Legislature(2019 - 2020)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)

04/23/2019 06:00 PM 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.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as
Download Video part 1. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
-- Please Note Time --
*+ HB 12 PROTECTIVE ORDERS TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
-- Public Testimony --
+= SJR 9 CONST.AM: APPROP. BILL FOR PUBL EDUCATION TELECONFERENCED
<Bill Hearing Canceled>
+ SB 80 INITIATIVE SEVERABILITY TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled: TELECONFERENCED
+= SB 52 ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL; ALCOHOL REG TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                              
                    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
              SENATE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                             
                         April 23, 2019                                                                                         
                           5:59 p.m.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
                             DRAFT                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Senator Shelley Hughes, Chair                                                                                                   
Senator Lora Reinbold, Vice Chair                                                                                               
Senator Peter Micciche                                                                                                          
Senator Jesse Kiehl                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Senator Mike Shower                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                              
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 12(JUD)                                                                                 
"An Act relating to protective orders."                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
SENATE BILL NO. 80                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to proposing and enacting laws by initiative."                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
SENATE BILL NO. 52                                                                                                              
"An  Act  relating  to  alcoholic   beverages;  relating  to  the                                                               
regulation  of  manufacturers,   wholesalers,  and  retailers  of                                                               
alcoholic  beverages;  relating  to licenses,  endorsements,  and                                                               
permits  involving   alcoholic  beverages;  relating   to  common                                                               
carrier  approval to  transport or  deliver alcoholic  beverages;                                                               
relating  to the  Alcoholic Beverage  Control Board;  relating to                                                               
offenses  involving  alcoholic  beverages; amending  Rule  17(h),                                                               
Alaska Rules  of Minor  Offense Procedure;  and providing  for an                                                               
effective date."                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 9                                                                                                   
Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of Alaska                                                                 
relating to an appropriation bill funding public education for                                                                  
grades kindergarten through 12.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     - BILL HEARING CANCELED                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 12                                                                                                                   
SHORT TITLE: PROTECTIVE ORDERS                                                                                                  
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) KOPP                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
02/20/19       (H)       PREFILE RELEASED 1/7/19                                                                                
02/20/19       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/20/19       (H)       STA, JUD                                                                                               
02/28/19       (H)       STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
02/28/19       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/28/19       (H)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
03/07/19       (H)       STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
03/07/19       (H)       Moved CSHB 12(STA) Out of Committee                                                                    
03/07/19       (H)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
03/08/19       (H)       STA RPT CS(STA) 7DP                                                                                    
03/08/19       (H)       DP: VANCE, LEDOUX, WOOL, SHAW, STORY,                                                                  
                         FIELDS, KREISS-TOMKINS                                                                                 
03/18/19       (H)       JUD AT 1:30 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
03/18/19       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/18/19       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
03/27/19       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
03/27/19       (H)       Moved CSHB 12(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                    
03/27/19       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
03/29/19       (H)       JUD RPT CS(JUD) 5DP 1NR                                                                                
03/29/19       (H)       DP: WOOL, LEDOUX, SHAW, KOPP, CLAMAN                                                                   
03/29/19       (H)       NR: EASTMAN                                                                                            
04/05/19       (H)       TRANSMITTED TO (S)                                                                                     
04/05/19       (H)       VERSION: CSHB 12(JUD)                                                                                  
04/08/19       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/08/19       (S)       JUD                                                                                                    
04/23/19       (S)       JUD AT 6:00 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
BILL: SB 80                                                                                                                   
SHORT TITLE: INITIATIVE SEVERABILITY                                                                                            
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) BIRCH                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
03/06/19       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/06/19       (S)       STA, JUD                                                                                               
04/11/19       (S)       STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
04/11/19       (S)       Moved SB 80 Out of Committee                                                                           
04/11/19       (S)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
04/12/19       (S)       STA RPT 2DP 1DNP 2NR                                                                                   
04/12/19       (S)       NR: SHOWER, REINBOLD                                                                                   
04/12/19       (S)       DP: MICCICHE, COGHILL                                                                                  
04/12/19       (S)       DNP: KAWASAKI                                                                                          
04/23/19       (S)       JUD AT 6:00 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
BILL: SB 52                                                                                                                   
SHORT TITLE: ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL; ALCOHOL REG                                                                            
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) MICCICHE                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
02/11/19       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/11/19       (S)       L&C, JUD, FIN                                                                                          
03/26/19       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
03/26/19       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/26/19       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
03/28/19       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
03/28/19       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/28/19       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
04/02/19       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
04/02/19       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/02/19       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
04/04/19       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
04/04/19       (S)       -- MEETING CANCELED --                                                                                 
04/09/19       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
04/09/19       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/09/19       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
04/11/19       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
04/11/19       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/11/19       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
04/16/19       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
04/16/19       (S)       Moved CSSB 52(L&C) Out of Committee                                                                    
04/16/19       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
04/17/19       (S)       L&C RPT CS FORTHCOMING 4DP                                                                             
04/17/19       (S)       DP: REINBOLD, COSTELLO, BIRCH, BISHOP                                                                  
04/17/19       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
04/17/19       (S)       -- MEETING CANCELED --                                                                                 
04/17/19       (S)       JUD AT 6:00 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
04/17/19       (S)       -- MEETING CANCELED --                                                                                 
04/19/19       (S)       L&C CS RECEIVED SAME TITLE                                                                             
04/22/19       (S)       JUD AT 6:00 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
04/22/19       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/22/19       (S)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
04/23/19       (S)       JUD AT 6:00 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK KOPP                                                                                                       
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as sponsor of HB 12.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
KEN TRUITT, Staff                                                                                                               
Representative Chuck Kopp                                                                                                       
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the sectional analysis on HB 12,                                                                
Version E, on behalf of the sponsor.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REGINA LARGENT, Staff                                                                                                           
Senator Shelley Hughes                                                                                                          
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT: Reviewed the changes in HB 12, Version G.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHRISTINE PATE, Executive Director                                                                                              
Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault (ANDVSA)                                                                 
Sitka, Alaska                                                                                                                   
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 12.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
PATTY MASTERS, Coordinator                                                                                                      
Direct Services                                                                                                                 
Advocates for Victims of Violence (AVV Valdez)                                                                                  
Valdez, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 12 to keep                                                                     
victims safe.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR CHRIS BIRCH                                                                                                             
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as sponsor of SB 80.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
KIM SKIPPER, Staff                                                                                                              
Senator Chris Birch                                                                                                             
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided the sectional analysis of SB 80 on                                                               
behalf of the sponsor, Senator Chris Birch.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
ERIC FJELSTAD, representing self                                                                                                
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the discussion of                                                               
SB 80, relating his involvement in Proposition 1.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
EDRA MORLEDGE, Staff                                                                                                            
Senator Peter Micciche                                                                                                          
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented the sectional analysis  for SB 52,                                                             
Version S.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
5:59:45 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  SHELLEY  HUGHES  called   the  Senate  Judiciary  Standing                                                             
Committee meeting  to order at 5:59  p.m. Present at the  call to                                                               
order were,  Micciche, Kiehl, and Chair  Hughes. Senator Reinbold                                                               
arrived shortly thereafter.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
                    HB 12-PROTECTIVE ORDERS                                                                                 
6:00:02 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR HUGHES announced that the  first order of business would be                                                               
SENATE BILL  NO. 12,  "An Act  relating to  assault in  the first                                                               
degree; relating to  sex offenses; and relating  to credit toward                                                               
a sentence of imprisonment for  time spent in a treatment program                                                               
or under electronic monitoring."                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
[Before the committee was CSHB 12(JUD), Version E.]                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR HUGHES made opening remarks on the committee hearing.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
6:01:06 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  CHUCK  KOPP,  Alaska State  Legislature,  Juneau,                                                               
said that one  of the habits he retains from  his law enforcement                                                               
days is that he reads  Alaska Supreme Court opinions and rulings.                                                               
He paraphrased from his sponsor statement, which read:                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     House Bill  12   An  Act Relating to  Protective Orders                                                                    
     Sponsor Statement Version E                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     Last summer,  the Alaska Supreme Court  ruled in Whalen                                                                    
     v Whalen  that victims of domestic  violence are unable                                                                    
     to  get  an  extension   or  renewal  for  an  existing                                                                    
     protective  order   based  on  the  same   incident  of                                                                    
     violence of  the original order. This  is regardless of                                                                    
     whether they  are still in  fear of  their perpetrators                                                                    
     or whether  their perpetrators continue to  pose a risk                                                                    
     to their safety.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     The  Court's holding  turned on  the interpretation  of                                                                    
     the protective  order statutes which fail  to expressly                                                                    
     allow   for   extensions,   renewals,   or   subsequent                                                                    
     protective  orders. The  Court ruled  the statutes  are                                                                    
     unclear and thus, do not allow for the extensions.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
     The  bill  also  extends   this  clarification  to  the                                                                    
     statute  that  covers   protective  orders  for  sexual                                                                    
     assault and stalking.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     HB  12  clarifies  that  a court  is  not  barred  from                                                                    
     ordering  relief to  victims based  on an  incident for                                                                    
     which relief has previously  been issued or considered,                                                                    
     thus preventing a situation in  which survivors must be                                                                    
     a victim again before receiving judicial assistance.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
6:02:55 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  KOPP  said  he   reviewed  two  protective  order                                                               
statutes that pertain to domestic  violence and to sexual assault                                                               
and  stalking. He  said  that the  bill  will provide  clarifying                                                               
language that  a protective order  may be renewed or  extended 30                                                               
days prior  to the end  of the order or  within 60 days  after it                                                               
expires  without a  person having  to  become a  victim a  second                                                               
time. The  court would  not need to  determine if  something else                                                               
happened to the victim to justify the renewal or extension.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP related a scenario  that illustrates how this                                                               
routinely arises. A person may  be arrested for domestic violence                                                               
assault and go to jail but  the last thing the offender tells the                                                               
victim  is that  upon release  the  matter will  be settled.  Six                                                               
months later the  offender is released, and  the victim expresses                                                               
to the  court fear  that the  offender will  be coming  after the                                                               
person  again  and  requests  an  extension  or  renewal  of  the                                                               
protective  order. The  Alaska Supreme  Court indicates  that the                                                               
statutes  are not  clear  that it  is  authorized unless  another                                                               
domestic  violence   incident  occurs.  That  seemed   wrong  and                                                               
inconsistent with  how the  courts had  been responding  to those                                                               
situations.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
6:04:28 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP  said that HB  12 does not introduce  any new                                                               
public policy  but clarifies the  statutes to expressly  allow an                                                               
extension  or renewal  of domestic  violence  orders. The  Alaska                                                               
Supreme Court  has requested this  change, so in that  spirit, he                                                               
brings forth HB 12.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
6:05:05 PM                                                                                                                    
KEN  TRUITT,  Staff,  Representative  Chuck  Kopp,  Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature, Juneau,  said the sponsor  would like the  record to                                                               
reflect the problems the Alaska  Supreme Court identified and how                                                               
this bill corrects them. He referred to Section 1.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     Section 1 AS 18.65.850(e)                                                                                                
     This section makes clear that  the court may not deny a                                                                    
     petition  for  a  protective  order  for  a  victim  of                                                                    
     stalking or  sexual assault solely  because there  is a                                                                    
     lapse  between the  assault and  the  petition, if  the                                                                    
     sexual assault  was the basis  of a previous  order, or                                                                    
     if  a  court previously  found  that  the incident  was                                                                    
     sexual  assault  or  stalking, but  declined  to  issue                                                                    
     relief.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. TRUITT referred  to page 1, lines 4-6 of  Version E, which is                                                               
the existing  language. He said  that the  language on line  5 is                                                               
conforming  language. He  said  that  currently, AS  18.65.850(e)                                                               
only applies to  sexual assault. He referred to  language on line                                                               
7, the language "the stalking or" was not in the original bill.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
6:06:28                                                                                                                         
MR. TRUITT  said that  Section 2 provides  the operative  fix for                                                               
the issues raised in Whalen v. Whalen.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Section 2 AS 18.65.850                                                                                                   
     This  section   allows  a  petitioner  to   request  an                                                                    
     extension  of a  protective  order 30  days before,  or                                                                    
     within 60 days after it  expires, or after an extension                                                                    
     was  granted through  the provisions  of  Section 1  of                                                                    
     this  bill.  The court  shall  give  the respondent  at                                                                    
     least 10 days'  notice of the hearing and  the right to                                                                    
     appear and be  heard, either in person  or though legal                                                                    
     counsel.  The court  may extend  the  provision of  the                                                                    
     order  it  necessary  to protect  the  petitioner  from                                                                    
     stalking or  sexual assault, regardless of  whether the                                                                    
     respondent  appears  at  the  hearing.  The  protective                                                                    
     order extension  will be for  six months or  earlier if                                                                    
     dissolved by court order.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
6:07:47 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  TRUITT  directed  attention  to  page 1,  line  14,  to  the                                                               
language  "or  extended under  this  section.  He said  that  two                                                               
provisions provide  clarity to the courts.  He directed attention                                                               
to  lines  9-11  of  HB  12,  Version  E,  which  highlights  the                                                               
situation Representative Kopp referenced.  The perpetrator of the                                                               
domestic violence  might be in jail  or have moved out  of state,                                                               
so due  to the  proximity of  the perpetrator  and the  victim, a                                                               
protective order  is not  necessary. He  explained that  prior to                                                               
Whalen, the  judge would advise  the victim  to come back  if the                                                               
situation changes.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
6:08:40 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  TRUITT  said  that  Section   2  provides  the  due  process                                                               
provisions of how  a court would administer an  extension, and he                                                               
reviewed the summary  of Section 2. He said  that nothing touches                                                               
on  the  existing burden  of  proof  that applies  to  protective                                                               
orders. He  referenced page 1,  lines 10-11, noting  the language                                                               
"if  the petition  alleges a  change in  circumstances since  the                                                               
court's  previous  finding." He  stated  that  this language  was                                                               
added by  the House Judiciary  Standing committee at  the request                                                               
of  the  Alaska  Court  System.   He  said  that  the  change  in                                                               
circumstance would  be the perpetrator  being released  from jail                                                               
or moving back to the locale where the victim resides.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
6:10:08 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. TRUITT  turned to Sections  3 and  4, which cover  the actual                                                               
domestic violence order.  He stated these sections  have the same                                                               
intent as Sections  1-2 but are not identical  since the domestic                                                               
violence protective order statute is  not identical to the sexual                                                               
assault and stalking protective order statute.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Section 3 AS 18.66.100(e)                                                                                                
     This section  clarifies that the  court may not  deny a                                                                    
     petition  for  a  protective  order  for  a  victim  of                                                                    
     domestic  violence  solely  because there  is  a  lapse                                                                    
     between the  assault and the petition,  if the domestic                                                                    
     violence was  the basis  of a previous  order, or  if a                                                                    
     court previously  found that the incident  was domestic                                                                    
     violence, but declined to issue relief.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. TRUITT directed  attention to page 2, lines  19-20 of Section                                                               
4, Version E.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     Section 4 AS 18.66.100                                                                                                   
     This  section   allows  a  petitioner  to   request  an                                                                    
     extension  of a  protective  order 30  days before,  or                                                                    
     within 60 days after it  expires, or after an extension                                                                    
     was  granted through  the provisions  of  Section 3  of                                                                    
     this bill.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     The court shall  give the respondent at  least 10 days'                                                                    
     notice of  the hearing and  the right to appear  and be                                                                    
     heard, either  in person or  though legal  counsel. The                                                                    
     court  may  extend  the  provision   of  the  order  it                                                                    
     necessary to  protect the  petitioner from  stalking or                                                                    
     sexual  assault, regardless  of whether  the respondent                                                                    
     appears at the hearing.  The protective order extension                                                                    
     will be for  one year or earlier if  dissolved by court                                                                    
     order.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR.  TRUITT   explained  that  this  language   only  applies  to                                                               
protective  orders  issued  under  [AS  18.66.100(b)(2)]  of  the                                                               
domestic violence  protective order statute. There  are two types                                                               
of  protective   orders  in  that  statute.   AS  18.66.100(b)(1)                                                               
contains  what  is  known  as   the  long-term  protective  order                                                               
statute, one without an end  date, unless dissolved by the court.                                                               
He said that AS  18.66.100(b)(2) contains 16 different provisions                                                               
of relief  the court can  issue by  way of the  protective order.                                                               
This  bill   applies  to  those  provisions   and  not  long-term                                                               
protective orders, he said.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
6:11:47 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. TRUITT reviewed Section 5.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Section 5 Applicability                                                                                                  
     Section   5   adds   applicability  language   to   the                                                                    
     uncodified  law of  the State  of Alaska  to protective                                                                    
     orders issued  before, on or  after the  effective date                                                                    
     of Sections 1 through 4 of this Act.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
He said that  if HB 12 is  enacted into law, Sections  1-4 of the                                                               
bill  will apply  to  every protective  order  in existence,  any                                                               
issued on the day the bill  is enacted, and any future protective                                                               
orders.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
6:12:16 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR REINBOLD  pointed out that  the bill does not  contain an                                                               
effective date.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP  acknowledged that making the  bill effective                                                               
as soon as possible could help a lot of people.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
6:13:13 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR HUGHES  said that  it is  not right that  a victim  must be                                                               
victimized a  second time in  order to have the  protective order                                                               
extended. She thanked Representative Kopp for introducing HB 12.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP  said that  he worked  with the  Alaska Legal                                                               
Services Corporation and the Alaska  Network on Domestic Violence                                                               
and  Sexual Assault  in drafting  the  bill. It  is supported  by                                                               
those   agencies,  as   well  as   the   Alaska  Peace   Officers                                                               
Association, he said.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
6:14:19 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  REINBOLD moved  to adopt  the  committee substitute  SCS                                                               
CSHB 12(JUD), work  draft 31-LS0103\G, Version G,  as the working                                                               
document of the committee.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR HUGHES objected for discussion purposes.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
6:14:43 PM                                                                                                                    
REGINA  LARGENT,  Staff,  Senator Shelley  Hughes,  Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature, Juneau, said that Version G contains three changes:                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     Section  1  would  amend  AS  18.65.850(b)  related  to                                                                    
     protective  orders   issued  for  stalking   or  sexual                                                                    
     assault. It would change the  effective period from six                                                                    
     months  to one  year,  which is  in  line with  current                                                                    
     protective order timeframes for domestic violence.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
     Section 3 is also  conforming language that would amend                                                                    
     AS 18.65.850(f)  to provide that protective  orders for                                                                    
     stalking  or sexual  assault have  a maximum  extension                                                                    
     period of  one year.  This section also  clarifies that                                                                    
     when  an extension  to a  current  protective order  is                                                                    
     granted the  start date  of that  extension is  the day                                                                    
     the current protective order would have expired.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Section  5  would add  a  new  subsection to  amend  AS                                                                    
     18.66.100(f)  to provide  that  extensions granted  for                                                                    
     domestic violence  protective orders start on  the date                                                                    
     the current protective order would have expired.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
6:16:30 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  MICCICHE asked  whether it  only allows  for a  one-year                                                               
extension.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MS. LARGENT said it provides the timeframes of when it expires.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  HUGHES  said  that  long-term  protective  orders  can  be                                                               
issued.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KOPP  answered that  there  is  no limit  to  the                                                               
number of renewals for protective orders.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  MICCICHE  asked  for   further  clarification  that  the                                                               
protective order can be issued for  one year, and an extension is                                                               
for one year  unless dissolved by the court. He  added that those                                                               
extensions can be renewed.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP answered yes.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
6:18:17 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  HUGHES asked  whether he  was supportive  of the  proposed                                                               
committee substitute.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KOPP answered  yes. He  said that  increasing the                                                               
duration for  sexual assault  and stalking from  six months  to a                                                               
year would  bring it  in line with  domestic violence  and sexual                                                               
assault. He said that in  reviewing the legislative history, that                                                               
it appears  the reason  was that  the domestic  violence involves                                                               
someone the  victim knows.  However, the  victim does  not always                                                               
know  the perpetrator  in stalking  and sexual  assault. He  said                                                               
that in terms of continuity, many  good reasons exist to have the                                                               
duration  at  one year.  He  stated  that the  Domestic  Violence                                                               
Support Network supports making protective  orders be one year in                                                               
duration. He fully supported the recommendation.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS. LARGENT pointed out that when  a victim files, there would be                                                               
an evidentiary hearing,  so it is not automatic.  The judge would                                                               
need to make findings on the  record and find by preponderance of                                                               
evidence  grounds  to  continue.  The  defendant  would  have  an                                                               
opportunity  to  present  evidence   that  an  extension  not  be                                                               
granted. She added  that the defendant or the victim  can file to                                                               
have a protective order extinguished.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
6:20:31 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  HUGHES  removed  her objection.  There  being  no  further                                                               
objections  the   Senate  committee  substitute  (CS)   for  CSHB                                                               
12(JUD), Version G was before the committee.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
6:20:44 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR HUGHES opened public testimony on HB 12.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
6:21:04 PM                                                                                                                    
CHRISTINE PATE,  Executive Director,  Alaska Network  on Domestic                                                               
Violence  and Sexual  Assault (ANDVSA),  Sitka,  stated that  she                                                               
runs  a  statewide  legal  services   program  for  survivors  of                                                               
domestic  violence,  sexual  assault,   and  stalking.  She  also                                                               
provides training  and technical assistance to  the advocates for                                                               
the statewide domestic violence  and sexual assault programs that                                                               
go into  court daily with  survivors on civil  protective orders.                                                               
She  appreciated Representative  Kopp introducing  this bill  and                                                               
the work  the committee did to  make the bill even  stronger. The                                                               
ANDVSA strongly supports Version G  to increase the length of the                                                               
stalking  and assault  protection orders  from six  to 12  months                                                               
since  it  provides  uniformity  in the  law.  It  also  provides                                                               
protection to survivors  who are not in  an intimate relationship                                                               
with the  opposing party and  often need a longer  timeframe than                                                               
the six-month period.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
She said that she  has worked for 25 years in  this field and has                                                               
found that civil legal protective  orders provide a critical tool                                                               
to help end domestic violence in  the state. She said that making                                                               
sure  they  are  strong  and  flexible  is  critical  to  keeping                                                               
survivors safe.  This is  because the  survivors can  control the                                                               
process  and have  a voice  in obtaining  the remedies  that they                                                               
need to keep  themselves and their families safe, she  said. As a                                                               
civil legal provider for survivors,  she has seen the devastating                                                               
effect  of  the Whalen  decision.  She  has heard  from  numerous                                                               
survivors who have needed protection  after histories of terrible                                                               
abuse but  are unable to  get it. She echoed  what Representative                                                               
Kopp said that  prior to Whalen many courts in  the state allowed                                                               
for an  extension or for  victims to  get a new  protective order                                                               
based on previously found domestic violence.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. PATE stated that now courts  are unable to do this. This bill                                                               
would give  discretion back  to the  courts to  protect survivors                                                               
who  need it  most.  She  said that  survivors  who have  endured                                                               
terrible  histories  of  domestic violence  are  currently  being                                                               
forced  to  make impossible  strategic  decisions  about when  to                                                               
apply  for a  protective order  to maximize  their safety.  These                                                               
victims know they  will only have six or 12  months of safety. If                                                               
a criminal case  exists, they must calculate if  they should wait                                                               
until the defendant is out of  jail. She said that provisions for                                                               
no contact orders may not  specifically allow victims to obtain a                                                               
civil protection order.  She did not think  survivors should need                                                               
to  make those  types  of decisions  and  protective orders  must                                                               
respond  to the  cyclical nature  of crimes  of intimate  partner                                                               
violence. She urged members to approve  HB 12 to allow the courts                                                               
to  go back  to having  discretion  to protect  victims after  12                                                               
months if safety demands it.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
6:24:41 PM                                                                                                                    
PATTY  MASTERS,  Coordinator,   Direct  Services,  Advocates  for                                                               
Victims  of   Violence  (AVV  Valdez),  Valdez,   said  that  she                                                               
advocates for victims  of violence. The AVV  Valdez also provides                                                               
a  shelter for  victims. She  said  she works  with survivors  of                                                               
domestic  violence  and sexual  assault  on  a daily  basis.  She                                                               
testified in  support of  HB 12  to help  keep victims  safe. She                                                               
said  Ms. Pate  made excellent  points. She  said that  survivors                                                               
need a protective order for longer  than one year. She said it is                                                               
difficult for  women and men  to come  into programs and  ask for                                                               
help.  The process  can  be daunting,  and  these victims  suffer                                                               
endless  trauma  in  getting  out   of  a  violent  household  or                                                               
lifestyle. This  bill would fix  the Whalen decision  by allowing                                                               
the  courts  to  grant  protective orders  on  already  litigated                                                               
domestic violence  sexual assault  and stalking by  extending the                                                               
protective  order past  one year.  She said  she recently  worked                                                               
with  several  victims  who have  been  terrified  because  their                                                               
perpetrators have  been incarcerated and are  being released this                                                               
month. They have been terrified that  they may not be able to get                                                               
a long-term protective order.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
6:27:02 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  HUGHES, after  first  determining no  one  else wished  to                                                               
testify, closed public testimony on HB 12.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
[HB 12 was held in committee.]                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
                 SB 80-INITIATIVE SEVERABILITY                                                                              
6:27:46 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR HUGHES announced  that the next order of  business would be                                                               
SENATE BILL  NO. 80, "An  Act relating to proposing  and enacting                                                               
laws by initiative."                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
6:28:18 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR   CHRIS   BIRCH,   Alaska  State   Legislature,   Juneau,                                                               
paraphrased from his sponsor statement, which read.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     Senate Bill 80 - Sponsor  Statement "An Act relating to                                                                    
     proposing and enacting laws by initiative."                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     SB 80  seeks to ensure ballot  initiative language that                                                                    
     appears before voters at the  ballot box is the same as                                                                    
     the language circulated  during the signature-gathering                                                                    
     phase and  to restore the legislature's  important role                                                                    
     in the initiative process.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     Alaska's  constitution details  a very  important right                                                                    
     of  our  residents -  the  right  to enact  legislation                                                                    
     through the  voter initiative process.  The legislature                                                                    
     also has  the right to enact  legislation substantially                                                                    
     the same  as the  proposed initiative thus  removing it                                                                    
     from the ballot.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     The  proposed   ballot  initiative  language   must  be                                                                    
     submitted  to  the  State of  Alaska  for  review.  The                                                                    
     Alaska Department of Law  reviews the proposed language                                                                    
     then provides the  Lieutenant Governor a recommendation                                                                    
     whether to certify or deny the language.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     The Lieutenant  Governor's certification is a  key step                                                                    
     in  the  initiative  process. Only  once  certification                                                                    
     happens  will the  state  print  petition booklets  for                                                                    
     gathering   voter  signatures.   The  petitioner   then                                                                    
     circulates  the  booklets   to  gather  signatures  and                                                                    
     submits  those  to  the state  for  verification.  Once                                                                    
     signatures are verified, an  initiative can be prepared                                                                    
     for the ballot.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     Per our  constitution, some  issues are  off-limits for                                                                    
     ballot initiatives  and initiatives can only  cover one                                                                    
     subject. But  while a cursory legal  review of language                                                                    
     occurs before the  Lieutenant Governor's certification,                                                                    
     it  has sometimes  been the  case  that further  review                                                                    
     finds constitutional  concerns with  proposed language.                                                                    
     In those  cases, a  party can file  a lawsuit  to force                                                                    
     the  issue through  the court  system. This  can happen                                                                    
     simultaneous to the circulation of signature booklets.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Under current law, if a  court determines that language                                                                    
     in  a proposed  initiative  is unconstitutional  and/or                                                                    
     severed, an amended version of  the language can appear                                                                    
     before  voters.   This  results  in  voters   seeing  a                                                                    
     different initiative  than the one they  supported with                                                                    
     their   signature.    Furthermore,   if    the   courts                                                                    
     revise/sever the language  after the legislative review                                                                    
     process, they deny the legislature  its right to review                                                                    
     the initiative as revised. The  net effect of a court's                                                                    
     severance  is that  an initiative  can move  forward to                                                                    
     the  voters that  is substantially  different than  the                                                                    
     initial version reviewed by the legislature.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     SB 80  would rectify  this situation. Under  this bill,                                                                    
     if  a  court determines  that  language  in a  proposed                                                                    
     initiative   is   unconstitutional  or   severed,   the                                                                    
     Lieutenant Governor  must reject the  entire initiative                                                                    
     petition and prohibit it from  appearing on the ballot.                                                                    
     Voters should  be assured that  language on  the ballot                                                                    
     has  not  changed from  the  language  in the  petition                                                                    
     booklets supported  with voter signatures  and further,                                                                    
     restores the  legislature's right  to review  and enact                                                                    
    substantially   similar   legislation    to   stop   an                                                                     
     initiative from moving forward.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
6:31:05 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  REINBOLD remarked  that she  heard this  bill in  Senate                                                               
State Affairs  Standing Committee. She  is a big supporter  of SB                                                               
80.                                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
6:31:28 PM                                                                                                                    
KIM   SKIPPER,  Staff,   Senator   Chris   Birch,  Alaska   State                                                               
Legislature, Juneau, provided the sectional  analysis of SB 80 on                                                               
behalf of  the sponsor, Senator  Chris Birch. She said  that this                                                               
bill has  one section  that amends  AS 15.45.240.  It adds  a new                                                               
subsection  (b), which  reads, "The  provisions of  an initiative                                                               
are not severable  after being circulated under  AS 15.45.110. An                                                               
initiative petition may  not contain a severability  clause. If a                                                               
court   finds    a   provision   of   an    initiative   petition                                                               
unconstitutional during a  review under (a) of  this section, the                                                               
court shall  order the lieutenant  governor to reject  the entire                                                               
initiative petition and prohibit  the placement of the initiative                                                               
on the ballot."                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
6:32:22 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR HUGHES  stated that an  initiative initiates new law  and a                                                               
referendum repeals existing law.  She asked whether citizens have                                                               
the ability to repeal and reenact  something and if that would be                                                               
an initiative  or if  it would  be defined  as a  referendum. She                                                               
asked whether this would be needed to extend a referendum.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR BIRCH said  he was unsure. He said he  thought it applied                                                               
solely to an initiative.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR MICCICHE  said since a referendum  only repeals language,                                                               
there would be no need to have severability protection.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  HUGHES asked  whether citizens  have the  ability to  do a                                                               
repeal and reenactment in the same process.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
6:33:46 PM                                                                                                                    
ERIC  FJELSTAD, representing  self,  Anchorage, stated  he is  an                                                               
attorney with Perkins  Coie LLP, but he is testifying  on his own                                                               
behalf. He said he was involved in Proposition 1 last year.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR HUGHES wondered if citizens  can repeal and reenact new law                                                               
in the same process.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR. FJELSTAD responded  that this provision is focused  on a very                                                               
narrow situation  in which citizens  are making law and  the role                                                               
of  the   legislature  in  reviewing   it.  That  is   unique  to                                                               
initiatives, he said.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  HUGHES indicated  she was  satisfying her  curiosity about                                                               
the process.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
6:35:51 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR MICCICHE  said that  he supports this  bill. He  has seen                                                               
people "shoot for the moon" and  let the courts sort it out. This                                                               
would take  the pressure away with  respect to the intent  of the                                                               
initiative process.  He said that if  my name were on  it and the                                                               
language of  the initiative  changed, he would  want to  give his                                                               
name  a  second time.  He  offered  his  belief that  this  would                                                               
correct a lot of problems.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR HUGHES said  she also supports SB 80. She  said it made her                                                               
think about the public trust factor.  She said when people sign a                                                               
contract,  the language  of the  contract cannot  change. We  all                                                               
know that is not the right thing to do.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
6:37:16 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  KIEHL said  that  a  provision like  this  one seems  to                                                               
provide  an incentive  for  parties  to sue  over  any and  every                                                               
initiative. He said  that if "you can nick it"  or "wound it just                                                               
the tiniest bit" the whole thing  is off the ballot. He expressed                                                               
concern  that   it  might  encouraged   citizens  to   be  overly                                                               
litigious.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  BIRCH answered  that he  did not  think so.  He did  not                                                               
think it  would be a  common practice  in which the  courts would                                                               
rewrite an  initiative. He said  that [Proposition 1] was  a long                                                               
initiative  that was  substantially  changed by  the courts.  The                                                               
presumption  would  be  that  the public  members  who  sign  the                                                               
initiative would not see significant  changes when it shows up in                                                               
the ballot.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
6:38:27 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  KIEHL said  that the  courts  first severed  part of  an                                                               
initiative in  the 1980s [in  McAlpine v. University  of Alaska].                                                               
He asked what has changed in the intervening years.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  BIRCH offered  his belief  that  initiatives are  overly                                                               
complex and overreaching. The net  effect is that initiatives are                                                               
put  in front  of  the  public that  have  not  gone through  the                                                               
deliberative process of law. He  said that the assumption is that                                                               
when  the initiative  is initially  certified  by the  lieutenant                                                               
governor  that  it  has  gone  through  a  legal  review  and  is                                                               
appropriate to be in front of the public.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
6:39:48 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  KIEHL  referred  to  Article  XII,  Section  11  of  the                                                               
Constitution  of the  State of  Alaska  issue. He  said that  the                                                               
second  sentence reads,  "Unless clearly  inapplicable, the  law-                                                               
making powers of  the legislature may be exercised  by the people                                                               
through  the initiative,  subject to  the limitations  of Article                                                               
XI."                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
He said that  would create an additional bar  to the legislature.                                                               
This would  put additional burdens  on the initiative  power that                                                               
are not imposed on the legislature's law-making power, he said.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR BIRCH deferred to Mr. Fjelstad.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
6:40:38 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. FJELSTAD answered that with  the initiative process, a number                                                               
of constitutional  provisions are  in play. He  acknowledged that                                                               
constitutional  repercussions  occur  when  a  change  like  this                                                               
happens. He agreed that the  provision Senator Kiehl mentioned is                                                               
in play,  but on the other  side is the constitutional  right and                                                               
policy obligation  of legislature to review  an initiative before                                                               
it goes  to the voters. He  said this is apolitical.  The framers                                                               
of  the Constitution  of  the State  of  Alaska contemplated  the                                                               
legislature would  be the last  stop, with the ability  to review                                                               
an initiative and to enact  something substantially similar if it                                                               
chooses to do so. That would  stop an initiative, he said. People                                                               
have the right to make  laws, subject to the legislature bringing                                                               
an end to it. The  dynamic of the court's severance significantly                                                               
changes that, because if the  courts severs something like it did                                                               
last year with Proposition 1  last year, it became something very                                                               
different  than  what the  legislature  considered  in the  first                                                               
instance.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
He said that it changes  the politics. The legislature may review                                                               
an  initiative  and  the probability  it  would  enact  something                                                               
substantially similar to  an initiative it does not  like is very                                                               
low. However,  if the court  were to  sever the things  that were                                                               
objectionable, it  creates a very different  piece of legislation                                                               
and the probability that it  would enact legislation goes way up.                                                               
He  said  that  the  positioning  and  the  timing  of  when  the                                                               
legislature reviews  it matters. He  said that putting  the court                                                               
after the legislative review and  creating something different is                                                               
significant.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR KIEHL said it seems  analogous to the governor's power to                                                               
sign a veto. He said that  the court retains the ability to sever                                                               
afterwards. He  said it is  the same  dynamic. He asked  how that                                                               
would  justify  putting an  additional  restriction  on the  law-                                                               
making power of the people through an initiative.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MR.  FJELSTAD said  the people  have a  law-making power  and the                                                               
ability  to  make laws.  The  question  is  not what  the  people                                                               
propose, which might be to say we  want a law that consists of 10                                                               
parts, which is fine, rather, it  is when the courts are deciding                                                               
unilaterally to remove two of 10 parts.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  KIEHL  answered that  the  people  ultimately make  that                                                               
decision when  they vote  on the  initiative consisting  of eight                                                               
parts instead of 10.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR. FJELSTAD  agreed that  the people get  to vote.  However, the                                                               
legislature could say it was  presented with a bill consisting of                                                               
10  parts. However,  after  the legislature  ends,  if the  court                                                               
carves out two  parts, it means the legislature  has not examined                                                               
the revised version, which could be a very different bill.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
6:45:09 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR BIRCH said  he thinks SB 80 has  some significant benefit                                                               
and consequences with the potential to streamline the process.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
6:45:44 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR MICCICHE  said the  Constitution of  the State  of Alaska                                                               
has different  provisions. He  said that  Title 1  on initiatives                                                               
answers  several of  the questions.  He  said he  has stated  his                                                               
support. He characterized it as  a truth in advertising issue. If                                                               
he places his signature on [an  initiative], it should be what is                                                               
going forward. Otherwise  it should come back for  another set of                                                               
signatures.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR BIRCH thanked the committee.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
6:46:33 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  HUGHES pointed  out that  legislators  can withdraw  their                                                               
sponsorship  on  proposed  bills  if the  language  in  the  bill                                                               
changes.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
[SB 80 was held in committee.]                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
         SB 52-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL; ALCOHOL REG                                                                      
                                                                                                                              
6:47:49 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR HUGHES announced that the  final order of business would be                                                               
SENATE  BILL NO.  52, "An  Act relating  to alcoholic  beverages;                                                               
relating  to the  regulation of  manufacturers, wholesalers,  and                                                               
retailers   of  alcoholic   beverages;   relating  to   licenses,                                                               
endorsements,   and   permits  involving   alcoholic   beverages;                                                               
relating  to  common carrier  approval  to  transport or  deliver                                                               
alcoholic beverages;  relating to the Alcoholic  Beverage Control                                                               
Board;  relating  to   offenses  involving  alcoholic  beverages;                                                               
amending  Rule 17(h),  Alaska Rules  of Minor  Offense Procedure;                                                               
and providing for an effective date."                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
6:48:23 PM                                                                                                                    
At-ease.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
6:49:09 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR HUGHES  reconvened the meeting.  She asked Ms.  Morledge to                                                               
discuss  the changes  that  were  made in  the  Senate Labor  and                                                               
Commerce Standing Committee.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
6:49:22 PM                                                                                                                    
EDRA  MORLEDGE,  Staff,  Senator  Peter  Micciche,  Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature,  Juneau,   explained  the  changes  in   Version  S,                                                               
beginning with Article 2.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     Explanation  of Changes  CS SENATE  BILL  NO. 52  (L&C)                                                                    
     Version: 31-LS0004/S                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     Page 6, Lines 13-15:  Requires the fermentation process                                                                    
     of all brewed beverages offered  for sale for a brewery                                                                    
     manufacturer   licensee  to   occur  on   the  holder's                                                                    
     premises in the state.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Page 6, Lines 20-21:  Requires the fermentation process                                                                    
     of all wine  offered for sale by  a winery manufacturer                                                                    
     licensee  to  occur on  the  holder's  premises in  the                                                                    
     state.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. MORLEDGE  explained that this  is a change from  the previous                                                               
version that required  80 percent of the final  product of brewed                                                               
beverages be  manufactured on site.  The same change is  made for                                                               
winery manufacturers.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
6:50:42 PM                                                                                                                    
MS.  MORLEDGE turned  to the  next  two changes,  which are  very                                                               
similar for breweries and wineries.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     Page  22, Lines  8-10:  Clarifies  that brewery  retail                                                                    
     license holders  can sell  up to  5.167 gallons  of the                                                                    
     holder's  beer   or  sake   for  consumption   off  the                                                                    
     premises.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Page 23,  Lines 9-11:  Clarifies that  the holder  of a                                                                    
     winery retail license  can sell up to  5.167 gallons of                                                                    
     the holder's  wine, mead, or cider  for consumption off                                                                    
     the premises, regardless of alcohol content.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
She said the only  change on page 22 is to  add sake although the                                                               
state does not currently have any sake manufacturers.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
6:52:00 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  KIEHL  said  that  he  appreciated  the  differentiation                                                               
between wine and  cider. He asked whether the amount  of wine was                                                               
doubled.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MS.  MORLEDGE responded  that in  current statute  both breweries                                                               
and wineries  can sell up  to five gallons. The  original version                                                               
of the  bill changed it to  nine liters. Some wineries  said that                                                               
change would  negatively impact  their profits.  She said  in the                                                               
Lower  48  wineries  are  selling kegs  for  special  events  and                                                               
functions.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
6:52:56 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  REINBOLD  said  that  was   her  amendment  and  it  was                                                               
conforming  language.  She said  that  the  committee heard  that                                                               
people wanted  to have  a wedding  and were  limited by  the nine                                                               
liters, she said.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
6:53:19 PM                                                                                                                    
MS.  MORLEDGE  continued  with  Section 10.  This  took  out  the                                                               
prohibition   of  manufacturer   sampling   license  holders   to                                                               
advertise sampling  activities on  their premises. She  said that                                                               
was  at  the request  of  wineries  who  wanted to  advertise  to                                                               
seasonal visitors  to come to  their premises and  purchase their                                                               
products.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
6:54:14 PM                                                                                                                    
MS. MORLEDGE continued [Sec. 04.09.440(a)].                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Page  33, Lines  23-24: Clarifies  that consumption  of                                                                    
     alcoholic  beverages on  a  large  resort is  permitted                                                                    
     whether  under or  not the  locations are  in the  same                                                                    
     building or under the same roof of the large resort.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS.  MORLEDGE said  that this  would allow  customers at  a large                                                               
resort to  move the wine  from a  bonfire to another  location on                                                               
the resort's property.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
6:55:01 PM                                                                                                                    
MS. MORLEDGE continued. She turned to Section 27.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     Page  55, Line  22  to Page  56, Line  10:  Adds a  new                                                                    
     section  to  allow  for the  automatic  transfer  of  a                                                                    
     license  if  no action  has  been  taken by  the  board                                                                    
     within 60  days. This applies to  restaurant and eating                                                                    
     places  with  or  without  endorsements,  and  seasonal                                                                    
     restaurant  or eating  place  tourism  license with  or                                                                    
     without endorsements.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MS. MORLEDGE  said that this  relates to the transfer  of license                                                               
to another person.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
6:55:48 PM                                                                                                                    
MS. MORLEDGE continued. She turned to Section 45.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     Page  65, Line  30  to  Page 66,  Line  2: Changes  the                                                                    
     authority  to impose  conditions or  restrictions on  a                                                                    
     permit from the Director to the Board                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Removed   the  prohibition   for   the   holder  of   a                                                                    
     manufacturer  sampling  license to  advertise  sampling                                                                    
     activities. (Version U, Page 31, Lines 13-17)                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
6:56:23 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR HUGHES  referred to Section  27 on the  automatic transfer.                                                               
She asked whether backlogs caused problems.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR MICCICHE  acknowledged that  some problems  have occurred                                                               
on the transfer of ownership when  people buy a new restaurant or                                                               
eating place. He said that this  raises some timing issues and it                                                               
is something  he will  probably have  to reconsider.  He supports                                                               
the  concept but  thinks that  some additional  work needs  to be                                                               
done.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
He referred to  the next change on page 65-66.  He said that this                                                               
language change was  to not give the director  the opportunity to                                                               
make  changes  that  only  the board  can  make.  Currently,  the                                                               
director cannot put  conditions on the permit. He  said he thinks                                                               
that  people believe  the conditions  are negative.  However, the                                                               
realty  is that  the conditions  would  be positive.  He said  it                                                               
could slow down  the process for people who have  a minor problem                                                               
to correct. Going through the  process could slow things down and                                                               
the event  may be long  over before the  board meets. He  said he                                                               
understands  the reason  for the  change, but  it will  need some                                                               
work to function as intended.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
6:58:47 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  MICCICHE  thanked  the  Chair  of  the  Senate  Labor  &                                                               
Commerce Committee.  He said it is  a big bill and  the committee                                                               
made some important changes. He  acknowledged that as mentioned a                                                               
few more  changes need to  be worked on,  but they will  be minor                                                               
ones.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR REINBOLD related her understanding  that it has taken six                                                               
or seven years for  the sponsor to get to this  point. She said a                                                               
lot of work  was done in the previous committee.  She has several                                                               
amendments. She said she is very supportive of this bill.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
[SB 52 was held in committee.]                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR HUGHES reviewed upcoming committee announcements.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
7:01:18 PM                                                                                                                    
There being  no further  business to  come before  the committee,                                                               
Chair Hughes  adjourned the  Senate Judiciary  Standing Committee                                                               
meeting at 7:01 p.m.                                                                                                            

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
CSHB 12(JUD) Version E.PDF SJUD 4/23/2019 6:00:00 PM
HB 12
HB012 Sponsor Statement ver E.pdf SJUD 4/23/2019 6:00:00 PM
HB 12
HB012 Sectional ver E.pdf SJUD 4/23/2019 6:00:00 PM
HB 12
HB012 Explantion of Changes ver E.pdf SJUD 4/23/2019 6:00:00 PM
HB 12
HB012 Reference Document CPO Statute and Duration of Order.pdf SJUD 4/23/2019 6:00:00 PM
HB 12
SB 80 Sponsor Statement.pdf SJUD 4/23/2019 6:00:00 PM
SSTA 4/11/2019 3:30:00 PM
SB 80
SB 80 Version U.pdf SJUD 4/23/2019 6:00:00 PM
SSTA 4/11/2019 3:30:00 PM
SB 80
SB 80 - Fiscal Note - GOV.pdf SJUD 4/23/2019 6:00:00 PM
SSTA 4/11/2019 3:30:00 PM
SB 80
SB052 EXPLANATION OF CHANGES 04.22.19.pdf SJUD 4/23/2019 6:00:00 PM
SB 52
SB52 SECTIONAL ANALYSIS 4-22-19.pdf SJUD 4/23/2019 6:00:00 PM
SB 52
SB 80 - Letter of Support.pdf SJUD 4/23/2019 6:00:00 PM
SSTA 4/11/2019 3:30:00 PM
SB 80
SB 80 - Letter of Support - RDC.pdf SJUD 4/23/2019 6:00:00 PM
SSTA 4/11/2019 3:30:00 PM
SB 80
SB 80 - Letter of Support - Alliance Board of Directors.pdf SJUD 4/23/2019 6:00:00 PM
SSTA 4/11/2019 3:30:00 PM
SB 80