Legislature(2001 - 2002)
04/18/2001 01:44 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
April 18, 2001
1:44 PM
TAPE HFC 01 - 85, Side A
TAPE HFC 01 - 85, Side B
TAPE HFC 01 - 86, Side A
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Williams called the House Finance Committee meeting
to order at 1:44 PM.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bill Williams, Co-Chair
Representative Eldon Mulder, Co-Chair
Representative Con Bunde, Vice-Chair
Representative Eric Croft
Representative John Davies
Representative John Harris
Representative Carl Moses
Representative Richard Foster
Representative Bill Hudson
Representative Ken Lancaster
Representative Jim Whitaker
ALSO PRESENT
Senator Randy Phillips; Dan Sullivan, Development Director,
Arctic Winter Games, Anchorage; Mike Tibbles, Staff,
Representative Williams; Randy Ruaro, Staff, Representative
Williams; Paul Rusanowski, Senior Vice President Operations,
Alaska Intrastate Gas Company, Anchorage; Dean Guaneli,
Chief Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division,
Department of Law.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Katelyn Markley, Alaska Industrial Development and Export
Authority (AIDEA); Jim Maley, Executive Director, Jesse Lee
Home, Seward; Tim Sczawinski, Seward; Jim Stratton,
Director, Parks and Outdoor Recreation, Department of
Natural Resources
SUMMARY
HB 40 "An Act providing for the revocation of driving
privileges by a court for a driver convicted of a
violation of traffic laws in connection with a
fatal motor vehicle or commercial motor vehicle
accident; amending Rules 43 and 43.1, Alaska Rules
of Administration; and providing for an effective
date."
HB 40 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
HB 96 "An Act relating to acquisition and development of
the Jesse Lee Home; and providing for an effective
date."
CSHB 96 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a
"do pass" recommendation and with previously
published fiscal impact note (1) by the House
Education and Social Services.
HB 101 "An Act relating to charter schools; and providing
for an effective date."
CSHB 101 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with
a "do pass" recommendation and with two previously
published fiscal impact note by the Department of
Education and Early Development (#1 and #2).
HB 236 "An Act relating to the contracting and financing
authority of the Alaska Industrial Development and
Export Authority; authorizing the authority to
issue bonds in a principal amount not to exceed
$76,000,000 to finance the acquisition, design,
construction, inventory, and operation of natural
gas, propane air, or manufactured gas public
utility facilities; and providing for an effective
date."
HB 236 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
SB 93 "An Act relating to the Arctic Winter Games Team
Alaska trust; and providing for an effective
date."
SB 93 was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with previously published
fiscal impact note (#1) by the Department of
Revenue.
CSSB 93 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a
"do pass" recommendation and with a previously
published zero fiscal note by the Department of
Revenue (#1).
SENATE BILL NO. 93
"An Act relating to the Arctic Winter Games Team Alaska
trust; and providing for an effective date."
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS, SPONSOR testified in support of SB
93. He observed that the legislation relates to the Arctic
Winter Games Team Alaska Trust Fund and was modeled after
the Alaska Children's Fund. The legislation would permit
state, federal and private money to be deposited in the Fund
and invested. The interest from the fund would be used to
support Team Alaska and the Arctic Winter Games. The Arctic
Winter Games occur every two years. The next games will be
held in Greenland. It is the second level winter games.
Approximately 2,000 athletics participate. Approximately 330
athletics participate from Alaska. State participation for
the games has been around $250,000 to $300,000 dollars every
two years. The trust fund would provide funding stability.
The games have been in existence for 30 years. The state has
provided financial support since 1970.
Representative Croft noted that there is a zero fiscal note
and questioned how funding would be established without a
fiscal note. Senator Phillips noted that the legislation
would only establish the shell.
Representative Hudson spoke in support. He questioned if a
permanent fund dividend check off had been considered.
Senator Phillips stated that he had considered the
possibility of using a check off. He stated that he would
consider it for the next year. He emphasized the uniqueness
of the Arctic Winter Games. He provided examples of his
experience with the Arctic Winter Games.
DAN SULLIVAN, DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, ARCTIC WINTER GAMES,
ANCHORAGE testified via teleconference in support of SB 93.
He observed that one part-time employee working out of a
donated office manages the event. More than 100 volunteers
assist. He observed that Alaska is lagging behind in
equipment and uniforms and the ability to manage the event.
Athletes pay a third of their participations cost; currently
each athletic pays about $450 dollars to participate. This
cost is estimated to double due to transportation costs. He
suggested the use of Tobacco Settlement Funds to establish
the trust. He noted that sports help keep young people from
tobacco.
Representative Lancaster MOVED to report CSSSB 93 (FIN) out
of Committee with the accompanying fiscal note.
Representative John Davies spoke in support of the
legislation. He noted that he participated in the first
Arctic Winter games. He emphasized the cultural exchange
that occurs at the event.
There being NO OBJECTION, CSSSB 93 (FIN) was moved from
Committee.
HOUSE BILL NO. 101
"An Act relating to charter schools; and providing for
an effective date."
MIKE TIBBLES, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS provided
members with Amendment 1 (copy on file). He explained that
the amendment would modify the section that provides a $500
dollar grant per student and adds a pro rata provision in
the event of a shortfall.
Co-Chair Williams MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 1. Representative
Croft OBJECTED for the purpose of discussion. Mr. Tibbles
reiterated that the amendment would add subsection (c) to
pro rata the appropriation if there are insufficent funds to
apply $500 dollars per student for every charter school
student. Each student's share would be reduced equally. The
cost is approximately $1.6 million dollars.
Representative Croft maintained that the appropriation
should be fully funded. He stated that he did not want the
fiscal note to drive the text. He felt that the fiscal note
should be funded at the level of the legislation.
Co-Chair Mulder spoke in support and stated his desire to
fund the entire fiscal note. He noted that the amendment
would provide future flexibility. Mr. Tibbles added that the
fiscal note would be funded in the conference committee. He
observed that the same pro rata language is contained in
other education funding such as the foundation formula. He
noted that the student count could change between the time
the fiscal note is funded and the student count occurs.
Co-Chair Mulder clarified that the same pro rata language
exists in regulation for pupil transportation.
Representative Croft expressed hope that the intent would be
to fully fund the appropriation and withdrew his objections.
Co-Chair Mulder MOVED to report CSHB 101 (FIN) out of
Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
CSHB 101 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with two previously published
fiscal impact note by the Department of Education and Early
Development (#1 and #2).
HOUSE BILL NO. 236
"An Act relating to the contracting and financing
authority of the Alaska Industrial Development and
Export Authority; authorizing the authority to issue
bonds in a principal amount not to exceed $76,000,000
to finance the acquisition, design, construction,
inventory, and operation of natural gas, propane air,
or manufactured gas public utility facilities; and
providing for an effective date."
RANDY RUARO, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS testified in
support of the legislation. He explained that the
legislation would provide the legislative approval necessary
for the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority
(AIDEA) to review the Southeast and Gulf of Alaska gas
project for bond funding, required under AS 44.88.095(g) for
projects over $10 million dollars. Approval does not mean
that the project would be funded as there are other
statutory requirements. There is a zero fiscal note.
Co-Chair Williams noted that it was not his intention to
move the bill from committee at that time.
PAUL RUSANOWSKI, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OPERATIONS, ALASKA
INTRASTATE GAS COMPANY, ANCHORAGE spoke in support of HB
236. He noted that the project would bring utility gas
utility service to Southeast and Gulf of Alaska communities.
The project is based on the production, transportation and
storage of liquid natural gas, liquid petroleum gas and
manufactured gases. The company is approved by the Alaska
Public Utilities Commission in 17 communities and is
involved in long-term operations and maintenance of local
gas distribution systems. They contract with communities to
provide gas supplies and marine transportation. The
communities involved include: 4 in the Gulf of Alaska and 13
in Southeast Alaska. The legislation would allow them to
expand to include five more communities in Southeast Alaska.
Juneau, Ketchikan, Sitka and Kodiak would be the largest
communities served. He projected a residential load of 5
billion cubic feet annually (for all four communities
combined) within 5 years of startup. He estimated that an
additional 3.7 billion cubic feet of commercial and
industrial loads would be available. He stated that there
would be 10 to 12 billion cubic feet annually, about 10
years out in the project.
Mr. Rusanowski provided members with a handout of slides
that were projected during his presentation(copy on file).
He reviewed the slides. He noted that gases move through
pipes to a processing facility and are stored and
transported. They are then re-injected into storage fields
and stored as liquids. Supplies would come from Prince
Rupert, which is the closest point.
Mr. reviewed major components of the project: acquisition of
gas supplies, transportation, storage and distribution. Gas
would come from Northern British Columbia and Southern Yukon
Alberta and Prince Rupert Canada have active gas fields.
Marine transportation involves three different modes: a
barge (1 million gallon capacity), railcar aqua train
(180,000 and 500,000 existing capacity) and existing small
bulk gas carriers (500,000 to 2 million capacity).
Representative Croft questioned what would happen in the
event of a collision or spill of a liquefied gases. Mr.
Rusanowski explained that they would float out on the water
and vaporize. Some would dissolve in the water but most
would be vaporized. There would not be an expulsion. The
double haul is designed to prevent damage to the internal
tanks. It is easier to repair the hull than to repair the
tanks. The purpose is not containment.
Mr. Rusanowski showed slides of existing facilities (copy on
file.) He stressed that the residential and small business
service is their focus. Residential service is expected at
$7.25 dollars per cubic feet and $7.95 dollars monthly
service charge. He compared the proposed rate with other
states. The rate would be about .40 cents above the national
average, but competitive to Northeastern states.
Once gas comes to the communities operations and management
costs would be under the control of the company. Debt
service is 30 percent. Fuel represents 62 percent of the
cost structure and transportation represents 32 percent. He
emphasized that efficiency would impact costs. Wholesale
liquid petroleum prices from Canada during the last 4 years
have ranged from .20 to .40 cents. He estimated their cost
at .25 to .30 cents a gallon.
Representative Croft noted that prices have increased in the
last years. Mr. Rusanowski agreed that prices had gone up,
but explained that the higher prices are not holding. He
explained that natural gas is a single carbon methane
molecular. Liquid petroleum gases are gases at near normal
temperature such as ethane, propane, and butanes. He
explained that liquid petroleum gases are now being put into
the natural gas stream in pipelines throughout North
America. The natural gas stream had been previously returned
to oilfields to maintain pressure or used to create
specialty products such as bottled propane. Propane stores
well and indefinitely. All the gases that go into the
pipeline are indistinguishable at the burner tip. Each one
provides a different amount of energy. Gases are balanced to
provide a stable energy content.
Mr. Rusanowski compared petroleum gases to crude oil. He
noted that their prices are linked. When there are peaks in
crude oil prices, petroleum gases do not follow as sharply.
Mr. Rusanowski referred to community energy surveys. He
noted that the annual energy consumption in Southeast Alaska
is 165 million BTU per year. The average cost of fuel oil in
rural Southeast Alaska was $1.74 dollars per gallon in 1999.
The average annual cost of fuel is $2,700 dollars a year in
small communities.
TAPE HFC 01 - 85, Side B
Mr. Rusanowski discussed savings for rural homeowners. He
estimated that there would be a 15 to 40 percent savings.
Those with the highest electric rates have the best savings.
Representative John Davies questioned what assumptions were
made regarding amortization of infrastructure costs. Mr.
Rusanowski noted that those cost were not included. An
incentive program was built in to allow cost recovery of
those modifications in 5 years or less.
Mr. Rusanowski reviewed a slide that compared the gas and
electric cost to operate a clothes dryer in Anchorage and
their service area (page 7 of handout). He concluded that
the stable pricing structure makes it advantageous to
convert to gas.
Mr. Rusanowski explained that their estimates use a 9-year
build out scenario. He added that they expect the actual
build out to be only 6 to 7 years. He anticipated a bump in
the fourth year as the first three communities come on line
and then steady growth from that point.
Mr. Rusanowski discussed marketing incentives, which would
make it in the interest of the public to convert. Juneau,
Ketchikan and Sitka would be the first communities to
receive services. Klawock and Craig would most likely be the
next two served.
Representative Croft noted that Angoon and Kake have the
lowest percent benefit and questioned why they would be
among the first served. Mr. Rusanowski noted that the
scenario is based on transportation logistics. The plan
takes advantage of the fact that the route would go by these
communities, because of the size they could be engineered
quickly. Savings would be less in these smaller communities
due to the cost for waterfront storage and send out
facilities. The infrastructure is the same in every
community. There is a small population to serve, but a large
volume of gas still needs to be available. There are fewer
people to amortize against.
Mr. Rusanowski noted that there would be 200 or more jobs
created during construction. There would be 15 permanent
full time jobs created in Juneau, another 35 jobs throughout
other areas of Southeast Alaska and 50 or more related
secondary industry jobs.
Mr. Rusanowski observed that there would be an equity
investment of $11.5 million dollars and loans of $45 million
dollars. There would be internally generated revenues of $13
million dollars. Infrastructure costs in the communities
would be $45 million dollars.
Mr. Rusanowski pointed out that HB 239 would provide
legislative approval for a utility project of over $10
million dollars and authorizes a bond limit of $76 million
dollars. There would be a sunset date of July 1, 2006 for
issuance of bonds. This would allow focus on the development
and finance program in AIDEA, which would target
development, ownership and operation of facilities like
road, ports and utilities. These projects would need to be
essential to the economic well being of the area,
financially feasible and supported by local communities. The
project would move into the due diligence and economic
feasibility review with AIDEA when the legislation is
passed.
Representative Whitaker asked if there is a downside to the
project. Mr. Rusanowski did not think there would be a
downside to introducing gas utilities to the communities.
The service would enhance infrastructure and provide
different opportunities. Some employees could be displaced
as the use of fuel oil is decreased but there would be an
increase in gas related jobs. He maintained that communities
would be more attractive for development and acknowledged
that some could view this negatively. Gas provides a clean
fuel source with environmental benefits. He discussed the
benefits, such as a reduction in pollution.
Representative Whitaker concluded that the project would
bring economic growth and opportunity. He questioned the gas
source.
Mr. Rusanowski noted that they have agreements with Amoco
Canada (the largest holder of gas reserves in Canada). He
stressed that Alaskan gas would be used when available and
Cook Inlet gas would be used if additional reserves are
discovered.
Mr. Rusanowski noted that average household consumption is
165 million BTU per year. The American Gas Association
estimates 170 million BTU per year.
Representative Whitaker questioned if the high price of gas
in the market was an anomaly and what factors could lower
the price. Mr. Rusanowski pointed out that gas and oil have
generally been coupled. They were decoupled during the last
excursion in prices. This has only happened one other time
in the past 30 - 40 years. Wholesale gas prices rose from
$2.50 - $3.50 per million BTU's to $13 dollars. The federal
government cost projection is $4.00 dollars by next year.
The current cost is $5.00 dollars per BTU. There has been an
increase in gas exploration.
Representative Whitaker disagreed that there would be a
significant reduction of the value of gas. Supply is still
out stripping demand. The futures market indicates that the
prices will remain high. He expressed support for the
project.
Mr. Rusanowski noted that the competition is with fuel oil
prices. As long as fuel oil prices remain high (they are
currently at $28 dollars) it doesn't matter what gas is.
Representative Lancaster noted that the project was
originally to bring gas from Alaska. Mr. Rusanowski
explained that the Cook Inlet reserves were in question. A
10-year reliable gas source is needed. They were unable to
secure a long-term commitment for gas from Cook Inlet. He
noted the intent to return to Alaskan gas when it is
available.
Representative Lancaster clarified that it is not their
intent to generate power. Mr. Rusanowski noted that they
would need certificates from the Regulatory Commission [in
order to generate power]. They could not sell gas for power
generation without approval.
Representative Lancaster questioned the cost of the
feasibility study. Co-Chair Williams explained that it would
go before AIDEA and that AIDEA would incorporate the cost.
The legislation only puts the project before AIDEA for
consideration. Mr. Rusanowski added that it would be a year
or two out before bonding would take place.
Representative John Davies asked if the AIDEA proposal would
come before the legislature.
KATELYN MARKLEY, ALASKA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND EXPORT
AUTHORITY (AIDEA) testified via teleconference. She
clarified that the once the legislature provides the bond
authorization a due diligence process by AIDEA would have to
be completed. This includes a feasibility study to determine
that the project is advantageous to the state of Alaska.
Sources and uses of funds would then be reviewed. Sufficient
revenues for debt and operation would have to be
demonstrated. The Alaska Industrial Development and Export
Authority would do a risk analysis and market review. They
would also review the credit strength of participants,
demand on public facilities, and adverse affects on
communities. They would also assess job creation and
determine if it is consistent with bonding authorization.
The projects would also have to be approved by the
communities. The project would not come before the
legislature again. Once the feasibility study is completed
the AIDEA board would approve or disapprove the project.
Representative Harris noted that the project would provide
possibilities to reduce rural utility costs. He asked the
process involved to gain approval from the Alaska Regulatory
Commission to sell gas to a utility system.
Mr. Rusanowski stated that it would make sense for some
communities to consider [the use of gas to generate power].
There would have to be a fully operational and functioning
gas utility in the community with an alternative fuel source
readily available for the electric utility. The electric
utility could approached the gas company. The gas utility
would have to assess their reserves to see if there are
sufficient reserves and how it would affect their customers.
The analysis would then be used to approach the Regulatory
Commission with the electric utility to apply for the right
to sell gas for the purpose of generating electricity. If it
is determined to be in the public's interest they would
determine the rate and conditions for sale. It would be
initiated by the electric utility. The Regulatory Commission
could determine that the rate should be higher or lower
depending on cost and the service being provided by the gas
utility. The regulatory prices would determine the
legitimate charges for the service.
HB 236 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
HOUSE BILL NO. 96
"An Act relating to acquisition and development of the
Jesse Lee Home; and providing for an effective date."
Representative Ken Lancaster, Sponsor testified in support
of HB 96. He explained that the legislation would allow the
Department of Natural Resources to look at acquisition of
the Jesse Lee Home. The home was built in Seward in 1925 to
house children. It hasn't been occupied since the 1964
earthquake when it was severely damaged. The Alaska state
flag was designed on the site and American soldiers were
housed there during World War II. It is currently in the
hands of the Kenai Peninsula Borough and is in the process
of being given to the city of Seward. There is a $65
thousand dollar fiscal note for an architectural study and
site assessment. The Jesse Lee Home was later moved to
Anchorage and is still in operation.
Representative John Davies clarified that the funds would go
toward the study. He questioned if the city of Seward would
donate the building. Representative Lancaster explained that
the Department of Natural Resources would be expected to
"make those assumptions". The city of Seward would be
willing to donate the property or it could be retained by
the city if the Department of Natural Resources wanted to
manage the property or help fix the building.
In response to a question by Representative Croft,
Representative Lancaster explained that the facility was
moved to Anchorage in the early 1960's after the earthquake.
Representative Harris referred to the fiscal note and
pointed out that an existing historic preservation grant
program would cover half of the cost.
JIM STRATTON, DIRECTOR, PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECREATION,
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES testified via
teleconference. He explained that the grant requires a 50
percent match. This is half of the consultant's costs. This
would be matched with $35 thousand dollars in federal funds.
Representative Moses clarified that Unalaska was the first
site of the home.
Representative John Davies noted that $70 thousand dollars
would be spent on the architectural consultant. Mr. Stratton
observed that the federal funds are authorized in the
current operating budget through a historical grant program.
JIM MALEY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, JESSE LEE HOME, SEWARD
testified via teleconference in support of the legislation.
The program is currently known as Alaska Children's
Services, which is the oldest and largest childcare
institution in Alaska. The original home was built as an
orphanage in Unalaska in 1890. It was moved to Seward in
1925. He noted its historic value. He emphasized the home's
service to Alaskan children.
TIM SCZAWINSKI, SEWARD, testified via teleconference. He
suggested that the move of the Jesse Lee Home was not a
result of the earthquake damage as much as Alaska's move
toward foster homes. He stressed the community's interest
and involvement in maintaining this historical site. The
City Council appropriated $50 thousand dollars to clear the
adjacent land to make the site more presentable and protect
against further damage.
Representative John Davies MOVED to report HB 96 out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CSHB 96 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with previously published fiscal impact
note (1) by the House Education and Social Services.
CSHB 96 (FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with previously published fiscal impact
note (1) by the House Education and Social Services.
TAPE HFC 01 - 86, Side A
HOUSE BILL NO. 40
"An Act providing for the revocation of driving
privileges by a court for a driver convicted of a
violation of traffic laws in connection with a fatal
motor vehicle or commercial motor vehicle accident;
amending Rules 43 and 43.1, Alaska Rules of
Administration; and providing for an effective date."
DEAN GUANELI, CHIEF ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT
OF LAW, explained that the legislation would revoke licenses
of those that violate a traffic law or regulation of the
state, which results in a death. Licenses would be revoked
for a year. He noted that there are a number of fatal
accidents on Alaskan highways. He observed that the criminal
penalty does not cover accidents where a traffic law or
regulation was violated such as running a stop light,
falling asleep at the wheel, crossing the center line, or
going off the road. Currently, the only penalty is a $300
dollar fine in the form of a traffic ticket. Victims'
families question how someone who caused a death can be
allowed to continue driving. He noted that, on page 2: if a
person is convicted of a violation of a traffic law and the
court finds that the person was operating a motor vehicle
and the driver's violation of a traffic law contributed to
an accident that caused the death of another person then
their license would be revoked for one year. He recounted
testimony and observed the affect on families.
Mr. Guaneli stressed that the question is, "should the state
of Alaska recognize that the poor judgment that is
exercised, whether you run a red light or whether you fall
asleep at the wheel, whether that justifies revoking the
license". He maintained that the answer to the question is
"yes". The legislation provides license revocation for one
year and also provides for a limited driver's license. The
court can grant a limited license to drive for purpose of
work or drive for purposes of providing care for someone who
is in need of the [driver's] physical care. There is
adequate protection to prevent loss of employment. He
asserted that it is time to recognize that there are a wide
variety of circumstances that reflect poor judgment, poor
driving and as a result, license action should be taken.
Vice-Chair Bunde asked if it would be a presumptive sentence
or mandatory minimum sentence. Mr. Guaneli stated that it
would be and noted that the Court would need to make certain
findings that the conduct contributed to the death. If there
were another license revocation (if the conduct put the
driver's points over the limit), the revocation would run
concurrently. It would guarantee that the sentence would be
at least one year.
In response to Vice-Chair Bunde, Mr. Guaneli discussed
presumptive sentencing. He pointed out that the
Administration is advocating for an appropriate sanction
were none exists.
st
Representative Lancaster asked why there is a September 1
effective date. Mr. Guaneli did not know the rationale for
the effective date.
Representative Harris felt that the legislation was
"unsettling". He observed that the penalty for the
identical conduct is changed depending on the outcome. Mr.
Guaneli pointed out that the law looks at the circumstances
and what results from the conduct in addressing sanctions.
Representative Croft noted that the legislation represents
"almost a strict liability consequence of a violation that
is proven". He questioned the lack of a mental state.
Mr. Guaneli noted that the state does not have to prove
intent for most violations of traffic laws. Mental states
that are generally associated with criminal law do not
applied to traffic violations. If the state could prove
criminal negligence then the current criminal negligence law
would pertain. The legislation would apply to a small set of
cases, perhaps a half a dozen cases a year that do not fall
under other criminal law. If the driver simply acts
carelessly, the only action would be a civil lawsuit. The
state could do nothing more than issue a traffic ticket.
In response to a question by Representative John Davies, Mr.
Guaneli clarified that the preponderance of evidence
standard is the usual legal standard applied in civil cases
involving negligence involving torts or contracts. The
penalty is in essence a civil penalty or administrative
action imposed by the court. The preponderance of evidence
standard would be the appropriate standard.
Representative John Davies observed that it is a relatively
low standard. He concluded that the action is between civil
and criminal. He questioned if it is appropriate to maintain
a civil standard when the case would be in between.
Mr. Guaneli explained that in most cases the court would
have found clear and convincing evidence and would be able
to make the [clear and convincing evidence] standard. He did
not think it [the change to clear and convincing evidence]
would make a practical difference.
Representative Davies expressed further concern with the use
of "contributed" on line 7, page 2: the violation of traffic
laws by the person contributed to the accident. He observed
that the person who was killed could also have done
something that "contributed" to the accident. Mr. Guaneli
noted that the [conduct of the person killed] does not
directly enter into the case. The court would discern
whether the violation of the traffic law contributed to the
accident and other negligence by another party is not the
court's concern. He argued in support of the language
contained in the legislation. Representative Davies pointed
out that the accident must "cause" the death. He expressed
further concern with the fact that there may be different
levels of contribution to the accident and questioned if
"contributed" should be changed to "caused". Mr. Guaneli
stated that he did not object to "substantially contributed"
to the accident. The legal system has a variety of terms
that it uses to weigh levels of culpability. All of these
concepts are taken into consideration. He explained that the
intent is not to turn these cases into large involved civil
lawsuits. The legislation is designed to be a simple
decision by a magistrate that the violation contributed to
the accident. It is not designed to be used in later civil
litigation. The legislation provides that the decision by
the judge is not to be used in other litigation.
Representative Davies gave an example of an accident: a
person at a stop sign has their car stall when they go into
the intersection. Another person comes over a hill, where
there is reduced sight and hits the stalled car. The stalled
car would be guilty of a traffic violation. The person that
came over the hill was speeding. He questioned if the driver
of the stalled car would lose their license if the driver of
the speeding car were killed. Mr. Guaneli was not sure. He
stated that if the violation were not a moving violation the
law would not apply.
HB 40 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 3:40 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|