Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legislative Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Multiple senators object to inserting non‑budget policy into the budget without public hearings
Summary
Several senators repeatedly raised points of order that substantive policy changes were being added in the budget package without separate public hearings, citing 2 GCA §2108 and urging consistency with open‑government requirements. The chair ruled the contested items in‑order in the provisions section and the body voted on the amendments; critics said they would pursue standalone bills to get public input.
Throughout debate on Chapter 12 floor amendments, multiple senators objected to adding substantive policy changes into the budget without separate, duly noticed public hearings. Objectors repeatedly invoked 2 GCA §2108, which requires that unrelated subjects attached to an annual budget be the subject of a prior public hearing unless an emergency justifies waiver.
Objectors said inserting procurement authorities, governance changes for the Guam Visitors Bureau, the repeal of a 1985 autonomous‑agency transfer law, and other policy items into the substitute budget subverts public notice and leaves local vendors, stakeholders and the public without opportunity to weigh in. "We are violating 2 GCA 2108," one senator said on the floor when arguing a point of order.
The chair disagreed on several rulings, finding contested provisions eligible in the provisions section and leaving the final decision "to the will of the body." Several overrule motions were made and failed; in some cases the committee carried the amendments after debate by voice/hand vote. Several senators said they would pursue standalone bills and public hearings after the committee session to revisit issues that drew process objections.
The pattern of objections was a recurring theme across the day's amendments: opponents asked for more public vetting, fiscal notes, and explicit safeguards before changing procurement, governance or reporting laws through budget riders. Proponents argued many changes reflected issues raised in budget oversight hearings and that reporting and documentation requirements were included to preserve public oversight.
Next steps: Senators on both sides signaled plans to use separate bills and public hearings to resolve outstanding transparency and scope concerns about several of the measures adopted on the floor.
