Legislature(2015 - 2016)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/11/2015 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB30 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 30 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 30-MARIJUANA REG;CONT. SUBST;CRIMES;DEFENSES
1:34:24 PM
CHAIR MCGUIRE announced the consideration of SB 30. [CSSB 30,
labeled 29-LS0231\I was before the committee.] She reviewed the
agenda and the invited testifiers.
1:36:25 PM
AMY SALTZMAN, Aide to the Senate Judiciary Committee and Staff
to Senator McGuire, introduced herself.
1:36:28 PM
JORDAN SHILLING, Staff to Senator John Coghill, introduced
himself.
SENATOR COGHILL informed the committee that he asked Ms.
Saltzman and Mr. Shilling to read through the first 2-3 sections
to show how they conform and then move on to the new crimes.
MS. SALTZMAN reviewed the sectional analysis for Sections 1-4 of
SB 30, version I.
Section 1 Amends AS 02.30.030(b) Operation of an
aircraft under the influence.
A person cannot operate an aircraft with a crew member
or passenger who is intoxicated.
Adds "marijuana."
Section 2 Amends AS 04.16.050(e) Possession, control,
or consumption by a person under the age of 21.
Requires the court to prohibit the use of alcohol as a
condition of probation.
Adds "marijuana."
Section 3 Amends AS 05.45.100(c) Duties and
responsibilities of skiers.
Prohibiting the use of a tramway, ski slope or trail
under the influence.
Adds "marijuana."
Section 4 Amends AS 08.68.270 Grounds for denial,
suspension, or revocation.
Grounds for denial, suspension, or revocation of a
nursing license for habitual use of alcohol.
Adds "marijuana."
SENATOR COGHILL suggested Ms. Saltzman move past the first 44
sections unless members had questions.
CHAIR MCGUIRE clarified that these changes are being made
because marijuana is being removed as a controlled substance and
will be regulated the same way as alcohol.
1:41:04 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he didn't object to Senator Coghill's
proposal but some sections may cause concern because there are
some differences between drug and alcohol abuse and the use of
marijuana. Section 4, for example, talks about license
revocation for someone who habitually abuses alcoholic beverages
or marijuana. He questioned how it would apply to someone who
uses medical marijuana and if it would be considered abuse if
someone used it every day. Section 26 provides another example.
A judicial officer may require a person to refrain from the
consumption of alcoholic beverages or marijuana. If a person is
using marijuana that is prescribed for medical purposes, this
allows a judge to deny that use.
CHAIR MCGUIRE summarized the concern. A prior initiative passed
that allowed for the use of medical marijuana but the
legislature did not fully implement the law. The question is how
these uses would interplay with medical marijuana.
1:43:10 PM
HILARY MARTIN, Legal Drafter, Legislative Legal and Research
Services, Legislative Affairs Agency, stated that the issue
existed when marijuana was a controlled substance. She advised
that it is still a bit of an open question but the defense would
cover anyone who is charged with a marijuana crime. She directed
attention to page 37 where the affirmative defense that exists
in statute is moved into Sec. 17.38.300.
1:44:15 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he didn't think that would apply to
the sections he pointed out because Sec. 17.38.300 relates to
prosecutions.
MS. MARTIN agreed and reiterated that it was a problem before
and the bill doesn't fix the issue.
CHAIR MCGUIRE said it would be a policy call to amend the bill
to insert "notwithstanding the use of medical marijuana" as
opposed to keeping the affirmative defense in Sec 17.38.300.
1:46:29 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO questioned why the reference to a schedule VIA
controlled substance appears on page 13, lines 13-16 if
marijuana is removed as a controlled substance in statute.
MS. MARTIN responded that it's drafted that way in criminal law
to preserve the numbering of statutes. If sections are bracketed
and renumbered it can be an issue when looking at court records
because the crimes look different for previous convictions. The
subsections that contain a reference to a VIA controlled
substance are in the repealer section.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked where the repealer section is located.
MS. MARTIN replied it's on page 91 Section 160.
Responding to a drafting question from Senator Coghill, she
confirmed that after the bill passes those sections will show
they are repealed.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI directed attention to Section 42 on page 25
and asked if the provision would generate a fiscal note. It adds
alcohol and marijuana to the educational programs the
commissioner of health and social services is required to
provide to deter abuse.
MS. SALTZMAN said she asked the question but has not received an
answer.
SENATOR COSTELLO described an educational program from Colorado
to deter marijuana abuse. She asked if the committee might
entertain a conversation about expanding that to include
information about the law and what conduct is and is not legal
with regard to marijuana use and possession.
1:51:57 PM
MR. SHILLING reviewed Section 45.
Section 45 Amends AS 17.38.070(a) Lawful operation of
marijuana - related facilities.
Establishes that a person 21 years of age or older may
own, operate, be an agent of or be employed by a
retail marijuana store with a valid registration and
perform all of the related duties and activities and
not be prosecuted for it or have it be a basis for
seizure or forfeiture. Language from Ballot Measure 2
with the exception of the phrase: "NOTWITHSTANDING ANY
OTHER PROVISION OF LAW" and other stylistic clarifying
changes.
He noted that the clause "notwithstanding any other provision of
law" was not included in the next five sections of the bill. He
suggested that Ms. Martin discuss why that clause could be
problematic.
MS. MARTIN said the phrase generally is avoided in statutes
because it can cause confusion and conflict.
SENATOR COGHILL summarized the reason for removing the phrase.
MS. MARTIN agreed that the language potentially would have
nullified the criminal laws and penalties associated with the
actions in Section 45.
1:54:13 PM
MR. SHILLING began a review of Section 50.
Section 50
AS 17.38.200. Misconduct involving marijuana in the
first degree.
A person commits the crime of MIM in the 1st degree,
which is a class A misdemeanor, if they:
- Possess marijuana with an aggregate weight of more
than four ounces
- Possess 25+ plants
- Manufacture or deliver more than one ounce.
- Deliver any amount to a person under 21 years of
age, who is not a patient registered under AS 17.37
(medical marijuana statutes).
- Manufacture "butane hash" without a license.
- Are a marijuana establishment and allows for a
person under the age of 21 to enter and remain in the
facility; allow the use of marijuana; or deliver
marijuana to a person under the age of 21.
He acknowledged that there is a question about the term
"deliver."
CHAIR MCGUIRE advised that a class A misdemeanor carries a
maximum fine of $10,000 and a potential jail time of 0-1 year.
SENATOR COGHILL stated that this section specifies more than
four ounces because of the Ravin case.
MR. SHILLING acknowledged that there is some question as to
which case allows possession of up to 25 plants.
SENATOR COGHILL asked how many plants are currently permitted in
the home.
MR. SHILLING replied it is a violation to have from 7-24 plants
and a misdemeanor to have 25 or more.
1:57:09 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI referred to page 30, lines 1-3, and asked
why water-based extraction is not included in Sec. 17.38.200.
MR. SHILLING replied the intention is to exclude the use of
solvents that might be flammable.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the language in paragraph (4)
includes water-based extraction.
MS. MARTIN said it's a possibility, but it isn't clear because
the term solvent isn't defined.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if she agrees that it's a good idea
to clarify the matter.
MS. MARTIN said it should be included if the committee wants to
make it clear that a person could use water-based extraction
methods.
SENATOR COGHILL offered his understanding that manufacturing
"butane hash" in the home is volatile. He questioned whether it
needs to be defined.
MR. SHILLING said the bill specifies that a person who is
registered or licensed is not prohibited from using a solvent-
based extraction method for manufacturing "butane hash." He
admitted that the sectional does not make that clear.
2:00:52 PM
MR. SHILLING reviewed AS 17.38.210.
AS 17.38.210. Misconduct involving marijuana in the
second degree.
A person commits the crime of MIM in the 2nd degree,
which is a class B misdemeanor, if they are:
- In possession of 7-24 plants.
- Unlicensed and deliver more than 1 ounce of
marijuana and 6 immature plants, 1 ounce or less for
remuneration, or up to 6 immature plants for
remuneration.
- Selling any amount of marijuana without a license.
MR. SHILLING noted that he misspoke earlier when he said that
possession of 7-24 plants was a violation.
CHAIR MCGUIRE advised that a class B misdemeanor carries a
maximum fine of $2,000 and a potential jail time of 0-90 days.
MR. SHILLING reviewed AS 17.38.220
AS 17.38.220. Misconduct involving marijuana in the
third degree.
A person commits the crime of MIM in the 3rd degree,
which is a violation, if he/she:
- Manufactures marijuana in a location where the
plants are in public view, not secure from
unauthorized access, or on property not in possession
of the person or without consent of the property
owner.
- Is under 21 and attempts to purchase marijuana with
false identification, or otherwise misrepresents the
person's age.
- Is under 18 and possesses, uses, or displays one
ounce or less of marijuana.
- Possesses 1.01 ounces up to four ounces.
SENATOR COGHILL asked if the provision relating to a person
under age 18 aligns with the statutory provisions for alcohol
for a person under age 18.
MR. SHILLING answered no; it becomes a class B misdemeanor when
a minor under age 18 possesses alcohol three or more times.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked what the punishment is.
CHAIR MCGUIRE advised that a violation carries a maximum fine of
$500 and no jail time.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked if a violation would go on a minor's
record.
MS. SALTZMAN replied a violation for a minor is treated the same
as for an adult. She deferred further explanation to Ms. Meade.
CHAIR MCGUIRE explained that the goal is to divert behavior so
the idea is to move towards a violation versus a class B
misdemeanor.
2:05:04 PM
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel, Administrative Staff, Office of
the Administrative Director, Alaska Court System, stated that
the court is neutral on the bill. Addressing the question of
keeping some records confidential, she explained that in this
draft somebody under age 18 who is charged with the crime of
misconduct involving marijuana in the first and second degree
would be adjudicated as a juvenile delinquent. Those cases are
confidential and the juvenile's name would not appear on
CourtView.
In the current draft, misconduct involving marijuana in the
third and fourth degree are violations. Violations are termed
minor offenses (mo) for court processing reasons and are public.
They are not confidential. If a person under age 18 commits a
crime, they generally are under the jurisdiction of the Division
of Juvenile Justice (DJJ), but DJJ does not have the authority
to prosecute violations so the minor would be treated like an
adult. His or her name would be on CourtView and the case would
not be confidential. She noted that the legislature could
certainly decide to make those cases confidential.
SENATOR COSTELLO expressed concern about protections for minors
and suggested the committee revisit the penalties.
MS. MEADE restated that the legislature could draft legislation
to make certain violations confidential, but under current law a
17-year-old who gets a speeding ticket will have their name
appear on CourtView with a case suffix of mo for minor offense.
She noted that the current draft of the bill has a juvenile
delinquency provision on pages [80-81] that lists all the minor
offenses (including alcohol offenses) for which a minor is
treated like an adult.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked for clarification of minor offenses.
MS. MEADE explained that if a 17-year-old received a ticket it
would be a violation. In the bill those would be misconduct
involving marijuana in the third and fourth degree. Those cases
appear on CourtView and the case suffix is mo. She clarified
that a minor offense does not refer to age; it's that the
offense is less substantial than a major offense. Clicking on
the suffix in CourtView will show the actual offense.
SENATOR COGHILL stated that a misdemeanor is a crime and a
violation is not.
SENATOR MCGUIRE agreed and added that Senator Costello's concern
is that it may be a disproportionate penalty. In the context of
the bill, a minor who is charged with a marijuana violation will
have their name appear on CourtView, but a minor who is charged
with a marijuana crime will not. She asked the members to
consider adding language in the bill that makes it clear that
these violations for minors are to be held confidential.
2:12:40 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI stated support for clarifying that these
violations should not appear on CourtView. He added that it
doesn't make sense that the more serious crimes are not public,
yet these minor crimes are public and will appear on CourtView
forever. He asked if marijuana is a barrier crime on the federal
level for future employment.
MS. MEADE replied a sub-group of the Criminal Justice Commission
is collecting that information, but she didn't know the answer.
CHAIR MCGUIRE said it's a good point since marijuana is treated
differently at the federal level.
2:14:27 PM
SENATOR COGHILL argued that it is a significant reproof and it
will get a minor's attention if they are caught and ticketed for
a violation. "To me the reproofs for youngsters need to be
there." It will be on CourtView but it's not as damning as a
criminal penalty, he opined.
SENATOR COSTELLO stressed the importance of understanding
precisely what the bill does in order to make a better policy
call.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he believes it's important to correct
the behavior when a child makes a mistake, but the current draft
imposes more than a slap on the wrist. His perspective is that
it's a bad policy call.
MS. MEADE suggested the committee look at paragraph (5) on page
81, lines 4-6. It is the current statute for minor consuming or
possession of alcohol. Those are currently on CourtView.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI stated that it's time to rethink the
punishments for minor consuming and possession.
2:19:12 PM
CHAIR MCGUIRE said that whatever policy decision is made with
respect to the violations that appear on CourtView, it makes
sense to consider what's on page 81, paragraph (5).
MS. SALTZMAN continued the review of Section 50.
AS 17.38.230. Misconduct involving marijuana in the
fourth degree.
A person commits the crime of MIM in the 4th degree,
which is a violation, if they:
- Are over 21 and use any amount of marijuana in a
public place
- Are between 18-20 and use, display, or possess 1
ounce or less of marijuana.
She noted that the definition for "public place" is the same as
in current statute.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if MIM 4 violations will appear on
CourtView.
MS. SALTZMAN answered yes. She continued to review Section 50.
AS 17.38.240. Proof of registration to be exhibited on
demand; penalty.
Requires a licensee to have a copy of their marijuana
license at all times when transporting more than one
ounce of marijuana, and shall present the license on
demand by a peace officer.
AS 17.38.250. Bail forfeiture for certain offenses.
Requires the court to make a bail schedule allowing
defendants to pay the fine for violations without a
court appearance for MIM 3rd (AS 17.38.220) and MIM
4th (AS 17.38.230.)
AS 17.38.260. Aggregate weight of live marijuana
plants.
For purposes of calculating the aggregate weight of a
marijuana plant, the weight shall be 1/6th the weight
of the plant after the roots have been removed.
AS 17.38.270. Rehabilitation.
A person convicted of misconduct relating to the use
of marijuana may be committed to the Department of
Corrections for treatment for not more than one year.
MS. SALTZMAN noted that this provision needs to be removed
because it doesn't apply.
AS 17.38.280. Restriction on prosecution for certain
persons in connection with a marijuana overdose.
A person may not be prosecuted for certain marijuana
crimes if that person, in good faith, sought medical
or law enforcement assistance for themselves or
another person who is experiencing a marijuana
overdose.
AS 17.38.290. Forfeitures and seizures.
Provides and establishes a process for forfeiture of
marijuana and other assets upon violation of AS
17.38.200 - 17.38.230.
MS. SALTZMAN advised that the foregoing section needs to be
rewritten or eliminated.
AS 17.38.300. Affirmative defense to a prosecution
under AS 17.38.200-17.38.230; medical use of
marijuana.
Establishes an affirmative defense in Title 17 for
certain conduct by medical marijuana patients and
caregivers.
MS. SALTZMAN reviewed Section 51.
Section 51 Amends AS 17.38.900(6) Definitions
Provides the definition of marijuana.
MS. SALTZMAN said the definition that was used in the ballot
initiative was amended to delete the word "salt." A few
stylistic changes were also made.
2:24:51 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked Ms. Martin to clarify whether a
person who uses medical marijuana has to mount an affirmative
defense to prove that possession is legal.
MS. MARTIN responded that the affirmative defense language in AS
11.71 for medical marijuana patients was moved to AS 17.38. She
added that neither a medical marijuana patient nor a parent
caregiver would have an issue with possession of less than 1
ounce.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked for clarification that this would
only apply to the sections previously discussed where there
could be over 1 ounce.
MS. MARTIN said that's correct; if there is no crime associated
with the possession there is no need to have a defense.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked how an affirmative defense for medical
marijuana works.
CHAIR MCGUIRE asked Ms. Schroeder to address the question.
2:28:48 PM
KACI SCHROEDER, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law,
explained that the normal course of events is that the
prosecution is notified that the defendant intends to put on an
affirmative defense. At trial, the burden of proof is on the
defendant to prove his/her innocence by a preponderance of the
evidence rather than beyond a reasonable doubt which is
generally the burden of proof required for the prosecution.
SENATOR COGHILL asked if first there would have to be an
underlying crime, and then the affirmative defense for medical
marijuana.
MS. SCHROEDER said that's correct. She added that Senator
Wielechowski brings up a good point that the medical marijuana
statutes do not provide any more protection in the criminal
context than the initiative.
SENATOR COGHILL opined that the mixed standard relating to one
ounce and four ounces adds to the confusion.
CHAIR MCGUIRE drew a parallel between possession of medical
marijuana and possession of OxyContin after shoulder surgery.
She opined that the likelihood of being charged with a crime is
fairly low.
2:31:24 PM
MS. SALTZMAN reviewed Section 52.
Section 52 Adds a new section to AS 17.38.900
Definitions
Adds definitions for criminal negligence, deliver(y),
knowingly, manufacture, marijuana concentrate, and
public place.
MR. SHILLING added that the language on page 39, line 11,
specifies that growing marijuana for personal use is not part of
the definition of "manufacturing."
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked Mr. Shilling to discuss the reasoning
for selecting the definition of "public place" given in AS
11.81.900.
MR. SHILLING replied it was a policy call to have all the crimes
on the books point towards the same comprehensive definition of
"public place."
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI read the definition of "public place" in AS
11.81.900(b)(53) and suggested that some people would question
including apartment houses and businesses.
(53) "public place" means a place to which the public
or a substantial group of persons has access and
includes highways, transportation facilities, schools,
places of amusement or business, parks, playgrounds,
prisons, and hallways, lobbies, and other portions of
apartment houses and hotels not constituting rooms or
apartments designed for actual residence;
He asked where this definition is used.
MR. SHILLING deferred to Ms. Schroeder.
CHAIR MCGUIRE asked Ms. Schroeder to also discuss whether or not
consumption of alcohol in a public place is treated the same
way.
MS. SCHROEDER advised that there is no state law that prohibits
alcohol consumption in public; it is generally done through
local ordinance. She couldn't give a ready example of another
crime that refers to public place and wasn't sure if Title 4
defines it differently.
CHAIR MCGUIRE asked Ms. Martin if she could answer the question.
2:35:54 PM
MS. MARTIN confirmed that Title 4 does not use "public place."
The term is used in a handful of criminal statutes including
stalking in the second degree.
SENATOR COGHILL stated that the term was used in an effort to
align with the initiative.
CHAIR MCGUIRE agreed with Senator Coghill that the initiative
said no marijuana use in a public place. She described the
current definition as a placeholder and noted that the Alcoholic
Beverage Control (ABC) Board is looking for a definition.
SENATOR COGHILL read the initiative language that refers to
public consumption of marijuana.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI noted that part of the definition of
"public place" in Title 11 includes hallways. He asked what
constitutes a hallway and if that it might include part of a
personal residence.
MS. MARTIN clarified that it is talking about hallways and lobby
areas in an apartment house or hotel, not individual rooms or
apartments.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the reference to "places of
business" would prohibit setting up a place where people can
smoke at an authorized business.
MS. MARTIN conceded that "business" is not defined and it would
require some drafting changes to allow marijuana establishments.
SENATOR COGHILL suggested that the committee may have to develop
a definition because smoking tobacco in your own car is
acceptable, but some people considered a car to be a public
place.
CHAIR MCGUIRE asked Mr. Shulte to discuss what he envisioned
when the term "public place" was included in the initiative and
how that fits in the context of the current draft.
2:40:30 PM
BRUCE SHULTE, Spokesman, Coalition for Responsible Cannabis
Legislation (CRCL), stated that CRCL does not dispute that
public consumption of marijuana is unlawful, but would like the
definition to be expanded to provide a little more flexibility.
He described it as an opportunity for businesses to allow the
consumption of marijuana on their premises the same as
establishments that can serve alcohol under varying
circumstances and for different durations, and a challenge to
make the distinction.
CHAIR MCGUIRE asked if he had additional testimony on the
current draft.
2:42:15 PM
MR. SHULTE said he would highlight a few points in the written
comments he submitted. The first is that while he agrees with
the intent of AS 17.38.200(a)(4), he would suggest a specific
reference to the use of volatile or explosive gases to extract
hash or hash oil. This would allow other, completely safe
extraction processes such as ice water or dry ice that a home
user might employ.
He then highlighted item 4) on page three of his written
comments relating to 17.38.200(a)(5). He acknowledged that the
rewrite of [Title 4] isn't before the legislature yet, but
suggested it might be an opportunity to bring the rules for
marijuana into line with the eventual rules for alcohol. In this
context, it would become a regulatory infraction rather than a
criminal act for a person working in a retail store to
intentionally or unintentionally sell marijuana to a person
under age 21.
He next suggested eliminating AS 17.38.260 entirely. This
section describes the method for ascertaining the aggregate
weight of a live marijuana plant. The process requires removal
of the roots, which would destroy the plant. He pointed out that
in a commercial setting that it could amount to tens of
thousands of dollars in inventory.
MR. SHULTE articulated concern with AS 17.38.290 relating to
forfeiture and seizures, but acknowledged that it more or less
mimics the language in the corresponding statute for alcohol. If
the language is included, he requested that the legislature
clarify that the intent is that any property or funds seized
under this law would be used to fund drug education and
treatment programs.
He stated agreement with removing the term "salt" from the
definition of marijuana under AS 17.38.900(6).
2:48:06 PM
MR. SHULTE said he first viewed the repeal of AS 17.38.020 and
AS 17.38.030 as a drafting decision given that many of the
provisions are addressed in the new AS 17.38.200. However, on
further reflection he determined that both sections should be
retained. Both were in the voter initiative and they articulate
what is lawful while AS 17.38.200 states the penalties for
activities that are unlawful. He described the sections as
complementary and respectfully requested that they be retained.
SENATOR COGHILL noted the penalty for misconduct involving
marijuana in the third degree for possessing more than one ounce
and then the definition of "marijuana." He asked Mr. Shulte if
he agrees that it could be one ounce of the oil derivative.
MR. SHULTE conceded that could be one interpretation. He then
pointed out that one ounce of hash oil would be a rather large
quantity outside a commercial transaction.
SENATOR COGHILL expressed concern that the penalty is basically
a ticket. He asked for help understanding what an ounce means
and how to value the derivatives under the definitions for
imposing penalties.
MR. SHULTE responded that he understands the concern and he
would work on some recommendations.
2:53:51 PM
MR. SHULTE stated that CRCL is committed to an orderly process
and recognizes that February 24 only changes personal
consumption and cultivation. The group looks forward to a nine-
month regulatory process and then another three months before
the state starts to accept permits.
We're not expecting to see commercial or retail
businesses go into effect until sometime in 2016,
spring or summer. That's what our members are
committed to and that's the message we're trying to
get out there.
CHAIR MCGUIRE asked how he might help communicate with the
public so there is an orderly transition.
MR. SHULTE replied CRCL intends to get the message out through
social media and letters to the editor. The goal is to
articulate what is lawful as of February 24, 2015 and what will
not be lawful for the 9-14 months thereafter.
2:56:43 PM
SENATOR COGHILL reiterated the request for help with a
definition based on value.
MR. SHULTE committed to help with the clarification.
CHAIR MCGUIRE held SB 30 in committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| CS SB30 Version I -Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 30 |
| SB30 Written Testimony Municipal Attorneys Legal Memo.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 30 |
| SB30 Committee Material Title 11 Definitions.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 30 |
| SB30 Written Testimony CRCL.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 30 |
| SB30 Committee Material Article Pediatric Academy.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 30 |
| SB30 Written Testimony CRCL.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 30 |
| SB 30- Ballot Measure 2.PDF |
SJUD 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 30 |
| SB 30- US DOJ Letter.pdf |
SJUD 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 30 |