Legislature(2007 - 2008)CAPITOL 120
04/20/2007 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB181 | |
| HB164 | |
| HB3 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 3 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 181 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 213 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 164 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 181 - TRAFFIC OFFENSES: FINES/SCHOOL ZONES 1:06:43 PM CHAIR RAMRAS announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 181, "An Act relating to traffic offenses and traffic offenses committed in a school zone; and providing for an effective date." [Before the committee was CSHB 181(HES).] 1:07:34 PM REPRESENTATIVE PEGGY WILSON, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor, relayed that HB 181 pertains to the safety of school children, and that her staff would be presenting the bill. 1:08:04 PM ROBB MYERS, Intern to Representative Peggy Wilson, Alaska State Legislature, explained on behalf of Representative Wilson that the legislature has already established double traffic fines for violations occurring in either highway work zones or traffic safety corridors, and that HB 181 will establish double traffic fines for violations that occur in school zones so as to provide extra protection to children. According to statistics, a child traveling on foot who is struck by a motor vehicle has a 90 percent chance of surviving if the motor vehicle is traveling at 20 mph, and only a 55 percent chance of survival if the motor vehicle is traveling at 30 mph. Nationwide, 20,000 children are injured every year as a result of being struck by vehicles while on foot, with up to half of those injuries requiring hospitalization. Washington state recently adopted a measure similar to what HB 181 proposes, and has experienced a decrease of collisions in school zones since then. MR. ROBB MYERS relayed that Section 1 adds the words "school zone" to AS 28.05.151(d), and that Section 2 provides that repeat offenders will be assessed double the points normally assessed for such violations if a second or subsequent offense occurs within 24 months of the first offense. Section 2 is meant to provide an extra deterrent, since only providing for elevated fines has not proven to be an effective deterrent. Section 3 raises the maximum fine provided for in AS 28.90.010(c) from $300 to $1,000; he indicated that Legislative Legal and Research Services requested this proposed change. Section 4 pertains to signage requirements and allows for automated technology, and Section 5 provides a definition of the term, "school zone". MR. ROBB MYERS offered that Section 4's definition acknowledges distinctions between urban and rural school zone signage; for example, the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF) doesn't bother to put up school zone signs in many rural areas because it fears that people will simply start ignoring them and so would rather just put up signs in urban areas. The DOT&PF currently uses three types of signs: one type says "when flashing" [and has a flashing light], one type says, "from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. schooldays", and one type says "when children present". However, the department has indicated that it is "moving away from those last two in favor of the one with the flashing light," he added. Essentially, the fines and penalties provided for by HB 181 would only apply during the times/circumstances indicated on the signage. MR. ROBB MYERS relayed that Section 6 annuls 13 AAC 02.325(d) and 13 AAC 03.325(d), both of which provide a current definition of "school zone" and set the speed limit at 20 mph. Section 7 provides an effective date of 7/1/2012 for Section 2 of the bill, thereby allowing the Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) time to implement that provision. 1:15:12 PM CHAIR RAMRAS said he wants to ensure that a person can't lose his/her driver's license for a single violation. REPRESENTATIVE LYNN questioned whether an assessment of points also affects one's insurance rates. MR. ROBB MYERS surmised that that is the case. In response to a question, he again explained that Section 2 - providing for the assessment of double points - pertains only to a second or subsequent violation that occurs within 24 months of the initial violation. Section 8 provides for a 7/1/07 effective date for the remainder of the bill, thus allowing people time to become aware of this new law before the next school year starts. MR. ROBB MYERS, in response to comments and questions, explained that municipalities often institute ordinances that mirror state law - and offered some examples - and that although the vast majority of speeding violations in school zones occur in Anchorage, the sponsor feels that HB 181 will address a state- wide problem. REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS asked how fast the DOT&PF will get all the signs replaced with the type that have a flashing light. MR. ROBB MYERS suggested that a representative from the department could better address that question. 1:23:43 PM BILL CHEESEMAN, Pupil Transportation Supervisor, Transportation Department, Matanuska-Susitna Borough School District (MSBSD), Department of Education and Early Development (EED), said he wishes to encourage approval of HB 181. He opined that given that the legislature has taken steps to safeguard highway construction workers, it is appropriate to provide the same protection to school children in school zones via similar fines/penalties. In response to comments and questions, he said that the MSBSD is attempting to get the type of signage that has flashing lights installed at all of its school zones - currently only about 50 percent of the signs are of that type - and that some of its school zones do have signage marking the end of the school zone. 1:28:24 PM LINDA JANOUSEK, Transportation Manager, Transportation Department, North Slope Borough School District (NSBSD), Department of Education and Early Development (EED), relayed that the same problem exists in the NSBSD - the end of a school zone is not clearly marked - adding that the elementary schools have signage with flashing lights but neither the high school nor junior high school have such signage. She said that she and 27 others [in the NSBSD} support HB 181. REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS asked whether the North Slope Borough could simply address this problem at the local level. MS. JANOUSEK offered her belief that local enforcement and prosecution would be more likely to occur if the proposed fines/penalties were instituted at the state level. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG questioned who would be paying for HB 181's associated enforcement and prosecution efforts. 1:33:48 PM DENNIS COOK, Coordinator, Bus & Transportation Department, Fairbanks North Star Borough School District (FNSBSD), Department of Education and Early Development (EED), said that he is in support HB 181. In response to earlier questions, he relayed that all of the FNSBSD's school zones that have signage with flashing lights either have "end of school zone" signage or, at the location where the flashing light signs instruct those going in the opposite direction, signage listing the regular posted speed. He explained that he has received numerous complaints over the year, both from crossing guards and parents, regarding vehicles speeding through the school zones. Given the winter darkness, ice fog, and hazardous walking conditions, he said he thinks HB 181 is a good idea and will increase safety for the district's school children. He mentioned that he has personally witnessed vehicles traveling very fast through school zones, and opined that the threat of double fines will help eliminate those occurrences. REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL questioned whether the state is currently enforcing existing law with regard to speeding violations in school zones. CHAIR RAMRAS said that he is in favor of safer speeds in school zones to protect children, but noted that he's received numerous complaints from constituents regarding the lack of signage in certain school zones. He indicated that he is concerned that HB 181 won't actually solve the problem of inadequate signage. MR. COOK said he would like to see signage with flashing lights put up because that type of signage actually gets the attention of drivers. CHAIR RAMRAS concurred, and surmised that the lack of clear signage indicating the ending of school zones is also problematic. MR. COOK concurred, and reiterated that signage with flashing lights will help drivers become aware that they are traveling through a school zone. REPRESENTATIVE LYNN opined that the signage issue really needs to be addressed, but surmised that HB 181 won't actually do that. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested that HB 181 [be changed] such that it provides school districts with financial assistance in making school zones safer. 1:48:05 PM ROBERT "BOB" MYERS said that as a father and grandfather, he visits three different school zones each afternoon to pick up his children and grandchildren, and travels through two other school zones en route, and he is very alarmed by some of the driving habits of others - speeding, tailgating, not stopping for children in a crosswalk. It is just a matter of time, he opined, before a child gets hit by a car in a school zone. He said he also works for the school district and has been doing duty as a crossing guard for eight years, and he feels that if he weren't out there, the situation would be much worse than it is currently, adding that even now he sees drivers speeding all the time. He said he would like to see the types of drivers who intentionally violate traffic safety laws in school zones prosecuted. CHAIR RAMRAS concurred. He then read a portion of the fiscal note analysis provided by the DOT&PF [original punctuation provided]: DOT&PF assumed that double fine signs will be installed below current speed limit school signs. 148 double fine signs will be installed on state roads at a cost of $80/sign. It is estimated that it will take 2 hours to install each sign with mobilization and travel time. Currently photoradar is not being used, however if it were to be used, DOT would be required to replace the already installed double fine signs with sings that say "double fines and photo radar in use". Additionally this fiscal analysis does not include the cost of putting up double fine signs at schools that are not on state roads. DOT estimates 256 signs are needed for schools on non state roads. CHAIR RAMRAS said he doesn't mind instituting double fine zones for those school zones that are clearly marked at both ends but not for those that aren't. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he is concerned about what he characterized as the over-breadth of Section 3; the proposed fine increase to $1,000 appears to apply to everything from jaywalking on down. MR. ROBB MYERS explained that Section 3 was added because of a concern that doubling the fines as Section 1 proposes would exceed the existing fine cap, and so Section 3 proposes to raise that cap, not actually raise all the fines. He also offered his understanding that if a violation or an infraction only results in the person being subject to a fine, a jury trial would not be required. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG offered his understanding, though, that in Baker v. City of Fairbanks, the court held that if there is a possibility that a person could be incarcerated, be subject to a substantial fine, or lose a valuable license, he/she would be entitled to a jury trial. 1:58:14 PM REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS asked how many tickets have been issued at the existing $300 limit, and how many injuries to, or fatalities of, school children in a school zone during school hours have taken place in Alaska and in the nation. MR. ROBB MYERS said he doesn't have statistics regarding the existing $300 fine limit, but in 2006, 433 speeding citations were issued in school zones in Alaska with 284 of those being issued in Anchorage and 61 and 69 being issued in Fairbanks and Juneau respectively. Most other communities either had none issued or just a few issued. Nationwide, there were approximately 20 fatalities and 20,000 injuries; in Alaska, in 2004, there were four minor injuries and two major injuries. CHAIR RAMRAS surmised that the question is whether increasing fines and points assessed will result in better driving. MR. ROBB MYERS, in response to comments, said he'd looked at data pertaining to the doubling of fines in construction zones, and that data - from 2002 through 2004 - indicated that the number of accidents had dropped from 216 down to 143; during that same time period, traffic accidents in general increased from just under 6,000 to just over 7,000. REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL pointed out that in construction zones, there are a lot of visual aids to notify drivers that they are entering such zones, and so it is not a fair comparison to make given that signage at school zones is still a big issue; proper signage could prove quite effective in and of itself in reducing this problem. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG sought and received confirmation that the department sets the amount of the fine for the various infractions/violations. He then asked why Section 7 specifies that Section 2 won't take effect for five years. MR. ROBB MYERS said that that effective date was provided for at the request of the DMV to allow it time to develop tracking codes and acquire a new computer system; also, it could be that merely instituting the double fine scheme will be sufficient, and so providing this extra time will allow the legislature to see whether the double point assessment provision is still needed. 2:04:36 PM CHAIR RAMRAS announced that public testimony was closed, and noted that the committee would be holding the bill over in order to give the sponsor time to address members' concerns, particularly with regard to signage and perhaps an exemption that would apply when signage is not adequate. He said he is assuming the fiscal note would increase in instances where posting the end of a school zone actually requires installing signage, not just changing or adding to the signage that is already in place, and where signage is installed on non state roads. [HB 181 was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|