ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE  LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL   SEPTEMBER 26, 2024  11:00 AM    MEMBERS PRESENT  Senator Elvi Gray-Jackson, Chair  Representative Kevin McCabe, Vice Chair  Senator Click Bishop  Senator Matt Claman  Senator Lyman Hoffman  Senator Jesse Kiehl  Senator Donny Olson  Senator Gary Stevens  Representative George Rauscher  Representative Dan Saddler  Representative Cathy Tilton    MEMBERS ABSENT  Senator Bert Stedman (alternate)  Representative Bryce Edgmon  Representative Sara Hannan  Representative Craig Johnson    OTHER MEMBERS PRESENT  Senator David Wilson  Representative Mike Cronk    AGENDA  APPROVAL OF AGENDA  APPROVAL OF MINUTES  CONTRACT APPROVALS  EXECUTIVE SESSION  COMMITTEE BUSINESS    SPEAKER REGISTER  Jessica Geary, Executive Director, Legislative Affairs  Agency (LAA)  JC Kestel, Procurement Officer, LAA  Shay Wilson, Chief Information Officer, LAA  John Wright, Manager, Print Shop, LAA  Rayme Vinson, Chief of Security, LAA  Emily Nauman, Director, Legal Services, LAA  Mindy Kissner, Finance Manager, LAA    I. CALL TO ORDER    11:04:13 AM  CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON called the Legislative Council meeting  to order in the Anchorage Legislative Information Office  Denali Room. Present at the call were: Senators Bishop,  Claman, Hoffman, Kiehl, Olson, Gray-Jackson;  Representatives Saddler, Tilton, McCabe.    Nine members present.    Senator Stevens joined at 11:05am.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON at 11:05am recognized Senator Wilson  joined online and Representative Cronk in the audience.    II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA    11:05:27 AM  VICE CHAIR MCCABE moved and asked unanimous consent that  Legislative Council approve the agenda as presented.    The motion passed without objection.    III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES    11:05:42 AM  VICE CHAIR MCCABE moved that Legislative Council approve  the minutes for the August 14, 2024, meeting as presented.    The motion passed without objection.    IV. CONTRACT APPROVALS  a. Kodiak Lease Extension Renewal No. 2    11:06:06 AM  VICE CHAIR MCCABE moved that the Legislative Council  approve Renewal No. 2 of the lease extension for Kodiak  office space in an amount of $70,396.44.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON objected for the purpose of discussion  and asked that JC Kestel, Procurement Officer, speak to  this item.    JC KESTEL, Procurement Officer, LAA, stated that in the  packet is a memorandum regarding a renewal of the lease  extension for the Kodiak office space, currently occupied  by Senator Stevens and Representative Stutes as well as a  Legislative Information Office. The current lease expires  on October 31, 2024; Renewal No. 2 is for a one-year term  and, if exercised, would leave three one-year renewal  options remaining. This lease agreement exceeds fifty  thousand dollars in one fiscal year; therefore, Legislative  Council approval is required.    There was no further discussion. Chair Gray-Jackson removed  her objection and asked for a roll call vote.    11:07:45 AM  YEAS: Senators Bishop, Claman, Hoffman, Kiehl, Olson,  Stevens, Gray-Jackson; Representatives Saddler, Tilton,  McCabe    NAYS: None    The motion passed 10-0.    b. Meraki License Five Year Renewal  11:08:48 AM  VICE CHAIR MCCABE moved that Legislative Council approve  the five-year Meraki license renewal for $72,604 from  existing funds.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON objected for purposes of discussion and  asked Shay Wilson, Chief Information Officer, to speak to  this item.    SHAY WILSON, Chief Information Officer, Legislative Affairs  Agency, stated before the Council members was a memo  regarding the Meraki 5-year licensing. Meraki are hardware  devices that control internet access to our branch offices,  including the LIO, Legislative Audit, OVR, and Ombudsman.  These devices also provide security and wireless access at  those locations. The total cost for the 5-year renewal is  $72,604 to be paid out of existing funds.    He continued that without this expenditure we would not be  able to provide the wide area network that connects all of  our separate locations together; we would not be able to  provide wireless access at those locations; and we would  lose some layers of internet security that protect the  LIOs.    In response to a question from Representative Saddler about  Meraki's performance to date and their ability to meet  their responsibilities for the next five years, Mr. Wilson  responded that Meraki is best of class for these services  and does a very good job; owned by Cisco, Meraki is a  stable company that Mr. Wilson is confident will remain in  business.    SENATOR OLSON followed up with a question regarding whether  there have been any security concerns in the past with  these devices. He further asked what locations these  devices provide wireless access points for. Mr. Wilson  clarified that these wireless access points were in  outlying LIOs and legislative offices and that there  haven't been security concerns specifically related to  these devices.    There was no further discussion. Chair Gray-Jackson removed  her objection and asked for a roll call vote.    YEAS: Senators Bishop, Claman, Hoffman, Kiehl, Olson,  Stevens, Gray-Jackson; Representatives Saddler, Tilton,  McCabe    NAYS: None    The motion passed 10-0.    c. Purchase of Four Palo Alto 1410 Firewalls    11:13:59 AM  VICE CHAIR MCCABE moved that Legislative Council approve  the purchase of four Palo Alto 1410 firewalls for $69,152  from existing funds.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON objected for purposes of discussion and  asked Shay Wilson, Chief Information Officer, to speak to  this item.    SHAY WILSON, Chief Information Officer, LAA, stated that  there was a memo in members packets regarding the purchase  of four Palo Alto 1410 devices. These are firewall devices  that will be installed to take the place of existing Palo  Alto 3410 devices currently installed in Juneau and  Anchorage. The replacement of the 3410 devices will  drastically reduce the year after year licensing cost.    These Palo Alto 1410 firewall devices provide VPN access,  firewall security, application identification and blocking,  as well as malware and network traffic inspection. The  purchase price of these devices is $69,152 and are to be  paid from existing capital funds.    There was no further discussion. Chair Gray-Jackson removed  her objection and asked for a roll call vote.    11:15:22 AM  YEAS: Senators Bishop, Claman, Hoffman, Kiehl, Olson,  Stevens, Gray-Jackson; Representatives Saddler, Tilton,  McCabe.    NAYS: None    The motion passed 10-0.    d. Print Shop Copier Add-On Request    11:15:56 AM  VICE CHAIR MCCABE moved that Legislative Council authorize  an increase of $2,900 for a document scanner attachment for  the new Print Shop copier from Boynton Office Systems by  amending the total authorized purchase to an amount not to  exceed $93,411.75.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON objected for purposes of discussion and  asked John Wright, Print Shop Manager, to speak to this  item.    JOHN WRIGHT, Print Shop Manager, LAA, stated he is speaking  to the recent acquisition of the Canon copier the Council  authorized in June. It was delivered and installed at the  beginning of the month. Just prior to the delivery of the  machine, the sales representative noticed that the machine  as ordered did not include a scanning device, where in the  past those have always come standard. Because of this  oversight, the sales representative reduced the price by  $700, from $3600 to $2900. The Print Shop depends on the  document scanner, especially during the legislative  session.    VICE CHAIR MCCABE clarified that this is for the scanner  that was approved two meetings ago because the printer we  had aged completely out and printed its lifetime number of  documents.    MR. WRIGHT confirmed that this was the case.    VICE CHAIR MCCABE recalled that this particular printer was  the less expensive of the bids received and was curious if  this would still be less expensive with the addition of the  scanner.    MR. WRIGHT responded that this is still less expensive, and  the other was a Xerox model which was priced at  approximately $160,000 and with the additional scanner puts  this at just about $93,000.    There was no further discussion. Chair Gray-Jackson asked  for a roll call vote.    11:19:54 AM  YEAS: Senators Bishop, Claman, Hoffman, Kiehl, Olson,  Stevens, Gray-Jackson Representatives Saddler, Tilton,  McCabe    NAYS: None    The motion passed 10-0.    V. EXECUTIVE SESSION  a. Security Update    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON said that Council would go into  Executive Session to receive a security update and security  staff salary review.    11:20:39 AM  VICE CHAIR MCCABE moved and asked unanimous consent that  the Legislative Council go into Executive Session under  Uniform Rule 22(B)(4), discussion of a matter the public  knowledge of which would adversely affect the security of  the state or nation, or adversely affect the security of a  governmental unit or agency and 22(B)(3), discussion of a  matter that may, by law, be required to be confidential.  The following individuals may remain in the room or online  during Executive Session: Jessica Geary, Sante Lesh, Rayme  Vinson, JC Kestel, Emily Nauman, Megan Wallace; Security  Subcommittee members Matt Simpson and Michaela Bradner; any  legislators not on Legislative Council, and any staff of  Legislative Council or Security Subcommittee members.    11:21:27 AM  A roll call vote was taken.    YEAS: Senators Bishop, Claman, Hoffman, Kiehl, Olson,  Stevens, Gray-Jackson Representatives Saddler, Tilton,  McCabe.    NAYS: None    The motion passed 10-0.    11:22:01 AM  Council went into Executive Session    12:44:45 PM  Council came out of Executive Session.    A roll call vote was taken to establish a quorum.    Present at the call were Senators Bishop, Claman, Kiehl,  Olson, Stevens, Gray-Jackson; Representatives Rauscher,  Saddler, Tilton, McCabe.    Ten members present.    b. Security Staff Salary Review    12:45:34 PM  VICE CHAIR MCCABE moved that Legislative Council approve  the creation of a flex position Uniformed Armed Security  Officer 1 through 3 and further moved that Legislative  Council approve a permanent transfer of $155,000 to  Legislative Security Services as outlined in the memo and  effective October 1, 2024.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON objected for purposes of discussion.  Recognizing the work of the Security Subcommittee on the  topic, inviting Rayme Vinson, Chief of Security, LAA, and  Jessica Geary, Executive Director, LAA, to provide an  overview and speak the topic.    JESSICA GEARY, Executive Director, LAA, said this issue was  brought before the Security Subcommittee to address the  recruitment and retention challenges of the Security  section. Their pay was not comparable to pay of other law  enforcement agencies and similar work, for which many of  Mr. Vinson's guards were leaving the Security section, that  had a higher level of pay. This motion would allow for the  creation of a flex position which created some movement  within the range. The current Armed Security Officer starts  at a range 16, this allows them to go up to a range 19  depending on prior training and certification.    Ms. Geary deferred further statements to Rayme Vinson,  Chief of Security, LAA.    RAYME VINSON, Chief of Security, LAA, stated that this  motion would bring the Security section of the LAA on par  with other employees in the Juneau area and make the  section more competitive in bringing in competent qualified  people. It also allows other applicants without prior law  enforcement experience to be able to learn, gain  experience, and continue in their career.    MS. GEARY stated the transfer would come from the  Legislative Council Chair budget, the Senate Operating  budget, and the House Operating budget, with a total of  $155,000 needed to increase these wages. This would be a  permanent transfer from those allocations into the Security  Services allocation.    SENATOR KIEHL commented his appreciation for the staff and  the members of the subcommittee in bringing this issue  forward. Further stating his support of this motion,  emphasizing the importance of having effective security  through placing a value on the pay, benefits, and training  opportunities for prospective applicants.    REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER, asked for clarification on if this  was going to establish an ongoing expense every year.  Understanding this first appropriation is going to be  coming from some lapsed money, what would the future  funding source will be and is this going to require an  increase in the total agency budget?    MS. GEARY stated that by identifying allocations with  highest estimated lapse, any kind of increase to the  legislature's budget can be avoided. Understanding that in  the future, it's hard to know how sustainable that is but  for now and the foreseeable future there isn't a need to  increase the legislatures overall budget to accomplish  this.    REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER followed up stating that he foresees  the issue of a long-term funding source for this to be  brought back before Legislative Council in the future.  Noting that he supports this measure, but that there may be  more work to come back to.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON commented that Ms. Geary and the  committee staff proposed the funding sources with careful  consideration after analyzing a 5-year average from the  different divisions. She thanked Ms. Geary and staff for  the creativity and intention in helping inform this motion  as it takes into consideration what will be needed now as  well as for the future.    There was no further discussion. Chair Gray-Jackson asked  for a roll call vote.    12:50:08 PM  YEAS: Senators Bishop, Claman, Kiehl, Olson, Stevens, Gray- Jackson; Representatives Rauscher, Saddler, Tilton, McCabe    NAYS: None    The motion passed 10-0      VI. COMMITTEE BUSINESS  a. Assembly Building Apartments Policy    12:50:53 PM  VICE CHAIR MCCABE moved that Legislative Council adopt the  Assembly Building Apartments Policy as amended.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON objected for purposes of discussion,  inviting Jessica Geary to speak to the topic.    JESSICA GEARY, Executive Director, LAA, stated that at the  last Legislative Council meeting she gave a brief update on  the first session of the Assembly Building Apartments  (ABA), including some positive feedback and some policy  changes that were being recommended in response to things  that came up this past session. Ms. Geary referred members  to a document titled Assembly Building Apartments Policy  Summary of Changes found in their packet, noting there  should be both a copy of the marked-up, red lined version  showing the changes, as well as a clean version of the  proposed updated policy.    MS. GEARY stated that the first change is simple: initially  in drafting the policy, it was unclear how many Americans  with Disability Act (ADA) compliant units there would be,  and this change confirms there are two (2) ADA units.    The next change pertains to the discovery that white linens  may not be reusable session after session. The proposed  change allows for tenants to choose previously used linens,  to bring their own linens, or to purchase a new set of  linens, a process comparable to many college dorms where a  nominal fee is paid for provided linens. The current  proposal is set at $100, though the fee could be any amount  to help offset the cost to replenish. Ms. Geary noted that  linens" are defined by anything that goes on or covers a  bed, pillows, bathmats, and towels.    Another change adds language to clarify that furnishings  cannot be removed or replaced without approval from the  property manager in consultation with the LAA. It was  discovered at the end of session that some tenants brought  in furniture of their own and removed some provided  furniture. Provided furniture is state property, which is  tagged and in the LAA inventory system. This change ensures  the LAA and property management can track state inventory  while allowing flexibility for tenants' furniture  preferences.    Ms. Geary said the next change is to clarify that a tenant  must be an employee of the legislature to be able to rent  at the ABA.    Ms. Geary outlined two changes in Section E. - Application,  Prioritization, and Apartment Assignment. The first change  adjusts the application window by two weeks and should  allow more time for applicants to know whether they get an  ABA unit, giving them time to seek another accommodation if  necessary. The second change narrows the window for an  applicant who is offered a unit to respond to property  management, reducing it from 48 hours to 24 hours to accept  or decline an offered unit.    The next item clarifies the prorating of rental rates  language to allow for tenants to move in any time in  January and occupy the unit through the end of May if there  is no immediate special session.    Under interim rental and rates section, the proposed change  removes the second session language to allow for legislator  tenants to remain in place indefinitely which saves time  and money.    Ms. Geary paused for questions or comments on this change  and recognized Senator Claman who said he thinks it's a  very good policy.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON announced that before moving onto  comments, she would like to make an amendment to this  policy and with discussion to follow.    12:55:30 PM  CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON moved that the Assembly Building  Apartments Policy as presented be amended to include  language that says, "11 studio apartments will be  designated for legislative staff."    DISCUSSION FOLLOWED between Chair Gray-Jackson, Senators  Olson, Claman, Bishop, Kiehl, Speaker Tilton,  Representative Saddler, Vice Chair McCabe and Director  Geary regarding: number of ABA units and types of units (a  mix of one bedrooms and studios); one purpose of the ABA as  lodging for special sessions primarily for legislators;  lack of affordable housing options for staff and the impact  to staff recruitment/retention; the possibility of the  Juneau Community Foundation purchasing additional housing  to be owned by the legislature and the impact to the  private sector; and concern that by setting aside ABA units  for staff, it implied the legislature was responsible for  providing staff housing.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON restated her motion to amend at  Representative Saddler's request, and then asked for a roll  call vote.    1:09:13 PM  YEAS: Senators Bishop, Olson, Stevens, Gray-Jackson    NAYS: Senators Kiehl, Claman; Representatives Rauscher,  Saddler, Tilton, McCabe    The motion failed 4-6.    1:10:55 PM  MS. GEARY continued through the remaining policy changes.    She detailed that the next set of changes adds key fobs to  the list of accountable property, clarifies that parking  spots are small and won't fit all vehicles, and changes the  language to "may" for time zone limits and parking fines to  allow for flexibility.    Ms. Geary said the next change added stronger language  about vaping in the units. She noted the policy already  forbids smoking and vaping but there was an apartment that  clearly had vaping residue and required a lot of extra  cleaning; this change clarifies that a tenant may be  charged for additional cleaning related to vaping.    SENATOR KIEHL asked if would it make sense to say here "any  evidence of vaping or smoking residue" since that also  might require expensive additional cleaning.    MS. GEARY, in response to a question by Senator Claman,  clarified that neither smoking nor vaping is currently  allowable; but because vaping is somewhat odorless it's  easier to sneak it whereas if somebody were smoking in  their apartment, they would set off a fire alarm and a  whole host of other things. Vaping leaves a very sticky  residue all over every surface so that was why smoking  wasn't included in the updated language. She concluded a  member could provide an amendment adding smoking if that  was desired.    SENATOR KIEHL responded that he has no expertise in  sneaking cigarettes into apartment buildings, but said he  believes it might help to include smoking in case there is  a need to recover costs from somebody who doesn't follow  the rules.    MS. GEARY asked for a brief at ease.    1:13:19 PM  Council took a brief at-ease.    1:13:56 PM  Council returned from a brief at-ease.    1:14:01 PM  SENATOR KIEHL moved that Legislative Council amend the  Assembly Building Apartments policy as presented to include  on page 4 of the policy the words "or smoking" so the  amended sentence would read: "any evidence of vaping or  smoking residue."    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON objected for purposes of discussion.  Seeing no discussion or questions, she asked for a roll  call vote.    SENATOR KIEHL, at the request of Senator Bishop, restated  the motion.    A roll call vote was taken on Senator Kiehl's amendment.    1:14:49 PM  YEAS: Senators Claman, Kiehl, Olson, Stevens, Gray-Jackson;  Representatives Rauscher, Saddler, Tilton, McCabe    NAYS: Senator Bishop    The motion passed 9-1.    1:15:40 PM  MS. GEARY continued, noting there were still a couple more  items to mention. She said while the lease already states  no open flames, she recommended adding the following  language to the policy: "for your safety and for those in  adjacent apartments no candles or open flames are  permitted; this change mirrors the lease language as  previously mentioned.    She said the next items are to add "recycling" to the list  of provided receptacles and to clarify that additional  required cleaning costs may be deducted from security  deposits. Finally, the very last item is language to notify  tenants that Legislative Security will be adding cameras in  the ABA parking garage.    MS. GEARY, in response to a question by Senator Bishop  about the dollar amount or scale of the additional cleaning  costs, said that a cleaning service is hired to ensure the  unit is suitable for the next tenant with the intent to  recoup that cost from the previous tenant. The dollar  amount, or scale, depends on who's available to do the  work. Additionally, she noted that a schedule of fees and  fines is being developed with the property manager so  tenants will know, as part of their lease agreement, of the  potential charges for which they would be responsible based  on the condition of the apartment at the end of the lease  term; that schedule was missing this last session. In  response to a follow-up from Senator Bishop, she confirmed  that it would be a fee for service.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON, there being no further discussion,  removed her objection and asked for a roll call vote.    1:18:02 PM  YEAS: Senators Bishop, Claman, Kiehl, Olson, Stevens, Gray- Jackson; Representatives Rauscher, Saddler, Tilton, McCabe    NAYS: None    The motion passed 10-0.    b. Capitol Visitor Policy    1:18:37 PM  VICE CHAIR MCCABE moved that Legislative Council adopt the  Capitol Visitor Policy as presented.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON objected for purposes of discussion and  invited Jessica Geary and Emily Nauman, Director,  Legislative Legal Services, to speak to the topic.    JESSICA GEARY, Executive Director, LAA, stated that the  need for this policy was due to an incident that occurred  this past session with some protestors who carried signs  into the Capitol, held them up, and were somewhat  disruptive during one of the committee hearings; and some  of the behaviors caused concerns for Legislative Security  Services, committee chairs, and the sergeant-t-arms.  Approval of this policy would allow for there to be some  guidelines on what types of signs members of the public can  bring into the Capitol.    Ms. Geary said that the policy limits the size of any sign  to no larger than 11x17 and which could not be affixed to a  pole; signs would have to be a handheld. This policy  doesn't contemplate what the sign could say, simply the  size of the sign and the method of carrying the sign. It  also authorizes Legislative Security to enforce a  prohibition on signs blocking the view of security cameras.  Another item this policy seeks to address are noise  complaints about members of the public coming through the  Capitol with a megaphone, being very loud and disruptive;  this policy would prohibit any noise in the Capitol that  disrupts legislative business. Ms. Geary concluded her  summary of the proposed policy, stating she was available  for questions and that Emily Nauman was also available for  questions pertaining to any legal ramifications.    DISCUSSION FOLLOWED regarding the sign size limit of 11x17.    MS. GEARY, in response to a question by Senator Kiehl about  what constitutes or defines a sign, asked for a brief at- ease to ensure she had a copy of the policy.    1:22:32 PM  Council took a brief at-ease.    1:22:47 PM  Council returned from brief at-ease.    1:22:50 PM  MS. GEARY cited the relevant section of the policy, which  states that visitors may …hand-carry a paper-based poster  board or placard type sign up to 11x17 inches[S]ignsmust  be handheld: no handles, sticks, supports, poles, posts, or  other item may be used to hold up signs.    SENATOR KIEHL responded he was looking specifically at  committee room restrictions, most of which are excellent  and which state there cannot be signs or banners of any  kind. He said he trusted that [in committee rooms] one  could wear a button or a t-shirt, but wondered if one could  paint something on the back of a jacket which could be  taken off and held up; he didn't think that would be  considered a sign. Senator Kiehl wanted to know the  boundaries of this policy; that he thinks a policy like  this is a good direction, but he needs to know what it  means.    MS. GEARY responded that Senator Kiehl's question may be  more within Ms. Nauman's area as Legislative Legal  organized the policy flow. She went on to say it was her  understanding the Signs section of the policy carried up  into the Committee Room Restrictions section, so she didn't  think there was a prohibition on holding up a jacket that  has been made into a sign. If such an example did come up  and Legislative Council wanted to address another change in  policy, such language could be added, but it was not  contemplated as the policy is currently written.    MS. GEARY, in response to a question by Representative  Rauscher, said that any preference to include in the policy  what types of language might be allowed was really a  question of how much the First Amendment should be  challenged; this policy, as presented, does not contemplate  that. She noted that in early drafts of this policy there  was a section prohibiting vulgar language on signs and that  language was taken out; she said Ms. Nauman could speak  more to this point.    EMILY NAUMAN, Legislative Legal Services Director, LAA,  said that as Executive Director Geary stated, Legal  Services reviewed the Visitor Policy for consistency with  the First Amendment and, to be clear, there was generally  no issue with the policy now, though there remains an issue  with enforcement of the policy. She said that in terms of  the First Amendment, the nut of the issue is that the  government can prohibit conduct, but it has to be on a  content neutral basis. For example, Legal Services removed  the prohibition on vulgar language because it can be  difficult to enforce that in a content neutral way. Another  example of an area that will be difficult to enforce  relates to the question of what is a sign?. Ms. Nauman  said she doubts Security was going to call Legal Services  every time there was an issue to ask if a given situation  was contemplated in the policy. She believed the policy was  clearly written which should allow for appropriate  application of enforcement. She continued that she hoped  Security, in enforcing this policy, considers what is  disruptive as that was the line the courts have drawn in  terms of the restrictions on conduct. She returned to the  example of holding up a t-shirt or jacket to say that she  hoped Security would consider whether the conduct was  disruptive as far as answering the question of whether it  counted as a sign in the policy's intent.    SENATOR CLAMAN commented on the question posed earlier by  Senator Kiehl regarding sign dimensions that it was his  understanding from Security Subcommittee discussions that  the goal of specifying the dimensions was to allow signs  but ensure they were not so large that they were a visual  obstruction and safety concern.    SENATOR BISHOP, regarding Senator Kiehl's example of  holding up a jacket, asked Ms. Nauman about legal standing  if, in a similar situation, the chair of a committee called  an at-ease or took a recess and called Security.    MS. NAUMAN responded that she would hope that the chair and  Security would aim to interpret this policy toward  disruptive behavior as that would be the most conservative  approach. She said certainly what disrupts a committee is  determined primarily by the chair and the committee members  so they can proceed in their business. She said as we're  all aware through other discussions in this committee that  there is a balance between people being able to speak to  their government in a way that's meaningful to them and be  heard versus impeding the work of the legislature.    REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said he had general observations  about this issue and commented that the First Amendment  right to expression is not an absolute right, the classic  example is that one cannot yell "fire" in a crowded  theater; there has to be a public safety consideration. He  said he agreed with Senator Claman's understanding and  supports limiting signs in legislative hallways to avoid  obstruction. He said people will push the limits of the  policy by lining several 11x17 signs together to create 2- foot by 3-foot signs and enforcement will have to rely on  discretion. He said there are many examples and anecdotes  of people interfering with legislative business with  noisemakers, shouting and chanting, and waving signs; he  continued that we have an obligation to conduct the  people's business without that kind of undue obstruction.  He said this is a very fraught issue. To the question of  whether we should try and police the language of the signs   no, we cannot do that. There are many settled First  Amendment cases that say people can put whatever vulgar,  profane, insulting, demeaning, provocative thing they want  and our job as legislators is to maintain decorum and  continue with our business regardless of what people might  say on their signs. He expressed concern about when  difficult actors push these limits and asked what  enforcement options are available; he wondered if Security  would be present to determine what is disruptive. He said  it will be difficult and anticipates that the policy may  need to be refined in the future but does applaud the  desire to maintain, through policy, some decorum for  legislative business.    VICE CHAIR MCCABE remarked that he had some concerns about  the policy taking away or limiting the ability of committee  chairs to run their committees in accordance with what they  see fit. He expressed that he would feel more comfortable  if there was explicit language stating that nothing in the  policy is intended to prevent committee chairs from  managing their committees in their committee rooms the way  they see fit.    MS. GEARY responded that there is language in the third  paragraph of this draft policy stating, "nothing in this  policy limits the authority of a presiding officer or chair  of a committee to maintain order in a chamber or gallery  during a floor session or a committee meeting." This does  allow some discretion of the presiding officers and the  committee chair.    VICE CHAIR MCCABE followed up to say he was hesitant that  prohibiting signs in a committee room or asking a  legislator not to wear a large button, as an example,  qualifies as maintaining order. That seems more about noise  and disruptions. In his perspective, it feels like this is  limiting a committee chair's ability to run their committee  as they see fit.    MS. NAUMAN, in response to the Chair's inquiry, said she  did not have any additional thoughts or comments to Vice  Chair McCabe's follow-up.    SENATOR BISHOP referred members to the third paragraph and  the foot note of the policy, which is marked by an asterisk  and cites Uniform Rule 3(c), stating that language should  suffice regarding Vice Chair McCabe's concerns and then  reading the footnote, which states "the chambers are  subject to the rules set forth by the presiding officer and  sergeant of arms He looked to Ms. Nauman for  confirmation.    MS. NAUMAN responded that she agreed with Senator Bishop's  comment and interpretation.    REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER stated his support that Legislative  Council go on record to say it was not the intent with this  policy to limit a committee chair's authority to maintain  decorum.    VICE CHAIR MCCABE said Uniform Rule 3(c) is pretty specific  to the chambers, presiding officers, and sergeant-at-arms,  which aren't in committee rooms. He said he expected that  the committee chair would be able to limit what folks are  wearing or doing. He said he agreed with Representative  Saddler that there be disclaimer added to let committee  chairs know they can run their committees the way they want  to. He then requested a brief at-ease.    1:35:35 PM  Council took a brief at-ease.    1:40:50 PM  Council returned from brief at-ease.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON, addressing those on teleconference,  said that a few committee members who were attending in  person had to leave and asked that those on teleconference  remain on the line if possible in order to maintain a  quorum for at least the next vote.    SENATOR KIEHL began by expressing appreciation for  Representative McCabe's concerns. He said the Visitor  Policy can give non-partisan staff some help in managing  disruptive behavior. He continued that he agreed with what  Representative McCabe was saying about that third paragraph  of the policy; this was not about the conduct of members in  a committee meeting or the chair's ability to manage a  committee meeting according to rules we've long had. He  said he doesn't think this policy particularly impacts  that. He said he appreciated Representative McCabe's  commentary and thinks that the chair's ability to work with  members and run the committee remains intact with this  policy.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON called a brief at-ease.    1:42:29 PM  Council took a brief at-ease.    1:43:08 PM  Council returned from brief at-ease.    1:43:09 PM  SENATOR CLAMAN moved that the Capitol Visitor Policy be  amended in the third paragraph to add the words "manage or"  so that the sentence would read "Nothing in this policy  limits the authority of a presiding officer or a chair of a  committee to manage or maintain order in a chamber or  gallery during a floor session or a committee meeting."    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON objected for the purpose of discussion.  Seeing none, Chair Gray-Jackson asked for a vote on the  amendment.    1:43:37 PM  YEAS: Senators Claman, Kiehl, Olson, Gray-Jackson;  Representatives Rauscher, Saddler, Tilton, McCabe    NAYS: Senator Stevens    The motion passed 8-1.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON noted that the committee was now back to  the main motion on the Capitol Visitor Policy. There being  no further discussion, Chair Gray-Jackson asked for a roll  call vote.    1:44:23 PM  YEAS: Senators Claman, Kiehl, Olson, Stevens, Gray-Jackson;  Representatives Rauscher, Saddler, Tilton, McCabe    NAYS: none    The motion passed 9-0.    c. Social Media Policy     1:44:59 PM  CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON moved to table this item until next  Legislative Council meeting on December 12, 2024.    There was no objection, and the item was tabled to the  December 12 meeting.    d. Continuity of Operations / Continuity of Government  Plan    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON noted for members that this item was  discussion only and that no action would be taken today.    JESSICA GEARY, Executive Director, LAA, provided an update  on the progress of the Continuity of Government plan for  the legislature, which was first discussed at the last  Legislative Council meeting. She said that on September 11  she met with the Alaska Department of Military & Veterans  Affairs Division of Homeland Security & Emergency  Management. This division is responsible for assisting with  State of Alaska's Continuity of Government plan and agreed  to provide templates to assist with the effort to craft a  similar plan for the legislature. While there is still work  to be done, she said feels confident now that we have this  resource. She said further decisions will be brought back  to the committee and that she simply wanted to provide an  update on this task.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON thanked Ms. Geary and, seeing there were  no questions from members, moved to the next agenda item.    e. Allowance Account Policy    1:46:43 PM  CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON said this item was also for discussion  only. She noted that LAA Finance Manager Mindy Kissner  would review the changes that were made to the Allowance  Account Policy in 2016 and then Representative Rauscher,  who requested this topic be placed on the agenda, would  share his thoughts.    MINDY KISSNER, Finance Manager, LAA, summarized that in  2016, as a budget saving measure, the House made the  decision to reduce the House allowance account from $16,000  to $12,000. At the time, the Senate did not choose to make  a reduction, and their allowance accounts remained at  $20,000.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON thanked Ms. Kissner and, there being no  questions, turned the floor over to Representative  Rauscher.    REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER began by saying that he sees some  disparity between rural and urban legislators. He explained  that Anchorage legislators can easily travel their district  in an hour or so; however, rural legislators may need to  travel by plane, boat, or long drives, which can take days.  While some office expenses, like supplies and mailings, are  common across districts, rural legislators face unique  costs due to the size and complexity of their districts,  including attending meetings in remote areas and multiple  cities or ports.    He said he has been considering this issue for the last  year and, while the timing is debatable, he said he  believes now might be right to address this issue.  Referring to a handout he provided to members before  speaking, he said he has been contemplating an idea to  allocate 75% of the office allowance equally among all  districts for shared needs, while the remaining 25% would  be distributed proportionally based on district size and  additional travel demands. This would better create  equitable support to rural legislators, who often spend  personal funds to reach constituents and attend key  meetings, unlike their urban counterparts with easier  access. Concluding that this idea isn't for immediate  action but rather a starting point for discussion to ensure  fairer support for all legislators.    1:54:00 PM  REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER expressed gratitude to  Representative Rauscher for bringing this issue forward and  recognized the thought and effort put into addressing the  challenges of representing large districts in our state. He  remarked that it's a creative idea that seems fair at first  glance.    SENATE PRESIDENT STEVENS commented that it seemed best for  the Senate to stay out of this discussion as the House  voluntarily took that budget cut. He continued that it  would, however, be good to know how those monies are used.  He stated that he often didn't use all of his account and  wondered if LAA could share how much of those funds are  used by other members of the legislature.    MS. KISSNER stated that the funds are often used for  mailings, constituent travel, and other routine items. She  said that often the funds arent fully used up each year  and that the accounting section would be happy to compile  any information that he or the committee is interested in.    SENATOR CLAMAN commented on the amount of the accounts and  stated that they haven't been adjusted recently for  inflation and it might be worth considering whether the  House should return to the $16,000 level, as that could  address some of the concerns that were highlighted.    SENATE PRESIDENT STEVENS commented that his only concern is  whether most House legislators are using the full $12,000  allowance and would be interested to see how close each  district comes to fully utilizing that amount.    SPEAKER TILTON commented that she understood the unused  funds roll back into the respective House or Senate funds,  which may contribute to balances used for things like  increased security funding. She shared that she does not  know who uses their full allowance but understands that  redistricting has created much larger districts, leading to  higher costs for those legislators. She thanked  Representative Rauscher for bringing this forward and said  that it's well thought out.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON noted for those on teleconference that  copies of what Representative Rauscher passed out here will  be sent to them and will also be posted to BASIS.    VICE CHAIR MCCABE commented that in addition to  responsibilities within the state, many committee chairs  and legislators have out-of-state responsibilities, such as  with PNWER (Pacific Northwest Economic Region), NCSL  (National Council of State Legislatures), or CSG (Council  of State Governments). Airline ticket prices have increased  in the last six months - flights that used to cost $500-600  to the Lower 48 now often exceed $1,000. These expenses  typically come out of office allowance accounts, so it's  something the committee should consider reviewing as well.    SENATOR KIEHL stated that he appreciates the effort that  was put into this discussion item and asked Representative  Rauscher if he knew of a way to account for "cost of  access". Offering that within his Senate district, travel  often requires ferries or small planes, along with  guaranteed overnight staysunlike districts where one can  drive to communities and return home the same day. He  wondered if this particular issue could be addressed in the  proposal.    REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER responded that he appreciates the  comments and questions raised and continued that the goal  was to figure out how to accommodate and understand these  needs. He shared that some legislators may not use their  full allowance, not because they don't need it, but because  limited funds prevent them from taking certain trips, like  out-of-state opportunities to develop as legislators. He  continued that districts like Representative Cronk's are  incredibly large, making it unrealistic to expect those  legislators to operate on the same budget as smaller, more  accessible districts. He felt that addressing all their  constituents, councils, and school districts on the same  funding as others with more accessible districts is a  significant challenge.    REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said that regarding district size  factor, some rural districts are on the road system with  easier access, while others, like Districts 39 and 40, have  few or no roads, making access significantly more  expensive. He felt that a policy like this should remain  somewhat general to avoid overly prescribed reimbursements,  yet he felt the current system feels too imprecise. He  applauded Representative Rauscher for his effort to visit  constituents, often using personal funds, as he  acknowledged many legislators do. He agreed that  accommodating such expenses seems reasonable, and he  restated appreciation for this proposal being brought  forward for consideration.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON added her gratitude to Representative  Rauscher for bringing this forward as an addition to the  agenda for the day as it has been an exceptional learning  opportunity provoking the desire to have more discussion on  this topic in the future to better figure out the next  steps in addressing this issue.    SPEAKER TILTON suggested conducting an analysis of office  accounts, not by specific individuals, but generally to see  how many legislators are using the full amount and whether  the reduced House allowance is limiting some, especially in  large districts like those of Representative Rauscher or  Representative Cronk. Commenting that as a fiscal  conservative and Speaker of the House, she carefully  reviews additional travel fund requests to ensure effective  use of legislative funds. Analyzing how much travel is  being supplemented from the presiding officer's account  could also provide insight. She appreciated Representative  Rauscher bringing this forward and understood the concerns  raised.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON thanked Speaker Tilton for her comments  and called on Representative Saddler.    REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER provided an additional comment that  it might be helpful to have data on the square footage of  each district from the Division of Elections or Community  and Regional Affairs, which could provide insight into how  adjustments in formula programs affect different districts.  He encouraged gathering this information for reference as  the committee continues this discussion.    CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON stated that she would like to see a  five-year analysis, like the one done for funding security  salaries, showing how much money from office accounts has  lapsed in both the Senate and the House. With 20 senators  and $20,000 each annually, she wondered how much has gone  unused over five years and thought the same analysis should  be done for the House.    SENATE PRESIDENT STEVENS commented that this is a complex  issue that requires careful consideration. That a Senate  district accounts for two House districts, and differences  need to be accounted for. He shared he was not sure how the  original $16,000 and $20,000 figures were determined, but  for larger districts like his, where flying is required,  they need to find a fair approach that considers the  differences between House and Senate districts.    MS. GEARY responded stating that the LAA could compile this  information in whatever way the members would prefer to see  it. They could work with the Legislative Council Chair's  office to develop some materials that can be shared for  consideration.    VII. ADJOURNMENT  CHAIR GRAY-JACKSON asked if any members of the committee  had any final comments and advised that the next  Legislative Council meeting will be December 12, 2024. She  continued that members should be aware that the Legislative  Council could have one final meeting in 2025 on the last  day of the interim if there is any outstanding business to  complete before the start of the next legislative session.  The Chair thanked members, LAA staff, LIO staff, and her  staff for their contributions.    2:09:42 PM  With no further comments, the meeting adjourned at 2:09pm.