03/22/2006 08:30 AM Senate JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB379 | |
| HB318 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 379 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 408 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| = | HB 318 | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
March 22, 2006
8:39 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Ralph Seekins, Chair
Senator Charlie Huggins, Vice Chair
Senator Hollis French
Senator Gretchen Guess
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Gene Therriault
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 379(JUD)
"An Act relating to scheduling as a Schedule IA controlled
substance gamma-hydroxybutyric acid and certain similar
substances."
MOVED CSHB 379(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 408(FIN) am
"An Act relating to the standard of proof required to terminate
parental rights in child- in-need-of-aid proceedings; relating
to a healing arts practitioner's duty to report a child
adversely affected by or withdrawing from exposure to a
controlled substance or alcohol; relating to disclosure of
confidential or privileged information about certain children by
the Departments of Health and Social Services and
Administration; relating to permanent fund dividends paid to
foster children and adopted children; amending Rule 18, Alaska
Child in Need of Aid Rules of Procedure; and providing for an
effective date."
BILL HEARING POSTPONED TO 3/23/06
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 318(FIN) am
"An Act limiting the exercise of eminent domain."
HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 379
SHORT TITLE: CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES, INCL. ANALOGS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) MEYER
01/18/06 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/18/06 (H) JUD, FIN
01/27/06 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
01/27/06 (H) Heard & Held
01/27/06 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
02/06/06 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/06/06 (H) Moved CSHB 379(JUD) Out of Committee
02/06/06 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
02/08/06 (H) JUD RPT CS(JUD) NT 3DP 1NR
02/08/06 (H) DP: WILSON, KOTT, MCGUIRE;
02/08/06 (H) NR: COGHILL
02/14/06 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/14/06 (H) Moved CSHB 379(JUD) Out of Committee
02/14/06 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
02/15/06 (H) FIN RPT CS(JUD) NT 9DP 1NR
02/15/06 (H) DP: STOLTZE, KERTTULA, JOULE, HAWKER,
WEYHRAUCH, MOSES, HOLM, FOSTER, MEYER;
02/15/06 (H) NR: KELLY
02/24/06 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
02/24/06 (H) VERSION: CSHB 379(JUD)
02/27/06 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/27/06 (S) HES, JUD
03/13/06 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/13/06 (S) Moved CSHB 379(JUD) Out of Committee
03/13/06 (S) MINUTE(HES)
03/15/06 (S) HES RPT 5DP
03/15/06 (S) DP: DYSON, ELTON, WILKEN, GREEN, OLSON
03/22/06 (S) JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: HB 318
SHORT TITLE: LIMITATION ON EMINENT DOMAIN
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) MCGUIRE, HOLM, HAWKER
01/09/06 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 12/30/05
01/09/06 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/09/06 (H) JUD, FIN
01/11/06 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
01/11/06 (H) Heard & Held
01/11/06 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
01/25/06 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
01/25/06 (H) Heard & Held
01/25/06 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
02/01/06 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/01/06 (H) -- Meeting Canceled --
02/03/06 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/03/06 (H) Moved CSHB 318(JUD) Out of Committee
02/03/06 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
02/06/06 (H) JUD RPT CS(JUD) NT 3DP 1NR 2AM
02/06/06 (H) DP: WILSON, ANDERSON, MCGUIRE;
02/06/06 (H) NR: GRUENBERG;
02/06/06 (H) AM: GARA, KOTT
02/09/06 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/09/06 (H) Moved CSHB 318(FIN) Out of Committee
02/09/06 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
02/10/06 (H) FIN RPT CS(FIN) NT 2DP 3NR 3AM
02/10/06 (H) DP: HAWKER, MEYER;
02/10/06 (H) NR: KERTTULA, JOULE, WEYHRAUCH;
02/10/06 (H) AM: STOLTZE, HOLM, FOSTER
02/21/06 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
02/21/06 (H) VERSION: CSHB 318(FIN) AM
02/22/06 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/22/06 (S) JUD, FIN
03/02/06 (S) JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
03/02/06 (S) Heard & Held
03/02/06 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
03/09/06 (S) JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
03/09/06 (S) Heard & Held
03/09/06 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
03/21/06 (S) JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
03/21/06 (S) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/22/06 (S) JUD AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
Michael Pawlowski, Legislative Aide
Staff to Representative Kevin Meyer
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HB 379
Annie Carpeneti, Assistant Attorney General
Department of Law
PO Box 110300
Juneau, AK 99811-0300
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding HB 379
Craig Johnson, Legislative Aide
Staff to Representative Lesil McGuire
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HB 318
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS called the Senate Judiciary Standing
Committee meeting to order at 8:39:27 AM. Present were Senators
Hollis French, Charlie Huggins, Gretchen Guess, and Chair Ralph
Seekins.
HB 379-CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES, INCL. ANALOGS
8:39:52 AM
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS announced CSHB 379(JUD) to be up for
consideration.
MICHAEL PAWLOWSKI, Staff to Representative Kevin Meyer
introduced the bill. Gamma-hydroxybutyric acid, otherwise known
as GHB, is a drug that, when ingested, elicits feelings similar
to intense intoxication. It is easily added to a drink,
difficult to detect, and leaves the system quickly. GHB has
become a popular "date rape" drug and has been recently elevated
at the federal level to a schedule 1 narcotic. The bill would
add the drug to Alaska's list of schedule 1A narcotics.
8:43:29 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS asked whether the Department of Law supports the
bill.
ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law
(DOL) said yes.
CHAIR SEEKINS noted there were no questions and no one signed up
to testify and so he closed public testimony.
8:45:14 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS moved CSHB 379(JUD) from committee with
individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes. Hearing no
objections, the motion carried.
HB 318-LIMITATION ON EMINENT DOMAIN
8:49:21 AM
CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS announced CSHB 318(FIN) AM to be up for
consideration.
SENATOR HOLLIS FRENCH commented that he read the Kelo case [Kelo
versus City of New London] and that the case centered on an
urban redevelopment plan in a downtrodden area of New London,
Connecticut. The upshot was that people who lived there for a
long time were going to lose their property. Pfizer was planning
on building a company there. The woman in the case lived in her
house since birth in 1918. The US Supreme Court 5-4 decision
upheld the taking and Justice O'Conner, who was opposed, wrote,
"Under the banner of economic development, all private property
is now vulnerable to being taken and transferred to another
private owner so long as it might be upgraded."
SENATOR FRENCH continued the decision that Alaska must make is
"what does public use mean?" Justice Thomas said that he would
revisit the public use clause and consider returning to the
original meaning of the public use clause - that the government
would take property only if it actually uses or gives the public
a legal right to use the property.
8:52:27 AM
SENATOR FRENCH stated the transfer of property simply for
upgrade is too great of power to put into the hands of
government and so he is behind that part of the bill.
8:53:48 AM
CRAIG JOHNSON, Staff to Representative Lesil McGuire, said the
overriding concern across the country is the taking of people's
homes. The home takes a little higher priority than perhaps a
back lot and there are provisions built into the bill that are
meant to protect the home.
8:57:26 AM
SENATOR GRETCHEN GUESS stated she had difficulty with the lack
of definition for "recreation."
MR. JOHNSON admitted that was a problematic thing to define.
9:01:19 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS said the intent of the committee was not to end up
with a 200-page document for the courts to have to deal with.
SENATOR FRENCH said the problem was with the intersection
between public use and recreational use. Justice O'Connor made
categories of what public use is. She said there are two easy
categories and there is a third hard one and that is where the
Kelo case came down. The two easy ones are controversial. First
the sovereign may transfer property to public ownership, such as
for a road, hospital or military base. Also the sovereign may
transfer private property to private parties who make the
property available to public use, such as a public utility or
railroad.
The conflict exists in a situation of a canoe launch at a river
and that splits the argument of whether that use was
recreational or not. He cited the example of the Seahawks
Stadium in Seattle where they tore down the stadium and built
another and that one could argue both ways of whether or not
that was recreational use or economical.
9:03:48 AM
SENATOR CHARLIE HUGGINS suggested they were witnessing a
scenario where the system went too far and so the bill seems to
swing too far the other way. He said he was uncomfortable with
the bill but supportive of the idea.
9:06:03 AM
SENATOR GUESS said the difficulty of the exemption on page 6,
line 4 was the phrase "rather than primarily for recreation,"
and the example that Senator French said could not be argued
under that provision because a road to a canoe launch could be
arguable.
MR. JOHNSON said the Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
drafted the language and the intent was to allow access to an
inaccessible trail.
SENATOR GUESS asked whether a for-profit hospital would be
excluded.
SENATOR FRENCH said yes, if it were defined as a private person.
CHAIR SEEKINS speculated that all committee members were in
favor of the concept of the bill but they want to make sure
there are no unacceptable unintended consequences. The Alaska
Municipal League (AML) approached him and asked the committee to
allow a city council, through public process, to be able to
override the provision.
9:09:45 AM
SENATOR FRENCH said the way the bill is phrased, the Legislature
can approve an economic taking of private-to-private transfer
but the Legislature cannot approve a recreational facility. The
exemption is listed in subsection (e). The local authority would
only extend to a private-to-private transfer and never to a
recreational facility.
MR. JOHNSON reported it was not the intent to have an absolute
moratorium on recreational facilities. He said he would have an
attorney look closer at that point and would accept a clause to
allow an out for that. As far as the municipality having an
overriding ability, that has been an item of discussion to date
and if they established a high level of standard to meet that
protects the intent of the bill then it could be acceptable.
9:14:18 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS asserted that a decision of that magnitude should
be made fully in the open with the people being able to comment
and vote on it. Because of the complex legal situations of the
day many things should be considered when considering the taking
of property.
SENATOR FRENCH reminded the committee that, in the Kelo case,
the city council had delegated the responsibility of the taking
of private land for economic development to a non-profit entity.
There was a lack of accountability and that could happen again.
9:16:33 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS said he saw an article where a New York mayor
proposed to use eminent domain to take a privately owned golf
course and give it to the area homeowners in order to increase
their property value.
SENATOR GUESS said people could easily get around the bill by
creating a non-profit entity. Also amendments can be put into a
bill at the final hour without going through a public hearing.
9:19:01 AM
MR. JOHNSON replied a non-profit by definition is considered a
private person so that would be private-to-private transfer.
9:23:13 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS said he has never seen a city take someone's back
yard for a municipal baseball field. The 250 linear feet
continues to be an object of discussion and some people would
prefer well over 1,000 feet. He asked whether the 250 feet came
about because of the coastal trail.
MR. JOHNSON responded that was not entirely correct. The bill
came about to protect private homes from municipalities. The 250
feet was an arbitrary number and ensures a certain amount of
privacy if someone were to take part of another's private rural
property.
9:28:31 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS said the committee would look at some of the
concerns and continue to hear the bill.
9:30:45 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS held the bill in committee.
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Seekins adjourned the meeting at 9:31:23 AM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|