Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/08/1999 01:20 PM House JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 151 - REVOCATION OF MINOR DRIVER'S LICENSE
CHAIRMAN KOTT announced that the next order of business is HB 151,
"An Act relating to revocation and reinstatement of the driver's
license of a person at least 14 but not yet 21 years of age."
Number 1108
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute, Version LS0492\N, Ford, 3/30/99, as the working draft
before the committee. There being no objection, it was so ordered.
CHAIRMAN KOTT, Sponsor of HB 151, Alaska State Legislature,
informed the committee that HB 151 was introduced in response to
the "Use It, Lose It" legislation which passed four or five years
ago. The "Use It, Lose It" legislation would take the license of
an underage person caught with the possession of alcohol. Chairman
Kott believed that the "Use It, Lose It" legislation has had some
unintended consequences. He noted that work on HB 151 has been
done in conjunction with the Department of Public Safety as well as
the Department of Law. Chairman Kott pointed out that Version N
eliminates all references to the youth court.
CORY WINCHELL, Administrative Assistant for Representative Kott,
Alaska State Legislature, stated that often the "Use It, Lose It"
law incurs unintended results. He explained that the desire is to
amend the law by requiring consumption of alcohol as a requisite
for revoking a license. Currently, there is a probable cause
standard which a police officer must find before the revocation of
a license. He commented that requiring consumption arose from the
inequities that occur with possession. Furthermore, the probable
cause standard is a very low finding. Mr. Winchell pointed out
that this legislation would remove "consecutive" penalties and run
them concurrently. Some teens have accumulated multiple offenses
which result in many years of license revocation. Running the
penalties concurrently, allows those teens to mend their ways and
have their license returned pursuant to good behavior. This
legislation removes youth courts, therefore, administrative hearers
were authorized to re-issue licenses upon a showing of the
following: compliance with the statute and compliance with the
title or department regulation. He pointed out that the license
would allow the offender to attend school, care for a dependent
child, or earn a livelihood without creating a danger to the
public.
CHAIRMAN KOTT specified that the legislation eliminates the
possession.
MR. WINCHELL interjected that this legislation does not negate the
criminal liability of teens that possess alcohol. Upon a probable
cause standard, possession is not the mere requisite for the
revocation of a license under this legislation. He pointed out
that if an underage person is caught with alcohol, the underage
teen can be charged. Mr. Winchell informed the committee, "It was
within the purview, that there be about 2,500 revocations per year.
That number has jumped to over 4,500 a year."
Number 1485
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI inquired as to why the youth court
provisions were deleted.
MR. WINCHELL noted that he had spoken with the youth court. The
youth court did not want the liability that could be associated
with requiring these hearings and reissuing licenses to youth that
may end up in accidents. Although the original youth court
language was permissive, the concern resulted in the deletion of
the youth court.
JUANITA HENSLEY, Administrator, Division of Motor Vehicles,
Department of Administration, noted that she and Ms. Carpeneti have
worked on this issue a great deal. Ms. Hensley passed out a graph
produced by the Department of Health & Social Services from the
statistical information provided by Ms. Hensley. When the law
first passed in 1994, it was estimated that 2,500 licenses would be
revoked. It was not anticipated that through 1995-1998, the number
would rise to 4,800 arrests. In the calendar year of 1995, there
were 2,891 revocations.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT inquired as to whether these statistics refer
to when the violation occurred or when the revocation of the
license occurred.
MS. HENSLEY pointed out that a minor consuming is a violation, that
was decriminalized at the time of the "Use It, Lose It" law. The
numbers on the first page indicate the numbers of incidents
referred to the DMV in order to revoke the drivers license. Ms.
Hensley clarified that the numbers strictly deal with the
incidents. The last page deals with the number of revoked licenses
during those calendar years. The information provided indicates
the first offense, the second offenders, and the third and
subsequent defenders. She clarified that the difference between
the numbers of revoked licenses is due to some incidents being
found that the officer did not have probable cause or the
individual was under appeal. She pointed out that less than 25
percent of the individuals request an administrative hearing.
Number 1718
MS. HENSLEY pointed out the struggle with requiring chronic
violators to seek treatment. She requested guidance in that area.
Ms. Hensley referred to information from the 1994-1998 Fatality
Analysis Reporting System, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration and the Alaska Highway Safety Planning Agency which
reports that there were a total of 13 crashes with a driver under
the age of 21 in 1994. Of those 13 crashes, six were alcohol
related. Those 13 crashes resulted in 17 fatalities of all ages
and nine alcohol related deaths. In 1998, there were a total of 16
crashes which resulted in 19 fatalities of all ages, but there was
only one alcohol related crash. Ms. Hensley said that in some
instances, the "Use It, Lose It" law has helped.
MR. HENSLEY explained that for a first offense revocation is 90
days, the second offense results in revocation for one year, and
the third and subsequent offenses result in an additional three
year license revocation. The revocations are currently run
consecutively. There are some teens who will not receive their
drivers license until the age of 30 or 50. Currently, there is no
mechanism in the law which would allow review of those records
after a certain time period. Ms. Hensley believed that the sponsor
has addressed this issue and developed criteria that if met, would
return the license to the teen.
MS. HENSLEY informed the committee that there are approximately
450,000 licensed drivers in Alaska of which 10 percent are picked
up for drunk driving. Of that, 6.9 percent of the licensed drivers
are ages 16 to 20 of which 10 percent of those individuals are
being picked up for drunk driving under the "Use It, Lose It" law.
Currently, there are approximately 9,400 "Use It, Lose It"
revocations for second and subsequent offenders. Of those 9,400 or
so, a little more than 700 have drunk driving convictions on their
record. She mentioned that she would provide the committee with
information regarding those revoked licenses for the "Use It, Lose
It" law for their second and subsequent offenses.
Number 2008
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if these statistics attribute the
second offense to driving without a license or because there is
another offense under the "Use It, Lose It" law?
MS. HENSLEY clarified that these statistics refer to the second and
subsequent offense for minors consuming. There is nothing included
in the statistics regarding an additional charge of driving while
a license is revoked. She noted that some of these individuals may
have an identification card, not a drivers license. She specified
that what is being revoked is the privilege to obtain a license.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG believed a huge number of offenders of
driving without a license would be created; are there statistics
regarding the number of minors charged with driving while license
revoked and no valid drivers license.
MS. HENSLEY said that she could provide that information.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG stated that the original bill created
criminals out of offenders.
MS. HENSLEY discussed some examples of those minors with multiple
offenses which she believed should be reviewed to determine if
those individuals could be helped. She reiterated that there is no
mechanism other than screening with regards to whether the minor
should attend a program.
Number 2124
CHAIRMAN KOTT inquired as to whether Ms. Hensley had any statistics
regarding whether those minors with multiple offenses were actually
using alcohol or were in the vicinity of an entire group that was
picked up.
MS. HENSLEY did not have such breakdowns, but did note that she
knew that at least one of the minors with multiple offenses was
using alcohol.
CHAIRMAN KOTT submitted that there are many infractions in which
minors were guilty by association.
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA asked if there was any requirement for
alcohol screening at all for these offenses.
MS. HENSLEY stated that alcohol screening only occurs at the time
the minor's license is reinstated. Before the minor can receive
his/her drivers license, the minor must be enrolled in, compliant
with and complete an alcoholism rehabilitation program. Ms.
Hensley pointed out that there is no monitoring of the minor to
ensure the alcoholism rehabilitation program because the program
does not go through the Alcohol Safety Action Program (ASAP).
ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division,
Department of Law, informed the committee that minor consuming used
to be a class A misdemeanor in Alaska. Those minors charged with
consuming went to superior court and appeared before a judge who
would order whatever necessary for that minor with regards to
rehabilitation and evaluation. At the time the "Use It, Lose It"
law was adopted, minor consuming was reduced to a violation which
means that a minor in violation of such receives what is similar to
a traffic ticket, goes to district court, and pays a minimum fine
of $100. Ms. Carpeneti believed that the rationale for reducing
minor consuming from a class A misdemeanor to a violation was that
the "Use It, Lose It" law would address the tragedy of alcohol
abuse among young people in Alaska by focusing on an area important
to a teen, a drivers license. Under the "Use It, Lose It" law, a
minor must be evaluated and complete whatever the evaluator
suggests in order to have the license returned. Perhaps, those are
not appropriate and minors in violation should go before a superior
court judge who can order treatment.
MS. CARPENETI agreed that the "Use It, Lose It" could use some work
in areas addressed by HB 151. The Department of Motor Vehicles
does need discretion with minors who have multiple offenses. Ms.
Carpeneti supported the provisions in HB 151 which provides the
Department of Administration and DMV that discretion; however, she
expressed concern with the elimination of the possession of
alcohol. She informed the committee that the police do not cite
minors who are not drinking. The definition in Title 11 which
specifies that the alcohol must be under the minor's immediate
control or in their actual possession is used. Currently, the
violation for minor consuming includes consuming or possessing
alcohol. If the "Use It, Lose It" law is limited to consuming, the
program will be gutted. When minor consuming prohibited consuming
only, a case could not be proven unless the police officer saw the
minor actually drinking. Ms. Carpeneti emphasized that removing
possession hurts the effort to protect minors from the effects of
alcoholism.
TAPE 99-25, SIDE B
Number 0001
MS. HENSLEY noted that currently, minor consuming is a violation in
which the police officer would write a citation to the minor and
order license revocation. The minor is given a copy of the
citation which is used as a temporary drivers license for seven
days, if the minor has had a driving permit. Within seven days,
the hearing must be requested. Ms. Carpeneti informed the
committee that she has heard many complaints regarding why the
license can be revoked if the case was dismissed. These are
officer prosecutions and therefore, the officer cannot always be
present in court which results is dismissal of the ticket.
Number 0051
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT inquired as to how many minors were age 18 to
21 and how many were under the age of 18. Although that would not
make a legal difference, it would seem to make a practical
difference.
MS. HENSLEY informed the committee that in 1994, the law was in
effect only six months, through the first three months of 1998,
there were 2,753 revocations of minors 16 and under. During that
same time, there were 1,274 revocations of minors age 20 and 1,955
revocations of minors age 18. Ms. Hensely said that she would
provide the committee with this information in graph by tomorrow.
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI commented that the "Use It, Lose It" law
is not making an impression on minors, if there are minors with
multiple offenses. Representative Murkowski did not believe that
HB 151 would help because there is not an opportunity for
administrative review. The chronic repeat offenders are not being
addressed. Is there an opportunity with HB 151 to address those
chronic repeat offenders?
MS. HENSLEY deferred to Loren Jones, Director, Division of Drug &
Alcohol Abuse, Department of Health & Social Services who deals
with this on a daily basis and is responsible for all the screening
programs. One of the bills passed last year gave the Division of
Drug & Alcohol Abuse the authority for screening alcohol programs;
however, that was not funded.
Number 0218
LINDA WRIGHT, Good Legislation Assures Democracy (GLAD),testified
via teleconference from Kenai. Ms. Wright indicated that the
changes encompassed in HB 151 do help bring the "Use It, Lose It"
law into constitutional compliance, but not all the problems are
addressed. Ms. Wright stated that GLAD is a unified group which
loves its children, fears for their safety, and is concerned for
the constitutional protection of their children. Ms. Wright said
that GLAD does not condone under age drinking, but the current "Use
It, Lose It" law has become a roadblock to responsible behavior and
endangers children's development to responsible adulthood as well
as the child's safety.
MS. WRIGHT said that her concern for her son's behavior was
overshadowed by the loss and abuse of her son's constitutional
protection. Ms. Wright discussed the designated driver program
which she believed had the rug pulled out from under it by the "Use
It, Lose It" law. In response to Chairman Kott, Ms. Wright
informed the committee that her son was subject to the "Use It,
Lose It" law.
DAVID HUDSON, Alaska State Troopers, testified via teleconference
from Anchorage. He stated that Ms. Carpeneti had already spoken to
his primary concern which is the elimination of possession of
alcoholic beverages as a reason for license revocation. This sends
a mixed message to minors and law enforcement officers. He said,
"Clearly, under Alaska Statute 416.050 which has be decriminalized
... now a violation based upon the use of the "Use It, Lose It"
law, it will create conflicts in the administration of that
particular law. We would hope that might be given some
consideration."
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if Mr. Hudson was suggesting that
minor possession is no longer a misdemeanor.
MR. HUDSON said that is correct; minor possession has been
decriminalized to be a violation. The purpose of that
decriminalization was to allow the "Use It, Lose It" law to
eliminate the criminal prosecution for a minor consuming. In
response to Chairman Kott, Mr. Hudson noted that he had not
personally cited any minor under the "Use It, Lose It" law.
However, Homer police officers and other troopers have cited minors
under the "Use It, Lose It" law.
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI inquired as to whether an 18 year old with
beer in the back seat of a car would be cited with the "Use It,
Lose It"law.
MR. HUDSON replied no. He informed the committee that he had
attended numerous youth parties in the Homer area and there were
large amounts of alcoholic beverages. Only those minors which it
could be determined had consumed alcoholic beverages were cited.
He added that he had responded to the Vice President of Students
Against Drunk Driving who was concerned that the designated driver
program would be hurt due to the possibility of the driver losing
his/her drivers license. Mr. Hudson did not understand how that
could occur.
Number 0540
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if the statute mandates that the
designated driver be cited or does the officer has discretion.
MR. HUDSON explained that if the designated driver has not consumed
any alcoholic beverage or does not have control or possession of an
alcoholic beverage, that designated driver should not be cited.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked what would be happen if there was a
six pack of beer in the back seat.
MR. HUDSON stated that it would depend upon the circumstances.
There could be circumstances in which the open container law could
come into play. Mr. Hudson believed that the idea in law
enforcement and society as a whole is to curb alcoholic beverage
use by youth.
CHAIRMAN KOTT inquired as to whether a designated driver with a six
pack of unopened beer in front of their seat would be interpreted
as the designated driver being considered in control or possession
of the beer.
MR. HUDSON said in that case, the designated driver would be
considered to be in control for the purposes of the law, however
there is officer discretion.
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT asked what the culpability of the driver would
be when there is an open container in the car regardless of if the
driver is a juvenile or an adult.
MR. HUDSON believed that having an open container, whether the
individual is driving or not, is a violation and would be treated
the same whether an adult or a juvenile. He acknowledged that
there are some mitigating circumstances.
CHAIRMAN KOTT announced that HB 151 would be held over to tomorrow.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG commented that he has received more
complaints regarding the "Use It, Lose It" law than any other bill
passed in past years. Representative Rokeberg said that he
supported this legislation. He discussed some instances in which
the "Use It, Lose It" law created problems.
The committee stood at-ease from 4:02 p.m. to 4:03 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|