HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ELECTION AND RULES

 

May 05, 2005 Hearing Room E

1:00 P.M.  Tapes 52 - 53

Corrected 10/10/05

MEMBERS PRESENT:            Rep. Derrick Kitts, Chair

Rep. Paul Holvey, Vice-Chair

Rep. Kim Thatcher, Vice-Chair

Rep. Billy Dalto

Rep. Debi Farr

Rep. Mitch Greenlick

Rep. Steve March

 

STAFF PRESENT:                  Cletus Moore, Committee Administrator

Annetta Mullins, Committee Assistant

 

MEASURES/ISSUES HEARD:

HJR 51- Public Hearing and Work Session

HJR 39- Work Session

HJR 20 – Public Hearing and Work Session

HB 2583 – Public Hearing and Work Session

HB 2614 – Work Session

HB 3302 – Work Session

Introduction of Committee Measure – 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 52, A

003

Chair Kitts

Calls the meeting to order at 1:07 p.m. and opens a public hearing on HJR 51.

HJR 51 – PUBLIC HEARING

 

Cletus Moore

Committee Administrator.  Reads summary of HJR 51.

014

Sen. Jason Atkinson

SD 2.  Thanks Rep. Richardson for introducing the bill and Chair Kitts for scheduling it. Explains that HJR 51 mirrors a bill that is in the Senate.  It will be a constitutional referral to Oregonians relating to a requirement that the legislature pass a K-12 budget within 81 days.  If the budget is not passed by the 81st day, politicians lose their pay, or if the governor decides to veto the bill, then the clocks restarts giving the legislature two weeks to pass the bill again.   Explains why he supports HJR 51.  Believes the system of K-12 funding is fundamentally broken.  Does not think anyone in the Assembly would argue that we do things right on K-12 and he does not think anyone would agree that it works very well. 

053

Sen. Atkinson

Comments on process of Governor setting a budget number early in the session and the length of time it has taken the legislature to pass the education budgets in the last three sessions.  States that larger states can pass their budgets in 60 days.  States that every politician in the building says education is their priority, but yet nobody can break the broken system.  That is why this bill seeks to put the requirement in the Constitution.  It binds future legislatures, to come to this building in January and get working. 

067

Sen. Atkinson

Comments that the forecast has never made any difference in funding education.  This actually breaks up the monopoly of delay in this building.  Believes it is not only good government, responsible and accountable, believes it goes a long way in helping the institution of the legislature branch to get it done first. 

090

Rep. Richardson

HD 4.  States this is a priority bill and brings this forward not just because it needs to be brought forward but because he was a member of the school district budget committee and the chair of the committee for a period of time.  Comments on the school board going over their budget without knowing what their budget would be.  Education has been held to the very end of the session where it becomes a political football.  Reality is that school districts need to know what their budgets are going to be so they can plan contracts that have to be signed.  The resolution tells the legislature they must pass a budget within the first 81 days, which is roughly around May 1, so that the school districts can plan on what their resources are gong to be.  This bill goes to the people and asks if the legislature should give the school districts a budget in the spring.  Believes it will pass with a resounding yes.

123

Rep. March

Questions when the 81st day would be.

 

Rep. Richardson

States that he misspoke and he should have said April 1.

163

Sen. Atkinson

Comments he thinks 81 days is three weeks more generous than in states that have 60-day budget years.  If this bill were enacted, instead of the Emergency Board being the committee of choice in the interim there would probably be a budget committee on education or a committee that is going to work all the time to make sure when the State of the State Address is given, the legislature goes to work. 

165

Rep. Greenlick

Comments that a couple of years ago, a constitutional amendment was passed that required the legislature to fund schools based on the Quality Education Model and that is in place but the legislature has ignored it.   Asks if there is anything in the resolution that would prohibit the legislature from passing an education budget and then adding more to the budget later.

 

Rep. Atkinson

Responds there is nothing to preclude the legislature from adding back.  Comments that his caucus has asked why he does not set a time for determining a total budget amount, or a date to complete the entire budget and not just this timeframe for the education budget. 

240

Rep. Dalto

Asks if it is a tacit suggestion that the legislature is incapable of making a decision about how to budget.  States that the legislature could put the education budget first.

 

Rep. Atkinson

Responds, continuing to commenting on need for legislature to be able to act.  Comments that the legislative process is broken and this is a fix to our process.

300

Rep. March

Comments this seems to deal with more than one subject.  Asks if they have received information from Legislative Counsel relating to Armatta issues.

 

Atkinson

Responds negatively. 

 

Rep. Richardson

Responds that they have not received information from Legislative Counsel.  States that HJR 51 and the Senate bill have been drafted separately.  A number of Legislative Counsel attorneys have gone through it and they feel comfortable it will not violate the double subject rule.

 

Rep. March

Comments that he still has concerns about it.

324

Rep. Thatcher

Comments this is worth considering.  Ask if Idaho, Washington, Utah and Florida have annual sessions.

 

Atkinson

Responds that Idaho does.  Comments that he has changed his position on annual sessions.  States if Oregon did a 60-day and a 90-day session in alternate years, the legislature would be here less.   Adds that it is amazing that the State of Florida can get it done in 60 days.

342

Rep Richardson

Responds this gives flexibility to the Oregon Legislature.  There was no flexibility provided in Nevada so the people passed an initiative saying the legislature will finish the budget in 120 days, that the legislators’ salaries would end after 60 days and the legislature would sine die in 120 days.  That is what Nevada has to live with.  This resolution only says pass the largest budget in 81 days.  There would be flexibility because everything would not have to be solved in 120 days.  Believes we will have shorter sessions if this becomes law.

395

Rep. Dalto

Comments on the budgeting process and time involved to gather information on all agency programs.  Asks how the legislature has time to do the work on the K-12 budget in 81 days. 

430

Rep. Richardson

Responds, explaining the governor’s process of developing the recommended budget.  States that this will take a change in scheduling but it is not impossible. 

TAPE 53, A

021

Sen. Atkinson

State that the legislative branch of government is enormously weaker than the other two.  The legislature does not have research staff or member staff.  The legislature does not take care of the building or the legislative branch of government and we never invest in our own process and institution.  We always give all the money away because there is a mouth to feed or some good cause.  The legislative branch of government is weak.  Asks who gives the legislature good research; the legislature has to wait for the agencies to get to the Governor’s budget whether you believe it or not.  States that the process is broken.  If this bill were in place and we had to have a real interim committee that did real work to get ready for January that would be fine.  

047

Rep. Dalto

Comments he respectfully disagrees that the legislature is a weak branch of government.  States the legislature does not invest in modern carpet or a comprehensive research office or put money on large staff because the money is put out to Oregonians in the form of education spending and human services spending and the other important areas.  The legislature has abilities and responsibilities set forth in the Constitution.  If the legislature wants to do something about holding agencies accountable, then we can do a better job of refocusing our efforts or expand our research capabilities or have further tools to be able to take back the power. 

 

 

The Legislative Fiscal Statement on HJR 51 is hereby made a part of these minutes (EXHIBIT D).

075

Chair Kitts

Closes the public hearing and opens a work session on HJR 51.

HJR 51 – WORK SESSION

077

Rep. March

Comments he believes HJR 51 will weaken the legislature.   Thinks the legislature is not passing the budget in 81 days because he believes the legislature is trying to do things thoughtfully and carefully.  Under the process, the legislature is supposed to determine the needs of the state and then decide how much to spend and if we are short we raise money.   Believes taking the time to determine the needs is appropriate, and he will be a no vote.

096

Rep. Greenlick

Comments he will support HJR 51but not because he thinks it will ultimately make a huge difference.  States if he were in charge of the legislature under this measure, in this session he would have said the governor is at $5.0 million, the House chair is $5.1+ and the Senate chair is $5.3+ and we need to get it passed in order to keep getting paid so pass the $5.0 million and add back whatever it takes when the legislature gets to the real budget.  States that might force the school districts to budget on the basis of the $5.0 even though the legislature might tell them it could be some larger number.   States he believes it is a good discussion and wants to see it move forward.

127

Rep. Thatcher

MOTION:  Moves HJR 51 be sent to the floor with a BE ADOPTED recommendation.

131

 

VOTE:  5-2-0

AYE:               5 - Farr, Greenlick, Holvey, Thatcher, Kitts

NAY:               2 - Dalto, March

 

Chair Kitts

The motion CARRIES.

REP. RICHARDSON will lead discussion on the floor.

135

Chair Kitts

Closes the work session on HJR 51 and opens a work session on HJR 39.

HJR 39 – WORK SESSION

135

Sen. Ryan Deckert

SD 14.  States that he, Rep. Farr, and Sen. Morse have been working with Rep. Dalto on the HJR 39-3 and HJR 39-4 amendments.  States that they like the -1 amendments (EXHIBIT A) the most, then the -4 (EXHIBIT B) and then the -3 amendments (EXHIBIT C) and defers to Rep. Dalto for explanation.

 

Rep. Dalto

Explains that he has brought the -3 and -4 as options for the committee.  States initially he thought he wanted to keep the legislature with an opportunity to try to adopt a bi-partisan plan for redistricting—reapportionment that occurs after the census.   The -3 amendments (EXHIBIT B) provide the legislature the first choice to draft a plan, and then the responsibility would fall to the commission.  States he has been struggling with the plan in the -3 amendments and the idea of pulling the partisanship out of the process altogether.   Explains the -4 amendments are the -1 amendments with added language that says the redistricting plan currently enacted has to be set aside and the commission has to start from scratch on a new plan.   States he would prefer the -4 amendments but will defer to the committee. 

 

Chair Kitts

Comments that the last redistricting plan is now law.  States that the plan has been implemented and it is his understanding that when there is a census every 10 years, the state is looked at as a blank map and then redistricting is done.

188

John Lindback

Director of Elections, Secretary of State’s Office.  Introduces himself

 

Chair Kitts

Asks if SOS uses the existing implemented plan and redraw the lines, or simply modify the existing plan.

 

Lindback

Responds it depends on the state of technology available.  Explains that each county was mailed a fresh set of maps.  The counties are expected to apply the census blocks to whatever mapping system they have.

 

Chair Kitts

Asks Sen. Deckert what his thoughts are about Rep. Dalto’s proposal to let the legislature have the first try.

232

Sen. Deckert

Responds they believe the non-partisan commission is the better way to do it.  States they can live with it but would not prefer it.  States it is highly unlikely this body would produce a plan and then they just want to make sure the timelines work.  The spirit of the bill is to get redistricting into a commission form.  States the -4 amendments (EXHIBIT C) are fine because that is what they hope the commission would do and this might provide clarity. 

249

Rep. Holvey

Comments that one would think that they would not want to put any kind of limitations on the commission; it would be up the commission whether or not to use the current plan as a baseline.  Does not think he would be in favor of the amendments to require them to not look at the current plan.

259

Rep. Farr

Comments she is not sure that is what Section 6a states. It says they may not use it as a baseline but still can use the current district map.

 

Rep. Dalto

Comments that is his intent.  States he is not suggesting that in certain neighborhoods it wouldn’t work to keep the existing plan.  Comments that the composition of his district could be improved but does not want to have politics inform the decision making of the commission.  Parts of the existing plan could be used if the commission determines that is an appropriate bundling of census blocks.  That is why he wants to start with something fresh and believes that is what the amendment does.

288

Rep. Farr

Comments she thinks Rep. Dalto’s point is well thought out.  States she believes Rep. Dalto does not want the commission to just take the district map and leave the districts the way they are carved; believes he wants to make sure they are taking a hard look at how best to serve the constituents. 

 

Rep. Dalto

States that is the intent with this bill.

300

Rep. Greenlick

States that the language in (9) on page 4 of the -1 amendments and the same language in the -4 amendments says the Legislative Assembly shall adopt a redistricting plan by July 1.   Asks what happens if the Legislative Assembly does not adopt the plan by July 1, and whether the plan would need to be approved by the governor.

 

Sen. Decker

Responds that line 24 should answer the first question.  States the plan would need to be signed by the governor.

 

Rep. Greenlick

Asks if the governor can veto the plan by the commission.

334

Rep. Holvey

Comments that If we are going to create a commission, we should let them do it and not give them prior direction.

353

Rep. Greenlick

Asks if this is intended to cut the governor out of the balance of power.

373

Sen. Deckert

Responds the discussions will take place in a better process with retired judges, the commission, doing it.  Believes there must be some backstops but believes it is highly unlikely that any of the backstops would need to be utilized.  Commissions across the country have been highly effective. 

409

Rep. Greenlick

Asks if Sen. Deckert would object if (9) said to be adopted by the Legislative Assembly and signed by the governor, and if it doesn’t happen, it goes to the Supreme Court. 

 

Sen. Deckert

Responds he believes the commission is where the action is and he would be happy to look at that.

421

Rep. Dalto

Comments the reapportionment plan affects the legislature and is driven by the legislature.  To involve the executive branch would only involve another layer of politics when we are trying to remove the politics by putting in an independent commission. 

 

Rep. Greenlick

Comments that the balance of power is there and if both parties can’t agree on a plan, it goes to the Supreme Court anyway.  Subsection (10) takes care of that.

TAPE 52, B

020

Chair Kitts

Comments that his prerogative is to not have the governor involved because it gets away from the spirit. 

037

Rep. Farr

MOTION:  Moves to ADOPT HJR 39-4 amendments dated 5/4/05.

039

 

VOTE:  7-0-0

 

Chair Kitts

Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED.

 

040

Rep. Farr

MOTION:  Moves HJR 39 be sent to the floor with a BE ADOPTED AS AMENDED recommendation.

046

Rep. March

Comments he has seen a lot of research on commissions.  There are a lot of imperfections in commission as there are in legislators. Thinks the legislature should have first short at this.  States he would have supported the -3 amendments and supports the -4 amendments out of deference to Rep. Dalto, but cannot support the resolution. 

056

 

VOTE:  5-2-0

AYE:               5 - Dalto, Farr, Greenlick, Thatcher, Kitts

NAY:               2 - Holvey, March

 

Chair Kitts

The motion CARRIES.

REP. FARR will lead discussion on the floor.

 

Chair Kitts

Closes the work session on HJR 39 and opens a public hearing on HJR 20.

HJR 20 – PUBLIC HEARING

067

Cletus Moore

Committee Administrator.  Reads summary of HJR 20 and introduces the HJR 20-1 amendments (EXHIBIT E).

 

Mark Kirchmeier

Legislative Assistant to Rep. Gary Hansen.  Reads a prepared statement for Rep. Hansen in support of HJR 20 (EXHIBIT F).

103

Rep. March

Asks if the HJR 20-1 amendments are from both Rep. Hansen and Rep. Greg Smith.

 

Kirchmeier

Responds affirmatively.

 

Rep. March

Comments he is glad to see that Rep. Hansen and Rep. Smith are including all of Oregon. 

110

Rep. Farr

Comments they would love to host the debate in Eugene.

 

Kirchmeier

Responds that they learned in 2000 that one of the criteria of the Commission on Presidential Debates is they want sites near an international airport, within 50 miles away.  Also they want a host city that has at least 2,000 to 4,000 first class hotel rooms. 

 

Chair Kitts

Comments they could go to Hillsboro.

 

Kirchmeier

States that any place in the Portland area would be a serious contender for the debate.

113

Rep. Greenlick

Comments that the 2,000 to 4,000 hotel rooms really mean the Portland metro area is the only place to have it.

 

Kirchmeier

States that 23 of the last 24 presidential or vice-presidential debates have been in cities the size of Portland or larger.  One exception was the 2000 vice-presidential debate which was in Danville, Kentucky, about one-hour drive out of Louisville, roughly comparable of Portland to Salem. 

 

Chair Kitts

Comments that he thinks we are trying to draw the debate to the Pacific Northwest, not to Portland. 

 

Chair Kitts

Closes the public hearing and opens a work session on HJR 20.

HJR 20 – WORK SESSION

144

Rep. March

MOTION:  Moves to ADOPT HJR 20-1 amendments dated 4/28/05.

148

 

VOTE:  5-1-1

AYE:               5 - Farr, Holvey, March, Thatcher, Kitts

NAY:               1 - Greenlick

EXCUSED:     1 - Dalto

 

Chair Kitts

The motion CARRIES.

 

152

Rep. March

MOTION:  Moves HJR 20 be sent to the floor with a BE ADOPTED AS AMENDED recommendation.

 

 

VOTE:  6-0-1

AYE:               6 - Farr, Greenlick, Holvey, March, Thatcher, Kitts

EXCUSED:     1 - Dalto

 

Chair Kitts

The motion CARRIES.

 

 

REPS. HANSEN AND G. SMITH will lead discussion on the floor.

 

 

NOTE:  SEE TAPE 52 B AT 198 and minutes immediately below.                         

 

Chair Kitts

The motion CARRIES.

 

Chair Kitts

Turns gavel over to Vice Chair Thatcher.

193

Rep. March

MOTION:  Moves to SUSPEND the rules for the purpose of allowing Rep. Dalto to vote AYE on passage of HJR 20.

 

 

VOTE:  6-0-1

EXCUSED:  1 - Rep. Kitts

 

Vice Chair Thatcher

Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED.

198

Rep. Dalto

VOTES AYE ON MOTION THAT HJR 20 be sent to the floor with a BE ADOPTED AS AMENDED recommendation.

 

 

VOTE:  7-0-0

 

 

Vice Chair Thatcher

Closes the work session on HJR 20 and opens a public hearing on HB 2583.

HB 2583 – PUBLIC HEARING

 

Ruth Bendl

Portland resident.  Submits a prepared statement and testifies in support of HB 2583 (EXHIBIT G).

260

Mike Balanesi

Hillsboro resident.  Testifies in support of HB 2583.  Comments that he followed the testimony presented to the committee at the meetings held around the state and listened to the archived testimony three and four times.  States that someone who signs an initiative petition can be disenfranchised by a date being either after or before.  When we are talking about the seriousness of elections, believes it is just as serious as an initiative petition being filled incorrectly.  An initiative passed in Arizona has passed the court test and is constitutional in Arizona.  There is precedence for HB 2583.  Comments on testimony presented to the committee in Florence.  Most of the negative testimony was from people who did voter registration drives; they want to make it as easy as possible for people to vote.  States he has with him today his passport and birth certificate and it was not difficult to get. 

321

Bendl

States that with the impending centralized voter registration system, and the momentum for the real identification bill before the U. S. Senate, she does not believe that the federal government wants to give Oregon $18 million for a centralized voter registration system where no tracking data is going to be entered into that system and people who did not give proof of citizenship or any kind of identity proof are going to be shoveled into the system.  Believes it is imperative this committee start the ball rolling by getting proof of citizenship and that the funding be tied to the requirement to have proof of citizenship and tracking data, whether it is a social security number or driver license or both, so that we do not have taxpayers paying $18 million for a system that simply cannot do the task that it is designed to do.

351

Balanesi

Comments that in Florence someone accused this committee of having their mind made up, and although he has hunches about the position of the committee, he would never have taken that position.  Thinks a lot of objections the committee has heard to HB 2583 and the two prior attempts in previous sessions will be rectified and made a lot easier when the real identification bill passes and President Bush signs it.  The Oregon driver license will then be available to register to vote.  We do have a movement that is coming that will make HB 2583 very manageable.  States if they have an initiative instead of coming before the legislature in Oregon, like Arizona did, their informal poll says that this bill would pass easily by 60 percent and probably closer to 70 percent.  States their polling is informal, but it is over the course of the years. 

410

Rep. March

Asks if Balanesi has comments about the bounty signatures.

 

Balanesi

States he would like to see registration drives done by volunteers but not on the street or at rock concerts.  Agrees bounty hunters are probably a problem.

 

Bendl

States that as long as anybody can be standing out there, whether it is a volunteer or otherwise, voter registration is far to serious to be done and brought in by the bucket load when there is no requirement for proof of identification when we have an act that says people should be submitting proof of identification when they register to vote.  States she does not support it, whether it is by bounty hunters or by volunteers.    

TAPE 53, B

018

Rep. Gordon Anderson

HD 3.  Testifies in support of HB 2583.  States he has a parallel bill, HB 2841, that is close to the same language but will sign on with HB 2583.  Believes everyone feels it is a privilege and honor to vote and feels it is time we regain some of the area we have lost.  Believes everyone who is qualified should vote.  We should seek them on the streets and bring them in but they must be qualified.  It is not too difficult to get a birth certificate and does not think $40 is too much for a person who wants to become a citizen of this state and nation and vote.  Those who became citizens have naturalization papers and they only have to produce them.  Some of the people who have been coming back and forth across the border already have passports.  We are talking about the people who are unwilling to take the steps to show that they are certified to vote and those are the ones we want to exclude and welcome them as soon as they are willing to go through the steps to become citizens.  Encourage passage of HB 2583. 

054

Rep. Linda Flores

HD 51.  Testifies in support of HB 2583.  States that she hears from time to time that this is an effort to disenfranchise voters and she cannot disagree more.  This is an effort to provide the accurate and true documentation for those people who are eligible and entitled to vote in Oregon.  This is an effort to validate those who have the right to vote here.   Encourages the committee to pass HB 2583.

080

Dr. Sylvia Zurich

Salem resident.  Testifies in favor of HB 2583.  States she was the campaign manager for the 20-day voter registration cutoff.  They worked extremely hard to get the measure on the ballot with record petition signers.  It was proven during that campaign that anyone could register their dog to vote in Oregon.  It would probably be easier today given what we saw in the last national campaign.  Anybody who can get across the borders into the country can now vote.  States that the media reported that in one county there were more votes than residents in the county.  States she hopes Oregon can be a leader in the effort to return meaning to voting. 

105

Andi Miller

Executive Director, Common Cause Oregon.  Submits and reads a prepared statement in opposition to HB 2583 (EXHIBIT H).

143

Kappy Eaton

Governance Coordinator, League of Women Voters.  Testifies in opposition to HB 2583.  States their representative was unable to speak at the meeting in North Plains and did submit testimony.  States that the Help America Vote Act ( HAVA) does not require additional identification.  County election officials have full authority to question and to not accept a person seeking to register if there is any doubt about the validity of the request.  The League believes that every citizen should be encouraged to register to vote and that the process should be accessible, efficient and simple.  HB 2583 would make it less accessible and more complicated.  This is the opposite of the results sought by HAVA which attempts to make the whole process of elections more open and user friendly, particularly for the disabled, minorities and young people.   

 

Chair Kitts

Asks if the League has a position on the statement on the registration form that says, “Sufficient identification is a copy of one of the following showing your current name and address: valid photo identification (such as a driver license, a paycheck stub, a utility bill, a bank statement, a government document…”. 

 

Eaton

Responds that is the federal voting act over which we have no control.  Adds that “we believe we have sufficient identification requirements for the state.”

183

Chair Kitts

Closes public hearing and opens a work session on HB 2583.

HB 2583 – WORK SESSION

180

Rep. Greenlick

Speaks in opposition to HB 2583.  Comments he has a fair amount of confidence and trust in the American people.  Thinks when someone signs a form and says under penalty of felony and punishment that they are a citizen, that is good enough.  States the committee heard how easy it is to buy false identification and birth certificates, etc.  To the extent to which that is true, what we have are people able to falsify their citizenship, but citizens being restricted from a right because they do not have documentation available will disenfranchise people.  States we need to do everything we can to protect the right.  Believes HB 2583 is a disaster.

226

Rep. Thatcher

Comments on going to the Mexican Consulate yesterday and comments on their stringent process for registering to vote in Mexico.   

247

Rep. Holvey

States he will vote no on this bill.  Comments on testimony received by the committee in opposition to it during the state wide travels of the committee.   States there was a lack of any evidence that there is abuse of our voting system the way it is and is worried about disenfranchising voters and limiting the ability of people who deserve and have the right to vote.  

288

Rep. Dalto

States his vote is a courtesy vote to get the bill to the House floor.

296

Rep. Thatcher

MOTION:  Moves HB 2583 to the floor with a DO PASS recommendation.

298

 

VOTE:  4-3-0

AYE:               4 - Dalto, Farr, Thatcher, Kitts

NAY:               3 - Greenlick, Holvey, March

 

Chair Kitts

The motion CARRIES.

REP. FLORES will lead discussion on the floor.

304

Rep. Holvey

Serves notice of a possible minority report on HB 2583.

 

Chair Kitts

Closes the work session on HB 2583 and opens a work session on HB 2614.

HB 2614 – WORK SESSION

315

Cletus Moore

Committee Administrator.  Reads summary of HB 2614.

The following statement is submitted for the record without public testimony:

 

Dan Meek

Portland.  Submits a prepared statement in opposition to HB 2614 (EXHIBIT I).

319

Chair Kitts

Comments that this is Rep. Nolan and his bill and if members have questions, he and Rep. Nolan will answer questions.

331

Rep. Greenlick

MOTION:  Moves HB 2614 to the floor with a DO PASS recommendation.

332

Rep. March

States he is a little concerned about the people who did not vote in the primary and are changing parties and are locked out of the process, but will give a courtesy vote to get the bill to the floor and may not vote for it on the floor.

344

 

VOTE:  7-0-0

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

 

Chair Kitts

The motion CARRIES.

REPS. NOLAN AND KITTS will lead discussion on the floor.

332

Chair Kitts

Closes the work session on HB 2614 and opens a work session on HB 3302.

HB 3302 WORK SESSION

357

Cletus Moore

Committee Administrator.  Reads summary of HB 3302 and notes the HB 3302-2 amendments received by the committee (EXHIBIT J).

 

Rep. Farr

Advises that the HB 3302-2 amendments were filed by Bill Northrup with the help of the Secretary of State’s Office.

376

Rep. Farr

MOTION:  Moves to ADOPT HB 3302-2 amendments dated 4/29/05.

379

 

VOTE:  6-0-1

EXCUSED:  1 - Rep. Greenlick

 

Chair Kitts

Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED.

 

381

Rep. Farr

MOTION:  Moves HB 3302 to the floor with a DO PASS AS AMENDED recommendation.

 

 

VOTE:  6-0-1

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

EXCUSED:  1 - Rep. Greenlick

 

Chair Kitts

The motion CARRIES.

 

 

REPS. FARR will lead discussion on the floor.

395

Chair Kitts

Asks that the committee stand at ease momentarily.

396

Chair Kitts

Reconvenes the meeting and opens a work session for the purpose of introduction of a committee measure.

INTRODUCTION OF COMMITTEE MEASURE

 

Chair Kitts

Advises members that the committee has received LC 3047 (EXHIBIT K) to be introduced as a committee bill.

402

Rep. Thatcher

MOTION:  Moves LC 3047 BE INTRODUCED as a committee bill.

413

 

VOTE:  5-1-1

AYE:               5 - Dalto, Farr, Holvey, Thatcher, Kitts

NAY:               1 - March

EXCUSED:     1 - Greenlick

 

Chair Kitts

The motion CARRIES.

418

Chair Kitts

Closes the work session on introduction of committee measures and adjourns meeting at 3:02 p.m.

 

 

EXHIBIT SUMMARY

 

  1. HJR 39, -1 amendments, Sen. Deckert, 9 pp
  2. HJR 39, -3 amendments, Rep. Dalto, 9 pp
  3. HJR 39, -4 amendments, Rep. Dalto, 9 pp
  4. HJR 51, Fiscal Impact Statement, staff, 1 p
  5. HJR 20, -1 amendments, Rep. Hansen, 1 p
  6. HJR 20, prepared statement of Rep. Hansen, Mark Kirchmeier, 2 pp
  7. HB 2583, prepared statement, Ruth Bendl, 1 p
  8. HB 2583, prepared statement, Andi Miller, 1 p
  9. HB 2614, prepared statement, Dan Meek, 1 p
  10. HB 3302, -2 amendments, Bill Northrup, 4 pp
  11. Introductions, LC 3047, staff, 8 pp