Legislature(2011 - 2012)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)

04/11/2012 01:30 PM JUDICIARY


Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
= HB 224 SALES OF NICOTINE PRODUCTS TO MINOR
Moved CSHB 224(FIN) am Out of Committee
= HB 55 KNIVES, GRAVITY KNIFE & SWITCHBLADE
Moved CSHB 55(JUD) Out of Committee
+ HB 343 DISCLOSURE OF CHILDREN'S RECORDS TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
+ HB 168 INJUNCTION SECURITY: INDUSTRIAL OPERATION TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
                    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
              SENATE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                             
                         April 11, 2012                                                                                         
                           1:34 p.m.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Senator Hollis French, Chair                                                                                                    
Senator Bill Wielechowski, Vice Chair                                                                                           
Senator Joe Paskvan                                                                                                             
Senator John Coghill                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Senator Lesil McGuire                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 224(FIN) AM                                                                             
"An  Act prohibiting  the sale  or gift  of a  product containing                                                               
nicotine to a minor under certain conditions."                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED CSHB 224(FIN) AM OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 55(JUD)                                                                                 
"An Act  adding definitions of 'gravity  knife' and 'switchblade'                                                               
to the criminal  law; and relating to reserving  the authority to                                                               
regulate  knives  to  the  state   with  limited  exceptions  for                                                               
municipalities to regulate knives."                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED CSHB 55(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 343(JUD) AM                                                                             
"An Act  relating to disclosure  of records of the  Department of                                                               
Health  and Social  Services pertaining  to  children in  certain                                                               
circumstances; and providing for an effective date."                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 168(JUD)                                                                                
"An Act  requiring the amount  of the  security given by  a party                                                               
seeking an injunction or order  vacating or staying the operation                                                               
of  a permit  affecting  an industrial  operation  to include  an                                                               
amount for  the payment of  wages and benefits for  employees and                                                               
payments to  contractors and subcontractors  that may be  lost if                                                               
the industrial operation is wrongfully enjoined."                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 224                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: SALES OF NICOTINE PRODUCTS TO MINOR                                                                                
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) SEATON                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
04/04/11       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/04/11       (H)       JUD, FIN                                                                                               
04/11/11       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
04/11/11       (H)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
04/13/11       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
04/13/11       (H)       Moved CSHB 224(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                   
04/13/11       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
04/14/11       (H)       JUD RPT CS(JUD) NT 4DP 3NR                                                                             
04/14/11       (H)       DP: HOLMES, THOMPSON, LYNN, GATTO                                                                      
04/14/11       (H)       NR: PRUITT, KELLER, GRUENBERG                                                                          
02/23/12       (H)       FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519                                                                       
02/23/12       (H)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
02/27/12       (H)       FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519                                                                       
02/27/12       (H)       Moved CSHB 224(FIN) Out of Committee                                                                   
02/27/12       (H)       MINUTE(FIN)                                                                                            
02/29/12       (H)       FIN RPT CS(FIN) NT 9DP 1AM                                                                             
02/29/12       (H)       DP: FAIRCLOUGH, T.WILSON, GUTTENBERG,                                                                  
                         COSTELLO,    EDGMON,   DOOGAN,    JOULE,                                                               
                         STOLTZE,                                                                                               
02/29/12       (H)       THOMAS                                                                                                 
02/29/12       (H)       AM: GARA                                                                                               
03/12/12       (H)       TRANSMITTED TO (S)                                                                                     
03/12/12       (H)       VERSION: CSHB 224(FIN) AM                                                                              
03/14/12       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/14/12       (S)       HSS, JUD                                                                                               
03/28/12       (S)       HSS AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
03/28/12       (S)       Moved CSHB 224(FIN) am Out of Committee                                                                
03/28/12       (S)       MINUTE(HSS)                                                                                            
03/30/12       (S)       HSS RPT 4DP                                                                                            
03/30/12       (S)       DP: DAVIS, MEYER, EGAN, DYSON                                                                          
04/09/12       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
04/09/12       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/09/12       (S)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
04/11/12       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB  55                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: KNIVES, GRAVITY KNIFE & SWITCHBLADE                                                                                
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) NEWMAN, LYNN                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
01/18/11       (H)       PREFILE RELEASED 1/7/11                                                                                
01/18/11       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
01/18/11       (H)       JUD                                                                                                    
02/15/12       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
02/15/12       (H)       Moved CSHB  55(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                   
02/15/12       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
02/17/12       (H)       JUD RPT CS(JUD) NT 6DP                                                                                 
02/17/12       (H)       DP: LYNN, GRUENBERG, KELLER, THOMPSON,                                                                 
                         HOLMES, GATTO                                                                                          
03/05/12       (H)       TRANSMITTED TO (S)                                                                                     
03/05/12       (H)       VERSION: CSHB 55(JUD)                                                                                  
03/06/12       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/06/12       (S)       JUD                                                                                                    
04/09/12       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
04/09/12       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/09/12       (S)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
04/11/12       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 343                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: DISCLOSURE OF CHILDREN'S RECORDS                                                                                   
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) MUNOZ                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
02/22/12       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/22/12       (H)       HSS, JUD                                                                                               
03/15/12       (H)       HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
03/15/12       (H)       Moved CSHB 343(HSS) Out of Committee                                                                   
03/15/12       (H)       MINUTE(HSS)                                                                                            
03/16/12       (H)       HSS RPT CS(HSS) 3DP 3NR                                                                                
03/16/12       (H)       DP: SEATON, MILLER, KERTTULA                                                                           
03/16/12       (H)       NR: MILLETT, HERRON, KELLER                                                                            
03/26/12       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
03/26/12       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/26/12       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
03/28/12       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
03/28/12       (H)       Moved CSHB 343(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                   
03/28/12       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
03/30/12       (H)       JUD RPT CS(JUD) 4DP 1NR 1AM                                                                            
03/30/12       (H)       DP: GRUENBERG, KELLER, PRUITT, THOMPSON                                                                
03/30/12       (H)       NR: LYNN                                                                                               
03/30/12       (H)       AM: HOLMES                                                                                             
04/06/12       (H)       TRANSMITTED TO (S)                                                                                     
04/06/12       (H)       VERSION: CSHB 343(JUD) AM                                                                              
04/07/12       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/07/12       (S)       JUD                                                                                                    
04/11/12       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 168                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: INJUNCTION SECURITY: INDUSTRIAL OPERATION                                                                          
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) FEIGE                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
02/23/11       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/23/11       (H)       JUD                                                                                                    
02/25/11       (H)       BILL REPRINTED 2/24/11                                                                                 
03/21/11       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
03/21/11       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/21/11       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
03/23/11       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
03/23/11       (H)       <Bill Hearing Canceled>                                                                                
03/30/11       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
03/30/11       (H)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
04/04/11       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
04/04/11       (H)       Moved CSHB 168(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                   
04/04/11       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
04/05/11       (H)       JUD RPT CS(JUD) 3DP 2NR                                                                                
04/05/11       (H)       DP: KELLER, PRUITT, THOMPSON                                                                           
04/05/11       (H)       NR: GRUENBERG, HOLMES                                                                                  
04/07/11       (H)       TRANSMITTED TO (S)                                                                                     
04/07/11       (H)       VERSION: CSHB 168(JUD)                                                                                 
04/08/11       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/08/11       (S)       L&C, JUD                                                                                               
02/23/12       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
02/23/12       (S)       <Bill Hearing Postponed>                                                                               
03/01/12       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
03/01/12       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/01/12       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
03/13/12       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
03/13/12       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/13/12       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
03/20/12       (S)       L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
03/20/12       (S)       Moved CSHB 168(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                   
03/20/12       (S)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
03/21/12       (S)       L&C RPT 2DP 3NR                                                                                        
03/21/12       (S)       DP: GIESSEL, MENARD                                                                                    
03/21/12       (S)       NR: EGAN, DAVIS, PASKVAN                                                                               
03/23/12       (S)       L&C UPDATED (2012 FORMAT) FISCAL NOTES                                                                 
04/11/12       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CATHY MUNOZ                                                                                                      
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, AK                                                                                                                      
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 343.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
TONY NEWMAN, Program Officer                                                                                                    
Division of Juvenile Justice                                                                                                    
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS)                                                                                 
Juneau, AK                                                                                                                      
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 343.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
STACIE KRALY, Assistant Attorney General                                                                                        
Human Services Section                                                                                                          
Civil Division                                                                                                                  
Department of Law (DOL)                                                                                                         
Juneau, AK                                                                                                                      
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions related to HB 343.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
QUINLAN STEINER, Public Defender                                                                                                
Public Defender Agency                                                                                                          
Department of Administration (DOA)                                                                                              
Anchorage, AK                                                                                                                   
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions related to HB 343.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ERIC FEIGE                                                                                                       
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, AK                                                                                                                      
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 168.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MIKE JUNGREIS, member                                                                                                           
Resource Development Council for Alaska, Inc. (RDC)                                                                             
Anchorage, AK                                                                                                                   
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 168.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
RACHEL PETRO, President and CEO                                                                                                 
Alaska State Chamber of Commerce                                                                                                
Anchorage, AK                                                                                                                   
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 168, version D.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
ANDREW KELLER, representing himself                                                                                             
Fairbanks, AK                                                                                                                   
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 168.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
BOB DICKSON, representing himself                                                                                               
Anchorage, AK                                                                                                                   
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 168.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
TERRY SEVY, representing himself                                                                                                
Anchorage, AK                                                                                                                   
POSITION STATEMENT: Stated firm opposition to HB 168.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
BONNIE ZIRCLE, representing herself                                                                                             
Palmer, AK                                                                                                                      
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 168.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
ANDY MODEROW, Executive Director                                                                                                
Alaska Conservation Alliance                                                                                                    
Anchorage, AK                                                                                                                   
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 168.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
TOM WALDO, Attorney                                                                                                             
Earth Justice                                                                                                                   
Juneau, AK                                                                                                                      
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 168.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
EMILY BREEZE, representing herself                                                                                              
Healy, AK                                                                                                                       
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 168.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MIKE SATRY, Executive Director                                                                                                  
Council of Alaska Producers                                                                                                     
Juneau, AK                                                                                                                      
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 168.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
KATHY WASSERMAN, Executive Director                                                                                             
Alaska Municipal League (AML)                                                                                                   
Juneau, AK                                                                                                                      
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that the municipalities are                                                                     
concerned with HB 168.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
SHIRLEY MARQUART, Mayor                                                                                                         
City of Unalaska and                                                                                                            
President                                                                                                                       
Alaska Municipal League                                                                                                         
Unalaska, AK                                                                                                                    
POSITION STATEMENT: Raised questions about HB 168.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
BARBARA HUFF-TUCKNESS, Executive Director                                                                                       
Governmental Affairs                                                                                                            
Teamsters Local 959                                                                                                             
Anchorage, AK                                                                                                                   
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 168.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
1:34:56 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR HOLLIS FRENCH called the Senate Judiciary Standing                                                                      
Committee meeting to order at 1:34 p.m. Present at the call to                                                                  
order  were Senators  Wielechowski,  Coghill,  and Chair  French.                                                               
Senator Paskvan arrived soon thereafter.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
           HB 224-SALES OF NICOTINE PRODUCTS TO MINOR                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
1:35:41 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  FRENCH announced  the  consideration of  HB  224, "An  Act                                                               
prohibiting the sale or gift  of a product containing nicotine to                                                               
a minor under certain conditions."  The bill was heard previously                                                               
and public testimony  was taken. Finding no  further questions or                                                               
discussion, he asked the will of the committee.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
1:35:59 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  WIELECHOWSKI  moved  to  report   CS  for  HB  224  from                                                               
committee  with individual  recommendations  and attached  fiscal                                                               
note(s).                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  FRENCH  announced  that CSHB  224(FIN)am  moved  from  the                                                               
Senate Judiciary Standing Committee.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
           HB  55-KNIVES, GRAVITY KNIFE & SWITCHBLADE                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
1:36:12 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  FRENCH  announced the  consideration  of  HB 55,  "An  Act                                                               
adding definitions  of 'gravity  knife' and 'switchblade'  to the                                                               
criminal  law;  and  relating  to   reserving  the  authority  to                                                               
regulate  knives  to  the  state   with  limited  exceptions  for                                                               
municipalities   to  regulate   knives."  The   bill  was   heard                                                               
previously  and public  testimony was  taken. Finding  no further                                                               
questions or discussion, he asked the will of the committee.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
1:36:37 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI moved to report  CS for HB 55 from committee                                                               
with individual recommendations and attached fiscal note(s).                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FRENCH  announced that CSHB  55(JUD) moved from  the Senate                                                               
Judiciary Standing Committee.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
1:36:50 PM                                                                                                                    
At ease from 1:36 p.m. to 1:37 p.m.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
            HB 343-DISCLOSURE OF CHILDREN'S RECORDS                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
1:37:58 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  FRENCH announced  the  consideration of  HB  343, "An  Act                                                               
relating to  disclosure of  records of  the Department  of Health                                                               
and   Social  Services   pertaining   to   children  in   certain                                                               
circumstances; and providing for an effective date."                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR PASKVAN joined the committee.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
1:38:28 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  CATHY MUNOZ,  sponsor of  HB 343,  said the  bill                                                               
does three  primary things. First,  it assures that  the Division                                                               
of Juvenile Justice  (DJJ) and the Office  of Children's Services                                                               
(OCS) can  exchange information to provide  necessary services to                                                               
children without undue delay. Second,  it allows individuals with                                                               
a  legitimate interest  - such  as former  clients who  once were                                                               
children  in  state custody,  their  parents  or guardians  -  to                                                               
receive information about delinquency  history and health records                                                               
from DJJ. Third, it clarifies  cumbersome language in current law                                                               
regarding   public  disclosure   of  juvenile   information.  The                                                               
legislation  strives  to  preserve   the  legislative  intent  of                                                               
maintaining public  safety by disclosing  appropriate information                                                               
on  serious offenders  while  protecting  the confidentiality  of                                                               
offenders who pose less risk to society.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:41:15 PM                                                                                                                    
TONY  NEWMAN,  Program  Officer, Division  of  Juvenile  Justice,                                                               
Department of  Health and  Social Services  (DHSS), spoke  to the                                                               
benefits of improving  OCS and DJJ's ability  to collaborate. The                                                               
amendment to  AS 47.12.310(f) (Section  3) will enable DJJ  to be                                                               
more responsive  to requests, particularly from  individuals with                                                               
a  need for  background  information on  their juvenile  history.                                                               
Provisions in  Section 4  will improve the  ability of  staff and                                                               
the  public  to  understand  when information  about  a  juvenile                                                               
offense is subject to public disclosure and when it is not.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
He  stated  that the  proposed  bill  will  not change  any  laws                                                               
regarding  victim notification,  and  parents  and agencies  with                                                               
well-established rights to juvenile  information will continue to                                                               
receive the necessary information  to effectively carry out their                                                               
duties.  The laws  surrounding child  abuse and  neglect are  not                                                               
affected by the proposed bill.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
1:43:45 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR PASKVAN asked for specifics  on how the guardian ad litem                                                               
or OCS  employee can get  a request for nondisclosure  before the                                                               
court.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MR. NEWMAN  said the  intention is  not for  the OCS  employee to                                                               
object. The  guardian ad  litem (GAL)  or child's  attorney would                                                               
make  the objection  and  the  court would  rule  on whether  the                                                               
release of information was in the  best interest of the child. He                                                               
continued  to  say  that  DJJ   intends  to  develop  policy  and                                                               
regulation  to   guide  staff  in   understanding  the   type  of                                                               
information  that   is  appropriate   to  exchange   between  the                                                               
divisions.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
1:46:49 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR PASKVAN  said he  was trying  to understand  the physical                                                               
mechanism  to   get  to   the  court   house  in   those  limited                                                               
circumstances when  it was not  in the best interest  to disclose                                                               
the information.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR. NEWMAN said  DDJ and OCS employees  already share information                                                               
in  all  but  a  few  pockets of  the  state,  and  this  statute                                                               
clarifies that  presumption. He  deferred further  explanation to                                                               
Ms. Kraly.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  PASKVAN mentioned  the $75  civil filing  fee and  asked                                                               
what  physical process  is  followed  to get  before  a judge  to                                                               
object to the disclosure of information.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:49:43 PM                                                                                                                    
STACIE   KRALY,  Assistant   Attorney  General,   Human  Services                                                               
Section, Civil Division, Department  of Law (DOL), explained that                                                               
the  majority of  these situations  are existing  court cases  so                                                               
there would be a pending child in  need of aid (CINA) action or a                                                               
pending juvenile  justice matter.  In that context,  the guardian                                                               
ad litem, public  defender, child, parent or  guardian could file                                                               
a  motion in  those existing  cases.  In the  rare instance  when                                                               
neither a CINA action nor  juvenile justice matter is pending, an                                                               
application for  an original action  would have to be  filed with                                                               
the  court  to  protect  or   prohibit  further  disclosure.  The                                                               
individuals representing the minor would bring that motion.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. KRALY  acknowledged that the  issue of the filing  fee wasn't                                                               
discussed since the majority of  cases arise in an existing civil                                                               
context.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:51:08 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR FRENCH  asked for a  discussion of the tension  between the                                                               
desire to protect  a minor from their  youthful indiscretions and                                                               
the need  for the  public to  be aware of  those acts  in certain                                                               
circumstances.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR.  NEWMAN  said he  believes  the  intention  of the  1997  law                                                               
regarding  public  disclosure  was  to  reconcile  that  tension,                                                               
because some  information about juvenile offenses  clearly should                                                               
be available to the public.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  FRENCH asked  if the  general rule  is that  most juvenile                                                               
records will stay confidential.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. NEWMAN said  yes; the statute is very  specific regarding the                                                               
conditions under  which agency  records may  be released.  HB 343                                                               
addresses the release of information  that will be rehabilitative                                                               
and in the child's interest.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
1:53:22 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR FRENCH  asked if the  language on  page 5, line  29 through                                                               
the end of  the subsection says that if information  is stored in                                                               
electronic form it may be disclosed in that same medium.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MR. NEWMAN said yes.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FRENCH  asked how the  seven enumerated offenses  listed on                                                               
page 5, lines 11-18, fit in the scheme of the bill.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MR. NEWMAN explained  that current law and the  bill provide that                                                               
when a minor  is charged with having committed one  of those more                                                               
serious  offenses,  the  information  about the  offense  may  be                                                               
disclosed upon adjudication  if the juvenile is age  13 or older.                                                               
Lessor offenses are not eligible for public disclosure.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FRENCH  asked if in  some situations  juvenile jurisdiction                                                               
can be maintained to age 21.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. NEWMAN relayed  that juvenile jurisdiction for  a new offense                                                               
applies to age  18. A juvenile already  under agency jurisdiction                                                               
can  be  maintained  under  probation  supervision  or  in  state                                                               
custody until his or her 19th  birthday, and if both the juvenile                                                               
and court agree, jurisdiction can extend to the 20th birthday.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FRENCH  asked if  this law could  pertain to  an individual                                                               
who is age 19.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR.  NEWMAN  responded  that  a 19-year-old  who  commits  a  new                                                               
offense  and   is  already   under  juvenile   jurisdiction  will                                                               
generally be remanded to the adult system.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FRENCH asked if the bill  provides that in the future those                                                               
records can be disclosed.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR. NEWMAN  said current  law and this  bill provide  that public                                                               
disclosure  will   be  maintained   for  five  years   after  the                                                               
adjudication. The  reasoning was  that the public  safety concern                                                               
would generally have passed by then.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
1:58:57 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR COGHILL asked if the  requests for information might come                                                               
from schools or foster homes.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR.  NEWMAN  replied  there are  different  statutes  that  allow                                                               
foster  parents  and  victims  to  receive  information  about  a                                                               
juvenile's history.  The bill is addressing  information that may                                                               
be disclosed to the public.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FRENCH asked if the bill had any opposition.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MR. NEWMAN said no.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
2:00:00 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR FRENCH  closed public testimony,  and asked Mr.  Steiner if                                                               
the  Public  Defender  Agency  had  concerns  about  the  current                                                               
version of HB 343.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
QUINLAN  STEINER,   Public  Defender,  Public   Defender  Agency,                                                               
Department of  Administration (DOA),  discussed working  with Mr.                                                               
Newman  throughout the  process and  the  work that  was done  on                                                               
sections  1   and  4   to  improve   the  bill.   Addressing  the                                                               
circumstances of nondisclosure was critical, he said.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  FRENCH asked  if a  juvenile could  oppose the  release of                                                               
these records.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR.  STEINER  said  yes,  but  as  a  practical  matter  it  will                                                               
generally  come  from the  guardian  ad  litem  in a  CINA  case.                                                               
Theoretically at that point there is no juvenile justice case                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  FRENCH asked  how  many juveniles  whose  records will  be                                                               
released will be  represented by someone who  will receive notice                                                               
of the release.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. STEINER  said there  is no notice  provision, and  a juvenile                                                               
may not have a lawyer unless there is an ongoing CINA case.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FRENCH asked if in his judgment notice isn't necessary.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR. STEINER responded that that  was one reason he worked closely                                                               
to preserve the option to litigate.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  FRENCH recalled  that the  Public  Defender Agency  rarely                                                               
takes a  position on a bill.  He asked if  it was fair to  say he                                                               
didn't oppose it.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MR.  STEINER confirmed  that he  didn't  take a  position on  the                                                               
bill,  but  some  sections,  Section 4  in  particular,  were  an                                                               
improvement.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:05:24 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR FRENCH announced he would hold HB 343 in committee.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
        HB 168-INJUNCTION SECURITY: INDUSTRIAL OPERATION                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:05:40 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR FRENCH  announced the  consideration of  HB 168,  and noted                                                               
the committee had lost its quorum.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
2:06:12 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE ERIC FEIGE,  sponsor of HB 168,  introduced HB 168                                                               
speaking to the following sponsor statement:                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Under current law  the cost to bring  a public litigant                                                                    
     lawsuit  against  a  legally permitted  project  is  in                                                                    
     effect zero.  There is very  little risk in  bringing a                                                                    
     suit. All  the risk is  borne by the  defendants. These                                                                    
     actions do  shut down projects at  significant costs to                                                                    
     working  Alaskans, businesses  and the  state treasury.                                                                    
     CSHB  168(JUD)   seeks  to  remedy  the   situation  by                                                                    
     leveling the playing field.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     CSHB  168(JUD)  parallels  the requirements  of  Alaska                                                                    
     Civil  Rule  65(c).  As   written,  65(c)  states:  "no                                                                    
     restraining  order  or   preliminary  injunction  shall                                                                    
     issue  except  upon  the  giving  of  security  by  the                                                                    
     applicant, in such  sum as the court  deems proper, for                                                                    
     the  payment  of  such  costs and  damages  as  may  be                                                                    
     incurred or suffered by any  party who is found to have                                                                    
     been wrongfully enjoined or restrained."                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     At the  request of  the Department of  Law, HB  168 was                                                                    
     amended to  more closely mirror the  language of Alaska                                                                    
     Civil Rule 65(c) in order  to clarify that the proposed                                                                    
     statute  would not  change the  court  rule. The  court                                                                    
     already  has  the  ability to  require  security.  CSHB                                                                    
     168(JUD)  simply  requests  that part  of  the  court's                                                                    
     deliberation  process should  include payment  of wages                                                                    
     and  benefits for  employees,  payments to  contractors                                                                    
     and  sub-contractors of  the industrial  operation that                                                                    
     is  shut down.  The amount  of security  and how  it is                                                                    
     calculated is totally within the hands of the court.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:09:32 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR FRENCH  recapped an earlier  conversation with  the sponsor                                                               
regarding  primacy   and  relayed  that  he   subsequently  asked                                                               
Legislative  Legal  to  address  that question  and  whether  the                                                               
current version of the bill may  raise issues for the EPA similar                                                               
to those  it expressed in  a 2006 letter  about a bill  passed by                                                               
the  Utah Legislature.  Legislative  Counsel,  Dennis C.  Bailey,                                                               
said the short answer is  "Yes." He asked Representative Feige if                                                               
he had had an opportunity to read the memo.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  FEIGE confirmed  that  he was  familiar with  the                                                               
Utah case.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FRENCH explained the issue is  whether or not Alaska law is                                                               
the same  as federal  law with respect  to injunctions.  Too much                                                               
separation  jeopardizes  the  state's   position  of  primacy  on                                                               
several areas of  permitting. He asked the sponsor  if his office                                                               
sought any legal advice regarding the primacy issue.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  FEIGE  replied  they asked  for  verification  on                                                               
several question.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FRENCH asked  if the responses were in memo  form or verbal                                                               
conversations with attorneys.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE said both.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FRENCH asked  if he cared to share any  of those memos with                                                               
the committee.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE  said he didn't bring  that information, but                                                               
he did  not believe the  bill raised a significant  primacy issue                                                               
and  he was  prepared  to  add intent  language  to clarify  that                                                               
point.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:12:12 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR FRENCH  asked if  an unjust  result in  any case  in Alaska                                                               
illustrates the need for the bill.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE  cited the  May 2004 Pogo  Mine case  as one                                                               
example that put some people out  of work for about two weeks. In                                                               
another example Shell Oil's projects  on the Chukchi and Beaufort                                                               
seas  were  stopped  for  several  years.  About  700  jobs  were                                                               
affected the summer  he was involved. He opined  that the concept                                                               
of enjoining a resource project was  not unusual and the bill was                                                               
being proactive.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
2:13:39 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR FRENCH asked if bonds were posted in the Shell cases.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  FEIGE said  he didn't  know;  those were  federal                                                               
cases.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FRENCH  reminded the committee  that primacy is  whether or                                                               
not Alaska law tracks federal law.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  PASKVAN  asked  about  the federal  legal  standard  for                                                               
posting  a bond  that is  similar to  or different  than what  is                                                               
proposed in the bill.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE deferred the question to Mike Jungreis.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:15:08 PM                                                                                                                    
MIKE JUNGREIS,  member, Resource  Development Council  of Alaska,                                                               
Inc., (RDC),  testified in  support of  HB 168.  He spoke  of the                                                               
awesome  power of  judges to  grant  injunctions and  highlighted                                                               
that the bill is aimed  only at preliminary adjudications, before                                                               
a  judge knows  whether a  permit, for  example, was  properly or                                                               
improperly granted. It  gives the court guidance  on what factors                                                               
to consider  in deciding whether  or not to grant  an injunction,                                                               
including  the potential  damage to  employees, contractors,  and                                                               
small  businesses.  He  emphasized  that the  decision  does  not                                                               
restrict any access  to the court or the ability  of the court to                                                               
issue a final injunction.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
He  reported  that  the  Ninth   Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  has                                                               
occasionally  issued injunctions  to  stop projects  with only  a                                                               
minimum  bond  requirement.  The   Kensington  Mine  case  is  an                                                               
example. Also, the  U.S. Supreme Court held that there  must be a                                                               
determination as  to whether  a bond should  be required  and the                                                               
amount.  He  emphasized  that it  is  certainly  consistent  with                                                               
federal law and  has been Alaska's long-standing law  that a bond                                                               
be issued. The  bill neither extends nor restricts  the powers of                                                               
the court; it gives guidelines.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. JUNGREIS opined that the  current situation is out of balance                                                               
because the  applicants have no  skin in  the game. They  are not                                                               
required  to  come  up  with  any way  to  protect  the  project,                                                               
employees, and contractors  for the damage that can  be done with                                                               
a preliminary injunction. The bill  tries to redress that balance                                                               
and place things  on an even keel. Finally, it  does not restrict                                                               
the  state's power  to grant  permits; it  only applies  to third                                                               
parties.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FRENCH asked if he was familiar with the Pogo Mine case.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR.  JUNGREIS said  yes, but  he couldn't  say that  this statute                                                               
would have come into play. He  reiterated that it would have been                                                               
invoked in  the Kensington  case, and opined  that it  would have                                                               
been  helpful  to  all  concerned  if  the  courts  had  specific                                                               
guidelines for evaluating damage.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
2:21:40 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR PASKVAN  asked if the  state has  the ability to  file an                                                               
injunction.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. JUNGREIS said  this proposal would not affect  the state; the                                                               
state is excused from posting a bond for injunctions.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE  added that the state  could simply withdraw                                                               
or suspend the permit if it wanted to stop a project.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR PASKVAN  asked if the  state has  the ability to  seek an                                                               
immediate injunction during the operational phase.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   FEIGE  offered   his   understanding  that   the                                                               
department can shut down a project based on the permitting.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:24:17 PM                                                                                                                    
RACHEL  PETRO,  President  and   CEO,  Alaska  State  Chamber  of                                                               
Commerce,  testified  in  support  of  HB  168,  version  D.  She                                                               
reported that  the Alaska Chamber  set litigation  reform related                                                               
to resource development  in Alaska as a  top legislative priority                                                               
this year. She said under  current law it costs virtually nothing                                                               
to challenge a legally permitted  project in Alaska. The risk and                                                               
cost of  litigation is borne  by the defendants and  Alaskans are                                                               
put out  of work. HB 168  seeks to level the  legal playing field                                                               
without infringing  on any  party's right  to bring  a legitimate                                                               
issue to court. The bill does  not attempt to change court rules;                                                               
it simply  articulates a request  that wages of  working Alaskans                                                               
be considered.  She expressed hope  that the bill would  gain the                                                               
same bipartisan support it enjoyed in the House.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FRENCH asked  if she had any examples where  the bill might                                                               
have prevented a wrongful injunction  that shut down a project if                                                               
the party seeking the injunction had to post a bond.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS. PETRO offered to follow up with specific examples.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FRENCH said the question he  was trying to answer was, "Are                                                               
we doing something wrong we need to fix?"                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:28:11 PM                                                                                                                    
ANDREW KELLER, representing himself,  Fairbanks, AK, testified in                                                               
opposition to  HB 168.  He stated that  the bill  will discourage                                                               
parties  from questioning  permits  granted  to corporations  for                                                               
industrial projects and  effectively prohibit whistle-blowing. It                                                               
will  seriously reduce  the ability  to protect  the air,  water,                                                               
wildlife, and  safety from  corporate irresponsibility.  He noted                                                               
              rd                                                                                                                
the recent  23  year anniversary  of the Exxon Valdez  spill, and                                                               
warned against making it harder  to prevent errors that result in                                                               
disaster.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:29:49 PM                                                                                                                    
BOB DICKSON, representing himself,  Anchorage, AK, summarized his                                                               
legal career and said he was  testifying in support of HB 168. He                                                               
said the  first point is that  the bill does not  deter access to                                                               
the court;  it simply requires  the court to follow  the existing                                                               
Court Rule 65(c). He read subsection  (c) and relayed that in all                                                               
his experience he has yet to see a bond required.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
He  addressed  the  primacy  question  saying  it's  an  argument                                                               
without merit  because the primacy  issue deals with  the process                                                               
for issuing  permits and the  bill does not involve  that process                                                               
at all. He  also pointed out that Alaska Civil  Rule 65(c) is the                                                               
same as  the federal rule  65(c). It says  the court may  issue a                                                               
preliminary injunction  or a temporary restraining  order only if                                                               
the movement  gives security  in the  amount the  court considers                                                               
proper. The  problem, he said,  is that courts  grant injunctions                                                               
without following the rule and requiring a bond.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
He  noted that  the Legal  Services memorandum  talked about  the                                                               
legal grounds  for getting a preliminary  injunction, and pointed                                                               
out  that  the  standard  is A.J.  Industries  v.  Alaska  Public                                                             
Service  Commission.   That  standard  allows  courts   to  issue                                                             
injunctions  even   when  the  defendant  cannot   be  adequately                                                               
protected. The problem  is that it actually takes  very little to                                                               
challenge  a development  project.  This bill  would remedy  that                                                               
situation  and help  the  wage earners  and  subcontractors on  a                                                               
project.  Addressing  the  question  of where  this  has  been  a                                                               
problem,  he said  no one  can come  up with  a specific  example                                                               
because  those  cases  are  typically  settled  so  there  is  no                                                               
determination of a prevailing party.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR PASKVAN asked if  maintaining primacy requires compliance                                                               
with a  standard that is  no less  than the same  opportunity for                                                               
judicial review under federal law.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MR.  DICKSON offered  his understanding  that it  relates to  the                                                               
permitting process.  To the extent  that it  addresses equivalent                                                               
judicial  law, both  the state  and federal  65(c) rules  are the                                                               
same.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR PASKVAN  again asked if maintaining  primacy requires the                                                               
state to provide  access to judicial review that is  no less than                                                               
the federal standard.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. DICKSON said the access goes  to the ability to appeal to the                                                               
court the issuance of a permit  and the bill doesn't affect that.                                                               
Anyone can  go into court and  try to explain how  the permitting                                                               
process is  flawed and that would  be the same in  both the state                                                               
and federal court systems.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  PASKVAN asked  if  it  could be  argued  that the  state                                                               
system is more  restrictive than the federal  system with respect                                                               
to parties before the court.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. DICKSON offered  his understanding that federal  law does not                                                               
have  an  equivalent to  HB  168,  but  the  test for  getting  a                                                               
preliminary injunction in federal court  is basically the same as                                                               
in state court. A lot  of federal courts are entering injunctions                                                               
without requiring any bonds, he said.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
2:38:45 PM                                                                                                                    
TERRY  SEVY, representing  himself,  Anchorage,  AK, stated  firm                                                               
opposition  to  HB  168.  He  said  the  bill  will  favor  large                                                               
corporations and strip individuals of  their right to take action                                                               
against such  corporations by making it  economically impossible.                                                               
He spoke to  the importance of developing  resources prudently to                                                               
ensure clean air  and water for future generations.  HB 168 lacks                                                               
such wisdom and invites disaster, he said.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
2:41:04 PM                                                                                                                    
BONNIE  ZIRCLE, representing  herself, Palmer,  AK, testified  in                                                               
opposition to HB 168. She  displayed photos showing damage to her                                                               
West  Virginia family  home, farmland,  and  nearby streams.  She                                                               
explained the  family home  and farm  was near  an open  pit mine                                                               
that blasted  once a day, and  that her Palmer home  and hundreds                                                               
of others  were located  within a mile  of the  proposed Wishbone                                                               
Hill Mine  in Palmer.  She said  it will  have the  same blasting                                                               
schedule. Because her  experience in West Virginia  was a damaged                                                               
home, slurry pond residue on  farmland and contaminated wells and                                                               
streams,  she questioned  how  it would  be  possible to  protect                                                               
homes and families in the MatSu Valley if HB 168 were to pass.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
2:44:53 PM                                                                                                                    
ANDY MODEROW,  Executive Director, Alaska  Conservation Alliance,                                                               
noted that  he submitted  written testimony.  He stated  that ACA                                                               
has concern that  HB 168 is unconstitutional,  punitive, and does                                                               
nothing  to  stop frivolous  litigants.  The  bill would  require                                                               
Alaskans  to bond  for  the  costs of  delay  if  a judge  issues                                                               
temporary relief  after initial  review of  a case.  He explained                                                               
that temporary  relief is  only granted  if a  case is  likely to                                                               
succeed and if irreparable harm will  occur if it is not granted.                                                               
If  a case  is  frivolous,  the judge  will  throw  it out.  This                                                               
punishes  Alaskans  that  bring  the  strongest  cases  and  does                                                               
nothing to punish  the frivolous litigant. He  emphasized that it                                                               
runs contrary  to the American  tradition of  protecting whistle-                                                               
blowers to require  a citizen to pay for a  governmental error or                                                               
a corporation not  following the terms of a  permit. He concluded                                                               
stating that  communities, tribal  organizations, municipalities,                                                               
and individual Alaskans  ought to have the right to  stand up for                                                               
clean air, land, and water.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:46:30 PM                                                                                                                    
TOM WALDO,  Attorney, Earth Justice,  Juneau, AK, stated  that HB                                                               
168 impermissibly prevents citizens  from making effective use of                                                               
the  courts to  protect  resources by  requiring  the posting  of                                                               
unaffordable bonds.  He emphasized that  it is very  difficult to                                                               
get a preliminary injunction. The  applicant has to show the case                                                               
is very strong  and that irreparable harm will  result absent the                                                               
stay.  These requests  aren't made  very often,  but can  be very                                                               
important. He said  his experience is that  bonds for injunctions                                                               
for  industrial operations  would  often be  in  the millions  of                                                               
dollars.  This means  the bill  effectively prevents  people from                                                               
getting  preliminary injunctions  or stays  in any  circumstance,                                                               
even to prevent irreparable harm.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
He listed three reasons that  the bill would be unconstitutional.                                                               
First,  it changes  court  rules adopted  by  the Alaska  Supreme                                                               
Court  that already  govern injunctions,  stays,  and bonds.  The                                                               
court  would  have  no  discretion.  Second,  it  violates  equal                                                               
protection because it singles out  a particular class of citizens                                                               
for  particularly discriminatory  treatment.  Third, it  violates                                                               
due process,  because it deprives  citizens of  meaningful access                                                               
to the courts to get interim relief.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR. WALDO  stated that Earth  Justice represented  the appellants                                                               
in  the  Pogo  Mine  litigation,   and  that  is  a  particularly                                                               
inappropriate example to illustrate any  reason for HB 168. There                                                               
was never  an injunction  and the  case never  went to  court. He                                                               
explained that the EPA issued a  permit under the Clean Water Act                                                               
and  Earth Justice  filed an  appeal to  establish a  legal point                                                               
about  jurisdiction under  the Act.  The Pogo  Mine responded  by                                                               
stopping  construction and  laying off  workers. Although  people                                                               
attribute that to an injunction, the  parties to the case did not                                                               
intend to shut down the mine.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
He  concluded that  the effect  of the  bill will  be to  prevent                                                               
citizens  from  getting  needed  relief  in  cases  where  it  is                                                               
appropriate in order to avoid  a hypothetical problem that no one                                                               
has been able to establish exists in the real world.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
2:51:28 PM                                                                                                                    
EMILY  BREEZE,  representing herself,  Healy,  AK,  said she  was                                                               
testifying against  HB 168  because it  works to  erode cherished                                                               
and vital  constitutional rights: the  right to have  one's voice                                                               
heard and access to the courts.  She spoke of the option to bring                                                               
forth local grievances and issues,  the ability to ask questions,                                                               
and voice concerns  or support, and described  these as treasured                                                               
actions. She  relayed that  she lives  in a  town that  feels the                                                               
effects  of   resource  development,   and  that   fracking  will                                                               
potentially occur beneath  her house. If HB 168 were  to pass she                                                               
couldn't  ask for  a second  look on  these projects  because she                                                               
couldn't afford the  bond. She stated that it was  the job of the                                                               
court  system to  weed  out frivolous  lawsuits,  and the  people                                                               
should listen if the court finds reason for an injunction.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MS.  BREEZE  concluded   that  by  opposing  the   bill  she  was                                                               
supporting  the   creation  of   future  jobs,   the  responsible                                                               
cultivation of  natural resources, the  health and safety  of her                                                               
family  and community  members, and  the right  to have  an equal                                                               
opportunity to have her voice heard.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
2:53:47 PM                                                                                                                    
MIKE  SATRY, Executive  Director,  Council  of Alaska  Producers,                                                               
Juneau, AK,  testified in support of  HB 168. He stated  that the                                                               
council supports a rigorous  science-based permitting system that                                                               
allows  responsible   development  of  Alaska's   resources.  The                                                               
council  also respects  the established  public  process used  to                                                               
manage  these resources.  However,  when a  permitted project  is                                                               
inappropriately  enjoined   it  can  harm  Alaskan   workers  and                                                               
families due  to lost  wages and opportunities.  HB 168  seeks to                                                               
mitigate this  issue by requiring  parties seeking  an injunction                                                               
or stay to  post a bond to  cover lost wages and  benefits if the                                                               
project  is found  to be  wrongfully  enjoined. It  appropriately                                                               
directs the  court to consider  the potential for lost  wages and                                                               
benefits  when  addressing  industrial operations.  He  said  the                                                               
council is  respectful of an  individual's rights to  seek relief                                                               
through the courts  if they believe a permit has  been granted in                                                               
error. By giving  the courts broad discretion  in the calculation                                                               
of the bond, the bill protects the rights of both parties.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
The bill does  not affect federal permits  appeals or litigation;                                                               
it does not  prevent appeals or litigation of  state permits; and                                                               
it  does not  impair the  state's regulatory  responsibilities or                                                               
permit enforcement  activities. It does encourage  involvement in                                                               
the  early  stages  of public  participation  in  the  permitting                                                               
process and it  requires litigants of state  permits to recognize                                                               
the financial risk of their actions.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
2:56:35 PM                                                                                                                    
KATHY  WASSERMAN,  Executive  Director, Alaska  Municipal  League                                                               
(AML), stated that AML is very  concerned about HB 168 because it                                                               
does not  make the municipal  exemption clear. The  current court                                                               
rule  says that  municipalities  are exempt  from securities  and                                                               
injunctions and it is important to maintain that exemption.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  FRENCH said  he heard  testimony that  the state  might be                                                               
exempt  from   the  rule  but   he  didn't   hear  municipalities                                                               
mentioned.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
2:58:37 PM                                                                                                                    
SHIRLEY  MARQUART, Mayor,  City  of Unalaska,  AK and  President,                                                               
Alaska Municipal League, made two points  on the topic of HB 168.                                                               
The   first   related   to    maintaining   the   exemption   for                                                               
municipalities. She  said occasions do exist  when a municipality                                                               
decides to speak on an issue  or effect a change by going through                                                               
the court system.  This wouldn't be possible  if the municipality                                                               
had to set aside what may be  millions of dollars to post a bond.                                                               
This would endanger municipal operating funds.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
The second point  was that the bill did not  include fisheries as                                                               
an   "industrial  organization."   She   discussed  the   federal                                                               
injunction  granted in  2000 to  protect Steller  sea lions  that                                                               
shut down  cod and  pollock fisheries  in the  western Aleutians.                                                               
Although there  is no  link between those  fisheries and  the low                                                               
pup  count,  Adak,  Unalaska,  Akutan,  Sand  Point,  King  Cove,                                                               
Kodiak, and  63 CDQ villages  in western Alaska have  been living                                                               
under an injunction for 12 years.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
3:01:54 PM                                                                                                                    
BARBARA  HUFF-TUCKNESS,  Director, Governmental  and  Legislative                                                               
Affairs, Teamsters  Local 959,  testified in  support of  HB 168.                                                               
She said  she didn't  believe the bill  changed any  court rules.                                                               
The  union doesn't  have deep  pockets and  potential injunctions                                                               
are taken  very seriously. She  spoke to what the  union supports                                                               
with  regard  to   clean  air,  land,  water   and  safe  working                                                               
conditions on  projects. She maintained  there was  nothing wrong                                                               
with asking  people to  put a  little skin in  the process  if it                                                               
encouraged people  to be more  proactive at the beginning  of the                                                               
environmental process.  Both sides  of the issue  definitely need                                                               
to be heard, and HB 168  doesn't close that door. Individuals and                                                               
groups  will continue  to  be  able to  voice  their concerns  in                                                               
court, but  the bill  provides some relief  for workers  that are                                                               
inappropriately impacted.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE  addressed the concerns that  were raised in                                                               
testimony.  He  said  existing state  law  covers  AML's  concern                                                               
regarding  whether or  not municipalities  would  be exempt  from                                                               
posting  bonds. He  directed attention  to  AS 09.68.040  Parties                                                               
exempt from giving bond and read subsection (a):                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     (a) In an action or proceeding  in a court in which the                                                                    
     state  or a  municipality is  a party  or in  which the                                                                    
     state  or  a  municipality  is interested,  a  bond  or                                                                    
     undertaking   is  not   required   of   the  state,   a                                                                    
     municipality,   or  an   officer   of   the  state   or                                                                    
     municipality.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Referring to  the pictures Ms.  Zircle distributed,  he suggested                                                               
that the permitting process in  Alaska is significantly different                                                               
than  in  West Virginia.  The  fact  that  no permits  have  been                                                               
rejected in  the last five  years speaks  to the strength  of the                                                               
system. He  continued that  Court Rule  65(c) already  requires a                                                               
bond and the bill simply asks  the court to consider the wages of                                                               
affected employees  and contractors in  any bond that  is posted.                                                               
It  does   not  give   specific  direction   to  the   judges  or                                                               
significantly change  that rule.  Citizens will continue  to have                                                               
the ability to bring suit.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
To address the primacy issue  he offered suggested language for a                                                               
letter of intent that would accompany the bill:                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     It is the intent of  the legislature that when deciding                                                                    
     what  security  to  require  of   a  party  seeking  an                                                                    
     injunction or stay of a  permit affecting an industrial                                                                    
     operation,  a court  can consider  the effect  that the                                                                    
     injunction  or stay  could have  on  the employees  and                                                                    
     contractors of the permittee. It  is also the intent of                                                                    
     the legislature not to  constrain the court's authority                                                                    
     or  discretion  under  governing court  rules,  but  to                                                                    
     direct  the  court's  attention  to  that  category  of                                                                    
     potential  harm to  the  permittee,  its employees  and                                                                    
     contractors  that  the  requirement  of  surety  should                                                                    
     protect  against.  It  is the  further  intent  of  the                                                                    
     legislature   that   this  legislation   operating   in                                                                    
     conjunction  with  AS   09.68.040(c)  will  assure  the                                                                    
     court's  consideration  of  the  potential  impacts  to                                                                    
     permittees,    employees,   and    contractors   facing                                                                    
     suspension of the permitted operations.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  FRENCH said  the  primacy issue  was  his biggest  concern                                                               
about the bill.  Similar legislation passed in  Utah and Governor                                                               
Huntsman vetoed it based on  the primacy issue. The Department of                                                               
Natural  Resources  brought  up  primacy concerns  last  year  in                                                               
testimony before the House Judiciary  Committee. The court system                                                               
also expressed  concerns about managing  these bonds. He  said he                                                               
would continue to research the issue.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR FRENCH held HB 168 in committee.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
3:09:35 PM                                                                                                                    
There being  no further  business to  come before  the committee,                                                               
Chair French adjourned the meeting at 3:09 p.m.                                                                                 

Document Name Date/Time Subjects