Legislature(1997 - 1998)
03/09/1998 01:45 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE BILL NO. 261
"An Act relating to a surcharge imposed for violations
of state or municipal law and to the Alaska police
training fund."
DEB DAVIDSON, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS testified in
support of HB 261. She noted that the legislation expands a
program that is already in effect. Alaska Law requires the
Alaska Police Standards Council to provide training for
police officers, correctional officers, probation officers
and village public safety officers. In 1996, the Alaska
Police Training Fund was established. Fund revenues come
from surcharges imposed on motor vehicle violations. House
Bill 261 expands the surcharge to all crimes and increases
the amount of the surcharge. Felony convictions and bail
forfeiture for felony offenses would have a surcharge of $85
dollars. Misdemeanor offenses dealing with drug and under
the influence revocation of licenses would have a $75 dollar
surcharge. Other misdemeanors would have a surcharge of $45
dollars. Violations and infractions would have a surcharge
of $15 dollars. She noted that the legislation was amended
in the House Judiciary Committee to direct judges not to
consider the surcharge when imposing a fine.
LADDIE SHAW, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA POLICE STANDARDS
COUNCIL spoke in support of the legislation. He observed
that the Alaska Police Standards Council has increased its
basic training commitments. The Council supported training
for 13 officers in FY 96. The Council would support up to
100 officers in training for FY 2000. Training at the Sitka
Academy would increase. Fairbanks is developing a police
academy and the Council is negotiating to sponsor basic
training at the Anchorage Academy. The Council has also
taken on the responsibility of a basic municipal corrections
officer-training program held at the Anchorage Academy.
In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault, Mr. Shaw
observed that the proposed surcharge would be similar to
those in place in Oregon. Twenty-six states run their
programs with surcharges. The legislation was based on the
Oregon program.
Representative Davis noted that it is difficult to compare
Alaska with other states. He noted that the Alaska State
Troopers are not highway patrolmen. Other states have
highway patrolmen.
Co-Chair Therriault referred to the fiscal note by the
Alaska Police Standards Council. Mr. Shaw clarified that
the Council received $396.1 thousand dollars in surcharge
revenues for FY 97. He estimated that $450 thousand dollars
would be collected from surcharges in FY 99. The Council
had an unfilled authorization of $53.9 thousand dollars.
CHRIS CHRISTENSEN, STAFF COUNSEL, ALASKA COURT SYSTEM stated
that the Supreme Court does not take a position on the
legislation. He provided members with Amendment A (copy on
file). Amendment A would neutralize the Alaska Court
System's fiscal note. He explained that Alaska Court
System's computer system is only capable of accounting for
one surcharge. Their new computer system is estimated to be
operational in two years. He observed that if everyone that
was charged a surcharge paid before they left the courthouse
that there would not be a problem. He noted that there are
many variables in tracking fines and surcharges.
Mr. Christensen observed that the Court System collects
approximately $4.4 million dollars in fines and forfeitures.
He noted that it would not cost any money to impose a
surcharge, collect a surcharge or turn the money over to the
General Fund. Accounting for the money would be costly.
The amendment would provide that until the Court System's
computer system is operational, an annual estimate of
collected surcharges would be turned over to the
legislature. Once the new computer system is operational
the precise figure would be given.
Mr. Christensen observed that the legislation would require
a $45 dollar surcharge on misdemeanors and a $15 dollar
surcharge on infractions. He pointed out that there are
many offenses, technically classified as misdemeanors, which
are on the bail schedule and are not subject to jail time.
New residence addresses must be notified to the Division of
Motor Vehicles within 30 days. Failure to do so is a
misdemeanor, but since it is on the bail schedule, the
maximum fine is $20 dollars. Without the amendment this
would receive a $45 dollar surcharge.
Mr. Christensen noted that if Amendment A is adopted that
there would be a one time $5 thousand dollars cost for form
redistribution.
In response to a question by Representative Davies, Mr.
Christensen estimated that the average fine on a misdemeanor
case is $250 dollars. Fines on the bail schedule range from
$15 dollars to over $100 dollars. The average fine on the
bail schedule would be between $30 and $60 dollars. Felony
cases generally receive jail time.
In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault, Mr.
Christensen suggested that "misdemeanor not on a bail
forfeiture schedule" be added on page 2, line 27.
"Misdemeanor, which is on the bail forfeiture schedule,"
could be added to page 2, line 31.
Representative Davis observed that he was aware of the
problem. Ms. Davidson questioned if language would be
needed on line 27. She observed that subsection (3) deals
with misdemeanors and violations of municipal ordinances for
which a sentence of incarceration could be imposed. She did
not know if misdemeanors on the bail schedule are offenses
for which a sentence of incarceration could be imposed. She
suggested that adding "misdemeanor" to subsection (4) could
solve the problem.
Representative Davies referred to page 2, line 22. He noted
that AS 28.33.030 refers to operating a commercial vehicle
while intoxicated. He noted that AS 23.33.033, Presumptions
and Chemical Analysis of Breath or Blood, is not included.
Representative Davies added that AS 28.35.030, Operating a
Vehicle While Intoxicated and AS 28.35.032, Chemical Test
were included, but AS 28.35.031, Implied Consent was omitted
from offenses relating to driving under the influence with a
non-commercial license.
Ms. Davidson noted that the legislation was based on current
statutes.
Representative Davis provided members with Amendment B (copy
on file). Ms. Davidson explained that as the legislation is
currently written a $15 dollar surcharge is placed on an
infraction violation for which a sentence of incarceration
is not imposed. She observed that parking tickets would
fall under this category. Amendment B would provide that if
the fine or bail forfeiture amount were less than $30
dollars then a $5 dollar surcharge would be charged. If the
fine or bail forfeiture amount were $30 dollars or more a
$15 dollar surcharge would be charged.
Co-Chair Therriault observed that the legislation would
change the amount of revenue received by the state of
Alaska. However, the legislation does not automatically
authorize the expenditure to the Alaska Police Standards
Council. He maintained that the expenditure should be
considered with the Department of Public Safety's budget
before the full House Finance Committee.
Co-Chair Hanley noted that the fiscal note shows a total
operating budget of $627.4 thousand dollars for FY 99. Mr.
Shaw clarified that this is the amount of revenues estimated
to be collected as the result of HB 261. The estimated
change in revenues of $573.5 thousand dollars includes a
$53.9 thousand dollar reduction for excess authorization in
FY 99. The total operating budget of the Alaska Police
Standards Council's budget would be approximately $1.597
million dollars. The Council's FY 98 budget is $524
thousand dollars. The proposed FY 99 budget, without HB
261, would be $627 thousand dollars. Co-Chair Hanley
summarized that an additional $627 thousand dollars would be
added to the FY 99 proposed budget.
Co-Chair Hanley noted that persons are paying for their
Community Residential Center (CRC) beds. He asked why half
the money should not be diverted to the Department of
Corrections to pay for prison space.
Mr. Shay stressed that Alaska Police Standards Council has a
responsibility to support municipal and state correctional
training. The Council will be supporting training for
contract jail officers.
Co-Chair Hanley observed that funding for training could
potentially offset some costs that the Department of
Corrections or local communities have normally supported.
He emphasized that there should be a corresponding decrease
if the Council provides basic training that had been
previously paid for by others.
Co-Chair Therriault suggested that the fiscal note be zero
and the operating expenses be set through the regular budget
process.
Representative Mulder noted that the Council would provide
training for officers of the city of Valdez. Mr. Shaw noted
that the community jails officer program was built with the
support of the Alaska Police Standards Council.
Representative Mulder observed that costs for municipal
training would be shifted to the state of Alaska.
Representative Davis noted that the Council provides
services to all state police departments. City police will
collect some of the surcharges.
Ms. Davidson observed that, of 67,000 citations issued,
approximately 31,000 citations were issued by cities other
than Anchorage. Anchorage officers wrote approximately
14,000 citations. State Troopers wrote approximately 22,000
citations.
Co-Chair Hanley observed that Anchorage would have to keep
track of municipal fines. Mr. Shaw noted that the Council
would support the Anchorage Academy by paying some operating
costs for use of the academy and providing training.
Co-Chair Hanley clarified that the Anchorage Court System
would not receive funding from the surcharge. He expressed
frustration that communities are being discouraged from
taking control.
Mr. Shaw noted that the Council sets standards for community
correctional officers. The Council supports 63 percent of
the police population at the Anchorage training center.
Mr. Shaw spoke in support of Amendment A. He stressed that
the Court could do a good job of estimating the surcharge.
(Tape Change, HFC 98 -58, Side 2)
Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to ADOPT Amendment A as Amendment
Representative Davis MOVED to ADOPT Amendment B as Amendment
2. He stated that the amendment would lower the surcharge
on parking tickets.
Co-Chair Hanley questioned if there is a surcharge on
parking tickets.
Ms. Davidson stated that, under existing law, a surcharge is
based on a violation. She did not think that there is
currently a surcharge on parking tickets. She observed that
the legislation would add a surcharge on infractions. She
thought that parking tickets would fall under the definition
of infraction. She observed that the statutes contain
several types of fines for infractions.
Mr. Christensen clarified that, in Anchorage, parking
tickets are under the civil system. He thought that most
municipalities would charge parking tickets under a civil
ordinance. Tickets issued under a civil system would not
receive a surcharge.
Co-Chair Hanley requested information regarding violations
and infractions and the dollar amounts imposed.
HB 261 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|