Legislature(1995 - 1996)
02/22/1996 01:41 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
February 22, 1996
1:41 P.M.
TAPE HFC 96-47, Side 1, #000 - end.
TAPE HFC 96-47, Side 2, #000 - end.
TAPE HFC 96-48, Side 2, #000 - 485.
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Mark Hanley called the House Finance Committee
meeting to order at 1:41 p.m.
PRESENT
Co-Chair Hanley Representative Mulder
Representative Brown Representative Navarre
Representative Kelly Representative Parnell
Representative Kohring Representative Therriault
Representative Martin
Co-Chair Foster and Representative Grussendorf were absent
from the meeting.
ALSO PRESENT
Anne Carpeneti, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal
Division, Department of Law; Jerry Luckhaupt, Legislative
Legal Counsel, Legislative Affairs Agency; Jerry Shriner,
Special Assistant, Department of Corrections; Willis
Kirkpatrick, Director, Division of Banking, Securities and
Corporations, Department of Commerce and Economic
Development; Arthur H. Snowden, II, Administrative Director,
Alaska Court System; George Dosier, Staff, Representative
Kott; John Higgins, General Manager, Northland Credit; John
Shibe, National Bank of Alaska; Chris Christensen, Staff
Counsel, Alaska Court System.
SUMMARY
HB 75 An Act relating to criminal mischief.
CSHB 75 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a
"do pass" recommendation and with nine fiscal
impact notes; three by the Department of Health &
Social Services, dated 1/30/96; one by the
Department of Law, dated 1/30/96; one by the
Alaska Court System, dated 1/30/96; two by the
Department of Public Safety, dated 1/30/96; one by
the House Finance Committee for the Department of
1
Corrections; and one by the Department of
Administration.
HB 204 An Act relating to the administrative revocation
of a minor's license to drive; creating criminal
offenses of minor operating a vehicle after
consuming alcohol, a minor's refusal to submit to
chemical test, and driving during the 24 hours
after being cited for minor operating a vehicle
after consuming alcohol; establishing penalties
for these offenses; and relating to implied
consent to certain testing if operating a motor
vehicle, aircraft, or watercraft.
CSHB 204 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with
a "do pass" recommendation and with five zero
fiscal notes, one by the Department of Law, and
two by the Department of Administration; two by
the Department of Public Safety; and with a fiscal
impact note by the Alaska Court System.
HB 319 An Act relating to the regulation of small loan
and retail installment transactions.
CSHB 319 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with
a "do pass" recommendation and with a zero fiscal
note by the Department of Commerce and Economic
Development, dated 2/2/96.
HB 437 An Act establishing the Judicial Officers
Compensation Commission; relating to the
compensation of supreme court justices, judges of
the court of appeals, judges of the superior
court, and district court judges; and providing
for an effective date.
CSHB 437 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with
"no recommendation" and with a zero fiscal note by
the Alaska Court System, dated 1/30/96; and with a
fiscal impact note by the Office of the Governor.
HOUSE BILL 75
An Act relating to criminal mischief.
Co-Chair Hanley provided members with a committee substitute
for HB 75, Work Draft #9-LS0369\O, dated 2/15/96 (copy on
file).
ANNE CARPENETI, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF
LAW reviewed the committee substitute. She noted that the
Committee discussed the inclusion of vehicles that would be
2
covered under the felony vehicle theft provision during the
2/13/95 meeting. This information was added on page 1, line
12 of the work draft. She added that page 2, line 30
provides for vehicle theft in the second degree. She
observed that vehicles not specified under vehicle theft in
the first degree would be covered under vehicle theft in the
second degree. She clarified that snow machines fit under
vehicle theft in the second degree. Second degree theft is
an A misdemeanor with a maximum sentence of up to a $5,000
thousand dollar fine and one year in jail.
Representative Mulder MOVED to adopt Work Draft #9-LS0369\O,
dated 2/15/96. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative Mulder prepared a House Finance Committee
fiscal note for the Department of Corrections (Attachment
1). He explained that the House Finance Committee fiscal
note was based on assumptions used in the Department of
Corrections' fiscal note for SB 14. Senate Bill 14 was
introduced in 1995 by Senator Leman. Senate Bill 14 also
addressed criminal mischief.
Ms. Carpeneti characterized HB 75 as a "tougher" bill than
SB 14. She observed that HB 75 raises the offense of
vehicle theft from a class A misdemeanor to a class C
felony. She estimated that this change will result in
additional costs. Representative Mulder maintained that the
costs would not be greater. He provided members with copies
of the Department of Corrections' fiscal note for SB 14
(Attachment 2).
Discussion ensued regarding the provisions of SB 14.
JERRY LUCKHAUPT, LEGISLATIVE LEGAL COUNSEL, LEGISLATIVE
AFFAIRS AGENCY clarified that CSSB 14 (JUD), vetoed by the
Governor, retained the existing penalty structure for
juveniles. He observed that the original draft of SB 14
would have revised the penalty structure. The original
draft more closely resembled HB 75.
Representative Mulder pointed out that Attachment 2 was
drafted based on the original version of SB 14. He
maintained that the provisions of SB 14 can be compared for
fiscal impact.
JERRY SHRINER, SPECIAL ASSISTANT, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS discussed Attachments 1 and 2. He
explained that the calculations used in the fiscal note for
SB 14 did not take into account the number of second time
felons that would be presumptively sentenced to a minimum of
four years. Thirty-two of one hundred and sixty offenders
prosecuted under felony car theft in HB 75 are estimated to
3
be second time offenders.
Representative Mulder provided members with assumptions used
in preparations of the House Finance Committee fiscal note
for the Department of Corrections, HB 75 (Attachment 3). He
maintained that the assumptions used by the Department of
Corrections were excessive. He observed that the Department
estimated that it will cost $107 dollars a day to house
these offenders. He reviewed assumptions used in Attachment
3. He estimated that it will cost $57 dollars a day to
house second time offenders. The fiscal note authorizes 1.4
new positions. He clarified that the House Finance
Committee fiscal note was based on assumptions used in the
fiscal note prepared by the Department of Corrections for SB
14, regarding the number of offenders and days served.
Mr. Shriner noted that the Department estimated that 32 out
of 160 offenders would be second time offenders which would
be incarcerated for a minimum of 90 days. He stressed that
$107 dollars a day is the Department's best guess regarding
what it costs to operate. He stated that CRC's and
probation costs would be more than $1.0 million dollars even
if the prison time was eliminated. The fiscal note prepared
by Representative Mulder for the House Finance Committee
estimates a cost of $801.0 thousand dollars for the
Department of Corrections. The Department's fiscal note
estimates a cost of $1.306.7 million dollars.
Representative Brown noted that state prisons are at
capacity. She questioned how the cost of incarceration
could be zero. Representative Mulder stated that every
institution is not at full capacity. He maintained that the
32 offenders can be absorbed into existing institutions. He
asserted that there is elasticity in the Department in
regards to cost. He maintained that 32 extra offenders are
not going to increase the Department's cost of doing
business. Representative Brown expressed doubt that the
Department could absorb 32 prisoners without additional
cost.
In response to a question by Representative Kelly,
Representative Mulder reiterated factors used in the
calculations of the fiscal note.
Representative Mulder MOVED to report CSHB 75 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes, with the exception of the fiscal
note for the Department of Corrections. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative Mulder MOVED to adopt the $801.0 thousand
dollar House Finance Committee fiscal note for the
4
Department of Corrections. Representative Brown OBJECTED.
A roll call vote was taken on the MOTION.
IN FAVOR: Kelly, Kohring, Martin, Mulder, Navarre, Parnell,
Therriault, Hanley
OPPOSED: Brown
Co-Chair Foster and Representative Grussendorf were absent
from the vote.
The MOTION PASSED (8-1).
CSHB 75 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with nine fiscal impact notes; three by
the Department of Health & Social Services, dated 1/30/96;
one by the Department of Law, dated 1/30/96; one by the
Alaska Court System, dated 1/30/96; two by the Department of
Public Safety, dated 1/30/96; one by the House Finance
Committee for the Department of Corrections; and one by the
Department of Administration.
HOUSE BILL NO. 437
"An Act establishing the Judicial Officers Compensation
Commission; relating to the compensation of supreme
court justices, judges of the court of appeals, judges
of the superior court, and district court judges; and
providing for an effective date."
Representatives Brown and Parnell provided members with
Amendment 1 (Attachment 4). Representative Brown explained
Amendment 1. She noted that the first portion of the
amendment on page 2, lines 23 -25 restate qualifications for
membership on the Commission. She stressed that
qualifications would be more flexible. "An economist" was
changed to "one person with experience in economics",
"business executive" was changed to "one person with
experience in business", and "lawyer" was changed to "one
attorney licensed to practice law in this state".
ARTHUR H. SNOWDEN, II, ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA COURT
SYSTEM spoke in support of the first portion of the
amendment.
Representative Brown noted that the second part of the
amendment would amend the time an order changing the
compensation of a justice or judge would take effect. She
observed that the legislation states that an order would
take effect unless it is disapproved in its entirety in 60
days. She noted that the amendment would delete "within 60
days after" and insert "on or before the last day of the
legislative session." She maintained that the amendment
5
would allow a coordinated decision between disapproving
legislation and the budget. Representative Brown asserted
that if the Legislature did not act and the change of
compensation was not funded in the budget that the Alaska
Court System would have to absorb any costs associated with
the order in their budget. She stressed that the intent is
to make a decision, up or down, and coordinate the decision
in the budget.
Mr. Snowden emphasized that there would not be enough time
to include the change in compensation in the budget if it
was not approved prior to the end of session. He suggested
that 80 or 85 days would allow time to include this item in
the House Budget. He stressed the difficulty of adding
items to the budget late in the process.
Co-Chair Hanley referred to Amendment 2 by Representative
Brown (Attachment 5). He questioned if the order changing
the compensation was not specifically appropriated and the
Legislature fails to enact legislation disapproving the
order would the Alaska Court System absorb the change in its
budget.
Mr. Snowden stated that there would be an obligation to
provide the pay raise to judges. He stated that the raise
would be paid from the Alaska Court System's budget.
Co-Chair Hanley noted that the issue becomes an
appropriation choice. Mr. Snowden emphasized that without a
date for consideration of the appropriation "it is up in the
air".
Representative Brown stated that there should be a separate
appropriation.
Co-Chair Hanley suggested that Amendment 1 be divided.
Representative Brown MOVED to divide Amendment 1. There
being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. Representative Brown
MOVED to adopt Amendment 1A, amending page 2, lines 23 - 25.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative Martin spoke in support of providing the
legislature with the maximum amount of flexibility. He
stressed that salary raises for judges should be analyzed
with the total budget.
Representative Mulder suggested that "on or before the last
day of the legislative session" be inserted into Amendment 2
and "within 60 days after" be deleted.
Representative Navarre suggested that the order take effect
on the date of a separate appropriation to fund the
increase. He noted that two steps would be taken. First
6
the increase would be turned down if the legislature
disapproves the order. Secondly, the order would be turned
down if it is not included in a separate appropriation.
CHRIS CHRISTENSEN, STAFF COUNSEL, ALASKA COURT SYSTEM
explained that the Court has held that to be constitutional
there has to be a two step process. He noted that the Court
did not address whether the steps can run concurrently.
Mr. Snowden questioned if problems would occur from one
legislature binding another if both actions do not take
place in the same year. He emphasized that if the
Legislature does not disapprove of the Commission's
recommendations that the raise would be 12 months later.
(Tape Change, HFC 96-47, Side 2)
Mr. Snowden estimated that the Legislature will take as much
time as is given to act. Co-Chair Hanley questioned if a
bill disapproving the recommendations would be passed prior
to 90 days. He suggested that the most likely scenario is
that the decision will be made in the budget process. Mr.
Snowden asked the Committee to consider inserting 110 days
in order to allow the conference committee time to consider
the item. Representative Martin did not feel that this item
should be treated differently from other items. Co-Chair
Hanley stated that if the Legislature does not take action
then the Executive Director of the Alaska Court System will
argue that the item was approved because it was not
disapproved.
Representative Navarre expressed concern that on or before
the last day of the session would not allow adequate time
for the recommendations to be incorporated into the budget
if they are not disapproved. He noted that if an item is
not in either the House or Senate budget it cannot be added
in conference committee. He suggested that disapproval
should be by 90 or 100 days in order to allow time for a
budget amendment.
Representative Mulder MOVED to adopted amended Amendment 2:
"(c) An order changing the compensation of a
justice or judge takes effect unless a bill
disapproving the order in its entirety is enacted
into law on or before the last day of the
legislative session in which the order is
submitted to the legislature. Unless disapproved,
an order increasing the compensation of a justice
or judge is subject to funding through legislative
appropriation and takes effect on the effective
7
date of the first separate appropriation to fund
the increase."
Representative Navarre OBJECTED. A roll call vote was taken
on the MOTION.
IN FAVOR: Brown, Kohring, Martin, Mulder, Parnell,
Therriault, Hanley
OPPOSED: Navarre
Co-Chair Foster and Representatives Kelly and Grussendorf
were absent from the vote.
The MOTION PASSED (7-1).
Representative Navarre stated that salary recommendations
for the Legislature should be contained in similar
legislation. He noted the political nature surrounding
legislative salaries. He gave a brief history of
legislative salary levels. He suggested that the inclusion
of legislative salary recommendations in similar legislation
would allow for objective deliberation regarding fair
compensation. Representative Martin noted that the public
expects the Legislature to set salary levels for state
employees.
Representative Mulder MOVED to report CSHB 437 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes.
CSHB 437 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with "no
recommendation" and with a zero fiscal note by the Alaska
Court System, dated 1/30/96; and with a fiscal impact note
by the Office of the Governor.
HOUSE BILL 75
An Act relating to criminal mischief.
Representative Mulder clarified that CSHB 75 (FIN) and the
original version of SB 14 were both tougher than CSSB 14
(JUD) which was vetoed by the Governor after the last
session.
HOUSE BILL NO. 319
"An Act relating to the regulation of small loan and
retail installment transactions."
GEORGE DOSIER, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT testified in
support of HB 319. He gave a brief overview of HB 319. He
noted that HB 319 addresses the Alaska's Small Loan Act and
the Retail Installment Sales Act. He observed that under
8
the Small Loan Act HB 319:
* Increases the application fee from $400.0 hundred
dollars to $1.0 thousand dollars:
* Authorizes multiple office licenses and
establishes 10 offices as the maximum number of
offices eligible under one license;
* Increases the annual license fee from $200 to $500
hundred dollars in the case of a single office and
allows a multiple office license of $2.0 thousand
dollars;
* Increases liquid asset requirements from $20.0 to
$25 thousand dollars; and clarifies that an
equivalent amount must be available for each
office licensed under a multiple office license;
* Increases the bond requirement from $5.0 to $20.0
thousand dollars; and clarifies that only one bond
is required for a multiple office license;
* Allows licensees to maintain books and records
consistent with contemporary data processing and
accounting methods (the licensee would not have to
maintain separate books for associated business);
* Clarifies regulations regarding splitting of loans
(husbands and wives may receive separate loans);
and
* Broadens the scope of non-interest fees that
lenders may charge borrowers and increases the
amount of late payment fees that may be charged
from 10 percent or $15 dollars to 10 percent or
$25 dollars whichever is less.
Mr. Dosier explained that HB 319 would permit the charge of
reasonable costs and fees for appraisals, surveys, and title
insurance and reports on loans of $10.0 thousand dollars or
less where real property is taken as collateral. This would
also apply to loans over $10.0 thousand dollars even in
cases where real collateral is not taken for the loan. He
added that reasonable attorney fees, actual expenses and
costs would be allowed in connection to the collection of a
delinquent loan or foreclosure.
Mr. Dosier noted the effects of HB 319 on the Retail
Installment Sales Act:
* Clarifies and broadens the scope of fees and
9
charges that may be imposed in connection with
transactions, including late fees, collection
charges and dishonored check charges which are not
currently allowed; and
* Amends current law to permit lenders to charge
interest rates at whatever rate the parties agree
to charge.
Representative Navarre referred to the increased bond
requirement. Mr. Dosier clarified that currently all
licensees pay a $5.0 thousand dollar bond. Representative
Navarre noted that a business with five offices currently
maintains a $25.0 thousand dollar bond. Under the bill they
would still need a $25.0 thousand dollar bond. He pointed
out that small operations would be penalized. He asked the
justification for the change.
Representative Brown noted that the legislation would remove
limits on interest. She questioned if the rate could be
changed without the agreement of both parties. Mr. Dosier
stated that notification of term changes would pertain to
future use of the card. The terms are established by
agreement.
WILLIS KIRKPATRICK, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF BANKING,
SECURITIES AND CORPORATIONS, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT stated that the Small Loan Act needs to
be addressed. He noted that the legislation is a
collaboration between the Division and businesses. He
observed that the Act was enacted at statehood. He observed
that the bond requirement was raised to reflect the maximum
personal loan a small loan company can make.
Representative Navarre pointed out that one bond could
pertain to 10 separate offices. Mr. Kirkpatrick observed
that currently each office has their own license and bond.
He noted that there has not been an action against a bond
since he began working with the Division in 1968.
Representative Navarre reiterated multiple licensees would
have an economic advantage.
Representative Brown asked Mr. Kirkpatrick to discuss
interest rates. Mr. Kirkpatrick maintained that if one side
of the balance sheet is deregulated that the other side of
the balance sheet should be deregulated. He noted that
interest rates are highly competitive. He observed that
interest rates are imported from other states. He
emphasized that the Division receives a lot of applications
from merchants that want to become small loan companies. He
maintained that Alaskan businesses want to compete in the
market place but cannot compete using the Alaska Retail
Installment Sales Act. He noted that one company in
10
Anchorage offers computers at no money down with an
interest rate of 21 percent. He stressed that competition
determines the interest rate.
Representative Navarre asked why the fiscal note by the
Department of Commerce and Economic Development is zero. He
asked if the Division has any concerns.
Mr. Kirkpatrick told the Committee that he would provide
them with an updated fiscal note explaining why it is at
zero. He observed that application fees will be increased
from $400.0 to $1.0 thousand dollars. The legislation also
allows the Department to charge actual expenses. He stated
that he did not foresee any substantial increase in actual
expenses. He stated that any expected impact will be
positive. He could not estimate the actual impact of the
legislation.
Representative Navarre asked how many single offices would
have fees reduced by going to a multiple license and how
many offices would have their fees raised by 150 percent.
Mr. Kirkpatrick noted that there are 18 licensees. Norwest
is the only licensee which has multiple offices.
(Tape Change, HFC 96-48, Side 1)
Representative Navarre asked if the Division has suggestions
for improvement. Mr. Kirkpatrick responded that the
Department is in total agreement with the legislation. He
observed that some adjustments were made through the debate
process. He noted that the Division met with members of the
industry on several occasions.
JOHN HIGGINS, GENERAL MANAGER, NORTHLAND CREDIT CORPORATION
testified in support of HB 319. He noted that he is also
speaking on behalf of the Alaska Consumer Financial Services
Association. He explained that the difference between a
$5.0 and $25.0 thousand dollar bond is only $100.0 hundred
dollars a year in premiums. He maintained that the license
fee cost is reasonable and in line with other states. He
reviewed highlights of HB 319. He stressed that joint loan
provisions are currently restrictive. House Bill 319 would
allow more than one open account with the same party or a
spouse. He observed that currently only 30 day incremental
payment cycles are allowed between payments. He suggested
that this is restrictive to seasonal workers. He noted that
increased fees for insufficient fund checks will assure that
costs are passed on to non-payers. He restated that HB 319
will allow a competitive interest rate structure to meet
competition with outside companies that export their rates
into the state of Alaska. He requested that the Committee
add an immediate effective date.
11
Mr. Higgins emphasized that HB 319 would create and retain
jobs in Alaska's financial industry and provide more
financing to local communities. He stressed that HB 319
would provide credit to a broader base of Alaskan consumers.
JOHN SHIBE, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, NATIONAL BANK OF
ALASKA, NORTHLAND CREDIT CORPORATION spoke in support of HB
319. He noted that the material has been well represented.
In response to a question by Representative Therriault, Mr.
Kirkpatrick stated that an immediate effective date would
have no impact on the agency.
Representative Brown asked how the legislation would change
the late fee authorization. Mr. Higgins stated that
currently it is unclear if late fees are authorized. The
industry does not charge a late fee at this time. He
observed that Section 13 clarifies what can be done. He
clarified that Section 13 applies to the Retail Installment
Sales Act. Representative Brown noted that the legislation
allows for a "reasonable" charge. She questioned what is
reasonable. Mr. Higgins stated that a dollar amount was not
inserted because of the changing nature of the industry.
Representative Brown suggested that the Department could use
regulations to determine what is "reasonable".
Representative Brown asked what recourse a consumer would
have it they felt they were charged an unreasonable fee.
Mr. Higgins stated that they could contact the company. He
explained that it would not be under the Division's
regulation. He observed that the consumer has the ability
to go to the State Attorney General or other agencies to
voice their concerns. Mr. Shibe added that late fees have
to be disclosed.
SUSAN BIZE, GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, CREDIT DEPARTMENT, JC
PENNY INC. testified via the teleconference network. She
spoke in support of HB 319. She explained that late fees
are agreed to once the charge account has been used. She
restated that the purpose of HB 319 is to allow Alaskan
retailers to effectively compete with out-of-state vendors
who are importing rates into the State.
Representative Therriault MOVED to adopt an immediate
effective date. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so
ordered.
Representative Therriault MOVED to report CSHB 319 (FIN) out
of Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
12
CSHB 319 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with a zero fiscal note by the
Department of Commerce and Economic Development, dated
2/2/96.
HOUSE BILL NO. 204
"An Act relating to the administrative revocation of a
minor's license to drive; creating criminal offenses of
minor operating a vehicle after consuming alcohol, a
minor's refusal to submit to chemical test, and driving
during the 24 hours after being cited for minor
operating a vehicle after consuming alcohol;
establishing penalties for these offenses; and relating
to implied consent to certain testing if operating a
motor vehicle, aircraft, or watercraft."
Ms. Carpeneti spoke in support of HB 204. She noted that
the legislation creates three new offenses:
* It establishes a "zero tolerance level" for minors
who consume alcohol and operate a motor vehicle,
aircraft or watercraft. The legislation created
an infraction for minors operating a vehicle under
the influence of alcohol, with a penalty of not
more than $1,000 thousand dollars and community
work service;
* Creates a separate infraction for the refusal to
take a breath test;
* Creates an offense for operating a motor vehicle
within 24 hours of having been cited for drinking
and driving as a juvenile; and
* Provides for administrative revocation of an
operator's license or privilege to drive for
having driven with any amount of alcohol for a
person under the age of 21.
Ms. Carpeneti maintained that the legislation was created to
ensure safety. She observed that juveniles represent a
higher percentage than their population group in traffic
accidents and fatalities. She added that the State will
loose federal highway funds if a zero tolerance bill is not
passed by the fall of 1997.
Ms. Carpeneti provided members with Amendment 1 (Attachment
6). She noted that Amendment 1 would correct an oversight
in the legislation. She explained that the amendment would
provide for an administrative revocation of an operator's
13
license after being cited for refusal to take a breath test.
The amendment also provides that a person that has been
cited for refusal to take a breath test may not drive for 24
hours after having been cited for the offense.
Ms. Carpeneti provided members with Amendment 2 (Attachment
7). She explained that the Court ruled in Booth versus
State, that the possibility of imposition of community work
service on a person who is charged with an offense raises
the requirement of court appointed counsel and right to a
jury trial. The Department would like to litigate this
ruling. She observed that the legislation provides for
penalties of up to a $1,000 thousand dollar fine and
community work service. She stated that the Department does
not want to have to provide for court appointed counsel.
The amendment would take effect upon the decision of the
Court. The amendment would impose up to a $1,000 dollar
fine and allow the offender to choose to work the fine off
with community service. This would be contingent on the
Court's final decision that the offenses being created in
the bill do trigger the right to court appointed counsel and
a jury trial. She further discussed the Court's ruling.
She noted that the penalties were drafted to be infractions
in order to not trigger the procedure safeguards due to the
expense of counsel and jury trials.
Ms. Carpeneti discussed other related cases. She noted that
"use it and loose it" legislation passed in 1995, provided
that a person under 21 who drinks automatically comes under
administration revocation of a motor operator's license.
This also covers the use of drugs. She noted that the Court
ruled that because of the possibility of administrative
revocation of a motor operator's license that this
legislation would also trigger the right to counsel and a
jury trial. This issue is on appeal.
In response to a question by Representative Brown, Ms.
Carpeneti explained that when a person is stopped for
driving under the influence a citation is issued which acts
as a temporary license for 7 days to allow time to appeal.
The legislation provides notification that the minor is not
allowed to drive for 24 hours after having received the
citation.
Representative Mulder MOVED to adopt Amendment 1. There
being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative Mulder MOVED to adopt Amendment 2. There
being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative Mulder MOVED to report CSHB 204 FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
14
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 3:40 p.m.
15
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|