Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120

04/12/2018 03:15 PM STATE AFFAIRS

Note: the audio and video recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as
Download Video part 1. <- Right click and save file as

Audio Topic
03:16:16 PM Start
03:17:05 PM HB409
03:30:09 PM HJR30
03:35:19 PM SB196
03:36:06 PM Presentation on Penalties for Marijuana Possession
04:05:39 PM HB409
04:29:03 PM Approval of Introduction of Potential Committee Legislation
04:30:18 PM Adjourn
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
-- Recessed to 4/13/18 at 10:15 am --
+= HB 409 DMV ID CARDS & REGISTRATION FEES TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
-- Public Testimony --
+= SB 204 DISABLED VET PLATES:CHIROPRACTORS CERTIFY TELECONFERENCED
<Bill Hearing Canceled>
-- Public Testimony --
+= SB 196 APPROPRIATION LIMIT TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
-- Public Testimony --
+ Presentation: Penalties for Marijuana Possession TELECONFERENCED
+ Approval of introduction of potential committee TELECONFERENCED
legislation
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
+= HJR 30 URGE U.S. SUPPORT OF REFUGEES TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
-- Public Testimony --
                    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
             HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                           
                         April 12, 2018                                                                                         
                           3:16 p.m.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins, Chair                                                                                   
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux, Vice Chair                                                                                     
Representative Chris Tuck                                                                                                       
Representative Adam Wool                                                                                                        
Representative Chris Birch                                                                                                      
Representative DeLena Johnson                                                                                                   
Representative Gary Knopp                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Representative Andy Josephson (alternate)                                                                                       
Representative Chuck Kopp (alternate)                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 409                                                                                                              
"An  Act relating  to identification  cards; relating  to vehicle                                                               
registration fee rates; relating  to changes of address; relating                                                               
to   driver's   license   fees;   and   relating   to   financial                                                               
responsibility for motor vehicles."                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 30                                                                                                   
Urging the United  States Congress to reaffirm  the commitment of                                                               
the United States  to promote the safety,  health, and well-being                                                               
of  refugees  and displaced  persons;  urging  the United  States                                                               
government  to  uphold  its   international  leadership  role  in                                                               
responding  to displacement  crises with  humanitarian assistance                                                               
and  to work  with  the international  community  and the  United                                                               
Nations  High  Commissioner for  Refugees  to  find solutions  to                                                               
conflicts and protect  refugees; and urging the  President of the                                                               
United  States  to continue  to  mitigate  the burden  placed  on                                                               
frontline refugee host countries.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 196(FIN)(EFD FLD)                                                                                        
"An Act relating  to an appropriation limit; and  relating to the                                                               
budget responsibilities of the governor."                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
PRESENTATION ON PENALTIES FOR MARIJUANA POSSESSION                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
APPROVAL OF INTRODUCTION OF POTENTIAL COMMITTEE LEGISLATION                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
SENATE BILL NO. 204                                                                                                             
"An Act relating to special registration plates for vehicles                                                                    
owned by veterans with disabilities."                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     - BILL HEARING CANCELED                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 409                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: DMV ID CARDS & REGISTRATION FEES                                                                                   
SPONSOR(s): STATE AFFAIRS                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
04/05/18       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/05/18       (H)       STA, FIN                                                                                               
04/10/18       (H)       STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
04/10/18       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/10/18       (H)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
04/12/18       (H)       STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HJR 30                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: URGE U.S. SUPPORT OF REFUGEES                                                                                      
SPONSOR(s): JOSEPHSON                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
01/24/18       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
01/24/18       (H)       CRA, STA                                                                                               
02/13/18       (H)       CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124                                                                              
02/13/18       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/13/18       (H)       MINUTE(CRA)                                                                                            
02/22/18       (H)       CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124                                                                              
02/22/18       (H)       Moved HJR 30 Out of Committee                                                                          
02/22/18       (H)       MINUTE(CRA)                                                                                            
02/27/18       (H)       CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124                                                                              
02/27/18       (H)       Adopted Fiscal Note                                                                                    
02/28/18       (H)       CRA RPT 3DP 1DNP 2NR                                                                                   
02/28/18       (H)       DP: KREISS-TOMKINS, DRUMMOND, PARISH                                                                   
02/28/18       (H)       DNP: TALERICO                                                                                          
02/28/18       (H)       NR: LINCOLN, SADDLER                                                                                   
04/10/18       (H)       STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
04/10/18       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/10/18       (H)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
04/12/18       (H)       STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
BILL: SB 196                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: APPROPRIATION LIMIT; BUDGET RESERVE FUND                                                                           
SPONSOR(s): FINANCE                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
02/19/18       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/19/18       (S)       FIN                                                                                                    
02/28/18       (S)       STA REFERRAL ADDED BEFORE FIN                                                                          
03/06/18       (S)       STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
03/06/18       (S)       Moved SB 196 Out of Committee                                                                          
03/06/18       (S)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
03/07/18       (S)       STA RPT  3DP 1DNP 1NR                                                                                  
03/07/18       (S)       DP: MEYER, GIESSEL, WILSON                                                                             
03/07/18       (S)       DNP: EGAN                                                                                              
03/07/18       (S)       NR: COGHILL                                                                                            
03/15/18       (S)       FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532                                                                      
03/15/18       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/15/18       (S)       MINUTE(FIN)                                                                                            
03/16/18       (S)       FIN RPT CS  6DP   NEW TITLE                                                                            
03/16/18       (S)       DP: HOFFMAN, MACKINNON, BISHOP, VON                                                                    
                         IMHOF, STEVENS, MICCICHE                                                                               
03/16/18       (S)       FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532                                                                      
03/16/18       (S)       Moved CSSB 196(FIN) Out of Committee                                                                   
03/16/18       (S)       MINUTE(FIN)                                                                                            
03/23/18       (S)       UPHOLD RULING OF THE CHAIR Y13 N5 E1 A1                                                                
03/23/18       (S)       UPHOLD RULING OF THE CHAIR Y11 N7 E1 A1                                                                
03/23/18       (S)       UPHOLD RULING OF THE CHAIR Y11 N7 E1 A1                                                                
03/23/18       (S)       UPHOLD RULING OF THE CHAIR Y11 N7 E1 A1                                                                
03/23/18       (S)       ENGROSSED                                                                                              
03/28/18       (S)       TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                                                                     
03/28/18       (S)       VERSION: CSSB 196(FIN)(EFD FLD)                                                                        
03/29/18       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/29/18       (H)       STA, FIN                                                                                               
04/10/18       (H)       STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
04/10/18       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/10/18       (H)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
04/12/18       (H)       STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MICHAEL STANKER, Assistant Attorney General                                                                                     
Labor and State Affairs Section                                                                                                 
Department of Law (DOL)                                                                                                         
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Answered questions during the discussion of                                                              
HB 409.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
GABBY WEISS, Student                                                                                                            
Colony Middle School                                                                                                            
Palmer, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HJR 30.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
ASHLEY STRAUCH, Staff                                                                                                           
Representative Adam Wool                                                                                                        
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided a presentation on marijuana on                                                                  
behalf of the sponsor, Representative Adam Wool.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CATHY SCHLINGHEYDE, Staff                                                                                                       
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins                                                                                          
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented a section-by-section analysis of                                                               
a work draft on penalties for marijuana possession, on behalf of                                                                
the sponsor, Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
TRACY DOMPELING, Director                                                                                                       
Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ)                                                                                              
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS)                                                                                 
Fairbanks, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Answered questions during the presentation.                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MATT DAVIDSON, Social Services Program Officer                                                                                  
Division of Juvenile Justice                                                                                                    
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS)                                                                                 
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Answered questions during the presentation.                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MARLA THOMPSON, Director                                                                                                        
Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV)                                                                                                
Department of Administration (DOA)                                                                                              
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Answered questions during the discussion of                                                              
HB 409.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
ANNA LATHAM, Deputy Director                                                                                                    
Division of Insurance                                                                                                           
Department  of  Commerce,  Community,  and  Economic  Development                                                               
(DCCED)                                                                                                                         
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Answered questions  during the hearing on HB                                                             
409.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
3:16:16 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  JONATHAN KREISS-TOMKINS  called  the  House State  Affairs                                                             
Standing   Committee    meeting   to    order   at    3:16   p.m.                                                               
Representatives  Kreiss-Tomkins,  Wool,  Tuck, Birch,  and  Knopp                                                               
were present  at the call  to order.  Representatives  LeDoux and                                                               
Johnson arrived as the meeting was in progress.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
            HB 409-DMV ID CARDS & REGISTRATION FEES                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
3:17:05 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  announced that the first  order of business                                                               
would be HOUSE  BILL NO. 409, "An Act  relating to identification                                                               
cards; relating  to vehicle registration  fee rates;  relating to                                                               
changes  of  address;  relating to  driver's  license  fees;  and                                                               
relating to financial responsibility for motor vehicles."                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
3:17:21 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  KREISS-TOMKINS  opened public  testimony  on  HB 409;  and                                                               
after first determining  no one wished to  testify, closed public                                                               
testimony on HB 409.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
3:18:01 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  asked for an  explanation of  the violations                                                               
that  one   would  need  an   SR-22  [certificate   of  financial                                                               
responsibility] insurance for life.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
3:18:24 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MICHAEL  STANKER, Assistant  Attorney  General,  Labor and  State                                                               
Affairs Section, Department  of Law (DOL), stated  there were two                                                               
instances where a person would  need an SR-22 [proof of financial                                                               
responsibility]  for  life.   Under  AS  28.20.330, if  a  person                                                               
failed to  pay a  judgment stemming  from an  automobile accident                                                               
with a  suspended license and  later satisfied the  judgment, the                                                               
person would need SR-22 for  life.  The second instance pertained                                                               
to DUIs  [driving while under  the influence].   If a  person had                                                               
four or  more DUIs or refused  to submit to a  chemical test, the                                                               
person would need an SR-22 as  long as the person was licensed to                                                               
drive.  He  explained the increased penalties for  DUIs, that the                                                               
first  DUI  or  refusal  to  submit  to  a  chemical  test  would                                                               
necessitate  SR-22 coverage  for five  years, the  second offense                                                               
for ten-years,  and the third  offense for  20 years.   All other                                                               
SR-22  requirements  would  be   imposed  for  three  years,  for                                                               
example,  in  instances  in  which   people  had  their  licenses                                                               
suspended or  revoked for  another reason  and their  license was                                                               
later  reinstated.   The SR-22  provision would  apply for  those                                                               
involved  in  vehicular  accidents   while  their  licenses  were                                                               
suspended and  driving without insurance  so when  their licenses                                                               
were reinstated these drivers must obtain SR-22 for three years.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
3:20:33 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL   asked  for  clarification  on   the  SR-22                                                               
requirements for a first DUI  and whether the penalty was similar                                                               
to that of a first refusal [to submit to a chemical test].                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. STANKER answered  yes; the first DUI or  refusal would result                                                               
in SR-22 coverage for five years.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
3:20:58 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL related  that the DUI and  refusal [to submit                                                               
to  a  chemical test]  were  parallel  offenses.   He  asked  for                                                               
clarification  on the  first instance,  which is  the one  HB 409                                                               
would address.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR. STANKER said that the bill  seeks to address the situation in                                                               
which a  person involved  in motor vehicle  accident was  sued, a                                                               
judgment was  issued, but the  person failed to pay  the judgment                                                               
within 30 days.  The court  would notify the DMV and the person's                                                               
license would  be suspended until  the judgment was  paid, unless                                                               
it fit one of the exceptions.   Exemptions would include that the                                                               
driver entered  into a payment  plan with the  judgment creditor,                                                               
or  consent  to  reinstate  the   license  was  given;  in  those                                                               
circumstances  the person  would  need SR-22  proof of  financial                                                               
responsibility for life.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL pointed out  that the penalty for non-payment                                                               
within 30  days was worse  than for  a driver convicted  of three                                                               
DUIs.   He assumed  that was  the reason  AS 28.20.330  was being                                                               
amended.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
3:22:25 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  TUCK   asked  whether  Representative   Wool  was                                                               
correct.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MR. STANKER  answered yes.  He  stated that for the  third DUI or                                                               
refusal conviction, the  driver would be subject to  SR-22 for 20                                                               
years;  that  a driver  with  four  or  more DUI  convictions  is                                                               
subject  to a  lifetime requirement,  which is  the same  penalty                                                               
that a  person who failed  to pay off  a judgment within  30 days                                                               
would receive.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK  hoped that  the penalty provisions  could be                                                               
fixed.  He expressed concern that  a 21-year-old who was in a car                                                               
accident but did not pay the  judgment timely must spend the rest                                                               
of  his/her  life providing  SR-22  proof  of responsibility  [or                                                               
high-risk insurance].   The penalty  did not have anything  to do                                                               
with risk or  driving ability but rather whether  the driver paid                                                               
the judgment within  the 30-day required timeframe.   The penalty                                                               
was the same for someone with multiple DUIs, he said.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS agreed.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
3:24:27 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  STANKER, in  response to  Representative Knopp,  agreed that                                                               
under the  current statute  if a  person does  not pay  within 30                                                               
days his/her  driver's license is  suspended until  the judgement                                                               
is  satisfied  in  whole  unless  they fell  within  one  of  the                                                               
exceptions previously mentioned.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
3:24:58 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL asked whether  an uninsured driver involved a                                                               
motor vehicle  accident who had  [his/her license  suspended] for                                                               
three months must also obtain SR-22 for three years.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR.  STANKER  answered  yes;  that a  person  whose  license  was                                                               
suspended  as a  result  of  an accident  -  either for  personal                                                               
injury  or a  dollar  threshold  amount -  would  be required  to                                                               
provide SR-22 for three years after the suspension period ended.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
3:25:46 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL  (audio  difficulties)  related  a  scenario                                                               
requiring  SR-22 for  life, in  which  an insured  driver had  an                                                               
accident,  a judgment  for  monetary damage  was  issued and  the                                                               
driver did not pay timely.   That driver would be required to get                                                               
high-risk insurance.  He asked  whether an uninsured driver would                                                               
be  punished  as  severely  as  the  insured  driver  in  such  a                                                               
scenario.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR.  STANKER answered  that one  exception to  mandatory lifetime                                                               
SR-22  proof of  responsibility applies  if an  insurance company                                                               
was  liable for  payment  but  did not  cover  a  portion of  the                                                               
monetary damage.   In that  instance, the driver would  be liable                                                               
and must provide SR-22 for  life.  The three-year requirement for                                                               
SR-22  would apply  if a  driver  should have  had insurance  but                                                               
failed  to do  so and  his/her  actions resulted  in a  suspended                                                               
license.  He concluded that  these two scenarios were related but                                                               
were also different.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
3:27:36 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
The committee took an at-ease from 3:29 p.m. to 3:29 p.m.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
3:29:35 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS passed the gavel to Vice Chair LeDoux.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
[HB 409 was set aside.]                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
              HJR 30-URGE U.S. SUPPORT OF REFUGEES                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
3:30:09 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR LEDOUX  announced  that the  next  order of  business                                                               
would  be CS  FOR  SENATE  BILL NO.  196(FIN)(efd  fld), "An  Act                                                               
relating to  an appropriation limit;  and relating to  the budget                                                               
responsibilities of the governor."                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR LEDOUX opened public testimony on HJR 30.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
3:30:46 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
GABBY  WEISS, Student,  Colony  Middle  School, paraphrased  from                                                               
written testimony,  which read  as follows  [original punctuation                                                               
provided]:                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
         Good morning, my name is Gabby Weiss and I am                                                                          
     from Palmer, Alaska. I have come here today to explain                                                                     
     the importance of House Joint Resolution No. 30 and to                                                                     
     urge all the committee members to help make this                                                                           
     resolution a reality.                                                                                                      
          First off, a brief recap of the magnitude of the                                                                      
     refugee crisis and refugees in general. According to                                                                       
     the Oxford Dictionary, a refugee is defined as "a                                                                          
     person who has been forced to leave their country in                                                                       
     order to escape war, persecution, or natural                                                                               
     disaster." That is all a refugee is. Just from the                                                                         
     definition, it is known that the term refugee means a                                                                      
     person, someone who is as human as you and me, who is                                                                      
     fleeing their country because it isn't safe. I think                                                                       
     that sometimes we people get caught up on the labels.                                                                      
     Because we are referring to the people who are fleeing                                                                     
     from violence as this new population, the "refugees,"                                                                      
     there is this barrier that is put up that makes us                                                                         
     humans feel like we are somehow very different from                                                                        
     each other.                                                                                                                
          It very intangible for us to grasp what refugees                                                                      
     are going through because right now, we are inside,                                                                        
     dry and warm, fed and watered, safe and sound, but                                                                         
     there are men, women, and children, who are fleeing                                                                        
     from war, persecution, or natural disaster...right                                                                         
     now. And it isn't like it is just hundreds of people,                                                                      
     or thousand of people, and it's not even just a                                                                            
     million people. No, according to the United Nations                                                                        
     High Commissioner for Refugees, it is 22.5 million                                                                         
     people, women, men and children, fleeing for their                                                                         
     safety. That means that if you take the population of                                                                      
     Alaska and multiply it by 30, that number is still                                                                         
     less than all the refugees in the world. And guess how                                                                     
     many of that number of refugees are children. Is it a                                                                      
     10th, a 5th or a 3rd? No! More than one half of those                                                                      
     22.5 million people are children, under the age of 18.                                                                     
     They didn't choose to be born into an unsafe area.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
3:31:38 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. WEISS continued to paraphrase and read portions of her                                                                      
written testimony, which read as follows [original                                                                              
punctuation provided]:                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
         That is a huge number of people facing adversity                                                                       
     and trauma, but even though you can't help everyone,                                                                       
     you can still make a difference! If the United States                                                                      
     uses its leadership to start encouraging other                                                                             
     countries to take in refugees, as well as tries to                                                                         
     prevent and help out in the events that create                                                                             
     refugees, imagine how many lives you could improve.                                                                        
         Also, the United States can benefit from taking in                                                                     
     refugees itself. In fact, the National Bureau of                                                                           
     Economic Research explains, an adult refugee will                                                                          
     generally pay 21,000 dollars more in taxes than they                                                                       
     will receive in benefits in their first 20 years in                                                                        
     the United States.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
 3:32:07 PM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
 MS. WEISS continued to paraphrase her written testimony,                                                                       
 which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
          A thought stopping Americans from welcoming                                                                           
     refugees is the idea that refugees may be terrorists.                                                                      
     However, a terrorist would not chose to come to the US                                                                     
     through the refugee resettling process. The accepting                                                                      
     process of refugees includes in depth vetting and                                                                          
     according to the US Department of State, it can take                                                                       
     up to 24 months. In addition, as of 2015, expert                                                                           
     Kathleen Newland from the Migration Policy Institute                                                                       
     said, "The United States has resettled 784,000                                                                             
     refugees since September 11, 2001. In those 14 years,                                                                      
     exactly three resettled refugees have been arrested                                                                        
     for planning terrorist activitiesand it is worth                                                                           
     noting two were not planning an attack in the United                                                                       
     States and the plans of the third were barely                                                                              
     credible."                                                                                                                 
         The last reason why we should help is because                                                                          
     these people, these refugees, need our help. The                                                                           
     refugee crisis has created horrible situations for all                                                                     
     refugees. Families become split apart and lives get                                                                        
     put on hold. According to United Nations High                                                                              
     Commissioner for Refugees, there are 3.5 million                                                                           
     refugee children who should be in school, but aren't.                                                                      
     Also, rates sometimes as high as 86% project post                                                                          
     traumatic stress disorder in refugees according to the                                                                     
     US Department of Veterans Affairs. Lastly, according                                                                       
     to the Mercy Corps Organization, one half of Syria's                                                                       
     population before the war, that is 11 million plus                                                                         
     people, have been killed or forced to abandon their                                                                        
     homes due to the Syrian conflict.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
 3:32:46 PM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
 MS. WEISS continued to paraphrase her written testimony,                                                                       
 which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
         Because we are the lucky ones who get to have                                                                          
     meetings, and eat lunch, and read the newspaper, and                                                                       
     spend time with our friends and families, we need to                                                                       
     take it upon ourselves to care and support the other                                                                       
     humans who aren't as lucky as us. This is so important                                                                     
     to me because if I was fleeing for my safety, I would                                                                      
     want someone to help me. To conclude, I am asking all                                                                      
     the committee members to please vote for House Joint                                                                       
     Resolution No. 30. Thank you so much for your time.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
3:33:18 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   BIRCH  (audio   difficulties)  asked   that  her                                                               
testimony be emailed.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MS. WEISS  reiterated that  she attends  Colony Middle  School in                                                               
Palmer, Alaska.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR LEDOUX provided the  e-mail address for the committee:                                                               
hsta@akleg.gov.  She said it  was great to have students involved                                                               
in the legislative process.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
3:34:28 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON  thanked Ms.  Weiss for  calling in.   She                                                               
thanked her for all of the work she has done on HJR 30.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR LEDOUX,  after  first determining  no  one wished  to                                                               
testify, closed public testimony on HJR 30.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR LEDOUX announced HJR 30 would be held over.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
        SB 196-APPROPRIATION LIMIT; BUDGET RESERVE FUND                                                                     
                                                                                                                              
3:35:19 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR LEDOUX  announced  that the  next  order of  business                                                               
would  be CS  FOR  SENATE  BILL NO.  196(FIN)(efd  fld), "An  Act                                                               
relating to  an appropriation limit;  and relating to  the budget                                                               
responsibilities of the governor."                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR  LEDOUX  opened  public  testimony  and  after  first                                                               
determining no one wished to  testify, closed public testimony on                                                               
SB 196.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR LEDOUX announced that SB 196 would be held over.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
^PRESENTATION ON PENALTIES FOR MARIJUANA POSSESSION                                                                             
       PRESENTATION ON PENALTIES FOR MARIJUANA POSSESSION                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
3:36:06 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR LEDOUX  announced  that the  next  order of  business                                                               
would be a presentation: Penalties for Marijuana Possession.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
3:36:52 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
The committee took a brief at-ease.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
3:37:47 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ASHLEY  STRAUCH, Staff,  Representative Adam  Wool, Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature,  stated her  presentation  was the  result of  draft                                                               
legislation being  considered by the  committee.  She  stated the                                                               
proposed bill  would not be  introduced this  legislative session                                                               
due to  committee time  constraints at this  late juncture.   The                                                               
focus  of the  presentation concerns  possession of  marijuana on                                                               
school  grounds,  she  said.    The  current  law  mandates  that                                                               
possession of marijuana  on school grounds, school  buses, and in                                                               
or near youth centers was a felony.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
3:39:14 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CATHY  SCHLINGHEYDE,   Staff,  Representative   Jonathan  Kreiss-                                                               
Tomkins,  Alaska State  Legislature,  on behalf  of the  sponsor,                                                               
Representative  Kreiss-Tomkins, referred  to  a  work draft  [not                                                               
specifically identified]  for a  proposed bill  that will  not be                                                               
introduced  during this  legislative session.   She  reviewed the                                                               
sectional analysis:  Section 1  would remove a section that makes                                                               
it a  Class C felony  to possess  any amount of  marijuana within                                                               
500 feet of  school grounds, on school buses, or  within 500 feet                                                               
of youth centers.  She added  that even an otherwise legal amount                                                               
possessed by  an adult would  be considered  a Class C  felony in                                                               
any of these circumstances.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
3:39:56 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. SCHLINGHEYDE  said that  Section 2  would make  it a  Class A                                                               
misdemeanor  to possess  more than  one ounce,  which is  in line                                                               
with penalties outside of these  restricted areas.  She explained                                                               
that a  person who possessed  more than  one ounce on  the street                                                               
would be subject to a Class  A misdemeanor.  This would make that                                                               
true across the board, she said.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS. SCHLINGHEYDE  stated that Section 3  would make it a  Class B                                                               
misdemeanor  to possess  up to  one ounce  within 500  feet of  a                                                               
school or  on a school  bus.  She advised  that it was  already a                                                               
Class  B misdemeanor  for a  minor to  possess up  to one  ounce,                                                               
which is  a legal amount  for an adult  to possess.   The penalty                                                               
for a minor in possession is  currently a Class B misdemeanor and                                                               
this section would make it true  for minors across the board, but                                                               
it would  make it a Class  B misdemeanor for adults  to possess a                                                               
legal amount of marijuana within one of the restricted areas.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
3:40:38 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  SCHLINGHEYDE  related  that  Section 4  would  establish  an                                                               
affirmative defense to be in  a private residence within 500 feet                                                               
of a  school.  It  would mean that as  an adult the  person could                                                               
possess an otherwise legal amount of marijuana.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS.  SCHLINGHEYDE  related  that  Section  5  provided  statutory                                                               
clean-up to  align with other  sections of  the bill.   Section 6                                                               
would  ensure  that the  provisions  in  the  bill do  not  apply                                                               
retroactively and  would not  affect pending  cases, even  if the                                                               
case was decided after the effective date of the bill, she said.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
3:41:23 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP  related his  understanding that  the intent                                                               
of  the original  felony  was to  prevent  people from  "dealing"                                                               
drugs at  a school.   This proposed  work draft would  reduce the                                                               
crime from a felony to Class A or B misdemeanors.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MS.  SCHLINGHEYDE answered  yes;  that the  proposed draft  would                                                               
make it a  Class A misdemeanor to possess more  than an ounce and                                                               
a Class B misdemeanor to possess up to an ounce of marijuana.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
3:41:51 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP  asked if the  work draft moved  forward and                                                               
was adopted  if the proposed  bill would remove  severe penalties                                                               
for those who  tried to "deal" drugs  in a school area.   He said                                                               
he agreed  with the concept  of reducing penalties  for students,                                                               
but he did  not agree with reducing penalties for  those who were                                                               
"dealing"  drugs in  school areas.   He  asked whether  this bill                                                               
would address both issues.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
3:42:30 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  SCHLINGHEYDE  acknowledged  that  Representative  Knopp  was                                                               
correct since one concern for  minors is that students would have                                                               
a small amount of marijuana  for recreational use and concern was                                                               
that they  could incur felony convictions  that could potentially                                                               
follow them  the rest of  their lives.   This was  particularly a                                                               
concern since  some students  turn the  age of  18 while  in high                                                               
school; thus,  these students  could be tried  as adults  and the                                                               
convictions  could be  very serious.   She  stated that  it would                                                               
make  it  a Class  B  misdemeanor  for  an  adult to  possess  an                                                               
otherwise legal amount within 500 feet  of a school grounds.  She                                                               
stated there was  room to consider returning to a  Class C felony                                                               
by  creating a  narrower  exception, for  example,  for an  adult                                                               
within school grounds.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
3:43:17 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP  said he would like  to consider misdemeanor                                                               
penalties   for  those   under   18  years   of  age   possessing                                                               
recreational amounts; however, stiffer  penalties for those above                                                               
the age  of consent  possessing more  than a  recreational amount                                                               
should stay in place.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
3:43:48 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
VICE   CHAIR   LEDOUX  suggested   the   sponsor   may  wish   to                                                               
differentiate between an  adult on the school grounds  who is not                                                               
attending the  school and an adult  who is present on  the school                                                               
grounds  but  is  a  senior   in  high  school  who  has  reached                                                               
adulthood.     She  stated  that   there  could  be   a  rational                                                               
distinction along those lines.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
3:44:11 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  noted that "an  ounce or more" for  an adult                                                               
off school  grounds was  a misdemeanor but  "under an  ounce" was                                                               
legal.    He asked  for  further  clarification that  if  someone                                                               
possessed  an  ounce  and  a  half  of  marijuana,  whether  that                                                               
represented  the  difference between  a  person  dealing or  non-                                                               
dealing.   He  envisioned  a  situation could  arise  in which  a                                                               
person picked up his/her child  after school and happened to have                                                               
slightly  over the  legal amount  in their  vehicle.   He further                                                               
asked for the distinction between dealing and non-dealing.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MS.  STRAUCH  responded that  the  statutes  do not  definitively                                                               
address the  amount that  constitutes a  dealing amount  versus a                                                               
possession amount; however, in public,  outside of school grounds                                                               
an amount  over an ounce  tends to lead to  further investigation                                                               
as  to the  type  of  activity involved.    She  added that  this                                                               
proposed  [work draft]  would  put the  penalties  for adults  on                                                               
school  grounds in  line  with penalties  that  exist in  public;                                                               
except that  currently a person  possessing under an ounce  as an                                                               
adult off  school property  falls within the  legal amount.   She                                                               
commented  it still  would  be  illegal to  carry  any amount  of                                                               
marijuana on school grounds.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
3:46:04 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  SCHLINGHEYDE  advised  members  that  the  sponsor  has  had                                                               
conversations with  prosecutors about  "dealing" marijuana.   She                                                               
related  there were  other crimes  people could  be charged  with                                                               
beyond  simple possession.   She  remarked  that the  prosecutors                                                               
indicated it  was always very  clear to  them when an  amount was                                                               
for personal  use and whether  it was  for dealing, not  based on                                                               
ounces, but  on testimony  from witnesses.   In  those instances,                                                               
the  prosecutors would  pursue additional  charges that  compound                                                               
the offense, she said.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
3:46:32 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  acknowledged that  the intent  to distribute                                                               
drugs typically would be indicated  by other things, for example,                                                               
someone  holding  20 small  packages,  or  possessing scales  and                                                               
other  paraphernalia.    He  offered   his  belief  that  someone                                                               
possessing  slightly over  the legal  amount  was different  than                                                               
someone who law enforcement determined had intent to distribute.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS. SCHLINGHEYDE answered that was correct.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
3:47:05 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON  stated that she was  mayor when marijuana                                                               
was  legalized  in Alaska.    She  noted  that police  can  smell                                                               
marijuana and it  is often easy to detect;  however, usually when                                                               
people are dealing  drugs, they hide the drugs.   She pointed out                                                               
that police  dogs are trained  to sniff out marijuana  as dealers                                                               
with large quantities of other  drugs often possess marijuana, as                                                               
well.  She wondered what problem  the proposed bill would like to                                                               
fix.   She  acknowledged that  someone  whose home  was in  close                                                               
proximity  to the  school might  benefit and  that this  proposal                                                               
might give law enforcement additional tools.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. STRAUCH answered  that the proposed work  draft would address                                                               
several concerns.  First, it  would eliminate a felony record for                                                               
youth  who possessed  any amount  of marijuana  since some  might                                                               
find it to  be a harsh penalty  for someone under the  age of 18.                                                               
Second, it  would also  fix or  attempt to  fix the  situation in                                                               
which parents  or other adults are  near a school ground  or pick                                                               
up students after school and they  have marijuana in their car or                                                               
on  their person.   This  proposal would  reduce the  penalty for                                                               
possession of recreational products.   It would also remove youth                                                               
center from the definition of school  grounds.  She said that the                                                               
statutory definition  for youth  centers is defined  very broadly                                                               
as any  public or private entity  that caters to any  youth under                                                               
the age of 18.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MS. STRAUCH offered that as a child  she attended a day care in a                                                               
residential neighborhood.  The day  care lacked proper signage so                                                               
there was  not any indication this  was a day care  facility, but                                                               
in statute  that would  qualify as  a youth  center.   She stated                                                               
that removing this from the  definition could help prevent people                                                               
who  are  participating in  activities  that  would otherwise  be                                                               
legal from [inadvertently committing a  felony crime] and have it                                                               
on their record.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
3:50:47 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. SCHLINGHEYDE,  to address  the point  that police  could more                                                               
easily  detect  marijuana  due  to its  aroma,  stated  that  the                                                               
proposed work  draft would  make possession  on school  grounds a                                                               
misdemeanor, making  it a justifiable  cause for  law enforcement                                                               
to search.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
3:51:00 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR LEDOUX returned the gavel to Chair Kreiss-Tomkins.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
3:51:19 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  BIRCH   asked  for  statistics  related   to  the                                                               
frequency  of instances  in which  a  person has  been charged  a                                                               
Class  C felony  for being  within  500 feet  of a  school, on  a                                                               
school bus, or within 500 feet of a youth center.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MS.  SCHLINGHEYDE responded  that the  sponsor has  been speaking                                                               
with  prosecutors but  found it  was difficult  to track  because                                                               
many of these cases were "plead  down," such that people would be                                                               
charged  with a  Class  C  felony but  would  plead  guilty to  a                                                               
misdemeanor.  In  other instances, the cases  relate to juveniles                                                               
and  are  sealed cases.    She  indicated  that the  sponsor  was                                                               
working to determine the number of  cases, but she did not have a                                                               
firm number.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
3:52:15 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH  said that  was a  reasonable approach.   He                                                               
further said that  pleading down the cases  seemed reasonable and                                                               
he thought  that prosecutors were  working to be reasonable.   He                                                               
hoped  the prosecutors  still had  the ability  to get  the "bad"                                                               
guys selling drugs.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
3:53:21 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
TRACY DOMPELING,  Director, Division  of Juvenile  Justice (DJJ),                                                               
Department  of  Health  and   Social  Services  (DHSS),  reviewed                                                               
statistics from FY  13-18.  She stated that the  division has had                                                               
909 referrals,  which is  the equivalent of  a police  report for                                                               
the division, for possession of  marijuana on school grounds.  In                                                               
FY 18 the division has had 101 referrals thus far, she said.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  BIRCH  asked  whether  any of  those  cases  been                                                               
prosecuted  as felonies  (audio  difficulties) and  if they  were                                                               
mostly juveniles.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MS.  DOMPELING  answered  that  in  the  majority  of  cases  the                                                               
division  probation officers  also use  other mechanisms  to hold                                                               
the youth  accountable for  being in  possession of  marijuana on                                                               
school grounds.   She  said that the  division has  the statutory                                                               
authority and  flexibility to not  prosecute cases.   She related                                                               
that a  small number  of juveniles  were taken  to court  for the                                                               
offense of  possession of marijuana  on school  grounds; however,                                                               
it is  rare to  bring such  a case to  court for  a felony.   She                                                               
explained that the  youth may have gotten into a  fight at school                                                               
and  have  stolen  an  iPod   from  a  student  and  during  that                                                               
investigation it surfaces  that the youth was  also in possession                                                               
of marijuana.   Therefore, the division might  petition the court                                                               
for three charges  and not just request a  stand-alone charge for                                                               
possession of marijuana on school grounds.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
3:55:48 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP  (audio difficulties) asked whether  the DJJ                                                               
needed  the statutory  changes since  the division  currently has                                                               
the flexibility.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS.  DOMPELING responded  that regardless  of whether  the charge                                                               
was a felony  or misdemeanor offense, it does not  change the way                                                               
the  DJJ responds  to allegations  of this  type of  delinquency.                                                               
The system was  not one based on a cumulative  system of specific                                                               
amount  of time  served but  rather is  based on  looking at  the                                                               
youth's likelihood of risk to reoffend  as well as what needs the                                                               
youth has to prevent them from committing future crimes.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
3:56:44 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP remarked that  he found it really intriguing                                                               
that this generation  was working to remedy this issue.   He said                                                               
he would hate  to see students charged with  felonies that follow                                                               
them around  for the  rest of  their lives.   He hoped  that this                                                               
work draft  would be  pursued next  year.   He affirmed  that the                                                               
committee brought  up not allowing  people on school  grounds for                                                               
[dealing drugs] to only be charged misdemeanors.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
3:57:35 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  said he thought  this issue might  be worth                                                               
looking  into  a little  more.    He  did not  anticipate  moving                                                               
forward with it this legislative session.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  related her  understanding that  under the                                                               
initiative  marijuana was  supposed to  be treated  like alcohol.                                                               
She asked what the penalties  for possession of alcohol on school                                                               
grounds.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MS. DOMPELING responded  that she did not know  for certain since                                                               
minor consuming alcohol charges are not referred to the DJJ.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
3:58:44 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  recalled that two years  ago the legislature                                                               
changed the law  (audio difficulties) to reduce  the penalties so                                                               
that everyone  at a party would  be charged with a  violation and                                                               
not  a  misdemeanor.     He  was  uncertain  as   to  whether  it                                                               
differentiated between  school grounds  or not.   He  offered his                                                               
belief that marijuana is treated  differently since it is illegal                                                               
federally.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
3:59:25 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX  expressed  an  interest  in  knowing  how                                                               
[alcohol] is treated on school grounds.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
3:59:43 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MATT  DAVIDSON,  Social  Services Program  Officer,  Division  of                                                               
Juvenile Justice (DJJ), Department  of Health and Social Services                                                               
(DHSS),  said that  two years  ago, Senate  Bill 165  changed the                                                               
penalties  for underage/drinking  minor  consuming  alcohol to  a                                                               
$500  fine, a  district court  appearance, with  an option  to go                                                               
through the ASAP  [Alcohol and Substance Abuse  Program] or youth                                                               
court to  address the underage  drinking.  The division  does not                                                               
consider  alcohol-related  offenses,  he  said.   He  noted  that                                                               
specific statutes address alcohol  consumption at schools, noting                                                               
it  is  currently  a  misdemeanor for  adults  and  juveniles  to                                                               
consume  alcohol on  school grounds  or at  school events.   Both                                                               
bodies of the legislature have  been considering reducing it to a                                                               
violation, he said.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MR. DAVIDSON  said the division  reviewed its records  related to                                                               
alcohol  consumption on  school  grounds and  does  not have  any                                                               
referrals;  that any  underage drinking  on school  grounds would                                                               
result in "minor possession" and not a misdemeanor.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
4:01:12 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX  asked  how   selling  alcohol  on  school                                                               
grounds would be handled.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR. DAVIDSON  answered that it  would be  covered in Title  4 [by                                                               
the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board].                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
4:01:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL  offered his  belief  that  someone over  21                                                               
years  of  age furnishing  alcohol  to  a  minor is  currently  a                                                               
misdemeanor, noting  he was unsure  if it  differentiated between                                                               
school  grounds or  not.   He was  also unsure  of penalties  for                                                               
minors selling alcohol.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MR. DAVIDSON agreed.   He clarified that furnishing  alcohol to a                                                               
minor  is  currently a  misdemeanor  and  would be  addressed  by                                                               
legislation under consideration in  both bodies.  He acknowledged                                                               
that the  division does  receive referrals  for minors  under the                                                               
age  of  18 for  misdemeanor  offense  of furnishing  alcohol  to                                                               
minors.   He added the penalty  is increased to a  felony if harm                                                               
or injury occurs.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
4:02:38 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  KREISS-TOMKINS related  his understanding  that there  was                                                               
not  a complete  "apples-to-apples  comparison" [between  alcohol                                                               
and  marijuana  penalties]  (audio difficulties)  but  they  were                                                               
close; currently it is a Class  C felony to possess marijuana and                                                               
it  is effectively  a misdemeanor  to possess  alcohol on  school                                                               
premises, possibly  a violation  if the Title  4 rewrite  were to                                                               
pass.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. DAVIDSON  answered that  the division  does not  review cases                                                               
for misdemeanor charges for underage  drinking.  He remarked that                                                               
typically  adults drinking  alcohol  on school  premises are  not                                                               
charged  but  would be  asked  to  "pour  it  out" or  leave  the                                                               
premises and juveniles  are charged with "minor  possession."  He                                                               
clarified that the  [marijuana] initiative did not  change any of                                                               
the penalties  for violations  by anyone under  21 years  of age.                                                               
He  acknowledged  that  Representative  LeDoux was  part  of  the                                                               
discussions that considered changing  criminal penalties, but the                                                               
criminal penalties  for minors  under the  age of  21 possessing,                                                               
consuming or using marijuana have not changed and are intact.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
4:04:09 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL  recalled   how  disciplinary  measures  and                                                               
criminal charges  for marijuana possession have  changed from his                                                               
generation  to the  current  one, noting  police  were often  not                                                               
brought in to  charge students; however, it has  gotten much more                                                               
restrictive and  any amount of  marijuana possession in  a school                                                               
could result  in a  felony conviction now.   He  recalled earlier                                                               
testimony that  the threat of  felony was often used  as leverage                                                               
for plea bargains.  He asked  whether any adults had been charged                                                               
with felonies  for incidental possession  of marijuana  on school                                                               
grounds.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  suggested that might better  be directed to                                                               
the Department of Law or the Department of Public Safety.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
            HB 409-DMV ID CARDS & REGISTRATION FEES                                                                         
4:05:39 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked to return to the hearing on HB 409.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
4:06:02 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL,  with respect to proposed  Section 11, noted                                                               
the penalty [under AS 28.20.330(b)]  was reduced from lifetime to                                                               
requiring  proof  of  financial  responsibility  [SR-22]  for  10                                                               
years;  however, he  thought 10  years  seemed a  bit severe  for                                                               
someone who  did not pay  the [penalty]  within 30 days  when the                                                               
penalty for a  first time DUI offense was five  years.  He stated                                                               
that the penalties seemed [inequitable] or onerous.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX   agreed;  however,  if  the   driver  has                                                               
insurance  the person  would not  pay  since liability  insurance                                                               
does not have any deductibles.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
4:07:04 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL   responded  that  he  was   uncertain  what                                                               
circumstances would cause someone to  be assessed a judgment.  He                                                               
recalled earlier  testimony that  a driver could  have insurance,                                                               
be involved an  accident, assessed a judgment, not  pay it within                                                               
30 days, and be  subject to SR-22 for life.   He thought that was                                                               
a correct assessment.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR.  STANKER  restated  the  question,   that  if  a  person  had                                                               
insurance, [and  was involved in  a crash] but the  insurance did                                                               
not cover  some portion  of the civil  judgment, that  the driver                                                               
could  have  his/her  license  suspended  and  be  subject  to  a                                                               
lifetime of SR-22.   He acknowledged he was not  well versed with                                                               
automobile insurance;  however, he  agreed with the  scenario and                                                               
lifetime SR-22 requirement.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
4:09:04 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX  said she  would  like  to hear  from  the                                                               
Division of  Insurance because in  her experience as  an attorney                                                               
in private  practice she  did not  think liability  insurance had                                                               
deductibles.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
4:09:52 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK  suggested that liability  insurance probably                                                               
had  capped   amounts,  including  ones  for   injuries  so  some                                                               
responsibility  could fall  on the  person causing  the accident.                                                               
He also  expressed concern with  the penalty  provision requiring                                                               
lifetime SR-22 for  failure to pay judgments timely.   He said it                                                               
seemed  extreme   especially  since   it  related   to  financial                                                               
obligation and  not due to  the driver's ability.   He speculated                                                               
that  the  penalty would  benefit  the  insurance industry.    He                                                               
compared it to  a debtor's prison, such that the  person is bound                                                               
for life  whereas someone who  had been drinking and  driving has                                                               
lots of extra chances, yet these drivers put the public at risk.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
4:11:33 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  stated that  what Representatives  Tuck and                                                               
Wool have  said also resonated with  him.  He asked  whether [the                                                               
lifetime requirement for] SR-22 made logical sense.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
4:11:55 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MARLA  THOMPSON,  Director,  Division of  Motor  Vehicles  (DMV),                                                               
Department of  Administration, stated  the reason for  a judgment                                                               
(audio difficulties)  usually has  resulted from  drivers without                                                               
any insurance  having an accident,  were sued, lost  the lawsuit,                                                               
and were  subject to a  judgment.  At  that point, the  DMV would                                                               
suspend  the driver's  license for  three years  and most  people                                                               
adhere to  a payment plan, if  so, the driver's license  would be                                                               
reinstated.   If  the driver  missed  (audio difficulties)  [then                                                               
offline] ....                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
4:13:07 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS (audio difficulties).                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
4:13:33 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX  asked  for  further  clarification  on  a                                                               
scenario  with   $50,000-100,000  policy  with  a   judgment  for                                                               
$150,000 ...   (audio difficulties) would the driver  have to pay                                                               
the SR 22 [financial responsibility].                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. STANKER answered  that he could not comment  on the insurance                                                               
aspect of  the question.   He said  as the statute  was currently                                                               
written,  that if  a  person  was liable  for  money  owed via  a                                                               
judgment, the party  would fall into the  circumstance of license                                                               
suspension and would be subject to lifetime SR-22 requirement.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
4:14:42 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX,  with  respect   to  drivers  with  SR-22                                                               
insurance, asked whether the insurance had a limit or cap.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR.  STANKER said  he was  not familiar  with that  insurance and                                                               
deferred to Ms. Thompson or the Division of Insurance.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
4:15:22 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  restated her  earlier scenario in  which a                                                               
driver had  a $100,000 policy but  was subject to a  judgment for                                                               
$150,000, whether the  driver would be required to  submit to SR-                                                               
22 for life.  She recollected  that SR-22 also had a limit, which                                                               
she thought was  the minimum amount of insurance,  so she thought                                                               
this simply made no sense whatsoever.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
4:15:56 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL related his  understanding of SR-22, relating                                                               
it was special  risk insurance, so drivers must  pay higher rates                                                               
for the same coverage.   He compared penalties for imposing SR-22                                                               
for insured  or uninsured  drivers having  the same  incident and                                                               
subsequently   being   required   to   obtain   SR-22   financial                                                               
responsibility, with the former subject  to SR-22 for three years                                                               
and  the  latter   subject  to  life.    He   asked  for  further                                                               
clarification on whether that was correct.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. STANKER  answered yes; adding  that this statute  was enacted                                                               
in 1959 and has not been updated since then.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
4:17:16 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL  was  unaware   that  the  state  had  SR-22                                                               
provisions in statute in 1959.   He questioned the discrepancy in                                                               
the  length of  time of  penalties for  similar infractions.   He                                                               
viewed the lifetime SR-22 requirements  as not making distinction                                                               
between  insured  or  uninsured  motorists;  yet  the  three-year                                                               
penalties  were  automatically  imposed for  uninsured  motorists                                                               
involved in  accidents with damages.   It  seemed to him  that if                                                               
the insurance rates doubled it was  less likely for the driver to                                                               
pay off the damages.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
4:18:14 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX asked  for  clarification  on the  minimum                                                               
amount of insurance required by law.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS.  THOMPSON  answered  that  the  driver  must  have  liability                                                               
insurance.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   LEDOUX  offered   her   belief  that   liability                                                               
insurance policies range  from $50,000 to $1,000,000.   She asked                                                               
for  further clarification  on the  minimum  amount of  liability                                                               
insurance.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MS.  THOMPSON   was  unsure  but  thought   it  was  $25-$50-$100                                                               
thousand.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
4:19:01 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. STANKER said he was unsure of the amount.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MS. THOMPSON offered to look it up and report to the committee.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
4:19:20 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX asked  for  clarification  that the  state                                                               
required  a  minimum   amount  of  insurance  and   that  it  was                                                               
relatively low amount.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MS. THOMPSON agreed.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
4:19:24 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  related a scenario  in which a  person had                                                               
the  minimum insurance  required, and  the judgment  exceeded the                                                               
coverage by $50,000 and the  driver was required to provide SR-22                                                               
coverage;  however, the  high-risk insurance  would not  be above                                                               
the minimum requirement either.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS.  THOMPSON responded  that SR-22  provided [a  certificate of]                                                               
financial  responsibility or  a financial  responsibility filing.                                                               
In  further  response, she  said  the  amount depended  upon  the                                                               
carrier and was  not a specific amount, but  rather was high-risk                                                               
insurance and only certain carriers provided it.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
4:20:23 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX   asked  how  much  insurance   the  state                                                               
required with  SR-22, noting she  thought the state  required the                                                               
same amount  of insurance,  but it was  more expensive  under the                                                               
SR-22 insurance.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS. THOMPSON agreed.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
4:20:47 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  questioned the logic in  requiring someone                                                               
to  carry high  risk insurance  when  the coverage  has the  same                                                               
insurance limits.  She was unsure if she was missing something.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS. THOMPSON  was unsure if  it was logical  but that is  the way                                                               
the statute is written.  She  said most of the people required to                                                               
submit to SR-22  insurance are uninsured drivers.   She explained                                                               
the process, such that these  drivers do not have insurance, have                                                               
motor  vehicle  accidents,  and   the  other  parties'  uninsured                                                               
motorist coverage pays the damages.   Subsequently, these drivers                                                               
are  sued,  which  results  in judgments  against  them.    These                                                               
drivers must  submit to SR-22  requirements for three  years, but                                                               
if they  default on the  final judgement, they are  then required                                                               
to have lifetime SR-22 requirements.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
4:22:28 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  expressed concern that it  would also pick                                                               
up motorists with the minimum amount of insurance.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS. THOMPSON  offered to compile  data to better  understand what                                                               
customers are affected by the SR-22 provisions.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
4:22:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX offered her  belief that someone will still                                                               
be affected even if  it was not many drivers.   She did not agree                                                               
with the statutory provisions as currently written.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MS. THOMPSON agreed.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
4:23:10 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  offered to  "drill down"  on SR-22  but was                                                               
interested in members' comments.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK  offered to work with  Representative Kreiss-                                                               
Tomkins' office to improve the  statutes related to SR-22 for the                                                               
public.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
4:24:07 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  said he  was still  interested in  the data                                                               
even though he agreed with  Representative LeDoux's comments.  He                                                               
wondered how many youths may  have been subject to lifetime SR-22                                                               
requirements.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL related a  personal scenario that illustrated                                                               
how  he could  have  been  affected by  SR-22  insurance that  he                                                               
thought would have been unjust.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
4:25:33 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  TUCK  requested  an  SR-22  chart  to  allow  the                                                               
committee to  better compare  what circumstances  warranted SR-22                                                               
provisions.  He also asked  whether an insurance company would be                                                               
breaking the  law if they  chose to charge regular  rates instead                                                               
of SR-22 rates.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
4:26:07 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ANNA LATHAM,  Deputy Director, Division of  Insurance, Department                                                               
of Commerce, Community, and  Economic Development (DCCED), stated                                                               
that HB 409  does not affect Title 21, the  Division of Insurance                                                               
statutes, but falls under Title 28.   She offered to research and                                                               
respond to the committee.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
4:26:41 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  KREISS-TOMKINS asked  whether  the  Division of  Insurance                                                               
would have the expertise.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS. LATHAM  answered that the  SR-22 requirements are all  set by                                                               
the DMV under Title 28;  however, if the committee has questions,                                                               
the division will work with DMV to respond.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
4:28:00 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH  expressed concern  that this  may adversely                                                               
affect some  youth in rural  Alaska and this  warrants additional                                                               
work.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that HB 409 would be set aside.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
[HB 409 was held over.]                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
^APPROVAL OF INTRODUCTION OF POTENTIAL COMMITTEE LEGISLATION                                                                    
  APPROVAL OF INTRODUCTION OF POTENTIAL COMMITTEE LEGISLATION                                                               
                                                                                                                              
4:29:03 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  announced that the final  order of business                                                               
would be the  approval of potential committee  legislation.  This                                                               
proposed  bill   would  give  the  Department   of  Environmental                                                               
Conservation the  ability to promulgate fees  for dairies. (audio                                                               
difficulties).                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
4:29:47 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  moved that "An  Act Relating to  Fees Levied                                                               
by  Resource  Agencies  for Designated  Regulatory  Services"  be                                                               
introduced as a House State Affairs Standing Committee bill.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  BIRCH expressed  concern  that  members have  not                                                               
seen a draft.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  stated that  the committee would  request a                                                               
work draft to share with the committee.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
There  being  no objection,  the  motion  to introduce  the  bill                                                               
passed.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
4:30:18 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ADJOURNMENT                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
The House  State Affairs Standing Committee  meeting was recessed                                                               
at 4:30  p.m. to a  call of the  chair.  [The  meeting reconvened                                                               
April 13, 2018.]                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
HB 409 Sponsor Statement 4.10.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 409
HB409 Sectional Analysis 4.9.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 409
HB409 ver D 4.6.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 409
HB409 Fiscal Note DOA 4.9.18.pdf HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 409
SB204 Sponsor Statement 04.06.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 204
SB204 ver A 04.06.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 204
SB204 Fiscal Note ADM 04.06.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 204
SB204 Letters of Support 1 04.06.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 204
SB204 Letters of Support 2 04.06.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 204
SB196 Sponsor Statement v. O.A 4.2.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 196
SB196 Sectional Analysis v. O.A 4.2.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 196
SB 196 v. O.A 4.2.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 196
SB196 Summary of Changes v.O.A 4.2.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 196
SB196 Fiscal Note OMB 4.2.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 196
SB 196 - NFIB Support 4.2.2018.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/17/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 196
SB 196 Graph 4.2.2018.pdf HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
SB 196
HJR030 Sponsor Statement 2.28.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/19/2018 3:15:00 PM
HJR 30
HJR030 ver D 2.28.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/19/2018 3:15:00 PM
HJR 30
HJR30 Fiscal Note LEG 4.9.18.pdf HSTA 4/10/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/19/2018 3:15:00 PM
HJR 30
HJR30 Supporting Testimony 4.12.18.pdf HSTA 4/12/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 4/19/2018 3:15:00 PM
HJR 30