Legislature(1995 - 1996)
02/08/1995 01:30 PM Senate JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SJUD - 2/8/95
SB 6 LICENSING/REGISTRATION SUSPENSION/DENIAL
The next order of business was SB 6. SENATOR TAYLOR, sponsor,
asked JOE AMBROSE to testify before the committee. MR. AMBROSE
stated the intent of SB 6 is to encourage individuals to make court
appearances and pay outstanding fines related to moving vehicle
citations and parking offenses. Each year, 25,000 traffic
citations for moving violations go unpaid in Alaska, according to
the Department of Public Safety. SB 6 is designed to provide the
court system, and municipalities, throughout Alaska, with
additional leverage in the collection of fines. It would also
apply to an individual who fails to appear in court when ordered.
SB 6 passed the Senate in a 17-3 vote last year as SB 166. SB 6
would be a valuable tool for use by the courts in addressing the
problems created by those who choose to ignore the law, especially
those who fail to make court ordered appearances or to pay fines
imposed by the court. SB 6 is based on statutes from other states.
In the State of Washington, over 50 percent of those who receive
notice of possible sanctions clear up outstanding matters within
one week. SB 6 ties the failure to settle moving violations to the
driver's license and parking violations to vehicle registration
which mirrors California law.
Number 096
SENATOR ADAMS asked why both moving and parking violations are
included in SB 6, since parking violations are under the
jurisdiction of municipalities. MR. AMBROSE replied SB 6 is based
on the California statute which operates the same way. When the
bill went through the process last year, there seemed to be quite
a bit of interest from the urban areas to give them leverage when
attempting to collect parking fines.
Number 114
SENATOR ADAMS questioned whether the sentence that allows the
department to require electronic reporting in Section 2 could
create a burden for municipalities. He asked whether this could be
considered an unfunded mandate imposed by the state on
municipalities. SENATOR TAYLOR replied that is not the intention;
the sentence refers to the use of personal computers and disks as
most municipalities now use. SENATOR ADAMS asked, if SB 6 passes,
what the time frame would be for municipalities to install the
electronic devices, and to notify the state of parking violations.
Number 140
MR. AMBROSE explained SB 6 calls for electronic reporting which
would allow a municipality, with a stack of uncollectible parking
citations, to make a report to the Division of Motor Vehicles.
When that individual tries to renew a vehicle registration,
outstanding fines would have to be paid prior to registering the
vehicle. SENATOR ADAMS discussed a scenario in which a person with
several vehicles driven by other family members might be prevented
from registering a vehicle because an outstanding parking citation
on one of the vehicles exists. MR. AMBROSE referred to line 5 of
page 2 which states actual notice must be given to the applicant.
SENATOR ADAMS expressed concern with the inclusion of parking
violations in SB 6.
Number 182
JUANITA HENSLEY, Chief of Driver Services for the Division of Motor
Vehicles (DMV), testified. She stated that a similar bill was
introduced several years ago in the Legislature to assist
municipalities in the collection of parking fines. Two years ago,
Senator Taylor introduced a bill to deal with moving violations.
At the request of some of the municipalities, the parking citation
provision was added. To ease the burden on the Department of
Public Safety, the department requested that municipalities have
electronic access to motor vehicle registration files to place a
hold on vehicle registrations until outstanding fines are paid.
She noted line 7 of Section 2 refers to any vehicle, so that all
fines on vehicles owned by the applicant would have to be paid
before a vehicle could be registered.
SENATOR ADAMS asked if the DMV would notify the owner of the
violation a second time, after issuance of the citation. MS.
HENSLEY explained notification would occur when the person
attempted to register the vehicle.
Number 232
SENATOR ELLIS asked what entity in Anchorage would be transferring
information to the DMV. MS. HENSLEY replied the Anchorage Parking
Authority. SENATOR ELLIS asked for clarification of the term "any
vehicle." MS. HENSLEY replied it would include any vehicle subject
to registration in Title 28, such as passenger cars, trucks, and
commercial vehicles, but not 3 and 4 wheelers. SENATOR ELLIS
expressed concern that the Anchorage Parking Authority would be the
entity transferring information.
SENATOR ADAMS asked what time line will be used for municipality
notification to the state. MS. HENSLEY stated there has not been
any discussion on a time line. SENATOR TAYLOR noted the time for
notification would be determined by the municipality.
SENATOR ADAMS referred to the fiscal note from the Trial Court
System and asked how the percentages of revocations and
terminations were determined. MS. HENSLEY was not familiar with the
fiscal note from the Court System. She explained that Section 3 of
SB 6 allows the court to suspend a driver's license. In 1994 the
Court System estimated it would suspend approximately 2500 drivers'
licenses out of the 25,000 unpaid moving violations.
Number 296
SENATOR ELLIS asked if an individual has an unpaid parking ticket
on a personal vehicle, would that outstanding fine effect the
registration of business vehicles registered by that individual.
MS. HENSLEY answered affirmatively. SENATOR TAYLOR explained every
time the individual attempted to register any vehicle, outstanding
fines would have to be paid first. SENATOR ELLIS requested
information on the schedule of fines and penalties for outstanding
parking citations. SENATOR TAYLOR noted the municipalities
requested the inclusion of parking violations to strengthen the
municipalities' position against people who waste police officers'
time and court time by not taking responsibility for the payment of
fines. Currently the municipalities request bench warrants for
these people.
SENATOR ADAMS asked what the Department of Public Safety's position
would be if Section 2 was deleted. MS. HENSLEY stated the
Department would have no problem with the deletion of Section 2.
Number 345
SENATOR MILLER moved SB 6 out of committee with individual
recommendations. SENATOR ADAMS objected. He stated Section 2
needs to be eliminated. SENATOR TAYLOR stated SB 6 has a further
referral to the Senate Finance Committee, where the municipalities
should be requested to present a justification for Section 2.
SENATOR ELLIS asked the committee to officially request information
on the schedule of parking fines and penalties for late payment.
SENATOR TAYLOR agreed. A roll call vote was taken on the motion
with the following results: Senators Taylor, Green and Miller
voted "Yea," and Senators Adams and Ellis voted "Nay." The motion
passed.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|