Legislature(2005 - 2006)HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/21/2005 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB88 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| = | HB 88 | ||
| = | HB 66 | ||
| = | HB 67 | ||
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
March 21, 2005
2:17 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
Vice-Chair Stoltze called the House Finance Committee
meeting to order at 2:17:39 PM.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Mike Chenault, Co-Chair
Representative Kevin Meyer, Co-Chair
Representative Bill Stoltze, Vice-Chair
Representative Eric Croft
Representative Richard Foster
Representative Mike Hawker
Representative Jim Holm
Representative Reggie Joule
Representative Mike Kelly
Representative Carl Moses
Representative Bruce Weyhrauch
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Carol Comeau, Superintendent of Schools, Anchorage; Steve
Weaver, Assistant Attorney General, Legislation & Regulation
Sections, Department of Law; Randy Ruaro, Attorney,
Legislation & Regulation Sections, Department of Law;
Suzanne Cunningham, Staff, Co-Chair Meyer
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
None
SUMMARY
HB 88 "An Act relating to certain weapons offenses
involving minors; to aggravating factors in
sentencing for certain offenses committed against
a school employee; and providing for an effective
date."
CSHB 88 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a
"no recommendation" recommendation and with an
indeterminate note by the Department of Health and
Social Services, and an indeterminate note by the
Department of Law.
2:17:58 PM
HOUSE BILL NO. 88
"An Act relating to certain weapons offenses involving
minors; to aggravating factors in sentencing for
certain offenses committed against a school employee;
and providing for an effective date."
[House Bill 88 was previously heard on March 17, 2005.]
2:18:41 PM
STEVE WEAVER, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, LEGISLATION &
REGULATION SECTIONS, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, offered to answer
questions.
CAROL COMEAU, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, ANCHORAGE, spoke in
support of HB 88. She referred to several assaults against
school district employees in the Anchorage School District
this past year. Vice-Chair Stoltze asked what the
punishment was in those instances. Ms. Comeau replied that
stricter punishment for assaults on teachers are needed. In
response to a question from Vice-Chair Stoltze, Ms. Comeau
deferred to the Department of Law to determine suitable
punishment.
2:24:49 PM
RANDY RUARO, ATTORNEY, LEGISLATION & REGULATION SECTIONS,
DEPARTMENT OF LAW, explained about misconduct involving
weapons in the second degree. He referred to a letter in
the members' packets from District Attorney Bob Linton
regarding automatic waivers of juvenile offenders (copy on
file.) He pointed out that getting a discretionary waiver is
nearly impossible for a juvenile even in murder cases.
Representative Weyhrauch asked if there are federal laws
that achieve what this state law intends to do. Mr. Ruaro
said it depends if the shooting or event occurs on school
grounds. In that case a federal law would apply.
Representative Weyhrauch requested more information about
related federal laws. Mr. Ruaro agreed to provide that
information.
2:29:03 PM
Vice-Chair Stoltze asked for more information about lesser
categories of offenses and juvenile waivers.
Mr. Ruaro explained that the only type of a possession
offense that would fall under second-degree is for a person
who has been previously adjudicated a delinquent for an act
that would have constituted a felony, and then they possess
a weapon on school grounds or near a day care center. There
were only 4-6 successful waiver cases a year.
2:32:09 PM
Representative Croft asked why some of the murder cases are
not on the unclassified felony list. Mr. Ruaro said he does
not know. Representative Croft expressed interest in
changing the statute to "pull in murder cases" rather than
target practice cases. Mr. Ruaro opined that discretion
would be exercised on the part of the prosecutor.
2:34:48 PM
SUZANNE CUNNINGHAM, STAFF, CO-CHAIR MEYER, explained that
the automatic waiver provision only applies when a minor is
at least sixteen years old. Representative Croft said that
makes sense.
Ms. Cunningham reviewed the status of the bill.
Representative Croft reintroduced Amendment 2. He MOVED to
ADOPT Amendment 2, to delete line 30 on page 3. He
explained that he is not opposed to how Section 4 targets
specific bad conduct with guns, however line 30 is not
narrowly tailored at this point. He opined that the removal
of line 30 still allows the bill to retain its focus on the
worst conduct for automatic waiver.
Co-Chair Meyer OBJECTED for purposes of discussion.
2:38:18 PM
Mr. Ruaro explained that omitting line 30 would delete the
crime of possessing a gun at a drug deal, the crime of being
found a delinquent of a felony and then possessing a gun on
school grounds or at a day care, and the crime of shooting
at a building from coverage of the automatic waiver
provision. He maintained that those offenses are serious
and he opposed Amendment 2.
Representative Hawker raised concerns about AS 11.61.195 and
the definition of dwelling. He suggested cleaning up that
section rather than deleting line 30. He spoke in
opposition to the amendment.
Co-Chair Meyer concurred.
Representative Weyhrauch asked if there is a crime that
cannot be prosecuted if line 30 is deleted. Mr. Ruaro
explained that the purpose of the automatic waiver is to
allow for certain serious offenses to be brought into the
adult system. The difference would be between prosecuting
as a juvenile where jurisdiction ends at age 19, or as an
adult. He discussed a retaliatory shooting case and how the
provision would apply in that case.
2:42:10 PM
Representative Croft acknowledged that the bill does a lot
of good, especially Sections 3 and 4. However, in the
findings section, Section 2, it says that 29 percent of male
students reported having carried a weapon. Representative
Croft suggested that that is not necessarily a bad thing. A
lot of students use guns for hunting and for what they were
intended to be used for. He stated that he does not want to
write laws that unintentionally criminalize and that rely on
prosecutors to not charge in those areas. He referred to a
case in Nome. He suggested that the committee take a
further look at AS 11.61.195 so as to not unintentionally
criminalize certain conduct.
Co-Chair Meyer pointed out that some of Representative
Croft's concern about bias was corrected by deleting Section
2.
Co-Chair Chenault agreed with Representative Croft's
analysis of (A) of Section 2. He noted that (B) concerns
him more.
2:47:58 PM
Representative Weyhrauch observed that the figure "29.8 of
male students" came from the "Alaska Youth Risk Behavior
Survey 2003" on page 8 (copy on file.) The survey gives no
context for the data collection. He sympathized with the
intent of Amendment 2 and the unintended consequences of
leaving line 30 in the bill. He wondered if House Judiciary
discussed this area.
Mr. Ruaro said there are approximately eight cases a year of
this type of serious crime against juveniles, not target
shooters, but serious crimes. He stressed that given the
low number of cases and the seriousness of them, the
committee should vote no on Amendment 2.
Representative Holm gave an example of possession of a gun
by a hunter who also was involved in a drug deal. Mr. Ruaro
explained that the prosecutor has complete discretion on
whether to charge as an automatic waiver offense or not.
2:51:28 PM
Vice-Chair Stoltze asked if it ever happens that a
prosecutor overcharges in order to scare a defender. Mr.
Ruaro said yes, but filters are built in such as the
discovery process, the grand jury process, the jury, and the
judge.
Representative Croft reviewed AS 11.61.190(a)(1) and (a)(2),
and pointed out that the ideas discussed today remain in the
bill and are not affected by deleting line 30.
Representative Kelly asked for a response from Mr. Ruaro.
Mr. Ruaro disagreed and explained that the elements of AS
11.61.195 include possession of a gun in a drug deal,
possession of a gun after being convicted of a serious crime
at a school, and retaliatory shootings.
Representative Kelly shared a personal hunting experience.
2:55:50 PM
Mr. Ruaro repeated the system of filters for those kinds of
situations; a whole system of fallbacks.
Representative Kelly explained that he does not like any of
the process, but added that he has no use for a system of
laws that would not protect citizens from drug shootings.
He related a story about a murder in his district. He said
he is afraid of harming someone if he votes to take line 30
out.
Mr. Ruaro related that drug deals are covered in AS
11.61.190(a)(1). Drugs and guns don't mix is the message in
the second provision. The other messages are if convicted
of a felony, don't carry a gun at school and don't shoot in
anger at a house.
3:00:56 PM
A roll call vote was taken on the motion to ADOPT Amendment
2.
IN FAVOR: Croft, Foster, Holm, Joule, Kelly Moses, Stoltze,
Weyrauch
OPPOSED: Hawker
Co-Chairs Chenault and Meyer were absent from the vote.
The MOTION PASSED (8-1).
Vice-Chair Stoltze asked if the short title fits the context
of the bill. Mr. Ruaro replied that the bill has changed.
Vice-Chair Stoltze suggested that the title be written to
conform to the revised bill.
Representative Foster MOVED to report CS HB 88 (FIN) out of
committed with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes.
Co-Chair Meyer OBJECTED for discussion purposes. He asked
what the result of the discussion about the title was.
Vice-Chair Stoltze repeated that the short title would be
written to reflect the contents of the bill.
Co-Chair Meyer removed his OBJECTION.
Representative Weyhrauch OBJECTED for discussion purposes.
He commented that the effects of the bill will cost the
state money and will require a new fiscal note.
Representative Weyhrauch withdrew his OBJECTION.
Representative Joule OBJECTED. He agreed that there would
be more cost to the state.
Representative Weyhrauch OBJECTED again, voicing concern
about the zero fiscal notes.
Representative Holm OBJECTED. He MOVED to ADOPT two new
House Finance Committee indeterminate fiscal notes.
Representative Weyhrauch OBJECTED for purposes of
discussion. He asked for the definition of "indeterminate
fiscal note".
3:07:05 PM
Representative Croft defined indeterminate fiscal note. He
agreed that the bill would cost more money.
Representative Hawker clarified that there "may or may not",
depending on circumstances, be costs incurred by this bill.
Representative Weyhrauch noted that there are two zero
notes. Representative Holm said his intent was that the
fiscal notes should go back to both departments for review.
3:10:26 PM
Vice-Chair Stoltze stated that no OBJECTIONS are maintained.
CSHB 88 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "no
recommendation" recommendation and with indeterminate note
by the Department of Health and Social Services, and
indeterminate note by the Department of Law.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 3:11 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|