Legislature(1995 - 1996)
05/06/1995 09:40 AM Senate FIN
Audio | Topic |
---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 159(JUD) An Act allowing a person under age 21 to be arrested by a peace officer without a warrant for illegal possession, consumption, or control of alcohol; relating to the offenses of driving while intoxicated and failure to submit to a chemical test of breath or blood; and providing for an effective date. Co-chairman Halford directed that CSHB 159 (Jud) be brought on for discussion. DANIELLA LOPER, aide to Representative Porter, came before committee and read from the sponsor's statement (copy appended to these minutes). She noted that drunk driving remains a misdemeanor in Alaska regardless of the number of times an individual is convicted. At some point repeat convictions should constitute a felony. The proposed bill would provide the criminal justice system tools to combat this crime by: 1. Allowing a peace officer in any municipality to arrest without a warrant minors who drink alcohol. 2. Rendering drunk driving a felony on the third offense within a five-year period. 3. Granting prosecution ability to convict based on prior offenses of lower blood alcohol levels than provided for in current statutes. The provision highlighted in item 3, above, would allow Alaska to take into consideration convictions in other states with lower blood alcohol standards when convicting an individual on the third offense. The proposed bill would give Alaska one of the toughest drunk driving statutes in the nation. Passage would send a clear message that Alaskans will no longer tolerate persons who drive drunk. Senator Rieger asked how the proposed bill would mesh with earlier passed legislation allowing peace officers to take action without a warrant against juveniles in possession. Ms. Loper advised that prior legislation allowed state troopers to take action but did not allow municipalities to do so. This bill makes that technical correction. Discussion followed between Senator Rieger and Ms. Loper regarding the case in Ketchikan giving rise to both the proposed bill and earlier passed legislation regarding warrantless arrest of juveniles. In response to a question from Senator Zharoff regarding infringement on individual rights, Ms. Loper directed attention to page 1, line 8, and noted language allowing a peace officer to arrest without a warrant when an officer has "reasonable cause for believing that the person has committed a crime . . . ." Senator Zharoff suggested that arrest would then be based on the judgment of the officer. Ms. Loper concurred, advising that that is the case in almost every crime. Senator Zharoff voiced concern regarding potential for harassment of juveniles by police officers and suggested that municipal liability may occur. Ms. Loper reiterated that the standard in the proposed bill reflects statutory practice since "the early 1960s." Further discussion of the definition of "reasonable cause" followed. Senator Rieger cited statutory ability to arrest without a warrant in cases of stalking and suggested that ability to make such an arrest usually involves immediate danger to another person. He then noted that the situation is somewhat different when applied to a minor in possession. He acknowledged that the proposed bill is less troublesome than earlier passed legislation in that the instant bill allows for warrantless arrest followed by the usual judicial process while the earlier bill allowed for warrantless arrest, conviction, and subsequent appeal of the conviction. Ms. Loper next referenced a memorandum from the district attorney and read the following definition of minor consuming (AS 04.16.050) into the record: A person under the age of twenty-one years may not knowingly consume, possess, or control alcoholic beverages furnished persons under 04.16.051(b). The district attorney contends that the word "possess" should be interpreted to include possession by consumption. Two judicial officers in the First Judicial District have ruled that it does not. The court ruled that an officer who contacts a minor under the influence of alcohol may not arrest the minor unless the officer actually sees the minor consume the alcohol, possess the alcohol, or control the alcohol. Merely being under the influence in the officer's presence is not enough. That is why the proposed bill is attempting to change current statutes. Further discussion followed regarding the definition of a class C felony. Ms. Loper advised that it is the lowest class of felony. In response to a question from Senator Zharoff, Co-chairman Halford advised that "this area is specifically exempted from the day fines original legislation." Senator Rieger referenced new language in Sec. 9, page 5, and inquired concerning punishment under subsection (q), noting that it applies in some cases but not others. Ms. Loper explained that subsection (q) establishes the new conviction upon a third offense. For an individual convicted of more than two DWI offenses, the third conviction will become a class C felony. The perpetrator will spend 240 days in jail and will be subject to a $5,000 fine. JUANITA HENSLEY, Chief of Driver Services, Division of Motor Vehicles, Dept. of Public Safety, advised that for an individual arrested for a subsequent drunk driving offense within a preceding ten-year period, present law applies and a felony will not be charged. When a third DWI offense occurs within a five-year period, the perpetrator would fall under new subsection (q) provisions and a felony would be charged. Co-chairman Halford asked how the cumulative fiscal note cost of $1.8 million could be reduced. Ms. Loper asked that in considering fiscal note costs, members bear in mind the cost of a life. Senator Rieger suggested that fiscal notes should show anticipated revenue resulting from the higher fine associated with a class C felony. Co-chairman Halford concurred. Senator Sharp observed that new efforts take time to implement. Fiscal notes evidence addition of 16 new positions scattered throughout four departments. He then questioned whether costs set forth on fiscal notes would actually accrue in the first year of operation. Co-chairman Halford again concurred. In response a question from Senator Rieger regarding the levy of fines, Juanita Hensley explained that the statutory fine schedule reflects a minimum fine. At the present time, the court can levy a maximum fine of up to $5,000 on a misdemeanor drunk driving conviction. The minimum fine for a third offense is $1,000. She then attested to judgments on first offenses ranging from $200 to $500. When queried further by the Senator concerning changes under the proposed bill, Mrs. Hensley advised, "In most of these cases I see the courts only assessing a minimum fine." If a minimum fine of $5,000 for third-offense felony drunk driving is established, the court will require "at least a $5,000 fine" for the offense. Discussion of the number of arrests, prosecutions, and convictions followed. Senator Rieger suggested that the bill should generate approximately $300.0 in general fund revenues. Co-chairman Halford suggested that at a 50% collection rate the legislation should generate "half a million dollars . . . ." He then voiced need for the Legislative Finance Division to review fiscal note assumptions and develop revenue projections based on both assumptions and fine increases. The Co-chairman then directed that the bill be held in committee pending receipt of a fiscal note reflecting anticipated revenues. Senator Sharp also asked that Legislative Finance review the Dept. of Corrections fiscal note for possible reduction associated with implementation of the new effort. HB 191 CS FOR SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 191(FIN) An Act relating to the management and disposal of state land and resources; relating to certain remote parcel and homestead entry land purchase contracts and patents; and providing for an effective date. Co-chairman Halford directed that CSSSHB 191(Fin) be brought on for discussion. REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT, sponsor of the legislation, came before committee. He explained that the proposed bill reflects the result of discussions with staff from the Dept. of Natural Resource in the course of subcommittee hearings on the budget. It contains cleanup language and provisions for Title 38 developed from legislation that died on the floor of the House during the final days of last session. Representative Therriault explained that in an attempt to mitigate the impact of reduced funding, he asked department staff to "go through their statutes [and] determine those things that were outdated or just flat didn't make sense any more." Negotiations and input produced the current bill which cleans up language directing the agency to do things that no longer make sense. An additional provision deals with the land swap along the Glenn Highway to Girdwood. A controversial section dealing with mining statutes was removed from the bill and placed in separate legislation. In response to a question from Senator Rieger, Representative Therriault explained that the land swap relates to right of way for a road project. Responding to a question from Co-chairman Halford regarding repeals within Sec. 5, Representative Therriault said that provisions therein would place the land disposal program on the same footing as other natural resource sale programs. Whether or not to submit a budget request each year would be discretionary rather than mandatory. Each budget proposal would be complete and would request full funding needed to get land disposals ready for sale, including access roads and other capital improvements that might be required. Co-chairman Halford further inquired concerning recreational cabin-site leases and sales. Representative Therriault noted that the current recreational cabin permit has never been utilized because it is not workable as presently structured. The new proposal is for a five-year lease at market value with a right of renewal for an additional five years or outright purchase at fair market value. The survey is paid for by the purchaser. In response to a question from Senator Phillips, Representative Therriault advised that fair market value would be established at the time of purchase. NICO BUS, Legislative Liaison, Dept. of Natural Resources, came before committee in response to a question from Senator Phillips. He explained that the lease terms would depend upon the size of the tract of land. Billing could be monthly, quarterly, or annually. Further discussion of the operation of the lease program followed. Representative Therriault directed attention to page 17, lines 23 through 28, and noted provisions that a lease not exceed five years with the right of an additional five-year extension. At any time during the lease, the lessee may purchase the remote cabin site by conducting a survey at that time. Senator Phillips expressed a preference for front loading the program by setting the purchase price at initiation of the lease and obtaining that price in five payments over the term of the lease with the possibility of a five-year extension of purchase payments. Representative Therriault explained that under present bill provisions, an individual could enter a lease and immediately move into a purchase. There may be individuals who only wish to lease the property rather than own it. The current bill accommodates both approaches. In his concluding remarks, Representative Therriault referenced the accompanying positive $225.0 fiscal note. Co-chairman Halford expressed concern that the positive revenue "comes from not doing anything because most of the `shalls' that apply to the commissioner, in existing law, are changed to `mays'. . . " End: SFC-95, #63, Side 2 Begin: SFC-95, #65, Side 1 Co-chairman Halford referenced Sec. 24, relating to set-net leases, and noted that the program was designed to tie lease permits to nearby communities. The proposed bill appears to repeal that condition. He then noted repeal of provisions relating to remote parcels, the homestead program, subdivision, etc., and advised of increasing discomfort with the bill. Representative Therriault suggested that Ron Swanson, Director, Division of Lands, Dept. of Natural Resource, be asked to come before committee to speak to technical questions. The Co-chairman concurred. Senator Zharoff also voiced concern regarding application of Sec. 24 to Bristol Bay, where much traditional use of salmon occurs. Co-chairman Halford noted that some of the mandatory provisions within Title 38 were designed to force administrations who sought to retain all land in state ownership to do differently. He then directed that the bill be held in committee for further review.
Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
---|