy.
MS. HOLMES said she has been a member of the board of trustees
for two years with the local Alaska chapter. She said it is an
interesting group with diverse interests. They look at
biodiversity and the best way to balance development and
conservation.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked Ms. Holmes to elaborate on the stocks
and bonds she listed in her disclosure statement.
MS. HOLMES advised the committee that her great-grandmother left
her several stocks and bonds.
SENATOR THERRIAULT noted both British Petroleum and Exxon were
in the portfolio. He asked her how the Select Committee on
Legislative Ethics would evaluate a legislator with the same
portfolio voting for a bill that was related to oil production.
MS. HOLMES said she could not say at this point. It would depend
on the rules and the amount owned.
10:16:16 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked whether she thought there should be a
penalty for anyone who knowingly and intentionally violates the
ethics code.
MS. HOLMES reported yes.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked whether she thought there should be a
penalty for anyone who knowingly and intentionally violates the
ethics code even if that person is the one who filed the
complaint.
MS. HOLMES admitted she was new to the issue and was hesitant to
make a judgment without having heard the entire complaint.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked whether dismissing the complaint would be a
meaningful penalty.
MS. HOLMES said she thinks so given the way the law is written
currently and the points brought up by Mr. Dennis Cook. At this
point it is unclear as to what the term "breaking
confidentiality" means.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked whether she would feel more comfortably with
the law if it were written, "...knowingly and intentionally
publicly disclosing or causing to be publicly disclosed..."
MS. HOLMES said yes.
10:19:53 AM
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked whether she was currently practicing
law.
MS. HOLMES said no. However, she is still a licensed member of
the Alaska Bar.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked the reason she was no longer practicing
law.
MS. HOLMES said she was offered an opportunity with Rise Alaska,
which is a project management and consulting company that runs
contracts.
10:21:39 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS announced the conclusion of the interview.
^Confirmation Hearing: Select Committee on Legislative Ethics -
Herman G. Walker, Jr.
Confirmation Hearing: Select Committee on Legislative Ethics -
Herman G. Walker, Jr.
10:22:17 AM
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS announced the next candidate for
confirmation. He asked Mr. Herman Walker, Jr. to give a brief
description of his background and the reason he desires to serve
on the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
MR. HERMAN WALKER, JR. testified he graduated from the
University of Wyoming and had heard wonderful stories about
Alaska from his roommate. He moved here with his wife in 1992
and started working as an intern for the Office of Public
Advocacy. Following that job he went into private practice
working as an associate with Rex Butler doing criminal defense
trial work. Following that job he went to work for the Public
Defender Agency. He currently owns The Body Shop located at the
th
5 Avenue mall. He is also working with his wife in their own
firm.
10:24:09 AM
SENATOR GRETCHEN GUESS asked Mr. Walker to describe the type of
law he currently practices.
MR. WALKER explained he is a trial attorney and is currently
doing personal injury work, tort litigation, criminal defense,
and business litigation.
SENATOR HOLLIS FRENCH advised for the record that he was a
prosecuting attorney during the same time that Mr. Walker was a
public defender. They have settled many cases out of court and
they also see each other socially on occasion.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked the amount of time he has been on the
Committee.
MR. WALKER said since 2001.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Mr. Walker whether the statute was easy to
follow.
MR. WALKER said no. It is quite complex.
10:26:14 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked him whether he was comfortable with the way
the statute reads in regards to confidentiality.
MR. WALKER related the statute was written with a lot of
ambiguity as far as disclosing. He would be more comfortable if
the definition of "public disclosure" were more clearly defined.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked whether he would feel more comfortable if
the statute read "...knowingly and intentionally publicly
disclosed or caused to be publicly disclosed..."
MR. WALKER responded the definition of "public disclosure"
should be put in the statutes.
10:28:49 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS referred to an interview in the Anchorage Daily
News in January 2005, which had to do with the Legislature
reappointing members of the Select Committee on Legislative
Ethics. In the article the columnist speculated that Mr. Walker
could be voted down in retribution for a certain opinion. The
columnist quoted Mr. Walker responded to the speculation by
saying, "It does not surprise me." He asked Mr. Walker to
explain his comment.
MR. WALKER said the comment was based on his experience with a
Committee member who came out against the Legislature and was
then removed.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Mr. Walker whether his comment might be
disruptive to his work on the Committee.
MR. WALKER said no. His follow-up to the comment was that he
would encourage anybody to accept a job with the Committee.
10:32:50 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS speculated that Mr. Walker was biased.
MR. WALKER maintained he is not biased.
CHAIR SEEKINS said there was concern that Mr. Walker believed
that the Legislature would remove someone through retribution
for voting one way or another on an issue.
MR. WALKER disagreed. He said his quote in the newspaper was in
response to observing what happened to another long-standing
Committee member. The action of the Legislature (removing the
one member) took every member of the Committee by surprise.
10:35:30 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS said he personally called Chief Justice Fabe and
explained the reason the Legislature voted not to reconfirm
Shirley McCoy.
MR. WALKER said his work on the Committee proves that he has no
bias or agenda.
CHAIR SEEKINS stated for the record he believes Mr. Walker to be
very fair.
SENATOR FRENCH echoed that sentiment and said it is his
observation that Mr. Walker, who has recently chaired the
Committee, is strictly unbiased.
10:37:17 AM
SENATOR CHARLIE HUGGINS asked Mr. Walker to explain what he
meant by the newspaper quote, "It does not surprise me."
MR. WALKER reiterated his earlier testimony. Further, he stated
that he is neither republican nor democratic.
10:40:01 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS advised Mr. Walker that part of the reason the
Legislature voted not to reconfirm Ms. McCoy was due to public
comments she made about members of the Legislature to the press.
MR. WALKER said his personal history proves that he becomes more
tactful with age.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Mr. Walker his interpretation of the mission
of the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
MR. WALKER said the statute details everything they do,
including advisory opinions and investigations into ethics
complaints.
10:43:16 AM
SENATOR FRENCH moved to forward the names of Dennis "Skip" Cook,
Lindsey Holmes, and Herman G. Walker, Jr. to the Senate
President for consideration during a joint session for
confirmations. Hearing no objections, the motion carried.
CHAIR SEEKINS advised the candidates that the motion of
forwarding their names to the Senate President does not reflect
how each member would vote on the confirmation.
10:44:02 AM
SENATOR THERRIAULT noted his wife is involved in the same law
firm as Dennis "Skip" Cook.
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Seekins adjourned the meeting at 10:45:52 AM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|