Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/09/1999 01:05 PM House JUD
Audio | Topic |
---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 151 - REVOCATION OF MINOR DRIVER'S LICENSE CHAIRMAN KOTT announced the next order of business is HB 151, "An Act relating to revocation and reinstatement of the driver's license of a person at least 14 but not yet 21 years of age." CHAIRMAN KOTT indicated the committee will take up the committee substitute for HB 151 [1-LS0492\N, Ford, 3/30/99]. Number 1815 CHAIRMAN KOTT called for a brief at-east at 2:41 p.m. and called the meeting back to order at 2:44 p.m. Number 1844 LOREN JONES, Director, Central Office, Division of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse, Department of Health and Social Services, came before the committee to testify. There is a significant number of children who continue to use and lose their driver's licenses. Generally, when looking at a deterrent, there is a perception of getting caught with a penalty that is swiftly applied. He's not sure, however, that works with children because they feel they are fairly omnipotent. Last year, the Administration sponsored SB 71 which transferred the approval of alcohol information schools from the Division of Motor Vehicles [Department of Administration] to the Division of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse [Department of Health and Social Services]. The division felt that would allow it to develop alcohol information that was age-appropriate. Right now, the only thing available to a 16-year-old who looses his driver's license is a school primarily for adult drunk drivers. That is not an appropriate place for a 16-year-old to learn about the use of alcohol and drugs or intervention. The division also proposed funding local assessments to allow each community to work with their courts, school systems, youth programs and prevention programs to better intervene in that community. But, it costs money. He noted about four years ago, Representative Porter chaired a House task force on alcohol and one of his recommendations was to increase the license reinstatement fee from $100 to $250. That has passed, but for only a second offense. Last year, the department proposed an increase for a first offense. The revenues would have paid for a lot of the services proposed. He further noted that HB 11 has passed, a graduated driver's license. That bill took the principles of SB 77, but it didn't include a fiscal note. As a result, the division now has the responsibility for alcohol information schools without the commensurate staff. The license reinstatement fee didn't pass, so there is no revenue to fund local communities in order to make this effort on their own. The division would propose looking at how to generate services in communities to appropriately intervene the first time; to make the penalties more meaningful to youth, based on what a community believes is best for their children, along with any school penalty; and, to allow the division to get seed money out to them. The legal mechanisms are in place, in law, but there isn't the funding even for the current "Use It, Lose It" law to work better and to reduce the number of children committing second and third offenses. Last year, some kids testified that they knew of the law, but they believed that they would never get caught, that they didn't think about it when they used it, and that it didn't cross their minds on a Saturday night. They know about it, but they never think about losing their driver's license. It's more of an adult model; the kids don't see the penalty as being as bad as adults do. MR. JONES further said, in relation to the issue of designated drivers, that while a person can drive at 16 years of age he or she is not a very skilled driver. The last thing that he wanted was his sober 16 year old with a car full of drunks. That is not a very good position for an unskilled driver. TAPE 99-27, SIDE A Number 0001 MR. JONES continued. He would appreciate a state trooper stopping and checking out situations like that than for his child to take that kind of risk. Number 0060 CHAIRMAN KOTT said, as a parent, the last thing he every wanted was his daughter or son to crawl into a car with five drunks, especially if they were also drunk. As a parent, he would rather have his sober daughter in a car with five drunk girlfriends than have her read in a newspaper the next day that here friends were killed because she didn't take the lead as a sober person and drive them home. Number 0126 REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI said she has always felt that the designated driver message is wonderful for adults, but it is confusing for minors. She asked Mr. Jones whether he has given any thought on taking the provisions of the "Use It, Lose It" law and instead of revoking a driver's license requiring community work service. Number 0231 MR. JONES replied the communities approach that in different ways. In small communities, such as Kotzebue, the superior court judge handles the cases. In real small communities, the magistrate handles them. The judge makes the intervention and typically holds in-advance the charge until the child has completed certain aspects of what is available in the community. In large communities, such as Anchorage, where there are lots of judges and magistrates that is not always possible. Often times, the district court judges will give the kid a card of a local program, such as Volunteers of America or Alaskans For a Drug Free Youth that might have something to offer. In Juneau, there is a network and the district court judge and police let the programs know which kids have been picked up and which have been in court. The programs actively outreach to the parents. He reiterated there are various community approaches. They aren't consistent and there aren't any standards established. Some operate on a shoestring budget. The division would like to help coalesce those ideas and put together information, so that all of the communities would be aware of how to work with the district court judges, local police departments, and local DMV [Division of Motor Vehicles] offices to identify these kids and intervene early. Part of the age-appropriate education would include some type of community work service. And, for those kids that don't get the message the first couple of times, there would be more of an assessment including counseling issues and long-term treatment. There are some good models out there. The division thinks that it could offer some funding and structure to communities in order to help them get to more of the kids and to be more effective. Number 0458 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked Mr. Jones to clarify the distinction between the larger and smaller communities. MR. JONES replied in Kotzebue there is a single judge that hears all the cases. That judge has taken it upon himself to make sure that some community intervention is done with all the kids. In Anchorage, on the other hand where there are eight to ten district judges and two to three magistrates there isn't consistency. There are a lot of other agencies involved as well: state troopers, police departments, and others for example. It takes more of a systematic approach of getting all those involved to buy into a system. It could work in Anchorage; it would just take more of an effort to make sure all involved are on board. Number 0542 REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA asked Mr. Jones what would it cost to fund an alcohol school for juveniles. MR. JONES replied, according to the fiscal note last year, it would cost $100,000 for the division to manage the renewal for quality assurance and policy, and $500,000 for grants to local communities on a competitive process. Changing the reinstatement fees would have raised over $1 million, and the division was proposing to use about one-half of that money. Number 0615 [THE RECORD REFLECTS THAT RONALD JORDAN'S TESTIMONY WAS INTERMITTENTLY AUDIBLE] RONALD JORDAN testified via teleconference from Anchorage. He believes that there should be an breath alcohol test required when there is a presumption of consumption of alcohol. There seems to be an issue of accusing those who haven't consumed any alcohol. For example, some officers can't tell the difference between O'Douls and Budweiser without a blood alcohol test. In addition, he has heard that people are losing their driver's licenses for a .003 alcohol level, which is basically one to two tablespoons of Robitussen. Those issues could be addressed by using a breath alcohol test. He noted for a prescribed dose of Robitussen, a person shows up as a .003 to .005 alcohol level, but if a person drank the bottle it shows up at .123, which is a level of intoxication in Alaska. These issues need to be addressed and corrected. Number 0941 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked Mr. Jordan whether there is alcohol in some root beer. MR. JORDAN replied Henry Weinhard's root beer contains a one-half of one percent alcohol level. In conducting a study of airline passengers drinking O'Douls, Budweiser and root beer, three root beers showed in one hour a .005 alcohol level; and three Budweiser's showed in one hour a .076 alcohol level. According to the state, any alcohol is a violation. Number 1022 KEVIN HYDE, President, Good Legislation Assures Democracy (G.L.A.D.), testified via teleconference from Kenai. He noted G.L.A.D. was formed out of concern on AS 28.15.183, which HB 151 addresses. He is a father and is very concerned about drug and alcohol use. However, there is a recent appeals court ruling that determined AS 28.15.183 was unconstitutional because driver's licenses were being removed for non-driving offenses. In addition, there is a justice system in place that is intended to help with the administration and enforcement of laws, but the administrative process through the DMV is adding a double jeopardy type of situation. The young are being subject to criminal procedures and often being sent off as not guilty or having their cases dismissed then having to go to a DMV hearing to be found guilty with a revocation imposed. It is a legal situation, but it is wrong. The 40 members participating in G.L.A.D. have heard that kids are losing their driver's license, but not taking it very seriously. They figure that they won't get caught again or go ahead and drive without a license. He originally had assumed that taking a driver's license made sense, but it is not working. The testimony yesterday [April 8, 1999] indicated that the kids are not taking it seriously. They are being forced to obey a law that maybe they don't understand. They don't understand when a judge finds them innocent, but another person says that they can't have their license. It puts a level of doubt on the justice system. He reiterated he doesn't want kids drinking alcohol or using drugs. He would like to see it recriminalized so that a judge is put in charge of the situation. Number 1309 REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI asked Mr. Hyde what he thinks would be an effective deterrent. Has G.L.A.D. had a chance to talk to kids affected by this, and does it have any suggestions on what to do to encourage kids who are underage not to use alcohol? Number 1368 MR. HYDE replied yes G.L.A.D. has had that opportunity. Some suggestions were community service, treatment and evaluation specific to youths, addressing needs, speaking to them on their level, and taking away their time. For example, his kid who is part of a cool gang would not think it is cool to wear a bright orange suit and pick up cans. The process is such that most kids talk to a judge via the telephone which doesn't have the same effect as going to court. Having to face that judge, would really get their attention. He has heard kids describe the process as a joke. Number 1503 REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI said it seems that the penalty is invisible. Who sees a driver's license anyway and a person can still drive as long as that person doesn't get caught. She likes the suggestion of community service because of the importance of image and free time being taken away compared to another revocation that hasn't had an impact anyway. Number 1565 MR. HYDE mentioned in quite a few bush community there aren't any cars or a license is not required to drive. CHAIRMAN KOTT asked Juanita Hensley [Division of Motor Vehicles, Department of Administration] whether a driver's license is needed to drive a snowmobile or a 3-wheeler. Number 1651 JUANITA HENSLEY, Administrator, Director's Office, Division of Motor Vehicles, Department of Administration, replied yes. A vehicle does not need to be registered, however, if the village or community has fewer than 499 average cars per day on any particular roadway. CHAIRMAN KOTT said, based on Ms. Hensley's answer, then there should be some impact in rural Alaska. Number 1692 VIRGINIA ESPENSHADE, Executive Director, Kenai Peninsula Youth Court, testified via teleconference from Kenai. She has practiced law in Homer for the past 14 years. She is in support of parts of the bill and in opposition to parts. She strongly supports any legislative change that would provide young adults with a way to earn their driver's licenses back, especially for the kids with multiple convictions. We are setting up these young adults by taking away any future for them. They are facing years without a driver's license. If they can't get jobs, they can't provide for their families. She is also in favor of using the youth courts as judicial entities to hear these violations. In Homer, the youth court hears minor consuming and possessing offenses and has already adjudicated ten of them. It's an ongoing process and is being developed as it goes. It is based on a community consensus of all the parties involved. That understands that wouldn't work in every community. She is concerned that the bill sets up the youth court as an alternative administrative agency. CHAIRMAN KOTT interjected and stated the current version of the bill does not reference youth court. MS. ESPENSHADE further stated that peer adjudication can be a big part of the community response. The kids in Homer appear before peers wearing black robes. The consequences include an essay and community work service. She asked the committee members to consider that when trying to fix this problem. It is up to the legislature to fix it because it will take at least another year for the courts to sort it out. The appeal that Mr. Jordan referenced earlier was a two-two split, therefore, it doesn't control any other court. The legal status of the statute is cloudy at best. She applauded the committee members for looking at the whole issue and asked them to look at individual communities having input in order to solve their particular problems. Number 1873 CHAIRMAN KOTT said he agrees that a two-two split is not binding, but it is persuasive. He asked Ms. Espenshade to comment on a letter dated March 10, 1999 from Linda Johnson [Legal Advisor, Anchorage Youth Court] which indicates the youth courts do not have the authority to act on any alcohol-related issue. Number 1905 MR. ESPENSHADE replied, according to her understanding, Title 47 authorizes the Department of Health and Social Services to deal with juvenile crime which excludes alcohol cases. But, according to the (indisc.) version of Title 47, DFYS [Division of Family and Youth Services] cannot refer alcohol cases to youth courts, but it can refer misdemeanor cases to them, which is happening across the state. The youth court in Homer is private and for non-profit. It has entered into agreements with the police departments and district attorneys, and is based on a public consensus. She agrees that an amendment to Title 47 would make it much clearer, that it is something the youth courts could do. Number 1986 LINDA WRIGHT testified via teleconference from Kenai. She is concerned about Section 6 of the bill. She wondered why there is an age barrier at 20 because 17, 18 or 19 year olds may be in school or have dependent children. In addition, the "more than one year left" provision means to her that a person would have to have at least two citations in order to be considered for reinstatement. While she is glad to see the addition of school and dependent care added, under these terms, a person with one citation who is 18 years old would not qualify. Number 2075 CHAIRMAN KOTT said the application for reinstatement is filed at least two years after the person's license, permit, or privilege has been revoked. It was changed from one to two years. Number 2085 REPRESENTATIVE CROFT indicated that the age limit has been taken out as well. CHAIRMAN KOTT stated those changes were a policy call made by this committee. MS. WRIGHT asked whether a person has to have more than two years (indisc.--coughing) in order to qualify for a privilege of a driver's license. CHAIRMAN KOTT replied correct. He asked Ms. Hensley to answer the question further. Number 2115 MS. HENSLEY said, according to this version of the bill, Section 4 says an individual may apply for a limited license privilege. In the case of her son who had his driver's license revoked for a first offense, he would be able to apply for a limited license to go to-and-from school, if he can show proof that he is in fact attending school such as a class schedule. He wouldn't be able to go anywhere else, however. Number 2150 CHAIRMAN KOTT said the reinstatement for a temporary license was increased from one to two years, so if a person had multiple offenses he would have to do at least two years. Therefore, a 21-year-old could apply and not find himself with that much of a penalty at all. MS. WRIGHT asked whether this would allow a person to apply for a provisional license to go to work. Number 2188 MS. HENSLEY replied, providing the person meets the requirements under the law and is eligible to drive, a person could get a provisional license to drive. The DMV has taken a fairly liberal approach when issuing limited licenses to youth drivers. Number 2240 JACK HARSHFIELD testified via teleconference from Homer. He is 21 with a family and a fiance who is 19. They have both been affected by this law. He had six minor consumptions and pled guilty to all of them. He will not get his driver's license back until the year 2004. His fiance had three convictions of which two were thrown out and she will not get her license back until next year. When a person is 16, he thinks he knows everything and the world, but people change. He now realizes those actions were really dumb, but he is still getting fined for something that he did when he was a kid. It is really hard because both he and his fiance don't have a driver's license and they have a kid on the way. It is hard to push a stroller around in the winter. In addition, many jobs require a driver's license, and if a person can't get a job he can't get money. As a result, some resort to petty theft. When he was 16, he didn't care if he got caught again because he wasn't going to get his license back for a long time anyway. Now, that he has grown up, has a family and responsibilities, he wishes that he wouldn't have drank when he was underage. He wishes that he could change it, but he can't. Number 2367 CHAIRMAN KOTT asked Mr. Harshfield to tell him the circumstances behind his fiance's two convictions that were dismissed. MR. HARSHFIELD replied two were dismissed in court by a judge, but the DMV proceeded with them because she didn't read the fine print requiring her to go back within seven days to file for an appeal. She now has to file for a late appeal, but there is still no guarantee that she will get her driver's license back. Number 2415 CHAIRMAN KOTT asked Mr. Harshfield whether he is aware of any of his friends that were also cited under the "Use It, Lose It" law who had their driver's licenses revoked when they were not using alcohol. MR. HARSHFIELD replied there was a case down at the beach where two people were cited who were not drinking because they were the designated drivers. Their cases were dismissed in court. They still had their driver's licenses revoked for 90 days, however. Number 2452 REPRESENTATIVE CROFT asked Mr. Harshfield whether any of his violations were related to using alcohol while driving a car. TAPE 99-27, SIDE B Number 001 MR. HARSHFIELD replied yes. He got a DWI (driving while intoxicated) while driving a 3-wheeler. Number 0033 MS. CARPENETI stated that there is another case before the supreme court on the "Use It, Lose It" law. The record will be certified this month and cited before a year. She noted that the court of appeals has upheld the "Use It, Lose It" law as constitutional. CHAIRMAN KOTT asked Ms. Carpeneti to provide him a copy of the court of appeals case. Number 0064 CHAIRMAN KOTT announced that the bill will be held over for further consideration.
Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
---|