Final
STAFF SUMMARY OF MEETING

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON STATE, VETERANS, & MILITARY AFFAIRS

Date:05/02/2012
ATTENDANCE
Time:01:33 PM to 04:34 PM
Baumgardner
X
Becker
X
Place:HCR 0112
Casso
*
Court
X
This Meeting was called to order by
Duran
X
Representative Kerr J.
Joshi
X
Todd
X
This Report was prepared by
Coram
X
Bo Pogue
Kerr J.
X
X = Present, E = Excused, A = Absent, * = Present after roll call
Bills Addressed: Action Taken:
SB12-154
SB12-139
HCR 12-1002
HCR 12-1003		Postponed Indefinitely
Postponed Indefinitely
Postponed Indefinitely
Postponed Indefinitely


01:33 PM -- Senate Bill 12-154

The committee was called to order. A quorum was present. Representative Duran presented Senate Bill 12-154, concerning standards for responsible medical marijuana vendors, for action only. The committee heard testimony on the bill at its April 25th meeting, and the committee went into recess with a motion on the table to refer the bill to the Committee of the Whole. Representative Duran recapped the General Assembly's action on the bill, and spoke in support of the legislation. She then withdrew her motion of April 25th. Discussion ensued regarding addressing medical marijuana vendor training during a future legislative session.
























BILL:SB12-154
TIME: 01:33:49 PM
MOVED:Duran
MOTION:Moved to refer Senate Bill 12-154 to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation. The motion was withdrawn.
SECONDED:Todd
VOTE
Baumgardner
Becker
Casso
Court
Duran
Joshi
Todd
Coram
Kerr J.
YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION:
BILL:SB12-154
TIME: 01:38:05 PM
MOVED:Duran
MOTION:Moved to postpone indefinitely Senate Bill 12-154. The motion passed on a vote of 9-0.
SECONDED:Court
VOTE
Baumgardner
Yes
Becker
Yes
Casso
Yes
Court
Yes
Duran
Yes
Joshi
Yes
Todd
Yes
Coram
Yes
Kerr J.
Yes
Final YES: 9 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS












01:39 PM

Discussion ensued regarding how to improve Senate Bill 12-154.


01:40 PM -- Senate Bill 12-139

Representatives Fields and Summers, prime sponsors, presented Senate Bill 12-139, concerning the "Colorado Job Support Act." Representative Fields provided background on the so-called "cliff effect," which is defined in the amended bill as the paradox that discourages persons who are receiving public assistance or services from accepting increases in wages or income because they may lose considerably more in public assistance or services than the increase in wages or income. She also spoke to the merits of the bill. Representative Summers discussed recent efforts to ameliorate poverty in Colorado, and explained the effect of the bill. He also discussed the merits of passing the legislation. Representative Summers responded to questions regarding the relationship between Senate Bill 12-139 and Senate Bill 12-022. Representative Fields responded to questions regarding the administration of the pilot program created by the bill at the county level.


01:50 PM

Discussion ensued regarding the ability to create the program considered in the bill without passing legislation, and the fiscal impact of the bill on counties. Representative Summers responded to questions regarding county input in crafting Senate Bill 12-139.


01:56 PM

The following persons testified regarding Senate Bill 12-139:

01:57 PM -- Ms. Becky Treece, representing the Women's Lobby of Colorado, testified in support of the bill. Ms. Treece discussed her experience with serving clients who have encountered the cliff effect, and explained how the bill would help families overcome the cliff effect. Ms. Treece provided an anecdotal example of the cliff effect, and further discussed the merits of the bill. Discussion ensued regarding the element of the bill that favors grant applications for grantees that teach financial literacy. Ms. Treece responded to questions regarding the process by which grants are awarded under the bill, and the ability to create such a grant-making process without passing statewide legislation. Discussion ensued regarding sources of funding from outside Colorado that are, or may become, available to Colorado counties for poverty programs. Committee members received a handout about potential poverty-related grant sources (Attachment A).

HseState0502AttachA.pdf

02:08 PM -- Ms. Gini Pingenot, representing Colorado Counties, Inc. (CCI), testified regarding the bill from the neutral position. Ms. Pingenot discussed county input into the crafting of Senate Bill 12-139. Ms. Pingenot responded to questions regarding the neutral position of CCI on the bill, and how the bill will operate at the county level, considering the demographic disparities among the counties. Ms. Pingenot responded to further questions regarding current efforts at the county level to assist families in overcoming the cliff effect.








02:16 PM -- Ms. Sarah Erhlich, representing Denver Human Services, testified in support of Senate Bill 12-139. Ms. Erhlich provided background on the state's Temporary Aid for Needy Families (TANF) caseload, and explained how the bill would help families transition to self-sufficiency. Ms. Erhlich also listed the additional merits of the bill. Ms. Erhlich responded to questions regarding the ability of Denver County to secure poverty-related grants without passing statewide legislation. Representative Fields provided clarification regarding how the bill would improve the ability of counties to secure funding for poverty programs. Ms. Ehrlich further explained how certain sources of funding would be secured under Senate Bill 12-139, as compared to current law.

02:25 PM -- Bridget Kaminetsky, representing 9 to 5 National Association of Working Women, testified in support of the bill. Ms. Kaminetsky provided an example of one of her organization's clients who benefitted from the type of program that would be supported by the bill. Discussion ensued regarding support that is needed by those in poverty as they seek self-sufficiency.


02:30 PM

No amendments were offered to Senate Bill 12-139. Representatives Summers provided closing remarks in support of the bill, and responded to questions regarding how the bill would change the provision of services to those seeking to transition from poverty to self-sufficiency.


02:40 PM

Representative Fields provided closing remarks in support of Senate Bill 12-139.
BILL:SB12-139
TIME: 02:42:35 PM
MOVED:Court
MOTION:Moved to refer Senate Bill 12-139 to the Committee on Appropriations with a favorable recommendation. The motion failed on a vote of 4-5.
SECONDED:Duran
VOTE
Baumgardner
No
Becker
No
Casso
Yes
Court
Yes
Duran
Yes
Joshi
No
Todd
Yes
Coram
No
Kerr J.
No
YES: 4 NO: 5 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: FAIL






BILL:SB12-139
TIME: 02:52:44 PM
MOVED:Joshi
MOTION:Moved to postpone indefinitely Senate Bill 12-139. The motion passed on a vote of 5-4.
SECONDED:Baumgardner
VOTE
Baumgardner
Yes
Becker
Yes
Casso
No
Court
No
Duran
No
Joshi
Yes
Todd
No
Coram
Yes
Kerr J.
Yes
Final YES: 5 NO: 4 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS


02:53 PM

The committee recessed.


03:07 PM -- HCR 12-1002

The committee returned to order. Representative Court, prime sponsor, presented House Concurrent Resolution 12-1002, concerning the property tax exemption for qualifying seniors, and, in connection therewith, allowing an owner of residential real property who does not actually reside in the property to claim an exemption under specified circumstances and providing the exemption only to persons with limited financial means. Representative Court provided background on what prompted her to sponsor the resolution, and explained the effect of the resolution. Representative Court responded to questions regarding applications for the senior property tax exemption by those of her constituents who are in favor of means testing for the exemption. Representative Court responded to further questions regarding the process by which those eligible to receive the exemption would apply for it under House Concurrent Resolution 12-1002.


03:20 PM

Discussion ensued regarding how tax information would be shared with county assessors under the concurrent resolution, and a provision in the resolution that allows a recipient of the homestead tax exemption who is eligible under the resolution to continue to receive it if he or she is renting the property.










03:23 PM

The following persons testified regarding House Concurrent Resolution 12-1002:

03:23 PM -- Mr. Jason Gelender, representing the Office of Legislative Legal Services, made himself available to answer questions regarding the resolution. Mr. Gelender responded to questions regarding the need to reapply for the homestead exemption under the concurrent resolution. Discussion ensued regarding the potential for amending the resolution to address concerns about reapplication for the exemption. Discussion followed regarding a provision in the resolution that allows a person to claim the exemption without living in the applicable home.

03:29 PM -- Ms. Christine Watson, representing the League of Women Voters, testified regarding House Concurrent Resolution from a neutral position, and explained the reason her organization is taking that position. Ms. Watson discussed the position of the league in support of broad-based tax relief rather than targeted relief, the league's support for keeping the state constitution unencumbered, and the best way to assist seniors. Ms. Watson provided background on the connection between rising property values and the passage of the senior homestead property tax exemption, and programs available to seniors to assist with keeping their homes. Ms. Watson clarified the position of the League of Women Voters on the resolution. Discussion ensued regarding the potential impact of Colorado's aging demographics on the use of the senior homestead tax exemption.


03:40 PM

No amendments were offered to House Concurrent Resolution 12-1002. Representative Kerr provided closing remarks in support of the resolution. Various committee members expressed their support for, or opposition to, the resolution.
BILL:HCR 12-1002
TIME: 03:42:45 PM
MOVED:Court
MOTION:Moved to refer House Concurrent Resolution 12-1002 to the Committee on Appropriations with a favorable recommendation. The motion failed on a vote of 4-5.
SECONDED:Casso
VOTE
Baumgardner
No
Becker
No
Casso
Yes
Court
Yes
Duran
Yes
Joshi
No
Todd
Yes
Coram
No
Kerr J.
No
YES: 4 NO: 5 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: FAIL






BILL:HCR 12-1002
TIME: 03:43:51 PM
MOVED:Baumgardner
MOTION:Moved to postpone indefinitely House Concurrent Resolution 12-1002. The motion passed on a vote of 5-4.
SECONDED:Joshi
VOTE
Baumgardner
Yes
Becker
Yes
Casso
No
Court
No
Duran
No
Joshi
Yes
Todd
No
Coram
Yes
Kerr J.
Yes
Final YES: 5 NO: 4 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS


03:44 PM -- HCR 12-1003

Representatives Court and Coram, prime sponsors, presented House Concurrent Resolution 12-1003, concerning the process for amending the state constitution, and, in connection therewith, increasing the number of votes needed to pass a constitutional amendment from a majority to at least 60 percent of the votes cast; allowing a constitutional amendment passed prior to 2013 to be repealed by a majority of the votes cast; and adding a requirement that a minimum number of petition signatures for a citizen-initiated constitutional amendment be gathered from voters who reside in each Colorado congressional district. Representative Court provided background on the ability of the voters in Colorado and other states to change their respective constitutions and state laws at the ballot box, and discussed the threshold for changing the constitution in Colorado under the resolution. Representative Coram discussed the provision in the resolution requiring a geographic distribution of signature-gathering to put a citizen initiative on the ballot. Discussion ensued regarding ways to change provisions already in the state constitution if House Concurrent Resolution 12-1003 were to pass. Representative Court explained the grandfather provision in the resolution.


















03:52 PM

The following persons testified regarding House Concurrent Resolution 12-1003:

03:53 PM -- Mr. Thad Tecza, representing himself, testified in opposition to the resolution. Mr. Tecza discussed the difference in nature between the types of powers exercised by federal and state governments, and explained how the initiative process acts as a check on broad state powers. Mr. Tecza explained why state constitutions are inherently longer than the U.S. constitution, and explained why he feels the resolution is "a solution in search of a problem." Mr. Tecza explained how the provision in the resolution requiring geographical distribution of signatures for putting an initiative on the ballot, and opposition to the citizen initiative process in general, favors those with greater financial resources.

04:00 PM -- Ms. Anne Campbell, representing herself, testified in opposition to House Concurrent Resolution 12-1003. Ms. Campbell opposed the resolution since it burdens ordinary citizens and grassroots organizations, particularly due to the provision requiring a geographical distribution of petition signatures. Ms. Campbell discussed the voices of minority interests. Ms. Campbell responded to questions regarding how grassroots organizations are disfavored when it becomes harder to put an initiative on the ballot. Ms. Campbell responded to further questions regarding the voices of rural communities.

04:07 PM -- Ms. Elena Nunez, representing Common Cause, testified in opposition to the resolution. Ms. Nunez discussed the importance of the initiative process, particularly as a tool when the legislature fails to act. She discussed the inherent incentives for citizens to amend the constitution rather than statute to effect public policy, and expressed opposition to a provision in the resolution that requires a supermajority vote to amend the constitution. Ms. Nunez also discussed the fact that a supermajority vote would not be required to pass House Concurrent Resolution 12-1003 if it were to reach the ballot. Ms. Nunez explained why the resolution will not prevent wealthy interests from putting measures on the ballot, and discussed public opinion about the right to petition through the initiative process.

04:13 PM -- Ms. Marty Neilson, representing the Colorado Union of Taxpayers, testified in opposition to House Concurrent Resolution 12-1003. She viewed it as a "backdoor" attack on Article XX, Section 10 of the Colorado Constitution, and supported the initiative process.

04:14 PM -- Mr. Mark Radtke, representing the Colorado Municipal League, testified in support of the resolution. Mr. Radtke discussed the need to raise the threshold for changing the state constitution.

04:16 PM -- Mr. Nicholas Colglazier, representing the Colorado Farm Bureau, testified in support of the resolution. Mr. Colglazier expressed support for raising the threshold for amending the state constitution.

04:19 PM -- Ms. Christine Watson, representing the League of Women Voters, testified about the resolution from a neutral position. Ms. Watson expressed support for the right of the citizens to petition their government, while also expressing a desire to protect the state constitution from excess amendment. Ms. Watson discussed the geographic signature distribution provision in House Concurrent Resolution 12-1003, and expressed support for providing protections to citizen-initiated statutes from amendment.













04:24 PM

Representative Becker explained the effect of prepared amendment L.004 (Attachment B). Discussion ensued regarding the fairness of increasing the threshold for removing a pre-existing constitutional amendment. Representative Becker clarified the effect of the amendment. Discussion returned to the fairness of the threshold created by the amendment.

HseState0502AttachB.pdf
BILL:HCR 12-1003
TIME: 04:26:25 PM
MOVED:Becker
MOTION:Moved prepared amendment L.004. The motion passed on a vote of 5-4.
SECONDED:Kerr J.
VOTE
Baumgardner
Yes
Becker
Yes
Casso
No
Court
No
Duran
No
Joshi
Yes
Todd
No
Coram
Yes
Kerr J.
Yes
YES: 5 NO: 4 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS
























04:32 PM
BILL:HCR 12-1003
TIME: 04:32:25 PM
MOVED:Court
MOTION:Moved to postpone indefinitely House Concurrent Resolution 12-1003. The motion passed on a vote of 8-1.
SECONDED:Coram
VOTE
Baumgardner
Yes
Becker
No
Casso
Yes
Court
Yes
Duran
Yes
Joshi
Yes
Todd
Yes
Coram
Yes
Kerr J.
Yes
Final YES: 8 NO: 1 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS


04:34 PM

The committee adjourned.