DELEGATE H. TAYLOR: As I under-
stand it, if we are here, we get $25.00 and
if we are not here, it costs us $15.00. I am
just puzzled by the arithmetic.
DELEGATE SCANLAN: If we are here,
we get the $25.00 we are allowed as per
diem expense. If we are not here and not
excused, we not only do not get the $25.00,
we are penalized an additional $15.00,
which is taken from the basic $2,000 salary.
On the other hand, if it is an excused
absence, we do not get the $25.00 expenses.
On the other hand we do not get penalized
$15.00.
THE PRESIDENT: Are there any
further questions? Delegate White?
DELEGATE WHITE: I would like to
ask the Chairman if he could justify pay-
ing the expense money in the case of an
excused absence, or is this a legal barrier?
DELEGATE SCANLAN: Yes. I think
there is a legal barrier. I would like, in
that respect, to refer the Convention to the
language from section 1I of chapter 4, of
the Enabling Act; it is found in the large
blue volume, I believe, around page 501.
There the General Assembly, I think, has
made rather manifest its legislative inten-
tion in this respect saying, "The members
of the Convention shall receive per diem or
any other payments, only with respect to
those days on which they are in actual at-
tendance of meetings at or on behalf of the
Convention."
I think that language, in your commit-
tee's view, would not permit a man who
was excused from attending to receive the
$25.00 for expenses in attending a session
he did not attend, so I think the answer to
that is we felt that would not be permitted.
THE PRESIDENT: I might supplement
that by reporting that that is one of the
questions which I asked the attorney gen-
eral. I was informed by the office of the
attorney general today that his opinion will
state, as Mr. Scanlan just stated, that there
is no discretion in the Convention with re-
spect to the $25.00 expense payment.
Delegate Storm?
DELEGATE STORM: Mr. President,
suppose the meetings which you attend are
public relations meetings for Lions, Rotary,
and other clubs that want you to speak, and
conflict with a regular meeting. This is not
considered a meeting in furtherance of the
Convention work, because it is not in An-
napolis? |
DELEGATE SCANLAN: My original
reaction to that would be no, that would
not be a session of the committee or sub-
committee or a session of the Convention.
On the other hand, I suppose in an impor-
tant meeting, where the Convention or a
committee of the Convention felt that de-
spite the rules, it was more important that
one or two of the members went to such a
meeting and spoke, it seems to me it would
not take any great deal of ingenuity for a
committee chairman pursuant to the rule
to create a subcommittee to deal ad hoc
with that subject and I suppose in a par-
ticular case it could be possible that pre-
senting of views of the Convention at an
outside meeting might constitute a meeting
of a duly authorized subcommittee, in which
case it would be all right. But outside of
that sort of situation, my answer to your
question would probably be no. I am glad,
however, I do not have to administer the
standard. We only propose it. The Presi-
dent will have to administer it.
DELEGATE STORM: In other words,
if I do not get excused by my committee
chairman, then I had better cancel these
meetings, is that right?
DELEGATE SCANLAN: No, just do not
count on the $25.00 for going there.
DELEGATE STORM: Or the $15.00.
DELEGATE SCANLAN: Or the $15.00.
DELEGATE STORM: It seems to me if
I do not get the $25.00, I ought not to get
the $15.00.
DELEGATE SCANLAN: You do not
have an excused absence. I say, it seems to
me with a little sagacity on your committee
chairman's part, this thing could be worked
out to everybody's satisfaction.
THE PRESIDENT: Are 4here further
questions? Delegate Chabot?
DELEGATE CHABOT: With regard to
70C [76], illness of the delegate, is that ill-
ness to the delegate only or does that per-
tain to the immediate family situation?
DELEGATE SCANLAN: I would take
it to mean that the illness of one's wife or
the illness of a child requiring the presence
of a father, if not covered in that section,
certainly could be reached by the last
phrase, factors beyond the delegate's con-
trol.
DELEGATE CHABOT: How would that
rule be applied in situations where the Con-
vention itself was not meeting and many
of the committees were not meeting and
other committees were meeting? |
