Legislature(1993 - 1994)
02/25/1993 03:00 PM House HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 136: DRUNK DRIVING AND BREATH TEST OFFENSES Number 030 REP. ELDON MULDER, PRIME SPONSOR OF HB 136, introduced himself and read his sponsor statement, which is on file in the committee room. In summary, the statement said the bill is aimed at eliminating the backlog of 2,500 offenders waiting as long as a year before serving their mandatory 72 hours of imprisonment for driving while intoxicated (DWI). Under the bill, offenders and those who refuse to submit to a breath test for alcohol must: serve their 72-hour sentence in a Community Residential Center (CRC); pay the costs for such incarceration, if necessary through permanent fund dividend withholding; while incarcerated, perform 24 hours of community service in a halfway house if available, or in an alternative facility designated by the Department of Corrections; and forfeit their vehicle upon third or subsequent offenses. The intent of the bill is to curtail the number of DWIs by stiffening punishment, and to ease financial burdens on the Department of Corrections, he said. Number 084 REP. MULDER read through the sectional analysis of HB 136, noting the important provisions of the bill. (Rep. B. Davis arrived at 3:13 p.m. Rep. Brice arrived at 3:14 p.m.) Number 118 REP. MULDER asked the committee to consider amendments to the bill to create a working draft, instead of developing a committee substitute. He presented a list of amendments to HB 136, and described them, numbered as described. Number 181 REP. G. DAVIS moved passage of the first amendment, changing the definition of half-way house to CRC. Hearing no objection, Chair Bunde announced the AMENDMENT PASSED. REP. B. DAVIS moved passage of the second amendment, specifying that "appropriate facilities" under the bill are to be determined by the Department of Corrections. Hearing no objection, Chair Bunde announced the AMENDMENT PASSED. REP. NICHOLIA moved passage of the third amendment, put forth as a cost-savings measure at the suggestion of the Department of Corrections, to extend the requirement for half-way house incarceration to second offenders, as well as to first offenders. Hearing no objection, Chair Bunde announced the AMENDMENT PASSED. REP. BRICE moved passage of the fourth amendment, to include provisions for limited driver's licenses, put forth at the suggestion at the Division of Motor Vehicles. Hearing no objection, Chair Bunde announced the AMENDMENT PASSED. REP. G. DAVIS moved passage of the fifth amendment, eliminating Section 3 of the bill, relating to forfeiture of vehicles. Hearing no objection, Chair Bunde announced the AMENDMENT PASSED. (Rep. Olberg arrived at 3:17 p.m.) Number 191 CHAIR BUNDE asked for comment and questions about the first two amendments, and hearing none, turned to the third amendment. REP. NICHOLIA asked whether a person arrested for DWI in an area in which no half-way house was available would have to serve the sentence in a jail. REP. MULDER answered yes, if no other appropriate facility was available, the sentence would have to be served in jail. Number 210 REP. NICHOLIA asked if the Department of Corrections had a list of appropriate facilities in rural areas. REP. MULDER said such a question might be better answered by the Commissioner of the Department of Corrections. Number 236 REP. KOTT asked if the committee could assume the first and third amendments replaced the term "half-way house" with "community residential center." REP. MULDER said he felt he could not change terminology in mid-stream and so put forth those amendments to make the change in terminology clear in both sections. Number 256 REP. MULDER said the fourth amendment addresses the current ability of the court to allow those convicted for up to six drunken driving offenses to enjoy the use of a limited drivers license, allowing them to drive to and from work. The Department of Motor Vehicles has said such a provision is costly, ineffective, and in violation of federal directives, Rep. Mulder said. Number 271 REP. TOOHEY asked a clarifying question about the fourth amendment. REP. MULDER answered the question, saying the amendment would limit such licenses only to first offenders and would deny the limited license to those with subsequent offenses, he said. CHAIR BUNDE said he did not wish to rush the amendments through the committee, especially as members had not seen them before the meeting. He encouraged members to take their time and pose any questions they wished. REP. MULDER noted that, under the bill, those who refuse to take a breath test and are still convicted of drunken driving would not be eligible for a limited license. CHAIR BUNDE asked whether the fifth amendment merely deleted the option of confiscating the vehicle of a person convicted of DWI. REP. MULDER said the court has the ability to confiscate a vehicle after the first offense. He said that he had wanted to include strict sanctions to take away the vehicle of a person who committed multiple offenses and continued to drive drunk. However, he encountered many statutory problems relating to ownership, liens and titles, and so decided to abandon the amendment as unnecessarily burdensome. CHAIR BUNDE invited Department of Corrections Commissioner Rupp to testify, and asked him to limit his testimony to HB 136, even though the commissioner was also planning to testify on HB 137 as well. Number 322 LLOYD RUPP, COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, testified in Juneau in support of HB 136. He expressed concern with the problem with drunken drivers and the delays of up to a year between sentencing and incarceration, which he said defeats the purpose of the law. He also said that the state needs to assess whether those arrested for DWIs are functioning alcoholics who need treatment for their problem, while at the same time not excusing drunken behavior. He supported the bill's effort to make people accountable for their actions and responsible for the costs incurred by their offenses. Commissioner Rupp referred to the fiscal notes accompanying the bill and said the bill would collect as much revenue as it would cost after some initial expenses. He said he had read news accounts of third-time offenders' involvement in fatal car accidents and called such situations intolerable. Number 380 CHAIR BUNDE asked why, if the program would generate receipts equal to expenditures, there was no zero fiscal note. REP. MULDER answered that the fiscal notes displayed expenses in the top half of the page, and program receipts on the bottom side, and the two amounts balanced after the first year. CHAIR BUNDE apologized for misreading the fiscal notes. Number 394 REP. BRICE asked about the assumption in the fiscal note that the state could collect only 60 percent of the charges levied under the bill, when the bill gave the state the ability to attach permanent fund dividends. COMMISSIONER RUPP said that the department generally assumes it can collect 60 percent of the funds due it. Also, he said, the department could not assume everyone arrested for DWI receives a permanent fund dividend. He added that the state would eventually pay for itself. Number 414 REP. BRICE said the fiscal notes were probably conservative estimates and the state would eventually bring in more money than the program cost. COMMISSIONER RUPP said he would be pleased with the extra money and could easily put the funds to good use within the department. REP. NICHOLIA noted that many people in Alaska do not receive permanent fund dividends because they owe for child care (support). Number 432 REP. G. DAVIS asked if the fiscal notes reflected the provisions for half-way house sentencing for second offenders. COMMISSIONER RUPP said extending the CRC provision to second offenders meant the department was looking at 20 days, which left more options. He invited a staffer to testify with details. Number 444 DANA LATOUR, LEGISLATIVE LIAISON FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, said 1,100 people were charged with a second DWI offense in 1992. The offense carries a 30-day sentence, with a third of the sentence, or 10 days, subtracted for "good time." Assuming 80 percent of those charged are convicted and serve their sentence, the second-offense CRC provision results in an additional 17,800 bed-days. She said HB 136 addresses first-time offenses, of which there were 3,261 in 1992. If each served a three-day sentence, that means 6,783 bed-days. At $60 per day, a 20-day sentence would cost an offender $1,200, she said. COMMISSIONER RUPP said that cost did not seem unreasonable given the permanent fund dividend and other assets that people would have. He said he felt the key was to say that people are responsible for the costs the state bears. Number 458 REP. KOTT asked if the term "imprisonment" should be used instead of "detention" when referring to a stay at a half- way house. COMMISSIONER RUPP answered that the term "half-way house" had been replaced in favor of "community residential center (CRC)," a more expressive and appropriate term. He added that some areas speak of community corrections, or community imprisonment, or house arrest. REP. KOTT asked if AS 28.35.03 also included other motorized vehicles, such as snowmobiles. COMMISSIONER RUPP responded affirmatively. Number 475 REP. KOTT asked what type of facility in rural Alaska might be deemed an "appropriate facility" by the Department of Corrections. COMMISSIONER RUPP said giving the department latitude would be appropriate. He noted the department would consider a community's resources for possible CRCs, including such facilities as a hotel, which would mean the prisoner would have to pay the cost of incarceration in a hotel. In other places, the department might deem an armory or other community facility an "appropriate facility." It is important to make sure a place of confinement was appropriate and safe, to address liability issues, he said. If the bill did not provide for CRC, requirements for imprisonment in jail might mitigate (sic) against it, he said. He stated he wanted to let the community respond to what it had. REP. KOTT said he would hate to tell constituents that a drunk driving conviction netted a person a three-day stay in Juneau's Westmark hotel. Number 475 COMMISSIONER RUPP said he was once sentenced in traffic court to a traffic school, which took place overnight in a hotel and which cost some participants both the cost of the traffic school and the costs of a night's lodgings at a hotel. He said it was a method that had been tried with success. Number 500 REP. BRICE asked what would happen if a first-time DWI offender was indigent and had their permanent fund dividend (PFD) already attached. COMMISSIONER RUPP said he would not mind attaching PFDs for future years. He also said offenders could borrow money from friends or relatives, credit cards or any method of payment to make sure that a person was held accountable for the cost to society of his actions. REP. BRICE said his major concern was not to see children neglected to pay costs of imprisonment. Number 522 REP. NICHOLIA asked if the Department of Corrections knew how the cost of incarceration in a CRC would compare to the cost of incarceration in a jail. COMMISSIONER RUPP answered yes, and noted that such costs vary by region. He said the cost for jails range from a low of $68 to a high of almost $140 per day, for an average of about $100 per day. The costs for CRCs range from a low of $38 per day to a high of almost $70 per day, he said. REP. NICHOLIA asked whether a person in an area without a CRC would have to serve their sentence in jail and incur the higher cost. COMMISSIONER RUPP answered yes. But he added that most communities are open to the idea of CRCs. He added that the department would be willing to contract with for- or non- profit corporations to provide the service. A church or a community association could provide the CRC service, as long as they met the core criteria for the state's core program. He said the state should make allowances for regional variations in CRC conditions or programs, especially to make allowances for Native issues. (Rep. Olberg departed at approximately 3:45 p.m.) REP. NICHOLIA asked which rural communities the department contacted concerning the CRC programs. COMMISSIONER RUPP said the department would not talk about contracting for CRCs until the legislature had its say on HB 136. But, he said, he had spoken with a representative of Saxman who was interested in doing a culture-relevant program in that area. Commissioner Rupp also noted that he had spoken with representatives of "two other areas that were associations," as well as with representatives from the Alaska Federation of Natives. He said the department's intent, if HB 136 were to pass, would be to sit down with people in various areas to see what types of facilities would make sense as CRCs. He said the department would promulgate its basic uniform requirements for certification, then talk with representatives from different areas to see how they might want to add to those basic requirements, then entertain proposals. Number 574 JUANITA HENSLEY, CHIEF OF DRIVER SERVICES FOR THE DIVISION OF MOTOR VEHICLES IN THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, testified from Anchorage on HB 136. She addressed the bill's fourth amendment, to include provisions for limited driver's licenses. She said the division asked Rep. Mulder to include the amendment for two reasons. The first reason was that the existing 1990 statutes regarding limited licenses, allowing such licenses to be granted to those charged with their second to sixth drunken driving offenses, are extremely burdensome to the division and to the court system. She said there was no method included to allow the division to keep track of the limited license. Given Alaskans' transience of residence and employment, the existing statutes create a large burden of paperwork and recordkeeping on the division and on the license-holder's employers, Ms. Hensley said. (Rep. Brice departed at 3:50 p.m.) (Rep. Brice returned at 3:52 p.m.) MS. HENSLEY said the second reason the division sought Rep. Mulder's fourth amendment was that granting limited licenses under the statutes was a large factor and disqualified the state from receiving about $200,000 in annual alcohol education grants given by the National Highway Safety Traffic Administration and administered by the Division of Public Safety's planning agency. The grant requirements specify that a qualifying state must meet five of six qualifications, she said. The state does not comply with requirements for limited licenses, for minimum age drinking prevention programs, or for sobriety checkpoints. TAPE 93-24, SIDE B Number 000 JAY DULANY, DIRECTOR OF THE DIVISION OF MOTOR VEHICLES, IN THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, testified from Anchorage, making himself available to answer questions on HB 136. (Rep. Olberg returned at 3:54 p.m.) LORN CAMPBELL, ADMINISTRATOR OF THE HIGHWAY SAFETY PLANNING AGENCY, IN THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, testified via teleconference in Juneau, making himself available to answer questions on HB 136. REP. G. DAVIS noted the absence of a fiscal note from the Division of Motor Vehicles on the bill, and asked whether the bill would not require more work for the division. MR. DULANY answered that the bill would actually help the division. He said that when amendments were passed in 1990, the division was unable to place a fiscal note and obtain funding to do the work called for by the amendments. He said HB 136 would help the division's operations in the driver services area. Number 039 REP. NICHOLIA asked whether the Department of Corrections would work with tribal courts in villages, as most nonprofits do not have programs in all villages. COMMISSIONER RUPP answered yes. Number 050 CHAIR BUNDE closed public testimony on HB 136 and asked the will of the committee. REP. BRICE moved passage of HB 136 with individual recommendations, with amendments and fiscal notes attached. Number 070 REP. VEZEY expressed concern about the number of amendments to the bill and said he would like to see a full list of the amendments so that the bill could be read in one document. He also expressed concern about the fiscal note. He said if the Department of Corrections wanted to come back later and ask for more money to administer the program, he would be encouraged to refuse. He said the bill was supposed to reduce the cost of enforcing compliance, and if it did not achieve that end, the legislature should try a different approach. REP. G. DAVIS expressed agreement with Rep. Vezey on the number of amendments and said the fiscal impact of the third amendment was not included in the fiscal note, which would be updated and included. REP. BRICE said he would be willing to withdraw his motion to pass the bill from the committee if it were the will of the committee. CHAIR BUNDE said he would be willing to have a vote on the motion. REP. B. DAVIS objected to the motion. CHAIR BUNDE said he understood the will of the committee to have a clean copy of HB 136, plus a revised fiscal note to allow for the impact of including second offenses. Chair Bunde closed discussion of HB 136 and announced his intention to turn the chair over to Rep. Toohey and to have the discussion turn to HB 137. REP. NICHOLIA asked whether the committee would be able to discuss HB 136 when the bill returned to the table with a clean copy. CHAIR BUNDE said yes, the committee would be able to continue discussing the bill until it was ready to vote. Chair Bunde announced he would have to leave the meeting at 4:30 p.m. for another commitment, at which time he would turn the chair over to Rep. Toohey. He noted the teleconferenced portion of the meeting was completed. He brought HB 137 to the table. (Rep. Kott departed at approximately 4:00 p.m.)
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|