Legislature(2025 - 2026)GRUENBERG 120
03/13/2025 03:15 PM House STATE AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB2 | |
| HB89 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 89 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 2 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 2-DUI DIVERSION PROGRAM
3:18:38 PM
CHAIR CARRICK announced that the first order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 2, "An Act establishing the driving while
under the influence diversion program for eligible persons
charged with driving while under the influence or refusal to
submit to a chemical test; relating to judgment for restitution;
relating to suspended imposition of sentence; relating to
records kept by the Department of Administration; relating to
operating a vehicle, aircraft, or watercraft while under the
influence of an alcoholic beverage, inhalant, or controlled
substance; relating to refusal to submit to a chemical test;
amending Rule 9, Alaska Rules of Administration, and Rule 39,
Alaska Rules of Criminal Procedure; and providing for an
effective date."
3:18:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE PRAX, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor, presented HB 2. He remarked that Alaska DUI laws
discourage people from driving while intoxicated; only about
one-fourth of those with a driving under the influence (DUI)
charge are repeat offenders. Those with DUIs suffer hardships
including the higher insurance rates, loss of employment or
unemployability, and family strife that often drive individuals
into financial stress and increased reliance on state provided
services. He explained that HB 2 would offer offenders the
opportunity to have the judgement on their case deferred until
they complete a program designed to make them aware of the
consequences of drinking and driving, while helping them to
recover from any substance abuse issues they may be facing.
Under the provisions of the bill, if offenders complete the
program, then the charges would be dismissed and the individual
would avoid the mandatory 72-hour jail time, the $1,500 fine,
the cost of SR22 insurance, and the possibility of losing their
driver's license for several months. A further incentive for
offenders to avoid drinking and driving is that this legal
benefit would not apply if they were picked up again for a DUI
in the succeeding 15 years. Representative Prax noted that this
[diversion program] is described in Section 1 off HB 2, which
begins on page 12, line 18.
3:22:31 PM
BILL SATTERBERG began invited testimony on HB 2 by sharing that
his daughter was picked up for a DUI in Oregon, and that state
has the DUI diversion program. He noted his time working as an
attorney, with the majority of his cases helping those who have
been charged with a DUI. He noted that he also worked on an
ambulance and witnessed the effects of drunk driving, including
fatalities. He specified that those driving under the influence
have made a mistake for which they should be held accountable
but they also should be given a chance. He noted that a number
of states have enacted this legislation and it is working. He
said the offender must make the decision within 30 days whether
to go through the program. When an individual with a DUI
chooses to enter the program, the work of the court system and
attorneys is substantially diminished. He recommended making
the penalty for repeat offenders stiffer. He acknowledged that
the bill needs some work, and he made suggestions regarding an
individual with a weapon in the vehicle and those with pending
DUIs. He said the key to this [program] is that the individual
would have to make the decision early, agree to plead guilty,
and upon meeting the terms and conditions, the guilty plea would
be set aside, which means no spike in insurance rates or serious
impact that takes place with a DUI conviction.
3:27:38 PM
MR. SATTERBERG, in response to Representative Holland, reported
that about 80-85 percent of DUI convictions are first-time
offenders.
3:28:48 PM
NANCY MEAD, General Council, Office of the Administrative
Director, Alaska Court System, discussed DUI statistics
pertaining to Alaska. She reported one year's statistics
showing that there were 1,563 first-time DUI offenders and about
300 re-offenders, which is approximately 20 percent.
3:29:37 PM
MS. MEAD, in response to Representative Story, discussed the
time period of DUIs going through the court system. Cases in
which a person is found to have a blood alcohol content of .08
or above are "relatively fast" because the evidence is well
established; she found out from a judge in Juneau that a case
can be finished in 60 or fewer days. However, there is no
definitive test for a drug DUI, and those cases may take a year.
She said 10-25 percent of DUI cases are drug related, typically
methamphetamine or fentanyl. In response to follow-up questions
from Representative Story, she said she doesn't know the average
pace for prosecuting in other states. She noted that places on
the road system will have more DUI cases. She said
municipalities, including Anchorage and Juneau, have their own
individual ordinances for DUIs. The previous statistics she
shared were based on statewide statistics.
3:34:03 PM
MS. MEAD, in response to a question from Representative McCabe
regarding the indeterminate fiscal note, said that she thinks
the bill does not provide a clear picture of what should happen
during the year. She said there would be litigation regarding
who can be in the program. She said there are concerns with the
bill as drafted that lead her to state that it would increase
the court's workload.
3:35:23 PM
MS. MEAD, in response to a question from Representative
Himschoot regarding the bill's effect on the time spent on
cases, said that the proposed legislation is not clear on that.
She pointed out that statute exists wherein by "a suspended
entry of judgement" a person can plead guilty [to a DUI] and
promise to behave for a year while on probation, get an
assessment, and abstain from committing any more crimes, and at
the end of that, the case is dismissed. She said this statute
is a time saver. She said HB 2 is not modeled on that statute,
and it is not clear what the program would entail and how long
it would take to administer it. She noted the bill sponsor has
been responsive to her comments recommending ways to clarify the
legislation. To a follow-up question regarding the possibility
of someone being able to participate in the proposed program if
they could not afford it, she confirmed that a judge could waive
the fee for an indigent person. She said this is an unusual
number to include, as the court usually does not charge a fee
for criminal defendants, although they would pay for their
treatment, if able.
3:38:57 PM
MR. SADDERBERG, in response to Representative Vance, said that
DUIs have a huge impact on families and can result in the loss
of employment. He respectfully disagreed with [Ms. Mead]
regarding the time these cases take, stating that they go on
longer than six months, sometimes taking over a year, and part
of that is that they are backed up. He commented on the success
rate of wellness court, which addresses felonies. He offered
further details. He confirmed that HB 2 would offer a program
that is an earlier intervention compared to someone who would
need to take part in wellness court.
3:43:06 PM
MR. SADDERBERG, in response to Representative Moore, said the
intention is to create a program based on successful programs in
other states. He added that the committee may hear that the
Office of the District Attorney ("DA's office") has the
discretion to "do deferred prosecution," to which he remarked,
"The answer is 'yes' but the reality is they don't."
3:43:55 PM
MS. MEAD, in response to Representative Story, said the
suspended entry of judgement is, arguably, unavailable for state
DUI cases because the DUI statute states that a person cannot
get a suspended imposition of sentence, which is similar and
interpreted as not being available for a DUI case. She said
that is under Alaska's DUI law. She explained, "I brought up
the suspended entry of judgement because it's a similar law
that's available for assaults or thefts and things like that,
that ... might be a similar model to what's in this statute."
She advised that the City of Juneau does use suspended entry of
judgement for its DUIs, and the prosecutor determines whether
someone is a first-time offender with no previous criminal
record and was not charged with other crimes in the case, along
with other factors, and people are diverted through this
suspended entry of judgement successfully for the city. She
highlighted that it is not available for state DUI crimes.
3:45:50 PM
CHAIR CARRICK announced that HB 2 was held over.