Legislature(2007 - 2008)BELTZ 211
04/30/2007 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB128 | |
| SB8 | |
| SB145 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 8 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 157 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 145 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| = | SB 128 | ||
CSSB 145(CRA)-MUNIS IMPOUND/FORFEIT MOTOR VEHICLE
2:44:58 PM
CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of SB 145. [Before the
committee was CSSB 145(CRA.)
SENATOR McGUIRE, sponsor of SB 145, explained that the bill
would implement an option for municipalities to set up
procedures to impound and forfeit vehicles of individuals who
have amassed $1,000 or more in delinquent traffic fines. She
said the Municipality of Anchorage brought the idea forward,
because 1,017 of its individuals have a total of over $7.57
million in unpaid traffic fines. One person in the community has
43 different citations totaling almost $10,000 and another has
70 traffic citations totaling nearly $8,000. She said that this
law is meant to target the habitual, repeat offenders who
blatantly disregard public safety and refuse to pay their
citation fines. Many refuse to pay the fines because they know
the municipality has no recourse.
The Anchorage Assembly unanimously passed an ordinance on this
same issue making it a misdemeanor for anyone to drive if they
have at least 3 unpaid traffic tickets. SB 145 does not do that;
it is simply a tool that municipalities may use and it has no
fiscal impact to the state. Individuals stopped by a police
officer under these circumstances would lose their vehicle for
30 days. To get it back, the individual would have to pay $390
in administration fees plus towing and storage fees. This is
meant to be a deterrent and a reminder to encourage people to
pay their traffic fines in a timely manner.
2:48:35 PM
SENATOR McGUIRE referred to a proposed amendment to allow the
department of labor to help a municipal attorney track down
individuals who have civil or criminal fines or penalties.
Currently the municipality has had difficulty getting that
cooperation, she said. The idea is for the municipality and the
department to have a written agreement specifying: the purpose
of the information; a description of the information provided;
the procedure for transmitting, securing, using or disposing of
the information; and the method of reimbursement of the cost for
providing the information.
SENATOR McGUIRE opined that this will be a useful tool because
people who amass these fines might skip around in terms of
employment and might be difficult to track down. The department
of labor is most likely to have that information, and this is an
effort to ask it to cooperate and help the municipality locate
those individuals. The bill does two things; one is mandatory
and the other is optional, she said.
2:50:13 PM
SENATOR THERRIAULT calculated the average per person amount of
the unpaid traffic fines and expressed amazement. He asked if
the municipality has any information about the value of the
vehicles that these individuals are driving.
SENATOR McGUIRE replied the point of the bill isn't value-for-
value; the idea is to get people's attention by taking their
vehicle.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked if he has to think about lending his
car to his neighbor if he/she one of the individuals who has
amassed large traffic fines.
SENATOR McGUIRE said yes; hopefully people will become more
careful about lending their vehicle. We're trying to set up a
situation where it's a deterrent, but clearly the local
governing authority will have to establish a procedure of notice
before taking someone's vehicle, she said.
2:53:26 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI, referring to subsection (r) in bill
section 1, asked if this applies only to municipalities and not
other legally designated forms of government.
SENATOR McGUIRE replied this bill only applies to municipalities
as defined by statute.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the department of labor supports
this provision.
CHAIR FRENCH said representatives from the Department of Labor &
Workforce Development, the Office of the Attorney General, and
the Municipality of Anchorage have signed up to testify.
2:54:18 PM
PAULA SCAVERA, Special Assistant, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Labor & Workforce Development (DOLWD), said some
of the questions are more applicable to Larry McKinstry, the
attorney who represents the department of this issue. She is
available to answer questions.
2:55:00 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the fiscal note applies to the new
subsection (r).
MR. SCAVERA said yes. The first two years will come from the
general fund because there won't be receipts, but the bill is
written such that any costs will be paid for by the
municipality.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if there are any legal hurtles to
overcome to provide this information to a municipal government.
MS. SCAVERA, referring to a proposed amendment, said the
department has worked with the sponsor to accommodate new
federal regulations related to trading information. She deferred
to Mr. McKinstry for further explanation.
2:56:21 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the department of labor provides
information to other non-state agencies or organizations.
MS. SCAVERA explained that by federal and state law the
department is required to provide information to certain
entities. Child support is one example.
2:57:04 PM
CHAIR FRENCH asked Mr. McKinstry to respond to the legal
question.
LARRY MCKINSTRY, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law,
explained that disclosure of this type of information is
governed by both state statute and federal regulation. In
general, wage and unemployment information is confidential and
is held by the department solely for the administration of the
unemployment insurance benefit program. There are a number of
exceptions, but anything that the state gives up pursuant to the
state statute must also comply with the federal regulations.
"It's a somewhat complex problem of trying to figure out whether
or not a specific request or a specific type of information
falls within one of those written exceptions," he said.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI referenced Chapter 20 of the Alaska
Employment Security Act and said the first sentence defines the
purpose, which is to promote employment security. He questioned
whether adding the provision does in fact do that.
MR. MCKINSTRY expressed uncertainty about the thrust of the
question. He explained that the statute would typically hold
this type of information confidential unless it's used for
unemployment purposes. This provision would create a new
exception for the collection of fines and any civil judgments.
The provision broadens the scope of the purpose for using the
information, he added.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI, referring to subsection (r), asked what
kind of information the department would provide to the
municipal attorney.
MR. MCKINSTRY said specifically the information would include
the name and address of the employee as well as the identifying
information of the employer. That would make it easier for the
municipality to locate the person who has the outstanding
tickets or judgment.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if just the name and address of the
employee would be included.
MR. MCKINSTRY said that's his understanding.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked how quickly the information would
have to be provided and if the state might be liable to a
municipality if it failed to provide the information.
MR. MCKINSTRY said he understands that the requests would be
ongoing and that the information would be exchanged through a
database that's set up by the municipality and the state. With
regard to liability exposure, there will have to be a written
agreement between the entities that complies with all the
restrictions that come with the federal regulation. "That should
in fact protect the state from any potential liabilities," he
said. If the information is denied the municipality would need
to litigate, but once the database is established the exchange
of information will be quite straightforward.
3:03:16 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI noted that paragraph (4) on page 2, says
that within the agreement there must be a "method of
reimbursement for the cost of providing the information."
Presumably the fiscal note should be zero, he said.
MR. MCKINSTRY said his understanding is that there will be
significant up-front costs to set up the database exchange, but
after that the long-term costs should be covered. Federal
regulations make it very clear that it's a state cost if the
information is provided for purposes other than unemployment, he
said.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if he's saying that the state would
be fully reimbursed for the general fund expenditures through FY
2013.
MR. MCKINSTRY said his understanding is that those costs are for
accounting, staffing to maintain the database, and to ensure
that the information exchange occurs when it should.
MS. SCAVERA added that the fiscal note is designed to use
general funds the first two years and after that statutory
designated receipts will be used. Federal dollars can not be
used.
3:06:11 PM
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked why it's not possible to start out
using statutory designated program receipts.
MS. SCAVERA said the work has to be started before entering into
an agreement with the municipalities. Doing the disclosures will
require two fulltime positions and one for about one month per
year. More municipalities will want to come on board over time
and each will require a separate memorandum of agreement, she
said.
CHAIR FRENCH held SB 145 in committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|