04/07/1997 08:19 AM House CRA

 HB 212 - LOCAL OPTION BOUNDARIES FOR VILLAGES                               
                                                                               
 Number 570                                                                    
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN IVAN indicated that the committee would next consider HB
, "An Act relating to determination of an established village              
 for purposes of regulating the sale, use, and possession of                   
 alcoholic beverages in the unorganized borough; and providing for             
 an effective date."                                                           
                                                                               
 Number 609                                                                    
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE GENE KUBINA came forward to testify on HB 212 as               
 sponsor of this legislation.  He stated that villages have a local            
 option law where they are allowed to opt out of selling alcohol in            
 their communities.  A vote is taken to do so.  A five mile radius             
 from the center of the village is mapped out and this area would be           
 the area opted out of.  No alcohol would be allowed in this radius.           
 He understood that there were three different levels involved as to           
 whether alcohol would not be sold or whether to have no alcohol               
 whatsoever.                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA continued that a problem came up in the                 
 village of Gulkana which is on the road system.  Previously, all of           
 the villages that have opted out have not been on the road system.            
 This five mile radius did not touch any other places.  When they              
 voted to opt out, the five mile radius touched a number of other              
 places like Gakona Junction and restaurants that are already                  
 established, etc.  The village did not intend to take these other             
 entities in.  The way the law is written, the Alcoholic Beverage              
 Control Board's (ABC) hands are tied.  Also, people outside the               
 village of Gulkana and inside the five mile radius didn't have a              
 vote on the issue either.  Only the people inside the village did.            
                                                                               
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA stated that the ABC Board needs more leeway             
 to make some common sense decisions on where these boundaries are.            
 In paragraph (c), there is language which allows the board to                 
 adjust this five mile radius, especially in situations where there            
 is a road system.  This gives the board more flexibility.  He                 
 believed this was supported by the villages of Gulkana and Gakona.            
 There has been some discussion about Copper Center voting to go               
 dry.  This would also have complications because of the road                  
 system.  He continued that this legislation gave the board a common           
 sense approach to draw these lines as necessary.                              
                                                                               
 Number 780                                                                    
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE RYAN asked if the purpose of a village is to go dry            
 and avoid the related problems of alcohol use, what happens in the            
 case of a nearby community which does provide alcohol.  He used               
 Fort Yukon as an example.                                                     
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA noted that when they talk about communities             
 on the road system five miles doesn't mean that much.  With this              
 five mile radius someone could go down the road seven miles to                
 Glennallen to another liquor store.  This policy does work well out           
 in the bush.  This keeps someone from setting up an establishment             
 to sell alcohol right outside a village, but this same concept                
 doesn't work on a community connected to a road system.                       
                                                                               
 Number 889                                                                    
                                                                               
 ALAN LEMASTER testified via teleconference from Gakona on HB 212.             
 He applauded this legislation and said it was needed.  Otherwise              
 nothing would be accomplished.  He noted that if the five mile                
 radius provision stood in the legislation, then everyone within the           
 five mile radius should have the opportunity to vote.  He stated              
 that he held a license in this area and said he has seen no                   
 increase in sales since it's gone into effect.  In Gakona, there              
 have been 20 to 22 people who have died in the last few years due             
 to alcohol related incidents.  He said this is a sad thing to see.            
 Assuming this bill was passed, he asked Representative Kubina if              
 another vote would be taken in Gakona since the people within the             
 five mile radius didn't get to vote.                                          
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA stated he wasn't sure about this and he                 
 hasn't asked the ABC Board.  He emphasized that the people in                 
 Gakona and the Copper Valley area are very supportive of the                  
 village and their objectives.  This in no way would try to hinder             
 them from those purposes.                                                     
                                                                               
 Number 1057                                                                   
                                                                               
 LINDA O'BANNON, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law,                
 testified via teleconference from Anchorage on HB 212.  She pointed           
 out that the five mile perimeter only affects sales of alcohol.               
 Possession and importation are limited to the actual village                  
 boundary.  The perimeter concept is not defined currently in                  
 statute but in regulation.  The boundaries were drawn in this                 
 particular election in Gulkana and Gakona such that Gakona was                
 excluded from the five mile radius.  The current licensees are                
 still able to hold onto their licenses.  The board will adopt the             
 boundaries suggested by staff so she didn't think there was a need            
 for another election in this situation since it doesn't affect the            
 current licensees.  If this legislation was to pass, along with               
 it's resulting statute, this would override the regulation.  The              
 perimeter definition would be changed by statute.  The board is               
 considering an amendment to the regulation.                                   
                                                                               
 Number 1219                                                                   
                                                                               
 JUDY SHELTON testified via teleconference from Gakona on HB 212.              
 She stated she was in favor of this legislation, but she was                  
 disappointed in the way this whole issue came about.  She thought             
 that a little forethought could avoid added expense.  She noted               
 that she doesn't drink, but she thought that everyone involved with           
 regulation and statute have the right to vote.                                
 Number 1321                                                                   
                                                                               
 DOUG GRIFFIN, Director, Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, testified           
 via teleconference from Anchorage on HB 212.  The board hasn't                
 taken a formal position, but have had discussions in principal on             
 HB 212.  He said he was sure the board would be supportive of this            
 effort given the problems with the Gakona situation.  The local               
 option provisions, as they exist currently, were probably drawn up            
 to deal with villages that are not on the road system.  These                 
 villages are more compact which has meant that the local option               
 provisions have worked fairly well.  Alaska is entering a new era             
 where communities on the road systems are approving local options.            
 This presents a whole host of challenges in terms of enforcement.             
                                                                               
 MR. GRIFFIN added that there were some concerns about how someone             
 would apply the technic provided for in statute, to do so fairly              
 and reasonably.  HB 212 is designed to try and correct this by                
 giving the ABC Board more flexibility in how votes are structured.            
 He mentioned that the ABC Board is just part of a collaborative               
 effort in this whole issue.  If there's an unincorporated area in             
 an unorganized borough of the Division of Elections, discussions              
 take place between this division and the Department of Community              
 and Regional Affairs.  If this were to pass, he saw this type of              
 collaboration continuing in order to make sure that an area would             
 qualify before they get into the election process, along with some            
 of these other issues.  This legislation gives the board                      
 flexibility to look at each situation on a case by case basis,                
 apply some general goals and then use common sense.                           
                                                                               
 Number 1492                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN IVAN asked about the current regulations controlling the             
 local option law and wondered if the elections regarding the same             
 are held within the boundaries of the five mile radius.                       
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA responded that he believed this was how they            
 did it in this last election.                                                 
                                                                               
 Number 1552                                                                   
                                                                               
 MR. GRIFFIN noted that the Division of Elections looked at just the           
 village for purposes of voting in the local option election and not           
 the five mile perimeter around the village.                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA added that the area affected was greater than           
 the village for purposes of sale, manufacturing and personal use of           
 alcohol.  There was a larger area of people who were not allowed to           
 vote.                                                                         
                                                                               
 Number 1588                                                                   
                                                                               
 MS. O'BANNON offered that the Division of Election is required on             
 these local option elections to have pre-clearance by the U.S.                
 Department of Justice.  There are always issues of not diluting the           
 vote.  In general, they believe that everyone should get to vote              
 who would be affected by the ban on importation or possession                 
 particularly.  They limited the eligible voters of this election to           
 the boundaries of the village of Gakona.                                      
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA added that those people who did not get to              
 vote within the radius feel like they were disenfranchised.  In               
 fact, it seems they would have an argument to challenge this                  
 election because they did not get to vote.  With this statute, it             
 makes it easier for a village to deal with this themselves because            
 it won't automatically take in such a large area.  This means they            
 can take care of their own issues themselves without the                      
 surrounding areas needing to concur.                                          
                                                                               
 Number 1703                                                                   
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON moved and asked unanimous consent to move HB
 out of committee with individual recommendations and                      
 accompanying zero fiscal note.  Hearing no objection, HB 212 was              
 moved out of the House Community and Regional Affairs Committee.