The Commission on the Legislative Process has concluded its most productive studies to date. Detailed in the thirty-eight item recommendations which follow is a program designed to help the General Assembly realize its full potential in the following decade. Rather than professionalize the General Assembly, this Commission has searched for means by which the most advantageous aspects of an "amateur" legislature can be enhanced and by which its negative features may be minimized.

Our studies indicated that the General Assembly suffered most from a lack bf staff and inadequate facilities. In the area of staffing, we found that, regardless of the index used, the Virginia General Assembly consistently ranked among the least staffed, most poorly equipped legislatures in the union. A 1971 Wisconsin study noted that the Virginia General Assembly, along with Tennessee and Utah, has always "ranked quite low in both total and per capita legislative expenditure." More telling figures, published by the Council of State Governments, show that Virginia, for the last decade, has spent a smaller proportion of its state budget on the operation of the legislature than all but three other states. In fiscal years 1969 and 1970, for instance, only Virginia, Tennessee and North Carolina allocated less than one tenth of one percent of state expenditures to the legislature.

Some may say that these figures reflect economy and planning. In part they do. The last set, however, shows exaggerated frugality where the General Assembly has been involved. Reflecting an "economy starts at home" attitude, the General Assembly has mortgaged much of its planning capability. In spite of extensive budget cutting in past years by the legislative fiscal committees, the total state budget has more than tripled in little more than a decade. Obviously, this situation cannot continue indefinitely. To curb this trend the General Assembly must employ competent staff and thereby extend its ability to supervise the expenditure of state funds. More legislative time must be spent in the management of state government. At the same time, legislators must not meet continuously, or, like Washington, we will always be meeting and rarely deciding. The answer, in part, is staff.

We are not, however, advocating a massive increase in General Assembly staffing. Rather, the Commission has proposed a series of experiments. For committees we encourage the use of some full-time assistance (from the Division of Statutory Research and Drafting) and continued part-time assistance. The committee chairmen can then evaluate the most suitable service. We have also advocated a limited research department and some expanded fiscal services.

Most importantly, however, we are proposing a methodology by which the General Assembly can have more direct control over the staffs which serve it. In the proposals which follow, a method is set forth to give the General Assembly more flexibility in the recruitment, selection, and direction of its staff. The staffing report was perhaps the most carefully prepared of its type ever done by the General Assembly. Senator Willey and the other members of the subcommittee have struck upon creative proposals which deserve the careful attention of us all.

The facilities study, primarily represented by the appended report, was prepared with great thought and careful deliberation. It becomes increasingly obvious to all who belong to and serve the General Assembly that continued operation in the present facilities is an impossibility. Our makeshift attempts to house the Assembly in separate buildings around the Square ,has also proven unsuccessful. The General Assembly clearly needs to be under one roof.  I urge you all to carefully consider the proposed alternative. The entire report "Facilities for the General Assembly" is reproduced in the appendix for this purpose. We commend it to you for your thoughtful consideration.

The Commission also prepared in-depth studies in the area of computer technology, procedures and other miscellaneous matters. Of particular interest is the computer report. Here we found, as the extensive report will explain, that careful planning can result in improved services and a coincident reduction in costs.

Much work on the part of both members and staff has gone into this report. On behalf of the Commission I would like to express appreciation for the support rendered by the several agencies and departments which contributed to the success of the study. Particular mention should also be made of the invaluable assistance rendered by Kirk Jonas, the Speaker's Administrative Assistant.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ John Warren Cooke
Chairman