04/05/2012 09:00 AM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB180 | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s)|| Alaska Public Offices Commission | |
| HB304 | |
| HB234 | |
| HB169 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 304 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | HB 234 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| = | HB 180 | ||
| = | HB 169 | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
April 5, 2012
9:04 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Bill Wielechowski, Chair
Senator Joe Paskvan, Vice Chair
Senator Albert Kookesh
Senator Kevin Meyer
Senator Cathy Giessel
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARING
ALASKA PUBLIC OFFICES COMMISSION
Vance Sanders
- CONFIRMATION ADVANCED
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 180(FIN)
"An Act authorizing the Department of Administration to note a
person's status as a retired veteran or a veteran discharged
under honorable conditions on the person's driver's license or
identification card, to provide certain information to the
Department of Military and Veterans' Affairs, and to charge a
fee for replacing a valid driver's license or identification
card with a new license or card that includes the veteran
designation; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED SCS CSHB 180(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 304
"An Act relating to the membership of the Alaska Fire Standards
Council."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 234
"An Act relating to picketing or protests at a funeral."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 169
"An Act relating to the review of proposed regulations by the
Legislative Affairs Agency; and providing for an effective
date."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 180
SHORT TITLE: VETERAN DESIGNATION ON DRIVER'S LICENSE
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) SADDLER
03/09/11 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/09/11 (H) MLV, STA
03/17/11 (H) MLV AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/17/11 (H) Moved CSHB 180(MLV) Out of Committee
03/17/11 (H) MINUTE(MLV)
03/18/11 (H) MLV RPT CS(MLV) NT 5DP 1DNP
03/18/11 (H) DP: LYNN, GATTO, MILLER, SADDLER,
THOMPSON
03/18/11 (H) DNP: AUSTERMAN
03/18/11 (H) FIN REFERRAL ADDED AFTER STA
03/31/11 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/31/11 (H) Moved CSHB 180(STA) Out of Committee
03/31/11 (H) MINUTE(STA)
04/01/11 (H) STA RPT CS(STA) NT 4DP 2AM
04/01/11 (H) DP: GRUENBERG, SEATON, PETERSEN, LYNN
04/01/11 (H) AM: JOHANSEN, P.WILSON
02/06/12 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/06/12 (H) Moved CSHB 180(FIN) Out of Committee
02/06/12 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
02/08/12 (H) FIN RPT CS(FIN) NT 10DP
02/08/12 (H) DP: FAIRCLOUGH, T.WILSON, NEUMAN,
COSTELLO, EDGMON, GUTTENBERG, GARA,
JOULE,
02/08/12 (H) STOLTZE, THOMAS
02/10/12 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
02/10/12 (H) VERSION: CSHB 180(FIN)
02/13/12 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/13/12 (S) STA, FIN
03/22/12 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
03/22/12 (S) Heard & Held
03/22/12 (S) MINUTE(STA)
04/05/12 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: HB 304
SHORT TITLE: ALASKA FIRE STANDARDS COUNCIL
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) JOHNSON
01/30/12 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/30/12 (H) STA, FIN
02/21/12 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/21/12 (H) Moved Out of Committee
02/21/12 (H) MINUTE(STA)
02/22/12 (H) STA RPT 5DP 1NR
02/22/12 (H) DP: P.WILSON, GRUENBERG, SEATON,
PETERSEN, LYNN
02/22/12 (H) NR: KELLER
02/28/12 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/28/12 (H) Moved Out of Committee
02/28/12 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
02/29/12 (H) FIN RPT 11DP
02/29/12 (H) DP: T.WILSON, GARA, FAIRCLOUGH,
GUTTENBERG, JOULE, NEUMAN, COSTELLO,
EDGMON,
02/29/12 (H) DOOGAN, STOLTZE, THOMAS
03/06/12 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
03/06/12 (H) VERSION: HB 304
03/12/12 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/12/12 (S) STA, FIN
04/05/12 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: HB 234
SHORT TITLE: PICKETING AND PROTESTS AT FUNERALS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) THOMAS
04/09/11 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/09/11 (H) MLV, JUD
02/09/12 (H) MLV AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/09/12 (H) Moved Out of Committee
02/09/12 (H) MINUTE(MLV)
02/10/12 (H) MLV RPT 4DP 1NR 2AM
02/10/12 (H) DP: GATTO, LYNN, THOMPSON, SADDLER
02/10/12 (H) NR: AUSTERMAN
02/10/12 (H) AM: MILLER, CISSNA
02/20/12 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/20/12 (H) Moved Out of Committee
02/20/12 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
02/22/12 (H) JUD RPT 5DP 2NR
02/22/12 (H) DP: LYNN, KELLER, THOMPSON, PRUITT,
GATTO
02/22/12 (H) NR: GRUENBERG, HOLMES
03/06/12 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
03/06/12 (H) VERSION: HB 234
03/12/12 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/12/12 (S) STA, JUD
04/05/12 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: HB 169
SHORT TITLE: LAA REVIEW OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS
SPONSOR(s): JUDICIARY
02/23/11 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/23/11 (H) JUD
02/23/11 (H) STA REFERRAL ADDED BEFORE JUD
03/15/11 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/15/11 (H) Heard & Held
03/15/11 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/17/11 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/17/11 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/22/11 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/22/11 (H) Moved Out of Committee
03/22/11 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/23/11 (H) STA RPT 5DP 1NR 1AM
03/23/11 (H) DP: JOHANSEN, P.WILSON, KELLER,
PETERSEN, LYNN
03/23/11 (H) NR: SEATON
03/23/11 (H) AM: GRUENBERG
03/28/11 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/28/11 (H) Moved Out of Committee
03/28/11 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/29/11 (H) JUD RPT 3DP 2NR
03/29/11 (H) DP: LYNN, KELLER, GATTO
03/29/11 (H) NR: HOLMES, PRUITT
04/07/11 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
04/07/11 (H) VERSION: HB 169
04/08/11 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/08/11 (S) STA, JUD
04/03/12 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
04/03/12 (S) Scheduled But Not Heard
04/05/12 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE DAN SADDLER
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 180.
WHITNEY BREWSTER, Director
Division of Motor Vehicles
Department of Administration
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 180.
VANCE SANDERS, Appointee
Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the Alaska Public
Offices Commission.
MICHELLE SYDEMAN, Staff
Senator Bill Wielechowski
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the APOC confirmation
hearing.
ERIN SHINE, Staff
Representative Craig Johnson
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 304 on behalf of the sponsor.
JEFF TUCKER, Past-President
Alaska Fire Chiefs Association
North Pole, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 304.
AARON SCHROEDER, Staff
Representative Bill Thomas
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Explained HB 234 on behalf of the sponsor.
DOUG GARDNER, Director
Legislative Legal Services
Legislative Affairs Agency
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions related to HB 234.
JEFFERY MITTMAN, Director
American Civil Liberties Union, (ACLU) of Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the discussion of HB 234.
MELANIE LESH, Staff
Representative Carl Gatto
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an overview of HB 169 on behalf of
the House Judiciary Committee, sponsor of the bill.
LISA KIRSCH, Attorney
Legislative Legal Services
Legislative Affairs Agency
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions related to HB 169.
ACTION NARRATIVE
9:04:50 AM
CHAIR BILL WIELECHOWSKI called the Senate State Affairs Standing
Committee meeting to order at 9:04 a.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Meyer, Paskvan, and Chair Wielechowski.
Senators Giessel and Kookesh arrived shortly thereafter.
HB 180-VETERAN DESIGNATION ON DRIVER'S LICENSE
9:05:41 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI announced that HB 180 was before the
committee. He related that HB 180 authorizes a veteran's
designation on driver's licenses and would enable veterans to
receive benefits they've earned. It would also provide veterans
with a convenient and easy proof of their status as veterans.
The committee heard the bill on March 22, 2012, and there is
currently a new CS, version O.
SENATOR MEYER moved to adopt the proposed SCS for CS for HB 180,
labeled 27-LS0589\O, as the version before the committee.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI objected for discussion purposes.
REPRESENTATIVE DAN SADDLER, sponsor of HB 180, reviewed the
changes in version O of the bill. Version O adds a short
provision to address the concerns expressed by the Division of
Motor Vehicles that while a U.S. flag might be well-known in
Alaska as a designation of a veteran's status, other states may
not recognize it as such. Version O authorizes the addition of
the word "veteran" along with the U.S. flag.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI noted the arrival of Senator Giessel.
9:07:08 AM
WHITNEY BREWSTER, Director, Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV),
Department of Administration, testified in support of HB 180.
She spoke in favor of the additions in version O because they
will give DMV direction as to what is to be placed on the
license. It also gets to the intent of benefitting Alaska
veterans, particularly when they travel outside of Alaska.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the Administration supports the
bill.
MS. BREWSTER replied that the DMV has no concerns about the bill
and supports efforts to honor Alaska veterans.
9:08:26 AM
SENATOR MEYER moved to report the SCS for CS for HB 180, version
O, from committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note. There being no objections SCS CSHB
180(STA) was reported from the Senate State Affairs Standing
Committee.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI stated it was a good bill.
^CONFIRMATION HEARING(S)
^Alaska Public Offices Commission
9:09:27 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI announced that the second order of business
would be the confirmation hearings on the Alaska Public Offices
Commission (APOC). He asked Mr. Sanders to share his background
information and why he wants to serve on APOC.
VANCE SANDERS, Appointee, Alaska Public Offices Commission
(APOC), testified as appointee to the Alaska Public Offices
Commission. He shared his background as an attorney with Alaska
Legal Services. He said he was asked to serve on APOC and
thought it would be an interesting experience.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI inquired what kind of law Mr. Sanders
practices.
MR. SANDERS related that he practices Indian Law, Medicaid and
Health Insurance work, arbitration, mediation, and civil
litigation. He said the last few years he has done appellate
work in federal and state court, as well as more work with the
Alaska Supreme Court.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI noted Senator Paskvan's arrival.
9:11:59 AM
SENATOR GIESSEL asked how Mr. Sander's practice would change
with his appointment to APOC.
MR. SANDERS replied that he thought serving on APOC would
require scaling back a little on his practice, which he said he
intended to do anyway.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if Mr. Sanders had had a chance to work
with APOC.
MR. SANDERS explained he had not observed any APOC meetings. He
noted his relationship with the chair of APOC, Ms. Hickerson.
SENATOR KOOKESH reported he has heard about Mr. Sanders'
contribution to the Native community. He voiced appreciation for
Mr. Sanders' work.
9:14:04 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if he had filled out his public
disclosure form.
MR. SANDERS said he had not.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if Mr. Sanders had any ideas for
changes or new directions for APOC.
MR. SANDERS suggested that everything APOC does should be
accessible on line.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI requested a motion to forward Mr. Sanders'
name to a joint session of the legislature for confirmation.
Such a motion or approval of such a motion would not indicate
intent on the part of any individual member to vote for or
against Mr. Sanders' confirmation.
SENATOR PASKVAN moved to forward Mr. Sander's name. There being
no objection, the motion carried.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI requested information about the nomination of
Dr. David Eichler.
9:16:44 AM
MICHELLE SYDEMAN, Staff, Senator Bill Wielechowski, testified
during the APOC confirmation hearing. She informed the committee
that she received a call from Jason Hooley, the Director of
Boards and Commissions, stating that Dr. David Eichler's name
had been withdrawn.
HB 304-ALASKA FIRE STANDARDS COUNCIL
9:17:26 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI stated that HB 304 was before the committee.
He noted that the bill makes several changes to the composition
of the Alaska Fire Standards Council.
ERIN SHINE, staff to Representative Craig Johnson, explained HB
304 on behalf of the sponsor. She related that HB 304 makes
three simple changes to the existing membership of the Alaska
Fire Standards Council. The first change is designating an
existing seat to a member of the Alaska Professional
Firefighters Association. The second change is adding a seat for
a member of the Alaska Fire Chiefs Association. The third change
is reclassifying an existing seat from a firefighter
administrator officer to a member of the State Alaska
Firefighters Association.
She stated that the mission of the Alaska Fire Standards Council
is to establish professional standards through fire service
personnel and the curriculum requirements for the certification
of training program. Under HB 304, the governor will appoint one
member from each of these associations to the Alaska Fire
Standards Council from a list of at least three nominees
submitted by each association. The intent of HB 304 is to ensure
that all three associations are represented on the Alaska Fire
Standards Council and to guarantee that each of the designees
from the three statewide firefighting associations will speak
with the full confidence of their associations and councils.
9:18:47 AM
SENATOR GIESSEL asked if there would be 12 members on the board.
MS. SHINE said that was correct. She explained the chair would
abstain from voting in the event of a full council.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked why these changes are needed.
MS. SHINE explained that the addition of the new members, who
were previously not full members, will allow them to speak with
the full confidence of their associations regarding training
information.
9:20:38 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI opened public testimony.
JEFF TUCKER, Past-President, Alaska Fire Chiefs Association,
testified in support of HB 304. He explained that currently the
Alaska Firefighters Association has a seat on the council, but
the other two organizations do not. Designated council members
can report back to their organizations, which can then have a
direct influence on the Alaska Fire Standards Council.
9:22:18 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI closed public testimony and set HB 304 aside.
HB 234-PICKETING AND PROTESTS AT FUNERALS
9:22:49 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI announced that the next bill before the
committee was HB 234, which would prohibit picketing one hour
before or after a funeral. Picketing would be prohibited within
150 feet of where a service was taking place. Forty-six other
states have passed laws similar to HB 234.
AARON SCHROEDER, staff to Representative Bill Thomas, explained
HB 234 on behalf of the sponsor. He stated that HB 234 would
regulate protests that would occur in Alaska. In order to fall
under the requirements of the bill, an individual would have to
meet the definition of "picketing" within time constraints and
within the distance, disrupt the funeral, and show reckless
disregard for doing so. The penalty would be disorderly conduct,
a Class B misdemeanor, and would carry a penalty of no more than
ten days in jail and a $2,000 fine.
He pointed out that the Alaska Peace Officers Association has
submitted a letter of support.
SENATOR MEYER asked if there has been a problem in Alaska.
MR. SCHROEDER replied that the bill was preemptive. He said he
was not aware of any protests in Alaska.
SENATOR MEYER asked about concerns regarding the First Amendment
- freedom of speech.
MR. SCHROEDER requested a more specific question.
SENATOR MEYER inquired if there is any opposition to the bill.
He suggested that someone might argue the bill limits freedom of
speech.
MR. SCHROEDER drew attention to the five confines of the bill.
He noted that it was not the first time free speech has been
regulated by federal or by state law. He opined that the bill
was appropriate and middle ground, showing respect for the
mourners, as well as for those who wish to express freedom of
speech.
9:25:52 AM
SENATOR MEYER agreed. He pointed out that this type of
legislation has been challenged and upheld in 46 other states.
SENATOR PASKVAN asked if any less restrictive application other
than criminalization has been considered.
MR. SCHROEDER reported that HB 234 is less restrictive than
legislation in other states.
SENATOR PASKVAN asked about having a permitting process in place
to address the appropriateness of the protest. He reiterated the
question about considering a less restrictive consequence,
rather than criminalizing the speech.
MR. SCHROEDER said the sponsor did not consider that.
SENATOR PASKVAN asked if the laws in other states have been
challenged.
MR. SCHROEDER replied that there have been a number of
challenges. Each case is unique. The language in the bill was
drafted from language that has been upheld. He said they modeled
the bill after Ohio's law and the federal statute. He opined
that if the bill was challenged, it would hold up.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI requested a legal opinion on whether the bill
violates the First Amendment.
9:28:40 AM
DOUG GARDNER, Director, Legislative Legal Services, Legislative
Affairs Agency, answered questions related to HB 234. He noted
that he worked with the sponsor to draft the bill. He addressed
Senator Paskvan's question about less restrictive alternatives.
He said in the context of criminal statutes that were reviewed
when drafting the bill, the effort was made to make the bill
content neutral and to tailor it in the time, place, manner, and
scope, as narrowly as possible, recognizing that communities in
Alaska are smaller than those in some areas. He recalled that
the distances in the statute are less than they are in other
states.
He observed that when speech is regulated, litigation is likely.
He related that if a person was protesting at a funeral, as long
as the protester's communication isn't directed at the burial
service and was not disruptive, the statute wouldn't necessarily
bar that activity. The statute is directed at communications
that are intended to disrupt.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked about a situation where a protest is
taking place which is unrelated to the funeral, but disturbs the
funeral.
MR. GARDNER gave an example of a protest on an unrelated matter
in the vicinity of a funeral. As long as the protests are not
directed at disrupting the funeral, they would not be actionable
or be cited or charged.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI addressed the definition of "picketing" on
page 3, lines 18 and 19: "protest activities engaged in by a
person that disrupt or are undertaken to disturb the funeral."
He said in the case that Mr. Gardner mentioned, the protest does
not have to be undertaken to disturb a funeral, but if it is
disruptive, then it meets the definition of picketing. He asked
if that was correct.
MR. GARDNER said he did not think Senator Wielechowski was
incorrect; however, he referred to case law to say that the
focus has to be on disrupting the funeral. He referred to a
Sixth Circuit case where the court found that the funeral
protest provision restricts only the time and place of speech
directed at a funeral or burial service. If a protestor's
communication is not directed at a funeral or burial service,
the mere fact that one holds a picket sign within 300 feet of a
funeral or burial service during the relevant time period,
without more, will not support a conviction. He opined that the
sponsor's intent was to capture conduct that's directed at the
funeral.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI suggested changing language to say,
"picketing means protest activities engaged in by a person,
undertaken to disrupt or disturb a funeral." He questioned if
that language would clarify the bill's intent.
MR. GARDNER hesitated to agree due to what he called unintended
consequences. He thought that language that had been addressed
in other cases would be preferred. He suggested that changing
the language opens it to litigation. The language in the bill
has been given a fairly narrow construction.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if there were 9th Circuit decisions
related to this issue.
MR. GARDNER did not think so. He related that most of the
litigation took place in the Mid-west. He said he was not aware
of any 9th Circuit cases.
9:37:59 AM
SENATOR PASKVAN spoke of constitutional challenges related to
free speech and suggested considering the least restrictive
methods of limiting speech. He focused on Section 2, which makes
an infraction a crime of disorderly conduct. He said he was
looking for a less restrictive penalty, such as a monetary
penalty.
MR. GARDNER said it was a policy call. The current bill
identifies the infraction as a B misdemeanor. The infraction
could be reduced to a violation making it punishable by fine.
SENATOR PASKVAN suggested having a discussion of least
restrictive solutions.
MR. GARDNER noted that in the most recent U.S. Supreme Court
expression on this issue, in Snyder vs. Phelps, a tort lawsuit,
the Court did recognized that there has been litigation in the
context of state criminal statutes regulating picketing at a
funeral. The Court did say that these laws are content neutral,
and raise different questions than tort cases. The court seemed
to be sending a message that a different analysis might be
applied by the U.S. Supreme Court in looking at speech and the
government's interest in placing content neutral, narrowly drawn
restrictions on speech as it related to balancing the rights of
free speech against the rights or interests of privacy of
funeral mourners. He said the Court sounded like it was
receptive to considering protection of individuals in times of
grief.
9:42:37 AM
SENATOR PASKVAN said, from a policy-making standpoint, he wanted
to discuss and further consider the issue of free speech.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI agreed that was true. He provided a
hypothetical example if two groups were protesting a military
funeral, one for and one against the military, and questioned if
they were violating the law.
MR. GARDNER replied if they both were disrupting the funeral,
they could both be cited. The statute is designed to be non-
judgmental.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI stated that the definition of "protest
activities" was key. He referred to page 3, line 18, and asked
if there was a definition of protest activities.
MR. GARDNER didn't have that information. He suggested noise and
volume of sound and disruptive activities would be involved in
the definition. He offered to provide that information.
9:45:25 AM
JEFFERY MITTMAN, Director, American Civil Liberties Union,
(ACLU) of Alaska, testified during the discussion of HB 234. He
noted he has provided written testimony to the committee. He
said that ACLU neither condones nor endorses the views of
persons protesting at funerals. Their views are universally
thought to be abhorrent and their conduct inappropriate. The
first amendment is the right to free speech. He said, "We do
best to protect the rights of all to engage in appropriate
political dialogue by ensuring that those unpopular opinions
expressed in unpopular manners are also protected." He gave an
example from the 70's when the ACLU defended the rights of
Nazi's to march.
He addressed the constitutional problems he saw in HB 234. He
contended that, in the previous example of two groups protesting
at a funeral, the group that was not in support of the military
would be in violation under HB 234. He maintained the bill is
not content neutral. He offered to work with the drafters of the
bill to clarify which conduct is permitted and which is not
permitted, such as disturbing the peace at a funeral. He
supported the right to picket near a funeral. He offered to work
with the drafter of the bill in order to protect free speech.
SENATOR PASKVAN asked whether criminalization in the bill was a
concern.
MR. MITTMAN opined it was a concern. He said he believed that
where criminal penalties apply, courts are likely to give higher
scrutiny. In the previous example of a civil case heard by the
Supreme Court, the Court clearly stated that, although the
expressive conduct was disgusting and the manner abhorrent, it
was still protected. Where there are criminal penalties that
apply to First Amendment activity, the court would look at the
chilling effect of the regulation. Having criminal penalties
apply, makes HB 234 more likely to be subject to scrutiny.
9:51:14 AM
SENATOR GIESSEL stated that the First Amendment right to free
speech in not universally protected. Persons crying "fire" in a
crowded theater or making inappropriate comments on an aircraft
that's in flight, are arrested. In AS 11.61.110(a)(2) it
describes disrupting the peace and privacy of another as a crime
of disorderly conduct. It clearly is not being appropriately
applied for funerals, though the effect is the same, as is being
added in definition 8. She inquired if that was true.
MR. MITTMAN reiterated that time, place, and manner of
restriction is a common exception to First Amendment protection.
The problem with Section 8 is that it states "the person
knowingly engages in picketing with reckless disregard where
that picketing occurs." Then, in Section 3, the definition of
picketing states "picketing means protest activities engaged in
by a person that disrupt or undertake to disturb a funeral."
Thus, picketing could be silent sign holding that disturbs a
funeral by the content of the message. Silent picketing could be
encompassed in Section 8 by the definition. That is not
disturbing the peace or unreasonably loud noise, as opposed to
the example of shouting "fire" in a crowded theater, which
represents a danger to harm to individuals.
9:53:47 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI suggested tightening up the bill. He voiced
concern on page 3, regarding the definition of picketing.
SENATOR PASKVAN asked if government was involved at a funeral,
such as a color guard, would that increase or decrease the level
of scrutiny.
MR. MITTMAN offered to research that issue.
SENATOR MEYER asked if the bill has a referral to the Senate
Judiciary Committee. He suggested making changes there.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI closed public testimony. He agreed it was a
good bill, but that there is a need to be careful when dealing
with free speech issues. He announced HB 234 would be held in
committee.
HB 169-LAA REVIEW OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS
9:56:42 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI announced that HB 169 was before the
committee. It addresses the Legislative Affairs Agency review of
regulations.
MELANIE LESH, staff to Representative Carl Gatto, noted she was
representing the House Judiciary Committee, sponsor of HB 169.
She pointed out that HB 169 is unopposed and not controversial.
She explained that the bill corrects two minor problems in an
otherwise functioning regulation review system. She related that
statutes covering Legislative Legal Services review of proposed
agency regulations, which are under AS 24.20.105, are subject to
Administrative Regulations Review and the Administrative
Procedures Act under AS 44.62.
She explained that the legislative review of statutes currently
lists those who can request a review of regulations from Legal
Services. They are a standing committee, Administrative Review
Committee, and Legislative Council. The same statues also limit
those who Legal Services is allowed to notify of the results of
the review. Those are the Administrative Review Committee,
President of the Senate, and Speaker of the House. Those lists
do not match.
She stated that Legal Services can only notify those entities if
the regulations fail to meet the statutory standards. The bill
adds the committee or council that requested the review to the
list of those who can receive the notice. Also, the bill allows
if the regulation implements newly enacted legislation, Legal
Services may consult with, and notify, the prime sponsor of the
legislation.
She concluded that the bill also allows Legal Services to notify
the requester that the regulations meet the statutory standards.
9:59:13 AM
LISA KIRSCH, Attorney, Legislative Legal Services, Legislative
Affairs Agency, answered questions related to HB 169.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the bill was necessary and solves
problems.
MS. KIRSCH recalled her experience with the Administrative
Regulation Review Committee. She opined that HB 169 does correct
a problem. She explained that there are three factors considered
under subsection (d) of the provision being amended. It allows
for looking at legality, constitutionality, whether the agency
that is preparing the regulations has statutory authority, and
whether the regulations are consistent with existing statutes.
There is also a fourth factor under subsection (f), whether it
is consistent with legislative intent. In the context of that
particular concern, it was determined that the sponsor should
know about the changes in regulation.
She said HB 169 makes good sense. She further explained the
needed change to share regulation changes with the committee or
council that requested the review.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI noted he was a member of the Administrative
Regulations Review Committee which approved of these changes.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI closed public testimony. He noted a zero
fiscal note and another committee referral for the bill. He set
HB 169 aside.
10:03:21 AM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Wielechowski adjourned the Senate State Affairs Standing
Committee at 10:03 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 01 HB 304 Version I .pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/10/2012 9:00:00 AM |
HB 304 |
| 06 HB 304 AFSC Letter of Support for AFCA.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/10/2012 9:00:00 AM |
HB 304 |
| 04 HB 304 APFFA Brochure.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/10/2012 9:00:00 AM |
HB 304 |
| HB 304 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/10/2012 9:00:00 AM |
HB 304 |
| 07 HB 304 AFSC Letter of Support for AKPFFA.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/10/2012 9:00:00 AM |
HB 304 |
| 09 HB 304 AFCA - About Us.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/10/2012 9:00:00 AM |
HB 304 |
| 10 HB304-DPS-FSC-02-17-12.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/10/2012 9:00:00 AM |
HB 304 |
| HB 304 Backup.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/10/2012 9:00:00 AM |
HB 304 |
| HB 304 Letters of Support.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/10/2012 9:00:00 AM |
HB 304 |
| 05 HB 304 AFCA Letter of Support.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/10/2012 9:00:00 AM |
HB 304 |
| HB 234.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/10/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/11/2012 9:00:00 AM |
HB 234 |
| HB 234 Sponser Statement.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM |
HB 234 |
| HB 234 Legal Memo.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/10/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/11/2012 9:00:00 AM |
HB 234 |
| HB 234 Support Doc.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/10/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/11/2012 9:00:00 AM |
HB 234 |
| 4 Fiscal Note HB234-LAW-CRIM-02-03-12.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/10/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/11/2012 9:00:00 AM |
HB 234 |
| HB 234 APOA_Letter of Support.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/10/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/11/2012 9:00:00 AM |
HB 234 |
| 5 HB 234 ACLU Review- Letter of Opposition.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/10/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 4/11/2012 9:00:00 AM |
HB 234 |
| Eichler Letter of Opposition.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM |
|
| APOC - Eichler #3.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM |
|
| APOC - Sanders #3.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM |
|
| Bristol Bay Native Corporation Letter of Opposition.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM |
|
| Sealaska Letter of Opposition David Eichler.pdf |
SSTA 4/5/2012 9:00:00 AM |