Legislature(2009 - 2010)BARNES 124
03/24/2010 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB415 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 415 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 416 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 415-911 CALL RECORDINGS
3:40:50 PM
CHAIR OLSON announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 415, "An Act relating to 911 call recordings and
the release of information regarding 911 calls."
3:41:00 PM
JENNIFER SENETTE, Staff, Representative Kurt Olson, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of the prime sponsor, the House Labor and
Commerce Committee, Representative Kurt Olson, Chair, related
that we have all heard frantic 911 calls. These calls are
frequently broadcast on 24-hour news channels. She paraphrased
from the sponsor statement, as follows, which read [original
punctuation provided]:
Public records disclosure is an essential tool for
Alaskans to track the performance of state agencies.
911 transcripts and audio recordings are among the
public records available for citizen inspection.
Access to these records serves a legitimate public
purpose; playing actual calls over the airwaves does
not. The growing practice of broadcasting 911
recordings on the radio, television, and internet is a
disturbing trend that not only serves little public
value, but violates the privacy rights of the Alaskans
making those calls. In an effort to protect the
privacy of 911 callers, House Bill 415 bars recordings
of 911 calls from being played over broadcast media.
Emergency calls are often desperate cries from
vulnerable individuals and placing such a call should
not consent to the caller's extremely private moments
being splashed over the airwaves. Transcripts and call
audio will remain open to the public, thus balancing
the public's right to know with the privacy rights of
the caller.
Widespread unease at the public airing of 911 calls
has spurred legislative action across the country.
Five states keep 911 recordings confidential, and an
additional four place restrictions on the release of
tapes. Four more states have legislation pending
addressing the issue.
House Bill 415 strikes the appropriate balance between
the public interest and the privacy of 911 callers.
There is little public value in airing the distressed
voices of 911 callers, and Alaskans should have the
expectation that the extremely personal and often
distressed calls they place to 911 will not be fodder
for the evening news.
3:42:45 PM
MS. SENETTE explained that media outlets often replay audio or
transcripts of 911 calls, which are considered public record.
She acknowledged it is a legitimate purpose to have these
recordings as public records. Thus, HB 415 would only prohibit
the airing of recordings on the broadcast media. The bill would
make it a crime to play a recording of a 911 call on broadcast
media. The penalty for a person convicted of airing broadcast
media would be a class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to
$10,000. She offered that the news media provides a constant
stream of sensational stories. She related several instances in
which people have heard their own family's calls played in the
media, including a North Carolina woman whose daughter was
killed and an Alaska teenager who mauled by a bear. Those calls
were broadcast repeatedly and the families had to relive the
anguish of the emergency calls.
3:47:22 PM
CHAIR OLSON related this bill has a further referral to the
House Judiciary Standing Committee.
3:48:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN offered that he shares some of the sponsor's
concerns. He asked whether the bill "bumps up against" Federal
Communication Commission (FCC) rules. Broadcasting 911 calls
would end up being illegal in Alaska if the bill passes but may
not be illegal in other states. Additionally, some people may
be broadcasting newsworthy stories so he was uncertain how news
stories would be affected by the bill.
MS. SENETTE answered that five states have similar laws, five
states have pending laws, and four other states have
restrictions.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked whether legal challenges have been
made in those states.
MS. SENETTE offered her belief that the four states are
currently working through the issues.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN characterized the issue of broadcasting 911
calls as "like trying to put toothpaste back into the tube."
3:50:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES reported that she has already requested a
legal opinion on the constitutional issues. She related that
the language of the bill implies members of the public and the
media would only have access to transcripts of the 911 calls.
She recalled previous testimony that the public or media could
get copies of the tapes. She referred to the fiscal note and
asked whether the Alaska State Troopers (AST) would have to
transcribe the calls or if the tapes would be distributed.
MS. SENETTE deferred to Lieutenant Dial, AST to answer questions
on the fiscal note. She related that the intent of the bill is
to allow the 911 audio be privately listened to by the public,
but the bill would restrict broadcasting the 911 recording.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES was not certain HB 415 will accomplish
what the sponsor intended it to do and thought the bill may need
to be "tweaked."
3:52:25 PM
CHAIR OLSON related that he worked with the legislative legal
drafter and discussed the bill with the AST prior to
introduction of the bill. He anticipated there would be some
cost for transcription of the 911 calls.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES asked whether the intent of HB 415 is that
people could listen to the 911 tapes or if people would only
have access to the transcripts of the calls.
CHAIR OLSON preferred that the public would have access to only
transcripts of the 911 call and not the recording. He expressed
concern for the privacy of family and friends of those involved
in emergency situations, but he related he does not want to
violate any privileges that Alaskans and Americans enjoy. He
said it appears that a verbatim transcript may provide some
balance.
3:54:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT asked whether "push back" on the bill is
coming from the public or the Alaska State Troopers (AST).
MS. SENETTE answered that the "push back" has come from the
media organizations in other states. She has not heard any
negative comments from the public or the police in Alaska.
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT commented that sometimes emergencies
happen in which children save siblings or parents. He agreed
that he did not want to see people hurt by 911 recordings being
aired but offered that some good press releases can sometimes
result from airing 911 calls.
3:55:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH recalled a former legislative member who
represented victim's rights. He anticipated some first
amendment right concerns with the bill. He wanted to ensure
that people suffering trauma do not suffer more from the media's
actions yet still protect individual rights. He offered his
belief that it is a matter of civility but he did not want
people to profit from other people's emergencies, which he
thought is difficult to capture and pinpoint in legislation.
3:58:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked, "When does news stop being news?" He
thought the immediacy of news would be lost if people had to
wait for a transcript. He asked whether this bill would apply
to instances in which someone shoots a video, a cell phone
video, or snapshots and subsequently releases or sells it to the
media during a catastrophe such as 9/11. He also recalled
seeing horrendous photos of caskets of soldiers. He said he did
not know the answer, but would like to be sensitive to the
victims and their families.
3:59:49 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN remarked on some legislative members' work
on behalf of victims.
4:00:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON asked whether people can currently
obtain a transcript of a 911 call.
MS. SENETTE answered yes. People can obtain copies of public
records so long as the records are not confidential records.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON referred to the fiscal note and
remarked on the AST's need for 2.5 people to address the
requests for 911 transcripts.
4:01:14 PM
JOHN MCKAY stated that he teaches a class at the University of
Alaska but that is testifying today on behalf of himself. He
just found out about the bill, he stated. He asked the
committee not to pass out the bill. He stated that the fiscal
note he reviewed was a zero fiscal note so he was not certain he
had the most current information. He asked how quickly
transcripts could be prepared and expressed concern that if the
work was not done quickly whether the transcripts would be
meaningful alternatives. He offered his belief that the bill is
unconstitutional. He is sympathetic to the concerns the bill's
sponsor is raising. However, he agreed that 911 calls broadcast
by the media are not much different than other news
circumstances. He did not see the need for this bill or for an
urgent change to the current law. He believed adequate laws for
privacy exist. He referred to the 911 calls and stated that
these are public records and to remove a whole category of
public records from public access would be a mistake. He agreed
that some good things come out of these kinds of records. He
offered that it is difficult to predict the future, but restated
that the few instances of inappropriate use should not result in
a whole category of public records should be removed. He cited
his 30 years of experience in the news media demonstrates to him
that the balancing of rights of access and constitutional rights
of individuals is something that courts and records custodians
already perform. He emphasized that there is no particular need
for the bill. The few instances of misuse can be countered with
instances of positive effects. He related a scenario in which a
foreigner called 911 during an emergency but could not be
understood. The man swept up his daughter and took her to the
emergency room but she died. The outcome was the responsible
agency replayed the message and the outcome led to reform,
including better access to translators during emergencies. He
suggested that the circumstances could be dealt with on a case-
by-case basis.
4:07:56 PM
CHAIR OLSON offered that the bill has several other committee
referrals so Mr. McKay would have time to consider the bill.
4:08:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN asked if he thought it was appropriate to
teach his students that the 911 calls of a personal nature made
by the emergency responders should be released to the media and
replayed on broadcast media.
MR. MCKAY answered that he teaches his student that editorial
choices are made by newspaper editors and broadcast news media
rather than by government. He related that there is a balance
of interests between statutory rights and freedoms. With
respect to public records, there is a constitutional right to
privacy which the courts have employed and balanced on a case-
by-case basis rather than making a whole category of public
records unavailable. Public records laws are important to allow
citizens the opportunity to monitor the activities of government
agencies. The public recordings help demonstrate that law
enforcement officers are performing their duties appropriately
and properly. He suggested the committee "look at the overall
picture and not be carried away to make changes in the law based
on a few very unfortunate situations." Some news stories are
excessive or lacking in taste and dignity, but we should not say
stories cannot be aired.
4:11:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN noted the bill is limited to 911 calls.
He remarked that legislation like this is important.
4:11:48 PM
RODNEY DIAL, Lieutenant; Deputy Commander, A Detachment,
Division of Alaska State Troopers (AST), Department of Public
Safety (DPS), stated that the Department of Public Safety is
neutral on the bill. He related that the DPS supports the
sponsor's intent. He said that the bill would impose additional
duties on the department. He explained that due to the Victim
Rights Act of 1991, Alaska statutes AS 40.25.120 (c), and the
DPS's inability to redact audio from audio files, the DPS holds
the position that protected information will not be released in
any form. The DPS believes that transcribing and redacting
audio files is the only method to ensure that protected
information, such as addresses, is not released. He emphasized
that if the DPS released a 911 audio tape that contained
protected information, it could be in violation of the Victim
Rights Act.
LT. DIAL pointed out that some AST detachments receive thousands
of 911 calls per month. The DPS receives some requests for 911
audio but very rarely does the department release any of the
recordings. In order to comply with HB 415, the DPS would have
to transcribe numerous recordings. One emergency incident can
actually result in numerous 911 recordings since various members
of the public report the same accidents. He envisioned the DPS
would need to set up a clearinghouse to process requests for the
911 recordings.
4:15:52 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT asked for the current process the
department uses when someone requests a copy of a 911 audio
call.
LT. DIAL explained that in most instances the DPS will not
furnish a copy of the 911 call except to a law enforcement
agency or to the Department of Law since the DPS does not have
the ability to redact from audio files. The audio files are
protected in a manner to ensure the integrity of the file in
case the file needs to be used as evidence in court proceedings.
He remarked that the AST's Ketchikan office does not currently
have the ability to redact the information. He summarized that
the department will not release the audio without a subpoena.
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT related the DPS follows the Victims
Rights Act. He asked the reason the department would need 2.5
people to accomplish the work.
LT. DIAL replied that 911 recordings are not currently given out
due to provisions in the statutes and the Victims Rights Act.
However, if the bill were to pass, the DPS would view the bill
as requiring the DPS to transcribe and release the information.
4:19:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES offered her belief that HB 415 would make
it harder for people to gain access to the recordings. She
related her understanding that the 911 recordings are not
currently public records and the bill would make it easier to
obtain the calls.
LT. DIAL agreed. He said that the AST does not currently
release 911 recordings. He explained the process the department
would use if HB 415 passed and people had the right to obtain a
transcript. The DPS would have someone type the recording and a
supervisor would redact the information. Thus, the recording
would be available to the public in the redacted form.
4:20:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON asked how often 911 recordings are
currently released.
LT. DIAL recalled recently receiving a request from an attorney.
The DPS's response was that the 911 recording contained
protected information and that the attorney would need a
subpoena to obtain the information. He related high activity of
911 calls in some offices, noting the multiple phone lines and
numerous dispatch centers. The DPS has made some exceptions to
its policy and has released 911 recordings to families, in
special circumstances, such as when a family member wants to
hear the last few minutes of a call from a loved one who died.
The process the AST uses in those circumstances is to bring in
the person and allow him/her to listen to the recording at the
AST Detachment office. The bill would impact the DPS due to the
sheer magnitude of statewide 911 calls. He envisioned
transcript requests from the media and from people who may wish
to file civil lawsuits.
4:22:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON asked whether a transcript would be
provided to a person who requests one.
LT. DIAL answered the DPS would not currently honor the request.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON asked whether a mechanism exists to
charge people a fee for a transcript.
LT. DIAL said he thought it was possible, but this aspect has
not yet been addressed by the department.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON referred to the fiscal note and asked
how many transcript requests the DPS anticipated in a year.
LT. DIAL explained that when the DPS prepared the fiscal note,
the DPS estimated it may need two staff to transcribe 911 calls
based on the time it currently takes to transcribe criminal
interviews. He said he does not know for certain the number of
requests, but anticipated that local news media may routinely
request transcripts on all major cases if the transcripts were
available. In further response to Representative T. Wilson, he
thought the department currently receives several hundred
requests per year. He was not certain whether an increase in
the number of requests would happen if the bill passed.
4:25:37 PM
CHAIR OLSON recalled a bear attack in Anchorage and asked if DPS
was the agency.
LT. DIAL did not recall the Anchorage teenager who was
bicycling, relating the responder would have been the Anchorage
Police Department.
4:26:09 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN remarked that police scanners are available.
He asked whether there is currently a prohibition against
recording those calls.
CHAIR OLSON believed the AST information is currently encrypted
and cannot be recorded.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN stated police scanners are readily
available. He asked where line would be drawn if the bill
passed.
CHAIR OLSON stated the bill specifically limits the prohibition
to 911 calls.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON asked whether the municipalities would
be affected.
LT. DIAL related some municipalities rely on AS 45.25.120 (c).
He offered his belief that the municipalities would not release
any 911 recording without a subpoena. He said that the
protected information cannot be altered in an audio recording at
this time. He restated that all of the municipalities that he
is familiar with do not currently release recordings to the
general public.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON asked whether the DPS would support
removing the AST from the bill.
LT. DIAL answered that if AST were exempted from HB 415, that it
would effectively eliminate the fiscal note.
4:28:59 PM
LT. DIAL recalled a personal incident for members to illustrate
the 911 calls. He referred to a case involving Timothy
Treadwell, who was a bear enthusiast who lived among the coastal
brown bears at Katmai National Park for 13 years. He and his
girlfriend were killed and a video tape recorded the graphic
deaths. The DPS obtained the video, during its investigation.
The video contained only an audio file since the lens cap was on
the camera. The department released the tapes to the family.
He offered that the department attempts to be understanding of
the victims and not add to their grief. The department also
works to help the press, but must also follow the Victims Rights
Act. Thus, the DPS will not release protected information to
the press or the general public.
4:31:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON asked how municipalities handle
requests for 911 audio recordings.
4:31:26 PM
TAMMY GOGGIA, Dispatcher, Kenai Peninsula Borough, stated that
she has been employed for 19 years at a joint dispatch office
for the Kenai Peninsula Borough and the AST. She stated that a
person must produce a subpoena before a 911 recording would be
released. She offered that the Kenai office would comply with
AS 40.25.120 (a) (6) (A)-(G). The 911 system is owned by the
Kenai Peninsula Borough so the request would also be reviewed by
the Kenai Peninsula Borough's attorney before a 911 recording
would be released.
CHAIR OLSON stated he did not intend to move the bill today.
4:32:52 PM
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON asked whether the 911 tape could be
obtained by a person but the call just could not be broadcast on
the media.
4:33:21 PM
ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General, Legal Services
Section, Criminal Division, Department of Law (DOL), clarified
that municipalities are covered under the Public Records law.
4:34:02 PM
MS. GOGGIA stated that some exceptions exist. She related that
when a baby is delivered and the delivery is recorded in a 911
call that if the parents asked for a tape it is possible that
the tape would be released to them as a means to celebrate the
birth.
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH asked for clarification of AS 40.25.120 (a)
(6) (A)-(G).
MS. CARPENETI related that these statutes are the exceptions.
These statutes pertain to public records that are excepted from
the public records disclosure requirements. She related that AS
40.25.120 (a) (6) (A)-(G) generally refers to law enforcement or
public health records. Thus, records compiled for law
enforcement purposes are not subject to disclosure.
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH related to the specifics of 911 emergency
calls. He asked for references that would include 911 calls.
MS. CARPENETI answered that if a 911 call reported a crime that
any disclosure may interfere with an ongoing investigation.
4:37:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH recalled Lt. Dial's testimony indicated that
the calls are not disclosed. He asked whether this law also
applies to municipalities.
MS. CARPENETI related she is not an expert on the Public Records
law, but the definition in AS 45.25.200 is a pretty broad
definition of who is bound by the public records statutes since
it defines public agencies, including political subdivisions,
departments, boards, and divisions. She offered to have an
expert come before the committee, if desired.
CHAIR OLSON asked whether municipalities are covered in this
statute.
MS. CARPENETI said she could not say for certain.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON offered that it seems like one
interpretation is that HB 415 would allow transcripts to be
released that currently are not available. She asked for
clarification.
MS. CARPENETI said she thought the bill was a little confusing
since it specifically cross references the exceptions to public
disclosure under AS 40.25.120 (a)(6), but does not reference
other exceptions in the subsection. She said she was not
certain about the drafting since it seemed confusing. She
thought that it was not clear if the other exceptions applied to
the transcripts in question.
4:40:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES thought it may be helpful to obtain the
current policy and specific statute cites that the AST and other
municipalities currently use for releasing 911 calls.
4:41:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN thought it may be helpful to find out from
some of the media outlets how the specific organizations are
currently obtaining the recordings of the 911 calls.
CHAIR OLSON agreed that requesting information from Anchorage,
Fairbanks, Juneau, and Soldotna would likely provide a range of
information.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN restated his question.
SUE STANCLIFF, Legislative Liaison, Department of Public Safety
(DPS), stated that the Department of Public Safety (DPS) takes
public information requests very seriously, since it affects
privacy, investigations, and many other considerations. The DPS
attorney developed a document, the "Public Records Request
Decision Key" to identify 17 pages of circumstances that apply
to the decision making key. She offered to request the
Assistant Attorney General who developed the key to participate
on-line to answer questions. Currently, the department
processes written requests for public information on a form,
evaluates the request, and determines whether the information
can be released by using the key. In most instances the request
is not authorized. The DPS routinely processes discovery
requests through the district attorney's office. The DPS uses a
State of Alaska Records Retention schedule to determine how long
to retain its 911 records, which are typically retained longer
than required under AS 09.10.070. The DPS does not currently
redact any 911 information, but under the bill the DPS would
transcribe the recording and redact the information. She
explained the DPS put considerable thought into the fiscal
impact of HB 415 when preparing the fiscal note.
MS. STANCLIFF offered to provide a copy of the Public Records
Request Decision Key to the committee.
MS. STANCLIFF explained that a complaint would be routed to the
manager and all complaints would be referred to the Office of
Professional Standards.
4:48:23 PM
MS. STANCLIFF, in response to Representative T. Wilson,
interpreted that recordings would not be released, but the bill
would require the DPS to transcribe and redact the information.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON asked for further clarification.
MS. STANCLIFF answered that the DPS currently does not release
the recordings.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON asked whether it would help to clarify
the language in the bill to state that if a party is successful
in obtaining a 911 audio tape that the party cannot broadcast
the tape.
4:51:03 PM
LT. DIAL answered that if an audio tape of a 911 call was
released it would violate the Victim Right's Act of 1991 and AS
40.25.120 (c). In essence, the compact disc (CD) of the 911
call would contain information that is private information. The
911 call is currently a public record and a process exists to
release the information. If this bill passed, the only way to
ensure that the protected information would not be released is
to transcribe the 911 call and review the information contained
on the CD, he stated.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON related her understanding that the bill
would really only apply to the one percent of the people who
currently are authorized to obtain the tape. She understood
that the person would be prohibited from using the information
on broadcast media.
LT. DIAL answered that in most cases when people obtain a 911
tape it does not contain any protected information, which is the
reason the department is able to release the audio tape of the
911 call. He maintained that the DPS believes that it must
abide by the Victim Rights Act and in most instances releasing a
911 recording would likely violate that act.
4:53:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES related that she is interested in
examining the legal aspects of AS 40.25.120 so she would like to
obtain the statute cites law enforcement agencies currently use.
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT asked whether everyone, including the
media, private citizens, district attorneys, and prosecuting
attorneys, uses the same form and the same criterion is used to
determine release of the 911 recording.
MS. STANCLIFF answered yes. However, she pointed out that the
District Attorney and the Department of Law use a subpoena to
obtain the information. She suggested perhaps Lt. Dial could
elaborate further.
REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT thought there were probably
confidentiality issues addressed with subpoenas.
[HB 415 was held over.]