Legislature(2021 - 2022)
01/13/2022 02:00 PM Senate LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
JANUARY 13, 2022
2:00 PM
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Sara Hannan, Chair
Senator Lora Reinbold, Vice Chair
Representative Matt Claman
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative Neal Foster
Representative Louise Stutes
Representative Cathy Tilton
Representative Chris Tuck
Senator Click Bishop
Senator Peter Micciche
Senator Mike Shower
Senator Bert Stedman
Senator Gary Stevens
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Lyman Hoffman
Senator Shelley Hughes (alternate)
OTHER MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative DeLena Johnson
AGENDA
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COMMITTEE BUSINESS
COMMITTEE BUSINESS - EXECUTIVE SESSION
SPEAKER REGISTER
Jessica Geary, Executive Director, Legislative Affairs Agency
(LAA)
Dr. Tom Hennessy, Captain, US Public Health Service (retired)
2:05:25 PM
I. CALL TO ORDER
CHAIR HANNAN called the Legislative Council meeting to order
at 2:05pm in the House Finance Committee Room. Present at the
call were: Representatives Claman, Edgmon, Foster, Hannan,
Stutes, Tuck; Senators Bishop, Micciche, Reinbold, Shower,
Stedman, Stevens.
Members absent were Senators Hoffman, Hughes.
Twelve members present.
Representative Tilton joined the meeting at 2:08pm.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN moved that Legislative Council rescind
their actions in failing to approve the transfer of funds to
2022 session per diem that took place at the December 16,
2021, Legislative Council Meeting.
CHAIR HANNAN asked if members wanted to speak to the motion.
SENATOR REINBOLD asked that the motion be restated.
CHAIR HANNAN said the motion is to rescind the Council's
action that took place December 16, 2021 - specifically that
Legislative Council approve the transfer of one million, nine
hundred and ninety-five thousand dollars ($1,995,000) from
existing legislative capital funds to the legislative
operating budget salaries and allowances allocation for the
purpose of paying FY22 legislator session per diem, and
further move that Legislative Council support the restoration
of the governor's FY22 veto in a supplemental appropriation;
once approved the transfer will be reversed. She asked if
there was any discussion on the motion to rescind.
SENATE PRESIDENT MICCICHE asked the maker of the motion to
please explain the motion's impact.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN responded that the purpose of the
motion, considering the governor's veto of the legislature's
per diem for the 2022 session, would allow the legislature to
pay per diem to members now at the beginning of session and
would be reimbursed later in the year when the money is
appropriated.
CHAIR HANNAN noted that Representative Tilton joined the
meeting at 2:08pm. She asked if there was other discussion on
the motion to rescind action.
SENATOR SHOWER asked if this was specific to regular session
2022.
CHAIR HANNAN responded yes, the original motion that did not
pass was just regular session per diem.
SENATOR STEVENS said it makes sense to proceed this way. The
other option was to wait until a supplemental passed and the
Co-Chair of Senate Finance indicated that may not happen until
very late in the session. If so, then members would spend the
entire session without receiving per diem which he said was
unfair. He said this is an excellent motion and intended to
vote for it.
CHAIR HANNAN asked if members were ready for a vote on the
motion to rescind and clarified that a yes vote puts back
before the committee the main motion. She then requested a
roll call vote.
2:11:14 PM
A roll call vote was taken.
YEAS: Representatives Claman, Edgmon, Foster, Hannan, Stutes,
Tuck; Senators Bishop, Micciche, Reinbold, Shower, Stedman,
Stevens.
NAYS: Representative Tilton.
The motion to rescind passed 12-1.
CHAIR HANNAN restated the original motion and moved that
legislative council approve the transfer of one million, nine
hundred and ninety-five thousand dollars ($1,995,000) from
existing legislative capital funds to the legislative
operating budget salaries and allowances allocation for the
purpose of paying FY22 legislator session per diem. She
further moved that Legislative Council support the
restoration of the governor's FY22 veto in a supplemental
appropriation; once approved the transfer would be reversed.
She asked if there was discussion.
SENATOR SHOWER said he thinks per diem is a little high,
however the loss of income from his primary job during session
is concerning. This issue makes it difficult for many members
to serve and reinforces that per diem's purpose is to help
offset the cost. He said he supports this motion because he
supports a citizen legislature.
SENATOR STEDMAN said this year, the governor's veto was an
anomaly, there has always been an agreement over multiple
governors to let each branch run their own affairs. He said
we need to reconstitute the per diem and move forward with
the session. He also noted that it can be very hard
financially for some legislators, especially those with
families, to maintain a second household during session and
he was in favor of the motion.
REPRESENTATIVE TILTON said she agrees with the points made by
previous speakers about the financial impact to legislators
in Juneau for session but believes a better option is to
quickly pass the supplemental budget, which includes an
appropriation for session per diem. She said while she does
not necessarily agree with the fact that it was vetoed in the
first place she does not support this motion.
CHAIR HANNAN, in response to questions by Senator Reinbold
about the State Officers Compensation Committee report, said
the report had not yet been finalized and believed the
committee would meet again on Monday to vote on a final plan.
The Legislature has 60 days to act on the final report.
SENATOR REINBOLD said the executive and legislative branches
have become too entwined, that the Legislature is about two
percent of the overall budget, and while she agreed per diem
should be reduced, she supports this motion.
SENATOR STEVENS said just because they pass the motion, it
does not mean that everyone must apply for per diem. In the
past, there have been legislators who chose not to take per
diem because they were wealthy, did not need it, or maybe had
a moral objection to per diem. He said that everyone on
Legislative Council received per diem. It was something they
apply for and anyone who chose not to receive per diem will
not receive it.
CHAIR HANNAN clarified that not all members of Legislative
Council received per diem, herself being one of them. She
asked Jessica Geary if members had to apply for regular
session per diem.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GEARY said that during a regular session,
per diem was paid automatically, though members had the option
to reject per diem by issuing something in writing to the
accounting office.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN noted that the salary commission's
action would not go into effect until after the next election,
so it would not have any effect this year. He said he
supported getting per diem started.
2:24:02 PM
A roll call vote was taken.
YEAS: Representatives Claman, Edgmon, Foster, Stutes, Tuck;
Senators Bishop, Micciche, Shower, Stedman, Stevens,
Reinbold, Hannan.
Nays: Representative Tilton.
12 YEAS, 1 NAY.
The motion passed 12-1.
II. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
2:25:57 PM
SENATE PRESIDENT MICCICHE moved and asked unanimous consent
that the agenda be approved.
The agenda was approved.
III. COMMITTEE BUSINESS
A. Review of Legislative Council COVID-19 Mitigation Policy
and Related Matters
CHAIR HANNAN said the first item on the agenda was a review
of the COVID mitigation policy and related matters, that
Executive Director Geary was on hand for discussion of the
COVID mitigation policy, and Dr. Hennessey was available for
questions.
SENATOR SHOWER said there was an epidemiologist and a health
expert from Anchorage who had called in. He requested that
they be allowed, if there were questions to be answered so
there would be a broader perspective.
CHAIR HANNAN said they have vetted one doctor who had advised
them for the last two years on the development of their COVID-
19 protocols and they have continued that relationship with
Dr. Hennessey through his generosity to donate his time. She
asked if there was a question about the current mitigation
policy. She asked Senator Shower if he had a proposal to amend
it.
SENATOR SHOWER said there were several that were going to
come up, but he wanted to have the debate first and the
question he had was whether the efficacy of masks was useful
and what type of masks should be worn, social distancing, the
various shots, etc. He said he hoped to have a differing
perspective from the epidemiologist.
CHAIR HANNAN said it was not a debate over COVID-19 or state
policies, only policies that would affect the Capitol Complex
and workers, and they were not there to engage in executive
branch powers or agencies. If Senator Shower had a specific
action, wished to amend the policy, or had a specific question
to address he could raise it.
SENATOR STEVENS asked what the City of Juneau's requirement
was. He said he wanted to make sure they were following
current CBJ guidance.
CHAIR HANNAN said CBJ's policy was that with indoor public
settings people were masked.
SENATOR STEVENS said as part of the community, and the
legislature certainly appreciates the generosity of the
community of Juneau, he thought they needed to comply with
the rules they have established.
SENATE PRESIDENT MICCICHE said he wanted to remind the body
that Legislative Council was representing the legislature in
a building that was not subject to CBJ laws.
CHAIR HANNAN said she wanted to constrain the discussion to
the COVID mitigation policy. She asked if members wanted to
make a motion or had a question about the current mitigation
policy.
SENATOR REINBOLD said she had thirteen questions that she
emailed to Chair Hannan's office. She had sent a letter to
Dr. Zink about a month ago with thirteen critical questions
and they were directly related to the policy, and she wanted
to ask some here.
CHAIR HANNAN said they did not have the questions, Dr. Zink
was not with them, and reminded members that the questions
needed to be about the COVID mitigation policy, or she would
rule them out of order. The issue was exclusively on the
mitigation policy that Legislative Council oversaw. She asked
Senator Reinbold to ask her first question.
SENATOR REINBOLD asked several detailed COVID-19 related
questions that CHAIR HANNAN ruled out of order because they
were not related to the policy.
SENATOR REINBOLD asked how her questions were ruled out of
order.
CHAIR HANNAN said Senator Reinbold was asking for clinical
evidence. She asked if the Senator would like to rephrase her
questions so that it addressed their policy.
SENATOR REINBOLD said that if someone chose to wear a mask,
they should wear one, by requiring it, they need the clinical
evidence that they work and she believed in medical choice,
most of them either had COVID-19 or were vaccinated. She said
her point was it has been a masquerade and people did not
wear them in their offices or meetings, they pulled them down,
touched them, they were full of bacteria, they were not being
used like they were in surgical settings, etc. She said it
was ridiculous to require testing for people in the building
every four days, and not the public. She said it was illegal
to mandate something that was under emergency use and the
science was all over the place on masks. It would possibly
have all sorts of negative side effects. She moved that masks
be optional in the Capitol, in addition to testing.
CHAIR HANNAN asked Senator Reinbold if she wanted to rephrase
her comment as a motion.
SENATOR REINBOLD moved masks and testing would be available,
but optional.
SENATE PRESIDENT MICCICHE moved to separate the question.
CHAIR HANNAN asked Senator Reinbold if she was ok with the
separation of the question so that masks and testing were two
separate motions.
SENATE PRESIDENT MICCICHE, responding to a request for
explanation by Senator Reinbold, said he thought there was
different logic in different areas, and he wanted to discuss
the testing option at length, he has some points about
required cycle testing and he thought they are separate from
the mask issue.
SENATOR REINBOLD said she would prefer they were together,
but she knows they must go with the will of the body.
CHAIR HANNAN called a brief at ease to confirm parliamentary
procedure that the motion to separate was not a debatable
motion.
2:38:56 PM
A roll call vote was taken on Senator Micciche's motion to
amend.
YEAS: Representatives Claman, Edgmon, Foster, Stutes,
Tilton, Tuck, Hannan; Senators Bishop, Micciche, Shower,
Stedman, Stevens.
NAYS: Senator Reinbold
12 YEAS, 1 NAY.
The motion to amend passed 12-1.
SENATOR REINBOLD, at Chair Hannan's request, repeated her
motion that masks be optional in the COVID-19 mitigation
policy.
SPEAKER STUTES asked if the policy change affected only
legislators and staff in the building, or the public visiting
the building as well. She said if masking was optional for
legislators, staff, and the public in the building, what would
the purpose of the masks be then? She understood that masks
were to protect others and somewhat yourself, but if that's
a hit or miss, she was a little confused as to the benefit.
SENATOR STEVENS said this is not his area of expertise, so he
relies on what he learns from others. He said that recently
Dr. Jones in Kodiak shared how he always wore a mask in public
not for himself, but for other people because he is exposed
to the disease in his line of work; Dr. Jones said that people
should just grow up and wear masks to protect other people.
Senator Stevens thought that was a strong statement so he
would be in favor of continuing the mask policy, but would
like to hear from the epidemiologist, Dr. Hennessey, on the
issue of masks before a vote.
DR. TOM HENNESSEY said he agreed with the physician from
Kodiak, that there was strong evidence that masks provided
benefit and there was a strong scientific consensus that masks
helped prevent the transmission of COVID. They really worked
in two ways many people with COVID were asymptomatically
infected and could still spread the virus so putting a mask
on that person was a matter of source control; in medical
facilities they have people wear a mask so they do not spread
the virus inadvertently and so there was a value in preventing
the spread of it that way, and then for the wearer of the
mask in encountering somebody who may be infected, there was
a reduction in the risk of acquiring COVID for the mask
wearer. So, the best situation was really to have everyone
masked since about fifty percent of transmission of COVID
occurs from people who did not know that they had the
infection. Since that is the situation with influenza, they
knew that mask use could prevent the spread in those settings,
so he said that by making masks optional, it exposes the
legislature to increased risk of COVID transmission and
threatened transmission in an outbreak in their setting. He
said the most conservative approach would be to maintain the
mask requirement that was endorsed by public health,
scientific, and medical experts.
REPRESENTATIVE TILTON said there was also a CNN article that
said masks were basically a face decoration and not effective
with the Omicron virus. She said she hoped there was somebody
online who could give them another viewpoint. She said that
even with masking in the City and Borough of Juneau, even
with masking and a high level of vaccination, Juneau had a
high rate of the virus. So, if masking and vaccination had
worked, there should not be a high rate and if compared to
other areas, such as the area she is from where they did not
have any kind of mandatory masking or vaccination, they did
not have a high rate in comparison. That is why she supported
optional masking. She thought it should be a personal
responsibility. She requested that they look at that being an
option.
CHAIR HANNAN said that Juneau only restored an indoor masking
mandate on Monday of this week, well into the Omicron surge
that they were experiencing.
SENATOR REINBOLD asked Dr. Hennessey for all the clinical
data, types of masks, how to wear them, and proof of
asymptomatic transmissions. She asked for backup with
clinical research and site references.
CHAIR HANNAN ruled Senator Reinbold's question dilatory and
out of order since it did not pertain to their policy.
SENATOR SHOWER asked to hear from another expert who may have
called into the meeting.
CHAIR HANNAN said she would not allow witnesses she had not
previously spoken with or vetted.
SENATOR SHOWER said this was a one sided-debate and a
travesty.
CHAIR HANNAN said that Dr. Hennessey responded to a question,
that Senators Shower and Reinbold did not have to take his
advice. She said they adequately expressed their concern and
asked if there were other members who wanted to ask a specific
question of Dr. Hennessey about their policy.
SENATOR SHOWER referenced a pandemic response task force
chart and asked Dr. Hennessey if he would discuss types of
masks and the protection each provided. The legislature's
policy was for a cloth mask, which on this chart gave an
exposure time of twenty-seven minutes. He asked Dr. Hennessey
to comment on the federally produced chart that talked about
the types of masks that would protect them.
DR. HENNESSEY said these masks, as far as protection, is not
an "all or nothing," there was a reason why they had social
distancing with masking, vaccinations, hand washing as layers
of protection, which was not one hundred percent protective
all the time. Seatbelts, airbags, and brakes are layers of
protection, which could provide a better chance of surviving
a car crash. When it came to masks there were different
recommendations for quality of masks, a double layer of fabric
barriers was better than single layer of fabric barriers, N95
or respirators were better than double layered masks, in terms
of filtration and prevention of virus leaving a person's face
area or someone inhaling it. However, some people were unable
to wear the N95 masks and sometimes they were not available.
Some people had respiratory problems and it would not be
appropriate to wear those masks. That is why there was a range
of options recommended by CDC about types of masks and he
believed the policies do reference those. An N95 mask would
provide better protection than a double layer mask or a single
cotton layer of mask.
SENATOR SHOWER said that the CDC stated cloth-based coverings
to cloth-based coverings only provided twenty-seven minutes
of protection and they could get more time from N95 to a more
fitted mask that filtrated the particles to the appropriate
micron level. The CDC itself said that six feet inside of
those numbers then they were not protected, it can be spread
through the release around the mask because they were not
fitted. He asked if the cloth mask was enough as the chart
suggested it was not.
DR HENNESSEY said he could not provide a specific response to
that question because he was not familiar with the document
that Senator Shower referred to. He pointed out that
protection was not a matter of absolutes, he was not familiar
with the twenty-seven-minute timeline in terms of masks. He
said it was generally better for both individuals who were
interacting to be masked. Higher quality masks, such as N95s
are certainly better than cloth masks but cloth masks have
been established to provide a barrier for droplet spread and
to protect the individual wearer. He said there were levels
of protection, the least level was that nobody used a mask,
it would be better if both people used an N95 mask and have
been appropriately trained and fit to wear one.
SPEAKER STUTES said she thought she heard Dr. Hennessey say
that a mask or a vaccination was not an absolute, it was one
of the many things that were protective, not just one thing
is the "cure all," that a mask was a barrier and one of many
protective measures.
DR. HENNESSEY responded to Speaker Stutes and said that had
been the approach to mitigation and spread of COVID, there
was not one single thing that would absolutely protect
everyone all the time. The control and mitigation strategies,
which included the legislative policy was based on layers of
protection. So, the more layers in place lowered the chance
of legislators and staff becoming ill and missing out on the
vital business that they were charged with.
REPRESENTATIVE TILTON asked Dr. Hennessey if there was
anything that said that a mask had stopped the virus.
DR. HENNESSEY said that the virus is spread through
respiratory droplets, small droplets of liquid that are
transmitted when people speak or breathe and are caught up in
the mask material, which is a physical mechanism of control
of the spread of the virus from a person who is infected and
transmitting it. The Omicron virus is more transmissible due
to the fact that people spread more of the virus per particle,
but the size of the particle has not changed and the physical
dynamics of stopping a particle going beyond the mask was the
same as was for previous versions of the virus. A study done
by the CDC last year shows that masks can block fifty to
eighty percent of those respiratory droplets at the source of
the person wearing them. So that was the physical mechanism
behind it, to contain the respiratory droplets from a person
who might be infected and not know it, and then the other
side is to prevent those droplets from reaching somebody as
they inhale the air around that person. He said he believed,
as did the CDC, that there was good evidence that masks helped
prevent the transmission of COVID-19.
REPRESENTATIVE TILTON said that Dr. Hennessey could not point
to any kind of study that showed that masks have made a
significant difference in containing the virus, there was
belief that they did, but no supporting data.
DR. HENNESSEY said there were many publications that have
provided the evidence, both in the laboratory and in the real-
world setting, that showed that mask use has made a big
difference, particularly in a hospital setting where they
have lots of experience dealing with infectious patients
either with influenza or COVID-19 or tuberculosis all where
masks were important and used. Some of the earlier evidence
of COVID-19 came from hospitals that instituted mask policies
and maintained them uniformly throughout the nation so there
was really no question about the value of masks in preventing
transmission and there were many studies, in a laboratory,
real world, and real hospitals within the United States that
he would gladly provide with publications that showed the
evidence base surrounding masks.
REPRESENTATIVE TILTON said there were many studies that did
not support the outcome and that it was his opinion of whether
masks have significantly stopped the spread of the virus.
SENATE PRESIDENT MICCICHE said he would support voluntary
mask wearing but did not want to get into a battle of the
science. He explained that for him there is some hypocrisy
about where people who serve in the legislature wear masks.
He said he thinks everyone is doing their best to protect
others and themselves, but folks are attending outside events
unmasked, then coming in to wear a mask for a little while,
then going out together after work. He did not want to debate
the doctor because he thought there were some benefits to
wearing masks. He would vote for voluntary mask wearing
because of the way the legislature operates in Juneau. He
wanted to explain his vote and does not think that behavior
is going to change, therefore that reduces the effectiveness
of masks in the building.
CHAIR HANNAN called a brief at ease due to technical issues.
CHAIR HANNAN, noting that the technical issues meant there
was not a quorum to conduct business, said she would recess
to a call of the chair. In response to a question by Senator
Stevens, she confirmed that the current COVID policy remains
in effect. She said there was a time sensitive executive
session item for discussion and asked that staff of those
members who were unable to reconnect please advise their boss
of the plan to reconvene. With that, Chair Hannan recessed
the Council to a call of the chair.
3:21:16 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Current COVID-19 Mitigation Policy.pdf |
JLEC 1/13/2022 2:00:00 PM |
|
| Thomas Hennessy, M.D., M.P.H. Curriculum Vitae.pdf |
JLEC 1/13/2022 2:00:00 PM |
|
| Agenda--January 13 2022 Legislative Council Meeting.pdf |
JLEC 1/13/2022 2:00:00 PM |