About the League
Where We Stand
Donate
Join Us
Pay Dues
Contact LWVAL
Contact a Local League
Baldwin Co.
Greater Birmingham
East Alabama
Mobile
Montgomery
Greater Tuscaloosa
Visit us on Facebook and become a Fan!
Quick Links for CitizensVoting & Elections
Register to vote
Find Your Polling Place
Restore your voting rights
"About the Help America Vote Act" (pdf)
Vote411.org
Read more
State Legislature & Congress
Who Speaks for You?
Find State Legislation & Take Action
The AL Legislature: Facts & Issues
Courts
"The Courts and Judicial Selection in AL" (pdf)
Environment
Environmental Management in AL: Facts & Issues
The State of Climate Change (LWVUS)
The Alabama Constitution
Resources on Constitutional Reform in AL
Government Transparency and Accountability
LWVAL Action Priority Level I (Highest) - Monitoring and action of highest priority. Major area for resource expenditures.Click a bill to see sponsor(s), summary (including link to full text), League action and justification for that action, and progress of the bill through the legislative process.
Legend:
= LWVAL's support for the legislation. 
= LWVAL's opposition to the legislation.
= new bill activity; change from previous week's report such as new progress in the legislature and/or League action. Bill may be one newly added to the report. These updates are in green font.LWVAL has taken a position on these bills:
SB4 - Legislative Compensation Commission, established, members, quadrennial recommendations for the compensation and expenses to be paid to members of Legislature, Sec. 29-1-8 repealed; Act 1196, 1971 Reg. Sess., Act 87-209, 1987 Reg. Sess.; Act 90-490, 1990 Reg. Sess.; Act 91-95, 1991 Reg. Sess.; Act 91-108, 1991 Reg. Sess.; Act 2007-75, 2007 Reg. Sess. repealed, const. amend.
Sponsor(s): Senator Williams
Summary/Synopsis: Constitutional Amendment. Under Amendment 57, now appearing as Section 48.01 of the Official Recompilation of the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, as amended, members of the Legislature are provided certain compensation and expense reimbursement authorized by law. Several acts of the Legislature provide reimbursement for presiding officers and members of the Legislature.
This bill would propose an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to create a Legislative Compensation Commission; to provide for its members and terms of office; to provide that the commission would establish for each quadrennium the compensation and expenses for members of the Legislature; and to repeal conflicting laws regarding compensation and expense reimbursement.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL strongly supports SB4. The bill fulfills the League’s long-standing position favoring an objective commission to set compensation. The explicit provisions flesh out the League’s basic statement and seem carefully crafted to avoid loopholes. Provisions suggest the bill seeks broad reform of the legislative compensation system. The language is heavy with encouragement for good government. For example, the purpose of the bill is a good statement about restoring trust for Legislature through transparency: “. . . to remove the establishment of legislative compensation from the hands of the Legislature itself, to ensure that no legislative pay may be raised or altered during the same quadrennium in which it was established, to validate the basis for which legislative pay is determined in a manner commensurate with other states and to publish those standards for the consumption of the general public, and to allow the citizens of Alabama to vote on this matter.”
The six members of the commission are to include: “one member, who may not be a member of the Legislature, appointed by the Governor; one member, who may not be a member of the Legislature, appointed by the Lieutenant Governor; one member, who may not be a member of the Legislature, and who has experience in human resources or as a compensation specialist, appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate; one member, who may not be a member of the Legislature, and who has experience in human resources or as a compensation specialist, appointed by the Speaker Pro Tempore of the House; one member of the House appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives; and one member of the Senate appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate.” The commissioners receive only expenses, which are to be the same as those for state employees. Their decision is to be presented to legislature in the third year of the quadrennium.
The rules are carefully drawn to prevent abuse. The performance criteria for the legislators to be considered in setting compensation are defined. Other provisions seem to encourage the Commission to re-evaluate what expenses are to be covered. No automatic cost-of-living adjustments are allowed. Compensation may change during a session only if proration is declared in the General Fund; in that case the legislative salaries shall be reduced by the same percentage as other state functions. Conflicting and unclear laws are repealed.
Bill Progress in Legislature: 2/7/2012: First reading and referred to 03/14/2012: On CCFE&E calendar for 2:00 p.m., Room 325
03/21/2012: on CCFE&E calendar for 3:30 p.m. Room 325
Summary/Synopsis: Constitutional Amendment. Under Amendment 57, now appearing as Section 48.01 of the Official Recompilation of the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, as amended, members of the Legislature are provided certain compensation and expense reimbursement authorized by law. Several acts of the Legislature provide reimbursement for presiding officers and members of the Legislature.
This bill would propose an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to create a Legislative Compensation Commission; to provide for its members and terms of office; to provide that the commission would establish for each quadrennium the compensation and expenses for members of the Legislature; and to repeal conflicting laws regarding compensation and expense reimbursement.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL strongly supports SB4. The bill fulfills the League’s long-standing position favoring an objective commission to set compensation. The explicit provisions flesh out the League’s basic statement and seem carefully crafted to avoid loopholes. Provisions suggest the bill seeks broad reform of the legislative compensation system. The language is heavy with encouragement for good government. For example, the purpose of the bill is a good statement about restoring trust for Legislature through transparency: “. . . to remove the establishment of legislative compensation from the hands of the Legislature itself, to ensure that no legislative pay may be raised or altered during the same quadrennium in which it was established, to validate the basis for which legislative pay is determined in a manner commensurate with other states and to publish those standards for the consumption of the general public, and to allow the citizens of Alabama to vote on this matter.”
The six members of the commission are to include: “one member, who may not be a member of the Legislature, appointed by the Governor; one member, who may not be a member of the Legislature, appointed by the Lieutenant Governor; one member, who may not be a member of the Legislature, and who has experience in human resources or as a compensation specialist, appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate; one member, who may not be a member of the Legislature, and who has experience in human resources or as a compensation specialist, appointed by the Speaker Pro Tempore of the House; one member of the House appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives; and one member of the Senate appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate.” The commissioners receive only expenses, which are to be the same as those for state employees. Their decision is to be presented to legislature in the third year of the quadrennium.
The rules are carefully drawn to prevent abuse. The performance criteria for the legislators to be considered in setting compensation are defined. Other provisions seem to encourage the Commission to re-evaluate what expenses are to be covered. No automatic cost-of-living adjustments are allowed. Compensation may change during a session only if proration is declared in the General Fund; in that case the legislative salaries shall be reduced by the same percentage as other state functions. Conflicting and unclear laws are repealed.
Bill Progress in Legislature: 2/7/2012: First reading and referred to 03/14/2012: On CCFE&E calendar for 2:00 p.m., Room 325
03/21/2012: on CCFE&E calendar for 3:30 p.m. Room 325
SB14 - Competitive bids, contracts of higher education institutions, minimum amount increased, Sec. 41-16-20 am'd.
Sponsor(s): Senator Dial
Summary/Synopsis: For contracts by institutions of higher education, the minimum amount that requires competitive bidding is raised from $7, 500 to $15,000. Preferred vendors, chiefly those from Alabama, may be chosen if their bids are no more than 5% higher than the lowest bid.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL supports SB14. The League supports competitive bidding but recognizes that the minimum level must be reasonable and that the costs of goods and services often increase due to inflation and other factors. When limits are too low or not allowed to increase as the price of goods and services increase, this leads to increased operating costs both for the buyer of goods and services and the institutions with oversight responsibility.
Bill Process in Legislature: 2/7/2012: First reading and referred to the 03/15/2012: Read for the 2nd time and placed on the calendar with 1 Substitute (137302-2); FR&A substitute offered; pending 3rd reading and favorable from FR&A with 1 Substitute.
4/26/2012: 3rd Reading passed; FR&A 1st Substitute (137302-2) offered; Dial motion to Adopt adopted (27-3-0); Motion to Read a 3rd time and Pass adopted (27-3-0); Engrossed.
4/26/2012: Read for the first time in the House and referred to the 5/02/2012: Listed on State Govt. calendar, Room 428, 1:30 p.m.
5/2/2012: Read for the 2nd time and placed on the calendar; pending 3rd reading and favorable from State Govt.
5/10/2012: House – 3rd reading Passed; Motion to Read a 3rd Time and Pass adopted (94-0-1); Senate – Passed Second House; House – Signature Requested; Senate – Enrolled; Forwarded to the Governor at 4:00 p.m.
Summary/Synopsis: For contracts by institutions of higher education, the minimum amount that requires competitive bidding is raised from $7, 500 to $15,000. Preferred vendors, chiefly those from Alabama, may be chosen if their bids are no more than 5% higher than the lowest bid.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL supports SB14. The League supports competitive bidding but recognizes that the minimum level must be reasonable and that the costs of goods and services often increase due to inflation and other factors. When limits are too low or not allowed to increase as the price of goods and services increase, this leads to increased operating costs both for the buyer of goods and services and the institutions with oversight responsibility.
Bill Process in Legislature: 2/7/2012: First reading and referred to the 03/15/2012: Read for the 2nd time and placed on the calendar with 1 Substitute (137302-2); FR&A substitute offered; pending 3rd reading and favorable from FR&A with 1 Substitute.
4/26/2012: 3rd Reading passed; FR&A 1st Substitute (137302-2) offered; Dial motion to Adopt adopted (27-3-0); Motion to Read a 3rd time and Pass adopted (27-3-0); Engrossed.
4/26/2012: Read for the first time in the House and referred to the 5/02/2012: Listed on State Govt. calendar, Room 428, 1:30 p.m.
5/2/2012: Read for the 2nd time and placed on the calendar; pending 3rd reading and favorable from State Govt.
5/10/2012: House – 3rd reading Passed; Motion to Read a 3rd Time and Pass adopted (94-0-1); Senate – Passed Second House; House – Signature Requested; Senate – Enrolled; Forwarded to the Governor at 4:00 p.m.
SB30 - Finance Department, Purchasing Division, establishment and maintenance of statewide database for bids or proposals for public contracts, required, database accessible through Internet
…and
SB46 - Comptroller, establishment and maintenance of statewide database for bids or proposals for public contracts, required, database accessible through Internet
Sponsor(s)
SB30 Senators Orr and Holtzclaw
SB46 Senators Allen, Holtzclaw, Sanford, and Pittman
Summary/Synopsis:
SB30 requires the Purchasing Division of the Finance Department to establish and maintain a statewide data base for bids, proposals for public contracts for the state and any division or institution. This database shall be accessible to citizens on the internet.
SB46 requires this of the State Comptroller rather than the Finance Department.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL supports SB30 and SB46. The legislation would enhance government transparency and accountability and is an anti-corruption device. League also supports the use of the internet as a transparency tool.
Bill Progress in Legislature:
SB30 2/7/2012: First reading and referred to the 02/08/2012: 2nd reading and placed on the calendar pending 3rd reading on day 3 and favorable from Finance and Taxation General Fund.
02/14/2012: 3rd reading passed; 1st Substitute (136645-2) offered; motion to adopt adopted; motions to read a 3rd time and pass adopted (32-0-0); Engrossed;
02/14/2012: Read for the first time in the House and referred to the 03/01/2012: 2nd reading and placed on calendar; pending 3rd reading and favorable from State Govt.
5/08/2012: House – 3rd Reading Passed; Knight Amendment (142842-1) Offered; Motion to Adopt adopted; Motion to Read a 3rd Time and Pass adopted (105-0-0). Senate – Concurrence Requested; Orr Motion to Concur In and Adopt adopted (33-0-0).
5/09/2012: House – Signature Requested; Senate—Enrolled; House Concurred in Second House Amendment; Forwarded to the Governor at 11:23 a.m.
Note: Knight Amendment replaced Comptroller with "Division of Control and Accounts with the State Department of Finance" as agency responsible for the database and turned specific web page to a generic reference to state web page.
SB46 2/7/2012: First reading and referred to
SB30 Senators Orr and Holtzclaw
SB46 Senators Allen, Holtzclaw, Sanford, and Pittman
Summary/Synopsis:
SB30 requires the Purchasing Division of the Finance Department to establish and maintain a statewide data base for bids, proposals for public contracts for the state and any division or institution. This database shall be accessible to citizens on the internet.
SB46 requires this of the State Comptroller rather than the Finance Department.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL supports SB30 and SB46. The legislation would enhance government transparency and accountability and is an anti-corruption device. League also supports the use of the internet as a transparency tool.
Bill Progress in Legislature:
SB30 2/7/2012: First reading and referred to the 02/08/2012: 2nd reading and placed on the calendar pending 3rd reading on day 3 and favorable from Finance and Taxation General Fund.
02/14/2012: 3rd reading passed; 1st Substitute (136645-2) offered; motion to adopt adopted; motions to read a 3rd time and pass adopted (32-0-0); Engrossed;
02/14/2012: Read for the first time in the House and referred to the 03/01/2012: 2nd reading and placed on calendar; pending 3rd reading and favorable from State Govt.
5/08/2012: House – 3rd Reading Passed; Knight Amendment (142842-1) Offered; Motion to Adopt adopted; Motion to Read a 3rd Time and Pass adopted (105-0-0). Senate – Concurrence Requested; Orr Motion to Concur In and Adopt adopted (33-0-0).
5/09/2012: House – Signature Requested; Senate—Enrolled; House Concurred in Second House Amendment; Forwarded to the Governor at 11:23 a.m.
Note: Knight Amendment replaced Comptroller with "Division of Control and Accounts with the State Department of Finance" as agency responsible for the database and turned specific web page to a generic reference to state web page.
SB46 2/7/2012: First reading and referred to
HB522, HB521 and HB537 - Legislative record, Clerk of the House (HB522 and HB537) and Secretary of the Senate (HB522 and HB521) to establish procedure to implement and maintain, record to contain committee discussions, floor debate, and other material
Sponsor(s): Representative Mitchell
These three bills are identical except that HB522 refers to both the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House; HB521 applies only to the Secretary of the Senate, and HB537 applies only to the House Clerk.
Summary/Synopsis: Under existing law certain matters related to the legislative process are not recorded. This bill would require the officials to establish and maintain a record comparable to the US Congressional Record. The record should include, but is not limited to, a verbatim copy of discussions in committee meetings, committee reports, committee votes, floor debates, discussions during public hearings, insertion of statements into the record by individual members as to why the member voted for or against an instrument or took a particular action, and insertion of other materials upon the request of a member. This record could be included as part of the Journal, as a separate publication, or in a separate digital form. In establishing the legislative record, the Secretary and the Clerk should consider (1) Cost effectiveness and feasibility; (2) Accessibility and availability; (3) Usefulness; (4) Accuracy; and (5) Ability to fulfill historical preservation purposes.
Within a reasonable time after the adjournment sine die of a legislative session, the Secretary and the Clerk must compile, index, and publish the legislative record. They may also publish the legislative record at shorter intervals. A reasonable fee may be charged with the proceeds to be used to defray costs.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL supports HB522, HB521, and HB537. Section V (Public Access to Information) of League’s positions on the Legislature specifies the need for “roll call votes on bills and amendments”, publication of legislative budgets, and information about all legislative meetings (chamber and committee). Although the committee system is “the core of the legislative process,” the current lack of reports and publications detailing committee debate and operations make it particularly difficult for citizens to follow the development of laws.
The published reports of committee work that this bill would require fulfill the chief requirement under League positions on the Budget Process for an entirely open process. League also supports open meetings. This bill would encourage the process, and provide information to those who cannot frequent legislative sessions.
Its archival requirements would be valuable in a state where laws, especially reforms, almost always take several sessions to pass. The bill’s most valuable innovation is the requirement for verbatim accounts of discussions in committee meetings, floor debate, and discussions in public hearings. Those would provide explanations never before available for citizens to educate themselves and participate in governmental decisions.
Bill Progress in the Legislature:
HB522, HB521, and HB537: 03/14/2012: Read for the first time and referred to the
These three bills are identical except that HB522 refers to both the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House; HB521 applies only to the Secretary of the Senate, and HB537 applies only to the House Clerk.
Summary/Synopsis: Under existing law certain matters related to the legislative process are not recorded. This bill would require the officials to establish and maintain a record comparable to the US Congressional Record. The record should include, but is not limited to, a verbatim copy of discussions in committee meetings, committee reports, committee votes, floor debates, discussions during public hearings, insertion of statements into the record by individual members as to why the member voted for or against an instrument or took a particular action, and insertion of other materials upon the request of a member. This record could be included as part of the Journal, as a separate publication, or in a separate digital form. In establishing the legislative record, the Secretary and the Clerk should consider (1) Cost effectiveness and feasibility; (2) Accessibility and availability; (3) Usefulness; (4) Accuracy; and (5) Ability to fulfill historical preservation purposes.
Within a reasonable time after the adjournment sine die of a legislative session, the Secretary and the Clerk must compile, index, and publish the legislative record. They may also publish the legislative record at shorter intervals. A reasonable fee may be charged with the proceeds to be used to defray costs.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL supports HB522, HB521, and HB537. Section V (Public Access to Information) of League’s positions on the Legislature specifies the need for “roll call votes on bills and amendments”, publication of legislative budgets, and information about all legislative meetings (chamber and committee). Although the committee system is “the core of the legislative process,” the current lack of reports and publications detailing committee debate and operations make it particularly difficult for citizens to follow the development of laws.
The published reports of committee work that this bill would require fulfill the chief requirement under League positions on the Budget Process for an entirely open process. League also supports open meetings. This bill would encourage the process, and provide information to those who cannot frequent legislative sessions.
Its archival requirements would be valuable in a state where laws, especially reforms, almost always take several sessions to pass. The bill’s most valuable innovation is the requirement for verbatim accounts of discussions in committee meetings, floor debate, and discussions in public hearings. Those would provide explanations never before available for citizens to educate themselves and participate in governmental decisions.
Bill Progress in the Legislature:
HB522, HB521, and HB537: 03/14/2012: Read for the first time and referred to the
HB678 - Attorney General, state litigation, contingency fee contracts with private attorneys, regulated, Transparency in Private Attorney Contracts Act, Sec. 41-16-72 am'd
Sponsor(s): Representatives DeMarco, Sanderford, Ball, W. Johnson, Farley, Greeson, McClurkin, Treadaway, Carns, Payne, R. Johnson and Beckman
Summary/Synopsis: Under existing law, attorneys retained to represent the state in litigation are required to be appointed by the Attorney General in consultation with the Governor. Existing law does not regulate the state agencies entering into a contingency fee contract with an attorney in private practice. This bill would regulate state agencies entering contingency fee contracts with private attorneys representing the state in litigation.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL supports HB678. This Transparency in Private Attorneys Act seems a remarkably carefully and complete construct of procedures and regulations to close a major loophole in current law. The provisions deal comprehensively with possible problems or consequences of the change proposed.
The Act regulates contingency fee hiring of private attorneys for any state official, director of a state agency, department, bureau, commission, authority, public corporation, board or commission or other instrumentality. The Attorney General (AG) in consultation with the Governor shall select from a list of interested attorneys according to such considerations as the level of skill, experience and expertise required and the fees, to ensure that the state gets the best representation possible for the funds paid. Copies of the contract and the written determination that the contract is cost effective and in the public interest are to be posted on line.
Maximum fees may be set and some caps are listed by percentages in the bill. Fees are to be negotiated and approved by AG and Governor. Purchasing entities may contract with a non-litigation attorney from a list maintained by the Governor’s Legal Advisors using the criteria listed above. Universities retain their current powers to hire their own attorneys.
The written determination of the need for the contract should include specific findings for each of the following factors:
Any private attorney under contract to provide services to the state on a contingency fee basis, from the inception of the contract until at least four years after the contract expires or is terminated, shall maintain detailed current records, including documentation of all expenses, disbursements, charges, credits, underlying receipts and invoices, and other financial transactions that concern the provision of the attorney services. The private attorney shall make all the records available for inspection and copying upon request. In addition, the private attorney shall maintain detailed contemporaneous time records for the attorneys and paralegals working on the contract in increments not greater than 1/10 of an hour and shall promptly provide these records to the Governor, Attorney General, or contracting agency, upon request.
Contingency fees are to be paid by the State Treasury from the money recovered by the litigations.
Bill Progress in Legislature:
4/10/2012: First reading and referred to the
Summary/Synopsis: Under existing law, attorneys retained to represent the state in litigation are required to be appointed by the Attorney General in consultation with the Governor. Existing law does not regulate the state agencies entering into a contingency fee contract with an attorney in private practice. This bill would regulate state agencies entering contingency fee contracts with private attorneys representing the state in litigation.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL supports HB678. This Transparency in Private Attorneys Act seems a remarkably carefully and complete construct of procedures and regulations to close a major loophole in current law. The provisions deal comprehensively with possible problems or consequences of the change proposed.
The Act regulates contingency fee hiring of private attorneys for any state official, director of a state agency, department, bureau, commission, authority, public corporation, board or commission or other instrumentality. The Attorney General (AG) in consultation with the Governor shall select from a list of interested attorneys according to such considerations as the level of skill, experience and expertise required and the fees, to ensure that the state gets the best representation possible for the funds paid. Copies of the contract and the written determination that the contract is cost effective and in the public interest are to be posted on line.
Maximum fees may be set and some caps are listed by percentages in the bill. Fees are to be negotiated and approved by AG and Governor. Purchasing entities may contract with a non-litigation attorney from a list maintained by the Governor’s Legal Advisors using the criteria listed above. Universities retain their current powers to hire their own attorneys.
The written determination of the need for the contract should include specific findings for each of the following factors:
- Whether there exist sufficient and appropriate legal and financial resources within the state to handle the matter.
- The expected time and labor required; the novelty, complexity, and difficulty of the questions involved; and the skill requisite to perform the attorney services properly.
- The geographic area where the attorney services are to be provided.
- The amount of experience desired for the particular kind of attorney services to be provided and the nature of the private attorney's experience with similar issues or cases.
Any private attorney under contract to provide services to the state on a contingency fee basis, from the inception of the contract until at least four years after the contract expires or is terminated, shall maintain detailed current records, including documentation of all expenses, disbursements, charges, credits, underlying receipts and invoices, and other financial transactions that concern the provision of the attorney services. The private attorney shall make all the records available for inspection and copying upon request. In addition, the private attorney shall maintain detailed contemporaneous time records for the attorneys and paralegals working on the contract in increments not greater than 1/10 of an hour and shall promptly provide these records to the Governor, Attorney General, or contracting agency, upon request.
Contingency fees are to be paid by the State Treasury from the money recovered by the litigations.
Bill Progress in Legislature:
4/10/2012: First reading and referred to the
HB761 - Open Records Act, government official response to a citizen's request regarding a public record or records, time limit
Sponsor(s): Representative Gimsley
Summary/Synopsis: Under existing law, the Open Records Act does not give a time limit for a government official to respond to a citizen's request to examine or copy a public record or records.
This bill adds to the Open Records Act such a time limit. An official in charge of a public record must determine within 10 days whether or not the record is accessible under current law, (section 36-12-40). Once the determination is made, the citizen must receive notification of that determination within 15 days.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL supports HB761.
National principle stating: “The League of Women Voters believes that democratic government depends upon informed and active participation in government and requires that governmental bodies protect the citizen’s right to know by giving adequate notice of proposed actions, holding open meetings and making public records accessible.” Transparency enhances trust in government and its decisions.
Bill Progress in Legislature:
4/26/2012: Read for the first time and referred to the
Summary/Synopsis: Under existing law, the Open Records Act does not give a time limit for a government official to respond to a citizen's request to examine or copy a public record or records.
This bill adds to the Open Records Act such a time limit. An official in charge of a public record must determine within 10 days whether or not the record is accessible under current law, (section 36-12-40). Once the determination is made, the citizen must receive notification of that determination within 15 days.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL supports HB761.
National principle stating: “The League of Women Voters believes that democratic government depends upon informed and active participation in government and requires that governmental bodies protect the citizen’s right to know by giving adequate notice of proposed actions, holding open meetings and making public records accessible.” Transparency enhances trust in government and its decisions.
Bill Progress in Legislature:
4/26/2012: Read for the first time and referred to the
LWVAL is monitoring these bills.
SB29 - Municipal public housing authorities, exercise of power of eminent domain with approval of municipal council, Sec. 24-1-28 am'd.
Sponsor(s): Senator Orr
Summary/Synopsis: This short bill adds to section of the code that gives the power of eminent domain to municipal housing authorities, the phrase, with the authority of the municipal council.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL is monitoring SB29. This bill addresses the fundamental right of citizens to control their city though elected officials. It goes directly to citizens’ rights and city accountability.
Bill Progress in Legislature: 2/7/2012: First reading and referred to 02/21/2012: 2nd reading and placed on calendar; pending 3rd reading and favorable from Govt. Affairs.
5/09/2012: Indefinitely postponed.
Summary/Synopsis: This short bill adds to section of the code that gives the power of eminent domain to municipal housing authorities, the phrase, with the authority of the municipal council.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL is monitoring SB29. This bill addresses the fundamental right of citizens to control their city though elected officials. It goes directly to citizens’ rights and city accountability.
Bill Progress in Legislature: 2/7/2012: First reading and referred to 02/21/2012: 2nd reading and placed on calendar; pending 3rd reading and favorable from Govt. Affairs.
5/09/2012: Indefinitely postponed.
SB59 and SB263 - Contract Review Permanent Legislative Oversight Committee, emergency contracts treatment, Secs. 29-2-41.1, 41-16-72 am'd.; Act 2011-577, 2011 Reg. Sess. am'd.
Sponsor(s):
SB59 - Senators Holtzclaw, Sanford, Orr and Pittman
SB263 - Senators Holtzclaw, Sanford, Orr and Irons
Summary/Synopsis: Under existing law, the Contract Review Permanent Legislative Oversight Committee reviews contracts of state departments for personal or professional services with private entities or individuals to be paid out of appropriated funds. Contracts let in specified emergency situations may be let for 60 days without committee review, but a succeeding contract is subject to review by the committee. Personal and professional service contracts let by competitive bid are excluded from review.
This bill would clarify that all emergency contracts excepted from legislative committee review, irrespective of the emergency circumstances, would have a term of no more than 60 days and a second identical or substantially similar emergency contract for those particular services could not be let within one year of the commencement date of the initial emergency contract.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL is monitoring SB59 and SB263. The legislation is attempting to maintain legislative oversight by closing a procedure by which the executive branch has circumvented legislative review of contracts.
Bill Progress in Legislature:
SB59 - 2/7/2012: First reading and referred to
SB263 - 2/9/2012: First reading and referred to the 02/16/2012: 2nd reading and place on calendar with one FR&A amendment (136840-3); pending 3rd reading and favorable from FR&A.
Note: Amendment clarifies procedures between the quadrennium and when no committee has been appointed.
02/23/2012: 3rd reading passed; FR&A amendment offered; Holtzclaw Motion to Adopt adopted; Motion to Read a 3rd Time and Pass adopted (31-0-0); Engrossed
02/23/2012: Read for the first time in the House and referred to the 03/08/2012: Read for the 2nd time and placed on calendar; pending 3rd read and favorable from State Govt.
5/08/2012: 3rd Reading passed; Motion to Read a 3rd Time and Pass adopted (99-0-2).
5/09/2012: Senate – Passed 2nd House; House – Signature Requested; Senate – Enrolled; Delivered to the Governor at 2:57 p.m.
SB59 - Senators Holtzclaw, Sanford, Orr and Pittman
SB263 - Senators Holtzclaw, Sanford, Orr and Irons
Summary/Synopsis: Under existing law, the Contract Review Permanent Legislative Oversight Committee reviews contracts of state departments for personal or professional services with private entities or individuals to be paid out of appropriated funds. Contracts let in specified emergency situations may be let for 60 days without committee review, but a succeeding contract is subject to review by the committee. Personal and professional service contracts let by competitive bid are excluded from review.
This bill would clarify that all emergency contracts excepted from legislative committee review, irrespective of the emergency circumstances, would have a term of no more than 60 days and a second identical or substantially similar emergency contract for those particular services could not be let within one year of the commencement date of the initial emergency contract.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL is monitoring SB59 and SB263. The legislation is attempting to maintain legislative oversight by closing a procedure by which the executive branch has circumvented legislative review of contracts.
Bill Progress in Legislature:
SB59 - 2/7/2012: First reading and referred to
SB263 - 2/9/2012: First reading and referred to the 02/16/2012: 2nd reading and place on calendar with one FR&A amendment (136840-3); pending 3rd reading and favorable from FR&A.
Note: Amendment clarifies procedures between the quadrennium and when no committee has been appointed.
02/23/2012: 3rd reading passed; FR&A amendment offered; Holtzclaw Motion to Adopt adopted; Motion to Read a 3rd Time and Pass adopted (31-0-0); Engrossed
02/23/2012: Read for the first time in the House and referred to the 03/08/2012: Read for the 2nd time and placed on calendar; pending 3rd read and favorable from State Govt.
5/08/2012: 3rd Reading passed; Motion to Read a 3rd Time and Pass adopted (99-0-2).
5/09/2012: Senate – Passed 2nd House; House – Signature Requested; Senate – Enrolled; Delivered to the Governor at 2:57 p.m.
HB526 - Legislative standing committees, granted subpoena powers, authority to administer oaths, immunity, penalty
Sponsor(s): Representative Mitchell
Summary/Synopsis: Existing law does not provide for a comprehensive method for legislative committees to subpoena witnesses and documents. This bill would provide standing committees of the House of Representatives and standing committees of the Senate with the authority to subpoena witnesses to testify before the committees and to subpoena documents as needed to conduct the business of the respective committee. This bill would further provide for enforcement by the 15th Judicial Circuit (Montgomery) regarding persons failing to properly respond to a legislative subpoena. This bill would provide for payment of certain expenses of witnesses.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL is monitoring HB526.
League has no position that directly addresses legislative subpoenas, but, because it is so comprehensive an addition to the code of something completely new, we are following the legislation.
Bill Progress in the Legislature: 03/14/2012: Read for the first time and referred to the
Summary/Synopsis: Existing law does not provide for a comprehensive method for legislative committees to subpoena witnesses and documents. This bill would provide standing committees of the House of Representatives and standing committees of the Senate with the authority to subpoena witnesses to testify before the committees and to subpoena documents as needed to conduct the business of the respective committee. This bill would further provide for enforcement by the 15th Judicial Circuit (Montgomery) regarding persons failing to properly respond to a legislative subpoena. This bill would provide for payment of certain expenses of witnesses.
League Action and Justification: LWVAL is monitoring HB526.
League has no position that directly addresses legislative subpoenas, but, because it is so comprehensive an addition to the code of something completely new, we are following the legislation.
Bill Progress in the Legislature: 03/14/2012: Read for the first time and referred to the
More issues