Legislature(2023 - 2024)BUTROVICH 205
04/12/2023 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB28 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 28 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 28-WORKPLACE VIOLENCE PROTECTIVE ORDERS
2:31:12 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 28
"An Act relating to workplace violence protective orders;
relating to the crime of violating a protective order; relating
to the powers of district judges and magistrates; amending Rules
4 and 65, Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure, and Rule 9, Alaska
Rules of Administration; and providing for an effective date."
CHAIR CLAMAN advised that because he was the sponsor, he was
turning the gavel over to Senator Tobin while he introduced the
bill.
2:31:28 PM
At ease
2:31:47 PM
ACTING CHAIR TOBIN reconvened the meeting and asked the sponsor
to introduce the bill.
2:32:07 PM
SENATOR MATT CLAMAN, speaking as sponsor of SB 28, introduced
the bill speaking to the following prepared testimony:
A member of the legal community contacted our office
about a situation where a former employee made a
credible threat that he intended to go into the
employer's worksite and shoot as many people as he
could. When the attorney representing the employer
tried to obtain a restraining order, she realized that
to protect the employer, she would need to file a
civil lawsuit and ask for a temporary restraining
order. The process took several days to complete and
obtain the order. In contrast, people seeking a
domestic violence restraining order can usually get
the court order within one day.
Senate Bill 28, modeled after Alaska's domestic
violence protective order process, allows an employer
to file a petition for a protective order against an
individual who the employer reasonably believes
committed an act of violence against the employer or
an employee, or made a threat of violence against the
employer or an employee that can reasonably be
construed as a threat that may be carried out at the
employer's workplace. A violation of the provisions of
the protective order would be the crime of violating a
protective order, which is a class A misdemeanor.
The intent of Senate Bill 28 is to help prevent
incidents such as the fatal shooting of a hospital
employee by an ex-employee at the Soldotna Central
Peninsula General Hospital in November 2008. Eight
states have laws providing for the issuance of
workplace restraining orders and three states have the
option for employers to file the same type of orders
that are available to victims. Several other states
are currently considering related legislation.
Senate Bill 28 gives employers a more effective way to
protect their workplace and their employees from
threats of violence.
2:33:56 PM
LIZZIE KUBITZ, Staff, Senator Matt Claman, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, presented the sectional analysis
for version B of SB 28, which makes a minor change in Section 6.
She read the following:
Section 1
AS 11.56.740. Violating a protective order.
amends AS 11.56.740(a) by adding a new subsection (4)
to specify that a person commits the crime of
violating a protective order if the person knowingly
commits or attempts to commit an act that violates the
provisions listed under the workplace violence
protective order statutes.
Section 2
AS 11.56.740. Violating a protective order.
Amends AS 11.56.740(c) by adding the workplace
violence protective order statutes to the meaning of
"protective order."
Section 3
AS 18.65.530. Mandatory arrest for crimes involving
domestic violence, violation of protective orders, and
violation of conditions of release.
Amends AS 18.65.530(a) by clarifying that the
mandatory arrest statute for crimes involving domestic
violence, violation of protective orders, and
violation of conditions of release is subject to the
requirements of sec. 1.
Section 4
AS 18.65.540. Central registry of protective orders.
Amends AS 18.65.540(a) to add the workplace violence
protective order statutes to the central registry of
protective orders maintained by the Department of
Public Safety.
Section 5
AS 18.65.540. Central registry of protective orders.
Amends AS 18.65.540(b) to add the workplace violence
protective order statutes to the list of protective
orders a peace officer enters into the central
registry within 24 hours of receiving.
2:35:33 PM
Section 6
Amends AS 18.65 to add new section: "Article 12A.
Workplace Violence Protective Orders."
Sec. 18.65.875(a) Protective orders; eligible
petitioners; relief.
Section (a) gives employers the ability to file a
petition for a protective order against an individual
who the employer reasonably believes: (1) committed an
act of violence against the employer; (2) committed an
act of violence against an employee at the workplace;
or (3) made a threat of violence against the employer
or an employee that can reasonably be construed as a
threat that may be carried out at the employer's
workplace.
MS. KUBITZ explained that this is where version A and version B
vary. The Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault
(ANDVSA) expressed concern that an employer may seek a workplace
violence protective order on behalf of an employee that may be
experiencing interpersonal violence outside of the workplace.
Taking such action on behalf of the employee without consent
could be harmful and unsafe for that employee. Therefore,
subsection (b) clarifies that violence against an employee would
need to occur at the workplace for it to qualify. This ensures
that an employer is acting within their duty to provide a safe
working environment and not overstepping.
MS. KUBITZ continued:
Section (b) specifies that the court shall schedule a
hearing and provide at least 10 days' notice to the
respondent.
Section (c) details prohibited behavior of the
respondent after the protective order is issued.
Section (d) describes the court's responsibilities
related to issuing a protective order.
Section (e) clarifies a court may not deny a petition
for a protective order solely because of a lapse of
time between an act of violence or a threat of
violence and the filing of the petition.
Sec. 18.65.877. Ex parte protective orders for
workplace violence.
Gives employers the ability to file a petition for an
ex parte protective ordera temporary order that would
grant immediate protection.
Sec. 18.65.880. Modification of workplace violence
protective order.
Creates a process for either the petitioner or the
respondent to request modification of a protective
order.
Sec. 18.65.885. Specific protective orders.
Specifies that an invitation by the petitioner or a
named designated employee of the petitioner to
communicate with the petitioner or to be present at or
enter the workplace, residence, vehicle, or other
place does not in any way invalidate or nullify the
protective order.
Sec. 18.65.890. Forms for petitions and orders; fees.
Clarifies that the court system will prepare forms for
petitions, protective orders, and instructions for
their use by an employer seeking a protective order.
Sec. 18.65.895. Service of process.
Clarifies that protective orders should be promptly
served and executed.
Sec. 18.65.897. Civil liability.
Creates civil liability provisions.
Sec. 18.65.899. Definitions.
Makes the definitions of "course of conduct,"
"employee," "employer," "threat of violence,"
"violence," and "workplace" apply to the workplace
violence protective statutes.
Section 7
AS 22.15.100. Functions and powers of district judge
and magistrate.
Amends AS 22.15.100(9) by adding a new section (C) to
give district judges and magistrates the power to
issue a protective order in cases involving workplace
violence.
Section 8
Uncodified law Indirect court rule amendments.
Specifies amendments to Rule 4, Alaska Rules of Civil
Procedure, and Rule 9, Alaska Rules of Administration,
relating to fees and service of process for a
workplace violence protective order; and Rule 65,
Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure, by changing the
method for obtaining and the timing of temporary
restraining orders.
Section 9
Uncodified law - applicability.
Makes sec. 8 conditional on approval by the two-thirds
majority vote of each house required by art. IV, sec.
15, Constitution of the State of Alaska.
Section 10
Effective date.
If sec. 9 takes effect, it takes effect on January 1,
2024.
2:40:03 PM
ACTING CHAIR TOBIN asked if there were questions.
2:40:07 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL asked about Section 5, page 4, lines 14-16 that
says, "... may not deny a petition for a protective order solely
because of a lapse of time between an act of violence ... and
the filing of the petition." She asked if that language infers
no statute of limitations.
MS. KUBITZ stated that the section applies to retroactivity, but
she was unsure of any specified statute of limitations. She
deferred further response to the sponsor.
SENATOR CLAMAN replied that the bill tracks the language in the
domestic violence protective order statutes. He stated that the
similarity between the language in the domestic violence
protective order and the bill involves time. If an act occurred
a year ago, that is not a reason to deny the petition.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked about applicability if the act occurred
ten years ago.
SENATOR CLAMAN replied that he had experienced judges denying ex
parte petitions because the threat wasn't sufficiently present.
He imagined that the longer period would require further
inquiry. He opined that the petition process would be best
decided by the court.
2:43:10 PM
SENATOR KAUFMAN asked why a general restraining order would not
suffice. He wondered if the restraining order must be
articulated by location or venue.
SENATOR CLAMAN responded that the introduction to the bill
highlights the challenge associated with domestic violence
restraining orders. Alaska law provides a structure to get a
restraining order faster in the domestic violence context. The
bill attempts to create a similar structure for workplace
violence threats.
SENATOR KAUFMAN presumed that the established protective order
process should address all domestic violence and workplace
violence needs.
SENATOR CLAMAN responded that a change of that caliber would be
a policy call for the legislature. This bill makes it clear that
the legislature can expand the authority to issue protective
orders.
ACTING CHAIR TOBIN referenced page 3, lines 8-10. She asked if
the stipulations would prevent an employee from petitioning a
different type of protective order if the employer decided not
to petition a workplace violence protective order on behalf of
the employee.
MS. KUBITZ denied that the bill limited any other course of
action.
ACTING CHAIR TOBIN highlighted page 3, line 11. She asked what
an act of violence would look like if the employer was the
perpetrator.
SENATOR CLAMAN responded that the inquiry deserved further
study.
ACTING CHAIR TOBIN discussed people who travel for work. She
pointed to stipulation 2, on page 3, line 12, highlighting the
act of violence against the employee at the workplace. She
queried the process if a person's workplace was their vehicle.
2:50:38 PM
MS. KUBITZ replied that version B seeks to strike a balance. She
mentioned that other states added a stipulation that employers
must try to provide notice that a person is targeted. A good
faith effort does not imply consent to move forward with the
process, so the sponsor sought to strike a balance. She agreed
that the question deserved further consideration.
ACTING CHAIR TOBIN appreciated the commentary. She highlighted
workplace shifts since the pandemic, with many people working
from home. She asked about the definition of employer on page
8 under AS 18.80.300, which does not include religious
organizations. She queried the process if an employer is a
church.
MS. KUBITZ replied that the provision does not apply to religion
if the club, association, or appropriation is not an organized
non-profit organization.
ACTING CHAIR TOBIN mentioned an Alaskan non-profit organization
owned by a church. She pointed out rural Alaska challenges.
2:53:32 PM
SENATOR KAUFMAN asked about the linear sequence of events if a
person is threatened in the workplace.
SENATOR CLAMAN deferred to Nancy Meade.
2:54:27 PM
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel, Alaska Court System, Anchorage,
Alaska, replied that the legislation is meant to mirror the
existing provisions for domestic violence and stalking
protective orders. She pointed to page 3, lines 11-16. She noted
that committing an act of violence would be reported as a crime.
In this event, the defendant/perpetrator has a hearing in front
of the court within 24 hours. A bail order is set, and the
defendant/perpetrator would be told to stay away from the
person. If a crime is alleged, a protective order would not be
necessary. She stated that the threat of violence would be
handled differently, as stated on lines 14-16. The threat must
be reasonably construed to be carried out in the employer's
workplace.
MS. MEADE responded to Senator Kaufman's question. She stated
that domestic violence protective orders involving the threat of
violence are classified as immediate or long-term. A long-term
protective order can last for six months. She noted that most
petitioners request both types of protective orders. She pointed
to page 4, line 17 related to the process. The petitioner first
requests the hearing and provides information about the
complaint. The respondent is not present, hence the ex parte
classification.
MS. MEADE continued that the court must then find probable cause
that the violence or the recent threat of violence was made. The
second finding deems that it is necessary to protect the
petitioner. She mentioned the requirement to attempt to provide
notice to the respondent. The court can then issue the short-
term 20-day order. The court also informs the petitioner about a
hearing and the document is delivered to the police department
or state troopers who serve it to the respondent.
3:00:06 PM
At ease
3:00:25 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN reconvened the meeting and solicited a motion to
adopt the CS.
3:00:46 PM
SENATOR TOBIN moved to adopt the committee substitute (CS) for
SB 28, work order 33-LS0242\B, as the working document.
SENATOR CLAMAN found no objection and version B was adopted.
CHAIR CLAMAN turned to invited testimony.
3:01:28 PM
BRENDA STANFILL, Executive Director, Alaska Network on Domestic
Violence and Sexual Assault (ANDVSA), Juneau, Alaska, provided
invited testimony in support of SB 28. She explained that the
protective orders for domestic violence, sexual assault, and
stalking are tools used regularly for protection. She stated
that the legislation benefits people in rural areas. She shared
a story about people threatening staff as they come and go from
the workplace. Law enforcement is helpless, and SB 28 provides a
tool to be able to help protect them. She supported an avenue
for further protection in the workplace. She appreciated the
acknowledgement of the request that the bill addresses the
workplace alone for further protection of clients.
3:03:17 PM
SENATOR KIEHL joined the committee.
3:04:11 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN held SB 28 in committee for further consideration.