Legislature(2005 - 2006)BUTROVICH 205
03/02/2005 08:30 AM Senate JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| SB104 | |
| Start | |
| SB104 | |
| SB84 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| = | SB 104 | ||
| = | SB 84 | ||
SB 84-CHILD PROTECTION CONFIDENTIALITY
9:31:50 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS announced SB 84 to be up for consideration.
SENATOR HUGGINS moved to adopt Version \F as the working
document. Hearing no objections, the motion carried.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked Gail Voigtlander to brief the committee on
the immunity section of SB 84.
MS. GAIL VOIGTLANDER, supervising attorney, Anchorage Attorney
General's Office, introduced the changes to the bill. She
understood the committee was concerned about immunity in the
original Section 14. She admitted it is difficult to draft
immunity language. The substitute language in the committee
substitute is designed to ensure defendants move to summary
judgment. The people at risk are court system employees.
9:38:26 AM
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked where the other immunity section was.
MS. VOIGTLANDER replied AS 47.35.810.
SENATOR THERRIAULT noted the new language in Section 14 sets the
bar very high.
9:40:50 AM
SENATOR FRENCH shared Senator Therriault's concern. He voiced
disappointment that the amendment didn't exclude gross
negligence. However, the jury will have to review whether gross
negligence occurred.
CHAIR SEEKINS advised he is open to amending the bill.
SENATOR THERRIAULT referred to AS 09.50.250 and AS 09.50.253,
both of which address immunity clauses. He suggested the
committee look at other immunity clauses, which are already in
the statutes.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked if other areas in the statutes cover state
employees.
SENATOR THERRIAULT answered AS 09.50.253 specifically refers to
state employees.
9:44:22 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS said the umbrella includes municipal and state
employees.
SENATOR THERRIAULT commented AS 47.35.810 says a person
operating under agreement with the department is immune from
civil liability.
9:45:07 AM
SENATOR FRENCH offered to have the Legislative Research
Department do a summary of the immunity clauses in the Alaska
statutes to make sure the standards all mesh.
CHAIR SEEKINS said he understands the importance of indemnifying
employees who need to work within the scope of their employment
and the legitimate best interest of the child.
9:47:27 AM
SENATOR THERRIAULT said malice is intentional.
CHAIR SEEKINS suggested asking the drafter to make sure Section
14 sets the same standard as that for other state employee
immunities, and also includes municipal employees.
9:48:33 AM
MR. SCOTT CALDER testified the purpose of SB 84 is sided toward
the Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS). The image
problem that DHSS has is self-imposed. State liability is a good
discussion to have. Negative instances occur within DHSS. He
voiced concern that DHSS is able to run the show. He said he
does not trust DHSS to divulge the truth and the public is not
able to correct any false information that may be exposed.
9:54:02 AM
MR. CALDER said parents should be able to obtain and evaluate
any information that DHSS has. Many parents have been shut out
of the process. The committee must carefully consider any matter
where a child is held by the state.
9:57:12 AM
SENATOR THERRIAULT reviewed SB 84 for drafting purposes and
pointed out that Section 11 needs clarification as to who is
covered with immunity.
Ms. DIANNE OLSON, senior attorney, Anchorage Attorney General's
office, explained Section 11 was read together with another
regulation.
SENATOR THERRIAULT said he wanted to make sure it was standard.
CHAIR SEEKINS perceived it allows sharing of confidential
information to people with a legitimate interest.
MS. OLSON said there are no regulations pertaining to who has a
legitimate interest.
SENATOR GUESS asked Ms. Olson why Section 3, lines 18-26,
doesn't include other parties.
MS. OLSON answered under AS 47.10 the person to be protected is
the child. The minor is the subject of the chapter. The concerns
that Senator Guess referenced could be brought up in court.
10:01:50 AM
SENATOR GUESS asked Ms. Olson if the courts have leeway.
MS. OLSON replied yes.
SENATOR GUESS asked why the guardian ad litem was removed on
Page 5, line 24.
MS. OLSON answered guardian ad litem are included through the
court rules process.
SENATOR FRENCH said Section 4 has a new subsection that allows
more open hearings in child in need of aide (CINA) cases unless
another section applies, closing the hearing. Section 6 suggests
sealing records after 30 days. He questioned sealing the records
of an open court proceeding.
10:04:16 AM
MS. OLSON said Section 6 pertains to the actual court records of
the child. There is a difference between the recording of a
hearing and the documents of a court case.
SENATOR FRENCH said he does not understand why an open court
proceeding should later be closed.
MS. OLSON explained if the court started opening records, people
would be able to view all the documents within the file. Some of
those documents are sensitive.
10:07:23 AM
SENATOR FRENCH advised he would consider working on an
amendment.
MS. MARCIE KENNAI, Department of Health and Social Services,
said the department looked at opening the court records, but the
intent is to ensure that family and child confidentiality is
maintained. DHSS has to submit items to the court such as a
mental health assessment, a person's HIV status and/or
participation in substance abuse treatment. The entire court
document would not necessarily come out in a hearing.
SENATOR GUESS asked Ms. Kennai whether DHSS discussed
consideration of a sunset.
10:10:36 AM
MS. KENNAI replied no. The department looked at other states'
laws; 18 have open hearings. There is public interest only in
very high profile cases.
CHAIR SEEKINS saw there were no other questions. He advised the
committee they would further review SB 84 in the next meeting.
The intent is to have the same level of immunity standardized.
SENATOR THERRIAULT suggested authorizing the drafter to converse
with the Department of Law.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|