|
According to the discussion with Pro-
fessor Penniman, the presence of the word
"that" required for smoothness and the
insertion of the word "any" which does
give a little trouble to some of us that are
reading this. I wonder if we could delete
on line 38 the word "any" and on line 38
the word "that" and still retain the
smoothness and continuity and not change
the substance as adopted by the Committee
of the Whole.
THE PRESIDENT: I must confess that
I do not follow what is troubling you,
Delegate Burgess. The clause of the sen-
tence as you would modify it would read
"subject to reasonable limitations and re-
strictions, the General Assembly may pre-
scribe by law," and the way it is now is
"subject to any reasonable limitations and
restrictions that the General Assembly
may prescribe by law."
It seems to the Chair grammatically the
way it is is much to be preferred and I
cannot understand the difference in sub-
stance or why you are concerned about
the difference in substance, any difference.
DELEGATE BURGESS: Mr. Presi-
dent, the problem that has been en-
countered here, quite frankly is that I can
read it two ways, as I am sure the Chair
can, but the problem is that there is, at
least in the mind of some of the delegates,
a suggestion that the word "any" has a
connotation which would tend to possibly
broaden interpretation of this section be-
yond what was intended by the Committee
of the Whole.
THE PRESIDENT: How can it broaden?
This is where I lost you.
DELEGATE BURGESS: I can see ar-
guments on both sides. However, since
there is a question of interpretation aris-
ing in some minds I wonder if we might
clarify it. The "any", I feel, modifies "limi-
tations", but there was the suggestion here
that "any" would mean unlimited although
this was suggested as a distinct proba-
bility.
THE PRESIDENT: I am disturbed at
your suggestion because it seems to me
that it raises a question that I did not
think existed. It was my understanding
from the discussion on the floor that the
purpose of this clause was to indeed to
give the General Assembly in a sense un-
limited, except as limited by the word
"reasonable", power to prescribe limita-
tions, any they chose to prescribe. Is that
not the situation?
|
DELEGATE BURGESS: That is cor-
rect. With that interpretation I am sure
that all minds will be put at ease in this
area, if that is spread on the record and is
considered as the legislative intent, if you
will, here, I am sure everybody would be
satisfied.
THE PRESIDENT: So far as the Chair
is concerned, I think the intent of the
clause in lines 38 to 40, on page 4, is to
confer upon the General Assembly the
power to prescribe by law any and all
limitations and restrictions that the Gen-
eral Assembly might desire to prescribe,
subject to the reasonableness of the limi-
tations and restrictions, as prescribed in
this line.
DELEGATE BURGESS: So should
there be a judicial test, it would be that
of reasonableness.
THE PRESIDENT: The only test is
that of reasonableness.
DELEGATE BURGESS: That satisfies,
I think, the problem. Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Bam-
berger.
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: Mr. Presi-
dent, page 75, lines 2 and 3, I am a little
bothered by the language suggested by the
Chair, as I understood it, the awkward-
ness of it, that would read "appoint a
charter board of not to exceed nine mem-
bers at any time."
THE PRESIDENT: That is correct. No.
Appoint at any time a charter board of
not to exceed nine members.
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: I am
bothered by the "of not to exceed nine
members." Would it read better if it was
"of not more than"?
THE PRESIDENT: It would to me. Do
you want to suggest the modification?
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: I suggest
that.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any objec-
tion to changing the words "not to ex-
ceed" in line 2, page 75, to the words, or
change the words "to exceed" to the
words "more than" so it would read, "of
not more than nine members"? Any ob-
jection?
The Chair hears none. The modification
will be made.
Delegate Marvin Smith:
|
