HOUSE COMMITTEE ON RULES AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS

 

July 01, 2003 Hearing Room E

1:00 PM  Tapes 89 - 91

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:            Rep. Dan Doyle, Chair

Rep. Linda Flores, Vice-Chair

Rep. Laurie Monnes Anderson, Vice Chair

Rep. Vic Backlund

Rep. Phil Barnhart

Rep. Betsy L. Close

Rep. Joanne Verger

 

STAFF PRESENT:                  Cara Filsinger, Administrator

                                                Janet Adkins, Administrator

Annetta Mullins, Committee Assistant

 

MEASURE/ISSUES HEARD: SB 903-A– Work Session 

                                                Introduction of Speaker-approved committee bill – Work Session

                                                SB 190-A – Public Hearing and Work Session

SB 854-A – Public Hearing and Work Session

HM 10 – Public Hearing and Work Session

 

 

These minutes are in compliance with Senate and House Rules.  Only text enclosed in quotation marks reports a speaker’s exact words.  For complete contents, please refer to the tapes.

 

TAPE/#

Speaker

Comments

Tape 89, A

004

Chair Doyle

Calls meeting to order at 1:05 p.m., announces order agenda items will be considered, and opens a work session on SB 903 A.

SB 903 A – WORK SESSION

014

Tim Nesbitt

President, Oregon AFL-CIO.  Testifies in support of SB 903-A (EXHIBIT A).

053

Chair Doyle

Asks if Associated Oregon Industries (AOI) will testify.

 

Nesbitt

Responds that AOI supports the bill, that there has been no opposition to the bill, and that the Employment Department Advisor Council consisting of labor, business, and community representatives has endorsed the bill.

066

Rep. Flores

MOTION:  Moves SB 903 A to the floor with a DO PASS recommendation.

070

Rep. Barnhart

Comments in support of SB 903 A.

 

Rep. Verger

Comments she wishes she were voting to say that the same number of jobs were going to be created.

 

 

VOTE:  7-0-0

AYE:            In a roll call vote, all members present vote Aye.

 

Chair Doyle

The motion CARRIES.

REP. DOYLE will lead discussion on the Floor.

080

Chair Doyle

Closes the work session on SB 903 A and opens a work session on introduction of Speaker-approved committee bill.

INTRODUCTION OF SPEAKER-APPROVED COMMITTEE BILL

089

Rep. Flores

MOTION:  Moves LC 3697 BE INTRODUCED as a committee bill (EXHIBIT B).

092

 

VOTE:  7-0-0

 

Chair Doyle

Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED.

 

Chair Doyle

Closes the work session on the introduction of Speaker-approved committee bill and opens a public hearing on SB 190 A.

SB 190 A – PUBLIC HEARING

100

Rob Douglas

Columbia River Steamship Operators Association (CRSOA).  Testifies in support of SB 190-A.  States they believe SB 190 A will streamline the Board of Maritime Pilots procedures for setting pilotage rates.  States that the operators, the people who pay the rates, the representatives from the various pilotage grounds, and the Board of Maritime Pilots support the measure.  Explains that they have worked with the Department of Justice and the Public Utility Commission (PUC). 

118

Dave Fiskum

Representing the Columbia River Pilots, and  speaking for Tom Gallagher, representative for the bar pilots.  Testifies in Support of SB 190 A.  States this is a consensus bill and attains a very important purpose and is very limited in its scope to allow the Board of Maritime Pilots access to the experienced PUC rate hearings officers.  Explains they  consulted with Rep. Shetterly in an effort to not violate the hearings officer program. 

142

Chair Doyle

Asks if the committee should proceed with the SB 190-A6 amendments (EXHIBIT C)   

 

Fiskum

States that the SB 190 A6 amendments go further than the SB 109-A7 amendments (EXHIBIT D).  The SB 190 A6 amendments include the conflict amendments as well as a provision that was omitted.  It would remove a section of the current ORS 776.115(8).  The language to be removed in the SB 190-A7 amendments is on page 3, starting at line 18.  States that it made more sense that once rate proceedings are decided that the rates be implemented immediately, rather than wait for a later deadline.

165

Fiskum

States they advocate for the SB 190-A6 amendments.

154

Douglas

States they also support the SB 190-A6 amendments.

 

Rep. Verger

Asks what recommendations the Economic Development Department and the Port of Portland would be making.

170

Douglas

States the language is in existing law.

 

Fiskum

Comments on existing law.

197

Susan Johnson

Administrator, Board of Maritime Pilots.  Advises that the board does support the bill and the amendments.

202

Chair Doyle

Closes the public hearing and opens a work session on SB 190 A.

 

SB 190 A – WORK SESSION

207

Chair Doyle

Asks the proponents to talk about the subsequent referral to Ways and Means Committee.

210

Douglas

Explains that the bill was considered by Ways and Means on the Senate side.

220

Rep. Flores

MOTION:  Moves to ADOPT SB 190-A6 amendments dated 7/1/03.

224

 

VOTE:  7-0-0

 

Chair Doyle

Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED.

 

225

Rep. Flores

MOTION:  Moves SB 190 A to the floor with a DO PASS AS AMENDED recommendation and the SUBSEQUENT REFERRAL to the committee on Ways and Means BE RESCINDED.

233

Rep. Monnes Anderson

Asks how many more hearings will be held.  Comments there would be a cost.

246

Douglas

Responds that the number of hearings will depend on whether anyone files for a rate hearing. 

249

Rep. Barnhart

Comments on consolidation of the hearings officers several years ago, and states that he sees this bill as a fix to get the Board of Maritime Pilots back into a situation where they have a knowledgeable hearings officer so they do not have to retry every single issue. 

268

 

VOTE:  7-0-0

AYE:            In a roll call vote, all members present vote Aye.

 

Chair Doyle

The motion CARRIES.

 

275

Chair Doyle

MOTION:  Moves SB 190 A be placed on the CONSENT CALENDAR.

276

 

VOTE:  7-0-0

 

Chair Doyle

Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED.

251

Chair Doyle

Closes the work session on SB 190 A and opens a public hearing on SB 854 A.

SB 854 A – PUBLIC HEARING

282

Sen. Roger Beyer

District 9.  Testifies in support of SB 854 A.  Explains efforts in developing the bill due to court decisions on commodity commissions across the nation.  Explains case involving the Washington State Apple Commission.  States that  no one can guarantee that if sued we will win the lawsuit.  The bill is what the Department of Justice, Legislative Counsel, administrators of the commodity commissions, and the boards and directors of commodity commissions have all decided as a group that this is the best defense we have with today’s history of court cases.

309

Sen. Beyer

Explains that he worked with the commodity commission groups, the Farm Bureau, and other producers to come up with SB 190 A.  States that not all producers support the bill as is; some want all commodity commissions to be required to offer refunds for their marketing, at least, if not for the entire program. 

324

Sen. Beyer

Explains that three of the 28 commissions wish to have the option to offer refunds.  States that the problem of making refunds mandatory is that the commissions are controlled by the producers.  Gives example of the Fryer Commission that has two processors and if one should decide they don’t want to pay into the commission that would get rid of the commission even through the people who raise the chickens may still want to have commission. 

345

Sen. Beyer

Explains that to ensure the commissions are working with their producers, they have included that all commissions must survey their membership and make the survey public so the legislature will know where the producers are.  Notes the sunset on the parts of the bill. 

 

Sen. Beyer

Explains the sunset dates on the public member on the commissions, and the increased oversight of the commissions by the Department of Agriculture.

392

Sen. Beyer

Urges committee to pass the bill as it is.

408

Chair Doyle

Comments it is his intention to pass the bill out today.

415

Rep. Barnhart

Asks if this bill is in response to the Supreme Court case  U. S. versus United Foods.

 

Sen. Beyer

Responds there have been about six lawsuits.  The first was the mushroom case and the last was the Washington Apple Commission.

 

Chair Doyle

Advises Sen. Beyer that comments have been made that this bill expands state government and entitles more employees for PERS.  Asks if those issues have been discussed on the Senate side.

439

Beyer

States there will not be additional people brought in as state employees by the bill.  States there is an increased oversight by the Department of Agriculture but that consists of approval of budgets, specifically the marketing part of the budgets.  Explains that in order for those to be considered public speech so they are not in violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution, there must be an increase in oversight by a state agency of those budgets. 

478

Chair Doyle

Notes that the bill has a minimal fiscal impact.

TAPE 90, A

023

Beyer

States that the commodity commissions already exist, they function with private citizens running the boards, most, if not all of them hire private firms to run the commissions, and this will only require increased oversight of their budget by the Department of Agriculture employees.

029

Rep. Barnhart

Asks if the commissions will continue to contract with outside companies for management services.

 

Beyer

Responds that will be a commission-by-commission decision as it is today.  Nothing in the bill forces them to do something different. 

037

Rep. Barnhart

Asks if they would have to come back to the legislature for new PERS positions.

 

Beyer

Responds they would have to come back to get authority to fund additional positions.

055

Rep. Jeff Kropf

District 17.  Testifies with “tepid” support for SB 854 A.  Submits the SB 854-7 amendments.  Comments on importance of the Mint Commission that allowed them to have the tools necessary to manage their crops.   States that commissions are threatened because of, in large part, the United Foods ruling.  Change is being forced upon them and he does not know what the proper response is to the United Foods ruling.  Believes that SB 854 A gets them most of the way there, but he does not believe the bill as written will  survive a legal challenge and that is why he offers the SB 854-7 amendments (EXHIBIT E).

109

Rep. Monnes Anderson

Ask Rep. Kropf to explain the United Foods ruling.

 

Rep. Kropf

States that commodity assessments are used for a number of purposes. Most commissions use their funds for promotion.  The United Foods ruling centers on promotion.  As he understands the ruling, it is a violation of free speech to compel a farmer to spend the assessment on promotional dollars if he should disagree with that. 

125

Rep. Monnes Anderson

Asks if refunding is the issue.

 

Rep. Kropf

Responds that is exactly the issue.  SB 854 A as currently written allows an exception for three of the commodity commissions, who chose this in the negotiations.  The three commissions have the authority to refund the assessment; it is not mandatory.  The SB 854 -7 amendments extends that to everyone because he believes it offers a more defensible position in court to defend the concept.  The SB 854-7 amendments do not provide protection from a lawsuit.  Believes it will be challenged anyway, but the amendments  would help prepare for the best legal defense possible. Without mandatory refund, they have been put on notice they will be sued.  Others think it will pass the legal challenge. 

147

Rep. Verger

Asks if she would benefit from others’ assessments even if she demands her money back.

 

Rep. Kropf

Responds affirmatively and states that is why mandatory refund ability is not part of SB 854-A.

184

Chair Doyle

Advises that the committee will hear about the court cases and why the refund ability is an issue.

 

Rep. Kropf

States that he believes Oregon would be sued even if the SB 854-7 amendments were adopted.

201

Janet Adkins

Administrator.  Explains the differences between SB 854 A and the SB 854-7 amendments is in Section 22 of the SB 854-7 amendments, which gives all commissions the authority to make refunds. 

211

Rep. Donna Nelson

District 24.  Testifies in opposition to SB 854-A.  Comments on 2001 legislation.  Comments that the commissions were established to maximize the marketing arm.  Comments on establishment of assessment rates and moneys raised by the apple commission in Washington.  Submits and reviews letter from Brian C. Leighton, attorney, who challenged commodity commission legislation in other states (EXHIBIT F).

351

Rep. Nelson

States her concern is that growers maintain and sustain their right to free speech; their voices should be heard in any kind of marketing campaign, and that should they feel their voice is not being heard or it is more expensive than they can afford, they have the right to opt out.  Adds that we do not need to establish 28 more government agencies.

365

Chair Doyle

Asks what part of the bill establishes new government agencies.

 

Rep. Nelson

Reads summary of the bill.

400

Chair Doyle

Asks if Rep. Nelson has expressed her concerns in the Senate and to members of the lobby.

 

Rep. Nelson

Responds she did not testify on the bill in the Senate, and that she has expressed her concerns to the lobby.

423

Rep. Nelson

Adds that her office polled all the commodity commissions and found that many did not know this bill was coming up. 

440

Mike Dewey

Representing a consortium of the commodity commissions.  Testifies in support of SB 854-A because without the various commodity commissions, we take immediately $10 to $12 million out of the Oregon economy.  About $2.5 million of that is for research at Oregon State University (OSU). 

 

 

Comments on working with the office of attorney general.  States that the commissions must look like and act like a state agency if they are going to be able to collect the money.  They must be under the umbrella of the government to have the government speech.  Believes the agency has adequate FTE because the Department of Agriculture is already doing this.

TAPE 89, B

014

Dewey

Comments on consensus of the groups working on the bill: the survey, the oversight, and the public member.  Having the requirement for the survey on refund ability will tell more about the organizations and they can come back next session to offer refund ability. 

036

Dewey

Explains there are mandatory assessments but not mandatory refunds.  Comments on survey by the Wheat League in other states that shows that 10 to 30 percent have refund ability.  States that when the budget fluctuates it is difficult to have contracts.  Everybody benefits by the research and promotions and if they benefit, they should pay in.  Some producers would like to promote their own particular brand name.  Three commissions chose to provide for refunds.  The other 25 said they believe they can win a lawsuit if SB 854 A is passed without any amendments. 

067

Dewey

States they believe a lawsuit will be filed. 

078

Rep. Flores

Asks if they know if the memberships would like to have the opt in or opt out provision, and how wide the inquiry was.

 

Dewey

Responds that it would vary from commission to commission.  They made it clear that refunds were an issue.  Comments on efforts to educate the commissions’ members about the legislation.

119

Rep. Close

Summarizes a letter from George VanLeeuwen, a grass seed farmer, indicating that the commodity commissions have outlived their usefulness, and the constitutional free speech problem could be addressed by eliminating the promotional activities and just doing the research and transportation.  Asks that the witnesses respond.

129

Dewey.

Comments on activity by government trade missions, and states it is very difficult for private business to access a China market because of the way the government imposes their regime or opportunity for access.  Believes some are making progress in terms of their own promotion but by and large, they must pool the money to have the opportunity for economic development.  States he respects VanLeeuwen’s opinion but does not believe it is time to say everyone should be on his own.

141

John McCulley

Representing commodity commissions.  Comments that VanLeeuwen may feel it is an issue in the grass seed industry; but it would not work in the fryer, mint, or hop industries because of the diversity of the commissions.

156

Chair Doyle

Asks the witnesses to talk about the litigation schedule.

172

Dewey

Responds they have entered into the record a letter from an attorney who has a client who is willing to test this statute and it has an emergency clause.  They anticipate they will see litigation soon.   Comments on efforts of the individual producers to form the commissions and set the assessments.  States that in the opinion of the attorney general, the commodity commissions were created illegally and they had to recreate the commissions.  It is another issue that must be dealt with. 

201

Dewey

Comments on the Senate vote on the measure. 

213

John McCulley

Oregon Dairy Products Commissions and other commodity commissions.

233

McCulley

States that each commission had to vote in public meetings to have this bill introduced and then vote and pass a motion in those same meetings saying that they would help support the lobbying effort for the bill.  Notes the matrix attached to his testimony (EXHIBIT G) showing what exists now and what the changes would be under SB 854 A.  States that commodity commissions are part of the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODOA).  Their budgets are currently approved by ODOA.  The commission contracts are approved by ODOA, and if the contracts are a certain size, they are approved by the Department of Justice.  States the commissions are audited and are subject to the state Public Meeting Law.  They report annually to the Secretary of State’s office the annual financial report, and they report to Legislative Counsel all the accounts receivable under a bill a couple of sessions ago.  They do act as state agencies now.  SB 854 tucks them more tightly under ODOA, primarily in the area of promotions.  The lawsuits have suggested that is the area where commissions are most vulnerable for the compelled speech argument.

266

McCulley

States that on page 11, the language in lines 4 through 11 shows the close relationship with ODOA.  Comments on current operations and the addition of a public member to each commission.  Notes that the second page of his testimony lists the key elements of the bill.  Explains compromise. 

298

Rep. Monnes Anderson

Asks if a grower could be a part of the commission and not pay the assessment.

 

McCulley

Explains exceptions to the assessment, including organic blueberry growers.  Adds that someone cannot opt out because they do not like the commission. 

352

Rep. Verger

Asks why someone would want a refund if they are benefited.  Gives example of a commission.  Ask what the problem is. 

 

McCulley

Responds there are people who want something for nothing and are willing to have someone else pay for them to benefit; some just do not want to pay the money to the commission.

362

Rep. Verger

Asks why the bill goes a step further with the oversight by ODOA.

 

McCulley

Responds that the attorneys read the various cases and brought everyone to the table and advised that additional government oversight was necessary to show that the State of Oregon was involved in providing that speech to the public.  Under the umbrella of government’s speech the commissions’ messages would be protected.  It was determined that the best defense is to be more closely aligned with ODOA and have the agency make the reviews. 

447

Rep. Verger

Asks if she could have her own advertising money while the pool of money is strictly under the umbrella of the State of Oregon.

464

McCulley

States that Rep. Verger is correct.

 

Dewey

Comments that under SB 854 A the Director of ODOA appoints the commission members. 

TAPE 90, B

023

Chuck Craig

Assistant Director, Oregon Department of Agriculture.  Comments on opportunities provided for public comments.  States they believe they have a good compromise that represents the points of view that the vast majority of folks have brought and that have been accepted.  They feel that taking the step to try as best they can to ensure the future viability of Oregon commodity commissions is an important part of this administration’s program for rural economic development, and to try to protect the infrastructure that serves the economy of rural Oregon.  ODOA very strongly supports the bill as it came from the Senate. 

047

Craig

Adds that the ODOA oversight for the promotional program has been explained.  The reason they feel this will not result in additional work or fiscal impact is that they have been trying for some time to create a stronger linkage between the international marketing program and the marketing programs of the commodity commissions.  This is a good venue for them to come together with a stronger working relationship in those areas. 

050

Rep. Verger

Asks why three groups are being treated differently

 

Dewey

Explains why three commodity commissions have chosen the opportunity to offer refunds.

067

Rep. Verger

Comments that she understands this was voluntary to help them have some balance that would give them legal protection.

 

 

 

070

Dewey

Responds their advice was that the issue is about free speech and this would get them closer to 100 percent in winning a lawsuit.  The surveys will tell a lot and thinks the legislature will want to ask for that information on what the growers think about a refund. 

071

Rep. Verger

Asks if the three commission offering refunds would help defend a lawsuit against any other commission.

 

McCulley

States that those three commissions will have to make those decisions, just like the other commissions will have to decide if they will step forward and help whichever commission is sued.

081

Rep. Barnhart

States that the Leighton letter (EXHIBIT F) talks about government speech.  Asks if the committee will have a review of the cases so the members can see where the courts are going with “government speech.”

092

Dewey

States that Richard Whitman, the chief counsel on this, is in the room. 

091

Rep. Barnhart

Asks Craig if the reason for this bill is not really in response to this line of cases; the reason for the bill is to make certain that we do a good job with our commodity commissions and integrating our international sales efforts.

104

Craig

Responds yes, and the bill serves both purposes.

101

Bernie Faber

Dairy farmer in west Salem.  States he is a member of the State Board of Agriculture and has served on the Oregon Dairy Commission, and his son is currently a member of the Oregon Dairy Commission.  States they support SB 854-A without additional amendments.  Comments on history of Oregon Dairy Commission assessment to promote dairy products.  Comments that anyone could have any kind of excuse to ask for a refund.  Explains that once one producer opts out, it allows other producers to ask why they want to be a part of it when somebody else is riding a free ride.  They don’t have that situation now.  Tells of failure of a commission because of the opt out provision. 

147

Glen Stonebrink

Executive Director, Oregon Cattlemen’s Association.  Comments on Oregon Beef Council, made up of two segments of the beef industry.  States that the ranchers and the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association  support SB 854-A.

179

Dave Nelson

Representing commodity commissions.  Comments in response to VanLeeuwen letter mentioned by Rep. Close.  Comments on chart on grass seed export (EXHIBIT H) and the Connection (EXHIBIT I). 

260

Rep. Verger

Comments that Oregon has the broadest free speech in the nation and asks why they are so concerned about free speech.

267

Richard Whitman

Attorney in Charge of Natural Resources Section, Department of Justice.  Responds that Rep. Verger is right, Oregon does have an extremely broad free speech clause in the State Constitution.  States there has been no challenge to these programs under the State Constitution.  There has been a case brought under the free speech clause having to do with license plates.  It raises some similar issues about free speech and whether people are compelled by certain government actions to speak in a particular way.  States there is a holding from the Oregon Court of Appeals that indicates the Oregon courts are likely to follow the direction of at least some of the federal courts in that if the government is speaking, then free speech clauses of the Oregon Constitution or the federal Constitution do not apply.  The free speech clause guarantees citizens the right to free speech; they do not guarantee citizens the right to be free of their government speaking.

294

Rep. Monnes Anderson

Asks how the growers are assessed.

 

Nelson

Explains how the assessments are made and collected.

292

Rep. Monnes Anderson

Asks if there may be one or two large producers who are providing most of the funding for a commission.

 

Nelson

Responds that the Highland bent grass growers are an example. 

360

Rep. Close

Comments that many state commissions are tax funded and many of them take positions that not everyone agrees with.  Ask what the difference is.

369

Whitman

Comments on other organizations that are not governmental yet people are required to pay into them.  States that the courts have pretty much struck those down.

398

Rep. Barnhart

Asks how the issues in SB 854 A differ from the case involving the California State Bar around these kinds of issues.

403

Whitman

Responds that the key difference is the California State Bar was found not to be a state governmental entity, at least for speech purposes.  In this situation we have an Oregon Court of Appeals decision saying the assessment funds that are collected are public funds.  The purpose of this bill is to ensure that the use of those funds for promotional activities by being subject to additional oversight by ODOA is considered to be state speech, rather than private speech. 

423

Chair Doyle

Asks witnesses to respond to commodity commission employees becoming state employees.

 

Nelson

Nelson responds he believes that was clarified in the 1991 session of the legislature when the commissions were granted the option of either hiring people as state employees; some commissions do have state employees.  The majority of the small commissions have contracts with commission administrators such McCulley and himself who provide the administrative services and they are not qualified to become state employees unless they become full time employees or they have an employee-employer relationship with the commission.  This bill does not change that section of the statute.

449

Chair Doyle

Closes the public hearing and opens a work session on SB 854 A.

SB 854 A – WORK SESSION

452

Rep. Flores

MOTION:  Moves SB 854 A to the floor with a DO PASS recommendation.

458

Chair Doyle

Comments he was not interested in the SB 854-7 amendments because they seemed to complicate things.  Suggests the committee pass the bill as is so it does not have to go back to the Senate for concurrence.

 

Rep. Barnhart

Comments as he understands the bill it is to help figure out how to sell the commodities our farmers grow in Oregon and how to continue to improve the product and the farming methods.  The bill clarifies these are government agencies and do speak for the government when they put out materials out, and to integrate the efforts to sell commodities overseas by bringing the commission closer to ODOA. 

498

Rep. Backlund

Comments on the variety of issues before the committee, and states he thinks SB 854 A is a good bill and will vote for it.

TAPE 91, A

015

Rep. Verger

Comments that SB 854 A also takes into consideration what we need to do in Oregon in promoting Oregon and Oregon products and thinks we do that better collectively than individually.  Believes everyone needs to pay in because everyone benefits.

027

Rep. Monnes Anderson

Comments that she needs to clarify a situation and will cast a no vote with the reservation that she will be a yes vote on the floor.  Explains that she has producers in her area who do a lot of promotion and ship fresh berries to restaurants in other states.  States she needs to touch base with them one more time.

050

 

VOTE:  6-1-0

AYE:               6 - Backlund, Barnhart, Close, Flores, Verger, Doyle

NAY:               1 - Monnes Anderson

 

Chair Doyle

The motion CARRIES.

REP. DOYLE will lead discussion on the floor.

054

Chair Doyle

Closes the work session on SB 854 A, announces that HM 9 will not be heard today, and opens a public hearing on HM 10.

HM 10 – PUBLIC HEARING

060

Rep. G.  Smith

District 57.  Explains he received notification that the U. S. Department of Agriculture was going to be taking testimony in regards to bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), mad cow disease.  States he feels a memorial is more appropriate than a letter to express Oregon’s concern and to express support for an industry that is very important to a very large segment of Oregon.  Reads HM 10.

125

Glen Stonebrink

Executive Director, Oregon Cattlemen’s Association.  Offers to answer questions.

131

Roger Huffman

Administrator, Animal Health and Identification Division, Oregon Department of Agriculture.  Comments on wildlife brought back from Canada.

148

Rep. Barnhart

Asks if it has been learned how the disease is spread.

 

Huffman

Responds there are still some questions.  Comments on contaminated feeds.

164

Rep. Barnhart

Asks if the disease can be eradicated by not feeding animal parts to other animals.

 

Huffman

Responds affirmatively.  States they have taken further steps in the United States on food. 

 

 

 

182

Rep. Barnhart

Asks if it is true that it is not known how  the “prion protein” affects other animals. 

 

Huffman

Responds that it is true and it is even more mysterious in subspecies.

190

Brad Harper

Executive Director, Water for Life.  Encourages passage of HM 10.

206

Chair Doyle

Closes the public hearing and opens a work session on HM 10.

HM 10 – WORK SESSION

210

Rep. Flores

MOTION:  Moves HM 10 be sent to the floor with a BE ADOPTED recommendation.

212

 

VOTE:  6-0-1

AYE:            In a roll call vote, all members present vote Aye.

EXCUSED:  1 - Rep. Close

 

Chair Doyle

The motion CARRIES.

REP. G. SMITH will lead discussion on the floor.

 

222

Chair Doyle

Closes the work session on HM 10, and announces that he committee will meet on Wednesday and not on Thursday.

231

Chair Doyle

Adjourns meeting at 3:15 p.m.

 

 

EXHIBIT SUMMARY

 

A – SB 903, prepared statement, Tim Nesbitt, 2 pp

B – Introduction of Speaker-Approved committee bill, staff, 4 pp

C – SB 190, SB 190-A6 amendments, Rep. Doyle, 4 pp

D – SB 190, SB 190-A7 amendments, Staff, 2 pp

E – SB 854, SB 854-7 amendments, Rep. Kropf, 78 pp

F – SB 854, prepared statement, Rep. Nelson, 2 pp

G – SB 854, prepared statement, John McCulley, 6 pp

H – SB 854, charts, Dave Nelson, 3 pp

I – SB 854, publication, Connection, Dave Nelson, 5 pp