Legislature(1993 - 1994)
02/17/1994 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
CSHB 299: "An Act relating to revocation of a driver's license for illegal possession or use of a controlled substance or illegal possession or consumption of alcohol; and providing for an effective date." Number 044 REP. CYNTHIA TOOHEY, Prime Sponsor of HB 299, stated that a proposed committee substitute (CS) had been drafted and requested to have the CS adopted as a working draft. She indicated there was not a quorum present. REP. TOOHEY stated that recent data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration indicates the alcohol fatality rate for high school students is nearly twice as high than drivers 25 years of age and older. She further stated that the rate is nearly three times as high for 18-20 year olds. She stressed that the consumption of alcohol or drugs can severely impair the ability of the driver to drive responsibly. She said that driving is a privilege and that loss of the privilege is a powerful deterrent to drugs or alcohol use or possession. She felt legislation would provide a strong incentive for children to say no. She also said the proposal would positively reinforce those youths who are alcohol and drug free by maintaining their eligibility. She said the proposed legislation is known as "use it/lose it." REP. TOOHEY asserted that a minor who is old enough to have a permit or license would lose that privilege if the minor possessed, used, or consumed a controlled substance or alcohol. She said the proposal is supported by the Department of Public Safety (DPS), the Alaska Medical Association, the Alaska Council on Prevention of Alcohol and Drug Abuse, Alaskans for Drug Free Youths, and the Alaska Association of the Chief of Police. REP. TOOHEY explained that there is a cost to DPS, but the revenues generated by the implementation of the proposal would be offset and a positive revenue stream is anticipated. She also said that the program would enable the state to access additional federal funds. REP. TOOHEY said that the Department of Law (DOL) said that there would be a zero fiscal note. She maintained that if the proposal achieves its intention, the savings of lives and the savings of alcohol and drug treatment costs could be tremendous. Number 174 CHAIR BUNDE indicated that there were witnesses present from Juneau/Douglas High School and asked for the first witness. Number 199 SAM RUSSELL, Student, Juneau/Douglas High School, testified in support of CSHB 299. He stated that the proposal was a very good idea. He did say, however, that the wording of the proposal is unclear and would leave a lot to the judgement of a police officer. He then asked what the definition of probable cause is. Number 233 MARGOT KNUTH, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law, answered legal questions on CSHB 299. She stated that probable cause is a recognized legal standard that requires that a police officer have evidence available that indicates, more likely than not, that the violation has occurred. The violation would be subject to review by the courts, who would use the standard and substitute their own judgement for the police officers, and then agree or disagree that there was probable cause. Number 260 CHAIR BUNDE commented that if a police officer makes a judgement based on probable cause that is incorrect, the case would be thrown out of court. MS. KNUTH agreed. SAM RUSSELL indicated that the words "possessed, used, and consumed" are used in the past tense and questioned what time frame was indicated. He also asked, if a neighbor was to call the police and report the suspicion of minors consuming alcohol in the house across the street, would that be enough evidence of probable cause for a police officer to make an arrest. Number 322 CHAIR BUNDE noted for the record that at 3:14 p.m. a quorum was present and indicated that Reps. Toohey, Brice, Nicholia, Bettye Davis, Gary Davis and himself (Rep. Bunde) were present. CHAIR BUNDE, for clarification, asked if the terms being discussed were well defined by law. Number 345 MS. KNUTH said yes, and further stated that the administrative revocation statute as proposed begins: "If a peace officer has probable cause based on personal observation..." She said that line requires the officer to actually observe enough to believe the offense has been committed. To only see suspicious conduct would not be enough. MS. KNUTH stated that the odor of alcohol on a juvenile's breath would be enough evidence for probable cause. She said the requirement of personal observation also gives a "time back" time frame. She explained that usually no more than a certain amount of hours could pass after the offense is committed and the time frame would not go back weeks or months or years. Number 393 CHAIR BUNDE said the proposal was a protective measure and it was not his intention that any legal rights be taken away. He further stated that youths should have the same legal rights as adults. Number 422 REP. G. DAVIS made a motion to adopt the CS for HB 299 as a working draft. Number 425 CHAIR BUNDE, hearing no objection, stated that CSHB 299 had been adopted as the working draft. Number 437 SAM RUSSELL reiterated his support for CSHB 299. Number 462 KAI MORRISON, Student, Juneau/Douglas High School, testified in support of CSHB 299. He stated that he was somewhat unclear as to the statutes involved in the proposal. CHAIR BUNDE maintained that the statutes would be made available to the students the following day. KAI MORRISON asked, if a minor does not have a license and is found to be in possession of drugs or alcohol, would the right to obtain a license be withheld for the same period as those minors who do have a license? Number 517 JUANITA HENSLEY, Chief, Driver Services, Division of Motor Vehicles, Department of Public Safety, answered questions on CSHB 299. She stated that driving is a privilege in the state Alaska; it is not a right. It is an earned privilege obtained by obeying the laws of the state. She stated that if a minor does not have a license, the privilege to obtain a license is revoked for the same period of time as a person who has a license. She explained that if an individual is charged with minor consuming, and the police officer had probable cause, the license would be revoked through the administrative process. She said the first offense lasts for 90 days from the date that the officer made the determination, or from the date prescribed by law, seven days from the initial charge. Number 548 KAI MORRISON asked if an administrative hearing must be held in the same town that the violation occurred in. Number 559 MS. HENSLEY stated that the administrative hearing could be conducted over the phone. Number 593 CHAIR BUNDE asked if Kai Morrison was in support or opposition of CSHB 299. Number 596 KAI MORRISON said he supports CSHB 299. Number 608 ALISHA HECK, Student, Juneau/Douglas High School, testified in support of CSHB 299. She asked how minors, whose parents will not let their children obtain permits or licenses, would be affected by the proposal. She explained that there would be nothing to take away if the minor was not going to be allowed to obtain a permit or a license. Number 550 MS. HENSLEY said if an administrative hearing is not requested, the privilege to drive or obtain a license would be revoked, effective the eighth day following the initial charge. She said that it would not start the day a person turns eighteen years of age. Number 674 ALISHA HECK stated that there would be nothing to take away in that time period if the parents did not allow them to obtain a permit or license. Number 683 MS. HENSLEY said the proposal would prevent the minor from obtaining a driver's license, and if they had a driver's license, it would be revoked. Number 689 CHAIR BUNDE interjected that in the event the parents change their minds, the proposal would affect the minor. Number 696 REP. TOOHEY asked how the proposal would apply to the minor who then turns 18 years of age. Number 705 MS. HENSLEY replied that there is a seven day grace period from the initial notice when the officer gave the minor the notice (called a notice in order of revocation). The revocation would actually start on the eighth day, unless the minor requests an administrative hearing. She further stated that if a minor comes in to apply on their 18 birthday, the period of revocation would be over. Number 729 CHAIR BUNDE interjected that the violation does not remain in suspended animation. Number 737 ALISHA HECK reiterated that nothing would be taken away if the parents do not allow the children to obtain a permit or license, therefore there is no lesson taught. Number 747 CHAIR BUNDE stated that the same circumstance applies to the minor who is too young to acquire a permit. He agreed that the legislation cannot take anything away in those circumstances, but said circumstance often change quickly. Number 759 ALISHA HECK indicated under Section 1, line 3, it specifies youthful drivers or teen drivers and felt that the section could apply to anyone driving under the influence. She said if the words youthful and teenager were deleted, the statement still would hold true. Number 781 CHAIR BUNDE commented that motor vehicle safety statistics indicate that young people are killed more often in motor vehicle accidents, more so than "drunk old people." Number 786 ALISHA HECK maintained that the language could be removed because the concept did not apply only to youths. Number 789 CHAIR BUNDE explained that the focus of the legislation addresses teenage drivers. He felt that the proposal was not intended to be prejudiced against teenagers. REP. TOOHEY stated that the safety administration indicates that among high school aged drivers, the alcohol fatality rate is nearly twice as high as for that of 25 year old drivers. She said the proposal specifically addresses youthful drinking. Number 816 ALISHA HECK said she supported CSHB 299 but felt the wording could be more clear. Number 822 REP. G. DAVIS commented that most parents who already deny their children the privilege of obtaining a permit or license would probably impose some type of further restrictions should their children be charged with an alcohol or drug related offense. Number 845 REP. BRICE asked if the revocation takes place automatically. Number 853 MS. HENSLEY stated that the revocation would take place automatically on the eighth day following the initial charge, unless the minor requests an administrative review. Number 861 REP. BRICE asked what the offense would be for individuals between 18 and 21 years of age. Number 874 MS. HENSLEY said the issue is addressed within CSHB 299. She said if a person is in need of a driver's license to earn a livelihood, they can request, through the Department of Public Safety, a limited work license. She referred to the provision on page 3, lines 16-18. Number 899 JESSE GEMMELL, Student, Juneau/Douglas High School, testified in support of CSHB 299. She asked why the seven day grace period is provided in the proposal. Number 908 MS. HENSLEY said the provision allows the minor to follow their due process rights. She stated that the same provision is included in the Driving While Under the Influence (DWI) statute. Number 939 CHAIR BUNDE asked Jesse Gammell in what capacity she represents Juneau/Douglas High School. Number 940 JESSE GEMMELL answered that she is a member of the Natural Helpers group. CHAIR BUNDE asked Jesse Gemmell if she was in support or opposition to CSHB 299. Number 947 JESSE GEMMELL replied that she was in support of CSHB 299. Number 955 VERNON MARSHALL, Executive Director, National Education Association/Alaska, testified in support of CSHB 299. He expressed concern that if a child is helping to support the family unit and that child's license is revoked, the impact may be extreme on the entire family. He said it was his hope that a hearing officer would take that into consideration when reviewing the case. Number 986 MS. HENSLEY said that the officer can take that into consideration. Number 994 MR. MARSHALL stated another concern as being the use of education along with revocation. He noticed that in AS 28.15.201 there is reference to enrollment and compliance with alcohol treatment programs when appropriate. He encouraged the committee to consider making some form of treatment a provision in the proposal. He also indicated that the CS did not contain the original provision of a continuing education program. He assumed that the programs are already being done and that is why it is not in the CS. If indeed the programs were not available, Mr. Marshall strongly urged the committee to make that a provision in the CS. He felt it would help families and prevent the possibility of repeat offenders in the future. Number 030 REP. TOOHEY indicated that on page 2, line 1, was a provision that would allow schools to conduct educational programs to teach youths about the dangers of drinking or using controlled substances and driving. Number 036 REP. BRICE said, to his understanding, what was read would not have power of statute as it would in the findings of the legislation. He asked Rep. Toohey if she would be amenable to making a reference to that in part of the administrative revocation. Number 046 REP. TOOHEY did not know the answer. Number 053 CHAIR BUNDE clarified by saying part of the penalty would be to attend some type of alcohol counselling. Number 056 MS. HENSLEY said that issue could be provided for in the bill. She said that any time a license is revoked for drinking and driving, the individual must show evidence of completion of an alcohol treatment program. Number 068 CHAIR BUNDE asked if the expense of the program would be the responsibility of the driver. Number 071 MS. HENSLEY answered yes. Number 072 REP. TOOHEY said she could support that provision if most treatment did not cost $1000 per day. She said that provision could kill the bill. She felt the wording should urge the joining of a twelve step program, such as Alcoholics Anonymous or Alateen, which cost nothing to attend. Number 086 MS. HENSLEY stated there is a program through the Alcohol Safety Action program and other programs that are certified through the Division of Motor Vehicles that are eight hour alcohol information schools. She said the average cost is between $20.00 and $40.00. Number 102 CHAIR BUNDE said there is a difference between residential commitment and alcohol awareness programs. He suggested that Rep. Toohey craft an amendment while further testimony is taken. Number 117 KAI MORRISON stated that his school already has a health program and questioned if that program would be considered an alcohol awareness program as specified in CSHB 299. Number 137 CHAIR BUNDE said it was his understanding that those types of classes would be included in the purview of the legislation. TAPE 94-23, SIDE B Number 000 JAIME MARKS, Representative, National Council on Alcoholism/Juneau, testified in support of CSHB 299. He also supported mandatory education along with revocation. Number 027 SAM RUSSELL stated that his school currently has a Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) program and asked if it would qualify under the guidelines in the proposal. CHAIR BUNDE said it was his feeling that the decision would be made by the administrative hearing officer as to what programs qualify. REP. BRICE suggested that perhaps some guidance be given within the amendment. Number 076 CHAIR BUNDE stated that the language should be fairly broad as the DARE program may be cut next year. Number 080 MS. HENSLEY stated that the DARE program can be certified through the Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV). She explained that once the program is certified, it is added to the list of available programs. Number 106 MS. HENSLEY stated that DPS supports the CS for HB 299. She felt that CSHB 299 would save lives of youths and future leaders by reducing the number of injuries and fatal accidents. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, she said, drivers between 16 and 20 years old comprised 7.4% of the nation's population in 1991 and were involved in 15.4% of fatal motor vehicle accidents. She said that 6630 youths between ages 15 through 20 died in motor vehicle accidents. She further stated that in addition to alcohol consumption, other high risk factors are speeding and inadequate use of seatbelts. She felt the revocation of a driver's license would serve as a deterrent to consuming or being in possession of illegal substances. MS. HENSLEY stated that there would be a fiscal cost, but that the costs would be offset by revenues taken in by the state. She said the Division of Family and Youth Services (DFYS) reported that 1200 youths between the ages of 14 and 17 are referred to their agency annually by police authorities for alcohol and drug offenses. She said that approximately 1300 persons between 18 and 20 were arrested and charged with drug and alcohol offenses in 1992. She projected the revocation of 2500 licenses in the first operating year. She said, due to the process of revocations and process of due process, the DMV would request one full time driver improvement hearing officer and two full time motor vehicle representatives. She said the cost would be $120,100. She also stated that if the license applicant is under 18 years of age, a parent must sign consent for the license. She expected 90% of revoked licenses to reinstate, which would result in $225,000 of revenue. She indicated that the first year's projected operating cost would be $188,000, the second year $143,00, and revenues would remain at $225,000. She said that hopefully CSHB 299 would lower revocations. Number 302 ALISHA HECK asked, if a person is over 18 years of age, is that person considered an adult? CHAIR BUNDE answered yes, but the person is not old enough to drink. ALISHA HECK felt the wording should be better defined. CHAIR BUNDE stated that he did not have a fiscal note in his packet. MS. HENSLEY stated that DPS could not provide the fiscal note until the CS was adopted. She said she would obtain the fiscal note immediately after the bill passes out of committee. Number 375 MS. HENSLEY reminded Chair Bunde that the bill would be referred to Judiciary. She then stated that under page 3, line 18, the sentence, "If a person's driver's license, permit, or privilege to obtain a license is revoked (under this section), the person's license or permit may not be issued or reinstated until the person demonstrates compliance with the terms of AS 28.15.211 (d)." Number 467 CHAIR BUNDE asked if the committee was comfortable with the amendment. After some discussion, Chair Bunde asked for a motion. Number 478 REP. B. DAVIS made a motion to adopt the amendment for CSHB 299. Number 480 CHAIR BUNDE, hearing no objections, stated that CSHB 299 as amended was before the committee. He then asked the pleasure of the committee. Number 487 REP. BRICE made a motion to move CSHB 299 as amended out of committee with anticipated fiscal note to Judiciary, the next committee of referral. Number 494 CHAIR BUNDE, hearing no objections, stated that the bill was so moved. He then charged the students with the responsibility of sitting on his side of the table within the next 20 to 30 years. Number 552 (NOTE: Rep. Toohey assumed the position of Chair for the remainder of the meeting.) CHAIR TOOHEY brought HB 417 to the table.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|