Legislature(2005 - 2006)

04/22/2005 02:44 PM JUD


Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
                    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
               HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                             
                         April 22, 2005                                                                                         
                           2:44 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. 257                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to a procurement and electronic commerce tools                                                                 
program for state departments and instrumentalities of the                                                                      
state; and providing for an effective date."                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED CSHB 257(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 92                                                                                                               
"An Act relating to the purchase of interests in corporations,                                                                  
including limited liability companies, by the University of                                                                     
Alaska."                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED CSHB 92(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATE BILL NO. 87                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to motor vehicle safety belt violations."                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED HCS SB 87(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 129(JUD)                                                                                                 
"An Act relating to the wrongful recording of a notice of                                                                       
pendency of an action relating to title to or right to                                                                          
possession of real property."                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     - SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 143(STA)                                                                                                 
"An Act amending  the definition of the term  'state agencies' as                                                               
it   applies  under   Executive  Order   No.  113;   relating  to                                                               
information  systems  in  the  legislative   branch  and  to  the                                                               
Telecommunications  Information  Council;  and providing  for  an                                                               
effective date."                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     - SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 36(JUD)                                                                                                  
"An Act relating to absentee ballots."                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     - SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 257                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: STATE PROCUREMENT ELECTRONIC TOOLS                                                                                 
SPONSOR(S): JUDICIARY                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
04/06/05       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/06/05       (H)       JUD, FIN                                                                                               
04/11/05       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
04/11/05       (H)       <Bill Hearing Rescheduled to 4/13>                                                                     
04/13/05       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
04/13/05       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/13/05       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
04/18/05       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
04/18/05       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/18/05       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
04/22/05       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB  92                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA AND CORPORATIONS                                                                              
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) KELLY                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
01/21/05       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
01/21/05       (H)       EDU, HES                                                                                               
04/05/05       (H)       EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 106                                                                            
04/05/05       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/05/05       (H)       MINUTE(EDU)                                                                                            
04/06/05       (H)       HES REFERRAL WAIVED                                                                                    
04/06/05       (H)       JUD REFERRAL ADDED AFTER EDU                                                                           
04/07/05       (H)       EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 106                                                                            
04/07/05       (H)       -- Meeting Canceled --                                                                                 
04/12/05       (H)       EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 106                                                                            
04/12/05       (H)       Moved CSHB 92(EDU) Out of Committee                                                                    
04/12/05       (H)       MINUTE(EDU)                                                                                            
04/14/05       (H)       EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 106                                                                            
04/14/05       (H)       -- Meeting Canceled --                                                                                 
04/18/05       (H)       EDU RPT CS(EDU) NT 1DP 5NR                                                                             
04/18/05       (H)       DP: LYNN;                                                                                              
04/18/05       (H)       NR: THOMAS, WILSON, GATTO, SALMON,                                                                     
                         NEUMAN;                                                                                                
04/18/05       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
04/18/05       (H)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
04/19/05       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
04/19/05       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/19/05       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
04/22/05       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
BILL: SB  87                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: SEAT BELT VIOLATION AS PRIMARY OFFENSE                                                                             
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) BUNDE                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
02/02/05       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/02/05       (S)       STA, JUD                                                                                               
02/17/05       (S)       STA AT 3:30 PM BELTZ 211                                                                               
02/17/05       (S)       Moved SB 87 Out of Committee                                                                           
02/17/05       (S)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
02/18/05       (S)       STA RPT  2DP 2NR                                                                                       
02/18/05       (S)       NR: THERRIAULT, HUGGINS                                                                                
02/18/05       (S)       DP: ELTON, WAGONER                                                                                     
03/01/05       (S)       JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
03/01/05       (S)       Moved SB 87 Out of Committee                                                                           
03/01/05       (S)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
03/02/05       (S)       JUD RPT 3DP 2NR                                                                                        
03/02/05       (S)       DP: SEEKINS, FRENCH, GUESS                                                                             
03/02/05       (S)       NR: THERRIAULT, HUGGINS                                                                                
03/03/05       (S)       TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                                                                     
03/03/05       (S)       VERSION: SB 87                                                                                         
03/04/05       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/04/05       (H)       STA, JUD                                                                                               
03/19/05       (H)       STA AT 9:30 AM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
03/19/05       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/19/05       (H)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
04/12/05       (H)       STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
04/12/05       (H)       Moved HCS SB 87(STA) Out of Committee                                                                  
04/12/05       (H)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
04/13/05       (H)       STA RPT HCS(STA) 1DP 4DNP 1NR                                                                          
04/13/05       (H)       DP: GRUENBERG;                                                                                         
04/13/05       (H)       DNP: GARDNER, LYNN, GATTO, ELKINS;                                                                     
04/13/05       (H)       NR: SEATON                                                                                             
04/22/05       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
VANESSA TONDINI, Staff                                                                                                          
to Representative Lesil McGuire                                                                                                 
House Judiciary Standing Committee                                                                                              
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided an explanation during discussion                                                                  
of HB 257.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
HEATH HILYARD, Staff                                                                                                            
to Representative Mike Kelly                                                                                                    
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  During discussion of HB 92, offered a                                                                      
comment on behalf of the sponsor, Representative Kelly.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MARY E. GREEN, Associate General Counsel                                                                                        
University of Alaska                                                                                                            
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Responded to questions during discussion of                                                                
HB 92.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR CON BUNDE                                                                                                               
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Sponsor of SB 87.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CINDY CASHEN                                                                                                                    
National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence                                                                              
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided comments during discussion of                                                                     
SB 87.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
KEVIN E. QUINLAN, Chief                                                                                                         
Safety Advocacy Division                                                                                                        
Office of Safety Recommendations and Accomplishments                                                                            
National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)                                                                                     
Washington D.C.                                                                                                                 
POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided comments during discussion of                                                                     
SB 87.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
JOAN DIAMOND                                                                                                                    
Department of Health and Human Services                                                                                         
Municipality of Anchorage (MOA)                                                                                                 
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:    Provided comments  during  discussion  of                                                               
SB 87.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
DON SMITH, Administrator                                                                                                        
Highway Safety Office                                                                                                           
Division of Program Development                                                                                                 
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF)                                                                       
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:    Provided comments  during  discussion  of                                                               
SB 87 and responded to a question.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
TODD SHARP, Lieutenant                                                                                                          
Division of Alaska State Troopers                                                                                               
Department of Public Safety (DPS)                                                                                               
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:    Provided comments  during  discussion  of                                                               
SB 87 and responded to questions.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LESIL   McGUIRE  called   the  House   Judiciary  Standing                                                             
Committee  meeting  to  order at  2:44:36  PM.    Representatives                                                             
McGuire, Anderson,  Coghill, Dahlstrom, Gruenberg, and  Gara were                                                               
present at  the call  to order.   Representative Kott  arrived as                                                               
the meeting was in progress.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
HB 257 - STATE PROCUREMENT ELECTRONIC TOOLS                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
2:45:32 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  announced that the  first order of  business would                                                               
be HOUSE  BILL NO.  257, "An  Act relating  to a  procurement and                                                               
electronic  commerce  tools  program for  state  departments  and                                                               
instrumentalities of  the state;  and providing for  an effective                                                               
date."    [Before  the  committee  was  HB  257,  as  amended  on                                                               
4/18/05.]                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE, speaking as chair  of the House Judiciary Standing                                                               
Committee, sponsor  of HB 257,  relayed that although  a proposed                                                               
committee  substitute  (CS)  for  HB  257,  Version  24-LS0826\Y,                                                               
Bannister, 4/21/05, was  available for adoption as  a work draft,                                                               
the  committee  must  also readopt  the  preferences  section  of                                                               
Conceptual  Amendment 1,  as amended,  to HB  257 -  the original                                                               
version  of the  bill  - which  was adopted  at  the bill's  last                                                               
hearing.    She explained  that  Version  Y simply  extends,  for                                                               
another year,  the sunset  provided for  in the  2003 legislation                                                               
originally authorizing the pilot project.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  moved to adopt  the proposed CS  for HB                                                               
257, Version 24-LS0826\Y, Bannister,  4/21/05, as the work draft.                                                               
There being no objection, Version Y was before the committee.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  made  a motion  [to  adopt  Conceptual                                                               
Amendment 1]  to "meld into"  Version Y [the amendment  which had                                                               
been adopted  to HB  257, that being  Conceptual Amendment  1, as                                                               
amended with  regard to proposed subsection  (c) referencing only                                                               
proposed subsections  (d)-(r), and  which prior to  being amended                                                               
read:                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
                             A BILL                                                                                           
                      FOR AN ACT ENTITLED                                                                                     
     "An  Act  relating  to  a  procurement  and  electronic                                                                  
     commerce  tools  program   for  state  departments  and                                                                  
     instrumentalities of  the state;  and providing  for an                                                                  
     effective date."                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                              
     BE  IT  ENACTED BY  THE  LEGISLATURE  OF THE  STATE  OF                                                                  
     ALASKA:                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     *  Section 1.   AS  36.30 is  amended by  adding a  new                                                                  
     section to article 1 to read:                                                                                              
          Sec. 36.30.093.  State procurement and electronic                                                                   
     commerce tools program.                                                                                                  
          (a) The department may enter into a program under                                                                     
     which the  department contracts with a  person from the                                                                    
     private sector  to provide procurement services  and to                                                                    
     provide  for   the  delivery  and  use   of  electronic                                                                    
     commerce  tools.   Notwithstanding any  other provision                                                                    
     of this  chapter, the contract  shall be  awarded under                                                                    
     AS 36.30.100 - 36.30.265.                                                                                                  
          (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of this                                                                       
     chapter,  all state  departments and  instrumentalities                                                                    
     of the state may  participate in the program authorized                                                                    
     by (a) of this section.                                                                                                    
          (c) A procurement conducted by the person                                                                             
     selected under  (a) of this  section is not  subject to                                                                    
     this chapter or to AS  36.15.  However, the procurement                                                                    
     is subject to (d) -  (u) of this section.                                                                                  
          (d) A contract based on solicited bids shall be                                                                       
     awarded  to  the   lowest  responsive  and  responsible                                                                    
     bidder  after  an  Alaska  bidder  preference  of  five                                                                    
     percent  has been applied for evaluation purposes.                                                                         
          (e) If a bidder qualifies as an Alaska bidder and                                                                     
     is offering services through an  employment program,  a                                                                    
     15  percent  cost  preference will  be  applied  during                                                                    
     evaluation.                                                                                                                
          (f) If a bidder is an Alaska bidder and is a                                                                          
     qualifying entity,  a ten percent cost  preference will                                                                    
     be applied during evaluation.                                                                                              
          (g) If a bidder is an Alaska bidder and if 50                                                                         
     percent or more  of the bidder's employees  at the time                                                                    
     the bid  is submitted are persons  with disabilities, a                                                                    
     ten  percent cost  preference  will  be applied  during                                                                    
     evaluation.   The  contract must  contain a  promise by                                                                    
     the  bidder   that  the  percentage  of   the  bidder's                                                                    
     employees  who  are   persons  with  disabilities  will                                                                    
     remain at 50 percent or more during the contract term.                                                                     
          (h) Insurance-related contracts shall be awarded                                                                      
     to the  lowest responsive and responsible  bidder after                                                                    
     an Alaska  bidder preference of  five percent  has been                                                                    
     applied  during   evaluation.    In   this  subsection,                                                                    
     "Alaska bidder" means a person  who is an Alaska bidder                                                                    
     and an Alaska domestic insurer.                                                                                            
          (f) Alaska products shall be used whenever                                                                            
     practicable  in   procurements  for  a   state  agency.                                                                    
     Recycled Alaska  products shall be  used when  they are                                                                    
     of  comparable   quality,  of  equivalent   price,  and                                                                    
     appropriate for the intended use.                                                                                          
          (g) If  a bid  indicates that the product(s)                                                                          
     being  purchased will  be recycled  Alaska products,  a                                                                    
     cost preference of five percent  will be applied during                                                                    
     evaluation.                                                                                                                
          (h) In a project financed by state money in which                                                                     
     the  use of  timber,  lumber,  and manufactured  lumber                                                                    
     products   is  required,   only  timber,   lumber,  and                                                                    
     manufactured lumber products  originating in this state                                                                    
     from local forests shall be used wherever practicable.                                                                     
          (i) When agricultural products are purchased , a                                                                      
     seven percent  cost preference  will be  applied during                                                                    
     evaluation  to agricultural  products harvested  in the                                                                    
     state.                                                                                                                     
          (j) When fisheries products are purchased, a                                                                          
     seven percent  cost preference  will be  applied during                                                                    
     evaluation   to   fisheries   products   harvested   or                                                                    
     processed within the jurisdiction of the state.                                                                            
          (k) If a bid or offer designates the use of an                                                                        
     Alaska  product  that  is identified  in  the  contract                                                                    
     specifications and  designated as a Class  I, Class II,                                                                    
     Class  III state  product under  AS  36.30.332, a  cost                                                                    
     preference equal to the  percentage established for the                                                                    
     class  under AS  36.30.332(c)  will be  applied to  the                                                                    
     product  during  evaluation.   The  program  contractor                                                                    
     shall  use  the  Alaska  product  preference  list,  as                                                                    
     described  in  3  AAC  92.090(a),   as  the  basis  for                                                                    
     establishing   the   percentage   of   Alaska   product                                                                    
     preference.                                                                                                                
          (l) If a contractor designates the use of an                                                                          
     Alaska product  in a bid  or proposal and fails  to use                                                                    
     the  designated  product  for  a  reason  within  their                                                                    
     control,  each  payment  under the  contract  shall  be                                                                    
     reduced  according  to the  schedule  set  forth in  AS                                                                    
     36.30.330(a).                                                                                                              
          (m) Except as provided under (q) of this section,                                                                     
     all preferences are cumulative and  shall be applied in                                                                    
     the order referenced under (d) - (n) of this section.                                                                      
          (n) A bidder may not receive a preference under                                                                       
     this section  under both (d)  and (e), (d) and  (f), or                                                                    
     (e) and (f) for the same contract.                                                                                         
          (o) In order to qualify for a preference under                                                                        
     (e), (f),  or (g) of  this section, a bidder  shall add                                                                    
     value  by actually  performing, controlling,  managing,                                                                    
     and  supervising the  services  provided,  or a  bidder                                                                    
     shall  have   sold  supplies  of  the   general  nature                                                                    
     solicited to other state  agencies, governments, or the                                                                    
     general public.                                                                                                            
          (p) When awarding a contract under competitive                                                                        
     sealed   proposals,   the  program   contractor   shall                                                                    
     consider  the preferences  described  in this  section.                                                                    
     Applicable preferences  shall be applied solely  to the                                                                    
     cost portion of the proposals during evaluation.                                                                           
          (q) Informal procurements conducted by the                                                                            
     program  contractor  are  subject  to  the  preferences                                                                    
     described in this section.                                                                                                 
          (r) In this section,                                                                                                  
               (1) "agency" has the meaning given in AS                                                                         
     36.30.990(1);                                                                                                              
               (2) "agricultural products" has the meaning                                                                      
     given in AS 36.15.050(g)(1);                                                                                               
               (3) "Alaska bidder" has the meaning given in                                                                     
     AS 36.30.170(b);                                                                                                           
               (4) "Alaska products" has the meaning given                                                                      
     in AS 36.30.338(1);                                                                                                        
               (5) "contract" has the meaning given in AS                                                                       
     36.30.990(7);                                                                                                              
               (6) "employment program" has the meaning                                                                         
     given in AS 36.30.990(11);                                                                                                 
               (7) "instrumentalities of the state" means a                                                                     
     state  public  corporation,   a  state  enterprise,  or                                                                    
     another  administrative unit  of state  government that                                                                    
     handles  its procurement  and  supply  management in  a                                                                    
     manner  that  is  separate from  a  department  of  the                                                                    
     state;                                                                                                                     
               (8) "qualifying entity" has the meaning                                                                          
     given in AS 36.30.170(e)(1)-(4);                                                                                           
               (9) "person" has the meaning given in AS                                                                         
     36.30.990(16);                                                                                                             
               (10) "person with a disability" has the                                                                          
     meaning given in AS 36.30.170(k);                                                                                          
               (11)    "program   contractor"    means   the                                                                    
     contractor  selected by  the department  to manage  the                                                                    
     program;                                                                                                                   
               (12) "recycled Alaska product" has the                                                                           
     meaning given in AS 36.30.338(4).                                                                                          
     * Sec.  2.  The uncodified  law of the State  of Alaska                                                                  
     enacted  in  secs. 2  and  3,  ch.  51, SLA  2003,  are                                                                    
     repealed.                                                                                                                  
     * Sec.  3.  The uncodified  law of the State  of Alaska                                                                  
     is amended by adding a new section to read:                                                                                
          APPLICABILITY.  Nothing in this Act affects the                                                                       
     validity  of   actions  taken  by  the   Department  of                                                                    
     Administration  under  ch.  51, SLA  2003,  before  the                                                                    
     effective date of this Act.                                                                                                
     * Sec. 4.   This Act takes effect  immediately under AS                                                                  
     01.10.070(c).                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  indicated that [Conceptual Amendment  1] would put                                                               
the bidder preferences back in the bill.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA objected for the purpose of discussion.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE reiterated that Version  Y simply extends the pilot                                                               
project, and that [Conceptual Amendment  1] would ensure that the                                                               
bidder   preferences  therein   would  apply   to  any   contract                                                               
authorized by the 2003 legislation.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA said  he wants  to  ensure that  [Conceptual                                                               
Amendment 1] really does what Chair McGuire intends it to do.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
VANESSA  TONDINI, Staff  to Representative  Lesil McGuire,  House                                                               
Judiciary   Standing   Committee,   Alaska   State   Legislature,                                                               
reiterated that  [Conceptual Amendment 1, as  amended], which was                                                               
brought  forth by  the administration,  had been  adopted at  the                                                               
fill's last hearing for application to the original legislation.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said he wanted  to ensure that [Version Y and                                                               
Conceptual  Amendment  1]  would  not expand  the  current  pilot                                                               
project to more departments.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  said  [they would  not],  again  reiterating  her                                                               
belief  that  [Conceptual Amendment  1]  simply  adds the  bidder                                                               
preferences to  Version Y.   She noted  that Alaska  Supply Chain                                                               
Integrators and other [contractors] object to [Version Y].                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GRUENBERG   withdrew   his  motion   [to   adopt                                                               
Conceptual Amendment 1].                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG then restated  the motion, that being to                                                               
adopt a new  [Conceptual Amendment 1], to  "incorporate Section 1                                                               
[of Conceptual Amendment 1, as amended,] into this bill.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MS. TONDINI  attempted to clarify that  [new Conceptual Amendment                                                               
1]   would  incorporate   subsections   (c)-(r)  [of   Conceptual                                                               
Amendment 1].                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG   concurred  and,  in  response   to  a                                                               
question, posited  that the drafter would  insert [new Conceptual                                                               
Amendment 1] in the proper location.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said he would not  hold the bill up but would                                                               
instead review the language later to  ensure that it did what the                                                               
committee intended.  He then  removed his objection to the motion                                                               
[to adopt new Conceptual Amendment 1].                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  stated  that [new  Conceptual]  Amendment  1  was                                                               
adopted.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
2:50:58 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  turned  attention   to  Section  2  of                                                               
[Conceptual Amendment 1, as amended,  as it was intended to apply                                                               
to the original  version of HB 257] and said  he didn't think the                                                               
committee ought to adopt that provision.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
The committee took an at-ease from 2:51 p.m. to 2:52 p.m.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:52:34 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM moved  to report the proposed  CS for HB                                                               
257, Version 24-LS0826\Y, Bannister,  4/21/05, as amended, out of                                                               
committee  with individual  recommendations and  the accompanying                                                               
fiscal notes.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA objected  [for the  purpose of  discussion],                                                               
and offered  his understanding that [new  Conceptual Amendment 1]                                                               
would  incorporate subsections  (c)-(r) [of  Conceptual Amendment                                                               
1, as amended].                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE, after  ascertaining  that there  were no  further                                                               
objections  to  the  motion, announced  that  CSHB  157(JUD)  was                                                               
reported from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
HB 92 - UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA AND CORPORATIONS                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
2:53:20 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE announced that the  next order of business would be                                                               
HOUSE BILL NO. 92, "An Act  relating to the purchase of interests                                                               
in corporations,  including limited  liability companies,  by the                                                               
University of Alaska."  [Before the committee was CSHB 92(EDU).]                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE noted that at  the bill's last hearing, the sponsor                                                               
had explained the bill and public testimony had been closed.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA said  that he  still doesn't  know what  the                                                               
concept of "piercing  the corporate veil" entails  and would like                                                               
further  explanation  regarding  why  the  university  should  be                                                               
exempted from that concept.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE mentioned  that the  sponsor's staff  has provided                                                               
members with  a copy,  from Westlaw,  of a portion  of a  book by                                                             
Stephen  B. Presser  entitled Piercing  the  Corporate Veil  that                                                             
specifically addresses the concept as it pertains to Alaska.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:55:21 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
HEATH HILYARD,  Staff to Representative Mike  Kelly, Alaska State                                                               
Legislature, sponsor,  offered on behalf of  Representative Kelly                                                               
that  perhaps  Ms.  Green  could  better  address  Representative                                                               
Gara's query.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
2:55:54 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MARY E.  GREEN, Associate General Counsel,  University of Alaska,                                                               
explained:                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     What the  policy of [piercing]  the corporate  veil was                                                                    
     designed to  do was to  eliminate what is  normally the                                                                    
     rule  that a  shareholder's  assets are  free from  the                                                                    
     debts  of  the  corporation.     And  it  was  designed                                                                    
     basically  to take  those cases  where  there had  been                                                                    
     fraud, or  [where] a corporation  sets up a  fraud kind                                                                    
     of  corporation  just   to  protect  the  corporation's                                                                    
     assets, or [where]  someone does the same  thing.  That                                                                    
     was the original basis for the  rule.  The rule in most                                                                    
     parts  of  the  country   has  a  number  of  different                                                                    
     provisions. ...  Generally what  it has  is that  ... a                                                                    
     plaintiff is  allowed to pierce the  corporate veil and                                                                    
     reach  the assets  of the  shareholder  if the  subject                                                                    
     corporation had  been a mere instrumentality,  if there                                                                    
     had  been an  attempt to  perpetrate fraud,  accomplish                                                                    
     injustice or a violation of the law.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     In  Alaska, it's  much easier  to pierce  the corporate                                                                    
     veil because the [Alaska] Supreme  Court has adopted [a                                                                    
     rule specifying that] only one  of those ... [criteria]                                                                    
     needs  to be  met.  ...  It either  has  to  be a  mere                                                                    
     instrumentality  of the  shareholder, or  there has  to                                                                    
     have been  wrongful conduct.   One  of the  things that                                                                    
     the ...  [aforementioned portion of the  book, Piercing                                                                  
     the Corporate  Veil] points out  about the  Alaska rule                                                                  
     is that  ... [Alaska]  is among  the easiest  states in                                                                    
     the union  [in which]  to pierce [the]  corporate veil.                                                                    
     Secondly,  the  [aforementioned  portion of  the  book]                                                                    
     also points  out, toward  the end,  that it  looks like                                                                    
     the [Alaska] Supreme  Court is going to  an even easier                                                                    
     way to  pierce the corporate  veil - relying  solely on                                                                    
     undercapitalization of the corporation.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. GREEN continued:                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     If that  happens, certainly  ... any  shareholder [who]                                                                    
     invests in a small corporation  that doesn't have a lot                                                                    
     of  assets  is  at  risk  to  end  up  paying  for  the                                                                    
     liabilities of  the corporation.  Usually  what happens                                                                    
     in small  corporations is that  the creditors  of small                                                                    
     corporations,  because they  know that  the corporation                                                                    
     is normally  free to contract  and that they  can't get                                                                    
     assets  [of] the  shareholders, ...  require guarantees                                                                    
     from the  primary people, and  so then  the shareholder                                                                    
     would  be,  in  fact,  liable, [but]  with  a  personal                                                                    
     guarantee. ...                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     What  this bill  would do  would  make it  so that  the                                                                    
     university [would] ... be free,  of course, to contract                                                                    
     just like any  other person, to guarantee  the debts if                                                                    
     it was  appropriate - if  not, the  university's assets                                                                    
     would be protected  by what is a  very easy application                                                                    
     [of] piercing the corporate veil.  ... As a university,                                                                    
     we  need to  protect the  public's assets  in this  ...                                                                    
     vast  university,  and  that's the  reason  that  we're                                                                    
     seeking this [change to statute].                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE   noted  that   Black's  Law   Dictionary  defines                                                             
corporate  veil as,  "the legal  assumption  that the  acts of  a                                                               
corporation are not the actions  of its shareholders, so that the                                                               
shareholders  are exempt  from  liability  for the  corporation's                                                               
actions."                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:59:54 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GRUENBERG   shared   his  concern   that   small                                                               
businesses who  act as  suppliers to the  university may  be left                                                               
"holding the bag."                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS.  GREEN  replied   that  this  is  an   obvious  problem,  but                                                               
commented, "That's  true in every  small corporation."   She said                                                               
that small suppliers can get  a personal guarantee from the major                                                               
people  who are  running the  corporation in  order to  avoid the                                                               
normal rule that shareholders aren't  liable.  She commented that                                                               
this  bill  would  not  change that  protection  that  the  small                                                               
business  owner has  to  choose  not to  extend  credit to  small                                                               
corporations.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  remarked  that  the  [Alaska]  Supreme                                                               
Court  has considered  this issue  on several  occasions and  has                                                               
enacted a  rule that's  an expansion of  the common  law "because                                                               
the court realizes that in  Alaska we're dealing with some fairly                                                               
unsophisticated  people and  we're dealing  with, in  many cases,                                                               
small  people who  ... never  heard of  the corporate  veil [and]                                                               
don't  know much  about this."   He  concluded that  the [Alaska]                                                               
Supreme  Court has  essentially  said that  [a supplier]  doesn't                                                               
have to get  personal guarantees, and if  the corporation doesn't                                                               
pay  its bill,  the  supplier will  be  able to  go  to court  to                                                               
collect that money.   He said:  "Here we're  letting probably the                                                               
biggest shareholder in  the whole state, the  ... university, off                                                               
the hook.   The state is in the least  equitable position to want                                                               
this break.   Nobody else gets this break in  dealing with small,                                                               
undercapitalized corporations.  Why should the State of Alaska?"                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  offered her  belief that  issues must  be weighed,                                                               
and  in  this   instance,  the  greater  good   of  allowing  the                                                               
university to  invest in small  businesses that might  make great                                                               
technological  advances outweighs  [other  considerations].   She                                                               
commented that  this is one way  for new small businesses  to get                                                               
some capital,  which is very hard  to get in Alaska.   She opined                                                               
that the  university isn't going  to invest  if it is  exposed to                                                               
tremendous liability.  She continued:                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     We're not saying that we  would allow the university to                                                                    
     be  an integral,  active  player committing  wrongdoing                                                                    
     and  then  shielding them  from  that  wrong. ...  What                                                                    
     we're saying is that we're going  to allow them to be a                                                                    
     passive investor  to provide  some of the  capital seed                                                                    
     money to grow  these companies, but we're  not going to                                                                    
     hold  them,  the entire  of  the  University of  Alaska                                                                    
     budget and  subsequently the State of  Alaska's general                                                                    
     fund, on the hook for it.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
3:06:45 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said that the  way that Chair McGuire is                                                               
interpreting  the  bill  is  more  palatable  than  it  would  be                                                               
otherwise.  However, he noted, the  way the bill is drafted it is                                                               
different.   He turned to  page 1, line  10, which says  that the                                                               
corporation is  "not considered  to be a  part of  the university                                                               
for any  purpose," which he surmised  is a much broader  grant of                                                               
immunity than Chair McGuire has stated.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  noted that perhaps  amendments could  address that                                                               
issue at a  later point, and reiterated her  understanding of the                                                               
bill.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL  commented, "Just  the fact that  they are                                                               
going to  put the full  weight of the  university behind it  as a                                                               
project in  allowing expertise  to go in  brings huge  ... 'blue-                                                               
sky' capital to  these projects, and might even be  a part of the                                                               
responsibility. ..."                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE reiterated  that  public testimony  on  HB 92  was                                                               
closed.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
3:09:33 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA, mentioning  that  he would  be offering  an                                                               
amendment to address  his concern, explained that  his concern is                                                               
that  current  corporate law  says  that  the shareholder,  which                                                               
would  be the  university in  this case,  is not  liable for  the                                                               
debts  or  the injuries  caused  by  the corporation  unless  the                                                               
shareholder  has committed  fraud  or is  engaged  in a  wrongful                                                               
conduct.   He opined that  by passing this bill,  the legislature                                                               
would  be saying  that the  university  can engage  in fraud  and                                                               
wrongful  conduct   without  having  its  assets   touched.    He                                                               
commented, "It's  a very  weird way  to encourage  development at                                                               
the  university,"  adding that  he  understands  the problem  but                                                               
doesn't think that this bill is the right solution.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA said  he  would like  to  make a  conceptual                                                               
amendment  that clarifies  that  this bill  would  not allow  the                                                               
university  to  escape  liability  if  it  engages  in  fraud  or                                                               
wrongful conduct.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MS.  GREEN replied  that such  a change  would be  fine with  the                                                               
university.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA  made a motion to  adopt Conceptual Amendment                                                               
1, to  retain the parts of  the corporate veil rule  that prevent                                                               
an  entity from  engaging in  fraud or  wrongful conduct.   There                                                               
being no objection, Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  noted  that Ms.  Green  was  concerned                                                               
about the  university's exposure  based only  on the  theory that                                                               
the small nonprofit  business would be a  mere instrumentality of                                                               
the university.   He pondered whether he could craft  the bill to                                                               
say that.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS. GREEN  said she  doesn't think that  would be  needed because                                                               
the [Alaska] Supreme Court has said  that there are only two ways                                                               
to  pierce the  corporate veil;  one  is from  fraud or  wrongful                                                               
conduct and the other is through a mere instrumentality rule.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE remarked:                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
     The [conceptual  amendment] is  in.   There'll be  a CS                                                                    
     that comes  back, and  what we  can do  ... is  have it                                                                    
     attached  with a  legal memo  that basically  certifies                                                                    
     that  this   amendment  completes  our  goal   in  this                                                                    
     committee  of  keeping  mere instrumentalities  in  and                                                                    
     wrongful conduct out.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG agreed that that would be fine.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ANDERSON   moved  to  report  CSHB   92(EDU),  as                                                               
amended, out  of committee  with individual  recommendations, the                                                               
accompanying  zero  fiscal  note,  and  the  attached  letter  of                                                               
intent.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA objected  for the purpose of  discussion.  He                                                               
asked   Ms.   Green   to   clarify   the   reference   to   "mere                                                               
instrumentality."                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
3:15:13 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. GREEN explained that there are  five to eleven factors in the                                                               
"mere instrumentality" portion.  She explained:                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     One is  that a parent owns  all or most of  the capital                                                                    
     stock.     Two   is   that  the   parent  and   subsidy                                                                    
     corporations have common directors.   Three is that the                                                                    
     corporation finances the subsidy.  ... Four is that the                                                                    
     parent  subscribes  to all  the  capital  stock of  the                                                                    
     subsidiary or  otherwise causes its incorporation.   We                                                                    
     would   probably  cause   the   incorporation  of   any                                                                    
     corporation  we   were  doing.    The   subsidiary  has                                                                    
     inadequate  capital, which  is  likely  in these  small                                                                    
     startups, or  within public policy nonprofits.   Parent                                                                    
     pays the salaries  and other expenses or  losses of the                                                                    
     subsidiary.  ... The  subsidiary  has substantially  no                                                                    
     business except  with the parent  and no  assets except                                                                    
     those conveyed to it by the parent.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     Chances are  the startup  that we  had would  have some                                                                    
     assets from  the inventor as  well.  And  not following                                                                    
     corporate form:  the parent using  the property  as its                                                                    
     own and the directors of  the subsidiary are not acting                                                                    
     independently in  the interest of the  subsidiary.  But                                                                    
     the  problem is  that you  don't  have to  have all  of                                                                    
     those  things met  to be  ruled a  mere instrumentality                                                                    
     and  thus  have  the  corporate   veil  pierced.    The                                                                    
     [Alaska] Supreme  Court has said  that you can  have as                                                                    
     little as two,  and has suggested that  even having low                                                                    
     capitalization is enough.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA removed  his  objection and  asked that  Ms.                                                               
Green fax  that list to  the committee.   He noted that  he still                                                               
had some  concern about the bill,  saying, "I'm not so  sure this                                                               
is good policy to let people avoid responsibility this way."                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  turned the  committee's attention  to a                                                               
memorandum to  Representative Mike  Kelly from  Legislative Legal                                                               
Services  dated January  13, 2005,  and pointed  out one  section                                                               
that read in part:                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     With regard to nonprofit corporations, did you have in                                                                     
     mind corporations from other states ...?                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG, remarking  that nonprofits  from other                                                               
states  might be  governed by  the other  state's laws,  asked if                                                               
perhaps the bill  should be limited to  investments in nonprofits                                                               
within the State of Alaska.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS.  GREEN replied:    "Certainly  the conflicts-of-law  question                                                               
would arise  in a deal with  ... out-of-state entities.   We will                                                               
have these. ... What we will  insist on before we enter into such                                                               
an agreement  is that the  law of Alaska  applies so that  we are                                                               
protected."   She remarked that  the only out-of-state  deals the                                                               
university will  be making are  those that promote  education and                                                               
research, rather than those that pertain to "startups."                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
3:19:51 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE,  noting that there  was no longer an  objection to                                                               
the motion  to report CSHB  92(EDU), as amended,  from committee,                                                               
stated that  CSHB 92(JUD) was  reported from the  House Judiciary                                                               
Standing Committee.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
SB 87 - SEAT BELT VIOLATION AS PRIMARY OFFENSE                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
3:21:55 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  announced that the  final order of  business would                                                               
be SENATE BILL  NO. 87, "An Act relating to  motor vehicle safety                                                               
belt violations."  [Before the committee was HCS SB 87(STA).]                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR CON  BUNDE, Alaska State  Legislature, sponsor of  SB 87,                                                               
said  the  bill  changes  Alaska's   seatbelt  law  such  that  a                                                               
violation would  be a primary  offense.  The  current "secondary"                                                               
law is required for federal funding,  he noted, adding that SB 87                                                               
simply allows a police officer to  stop and ticket a motorist for                                                               
not wearing a  seatbelt.  He said testimony  from law enforcement                                                               
indicates that SB 87 will not  make a change to police practices.                                                               
If police  want to stop  a car, there  are any number  of reasons                                                               
that are much  more visible than a seatbelt violation,  he said -                                                               
for example,  a cracked windshield, snow-obscured  license plate,                                                               
and  bad lane  changes.   He  said the  fear that  the bill  will                                                               
result  in more  "preemptive"  stops is  not  logical.   National                                                               
Highway  Safety  Administration  data  indicates  that  in  other                                                               
states  with this  law, the  number of  stops has  not risen,  he                                                               
noted, but seatbelt  usage has - by  up to 12 percent.   About 84                                                               
percent  of  Alaskans  currently  use  seatbelts,  and  if  usage                                                               
increases to  90 percent,  the federal  government will  give the                                                               
state $18 million for highway safety [projects], he said.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
3:27:13 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  BUNDE said  that  more importantly,  the  law will  save                                                               
lives,  and offered  his belief  that had  this bill  passed last                                                               
year,  there would  be six  or seven  Alaskans alive  who instead                                                               
died  from lack  of  seatbelt use.    He said  he  has heard  the                                                               
argument that "I  always wear my belt  - I just don't  want to be                                                               
told I have  to," adding that he  has a hard time  with that kind                                                               
of logic.   He said he is guilty of  having a libertarian streak,                                                               
except when  people feel that  it is  their own business  if they                                                               
suffer  from not  wearing their  seatbelt.   There is  a cost  to                                                               
society,  including  [a rise  in]  insurance  rates and  Medicaid                                                               
rates, he  declared, adding that although  he supports individual                                                               
rights, if  those rights  cost the society,  the society  has the                                                               
right to  "offer this  minor, minor change."   There  are already                                                               
primary seatbelt  laws for  passengers and  children under  16 in                                                               
Alaska now, he added.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  BUNDE said,  "We're going  from  a primary  law in  some                                                               
instances to  a primary law  in all instances."   He said  he had                                                               
intended to  gather the names of  people who suffered due  to not                                                               
wearing  a  seatbelt,  but  it  was  too  emotionally  difficult.                                                               
However, he did have a man contact  him who said he could use his                                                               
19-year-old son  as an example  of one  who would still  be alive                                                               
had he  used a seatbelt.   Senator Bunde said his  bill is really                                                               
targeted at that age group; data  shows that young adults are the                                                               
most likely  to not use  a seatbelt.  "This  is a small  trade of                                                               
individual freedom for a large societal gain," he concluded.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
3:33:09 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  asked if  points would be  assessed and                                                               
if one's insurance costs would go up if he/she were ticketed.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR BUNDE  said there  was a  suggestion to  cancel insurance                                                               
for  anyone  involved  in  an  accident who  was  not  wearing  a                                                               
seatbelt, but  such would have  resulted in a far  more draconian                                                               
impact on  people's rights.   He characterized HCS SB  87(STA) as                                                               
fine-tuned, and  concluded by indicating  that he is  amenable to                                                               
incorporating  a  proposed  amendment  from  Representative  Gara                                                               
[which  later   became  known  as   Amendment  1],   labeled  24-                                                               
LS0457\Y.1, Luckhaupt, 4/21/05, which read:                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Page 2, following line 7:                                                                                                  
          Insert a new bill section to read:                                                                                    
        "*Sec.3. AS 28.05.095 is amended by adding a new                                                                      
     subsection to read:                                                                                                        
          (f) In a prosecution under (a) of this section,                                                                       
     the  prosecution  must  show  that  the  peace  officer                                                                    
     stopping of  detaining the vehicle  personally observed                                                                    
     the violation of (a) of  the section before stopping or                                                                    
     detaining the vehicle."                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
3:35:51 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CINDY   CASHEN,  National   Council   on   Alcoholism  and   Drug                                                               
Dependence,  after noting  that  she was  recently the  executive                                                               
director of the  Juneau Chapter of Mothers  Against Drunk Driving                                                               
(MADD), acknowledged  that there have  been claims that  MADD has                                                               
taken grant money to  lobby for the bill.  This  is not true, she                                                               
said,  and  explained  that  MADD has  a  media  campaign  called                                                               
"Click-it or  Ticket" under the  National Highway  Traffic Safety                                                               
Administration, which  funnels money  through the  Alaska Highway                                                               
Safety  Office.   She surmised  that it  is perhaps  through this                                                               
campaign  that   the  misperception   arises.     Another  second                                                               
accusation she has  heard, she relayed, is that if  SB 87 were to                                                               
become law,  MADD would pressure  law enforcement to  pull people                                                               
over.  "That's ridiculous," she declared.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
3:38:19 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
KEVIN  E. QUINLAN,  Chief, Safety  Advocacy  Division, Office  of                                                               
Safety    Recommendations     and    Accomplishments,    National                                                               
Transportation  Safety  Board  (NTSB),   said  the  NTSB  is  the                                                               
nation's crash investigators,  and its view is that SB  87 is the                                                               
single most  important measure  that the state  could adopt.   He                                                               
said it is very effective,  and noted that military installations                                                               
require seatbelt use.   He concluded that the bill  will have its                                                               
greatest impact on the state's youngest drivers.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
3:41:33 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
JOAN   DIAMOND,  Department   of  Health   and  Human   Services,                                                               
Municipality of  Anchorage (MOA),  said there  is no  downside to                                                               
SB 87.   She relayed that she  collects data on injuries  for her                                                               
department,  and  her  research  shows  that  the  benefit  of  a                                                               
seatbelt is that  it distributes the force of a  collision to the                                                               
strongest parts  of the  body -  hips, shoulders,  and chest.   A                                                               
person's  head or  chest is  less likely  to strike  the steering                                                               
wheel or  windshield or be thrown  out of the vehicle.   She said                                                               
there is a  79 percent use rate,  and the goal is  to increase it                                                               
to 91 percent.   "We are counting on you to  pass the primary law                                                               
this year," she stated.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
3:43:18 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
DON  SMITH, Administrator,  Highway  Safety  Office, Division  of                                                               
Program  Development,  Department   of  Transportation  &  Public                                                               
Facilities  (DOT&PF),  relayed that  he  is  also the  governor's                                                               
representative  for highway  safety, and  asked the  committee to                                                               
imagine an outbreak of a disease  in Alaska that killed or maimed                                                               
4,500 people.   He opined that if this many  Alaskans were to die                                                               
or be hurt from any one  disease in a single year, Alaskans would                                                               
demand a  vaccine.  He noted  that the irony is  that "we already                                                               
have the best  vaccine available to reduce the death  toll on our                                                               
highways,  and those  are seatbelts."   He  said 101  people died                                                               
last year  in crashes,  but 54  would have  survived if  they had                                                               
been wearing their seatbelts.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
3:44:33 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked  if there is a  statutory definition of                                                               
highway.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MR.  SMITH  indicated that  it  includes  every roadway  that  is                                                               
publicly maintained for vehicular travel.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
3:45:32 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
TODD  SHARP,  Lieutenant,  Division  of  Alaska  State  Troopers,                                                               
Department of  Public Safety  (DPS), said SB  87 is  about saving                                                               
lives, reducing  injuries, and keeping people  from being ejected                                                               
from  their vehicles,  all  of which  the  Alaska State  Troopers                                                               
support  100  percent,  adding  that he  has  seen  the  proposed                                                               
amendment and is absolutely comfortable with it.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  COGHILL  noted  that  the bill,  via  Section  3,                                                               
repeals [AS 28.05.095(e)], which currently reads:                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
          (e) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a                                                                     
     peace officer  may not stop  or detain a  motor vehicle                                                                    
     to determine  compliance with (a)  of this  section, or                                                                    
     issue  a  citation  for  a violation  of  (a)  of  this                                                                    
     section, unless  the peace  officer has  probable cause                                                                    
      to stop or detain the motor vehicle other than for a                                                                      
     violation of (a) of this section.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL  offered his  belief that the  standard of                                                               
probable cause is going to be  reduced.  He asked, "When you stop                                                               
another vehicle right  now, under the probable cause  law that we                                                               
have right now,  what do you have  to visually see?"   He said he                                                               
might  offer an  amendment  to  delete Section  3  and leave  the                                                               
standard of probable cause.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
LIEUTENANT SHARP said an officer  would have to see and recognize                                                               
the violation to make a stop.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  COGHILL questioned  whether an  officer would  be                                                               
able to see the violation.  "It  seems to me ..., if we pass this                                                               
law as stated,  un-amended, then you really  literally could stop                                                               
any car you wanted to stop."                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
LIEUTENANT SHARP said he doesn't see  it that way; an officer has                                                               
to see  and recognize the violation  and be able to  testify that                                                               
the violation was witnessed.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON said  he supports [Representative Gara's]                                                               
proposed amendment.   He asked if  a person could be  cited for a                                                               
seatbelt  violation if  he or  she  was pulled  over for  another                                                               
reason.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
LIEUTENANT  SHARP said  he could  issue a  citation; however,  he                                                               
would  want to  be  able  to witness  that  that  person was  not                                                               
wearing the  seatbelt while  the vehicle was  being operated.   A                                                               
person could remove a seatbelt after being stopped, he noted.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
3:49:38 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL  reiterated that  he would like  to delete                                                               
Section 3.  He opined that the  law could be used to stop anybody                                                               
at any  time for any purpose  when an officer may  be looking for                                                               
other things.  "I'm certainly not  here to protect people who are                                                               
doing  wrong things,  but it  may  be just,  for example,  [that]                                                               
somebody has a attitude about me and wants to just stop me."                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said  he understands Representative Coghill's                                                               
concern,  but relayed  that the  sponsor has  satisfied him  that                                                               
everything is going  to be alright under the bill.   The proposed                                                               
amendment is  something that is  already implied in the  bill, he                                                               
said,  and suggested  stating  somewhere else  in  the bill  that                                                               
nothing repeals the legal requirement of probable cause.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
3:52:52 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL  said that is  the heart of  his question.                                                               
If  someone is  stopped, there  must be  probable cause.   "As  a                                                               
primary law, I  still think you need to have  some reason, and it                                                               
seems to me that [current law, AS 28.05.095(e),] does that."                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KOTT  asked if  a violation  will become  a moving                                                               
violation subject "to points."                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
LIEUTENANT SHARP said  there are no points for  this offense, and                                                               
offered  his  belief that  it  wouldn't  be considered  a  moving                                                               
violation.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
3:54:36 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
LIEUTENANT  SHARP  said he  did  not  know  how it  would  affect                                                               
insurance costs.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  said her car  insurance company asked  her whether                                                               
she wears her seatbelt.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
LIEUTENANT SHARP said a passenger could receive a citation.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON  pointed out  that such  is subject  to a                                                               
fine of only $15.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
3:56:38 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  BUNDE  said  [AS  28.05.095(e)]  makes  it  a  secondary                                                               
offense,  and  keeping  that provision  in  statute  negates  the                                                               
intent of  the bill.   He  said pilots don't  get in  an airplane                                                               
without  a seatbelt,  and there  are many  more car  crashes than                                                               
airplane crashes.  Seatbelts also  keep a driver controlled under                                                               
extreme maneuvers, he  added, which helps prevent  accidents.  Do                                                               
it for the kids, he concluded.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
3:59:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA made  a motion  to adopt  Amendment 1  [text                                                               
provided previously].                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON objected for the purpose of discussion.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said Amendment 1  would require an officer to                                                               
see that someone is not wearing  a seatbelt before making a stop.                                                               
It will protect against a citizen  telling on someone else who is                                                               
driving without a seatbelt.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON removed his objection.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made  a motion to amend  Amendment 1, to                                                               
replace the  word "show" with the  word "prove".  There  being no                                                               
objection, Amendment 1 was amended.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  asked  whether   there  were  any  objections  to                                                               
Amendment  1, as  amended.   There  being none,  Amendment 1,  as                                                               
amended, was adopted.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  COGHILL said  he wants  to make  sure there  is a                                                               
violation  before  an  officer  stops a  vehicle,  and  asked  if                                                               
Amendment 1, as amended, did that.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  BUNDE  offered  his understanding  that  there  must  be                                                               
probable cause in order to bring a prosecution.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
4:04:08 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG said  yes  to Representative  Coghill's                                                               
question.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said he agrees, but  it would not hurt to add                                                               
language to  the effect  that "nothing in  this bill  reduces the                                                               
requirement that an officer have  probably cause before they stop                                                               
a car."                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  suggested  wording   it  such  that  a                                                               
seatbelt violation is not probable  cause for search and seizure;                                                               
he then he withdrew that suggestion.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
4:05:57 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  COGHILL   made  a  motion  to   adopt  Conceptual                                                               
Amendment 2, to say, "Nothing in  the bill minimizes the need for                                                               
establishing probable  cause for stopping or  detaining a vehicle                                                               
for a violation."                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  suggested that  that language  could be                                                               
inserted  into  AS  28.05.095, and  indicated  that  he  supports                                                               
Conceptual Amendment 2.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  asked  whether   there  were  any  objections  to                                                               
Conceptual   Amendment  2.      There   being  none,   Conceptual                                                               
Amendment 2 was adopted.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
4:06:44 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ANDERSON  moved  to  report HCS  SB  87(STA),  as                                                               
amended,  out of  committee with  individual recommendations  and                                                               
the accompanying fiscal notes.   There being no objection, HCS SB                                                               
87(JUD)   was  reported   from  the   House  Judiciary   Standing                                                               
Committee.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
ADJOURNMENT                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
4:07:12 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
There being no  further business before the  committee, the House                                                               
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 4:07 p.m.                                                                 

Document Name Date/Time Subjects