Date: 03/14/2008
Final
Other States' Activities in Operations Planning
COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE EMERGENCY EPIDEMIC RESPONSE
| Votes: View--> | Action Taken: |
| <none> | <none> |
1:25 p.m. — Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Senator Bob Hagedorn, committee chairman.
1:22 p.m. — Other States' Activities in Continuity of Operations Planning
Ms. Kae Warnock and Ms. Brenda Erickson, National Conference of State Legislatures, presented information regarding other states' efforts in developing continuity of operations plans. Ms. Warnock and Ms. Erickson distributed a series of handouts (see Attachments A-E) on the subject of maintaining continuity of the legislature during a pandemic event. Ms. Erickson offered three examples of actual emergencies that occurred in recent years in state capitols: fires in Idaho and Texas; an earthquake in Washington, and; an attack on the capitol in California. She said that continuity of government plans need to include several key factors: plans for lines of succession and for maintaining contact with legislative members; the ability to change the seat of government, and; the ability to protect public records fo the legislature. She noted that developing lines of succession are critical to achieving a quorum in an emergency and, if necessary, the ability to quickly redefine the requirements for a quorum. Ms. Warnock spoke to the Washington example to illustrate the ability fo the legislature to depart from constitutional requirement in the event of an emergency.
Ms. Warnock discussed the handouts that detail the continuity of government statutes in other states and examples of other emergency succession acts.
Ms. Brenda Erickson spoke to the issue of remote voting in other states, which included methods such as vote pairing and proxy voting. She said that there several advantages to these techniques, but the biggest obstacle to remote voting is protection of the integrity of the process by guarding against fraud. She also said that remote voting is more commonly allowed in committee settings and is not used in others states' floor sessions. Very few states allow proxy voting, she said. The integrity of the process remains the highest concern among most state legislators. Open public meetings and notice to the public remain among the main concerns of state policy makers. Ms. Erickson said there are no states currently allowing remote voting although some states such as Alaska and Nevada do provide for testimony to be taken from remote locations. Ms. Erickson concluded by noting the number of states that allow for some type of special session which is a possible option in the instance of a pandemic event. In response to committee questions, Ms. Erickson noted that no states are currently exploring technological alternatives to holding legislative sessions, other than the committee situation in Alaska described above. Ms. Warnock concurred that states with continuity of government plans focused on moving the legislature and do not contemplate and electronic solution.