Legislature(1993 - 1994)
04/19/1993 01:00 PM House JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
April 19, 1993
1:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Rep. Brian Porter, Chairman
Rep. Pete Kott
Rep. Gail Phillips
Rep. Joe Green
Rep. Cliff Davidson
MEMBERS ABSENT
Rep. Jeannette James, Vice-Chair
Rep. Jim Nordlund
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SB 86 "An Act relating to funds transfers under the
Uniform Commercial Code; changing Alaska Rule of
Civil Procedure 82; and providing for an effective
date."
PASSED OUT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION
SB 112 "An Act relating to the Uniform Commercial Code;
amending Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure 8 and 82,
and Alaska Rule of Evidence 402; and providing for
an effective date."
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE PASSED OUT
WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION
SB 149 "An Act revising the laws governing financial
institutions and relating to trust companies, the
Alaska Small Loans Act, and the Premium Financing
Act; amending Alaska Rule of Criminal Procedure 17
and Alaska Rule of Civil Procedure 45(b); and
providing for an effective date."
HOUSE LABOR AND COMMERCE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE
PASSED OUT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION
SB 84 "An Act relating to fees for identification cards
and certain motor vehicle licenses and permits; to
licenses issued to drivers and to revocation of a
license to drive; and providing for an effective
date."
BILL (AMENDED SENATE) PASSED OUT WITH A DO PASS
RECOMMENDATION
HB 132 "An Act extending the time period of all permits
issued by the state relating to the extraction or
removal of resources if the holder of the permits
is involved in litigation concerning the issuance
or validity of any permit related to the
extraction or removal."
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE PASSED OUT WITH A
DO PASS RECOMMENDATION
HB 187 "An Act authorizing the interception of private
communications related to the commission of
certain criminal offenses; making related
amendments to statutes relating to eavesdropping
and wiretapping; relating to the penalty for
violation of statutes relating to eavesdropping
and unauthorized interception, publication, or use
of private communications; and providing for an
effective date."
PASSED OUT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION
Additional bill(s) heard:
SB 54 "An Act relating to violations of laws by
juveniles, to the remedies for offenses and
activities committed by juveniles and to records
of those offenses, and to incarceration of
juveniles who have been charged, prosecuted, or
convicted as adults; and providing for an
effective date."
SENATE LETTER OF INTENT ADOPTED
WITNESS REGISTER
BILL KELDER, Aide
Sen. Jay Kerttula
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 427
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
Phone: 465-6600
Position Statement: Supported SB 112 and SB 86
ART PETERSON
National Conference of Commissioners on
Uniform State Laws
One Sealaska Plaza, Suite 202
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Phone: 586-4000
Position Statement: Supported SB 112 and SB 86
GAYLE HORETSKI, Committee Counsel
House Judiciary Committee
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 120
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
Phone: 465-6841
Position Statement: Discussed SB 54 and HB 132
JOSH FINK, Aide
Sen. Tim Kelly
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 101
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
Phone: 465-3822
Position Statement: Supported SB 149; Supported SB 84
JEFF BUSH
Division of Banking, Securities and Corporations
Department of Commerce and Economic Development
175 South Franklin Street, Suite 308
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Phone: 463-4150
Position Statement: Discussed SB 149
KEITH SILVER
505 West Northern Lights Boulevard, #216
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Phone: 272-4445
Position Statement: Discussed SB 149
DAVID STRATTON
8300 Briarwood, Suite B
Anchorage, Alaska 99518
Phone: 522-1194
Position Statement: Discussed SB 149
(Spoke via teleconference)
LINDA HALL
3111 C Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Phone: 561-1250
Position Statement: Discussed SB 149
(Spoke via teleconference)
KAREN HOFSTAD
P.O. Box 203
Petersburg, Alaska 99833
Phone: 772-3858
Position Statement: Discussed SB 149
(Spoke via teleconference)
SUSAN ERICKSON
P.O. Box 58
Petersburg, Alaska 99833
Phone: 772-3858
Position Statement: Discussed SB 149
(Spoke via teleconference)
ARNE IVERSEN
1831 Tongass Avenue
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 225-9841
Position Statement: Discussed SB 149
(Spoke via teleconference)
JAMES BARRY
1831 Tongass Avenue
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 225-9841
Position Statement: Discussed SB 149
(Spoke via teleconference)
JIM SARVELA
P.O. Box 7920
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 228-4219
Position Statement: Discussed SB 149
(Spoke via teleconference)
RICK HARDCASTLE
100 Main Street
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 225-2176
Position Statement: Discussed SB 149
(Spoke via teleconference)
JACK DAVIES
100 Main Street
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 225-2176
Position Statement: Discussed SB 149
(Spoke via teleconference)
JACK BERRY
1831 Tongass Avenue
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: 225-9841
Position Statement: Discussed SB 149
(Spoke via teleconference)
JOHN SWEENEY
508 Marine Way
Kodiak, Alaska 99615
Phone: 486-3101
Position Statement: Discussed SB 149
(Spoke via teleconference)
BUD JAEGER, President
Alaska Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers
301 Seward Street
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Phone: 586-2414
Position Statement: Discussed SB 149
JUANITA HENSLEY
Chief, Driver Services
Division of Motor Vehicles
Department of Public Safety
P.O. Box 20020
Juneau, Alaska 99802
Phone: 465-4335
Position Statement: Supported SB 84
REP. TOM BRICE
Alaska State Legislature
Court Building, Room 605
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Phone: 465-3466
Position Statement: Prime sponsor of HB 132
MARGOT KNUTH
Assistant Attorney General
Criminal Division
Department of Law
P.O. Box 110300
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0300
Phone: 465-3428
Position Statement: Supported HB 187
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: SB 86
SHORT TITLE: FUND TRANSFERS UNDER THE UCC
BILL VERSION:
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) KERTTULA
TITLE: "An Act relating to funds transfers under the Uniform
Commercial Code; changing Alaska Rule of Civil Procedure 82;
and providing for an effective date."
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
2/03/93 220 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
02/03/93 221 (S) LABOR & COMMERCE, JUDICIARY
03/02/93 (S) L&C AT 01:30 PM FAHRENKAMP
ROOM 203
03/02/93 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/03/93 588 (S) L&C RPT 1DP 2NR
03/03/93 588 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTES (DCED,LAW)
03/12/93 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ RM 211
03/15/93 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ RM 211
03/19/93 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ RM 211
03/19/93 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
03/22/93 896 (S) JUD RPT 4NR
03/22/93 896 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FNS (DCED,LAW)
03/24/93 (S) MINUTE(RLS)
03/31/93 (H) MINUTE(ECO)
04/02/93 1063 (S) RULES 3CAL 1NR 4/2/93
04/02/93 1069 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
04/02/93 1069 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING
UNAN CONSENT
04/02/93 1069 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME SB 86
04/02/93 1070 (S) PASSED Y20 N-
04/02/93 1070 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE VOTE SAME AS
PASSAGE
04/02/93 1070 (S) COURT RULE CHANGE VOTE SAME AS
PASSAGE
04/02/93 1080 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
04/02/93 954 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
04/02/93 954 (H) LABOR & COMMERCE, JUDICIARY
04/13/93 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
04/13/93 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
04/14/93 1202 (H) L&C RPT 2DP 5NR
04/14/93 1202 (H) -2 SENATE ZERO FNS (DCED,LAW)
3/3/93
04/19/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: SB 112
SHORT TITLE: UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE REVISIONS
BILL VERSION: CSSB 112(JUD)
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) KERTTULA
TITLE: "An Act relating to the Uniform Commercial Code;
amending Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure 8 and 82, and
Alaska Rule of Evidence 402; and providing for an effective
date."
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
02/11/93 338 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
02/11/93 338 (S) LABOR & COMMERCE, JUDICIARY,
FINANCE
03/02/93 (S) L&C AT 01:30 PM FAHRENKAMP
ROOM 203
03/02/93 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/04/93 (S) L&C AT 01:30 PM FAHRENKAMP
ROOM 203
03/04/93 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/05/93 613 (S) L&C RPT CS 1DP 3NR
SAME TITLE
03/05/93 613 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTES TO SB & CS
(DCED, LAW)
03/19/93 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ RM 211
03/19/93 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
03/22/93 897 (S) JUD RPT CS 4NR
SAME TITLE
03/22/93 897 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTE TO L&C & JUD
CS (DNR)
03/22/93 897 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FNS APPLY TO CS
(DCED,LAW)
03/22/93 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518
03/23/93 911 (S) FIN RPT 3DP 4NR (JUD)CS
SAME TITLE
03/23/93 911 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FNS APPLY (DCED,
LAW, DNR)
03/23/93 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518
03/24/93 (S) MINUTE(RLS)
03/31/93 1004 (S) RULES RPT 3CAL 1NR 3/31/93
03/31/93 1008 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
03/31/93 1008 (S) JUD CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT
03/31/93 1008 (S) THIRD READING 4/1 CALENDAR
03/31/93 (H) MINUTE(ECO)
04/01/93 1032 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME CSSB
112(JUD)
04/01/93 1033 (S) PASSED Y20 N-
04/01/93 1033 (S) COURT RULE CHANGES VOTE SAME AS
PASSAGE
04/01/93 1033 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE CLAUSES SAME AS
PASSAGE
04/01/93 1033 (S) KELLY NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION
04/02/93 1079 (S) RECONSIDERATION NOT TAKEN UP
04/02/93 1080 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
04/02/93 954 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
04/02/93 955 (H) LABOR & COMMERCE, JUDICIARY
04/13/93 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
04/13/93 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
04/14/93 1203 (H) L&C RPT 2DP 5NR
04/14/93 1203 (H) -2 SEN ZERO FNS (LAW, DCED)
3/5/93
04/14/93 1203 (H) -SEN ZERO FN (DNR) 3/22/93
04/19/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: SB 149
SHORT TITLE: REVISION OF BANKING CODE
BILL VERSION: CS CSSB 149(FIN)
SPONSOR(S): LABOR & COMMERCE
TITLE: "An Act revising the laws governing financial
institutions and relating to trust companies, the Alaska
Small Loans Act, and the Premium Financing Act; amending
Alaska Rule of Criminal Procedure 17 and Alaska Rule of
Civil Procedure 45(b); and providing for an effective date."
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
03/05/93 616 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
03/05/93 616 (S) JUDICIARY, FINANCE
03/19/93 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211
03/19/93 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
03/22/93 898 (S) JUD RPT 1DP 2NR
03/22/93 898 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DCED)
03/22/93 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518
03/23/93 911 (S) FIN RPT CS 5DP 2NR
SAME TITLE
03/23/93 911 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FN (DCED)
03/23/93 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518
03/24/93 (S) MINUTE(RLS)
03/31/93 1004 (S) RULES 3CAL 1NR 3/31/93
03/31/93 1007 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
03/31/93 1007 (S) FIN CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT
03/31/93 1008 (S) ADVANCE TO 3RD RDG FAILED
Y12 N8
03/31/93 1008 (S) THIRD READING 4/1 CALENDAR
04/01/93 1031 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME CSSB
149(FIN)
04/01/93 1032 (S) PASSED Y18 N2
04/01/93 1032 (S) COURT RULE CHANGES VOTE SAME AS
PASSAGE
04/01/93 1032 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE VOTE SAME AS
PASSAGE
04/01/93 1032 (S) ADAMS NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION
04/02/93 1079 (S) RECONSIDERATION NOT TAKEN UP
04/02/93 1081 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
04/02/93 955 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
04/02/93 955 (H) LABOR & COMMERCE, JUDICIARY
04/13/93 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
04/13/93 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
04/14/93 1203 (H) L&C RPT HCS(L&C) 2DP 5NR
04/14/93 1204 (H) DP: MULDER, HUDSON
04/14/93 1204 (H) NR: PORTER, SITTON, WILLIAMS,
GREEN,MACKIE
04/14/93 1204 (H) -SEN ZERO FN (DCED) 3/22/93
04/19/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: SB 84
SHORT TITLE: REVOKE DRIVER'S LICENSE IF USE FALSE I.D.
BILL VERSION: SB 84 AM
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) KELLY,Salo
TITLE: "An Act relating to fees for identification cards and
certain motor vehicle licenses and permits; to licenses
issued to drivers and to revocation of a license to drive;
and providing for an effective date."
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
02/01/93 204 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
02/01/93 204 (S) STA, JUD, FINANCE
02/10/93 323 (S) COSPONSOR: SALO
02/17/93 (S) STA AT 09:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
02/17/93 (S) MINUTE(STA)
02/17/93 (S) MINUTE(STA)
02/19/93 409 (S) STA RPT 3DP 2NR
02/19/93 410 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (S.STA)
03/05/93 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211
03/05/93 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
03/08/93 657 (S) JUD RPT 4DP 1NR
03/12/93 768 (S) FISCAL NOTE (DPS)
03/08/93 657 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FN (S.STA)
03/15/93 (S) FIN AT 08:30 AM SENATE FIN 518
03/17/93 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518
03/22/93 896 (S) FIN RPT 6DP 1NR
03/22/93 896 (S) FISCAL NOTE (S.FIN/DPS)
03/23/93 (S) MINUTE(RLS)
03/25/93 943 (S) RULES RPT 3 CAL 1 OTHER REC
3/25/93
03/25/93 947 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
03/25/93 948 (S) TECH AM TO AM 1 ADOPTED UNAN
CONSENT
03/25/93 948 (S) AM NO 1 ADOPTED Y9 N8 E1 A2
03/25/93 949 (S) ADVANCE TO 3RD READING FLD Y9
N8 E1 A2
03/25/93 949 (S) THIRD READING 3/29 CALENDAR
03/29/93 975 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME SB 84 AM
03/29/93 975 (S) HELD IN THIRD READING TO 3/31
CALENDAR
03/31/93 1008 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 2 ADOPTED
Y11 N9
03/31/93 1009 (S) AM NO 2 ADOPTED Y12 N8
03/31/93 1010 (S) AUTOMATICALLY IN THIRD READING
03/31/93 1010 (S) PASSED Y19 N1
03/31/93 1010 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE VOTE SAME AS
PASSAGE
03/31/93 1010 (S) ADAMS NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION
04/01/93 1028 (S) RECON TAKEN UP-IN THIRD READING
04/01/93 1029 (S) PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y19
N1
04/01/93 1029 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE VOTE SAME AS
PASSAGE
04/01/93 1049 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
04/02/93 925 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
04/02/93 925 (H) JUDICIARY, FINANCE
04/19/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: HB 132
SHORT TITLE: EXTEND RESOURCE EXTRACTION PERMIT/LEASE
BILL VERSION:
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) BRICE,Kott,James
TITLE: "An Act extending the time period of all permits
issued by the state relating to the extraction or removal of
resources if the holder of the permit is involved in
litigation concerning the issuance or validity of any permit
related to the extraction or removal."
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
02/05/93 236 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
02/05/93 236 (H) RESOURCES, JUDICIARY, FINANCE
03/22/93 739 (H) COSPONSOR(S): KOTT
03/29/93 838 (H) COSPONSOR(S): JAMES
03/23/93 (H) MINUTE(ARR)
03/26/93 (H) MINUTE(RES)
03/29/93 (H) RES AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 124
03/29/93 (H) MINUTE(RES)
03/30/93 848 (H) RES RPT CS(RES) NEW TITLE 5DP
2NR
03/30/93 848 (H) DP: HUDSON, CARNEY,
JAMES,BUNDE,WILLIAMS
03/30/93 848 (H) NR: FINKELSTEIN, DAVIES
03/30/93 848 (H) -ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DNR) 3/30/93
04/16/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120
04/16/93 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
04/19/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: HB 187
SHORT TITLE: INTERCEPTION OF PRIVATE COMMUNICATIONS
BILL VERSION:
SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
TITLE: "An Act authorizing the interception of private
communications related to the commission of certain criminal
offenses; making related amendments to statutes relating to
eavesdropping and wiretapping; relating to the penalty for
violation of statutes relating to eavesdropping and
unauthorized interception, publication, or use of private
communications; and providing for an effective date."
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
05/01/03 (S) JUD AT 12:00 PM BELTZ ROOM 211
03/01/93 488 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
03/01/93 488 (H) LABOR & COMMERCE, JUDICIARY,
FINANCE
03/01/93 488 (H) -3 ZERO FNS(ADM, DPS, LAW)
3/1/93
03/01/93 488 (H) -INDETERMINATE FISCAL NOTE
(ADM) 3/1/93
03/01/93 488 (H) GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER
04/01/93 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
04/01/93 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
04/02/93 929 (H) L&C RPT 3DP 1DNP 2NR
04/02/93 929 (H) DP: PORTER, GREEN, HUDSON
04/02/93 929 (H) DNP: SITTON
04/02/93 929 (H) NR: MACKIE, WILLIAMS
04/02/93 929 (H) -FISCAL NOTE (DPS) 4/2/93
04/02/93 929 (H) -PREVIOUS INDETERMINATE FN(ADM)
3/1/93
04/02/93 929 (H) -2 PREVIOUS ZERO FNS (ADM,LAW)
3/19/93
04/16/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120
04/19/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: SB 54
SHORT TITLE: OFFENSES BY JUVENILE OFFENDERS
BILL VERSION: CSSB 54(FIN)
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) HALFORD,Phillips,Leman,Taylor,Miller;
REPRESENTATIVE(S) Porter,Bunde
TITLE: "An Act relating to violations of laws by juveniles,
to the remedies for offenses and activities committed by
juveniles and to records of those offenses, and to
incarceration of juveniles who have been charged,
prosecuted, or convicted as adults; and providing for an
effective date."
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/22/93 122 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
01/22/93 122 (S) JUDICIARY, FINANCE
02/08/93 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211
02/08/93 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/17/93 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211
02/17/93 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/19/93 408 (S) JUD RPT CS 3DP 1DNP NEW TITLE
02/19/93 408 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTES TO SB (LAW,
DPS, CORR)
02/19/93 408 (S) FISCAL NOTE TO SB (ADM - 2)
02/24/93 461 (S) FISCAL NOTES TO CS (COURT, CORR)
02/24/93 461 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTES TO CS (DHSS,
LAW)
02/22/93 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
02/24/93 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518
02/25/93 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518
02/26/93 499 (S) FIN RPT CS 6DP 1NR NEW TITLE
02/26/93 500 (S) FN TO FIN CS (ADM-2, COURT)
02/26/93 500 (S) PREVIOUS CS ZERO FNS APPLY (LAW,
DHSS)
02/26/93 500 (S) PREV SB ZERO FN APPLIES (DPS)
02/26/93 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518
02/26/93 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
02/26/93 (S) RLS AT 01:15 PM FAHRENKAMP ROOM
203
02/26/93 (S) MINUTE(RLS)
03/01/93 538 (S) PREVIOUS FN APPLIES TO CS (CORR)
03/01/93 540 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 3/1/93
03/01/93 541 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
03/01/93 542 (S) FIN CS ADOPTED Y11 N8 E1
03/01/93 543 (S) THIRD READING 3/2 CALENDAR
03/02/93 561 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME CSSB 54(FIN)
03/02/93 562 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 1 FLD
Y9 N10 E1
03/02/93 567 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 2 FLD
Y9 N10 E1
03/02/93 568 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 3 FLD
Y9 N10 E1
03/02/93 568 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 4 FLD
Y9 N10 E1
03/02/93 569 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 5 FLD
Y9 N10 E1
03/02/93 570 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 6 FLD
Y9 N10 E1
03/02/93 571 (S) (S) ADOPTED LETTER OF INTENT
03/02/93 571 (S) PASSED Y12 N7 E1
03/02/93 571 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE PASSED Y14
N5 E1
03/02/93 572 (S) Kerttula NOTICE OF
RECONSIDERATION
03/03/93 595 (S) RECONSIDERATION NOT TAKEN UP
03/03/93 596 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/05/93 538 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
03/05/93 538 (H) JUDICIARY, FINANCE
03/12/93 629 (H) CROSS SPONSOR(S): PORTER
03/16/93 (H) MINUTE(HES)
03/24/93 765 (H) CROSS SPONSOR(S): BUNDE
03/26/93 (H) JUD AT 01:30 PM CAPITOL 120
03/26/93 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/26/93 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
04/16/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120
04/16/93 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
04/16/93 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 93-64, SIDE A
Number 000
The House Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was called to
order at 1:31 p.m. on April 19, 1993. A quorum was not
present; therefore, a work session remained in progress
until a quorum was established. Chairman Porter announced
that all individuals who wished to testify via
teleconference wanted to address SB 149. He said that it
was his intention to hold a joint hearing on SB 149, SB 86,
and SB 112, Uniform Commercial Code Revisions.
SB 86 FUND TRANSFERS UNDER THE UCC
SB 112 UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE REVISIONS
SB 149 REVISION OF BANKING CODE
CHAIRMAN PORTER announced that when SB 149 was heard by the
Labor and Commerce Committee, a provision allowing banks to
enter the insurance business was removed. He noted that it
was not the committee's intention to reinsert that
provision.
Number 067
BILL KELDER, LEGISLATIVE AIDE TO SEN. JAY KERTTULA, the
PRIME SPONSOR of SB 86 and SB 112, said that the two pieces
of legislation were companion bills modifying and
modernizing the state's Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). He
noted that 45 other states had already implemented most of
the changes contained in the two bills. Alaska, he said,
needed to "catch up" to those other states in order that
businesses outside of Alaska would feel comfortable doing
business in Alaska.
MR. KELDER stated that SB 86 created a new Chapter 14 for
the UCC, and pertained to the electronic transfer of funds
for business purposes. He commented that, on a given day
nationally, one trillion dollars changed hands in this
manner. But, he said, Alaska's UCC had not been modified to
take this practice into account. He noted that the
governor's office, the attorney general, the Division of
Banking, and the Department of Natural Resources' recorder's
office supported SB 86. Additionally, he said, the banking
community and the business community endorsed the
legislation. He expressed his opinion that SB 86 would help
to reduce litigation.
MR. KELDER said that all of the changes made to the original
SB 112 were merely technical in nature. He said that SB 112
represented changes to the UCC which would accommodate the
changes made in SB 86 regarding electronic funds transfers,
and also updated other sections of the UCC. A section
pertaining to bulk sales was being deleted from the UCC, he
said, because it was out-of-date. Beyond that, he added,
SB 112 updated the UCC and made other technical changes.
Number 165
REP. PHILLIPS asked Mr. Kelder if any attempts had been made
last year to change the UCC.
Number 170
MR. KELDER replied that he was not aware of any such
attempts. He said that in approximately 1989, the federal
government decided that the UCC needed to be updated to
reflect current technology. Uniform Law commissioners from
all of the states came together to develop a model law.
States were given until 1994 to come into compliance with
the model law, he said. If states failed to do so, he said,
then the federal government could take over enforcement of
the UCC.
Number 187
REP. PHILLIPS asked if failure to enact SB 112 and SB 86
would mean that Alaska would be under the purview of federal
banking codes and laws. She asked Mr. Kelder how many
states had adopted UCC updates.
MR. KELDER replied that 45 states had done so. He noted
that Alaska had until 1994 to enact the UCC update.
Number 207
ART PETERSON, A UNIFORM LAW COMMISSIONER FOR ALASKA, said
that SB 86 and SB 112 contained the most recent proposals of
the Uniform Law Conference, a national organization. He
said that all states had uniform commercial codes and needed
to keep them up-to-date. He commented that Alaska was
getting further and further behind on the issue of
electronic fund transfers, putting Alaska businesses at a
serious disadvantage. He noted that SB 112 contained three
basic parts: personal property leasing, negotiable
instruments, and bulk sales. He said that Alaska was also
falling behind with regard to these areas. He stated that
the dollar amount of business done in these areas was
staggering, resulting in a disadvantage to the state's
businesses.
(REP. DAVIDSON and REP. KOTT arrived at approximately 1:45
p.m. A quorum was obtained.)
Number 307
MR. PETERSON summarized his earlier comments for the benefit
of Rep. Kott and Rep. Davidson. He noted that SB 86 and
SB 112 embodied current thinking of the Uniform Law
Conference. He said that if the bills were not enacted, the
federal government might intervene. He stated that federal
law already regulated consumer electronic funds transfers.
He said that both bills recognized that business was now
sometimes transacted by electronic impulses. He commented
that the state needed to enact laws relating to this
business practice. He noted that bulk sales provisions
would be repealed because changes in business practices had
negated the need for those provisions.
Number 370
REP. GREEN asked why some states had not yet enacted the
changes proposed by the Uniform Law Conference.
Number 376
MR. PETERSON replied that there had been some concerns
regarding the negotiable instruments portion of the Uniform
Law Conference's recommendations, but those issues had been
largely resolved. He said that other issues of concern had
been resolved in one manner or another. Regarding why other
states had not yet enacted the Uniform Law Conference
proposals, he said that most states probably did not
perceive that it was urgent to do so.
Number 408
REP. PHILLIPS asked Mr. Peterson to explain the difference
between the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee's version of
SB 112 and the Senate Judiciary Committee's version.
Number 414
MR. PETERSON mentioned that the committee members had in
their bill packets a list of the changes between the two
versions of SB 112. He said that all of the changes were
tiny, technical changes.
Number 437
REP. DAVIDSON made a motion to move SB 86 and SB 112 out of
committee with individual recommendations and attached
fiscal notes. There being no objection, it was so ordered.
SB 54 OFFENSES BY JUVENILE OFFENDERS
CHAIRMAN PORTER announced that the committee would next
address a Senate letter of intent for SB 54, which the
committee had failed to adopt when it passed the bill out of
committee at an earlier hearing.
Number 466
GAYLE HORETSKI, COMMITTEE COUNSEL TO THE HOUSE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE, explained that the letter of intent adopted by
the Senate dealt with records of juveniles. She said that
there was some question as to whether it was necessary for
the House to adopt the letter of intent, given changes which
had been made to the bill since it passed the Senate. But,
she said, in order to be on the safe side, she was bringing
the Senate's letter of intent to the committee's attention.
REP. DAVIDSON asked for a brief explanation of what the
Senate letter of intent said, as well as what the letter of
intent adopted by the Judiciary Committee said.
Number 496
MS. HORETSKI replied that the letter of intent adopted by
the Judiciary Committee at its hearing on SB 54 dealt with
the issue of substantive versus procedural changes in the
law.
Number 503
REP. PHILLIPS made a motion to adopt the Senate letter of
intent for SB 54. There being no objection, it was adopted.
SB 149 REVISION OF BANKING CODE
Number 509
JOSH FINK, LEGISLATIVE AIDE TO SEN. TIM KELLY, PRIME SPONSOR
of SB 149, commented that the state's existing banking code
was viewed as obsolete by those in the banking industry as
well as state officials. He said that SB 149 was the result
of the Division of Banking, Securities, and Corporations
working with state-chartered banks and the Senate Labor and
Commerce Committee to revise the state's banking code.
Number 536
REP. PHILLIPS asked if the Senate Labor and Commerce
Committee supported the House Labor and Commerce Committee's
deletion of a provision allowing banks to enter the
insurance business.
Number 540
MR. FINK replied that the Senate Labor and Commerce
Committee did not object to the change.
Number 545
REP. DAVIDSON indicated his surprise that the Senate had not
raised the insurance issue.
Number 553
JEFF BUSH, an ATTORNEY under contract with the DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (DCED) to draft SB 149 and
accompanying regulations, explained that the bill did three
things: (1) it revised and expanded banks' powers; (2) it
made changes to DCED's regulatory powers; and (3) it amended
the DCED's enforcement powers.
MR. BUSH stated that the most substantive changes were made
to the expansion and revision of banks' powers. He said
that a new article regarding interstate and international
banking was included in SB 149. He said that former DCED
Commissioner Glenn Olds was very interested in trying to
encourage international banks to invest in Alaska and to
assist their clients in doing so. He noted that the
existing banking code, drafted in the 1930s, did not address
international banking. Although the existing code did not
prohibit international banking, he said, it did not include
any specific guidelines.
MR. BUSH commented that SB 149 included similar guidelines
for interstate banks. He said that the bill required that
home states of interstate banks wanting to do business in
Alaska also allow Alaskan banks to do business in that
state. He noted that SB 149 also allowed banks to have
subsidiaries, stating that in today's marketplace, banks
needed ways to earn money other than just making loans. He
said that the bill rewrote lending statutes, requiring banks
to comply with "sound banking policies" instead of specific
statutory requirements. He said that experience had shown
that setting out specific lending requirements in statute
did not prevent banks from failing.
MR. BUSH stated that SB 149 made the Alaska Corporations
Code applicable to banks. He noted that the bill repealed
the Alaska Savings Association Act, as there were currently
no state savings and loans in Alaska. Under the current
banking code, he said, any new savings and loan would be
under three regulatory agencies -- two federal and one
state. He said there was a federal system for creating
savings and loans, and therefore no need for the Alaska
Savings Association Act.
MR. BUSH stated that the banking code's penalty provisions
were consolidated and made consistent in SB 149. He said
the bill made major revisions to bank liquidation
provisions. He commented that, although SB 149 was a long
bill, it was probably shorter than the existing banking code
and included a great deal more substance.
Number 717
REP. GREEN asked Mr. Bush how the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA) would mesh with the new banking code.
Number 728
MR. BUSH replied that he did not believe that any provision
of SB 149 would be detrimental to NAFTA, but added that he
did not know a great deal about NAFTA.
Number 735
REP. PHILLIPS asked Mr. Bush to explain for which banks
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insurance would
be optional.
Number 751
MR. BUSH replied that a state bank could apply to the DCED
to get a waiver from FDIC insurance requirements. In order
to get the waiver, he said, a bank would probably have to
show a sufficient asset base and also notify depositors of
the lack of FDIC insurance.
Number 759
REP. PHILLIPS asked if any other state currently employed a
similar practice. She mentioned that currently anyone with
a bank account in Alaska had his or her deposit insured by
FDIC.
Number 764
MR. BUSH noted that Rep. Phillips was correct with regard to
current practices in Alaska. He said that, at the federal
level, there appeared to be a trend toward private insurance
to compete with FDIC insurance. He said the DCED wanted to
allow Alaska's banks the option of using that private
insurance instead of FDIC insurance, if they wished. Also,
he stated that a neighborhood or village bank might not be
large enough to qualify for FDIC insurance, but should still
be able to do business if they could demonstrate protection
to depositors. He noted that there was no intention at
present to permit waivers. He commented that he was not
sure if any other states allowed for a waiver of FDIC
insurance, but he did not believe so.
Number 781
REP. PHILLIPS expressed her opinion that tremendous problems
and litigation could arise if some bank accounts were not
insured.
Number 784
MR. BUSH responded that the DCED shared Rep. Phillips'
concerns and did not intend to permit waivers unless a bank
could guarantee protection to depositors. International
banks, he added, were a different situation and could not at
present obtain FDIC insurance. Because of that, he said,
international banks would have to maintain assets within the
state equal to the total amount of deposits.
Number 800
REP. GREEN asked Mr. Bush what would happen in the event of
a downturn in the economy. Would an international bank have
to acquire additional assets in-state if the value of
existing assets decreased?
MR. BUSH replied that Rep. Green was correct.
Number 808
CHAIRMAN PORTER asked Mr. Bush if the removal of the
language regarding banks going into the insurance business
would prohibit banks from doing so.
Number 813
MR. BUSH said that in his understanding, banks would be
prohibited from going into the insurance business without
specific statutory authority to do so.
Number 814
CHAIRMAN PORTER conveyed a question on behalf of Rep. James,
who was absent. He asked Mr. Bush if a bank could go into
the real estate business.
Number 820
MR. BUSH replied that he thought that the answer to that
question was "yes," although he said he was not certain if a
bank could go into the real estate broker business. He
commented that the way SB 149 was worded, a bank could go
into the real estate management business. He explained that
in the 1980s banks suddenly found themselves with huge real
estate portfolios due to foreclosures. There was no way to
put the real estate into a separate management organization
outside of the bank. He said that at the time, banks wanted
to create separate real estate management corporations, but
were prohibited from doing so. This resulted in a drain on
bank assets and personnel. He said banks should have the
ability to manage real estate assets owned by the bank.
MR. BUSH stated that violations of current banking law
existed in Alaska today. He said there was a law that banks
could not own real estate, except as necessary for the
banking business. He mentioned banks which owned large
buildings because it was better financially to buy a large
building and lease out space that the bank did not need than
to lease space elsewhere.
TAPE 93-64, SIDE B
Number 012
CHAIRMAN PORTER asked if it would be possible, under SB
149's provisions, for a person to go to a bank seeking a
loan to buy a piece of real estate, have his or her loan
request denied, and then see the bank go out and purchase
that same piece of real estate.
Number 022
MR. BUSH replied that the answer to the Chairman's question
was "no." He said SB 149 did not allow banks to own real
estate; it allowed separate bank subsidiaries to own real
estate. He said that in theory, under SB 149, a bank could
turn down a person's loan request and then inform the
subsidiary of the opportunity to purchase the real estate
for which the loan request was made. He said that such a
practice would violate state regulations and probably
federal law as well.
Number 044
REP. PHILLIPS mentioned that language on page 24 of the bill
referred to real property ownership, development, or
leasing. It did not mention brokerage.
Number 065
KEITH SILVER, testifying via teleconference from Anchorage,
stated that because the committee did not intend to reinsert
language allowing banks to enter the insurance business, he
had no comments to make.
Number 077
DAVID STRATTON, testifying via teleconference from
Anchorage, stated that he had submitted written comments
regarding allowing banks to enter the insurance industry.
He said that if it was the committee's intent to respect the
prior committee's removal of language regarding banks
entering the insurance industry, he had nothing further to
add.
Number 083
LINDA HALL, testifying via teleconference from Anchorage,
said that she was present to testify against allowing banks
to enter the insurance industry. As long as the committee
did not intend to reinsert language to that effect, she said
that she had no comments to make.
Number 097
KAREN HOFSTAD, testifying via teleconference from
Petersburg, indicated her support for SB 149, provided that
banks were not allowed to enter the insurance business.
Number 105
SUSAN ERICKSON, testifying via teleconference from
Petersburg, thanked the committee for maintaining the
removal of language allowing banks to enter the insurance
industry.
Number 112
ARNE IVERSEN, testifying via teleconference from Ketchikan,
echoed the comments of the previous speakers.
Number 118
JAMES BARRY, testifying via teleconference from Ketchikan,
commented that he agreed that banks should stay out of the
insurance business.
Number 125
JIM SARVELA, testifying via teleconference from Ketchikan,
said that he had no comments to make at this time.
Number 130
RICK HARDCASTLE, testifying via teleconference from
Ketchikan, said that he had no comment to make at this time.
Number 139
JACK DAVIES, testifying via teleconference from Ketchikan,
thanked the committee for the opportunity to testify and for
the fact that he did not have to testify.
Number 144
JACK BERRY, testifying via teleconference from Ketchikan,
stated that he supported the comments of the previous four
speakers.
Number 156
JOHN SWEENEY, testifying via teleconference from Kodiak,
thanked the committee for allowing the hearing on SB 149 to
be teleconferenced.
Number 169
BUD JAEGER, from SHATTUCK AND GRUMMETT INSURANCE COMPANY in
Juneau, and PRESIDENT of the ALASKA INDEPENDENT INSURANCE
AGENTS AND BROKERS, indicated his support for the removal of
language allowing banks to enter the insurance business.
Number 195
REP. GREEN made a motion to pass the Labor and Commerce
Committee's substitute for SB 149 out of committee, with a
zero fiscal note and individual recommendations. There
being no objection, it was so ordered.
SB 84 REVOKE DRIVER'S LICENSE IF USE FALSE I.D.
CHAIRMAN PORTER announced that the committee would take up
SB 84 next.
Number 244
JOSH FINK, LEGISLATIVE AIDE TO SEN. TIM KELLY, PRIME SPONSOR
of SB 84, stated that SB 84 addressed the problem of minors
who used false driver's licenses to purchase alcohol. He
said that a similar bill had passed the House last year, but
died in the Senate during the final hours of the session.
He commented that the Department of Health and Social
Services (DHSS), the Department of Public Safety (DPS),
Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), the Municipality of
Anchorage's Health and Human Services Commission, the
Bristol Bay Health Corporation, and the Anchorage Daily
News, among others, supported the bill.
MR. FINK said that SB 84 would require that a hologram be
placed over vital information on a driver's license in order
to prevent tampering. Also, he said, the phrase "under 21"
would be placed on driver's licenses of minors, clearly
indicating to alcohol servers that the bearer of the license
could not legally purchase alcohol. Additionally, he said,
SB 84 would deter minors from attempting to purchase alcohol
with a fraudulent driver's license. Driving privileges
would be revoked for any individual caught trying to
purchase alcohol with a fraudulent driver's license.
Revocation would be for 60 days for a first offense, and one
year for a second or subsequent offense, he said.
Number 283
REP. GREEN asked Mr. Fink to explain the two fiscal notes
accompanying the bill.
Number 290
MR. FINK responded that the Senate Finance Committee felt
that the DPS's fiscal note was too high, and based on
unreasonable assumptions regarding the number of licenses
that would be revoked. But, he said, the DPS had convincing
arguments in defense of its fiscal note. He stated that it
was up to the committee to decide which fiscal note it chose
to attach to the bill.
Number 312
REP. PHILLIPS remarked that there was tremendous support for
last year's bill which was similar to SB 84. She applauded
the use of holograms on driver's licenses.
Number 332
JUANITA HENSLEY, CHIEF, DRIVER SERVICES, DIVISION OF MOTOR
VEHICLES, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, said the DPS
supported SB 84, but opposed the Senate Finance Committee's
fiscal note. She stated that holograms would appear on all
driver's licenses, not just those belonging to minors. She
said that every year the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board
sent the DMV approximately 500-700 fraudulent licenses
confiscated in liquor establishments. She estimated that
law enforcement officials confiscated another 500-700
licenses. She said that she had a letter from the manager
of Chilkoot Charlie's, a bar in Anchorage, claiming that his
employees confiscate over 400 fake licenses every year. She
commented that SB 84 could potentially result in many
licenses being revoked. She said the DPS's fiscal note was
based on a conservative estimate of 1500 licenses being
revoked every year.
MS. HENSLEY mentioned that the DPS would soon be able to use
an imaging system for driver's license photographs in its
Anchorage field office. She said that the new system would
allow the DMV to guard against minors obtaining licenses
while using someone else's identification.
Number 409
REP. GREEN asked Ms. Hensley if a person, upon turning 21,
would get a new driver's license that did not say "under 21"
on it.
Number 413
MS. HENSLEY said that Rep. Green was correct.
Number 418
CHAIRMAN PORTER asked Ms. Hensley if the type of licenses
proposed in SB 84 would prevent a minor from obtaining a
license using his or her sibling's identification.
Number 425
MS. HENSLEY responded that the imaging system would prevent
such a situation in the Anchorage field office only, but not
in other DMV field offices. She said that individuals
"office hop," meaning that if they could not obtain a
fraudulent license in one office, they tried another office.
Number 435
CHAIRMAN PORTER asked if SB 84 was an attempt to reduce a
person's ability to alter an existing license.
(REP. DAVIDSON arrived at 2:41 p.m.)
Number 441
MS. HENSLEY said that the chairman was correct.
Number 459
CHAIRMAN PORTER asked how SB 84 would increase the number of
licenses that DMV revoked.
Number 463
MS. HENSLEY replied that, when an individual used a
fraudulent license to purchase alcohol or to enter a liquor
establishment, a law enforcement officer was required to
issue a notice and order of revocation, to confiscate the
license, and to notify the DMV of the revocation under SB
84's provisions.
Number 476
CHAIRMAN PORTER asked if that was not already occurring.
MS. HENSLEY said that it was not.
REP. PHILLIPS commented that SB 84 was a very good bill.
She made a motion to move it out of committee with
individual recommendations and the DPS's fiscal note.
Number 489
MS. HENSLEY stated that SB 84 also increased the cost of a
driver's license.
There being no objection to the motion to pass SB 84 out of
committee, it was so ordered.
HB 132 EXTEND RESOURCE EXTRACTION PERMIT/LEASE
CHAIRMAN PORTER announced that the committee would take up
HB 132 next.
Number 511
MS. HORETSKI, HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE COUNSEL, called the
committee members' attention to a draft committee substitute
for HB 132 dated April 18, 1993. She said that she had met
with the sponsor, Rep. Brice, and Mr. Jerry Luckhaupt from
the Legislative Affairs Agency's Division of Legal Services
to discuss the issue of who would be considered "successful"
in litigation. She stated that language in the committee
substitute was amended to clarify that issue.
MS. HORETSKI commented that three changes appeared in the
new committee substitute, two of which were amendments
adopted by the committee at the last hearing on HB 132.
Those appeared on page 2, line 2, and page 2, line 26, she
said. The third change appeared on page 2, lines 5-7 and
lines 22-24, and had not yet been discussed by the
committee. New language provided that a permit would be
extended if the permit holder or the agency was the
"prevailing party." "Prevailing party" was defined on lines
22-24 as "one who has successfully prosecuted or defended
against the action, who is successful on the main issue of
the action and in whose favor the decision or verdict is
rendered and the judgment entered." She said that the
language had been taken from case law decisions interpreting
the term "prevailing party" for Alaska Civil Court Rule 82
purposes.
Number 566
REP. DAVIDSON asked if the Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) had a position on HB 132.
Number 569
REP. TOM BRICE, PRIME SPONSOR of HB 132, commented that Mr.
Raga Elim of DNR had indicated that his department supported
the bill, although no written position paper had been
submitted. Rep. Brice said that the DCED also supported the
bill.
Number 580
REP. PHILLIPS commented that the Governor's Task Force on
Regulatory Reform supported the concept behind the bill.
Number 585
REP. KOTT expressed his opinion that if the DNR opposed
HB 132, the committee would have been informed of that
opposition. He made a motion to adopt the Judiciary
committee substitute for HB 132. There being no objection,
it was so ordered.
Number 600
REP. KOTT made a motion to move the Judiciary committee
substitute for HB 132 out of committee, with a zero fiscal
note and with individual recommendations. There being no
objection, it was so ordered.
Number 601
REP. PHILLIPS said that HB 132 was a good piece of
legislation.
HB 187 INTERCEPTION OF PRIVATE COMMUNICATIONS
CHAIRMAN PORTER announced that the committee would take up
HB 187.
Number 609
MARGOT KNUTH, from the DEPARTMENT OF LAW'S CRIMINAL
DIVISION, said that HB 187 was the governor's bill on
wiretapping and a component of his crime package. She said
that when discussing the bill with legislators and members
of the public, she had generally heard two responses to the
issue of wiretapping: surprise that the state did not
already allow it, and nervousness about employing it. She
said HB 187 would authorize the state to electronically
eavesdrop in murder, kidnapping, and unclassified and class
A felony drug cases.
MS. KNUTH commented that federal law required states to
abide by certain limitations before implementing a
wiretapping program. She said HB 187 would honor those
requirements and also followed suggestions made in the Model
Electronic Eavesdropping Act. She stated that HB 187
included safeguards. The state did not anticipate using
eavesdropping very often, she said, as it was expensive and
unnecessary in many cases. She said that it would have been
useful in the Eklutna mail bombing case last year, however.
MS. KNUTH stated that law enforcement officials would need
the approval of the attorney general's office to use
wiretapping. Additionally, she said, a judge would have to
find that there was probable cause that wiretapping would
produce evidence that a crime had been committed or was to
be committed. Also, notice would have to be provided at
some point to all persons whose conversations were
intercepted.
Number 680
REP. PHILLIPS asked when the notification would occur.
Number 684
MS. KNUTH replied that notification would usually occur as
soon as a charge was filed. She likened the procedure to
that used when a search warrant was issued and served.
REP. DAVIDSON asked Ms. Knuth to comment on how probable
cause would be demonstrated.
MS. KNUTH responded that an application for a wiretapping
order had to be filed. She said HB 187 set out a long list
of elements that had to be shown when filing a wiretapping
application. A law enforcement officer would have to
identify the facts upon which he or she was relying when
applying for the order. There would have to be enough
information to warrant the issuance of a wiretapping order.
There was no "trust me" component to HB 187, she added.
MS. KNUTH stated that, in order for a wiretapping order to
be issued, a judge had to be presented with specific time
periods, modes of communication, locations, etc. She called
the members' attention to section 12.37.040 of the bill.
Number 736
REP. DAVIDSON asked Ms. Knuth what protections HB 187
included for innocent parties.
Number 748
MS. KNUTH replied that the bill provided that privileged
communications would always remain privileged.
Number 752
REP. DAVIDSON asked how many judges, law enforcement
officials, and attorneys would be party to these
communications. He expressed doubt that privileged
communications would remain confidential, given the number
of people involved in the wiretapping exercise.
Number 760
MS. KNUTH commented that the bill included penalties for
unauthorized disclosure. Additionally, she said, the
wiretapping applications and the conversations intercepted
would be sealed by the court until they were used in court
proceedings. The court system, not law enforcement
officials, would have custody of those items, she said.
Number 771
REP. DAVIDSON stated that although he trusted police
officers, he knew that people talked while at work.
Number 780
MS. KNUTH said that under current law, law enforcement
officers could obtain orders allowing the recording of a
face-to-face conversation. She said that the problem of
people hearing conversations which were not germane to the
investigation occurred in that situation also. She
mentioned that law enforcement agencies imposed standards on
their employees, and disciplinary actions were taken when
those standards were breached.
Number 791
REP. KOTT asked about language on page 9 regarding required
reports. He asked why the state was reporting to the
federal government.
MS. KNUTH replied that the reports were required under
federal law.
TAPE 93-65, SIDE A
Number 000
REP. KOTT asked if the federal requirements were tied to
funding.
(REP. DAVIDSON left the meeting.)
Number 010
MS. KNUTH stated that the requirements did not have anything
to do with funding, but rather if a state would be allowed
to conduct wiretapping in the first place.
REP. PHILLIPS made a motion to move HB 187 out of committee
with individual recommendations and a zero fiscal note.
There being no objection, it was so ordered.
ADJOURNMENT
CHAIRMAN PORTER adjourned the meeting at 3:11 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|