Legislature(2019 - 2020)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/24/2019 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY
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 | |
| SB52 | |
| SB80 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 34 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 52 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 80 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
April 24, 2019
1:32 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Shelley Hughes, Chair
Senator Lora Reinbold, Vice Chair
Senator Mike Shower
Senator Peter Micciche
Senator Jesse Kiehl
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Mike Shower
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 52
"An Act relating to alcoholic beverages; relating to the
regulation of manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers of
alcoholic beverages; relating to licenses, endorsements, and
permits involving alcoholic beverages; relating to common
carrier approval to transport or deliver alcoholic beverages;
relating to the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board; relating to
offenses involving alcoholic beverages; amending Rule 17(h),
Alaska Rules of Minor Offense Procedure; and providing for an
effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 80
"An Act relating to proposing and enacting laws by initiative."
- MOVED SB 80 OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 34
"An Act relating to probation; relating to a program allowing
probationers to earn credits for complying with the conditions
of probation; relating to early termination of probation;
relating to parole; relating to a program allowing parolees to
earn credits for complying with the conditions of parole;
relating to early termination of parole; relating to eligibility
for discretionary parole; relating to good time; and providing
for an effective date."
- BILL HEARING CANCELED
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 52
SHORT TITLE: ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL; ALCOHOL REG
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) MICCICHE
02/11/19 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/11/19 (S) L&C, JUD, FIN
03/26/19 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/26/19 (S) Heard & Held
03/26/19 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/28/19 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/28/19 (S) Heard & Held
03/28/19 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
04/02/19 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/02/19 (S) Heard & Held
04/02/19 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
04/04/19 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/04/19 (S) -- MEETING CANCELED --
04/09/19 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/09/19 (S) Heard & Held
04/09/19 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
04/11/19 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/11/19 (S) Heard & Held
04/11/19 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
04/16/19 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/16/19 (S) Moved CSSB 52(L&C) Out of Committee
04/16/19 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
04/17/19 (S) L&C RPT CS FORTHCOMING 4DP
04/17/19 (S) DP: REINBOLD, COSTELLO, BIRCH, BISHOP
04/17/19 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/17/19 (S) -- MEETING CANCELED --
04/17/19 (S) JUD AT 6:00 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/17/19 (S) -- MEETING CANCELED --
04/19/19 (S) L&C CS RECEIVED SAME TITLE
04/22/19 (S) JUD AT 6:00 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/22/19 (S) Heard & Held
04/22/19 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
04/23/19 (S) JUD AT 6:00 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/23/19 (S) Heard & Held
04/23/19 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
04/24/19 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: SB 80
SHORT TITLE: INITIATIVE SEVERABILITY
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) BIRCH
03/06/19 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/06/19 (S) STA, JUD
04/11/19 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/11/19 (S) Moved SB 80 Out of Committee
04/11/19 (S) MINUTE(STA)
04/12/19 (S) STA RPT 2DP 1DNP 2NR
04/12/19 (S) NR: SHOWER, REINBOLD
04/12/19 (S) DP: MICCICHE, COGHILL
04/12/19 (S) DNP: KAWASAKI
04/23/19 (S) JUD AT 6:00 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/23/19 (S) Heard & Held
04/23/19 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
04/24/19 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
WITNESS REGISTER
BEVERLY SCHOONOVER, Acting Director
Alaska Advisory Board on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse
Alaska Mental Health Board
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 52 to modernize
the language and limit youth access to alcohol.
LEE ELLIS, President
Brewers Guild of Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 52.
JAN HILL, Member
Title 4 Review Steering Committee
Haines, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 52.
LOGAN DANIELS, Volunteer
Healthy Voices Healthy Choices
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 52 to modernize
the language and limit youth access to alcohol.
KATI CAPOZZI, President and CEO
Alaska State Chamber of Commerce
Eagle River, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 80.
LAURA BONNER, representing herself
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 80.
BETHANY MARCUM, Executive Director
Alaska Policy Forum
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 80.
SENATOR CHRIS BIRCH
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as sponsor during the hearing on
SB 80.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:32:57 PM
CHAIR SHELLEY HUGHES called the Senate Judiciary Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:32 p.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Kiehl, Micciche, Reinbold, and Chair Hughes.
SB 52-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL; ALCOHOL REG
1:33:19 PM
CHAIR HUGHES announced that the first order of business would be
SENATE BILL NO. 52, "An Act relating to alcoholic beverages;
relating to the regulation of manufacturers, wholesalers, and
retailers of alcoholic beverages; relating to licenses,
endorsements, and permits involving alcoholic beverages;
relating to common carrier approval to transport or deliver
alcoholic beverages; relating to the Alcoholic Beverage Control
Board; relating to offenses involving alcoholic beverages;
amending Rule 17(h), Alaska Rules of Minor Offense Procedure;
and providing for an effective date."
CHAIR HUGHES made opening remarks.
1:33:54 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE said he looks forward to hearing from the
public.
1:34:16 PM
CHAIR HUGHES opened public testimony on SB 52.
1:34:32 PM
BEVERLY SCHOONOVER, Acting Director, Alaska Advisory Board on
Alcoholism and Drug Abuse, Alaska Mental Health Board,
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS), Juneau, stated
that the agencies she oversees are statutorily charged with
planning and coordinating behavioral health services funded by
the state. The boards are in support of SB 52, which provides a
much-needed update to the Title 4 provisions and includes
prevention measures to reduce underage drinking. She said that
the agencies have made progress to reduce underage drinking.
According to the annual youth risk behavioral survey (YRBS) over
the last 25 years there have been declines in the percentage of
youth starting drinking before 13 years of age. However, the
department knows that underage drinking, including binge
drinking occurs in Alaska. In 2017, nearly 15 percent of the
students surveyed in the YRBS reported binge drinking in the
past 30 days. She related that is four or more drinks in a row
for females and five or more drinks in a row for males. Underage
drinking, especially binge drinking is harmful to adolescent
brain development. The department does not want Alaska's
teenagers engaging in other risky behaviors while under the
influence of alcohol. The department believes the preventative
measures outlined in SB 52 will reduce underage drinking in
Alaska for the following reasons. SB 52 would hold adults who
supply alcohol to youth accountable by maintaining current
penalties for furnishing alcohol to a minor, especially if it
causes the youth harm or is a repeat offense, both of which are
felonies under the bill. This bill also provides much needed
resources for enforcement of Title 4 by increasing license fees,
many of which have not been increased in decades, which has
continued to limit the ABC Board's ability to do its job. This
includes ensuring that businesses do not sell or serve alcohol
to minors. She thanked Senator Micciche for sponsoring this bill
for his steadfast leadership to the large group of diverse
contributors who have worked hard to find solutions through
compromise and move these changes forward for the last seven
years.
1:36:29 PM
LEE ELLIS, President, Brewers Guild of Alaska, Anchorage, stated
support for SB 52. He said that over the multi-year process of
developing the compromises in this bill, the bill is fair. It is
not considered a gift to the Brewers Guild of Alaska, but it is
fair to every stakeholder in the process. He said that his group
would like to honor that process by supporting this bill. He
further wanted to support the efforts by Senator Micciche and
others who have been involved in the process. He said that the
bill will benefit the industry by cleaning up the regulations
that affect it. He said brewery startups often must hire an
attorney to sort through the regulatory process to open a
business. Manufacturers have been a bright spot in the economy
in the last few years in Alaska. Anything that would make it
easier to assist entrepreneurs will benefit the industry. The
bill will still maintain regulation on the tap room and the
three-tier system that is critical for wholesalers,
manufacturers, and retailers. This has been the best work by all
these groups, which is the reason the guild supports it.
1:38:17 PM
JAN HILL, Member, Title 4 Review Steering Committee, Haines,
stated that she was a member of the Title 4 review steering
committee and has been involved throughout the process. She has
served as cochair of the local option subcommittee with Chris
Simon, formerly of the Alaska Department of Education and Early
Development. She emphasized that Title 4 very much needs to be
modernized and SB 52 is a huge step forward. She related the
subcommittee talked extensively about the impacts of alcohol on
dry and damp communities, alcohol-related crimes, and the need
to improve Title 4 in order to increase enforcement. While much
work still needs to be done with local option laws, SB 52 makes
some important changes. One of these is to give rural
communities access to existing data about legal alcohol sales
and deliveries, so law enforcement can understand the flow of
alcohol into rural Alaska. Another change is regulating Internet
sales to ensure that a person in a dry community is not using
this loophole to get around the monthly order limits in existing
laws. She stated her support for SB 52. She urged members to
pass the bill this year.
1:39:58 PM
LOGAN DANIELS, Healthy Voices Healthy Choices, Anchorage, said
that a friend's brother was killed by a 16-year-old drunk driver
in the Lower 48. He said that anything that can be done to
modernize the regulations and limit youth access to alcohol will
be a step in the right direction.
1:41:25 PM
CHAIR HUGHES, after first determining no one wished to testify,
closed public testimony on SB 52.
[SB 52 was held in committee.]
SB 80-INITIATIVE SEVERABILITY
1:41:41 PM
CHAIR HUGHES announced that the final order of business would be
SENATE BILL NO. 80, "An Act relating to proposing and enacting
laws by initiative."
1:42:07 PM
CHAIR HUGHES opened public testimony on SB 80.
1:42:29 PM
KATI CAPOZZI, President and CEO, Alaska State Chamber of
Commerce, Eagle River said that her nonprofit organization was
founded in 1953 to promote a positive business environment in
Alaska. The Alaska State Chamber of Commerce (State Chamber]
represents hundreds of businesses, manufacturers, and local
chambers of commerce across the state. These companies employ
more than 100,000 hard-working Alaskans, she said. The State
Chamber believes that SB 80 is necessary to maintain the
integrity of the signature-gathering process for a ballot
measure.
She explained that once voters sign their names to specific
ballot measure language, their support should be applied only to
the exact language to which they lent their names. If any court
or courts decide to alter or remove language from the
initiative, it cannot be assumed that the voters' support
remains. If a court severs language from a proposed ballot
measure, it should be mandatory that initiative proponents
support the revised language that actually appears on the
ballot.
MS. CAPOZZI said the State Chamber supports SB 80 because it
will correct a deficiency that has been overlooked in the ballot
initiative process. Further, the organization also believes that
this bill will result in fewer protracted legal battles once
ballot-measure proponents understand that if any section of the
initiative does not pass constitutional muster, the proponents
would be required to revert to the signature gathering stage of
the process. Passage of SB 80 should result in more carefully-
crafted-ballot measures at the outset, she said. This would
result in a smoother, more predictable process for all parties,
whether the parties support or oppose the ballot measure in
question.
1:44:22 PM
LAURA BONNER, representing herself, Anchorage, said that she is
a 47-year retiree who strongly opposes SB 80. She offered her
belief that this bill would usurp the peoples' power in the
initiative process. Gathering the number of signatures in all 40
districts to place an initiative on the ballot takes
considerable time, effort, and expense. If SB 80 were to pass,
if even one word was changed, added, or deleted that process
would need to start over. She has signed numerous petitions over
the years, sometimes just because she wanted to see the issue
come before the voters, she said. She said she has seen
legislators support a proposed bill [in committee] but vote
against it on the floor because the bill was amended, or the
legislator obtained more information on the bill. It is the
floor vote that matters in the legislature; likewise, it is a
person's vote during the election that matters in terms of an
initiative. She expressed concern that SB 80 would stifle
Alaskans' constitutional rights. Although she is not an
attorney, she has concerns about potential constitutional issues
related to this bill.
1:46:31 PM
BETHANY MARCUM, Executive Director, Alaska Policy Forum,
Anchorage, said that Alaska is fortunate to have a
constitutionally enshrined ballot initiative process. Not all
states trust their citizens to participate directly in the
legislative process. Most Alaskans would agree this is an
important right. In order for the initiative process to continue
to have value for future generations of Alaskans, it is
imperative that the integrity of the process is ensured.
Currently, a loophole created by past Alaska Supreme Court
decisions allow the courts to tamper with the initiative
language. She related that when the courts remove
unconstitutional provisions, the end result is that the language
voters see on their ballots may be different than the language
in the petition booklet that voters signed. This is what
happened last year with Ballot Initiative 1, she said. She
characterized it as an injustice to voters. Further, the
legislature can be stripped of its role to act as a
counterbalance in the process. The legislature has the right to
pass legislation that is substantially the same as proposed
initiatives, thus removing those initiatives from the ballot.
When courts change the language, the legislature loses its
ability to provide oversight on the process. She urged members
to consider [SB] 80 to rectify this situation.
1:48:40 PM
CHAIR HUGHES after first determining no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on SB 80.
1:48:48 PM
SENATOR KIEHL referred to a memo with legal analysis from the
Division of Legislative Legal Services, [Legal Services,
Legislative Affairs Agency memo of 4/23/19 from Alpheus Bullard,
Legislative Counsel] as to the constitutionality of SB 80. The
memo cited the rule of construction, in Latin [expression unius
est exclusio alterius" or "the expression of one thing is the
exclusion of another".] In essence, the legal counsel
interpreted that the Constitution of the State of Alaska
provides some limits and strictures on the peoples' ability to
exercise the legislative power directly, but having those limits
and rules in place means that the legislature does not get to do
other limits and rules on the peoples' power, at least not
through statutes. He related a scenario he had with a
constituent who was interested in obtaining a presidential
candidate's tax returns. The Legislative Legal Research answer
was the same, that the U.S. Constitution has a set of
qualifications and the state does not get to add more
qualifications, which is the same principle, he said. He said he
would not hold up the bill today, but he does have concerns.
CHAIR HUGHES said she also reviewed the memo. She asked the
record to reflect her comments, that the restrictions in Article
XI, Section 7, of the Constitution of the State of Alaska, and
read, "The initiative shall not be used to dedicate revenues,
make or repeal appropriations, create courts, define the
jurisdiction of courts or prescribe their rules, or enact local
or special legislation.". She said she realizes that those are
restrictions on content and not process.
She referred to the "Law-Making Power" in Article XII" of the
Constitution of the State of Alaska, and read, "As used in this
constitution, the terms 'by law' and 'by the legislature,' or
variations of these terms, are used interchangeably when related
to law-making powers. Unless clearly inapplicable, the law-
making powers assigned to the legislature may be exercised by
the people through the initiative, subject to the limitations of
Article XI."
CHAIR HUGHES asked whether this would create an imbalance
between the initiative and what the people can do. She said that
when the legislature passes a law, and the governor signs it, it
can be appealed in court. The courts can find some sections in a
bill could be found unconstitutional and pulled out, but the
rest of the bill stands. Thus, the legislature's process has
severability. She asserted that SB 80 does not remove that
ability because if an initiative were to pass and become law, 90
days after passage, if challenged, the court could remove parts
that it deems unconstitutional, so the rest of the initiative
would stand. She concluded that these "law-making powers" as
being very balanced. This refers to severability in the process,
she said.
She commented that one benefit is that the people putting forth
initiatives will work harder to create accurate language during
the drafting of initiatives. This would reduce time and effort
spent by the Lieutenant Governor's office and by the Alaska
Court System, she said. She acknowledged that the analogy of the
balance and law-making power is not a perfect analogy. However,
people are signing petitions based on the language that they
believe will be on the ballot. If it is rewritten it could be
likened to her duties, if she were to cosponsor a bill and vote
in favor of it, but the bill is rewritten before the governor
signs it. At that point her name is on a final bill that she
voted for, yet it contains language she does not support.
CHAIR HUGHES characterized [SB 80] as being about the process,
that the severability still stands for the initiative process
after it becomes law. The courts could determine a part of it is
not constitutional, but the rest would stand. She acknowledged
that the Division of Legislative Legal [Services, Legislative
Affairs Agency] does a good job, but she thinks that the
restrictions in the Constitution of the State of Alaska are
content related and that the severability still holds for the
initiative process after it becomes law.
1:55:37 PM
SENATOR CHRIS BIRCH, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau agreed
with the Chair's comments. He said that fundamentally it comes
down to truth in advertising. He said that SB 80 would restore a
check in the "checks and balances" of the constitutional
framers' vision of the initiative process. The intent of the
voters at the signature phase should matter, he said. When
signing the petition, these voters are not giving their support
to a general concept for legislation. The courts should not be
empowered to divine the intent of those who support an
initiative to guess what degree of changes would be permissible.
The legislature has an obligation and right by the Constitution
of the State of Alaska to stop an initiative by enacting
similarly situated legislation. If the courts revise initiatives
after the legislative review process, they deny the legislature
its right to review a revised initiative. He said he would
appreciate the committee's support.
1:57:09 PM
SENATOR REINBOLD moved to report SB 80, work order 31-LS0185\U,
Version U, from committee with individual recommendations and
attached fiscal note(s).
CHAIR HUGHES found no objection. Therefore, SB 80 was reported
from the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee.
1:57:34 PM
At-ease.
1:59:58 PM
CHAIR HUGHES reconvened the meeting and reviewed upcoming
committee announcements.
2:00:24 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Hughes adjourned the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting at 2:00 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Memorandum from Legal Services 4/23/2019.pdf |
SJUD 4/24/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 80 |