Legislature(2023 - 2024)BARNES 124
05/07/2024 08:00 AM House COMMUNITY & REGIONAL 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 | |
| HB398 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 174 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 398 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
HB 398-CONTROLLED SUBS: DAY CARE/SHELTER/REHAB
9:04:15 AM
CHAIR MCCORMICK announced that the only order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 398, "An Act relating to controlled
substances."
9:04:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG JOHNSON, Alaska State Legislature, on
behalf of the House Rules Standing Committee, sponsor by
request, explained that HB 398 would extend the distance for
drug-free zones surrounding certain public areas.
9:05:47 AM
ISSAC SCHLOSSER, Staff, Representative Craig Johnson, Alaska
State Legislature, answered questions related to Amendments
associated with HB 398
9:06:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE said he would not be offering Amendment 1.
He moved to adopt Amendment 2 to HB 398, labeled 33-LS1553\A.2,
C. Radford, 4/28/24, which read:
Page 1, line 15, following the second occurrence of
"a":
Insert "drug or alcohol"
Page 2, line 16, following "or":
Insert "drug or alcohol"
Page 3, line 7, following the second occurrence of
"a":
Insert "drug or alcohol"
Page 4, line 5, following "or":
Insert "drug or alcohol"
Page 4, line 23, following "each":
Insert "drug or alcohol"
CHAIR MCCORMICK objected.
9:06:45 AM
MR. SCHLOSSER explained Amendment 2. He said that Amendment 2
would specify in statute the difference between a "plan"
treatment center and a drug/alcohol treatment center.
CHAIR MCCORMICK removed his objection. There being no further
objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
9:07:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE moved to adopt Amendment 3 to HB 398,
labeled 33-LS1553\A.3, C. Radford, 5/3/24, which read:
Page 4, following line 7:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 5. AS 11.71.900 is amended by adding a new
paragraph to read:
(33) "shelter for the homeless" does not
include a shelter that primarily offers services to
victims of domestic violence."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 4, line 22, following "zone";":
Insert "in this paragraph, "shelter for the
homeless" does not include a shelter that primarily
offers services to victims of domestic violence;"
CHAIR MCCORMICK objected.
9:07:27 AM
MR. SCHLOSSER explained Amendment 3. He said that Amendment 3
would clarify in the bill that domestic violence shelters are
not included in the statutory definition for homeless shelters.
CHAIR MCCORMICK removed his objection. There being no further
objection, Amendment 3 was adopted.
9:08:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 4
to HB 398, labeled 33-LS1553\A.4, C. Radford, 5/6/24, which
read:
Page 4, line 13:
Delete the second occurrence of "school"
Insert "[SCHOOL]"
Page 4, line 17:
Delete "recreation and youth center"
Insert "[RECREATION AND YOUTH CENTER]"
Page 4, line 20:
Delete "day care"
Page 4, line 22:
Delete "homeless shelter"
Page 4, line 24:
Delete "treatment and rehabilitation center"
Page 4, line 28, following "APPLICABILITY.":
Insert "(a)"
Page 4, following line 31:
Insert a new subsection to read:
"(b) AS 28.01.010(d), as amended by sec. 5 of
this Act, applies to signs erected on or after the
effective date of this Act."
CHAIR MCCORMICK objected.
9:08:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT explained that the proposed conceptual
amendment would change the specifications on the signage for
drug-free zones to ensure that one standard sign could be used.
She added that the proposed conceptual amendment would allow
existing signs to remain.
9:10:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MEARS commented that Conceptual Amendment 4 would
absolve some of her concerns surrounding cost and logistics.
REPRESENTATIVE C. JOHNSON added that Conceptual Amendment 4 was
a friendly amendment.
9:10:52 AM
CHAIR MCCORMICK removed his objection. There being no further
objection, Conceptual Amendment 4 to Amendment was adopted.
9:11:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 5
to HB 398, labeled 33-LS1553\A.5, C. Radford, 5/6/24, which
read:
Page 4, following line 25:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 6. AS 28.01.010 is amended by adding a new
subsection to read:
(k) At the request of a municipality, the
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
shall provide the municipality with a sign required
under (d) of this section. The Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities may not require a
municipality to pay for a sign provided under this
subsection."
Renumber the following bill section accordingly.
CHAIR MCCORMICK objected for the purpose of discussion.
9:11:06 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT explained that Conceptual Amendment 5
would allow municipalities and boroughs to go to the Alaska
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) for
signage needs.
9:11:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE C. JOHNSON said the amendment would add a fiscal
cost to the bill and encouraged a "no" vote from committee
members.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked whether Conceptual Amendment 4 would
mitigate any cost raised by Conceptual Amendment 5.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT explained that she did not know whether
Conceptual Amendment 4 would lower any cost associated with
Conceptual Amendment 5 and said she hoped that it would not
generate a fiscal note.
9:13:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked about the potential fiscal impact of
Conceptual Amendment 5.
REPRESENTATIVE C. JOHNSON explained that the first drug-free
zone sign would be the most expensive and each subsequent sign
would be less and less expensive. He emphasized the overall cost
of the signs by pointing out that it could cost more to ship the
signs in the first place than to expedite the fabrication of
signs.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked who originally paid for the signs.
REPRESENTATIVE C. JOHNSON shared his understanding that the
associated municipality would have paid for them.
9:15:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MEARS suggested that the state could create an
unfunded mandate if no one was to pay for the signs and
expressed her concern that more signs would create one more
barrier of entry to places for people in crisis or people in
need.
REPRESENTATIVE C. JOHNSON added that the hope is for a cost of
less than $10,000.
9:16:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked whether a daycare center could pay
for a sign on municipal property.
REPRESENTATIVE C. JOHNSON said it would be the responsibility of
the municipality to pay for any signs on its own property.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT said she was trying to put the
responsibility of the initial cost of the sign on DOT&PF as a
means to take any burden off of the associated the municipality.
CHAIR MCCORMICK maintained his objection.
9:18:58 AM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Himschoot and Mears
voted in favor of Amendment 5. Representatives McKay, Baker,
Ruffridge, McCabe, and McCormick voted against it. Therefore,
Amendment 5 failed by a vote of 2-5.
9:19:59 AM
CHAIR MCCORMICK opened public testimony. After ascertaining
that no one wished to testify, he closed public testimony.
9:20:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked whether businesses or service
providers associated with drug-free zones would be allowed to
apply for grants to pay for signs on their property.
REPRESENTATIVE C. JOHNSON gave his understanding that the signs
would likely be too cheap to pay for with a grant.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE commented that he was envisioning a
community-driven initiative to acquire signage for businesses
and service providers across the state.
9:22:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked whether HB 398's definition of
daycare centers would include home daycares.
MR. SCHLOSSER said there is no definition of daycare in statute
so what a daycare center is defined as would be up to
interpretation.
9:23:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE moved to report HB 398, as amended out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes. There being no objection. CSHB 398(CRA) was
reported from the House Community and Regional Affairs Standing
Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 398 Sectional Analysis 4.25.24.pdf |
HCRA 5/7/2024 8:00:00 AM |
HB 398 |
| HB 398 Sponsor Statement 4.25.24.pdf |
HCRA 5/7/2024 8:00:00 AM |
HB 398 |
| HB 398 Supporting Document #2 4.25.24.pdf |
HCRA 5/7/2024 8:00:00 AM |
HB 398 |
| HB 398 Supporting Document #1 4.25.24.pdf |
HCRA 5/7/2024 8:00:00 AM |
HB 398 |
| HB0398A.pdf |
HCRA 5/7/2024 8:00:00 AM |
HB 398 |
| HB398 Amendment #2 5.6.24.pdf |
HCRA 5/7/2024 8:00:00 AM |
HB 398 |
| HB398 Amendment #3 5.6.24.pdf |
HCRA 5/7/2024 8:00:00 AM |
HB 398 |
| Hb398 Amendment #4 5.7.24.pdf |
HCRA 5/7/2024 8:00:00 AM |
HB 398 |