Legislature(2017 - 2018)BARNES 124


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.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as
Download Video part 1. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
Heard & Held
                  SB 63-REGULATION OF SMOKING                                                                               
8:20:54 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR PARISH  announced that the  next order of  business would                                                              
be CS  FOR SENATE BILL  NO. 63(FIN),  "An Act prohibiting  smoking                                                              
in  certain   places;  relating   to  education  on   the  smoking                                                              
prohibition; and providing for an effective date."                                                                              
8:21:23 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR  FANSLER moved  to  adopt Amendment  1  to CSSB  63(FIN),                                                              
labeled 30 LS0024/N.4, Martin, 4/19/17, which read as follows:                                                                  
     Page 2, lines 29 - 30:                                                                                                     
          Delete all material and insert:                                                                                       
               "(1)  within 10 feet of playground equipment                                                                     
      located at a public or private school or a state or                                                                       
     municipal park while children are present;"                                                                                
     Page 3, lines 9 - 11:                                                                                                      
          Delete all material and insert:                                                                                       
               "(C)  a reasonable distance, as determined                                                                       
     by the owner or operator, of an entrance, open window,                                                                     
     or heating or ventilation system air intake vent of                                                                        
               (i)  a vessel covered by this section; or                                                                        
         (ii)  a long-term care facility as defined in                                                                          
     AS 47.62.090."                                                                                                             
CO-CHAIR PARISH objected for discussion purposes.                                                                               
8:22:10 AM                                                                                                                    
The committee took an at-ease from 8:22 a.m. to 8:24 a.m.                                                                       
8:24:33 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR PARISH  explained that the proposed Amendment  1 pertains                                                              
to areas  where smoking would  not be allowed.   The  first change                                                              
it would  make would  be to expand  the area  from being  "at" the                                                              
public or  private school or  state or municipal  park playgrounds                                                              
to being  "within 10 feet" of  those areas.  He  further explained                                                              
how  the   language  would  be   changed  in  regard   to  smoking                                                              
prohibitions  related to  vessels and  long-term care  facilities,                                                              
as defined by AS 47.62.090.                                                                                                     
8:26:24 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER  noted that Amendment  1 would leave  it up                                                              
to  the  owner or  operator  of  a  vessel  to determine  what  is                                                              
reasonable, and  he asked Co-Chair Fansler for  his interpretation                                                              
of what would be "reasonable".                                                                                                  
8:26:46 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR  FANSLER  remarked  that  the proposed  Amendment  1,  in                                                              
general, addresses  a concern  that people  are being  "dinged for                                                              
smoking outside near  a playground" and to include  language about                                                              
long-term  care  facilities  -   a  topic  brought  up  in  public                                                              
testimony at  a previous hearing.   In response to  Representative                                                              
Saddler's question,  he suggested  someone from the  Department of                                                              
Health and Social  Services (DHSS) could better answer  as to what                                                              
would be reasonable.                                                                                                            
REPRESENTATIVE  SADDLER suggested the  bill sponsor  could provide                                                              
8:27:54 AM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  PETER  MICCICHE,  Alaska   State  Legislature,  as  prime                                                              
sponsor  of  CSSB   63(FIN),  indicated  that  one   challenge  of                                                              
creating this legislation  was to determine how  to protect people                                                              
from  secondhand smoke,  while  at  the same  time  not trying  to                                                              
regulate those who  choose to smoke tobacco.   He acknowledged the                                                              
recent  fire that  had burned  down a  playground in  Juneau.   He                                                              
shared that his  community was involved in building  a playground,                                                              
and on  the day  of the ribbon  cutting, a  parent was  sitting in                                                              
the  treehouse, with  his/her kids,  smoking.   He clarified  that                                                              
the intent  of CSSB  63(FIN) is not  to regulate smoking  outside,                                                              
but  to   allow  smoking  a   certain  distance   from  buildings,                                                              
including  playground equipment.   He  noted that  members of  the                                                              
House supported the  bill, but asked that the terms  be loosened a                                                              
bit,  in terms  of  how  close the  smoker  is to  the  playground                                                              
equipment.   Regarding vessels and  long-term care  facilities, he                                                              
said  those  in charge  will  make  the determination  about  what                                                              
distance is reasonable.                                                                                                         
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER  asked Senator Micciche if  he supports all                                                              
or part of Amendment 1.                                                                                                         
SENATOR  MICCICHE  answered  that  he  supports  both  [parts  of]                                                              
Amendment 1.                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked for the definition of "children".                                                                  
SENATOR MICCICHE  said children  are under  18 years  of age.   He                                                              
related  that  "young  adults  like  to  come  and  play"  at  the                                                              
aforementioned  playground and  may choose  to smoke a  cigarette.                                                              
He indicated  that [any attempt  to regulate that  activity] would                                                              
cross  over into saying  that people  who choose  to smoke  should                                                              
not be allowed to do so.                                                                                                        
REPRESENTATIVE  SADDLER   noted  that  the   "tremendously  cushy,                                                              
recycled rubber  product" [used on  the ground at  playgrounds] is                                                              
highly  flammable, and  he expressed  his hope  that people  would                                                              
determine that adults should not be smoking at playgrounds.                                                                     
8:31:54 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  DRUMMOND  noted   that  the  playground  equipment                                                              
itself  may be  well within  the 10-foot  of the  boundary of  the                                                              
[flammable] ground  cover.  She  questioned whether  people should                                                              
smoke near the ground  cover, even if it they are  further than 10                                                              
feet  from   the  playground  equipment.     She  noted   that  in                                                              
participating in  cleanup efforts, she has picked  up thousands of                                                              
cigarette butts,  and she  questioned, "Do  we want the  cigarette                                                              
butts  ending up  in the  playground  groundcover and  potentially                                                              
starting  a fire  or  are we  going to  rely  on people's  general                                                              
smarts at keeping cigarettes ... out of the groundcover itself?"                                                                
SENATOR  MICCICHE responded  that  legislation  is about  balance,                                                              
and  having  participated  in  the   cleanup  of  his  community's                                                              
playground, he  has found "lots of  things that shouldn't  be in a                                                              
playground."   He said,  "We can't  legislate  against that."   He                                                              
indicated  that [Amendment  1] serves  as a  compromise; it  would                                                              
address the goal  of protecting employees at work  and children on                                                              
playgrounds from secondhand smoke.                                                                                              
8:34:00 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER  said he would  not object to  Amendment 1,                                                              
because it sounds like a reasonable amendment.                                                                                  
8:34:17 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR  FANSLER, regarding  Representative Drummond's  concerns,                                                              
said he thinks Amendment  1 is trying to find balance  in a "tough                                                              
balancing act."                                                                                                                 
8:35:11 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER  brought up  the issue of  flammability of                                                              
playgrounds, because  of the fire the day before  that burned down                                                              
the playground  at  Twin Lakes in  Juneau, Alaska.   He  suggested                                                              
there  may  be  a  need  for  future   legislation  regarding  the                                                              
materials that are allowed for use in playgrounds.                                                                              
8:36:42 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO  said he was involved in  the construction                                                              
of a  playground, and all  materials, including ground  cover were                                                              
considered  playground equipment.    He added  that he  personally                                                              
considers  the  private property  to  be  part of  the  playground                                                              
equipment,  for  example  a  big  sand  pit  and  the  fence  that                                                              
surrounds it.                                                                                                                   
8:37:25 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR  PARISH  offered  his understanding  that  considering  a                                                              
fence  around a  playground as  part of  the playground  equipment                                                              
surpasses the intent of Amendment 1.                                                                                            
8:37:48 AM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  MICCICHE  illustrated that  under  Amendment  1, a  young                                                              
adult  smoking on  a  playground at  11 p.m.,  when  there are  no                                                              
children  around, would  be  fine, whereas  the  same young  adult                                                              
smoking  on  the  same  playground  at  3  p.m.,  when  there  are                                                              
children  around, may  be fined.   He also  noted that  playground                                                              
ground  cover material  is  regulated, included  flammability  and                                                              
depth;  however, anyone  with a  determination  to burn  something                                                              
can be successful in that attempt.                                                                                              
8:39:23 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR  PARISH   expressed  concerned   about  the   point  that                                                              
Representative  Talerico  raised.   He  considered  that a  person                                                              
walking around  the playground  where children  are present  could                                                              
be  fined.   He suggested  an  amendment to  Amendment  1, to  add                                                              
"exclusive of groundcover  and fencing" following  "within 10 feet                                                              
of playground equipment".                                                                                                       
SENATOR  MICCICHE  offered  his  understanding that  half  of  the                                                              
committee wants  "to go one  way" while  the other half  wants "to                                                              
go the other."   He reminded the  committee that "this  is the law                                                              
in half  of the  state right  now, and  three citations  have been                                                              
written since it  became law over a decade ago."   He said he does                                                              
not  think  "we   need  to  be  overly  concerned,"   because  "it                                                              
purposely has a  light footprint on enforcement."   The intent, he                                                              
reiterated,  is to  protect employees.    He said  he thinks  most                                                              
people  find  they  enjoy  being in  a  work  environment  without                                                              
[tobacco] smoke.   He said  he thinks  there is "a  fair balance,"                                                              
but  pointed out  that the  House Community  and Regional  Affairs                                                              
Standing Committee,  having possession of CSSB 63(FIN),  can amend                                                              
it as it chooses.                                                                                                               
8:41:32 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR PARISH responded  that upon hearing there  have only been                                                              
three citations, his mind has been put at ease on that subject.                                                                 
8:41:42 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR  PARISH removed  his  objection to  the  motion to  adopt                                                              
Amendment 1.   There being no  further objection, Amendment  1 was                                                              
8:42:03 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR  FANSLER moved  to  adopt Amendment  2  to CSSB  63(FIN),                                                              
labeled 30-LS0024\N.5, Martin, 4/24/17, which read as follows:                                                                  
     Page 4, line 28, following "building":                                                                                     
          Insert "if the smoking is in accordance with                                                                          
       regulations adopted by the Marijuana Control Board                                                                       
     created under AS 17.38.080"                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND objected for discussion purposes.                                                                       
8:42:27 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR  PARISH   moved  to  adopt  Conceptual   Amendment  1  to                                                              
Amendment 2,  to delete "freestanding"  from page 4, line  27.  He                                                              
explained   that  he   believes   that  the   regulation  of   the                                                              
consumption  of marijuana  should  be regulated  by the  Marijuana                                                              
Control Board.                                                                                                                  
8:44:16 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  DRUMMOND asked  for clarification.   She  read the                                                              
sentence in  which the  word "freestanding"  is found,  which read                                                              
as follows:                                                                                                                     
           (3) in an establishment licensed under AS                                                                            
     17.38 that is a freestanding building.                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE  DRUMMOND asked  Co-Chair Parish,  "Do you  mean to                                                              
insert 'if  the smoking is  in accordance' following  'AS 17.38'?"                                                              
She indicated that  without the word "freestanding",  the sentence                                                              
would be confusing, because it would read as follows:                                                                           
           (3) in an establishment licensed under AS                                                                            
     17.38 that is a building.                                                                                                  
8:44:55 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  SADDLER  said  he   does  not  think  that  "that"                                                              
modifies  AS  17, but  rather  it  modifies "establishment".    He                                                              
suggested  a placement  of  commas following  "establishment"  and                                                              
following   "AS  17.38"   may  help   clarify  that   it  is   the                                                              
establishment that is the building.                                                                                             
CO-CHAIR FANSLER  objected to Conceptual Amendment  1 to Amendment                                                              
2 for discussion purposes.                                                                                                      
REPRESENTATIVE   SADDLER   asked    Co-Chair   Parish   to   point                                                              
specifically to the  part of Amendment 2 that would  be amended by                                                              
Conceptual Amendment 1.                                                                                                         
CO-CHAIR  PARISH explained  that  he  would be  adding  a line  to                                                              
Amendment 2  that would include the  sentence on page 4,  line 27,                                                              
and  would  delete   "freestanding"  from  that   sentence  [which                                                              
precedes the word "building" on line 28].                                                                                       
REPRESENTATIVE  SADDLER asked  if it is  Co-Chair Parish's  intent                                                              
to  exempt  buildings  that  are  attached,  in  other  words  not                                                              
CO-CHAIR PARISH  answered that would  be at the discretion  of the                                                              
Marijuana Control Board.                                                                                                        
8:47:34 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  RAUSCHER asked who  oversees "whatever  regulation                                                              
we're  trying  to stick  in  this."   He  asked,  "Who's  actually                                                              
regulating the first part, and who's regulating that part?"                                                                     
CO-CHAIR PARISH answered,  "They're both nested."   In response to                                                              
a  follow-up  question,  he  said   the  final  enforcement  would                                                              
probably fall to  public safety or municipal officials.   He added                                                              
that  the Marijuana  Control  Board would  have  the authority  to                                                              
"remove the  licensure from the  establishment, if it ...  came to                                                              
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER  asked if the result of  Amendment 2 being                                                              
amended  by Conceptual  Amendment  1 would  be  that two  agencies                                                              
would have to be involved in regulation.                                                                                        
CO-CHAIR PARISH  answered no,  it would  be the Marijuana  Control                                                              
8:48:38 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  DRUMMOND   offered  her  understanding   that  the                                                              
Marijuana  Control  Board  is  discussing  whether  to  allow  on-                                                              
premise smoking  and the purpose  of "this amendment" is  to allow                                                              
on-premise  smoking should  the Marijuana  Control Board  make the                                                              
determination in favor of it in a licensed facility.                                                                            
CO-CHAIR  PARISH  advised that  CSSB  63(FIN) already  makes  that                                                              
provision;  the  proposed  amendment   is  intended  to  give  the                                                              
Marijuana  Control  Board  maximum   latitude  in  its  regulatory                                                              
8:49:37 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  TALERICO  said he  would like  to  hear the  prime                                                              
sponsor's   thoughts   regarding   [Conceptual  Amendment   1   to                                                              
Amendment 2].                                                                                                                   
8:49:47 AM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  MICCICHE  said  he  supports Amendment  2,  "but  if  you                                                              
choose to  adopt the free-standing piece,  that's up to  you."  He                                                              
asked the committee  members to imagine that they  have operated a                                                              
children's  book  store in  a  mini-mall  for  20 years,  and  the                                                              
Marijuana  Control  Board  decides to  allow  on-premise  smoking,                                                              
"and  suddenly you're  sharing  air  with a  marijuana  dispensary                                                              
that allows smoking."  He continued:                                                                                            
     If  that's   your  intention  by  allowing  it   in  any                                                                   
     building, then  you should support the amendment  to the                                                                   
     amendment.   If you believe  that that probably  is only                                                                   
     appropriate in  a freestanding building where  the other                                                                   
     tenants wouldn't  be subject  to the marijuana,  then it                                                                   
     may be more difficult to support.                                                                                          
SENATOR  MICCICHE said  he supports  the regulation  going to  the                                                              
Marijuana Control Board.  He continued:                                                                                         
     We already  have someone doing  that, but I  think there                                                                   
     may be  one piece  worth, perhaps,  not supporting.   If                                                                   
     you're subjecting  others in  abutting shops --  many of                                                                   
     these  mini-malls   just  don't  have   any  ventilation                                                                   
     whatsoever,  right?   So,  whatever  they're  breathing,                                                                   
     you're breathing.                                                                                                          
     We  did  exempt  vape  shops,   because  I've  not  been                                                                   
     convinced that  vapes are travelling  the same  way that                                                                   
     marijuana smoke  or tobacco  smoke would - just  because                                                                   
     I don't  know enough about it.   So, that's kind  of the                                                                   
     I'm  not going  to make  a fuss  either way,  but ...  I                                                                   
     think  it's   important  to  understand  why   the  word                                                                   
     "freestanding" is in this bill at all.                                                                                     
8:51:40 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE WESTLAKE  said he is still trying to  wrap his head                                                              
around  marijuana being  treated the  same as  a tobacco  product,                                                              
and  he   questioned  whether  "the   tobacco  police"   and  "the                                                              
marijuana  police"  would regulate  both  products.    He said  he                                                              
thinks  "both"  would [involve]  different  enforcement  agencies.                                                              
He concluded,  "Because marijuana is  legal, ... we're  putting it                                                              
in with tobacco  products, and I  don't know if it's a  tobacco or                                                              
CO-CHAIR PARISH  responded that he offered Conceptual  Amendment 1                                                              
to  Amendment 2  to  provide "maximum  latitude  to the  Marijuana                                                              
Control Board,"  which he opined has  a good record of  "erring on                                                              
the side of caution."                                                                                                           
8:52:56 AM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR MICCICHE stated  that CSSB 63(FIN) is a  health bill about                                                              
secondhand  smoke that  would be  regulated by  the Department  of                                                              
Health  and   Social  Services   (DHSS),   which  would   be  "the                                                              
enforcement."   He said,  "This is  the one  place that  you cross                                                              
over;  ... it's  a little awkward,  but  ... if there  ever  is an                                                              
enforcement action, it would be in the same department."                                                                        
8:53:19 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  SADDLER directed  attention to  the definition  of                                                              
smoking on page 11, [beginning on line 6], which read:                                                                          
                (11) "smoking" means using an e-                                                                                
     cigarette  or other  oral  smoking device  or  inhaling,                                                                   
     exhaling,  burning,  or  carrying a  lighted  or  heated                                                                   
     cigar,  cigarette,  pipe, or  tobacco  or plant  product                                                                   
     intended for inhalation.                                                                                                   
REPRESENTATIVE  SADDLER  asked,   "Does  'plant  product'  include                                                              
SENATOR MICCICHE  answered, "In the aspect of  secondhand smoke in                                                              
the workplace, it does."                                                                                                        
REPRESENTATIVE  SADDLER  expressed  that  having heard  the  prime                                                              
sponsor's  explanation, he  is less likely  to support  Conceptual                                                              
Amendment 1 to Amendment 2.                                                                                                     
8:54:17 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR FANSLER  asked for confirmation that  currently marijuana                                                              
on-site consumption is not allowed.                                                                                             
CO-CHAIR PARISH  answered that's correct.   He added,  "At present                                                              
the Marijuana Control Board is considering the subject."                                                                        
CO-CHAIR FANSLER  reasoned that the  board would have to  make the                                                              
decision  to allow  on-site consumption  "before  this would  even                                                              
come into play."                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR PARISH answered that's correct.                                                                                        
CO-CHAIR  FANSLER said,  "We certainly  don't  want the  situation                                                              
that I  think Senator  Micciche laid  out in  his example;  but we                                                              
have  no  reason to  believe  that  the  board  would be  able  to                                                              
theoretically  license  which  establishments  could  have  onsite                                                              
consumption and things  like that; but we have  not real knowledge                                                              
if  that's  going  to  be the  case  until  they  make  a  broader                                                              
CO-CHAIR PARISH replied that that is his understanding.                                                                         
8:55:42 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  DRUMMOND  offered her  understanding  that if  the                                                              
Marijuana  Control  Board  has  this  discussion,  then  it  would                                                              
include  whether to  allow onsite  consumption  in a  freestanding                                                              
building  or in  a building  connected  to other  buildings.   She                                                              
said she is not  sure how the proposed deletion  of "freestanding"                                                              
would help CSSB  63(FIN); therefore, she would  oppose [Conceptual                                                              
Amendment 1 to Amendment 2].                                                                                                    
8:57:00 AM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR MICCICHE  said [Amendment  2] makes  the statement  to the                                                              
Marijuana Control  Board that "every part  of it is in  your lane,                                                              
except for  where it  crosses into the  workplace safety  of smoke                                                              
in  a mini-mall."    He  said he  supports  Amendment  2, but  not                                                              
Conceptual Amendment  1 to Amendment  2, which "crosses  into sort                                                              
of  countering what  SB  63 is  trying  to do."    He said  boards                                                              
consider  what   "lanes"  have  already  been   established  under                                                              
existing statute when figuring out what they can do.                                                                            
8:58:42 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR FANSLER asked for the definition of "freestanding".                                                                    
SENATOR MICCICHE  answered that  a freestanding building  does not                                                              
share  a common  wall; it  does  not share  an air  exchange.   He                                                              
added  that  two  buildings  that   abut  but  have  two  separate                                                              
exterior walls would  be considered freestanding.   In response to                                                              
a  follow-up   question  regarding   the  stores  in   Juneau,  he                                                              
emphasized  that even  if the walls  of the  buildings are  really                                                              
close, if  the structures do  not share  a wall or  airspace, they                                                              
are freestanding.   In terms of a building with a  business on the                                                              
ground  level and  apartments above,  [the  business space]  would                                                              
not be considered freestanding.                                                                                                 
9:01:42 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  RAUSCHER offered  a  definition of  "freestanding"                                                              
he  said was  from Investor  World  as follows:   "A  freestanding                                                            
building  is  a   structure  that  is  not  attached   to  another                                                              
structure.    A  detached  garage  is  considered  a  freestanding                                                              
9:02:08 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR  PARISH   recapped  that  shared  air  and   shared  wall                                                              
indicate a building that is not freestanding.                                                                                   
9:02:24 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE   DRUMMOND  offered   her  understanding   that  [a                                                              
building  that  is not  freestanding]  could  be determined  by  a                                                              
having a shared  wall or "seams."  She mentioned  a recent fire in                                                              
the wall of a  downtown Juneau camera store, which  is has another                                                              
shop in the same  building next door and other spaces  above.  She                                                              
said the  smoke from  that fire was  moving throughout  the entire                                                              
building  and coming  out  the eaves  of the  second  floor.   The                                                              
space  between the  camera store  and  the next  building is  less                                                              
than two feet wide.  She offered further details.                                                                               
9:04:59 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR  FANSLER spoke  in  favor of  Conceptual  Amendment 1  to                                                              
Amendment 2,  because "sometimes  you need not  bind the  hands of                                                              
the Marijuana Control  Board."  He said he would  like to give the                                                              
board the  ability to  make knowledgeable  decisions, such  as not                                                              
to allow  a marijuana dispensary  next to a children's  book store                                                              
without proper ventilation and prohibitions put into place.                                                                     
9:06:06 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR PARISH  spoke to Conceptual  Amendment 1 to  Amendment 2.                                                              
He  said   he  thinks   it  is   appropriate  to  have   stringent                                                              
requirements about shared  air, and he does not want  anyone to be                                                              
exposed  to  any  intoxicant  without   his/her  knowing  consent.                                                              
Notwithstanding  that, when there  are two  buildings that  do not                                                              
share  walls or  "simply share  a wall"  or "lean  up against  one                                                              
another over  the course  of years,"  he said  he is "inclined  to                                                              
want to make a carveout ... for them."                                                                                          
CO-CHAIR FANSLER  stated that he  did not maintain  his objection,                                                              
but gathered that others did.                                                                                                   
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO  stated objection  to the motion  to adopt                                                              
Conceptual Amendment 1 to Amendment 2.                                                                                          
[REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND] maintained her objection.                                                                             
9:07:39 AM                                                                                                                    
A roll  call vote  was taken.   Representatives Westlake,  Fansler                                                              
and  Parrish voted  in favor  of  the motion  to adopt  Conceptual                                                              
Amendment 1 to  Amendment 2.  Representatives  Talerico, Rauscher,                                                              
Saddler,  and Drummond voted  against it.   Therefore,  Conceptual                                                              
Amendment 1 to Amendment 2 failed by a vote of 3-4.                                                                             
9:08:13 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR  PARISH [removed  his objection  to the  motion to  adopt                                                              
Amendment  2].     He  announced  that  there   being  no  further                                                              
objection, Amendment 2 was adopted.                                                                                             
9:09:07 AM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR PARISH presented  questions to the prime  sponsor, with a                                                              
request  that he  return  with answers  at  his  convenience.   He                                                              
directed attention  to language  beginning on  page 5,  [line 29],                                                              
through page 6, [line 4], which read:                                                                                           
               (b) A person in charge of a building at                                                                          
     which smoking  is prohibited within a  specific distance                                                                   
     from   the   entrance   of   the   building   under   AS                                                                   
     18.35.301(c)(4)  shall  conspicuously   display  a  sign                                                                   
     that  reads "Smoking  within  (number of  feet) Feet  of                                                                   
     Entrance Prohibited  by Law--Fine $50" visible  from the                                                                   
     outside of each entrance to the building.                                                                                  
               (c) The department shall furnish signs                                                                           
     required  under this  section to a  person who  requests                                                                   
     them with the intention of displaying them.                                                                                
CO-CHAIR  PARISH asked  Senator Micciche  how many  establishments                                                              
he anticipates would have a need for signage.                                                                                   
SENATOR  MICCICHE   said  he  would  provide  that   answer.    He                                                              
     Most facilities  have them.  The reason we  amended part                                                                   
     of the bill  is that the new bill required  the signs to                                                                   
     be  changed;   [they're]  no   longer  required   to  be                                                                   
     changed.    And the  reason  it  doesn't have  a  fiscal                                                                   
     note,  is [that for]  anyone that  requires a sign  that                                                                   
     is  not  paper, we  have  a  sponsor that  is  providing                                                                   
     those signs.                                                                                                               
SENATOR  MICCICHE said  he wanted  the proposed  bill to have  the                                                              
least fiscal impact  possible, so "the existing signs  that are in                                                              
place right now will suffice."                                                                                                  
CO-CHAIR PARISH  said that  is commendable.   He said there  are a                                                              
few extra questions  that he would forward to  the prime sponsor's                                                              
9:10:49 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  SADDLER asked  if the  committee could  anticipate                                                              
further amendments.                                                                                                             
CO-CHAIR PARISH  replied that an  amendment was being  drafted for                                                              
CSSB 63(FIN).                                                                                                                   
[CSSB 63(FIN) was held over.]                                                                                                   

Document Name Date/Time Subjects