Legislature(1993 - 1994)
03/02/1994 01:40 PM Senate JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
March 2, 1994
1:40 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Robin Taylor, Chairman
Senator Rick Halford, Vice-Chairman
Senator Dave Donley
Senator Suzanne Little
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator George Jacko
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 321
"An Act relating to the taking of a legible set of fingerprints
when a person is arrested, upon initial appearance or arraignment,
upon the conviction of the person, and when the person is received
at a correctional facility, and providing that the set of
fingerprints shall be provided to the Department of Public Safety;
relating to criminal and crime records and information; requiring
the reporting of information concerning homicides and suspected
homicides to the Department of Public Safety for analysis;
requiring the Department of Public Safety to participate in the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, Violent Crimes Apprehension
Program."
SENATE BILL NO. 286
"An Act extending the termination date of the Board of Parole; and
providing for an effective date."
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 157(TRA)
"An Act relating to limitations on outdoor advertising signs,
displays, and devices."
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 184(L&C)
"An Act relating to civil liability of certain nonprofit
corporations and of volunteers of certain nonprofit corporations;
and providing for an effective date."
CS FOR SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 17(RES)
Relating to reauthorization of the Magnuson Fishery Conservation
and Management Act.
PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION
SB 321 - No previous action to record.
SB 286 - See Labor & Commerce minutes dated 2/15/94.
SB 157 - See Transportation minutes dated 3/23/93, 3/30/93,
2/10/94, and 2/15/94.
SB 184 - See Labor & Commerce minutes dated 4/13/93 and
1/25/94.
SJR 17 - See Resources minutes dated 2/23/94.
WITNESS REGISTER
Senator Rick Halford
Prime Sponsor
State Capitol
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Reviewed SB 321 and offered two amendments.
Steve Branchflower, Assistant District Attorney
Department of Law
310 K Street, Suite 520
Anchorage, Alaska 99501-1975
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 321.
Greg Cooper, VICAP Program Manager
Federal Bureau of Investigations
Quantico, Virginia
POSITION STATEMENT: Reviewed VICAP.
Richard Collum, Executive Director
Alaska Parole Board
Department of Corrections
P.O. Box 112000
Juneau, Alaska 99811-2000
POSITION STATEMENT: Reviewed the amendments to SB 286 and the
Parole Board.
Michael Stark, Assistant Attorney General
Department of Law
Council, Department of Corrections and the Parole Board
P.O. Box 110300
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0300
POSITION STATEMENT: Reviewed the amendments to SB 286 and the
Parole Board.
Senator Steve Frank
Prime Sponsor
State Capitol
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 157, reviewed SB 184.
Jim Frey
SR Box 360
Gakona, Alaska 99586
POSITION STATEMENT: Expressed concerns with SB 157.
Don Butler, Representative
Boy Scouts of America
United Way
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Reviewed SB 184.
Senator Little
Prime Sponsor
State Capitol
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SJR 17.
Richard Lauber
Pacific Seafood Processors Association
321 Highland Drive
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SJR 17.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 94-13, SIDE A
Number 001
CHAIRMAN ROBIN TAYLOR called the Judiciary Committee meeting to
order at 1:40 p.m. He introduced SB 321 (FINGERPRINTING AND CRIME E
RECORDS) as the first order of business before the committee.
SENATOR HALFORD explained that SB 321 establishes a uniform system
to deal with fingerprinting and it adopts the Violent Crimes
Apprehension Program (VICAP). The VICAP program has information on
unsolved crimes which should help with major serial type cases.
VICAP identifies the fingerprint and the crime print in order to
prosecute crimes more effectively. He noted his amendment which
was a clarification of the definition of information. The
amendment by the Department of Public Safety adds violent sexual
assaults to the VICAP provisions. Senator Halford offered those
amendments for the committee's review.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR held the two amendments until the conclusion of the
testimony so that the committee could review them.
STEVE BRANCHFLOWER, Assistant District Attorney in the Department
of Law, explained that he assists police officers with their cases
in order to make better cases. He informed the committee of the
increase in murders in the last few years, especially in Anchorage.
The conspiracy bill and the juvenile waiver bill would be a great
help in facing this increase in murders. He pointed out that the
legislature could also help prosecutors and police officers through
the Uniform Homicide Reporting section of SB 321. This amendment
would guarantee that police across the state would work with VICAP
administrators in the prompt sharing of important information;
receiving information in a timely manner is very important. He
encouraged the committee to view the video prepared by Greg Cooper.
The video features a serial killer who was arrested and prosecuted
in Juneau.
Mr. Branchflower described how VICAP evolved. Before VICAP, there
was no national information clearinghouse to compare information.
He stated that VICAP, a national computer data information center,
collects and analyzes reports of violent crimes, specifically
murder. He explained that VICAP deals with three categories of
homicides:
(1) solved or unsolved homicides which seem to be random in nature,
sexually oriented, or those appearing not to have a motive, part of
a series of homicides;
(2) missing persons suspected of being part of a series of
homicides; and
(3) dead bodies suspected of being victims of homicide.
Number 145
A police officer would fill out a VICAP questionnaire detailing all
phases of the crime from victimology to physical evidence. This
information is programmed into the VICAP computer and then a search
of the database occurs in order to uncover similar patterns of
homicide. Mr. Branchflower noted that if similarities are found,
VICAP assists the local law enforcement agencies in coordinating
investigations. He said that this had been successfully used in
many Anchorage cases. He informed the committee that VICAP is
located in the Behavioral Sciences Unit of the FBI which allows
access to expertise in various areas. VICAP provides law
enforcement with an important tool, especially helpful for remote
states like Alaska.
Mr. Branchflower recognized that the VICAP database depends upon
reliable information. Passage of SB 321 would specify that law
enforcement officers and prosecutors in Alaska want to participate
nationally. He observed that accurate reporting would increase the
chances of catching a murderer before he does more harm. He
applauded the Department of Public Safety's amendment adding that
violent sexual assaults must also be reported. He pointed out that
four other states have passed similar legislation. He expressed no
surprise at the zero fiscal note, many Alaskan officers are doing
this on a voluntary basis now. SB 321 is needed. He believed that
identifying arrested convicts with fingerprints is necessary to
notify prosecutors and officers of the type of individual before
them, and more importantly, to assist law enforcement protection.
Passage of SB 321 would ensure that the data base would
systematically and continuously input fingerprints. He indicated
a slight increase in the burden on the Department of Corrections
(DOC), but the fingerprint process should become self-sufficient.
Number 244
SENATOR LITTLE asked if the entire state currently has the
equipment and capability to do fingerprinting. STEVE BRANCHFLOWER
deferred to DOC. Mr. Branchflower stated that the equipment would
not be a large investment and would probably already be present in
most police offices.
GREG COOPER, VICAP Program Manager, clarified that VICAP's mission
is to facilitate the cooperation, communication, and coordination
between law enforcement agencies around the country and support
their efforts to investigate, identify, track, apprehend, and
prosecute the targeted violent serial killer. The VICAP national
data clearinghouse is involved in case matching, multi-agency
investigative task forces and major case management consultation.
VICAP provides research, publication, training, and investigative
resources in order to have efficient and effective investigations
regarding a serial killer.
From a policy and administrative perspective, Mr. Cooper supported
any effort to increase VICAP's admissions; the success of the case
matching capability is contingent upon the amount and accuracy of
these unsolved homicides. He informed the committee that
currently, the VICAP database contains over 8,000 cases which seems
small in comparison to the 22,000 homicides per year.
Approximately 69 percent of those homicides are unsolved. He
explained that much of the reason for the decrease in the ability
to solve homicides was related to the serial killer phenomena. A
serial killer often travels over county and state jurisdictions
which emphasizes law enforcement's difficulty in communicating with
each other. VICAP attempts to coordinate law enforcement
organizations in an interdependent manner. In conclusion, he
applauded the efforts to increase VICAP admissions.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR thanked Mr. Cooper for his testimony. He asked if
there were any questions from the committee.
SENATOR DONLEY moved to adopt Senator Halford's amendment,
Amendment 1.
SENATOR LITTLE asked if Amendment 1 would require that
fingerprinting be done at a correctional facility. SENATOR HALFORD
clarified that Amendment 1 replaces (d) with more specific
language.
Hearing no objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
SENATOR DONLEY moved to adopt the Department of Public Safety's
amendment, Amendment 2. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR pointed out that the
insert for page 5, line 1 did not specify exactly where to insert
the new language. SENATOR DONLEY moved to adopt Amendment 2 with
drafting corrections. The insert was said to be placed on page 5,
line 1, after "committed." Hearing no objections, Amendment 2 was
adopted.
SENATOR HALFORD moved that the adopted amendments be incorporated
into a Judiciary CS and that CSSB 321(JUD) be moved out of
committee with individual recommendations. Hearing no objections,
it was so ordered.
Number 362
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR introduced SB 286 (CONDITIONS OF PAROLE; EXTEND BD D
OF PAROLE) as the next order of business before the committee.
RICHARD COLLUM, Executive Director of the Alaska Parole Board,
thanked Chairman Taylor and his staff for preparing some amendments
today. He explained that there were two amendments: one which
would allow one board member to set conditions and the other
amendment would extend the board for ten years. He pointed out
that the sponsor statement contains a typographical error, there
are currently 700 felons on parole supervision.
SENATOR LITTLE asked if the members of the board had to be approved
every four years. RICHARD COLLUM clarified that each member is
appointed to a five year term with one member being appointed each
year. The Board of Parole falls under the Title 44 sunset
provisions of being reviewed every four years, Legislative Audit
does a report every four years. Mr. Collum noted that Legislative
Audit suggested extending the board for ten years. The audit would
then be every ten years.
SENATOR DONLEY noted constituents' complaints regarding the board.
The complaints suggested that the board discouraged victims from
attending the meetings. He stated that he reviewed the written
notification given to victims, it did not seem to have any
problems. He inquired as to the possibility that a negative
perception was being given orally. RICHARD COLLUM was sure that
the board members and their staff were not discouraging victims.
Mr. Collum noted that they rely on institutional probation officers
and field probation officers to do much of the notification. Mr.
Collum stated that currently, they had encouraged teleconference
testimony by victims. There was some question regarding whether
they would actually do the teleconferencing or whether the
institutions would even permit that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR expressed concern regarding the need for repealers
in other sections in order to accomplish the ten year provision.
He asked if the ten year provision was of major significance.
RICHARD COLLUM stated that the board does not object to four years;
the ten year extension was offered due to Legislative Audit's
suggestion. The bill was originally heard on the four year basis.
SENATOR DONLEY inquired as to the board's role with the furlough
program. RICHARD COLLUM deferred to the Department of Corrections,
the Parole Board does not have a role in furlough program.
Number 430
SENATOR HALFORD asked why the first six sections of SB 286 were
retroactive to 1986.
MICHAEL STARK, Assistant Attorney General and Counsel to the Alaska
Department of Corrections and the Parole Board, explained that
sections 1-6 were intended to fix loopholes. The Parole Board is
a part-time board which meets every few months and the present
statutes require decisions by the board be approved by a quorum of
the board, three members. He noted that traditionally, a single
board member, usually in Juneau, would be responsible for setting
the supplemental conditions. There are some standard conditions
that apply to every mandatory parolee.
Mr. Stark informed the committee that recently some prisoners
awaiting release to mandatory parole are challenging the
establishment of their supplemental parole conditions because those
decisions were made by a single board member. In order for the
board to set supplemental conditions of mandatory parole, frequent
meetings by the board would be required which would create an
unnecessary drain on the State's treasury. He believed that a
single board member is competent to set supplemental conditions and
furthermore, the prisoner can object or appeal the proposed
conditions to the entire board. In response to Senator Halford, he
said that sections 1-6 were retroactive to January 1, 1986 because
that is when the statute was first enacted which should eliminate
some of the litigation and expenses. This clarifies that the board
is not required to meet to set these conditions, the board can
delegate that responsibility to one board member.
SENATOR HALFORD asked if there are pending lawsuits on that issue.
MICHAEL STARK said yes, there are a number of lawsuits pending.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR asked if the litigation was only on the issue of
one board member setting supplemental conditions. MICHAEL STARK
said no, but it is a significant issue that is pending. Mr. Stark
noted that he hoped to moot out this issue by the adoption of the
committee substitute.
SENATOR HALFORD inquired as to the board's thoughts on having two
lists of the board's conditions of parole: one of mandatory
requirements and the other of permissive requirements. He
indicated the need to require that a parolee "shall" not possess or
control firearms or other dangerous weapons.
The committee was informed that there are thirteen standard
conditions of which Senator Halford's concern was one. Weapons,
violation of the law, alcohol, association with felons, and others
apply to everyone on discretionary or mandatory parole.
MICHAEL STARK noted that a number of inmates have challenged the
board's adoption of regulations making mandatory what the
legislature considers discretionary with the board.
SENATOR HALFORD suggested that the thirteen standards be put into
the regulations. MICHAEL STARK said that those standards are
currently reflected in statute. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said that they
would review this and perhaps, offer an amendment.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR held SB 286 for further review.
Number 520
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR introduced SB 157 (PROHIBITED HIGHWAY ADVERTISING) )
as the next order of business.
SENATOR FRANK, Prime Sponsor, explained that SB 157 would allow
advertising for directional signing for highway dependent
businesses. Currently, federal law prohibits off premises
advertising on federally aided highways. He noted that the state
law goes further, the federal law allows off premises signing for
areas zoned commercial or industrial. He directed the committee to
section 2 on page 3 of SB 157, where authorization for the
department's airspace leasing program would be put into statutes.
Business on or adjacent to the highway can lease right-of-way space
from the department or the state to put up a sign. The Tourist
Orientational Directional Signing (TODS) program authorized by the
federal government would also be placed in statutes.
SENATOR LITTLE stated that she had the responsibility of writing
and enforcing the Soldotna sign ordinance. She asked if SB 157
would override a municipality's ability to have stricter signing
regulations. SENATOR FRANK said yes, but only to a limited degree.
SB 157 does not allow a municipality to prohibit a sign authorized
in section 1 of the bill.
SENATOR HALFORD indicated that it would be controlled by zoning.
SENATOR FRANK agreed, signs would only be allowed in areas zoned
commercial or industrial.
SENATOR LITTLE emphasized the need to have an exemption for
municipalities who currently have or wish to have their own signing
regulations.
SENATOR FRANK said that he would be willing to consider language
speaking to Senator Little's concerns. Allowing for limited
signing is an important element of SB 157. He pointed out the need
to review that concern with care so as not to lose the intent of
the bill.
SENATOR LITTLE agreed that the intent of SB 157 should not be lost.
She stated that Soldotna had restrictive sign regulations in order
to comply with state regulations. She felt some loosening would
occur, but cities such as Soldotna should not be forced to loosen
their current regulations.
TAPE 94-13, SIDE B
Number 590
SENATOR HALFORD felt that the national sign ordinance was a
national disgrace. He stated that he wanted the minimum mandate
necessary in order not to lose federal funds. From that point,
municipalities should be allowed to make their own regulations.
SENATOR LITTLE inquired as to the possibility that federal funds
would be lost through the passage of SB 157. SENATOR FRANK said
no, SB 157 does not go as far as the federal law allows.
Currently, state law does not allow the exemption allowed in
federal law for signing on property zoned commercial or industrial.
SB 157 opens a limited window of opportunity for commercial or
industrial zoned areas.
SENATOR HALFORD referred to page 2, lines 15-18 of SB 157 when
asking why an individual business must document at least 75
percent; why not 25 percent, 50 percent, or a significant portion
of their revenue. Would that effect federal funds? He inquired of
the 20 mile restriction. He expressed the need to know what could
be done for these businesses to have informative signs regardless
of whether 75 percent of their business comes from 20 miles away.
SENATOR FRANK explained that SB 157 attempts to provide highway
dependent businesses an opportunity under state law to loosen the
current restrictive signing laws. He indicated that they are
attempting to help the general public while staying within the
federal guidelines. He stated that he was open to suggestions
regarding the percentage of the business and the mileage
requirements.
SENATOR HALFORD asserted that as long as municipalities can adopt
their own standard, he would support the minimum standard that
would not jeopardize federal funding, in the unincorporated areas.
He expressed concern with saying that if a business deals mainly
with tourists then they would be allowed to have signs while a
business dealing mainly with locals would not be allowed the same
signing.
SENATOR FRANK explained that some are compelled by the notion that
visitors could not find their way without signing; whereas locals
know where things are located.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR informed the committee that a group in Wrangell
purchased green highway signs, built to specs by the Department of
Transportation (DOT). DOT has not allowed them to put up these
signs on the highway. They are informative signs noting the
direction to the restroom, the campground, etcetera. He did not
understand that situation.
SENATOR FRANK reiterated his desire to present something that would
work. He felt that they had broad bipartisan support for SB 157.
He indicated that they try to be sensitive to highway dependent
businesses while not promoting a proliferation of billboards.
SENATOR TAYLOR held SB 157.
JIM FREY stated that he did auto repair work at a gas station on
Tok Highway. He expressed concern with SB 157. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR
pointed out that the committee is trying to open up SB 157.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR said that the committee would work with Senator
Frank to come up with a CS and some amendments. SB 157 will be
rescheduled as soon as possible.
Number 481
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR introduced SB 184 (VOLUNTEERS AND EMPLOYEES OF
NONPROFITS) as the next order of business before the committee.
SENATOR FRANK, Prime Sponsor, explained that SB 184 would limit the
liability of nonprofit agency volunteers. He said that he is
trying to promote volunteerism of nonprofit agencies; nonprofit
volunteers should not be held liable for actions that are not
grossly negligent, reckless, or intentional misconduct. SB 184
requires that in order for nonprofit agencies to be exempt, the
agency would have to carry insurance, at least $200,000 per
individual claim or $500,000 for all claims. He noted that a small
nonprofit agency would not be required to carry insurance; small
meaning administrative operating costs of less that $100,000 in the
previous year and the nonprofit must be exempt from the Internal
Revenue Code.
SENATOR DONLEY pointed out that the Department of Law's memorandum
is different than SB 184. The memorandum stated that the liability
of the nonprofit agencies would not be effected. SENATOR FRANK was
not sure that the April 28, 1993 memorandum was still applicable.
Senator Frank noted that the scope of the bill had been limited due
to concerns of the Labor & Commerce Committee. This memorandum
could speak to a different bill.
SENATOR DONLEY said that there are many types of nonprofit
agencies; he was not sure that nonprofit agencies should be
insulated. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR noted that SEAC, the Sierra Club, and
Green Peace are nonprofit. Chairman Taylor expressed concern with
insulating those groups. SENATOR DONLEY asked if the American Nazi
Party was nonprofit. Senator Donley stated that he did not want to
give unlimited liability to all nonprofit groups solely because
they are nonprofit.
SENATOR FRANK suggested that perhaps, a narrower definition of the
envisioned nonprofit agencies could be used. He said that he was
thinking of United Way type agencies.
DON BUTLER, representing the Boy Scouts of America and the United
Way, suggested setting the limits of liability required higher.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR discussed a pedophile case in Ketchikan, where the
pedophile was a Boy Scout leader. He said that the Ketchikan case
illustrates the importance to not shield against those activities.
SENATOR FRANK reviewed the Labor & Commerce version of SB 184. He
thought that they had removed employees and corporations. The
focus of SB 184 was on the immunity of the volunteers. He assumed
that the case Chairman Taylor cited should be considered
intentional conduct. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR agreed that the case was
criminal conduct, intentional.
Number 358
DON BUTLER suggested that upping the limit of liability that
nonprofit agencies should carry would be beneficial. He noted that
they carry a $15 million blanket.
SENATOR LITTLE noted that SB 184 exempts nonprofit agencies
operating with less that $100,000 a year administrative costs. She
said that most nonprofit agencies operate under $100,000. She
inquired as to the reasoning behind that amount. SENATOR FRANK
stated that the amount was a way to distinguish between larger and
smaller nonprofit agencies. Senator Frank felt that most nonprofit
agencies would be above that $100,000 amount.
SENATOR FRANK inquired of the committee's thoughts regarding if the
bill was only limited to volunteers with the standard as stated on
page 2, line 11 subsection (d). SENATOR LITTLE thought that was a
good approach, but she did not understand (b); would it apply only
up to the amount of liability insurance carried by the entity.
SENATOR FRANK explained that the original intent was that if you
were going to allow for some immunity, limited liability, for
volunteers or corporations, they should be required to carry some
insurance. If they were a large nonprofit corporation, they would
need insurance in which case their liability would be limited to
the amount of the insurance. This would eliminate expensive claims
that could bankrupt a nonprofit corporation.
SENATOR DONLEY clarified that corporations can only be sued up to
the amount of their insurance or gross. SENATOR FRANK agreed.
SENATOR DONLEY noted that this only applies to nonprofit
corporations carrying a minimum insurance of $200,000 per
individual, which means they could be sued up to $200,000.
SENATOR LITTLE asked if nonprofits are currently required to have
liability insurance. SENATOR TAYLOR explained that they would be
required to carry liability insurance if they are grantees of the
state. The state requires an indemnification agreement.
Nonprofits are defined under 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue
Code.
SENATOR TAYLOR said that he could envision many different
situations. He used two nonprofits in Wrangell that are daycare
centers with volunteers and salary workers as an example. If the
daycare center was coloring eggs and one of the volunteers boiling
water for the eggs tripped and spilled the boiling water on a
couple of kids. He said that the employee would be immune and the
nonprofit could not be sued because the situation would probably
not be considered gross negligence. He pointed out the two
different mindsets in the legislature: one view is concerned with
people being individually accountable for their criminal
activities, while another view is concerned with not making the
individual accountable civilly. He expressed the need for more
work on SB 184.
SENATOR FRANK offered to work with the committee to meet the intent
of the bill without causing any harm.
Number 238
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR introduced SJR 17 (MAGNUSON FISHERY CONSRV & MGT
ACT) as the last order of business before the committee.
SENATOR LITTLE, Prime Sponsor, explained that SJR 17 asks Congress
to retain current geographic composition of the North Pacific
Fishery Council. Alaska needs to retain its designated seats on
that council. She noted the changes that the new CS encompasses:
changes "will" to "may" on page 2, line 4 of the resolution, and
five names were added to the list of the copies of the resolution.
She pointed out the position paper in the committee packets. She
urged favorable consideration of the committee.
RICHARD LAUBER stated support for SJR 17.
SENATOR LITTLE moved SJR 17 out of committee with individual
recommendations. Hearing no objections, it was so ordered.
There being no further business before the committee, Chairman
Taylor adjourned the meeting at 3:05 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|