Meetings
Transcript: Select text below to play or share a clip
[Rep. Golrang "Rey" Garofano (Vice Chair)]: Good morning, to House Human Services. Today is Wednesday, January 14. Are meeting up our Community Action Agency Bill Page five thirty four and reviewing the changes that we made yesterday. Great.
[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Thank you. Good morning. Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel. You have an amendment to look at. I will share my screen.
[Rep. Golrang "Rey" Garofano (Vice Chair)]: That amendment was posted on our website.
[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Thank you. So we're looking at five thirty four, which is the Community Action Agency bill. Yesterday, the committee discussed changes to two sections of title three. So what you have in front of you is not a strike all amendment. It instead just takes out those sections of the bill that in the those introduced and puts in two new replacement sections with your changes. So that means you have to use two documents together to get the full idea of what is in the bill that you are considering. So 3904 was the Community Action Agency. It said plan last time you saw it. And then you asked that Lily worked with me and with Amy Johnson to put together some language. So this is what is coming back from that. So now it is Community Action Agency Assessment and Plan. Each designated Community Action Agency shall determine the need for activities and services within the area served by the agency every three years, complete an assessment and incorporate that information into an annual community action plan. The plan shall include a schedule for the anticipated provision of new or ongoing services, and she'll specify the resources that are needed by and available to the agency to implement the plan. So that's the first section. And then in 3905, we have language, the community action agencies that was in your underlying draft. Two places in subsection A where you're changing community service agency to one place, community action agency that was in your underlying draft. On page two, line two, it says it shall administer programs as set out in the community action plan instead of the community services plan. So that is to mirror the language in the previous section. In subsection B, we have the same strikeout of the non hyphenated community based for the hyphenated community based. And then in terms of the subdivisions in B, you decided to reorganize the order of those. So now what had been two or what is currently two would be one. And then what had been or currently is one bumps down to two on the list. Under Subdivision 1, starting on line 14, the newly renumbered Subdivision 1, you added language that a minimum of one third of the members of the board are persons chosen in accordance with election procedures adequate to ensure that they are representative of individuals with low income. And then under subdivision, newly renumbered Subdivision 2, it's underlined to show that it has moved, but the language itself is the
[Rep. Golrang "Rey" Garofano (Vice Chair)]: same. And
[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: the C is the same.
[Rep. Golrang "Rey" Garofano (Vice Chair)]: That's it. Thank you. Any questions?
[Rep. Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: Go ahead,
[Rep. Golrang "Rey" Garofano (Vice Chair)]: grab some questions.
[Unidentified Committee Member]: You started by saying you pulled something out, so we now have two components.
[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: You now have two documents. So instead of a strike all, which says we're starting fresh with a clean document, because you're only amending two specific portions of the bill is introduced, I just pulled out those two sections and I'm putting them back in here. So if you look at your bills introduced, you have a section one amends 3901, 3902, 3903, thirty nine zero four, thirty nine zero five. So thirty nine zero one through thirty nine zero three are untouched by this amendment. They stand as is, And all that's happening is you're replacing the 39043905, and your bill is introduced with these two sections. That makes sense?
[Unidentified Committee Member]: I think so. Rather than Since we have a moment.
[Rep. Golrang "Rey" Garofano (Vice Chair)]: Yeah, yeah.
[Unidentified Committee Member]: A little bit of education here. What would we have been prohibited from? Or is it just not clear practice to have simply amended those sections?
[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: If you want a strike call, I can do it as a strike call. Sometimes when there are just narrower amendments, if the whole bill isn't being amended, we'll just amend the sections amended. If you've seen instances of amendment on the floor, this is instances of amendment, but this is one instance of amendment where you're just taking out two sections and putting two sections in. If this is unclear, I'm happy to flip it into strike off.
[Unidentified Committee Member]: I'm not making that request. I'm just trying to get some
[Unidentified Committee Member]: So when it's presented on the floor, will there be one document or two documents?
[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: You'll use two documents.
[Unidentified Committee Member]: I see. So we're presenting an amendment essentially, yeah.
[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Amendment to the bill is introduced.
[Unidentified Committee Member]: I see. Yeah. Okay. That's how we would talk about it.
[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Yeah. Yeah. So you are retaining the first three sections and the bill is introduced as is unchanged, and you're only presenting an amendment to those last two sections that are amended by the bill. So
[Unidentified Committee Member]: on the floor, then does we have to since it's presented as an amendment, there would be a vote for the amendment, and then there would be a vote for the entire bill? Or is it all thought of
[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: as something that I think that would be the same regardless of how you did it. Because even if you did a strike all, I think you would take a vote on the amendment. And then the underlying, am I correct on that? This is a parliamentarian question.
[Unidentified Committee Member]: All right. Well, just wondering. Just curious.
[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: But I'm seeing there's some confusion, so I'm definitely happy to pop it into a struggle, if that's easier.
[Rep. Golrang "Rey" Garofano (Vice Chair)]: I would refer to Madam Chair when she returns to hear from her experience what's most easily understandable on the floor of this. This is kind of a straightforward bill. And to me, if doing it one way might raise some questions that are confusing members on the floor. So I don't know the answer to that. I understand it, but I could see how there might be confusion on the floor.
[Unidentified Committee Member]: Yeah, you would speak to the bill, and then you would speak to the amendment, but you could do the presentation together, but I am a little question on how the vote would happen, because first, you vote on the bill and then the underlying amendment. So other way around. No, you're voting amendment as amended. So I'm sorry.
[Rep. Golrang "Rey" Garofano (Vice Chair)]: Anne, do you know? Yes. Online.
[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Thank you. Yeah. She got some lights. So Yeah. Sorry.
[Rep. Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: So I yeah. You you can leave the thing up. I can just my voice here. But Katie was right. Either way, there's two votes because a strike all is an amendment to the original, just like just doing this one piece would be an amendment to the original. But the difference would be people would be voting first on a total replacement versus voting first on the two pieces replacing and then go to the vote on the on the the bill as amended. So I think, you know, I think it was a good point by your vice chair, whose name I'm forgetting. But I think with a very short bill like this, dividing it into two pieces makes it seem like, oh, it was a simple bill, but, you know, then we rethought a section, and so there's something significant about what we rethought. It might be just easier to say, alright, you have the bill as introduced, but we're actually presenting this strike all which incorporates everything that we responded to after testimony. And then then you only need to go through the whole thing one time rather than than breaking it up. But but it doesn't make any difference in terms of the voting process. It's first to vote on the amendment, which is either a strike all amendment or just the two paragraphs being amended, and then a vote on the bill as amended.
[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Okay. Would you like me to pop this into a strike all? Sounds like that's the direction everyone's heading. I think so. Okay. Let me do that now.
[Rep. Golrang "Rey" Garofano (Vice Chair)]: Yeah. So let's go offline. We'll take ten minutes.