HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE April 19, 1993 1:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT Rep. Brian Porter, Chairman Rep. Pete Kott Rep. Gail Phillips Rep. Joe Green Rep. Cliff Davidson MEMBERS ABSENT Rep. Jeannette James, Vice-Chair Rep. Jim Nordlund COMMITTEE CALENDAR SB 86 "An Act relating to funds transfers under the Uniform Commercial Code; changing Alaska Rule of Civil Procedure 82; and providing for an effective date." PASSED OUT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION SB 112 "An Act relating to the Uniform Commercial Code; amending Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure 8 and 82, and Alaska Rule of Evidence 402; and providing for an effective date." SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE PASSED OUT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION SB 149 "An Act revising the laws governing financial institutions and relating to trust companies, the Alaska Small Loans Act, and the Premium Financing Act; amending Alaska Rule of Criminal Procedure 17 and Alaska Rule of Civil Procedure 45(b); and providing for an effective date." HOUSE LABOR AND COMMERCE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE PASSED OUT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION SB 84 "An Act relating to fees for identification cards and certain motor vehicle licenses and permits; to licenses issued to drivers and to revocation of a license to drive; and providing for an effective date." BILL (AMENDED SENATE) PASSED OUT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION HB 132 "An Act extending the time period of all permits issued by the state relating to the extraction or removal of resources if the holder of the permits is involved in litigation concerning the issuance or validity of any permit related to the extraction or removal." JUDICIARY COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE PASSED OUT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION HB 187 "An Act authorizing the interception of private communications related to the commission of certain criminal offenses; making related amendments to statutes relating to eavesdropping and wiretapping; relating to the penalty for violation of statutes relating to eavesdropping and unauthorized interception, publication, or use of private communications; and providing for an effective date." PASSED OUT WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION Additional bill(s) heard: SB 54 "An Act relating to violations of laws by juveniles, to the remedies for offenses and activities committed by juveniles and to records of those offenses, and to incarceration of juveniles who have been charged, prosecuted, or convicted as adults; and providing for an effective date." SENATE LETTER OF INTENT ADOPTED WITNESS REGISTER BILL KELDER, Aide Sen. Jay Kerttula Alaska State Legislature Capitol Building, Room 427 Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182 Phone: 465-6600 Position Statement: Supported SB 112 and SB 86 ART PETERSON National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws One Sealaska Plaza, Suite 202 Juneau, Alaska 99801 Phone: 586-4000 Position Statement: Supported SB 112 and SB 86 GAYLE HORETSKI, Committee Counsel House Judiciary Committee Alaska State Legislature Capitol Building, Room 120 Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182 Phone: 465-6841 Position Statement: Discussed SB 54 and HB 132 JOSH FINK, Aide Sen. Tim Kelly Alaska State Legislature Capitol Building, Room 101 Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182 Phone: 465-3822 Position Statement: Supported SB 149; Supported SB 84 JEFF BUSH Division of Banking, Securities and Corporations Department of Commerce and Economic Development 175 South Franklin Street, Suite 308 Juneau, Alaska 99801 Phone: 463-4150 Position Statement: Discussed SB 149 KEITH SILVER 505 West Northern Lights Boulevard, #216 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Phone: 272-4445 Position Statement: Discussed SB 149 DAVID STRATTON 8300 Briarwood, Suite B Anchorage, Alaska 99518 Phone: 522-1194 Position Statement: Discussed SB 149 (Spoke via teleconference) LINDA HALL 3111 C Street Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Phone: 561-1250 Position Statement: Discussed SB 149 (Spoke via teleconference) KAREN HOFSTAD P.O. Box 203 Petersburg, Alaska 99833 Phone: 772-3858 Position Statement: Discussed SB 149 (Spoke via teleconference) SUSAN ERICKSON P.O. Box 58 Petersburg, Alaska 99833 Phone: 772-3858 Position Statement: Discussed SB 149 (Spoke via teleconference) ARNE IVERSEN 1831 Tongass Avenue Ketchikan, Alaska 99901 Phone: 225-9841 Position Statement: Discussed SB 149 (Spoke via teleconference) JAMES BARRY 1831 Tongass Avenue Ketchikan, Alaska 99901 Phone: 225-9841 Position Statement: Discussed SB 149 (Spoke via teleconference) JIM SARVELA P.O. Box 7920 Ketchikan, Alaska 99901 Phone: 228-4219 Position Statement: Discussed SB 149 (Spoke via teleconference) RICK HARDCASTLE 100 Main Street Ketchikan, Alaska 99901 Phone: 225-2176 Position Statement: Discussed SB 149 (Spoke via teleconference) JACK DAVIES 100 Main Street Ketchikan, Alaska 99901 Phone: 225-2176 Position Statement: Discussed SB 149 (Spoke via teleconference) JACK BERRY 1831 Tongass Avenue Ketchikan, Alaska 99901 Phone: 225-9841 Position Statement: Discussed SB 149 (Spoke via teleconference) JOHN SWEENEY 508 Marine Way Kodiak, Alaska 99615 Phone: 486-3101 Position Statement: Discussed SB 149 (Spoke via teleconference) BUD JAEGER, President Alaska Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers 301 Seward Street Juneau, Alaska 99801 Phone: 586-2414 Position Statement: Discussed SB 149 JUANITA HENSLEY Chief, Driver Services Division of Motor Vehicles Department of Public Safety P.O. Box 20020 Juneau, Alaska 99802 Phone: 465-4335 Position Statement: Supported SB 84 REP. TOM BRICE Alaska State Legislature Court Building, Room 605 Juneau, Alaska 99801 Phone: 465-3466 Position Statement: Prime sponsor of HB 132 MARGOT KNUTH Assistant Attorney General Criminal Division Department of Law P.O. Box 110300 Juneau, Alaska 99811-0300 Phone: 465-3428 Position Statement: Supported HB 187 PREVIOUS ACTION BILL: SB 86 SHORT TITLE: FUND TRANSFERS UNDER THE UCC BILL VERSION: SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) KERTTULA TITLE: "An Act relating to funds transfers under the Uniform Commercial Code; changing Alaska Rule of Civil Procedure 82; and providing for an effective date." JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 2/03/93 220 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 02/03/93 221 (S) LABOR & COMMERCE, JUDICIARY 03/02/93 (S) L&C AT 01:30 PM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203 03/02/93 (S) MINUTE(L&C) 03/03/93 588 (S) L&C RPT 1DP 2NR 03/03/93 588 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTES (DCED,LAW) 03/12/93 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ RM 211 03/15/93 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ RM 211 03/19/93 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ RM 211 03/19/93 (S) MINUTE(JUD) 03/22/93 896 (S) JUD RPT 4NR 03/22/93 896 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FNS (DCED,LAW) 03/24/93 (S) MINUTE(RLS) 03/31/93 (H) MINUTE(ECO) 04/02/93 1063 (S) RULES 3CAL 1NR 4/2/93 04/02/93 1069 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME 04/02/93 1069 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN CONSENT 04/02/93 1069 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME SB 86 04/02/93 1070 (S) PASSED Y20 N- 04/02/93 1070 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE VOTE SAME AS PASSAGE 04/02/93 1070 (S) COURT RULE CHANGE VOTE SAME AS PASSAGE 04/02/93 1080 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H) 04/02/93 954 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 04/02/93 954 (H) LABOR & COMMERCE, JUDICIARY 04/13/93 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17 04/13/93 (H) MINUTE(L&C) 04/14/93 1202 (H) L&C RPT 2DP 5NR 04/14/93 1202 (H) -2 SENATE ZERO FNS (DCED,LAW) 3/3/93 04/19/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120 BILL: SB 112 SHORT TITLE: UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE REVISIONS BILL VERSION: CSSB 112(JUD) SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) KERTTULA TITLE: "An Act relating to the Uniform Commercial Code; amending Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure 8 and 82, and Alaska Rule of Evidence 402; and providing for an effective date." JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 02/11/93 338 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 02/11/93 338 (S) LABOR & COMMERCE, JUDICIARY, FINANCE 03/02/93 (S) L&C AT 01:30 PM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203 03/02/93 (S) MINUTE(L&C) 03/04/93 (S) L&C AT 01:30 PM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203 03/04/93 (S) MINUTE(L&C) 03/05/93 613 (S) L&C RPT CS 1DP 3NR SAME TITLE 03/05/93 613 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTES TO SB & CS (DCED, LAW) 03/19/93 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ RM 211 03/19/93 (S) MINUTE(JUD) 03/22/93 897 (S) JUD RPT CS 4NR SAME TITLE 03/22/93 897 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTE TO L&C & JUD CS (DNR) 03/22/93 897 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FNS APPLY TO CS (DCED,LAW) 03/22/93 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518 03/23/93 911 (S) FIN RPT 3DP 4NR (JUD)CS SAME TITLE 03/23/93 911 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FNS APPLY (DCED, LAW, DNR) 03/23/93 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518 03/24/93 (S) MINUTE(RLS) 03/31/93 1004 (S) RULES RPT 3CAL 1NR 3/31/93 03/31/93 1008 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME 03/31/93 1008 (S) JUD CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT 03/31/93 1008 (S) THIRD READING 4/1 CALENDAR 03/31/93 (H) MINUTE(ECO) 04/01/93 1032 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME CSSB 112(JUD) 04/01/93 1033 (S) PASSED Y20 N- 04/01/93 1033 (S) COURT RULE CHANGES VOTE SAME AS PASSAGE 04/01/93 1033 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE CLAUSES SAME AS PASSAGE 04/01/93 1033 (S) KELLY NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION 04/02/93 1079 (S) RECONSIDERATION NOT TAKEN UP 04/02/93 1080 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H) 04/02/93 954 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 04/02/93 955 (H) LABOR & COMMERCE, JUDICIARY 04/13/93 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17 04/13/93 (H) MINUTE(L&C) 04/14/93 1203 (H) L&C RPT 2DP 5NR 04/14/93 1203 (H) -2 SEN ZERO FNS (LAW, DCED) 3/5/93 04/14/93 1203 (H) -SEN ZERO FN (DNR) 3/22/93 04/19/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120 BILL: SB 149 SHORT TITLE: REVISION OF BANKING CODE BILL VERSION: CS CSSB 149(FIN) SPONSOR(S): LABOR & COMMERCE TITLE: "An Act revising the laws governing financial institutions and relating to trust companies, the Alaska Small Loans Act, and the Premium Financing Act; amending Alaska Rule of Criminal Procedure 17 and Alaska Rule of Civil Procedure 45(b); and providing for an effective date." JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 03/05/93 616 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 03/05/93 616 (S) JUDICIARY, FINANCE 03/19/93 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211 03/19/93 (S) MINUTE(JUD) 03/22/93 898 (S) JUD RPT 1DP 2NR 03/22/93 898 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DCED) 03/22/93 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518 03/23/93 911 (S) FIN RPT CS 5DP 2NR SAME TITLE 03/23/93 911 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FN (DCED) 03/23/93 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518 03/24/93 (S) MINUTE(RLS) 03/31/93 1004 (S) RULES 3CAL 1NR 3/31/93 03/31/93 1007 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME 03/31/93 1007 (S) FIN CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT 03/31/93 1008 (S) ADVANCE TO 3RD RDG FAILED Y12 N8 03/31/93 1008 (S) THIRD READING 4/1 CALENDAR 04/01/93 1031 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME CSSB 149(FIN) 04/01/93 1032 (S) PASSED Y18 N2 04/01/93 1032 (S) COURT RULE CHANGES VOTE SAME AS PASSAGE 04/01/93 1032 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE VOTE SAME AS PASSAGE 04/01/93 1032 (S) ADAMS NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION 04/02/93 1079 (S) RECONSIDERATION NOT TAKEN UP 04/02/93 1081 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H) 04/02/93 955 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 04/02/93 955 (H) LABOR & COMMERCE, JUDICIARY 04/13/93 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17 04/13/93 (H) MINUTE(L&C) 04/14/93 1203 (H) L&C RPT HCS(L&C) 2DP 5NR 04/14/93 1204 (H) DP: MULDER, HUDSON 04/14/93 1204 (H) NR: PORTER, SITTON, WILLIAMS, GREEN,MACKIE 04/14/93 1204 (H) -SEN ZERO FN (DCED) 3/22/93 04/19/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120 BILL: SB 84 SHORT TITLE: REVOKE DRIVER'S LICENSE IF USE FALSE I.D. BILL VERSION: SB 84 AM SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) KELLY,Salo TITLE: "An Act relating to fees for identification cards and certain motor vehicle licenses and permits; to licenses issued to drivers and to revocation of a license to drive; and providing for an effective date." JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 02/01/93 204 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 02/01/93 204 (S) STA, JUD, FINANCE 02/10/93 323 (S) COSPONSOR: SALO 02/17/93 (S) STA AT 09:00 AM BUTROVICH 205 02/17/93 (S) MINUTE(STA) 02/17/93 (S) MINUTE(STA) 02/19/93 409 (S) STA RPT 3DP 2NR 02/19/93 410 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (S.STA) 03/05/93 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211 03/05/93 (S) MINUTE(JUD) 03/08/93 657 (S) JUD RPT 4DP 1NR 03/12/93 768 (S) FISCAL NOTE (DPS) 03/08/93 657 (S) PREVIOUS ZERO FN (S.STA) 03/15/93 (S) FIN AT 08:30 AM SENATE FIN 518 03/17/93 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518 03/22/93 896 (S) FIN RPT 6DP 1NR 03/22/93 896 (S) FISCAL NOTE (S.FIN/DPS) 03/23/93 (S) MINUTE(RLS) 03/25/93 943 (S) RULES RPT 3 CAL 1 OTHER REC 3/25/93 03/25/93 947 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME 03/25/93 948 (S) TECH AM TO AM 1 ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT 03/25/93 948 (S) AM NO 1 ADOPTED Y9 N8 E1 A2 03/25/93 949 (S) ADVANCE TO 3RD READING FLD Y9 N8 E1 A2 03/25/93 949 (S) THIRD READING 3/29 CALENDAR 03/29/93 975 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME SB 84 AM 03/29/93 975 (S) HELD IN THIRD READING TO 3/31 CALENDAR 03/31/93 1008 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 2 ADOPTED Y11 N9 03/31/93 1009 (S) AM NO 2 ADOPTED Y12 N8 03/31/93 1010 (S) AUTOMATICALLY IN THIRD READING 03/31/93 1010 (S) PASSED Y19 N1 03/31/93 1010 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE VOTE SAME AS PASSAGE 03/31/93 1010 (S) ADAMS NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION 04/01/93 1028 (S) RECON TAKEN UP-IN THIRD READING 04/01/93 1029 (S) PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y19 N1 04/01/93 1029 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE VOTE SAME AS PASSAGE 04/01/93 1049 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H) 04/02/93 925 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 04/02/93 925 (H) JUDICIARY, FINANCE 04/19/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120 BILL: HB 132 SHORT TITLE: EXTEND RESOURCE EXTRACTION PERMIT/LEASE BILL VERSION: SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) BRICE,Kott,James TITLE: "An Act extending the time period of all permits issued by the state relating to the extraction or removal of resources if the holder of the permit is involved in litigation concerning the issuance or validity of any permit related to the extraction or removal." JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 02/05/93 236 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 02/05/93 236 (H) RESOURCES, JUDICIARY, FINANCE 03/22/93 739 (H) COSPONSOR(S): KOTT 03/29/93 838 (H) COSPONSOR(S): JAMES 03/23/93 (H) MINUTE(ARR) 03/26/93 (H) MINUTE(RES) 03/29/93 (H) RES AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 124 03/29/93 (H) MINUTE(RES) 03/30/93 848 (H) RES RPT CS(RES) NEW TITLE 5DP 2NR 03/30/93 848 (H) DP: HUDSON, CARNEY, JAMES,BUNDE,WILLIAMS 03/30/93 848 (H) NR: FINKELSTEIN, DAVIES 03/30/93 848 (H) -ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DNR) 3/30/93 04/16/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120 04/16/93 (H) MINUTE(JUD) 04/19/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120 BILL: HB 187 SHORT TITLE: INTERCEPTION OF PRIVATE COMMUNICATIONS BILL VERSION: SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR TITLE: "An Act authorizing the interception of private communications related to the commission of certain criminal offenses; making related amendments to statutes relating to eavesdropping and wiretapping; relating to the penalty for violation of statutes relating to eavesdropping and unauthorized interception, publication, or use of private communications; and providing for an effective date." JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 05/01/03 (S) JUD AT 12:00 PM BELTZ ROOM 211 03/01/93 488 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 03/01/93 488 (H) LABOR & COMMERCE, JUDICIARY, FINANCE 03/01/93 488 (H) -3 ZERO FNS(ADM, DPS, LAW) 3/1/93 03/01/93 488 (H) -INDETERMINATE FISCAL NOTE (ADM) 3/1/93 03/01/93 488 (H) GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER 04/01/93 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17 04/01/93 (H) MINUTE(L&C) 04/02/93 929 (H) L&C RPT 3DP 1DNP 2NR 04/02/93 929 (H) DP: PORTER, GREEN, HUDSON 04/02/93 929 (H) DNP: SITTON 04/02/93 929 (H) NR: MACKIE, WILLIAMS 04/02/93 929 (H) -FISCAL NOTE (DPS) 4/2/93 04/02/93 929 (H) -PREVIOUS INDETERMINATE FN(ADM) 3/1/93 04/02/93 929 (H) -2 PREVIOUS ZERO FNS (ADM,LAW) 3/19/93 04/16/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120 04/19/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120 BILL: SB 54 SHORT TITLE: OFFENSES BY JUVENILE OFFENDERS BILL VERSION: CSSB 54(FIN) SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) HALFORD,Phillips,Leman,Taylor,Miller; REPRESENTATIVE(S) Porter,Bunde TITLE: "An Act relating to violations of laws by juveniles, to the remedies for offenses and activities committed by juveniles and to records of those offenses, and to incarceration of juveniles who have been charged, prosecuted, or convicted as adults; and providing for an effective date." JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION 01/22/93 122 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 01/22/93 122 (S) JUDICIARY, FINANCE 02/08/93 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211 02/08/93 (S) MINUTE(JUD) 02/17/93 (S) JUD AT 01:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211 02/17/93 (S) MINUTE(JUD) 02/19/93 408 (S) JUD RPT CS 3DP 1DNP NEW TITLE 02/19/93 408 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTES TO SB (LAW, DPS, CORR) 02/19/93 408 (S) FISCAL NOTE TO SB (ADM - 2) 02/24/93 461 (S) FISCAL NOTES TO CS (COURT, CORR) 02/24/93 461 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTES TO CS (DHSS, LAW) 02/22/93 (H) MINUTE(JUD) 02/24/93 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518 02/25/93 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518 02/26/93 499 (S) FIN RPT CS 6DP 1NR NEW TITLE 02/26/93 500 (S) FN TO FIN CS (ADM-2, COURT) 02/26/93 500 (S) PREVIOUS CS ZERO FNS APPLY (LAW, DHSS) 02/26/93 500 (S) PREV SB ZERO FN APPLIES (DPS) 02/26/93 (S) FIN AT 09:00 AM SENATE FIN 518 02/26/93 (S) MINUTE(FIN) 02/26/93 (S) RLS AT 01:15 PM FAHRENKAMP ROOM 203 02/26/93 (S) MINUTE(RLS) 03/01/93 538 (S) PREVIOUS FN APPLIES TO CS (CORR) 03/01/93 540 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 3/1/93 03/01/93 541 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME 03/01/93 542 (S) FIN CS ADOPTED Y11 N8 E1 03/01/93 543 (S) THIRD READING 3/2 CALENDAR 03/02/93 561 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME CSSB 54(FIN) 03/02/93 562 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 1 FLD Y9 N10 E1 03/02/93 567 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 2 FLD Y9 N10 E1 03/02/93 568 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 3 FLD Y9 N10 E1 03/02/93 568 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 4 FLD Y9 N10 E1 03/02/93 569 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 5 FLD Y9 N10 E1 03/02/93 570 (S) RETURN TO 2ND FOR AM 6 FLD Y9 N10 E1 03/02/93 571 (S) (S) ADOPTED LETTER OF INTENT 03/02/93 571 (S) PASSED Y12 N7 E1 03/02/93 571 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE PASSED Y14 N5 E1 03/02/93 572 (S) Kerttula NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION 03/03/93 595 (S) RECONSIDERATION NOT TAKEN UP 03/03/93 596 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H) 03/05/93 538 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S) 03/05/93 538 (H) JUDICIARY, FINANCE 03/12/93 629 (H) CROSS SPONSOR(S): PORTER 03/16/93 (H) MINUTE(HES) 03/24/93 765 (H) CROSS SPONSOR(S): BUNDE 03/26/93 (H) JUD AT 01:30 PM CAPITOL 120 03/26/93 (H) MINUTE(JUD) 03/26/93 (H) MINUTE(JUD) 04/16/93 (H) JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120 04/16/93 (H) MINUTE(JUD) 04/16/93 (H) MINUTE(JUD) ACTION NARRATIVE TAPE 93-64, SIDE A Number 000 The House Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was called to order at 1:31 p.m. on April 19, 1993. A quorum was not present; therefore, a work session remained in progress until a quorum was established. Chairman Porter announced that all individuals who wished to testify via teleconference wanted to address SB 149. He said that it was his intention to hold a joint hearing on SB 149, SB 86, and SB 112, Uniform Commercial Code Revisions. SB 86 FUND TRANSFERS UNDER THE UCC SB 112 UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE REVISIONS SB 149 REVISION OF BANKING CODE CHAIRMAN PORTER announced that when SB 149 was heard by the Labor and Commerce Committee, a provision allowing banks to enter the insurance business was removed. He noted that it was not the committee's intention to reinsert that provision. Number 067 BILL KELDER, LEGISLATIVE AIDE TO SEN. JAY KERTTULA, the PRIME SPONSOR of SB 86 and SB 112, said that the two pieces of legislation were companion bills modifying and modernizing the state's Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). He noted that 45 other states had already implemented most of the changes contained in the two bills. Alaska, he said, needed to "catch up" to those other states in order that businesses outside of Alaska would feel comfortable doing business in Alaska. MR. KELDER stated that SB 86 created a new Chapter 14 for the UCC, and pertained to the electronic transfer of funds for business purposes. He commented that, on a given day nationally, one trillion dollars changed hands in this manner. But, he said, Alaska's UCC had not been modified to take this practice into account. He noted that the governor's office, the attorney general, the Division of Banking, and the Department of Natural Resources' recorder's office supported SB 86. Additionally, he said, the banking community and the business community endorsed the legislation. He expressed his opinion that SB 86 would help to reduce litigation. MR. KELDER said that all of the changes made to the original SB 112 were merely technical in nature. He said that SB 112 represented changes to the UCC which would accommodate the changes made in SB 86 regarding electronic funds transfers, and also updated other sections of the UCC. A section pertaining to bulk sales was being deleted from the UCC, he said, because it was out-of-date. Beyond that, he added, SB 112 updated the UCC and made other technical changes. Number 165 REP. PHILLIPS asked Mr. Kelder if any attempts had been made last year to change the UCC. Number 170 MR. KELDER replied that he was not aware of any such attempts. He said that in approximately 1989, the federal government decided that the UCC needed to be updated to reflect current technology. Uniform Law commissioners from all of the states came together to develop a model law. States were given until 1994 to come into compliance with the model law, he said. If states failed to do so, he said, then the federal government could take over enforcement of the UCC. Number 187 REP. PHILLIPS asked if failure to enact SB 112 and SB 86 would mean that Alaska would be under the purview of federal banking codes and laws. She asked Mr. Kelder how many states had adopted UCC updates. MR. KELDER replied that 45 states had done so. He noted that Alaska had until 1994 to enact the UCC update. Number 207 ART PETERSON, A UNIFORM LAW COMMISSIONER FOR ALASKA, said that SB 86 and SB 112 contained the most recent proposals of the Uniform Law Conference, a national organization. He said that all states had uniform commercial codes and needed to keep them up-to-date. He commented that Alaska was getting further and further behind on the issue of electronic fund transfers, putting Alaska businesses at a serious disadvantage. He noted that SB 112 contained three basic parts: personal property leasing, negotiable instruments, and bulk sales. He said that Alaska was also falling behind with regard to these areas. He stated that the dollar amount of business done in these areas was staggering, resulting in a disadvantage to the state's businesses. (REP. DAVIDSON and REP. KOTT arrived at approximately 1:45 p.m. A quorum was obtained.) Number 307 MR. PETERSON summarized his earlier comments for the benefit of Rep. Kott and Rep. Davidson. He noted that SB 86 and SB 112 embodied current thinking of the Uniform Law Conference. He said that if the bills were not enacted, the federal government might intervene. He stated that federal law already regulated consumer electronic funds transfers. He said that both bills recognized that business was now sometimes transacted by electronic impulses. He commented that the state needed to enact laws relating to this business practice. He noted that bulk sales provisions would be repealed because changes in business practices had negated the need for those provisions. Number 370 REP. GREEN asked why some states had not yet enacted the changes proposed by the Uniform Law Conference. Number 376 MR. PETERSON replied that there had been some concerns regarding the negotiable instruments portion of the Uniform Law Conference's recommendations, but those issues had been largely resolved. He said that other issues of concern had been resolved in one manner or another. Regarding why other states had not yet enacted the Uniform Law Conference proposals, he said that most states probably did not perceive that it was urgent to do so. Number 408 REP. PHILLIPS asked Mr. Peterson to explain the difference between the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee's version of SB 112 and the Senate Judiciary Committee's version. Number 414 MR. PETERSON mentioned that the committee members had in their bill packets a list of the changes between the two versions of SB 112. He said that all of the changes were tiny, technical changes. Number 437 REP. DAVIDSON made a motion to move SB 86 and SB 112 out of committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes. There being no objection, it was so ordered. SB 54 OFFENSES BY JUVENILE OFFENDERS CHAIRMAN PORTER announced that the committee would next address a Senate letter of intent for SB 54, which the committee had failed to adopt when it passed the bill out of committee at an earlier hearing. Number 466 GAYLE HORETSKI, COMMITTEE COUNSEL TO THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, explained that the letter of intent adopted by the Senate dealt with records of juveniles. She said that there was some question as to whether it was necessary for the House to adopt the letter of intent, given changes which had been made to the bill since it passed the Senate. But, she said, in order to be on the safe side, she was bringing the Senate's letter of intent to the committee's attention. REP. DAVIDSON asked for a brief explanation of what the Senate letter of intent said, as well as what the letter of intent adopted by the Judiciary Committee said. Number 496 MS. HORETSKI replied that the letter of intent adopted by the Judiciary Committee at its hearing on SB 54 dealt with the issue of substantive versus procedural changes in the law. Number 503 REP. PHILLIPS made a motion to adopt the Senate letter of intent for SB 54. There being no objection, it was adopted. SB 149 REVISION OF BANKING CODE Number 509 JOSH FINK, LEGISLATIVE AIDE TO SEN. TIM KELLY, PRIME SPONSOR of SB 149, commented that the state's existing banking code was viewed as obsolete by those in the banking industry as well as state officials. He said that SB 149 was the result of the Division of Banking, Securities, and Corporations working with state-chartered banks and the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee to revise the state's banking code. Number 536 REP. PHILLIPS asked if the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee supported the House Labor and Commerce Committee's deletion of a provision allowing banks to enter the insurance business. Number 540 MR. FINK replied that the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee did not object to the change. Number 545 REP. DAVIDSON indicated his surprise that the Senate had not raised the insurance issue. Number 553 JEFF BUSH, an ATTORNEY under contract with the DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (DCED) to draft SB 149 and accompanying regulations, explained that the bill did three things: (1) it revised and expanded banks' powers; (2) it made changes to DCED's regulatory powers; and (3) it amended the DCED's enforcement powers. MR. BUSH stated that the most substantive changes were made to the expansion and revision of banks' powers. He said that a new article regarding interstate and international banking was included in SB 149. He said that former DCED Commissioner Glenn Olds was very interested in trying to encourage international banks to invest in Alaska and to assist their clients in doing so. He noted that the existing banking code, drafted in the 1930s, did not address international banking. Although the existing code did not prohibit international banking, he said, it did not include any specific guidelines. MR. BUSH commented that SB 149 included similar guidelines for interstate banks. He said that the bill required that home states of interstate banks wanting to do business in Alaska also allow Alaskan banks to do business in that state. He noted that SB 149 also allowed banks to have subsidiaries, stating that in today's marketplace, banks needed ways to earn money other than just making loans. He said that the bill rewrote lending statutes, requiring banks to comply with "sound banking policies" instead of specific statutory requirements. He said that experience had shown that setting out specific lending requirements in statute did not prevent banks from failing. MR. BUSH stated that SB 149 made the Alaska Corporations Code applicable to banks. He noted that the bill repealed the Alaska Savings Association Act, as there were currently no state savings and loans in Alaska. Under the current banking code, he said, any new savings and loan would be under three regulatory agencies -- two federal and one state. He said there was a federal system for creating savings and loans, and therefore no need for the Alaska Savings Association Act. MR. BUSH stated that the banking code's penalty provisions were consolidated and made consistent in SB 149. He said the bill made major revisions to bank liquidation provisions. He commented that, although SB 149 was a long bill, it was probably shorter than the existing banking code and included a great deal more substance. Number 717 REP. GREEN asked Mr. Bush how the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) would mesh with the new banking code. Number 728 MR. BUSH replied that he did not believe that any provision of SB 149 would be detrimental to NAFTA, but added that he did not know a great deal about NAFTA. Number 735 REP. PHILLIPS asked Mr. Bush to explain for which banks Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insurance would be optional. Number 751 MR. BUSH replied that a state bank could apply to the DCED to get a waiver from FDIC insurance requirements. In order to get the waiver, he said, a bank would probably have to show a sufficient asset base and also notify depositors of the lack of FDIC insurance. Number 759 REP. PHILLIPS asked if any other state currently employed a similar practice. She mentioned that currently anyone with a bank account in Alaska had his or her deposit insured by FDIC. Number 764 MR. BUSH noted that Rep. Phillips was correct with regard to current practices in Alaska. He said that, at the federal level, there appeared to be a trend toward private insurance to compete with FDIC insurance. He said the DCED wanted to allow Alaska's banks the option of using that private insurance instead of FDIC insurance, if they wished. Also, he stated that a neighborhood or village bank might not be large enough to qualify for FDIC insurance, but should still be able to do business if they could demonstrate protection to depositors. He noted that there was no intention at present to permit waivers. He commented that he was not sure if any other states allowed for a waiver of FDIC insurance, but he did not believe so. Number 781 REP. PHILLIPS expressed her opinion that tremendous problems and litigation could arise if some bank accounts were not insured. Number 784 MR. BUSH responded that the DCED shared Rep. Phillips' concerns and did not intend to permit waivers unless a bank could guarantee protection to depositors. International banks, he added, were a different situation and could not at present obtain FDIC insurance. Because of that, he said, international banks would have to maintain assets within the state equal to the total amount of deposits. Number 800 REP. GREEN asked Mr. Bush what would happen in the event of a downturn in the economy. Would an international bank have to acquire additional assets in-state if the value of existing assets decreased? MR. BUSH replied that Rep. Green was correct. Number 808 CHAIRMAN PORTER asked Mr. Bush if the removal of the language regarding banks going into the insurance business would prohibit banks from doing so. Number 813 MR. BUSH said that in his understanding, banks would be prohibited from going into the insurance business without specific statutory authority to do so. Number 814 CHAIRMAN PORTER conveyed a question on behalf of Rep. James, who was absent. He asked Mr. Bush if a bank could go into the real estate business. Number 820 MR. BUSH replied that he thought that the answer to that question was "yes," although he said he was not certain if a bank could go into the real estate broker business. He commented that the way SB 149 was worded, a bank could go into the real estate management business. He explained that in the 1980s banks suddenly found themselves with huge real estate portfolios due to foreclosures. There was no way to put the real estate into a separate management organization outside of the bank. He said that at the time, banks wanted to create separate real estate management corporations, but were prohibited from doing so. This resulted in a drain on bank assets and personnel. He said banks should have the ability to manage real estate assets owned by the bank. MR. BUSH stated that violations of current banking law existed in Alaska today. He said there was a law that banks could not own real estate, except as necessary for the banking business. He mentioned banks which owned large buildings because it was better financially to buy a large building and lease out space that the bank did not need than to lease space elsewhere. TAPE 93-64, SIDE B Number 012 CHAIRMAN PORTER asked if it would be possible, under SB 149's provisions, for a person to go to a bank seeking a loan to buy a piece of real estate, have his or her loan request denied, and then see the bank go out and purchase that same piece of real estate. Number 022 MR. BUSH replied that the answer to the Chairman's question was "no." He said SB 149 did not allow banks to own real estate; it allowed separate bank subsidiaries to own real estate. He said that in theory, under SB 149, a bank could turn down a person's loan request and then inform the subsidiary of the opportunity to purchase the real estate for which the loan request was made. He said that such a practice would violate state regulations and probably federal law as well. Number 044 REP. PHILLIPS mentioned that language on page 24 of the bill referred to real property ownership, development, or leasing. It did not mention brokerage. Number 065 KEITH SILVER, testifying via teleconference from Anchorage, stated that because the committee did not intend to reinsert language allowing banks to enter the insurance business, he had no comments to make. Number 077 DAVID STRATTON, testifying via teleconference from Anchorage, stated that he had submitted written comments regarding allowing banks to enter the insurance industry. He said that if it was the committee's intent to respect the prior committee's removal of language regarding banks entering the insurance industry, he had nothing further to add. Number 083 LINDA HALL, testifying via teleconference from Anchorage, said that she was present to testify against allowing banks to enter the insurance industry. As long as the committee did not intend to reinsert language to that effect, she said that she had no comments to make. Number 097 KAREN HOFSTAD, testifying via teleconference from Petersburg, indicated her support for SB 149, provided that banks were not allowed to enter the insurance business. Number 105 SUSAN ERICKSON, testifying via teleconference from Petersburg, thanked the committee for maintaining the removal of language allowing banks to enter the insurance industry. Number 112 ARNE IVERSEN, testifying via teleconference from Ketchikan, echoed the comments of the previous speakers. Number 118 JAMES BARRY, testifying via teleconference from Ketchikan, commented that he agreed that banks should stay out of the insurance business. Number 125 JIM SARVELA, testifying via teleconference from Ketchikan, said that he had no comments to make at this time. Number 130 RICK HARDCASTLE, testifying via teleconference from Ketchikan, said that he had no comment to make at this time. Number 139 JACK DAVIES, testifying via teleconference from Ketchikan, thanked the committee for the opportunity to testify and for the fact that he did not have to testify. Number 144 JACK BERRY, testifying via teleconference from Ketchikan, stated that he supported the comments of the previous four speakers. Number 156 JOHN SWEENEY, testifying via teleconference from Kodiak, thanked the committee for allowing the hearing on SB 149 to be teleconferenced. Number 169 BUD JAEGER, from SHATTUCK AND GRUMMETT INSURANCE COMPANY in Juneau, and PRESIDENT of the ALASKA INDEPENDENT INSURANCE AGENTS AND BROKERS, indicated his support for the removal of language allowing banks to enter the insurance business. Number 195 REP. GREEN made a motion to pass the Labor and Commerce Committee's substitute for SB 149 out of committee, with a zero fiscal note and individual recommendations. There being no objection, it was so ordered. SB 84 REVOKE DRIVER'S LICENSE IF USE FALSE I.D. CHAIRMAN PORTER announced that the committee would take up SB 84 next. Number 244 JOSH FINK, LEGISLATIVE AIDE TO SEN. TIM KELLY, PRIME SPONSOR of SB 84, stated that SB 84 addressed the problem of minors who used false driver's licenses to purchase alcohol. He said that a similar bill had passed the House last year, but died in the Senate during the final hours of the session. He commented that the Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS), the Department of Public Safety (DPS), Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), the Municipality of Anchorage's Health and Human Services Commission, the Bristol Bay Health Corporation, and the Anchorage Daily News, among others, supported the bill. MR. FINK said that SB 84 would require that a hologram be placed over vital information on a driver's license in order to prevent tampering. Also, he said, the phrase "under 21" would be placed on driver's licenses of minors, clearly indicating to alcohol servers that the bearer of the license could not legally purchase alcohol. Additionally, he said, SB 84 would deter minors from attempting to purchase alcohol with a fraudulent driver's license. Driving privileges would be revoked for any individual caught trying to purchase alcohol with a fraudulent driver's license. Revocation would be for 60 days for a first offense, and one year for a second or subsequent offense, he said. Number 283 REP. GREEN asked Mr. Fink to explain the two fiscal notes accompanying the bill. Number 290 MR. FINK responded that the Senate Finance Committee felt that the DPS's fiscal note was too high, and based on unreasonable assumptions regarding the number of licenses that would be revoked. But, he said, the DPS had convincing arguments in defense of its fiscal note. He stated that it was up to the committee to decide which fiscal note it chose to attach to the bill. Number 312 REP. PHILLIPS remarked that there was tremendous support for last year's bill which was similar to SB 84. She applauded the use of holograms on driver's licenses. Number 332 JUANITA HENSLEY, CHIEF, DRIVER SERVICES, DIVISION OF MOTOR VEHICLES, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, said the DPS supported SB 84, but opposed the Senate Finance Committee's fiscal note. She stated that holograms would appear on all driver's licenses, not just those belonging to minors. She said that every year the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board sent the DMV approximately 500-700 fraudulent licenses confiscated in liquor establishments. She estimated that law enforcement officials confiscated another 500-700 licenses. She said that she had a letter from the manager of Chilkoot Charlie's, a bar in Anchorage, claiming that his employees confiscate over 400 fake licenses every year. She commented that SB 84 could potentially result in many licenses being revoked. She said the DPS's fiscal note was based on a conservative estimate of 1500 licenses being revoked every year. MS. HENSLEY mentioned that the DPS would soon be able to use an imaging system for driver's license photographs in its Anchorage field office. She said that the new system would allow the DMV to guard against minors obtaining licenses while using someone else's identification. Number 409 REP. GREEN asked Ms. Hensley if a person, upon turning 21, would get a new driver's license that did not say "under 21" on it. Number 413 MS. HENSLEY said that Rep. Green was correct. Number 418 CHAIRMAN PORTER asked Ms. Hensley if the type of licenses proposed in SB 84 would prevent a minor from obtaining a license using his or her sibling's identification. Number 425 MS. HENSLEY responded that the imaging system would prevent such a situation in the Anchorage field office only, but not in other DMV field offices. She said that individuals "office hop," meaning that if they could not obtain a fraudulent license in one office, they tried another office. Number 435 CHAIRMAN PORTER asked if SB 84 was an attempt to reduce a person's ability to alter an existing license. (REP. DAVIDSON arrived at 2:41 p.m.) Number 441 MS. HENSLEY said that the chairman was correct. Number 459 CHAIRMAN PORTER asked how SB 84 would increase the number of licenses that DMV revoked. Number 463 MS. HENSLEY replied that, when an individual used a fraudulent license to purchase alcohol or to enter a liquor establishment, a law enforcement officer was required to issue a notice and order of revocation, to confiscate the license, and to notify the DMV of the revocation under SB 84's provisions. Number 476 CHAIRMAN PORTER asked if that was not already occurring. MS. HENSLEY said that it was not. REP. PHILLIPS commented that SB 84 was a very good bill. She made a motion to move it out of committee with individual recommendations and the DPS's fiscal note. Number 489 MS. HENSLEY stated that SB 84 also increased the cost of a driver's license. There being no objection to the motion to pass SB 84 out of committee, it was so ordered. HB 132 EXTEND RESOURCE EXTRACTION PERMIT/LEASE CHAIRMAN PORTER announced that the committee would take up HB 132 next. Number 511 MS. HORETSKI, HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE COUNSEL, called the committee members' attention to a draft committee substitute for HB 132 dated April 18, 1993. She said that she had met with the sponsor, Rep. Brice, and Mr. Jerry Luckhaupt from the Legislative Affairs Agency's Division of Legal Services to discuss the issue of who would be considered "successful" in litigation. She stated that language in the committee substitute was amended to clarify that issue. MS. HORETSKI commented that three changes appeared in the new committee substitute, two of which were amendments adopted by the committee at the last hearing on HB 132. Those appeared on page 2, line 2, and page 2, line 26, she said. The third change appeared on page 2, lines 5-7 and lines 22-24, and had not yet been discussed by the committee. New language provided that a permit would be extended if the permit holder or the agency was the "prevailing party." "Prevailing party" was defined on lines 22-24 as "one who has successfully prosecuted or defended against the action, who is successful on the main issue of the action and in whose favor the decision or verdict is rendered and the judgment entered." She said that the language had been taken from case law decisions interpreting the term "prevailing party" for Alaska Civil Court Rule 82 purposes. Number 566 REP. DAVIDSON asked if the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) had a position on HB 132. Number 569 REP. TOM BRICE, PRIME SPONSOR of HB 132, commented that Mr. Raga Elim of DNR had indicated that his department supported the bill, although no written position paper had been submitted. Rep. Brice said that the DCED also supported the bill. Number 580 REP. PHILLIPS commented that the Governor's Task Force on Regulatory Reform supported the concept behind the bill. Number 585 REP. KOTT expressed his opinion that if the DNR opposed HB 132, the committee would have been informed of that opposition. He made a motion to adopt the Judiciary committee substitute for HB 132. There being no objection, it was so ordered. Number 600 REP. KOTT made a motion to move the Judiciary committee substitute for HB 132 out of committee, with a zero fiscal note and with individual recommendations. There being no objection, it was so ordered. Number 601 REP. PHILLIPS said that HB 132 was a good piece of legislation. HB 187 INTERCEPTION OF PRIVATE COMMUNICATIONS CHAIRMAN PORTER announced that the committee would take up HB 187. Number 609 MARGOT KNUTH, from the DEPARTMENT OF LAW'S CRIMINAL DIVISION, said that HB 187 was the governor's bill on wiretapping and a component of his crime package. She said that when discussing the bill with legislators and members of the public, she had generally heard two responses to the issue of wiretapping: surprise that the state did not already allow it, and nervousness about employing it. She said HB 187 would authorize the state to electronically eavesdrop in murder, kidnapping, and unclassified and class A felony drug cases. MS. KNUTH commented that federal law required states to abide by certain limitations before implementing a wiretapping program. She said HB 187 would honor those requirements and also followed suggestions made in the Model Electronic Eavesdropping Act. She stated that HB 187 included safeguards. The state did not anticipate using eavesdropping very often, she said, as it was expensive and unnecessary in many cases. She said that it would have been useful in the Eklutna mail bombing case last year, however. MS. KNUTH stated that law enforcement officials would need the approval of the attorney general's office to use wiretapping. Additionally, she said, a judge would have to find that there was probable cause that wiretapping would produce evidence that a crime had been committed or was to be committed. Also, notice would have to be provided at some point to all persons whose conversations were intercepted. Number 680 REP. PHILLIPS asked when the notification would occur. Number 684 MS. KNUTH replied that notification would usually occur as soon as a charge was filed. She likened the procedure to that used when a search warrant was issued and served. REP. DAVIDSON asked Ms. Knuth to comment on how probable cause would be demonstrated. MS. KNUTH responded that an application for a wiretapping order had to be filed. She said HB 187 set out a long list of elements that had to be shown when filing a wiretapping application. A law enforcement officer would have to identify the facts upon which he or she was relying when applying for the order. There would have to be enough information to warrant the issuance of a wiretapping order. There was no "trust me" component to HB 187, she added. MS. KNUTH stated that, in order for a wiretapping order to be issued, a judge had to be presented with specific time periods, modes of communication, locations, etc. She called the members' attention to section 12.37.040 of the bill. Number 736 REP. DAVIDSON asked Ms. Knuth what protections HB 187 included for innocent parties. Number 748 MS. KNUTH replied that the bill provided that privileged communications would always remain privileged. Number 752 REP. DAVIDSON asked how many judges, law enforcement officials, and attorneys would be party to these communications. He expressed doubt that privileged communications would remain confidential, given the number of people involved in the wiretapping exercise. Number 760 MS. KNUTH commented that the bill included penalties for unauthorized disclosure. Additionally, she said, the wiretapping applications and the conversations intercepted would be sealed by the court until they were used in court proceedings. The court system, not law enforcement officials, would have custody of those items, she said. Number 771 REP. DAVIDSON stated that although he trusted police officers, he knew that people talked while at work. Number 780 MS. KNUTH said that under current law, law enforcement officers could obtain orders allowing the recording of a face-to-face conversation. She said that the problem of people hearing conversations which were not germane to the investigation occurred in that situation also. She mentioned that law enforcement agencies imposed standards on their employees, and disciplinary actions were taken when those standards were breached. Number 791 REP. KOTT asked about language on page 9 regarding required reports. He asked why the state was reporting to the federal government. MS. KNUTH replied that the reports were required under federal law. TAPE 93-65, SIDE A Number 000 REP. KOTT asked if the federal requirements were tied to funding. (REP. DAVIDSON left the meeting.) Number 010 MS. KNUTH stated that the requirements did not have anything to do with funding, but rather if a state would be allowed to conduct wiretapping in the first place. REP. PHILLIPS made a motion to move HB 187 out of committee with individual recommendations and a zero fiscal note. There being no objection, it was so ordered. ADJOURNMENT CHAIRMAN PORTER adjourned the meeting at 3:11 p.m.