Legislature(2001 - 2002)

05/05/2001 08:49 PM JUD

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
                     ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                   
                    SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE                                                                                
                            May 5, 2001                                                                                         
                             8:49 p.m.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS PRESENT                      G                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Senator Robin Taylor, Chair                                                                                                     
Senator John Cowdery                                                                                                            
Senator Gene Therriault                                                                                                         
Senator Johnny Ellis                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Senator Dave Donley, Vice Chair                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 4(FIN) am                                                                                                 
"An  Act  relating  to motor  vehicles  and  to  operating  a  motor                                                            
vehicle,  aircraft, or watercraft;  and providing  for an  effective                                                            
date."                                                                                                                          
     MOVED SCS CSHB 4(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 132(2d RLS)(efd am)                                                                                       
"An Act relating  to the possession, distribution,  importation, and                                                            
transportation  of alcohol in a local option area;  requiring liquor                                                            
license  applicants  to  submit  fingerprints  for  the  purpose  of                                                            
conducting a criminal history  background check, and relating to the                                                            
use  of criminal  justice  information  by  the  Alcoholic  Beverage                                                            
Control  Board;  relating  to  the offenses  of  operating  a  motor                                                            
vehicle, aircraft,  or watercraft  while intoxicated and  refusal to                                                            
take a breath  test; relating to implied consent to  take a chemical                                                            
test; relating  to presumptions arising  from the amount  of alcohol                                                            
in  a person's  breath  or blood;  and  providing for  an  effective                                                            
date."                                                                                                                          
     HEARD AND HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 179(FIN)                                                                                                  
"An  Act  relating  to underage  drinking  and  drug  offenses;  and                                                            
providing for an effective date."                                                                                               
     MOVED CSHB 179 (FIN) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATE BILL NO. 177                                                                                                             
"An Act relating  to driving while  intoxicated and to presumptions                                                             
arising from  the amount of alcohol  in a person's breath  or blood;                                                            
and providing for an effective date."                                                                                           
     MOVED SB 177 OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 152(RLS)                                                                                                  
"An Act relating to brewpub licenses; and providing for an                                                                      
effective date."                                                                                                                
     HEARD AND HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 181(JUD)                                                                                                  
"An  Act  relating  to the  obligations  of  spouses,  to  insurance                                                            
policies  of spouses,  to  the nonprobate  transfer  of property  on                                                            
death  to  a community  property   trust, to  the  division  of  the                                                            
community property of spouses  at death, and to the Alaska Community                                                            
Property  Act; amending  Rule  301, Alaska  Rules  of Evidence;  and                                                            
providing for an effective date."                                                                                               
     MOVED CSHB 181(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 191(L&C)                                                                                                 
"An Act relating to insurance pooling by air carriers."                                                                         
     MOVED CSSB 191(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
HB 4 - No previous Senate action.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
HB 132 - No previous Senate action.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
SB 177 - See Judiciary minutes dated 4/27/01.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
HB 152 - See Labor and Commerce minutes dated 5/1/01.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
HB 181 - See Labor and Commerce minutes dated 5/2/01.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
SB 191 - See Labor and Commerce minutes dated 4/24/01 and                                                                       
           5/1/01.  See Judiciary minutes dated 5/4/01.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Representative Norman Rokeberg                                                                                                  
Alaska State Capitol                                                                                                            
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182                                                                                                       
POSITION STATEMENT:  Sponsor of HB 4, HB 132, and HB 179                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Ms. Cindy Cashen                                                                                                                
Mothers Against Drunk Driving                                                                                                   
No address furnished                                                                                                            
Juneau, Alaska 99801                                                                                                            
POSITION STATEMENT:  Supported CSHB 4(FIN) AM                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Blair McCune                                                                                                                
Office of Public Advocacy                                                                                                       
Department of Administration                                                                                                    
900 W 5th Ave., Suite 525                                                                                                       
Anchorage, Alaska  99501-2090                                                                                                   
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on CSHB 4(FIN) AM                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Ms. Mary Marshburn                                                                                                              
Division of Motor Vehicles                                                                                                      
Department of Administration                                                                                                    
3300B Fairbanks St.                                                                                                             
Anchorage, AK  99503                                                                                                            
POSITION STATEMENT:  Supports parts of CSHB 4(FIN) AM                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Ms. Janet Seitz                                                                                                                 
Staff to Representative Rokeberg                                                                                                
Alaska State Capitol                                                                                                            
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182                                                                                                       
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on CSHB 4(FIN) AM and HB 132                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Dean Guaneli                                                                                                                
Department of Law                                                                                                               
PO Box 110300                                                                                                                   
Juneau, AK  99811-0300                                                                                                          
POSITION STATEMENT:  Supports HB 132                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Elmer Lindstrom, Special Assistant                                                                                          
Office of the Commissioner                                                                                                      
Department of Health &                                                                                                          
  Social Services                                                                                                               
PO Box 110601                                                                                                                   
Juneau, Alaska 99801-0601                                                                                                       
POSITION STATEMENT:  Supports HB 179                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Robert Buttcane, Legislative Liaison                                                                                        
Division of Juvenile Justice                                                                                                    
Department of Health &                                                                                                          
  Social Services                                                                                                               
PO Box 110601                                                                                                                   
Juneau, Alaska 99801-0601                                                                                                       
POSITION STATEMENT:  Supports HB 179                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Kevin Hand                                                                                                                  
Staff to Representative Andrew Halcro                                                                                           
Alaska State Capitol                                                                                                            
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182                                                                                                       
POSITION STATEMENT:  Introduced HB 152 for the sponsor                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Matt Jones                                                                                                                  
Moose's Tooth                                                                                                                   
Anchorage, AK                                                                                                                   
POSITION STATEMENT:  Supports HB 152                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Chuck Freese                                                                                                                
Great Bear Brewing Company                                                                                                      
Wasilla, AK                                                                                                                     
POSITION STATEMENT:  Supports HB 152                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Representative Lisa Murkowski                                                                                                   
Alaska State Capitol                                                                                                            
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182                                                                                                       
POSITION STATEMENT:  Sponsor of HB 181                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Dave Chafftel                                                                                                               
No address provided                                                                                                             
Anchorage, AK                                                                                                                   
POSITION STATEMENT:  Supports HB 181                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
TAPE 01-31, SIDE A                                                                                                            
Number 001                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN ROBIN TAYLOR called  the Senate Judiciary Committee meeting                                                          
to order at 8:49 p.m.   Chairman Taylor announced the first order of                                                            
business would be CSHB 4(FIN)am.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
          CSHB 4(FIN)am - MOTOR VEHICLES & DRUNK DRIVING                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG,  sponsor of HB 4, gave the following                                                            
description of the measure.   CSHB 4(FIN)am is omnibus drunk driving                                                            
legislation.   It is the result of work done by the  Municipality of                                                            
Anchorage  (MOA) Assembly's  task force on  driving while under  the                                                            
influence (DUI)  of alcohol.  That  task force was formed  last year                                                            
after a  number of  tragic accidents  occurred in  Anchorage.   CSHB
4(FIN)am does the following things:                                                                                             
   · Lowers the blood alcohol content limit from .1 to .08;                                                                     
   · Mandates treatment for prisoners;                                                                                          
   · Deletes the five-year "look-back" provision while phasing in a                                                             
     ten-year "look-back" provision;                                                                                            
   · Provides for discretionary immobilization on the second                                                                    
     offense and discretionary forfeiture of vehicles on the third                                                              
     offense; and                                                                                                               
   · Requires seizure of license plates, increased fees and fines                                                               
     and cost caps on various areas of the law to enhance revenue                                                               
     and offset associated costs.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG  commented:  "Mr.  Chairman,  this  is  the                                                            
carrot and stick  and the penalty provisions of the  alcohol package                                                            
that is emanating  from the House  this year."  The intention  is to                                                            
separate  the vehicle  from the  habitual offender.   CSHB  4(FIN)am                                                            
also  emphasizes certain  elements  of treatment,  particularly  for                                                            
those who are incarcerated.  He offered to answer questions.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR asked  why the  term "intoxicated"  was changed  to                                                            
"under  the  influence  of  an  alcoholic  beverage,   inhalant,  or                                                            
controlled substance."                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG said that  change was made for a  number of                                                            
reasons.  The term, "driving  while under the influence ..." is more                                                            
applicable  throughout  the United  States and  inhalants and  other                                                            
controlled  substances were  added to the  definition.  He  believes                                                            
that  lowering the  blood alcohol  level (BAC)  from  .1 to .08  and                                                            
changing  the name of  the offense  sends a message  to the  public:                                                            
think  before  you  drink  and  get behind  the  wheel.    When  the                                                            
legislature  lowers  the  standard  and  changes  the  name  of  the                                                            
offense,  a person will have  to decide whether  he or she  is under                                                            
the influence rather than  intoxicated.  He believes it is important                                                            
to send the  message to the public  that the legislature  is serious                                                            
about stopping this offense from occurring.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR   asked  at  what  level  Representative   Rokeberg                                                            
believes a person is under the influence.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG  replied: "Mr. Chairman, we have also in the                                                            
bill the impairment provisions  in state law. It is my understanding                                                            
that law enforcement  officers, when  they make the initial  arrest,                                                            
many  times  charge  under  the  impairment   statute."    Currently                                                            
"impairment" is  defined as .05; it was lowered in  the bill to .04.                                                            
He talked to  municipal prosecutors  in Anchorage who, on  occasion,                                                            
bring criminal  actions under the  impairment offense.  He  reminded                                                            
committee  members that .1  is the under the  influence level  so an                                                            
individual  could  be driving  impaired  at  a  .04 BAC  under  CSHB
4(FIN)am.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  asked how the penalties  differ for impairment  and                                                            
under the influence.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR. DEAN  GUANELI,  Assistant Attorney  General,  Department of  Law                                                            
(DOL), said there is no difference.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  maintained that by  changing the definition  within                                                            
the  bill to  "under  the influence  ...,"  the same  penalties  are                                                            
involved but the standard is lowered to .04.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG said the current law is .05;  CSHB 4(FIN)am                                                            
would lower it to .04.   He noted Chairman Taylor is correct in that                                                            
it is the per  se level at .1 or .08.  A person is  still considered                                                            
under the influence under current law.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Number 784                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR COWDERY asked for  definitions of "inhalant" and "controlled                                                            
substance."                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG said "controlled  substance" is  defined in                                                            
statute,  which contains  a list of  certain drugs.   He then  said,                                                            
"Inhalant  also,  I  believe,  is defined  here  and  there's  other                                                            
pending legislation  on that."   He pointed  out the definition  was                                                            
included at the request of Representative Kapsner.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR COWDERY  referred to Section  19, regarding evaluation,  and                                                            
asked if an evaluation  can be done if a person refuses to submit to                                                            
a breath test.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG  said one reason the bill is so long is that                                                            
the  implied   consent  and  blood   alcohol  level  statutes   were                                                            
replicated in  it.  Regarding treatment, the bill  refers to ASERP -                                                            
the Alcohol Screening  and Evaluation Referral Program,  an existing                                                            
program  where initial  screening  occurs  to evaluate  whether  the                                                            
individual  needs additional  alcohol abuse  treatment.  The  charge                                                            
for  that program  is paid  for  by the  defendant.   CSHB  4(FIN)am                                                            
contains a  provision that allows  municipalities to charge  the fee                                                            
for ASERP screening.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  THERRIAULT asked  Representative  Rokeberg  to clarify  the                                                            
comments he made about the .05 blood alcohol level.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG   explained  that  the current   impairment                                                            
statute has a .05 to .1 level.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR THERRIAULT  asked  if a person was  driving erratically  and                                                            
had a BAC of over .05, he or she could be cited while impaired.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said that is correct.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR THERRIAULT  asked if the fines  are the same for  impairment                                                            
and driving under the influence.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG  said  according  to  Mr. Guaneli  that  is                                                            
correct.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  THERRIAULT  asked why  the bill  requires a  vehicle to  be                                                            
registered under a person's first, middle and last name.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   ROKEBERG  said  the  Division  of  Motor   Vehicles                                                            
currently   has   two   separate   databases    for   licenses   and                                                            
registrations.   Those databases are not interactive  because of the                                                            
ways the names  are entered into them.   By requiring the  same name                                                            
format, the databases will be interactive.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR   THERRIAULT  asked   for  clarification   of  the   vehicle                                                            
forfeiture provision.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG explained  that under current law,  a judge                                                            
may make a discretionary  call as to whether to forfeit a vehicle on                                                            
the third  offense.  However,  the municipalities  of Anchorage  and                                                            
Fairbanks  have ordinances  that mandate  forfeiture  on the  second                                                            
offense, that  has worked as an excellent  deterrent.  The  original                                                            
version  of  the bill  had  mandatory,  rather  than discretionary,                                                             
forfeiture  on the third  offense.   It also  contained a  provision                                                            
that allowed for  either mandatory forfeiture or impoundment,  which                                                            
was primarily  aimed  at smaller  communities where  no vendors  are                                                            
available to take the vehicle  and, for example, in a situation that                                                            
warranted impounding  the vehicle  for 20 days so that it  could not                                                            
be used by  the owner.  However, some  House members were  concerned                                                            
about the mandatory  aspect so "shall"  was changed to "may"  on the                                                            
House floor,  making  both discretionary.   He felt  the bill  still                                                            
makes  progress  because  it  provides  a discretionary   forfeiture                                                            
and/or  impoundment  for the  second  offense.   His  intent was  to                                                            
implement  the mandatory  standard used in  Anchorage and  Fairbanks                                                            
statewide.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR THERRIAULT  asked about impoundment  if a car is  registered                                                            
to several people.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG said  that current  statute allows  for any                                                            
co-owner  or lien holder  to assert  his or her  claim.  During  the                                                            
floor  debate,  House  members  discussed  the  possibility  that  a                                                            
defendant may  have to sell the vehicle  to pay off the co-owner  or                                                            
lien holder.  He explained  that the rights of the co-owner would be                                                            
protected.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR THERRIAULT  asked if the co-owners would have  to pay a fine                                                            
or fee to get the vehicle back.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG said  a fee  would have to  be paid  to re-                                                            
register  the car.   He pointed out  that is  one of the  provisions                                                            
with license plate confiscation.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  THERRIAULT asked  about a  vehicle that  is towed away  and                                                            
auctioned.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG said a statutory  procedure is in  existing                                                            
law and Anchorage  and Fairbanks use a very simple  civil procedure.                                                            
He informed the  committee that the Chair of the Anchorage  Assembly                                                            
has proposed an amendment  that will allow a municipal government to                                                            
have tougher provisions  for the offense of driving with a suspended                                                            
license by  allowing for the forfeiture  of vehicles.  He  asked for                                                            
the committee's support of the amendment.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR took public testimony.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MS.  CINDY  CASHEN,  representing  Mothers   Against  Drunk  Driving                                                            
(MADD), gave the following testimony.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     The MADD chapter strongly  endorses HB 4 and we have spent                                                                 
     a  lot  of  time  working  on  this  with  Representative                                                                  
     Rokeberg and  his staff and it is our hope that  this bill                                                                 
     will pass.  Thank you.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Number 1187                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. BLAIR  MCCUNE,  Deputy Director  of the  Alaska Public  Defender                                                            
Agency,  stated the  House  has done  quite a  bit of  work on  CSHB
4(FIN)am  but  he  feels  the need  to  point  out  some  continuing                                                            
problems with  the bill.  Fines will  increase dramatically,  making                                                            
Alaska one  of the harshest states  in the nation. For a  first time                                                            
offense,  the mandatory  minimum  fine will  increase  from $250  to                                                            
$1500.   The judge would  have no discretion  to lower that  amount.                                                            
The fine for  a third offense will  increase from $1,000  to $4,000.                                                            
The public defender's agency  is concerned about putting these fines                                                            
in place at such a high  level.  In addition, the license forfeiture                                                            
period for a felony  DUI is permanent.  It can be  restored after 10                                                            
years. He  believes it is  important to make  sure that drivers  are                                                            
licensed and  insured and fears that  people whose license  has been                                                            
revoked will be  tempted to drive anyway.  He feels  the bill should                                                            
provide a way  for people to get licensed  and insured in  a shorter                                                            
period of time.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. MCCUNE  said CSHB 4(FIN)am increases  the "look-back"  provision                                                            
from five to  10 years for felony  DUIs, which will add quite  a bit                                                            
of time and expense for the public defender's agency.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MS.  MARY MARSHBURN,  Director  of the  Division  of Motor  Vehicles                                                            
(DMV), said,  like Mr. McCune, DMV  has been significantly  involved                                                            
with the  sponsor and the  legislation since  its drafting  almost a                                                            
year ago.   DMV supports lowering  the BAC to .08 but DMV  continues                                                            
to take issue  with the vehicle registration revocation  provisions.                                                            
A driver's  license  dictates whether  an individual  may drive  any                                                            
vehicle.   If a person  is permitted  to drive,  it is the  driver's                                                            
license  that determines  when and  where he  or she  may drive.   A                                                            
vehicle does not  need to be registered in a specific  person's name                                                            
for an individual  to drive it.  DMV does not believe  that removing                                                            
a person's  name from a vehicle registration  for the period  of the                                                            
driver's license revocation  will have any appreciable effect on the                                                            
DUI problem.   DMV does  believe that dealing  with re-registration                                                             
will be a chore for spouses,  other family members, or co-owners who                                                            
need the vehicle.  Likewise,  she does not believe the work required                                                            
of DMV to implement  that provision will be the most  productive and                                                            
have the  intended effect.   DMV  believes the  funds in its  fiscal                                                            
note should  be directed  to more  effective  methods of  addressing                                                            
drunk driving, such as  screening, treatment and rehabilitation, and                                                            
vehicle impoundment.   She repeated  DMV does not support  inclusion                                                            
of the vehicle registration provision in the bill.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  THERRIAULT asked  that Representative  Rokeberg respond  to                                                            
Ms. Marshburn's comments.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS. JANET  SEITZ, Chief  of Staff to Representative  Rokeberg,  said                                                            
Ms. Marshburn  was referring to Section  7: Seizure of Registration                                                             
Plates.  Currently, when  a person is stopped for a DUI offense, the                                                            
driver's  license is  seized and  replaced by  a temporary  driver's                                                            
license during which time  the person can file an appeal.  Section 7                                                            
puts a similar  scheme in place for the registration  plates so that                                                            
license  plates  are seized  and the  driver  is given  a  temporary                                                            
permit.  The bill  also says that DMV shall allow  a co-owner to re-                                                            
register  the vehicle.    She noted  it  is a  way to  separate  the                                                            
vehicle from the drunk  driver to impress upon the inebriated person                                                            
that he or she should not be driving.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR THERRIAULT  said he is not sure what will  be gained for the                                                            
cost and, apparently, neither does DMV.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MS. SEITZ thought the offender  would realize the seriousness of the                                                            
offense.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Number 1509                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  THERRIAULT  asked if  the  co-owner will  have  to pay  the                                                            
registration  fee under  Section (7)(e)  and the  offender, using  a                                                            
temporary license, can continue to drive that vehicle.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MS. SEITZ said the offender  and still has the right to appeal, just                                                            
as he or she does when a driver's license is confiscated.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR THERRIAULT  asked if a vehicle would be considered  borrowed                                                            
if a husband drove a vehicle  registered under the wife's name only.                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS. SEITZ  said she believes  that would be  correct if his  name is                                                            
not on the title.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR THERRIAULT  asked if the seizure provision  would kick in at                                                            
all for a borrowed vehicle.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. MARSHBURN said it does not apply to a borrowed vehicle.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  surmised that if a person was convicted  under CSHB
4(FIN)am and could  not register a vehicle, he or  she would only be                                                            
able to drive a borrowed vehicle.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MS. MARSHBURN  agreed but noted it  is the revocation of  a driver's                                                            
license that determines whether a person can drive or not.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR said the  bill contains a  provision that  makes an                                                            
exception  for a limited  class of  people, those  being victims  of                                                            
domestic violence.  He asked how that will work.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS.  SEITZ  explained  that  under  current  law, a  person  is  not                                                            
supposed to knowingly authorize  or permit another person to drive a                                                            
vehicle   if  that   person   does  not   have  a   valid   license.                                                            
Representative Rokeberg  added language on page 12, lines 11 through                                                            
14,  at  the  request  of  people  who felt  the  law  needs  to  be                                                            
strengthened  so that  victims  of domestic  violence  could not  be                                                            
charged  under  current  law  as being  an  enabler  if in  fear  of                                                            
domestic violence.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR DONLEY  asked how that differs from any person  who acts out                                                            
of fear of physical violence.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Number 1800                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. SEITZ said  the language regarding  domestic violence  was added                                                            
at the request of Lauree Hugonin.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  DONLEY  expressed  concern  that  the  language  is  myopic                                                            
because acting under threat  is an affirmative defense to any crime.                                                            
He questioned  why the law should  specify that the person  can only                                                            
be threatened in a domestic violence situation.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG  said Senator  Donley is  correct but  that                                                            
provision will not lessen a person's common law right.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  said existing law  says one cannot loan  a car to a                                                            
person  without a valid  license.   He asked how  the vehicle  owner                                                            
would know  whether a  driver is  licensed under  existing law.   He                                                            
asked if that immunity is also part of the forfeiture provision.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS. SEITZ said  the title of the current statute is  Unlawful Use of                                                          
License Permitting  Unauthorized Person  to Drive.  She thought  the                                                          
"knowingly" standard would  apply so a person would not be guilty if                                                            
he or she did not know the driver did not have a valid license.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR  indicated  that  with  the  modification  in  CSHB
4(FIN)am, a person  could knowingly loan a vehicle  to an unlicensed                                                            
driver but could  "bail out" by claiming to be a victim  of domestic                                                            
violence.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS. SEITZ said that is correct.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR informed  members that an  amendment [Amendment  1]                                                            
had been proposed that  would allow municipalities to impose harsher                                                            
penalties than those provided in CSHB 4(FIN)am.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG  noted  the  Anchorage  Assembly  passed  a                                                            
resolution  a  few  weeks  ago  that  requests  the  legislature  to                                                            
[indisc.] forfeiture.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  DONLEY maintained  that the  MOA was  successfully  dealing                                                            
with forfeiture.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG  said  the ordinance  only  applies to  DUI                                                            
offenses; not to suspensions.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Number 2004                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. SEITZ explained  the MOA approved an ordinance  on April 17.  It                                                            
is considering  a resolution that requests the legislature  to amend                                                            
Title 28 to allow  municipalities to increase penalties  for driving                                                            
while a license  is suspended, revoked,  or cancelled and  allow the                                                            
impound and forfeiture  of vehicles used in the offense. She pointed                                                            
out implementation  of the  MOA's ordinance  is pending a change  to                                                            
state law.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  DONLEY  said he  was  very skeptical  when  penalties  were                                                            
lowered for driving without  a license.  He moved to adopt Amendment                                                            
1, which reads as follows:                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
                           AMENDMENT  1                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     TO:  CSHB 4(FIN) am                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Page 12, following line 14:                                                                                                     
     Insert a new bill section to read:                                                                                         
   "* Sec. 22.   AS 28.15.291 is amended by adding  a new subsection                                                          
to read:                                                                                                                        
          (d)  Notwithstanding other provisions in this title, a                                                                
     municipality   may  adopt  an   ordinance  providing   for  the                                                            
     impoundment  or forfeiture of  a motor vehicle involved  in the                                                            
     commission  of an offense  described under  this section  or an                                                            
     ordinance  with elements  substantially  similar to an  offense                                                            
     described under this  section.  An ordinance adopted under this                                                            
     subsection is not  required to be consistent with this title or                                                            
     regulations adopted under this title."                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR THERRIAULT  expressed concern that the phrase  "not required                                                            
to be consistent"  was used in the last line of Amendment  1 because                                                            
it could be interpreted to mean less stringent.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR noted he shares the same concern.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR THERRIAULT said  he favors allowing municipalities to impose                                                            
stricter  provisions, but  he does not favor  allowing more  lenient                                                            
provisions.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR DONLEY agreed with  Senator Therriault in that the state law                                                            
should  be  the  floor and  that  local  governments  be  given  the                                                            
discretion to go farther.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR suggested  striking the last sentence from Amendment                                                            
1.                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG said  he agrees  with Senator Therriault's                                                             
concern.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR DONLEY moved a  conceptual amendment to Amendment 1 to allow                                                            
local  governments to  adopt  standards that  are the  same or  more                                                            
stringent than the state standards, but not less.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR announced  that with no  objection, Amendment  1 as                                                            
amended was adopted.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  DONLEY  asked  if the  House  examined  the  penalties  for                                                            
driving  without a  license.   He felt that  is a  problem with  the                                                            
current law  because the penalty for  driving without a license  has                                                            
been reduced.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG  said  that  subject  was talked  about  in                                                            
general terms but was not  addressed in the bill as he was trying to                                                            
keep the focus of the bill narrow.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  asked what rehabilitation provisions  are contained                                                            
within the bill.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG replied  the primary  one is the long  term                                                            
mandatory  treatment.   In  addition, the  fiscal  notes expand  the                                                            
ASERP  or  the  initial  assessment,  as  well  as  other  treatment                                                            
elements  that normally  occur for  those defendants  found to  need                                                            
additional treatment.   The most innovative part makes treatment for                                                            
long term, incarcerated substance abusers mandatory.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR asked if,  in some instances,  mandatory  treatment                                                            
could last for as long as one year.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   ROKEBERG   said  it   could;   the  Department   of                                                            
Corrections will  have to make a judgment call about  the timing and                                                            
length of treatment.   The problem with voluntary  treatment is that                                                            
some inmates succeed  with treatment but others do  not even attempt                                                            
it.                                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR noted  that not  everyone incarcerated  under  CSHB
4(FIN)am will be serving lengthy terms.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG  said he was trying to focus on the habitual                                                            
drunk driver.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  said with a ten-year  look-back, a person  could be                                                            
arrested  with a .04 BAC  who had a DUI  nine years prior,  and that                                                            
person would lose his or her license and car for 10 years.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG  clarified  that  is  possible on  a  third                                                            
offense.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR  asked if  the ten  years  is a  minimum  mandatory                                                            
sentence.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG said  in 1995 the  legislature changed  the                                                            
third offense  to the felony  level.  That  has not been changed  in                                                            
CSHB 4(FIN)am,  but  the anomaly  that happened  with the  five-year                                                            
look-back was  changed; i.e., a third offense within  the fifth year                                                            
was  a  felony,  but  a third  offense  in  the  sixth  year  was  a                                                            
misdemeanor. He felt that  was unfair and, in addition, he wanted to                                                            
clarify that a third offense is a felony.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said hopefully  the vast majority of people affected                                                            
by this bill will be those with a high rate of recidivism.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG pointed out  that over 73 percent  of first                                                            
offenders do not re-offend.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked within  what time period those 73 percent were                                                            
measured.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said within three years.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked what  the percentage is over a ten-year period                                                            
and expressed  concern  that it is  unlikely that  such records  are                                                            
available.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
TAPE 01-31, SIDE B                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  said maybe 30 to 40 percent no longer  drink at all                                                            
but  they will  not be  able to  work for  10 years  if they  cannot                                                            
drive.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG suspected the percentage  would not be very                                                            
high.   He  noted the  numbers start  falling  off to  less than  10                                                            
percent for major habitual offenders.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if  less than 10 percent of habitual offenders                                                            
will be "turned around" with treatment programs.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said it is the opposite.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  said that is why he asked about the  rehabilitation                                                            
program.  He asked if Representative  Rokeberg is assuming that some                                                            
of these people will not drink anymore.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG  said, "Absolutely,  that's  why the  whole                                                            
package,  particularly  with  the  therapeutic  courts -  the  other                                                            
provision we have  there - we believe that we will  make progress in                                                            
rehabilitation and treatment."                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR asked  how the  rehabilitated  individuals will  be                                                            
treated  in contrast  to the  habitual  offenders  that continue  to                                                            
drink and what  benefit the rehabilitated  individual will  get from                                                            
complying.   He said the  loss of a person's  license often  affects                                                            
that person's ability to earn a living.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG  agreed but suggested the person could get a                                                            
temporary license to get to and from work.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  disagreed and said  CSHB 4(FIN)am does not  provide                                                            
for a temporary license for that 10-year period.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR THERRIAULT  asked if the bill has provisions  with regard to                                                            
driving with  a revoked license that  trigger other suspensions  for                                                            
longer  periods of  time  or whether  everything  is tied  to a  DUI                                                            
conviction.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. SEITZ said the latter.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR DONLEY  said his concern about Section 21  is that the court                                                            
has standards  for an affirmative  defense  if a person acts  out of                                                            
fear.    He believes   the statute  sets  out  the  tests  for  that                                                            
standard, yet  Section 21 doesn't seem to have any  trigger tests at                                                            
all.  It appears  that anyone could  assert that they acted  in fear                                                            
of domestic  violence and would automatically  be exempted  from the                                                            
provisions of the bill.  He asked Mr. Guaneli to comment.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR. GUANELI said Senator  Donley's characterization of Section 21 is                                                            
accurate.  Under existing  statute, a person who is forced to commit                                                            
a  crime  in order  to  avoid  a greater  harm  has  an affirmative                                                             
defense, but the person  must present some evidence.  The Network on                                                            
Domestic  Violence  and Sexual  Assault did  not  want the  domestic                                                            
violence victim to even be charged and have to provide evidence.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR DONLEY  said his  concern is that  many of these  situations                                                            
will involve spouses who  use the same vehicle.  CSHB 4(FIN)am seems                                                            
set up to  allow abuse of  the law, whereas  if one was required  to                                                            
follow the  normal law [affirmative  defense], some sort  of measure                                                            
is involved.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. GUANELI agreed  that is a possibility.  He said  he would prefer                                                            
to rely on the existing law which involves necessity and duress.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR  asked  Representative   Rokeberg  to  clarify  his                                                            
statement  that he lost a  vote on the floor  on a provision  he was                                                            
trying to change.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG said that provision pertained  to mandatory                                                            
versus discretionary forfeiture.   He said the floor vote changed it                                                            
back to discretionary.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  THERRIAULT  asked  for an  example  of a  case  in which  a                                                            
person's vehicle would be impounded or sold.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG  said, excluding an offense in Anchorage and                                                            
Fairbanks,  under  existing  law,  law  enforcement  officials  will                                                            
impound  the vehicle  initially  when a  person is  arrested.   CSHB
4(FIN)am  will  provide  for  the confiscation  of  plates  and  the                                                            
release of the vehicle  with a temporary permit.  After adjudication                                                            
and  the  finding,  the judge  could  require  confiscation  if  the                                                            
offense is a second or third.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked  if the vehicle has to be registered in the                                                            
offender's name.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG said he believes  the offender has  to have                                                            
an ownership interest in the vehicle.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR THERRIAULT  said for a first offense, the  spouse would have                                                            
to get  the vehicle re-registered  in his  or her name, thereafter,                                                             
the offender  would  be driving  a borrowed  car.   He asked if  the                                                            
judge would have the latitude to seize the vehicle.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG said  he doesn't believe  so, which  is one                                                            
reason he  didn't want the  civil procedures  used in Anchorage  and                                                            
Fairbanks. In Anchorage and Fairbanks they use a civil action.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR THERRIAULT's next comment was inaudible.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG  said under current statute a person has the                                                            
right to assert ownership.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked Representative  Rokeberg if he has statistical                                                            
information from the District  Attorney's Office or the court system                                                            
on the actual days of sentence  being given on average by the courts                                                            
in the state for a first, second, and third offense.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG said he has  not seen the actual  number of                                                            
days, but he found  the prosecuting community to be  frustrated that                                                            
the  court  system has  tended  to  default to  the  lowest  minimum                                                            
sentence it can impose.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  noted, "Well, the previous low minimums  were 120 -                                                            
you've  gone up  to 180,  240  - you've  gone  to 360,  360 was  the                                                            
minimum  before  -  you've now  gone  to  440."   He  asked  whether                                                            
Representative Rokeberg  had any information to show that sentencing                                                            
was occurring at those levels or below.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG  said he  has a  sentencing  report but  he                                                            
could not recollect the amount of time.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  said Representative  Rokeberg also came  up with an                                                            
extensive  list for  seven different  standards  for first,  second,                                                            
third, fourth,  and more offenses.  He pointed out  the existing law                                                            
requires  not  less  than 60,  120,  240,  and 360  days  for  those                                                            
offenses.   He asked Representative  Rokeberg  if he found  that the                                                            
court system was not increasing the fines.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG explained  that one  reason for stepped  up                                                            
fines in  the bill was that  they were recommended  by the  DUI task                                                            
force  in  Anchorage.    Also,  during  substantial  discussions  in                                                            
committees,  there  was a  feeling that  the recommendation  of  the                                                            
confiscation   of  a  permanent  fund  dividend   would  be  a  good                                                            
deterrent.   However, because of priority  lists for permanent  fund                                                            
dividends,  the committee  decided to  use an  equivalent amount  or                                                            
close  to it  to catch  people's  attention  at the  first  offense.                                                            
Members decided  on $1500 for a first offense and  raised the others                                                            
from there.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said he  asked because he wondered if Representative                                                            
Rokeberg  had information  showing  the  courts were  sentencing  at                                                            
lower  amounts than  that  or at such  low  amounts he  felt it  was                                                            
important to impose the additional mandatory minimums.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG  said that  is from  anecdotal evidence  he                                                            
received  from prosecutors.   He noted, "There  was a regular  time,                                                            
particularly because of  using [indisc.] credits for time served and                                                            
defaulting  to the minimum allowable,  that's what they would  use."                                                            
He also  pointed  out that  in response  to  a comment  made by  Mr.                                                            
McCune, the public defender,  a provision was added to the bill that                                                            
allows a judge to reduce the fine by half.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  DONLEY referred  to  Section 21,  and pointed  out that  AS                                                            
18.66.990  is the definition  of domestic  violence that contains  a                                                            
list of the  elements of domestic  violence, one is making  repeated                                                            
phone calls  at extremely inconvenient  hours.  He said if  a person                                                            
one formerly  dated  was inebriated  and called  at an inconvenient                                                             
hour and asked  to borrow a car, the  loaner would have a  foolproof                                                            
defense for  doing so.   He questioned whether  that is good  public                                                            
policy.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG responded:                                                                                              
     Let me  just explain what happened  there.  We had -  this                                                                 
     is  the  enabling  section  of  the  law.    It's already                                                                  
     existing  law.  There's a recommendation  of the DUI  task                                                                 
     force that  we make that tougher so the original  draft of                                                                 
     the  bill had a tougher  section in  here.  What happened                                                                  
     is, the committee  didn't like that and then the  domestic                                                                 
     violence  people came  in before the  committee and  asked                                                                 
     that  we adopt  this.   So  we did  a  complete flip-flop                                                                  
     there.  It was like one  of those - a little bit of a last                                                                 
     minute  thing so, Mr.  Chairman, I'm  not married to  that                                                                 
     and I agree with [Senator]  Donley if it's not appropriate                                                                 
     at all...."                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Number 1711                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR DONLEY moved to delete Section 21 [Amendment 2].                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  announced that with  no objection, Amendment  2 was                                                            
adopted.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG  clarified that  the standard  will not  be                                                            
lowered by Amendment 2 because the common law defense remains.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR THERRIAULT said  that the proponents of Section 21 will have                                                            
an opportunity  to provide more balanced language  and present it to                                                            
the Senate Finance Committee.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR DONLEY moved SCS  CSHB 4(JUD) from committee with individual                                                            
recommendations.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR THERRIAULT  objected and asked  for the total amount  of all                                                            
fiscal notes.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG  said they amount to about $3.5 million with                                                            
the  five percent  assumption  that pertains  to  the .08  BAC.   He                                                            
pointed out  that is the net amount  because the bill will  generate                                                            
revenue.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR stated  with no  objection, SCS  CSHB 4(JUD)  moves                                                            
from committee with individual recommendations.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR announced  that HB 106 and HB 184 would be heard the                                                            
next day.  The committee took up HB 132.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
    CSHB 132(2nd RLS)efd am-ALCOHOL:LOCAL OPTION/DWI/LICENSING                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG presented  the bill on behalf of  the House                                                            
Judiciary  Committee.   He explained  that CSHB  132(2nd RLS)efd  am                                                            
gives  the  Alcohol  Beverage  Control  (ABC)  Board  permission  to                                                            
require fingerprints  of applicants for liquor license  applications                                                            
and makes provisions for  cutting down on the bootlegging activities                                                            
by restricting  the amount  of presumed alcohol  in the hard  liquor                                                            
form from 12 to 6 liters  of hard alcohol that can be brought into a                                                            
"damp" area.  It also increases  the penalty for mailing or shipping                                                            
liquor to dry  areas to include an  attempt to import liquor  into a                                                            
"damp" area.   The final change in the bootlegging  part of the bill                                                            
is the establishment  of delivery  sites for the receipt  of and the                                                            
importation   of  alcohol   beverages  into   a  "damp"   community.                                                            
Currently,  the city  of  Barrow operates  one  quite successfully.                                                             
This  bill will  allow  the  state to  operate  them in  Bethel  and                                                            
Kotzebue, part  and parcel with a $1.5 million federal  grant to cut                                                            
down on  bootlegging.  In  addition, because  of timing issues,  the                                                            
House decided  to add the  .08 blood alcohol  level (BAC)  provision                                                            
stand alone  and the look-back  from CSHB  4(FIN)am.  He offered  to                                                            
answer questions.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR THERRIAULT  asked about the fiscal impact  of adding the .08                                                            
BAC provision to the bill.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG  thought  the  amount  was  $197,000.    He                                                            
suggested directing the question to Mr. Guaneli.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR said  he noted that  the phrase,  "within 10  years                                                            
preceding  the  date of  a  present  offense"  was deleted  from  AS                                                            
28.35.030(o)  on page  10.   He asked if  that refers  to a  driving                                                            
while under the influence (DUI) offense.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG said,  "No, that's  part of the  look-back,                                                            
Mr. Chairman."                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR asked  if, because  the 10 years  was deleted,  the                                                            
look back provision would apply forever.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG said it contains the language  from HB 4 so                                                            
he would have  to defer to the drafter for an answer.   He then said                                                            
it is a phase in of the look back.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS. SEITZ explained the  phrase, "within 10 years preceding the date                                                            
of the present  offense" because,  as Representative Rokeberg  says,                                                            
we are  phasing  in a  ten-year look  back  with a  date certain  of                                                            
January 1, 1996.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said that is clarified in Section 14 on page 11.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said that helps with the fiscal note.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  DONLEY pointed out  the Department  of Corrections'  fiscal                                                            
note does not  specify the fund source.   He asked that information                                                             
be  provided  before  the  bill  is  heard  by  the  Senate  Finance                                                            
Committee.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  referred to Section  22(2) on page 12 and  asked if                                                            
that is the impairment section as it drops the .05 BAC to 04.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG  said there was a spread between .05 and .1.                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR said  he didn't note  any rewriting  of the  entire                                                            
code  as  was  done  with  HB  4,  for  example  changing  the  word                                                            
"intoxicated" to "under the influence."                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG replied, "This is the light version."                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Number 1198                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. DEAN  GUANELI,  Assistant Attorney  General,  Department of  Law                                                            
(DOL), said the Administration  strongly supports HB 132.  This bill                                                            
accomplishes many  of the goals that DOL set out to  accomplish, the                                                            
.08  BAC  being one  of  the  goals.   He  said  regarding  Chairman                                                            
Taylor's  question about deleting  the 10  year look back  language,                                                            
that  particular definition  applies  to second  offenders.   To  be                                                            
considered  a second offender  under current  law, the person  would                                                            
have had to  committed the first offense  within 10 years.   The new                                                            
language removes the 10 year limit.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MR. GUANELI said  he believes this bill makes meaningful  changes to                                                            
the laws  involving alcohol  in rural Alaska.   It cuts in  half the                                                            
allowable  limit that  people can  possess in  "damp" areas,  places                                                            
where the sale of alcohol  is prohibited but importation is allowed.                                                            
Right now, a person can  possess 12 liters of hard liquor, 24 liters                                                            
of wine, plus 12 gallons  of beer.  The profit margin in bootlegging                                                            
is in hard  liquor so cutting that  presumptive level in  half is an                                                            
important  step, an  act was  recommended  by the  Criminal  Justice                                                            
Assessment Commission.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if  the presumptive level is being cut in half                                                            
for the second offender.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MR. GUANELI  clarified that  it pertains to  areas where alcohol  is                                                            
allowed to  be imported but not sold.   He noted only the  amount of                                                            
hard liquor  was cut in half because  there was some concern  on the                                                            
House side  that a person should be  allowed to possess the  current                                                            
limit.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MR.  GUANELI  said DOL  believes  it  is important  to  change  some                                                            
definitions so  that anyone who attempts to send liquor  to a "damp"                                                            
area  and is  intercepted  would be  treated  as if  the liquor  had                                                            
actually  arrived, a  class C  felony.   Under current  law, if  the                                                            
liquor  doesn't  arrive, the  sender  can only  be charged  with  an                                                            
attempt,  a class  A misdemeanor.   DOL  does not  believe that  the                                                            
charge  should  be  less  because  good   police  work  stopped  the                                                            
shipment.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR. GUANELI  said after receiving  a $1.4 million grant for  alcohol                                                            
interdiction  and  reviewing  the  issue  further,  he feels  it  is                                                            
appropriate to  go one step further.  At present,  a municipality in                                                            
a damp area  can designate a site  where all of the alcohol  shipped                                                            
to the area must  go so that the municipality can  guarantee package                                                            
stores  are  not  shipping  more  than  the  monthly  legal  amount.                                                            
However,  a bootlegger  could  place  orders from  multiple  stores.                                                            
Barrow has designated  a site and put out a contract.  All liquor is                                                            
funneled   into   that   area,  where   it   and   the  recipient's                                                             
identification  are checked.   That  procedure has  cut back  on the                                                            
amount of bootlegged liquor  in Barrow.  In some areas of the state,                                                            
communities do  not have the money or political will  to establish a                                                            
similar procedure so the  question is, why shouldn't the state?  The                                                            
state  spends  millions of  dollars  to counteract  the  effects  of                                                            
alcohol in  many places in  rural Alaska.   CSHB 132(2nd RLS)efd  am                                                            
provides the statutory  authority that allows the state to operate a                                                            
delivery site.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR commented  a  community would  have to  vote to  be                                                            
either damp or dry for  bootlegging to occur.  He asked if the state                                                            
would be  spending money  to run a checkpoint  for those people  who                                                            
are shipping liquor into their community.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR. GUANELI  said that is the basic  idea.  He clarified  that it is                                                            
illegal to ship  any alcohol into dry communities  so this provision                                                            
would only apply to damp communities.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if  a bootlegger would ship to that checkpoint                                                            
voluntarily.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. GUANELI  said that  is correct.   Right now  any orders  shipped                                                            
from a package  store must contain  a label specifying what  and the                                                            
amount  of the product.   In Barrow,  someone  checks the labels  to                                                            
make  sure  the  recipient  hasn't   exceeded  his  or  her  monthly                                                            
allowance.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR DONLEY  asked what  the public policy  reason is to  set the                                                            
limits in statute.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Number 777                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. GUANELI said when sale  is banned but possession and importation                                                            
is allowed, some level  had to be established to prevent people from                                                            
having  huge storehouses   from which  to  sell.   Recognizing  that                                                            
bootlegging  did exist in those areas,  those limits were  set.  The                                                            
limits  were designed  to  provide  an amount  to allow  for  social                                                            
drinking but not  too much to sell.  The feeling is  that the amount                                                            
of hard  liquor is too much.   This has existed  in state law  for a                                                            
number of years.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  DONLEY thought  the  limits were  set quite  high and  that                                                            
bootlegging could take place within those parameters.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. GUANELI  agreed and said that  is why the amount of hard  liquor                                                            
was cut in half.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR  said  he  appreciates   the  efforts  behind  this                                                            
legislation and  hopes it work.  He expressed concern  that the bill                                                            
is based on voluntary activities.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MR.  GUANELI said  if someone  circumvents  the delivery  site,  the                                                            
offense  would be a  misdemeanor.   He noted he  has discussed  this                                                            
measure with  Representatives Kapsner  and Joule.  They are  excited                                                            
about the idea and feel it can't hurt.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR wondered  how  tough things  would have  to get  in                                                            
Juneau before a checkpoint program could be imposed.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR DONLEY  said these  communities have  had a popular  vote to                                                            
impose such a program.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said he  finds it fascinating that the committee can                                                            
so easily sit  back and consider these things as if  it is them, not                                                            
us.   He announced  that he would  hold CSHB  132(2nd RLS)efd  am in                                                            
committee  until tomorrow.    He assured  participants  he was  only                                                            
holding the  bill for the  purpose of accommodating  others  who are                                                            
interested in amending it.  He then took up HB 179.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
          CSHB 179(FIN)-UNDERAGE DRINKING & DRUG OFFENSES                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG  presented CSHB 179(FIN) on behalf of                                                            
the House  Judiciary  Committee.   In December,  the Alaska  Supreme                                                            
Court  ruled  on  the  state  versus  Neidemeyer  (ph)  case  making                                                            
structurally  inoperative the "Use  it and lose it" law.   The court                                                            
found  that revoking  a minor's  driver's  license  without a  trial                                                            
violated   the  minor's   constitutional  right   of  due   process.                                                            
Consequently,   the  House  Judiciary  Committee   worked  with  the                                                            
Administration to find  a way to re-criminalize minor possession and                                                            
consumption.   The prosecutors and law enforcement  are doing little                                                            
or nothing to  enforce the law because their hands  are tied.  Right                                                            
now a  maximum fine  of $300 is  imposed.  He  said the Legislature                                                             
needs to send a message  to the youth of this state that they should                                                            
wait until they are of age before using alcohol responsibly.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Working  with  the Administration,  the  House  Judiciary  Committee                                                            
designed a new penalty  scheme which provides for a violation on the                                                            
first  two offenses.   The  fine amounts  range from  $200 to  $600,                                                            
which can be suspended.   It also mandates attendance  at an alcohol                                                            
education  program and,  for a first  offense, allows  the use  of a                                                            
community  diversion  panel,  which  could  be  a  youth  court,  if                                                            
approved by  the court.  For a second  offense, the maximum  fine is                                                            
$1,000  (up to one-half  may be  suspended), 48  hours of  community                                                            
service,  revocation of the  driver's license  for three months.   A                                                            
third offense rises to  a class B misdemeanor with the imposition of                                                            
96  hours  of community  service  and  revocation  of  the  driver's                                                            
license for  6 months.  A person under  18 years of age is  referred                                                            
to juvenile court, if over, to district court.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
TAPE 01-32, SIDE B                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked why  community service is part of the sentence                                                            
for offenders  over the age  of 18 if they  are old enough to  go to                                                            
jail.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG said, "Well, I believe Mr.  Chairman, it is                                                            
a class B misdemeanor."                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if  the House Judiciary Committee came up with                                                            
a habitual minor consuming standard and if that is new.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG  said he believes it is new and that it also                                                            
provides for a juvenile alcohol safety action program (ASAP).                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if it will provide for treatment.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ROKEBERG said  the bill includes  a pilot  treatment                                                            
program  that specifies  the communities  of  Ketchikan,  Fairbanks,                                                            
Kotzebue  and Juneau as recipients  of the  treatment money  at this                                                            
time.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR  asked  a representative  from  the  Department  of                                                            
Health and Social Services (DHSS) to testify.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR.  ELMER LINDSTROM,  special  assistant  to  Commissioner  Perdue,                                                            
DHSS,   said  he   appreciates   the   opportunity   to  work   with                                                            
Representative  Rokeberg on this bill.  The genesis  of HB 179 began                                                            
last  summer when  they  met  with representatives  from  the  court                                                            
system, law  enforcement, prosecutors  and the public defender.  The                                                            
bill contains  elements that DHSS believed should  come forward even                                                            
before the  Alaska Supreme  Court ruled.   From DHSS's perspective,                                                             
monitoring  is key.  ASAP  serves only adults  and the court  system                                                            
wants  and needs equivalent  assistance  for juveniles.   The  court                                                            
system  feels it  has been  unable to  have any  kind of  meaningful                                                            
intervention  with juveniles.  If  the "Use it and lose it"  law did                                                            
nothing else,  it provided good data.  That data revealed  juveniles                                                            
who were  10, 12,  or 15-time  offenders.   Under  current law,  the                                                            
state's response  for the 15th offense is the same  as it is for the                                                            
first offense  so the concept  of graduated  sanctions was  one that                                                            
DHSS felt had merit.  Its  goal is to get the monitoring and provide                                                            
treatment to intervene early.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if  the state has any treatment facilities for                                                            
juveniles.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. LINDSTROM  said treatment  capacity for  juveniles in Alaska  is                                                            
very limited,  either in-patient  or out-patient.   DHSS's  original                                                            
fiscal  note on  this bill  requested in  excess of  $1 million  for                                                            
treatment in all  places it wanted to put juvenile  ASAP sites.  The                                                            
House  Finance Committee  cut  that and  put in  language for  pilot                                                            
sites. He  said he does not  want anyone to  believe that even  with                                                            
passage of  this bill and  its attached fiscal  note, there  will be                                                            
adequate facilities for youth in the state.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said,                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     In  fact, what  we've  been doing  with the  court system                                                                  
     until  the decision came down  from the Supreme Court,  is                                                                 
     we were fining kids until  we worked our way through their                                                                 
     permanent  fund dividend  check.  So,  at $300 a pass,  it                                                                 
     took you about seven times  and you got to drink for free.                                                                 
     So,  number 8, 9,  10, 11,  12, 13 that  year, those  were                                                                 
     free because  you'd already burned up your permanent  fund                                                                 
     dividend check.  That's  literally how they work it in the                                                                 
     court.   They'd come  in and give them  $300 civil fine  -                                                                 
     they'd take it out of their  permanent fund dividend check                                                                 
     ...."                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
He  said  he appreciates   this legislations    and  said  he  would                                                            
personally  go a little  tougher on  the state  as far as  providing                                                            
treatment facilities.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Number 470                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. ROBERT  BUTTCANE, Division of  Juvenile Justice, DHSS,  informed                                                            
the committee  that his division has a number of treatment  programs                                                            
in the  state  for adolescents,  mostly  outpatient  programs.   The                                                            
amount in the  fiscal note will increase  some of that capacity  but                                                            
HB 179 will hopefully  provide a scheme to identify  chronic abusers                                                            
of alcohol earlier  so that early intervention can  take place. DHSS                                                            
will be able  to provide additional  supervision and support  to the                                                            
court system  to try to  change behavior.   If that doesn't  happen,                                                            
the delinquency  system will  kick in on the  third offense  and the                                                            
forces  of  the Superior  Court,  juvenile  probation  officers  and                                                            
family   members  will   attempt   more  intrusive   and   effective                                                            
interventions.    He believes  it will  be a  lot  better than  what                                                            
currently exists.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said he  is glad the bill has a pilot program aspect                                                            
to it so that  the state can get some hard numbers  to determine how                                                            
it works  and how  to expand  it.  He  then asked  Mr. Guaneli  what                                                            
happened to the minors  who lost their drivers' licenses for decades                                                            
as a result of multiple offenses under the "Use it lose it law."                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR. DEAN  GUANELI, Assistant  Attorney General,  Department  of Law,                                                            
said he believes  that provision of the law was changed  recently so                                                            
that   those  revocations   will   run  concurrently   rather   than                                                            
consecutively.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
There being no further  questions or testimony, SENATOR DONLEY moved                                                            
CSHB 179(FIN)am from committee with individual recommendations.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR  announced  that  with no  objections,  the  motion                                                            
carried.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
         SB 177-DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED:BAC LEVEL/FINES                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  announced participants that the committee  has held                                                            
two hearings on SB 177, sponsored by Senator Ward.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR DONLEY said although  he likes the substance of the bill, he                                                            
is still  concerned about  the fiscal  note.  He  then moved  SB 177                                                            
from committee with individual recommendations.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR announced  that with no objection, SB 177 moved from                                                            
committee with individual recommendations.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
                      HB 152-BREWPUB LICENSES                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
The committee took up HB 152.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR. KEVIN HAND,  staff to Representative Halcro, sponsor  of HB 152,                                                            
explained  that  HB  152  is  a  stop  gap  measure  to  ensure  the                                                            
unencumbered  operation  of  a  relatively  new,  highly  successful                                                            
industry in Alaska.   HB 152 provides a band-aid solution  involving                                                            
a one-year  sunset clause  that will  enable brew  pubs to  continue                                                            
their operation  for a full  year, rather  than having to shut  down                                                            
their operation  once they reached the production  cap put in place.                                                            
The  bill  has a  sunset  date  is  June 30,  2002;  it  raises  the                                                            
production  cap on brew pubs  to 150,000 gallons,  of which  no more                                                            
than  75,000 gallons  can  be  sold retail  through  their  in-house                                                            
establishments  and no  more than 75,000  gallons  can be sold  to a                                                            
wholesaler.   The brew pub industry  has fostered employment  in the                                                            
state, it has  made millions of dollars in capital  investments, and                                                            
it provides  diversification  of the economy.   The idea behind  the                                                            
sunset clause is to allow  a one year period for everyone to come to                                                            
the table, including the  industry groups to foster a long solution.                                                            
He informed  the committee that Representative  Halcro has  received                                                            
thousands   of  contacts  from  patrons   of  these  establishments                                                             
statewide  who would like  to see the continued  operation  of them.                                                            
He pointed  out the net effect  of this production  cap in  place is                                                            
that it  will leave the brew  pub operator  with a few choices:  the                                                            
operator can  cease the operation  upon reaching the production  cap                                                            
and no longer  sell beer or bring in another brand  until the end of                                                            
the calendar  year; contract  brew to a brewery,  which can  be done                                                            
without  the cap, or  contract brew  to a company  out-of-state;  or                                                            
move  the  entire  facility  to  the Lower  48  where  there  is  no                                                            
production  cap,  but  the  operator  will  lose the  moniker  of  a                                                            
handcrafted  Alaskan  beer.    In  fact, the  production  cap  is  a                                                            
disincentive  for  Alaskan  employment  and  capital  investment  in                                                            
Alaska.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR COWDERY  noted the downtown pub is an asset  to the downtown                                                            
area.  He questioned  whether any  other establishments are  limited                                                            
to what they can sell, for example, imports.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. HAND said  regarding the alcohol industry, there  is no limit to                                                            
how much Anheuser-Bush  or Coors can  ship into Alaska and  sell and                                                            
there is no  limit to how much a package  store or brewery,  such as                                                            
the Alaskan Brewery, can sell of any product.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  COWDERY asked  when the  limit was  established whether  it                                                            
would be adjusted in the future.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR. HAND  said that brings  up a very valid  point because  when the                                                            
brew pubs  first came  on to the  scene in Alaska,  for example  the                                                            
Moose's Tooth,  the law allowed a brewery to also  own a restaurant-                                                            
eating  place license.   At  that time,  there was  no limit on  the                                                            
amount that could  be brewed.  That law was changed  and the cap was                                                            
put in  place while  they were in  operation in  1996.  The  Moose's                                                            
Tooth's license became illegal and had to be grandfathered in.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR DONLEY asked if the increase is temporary for one year.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. HAND  said that is correct;  it is a  temporary fix so  that all                                                            
parties have time to come up with a long term fix.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MR.  MATT JONES,  co-owner  of the  Moose's Tooth  Brewing  Company,                                                            
urged  committee  members  to  support  HB  152.   He  informed  the                                                            
committee  that when he and  his partner  planned their business  in                                                            
1995, the Moose's  Tooth legally obtained both a restaurant  license                                                            
and a  brewery license.   At that  time, when  they opened in  1996,                                                            
they could produce and  sell an unlimited amount of beer in both the                                                            
wholesale  and retail  sectors, as  well as own  as many  restaurant                                                            
licenses as they desired.   After less than six months of operation,                                                            
the 1996 Legislature  passed a statute prohibiting  the simultaneous                                                            
ownership of a restaurant and brewery license.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
His business  was  never contacted  during  that session  as to  the                                                            
effect  that statutory  change  would  have on  the  business.   The                                                            
Moose's Tooth  was told by  the ABC Board  that the law had  changed                                                            
and that their license  was in a grandfather status.  Right now, the                                                            
Moose's Tooth  is asking to be able to brew beer to  meet the market                                                            
demand  for  its product,  as  allowed  in 1996.  Bar  owners  often                                                            
complain that the Moose's  Tooth has an unfair market advantage, but                                                            
he pointed  out that bar owners can  also add a brewing facility  to                                                            
their bar  to become a brew  pub.  The only  thing stopping  them is                                                            
the investment  in that infrastructure.   In  many states brew  pubs                                                            
can wholesale  and retail.   The state of  Oregon has a free  market                                                            
approach,  in  which   brew  pubs  can  wholesale,   retail,  own  a                                                            
distillery, winery  or restaurant and bar and they  can brew to meet                                                            
the market  demands.   That  approach is  the reason  Oregon is  now                                                            
internationally  recognized as one  of the most flourishing  brewing                                                            
industries  in the  world.   His final point  was that  of the  beer                                                            
produced  in Alaska,  the microbrewed  sector accounts  for about  4                                                            
percent.  Of that 4 percent,  the Alaskan Brewery makes about 2 to 3                                                            
percent;  the remainder is  divvied up amongst  10 other  breweries.                                                            
He does not believe his  business is about to monopolize the market.                                                            
He noted that  he would like to be  able to brew to the demand  that                                                            
he built  his brewery  for  in 1996.   Doubling  the production  cap                                                            
under HB 152 will  allow him to get closer to that  and to meet with                                                            
other parties to find a permanent solution.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. CHUCK  FREESE, a principal  in the Great  Bear Brewing  Company,                                                            
stated  support  for HB  152.   He  said Mr.  Jones  summarized  the                                                            
benefits of HB 152.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  COWDERY  asked Mr.  Freese  if his  primary  business is  a                                                            
restaurant  and,  in  a  brew  pub  business,   whether  arrests  of                                                            
intoxicated people occur more often than with a restaurant.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. FREESE said his business  is just getting started and does about                                                            
half restaurant  business and half brew pub business.   His business                                                            
closes at 1:00 a.m. on  Friday and Saturday nights.  They have never                                                            
had an incident with the  police.  He offered to forward a letter he                                                            
has  received  from  the  Chamber  of Commerce.    He  believes  the                                                            
community is very  supportive of his business and  families comprise                                                            
a big part of his business.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR noted he would take up HB 132 again tomorrow.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
         HB 181-COMMUNITY PROPERTY/OBLIGATIONS OF SPOUSES                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LISA MURKOWSKI,  sponsor of  HB 181, explained  that                                                            
the bill fills  in gaps in Alaska's  Community Property Act,  passed                                                            
in 1998.  HB 181  is the result of discussions with  and suggestions                                                            
from one of  her constituents, Dave  Chafftel, a trust attorney  who                                                            
is  very  involved  with  the  trust  section   of  the  Alaska  Bar                                                            
Association.  Four areas  are at  issue.   The first  is a  creditor                                                            
rights  issue  with regard  to  obligations  incurred  by a  spouse.                                                            
Those  obligations  can only  be satisfied  from  the spouse's  non-                                                            
community property.  The  creditor of a debtor spouse can only reach                                                            
the  separate  property  of  the debtor  spouse  and  that  spouse's                                                            
jointly held property.   Two other issues pertain  to life insurance                                                            
and specify that one can  designate a trust itself as a beneficiary.                                                            
HB 181 clarifies  the sources of funds that can be  used to purchase                                                            
the life  insurance and  expand the  category.   At present  it only                                                            
pertains  to family  members but  often one  wants to  extend it  to                                                            
grandchildren.  The final  area relates to the division of property.                                                            
When community property  was discussed in 1998, division of property                                                            
upon  death was  not covered.   HB  181 specifies  that  if one  has                                                            
different property items,  they can be allocated differently as long                                                            
as the surviving spouse receives half of the total value.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR. DAVE CHAFFTEL, an Anchorage  attorney, said he is one of a group                                                            
of  estate planning  attorneys  who  have helped  with  some of  the                                                            
technical  matters of  drafting estate  planning  legislation.   The                                                            
group  has   found  that  the  community   property  act   that  the                                                            
legislature  passed in  1998 has  been very  popular.   Most of  his                                                            
clients opt to designate  some or all of their property as community                                                            
property  so the bill  has been  very successful  and beneficial  to                                                            
Alaskans.  He said:                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     We originally  adopted the Uniform  Marital Property  Act,                                                                 
     which  was a uniform act that  provided a basic framework                                                                  
     for community property but  has a number of gaps, as a lot                                                                 
     of these model  acts do, and they need to be designed  for                                                                 
     each  state.   That's  what  this  bill  is doing  -  it's                                                                 
     filling in  some of the gaps in a number of areas  that we                                                                 
     have noticed  either are ambiguous or need resolution  for                                                                 
     Alaskans.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR  thanked  Mr.  Chafftel  for his  efforts  on  this                                                            
legislation.   He said that he plans to hold a hearing  next session                                                            
for the  specific purpose  of learning  what has  happened with  the                                                            
trust modifications made  by the legislature.  He pointed out that a                                                            
lot of  local people  owned large  pieces of land,  homes and  other                                                            
things and would have been  wiped out by taxes if it hadn't been for                                                            
some unique  properties provided by  Alaska that other states  don't                                                            
have.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  DONLEY   moved  HB  181  from  committee  with   individual                                                            
recommendations and its accompanying zero fiscal note.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR announced  that with no objection, HB 181 moved from                                                            
committee.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
           SB 191-JOINT AVIATION INSURANCE ARRANGEMENTS                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR  informed  participants   that  the  committee  has                                                            
already  held several  hearings on  this legislation.   He  proposed                                                            
Amendment 1,  and explained that it  provides further clarification                                                             
from the Division of Insurance.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR DONLEY  moved to adopt Amendment 1, which  reads as follows.                                                            
                                                                                                                                
                           AMENDMENT  1                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
TO:  SB 191                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Page 2, line 9                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     Insert a new subsection (b) and re-letter accordingly:                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     21.77.020  (b)  Before  the air carrier  signs the cooperative                                                             
     agreement,  the  Joint  Aviation  Insurance  Arrangement  shall                                                            
     notify  the air  carrier  in writing  that the  Joint  Aviation                                                            
     Insurance  Arrangement is  not licensed  in this state,  is not                                                            
     subject  to this state's supervision,  and in the event  of the                                                            
     insolvency of the  Joint Aviation Insurance Arrangement, losses                                                            
     will not  be covered under AS 21.80 (Alaska Insurance  Guaranty                                                            
     Association Act).                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR  announced  that  with  no  objection,  the  motion                                                            
carried.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR ELLIS asked for clarification.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN  TAYLOR  said  Amendment  1  provides  additional  sidebars                                                            
because,  "Everybody's  worried  about these  guys  running off  and                                                            
being too thinly financed."                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR ELLIS proposed Amendment 2, which reads as follows.                                                                     
                                                                                                                              
                             AMENDMENT 2                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
TO:  SB 191                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Page 2, lines 5-9:                                                                                                              
         Delete all material and insert:                                                                                        
              "Sec. 21.77.020. Annual report. By October 1 of each                                                            
              year, the administrator of a joint insurance"                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR ELLIS  said his intent  is to require  an annual report  and                                                            
that requiring annual reports  seem to be the prevailing attitude on                                                            
the floor today.  He noted  Amendment 2 would require this structure                                                            
to be under the review of the Division of Insurance.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  said he has no problem  requiring an annual  report                                                            
but he has a problem  with the first part. He therefore  objected to                                                            
Amendment 2 and explained:                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     ...  what  it  does  is  today  it's  a  joint  insurance                                                                  
     arrangement,  which  is not under  the regulation  of  the                                                                 
     Division  of  Insurance,  like  the  pools  are  with  the                                                                 
     schools, and  the amendment would put them back  under the                                                                 
     division and  require an annual report.  And I'll  have to                                                                 
     object to that one.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR ELLIS noted the  committee heard testimony from the director                                                            
of the Division  of Insurance that  it would be a good idea  because                                                            
of the risk involved.   He said he supports what Chairman  Taylor is                                                            
trying to do but  he would feel more comfortable if  the Division of                                                            
Insurance had oversight.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR stated:                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
     I appreciated  that.  My frustration  is if that were  the                                                                 
     case, they  could just form a reciprocal at this  time and                                                                 
     there's  been no  movement towards  that and  part of  the                                                                 
     difficulty  is the  extensive reporting  requirements  and                                                                 
     auditing  requirements, much  of which we've not put  back                                                                 
     into  the bill  or a  good portion  of it  we have,  which                                                                 
     further  will impinge on them  a bit.  Actually, the  JIAs                                                                 
     that  are working  on  the municipalities  in  the school                                                                  
     districts  have basically  a one  paragraph authorization                                                                  
     and they have done the things  they are doing because it's                                                                 
     good business to do it and  not because they were required                                                                 
     to.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
A roll call vote was taken.   The motion to adopt Amendment 2 failed                                                            
with  Senators  Cowdery,   Therriault,  Donley  and   Taylor  voting                                                            
against, and Senator Ellis voting in favor.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR ELLIS  moved to adopt Amendment  3, which reads as  follows:                                                            
                                                                                                                                
                            AMENDMENT 3                                                                                     
                                                                                                                              
TO:  SB 191                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                              
     Page 3, line 3l:                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
         Delete "$250,000"                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
         Insert "$500,000"                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
He said the  doubled amount would  provide a more adequate  level of                                                            
capitalization. The director  of the Division of Insurance testified                                                            
that $250,000 was inadequate.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  said he believes Amendment 3 is fair  and he has no                                                            
objection  to it. With  no other  objection to  Amendment 3,  it was                                                            
adopted.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR DONLEY  moved CSSB 191(JUD)  from committee with  individual                                                            
recommendations. There being no objection, the motion carried.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  announced, regarding HB 152, that  it is his intent                                                            
to let  the parties  find a solution  and insert  it into the  other                                                            
bill.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR ELLIS  said that bill represents everything  the legislature                                                            
says it stands  for, regarding economic development  in Alaska so he                                                            
hopes the Chairman can make that happen.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR  announced that the  committee would take  up HB 106                                                            
and HB 184 the following  day, and that he hopes to hold the meeting                                                            
at 1:30  p.m.  or while  the full  Senate  takes a  recess. He  then                                                            
adjourned the meeting at 11:13 p.m.                                                                                             

Document Name Date/Time Subjects