Legislature(1997 - 1998)
03/09/1998 01:45 PM House FIN
Audio | Topic |
---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE BILL NO. 261 "An Act relating to a surcharge imposed for violations of state or municipal law and to the Alaska police training fund." DEB DAVIDSON, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS testified in support of HB 261. She noted that the legislation expands a program that is already in effect. Alaska Law requires the Alaska Police Standards Council to provide training for police officers, correctional officers, probation officers and village public safety officers. In 1996, the Alaska Police Training Fund was established. Fund revenues come from surcharges imposed on motor vehicle violations. House Bill 261 expands the surcharge to all crimes and increases the amount of the surcharge. Felony convictions and bail forfeiture for felony offenses would have a surcharge of $85 dollars. Misdemeanor offenses dealing with drug and under the influence revocation of licenses would have a $75 dollar surcharge. Other misdemeanors would have a surcharge of $45 dollars. Violations and infractions would have a surcharge of $15 dollars. She noted that the legislation was amended in the House Judiciary Committee to direct judges not to consider the surcharge when imposing a fine. LADDIE SHAW, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA POLICE STANDARDS COUNCIL spoke in support of the legislation. He observed that the Alaska Police Standards Council has increased its basic training commitments. The Council supported training for 13 officers in FY 96. The Council would support up to 100 officers in training for FY 2000. Training at the Sitka Academy would increase. Fairbanks is developing a police academy and the Council is negotiating to sponsor basic training at the Anchorage Academy. The Council has also taken on the responsibility of a basic municipal corrections officer-training program held at the Anchorage Academy. In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault, Mr. Shaw observed that the proposed surcharge would be similar to those in place in Oregon. Twenty-six states run their programs with surcharges. The legislation was based on the Oregon program. Representative Davis noted that it is difficult to compare Alaska with other states. He noted that the Alaska State Troopers are not highway patrolmen. Other states have highway patrolmen. Co-Chair Therriault referred to the fiscal note by the Alaska Police Standards Council. Mr. Shaw clarified that the Council received $396.1 thousand dollars in surcharge revenues for FY 97. He estimated that $450 thousand dollars would be collected from surcharges in FY 99. The Council had an unfilled authorization of $53.9 thousand dollars. CHRIS CHRISTENSEN, STAFF COUNSEL, ALASKA COURT SYSTEM stated that the Supreme Court does not take a position on the legislation. He provided members with Amendment A (copy on file). Amendment A would neutralize the Alaska Court System's fiscal note. He explained that Alaska Court System's computer system is only capable of accounting for one surcharge. Their new computer system is estimated to be operational in two years. He observed that if everyone that was charged a surcharge paid before they left the courthouse that there would not be a problem. He noted that there are many variables in tracking fines and surcharges. Mr. Christensen observed that the Court System collects approximately $4.4 million dollars in fines and forfeitures. He noted that it would not cost any money to impose a surcharge, collect a surcharge or turn the money over to the General Fund. Accounting for the money would be costly. The amendment would provide that until the Court System's computer system is operational, an annual estimate of collected surcharges would be turned over to the legislature. Once the new computer system is operational the precise figure would be given. Mr. Christensen observed that the legislation would require a $45 dollar surcharge on misdemeanors and a $15 dollar surcharge on infractions. He pointed out that there are many offenses, technically classified as misdemeanors, which are on the bail schedule and are not subject to jail time. New residence addresses must be notified to the Division of Motor Vehicles within 30 days. Failure to do so is a misdemeanor, but since it is on the bail schedule, the maximum fine is $20 dollars. Without the amendment this would receive a $45 dollar surcharge. Mr. Christensen noted that if Amendment A is adopted that there would be a one time $5 thousand dollars cost for form redistribution. In response to a question by Representative Davies, Mr. Christensen estimated that the average fine on a misdemeanor case is $250 dollars. Fines on the bail schedule range from $15 dollars to over $100 dollars. The average fine on the bail schedule would be between $30 and $60 dollars. Felony cases generally receive jail time. In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault, Mr. Christensen suggested that "misdemeanor not on a bail forfeiture schedule" be added on page 2, line 27. "Misdemeanor, which is on the bail forfeiture schedule," could be added to page 2, line 31. Representative Davis observed that he was aware of the problem. Ms. Davidson questioned if language would be needed on line 27. She observed that subsection (3) deals with misdemeanors and violations of municipal ordinances for which a sentence of incarceration could be imposed. She did not know if misdemeanors on the bail schedule are offenses for which a sentence of incarceration could be imposed. She suggested that adding "misdemeanor" to subsection (4) could solve the problem. Representative Davies referred to page 2, line 22. He noted that AS 28.33.030 refers to operating a commercial vehicle while intoxicated. He noted that AS 23.33.033, Presumptions and Chemical Analysis of Breath or Blood, is not included. Representative Davies added that AS 28.35.030, Operating a Vehicle While Intoxicated and AS 28.35.032, Chemical Test were included, but AS 28.35.031, Implied Consent was omitted from offenses relating to driving under the influence with a non-commercial license. Ms. Davidson noted that the legislation was based on current statutes. Representative Davis provided members with Amendment B (copy on file). Ms. Davidson explained that as the legislation is currently written a $15 dollar surcharge is placed on an infraction violation for which a sentence of incarceration is not imposed. She observed that parking tickets would fall under this category. Amendment B would provide that if the fine or bail forfeiture amount were less than $30 dollars then a $5 dollar surcharge would be charged. If the fine or bail forfeiture amount were $30 dollars or more a $15 dollar surcharge would be charged. Co-Chair Therriault observed that the legislation would change the amount of revenue received by the state of Alaska. However, the legislation does not automatically authorize the expenditure to the Alaska Police Standards Council. He maintained that the expenditure should be considered with the Department of Public Safety's budget before the full House Finance Committee. Co-Chair Hanley noted that the fiscal note shows a total operating budget of $627.4 thousand dollars for FY 99. Mr. Shaw clarified that this is the amount of revenues estimated to be collected as the result of HB 261. The estimated change in revenues of $573.5 thousand dollars includes a $53.9 thousand dollar reduction for excess authorization in FY 99. The total operating budget of the Alaska Police Standards Council's budget would be approximately $1.597 million dollars. The Council's FY 98 budget is $524 thousand dollars. The proposed FY 99 budget, without HB 261, would be $627 thousand dollars. Co-Chair Hanley summarized that an additional $627 thousand dollars would be added to the FY 99 proposed budget. Co-Chair Hanley noted that persons are paying for their Community Residential Center (CRC) beds. He asked why half the money should not be diverted to the Department of Corrections to pay for prison space. Mr. Shay stressed that Alaska Police Standards Council has a responsibility to support municipal and state correctional training. The Council will be supporting training for contract jail officers. Co-Chair Hanley observed that funding for training could potentially offset some costs that the Department of Corrections or local communities have normally supported. He emphasized that there should be a corresponding decrease if the Council provides basic training that had been previously paid for by others. Co-Chair Therriault suggested that the fiscal note be zero and the operating expenses be set through the regular budget process. Representative Mulder noted that the Council would provide training for officers of the city of Valdez. Mr. Shaw noted that the community jails officer program was built with the support of the Alaska Police Standards Council. Representative Mulder observed that costs for municipal training would be shifted to the state of Alaska. Representative Davis noted that the Council provides services to all state police departments. City police will collect some of the surcharges. Ms. Davidson observed that, of 67,000 citations issued, approximately 31,000 citations were issued by cities other than Anchorage. Anchorage officers wrote approximately 14,000 citations. State Troopers wrote approximately 22,000 citations. Co-Chair Hanley observed that Anchorage would have to keep track of municipal fines. Mr. Shaw noted that the Council would support the Anchorage Academy by paying some operating costs for use of the academy and providing training. Co-Chair Hanley clarified that the Anchorage Court System would not receive funding from the surcharge. He expressed frustration that communities are being discouraged from taking control. Mr. Shaw noted that the Council sets standards for community correctional officers. The Council supports 63 percent of the police population at the Anchorage training center. Mr. Shaw spoke in support of Amendment A. He stressed that the Court could do a good job of estimating the surcharge. (Tape Change, HFC 98 -58, Side 2) Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to ADOPT Amendment A as Amendment Representative Davis MOVED to ADOPT Amendment B as Amendment 2. He stated that the amendment would lower the surcharge on parking tickets. Co-Chair Hanley questioned if there is a surcharge on parking tickets. Ms. Davidson stated that, under existing law, a surcharge is based on a violation. She did not think that there is currently a surcharge on parking tickets. She observed that the legislation would add a surcharge on infractions. She thought that parking tickets would fall under the definition of infraction. She observed that the statutes contain several types of fines for infractions. Mr. Christensen clarified that, in Anchorage, parking tickets are under the civil system. He thought that most municipalities would charge parking tickets under a civil ordinance. Tickets issued under a civil system would not receive a surcharge. Co-Chair Hanley requested information regarding violations and infractions and the dollar amounts imposed. HB 261 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
---|