Legislature(1997 - 1998)
04/23/1997 08:04 AM House CRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 162 - BAN CRAFT BUYING ON LIQUOR PREMISES Number 521 KATTARYNA BENNETT, Researcher for Representative Irene Nicholia, came forward to testify on HB 162,"An Act relating to the sale or purchase of authentic Native handicrafts on certain licensed premises; and providing for an effective date." This bill would make it illegal to buy or sell authentic native handicrafts on premises which hold beverage dispensary licenses, in other words, bars. Bars are often used by native artists to sell their art to local patrons, community members, tourists, and sometimes the bar owner and their employees. This has been a problem particularly in rural Alaska and in northern communities where carvers or other native artisans under the influence of alcohol may be induced to sell their handicrafts at unreasonably low prices. MS. BENNETT continued that when people are drinking, their ability to make good decisions on their own behalf is seriously impaired. As a result, people are often persuaded to sell their wares for far less than fair market value. There are some who will deliberately take advantage of an intoxicated artist to obtain a valuable piece of native art work at an unjustly low cost. Addiction to drugs, including alcohol, does make people unprotected victims of their own irresponsible acts. Although these addictions are not fully understood by those of us who are not plagued by such diseases, it is important to understand that this type of activity puts enough money in the intoxicated person's pockets to allow them to continue abusing alcohol. In addition to supporting a person's continued alcohol abuse this activity is degrading to the cultural, traditional and aesthetic value of the art and the artist. MS. BENNETT summed up that they can't stop people from abusing alcohol, but they can however give these individuals the necessary tools to help them help themselves. This legislation will do that and more. The Institute of Native Arts, the Alaska State Council on the Arts and the Citizen's Advisory Board on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse support this bill. She urged the committee members to do the same. Number 649 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked that if this bill passes, how would an owner of a dispensary license purchase native origin art to decorate their establishment. MS. BENNETT responded that an individual such as this could purchase Native art work outside the realm of their establishment, off premises. Number 675 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked how this situation would be policed? MS. BENNETT noted that enforcement of a lot of existing laws is very difficult. For example, in downtown Anchorage, there are community patrols by bicycle police officers. In rural villages, there are the Village Public Safety Officers who could easily police this situation. Number 700 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked if this legislation provided a course of action for someone who has sold their Native handicrafts to a bar owner under prohibitive circumstances would they have recourse and can they go back afterwards and say, "you ripped me off and under the provisions of this bill I've got a course of action to haul you before a magistrate both for criminal action and to recover damages because you got me when I was snookered." MS. BENNETT responded that this bill does not address this, but in her own opinion this would probably not be covered because if the artisan were to make a complaint against a person who bought or sold a piece of art work, they could also be implicated. This legislation addresses both buyer and seller. Number 763 REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH agreed that this legislation would be a hard law to enforce; however, he wanted to state that it's not so much the buying or the agreement to buy that's going to solve the problem here, it's the reselling of those items by the person who holds the dispensary license. It will be hard for a person from a bar to try to sell those goods. He believed this is where the enforcement will come in. This legislation would help eliminate those individuals doing so and this will be beneficial for all of Alaskans. It's not a catch-all and it will probably not answer all of the questions out there but it's a step in the right direction. He thought they should take this step. REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked if a person could lose their license or have a sanction against it if they try to sell handiwork. He asked about a situation where someone else comes into a bar and the owner has no knowledge about a transaction between buyer and seller. Number 831 MS. BENNETT responded that under this legislation, it is only if an owner is directly involved in a transaction will they be held accountable. REPRESENTATIVE OGAN stated for the record that he's traveled extensively in the bush and he felt that this is a common practice for individuals to sell their art work in bars. He had concerns about policing these types of situations under these circumstances. Number 913 REPRESENTATIVE RYAN stated that he doesn't oppose this bill but what they're basically addressing is personal responsibility. "Many a country boy has come to town and got skinned." If passing this law is going to help this situation and people feel it will help, he doesn't object. On the other hand, they constantly preach that people have to be responsible for their actions. In this situation the responsibility shifts. REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS asked whether this legislation was aimed primarily at liquor establishment owners who take advantage of this situation or at a bar patron. Number 994 MR. BENNETT responded that it would be fair to say that this legislation isn't targeted at either party one way or another. This legislation is merely to prevent the buying or selling of Native handicrafts in liquor serving establishments. The bill wasn't introduced as a result of one particular bar owner, for example, who was taking advantage of an artisan or a particular patron. This has just been an on-going problem in Alaska. REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS stated that he would support this legislation, but questioned the bar owner's ability to stop things like this from happening. This legislation puts a bar owner in jeopardy over something he has little control over. One other question he had was if this is good for the individual and the private sector, he asked why does this legislation exempt the state. Why are they allowed to do something that's detrimental to the Native community when the private sector can't. Number 1071 MS. BENNETT clarified that Representative Sanders referred to Section 1, subparagraph (e). She stated that she was not exactly certain why this section was included in the bill. REPRESENTATIVE RYAN explained that there is a presumption in English Common Law that the King can do no wrong. Since we don't have a King, government takes his place, the government can do no wrong. So necessarily, the government is exempt from responsibility. This may not be fair, but until such time as we individually address it, this presumption will stay there. Number 1120 REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS suggested then that the committee should strike this subparagraph (e) as an amendment. On page two, line 10, he suggested they strike this subsection. REPRESENTATIVE OGAN pointed out that this amendment might affect Fur Rondy festivities and the convention center functions, for example. He asked, what if beer was being sold at these places. He also noted the fact that there were lots of Native handicrafts sold at these types of events. He noted that this legislation is intended to prevent the sale of handicrafts for cheap by someone who needs the money for alcohol but not necessarily at these types of organized shows. Number 1210 REPRESENTATIVE RYAN offered that government has the same responsibility to act in the same manner as it demands from its citizens. Exempting government all of the time and allowing them and their employees to do whatever they choose because their exempt from the law doesn't breed responsibility. REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS added that people who are authorized to sell in these situations were required to obtain a permit. He didn't think this legislation was aimed at these types of individuals. Number 1309 CHAIRMAN IVAN stated that more work needed to be done on this legislation to address all of the concerns raised. He also mentioned the artisans in his district who used every opportunity and locales to sell their handicrafts. He used the example of posting signs about the hazards of drinking alcohol when a woman is pregnant. He wondered if they should post the same types of signs for the prohibition of the sale of artifacts on particular premises. REPRESENTATIVE DYSON stated that these efforts which are well intended will have unintentional, unfortunate results. He read a note from an Anchorage individual who is a member of the downtown Community Council. "As a member of the downtown Community Council that's been dealing with liquor license renewals I am concerned that this bill will give police another reason to be able to hassle Native bar patrons. We already have quite a problem with unequal and discriminatory ways (of how bars are overseen downtown) and don't need more reasons for police and other authorities to enter bars that serve mostly Native people and hassle and shake down those people in there." He thought that this was a legitimate concern. He noted that they didn't want anyone taken advantage of, but he also didn't want police either taking a lot of time to go around and see if anyone's got ivory in their pockets to sell. He also didn't want overzealous and sometimes "bad attitude" policeman using this law as another excuse to hassle people they consider undesirable. Number 1565 REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS withdrew his amendment as proposed until further notice. Number 1588 DOUG GRIFFIN, Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Board, testified via teleconference from Anchorage on HB 162. The board is generally supportive of this bill. Some of the issues raised regarding enforcement and whether this legislation would actually work are legitimate but he thought the concept was definitely one that's unique to Alaska. It's a reality as contributing to alcohol abuse and the taking advantage of people who are in a diminished capacity. He suggested that maybe the sponsor or the committee look at also including liquor stores under this provision. He stated that a more classic example of buying, trading and selling of handicrafts does take place in bars, but he was concerned that if this activity stopped taking place in bars they may see more people directed towards liquor stores instead. He noted the section where this language might be inserted, along with reference to other related statutes. He noted the fiscal note which, from the ABC Board's perspective, would be the cost of printing of signs noticing patrons about this policy. He also noted the Department of Law was looking for a pass through from the board dealing with administrative actions and explained the remainder of the related costs. Number 1821 DON DAPCEVICH, Executive Director, Citizen's Advisory Board on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse, came forward to testify on HB 162. The Citizen's Board is made up Alaskans from all over the state of Alaska. They've considered this bill and that it's a good piece of legislation. They have some concerns with targeting Natives. If the bill is good on its face, then it should be good for arts and handicrafts made by non-Natives as well for the same reasons. Whether someone is Native or not and selling their art and handicrafts at a disadvantage bears no race. The issue of diminished capacity from alcohol bears no racial designation. MR. DAPCEVICH continued that in regard to enforcement, having signs located in establishments is preventative. This is why they want emphasis on prevention. In regards to enforcement one would assume that only the most egregious cases will be pursued. These should be, especially those who abuse these situations through purchases in order to re-sell. This is a real concern in rural Alaska where individuals make it a practice in effect to trade alcohol for handicrafts and art. This is no less blatant than years ago when gold was traded for whiskey. There are families who rely on the proceeds of these sales. When a person is in the situation of bartering at a diminished capacity, it does the individual or their families no good. CHAIRMAN IVAN stated that more work needed to be done on this legislation before any action could be taken. He assigned a subcommittee to address this work with Representative Sanders as chairman, along with Representatives Kookesh and Dyson.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|