Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/09/1999 01:05 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 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."
CHAIRMAN KOTT indicated the committee will take up the committee
substitute for HB 151 [1-LS0492\N, Ford, 3/30/99].
Number 1815
CHAIRMAN KOTT called for a brief at-east at 2:41 p.m. and called
the meeting back to order at 2:44 p.m.
Number 1844
LOREN JONES, Director, Central Office, Division of Alcoholism and
Drug Abuse, Department of Health and Social Services, came before
the committee to testify. There is a significant number of
children who continue to use and lose their driver's licenses.
Generally, when looking at a deterrent, there is a perception of
getting caught with a penalty that is swiftly applied. He's not
sure, however, that works with children because they feel they are
fairly omnipotent. Last year, the Administration sponsored SB 71
which transferred the approval of alcohol information schools from
the Division of Motor Vehicles [Department of Administration] to
the Division of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse [Department of Health and
Social Services]. The division felt that would allow it to develop
alcohol information that was age-appropriate. Right now, the only
thing available to a 16-year-old who looses his driver's license is
a school primarily for adult drunk drivers. That is not an
appropriate place for a 16-year-old to learn about the use of
alcohol and drugs or intervention. The division also proposed
funding local assessments to allow each community to work with
their courts, school systems, youth programs and prevention
programs to better intervene in that community. But, it costs
money. He noted about four years ago, Representative Porter
chaired a House task force on alcohol and one of his
recommendations was to increase the license reinstatement fee from
$100 to $250. That has passed, but for only a second offense.
Last year, the department proposed an increase for a first offense.
The revenues would have paid for a lot of the services proposed.
He further noted that HB 11 has passed, a graduated driver's
license. That bill took the principles of SB 77, but it didn't
include a fiscal note. As a result, the division now has the
responsibility for alcohol information schools without the
commensurate staff. The license reinstatement fee didn't pass, so
there is no revenue to fund local communities in order to make this
effort on their own. The division would propose looking at how to
generate services in communities to appropriately intervene the
first time; to make the penalties more meaningful to youth, based
on what a community believes is best for their children, along with
any school penalty; and, to allow the division to get seed money
out to them. The legal mechanisms are in place, in law, but there
isn't the funding even for the current "Use It, Lose It" law to
work better and to reduce the number of children committing second
and third offenses. Last year, some kids testified that they knew
of the law, but they believed that they would never get caught,
that they didn't think about it when they used it, and that it
didn't cross their minds on a Saturday night. They know about it,
but they never think about losing their driver's license. It's
more of an adult model; the kids don't see the penalty as being as
bad as adults do.
MR. JONES further said, in relation to the issue of designated
drivers, that while a person can drive at 16 years of age he or she
is not a very skilled driver. The last thing that he wanted was
his sober 16 year old with a car full of drunks. That is not a
very good position for an unskilled driver.
TAPE 99-27, SIDE A
Number 0001
MR. JONES continued. He would appreciate a state trooper stopping
and checking out situations like that than for his child to take
that kind of risk.
Number 0060
CHAIRMAN KOTT said, as a parent, the last thing he every wanted was
his daughter or son to crawl into a car with five drunks,
especially if they were also drunk. As a parent, he would rather
have his sober daughter in a car with five drunk girlfriends than
have her read in a newspaper the next day that here friends were
killed because she didn't take the lead as a sober person and drive
them home.
Number 0126
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI said she has always felt that the
designated driver message is wonderful for adults, but it is
confusing for minors. She asked Mr. Jones whether he has given any
thought on taking the provisions of the "Use It, Lose It" law and
instead of revoking a driver's license requiring community work
service.
Number 0231
MR. JONES replied the communities approach that in different ways.
In small communities, such as Kotzebue, the superior court judge
handles the cases. In real small communities, the magistrate
handles them. The judge makes the intervention and typically holds
in-advance the charge until the child has completed certain aspects
of what is available in the community. In large communities, such
as Anchorage, where there are lots of judges and magistrates that
is not always possible. Often times, the district court judges
will give the kid a card of a local program, such as Volunteers of
America or Alaskans For a Drug Free Youth that might have something
to offer. In Juneau, there is a network and the district court
judge and police let the programs know which kids have been picked
up and which have been in court. The programs actively outreach to
the parents. He reiterated there are various community approaches.
They aren't consistent and there aren't any standards established.
Some operate on a shoestring budget. The division would like to
help coalesce those ideas and put together information, so that
all of the communities would be aware of how to work with the
district court judges, local police departments, and local DMV
[Division of Motor Vehicles] offices to identify these kids and
intervene early. Part of the age-appropriate education would
include some type of community work service. And, for those kids
that don't get the message the first couple of times, there would
be more of an assessment including counseling issues and long-term
treatment. There are some good models out there. The division
thinks that it could offer some funding and structure to
communities in order to help them get to more of the kids and to be
more effective.
Number 0458
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked Mr. Jones to clarify the distinction
between the larger and smaller communities.
MR. JONES replied in Kotzebue there is a single judge that hears
all the cases. That judge has taken it upon himself to make sure
that some community intervention is done with all the kids. In
Anchorage, on the other hand where there are eight to ten district
judges and two to three magistrates there isn't consistency. There
are a lot of other agencies involved as well: state troopers,
police departments, and others for example. It takes more of a
systematic approach of getting all those involved to buy into a
system. It could work in Anchorage; it would just take more of an
effort to make sure all involved are on board.
Number 0542
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA asked Mr. Jones what would it cost to fund
an alcohol school for juveniles.
MR. JONES replied, according to the fiscal note last year, it would
cost $100,000 for the division to manage the renewal for quality
assurance and policy, and $500,000 for grants to local communities
on a competitive process. Changing the reinstatement fees would
have raised over $1 million, and the division was proposing to use
about one-half of that money.
Number 0615
[THE RECORD REFLECTS THAT RONALD JORDAN'S TESTIMONY WAS
INTERMITTENTLY AUDIBLE]
RONALD JORDAN testified via teleconference from Anchorage. He
believes that there should be an breath alcohol test required when
there is a presumption of consumption of alcohol. There seems to
be an issue of accusing those who haven't consumed any alcohol.
For example, some officers can't tell the difference between
O'Douls and Budweiser without a blood alcohol test. In addition,
he has heard that people are losing their driver's licenses for a
.003 alcohol level, which is basically one to two tablespoons of
Robitussen. Those issues could be addressed by using a breath
alcohol test. He noted for a prescribed dose of Robitussen, a
person shows up as a .003 to .005 alcohol level, but if a person
drank the bottle it shows up at .123, which is a level of
intoxication in Alaska. These issues need to be addressed and
corrected.
Number 0941
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked Mr. Jordan whether there is alcohol
in some root beer.
MR. JORDAN replied Henry Weinhard's root beer contains a one-half
of one percent alcohol level. In conducting a study of airline
passengers drinking O'Douls, Budweiser and root beer, three root
beers showed in one hour a .005 alcohol level; and three
Budweiser's showed in one hour a .076 alcohol level. According to
the state, any alcohol is a violation.
Number 1022
KEVIN HYDE, President, Good Legislation Assures Democracy
(G.L.A.D.), testified via teleconference from Kenai. He noted
G.L.A.D. was formed out of concern on AS 28.15.183, which HB 151
addresses. He is a father and is very concerned about drug and
alcohol use. However, there is a recent appeals court ruling that
determined AS 28.15.183 was unconstitutional because driver's
licenses were being removed for non-driving offenses. In addition,
there is a justice system in place that is intended to help with
the administration and enforcement of laws, but the administrative
process through the DMV is adding a double jeopardy type of
situation. The young are being subject to criminal procedures and
often being sent off as not guilty or having their cases dismissed
then having to go to a DMV hearing to be found guilty with a
revocation imposed. It is a legal situation, but it is wrong. The
40 members participating in G.L.A.D. have heard that kids are
losing their driver's license, but not taking it very seriously.
They figure that they won't get caught again or go ahead and drive
without a license. He originally had assumed that taking a
driver's license made sense, but it is not working. The testimony
yesterday [April 8, 1999] indicated that the kids are not taking it
seriously. They are being forced to obey a law that maybe they
don't understand. They don't understand when a judge finds them
innocent, but another person says that they can't have their
license. It puts a level of doubt on the justice system. He
reiterated he doesn't want kids drinking alcohol or using drugs.
He would like to see it recriminalized so that a judge is put in
charge of the situation.
Number 1309
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI asked Mr. Hyde what he thinks would be an
effective deterrent. Has G.L.A.D. had a chance to talk to kids
affected by this, and does it have any suggestions on what to do to
encourage kids who are underage not to use alcohol?
Number 1368
MR. HYDE replied yes G.L.A.D. has had that opportunity. Some
suggestions were community service, treatment and evaluation
specific to youths, addressing needs, speaking to them on their
level, and taking away their time. For example, his kid who is
part of a cool gang would not think it is cool to wear a bright
orange suit and pick up cans. The process is such that most kids
talk to a judge via the telephone which doesn't have the same
effect as going to court. Having to face that judge, would really
get their attention. He has heard kids describe the process as a
joke.
Number 1503
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI said it seems that the penalty is
invisible. Who sees a driver's license anyway and a person can
still drive as long as that person doesn't get caught. She likes
the suggestion of community service because of the importance of
image and free time being taken away compared to another revocation
that hasn't had an impact anyway.
Number 1565
MR. HYDE mentioned in quite a few bush community there aren't any
cars or a license is not required to drive.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked Juanita Hensley [Division of Motor Vehicles,
Department of Administration] whether a driver's license is needed
to drive a snowmobile or a 3-wheeler.
Number 1651
JUANITA HENSLEY, Administrator, Director's Office, Division of
Motor Vehicles, Department of Administration, replied yes. A
vehicle does not need to be registered, however, if the village or
community has fewer than 499 average cars per day on any particular
roadway.
CHAIRMAN KOTT said, based on Ms. Hensley's answer, then there
should be some impact in rural Alaska.
Number 1692
VIRGINIA ESPENSHADE, Executive Director, Kenai Peninsula Youth
Court, testified via teleconference from Kenai. She has practiced
law in Homer for the past 14 years. She is in support of parts of
the bill and in opposition to parts. She strongly supports any
legislative change that would provide young adults with a way to
earn their driver's licenses back, especially for the kids with
multiple convictions. We are setting up these young adults by
taking away any future for them. They are facing years without a
driver's license. If they can't get jobs, they can't provide for
their families. She is also in favor of using the youth courts as
judicial entities to hear these violations. In Homer, the youth
court hears minor consuming and possessing offenses and has already
adjudicated ten of them. It's an ongoing process and is being
developed as it goes. It is based on a community consensus of all
the parties involved. That understands that wouldn't work in every
community. She is concerned that the bill sets up the youth court
as an alternative administrative agency.
CHAIRMAN KOTT interjected and stated the current version of the
bill does not reference youth court.
MS. ESPENSHADE further stated that peer adjudication can be a big
part of the community response. The kids in Homer appear before
peers wearing black robes. The consequences include an essay and
community work service. She asked the committee members to
consider that when trying to fix this problem. It is up to the
legislature to fix it because it will take at least another year
for the courts to sort it out. The appeal that Mr. Jordan
referenced earlier was a two-two split, therefore, it doesn't
control any other court. The legal status of the statute is cloudy
at best. She applauded the committee members for looking at the
whole issue and asked them to look at individual communities having
input in order to solve their particular problems.
Number 1873
CHAIRMAN KOTT said he agrees that a two-two split is not binding,
but it is persuasive. He asked Ms. Espenshade to comment on a
letter dated March 10, 1999 from Linda Johnson [Legal Advisor,
Anchorage Youth Court] which indicates the youth courts do not have
the authority to act on any alcohol-related issue.
Number 1905
MR. ESPENSHADE replied, according to her understanding, Title 47
authorizes the Department of Health and Social Services to deal
with juvenile crime which excludes alcohol cases. But, according
to the (indisc.) version of Title 47, DFYS [Division of Family and
Youth Services] cannot refer alcohol cases to youth courts, but it
can refer misdemeanor cases to them, which is happening across the
state. The youth court in Homer is private and for non-profit. It
has entered into agreements with the police departments and
district attorneys, and is based on a public consensus. She agrees
that an amendment to Title 47 would make it much clearer, that it
is something the youth courts could do.
Number 1986
LINDA WRIGHT testified via teleconference from Kenai. She is
concerned about Section 6 of the bill. She wondered why there is
an age barrier at 20 because 17, 18 or 19 year olds may be in
school or have dependent children. In addition, the "more than one
year left" provision means to her that a person would have to have
at least two citations in order to be considered for reinstatement.
While she is glad to see the addition of school and dependent care
added, under these terms, a person with one citation who is 18
years old would not qualify.
Number 2075
CHAIRMAN KOTT said the application for reinstatement is filed at
least two years after the person's license, permit, or privilege
has been revoked. It was changed from one to two years.
Number 2085
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT indicated that the age limit has been taken
out as well.
CHAIRMAN KOTT stated those changes were a policy call made by this
committee.
MS. WRIGHT asked whether a person has to have more than two years
(indisc.--coughing) in order to qualify for a privilege of a
driver's license.
CHAIRMAN KOTT replied correct. He asked Ms. Hensley to answer the
question further.
Number 2115
MS. HENSLEY said, according to this version of the bill, Section 4
says an individual may apply for a limited license privilege. In
the case of her son who had his driver's license revoked for a
first offense, he would be able to apply for a limited license to
go to-and-from school, if he can show proof that he is in fact
attending school such as a class schedule. He wouldn't be able to
go anywhere else, however.
Number 2150
CHAIRMAN KOTT said the reinstatement for a temporary license was
increased from one to two years, so if a person had multiple
offenses he would have to do at least two years. Therefore, a
21-year-old could apply and not find himself with that much of a
penalty at all.
MS. WRIGHT asked whether this would allow a person to apply for a
provisional license to go to work.
Number 2188
MS. HENSLEY replied, providing the person meets the requirements
under the law and is eligible to drive, a person could get a
provisional license to drive. The DMV has taken a fairly liberal
approach when issuing limited licenses to youth drivers.
Number 2240
JACK HARSHFIELD testified via teleconference from Homer. He is 21
with a family and a fiance who is 19. They have both been affected
by this law. He had six minor consumptions and pled guilty to all
of them. He will not get his driver's license back until the year
2004. His fiance had three convictions of which two were thrown
out and she will not get her license back until next year. When a
person is 16, he thinks he knows everything and the world, but
people change. He now realizes those actions were really dumb, but
he is still getting fined for something that he did when he was a
kid. It is really hard because both he and his fiance don't have
a driver's license and they have a kid on the way. It is hard to
push a stroller around in the winter. In addition, many jobs
require a driver's license, and if a person can't get a job he
can't get money. As a result, some resort to petty theft. When he
was 16, he didn't care if he got caught again because he wasn't
going to get his license back for a long time anyway. Now, that he
has grown up, has a family and responsibilities, he wishes that he
wouldn't have drank when he was underage. He wishes that he could
change it, but he can't.
Number 2367
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked Mr. Harshfield to tell him the circumstances
behind his fiance's two convictions that were dismissed.
MR. HARSHFIELD replied two were dismissed in court by a judge, but
the DMV proceeded with them because she didn't read the fine print
requiring her to go back within seven days to file for an appeal.
She now has to file for a late appeal, but there is still no
guarantee that she will get her driver's license back.
Number 2415
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked Mr. Harshfield whether he is aware of any of
his friends that were also cited under the "Use It, Lose It" law
who had their driver's licenses revoked when they were not using
alcohol.
MR. HARSHFIELD replied there was a case down at the beach where two
people were cited who were not drinking because they were the
designated drivers. Their cases were dismissed in court. They
still had their driver's licenses revoked for 90 days, however.
Number 2452
REPRESENTATIVE CROFT asked Mr. Harshfield whether any of his
violations were related to using alcohol while driving a car.
TAPE 99-27, SIDE B
Number 001
MR. HARSHFIELD replied yes. He got a DWI (driving while
intoxicated) while driving a 3-wheeler.
Number 0033
MS. CARPENETI stated that there is another case before the supreme
court on the "Use It, Lose It" law. The record will be certified
this month and cited before a year. She noted that the court of
appeals has upheld the "Use It, Lose It" law as constitutional.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked Ms. Carpeneti to provide him a copy of the
court of appeals case.
Number 0064
CHAIRMAN KOTT announced that the bill will be held over for further
consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|