Senate debates proposal to create time‑certain veto/cleanup session; idea referred to legislative process committee

Senator Stewart introduced SJR 10 on Feb. 19, 1996, proposing that the Legislature establish a time‑certain, up-to-four-day post‑session meeting within 60 days after adjournment to consider veto overrides and technical corrections to legislation passed that year.

Stewart framed the resolution as a way to organize what he described as an occasional need for a short session to address vetoes and late technical fixes: "This resolution would allow us to set a time certain for a, up to 4 day meeting, at least, sometime within 60 days after the end of the session to discuss a veto override session and also to discuss legislation that was passed during that session," he said.

Several senators raised objections. Senator Black and others argued the proposal could be used as a de facto extra legislative session and remove individual senators’ judgment about whether to reconvene, citing the proposal’s use of the word "shall" and language that could require consideration of "all bills" passed. Senator Watson warned the provision could become an automatic five‑day cleanup session and be used to address unrelated bills. In response, proponents said the resolution was intended to be limited to bills that had passed and needed correction or veto consideration, not to open a new general session.

Senator Hillier and others proposed a more deliberative approach: rather than immediate adoption, the idea was sent to the legislative process committee for refinement. The motion to refer passed on voice vote, and the Senate did not adopt SJR 10 on the floor that day. Leaders said the committee would examine language, scope and constitutional implications.