Legislature(2005 - 2006)CAPITOL 120

03/02/2005 01:00 PM JUDICIARY


Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
*+ HB 155 USE CRIMINAL FINES FOR YOUTH COURTS TELECONFERENCED
Moved CSHB 155(JUD) Out of Committee
+= HB 132 CRIMES AGAINST ELDERLY TELECONFERENCED
Moved CSHB 132(JUD) Out of Committee
+= HB 107 ATTY FEES: HUNTING/FISHING INTERFERENCE TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
*+ HB 131 ACCESS DEVICE & I.D. DOCUMENT CRIMES TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled
                    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
               HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                             
                         March 2, 2005                                                                                          
                           1:11 p.m.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Representative Lesil McGuire, Chair                                                                                             
Representative Tom Anderson                                                                                                     
Representative John Coghill                                                                                                     
Representative Nancy Dahlstrom                                                                                                  
Representative Pete Kott                                                                                                        
Representative Les Gara                                                                                                         
Representative Max Gruenberg                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
All members present                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 155                                                                                                              
"An Act  relating to youth courts  and to the recommended  use of                                                               
criminal  fines  to fund  the  activities  of youth  courts;  and                                                               
relating to accounting for criminal fines."                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED CSHB 155(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 132                                                                                                              
"An  Act  relating to  sentencing  for  certain crimes  committed                                                               
against the elderly; and providing for an effective date."                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED CSHB 132(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 107                                                                                                              
"An Act providing for the award  of full actual attorney fees and                                                               
costs to a person aggrieved  by unlawful obstruction or hindrance                                                               
of hunting, fishing,  or viewing of fish or  game; amending Rules                                                               
79 and  82, Alaska  Rules of Civil  Procedure; and  amending Rule                                                               
508, Alaska Rules of Appellate Procedure."                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD AND HELD                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 131                                                                                                              
"An Act  increasing the  criminal classification  of theft  of an                                                               
access   device   and   of  obtaining   an   access   device   or                                                               
identification  documents  by  fraudulent means;  increasing  the                                                               
criminal classification for certain cases of fraudulent use of                                                                  
an access device; and providing for an effective date."                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD AND HELD                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 155                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: USE CRIMINAL FINES FOR YOUTH COURTS                                                                                
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) SAMUELS                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
02/16/05       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/16/05       (H)       JUD, FIN                                                                                               
03/02/05       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 132                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: CRIMES AGAINST ELDERLY                                                                                             
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) STOLTZE                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
02/09/05       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/09/05       (H)       JUD, FIN                                                                                               
02/23/05       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
02/23/05       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/23/05       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
03/02/05       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 107                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: ATTY FEES: HUNTING/FISHING INTERFERENCE                                                                            
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) RAMRAS                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
01/24/05       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
01/24/05       (H)       RES, JUD                                                                                               
02/02/05       (H)       RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                                                                             
02/02/05       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/02/05       (H)       MINUTE(RES)                                                                                            
02/09/05       (H)       RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                                                                             
02/09/05       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/09/05       (H)       MINUTE(RES)                                                                                            
02/16/05       (H)       RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                                                                             
02/16/05       (H)       Moved CSHB 107(RES) Out of Committee                                                                   
02/16/05       (H)       MINUTE(RES)                                                                                            
02/18/05       (H)       RES RPT CS NT  3DP 1DNP 4NR                                                                            
02/18/05       (H)       DP: OLSON, ELKINS, RAMRAS;                                                                             
02/18/05       (H)       DNP: SEATON;                                                                                           
02/18/05       (H)       NR: GATTO, LEDOUX, CRAWFORD, KAPSNER                                                                   
02/18/05       (H)       FIN REFERRAL ADDED AFTER JUD                                                                           
03/02/05       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 131                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: ACCESS DEVICE & I.D. DOCUMENT CRIMES                                                                               
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) STOLTZE                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
02/09/05       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/09/05       (H)       JUD, FIN                                                                                               
02/23/05       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
02/23/05       (H)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
03/02/05       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
SARA NIELSEN, Staff                                                                                                             
to Representative Ralph Samuels                                                                                                 
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented HB 155 on behalf of the sponsor,                                                                 
Representative Samuels.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
DOUG WOOLIVER, Administrative Attorney                                                                                          
Administrative Staff                                                                                                            
Office of the Administrative Director                                                                                           
Alaska Court System (ACS)                                                                                                       
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  During discussion of HB 155, provided                                                                      
comments on a proposed CS.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
JONATHON LACK, Member                                                                                                           
Board of Directors                                                                                                              
Anchorage Youth Court (AYC)                                                                                                     
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided comments during discussion of HB                                                                  
155, encouraged its passage, and relayed the support of Sharon                                                                  
Leon and Joseph Ehrheart for HB 155.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
WHITNEY CUSHING                                                                                                                 
Homer, Alaska                                                                                                                   
POSITION STATEMENT:  During discussion of HB 155, provided                                                                      
comments on behalf of himself, Katie Gavenus, and Ginny                                                                         
Espenshade.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MARK WARTES, Chair                                                                                                              
Board of Directors                                                                                                              
North Star Youth Court                                                                                                          
Fairbanks, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:   Provided comments  during discussion  of HB                                                               
155 and said he looks for the legislature's support.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MELISSA McCUMBY, Program Director                                                                                               
Valdez Youth Court                                                                                                              
Valdez, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:   Provided comments  during discussion  of HB                                                               
155.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
PATTY WARE, Director                                                                                                            
Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ)                                                                                              
Department of Health & Social Services (DHSS)                                                                                   
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:    During discussion  of  HB  155,  provided                                                               
comments, suggested  a change to  the proposed CS,  and responded                                                               
to questions.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
BEN MULLIGAN, Staff                                                                                                             
to Representative Bill Stoltze                                                                                                  
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
POSITION  STATEMENT:   Presented  a  proposed CS  for  HB 132  on                                                               
behalf of  the sponsor, Representative Stoltze;  presented HB 131                                                               
on behalf of the sponsor, Representative Stoltze.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
RANDY RUARO, Assistant Attorney General                                                                                         
Legislation & Regulations Section                                                                                               
Office of the Attorney General                                                                                                  
Department of Law (DOL)                                                                                                         
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:    Assisted   with  the  presentation  of  a                                                               
proposed CS for  HB 132; responded to  comments during discussion                                                               
of HB 131.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
JIM POUND, Staff                                                                                                                
to Representative Jay Ramras                                                                                                    
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:   Presented HB 107 on behalf  of the sponsor,                                                               
Representative Ramras.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
SAM TRIVETTE, AARP;                                                                                                             
President                                                                                                                       
Retired Public Employees of Alaska (RPEA)                                                                                       
Alaska   Public   Employees  Association/Alaska   Federation   of                                                               
Teachers (APEA/AFT)                                                                                                             
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 131 on behalf of                                                                
the AARP.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MICHELLE LOGAN, Detective                                                                                                       
Anchorage Police Department (APD)                                                                                               
Municipality of Anchorage (MOA)                                                                                                 
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 131.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
JAY FOLEY, Co-Executive Director                                                                                                
Identity Theft Resource Center (ITRC)                                                                                           
San Diego, California                                                                                                           
POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided comments and responded to                                                                         
questions during discussion of HB 131.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
STEVE CLEARY, Executive Director                                                                                                
Alaska Public Interest Research Group (AkPIRG)                                                                                  
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided comments during discussion of HB                                                                  
131.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
LINDA WILSON, Deputy Director                                                                                                   
Central Office                                                                                                                  
Public Defender Agency (PDA)                                                                                                    
Department of Administration (DOA)                                                                                              
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  During discussion of HB 131, provided                                                                      
comments, mentioned concerns, and responded to a question.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General                                                                                      
Legal Services Section-Juneau                                                                                                   
Criminal Division                                                                                                               
Department of Law (DOL)                                                                                                         
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  During discussion of HB 131, responded to                                                                  
comments and questions.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
JOHN B. SKIDMORE, Assistant District Attorney                                                                                   
Third Judicial District (Anchorage)                                                                                             
Department of Law (DOL)                                                                                                         
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  During discussion of HB 131, addressed                                                                     
concerns and responded to questions.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LESIL   McGUIRE  called   the  House   Judiciary  Standing                                                             
Committee  meeting  to  order at  1:11:35  PM.    Representatives                                                             
McGuire, Anderson,  Dahlstrom, and Gruenberg were  present at the                                                               
call to order.   Representatives Coghill, Kott,  and Gara arrived                                                               
as the meeting was in progress.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
HB 155 - USE CRIMINAL FINES FOR YOUTH COURTS                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
1:12:16 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  announced that the  first order of  business would                                                               
be HOUSE  BILL NO. 155, "An  Act relating to youth  courts and to                                                               
the recommended use  of criminal fines to fund  the activities of                                                               
youth courts; and relating to accounting for criminal fines."                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
SARA  NIELSEN,  Staff  to Representative  Ralph  Samuels,  Alaska                                                               
State Legislature, sponsor, on  behalf of Representative Samuels,                                                               
characterized HB 155 as simply  an accounting bill that gives the                                                               
legislature the authority  to appropriate to the  youth courts up                                                               
to 25 percent  of the fines collected by the  Alaska Court System                                                               
(ACS).    Youth  courts  comprise  a  program  that  helps  young                                                               
offenders by intervening  early to set them on  the "right track"                                                               
and  works to  deter them  from  becoming adult  offenders.   The                                                               
Anchorage Youth Court  (AYC) is the oldest in Alaska,  and in the                                                               
first two quarters of the  current fiscal year (FY), youth courts                                                               
dealt  with  471 youth  offender  referrals,  resulting in  8,833                                                               
hours of community [work] service  (CWS) being ordered.  Although                                                               
HB  155 allows  the legislature  to appropriate  monies to  youth                                                               
courts, it does not mandate it.   She noted that members' packets                                                               
include a proposed committee substitute  (CS) for HB 155, Version                                                               
24-LS0614\G,  Bullock,  2/28/05,  that  is  intended  to  address                                                               
concerns expressed by the ACS.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
1:13:48 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON  moved to  adopt the  proposed CS  for HB                                                               
155, Version 24-LS0614\G, Bullock, 2/28/05, as the work draft.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG objected for  the purpose of discussion.                                                               
He asked for a description of  the differences between HB 155 and                                                               
Version G.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MS. NIELSEN  relayed that the differences  pertain to estimations                                                               
regarding the collection of fines.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  noted  that  Version  G  includes  new                                                               
Sections 3 and 4.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  mentioned that members' packets  include an e-mail                                                               
from the  ACS that  provides a more  in-depth explanation  of why                                                               
the changes offered in the CS are necessary.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
1:14:30 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
DOUG  WOOLIVER,  Administrative Attorney,  Administrative  Staff,                                                               
Office  of  the  Administrative  Director,  Alaska  Court  System                                                               
(ACS),  said  that the  CS  addresses  the  fact that  the  ACS's                                                               
computer accounting  system cannot  yet, in all  locations, break                                                               
out fines  from forfeitures.  The  CS will allow the  ACS to give                                                               
the legislature a  yearly estimate of fines rather  than an exact                                                               
amount; he noted that such is already done regarding surcharges.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG withdrew his objection.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE announced that Version G was before the committee.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR. WOOLIVER remarked  that as a general matter, the  ACS is very                                                               
supportive  of   youth  courts,  considering  them   to  be  very                                                               
worthwhile on a number of levels.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
1:16:46 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
JONATHON LACK, Member, Board of  Directors, Anchorage Youth Court                                                               
(AYC),  after  mentioning that  he  also  serves on  the  [Alaska                                                               
Juvenile  Justice Advisory  Committee (AJJAC)],  said that  youth                                                               
courts  throughout the  state are  remarkable in  producing young                                                               
people who  are involved in the  program and in training  them to                                                               
take an  active role  in the  community.   Youth courts  excel at                                                               
punishing  first time  juvenile offenders  severely and  far more                                                               
quickly than the  regular juvenile justice system (JJS).   He too                                                               
characterized  HB 155  as  an accounting  bill,  and offered  his                                                               
belief  that  the  fiscal  note from  the  Division  of  Juvenile                                                               
Justice  (DJJ)  reflects  an  amount   anticipated  only  if  the                                                               
legislature  does  appropriate  funds  as allowed  by  the  bill.                                                               
House Bill 155 will give  youth courts some reassurance that they                                                               
will  be  funded every  year  and  that the  current  legislature                                                               
understands  the  importance  of  youth courts.    He  encouraged                                                               
passage of the bill and co-sponsorship of it.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
1:19:17 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  LACK   relayed  that  Sharon  Leon   -  Executive  Director,                                                               
Anchorage Youth Court (AYC) -  and Joseph Ehrheart - United Youth                                                               
Courts  of Alaska  (UYCA)  - have  indicated  agreement with  his                                                               
comments and support the bill.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
1:20:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
WHITNEY CUSHING -  speaking on behalf of  himself, Katie Gavenus,                                                               
and  Ginny Espenshade  -  relayed  that he  is  the past  student                                                               
president  of  the United  Youth  Courts  of Alaska  (UYCA),  and                                                               
opined  that  no  other  group   can  be  found  with  a  greater                                                               
commitment to  community and volunteerism.   During his  terms on                                                               
the  UYCA, he  said  he  found that  the  students and  directors                                                               
involved in the  UYCA have an unmatched frugality  and resolve to                                                               
carry out  justice.  He  opined that  the youth courts  of Alaska                                                               
have filled  in an integral  part of  the court system,  and have                                                               
saved the state money through  profound ways, such as by reducing                                                               
the number of juveniles that  go through regular juvenile courts,                                                               
and by addressing  recidivism rates.  He offered  his belief that                                                               
the  chances are  great that  a  juvenile going  through a  youth                                                               
court will never show up in  any of Alaska's other court systems.                                                               
Even in times  of economic downturns, he said, he  believes it is                                                               
necessary  to  invest   in  [youth]  courts.     He  thanked  the                                                               
legislature for recognizing  youth courts as an  integral part of                                                               
Alaska's  justice   process,  and  concluded  by   saying,  "Over                                                               
thousands and  thousands of hours  are employed by  youth courts;                                                               
youth   court  is   basically   justice   structured  to   employ                                                               
volunteerism."                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
1:22:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MARK WARTES, Chair,  Board of Directors, North  Star Youth Court,                                                               
said  he agrees  with  all  of the  comments  from Anchorage  and                                                               
[Homer], and relayed that the  board unanimously supports HB 155.                                                               
He mentioned  that he has served  on at least "three  major youth                                                               
boards  here in  the Fairbanks  area," and  the North  Star Youth                                                               
Court  is  the only  organization  in  which youths  serve  their                                                               
communities.   It  is  an  exciting program  to  be  part of,  he                                                               
remarked, adding that he looks for the legislature's support.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
1:23:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MELISSA McCUMBY,  Program Director,  Valdez Youth  Court, relayed                                                               
that  the  DJJ's  juvenile  probation  officer  handles  Cordova,                                                               
Glennallen, and Valdez  and so any relief the  Valdez Youth Court                                                               
is able  to provide is greatly  appreciated.  She noted  that the                                                               
juvenile probation  officer handled  41 referrals, 36  percent of                                                               
which  Valdez  Youth  Court  was  able  to  address.    She  also                                                               
mentioned  that the  Valdez Youth  Court  handles city  ordinance                                                               
violations, such  as minors in  possession of alcohol  or tobacco                                                               
and  curfew violations.   To  date,  the Valdez  Youth Court  has                                                               
imposed 187  hours of CWS  and collected $377 of  restitution for                                                               
victims.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:25:07 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
PATTY  WARE,  Director,  Division   of  Juvenile  Justice  (DJJ),                                                               
Department  of Health  & Social  Services (DHSS),  said that  the                                                               
DHSS  and the  DJJ are  very strong  supporters of  youth courts.                                                               
She  mentioned that  statewide  in  FY 04,  in  terms of  holding                                                               
youths accountable through  the use of their  peers, youth courts                                                               
handled 10  percent of  the DJJ's  volume.   Characterizing youth                                                               
courts as  an excellent  program, she said  that Alaska  has long                                                               
been  a leader  [in this  venue].   She suggested,  however, that                                                               
Section 2 of  Version G, lines 11-12, be altered  by deleting the                                                               
reference to the United Youth  Courts of Alaska, and relayed that                                                               
this  suggested change  was engendered  by a  request from  youth                                                               
courts that  the DHSS, rather  than the UYCA, be  responsible for                                                               
the distribution of the funds authorized by the bill.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked whether  such a change would incur                                                               
any indirect costs.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
1:28:09 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. WARE  mentioned that although  the DJJ has submitted  a small                                                               
fiscal  note,  the  estimated  costs   are  contingent  upon  the                                                               
legislature  actually  appropriating  monies as  allowed  by  the                                                               
bill, and  would fund a  half time program  coordinator position.                                                               
She characterized  this fiscal note  as small given the  level of                                                               
programming  and  technical assistance  it  would  support.   She                                                               
opined that  were youth  courts to be  asked, they  would express                                                               
appreciation of the DJJ's interaction with them.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  asked how  many  youth  courts are  in                                                               
Alaska.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MS. WARE said that 14 youth  courts are operating currently and 5                                                               
are in various stages of development.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG asked  whether the  aforementioned half                                                               
time position is really necessary.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS. WARE  replied, "We based  that figure on an  additional 34-40                                                               
youth courts, based  on a figure of about $900,000,  based on the                                                               
amount  of money  that would  have  been taken  from the  [ACS's]                                                               
fines  collected."    In  response   to  further  questions,  she                                                               
indicated  that the  fiscal note  addresses future  fiscal years,                                                               
but   not  the   current   fiscal  year   because  the   existing                                                               
infrastructure  is  sufficient  to  manage the  14  youth  courts                                                               
already in existence as well as the 5 under development.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:30:53 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  suggested possibly narrowing  the title                                                               
if additional issues aren't going to be addressed by the bill.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MS. WARE  indicated she  is not  aware of  any other  issues that                                                               
could be addressed by the bill.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
1:32:23 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made  a motion to adopt  Amendment 1, to                                                               
delete from  page 1,  lines 11-12:   ", or  (2) the  United Youth                                                               
Courts of  Alaska".   There being no  objection, Amendment  2 was                                                               
adopted.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:33:03 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  made  a  motion  to  adopt  Conceptual                                                               
Amendment 2,  to narrow the  title "so  it just covers  what's in                                                               
the bill."                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  asked  whether   there  were  any  objections  to                                                               
Conceptual Amendment 2  "and title resolution to  follow."  There                                                               
being none, Conceptual Amendment 2 was adopted.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
1:34:00 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON  moved to report  the proposed CS  for HB                                                               
155, Version  24-LS0614\G, Bullock,  2/28/05, as amended,  out of                                                               
committee  with individual  recommendations and  the accompanying                                                               
fiscal  notes.   There  being  no  objection, CSHB  155(JUD)  was                                                               
reported from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
HB 132 - CRIMES AGAINST ELDERLY                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
1:34:35 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE announced that the  next order of business would be                                                               
HOUSE BILL  NO. 132, "An  Act relating to sentencing  for certain                                                               
crimes  committed  against  the  elderly; and  providing  for  an                                                               
effective date."                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
BEN MULLIGAN, Staff to Representative  Bill Stoltze, Alaska State                                                               
Legislature,  sponsor,   relayed  on  behalf   of  Representative                                                               
Stoltze  that  he  and the  sponsor  considered  the  committee's                                                               
suggestions and created a proposed  committee substitute (CS) for                                                               
HB 132, Version 24-LS0421\G, Luckhaupt, 3/1/05.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
RANDY   RUARO,   Assistant   Attorney  General,   Legislation   &                                                               
Regulations Section,  Office of the Attorney  General, Department                                                               
of Law  (DOL), said that  because of members'  concerns regarding                                                               
possible issues related  to the U.S. Supreme  Court case, Blakely                                                             
v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 2531  (U.S., 2004), Version G no longer                                                             
references sentencing; now provides  that the proposed changes to                                                               
penalties  for crimes  against  the elderly  will  be located  in                                                               
Title 11;  contains language clarifying  [what the  mental intent                                                               
of the perpetrator must be in order  for Section 2 of the bill to                                                               
apply] -  he mentioned that  the intent  is for the  defendant to                                                               
get  notice of  the possible  enhanced penalty  via the  charging                                                               
documents,  thus  alleviating  any  "Blakely  problems";  and  no                                                             
longer  contains  the  language  that  was  formerly  located  in                                                               
subsection  (b)(6)  of  the   original  version  that  referenced                                                               
criminal mischief  crimes -  that language  has been  deleted and                                                               
the remaining paragraphs have been renumbered.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
1:37:15 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA  said the  changes in  Version G  satisfy his                                                               
concerns, and relayed  that after further review,  he now concurs                                                               
with Mr. Ruaro's interpretation of the bill.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE offered her understanding  that she'd closed public                                                               
testimony at the bill's last hearing.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  asked  Mr.   Ruaro  to  clarify  which                                                               
language has been deleted from Version G.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR. RUARO said  it was the language referring  to property crimes                                                               
such as using a key to damage the paint job on a car.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
1:39:34 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM moved  to report the proposed  CS for HB                                                               
132,  Version 24-LS0421\G,  Luckhaupt, 3/1/05,  out of  committee                                                               
with  individual  recommendations  and  the  accompanying  fiscal                                                               
notes.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  pointed out that  Version G  had to be  adopted as                                                               
work draft first.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM  moved to adopt  the proposed CS  for HB                                                               
132, Version  24-LS0421\G, Luckhaupt, 3/1/05, as  the work draft.                                                               
There being no objection, Version G was before the committee.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM  again moved  to report the  proposed CS                                                               
for  HB  132,  Version  24-LS0421\G, Luckhaupt,  3/1/05,  out  of                                                               
committee  with individual  recommendations and  the accompanying                                                               
fiscal  notes.   There  being  no  objection, CSHB  132(JUD)  was                                                               
reported from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
HB 107 - ATTY FEES: HUNTING/FISHING INTERFERENCE                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
1:40:26 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE announced that the  next order of business would be                                                               
HOUSE  BILL NO.  107, "An  Act providing  for the  award of  full                                                               
actual attorney fees and costs  to a person aggrieved by unlawful                                                               
obstruction or hindrance of hunting,  fishing, or viewing of fish                                                               
or  game;  amending  Rules  79  and 82,  Alaska  Rules  of  Civil                                                               
Procedure;  and  amending Rule  508,  Alaska  Rules of  Appellate                                                               
Procedure."  [Before the committee was CSHB 107(RES).]                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
JIM  POUND,  Staff to  Representative  Jay  Ramras, Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature,   sponsor,   presented   HB   107   on   behalf   of                                                               
Representative Ramras.  He said:                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     [House Bill 107] is based  on language, in part written                                                                    
     years   ago,  about   a   growing   concern  that   the                                                                    
     legislature had  of individuals and  groups obstructing                                                                    
     hunting, trapping,  and even  wildlife viewing  in this                                                                    
     state.   When an  obstruction takes place,  there often                                                                    
     is  a criminal  charge  filed  against the  individual.                                                                    
     [He/she]  can also  be sued  by  the aggrieved  person;                                                                    
     juries  have awarded  as much  as $200,000  in some  of                                                                    
     these cases.  But under  the current system and current                                                                    
     statute,  reasonable attorney  fees and  costs are  not                                                                    
     awarded.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     This  has  a  chilling   effect,  as  those  costs  are                                                                    
     directly passed  onto the  plaintiff in  the case.   An                                                                    
     individual has  to consider, before  they go  to court,                                                                    
     how  much it's  going to  cost to  pursue a  civil case                                                                    
     even if  they prevail;  HB 107  corrects this  error in                                                                    
     the law.   It allows the court  to authorize reasonable                                                                    
     and actual  attorney fees and  costs to  the prevailing                                                                    
     party.   It sends  a clear message  to those  who would                                                                    
     attempt to  prevent people from enjoying  their outdoor                                                                    
     activities.  It also  tells Alaska's hunters, trappers,                                                                    
     and  wildlife viewers  that we  support  them in  their                                                                    
     activities.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR. POUND,  in conclusion,  urged the  committee's support  of HB                                                               
107.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE reminded members that  CSHB 107(RES) was before the                                                               
committee.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
1:42:25 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA raised the  issue of unintended consequences.                                                               
Using the example  of those who fish in combat  fishing areas, he                                                               
indicated that he wouldn't want to  see a lot of lawsuits "coming                                                               
out of a weekend at the Russian River."                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MR. POUND offered his understanding  that the language on page 2,                                                               
line 8,  should address  that concern  because it  specifies that                                                               
"lawful competitive practices" are exempted from the bill.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA  argued that he  still has a  concern because                                                               
some things that occur are  not necessarily part of a competitive                                                               
process; instead,  they occur because  somebody is "just  being a                                                               
jerk  - they're  not trying  to  compete with  you, they're  just                                                               
cluelessly walking  over your line  or something like that."   He                                                               
said he  would like to see  this issue addressed before  the bill                                                               
gets to  the house floor.   He noted that trout  fisherman try to                                                               
keep a  low profile - they  try not to splash  through the water,                                                               
they crouch a little  bit so as not to scare the  fish away - and                                                               
so  according to  the  wording of  the bill,  a  person would  be                                                               
interfering with a trout fisherman  if he/she were walking around                                                               
splashing through the  water.  Does the language in  the bill now                                                               
say that  anybody who gets  hypersensitive about  "stream ethics"                                                               
can sue for full attorney fees?                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR.  POUND   opined,  "The  fact   that  we're  dealing   with  a                                                               
'prevailing  party'  clause  ... would  eliminate  the  frivolous                                                               
lawsuits of that nature."  He  mentioned that much of the wording                                                               
in the bill  is part of current statute and  that HB 107 proposes                                                               
to  add  the aforementioned  clause  [to  AS 16.05.791(b)].    He                                                               
offered his  belief that  this would not  increase the  number of                                                               
lawsuits, and  that the prevailing party  [clause] was originally                                                               
designed to address concerns pertaining to commercial fishing.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA,  in response  to a question,  clarified that                                                               
the language which causes him concern  is located in Section 1 of                                                               
the  bill.     That  language   is  part  of  existing   law,  AS                                                               
16.05.790(a), and says in part:                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
       a person may not intentionally obstruct or hinder                                                                        
     another person's lawful hunting, fishing, trapping, or                                                                     
     viewing of fish or game by                                                                                                 
         (1)  placing one's self in a location in which                                                                         
     human presence may alter the                                                                                               
             (A)  behavior of the fish or game that                                                                             
     another person is attempting to take or view                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA  remarked  that   scaring  fish  away  could                                                               
qualify  as behavior  addressed in  the aforementioned  paragraph                                                               
(1)(A);   this,   along  with   the   proposed   changes  to   AS                                                               
16.05.791(b), would  make it financially  rewarding for  a person                                                               
to sue someone for scaring fish  away because the person would be                                                               
able to get back  all of his/her attorney fees.   "It seems to me                                                               
that an unintended  consequence would be to  make annoyances that                                                               
people normally deal with now  ... profitable to complain about,"                                                               
he added.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
1:48:43 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  POUND  offered instead  that  the  plaintiff will  still  be                                                               
losing time and  various other things and thus would  not find it                                                               
worthwhile to pursue such a case.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE acknowledged  Representative  Gara's concern,  and                                                               
suggested that the dialog on this issue continue.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA remarked that  regardless of whether a person                                                               
would  find it  worthwhile to  pursue  a lawsuit,  the bill  does                                                               
allow a person to get back  full attorney fees if he/she brings a                                                               
lawsuit  because someone  scared his/her  fish away.   "Fishermen                                                               
are pretty  serious about what they  do, and I can  tell you that                                                               
people ...,  when they deal  with ...  bad behavior at  a fishing                                                               
stream,  it ruins  their day,  and they  would sue  somebody over                                                               
it," he predicted.   He asked that the  sponsor consider changing                                                               
the bill  so that  it allows  for the recovery  of 80  percent of                                                               
attorney fees.  Such a  change, he opined, would still accomplish                                                               
most of  the bill's  goals, to punish  someone for  bad behavior,                                                               
without making  it lucrative enough  for someone who's had  a bad                                                               
day [fishing] to go out and file a lawsuit.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. POUND said  [the sponsor] wouldn't have an  objection to such                                                               
a  change.    He  pointed  out, however,  that  the  language  in                                                               
Sections 3  and 4 has  become a more  important part of  the bill                                                               
because  the state  has actually  lost money  by not  having that                                                               
language in statute; such language  would have eliminated some of                                                               
the lawsuits  that Alaska State Troopers  and wildlife protection                                                               
officers have been faced with.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked what the motivation for the bill is.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR.  POUND   said  that  most   of  the  motivation   stems  from                                                               
circumstances involving  trapping [and  hunting]:  trap  lines up                                                               
in  the  Interior  have  been  cut,  injured  animals  have  been                                                               
released from traps, and people have  come between a hunter and a                                                               
moose or caribou in order to keep the hunter from shooting it.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
1:52:04 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL  surmised that  the increase  in multi-use                                                               
activities on  trails has created tension  between different user                                                               
groups.   For example,  some of the  activities now  occurring on                                                               
trapping trails can spring traps,  and some of the activities now                                                               
occurring on ski  trails can damage snow machines.   He mentioned                                                               
he has a  concern regarding how to quantify  or define physically                                                               
interfering or tampering with a  person's viewing experience, for                                                               
example.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE suggested  that the committee ought  to ensure that                                                               
the  behavior  to  which  the   bill  can  apply  is  intentional                                                               
behavior,  and  although  the bill  does  specify  "intentionally                                                               
obstruct  or  hinder",  it  goes  on to  also  specify  what  the                                                               
behavior actually  is; she  noted that this  language is  part of                                                               
existing law, and that in order  for the bill to apply, the state                                                               
will have to prove that someone did something intentionally.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  COGHILL noted  that  some  people might  consider                                                               
viewing trees more  pleasurable than viewing the  skyline, and so                                                               
if one  brushes a  trail, that could  "mess up  somebody's view."                                                               
He  offered  an  example  wherein   a  person  building  a  house                                                               
obstructed  the view  that  another  person had  paid  for -  the                                                               
courts required  the person  obstructing the  view to  remove the                                                               
top story of his  house.  "As we get into  more and more multiple                                                               
uses  in Alaska,  we better  be really  clear [about]  what we're                                                               
talking about," he concluded.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
1:56:10 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG mentioned  that his  wife is  active in                                                               
creating dog parks, and he has  concern that the creation of such                                                               
could run  afoul of HB 107  as currently written even  if that is                                                               
not the intent.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. POUND  pointed out  that the sponsor  is just  using existing                                                               
law as the  vehicle for the proposed changes,  which are intended                                                               
to address two actual cases.   One proposed change is designed to                                                               
give  the police  more authority  and  ensure that  they are  not                                                               
inadvertently the subject of a lawsuit.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE    GRUENBERG    cautioned    against    unintended                                                               
consequences.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
1:58:05 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA  said the bill appears  to address situations                                                               
in which rafters or those in  motor boats travel through water in                                                               
which  someone is  fishing  for  trout, for  example;  this is  a                                                               
behavior that can anger those that  are fishing.  Under the bill,                                                               
lawsuits engendered by  such cases could result  in the plaintiff                                                               
being awarded full attorney fees.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MR.  POUND  remarked that  such  lawsuits  could be  filed  under                                                               
existing law.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA countered that under  the bill it will be for                                                               
"real money."                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked whether it  is the intent to "have                                                               
actual costs and  [attorney] fees on appeal?"  He  opined that if                                                               
that is  not the intent, then  the bill would not  alter Rule 508                                                               
of the Alaska Rules of Appellate Procedure.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  COGHILL  mentioned  that   the  bill  appears  to                                                               
include licensed  activities, except for [wildlife]  viewing, and                                                               
so he is wondering  if "that has any snags to  it."  He suggested                                                               
that  there should  be some  mechanism  in the  bill to  quantify                                                               
[obstructing and hindering].                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE remarked  that existing  law, as  detailed in  the                                                               
bill, appears to raise concerns.   she suggested that the sponsor                                                               
and members work together to  come up with a committee substitute                                                               
(CS) or amendments that will address those concerns.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
2:03:09 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  opined that  the language  currently in                                                               
existing  AS  16.05.790(d)  would  seem to  already  include  law                                                               
enforcement  officers.   If that  is  the case,  why include  the                                                               
change proposed by Section 2?                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR.  POUND said  that although  it  might seem  that current  law                                                               
already addresses situations  involving law enforcement officers,                                                               
the court has ruled otherwise in  a recent case where a "fish and                                                               
wildlife" helicopter  was flying too low  over commercial fishing                                                               
grounds.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he'd like  to see whether that case                                                               
has  been appealed.   Just  because  a judge  makes an  erroneous                                                               
decision, it  doesn't mean  that the  law has  to be  changed, he                                                               
remarked, noting that the such cases can be appealed.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. POUND offered his understanding that "they settled."                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  suggested  that the  committee  get  a                                                               
legal opinion on whether current law does cover such situations.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE indicated that HB 107 would be held over.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
HB 131 - ACCESS DEVICE & I.D. DOCUMENT CRIMES                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
2:05:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  announced that the  final order of  business would                                                               
be  HOUSE  BILL   NO.  131,  "An  Act   increasing  the  criminal                                                               
classification of theft  of an access device and  of obtaining an                                                               
access device  or identification  documents by  fraudulent means;                                                               
increasing  the  criminal  classification for  certain  cases  of                                                               
fraudulent  use  of  an  access  device;  and  providing  for  an                                                               
effective date."                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
2:06:05 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
BEN MULLIGAN, Staff to Representative  Bill Stoltze, Alaska State                                                               
Legislature,  sponsor,   relayed  on  behalf   of  Representative                                                               
Stoltze  that "access  [identification (ID)]  theft is  a growing                                                               
problem in  Alaska" and  nationwide; between  2002 and  2004, the                                                               
number  of complaints  regarding access  ID theft  rose over  152                                                               
percent.   Alaska currently ranks  second [in the nation]  in the                                                               
number of complaints  issued per 100,000 people.   House Bill 131                                                               
proposes to increase  the penalty, from a class  A misdemeanor to                                                               
a class  C felony,  for the  theft of an  access device,  for the                                                               
fraudulent  use  of  an  access   devise,  and  for  fraudulently                                                               
obtaining  an  access device  or  identification  document.   The                                                               
proposed changes  are meant to provide  deterrence and punishment                                                               
for such crimes.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
2:08:17 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SAM  TRIVETTE,  AARP;  President,  Retired  Public  Employees  of                                                               
Alaska   (RPEA),  Alaska   Public  Employees   Association/Alaska                                                               
Federation of  Teachers (APEA/AFT), after mentioning  that he has                                                               
been  involved in  the corrections  industry for  over 32  years,                                                               
said  his experience  has shown  him that  it is  clear that  law                                                               
enforcement  resources are  stretched  to the  "nth degree,"  and                                                               
that when such is  the case, if a crime is felony,  it will get a                                                               
lot much more  attention than a misdemeanor.  He  relayed that at                                                               
a recent  seminar regarding identity  theft, there  was testimony                                                               
by police officers acknowledging  "how complicated this situation                                                               
is  and how  much the  impact  is upon  seniors, especially,  who                                                               
sometimes just don't  understand the systems as  they change over                                                               
the years."  He relayed that  the AARP supports HB 131 because it                                                               
thinks  that by  increasing  the penalty  for  "this crime,"  the                                                               
chances are  much more likely  that police will get  involved and                                                               
prosecute the crime.   He noted that police have  also relayed to                                                               
him that  since many ID theft  crimes are committed by  people in                                                               
other  states, if  the crime  is  not a  felony, law  enforcement                                                               
agencies in those  other states will essentially  "blow you off."                                                               
Offering a personal example wherein  his parents had items stolen                                                               
by  caretakers, he  opined that  there is  a need  for sending  a                                                               
strong  message  that  law  enforcement will  use  its  best  and                                                               
strongest efforts to prosecute such crimes as felonies.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
2:11:17 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MICHELLE  LOGAN, Detective,  Anchorage  Police Department  (APD),                                                               
Municipality  of  Anchorage  (MOA),  after noting  that  she  has                                                               
worked  in  the  APD's  fraud  unit for  the  past  three  years,                                                               
testified in  support of  HB 131.   She  relayed that  during the                                                               
past year and  a half, she has seen a  noticeable increase in the                                                               
number of  identity theft reports.   Some of the  reports involve                                                               
crimes that  are committed by  perpetrators in Alaska,  but often                                                               
ID theft originates in other  states.  She mentioned that victims                                                               
of ID  theft have  to spend  a lot of  time getting  their credit                                                               
reports "back  on track."   Most ID  theft the APD  sees involves                                                               
credit card fraud,  she remarked, adding that although  HB 131 is                                                               
not  specifically an  ID theft  bill, if  it is  passed, it  will                                                               
greatly  enhance the  efforts  of law  enforcement  to combat  ID                                                               
theft and will give the APD  the tools with which to put together                                                               
more meaningful cases for prosecution purposes.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS. LOGAN, with regard to comments  by Mr. Trivette, said that it                                                               
is not  that law enforcement  will "blow off"  misdemeanor cases;                                                               
rather, there  are just  limited resources  with which  to pursue                                                               
misdemeanor  cases.   In fact,  unless a  crime is  a felony,  it                                                               
doesn't  even get  referred  to the  "detective  division."   She                                                               
indicated that  she has experienced  frustration when  charging a                                                               
person with fraudulent use of an  access device when the crime is                                                               
currently only  a misdemeanor.   She provided  examples regarding                                                               
credit  card  theft  wherein  multiple   charges  were  made  but                                                               
individually  the   amounts  being   charged  only   warranted  a                                                               
misdemeanor.  In  conclusion, she opined that adoption  of HB 131                                                               
will send a  message that Alaska is serious  about protecting its                                                               
citizens against ID theft and  is serious about prosecuting those                                                               
that perpetrate crimes of ID theft.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
2:16:23 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
JAY FOLEY, Co-Executive Director,  Identity Theft Resource Center                                                               
(ITRC), relayed  that the ITRC works  one on one with  victims of                                                               
identity theft  in assisting them  in clearing their  names, from                                                               
the  simple cases  of credit  card "skimming"  and fraud,  to the                                                               
most  complicated criminal  identity theft  cases.   Any and  all                                                               
enhancement  of penalties  dealing with  the subject  of identity                                                               
theft will be a welcome  relief, he remarked; all too frequently,                                                               
law enforcement  agencies are taxed  too greatly to  pursue these                                                               
cases, and when  they are fortunate enough to pursue  them, it is                                                               
almost a  mockery to  the victim  to have  the court  system rule                                                               
that the crime is a minor misdemeanor.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MR. FOLEY said  that in the instances when a  perpetrator does go                                                               
to court, he/she should face  tougher penalties, which should act                                                               
as a deterrent to future identity  thieves.  Referring to a study                                                               
the ITRC  released in  2003 regarding  the aftermath  of identity                                                               
theft, he said it indicates that  on average, a victim will spend                                                               
about 600  hours cleaning  up the  mess left  by the  thief, will                                                               
incur  up to  $1,400 in  expenses not  including legal  fees, and                                                               
will suffer from a wide range  of emotional issues because of the                                                               
betrayal and  a lack  of support.   He  said that  identity theft                                                               
victims in  Alaska are imploring the  legislature's consideration                                                               
of HB 131.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
2:19:09 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA asked  whether there  are laws  that prevent                                                               
the cardholder  of a  stolen credit card  from being  held liable                                                               
for the charges incurred by the thief.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MR. FOLEY  said yes.   Under  the Fair  Credit Reporting  Act and                                                               
other  federal laws,  a cardholder  is only  responsible for  the                                                               
first $50  of loss.  A  caveat, however, is that  this limitation                                                               
only applies if the cardholder  reports the theft promptly, so if                                                               
the cardholder doesn't  notice the theft within  a certain number                                                               
of  days or  fails to  report it  within that  time period,  then                                                               
he/she will become responsible for all charges.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA asked  whether federal  law preempts  states                                                               
from  regulating "that  area," from  saying that  cardholders are                                                               
not responsible for credit card debt incurred without consent.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR.  FOLEY, although  offering his  belief that  states would  be                                                               
preempted from such, recommended  that the legislature speak with                                                               
counsel of  the Federal  Trade Commission  (FTC) further  on that                                                               
issue.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
STEVE   CLEARY,  Executive   Director,  Alaska   Public  Interest                                                               
Research Group (AkPIRG),  opined that others have  summed up "the                                                               
great merits"  of HB 131,  and relayed  that the AkPIRG  has been                                                               
trying to get  more identity theft protections  instituted in the                                                               
wake  of the  [recent]  ChoicePoint Inc.  security breach,  which                                                               
resulted  in  nearly  150,000  consumers  having  their  personal                                                               
information  stolen.    He mentioned  that  ChoicePoint  had  its                                                               
security breached several  years ago as well,  but never notified                                                               
those who  became victims of  identity theft  because of it.   He                                                               
raised the issue of possible  amendments, for either this bill or                                                               
another, that would require  mandatory notification when security                                                               
breaches  occur  and  that  would  allow  consumers  to  place  a                                                               
security freeze on their account  information.  He mentioned that                                                               
the AkPIRG  is hopeful that such  changes to current law  will be                                                               
made,  and  opined that  HB  131  is a  good  first  step in  the                                                               
direction [of consumer protection].                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
2:23:09 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
LINDA WILSON,  Deputy Director,  Central Office,  Public Defender                                                               
Agency  (PDA),  Department  of  Administration  (DOA),  said  she                                                               
agrees with some  of the prior comments  regarding the importance                                                               
of and  concerns over  identity theft.   She  said that  when she                                                               
considers  identity theft,  she is  thinking of  what she  called                                                               
"true identity and  credit card theft," wherein  a stranger comes                                                               
along and takes  on another's identity.  She  mentioned a concern                                                               
regarding familial  situations wherein  a family member  is using                                                               
or taking  another family member's  credit card or  check, noting                                                               
that even if  such were not used, just the  taking of either item                                                               
could result in a felony charge.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS. WILSON  then raised the issue  of fake IDs.   She referred to                                                               
Section   4,  which   makes  obtaining   an   access  devise   or                                                               
identification  document by  fraudulent means  a class  C felony,                                                               
and  noted that  AS  11.81.900(b)(30)  defines an  identification                                                               
document as:                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     "identification  document" means  a paper,  instrument,                                                                    
     or other  article used to  establish the identity  of a                                                                    
     person;  "identification  document" includes  a  social                                                                    
     security    card,   driver's    license,   non-driver's                                                                    
     identification,  birth certificate,  passport, employee                                                                    
     identification, or hunting or fishing license                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS.  WILSON noted  that under  the aforementioned  definition and                                                               
Section  4 of  the  bill, minors  who acquire  fake  IDs will  be                                                               
exposed to  felony prosecution because they  have used fraudulent                                                               
means to obtain an ID.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:26:14 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  COGHILL remarked  that Ms.  Wilson raised  a good                                                               
point.    He mentioned  that  sometimes  in domestic  situations,                                                               
people  might  be  fighting  over  a  checkbook,  and  questioned                                                               
whether a check would be considered an identification document.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS. WILSON offered  her belief that a check  is an identification                                                               
document.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   COGHILL  posited,   then,  that   an  unintended                                                               
consequence  in domestic  dispute situations  involving arguments                                                               
over a  checkbook could be that  one of the parties  gets charged                                                               
with a  felony.  He  suggested that  the committee might  want to                                                               
eliminate that potential.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
RANDY   RUARO,   Assistant   Attorney  General,   Legislation   &                                                               
Regulations Section,  Office of the Attorney  General, Department                                                               
of  Law (DOL),  pointed out,  however, that  in domestic  dispute                                                               
situations  involving joint  bank accounts,  both parties  have a                                                               
right to  have the checks.   Additionally, if a  domestic dispute                                                               
didn't involve  a joint bank  account, before one of  the parties                                                               
can be  charged with identification theft,  local law enforcement                                                               
would have  to agree to investigate  and to make the  arrest.  At                                                               
that point,  the prosecutor could exercise  his/her discretion to                                                               
charge  the  person  at  the  felony level  or  at  some  "lesser                                                               
included"  level.   He acknowledged  that Representative  Coghill                                                               
has  a   valid  concern,  but  surmised   that  the  prosecutor's                                                               
discretion would  provide a filter  before a party in  a domestic                                                               
dispute situation  actually gets charged  with a felony;  also, a                                                               
jury would  have to convict  at the  felony level, and  the judge                                                               
would  still  retain the  discretion  to  fashion an  appropriate                                                               
sentence.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:29:58 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA said  he didn't  think that  the legislature                                                               
should  pass  laws and  at  the  same  time  be hoping  that  the                                                               
prosecution won't  enforce those laws.   He  also said he  is not                                                               
sure that if the law  specifies that certain behavior constitutes                                                               
a  felony, that  prosecutors have  the discretion  to charge  the                                                               
person with a misdemeanor.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. RUARO offered his understanding  that other statutes could be                                                               
used when  the prosecutor doesn't  want to charge someone  with a                                                               
felony; for  example, a  person could be  charged with  "a simple                                                               
theft" or with some other  type of lesser offense.  Acknowledging                                                               
Representative Gara's  concern, he suggested that  John Skidmore,                                                               
Department of Law (DOL), could better address this issue.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA  offered his understanding that  when "a plea                                                               
deal" is proposed  to the judge, he/she has  to determine whether                                                               
the deal makes sense  in light of the known facts,  and so if the                                                               
law specifies  that a situation  involving a check,  for example,                                                               
constitutes a  felony, then  it would  be hard  for the  judge to                                                               
ignore the fact that the situation  did involve a check and allow                                                               
a person to be charged differently.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
2:32:21 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ANNE  CARPENETI,  Assistant   Attorney  General,  Legal  Services                                                               
Section-Juneau,  Criminal  Division,  Department  of  Law  (DOL),                                                               
mentioned that  when she  was a  prosecutor, there  were domestic                                                               
dispute cases wherein people wanted  "the prosecution to deal, in                                                               
a  criminal  manner,  with  issues   that  were  really  domestic                                                               
issues,"  and   prosecutors  did   have  the  authority   not  to                                                               
prosecute,  and so  did exercise  that authority  in such  cases.                                                               
She also offered her belief that  a check would not be considered                                                               
an identification  document under the  aforementioned definition;                                                               
although a check has commercial value,  it is not a document that                                                               
one can use to establish identification.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  noted that Section  3 refers to an  access device,                                                               
which is defined in AS 11.81.900(b)(1) as:                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     "access  device"  means  a card,  credit  card,  plate,                                                                    
     code,  account  number,  algorithm,  or  identification                                                                    
     number, including a  social security number, electronic                                                                    
     serial number,  or password, that  is capable  of being                                                                    
     used,  alone  or  in conjunction  with  another  access                                                                    
     device or  identification document, to  obtain property                                                                    
     or  services,  or  that  can  be  used  to  initiate  a                                                                    
     transfer of property                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE noted that Section  4 refers to both access devices                                                               
and identification  documents, and read from  AS 11.81.900(B)(30)                                                               
[text  provided  previously]   which  defines  an  identification                                                               
document.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:34:53 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA  said  he  still  has  a  concern  that  the                                                               
prosecution won't  be able to  charge situations  involving fraud                                                               
by credit card,  for example, differently than  is being proposed                                                               
in the bill.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI  pointed out, however,  that "most of  these" cases                                                               
are "plead out,"  and that the DOL has not,  to date, experienced                                                               
any  problems  negotiating pleas  on  property  crimes of  "this"                                                               
nature.   She said that because  there are so many  creative ways                                                               
for the judge  and prosecutor to reach a just  result, she is not                                                               
worried about  problems arising.   She,  too, suggested  that Mr.                                                               
Skidmore could better address this issue.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL  asked how would one  go about determining                                                               
whether someone has obtained an  access device; he indicated that                                                               
he wants to know how "obtaining" becomes a felony.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI  offered a personal  example wherein her  purse was                                                               
stolen, calling  such [trespassory] taking, and  also referred to                                                               
an  example  wherein  the  perpetrator  gets  someone's  personal                                                               
information by going through his/her garbage.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  COGHILL said  that although  he understands  [how                                                               
the law  would apply in  cases involving] "regular  thievery," he                                                               
is  not  sure  he  understands  [how  it  would  apply  in  cases                                                               
involving]  what he  called "high-tech  thievery,"  such as  when                                                               
people are talked into  willingly providing personal information.                                                               
Could  there be  some argument  that such  information, if  given                                                               
willingly, wasn't obtained through deception?                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MS. CARPENETI  said it  would depend on  what the  people seeking                                                               
the   information  told   the  person   they  were   getting  the                                                               
information  from, and  again suggested  that Mr.  Skidmore could                                                               
better address this issue.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
2:39:08 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE, using  hypothetical  examples, recapped  members'                                                               
concerns for Mr. Skidmore.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
2:40:20 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
JOHN  B. SKIDMORE,  Assistant District  Attorney, Third  Judicial                                                               
District (Anchorage),  Department of Law (DOL),  after mentioning                                                               
that  his  duties include  supervising  the  "property unit"  and                                                               
relaying that  his past experience  includes prosecuting  for the                                                               
DOL in other areas of the state,  he said that the easiest way to                                                               
resolve  a case  at a  lower  level -  to  reduce a  felony to  a                                                               
misdemeanor -  is to charge  someone for an attempted  crime; for                                                               
purposes  of HB  131, doing  so  would allow  the prosecution  to                                                               
reduce  the charge  to a  class A  misdemeanor.   There are  also                                                               
varying levels  of theft,  he noted,  and so it  would be  easy -                                                               
even  in cases  involving amounts  over $500  - to  simply charge                                                               
someone  with theft  in the  third degree  or with  theft in  the                                                               
fourth  degree, instead  of with  theft in  the second  degree as                                                               
proposed in the  bill; he noted that every day  he resolves cases                                                               
involving theft  of amounts over  $500 as misdemeanors.   Such is                                                               
the real world discretion that prosecutors have.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR. SKIDMORE  noted, with  regard to the  issue of  prosecuting a                                                               
family member  for taking a check,  that a check is  not included                                                               
in the  statutory definition of  an identification  document, and                                                               
said that he cannot imagine a  situation in which one would use a                                                               
check  as  a  form  of  identification.    Instead,  a  check  is                                                               
statutorily  defined  as  an   access  device;  additionally,  if                                                               
someone improperly  uses a  check, the  bill won't  apply because                                                               
such situations are  already addressed by the  laws pertaining to                                                               
forgery.   He  pointed  out that  children  steal their  parents'                                                               
checks all the time, and  the prosecution has the discretion, and                                                               
often  uses  it,  to  determine  whether  it  is  appropriate  to                                                               
prosecute someone in  such cases under the  existing [forgery and                                                               
theft] statutes.  He offered  his understanding that in order for                                                               
proposed  AS  11.46.290(b) to  apply,  the  person obtaining  the                                                               
access  device or  identification document  must do  so with  the                                                               
intent to  defraud, and so  elements other than merely  taking an                                                               
access  device  or identification  document  must  be taken  into                                                               
consideration.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR.  SKIDMORE said  he  would  echo prior  testimony  by the  DOL                                                               
representative regarding  discretion, which  he opined,  is built                                                               
into the criminal justice system  in multiple layers.  There must                                                               
first be enough  evidence for the police to want  to move forward                                                               
with  a  case  and  refer  it to  the  prosecutor's  office;  the                                                               
prosecutor  then uses  discretion  in determining  whether it  is                                                               
appropriate to  charge a  particular case and  thus use  up state                                                               
resources  in seeking  a criminal  sanction against  someone; and                                                               
the checks  and balances on  the police and prosecutor  come from                                                               
juries and  judges.  In  the occasional instances  where familial                                                               
context  cases are  prosecuted, it  is because  they are  just as                                                               
serious as  all other theft  cases or because the  parents really                                                               
think there is a need for  a child to be prosecuted; for example,                                                               
if the  child has a drug  addiction and can't be  caught with the                                                               
drugs but  can be charged  with another felony offense,  then the                                                               
child could be  sentenced to probation only,  with mandatory drug                                                               
treatment as a condition of probation.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:46:51 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  COGHILL indicated  that  Mr. Skidmore's  comments                                                               
alleviate his  concerns, and  said he agrees  with the  intent of                                                               
bill.  However, the bill proposes to  make it a class C felony if                                                               
the value  obtained from the use  of the access device  is $50 or                                                               
more.   This  would seem  to make  it easier  to become  a felon,                                                               
which has many  repercussions.  He asked whether  using an access                                                               
device for several  purchases under $50 would  result in separate                                                               
criminal charges  or whether the purchases  combined would result                                                               
in a single criminal charge.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  SKIDMORE  noted  that existing  AS  11.46.980(c)  says,  "In                                                               
determining the  degree or classification  of a crime  under this                                                               
chapter, amounts  involved in criminal  acts committed  under one                                                               
course  of  conduct, whether  from  the  same person  or  several                                                               
persons, shall  be aggregated."   He opined that this  means that                                                               
it would have to be shown that  the multiple acts were all in one                                                               
course of conduct  as opposed to several courses of  conduct.  He                                                               
characterized  this as  a fact-driven  question,  adding, "We  do                                                               
often aggregate  those types of cases,  but you have to  have the                                                               
appropriate  facts  that [show]  it  was  all  in one  course  of                                                               
conduct."                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL opined  that $50 seems too  low, and asked                                                               
why they  should lower the  threshold for this  particular felony                                                               
crime to that amount.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. SKIDMORE  opined that identity  theft is much  more insidious                                                               
than  "a straight"  theft.    For example,  with  a theft  occurs                                                               
wherein  a person  steals  an item  or items  from  a store,  the                                                               
offense ends when  the perpetrator is caught - there  are no more                                                               
repercussions to the  victim from that theft.   In contrast, when                                                               
an identity  theft occurs,  the consequences  for the  victim are                                                               
ongoing.   He  relayed that  he'd recently  heard someone  on the                                                               
radio  say that  if one  becomes  the victim  of identity  theft,                                                               
he/she can be  told:  "Congratulations, you've just  gotten a new                                                               
part time job;  you will now spend countless hours  trying to fix                                                               
your  credit history  and  protect yourself,"    For some  folks,                                                               
dealing with creditors  and other people results  in a tremendous                                                               
amount of  trauma.  He  relayed an  example from three  years ago                                                               
wherein a  woman living in Los  Vegas had her identity  stolen by                                                               
people who  came to Alaska  and started buying things;  the woman                                                               
lost promotion  opportunities and ultimately her  job because she                                                               
missed days  at work trying to  deal with her creditors,  and had                                                               
to  undergo   psychological  counseling.     And   although  such                                                               
repercussions may  not occur  when someone  is only  defrauded of                                                               
$50-$75,  the   insidious  nature  of  identity   theft  warrants                                                               
lowering the threshold to $50, he opined.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said that a  $50 threshold for a felony is                                                               
"pretty low for me."                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE, after  ascertaining that  no one  else wished  to                                                               
testify, closed public testimony on HB 131.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:52:36 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM moved to report  HB 131 out of committee                                                               
with  individual  recommendations  and  the  accompanying  fiscal                                                               
notes.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA objected  for the purpose of  discussion.  He                                                               
said that he  too is struggling with the  proposed $50 threshold,                                                               
and noted  that although the  hope is that the  increased penalty                                                               
will  act as  a deterrent,  those that  commit crimes  don't read                                                               
statutes.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE asked  whether  he had  a  different threshold  in                                                               
mind.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA indicated that he did not, at this time.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  mentioned  that  the bill  has  a  House  Finance                                                               
Committee referral.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA  asked whether  there are any  other felonies                                                               
with a $50 threshold.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  said she  did  not  think  that there  were,  and                                                               
surmised  that Mr.  Skidmore's testimony  indicated  that one  is                                                               
being proposed  in the  bill because of  the insidious  nature of                                                               
identity theft.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL  mentioned that  he is  working on  a bill                                                               
that will be addressing all felonies.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
2:55:38 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KOTT said  he shares  some of  the same  concerns                                                               
that Representatives Gara and Coghill  have expressed.  Referring                                                               
to the argument  that the crime the bill  addresses is insidious,                                                               
he  noted that  the  same  argument could  be  made  even if  the                                                               
threshold were being lowered to  $10, but people would still face                                                               
the same  consequences associated  with a felony  that has  a $50                                                               
threshold.    He  indicated  that  he  would  go  along  with  an                                                               
amendment to raise the proposed threshold above $50.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  noted that the  current threshold for  [the felony                                                               
level crime of fraudulent use of access device] is $500.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  COGHILL said  that  the  "aggregated amount"  was                                                               
what he was looking for.   He offered his understanding that most                                                               
fraudulent uses  of access devices probably  involve amounts much                                                               
more significant than $50.  He  mentioned that he himself has had                                                               
to deal with  this issue and, thus, he is  sympathetic.  However,                                                               
he relayed, he  is also very cautious about  creating a situation                                                               
whereby somebody  becomes a felon  over a $75 charge,  since that                                                               
will result in repercussions for  that person.  He mentioned that                                                               
he  is getting  some comfort  from the  fact that  fraudulent use                                                               
must be proven before a person  can be convicted of a felony, but                                                               
that's the only comfort he is getting.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE relayed  to Mr. Mulligan that members  appear to be                                                               
struggling with the proposed threshold amount.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR. MULLIGAN  noted that even  though a person stealing  a credit                                                               
card  might only  charge $50  worth of  merchandise or  services,                                                               
there is the potential for that  person to charge the maximum the                                                               
credit card  will allow.   With regard  to the issue  of altering                                                               
the proposed threshold,  he surmised that the  sponsor would like                                                               
some  time to  research  the issue  to  determine an  appropriate                                                               
amount.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM withdrew her motion to move bill.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
3:01:04 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  DAHLSTROM said  she  shares  the concerns  raised                                                               
regarding  the  proposed threshold.    She  noted, however,  that                                                               
there  are  consequences  to  having  one's  access  devices  and                                                               
identity documents stolen, some of  which could include not being                                                               
able to close  on a house or  to lose a job.   She mentioned that                                                               
she  has had  someone else's  credit information  show up  on her                                                               
credit report,  and that it  took her two  years to clear  up the                                                               
situation.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR   McGUIRE  relayed   her   personal  experience   regarding                                                               
someone's fraudulent use  of her debit card.   She indicated that                                                               
although there is a policy call  to make on this issue, there are                                                               
concerns with  the bill  that still  need to  be addressed.   She                                                               
suggested  that perhaps  the sponsor  could  research what  other                                                               
states do,  and perhaps consider proposing  a different threshold                                                               
amount.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA  surmised that the insidiousness  of stealing                                                               
someone's access  device stems from  the potential to  keep using                                                               
it,  so perhaps  members'  concerns regarding  the $50  threshold                                                               
could be addressed via aggregating the amounts of repeat usage.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GRUENBERG  relayed   his  personal   experiences                                                               
regarding the  fraudulent use  of his credit  card by  an unknown                                                               
person and  the attempted misuse of  his credit card by  a family                                                               
member.   He  said he  is wondering  what else  is being  done to                                                               
protect the consumer and address  identity theft more thoroughly.                                                               
He asked where the crime is  committed if a citizen of Alaska has                                                               
his/her  credit   card  used   fraudulently  in   California;  he                                                               
indicated  his  assumption that  such  a  crime would  have  been                                                               
considered as having been committed in California.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
[Following was a brief discussion about which other bills,                                                                      
currently and in the past, have pertained to credit card                                                                        
companies and to fraud.]                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
[HB 131 was held over.]                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
ADJOURNMENT                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
There being no further business before the committee, the House                                                                 
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:08 p.m.                                                                 

Document Name Date/Time Subjects