Legislature(2003 - 2004)
04/06/2004 01:50 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 438 - MOVE OVER LAW FOR DRIVERS Number 2294 CHAIR McGUIRE announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 438, "An Act relating to motorists moving over or slowing down for emergency vehicles." Number 2300 REPRESENTATIVE HOLM moved to adopt CSHB 438(STA). There being no objection, it was so ordered. REPRESENTATIVE HOLM, sponsor of HB 438, explained that the bill was brought to him by public safety officers in the state because of concern about danger. He deferred to Mr. Rudig. Number 2320 MATTHEW RUDIG, Staff to Representative Jim Holm, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor, agreed that safety is the goal of the bill and said moving over and slowing down can save lives. He reported that 93 law enforcement officers across the country from 1997 to 2002 were struck and killed by vehicles alongside of roads; many more were injured, and substantially more experienced close calls. Although no measure of "move over" legislation will guarantee complete safety for officers and other emergency personnel, he said this bill, along with further public education efforts, can heighten drivers' awareness of the inherent danger to these men and women who serve the public. He indicated that at least 38 states have already addressed this issue. [An at-ease was called because of a technical difficulty; this is the end of Tape 04-60.] TAPE 04-61, SIDE A Number 0001 CHAIR McGUIRE called the meeting back to order. MR. RUDIG noted that Allen Storey and Shelley Owens could answer questions. He closed by saying, "These people fight for our lives every day, ... and this legislation is just an opportunity for the legislature to fight for theirs." Number 0100 ALLEN STOREY, Lieutenant, Central Office, Division of Alaska State Troopers, Department of Public Safety (DPS), testified in support of HB 438, saying it's long overdue. He gave real-life examples involving two of his own patrol cars, the car of his first patrol sergeant, two troopers in the Palmer region who were struck recently, and a near miss he'd seen just that morning. If the bill becomes law, he surmised that [DPS's] public information office can get the word out through public service announcements and other efforts so people know of the requirement, which is to slow down and provide a cushion of safety to people who are trying to help others in need - not just troopers and police officers, but also volunteer and professional firefighters and others taking care of business on the shoulder of the road. Number 0239 SHELLEY OWENS, Health Program Manager, Community Health & Emergency Medical Services, Division of Public Health, Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS), testified that the department supports this bill in the hope it will reduce the incidence of secondary collisions that result from inattentive and distracted drivers. She provided statistics and further information as follows: It is estimated that there are 12,000 emergency medical vehicle collisions each year, and the U.S. Fire Administration reports that emergency vehicle crashes are the second leading cause of death for firefighters. The International Association of Chiefs of Police reported that in 1997 nearly 40 percent of law enforcement officers who died in the line of duty died in traffic. And Washington State found that in a seven-year period over 3,000 shoulder collisions - collisions where a vehicle was parked on the side of the road - resulted in 40 deaths and 1,770 injuries. In Florida during a five-year period, 1996 to 2000, motorists crashed into working ... law enforcement vehicles that were stopped along Florida roadways 1,800 times, resulting in five deaths and over 400 injuries. In Alaska, in the four-year period from 1998 to 2001, 386 emergency response vehicles were involved in accidents. Of the 386 crashes, 46 incidents involved a parked emergency response vehicle. There's also a statistic from California that ... once there's been an initial accident, ... the fact that this vehicle is on the side of the road creates a 600 percent increase of likelihood of a secondary collision. MS. OWENS concluded: Motor vehicle operators are exposed to multiple sources of distraction including mobile phones, radios, children, failure to see or hear sirens and lights, and driver inattention. The department supports the efforts to reduce the number and severity of injuries to fire, EMS [emergency medical service], and law enforcement personnel at emergency scenes. Number 0390 REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG indicated he had a question for someone from the Criminal Division of the Department of Law, but didn't see anyone present. Noting that he was searching for statute related to mental states and the requirements for culpability, he explained that subsection (a) of the bill requires a person to move over [or slow to specified speeds], and subsection (b) makes it a class A misdemeanor if [the behavior] results in injury. However, it just says "who violates this section" [on line 14], which he suggested almost makes it a crime of strict liability. Thus he proposed that the bill should at least say "negligently or something" because people can go to jail for a year. REPRESENTATIVE GARA remarked that "knowing" is important in a lot of the criminal [statutes], but he can't imagine someone using the defense of having sped by a car that had flashing lights without knowing, which should be even worse, perhaps a felony. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG read from the statute he'd been looking for, AS 11.81.610, which stated in part: (b) Except as provided in AS 11.81.600(b), if a provision of law defining an offense does not prescribe a culpable mental state, the culpable mental state that must be proved with respect to (1) conduct is "knowingly"; and (2) a circumstance or a result is "recklessly." REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he thought that probably would apply, but wasn't sure and was simply drawing it to the committee's attention. He added that he was satisfied with the language now because he believed AS 11.81.610 "would be what would be read into the statute if we leave it alone." CHAIR McGUIRE asked whether anyone else wished to testify. She then closed public testimony. Number 0619 REPRESENTATIVE HOLM moved to adopt Amendment 1, labeled 23- LS1602\D.1, Luckhaupt, 4/2/04, which read: Page 1, lines 11 - 13: Delete all material. Insert "fighter, shall slow to a reasonable and prudent speed below the speed limit." CHAIR McGUIRE asked whether there were any objections to Amendment 1. There being none, Amendment 1 was adopted. REPRESENTATIVE GARA remarked that Amendment 1 was good and clarified a lot for him, but requested clarification. He said he understands the circumstance when a trooper or ambulance is dealing with an accident or injured person. But can someone still drive by at 55 miles an hour in the right lane of the highway if a trooper has pulled a driver over for speeding and they're in the "breakdown" lane? Would that be a safe and prudent speed under the circumstances, or would it now be a crime? he asked. REPRESENTATIVE HOLM answered: It's my understanding ... that the reason that we offered the amendment was so that it would be reasonable and prudent speed. And that means it would have to be something defensible, at some point in time, if there was a problem. And I would assume, if someone was going 55 miles an hour past ... a problem on the side of the road, he would miss the other person. If he didn't, I suppose it would be no different than any other case where you are negligent or reckless in your driving. CHAIR McGUIRE paraphrased subsection (a)(1), which talks about safely vacating the lane closest to the emergency, fire, or law enforcement vehicle when there are two or more lanes traveling in the same direction. REPRESENTATIVE GARA noted that many people stay in the right lane when they see a trooper pull someone over for speeding, but said he thinks that would be OK with Amendment 1 because it says "or if you are driving safely under the circumstances." CHAIR McGUIRE concurred, mentioning "reasonable and prudent". Number 0754 CHAIR McGUIRE asked Representative Holm whether he'd thought about adding an "emergency signal override" and whether there already was a House version of Senator Therriault's [legislation related to that]. REPRESENTATIVE GARA said, "Let's get that in there too." REPRESENTATIVE HOLM answered that he hadn't thought about it. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG reported that he'd talked to Senator Therriault about that bill because the same firefighters who were interested in the carbon monoxide and arson legislation also considered that a priority. He recalled that the feeling expressed was that there was no need for House companion legislation because the Senate version was moving. CHAIR McGUIRE remarked, "Fair enough - just an idea." REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said it's a good idea. Number 0816 REPRESENTATIVE HOLM moved to report CSHB 438(STA), as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB 438(JUD) was reported from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|