Legislature(2005 - 2006)CAPITOL 17
01/25/2006 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB242 | |
| HB274 | |
| HB373 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 242 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 274 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 373 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 373-ALCOHOL:TRANSPORT MANUFACTURE; FORFEITURE 5:20:30 PM CHAIR ANDERSON announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 373, "An Act relating to the manufacture and transportation of alcoholic beverages; relating to forfeitures of property for violations of alcoholic beverage laws; and relating to violations of alcoholic beverage laws." 5:20:53 PM REPRESENTATIVE KEVIN MEYER, Alaska State Legislature, speaking as the sponsor of HB 373, noted that many communities have adopted local options to control the importation of alcohol. In fact, in 2001 the U.S. Congress established the Alaska Rural Justice And Law Enforcement Commission ("commission") to study the challenges facing rural Alaska. This summer the commission released a draft interim report, which contains several recommended changes to Alaska's statutes. Upon reviewing the recommendations, Representative Meyer said he focused on those that he viewed as good. Therefore, HB 373 proposes, upon the recommendation of the report, to change the forfeiture statutes to allow the state to seize alcohol that's transported in violation of the local option, to seize property purchased with the proceeds of alcohol sold in violation of the local option, and firearms carried or visible during the furtherance of the violation could also be seized. The legislation also changes the allowable quantities of alcohol such that a package store may not ship more than 10.5 liters of distilled spirits in a calendar month to an individual in a community with a local option. Representative Meyer opined, "This bill represents reasonable changes to the statute that will strengthen the hand of law enforcement and communities in their effort to fight against alcohol in their communities." 5:24:08 PM MIKE PAWLOWSKI, Staff to Representative Kevin Meyer, Alaska State Legislature, explained that Section 1 reduces the amount of distilled spirits from 12 liters to 10.5 liters in terms of presumption of guilt in a violation of Title 4. Section 2 adds alcoholic beverages transported in violation of the common carrier provisions to what can be seized by the state, including items of value purchased from the proceeds of the sale of alcoholic beverages and firearms that are visible or were carried during the furtherance of a violation to the forfeiture provisions. Section 3 establishes a procedure that the Department of Public Safety must go through to determine whether the [seized] property can be kept. Section 4 is merely a conforming amendment. Section 5, he noted, adds a definition of "manufacture" because there was no definition in statute, although the manufacture of alcohol in a community that had adopted a local option is illegal. 5:25:48 PM REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG inquired as to the result of inserting the term "or" on page 2, lines 7 and 15. MR. PAWLOWSKI deferred to the Department of Law (DOL). 5:26:09 PM REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG inquired as to why seven jugs rather than eight jugs. MR. PAWLOWSKI pointed out that the statute being adjusted is AS 04.11.150, which refers to package store licenses. Those statutes refer to 10.5 liters as the standard amount of alcohol that can be delivered. For the presumption of a violation, it was made consistent with what was allowed under the other statutes. In further response to Representative Rokeberg, Mr. Pawlowski related his understanding that when a person is involved in a criminal prosecution for a violation and the person is in possession of 14-15 jugs of alcohol, it's presumed that those were being offered for sale rather than for personal use. 5:27:25 PM REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG turned attention to Section 3, which only allows 30 days for response from someone with an interest in an object being forfeited. He highlighted that most of the violations occur in rural Alaska where [30 days] would seem to be a tight time frame since folks may be out fishing or doing other activities/work that take them out of town. MR. PAWLOWSKI deferred to DOL. 5:28:04 PM REPRESENTATIVE LYNN noted his support of HB 373. 5:28:32 PM REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD referred to the language on page 3, line 3: "or items of value purchased from the proceeds". The language "items of value" could refer to many different things. he noted. Therefore, he inquired as to whether one could lose his/her house if a mortgage payment was made with some of the proceeds [of an activity prohibited under AS 04.11.010 or a violation of a local option under AS 04.11.491]. MR. PAWLOWSKI related his understanding that the intent is to mirror the drug statutes as closely as possible, but he deferred to DOL for specifics. 5:29:35 PM ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General, Legal Services Section - Juneau, Criminal Division, Department of Law, related her belief that the insertion of "or" on page 2, lines 7 and 15 is a cleanup by Legislative Legal. With regard to the concern that someone with an interest in an object being forfeited only has 30 days [to make a claim], Ms. Carpeneti highlighted that the forfeiture occurs 30 days after the department has made reasonable efforts to [ascertain the identity and whereabouts of a person with an interest in the forfeited object]. 5:31:41 PM REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG surmised then that there is a 60-day window for someone with a title or claim on an item. MS. CARPENETI replied yes, clarifying that it would be 30 days after the service of publication. 5:32:06 PM REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX referred to existing statute as specified on page 3, line 13 of HB 373. She asked if there is any language specifying that the notification has to be in a specific form such as certified mail. MS. CARPENETI answered that she believes there is in the regular civil procedure rules, and she offered to get back with the committee in regard to the specifics. 5:33:01 PM REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD returned attention to his question regarding the language, "or items of value purchased from the proceeds" located on page 3, line 3. MS. CARPENETI related her understanding that in order to seize an item purchased by money received from bootlegging activities, a significant interest has to be shown. She opined that the [state] wouldn't seize a house unless the house was purchased only with money received from bootlegging activities. 5:34:41 PM ED HARRINGTON, Captain/Commander, Alaska Bureau of Alcohol & Drug Enforcement, N Detachment, Division of Alaska State Troopers, Department of Public Safety (DPS), informed the committee that he was also a member of the subcommittee on the Alaska Rural Justice and Law Enforcement Commission. Mr. Harrington explained that DPS supports HB 373 because it enhances enforcement efforts related to the local option in rural Alaska. With regard to forfeiture of property, Mr. Harrington opined that it's probably the single best deterrent of importers of alcohol in rural Alaska. For the most part, the property that is seized are conveyances such as snow machines, four wheelers, and boats. Generally, those properties are forfeited through the court and most commonly during sentencing. Mr. Harrington related that generally real property isn't forfeited, although that's not to say that it wouldn't/couldn't happen. 5:36:54 PM REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD acknowledged Mr. Harrington's intent, but indicated concern that he doesn't know the intent of future DPS staff. 5:37:16 PM REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG inquired as to why the [allowable quantities of alcohol] has been lowered and made consistent with the importation allowance. MR. HARRINGTON explained that the current statute is somewhat confusing in that one can possess up to 12 liters if one sells alcohol, but only 10.5 if one is shipping. He pointed out that this is merely a reduction by 1.5 liters. Therefore, the change proposed in HB 373 simplifies the law by making 10.5 liters the "common denominator." 5:39:02 PM CHAIR ANDERSON, upon determining no one else wished to testify, closed public testimony. 5:39:17 PM REPRESENTATIVE LYNN moved to report HB 373 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal note. There being no objection, it was so ordered.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|