Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120
03/05/2018 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB259 | |
| HB319 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 319 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 259 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 319-RENEW MARIJUANA LICENSE:BACKGROUND CHECKS
2:18:46 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 319, "An Act relating to criminal background
checks for marijuana establishment registrations and renewals;
and providing for an effective date." [Before the committee was
CSHB 319(STA).]
2:19:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS moved to adopt Amendment 1, 30-
LS1334\D.1, Radford, 2/28/18, which read as follows:
Page 1, line 14:
Delete "six"
Insert "10"
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES objected.
2:19:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS explained that Amendment 1
increases the current fingerprint requirement from six years to
ten years because the ten years requirement is less of an
intrusion and burden on proprietors of legal businesses. Ten
years is still not quite what is required of proprietors of
alcohol establishments, but it appears to be a fair compromise
and the marijuana industry finds it reasonable, he offered.
2:20:32 PM
MEGAN HOLLAND, Staff, Representative Andy Josephson, Alaska
State Legislature, advised that the sponsor reviewed the
amendment and he does not support it for the same reasons as the
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development
(DCCED).
2:21:33 PM
KIM KOLE, Secretary/Board Member, Alaska Marijuana Industry
Association, advised that the Alaska Marijuana Industry
Association Board agreed that extending the fingerprint
requirement to ten years will definitely be good for the license
holders as well as their staff. She acknowledged that these
individuals are already overworked and this will help ease their
burden by giving them more time. A red flag could be raised if
the committee moved the fingerprint requirement beyond ten years
and Amendment 1 is a good compromise upon which everyone can
agree, she pointed out.
2:23:00 PM
ERIKA MCCONNEL, Director, Alcohol & Marijuana Control Office,
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development
(DCCED), advised that AS 17.38.010(b)(2) read as follows:
(b) In the interest of the health and public
safety of our citizenry, the people of the state of
Alaska further find and declare that the production
and sale of marijuana should be regulated so that ...
(2) legitimate, taxpaying business people,
and not criminal actors, will conduct sales of
marijuana; and
MS. MCCONNEL referred to AS 17.48.200(i), and paraphrased as
follows:
(i) a marijuana establishment may not
be registered, which means licensed, under this
chapter if a person who is an owner, officer, or agent
of the establishment has been convicted of a felony
and either less than five years has elapsed from the
time of the person's conviction, or the person is
currently on probation or parole for that felony.
MS. MCCONNEL referred to 3 AAC 306.010, which read as follows:
(d) The board will not issue a marijuana
establishment license to a person that
(1) is prohibited under AS 17.38.200(i) ...
2:23:57 PM
MS. MCCONNEL commented that the statutes and regulations are
clear that there are certain criminal histories disqualifying
for a period of a minimum of five years. On the alcohol side,
she referred to AS 04.11.295 Criminal justice information and
records statute, which read as follows:
(a) ... The board shall use the information
obtained under this section in its determination of an
applicant's qualification for issuance, transfer, or
renewal of a license or a conditional contractor's
permit.
MS. MCCONNEL referred to its regulations, and paraphrased as
follows:
Factors the board will, in its discretion, consider in
determining whether it is in the public interest to
deny or revoke, suspend, or refuse to renew or
transfer a license include that a person's criminal
history.
2:24:48 PM
MS. MCCONNEL described it as "very black and white" on the
marijuana side, and "very discretionary" on the alcohol side.
In the event the background check period was to be extended to
ten years, the department would not be able to say it was
implementing and enforcing its statutes or be able to assure the
public that the people are legitimate taxpaying businesses and
that criminal actors are not conducting the sales of marijuana.
2:25:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN noted that there are many different
boards and licensing bodies in Alaska and if someone is
convicted of a crime, depending upon the crime, they are at risk
of losing their license and having their next license renewal
turned down for that reason. He asked why that would not be the
same for the Marijuana Control Board licenses and renewals
because there is already the opportunity to identify whether
someone is committing crimes in Alaska. It was his
understanding, he offered, that the only effect of this
amendment is that the state does not require someone to check
for recent crimes committed in other states, or federal crimes
such as the federal marijuana laws. He asked why the
legislature should treat this board so differently than other
boards.
MS. MCCONNEL responded that marijuana is a highly regulated
substance and it is illegal at the federal level. She referred
to the "Cole Memorandum" and advised that it provided guidance
by the United States Department of Justice on its enforcement
priorities but it was recently rescinded so there is no longer
that guidance in terms of how it will enforce federal law with
respect to marijuana. At this time, she explained, marijuana
licensees are different from other types of licensees. She
related that her job, the job of the board and its staff is to
enforce the statute. Her concern, as stated, is that with
Amendment 1, it would not be able to inform the legislature that
it is enforcing the rules the legislature provided to the
department, she said.
2:27:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether it is her professional
belief that the ability of competitors to assist in policing
this industry is different than competing businesses assisting
in policing themselves in other industries.
MS. MCCONNEL asked whether his question was inferring that
licensees would turn in other licensees if they were aware that
someone had committed a crime.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN explained that his question is that
whenever the state enforces anything, it relies on industries
policing themselves and providing that type of information if
the state does not already have it at its disposal. He asked
whether it is her understanding that this industry would not
police itself.
MS. MCCONNEL answered that she has no reason to believe the
people in the marijuana industry would operate differently from
the people in other industries.
2:30:00 PM
NOAH STAR, Staff, to Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins,
Alaska State Legislature, offered that the sponsor's
conversations with the industry representatives indicate that
the ten years requirement is consistent with what it would like
to see and consistent with its interpretation of being in
compliance with the statute.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS said he would be interested in the
marijuana industry's response to Ms. McConnel's testimony.
CHAIR CLAMAN responded that the marijuana industry's position
was previously offered.
2:30:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD commented that she is a no-vote on this
amendment because "I took a concealed carry, ten minutes to get
fingerprints, no big deal." The marijuana industry is new and,
she opined, the state needs to have extremely high standards and
she would put the fingerprinting requirement at two years. She
offered concern about edibles and that the legislature has an
absolutely responsibility to the public to monitor this industry
carefully. The transactions are all performed in cash which can
cause the temptation to not pay taxes, and she does not know
whether they are established taxpayers. She advised that the
legislature needs to be cautious and that public safety is the
highest mandate, and risks are associated with this industry so
she will be a no-vote.
2:32:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP opined that without the bill of which the
amendment is to, the standard right now is annual fingerprint
checking, and this bill changes it to fingerprints every six
years. He asked whether his understanding was correct.
CHAIR CLAMAN related that Ms. Holland was nodding her head and
indicating yes as to the current status.
2:33:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES asked Ms. Holland whether the sponsor is
amendable to this amendment.
MS. HOLLAND advised that the sponsor is not amenable to this
amendment.
2:33:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN commented that he supports Amendment 1
because it is simply a common-sense reduction in the size of
wasteful government. Previously, he pointed out, testimony was
heard wherein there has not been a single instance, in the four
years since marijuana was legalized, where this background check
has caught anyone doing anything wrong. Each year, every member
of this industry must have a national background check involving
fingerprinting, costs, and the involvement of state employees,
he pointed out. He said that he has to ask why, and the only
answer he can come up with is that those who opposed the
legalization of marijuana four years ago feel more comfortable
by continuing to have these regulations on the books. Thereby,
he said, hoping that at some point it will catch someone running
afoul of federal laws for doing the very thing Alaska legalized.
The fact is that the federal government comes in and prosecutes
someone for doing what Alaska has deemed legal, and while that
may be a federal issue, it is not of great interest to him
because the marijuana industry has been legalized. The public
asked the legislature to regulate the marijuana industry and in
regulating it, the legislature's responsibility is to regulate
efficiently and this is neither efficient or prudent, it is just
more government with little return to the taxpayer.
2:35:54 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN offered his understanding of the previous
discussions that the real gist of this legislation is to have
enough background checks to reassure the public, and to a lesser
extent the federal government because "you never really know
what makes the federal government happy, or not happy, or
satisfied." The reason for the frequency of the fingerprinting
requirement, in contrast to other professions and industries
that require fingerprinting, is to go through the federal
government background check at some periodic level. The
marijuana industry is comfortable with this timing and he will
follow the industry's request because he does not see this as
critical to the state's supervisory role, he said.
2:36:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS noted that one of the primary
functions of the fingerprinting requirement is to basically show
the federal government that this is not a criminal enterprise or
attract undue attention from the federal government. He pointed
out that the marijuana industry has something to lose if it does
attract the federal government's attention, and an important and
telling point is that the marijuana industry is supportive of
the 10 years fingerprinting requirement and it does not feel
that this timing will jeopardize the existence of the industry.
Secondly, he offered, the other value of this is to prevent
criminals from running these establishment. The state can
already determine whether they are criminals in Alaska because
the department has access to that data, and the value of these
fingerprints in particular is to check whether these people have
committed felonies outside of Alaska. He said that he struggles
with the presumption that no matter how watered down the
fingerprint requirement is, there is some likelihood that people
are committing felonies outside of Alaska and the department
needs to check it out on a relatively regular basis. He offered
that the sponsor is carrying this legislation on behalf of the
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development (DCCED)
and he appreciates Ms. McConnel's comments, but there have not
been any problems during the last four years and moving to 10
years is a reasonable compromise.
2:38:33 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Eastman, Stutes,
Kreiss-Tomkins, and Claman voted in favor of the adoption of
Amendment 1. Representatives Reinbold and Kopp voted against
it. Therefore, Amendment 1 was adopted by a vote of 4-2.
2:39:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD commented that she will be a no-vote on
moving this bill out of committee because "I absolutely think we
just made a silly mistake."
2:39:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS moved to report CSHB 319(STA), as
amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and
the accompanying fiscal notes.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD objected.
2:40:01 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Kreiss-Tomkins,
Eastman, Stutes, and Claman voted in favor of the motion to
report CSHB 319(STA), as amended, out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
Representatives Reinbold and Kopp voted against it. Therefore,
CSHB 319(JUD) was reported out of the House Judiciary Standing
Committee by a vote of 4-2.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB319 ver D 2.26.18.pdf |
HJUD 2/26/2018 1:00:00 PM HJUD 3/5/2018 1:00:00 PM |
HB 319 |
| HB319 Supporting Document-Public Comment 3.5.18.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2018 1:00:00 PM |
HB 319 |
| HB319 Opposing Document-Public Comment (Amend) 3.5.18.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2018 1:00:00 PM |
HB 319 |
| HB319 Amendment #1 3.5.18.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2018 1:00:00 PM |
HB 319 |
| HB319 Amendment #1 HJUD Final Vote 3.5.18.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2018 1:00:00 PM |
HB 319 |
| HB259 Work Draft Committee Substitute ver L 2.23.18.pdf |
HJUD 2/23/2018 1:30:00 PM HJUD 3/5/2018 1:00:00 PM |
HB 259 |
| HB259 Opposing Document-Alaska Trucking Association Letter 3.5.18.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2018 1:00:00 PM |
HB 259 |
| HB259 Amendments #1-5 3.5.18.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2018 1:00:00 PM |
HB 259 |
| HB259 Amendments #1-5 HJUD Final Votes 3.5.18.pdf |
HJUD 3/5/2018 1:00:00 PM |
HB 259 |