Senate Journal: Wednesday, January 15, 2003
JOURNAL OF THE SENATE
__________
THIRD CALENDAR DAY
THIRD SESSION DAY
Senate Chamber
Des Moines, Iowa, Wednesday, January 15, 2003
The Senate met in regular session at 8:40 a.m., President Kramer
presiding.
Prayer was offered by Gregg Rivers, Branch President of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in Newton, Iowa. He
was the guest of Senator Black.
The Journal of Tuesday, January 14, 2003, was approved.
LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Leave of absence was granted as follows:
Senator Schuerer, until he arrives, on request of Senator Zieman.
The Senate stood at ease at 8:50 a.m. until the fall of the gavel.
The Senate resumed session at 9:58 a.m., President Kramer
presiding.
COMMITTEE FROM THE HOUSE
A committee from the House appeared and announced that the
House was ready to receive the Senate in joint convention.
In accordance with House Concurrent Resolution 2, duly adopted,
the Senate proceeded to the House chamber under the direction of the
Secretary of the Senate and the Sergeant-at-Arms.
JOINT CONVENTION
In accordance with law and House Concurrent Resolution 2, duly
adopted, the joint convention was called to order at 10:03 a.m.,
President Kramer presiding.
Senator Iverson moved that the roll call be dispensed with and
that the President of the joint convention be authorized to declare a
quorum present, which motion prevailed by a voice vote.
President Kramer declared a quorum present and the joint
convention duly organized.
Senator Iverson moved that a committee of six, three members
from the Senate and three members from the House, be appointed to
escort Governor Thomas J. Vilsack to the Condition of the Iowa
Judiciary Message.
The motion prevailed by a voice vote and the Chair announced the
appointment of Senators Lamberti, Boettger, and Kreiman on the
part of the Senate, and Representatives Upmeyer, Baudler, and
Struyk on the part of the House.
Senator Iverson moved that a committee of six, three members
from the Senate and three members from the House, be appointed to
notify the Honorable Louis A. Lavorato, Chief Justice of the Iowa
Supreme Court, that the joint convention was ready to receive him.
The motion prevailed by a voice vote and the Chair announced the
appointment of Senators Angelo, Redfern, and Fraise on the part of
the Senate, and Representatives Maddox, Paulsen, and Miller on the
part of the House.
Secretary of State Chet Culver, Secretary of Agriculture Patty
Judge, Auditor of State David A. Vaudt, and Attorney General Tom
Miller were escorted into the House chamber.
The Justices of the Supreme Court, Chief Judge Sackett and the
Judges of the Court of Appeals, and the District Court Chief Judges
were escorted into the House chamber.
Lieutenant Governor Sally J. Pederson was escorted into the
House chamber.
Mrs. Janis Lavorato, wife of the Chief Justice; his sons, Anthony
and Dominick Lavorato; his stepdaughter, Jenna Green; his sister-in-
law, Delayne Johnson, and her sons Matt and Jacob Johnson were
escorted into the House chamber.
The committee waited upon Governor Thomas J. Vilsack and
escorted him into the House chamber.
The committee waited upon Chief Justice Louis A. Lavorato and
escorted him to the Speaker’s station.
President Kramer then presented Chief Justice Louis A. Lavorato,
who delivered the following Condition of the Judiciary Message:
Mr. Speaker, Madam President, Members of the General Assembly, Governor
Vilsack, Lieutenant Governor Pederson, distinguished guests, and friends. On behalf of
the Iowa Judicial Branch, thank you for the invitation to speak here today. Before I
begin, I would like to invite you to join us downstairs in our courtroom for coffee and
conversation following my remarks.
I would also like to extend a warm welcome to the new members of the General
Assembly, and to acknowledge the newest member of the Iowa Judicial Council, Judge
Michael Walsh, Chief Judge of the Third Judicial District, which encompasses most of
northwest Iowa. No doubt you will encounter many challenges in your new roles,
especially this year. But that’s what public service is all about-finding solutions to
challenges facing our society.
Dr. Martin Luther King
It’s appropriate to take a moment to acknowledge the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther
King, Jr., which is today. Challenges did not deter Dr. King and his followers. They
encountered hostile, often violent opposition to their peaceful efforts to end racial
segregation and discrimination, and yet they persevered, helping bring the promise of
the Constitution to all Americans.
Dr. King once said: "The ultimate measure of man is not where he stands in
moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and
controversy." Although the present challenges we face in Iowa are much different from
those Dr. King confronted, his example and words can serve to inspire us as we work
through our present difficulties.
We are concerned, as you are, about the state’s fiscal problems. I’m here to report
that notwithstanding continuing financial hardships and unprecedented cuts in court
operations, the Judicial Branch is managing to perform its basic responsibilities. All
credit for this belongs to our judges and court staff. We’re immensely proud of them.
I will discuss the condition of our day-to-day operations later in my remarks. But
first, some encouraging news about progress we’ve made in the midst of these most
trying times.
Termination of Parental Rights: Appellate Rules
Like you, we regard our work with troubled families, especially children, as one of
the most important things we do, and we are always searching for new strategies to
address their needs. One of our most notable accomplishments this year has been our
continuing effort to move children out of foster care and into permanent homes faster
by speeding up the process in termination of parental rights cases.
The 1997 federal Adoption and Safe Families Act, and subsequent state action,
sought to reduce the amount of time children spend in foster care and to bring
permanency to their lives as quickly as possible. Immediately following the adoption of
the Act, our trial courts made great strides fulfilling its spirit, but the appellate
process, which the Act did not address, continued to be slow in termination of parental
rights cases. We sought to correct this.
Last year we adopted new court rules that simplified appellate procedures and cut
the time for appeal by more than half for these cases. A process that used to drag on
for about 13 months, now takes about four months. That means children can be adopted
sooner, or in some cases, families wait less time before they’re reunited.
The longer a case continues, the more stress on the families and children involved.
Children in these situations routinely need more therapy to cope with the uncertainty
of waiting for the process to conclude. Our new rules ease the strain of families and
children. As Judge Stephen Clarke so aptly said, "One of the primary goals of the new
rules is to let children have a childhood." Our new procedures are helping us do this.
The new rules have also helped ease the workload of juvenile judges, social workers,
juvenile court officers, court-appointed attorneys, and county attorneys.
Many people deserve credit for this success. The new procedures were the
brainchild of our Iowa Court Improvement Project Task Force. The General Assembly
and the Governor also deserve praise for your part in this success story. A simple, but
important, statutory change that you approved in 2001 helped make the expedited
procedures possible. We’re grateful for your assistance.
Our new appellate rules are the first of their kind and a model for other states.
Now we’re ready to expand the rules to child in need of assistance cases, and again, we
need your help to do so. We urge you to pass legislation, which we have submitted to
you, that would allow us to expedite more of these important cases.
iowacourtsonline.org
Perhaps our most significant advancements in the past few years have come
through the use of information technology. The Internet is increasingly becoming the
place where government business is conducted. According to a recent study, citizens’
use of the Internet to access government services increased in the US from 24% to 43%
in 2001.
Last February, we took a giant step by starting iowacourtsonline, a service that
enables anyone with Internet access to search court records in all counties and the
appellate courts. Before this, people had to travel to each clerk of court office to search
for the information. Now it’s at their fingertips. A person can search the records by
typing in a name or case number. And the basic service, which provides important
information such as criminal charges, restitution, child support payments, and
criminal sentences, is free. This site has been very popular, attracting 12,000 to 15,000
hits each day.
In September last year, we expanded the service by offering more detailed case
information for a monthly subscription fee of $25. This feature is popular with
lawyers, abstractors, insurance companies, and state and local government agencies.
E-Pay
Before long, we’ll be adding another feature: e-pay. E-pay will allow people to pay
their fines and court costs online. We hope the convenience of paying online will
encourage people to pay their fines promptly.
The benefits of our online services are two-fold: they serve as convenient tools for
citizens, and they ease the burden on clerks’ offices. The time that clerks’ offices used
to spend retrieving records has been freed up for other priorities.
Online Access: Deferred Judgment Records
Recently, we began a new program that provides direct online access to the state’s
deferred judgment docket for authorized users such as judges, clerks, and county
attorneys. This program places confidential deferred judgment information into the
hands of county attorneys and judges faster. With your help we can improve the
process even more.
We recommend that you pass legislation authorizing access to deferred judgment
records by corrections officers. These officers need this information to complete
sentencing reports. Online access to the records would facilitate their work. We have
submitted a bill to you to accomplish this.
Technology Funds
Clearly, the public is enjoying the fruits of our advances in technology. The online
services I mentioned were accomplished through planning, hard work, and the
dedication of resources. Many years ago, you astutely recognized that innovations of
this magnitude would require a reliable and continuous funding stream, and you
wisely earmarked funds for court technology. Now your foresight is paying off. Despite
our present financial crisis, we’re harnessing information technology to bring court
services to the people, and we can do more.
We have plans to revolutionize the way in which we gather, store, and retrieve
court records through electronic filing and electronic data management. The demand
for this type of service is growing. But it will take a substantial investment of
resources to put this technology in place. We recommend you take two steps to ensure
further advancements in public service through technology: (1) transfer our on-going
technology operating budget from earmarked funds to the general fund; and (2) raise
the cap on the Enhanced Court Collections Fund from $4 million to $6 million.
Court Generated Revenue
The Enhanced Court Collections Fund is derived from court-generated revenue
from fines and fees that exceed the projections of the Revenue Estimating Conference.
We view the collection of fines and fees as an integral part of enforcing court orders.
The diligent efforts of our judges and staff produced a 6% increase in court-generated
revenue last fiscal year. This was certainly a bright note in an otherwise gloomy
revenue picture for the state.
New Judicial Branch Building
I would be remiss not to mention and thank you for our most visible symbol of
progress this year-the new Judicial Branch Building. Although the project has taken
longer than originally anticipated, we are extremely pleased with the results, and we
hope you are too. We are expecting to move into our new quarters later this spring,
and that will free up most of our Capitol space for the General Assembly’s use.
I must admit that, when legislative leaders approached the Court in 1998 about
moving out of the Capitol, we were reluctant to even talk about the idea. After all, our
three branches of government have worked together in the same building for over a
century. On the other hand, the new building will allow us to house all of our offices
together in one facility, and its strong, identifiable civic presence reflects the
independent status of the judicial branch of government.
Not only is the building capable of meeting present day needs, it has been designed
to meet future demands. It was planned to handle the anticipated growth in our
workload; it is wired for extensive use of electronic technology, including audio and
video communications; and it was built to last as long as the Capitol. In short, it will
serve the public well, and it is a solid investment.
We’re pleased to report that the building has already received two honors. The
American Institute of Architects recently recognized our architects, DLR Group and
Kaplan/McLaughlin/Diaz, for the building’s design. In addition, the American Council
of Engineering awarded its 2003 Engineering Excellence Award to Pulley & Associates
for the building’s mechanical, electrical, and lighting systems.
As Sir Winston Churchill wisely recognized in 1943 when debating the
reconstruction of the House of Commons after it had been destroyed in the blitz: "We
shape our buildings, and afterwards, our buildings shape us." Iowa’s new Judicial
Branch Building, designed with that principle in mind, will support the mission of the
Judicial Branch for years to come.
Judicial Branch Mission
Which brings me back to the primary reason we are gathered here today, to take
stock of the mission of the Judicial Branch. For the benefit of the new members of the
General Assembly, I would like to briefly review our mission, which is administering
justice under the law equally to all people by providing independent and accessible
forums for the fair and prompt resolution of disputes.
We rely on our judges and staff, who are committed to excellence, to fulfill this
critical mission. Judges serve the public by using their legal skills and knowledge to
impartially interpret and apply the laws you pass. Their role is crucial, but their
ability to perform this role effectively in today’s complicated and litigious society
requires the assistance of support staff. A team of indispensable specialists-clerks of
court, court attendants, court reporters, juvenile court officers, secretaries,
administrators, computer programmers, law clerks, and others-work closely with our
judges, helping them coordinate the disposition of hundreds of thousands of cases from
beginning to end.
Iowans have many reasons to be proud of their top-rate court system. According to
a national survey, Iowa is rated as one of the top five states for creating a fair and
reasonable litigation environment. The survey, which was released early last year,
ranked Iowa high in treatment of class actions, timeliness of summary judgments and
dismissals, judges’ impartiality, and judges’ competence.
The fine quality of Iowa’s judicial system is, in part, a result of your backing. The
General Assembly and the Governor have a history of recognizing the importance of
fair compensation for judges and court staff.
Budget Cuts and Making Ends Meet
Our achievements over the past year, though important, are only part of the whole
picture, however. We must not lose sight of the fact that these are the most difficult
times we’ve ever faced. The cost-cutting measures we put in place last year to help
address the state’s fiscal problems have taken a heavy toll on every facet of court
operations.
Last year, after unprecedented staff reductions, about sixty clerk of court offices cut
back their public hours so that they could focus on processing court files and data entry
without interruption. Many offices are sharing staff with each other to cover for
vacation and sick leave, or sometimes to help with training.
Presently, we have 14 clerks who are managing more than one office. While
sharing managers works better in some offices than in others, we think it is a sound
policy that would help us reallocate some resources. We recommend a statutory
change that would allow us to continue this practice on a permanent basis, while
maintaining a clerks’ office in each county.
Our judges and employees are doing all they can to make ends meet. And many
people are pitching in whenever and however they can. Here are a few more examples.
Court reporters such as Brook Davis, Mark Sturgeon, and Kathy Gray are helping
clerks with jury management duties, updating law libraries, and purging files. Other
court reporters such as Deb Bergman, Jodi Krueger, and Cheryl Smith are performing
case scheduling and court attendant duties.
When budget cuts gutted funding for juvenile services, resourceful juvenile court
officers and others found ways to continue services at minimal cost to the state. For
example, Juvenile Court Officers Annette Peterson and Patty Redmond started a skill-
building program for troubled young people, with the support of local community
organizations. The program offers classes on topics such as teen pregnancy, anger
management, and victim empathy. Annette and Patty work long hours to attend the
life-skills classes, not because they must, but because they care.
In the past, the state’s juvenile restitution fund paid wages to juveniles doing
community service work so that they would have money to pay their victim restitution
obligations. After the funds were cut, a number of juvenile court offices, and state and
local agencies, worked with Peggy Sullivan, our Director of Finance and Personnel, to
keep the restitution program alive through a patchwork of other funding sources.
On-going education and training for judges and staff are an essential investment
for a first-rate court system. Regrettably, for the time being, all of our state-funded
education programs are on hold. But we’re always searching for alternative resources
to fill the gap, and we’ve had some success with that.
Our Court Improvement Program has provided some federal funds for several
juvenile law conferences. Also, thanks to the efforts of Jerry Beatty, our Director of
Education, federal traffic safety funds are available to cover the cost of a judges’
program. In addition, Jennifer Juhler, our Domestic Abuse Coordinator, with the help
of a substantial federal grant, has developed a web-based training program for judicial
magistrates. This innovative program will serve as a model for future efforts.
Unquestionably, we have a duty to the taxpayers to carefully manage the resources
you provide us, and to that end, we are doing everything in our power to operate as
efficiently as possible and to channel available resources to meet our most pressing
needs. Certainly, we want to be part of the solution, but the quick fixes and band-aids
will not sustain the courts indefinitely. We need to implement lasting solutions, and
we must do so now. Otherwise we will be unable to fulfill our mission to the people.
Searching for Solutions
The Judicial Branch must take full advantage of the benefits of state funding-
system uniformity, economies of scale, and shifting resources to areas where they are
most needed. Along that line, we have embarked on an ambitious effort to examine
every component of our trial court operations to identify best practices, streamline
procedures, develop or update staffing formulas, and achieve uniformity throughout
the state, as much as possible.
The Supreme Court has established four committees to spearhead this effort. The
committees are composed of court employees, judges, and attorneys-the people who are
actually doing the work. There are two separate studies underway involving the
operations of clerk of court offices: one to update the clerks’ staffing formula, and
another to identify management strategies and best business practices aimed at
improving the operation of the clerks’ offices within the current statutory framework
and funding levels. Another committee is studying similar issues concerning the
operation of our juvenile court offices. Shortly, a fourth committee will study the
operation of district court administration. We look forward to receiving their
recommendations for efficiencies and improvements.
Legislative Solutions: Streamlining the Courts
Although the judicial branch is an independent and separate branch of government,
we do not work in a vacuum. By constitutional design, the three branches of
government, in differing roles, contribute to the administration of justice. Our role is
to promptly but carefully decide cases according to law, equally to all people. But it is
up to you, the legislature and the governor, to provide the tools and resources we need
to carry out these enormous responsibilities.
As you can see, we are doing our part to watch expenses and operate within our
budget constraints. With your help, we can do more. We have many sound ideas for
statutory changes that would reduce costs, improve services, and enable us to do more
with our existing resources. These include allowing one clerk of court to manage more
than one office, realigning district court judges through attrition, delaying the filling of
judicial vacancies for budgetary reasons, eliminating outdated statutory duties, and
streamlining a multitude of procedures.
We suggested most of these changes to you last year, but you did not approve them.
Clearly in times such as these we should not cling to the status quo. We urge you to
reconsider these ideas, which have been submitted as prefiled bills. The benefits are
too great to pass up.
Reorganization of Judicial Districts
One of the statutory changes we seek would establish a process for regularly
reviewing and adjusting the configuration of the judicial districts. The organization of
the districts has not changed for thirty years.
The court views the general concept of redistricting as a valuable tool in any
comprehensive plan to effectively manage judicial resources. It has the potential to
give us greater flexibility in the equitable distribution of judicial staffing power
throughout our state. Given the severe budgetary constraints facing us as an
institution, we cannot afford to ignore the administrative efficiencies redistricting
offers.
Last month, the Court received the report of its advisory committee on judicial
branch redistricting. In response to its charge, the committee proposed alternative
administrative structures to address changes in demographics and judicial workload
that have affected court services since our current eight-district structure was
established. We commend the committee, and especially its chairs, Chief Judge David
Remley and businessman David Oman. Their thoughtful analysis, enhanced by their
initiative in seeking public comment, deserves our appreciation.
As our Commission on Planning for the 21st century said in its 1996 report, the
Court should periodically evaluate the administrative effectiveness of the district
boundaries and suggest legislative changes when appropriate. We feel it's appropriate
now. After careful consideration, the court has decided to recommend legislation for
redrawing judicial district boundaries. Due to the complexity of implementing such
changes, we anticipate that the new boundaries would become effective no sooner than
July 1, 2004.
Moreover, we do not view redistricting as an isolated or short-term solution. To be
truly effective, any redistricting plan must be complimented by other important
initiatives, some of which I have mentioned.
Impact of Legislation on Court
There is another way you can help. The courts are charged with the responsibility
of deciding cases brought before them. We have no control over the number of cases
presented. Nor should we. Though well-intentioned, legislation nearly always adds to
our workload. We ask that when debating new laws, you carefully consider the impact
your actions have on the court system. More responsibilities without commensurate
resources sometimes make for poor results.
Conclusion
I began this report talking about achievements and challenges-we have our share of
both.
We are heartened by recent accomplishments that bolster our efforts to serve the
people of Iowa. Our new procedures to expedite appeals of termination of parental
rights cases are a huge benefit to troubled children and families, reducing the period of
uncertainty in their lives. Technology is an enormous help to us, making us more
efficient and accessible, bringing the courts closer to the people. Our achievements are
cause for optimism in these otherwise gloomy times.
Certainly, we face many challenges. The greatest challenge, for all of us, will be to
continue performing our constitutional responsibilities to the people despite Iowa’s
present fiscal hardships. While the problem is serious, it is not insurmountable. We
must find lasting solutions to our problems. We have offered you many ideas for
sensible changes that would help us place scarce resources where we need them most,
enabling us to deliver affordable and high-quality judicial services to the citizens of
Iowa, now and in the future. We cannot act unilaterally; these changes require your
approval. Although we as citizens know of the demands being made upon you, we trust
you will respond to the needs of the justice system. It is in the public interest to do so.
And finally, we are grateful for our dedicated judges and court employees, whose
collective talents, resourcefulness, and perseverance, enable the courts to make
progress and to pursue our mission with vigor. The ultimate measure of these
dedicated public servants is being proven over and over again in these times of great
challenges.
Thank you.
Chief Justice Louis A. Lavorato was escorted from the House
chamber by the committee previously appointed.
Governor Thomas J. Vilsack was escorted from the House chamber
by the committee previously appointed.
Representative Gipp moved that the joint convention be dissolved,
which motion prevailed by a voice vote.
The Senate returned to the Senate chamber.
RECESS
On motion of Senator Iverson, the Senate recessed at 10:48 a.m.
until 2:30 p.m.
AFTERNOON SESSION
The Senate reconvened at 2:33 p.m., President Kramer presiding.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
(Deferred January 14, 2003)
Senate Resolution 1
The Senate resumed consideration of Senate Resolution 1, a
resolution relating to permanent rules of the Senate for the Eightieth
General Assembly, deferred January 14, 2003.
The Senate stood at ease at 2:34 p.m. until the fall of the gavel.
The Senate resumed session at 4:12 p.m., President Kramer
presiding.
LEAVES OF ABSENCE
Leaves of absence were granted as follows:
Senator McCoy, until he returns, on request of Senator Gronstal; and Senator
Larson, until he returns, on request of Senator Iverson.
BUSINESS PENDING
Senate Resolution 1
The Senate resumed consideration of Senate Resolution 1.
Senator Connolly offered amendment S-3001, filed by Senator
Connolly, et al., from the floor to pages 3 and 10 of the resolution and
moved its adoption.
A record roll call was requested.
On the question "Shall amendment S-3001 be adopted?" (S.R. 1),
the vote was:
Yeas, 20:
Beall Dearden Hatch Quirmbach
Black Dotzler Holveck Ragan
Bolkcom Dvorsky Horn Seng
Connolly Fraise Kibbie Stewart
Courtney Gronstal Kreiman Warnstadt
Nays, 27:
|
Angelo Houser McKinley Shull
Behn Iverson Miller Sievers
Boettger Johnson Putney Tinsman
Brunkhorst Kramer Redfern Veenstra
Drake Lamberti Rehberg Wieck
Gaskill Lundby Schuerer Zieman
Hosch McKibben Seymour
|
Absent, 2:
Larson McCoy
Vacant, 1.
Amendment S-3001 lost.
Senator Connolly offered amendment S-3004, filed by Senators
Connolly, et al., from the floor to pages 3 and 10 of the resolution and
yielded the floor to Senator Kreiman.
The Senate stood at ease at 5:27 p.m. until the fall of the gavel.
The Senate resumed session at 6:09 p.m., President Kramer
presiding.
Senator Kreiman moved the adoption of amendment S-3004.
A record roll call was requested.
On the question "Shall amendment S-3004 be adopted?" (S.R. 1),
the vote was:
Yeas, 20:
Beall Dearden Hatch Quirmbach
Black Dotzler Holveck Ragan
Bolkcom Dvorsky Horn Seng
Connolly Fraise Kibbie Stewart
Courtney Gronstal Kreiman Warnstadt
Nays, 27:
|
Angelo Houser McKinley Shull
Behn Iverson Miller Sievers
Boettger Johnson Putney Tinsman
Brunkhorst Kramer Redfern Veenstra
Drake Lamberti Rehberg Wieck
Gaskill Lundby Schuerer Zieman
Hosch McKibben Seymour
|
Absent, 2:
Larson McCoy
Vacant, 1.
Amendment S-3004 lost.
Senator Iverson offered amendment S-3003, filed by him from the
floor to page 3 of the resolution.
Senator Kreiman offered amendment S-3005, filed by him from the
floor to page 1 of amendment S-3003, and moved its adoption.
Amendment S-3005 was adopted by a voice vote.
Senator Iverson asked unanimous consent to withdraw
amendment S-3003, as amended.
Senator Gronstal objected to the request for unanimous consent to
withdraw amendment S-3003.
Senator Connolly raised the point of order whether unanimous
consent is needed on an individually sponsored amendment.
The Chair stated that unanimous consent is needed when there is
more than one sponsor on the amendment or the amendment has
been amended, as in this case.
Senator Iverson moved to withdraw amendment S-3003.
Senator Black raised the point of order whether this motion was
debatable.
The Chair ruled that the motion to withdraw was debatable.
Senator Gronstal withdrew his objection to Senator Iverson’s
request for unanimous consent to withdraw amendment S-3003.
Senator Iverson asked and received unanimous consent to
withdraw amendment S-3003, as amended.
Senator Iverson offered amendment S-3002, filed by Senators
Iverson and Kramer from the floor to pages 3 and 10 of the resolution
and moved its adoption.
Amendment S-3002 was adopted by a voice vote.
Senator Iverson moved the adoption of Senate Resolution 1.
A record roll call was requested.
On the question "Shall the resolution be adopted?" (S.R. 1), the
vote was:
Yeas, 27:
Angelo Houser McKinley Shull
Behn Iverson Miller Sievers
Boettger Johnson Putney Tinsman
Brunkhorst Kramer Redfern Veenstra
Drake Lamberti Rehberg Wieck
Gaskill Lundby Schuerer Zieman
Hosch McKibben Seymour
Nays, 20:
|
Beall Dearden Hatch Quirmbach
Black Dotzler Holveck Ragan
Bolkcom Dvorsky Horn Seng
Connolly Fraise Kibbie Stewart
Courtney Gronstal Kreiman Warnstadt
|
Absent, 2:
Larson McCoy
Vacant, 1.
The motion prevailed and the resolution was adopted.
ADJOURNMENT
On motion of Senator Iverson, the Senate adjourned at 7:33 p.m.
until 8:30 a.m. Thursday, January 16, 2003.
APPENDIX
COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED
The following communications were received in the office of the
Secretary of the Senate and placed on file in the Legislative Service
Bureau:
January 15, 2003
BOARD OF REGENTS
Annual Report of the Center for Health Effects of Environmental Contamination,
pursuant to Iowa Code section 263.17.
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Student Achievement and Accountability Annual Report, pursuant to 2001 Acts,
Senate File 476.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
Annual Report of the Healthy and Well Kids in Iowa Board, pursuant to Iowa Code
section 514I.5.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC DEFENSE
Enhanced 911 Status Report, pursuant to Iowa Code section 34A.7A.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Iowa Child Death Review Team Report - notification that the report in electronic
form is available online.
IOWA TELECARE CONSORTIUM
Report on Chronic Disease Management: Breakthrough Opportunities for
Improving the Health and Productivity of Iowans, pursuant to 2001 Acts, House
File 732.
AGENCY ICN REPORTS
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Iowa Communications Network (ICN) Usage for FY 2002, pursuant to Iowa Code
section 8D.10.
REPORT OF COMMITTEE MEETING
AGRICULTURE
Convened: January 15, 2003, 1:00 p.m.
Members Present: Behn, Chair; Hosch, Vice Chair; Fraise, Ranking Member;
Angelo, Courtney, Gaskill, Houser, Johnson, Kibbie, Putney, Ragan, Seng, Veenstra,
and Zieman.
Members Absent: Black (excused).
Committee Business: Organizational meeting.
Adjourned: 1:20 p.m.
INTRODUCTION OF BILLS
Senate File 18, by Angelo, a bill for an act relating to hunting by
allocating nonresident turkey and deer hunting licenses.
Read first time under Rule 28 and referred to committee on
Natural Resources and Environment.
Senate File 19, by Gronstal, Beall, Black, Bolkcom, Connolly,
Courtney, Dearden, Dotzler, Dvorsky, Fraise, Hatch, Holveck, Horn,
Kibbie, Kreiman, McCoy, Quirmbach, Ragan, Seng, Stewart, and
Warnstadt, a bill for an act relating to the allowance of and
reimbursement for the homestead, agricultural land, military service,
and elderly and disabled property tax credits, making appropriations,
and providing an effective date.
Read first time under Rule 28 and referred to committee on
Appropriations.
Senate File 20, by Veenstra, a bill for an act relating to the
certification of manure applicators, making penalties applicable, and
providing an effective date.
Read first time under Rule 28 and referred to committee on
Natural Resources and Environment.
Senate File 21, by McKibben, a bill for an act reducing the
number of days of payment for the expenses of office for members of
the general assembly during a regular legislative session.
Read first time under Rule 28 and referred to committee on State
Government.
Senate File 22, by Kibbie and Bolkcom, a bill for an act providing
for special late voter registration to enable an eligible elector to vote
at the polling place on election day and providing a durational
residency requirement for voting.
Read first time under Rule 28 and referred to committee on State
Government.
Senate File 23, by Miller, a bill for an act relating to a capital
gain deduction for state individual income tax purposes and providing
effective and retroactive applicability date provisions.
Read first time under Rule 28 and referred to committee on Ways
and Means.
Senate File 24, by Hatch, a bill for an act relating to payments
from the personal property tax replacement fund to city-county
consolidated governments and community commonwealths.
Read first time under Rule 28 and referred to committee on Ways
and Means.
SUBCOMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS
Senate File 1
APPROPRIATIONS: McKinley, Chair; Behn and Warnstadt
Senate File 3
HUMAN RESOURCES: Boettger, Chair; Kreiman and Seymour
Senate File 11
HUMAN RESOURCES: Behn, Chair; Hatch and Schuerer
AMENDMENTS FILED
S-3001 S.R. 1 Mike Connolly
Robert E. Dvorsky
Herman C. Quirmbach
Daryl Beall
Thomas Courtney
Roger Stewart
Jack Hatch
William Dotzler
Steven Warnstadt
Amanda Ragan
Dennis H. Black
Joe Bolkcom
Keith Kreiman
John P. Kibbie
Jack Holveck
Dick L. Dearden
Eugene S. Fraise
Wally E. Horn
Michael E. Gronstal
Joe Seng
S-3002 S.R. 1 Stewart Iverson, Jr.
Mary E. Kramer
S-3003 S.R. 1 Stewart Iverson, Jr.
S-3004 S.R. 1 Mike Connolly
Robert E. Dvorsky
Herman C. Quirmbach
Daryl Beall
Thomas Courtney
Roger Stewart
Jack Hatch
William Dotzler
Steven Warnstadt
Amanda Ragan
Joe Bolkcom
Keith Kreiman
John P. Kibbie
Jack Holveck
Dick L. Dearden
Eugene S. Fraise
Wally E. Horn
Michael E. Gronstal
Joe Seng
S-3005 S.R. 1 Keith Kreiman
© 2003 Cornell College and
League of Women Voters of Iowa
Comments about this site or page?
sjourn@legis.iowa.gov.
Please remember that the person listed above does not vote on bills. Direct all comments concerning legislation to State Legislators.
Last update: Wed Jan 22 14:05:00 CST 2003
URL: /DOCS/GA/80GA/Session.1/SJournal/Day/0115.html
jhf