SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE March 11, 1994 1:35 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT Senator Robin Taylor, Chairman Senator George Jacko Senator Dave Donley Senator Suzanne Little MEMBERS ABSENT Senator Rick Halford, Vice-Chairman OTHERS PRESENT Senator Bert Sharp COMMITTEE CALENDAR HOUSE BILL NO. 71 "An Act relating to the involuntary dissolution of Native corporations; and providing for an effective date." HOUSE BILL NO. 280 "An Act adopting the Uniform Custodial Trust Act." HOUSE BILL NO. 415 "An Act making corrective amendments to the Alaska Statutes as recommended by the revisor of statutes; and providing for an effective date." SENATE BILL NO. 332 "An Act relating to the method of calculating the weight of live marijuana plants for purposes of applying controlled substance laws and amending the definition of `marijuana'." SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 223 "An Act relating to credits against certain taxes for contributions to certain public educational radio and television networks and stations; and providing for an effective date." SENATE BILL NO. 256 "An Act increasing the tax on transfers and consumption of aviation fuel." PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION HB 71 - See Community & Regional Affairs minutes dated 4/28/93. See Judiciary minutes dated 3/9/94. HB 280 - See State Affairs minutes dated 3/2/94. See Judiciary minutes dated 3/9/94. HB 415 - See Judiciary minutes dated 3/9/94. SB 332 - See Judiciary minutes dated 2/11/94. SB 223 - See Community & Regional Affairs minutes dated 3/1/94. SB 256 - See Transportation minutes dated 1/27/94. WITNESS REGISTER Lt. Charles Mallott, Commander Investigation & Support Services Ketchikan Police Department 361 Main Street Ketchikan Alaska 99901 POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 332. Cheri Davis Box 5723 Ketchikan, Alaska 99901 POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 332. Lynda Adams Alaskans for a Drug Free Youth 2557 Tongass Ketchikan, Alaska 99901 POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 332. Sallie Dodd-Butters P.O. Box 1223 Homer, Alaska 99603 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposes SB 332. Julie Cesarini P.O. Box 812 Homer, Alaska 99603 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposes SB 332. Margot Knuth, Asst. Atty. General Criminal Division Department of Law P.O. Box 110300 Juneau, Alaska 99811-0300 POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 332. Rob Rawls Alaska Public Radio Network 810 E. Ninth Ave. Anchorage, Alaska 99510 POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 223. Helvi Sandvic, Deputy Commissioner Department of Transportation 3132 Channel Drive Juneau, Alaska 99801-7898 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposes SB 256. Gary Moore, Planning Director Tanana Chiefs Conference OFFNET from 452-8251 Fairbanks, Alaska POSITION STATEMENT: Opposes SB 256. ACTION NARRATIVE TAPE 94-15, SIDE A Number 001 CHAIRMAN ROBIN TAYLOR called the Judiciary Committee meeting to order at 1:35 p.m. SENATOR TAYLOR returned HB 71 (DISSOLUTION OF NATIVE CORPORATIONS) sponsored by REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD FOSTER, and SENATOR TAYLOR reviewed the problems of Native land titles solved by the passage of HB 71. There was a discussion of the number of corporations involved with this problem. SENATOR JACKO moved to pass HOUSE BILL NO. 71 (DISSOLUTION OF NATIVE CORPORATIONS) from committee with individual recommendations. Without objections, so ordered. Number 053 SENATOR TAYLOR returned HB 280 (UNIFORM CUSTODIAL TRUST ACT) to committee and reviewed the discussion by DAVID DIERDORFF, Revisor of Statutes, on the legislation. SENATOR TAYLOR moved to pass HOUSE BILL NO. 280 (UNIFORM CUSTODIAL TRUST ACT) from committee with individual recommendations. Without objections, so ordered. SENATOR TAYLOR returned HB 415 (1994 REVISOR'S BILL) to committee. SENATOR LITTLE moved to pass CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 415(JUD) from committee with individual recommendations. Without objections, so ordered. SENATOR TAYLOR introduced SB 332 (WEIGHT OF LIVE MARIJUANA PLANTS) sponsored by the Senate Judiciary Committee, and invited LT. CHARLES MALLOTT, Commander for the Ketchikan Police Department, to testify by teleconference. LT. MALLOTT began by pointing out that presently their police department has been addressing the current mandate that involved processing a large growing operation of 200 marijuana plants, and this has entailed many personnel hours harvesting, hanging, drying, and then plucking the buds and leaves from the stems. He explained the two hundred mature marijuana plant growing operation took the narcotics enforcement team approximately 32 officer hours to process. He thought it was a real waste of resources that could be better allocated time wise. Number 103 LT. MALLOTT described the growing operation of 200 marijuana plants as a large growing operation complete with an irrigation system, lighting equipment, utility records, potting soil, plants, and fertilizer. He explained all of these items were photographed, but the processing just wasn't practical. LT. MALLOTT hoped there could be a number of plants that would be the determination as to a felony cutoff or a misdemeanor cutoff. He discussed having to deal with specific weights, and he quoted the current law dealing with the finished product. He thought it would be a big help for small agencies if that could be changed in SB 332 so the plants could be cut off at the stem and weighed at the time of harvest. He argued that even thought not all of the plant was smoked, the plant is still an illicit plant. SENATOR TAYLOR invited former representative, CHERI DAVIS to testify from Ketchikan. MS. DAVIS testified in support of SB 332 explained how she thought it would save money in law enforcement. In talking to persons on the street in Ketchikan, she commented they thought the process was crazy. She urged that the legislation be passed quickly to free up the police for more important duties. Number 142 LYNDA ADAMS also testified from Ketchikan on behalf of Alaskans for a Drug Free Youth, and she indicated support for the bill from the Governor's Advisory Board on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse, as well as the Ketchikan Mayor's Task Force on Substance Abuse. She thought the current process was a handicap for law enforcement. From Ketchikan, SENATOR TAYLOR moved on to Homer, Alaska to hear first from SALLIE DODD-BUTTERS. MS. DODD-BUTTER claimed the police were spying on people in their back yards. In regards to the 4 oz rule, she suggested the police dry and weigh one plant, and use a formula to decide how much is lost in the stems and "things," to decide the amount. She declared the whole process was fascist and ridiculous. She also thought cigarettes and alcohol use should be pursued rather increasing marijuana seizures. She claimed to have been a marijuana smoker since 1966, has had a successful life, and deeply resents this intrusion on her civil liberties. Number 208 Next to testify from Homer was JULIE CESARINI, who spoke in opposition to SB 332, and reviewed her knowledge of the hemp plant, including the importation of hemp cloth from China. She demanded to know what scientific evidence was being used to calculate the amount of mind altering qualities in the stalk. She thought the troopers should be freed to pursue people who are committing vicious and anti-social crimes. She urged the committee to read the information on hemp, which she claimed was a most healthy plant. SENATOR TAYLOR explained the legislation only defines the manner in which the plant of marijuana would be weighed, and he asked if she knew a better way to weigh the plant. MS. CESARINI explained the weight was arbitrary, and should only be the weight of the buds, excluding the seed, leaves, stalks, and roots. She said the buds were the mind altering portion of the plant. Number 252 SENATOR LITTLE asked if the buds were the portion being weighed. SENATOR TAYLOR called on MARGOT KNUTH with the Criminal Division from the Department of Law to answer some of the questions. MS. KNUTH explained the Department of Law supports the provision in the bill that will allow the entire marijuana plant to be weighed, including the stalk. She quoted the definition as set out in present statute is the seeds, leaves, buds, and flowers, but not the stalk. Adding the stalk, she said would allow the prosecution to reach the one pound level sooner. MS. KNUTH addressed the new language at the time of harvest or seizure and presented a practical problem of having the plants rot if not dried, and secondly, it is the State's burden of proof in criminal cases beyond a reasonable doubt. She said the weight of the plant needs to be the same at the time the case goes to the jury as has been charged, and she gave an example. MS. KNUTH reiterated the Department's support for SB 332 - especially Section 2, but she suggested the phrase on page 1, lines 9 and 10, [WHEN REDUCED TO ITS COMMONLY USED FORM] be reinstated. Number 298 SENATOR DONLEY questioned the amount of time saved since most of the time seemed to be in the drying out process. MS. KNUTH said it would still have to be dried, but with the weight it would be more for the product. SENATOR DONLEY protested it would never get passed a judge, and MS. KNUTH thought the matter could be addressed by changing the language to include "dried" weight. SENATOR JACKO asked about the stalks not having THC, and SENATOR DONLEY confirmed there was nothing in the stalk that is mind altering, but the whole stalk is illegal. SENATOR DONLEY agreed there was a compelling reason behind the bill, because there is a considerable waste of resources for law enforcement officers to be processing this illegal substance. He also agreed there had to be a preservation of the evidence, but he was concerned there would be nothing done but increasing the penalty for smaller amounts of the drug. MS. KNUTH was hoping there would be a difference between processing and simply drying it, so it remains unspoiled evidence. She said the prosecution had no interest in processed marijuana, but they do need the marijuana to be a stable amount. SENATOR TAYLOR expressed concern for the officer who initiate the process, and talked in terms of fishing violations where just samples were saved. Illegal fish are sold and the fish ticket is preserved for evidence. He questioned whether truck loads of marijuana would be saved, rather than just samples and the photographs. Number 350 SENATOR DONLEY, a lawyer, declared he could beat that scenario in court, and asked about the fish. There ensued a discussion between SENATOR DONLEY and SENATOR TAYLOR about fishing violations, penalties, higher standards, evidentiary process, and the lack of logic in the different violations. SENATOR TAYLOR asked MS. KNUTH about processing a large growing operation, and she suggested Public Safety could provide more information on these facts. She described her position as a prosecutor and the manner in which she presented marijuana as evidence. SENATOR DONLEY clarified the difference from existing law is that the stocks would be included in the dried product, and he asked what the difference would be in the aggregate weight. He wanted to know how many people would be moved into a felony category, and he also wanted to know the status of the initiative thrown out by the superior court. He asked MS. KNUTH if her division had appealed the decision. MS. KNUTH said her division had not, but she thought it was a district court from Southeast Alaska, possibly Ketchikan, that curtailed it in that area. She explained there was a supreme court decision that if the court did not appeal an adverse decision, the prior law would prevail. MS. KNUTH quoted a supreme court opinion that says it doesn't have binding effect in another judicial district. SENATOR DONLEY didn't think it was binding completely, but there was room to maneuver, and asked if the decision was published. Number 398 MS. KNUTH explained, at this point, the department has no statewide ruling that says the amendment was unconstitutional, but she thought the superior litigation was still ongoing, where the amendment was attacked by a right-to-privacy group. She said it was stalled out on the plaintiff's burden of proof, and they continued to discuss the constitutionality of the suit. SENATOR DONLEY thought the initiative was still good, but he was unclear as to whether it made all possession of marijuana a felony. MS. KNUTH said it became a misdemeanor offense that could be prosecuted to possess, even your own home, but it would require law enforcement officers to have a reason to be there. If the officers enter on a search warrant for some other offense and find marijuana, prosecution could be initiated. There was a discussion of quantity cutoffs for marijuana. She said one pound was the felony cutoff. SENATOR DONLEY indicated that was a beginning point for a discussion on the impact of prosecutions by including the stalks, and he opined there would be more people prosecuted on felony crimes as opposed to misdemeanors. He claimed there would also be an impact on the fiscal note with the increase in felony crimes, and he asked the committee if that was what they really wanted. SENATOR DONLEY also asked if the committee was actually addressing a procedural and a time problem. SENATOR TAYLOR thought the focus was in solving the actual practical problem of handling this contraband subsistence in the manner in which it would have to be stored, collected, and saved. SENATOR TAYLOR turned to LT. MALLOTT in Ketchikan to respond to some of the practical concerns. LT. MALLOTT explained the actual harvesting of cutting off the plant at the base and hanging it up in a room to dry, is not as time consuming as the physical process of taking each marijuana bud off the plant and storing various parts independently. He claimed the major time consuming process is the grooming, and he explained it took 32 officer hours grooming the 200 plants seized in a recent raid. LT. MALLOTT explained if they could weigh the entire dried plant it would be less time consuming, and he objected to having to deal with the time consuming procedures mandated by law. Number 452 SENATOR DONLEY indicated a great deal of sympathy for the plight of LT. MALLOTT and thought the process was ridiculous. However, he noted the relevant factor to the amount of an illicit substance, and gave the analogy of how large a theft is involved in a crime. He thought the punishment should fit the crime and be done in a rational manner. He expressed concern the change in the bill would change the level of punishment which would bring about fiscal and social impacts. He again asked the committee members what they were trying to do. LT. MALLOTT explained in his eighteen years experience, extremely few cases were involved at or near the one pound level, so he thought it would effect a small number of cases. His concern was the growing operation of 50 or 75 plants, where there is obviously more than a pound, and he thought it was a waste of resources to continue to process all those plants. SENATOR DONLEY agreed it was a waste of resources but could be fixed without the increase in penalty for possession to do that, and he led a discussion of rational ratio adjustment in a felony v. a misdemeanor. LT. MALLOTT did not see the bill as increasing penalties so much as trying to make it simpler for law enforcement to obtain a usable weight in a large growing operation. SENATOR TAYLOR reviewed the interchange with SENATOR DONLEY on the points of the legislation dealing with the inclusion of the stalks in the grooming of the marijuana, making a major impact on breaking through the borderline of felony v. misdemeanor. SENATOR TAYLOR quoted SENATOR DONLEY'S idea for a formula to allow for the stalks to be of a certain percentage of the groomed weight. SENATOR DONLEY agreed with his assessment of the problem. Number 508 MS. KNUTH questioned MR. MALLOTT if someone had dried weight that included the stalk making it over a pound, would that still be a quantity that could be arguably "personal use." Or would it be a commercial quantity when the amount is over a pound including the stalk. MR. MALLOTT was not aware of anyone has been in possession of more than a pound of groomed and processed marijuana for their personal use. He described various times at which a marijuana plant could be harvested, and he gave an example of finding 1000 starter plants, two inches high, but which might not contain a pound of useable product. He expressed appreciation at the struggles by the legislators to address his problem, and he restated his dilemma as continuously discussed. SENATOR DONLEY suggested using the standard of so many pounds of total weight or so many plants, saying he would be suspicious of anyone with 100 plants. SENATOR TAYLOR talked about MS. KNUTH'S amendment to insert "dried" on page 1, line 8, before the word "weight." MS. KNUTH suggested placing a period after the word "attachments" on line 9 on page 1. SENATOR LITTLE clarified the weight at seizure would not be the dried weight. SENATOR DONLEY clarified the use of "dried weight" in the sentence, line 8, page 1. He said he was also interested in the using the number of plants as an issue, and there was some discussion of this among the committee members. Number 550 SENATOR DONLEY gave some examples for getting a search warrant for probable cause for large scale marijuana crops, along with some concerns that 200 small plants might not fit the definition. MS. KNUTH explained AS 11.71.040 is misconduct involving a controlled substance in the fourth degree, which is a class C felony, and she explained how a subsection (g) could be added to describe the number of plants, which would be the cutoff level. SENATOR TAYLOR asked MS. KNUTH if she thought it had to be a dried product, and she quote some statutory authority consistent with the need from an evidentiary stand point. After some discussion, SENATOR DONLEY proposed some provisions for total numbers of plants, along with some adjustment in total weight as a felony, taking into consideration the stalks. SENATOR TAYLOR asked MS. KNUTH to work with the committee and his aide, KEVIN, to amend the bill for a future hearing. SENATOR DONLEY admitted to having some constitutional qualms about the lower levels within a person's home and the privacy clause of the constitution. He thought there was a compelling state interest in regulating the substance, which goes beyond the constitutional right to privacy. SENATOR TAYLOR expressed concern that persons may have in their homes a substance which we cannot purchase, transport, receive by gift, or sale and can only appear on his dining room table by immaculate reception. SENATOR TAYLOR thanked all who worked on the legislation, asked for additional ideas, and promised copies of a proposed committee substitute to the LIO in Ketchikan. TAPE 94-15, SIDE B Number 001 SENATOR TAYLOR introduced his bill, SB 223 (TAX CREDIT: GIFTS TO PUBLIC BROADCASTING) to committee and explained it was "An Act relating to credits against certain taxes for contributions to certain public educational radio and television networks and stations; and providing for an effective date." He said the bill was really intended to provide for Alaska Public Radio and television an opportunity to get off of the State general fund, but he admitted the process could lose some general funds. He didn't think the State would lose quite the amount as suggested by the Department of Revenue, who indicates the fiscal note on this bill is $122,250,000. There was some raillery about the funding of other educational facilities. SENATOR TAYLOR called on ROB RAWLS in Anchorage, to testify. MR. RAWLS said SB 223 provides a challenge to public broadcasters in Alaska to see how effective they can be in attracting new businesses to become involved in underwriting the cost of programming, and getting current contributors to increase their contributions to public broadcasting with private funds. He thought it would mean less demand on the capital budget. MR. RAWLS explained SB 223 has the potential to bring substantial new federal dollars to Alaska through a new CBB funding formula negotiated last year in Washington, D.C. with the support of SENATOR TED STEVENS. MR. RAWLS said as of October 1, 1994 stations which are Native licensed, located in rural areas, are eligible for a higher level of federal matching dollars to fund public broadcasting stations. He said it was an important new flow of federal funds to rural Alaska, and he claimed Bethel and Barrow will now receive over $25 in federal matching funds for every $100 they can raise themselves. MR. RAWLS explained the Alaska Public Radio Network is facing difficult times as well, and for the first time the membership is looking at cutting back programs such as Alaska News Nightly, or eliminating the morning news. He said this bill would be a valuable tool for the network to attract new underwriters, which would be necessary to continue to offer news and information to Alaskans. SENATOR TAYLOR questioned the qualifications as an Native community entitled to the 25%. MR. RAWLS explained CBB established the qualifications as having more than 50% Native Alaskans on their Board of Directors, 50% Native Americans in their audience, and the other criteria would be 50% Native Americans on the staff. He said it is an important piece of legislation for rural Alaska radio stations. Number 045 SENATOR TAYLOR asked if the station had to qualify on all three criteria. MR. RAWLS explained there was another requirement for rural stations if it is a sole signal providing the only public broadcasting, the station can also qualify for increased match for the dollars raised. After some discussion among the members, SENATOR TAYLOR asked if the station had to meet all of the criteria, and MR. RAWLS said that meeting the 50% of board members, automatically qualified the station, but he thought the station had to meet two out of the three if they didn't have the 50% board members. SENATOR TAYLOR thought his area could meet those qualifications. SENATOR DONLEY explained the persons currently giving the amounts would also qualify for the 50% tax credit, and he didn't think this met the goal of getting more money for public broadcasting. He thought it only reduced income to the state treasury, and he contended there should be a threshold beyond which a present corporation contributes, in order for them to receive the credit, as an incentive for people to give more. SENATOR TAYLOR and SENATOR DONLEY said there was a need to reach for new money, and SENATOR DONLEY said this formula as in current statute, does not encourage new money. In another complaint, SENATOR DONLEY expressed a concern as to where the process would end, and he explained he had opposed it for the universities. He listed both universities and public radio as being worthy recipients, but he also thought domestic shelters and other non-profits as being equally deserving and perhaps more important than public broadcasting. He used the proliferation of gaming in Alaska as an argument for his point that others will want to be included in the formula of tax and credits. Number 105 SENATOR TAYLOR said he would prefer to spend his income taxes on his own preferences, which resulted in some raillery on the subject. SENATOR LITTLE moved to pass SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 223 (TAX CREDIT: GIFTS TO PUBLIC BROADCASTING) from committee. SENATOR DONLEY objected as being consistently opposed to credits. SENATOR TAYLOR called for a vote to move SB 223 from committee. The roll was taken with the following results: SENATORS TAYLOR, JACKO, and LITTLE voted "yea," and SENATOR DONLEY voted "nay." SENATOR TAYLOR stated the motion carried and SB 223 was passed from committee. SENATOR TAYLOR introduced SB 256 (INCREASE AVIATION FUEL TAX) sponsored by the Senate Transportation Committee at the request of the Department of Transportation, and invited SENATOR BERT SHARP to review the bill. SENATOR SHARP noted the committee would be considering CS for SENATE BILL NO. 256(TRA). SENATOR SHARP reviewed some of the history of supporting rural airports through landing fees. Last session, air carriers were contacted and asked if they would prefer reinstatement of the landing fees or collection of an equivalent amount of revenue through another means. While no firm commitment was made, the general feeling expressed was that an increase in the aviation fuel tax to collect an equivalent amount of revenue would be preferable, since collecting landing fees was expensive and not always successful. SENATOR SHARP said the bill would increase aviation and turbine fuel tax in the amount of $.007/gallon, which would generate $1.6 million which would be needed to support the airports. SENATOR LITTLE clarified the amount of the tax, and SENATOR SHARP assured the committee it was not a tax increase. SENATOR TAYLOR invited HELVI SANDVIC, Deputy Commissioner for the Department of Transportation, to testify. Number 153 MS. SANDVIC praised SENATOR SHARP for presenting the issue, and she explained that DOTPF undertook an effort several years ago to help off set the costs of maintenance and operation of their airports. He said an analysis of the airports supported by the general fund and determined the airports receiving certificated air service were most costly due to the mandated federal requirements. The decision at that time, she explained was to go forth with landing fees applied to aircraft of 6,000 pound or greater, which are the type of aircraft that require the additional presence of state forces to respond in the event of a crash or with law enforcement response security. MS. SANDVIC said there was significant opposition to any increase in fees and several alternatives were suggested including the landing fees, with an increase in fuel tax being the other. It was decided to go forth with the landing fees; it was challenged in court, and was ruled against them because they had not followed the Administrative Procedures Act for implementing the landing fee that was no longer valid. MS. SANDVIC said the preference, as stated by the air carriers, was to apply a fuel tax increase was the most equitable means of sharing the cost of maintaining the airports among all aviation users, and she claimed the proposed fuel tax would result in the same amount of revenue that would have been coming into the State had the landing fee proposal gone forward. SENATOR LITTLE asked MS. SANDVIC about the consideration from the people in rural areas about the idea of the fuel tax, and she suggested there were problems in collecting the landing fees. She asked if the people in rural areas approved of the solution. MS. SANDVIC explained initially there was opposition to landing fees and difficult to collect, there was a feeling it was equitable. She described the objection came from the larger carriers who felt everyone benefitted from the airport, but it was felt that not everyone was contributing their fair share; whereas, the tax would properly reflect usage because it wold be adjusted according to the level of fuel used. Number 196 SENATOR TAYLOR suggested MS. SANDVIC meant to use "gasoline use fee." He called on GARY MOORE, Planning Director for the Tanana Chief's Conference, who testified OFFNET from Fairbanks. MR. MOORE asked if there was just an increase aviation tax or did it include motor fuel included in water craft, which is $.05 per gallon. Is it just aviation tax? SENATOR TAYLOR directed MR. MOORE'S attention to the bill to the language in darker print as the only changes being made, and explaining the rest of the bill is existing language in law. He reiterated the only changes were to aviation fuels. MR. MOORE described the aviation fuel tax increase as impacted on the villages in his region and he reviewed the Interior regions which are accessible only by air or river, where any increase in aviation fuel would be passed on to the customers. In checking the prices of gasoline, MR. MOORE found the current cost of gasoline in that region is $2.35 per gallon; aviation fuel is $4.18 per gallon; gasoline in Galena is $2.50 per gallon, and aviation fuel is $3.50 a gallon, and in Fort Yukon the price of gas is $2.55 and aviation fuel is $2.88 per gallon. MR. MOORE thought it was a substantial amount of money to pay for fuel in the rural areas that are more depressed than the urban areas in Alaska. He expressed concerns the tax would be passed on to the rural residents, and although he understands DOT's role in maintenance, he could not support the bill. Number 240 SENATOR TAYLOR assured MR. MOORE this was not a price increase on the existing price of gasoline, but only on the amount of the flow. He gave an example of an airplane burning 20 gallons an hour, making an increase of $.14 per hour's flying time. MR. MOORE asked if there would be a corresponding increase in the fares to the rural areas, and SENATOR TAYLOR explained the $.14 would be divided among the fares of the passengers. MS. SANDVIC responded in describing the public hearing process where the air carriers testified the fuel tax was preferable, since it spreads the burden out amongst more carriers than otherwise. SENATOR SHARP pointed to Section 6 as a blackmail clause to prevent double dipping, and SENATOR TAYLOR referred Section 6 to MR. MOORE which presents the Department of Transportation from charging landing fees until January 1, 2000. MR. MOORE said most of his questions had been answered. SENATOR LITTLE questioned SENATOR TAYLOR'S use of "kerosine burners," and he explained they were jets, which were very inefficient. Number 289 SENATOR LITTLE asked MS. SANDVIC for a review of the fiscal note, and she quoted the revenue as $1,725.7 million and would cost approximately $20.4 thousand to administer. SENATOR JACKO asked what assurance would there be the $1,725.7 million would be spent on maintenance of rural airports. MS. SANDVIC said it would not pay for the entire cost of maintenance of the airports, and she suggested several ways of dealing with the problem by dedicated funds or a constitutional amendment. SENATOR DONLEY declared he was not supporting any new taxes until the operating budget was under control, and he blamed the administration for not proposing reductions in the operating budget. His only exception was alcohol and tobacco taxes. Second, SENATOR DONLEY didn't think this was a fair tax, and he blamed the Department of Transportation for not following the Administrative Procedures Act for implementing the landing fees regulations. He said he was voting against the bill. SENATOR JACKO moved to pass CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 256(TRA) (INCREASE AVIATION FUEL TAX) from committee. SENATOR DONLEY objected. SENATOR TAYLOR called for a vote on SENATOR JACKO's move to pass CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 256(TRA) (INCREASE AVIATION FUEL TAX) from committee. The roll was taken with the following results: SENATORS TAYLOR, JACKO, and LITTLE voted "yes," and SENATOR DONLEY voted "nay." SENATOR TAYLOR stated the bill was moved from committee. There being no further business to come before the committee, the meeting was adjourned at 2:55 p.m. by SENATOR TAYLOR. -