Legislature(1993 - 1994)

04/06/1994 01:00 PM House JUD

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
               HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE                              
                          April 6, 1994                                        
                            1:00 p.m.                                          
  MEMBERS PRESENT                                                              
  Representative Brian Porter, Chairman                                        
  Representative Jeannette James, Vice Chair                                   
  Representative Gail Phillips                                                 
  Representative Pete Kott                                                     
  Representative Joe Green                                                     
  Representative Cliff Davidson                                                
  Representative Jim Nordlund                                                  
  MEMBERS ABSENT                                                               
  OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT                                                    
  Representative Con Bunde                                                     
  COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                           
  HJR 48:   Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the                    
            State of Alaska relating to revenues from natural                  
            resources, the Alaska permanent fund, the                          
            appropriation limit and the  budget reserve fund;                  
            and providing for an effective date for the                        
            PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                            
  HB 337:   "An Act relating to the possession of controlled                   
            substances within 500 feet of recreation and youth                 
            centers; and permitting municipalities to install                  
            `drug-free recreation and youth center zone'                       
            PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                            
  HB 153:   "An Act relating to sentencing."                                   
            PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                            
  HB 417:   An Act relating to the possession of weapons                       
            within  the grounds of or on the parking lots of                   
            preschools, elementary, junior high, and secondary                 
            schools or while participating in  a school-                       
            sponsored event; and relating to school lockers                    
            and other containers provided in a public or                       
            private school by the school or the school                         
            PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                            
  HB  534:  "An Act relating to insurance, to the licensing,                   
            accreditation, examination, regulation, and                        
            solvency of persons engaged in the insurance                       
            business, including insurers, nonadmitted                          
            insurers, purchasing groups, risk retention                        
            groups, and United States branches of alien                        
            insurers; relating to the management of and the                    
            filing of reports by persons licensed or otherwise                 
            doing business under the insurance code; amending                  
            Alaska Rule of Civil Procedure 45; and providing                   
            for an effective date."                                            
            NOT HEARD                                                          
  WITNESS REGISTER                                                             
  MEL KROGSENG, Legislative Aide                                               
  Representative Ramona Barnes                                                 
  State Capitol, Room 208                                                      
  Juneau, AK 99801-1182                                                        
  Phone:  465-3438                                                             
  POSITION STATEMENT:                                                          
  JERRY LUCKHAUPT, Attorney                                                    
  Division of Legal Services                                                   
  Legislative Affairs Agency                                                   
  130 Seward Street, Rm 401                                                    
  Juneau, AK 99801                                                             
  Phone:  465-2450                                                             
  POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on HB 153                                     
  PATTY SWENSON, Legislative Aide                                              
  Representative Con Bunde                                                     
  State Capitol, Room 112                                                      
  Juneau, AK  99801=1182                                                       
  Phone:  465-4843                                                             
  POSITION STATEMENT:  Addressed CSHB 417                                      
  MARGOT KNUTH, Attorney                                                       
  Criminal Division                                                            
  Department of Law                                                            
  P.O. Box 110300                                                              
  Juneau, AK 99811-0300                                                        
  POSITION STATEMENT:  Supported CSHB 417                                      
  LARRY WIGET                                                                  
  Division of Governmental Relations                                           
  Anchorage School District                                                    
  P.O. Box 196614                                                              
  Anchorage, AK 99519-6614                                                     
  Phone:  269-2255                                                             
  POSITION STATEMENT:  Supported CSHB 417                                      
  REPRESENTATIVE CON BUNDE                                                     
  Alaska State Legislature                                                     
  State Capitol, Room 112                                                      
  Juneau, AK 99801-1182                                                        
  Phone:  465-4843                                                             
  POSITION STATEMENT:  Supported CSHB 417                                      
  PREVIOUS ACTION                                                              
  BILL:  HJR 48                                                                
  SHORT TITLE: RESTRUCTURE PERMANENT FUND                                      
  SPONSOR(S): FINANCE                                                          
  JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                     
  01/11/94      2032    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  01/11/94      2032    (H)   JUDICIARY, FINANCE                               
  02/02/94              (H)   JUD AT 01:15 PM CAPITOL 120                      
  02/02/94              (H)   MINUTE(JUD)                                      
  02/04/94              (H)   JUD AT 01:15 PM CAPITOL 120                      
  02/04/94              (H)   MINUTE(JUD)                                      
  02/07/94              (H)   JUD AT 01:15 PM CAPITOL 120                      
  02/07/94              (H)   MINUTE(JUD)                                      
  BILL:  HB 337                                                                
  SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)NORDLUND,Porter,Finkelstein,                    
  Davies, Phillips,B.Davis,Green,Nicholia,G.Davis,Toohey,                      
  JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                     
  01/03/94      2015    (H)   PREFILE RELEASED                                 
  01/10/94      2015    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  01/10/94      2015    (H)   HES, JUDICIARY                                   
  01/13/94      2055    (H)   COSPONSOR(S):  B. DAVIS                          
  01/14/94      2084    (H)   COSPONSOR(S):  GREEN                             
  01/18/94      2101    (H)   COSPONSOR(S):  NICHOLIA                          
  03/02/94              (H)   HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106                      
  03/02/94              (H)   MINUTE(HES)                                      
  03/03/94              (H)   MINUTE(HES)                                      
  03/04/94      2603    (H)   HES RPT  CS(HES) NEW TITLE                       
                              4DP  4NR                                         
  03/04/94      2603    (H)   DP:G.DAVIS,TOOHEY,NICHOLIA,                      
  03/04/94      2603    (H)   NR:VEZEY,KOTT,BUNDE,OLBERG                       
  03/04/94      2603    (H)   -3 ZERO FNS (LAW,DPS,CORR)                       
  03/04/94      2625    (H)   COSPONSOR(S):  G. DAVIS                          
  03/23/94      2952    (H)   COSPONSOR(S):  TOOHEY                            
  03/25/94              (H)   JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120                      
  04/06/94              (H)   JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120                      
  BILL:  HB 153                                                                
  SPONSOR(S): JUDICIARY BY REQUEST                                             
  JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                     
  02/15/93       345    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  02/15/93       345    (H)   STATE AFFAIRS,JUDICIARY,FINANCE                  
  02/27/93              (H)   STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102                      
  02/27/93              (H)   MINUTE(STA)                                      
  03/01/93       481    (H)   STA RPT  4DP                                     
  03/01/93       482    (H)   DP:VEZEY,B.DAVIS,OLBERG,G.DAVIS                  
  03/01/93       482    (H)   -ZERO FISCAL NOTE  (COURT)                       
  04/06/94              (H)   JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120                      
  BILL:  HB 417                                                                
  SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) BUNDE                                          
  JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                     
  01/31/94      2205    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  01/31/94      2205    (H)   HES, JUDICIARY                                   
  02/17/94              (H)   HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106                      
  02/17/94              (H)   MINUTE(HES)                                      
  02/22/94              (H)   MINUTE(HES)                                      
  02/24/94      2518    (H)   HES RPT CS(HES) NEW TITLE                        
                              4DP  4NR                                         
  02/24/94      2518    (H)   DP:G.DAVIS,BUNDE,TOOHEY,BRICE                    
  02/24/94      2518    (H)   NR:KOTT,VEZEY,OLBERG,NICHOLIA                    
  02/24/94      2518    (H)   -2 ZERO FISCAL NOTES (LAW, DPS)                  
  04/06/94              (H)   JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120                      
  BILL:  HB 534                                                                
  SHORT TITLE: OMNIBUS INSURANCE REFORM                                        
  SPONSOR(S): LABOR & COMMERCE                                                 
  JRN-DATE     JRN-PG               ACTION                                     
  03/18/94      2868    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  03/18/94      2868    (H)   L&C, JUDICIARY, FINANCE                          
  03/29/94              (H)   L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17                       
  03/29/94              (H)   MINUTE(L&C)                                      
  04/06/94              (H)   JUD AT 01:00 PM CAPITOL 120                      
  ACTION NARRATIVE                                                             
  TAPE 94-57, SIDE A                                                           
  Number 000                                                                   
  The House Judiciary Standing Committee was called to order                   
  on April 6, 1994.  A quorum was present.  CHAIRMAN PORTER                    
  stated that the committee would be hearing HJR 48, HB 337,                   
  HB 153, and HB 417.  He said the committee would not be                      
  hearing HB 534 because the Labor & Commerce Committee did                    
  not get it out of committee.  CHAIRMAN PORTER called on                      
  Representative Phillips, chairperson of the subcommittee for                 
  HJR 48 to talk about the subcommittee's work.                                
  HJR 48 - RESTRUCTURE PERMANENT FUND                                          
  REPRESENTATIVE GAIL PHILLIPS:  "Mr. Chairman, that was an                    
  interesting subcommittee, because we had to deal with an                     
  awful lot of material and come up with a workable decision                   
  for the House Judiciary Committee to take a responsible                      
  position.  After meeting quite  a few times and coming up                    
  with what we think is a workable solution, we did put                        
  together a packet that includes the bill as originally                       
  presented to us.  It includes a letter of intent that is                     
  fairly comprehensive as to what we think  needs to  be done.                 
  It includes a resolution that we would like to see                           
  addressed, a like resolution to be addressed by the Finance                  
  Committee with a general fiscal note  on it.  Basically,                     
  what we said is this legislative body does not have time or                  
  the wherewithal to deal with this subject during the                         
  legislative year, that we would recommend the bill go on to                  
  Finance, and that Finance look into creating a blue ribbon                   
  task force comprised of major Alaskans that are                              
  knowledgeable about the state government and state budgeting                 
  process, out of the private sector; and then highly                          
  technical members of both the legislative and administrative                 
  staffs that comprise this blue ribbon task force, that will                  
  look at not only the CREMO plan, but maybe other plans that                  
  have been turned in, and come up during their investigation.                 
  And they be required to spend a lot of time looking at all                   
  the ramifications of the CREMO plan.  We did list quite a                    
  few policy issues that we felt should be addressed before we                 
  have a document that is ready to take to the public, and we                  
  would  like to pass the letter of intent with our                            
  recommendations with the bill onto the Finance Committee."                   
  Number 091                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "As a member of the subcommittee,                  
  I support that, and would certainly hope that the Finance                    
  Committee can do what we suggest, and if they have time in                   
  the evenings, or whatever, to take a look at the CREMO                       
  proposal itself,  and try to begin to answer some of these                   
  questions, or at least begin the research or get the wheels                  
  in motion to answer some of these questions.  I certainly                    
  support passing out the bill today.  I would like the                        
  opportunity to add a couple of things to the letter of                       
  intent.  I am sorry I did not get that done.  I apologize.                   
  I was given plenty of opportunity and I was late, but I                      
  would really appreciate it if we could take action to pass                   
  the bill out today.  One of the questions I think should be                  
  asked is - it's not clear in the legislation - `What are the                 
  sources of revenue that would be required to go into the                     
  principal of the permanent fund under the CREMO plan?'                       
  There is some question that income taxes that would be                       
  derived from people who earn income off of resource related                  
  jobs would go into it, that some similar sales taxes could                   
  possibly be construed as needing to go into the fund,  and                   
  it would be my hope that  that wouldn't happen, and I think                  
  that's an issue that should be addressed.  I had a couple of                 
  notes on other things that I would want to add there.                        
  Again, they are just questions.  They are not controversial,                 
  so I would like to bring those up with the Chair of the                      
  subcommittee and add them to the letter.                                     
  REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS said she had no problem with that at                 
  CHAIRMAN PORTER said what he would do then would be to                       
  initially entertain a motion to adopt the draft letter of                    
  intent as a working document for the letter of intent.                       
  Number 132                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE GREEN moved to adopt the draft letter of                      
  Number 143                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER asked if there was any objection.  He said,                  
  "If not, we have a letter of intent before us.  I think for                  
  just purposes of consensus, if there is no objection, I will                 
  finalize the letter of intent with the items that                            
  Representative Nordlund would like to add and attached that                  
  to the bill and pass it along.  So with that in mind, I                      
  would entertain a motion to move the bill with the adopted                   
  letter of intent."                                                           
  REPRESENTATIVE GREEN agreed to move the letter of intent and                 
  HJR 48 to the Finance Committee.                                             
  Number 180                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "The only discussion necessary would be                    
  the Chairman's thanks and sincere appreciation to the                        
  subcommittee for working diligently on what had to be quite                  
  a task, and I thoroughly agree and support your decision.                    
  This is something of the magnitude we should not try to                      
  resolve at one of our round tables in the Judiciary                          
  Committee, although we are good at that.  This might be a                    
  little bit more expansive than that process would allow for                  
  accomplishment.  With that in mind, is there objection?  If                  
  not, HJR 48, with the letter of intent is moved on to the                    
  Finance Committee.  Now, we have HB 337, Drug free                           
  recreation and youth center."                                                
  HB 337 - DRUG FREE RECREATION AND YOUTH CENTERS                              
  Number 184                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "Thank you, Mr. Chairman for                       
  scheduling this bill.  It's really a pretty simple concept.                  
  It's an expansion of the current law we have which provides                  
  for drug free schools.  It expands that concept to include                   
  an area 500 feet around youth and recreation center that are                 
  operated by a municipality or by the state.  Basically, it                   
  increases the penalties by one notch, for instance from a                    
  Class A misdemeanor to a Class C felony for possession of                    
  controlled substances.  It increases the penalties for                       
  possession in those zones.   The need for the bill, Mr.                      
  Chairman, comes from a problem in my district surrounding                    
  the Spenard rec center.  I've gotten reports that,                           
  ironically,  the place where you send kids to play and have                  
  recreational activities, are actually being approached in                    
  the parking lot by people wanting to sell drugs.  It is an                   
  expansion of the drug free zones around the schools                          
  presently.  There is no fiscal note with the bill.   The                     
  bill does provide for  municipalities to erect signs if they                 
  so choose, and in the case of our community, I'm sure they                   
  will probably choose to do that.  They can also post signs                   
  in the rec centers, themselves, that would alert potential                   
  drug dealers that this is not a place that they are invited,                 
  by any means, to do  business.  That is basically what the                   
  bill does."                                                                  
  REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS:  "Thank you, Mr. Chairman.                          
  Representative Nordlund, I certainly agree with the concept                  
  of your bill, and will support it.  I have one question,                     
  however.  On the designation of recreation or youth center,                  
  will there be any problem with private versus public                         
  facilities?  Are we making this inclusive to any kind of                     
  facility, regardless of ownership?"                                          
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "Thank you, Mr. Chair.  That's a                   
  good question.  When we originally had the bill drafted, it                  
  included all recreation centers, regardless of whether they                  
  would be operated by nonprofit, or whatever.  In talking to                  
  the Departments of Law and Public Safety, they thought the                   
  definition was too broad, so we narrowed it down to rec                      
  centers that are operated by municipalities, or by the                       
  state.  Otherwise, it would be virtually impossible to                       
  enforce all the areas that were included in the original                     
  version of the bill."                                                        
  Number 252                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT:  "Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I guess                     
  I've got a couple of questions that the sponsor might be                     
  able to answer.  Do we have any estimate as to what these                    
  signs might cost?  I envision actually allowing                              
  municipalities to post signs at recreational facilities or                   
  youth center, ballparks, playgrounds, and what not.  But                     
  when we look at the total numbers and the total cost,                        
  because this is a little bit different than hanging a sign                   
  like `School Zone', where it's just attached to the post, we                 
  are talking about a whole new feature, if in fact, we are                    
  talking about the same kind of vehicle for the sign to be                    
  embedded on.  Or are we talking about placing a sign on,                     
  let's say, a building.  I'm not clear."                                      
  Number 275                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "I have something here from the                    
  Department of Transportation that says, `large sign                          
  contracts average approximately $50 per square foot for                      
  installed sign.  Including the need to locate signs rather                   
  accurately, the estimated cost per sign is conservatively                    
  $150 a piece.'  Again, this is something that would be up to                 
  the municipality to decide the size of the sign, where they                  
  would be located, and even whether or not they wanted to put                 
  the sign up, given their own budget constraints.  There is                   
  no mandate here."                                                            
  Number 292                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT:  "And that kind of is what I'm leading                  
  to.  I certainly support the idea.  I am just wondering how                  
  effective it would actually be, considering the budget                       
  constraints of many municipalities around -- and just $150                   
  per -- and I don't know how many facilities this would apply                 
  to.  Do you have any numbers just for Anchorage alone?"                      
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "No, Mr. Chairman, I don't have                    
  any numbers as to how many signs would be necessary to                       
  effectively post the area, or not necessarily an indication                  
  of whether or not they would, other than the fact that we                    
  got letters of support from Chief O'Leary, and the                           
  Department of Parks and Recreation, and various entities in                  
  our community, indicating they would like to have this as an                 
  additional tool for enforcement."                                            
  Number  316                                                                  
  REPRESENTATIVE GREEN:  "As Representative Nordlund points                    
  out, the city of Kenai goes along with it.   There is                        
  overwhelming support from various types of groups, as well                   
  as various cities."                                                          
  REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS:  "Thank you, Mr. Chairman.                          
  Representative Nordlund.  The permissiveness in the signage,                 
  that was done in order for us not to do an unfunded mandate                  
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "Mr. Chairman, these are programs                  
  that are operated by municipalities, and I think it should                   
  be up to them to decide how - including this particular                      
  aspect of signage for a criminal offense - it should be up                   
  to the municipalities to decide on whether on where to put                   
  them and if they want to put them..."                                        
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT:  "Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I'm                         
  wondering if I might offer what I call a friendly amendment                  
  to page four, line 19, and insert after `may' the word                       
  `prominently' post  a sign.  We are in  fact, increasing the                 
  penalty.  I think at least it should be apparent that we                     
  are, in fact, entering a drug-free recreational zone or                      
  area. And if it is going to be on a building, let's not put                  
  it on the side of a  door, where you can't see it from the                   
  front of the building."                                                      
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "Mr. Chairman, I would certainly                   
  consider that a friendly amendment."                                         
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "Let me see if I understand the amendment.                 
  On page four, line 19 we would be inserting the word                         
  `prominently' -- `may prominently post a sign at each                        
  recreation and  youth center.'  Is there any discussion on                   
  the amendment?  Is there objection to the amendment?"                        
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "Mr. Chairman, the word                            
  `prominently' might fit in better after the  word `sign.'                    
  `May post a sign prominently.'"                                              
  CHAIRMAN PORTER AND REPRESENTATIVE KOTT agreed with that.                    
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "So, the amendment to the amendment would                  
  be to move `prominently' the word, not the act, `may post a                  
  sign prominently at each recreation and youth center.'"                      
  REPRESENTATIVE GREEN:  "To the maker of that amendment, is                   
  there any merit to doing that in both one and two?"                          
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "I suppose as the maker of the                     
  amendment, there could possibly could be some merit with the                 
  exception that I believe that when we look at the drug-free                  
  zone signs, they are generally attached to the school or                     
  entering the school zones, so I think in those cases, it                     
  would be fairly prominent."                                                  
  REPRESENTATIVE GREEN:  "The reason I brought that up is in                   
  two they `may' and in one they `shall' and it seems almost                   
  backwards that you may post a prominent sign, but in the                     
  other one, you shall post a sign, it just doesn't have to be                 
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "Well, I would be hesitate to                              
  (indiscernible) right now, because that is existing law and                  
  it may affect signs already up."                                             
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "Mr. Chairman, they might have to                  
  (indiscernible), they might have to go back and take another                 
  look at where they're posting a sign and somebody might                      
  argue that they are not prominently posted, and get into all                 
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "Okay, with no objection, we will consider                 
  that we have adopted amendment number 1, which is now                        
  placement of the word `prominently' between `sign' and `at'                  
  on line 19, page four.  And Representative Phillips."                        
  REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS:  "I would be honored to move the                    
  bill, if that would be appropriate at this time.  I would                    
  move that we move HB 337 out of Judiciary, with individual                   
  recommendations and zero fiscal notes."                                      
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "Is there discussion?  Is there objection?                 
  HB 337 is moved."                                                            
  HB 153 - GOOD TIME: PT. MACKENZIE REHAB PROJECT                              
  Number 417                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "We have next, HB 153 reduction of                         
  presumptive sentences and we have with us, a representative                  
  of Madam Speaker, who is going to tell us about this bill."                  
  Number 420                                                                   
  MEL KROGSENG, Staff assistant to Speaker, Ramona Barnes.                     
  She said, "The Speaker would ask that the Committee                          
  Substitute in lieu of the original bill, a Committee                         
  Substitute with a new title, which would read, "An Act                       
  related to the awarding of special good time deductions for                  
  prisoners participating in the Point MacKenzie                               
  Rehabilitation Project, and providing for an effective                       
  date."  The reason for this Committee Substitute is                          
  basically that, according to letters that have been sent by                  
  some of the superintendents in institutions to the chief                     
  classifications officer of the Department of Corrections,                    
  there seems to be reluctance on the part of inmates wanting                  
  to volunteer to go to Point MacKenzie because of a perceived                 
  notion - some of it is not perceived, some of it is actual -                 
  that there are not the same benefits at Point MacKenzie that                 
  there are in the regular conventional institutions.  The                     
  reason that those benefits are not there, is that Point                      
  MacKenzie is a farm.  It is a prison farm, it is not an                      
  institution.  Therefore, we believe that it does not fall                    
  under the Cleary decision.  We are not required to have a                    
  library there, and all the other requirements of Cleary.  In                 
  order to keep this in this category, it is thought that it                   
  is essential that inmates volunteer to go there, rather than                 
  be simply assigned there.  I have provided you with a packet                 
  which is labeled, `Active Inmate Profiles' which was run                     
  from the state OBSCIS system, Correction's computer system,                  
  on inmates, and if you would look at the second page two,                    
  you'll notice that there is the custody level classification                 
  on the left side at the top.  There are 481 minimum custody                  
  prisoners as of March 28, and 96 community custody prisoners                 
  sitting in hard beds in our institutions last week.  That's                  
  a total of 577 under the existing classification system, who                 
  would be eligible to go to Point MacKenzie.  However, again,                 
  I believe there is a letter in your file that Mr. Ken Brown,                 
  Superintendent at Wildwood wrote to Bob Spinde who is our                    
  chief classification officer, saying that the inmates were                   
  reluctant to volunteer to go to Point MacKenzie.  So Speaker                 
  feels very strongly that it would be appropriate to develop                  
  an incentive program.  The incentive program that is being                   
  proposed in this Committee Substitute is a special good time                 
  incentive.  For each full month for an inmate who volunteers                 
  to go to Project Hope - for each full month of participation                 
  at Project Hope, the inmate, upon recommendation of the                      
  project manager, would be credited with three days of                        
  special good time.  This would be in addition to the regular                 
  good time that they are already eligible to receive.  This                   
  good time would not be revocable unless the inmate were                      
  involuntary removed from Project Hope or Point MacKenzie for                 
  bad behavior.  The project manager would post a set of rules                 
  which would list appropriate behavior and inappropriate                      
  behavior examples.  As long as the inmate was not                            
  involuntarily removed for inappropriate behavior, then the                   
  good time would be irrevocable.  So that should be a pretty                  
  good incentive.                                                              
  "I might tell you that as of this morning there were 54                      
  prisoners at Project Hope.  You were, I believe, given a                     
  copy of the proposed CS yesterday - that was changed this                    
  morning for two reasons.  One, Point MacKenzie was spelled                   
  incorrectly in the original proposed CS, and additionally,                   
  no provision had been made for the inmates who are already                   
  there who volunteered to go there with no additional                         
  incentive.  And we certainly didn't want to penalize those                   
  people because they have been doing a real bang up job for                   
  us and the program is starting to move forward.  We had a                    
  visit yesterday from Mr. Bernie Carl from Fairbanks, who                     
  donated the first set of ATCO trailers.  He tells us the                     
  state owns another camp at Prudhoe Bay - the Prudhoe Bay                     
  Hotel, I believe it's called.  It is owned by DOT at this                    
  point.  He has offered to house, feed, help in any way he                    
  can for us to go up with inmates, as we did before and                       
  remove that camp, and bring it down to either be used at                     
  Project Hope or at Palmer Minimum, as a potential minimum                    
  custody facility.  There are some real good things happening                 
  out at Project Hope.  We just simply need to have a little                   
  further enticement to get inmates out there and the Project                  
  Director, Mr. Michael Dindinger tells me he feels very                       
  comfortable that they could use 160 prisoners total out                      
  there this year, as long  as we can sort of give them the                    
  enticement to come out there."                                               
  CHAIRMAN PORTER asked Ms. Krogseng to give the executive                     
  summary for the record.                                                      
  MS. KROGSENG read the following Sponsor Statement:  "The                     
  Department of Corrections is currently experiencing a                        
  problem with overcrowding in our institutions.  The proposed                 
  Committee Substitute for House Bill 153 (Judiciary) is                       
  introduced to address two issues.  First, it will help                       
  alleviate the overcrowding problem, and secondly, it will                    
  help attract volunteers for the Point MacKenzie                              
  rehabilitation project.  Presently, inmates appear concerned                 
  that the benefits at Point MacKenzie are fewer than those in                 
  the conventional institutions.  Consequently, they are                       
  hesitant to volunteer.  This proposed legislation will                       
  provide an incentive for inmates to participate in the                       
  program.  By implementing a special good time statute, we                    
  believe inmates will volunteer to serve their time at the                    
  Point MacKenzie rehabilitation project instead of in one of                  
  the conventional institutions.  At Point MacKenzie, there                    
  are no fences, other than for the reindeer.  There are no                    
  lock-down facilities, and all inmates must be minimum                        
  custody level, or lower.  Presently, there are over 550                      
  inmates in our system that are classified appropriately, for                 
  placement at Point MacKenzie, but some form of incentive is                  
  needed to entice volunteers.  Under this legislation, each                   
  inmate who participates in the Point MacKenzie                               
  rehabilitation project will be entitled to three days of                     
  special good time for each full month served at Point                        
  MacKenzie.  This good time will be irrevocable once credited                 
  against the inmate's sentence, unless the inmate is                          
  involuntarily removed from the project for inappropriate                     
  behavior.  The inmate's record will be reviewed by the                       
  project manager to determine if a recommendation is to be                    
  forwarded to the commissioner for the crediting of the good                  
  time against the inmate's sentence.  Not all inmates who                     
  volunteer will  be selected.  Each inmate will be thoroughly                 
  screened by the chief of security at Point MacKenzie and/or                  
  his or her designee.  If the chief of security feels that an                 
  inmate will not be a suitable candidate, that inmate will                    
  not be selected for placement at Point MacKenzie."                           
  Number 551                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "Thank you, Mr. Chairman.                          
  Shouldn't there be some fiscal savings?"                                     
  Number 558                                                                   
  MS. KROGSENG:  "Mr. Chairman, Representative Nordlund.  Yes,                 
  I would think this would provide the department with a cost                  
  savings, how much I can't say for certain at this time, but                  
  it certainly will not, I don't believe it will cost us any                   
  money, but it should save money, because our inmates would                   
  be getting out earlier than they would otherwise."                           
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "But their fiscal note is not                      
  complete yet, is that...."                                                   
  MS. KROGSENG:  "I guess I would ask the committee to adopt a                 
  zero fiscal note and say that it was an oversight on our                     
  part yesterday, not to have that done."                                      
  Number 571                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS:  "Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  How                     
  many people are out at Point MacKenzie right now?  And how -                 
  - currently how many can they house?"                                        
  MS. KROGSENG answered that there were 54 inmates at present,                 
  and as soon as the kitchen is complete, the capacity will be                 
  160.  She said the department does not oppose this                           
  Number  594                                                                  
  REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS:  "When we need these kinds of                       
  minimum security beds so badly, why do we have a facility                    
  that people have to go to voluntarily, though.  Why do we                    
  not just mandate that they go there?"                                        
  Number 600                                                                   
  MS. KROGSENG:  "Chairman Porter, Representative Phillips, if                 
  we were to mandate it, there is concern that the counsel for                 
  the inmates who represented them in Cleary, might then say                   
  this is an institution, which would then require us to                       
  provide all the same programs and services, facilities,                      
  libraries, and so forth, that are provided in all the other                  
  institutions.   We believe very strongly, that the inmates                   
  will volunteer to go if there is a little more incentive.                    
  We have been told, according to Mr. Brown, as I mentioned in                 
  the letter that you have, that the reason the inmates don't                  
  want to go there are thus and such.  However, we have also                   
  received calls from employees within the Department of                       
  Corrections, whose names will remain anonymous, who tell us                  
  that although the material is being provided to them that                    
  says Point MacKenzie is thus and so, that by word of mouth                   
  they are being told, `Why would you want to go to Project                    
  Hope?  All you're going to get to do is work 12 hours a day,                 
  seven days a week.  It's a long way out there, there are no                  
  programs, your family cannot visit' -which is not true -                     
  it's been made into a very doom and gloom type scenario.                     
  There is a prisoner who was scheduled to go to Project Hope,                 
  and had been screened by security, who was a master                          
  mechanic, who they really needed out there, and just before                  
  he was to be transferred out there, he changed his mind                      
  because somebody talked him out of it.  I don't have any                     
  concrete evidence, but that's the sort of thing that's                       
  happening, and it's not just in one institution,  we've had                  
  calls from employees in several institutions.  Speaker felt                  
  very strongly that this is a good program.  We think there's                 
  a lot of potential at Project Hope, given the opportunity to                 
  have the program really  get going, so consequently the idea                 
  for some kind of incentive."                                                 
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "And I should add, when you mentioned the                  
  requirement for libraries, this doesn't presume normal                       
  libraries - the Cleary requires for law libraries, with a                    
  law clerk."                                                                  
  MS. KROGSENG:  "Yes, sir.  Mr. Chairman, if I might take                     
  just take another moment of the committee's time, just to                    
  bring you up to date on a couple of things that are                          
  happening out at Project Hope already.  There is, as you may                 
  or may not have heard, in each institution we have to                        
  provide an educational counselor.  I think you'll find that                  
  this `Active Inmate Profile' is very interesting, if you can                 
  take the time to look through it because it tells you how                    
  many people in the institutions, out of our almost 3,000                     
  inmates, have a GED, how many have completed a high school                   
  education, how many have not, how many have a four-year                      
  degree, how many do not.  We're paying thousands of dollars                  
  for education programs.  We have 47 inmates out of almost                    
  3,000 who've gotten a GED.  That seems to be, I'm told, the                  
  biggest issue in the institutions as far as education is                     
  concerned.  There is a program at Project Hope right now - a                 
  GED program - being run by the inmates, it is accredited by                  
  the State Board of Education and inmates are teaching other                  
  inmates and helping them to get their GED.  There is a fire                  
  training program which will provide forest fire training.                    
  The inmates will get a state certificate that has no                         
  reference to Project Hope, or to the Department of                           
  Corrections.  They will be certified firefighters.  They                     
  will, in addition to being able to, when they complete their                 
  sentence, go out and obtain work in this area of labor, they                 
  will also provide volunteer firefighter services for the                     
  Point MacKenzie area.  There is no fire department out there                 
  at all.  There's just a tremendous amount of potential to be                 
  had at Project Hope, if we can get it really rolling.  It's                  
  picking up steam - it just needs a little more impetus.  And                 
  the people that are out there - Mr. Carl that I referenced                   
  before, has two men right now who have been released, who                    
  are working for him on the North Slope.  He said he would                    
  like to hire everyone who's released because when the men                    
  went up and took down the camp to bring it down, they did                    
  such an excellent job.  Give them a little incentive.  Give                  
  them the idea that they're worthwhile and they can make a                    
  contribution.  There is potentially hope for some of these                   
  folks down the road."                                                        
  REPRESENTATIVE GREEN:  "Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  If this                    
  can be brought about, there's 110 or so beds in other                        
  institutions that would be freed up and I think this is an                   
  excellent, excellent chance to do that."                                     
  Number 674                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "The good time reduction of the                    
  sentence here amounts to three days out of a month is                        
  essentially 10 percent.  Under the regular good time, what                   
  is the reduction for that?"                                                  
  Number 680                                                                   
  JERRY LUCKHAUPT:  "For the record, my name is Jerry                          
  Luckhaupt, Division of Legal Services.  Right now, inmates                   
  get one-third of whatever their sentence is.  One-third                      
  comes off the top. When they come in the institution -- it's                 
  a record keeping measure -- they take one-third off.  When                   
  the person finishes serving the two-thirds of their                          
  sentence, they are then released on mandatory probation, if                  
  they haven't screwed up while they've been in the                            
  penitentiary and they serve out on mandatory parole that                     
  remaining one-third of their sentence.  Add on -- this extra                 
  three days a month would add on to that period of time and                   
  so it would be subtracted off of that one-third, it would                    
  continue stair-stepping down, so it would actually increase                  
  their time on mandatory parole.  In a lot of cases, that                     
  mandatory parole gives you a bit of a hammer over the inmate                 
  when he gets out and back into society.  They know that they                 
  just can't revert back to their previous bad behavior.  In a                 
  lot of situations that mandatory parole is not supervised in                 
  most cases, right at first it is, and then gradually moves                   
  into an unsupervised sort of routine."                                       
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "What kinds of folks go to Point                   
  MacKenzie - you know, what kind of crimes have they                          
  committed. Any time you have another bill dealing with                       
  furloughs and we're talking about good times, and basically                  
  relieving people of their sentences, it's always a concern                   
  to the public that you're letting people back in society                     
  sooner than maybe you want to and I'm just trying to figure                  
  out who we're letting off the hook here."                                    
  Number 706                                                                   
  MS. KROGSENG:  "Mr. Chairman, Representative Nordlund, it's                  
  my understanding that the department's policy is that no                     
  untreated sex offenders would be allowed out there                           
  regardless of custody level, but they must be minimum                        
  custody or lower, which would be community.  And as I said,                  
  as of March 28, there are 577 inmates at those two custody                   
  levels - community and minimum.  I might also tell you that                  
  on this run that I had done, there's a crime category and                    
  out of the 2800 inmates that were in the institutions on                     
  March 28, 1414 were crimes of violence, 283 crimes against                   
  property, 314 crimes of substance abuse, crimes of other                     
  categories were 793.  Now part of those could be                             
  unsentenced, certainly because we've had 700 and some                        
  inmates who had not been sentenced yet and they're not                       
  classified until after that.  There were 577 with the                        
  appropriate classification."                                                 
  Number 721                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "So the decision on who can                        
  participate in the program is made on the security risk, as                  
  opposed to the crime they committed?"                                        
  Number 724                                                                   
  MS. KROGSENG:  "Yes, that's correct.  And as I understand                    
  it, Mike Newman who is the chief of security, goes                           
  personally and interviews each potential candidate to go to                  
  Point MacKenzie, and I'm told that he looks them eyeball to                  
  eyeball and says to them, `Are you ready to be my roommate                   
  for a month?' And he's been a CO, I believe, for about 17                    
  years.  He has, I believe, a very good understanding of who                  
  would be a potentially good candidate and who would not.                     
  And he has, in fact, rejected someone that was brought out                   
  there, stayed for one day, and was returned to the                           
  institution because they did not like the behavior he was                    
  displaying immediately.  And that's very critical for this                   
  project to succeed, because there are no fences."                            
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT:  "Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I think one                 
  of my questions has already been answered, but the                           
  subsequent one is, can you tell us what you used as a yard                   
  stick or measurement to come up with three days.  What's so                  
  magical about the three days?"                                               
  Number 738                                                                   
  MS. KROGSENG:  "Mr. Chairman, Representative Kott.  The old                  
  statute - the old good time statute which, I believe a copy                  
  has been put in your packet, allowed for crediting of three                  
  days for each month of actual (indiscernible) in a prisoner                  
  camp project or activity for the first year or any part of                   
  it and not to exceed five days for each month of any                         
  succeeding year.  Now, we've left it at three.  We've not                    
  provided for any increase."                                                  
  Number 748                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE DAVIDSON:  "Ms. Krogseng, why is it that                      
  there are not these facilities -- we saw this list in here                   
  of the things people were not going there because of -- why                  
  aren't those other than what we've mentioned as far as the                   
  law library.  Is that why there isn't kind of a -- can we                    
  get by with a partial type of library -- or some of these                    
  other substance abuse programs or other educational programs                 
  available at Point MacKenzie?"                                               
  Number 762                                                                   
  MS. KROGSENG:  "Mr. Chairman, Representative Davidson, I                     
  believe that eventually probably some of them will be                        
  available, especially the substance abuse counseling.  I                     
  know there is a plan to have a substance abuse program                       
  there.  However, we don't want to have it mandated.  Because                 
  if one is mandated, then the next thing you know, another                    
  requirement will be added, we believe, and another, and                      
  another, and another.  It's a farm - a work farm.  The idea                  
  is that in addition to providing training for the inmates,                   
  it could and hopefully should, and will in the long run                      
  provide sufficient food to feed the prison population, at                    
  least up in the central and northern part of the state.                      
  That's basically why.  I'm sure there will be a library of                   
  sorts out there, but we don't want it to be mandated.  We                    
  don't want it to be anything considered to be even remotely                  
  close to Cleary."                                                            
  REPRESENTATIVE GREEN:  "Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I think                    
  the whole concept and (indiscernible) keeping it away from                   
  Cleary is an outstanding idea, because it's about half the                   
  cost of a regular institution.  We go a screen..."                           
  MS. KROGSENG:  "One-third."                                                  
  REPRESENTATIVE GREEN:  "One-third.  The incarceration time                   
  dropped from 33 1/3 percent to 40 percent and they'll serve                  
  60 percent.  That seems to be a real good compromise to                      
  accomplish two things.  I think it would be a benefit to                     
  those who are incarcerated, as well as to the state,                         
  obviously in a fiscal crisis year, without jeopardizing                      
  safety to the public.  So, it seems like it's about a three-                 
  way win, win, win situation."                                                
  REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS:  "Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I think                 
  this is a very good idea.  I know if I was in jail, I                        
  certainly would much rather go out to a work farm than I                     
  would to sit in jail - in a prison all day.  And I would                     
  move that we move House Bill 153, Draft K dated 4/6/94 and                   
  no fiscal note, out of Judiciary with individual                             
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "Is there discussion?  Representative                      
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "Mr. Chairman, I would move that                   
  we adopt the CS if we haven't already done so."                              
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "Well, I think that was part of the motion                 
  -the CS, dated 4/6/94."                                                      
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES:  "Yes, I just have only one comment.                   
  I grew up in Oregon where we have the prison farm which is a                 
  very successful operation.  It was fenced, however, but I                    
  know that they were very productive, and they did pay their                  
  own way in many of the years, so I support this concept."                    
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "I guess just for the record, I should add                 
  that the first ten years or so of my time in Anchorage, the                  
  Police Department ran an honor farm with the same                            
  principles.  And on most occasions, there was one person                     
  looking after about 50 guys.  No problems."                                  
  MS. KROGSENG:  "Mr. Chairman, if I might, I believe Mr.                      
  Dindinger on the farm that he ran back in Wyoming or                         
  Oklahoma had 130 some inmates, had 10 personnel, and in the                  
  two or three years he was there, had one minor incident and                  
  that was it.  And it is very cost effective.  The beds, we                   
  anticipate, should run about $35 a day and then..."                          
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND asked if this was the only committee                 
  of referral for this bill.                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER responded he did not know.                                   
  MS. KROGSENG:  "Mr. Chairman, Representative Nordlund, yes,                  
  it was."                                                                     
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "I think we need to have a fiscal                  
  note before we pass it out."                                                 
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "Very good idea.  Within the discussion of                 
  the motion, could we say that we will include a zero fiscal                  
  note signed by the committee?"                                               
  The committee was in agreement.                                              
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "Although one from Corrections                     
  would be good - I think it'd be a positive fiscal note and                   
  that would do more good for the bill than just a zero fiscal                 
  note from this committee."                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "We'll endeavor to do that."                               
  MS. KROGSENG:  "I will contact the department.  Thank you."                  
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "Which would negate the zero from us.  Is                  
  there further discussion?  If not, the bill is moved."                       
  CSHB 417 - POSSESSION OF FIREARMS IN SCHOOL LOCKERS                          
  Number 833                                                                   
  PATTY SWENSON:  "My name is Patty Swenson, and I'm a member                  
  of Representative Bunde's staff.  HB 417 basically allows                    
  school lockers to be searched after the publication of a                     
  notice for at least two weeks.  And it makes the existing                    
  crime of misconduct involving a weapon in the fourth degree,                 
  a Class A misdemeanor.  I think that - please just ask me                    
  some questions and I'll try to answer them.  Margot Knuth is                 
  here to also answer questions."                                              
  Number 846                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "Thank you.  I didn't see anything                 
  in the back-up regarding any possible constitutional                         
  problems of search and seizure issues and it wasn't                          
  addressed in any of the back-up and I was wondering what the                 
  answer to that..."                                                           
  Number 852                                                                   
  MARGOT KNUTH, Criminal Division, Department of Law:  "There                  
  is a United States Supreme Court decision indicating that                    
  searches such as this are not violative of rights of                         
  privacy, or the prohibition against unreasonable search and                  
  seizures under the United States Constitution.  And we also                  
  have two Alaska Supreme Court decisions that have touched on                 
  this issue.  Neither of them directly, but both of them are                  
  indicative that this would be constitutional.  And the                       
  reason has to do with the school owns these lockers, and                     
  they are provided to students.  If you provide notice that                   
  lets the students know that their lockers may be searched,                   
  this is considered reasonable balancing between the                          
  student's right of privacy in the space that they are using,                 
  with the state's need for providing a safe area for                          
  education to be going on.  The fourth amendment protections                  
  are greater for searching the student's person than they are                 
  for searching the locker.  There is sort of a continuum, and                 
  school lockers are beneath both the student's car and                        
  searching the student's person in terms of the amount of                     
  protection that they are getting.   This bill essentially is                 
  setting out specific guidelines and parameters for something                 
  that is allowed under constitutional law already, but it                     
  will increase the schools' comfort with the practice, and it                 
  increases our comfort that there are guidelines set out, and                 
  now they know what to do.                                                    
  "Speaking to the other part of the bill, the Department of                   
  Law had, in fact, supported making it a felony instead of                    
  just  a Class A misdemeanor for there to be a possession of                  
  firearms on school grounds, but the sponsor of the bill was                  
  reluctant to go that far, for reasons...                                     
  TAPE 94-57, SIDE B                                                           
  Number 000                                                                   
  MS. KNUTH continued "when this type of violation occurs,                     
  right now it has been a Class B misdemeanor, which is the                    
  very lowest level of offense, and it hasn't allowed                          
  authorities any flexibility in trying to deal with what they                 
  consider to be a serious matter.  To have a gun on school                    
  grounds is the antithesis of what we are trying to                           
  accomplish in education and the more serious an offense                      
  level it is, the more flexibility authorities have in trying                 
  to deal with the situation, so just moving it up to a Class                  
  A misdemeanor helps a great deal."                                           
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "This bill moves the offense to a Class A                  
  misdemeanor, of having a firearm on school property period,                  
  let alone a locker."                                                         
  MS. KNUTH:  "That's right."                                                  
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND inquired what is was now.                            
  MS. KNUTH responded is was a Class B.                                        
  Number 028                                                                   
  LARRY WIGET, Director of Governmental Relations for the                      
  Anchorage School District testifying via teleconference.  He                 
  said that their executive director wrote a memorandum of                     
  support for HB 417 which would provide statutory support for                 
  administrative procedures already in place in the Anchorage                  
  School District.  The Anchorage School District parents and                  
  students have discussed and approved the concept of locker                   
  searches in the Anchorage schools.  At the request of one of                 
  the legislators, they hired attorneys to take a look at                      
  this.  They provided a letter of support, also.  Schools                     
  have had problems with people having guns in school parking                  
  lots who are not even students.  Therefore, the gun owners                   
  are not subject to the school's administrative rules.  Law                   
  enforcement officers are not able to assist in helping                       
  school officials until some altercation breaks out, and the                  
  school administrator makes a citizens arrest for trespassing                 
  under local ordinances.  By the time a situation gets to the                 
  point of an altercation where a citizens arrest is                           
  necessary, the safety of school personnel and students has                   
  already arisen.  But local law enforcement agencies have no                  
  criminal law to enforce those situations.  The proposed law                  
  would be a meaningful remedy and aid to school                               
  administrators.  If the bill was passed, the school would be                 
  able to call the local law enforcement agencies, who would                   
  be able to intervene with possession of a deadly weapon law.                 
  Moreover, such a law would have a deterred impact,                           
  particularly on the non-students.                                            
  MR. WIGET stated briefly, regarding the possession of school                 
  lockers, the proposed law would grant broad authority for                    
  school officials to conduct general random searches of                       
  school lockers with advance notice.   Although there has not                 
  been an exhaustive constitutionality analysis of this                        
  measure, then (indiscernible) cases have greatly expanded                    
  the authority of school officials to conduct random                          
  searches.  In Isaiah B. v. State of Wisconsin, 500 North                     
  West 2nd 637, Wisconsin, 1993, the proposed law would                        
  undoubtedly serve as a significant deterrent to students                     
  bringing weapons, drugs, or alcohol within the school.  If                   
  the school districts adopt appropriate policy to implement                   
  this provision, they are confident the legislation could be                  
  applied in a constitutional manner.                                          
  MR. WIGET commented that the section on the locker searches                  
  could be made more broad so as to allow notification of the                  
  searches through the student handbook and perhaps permanent                  
  posting of notices of a right to search in each school.                      
  Number  130                                                                  
  REPRESENTATIVE DAVIDSON:  "Mr. Wiget, how many incidents of                  
  weapons possession problems did you have within your school                  
  district this past school year?"                                             
  Number 138                                                                   
  MR. WIGET:  "I don't have those figures before me.  We had                   
  provided them to someone else...I know there have been                       
  several and I don't have the specific number at the tip of                   
  my tongue.  If you'd like, I could have that information                     
  sent down to you."                                                           
  Number 147                                                                   
  MS. SWENSEN:  "I have those numbers here and they're also                    
  included in your packet, I believe.  For 1993, there was a                   
  total of 106 suspensions for all types of weapons-related                    
  incidents, and for this year, the only numbers we have                       
  available, the breakout is minimal for the first two                         
  quarters of the year, and they went down significantly.  As                  
  a matter of fact, there were 36 in the second quarter, 32 in                 
  the first quarter."                                                          
  Number 173                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "I'm kind of curious about the                     
  section of the bill that requires the posting of signs.  Was                 
  that done for some concern about the possible                                
  constitutionality of the bill?"                                              
  MS. KNUTH:  "I don't know if it's constitutionally required,                 
  but it is an appropriate measure to, as I say, balance the                   
  student's right of privacy against the interest we're trying                 
  to protect in searching the lockers.  I don't know if it's                   
  mandatory, but it's something that the ACLU is behind, and                   
  there has been no objection to the concept by the school                     
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "Mr. Chairman, I guess my concern                  
  is that it says you should post a sign two weeks before the                  
  search is going to be conducted, or that you can leave a                     
  sign up continuously, so you can search any time.  I mean, I                 
  think that's kind of (indiscernible).  Basically, a search                   
  can be conducted any time as long as there is a sign up.  I                  
  don't understand that.  It seems that you're trying to have                  
  it both ways or something."                                                  
  Number 203                                                                   
  MS. KNUTH:  "All you're trying to do with the sign is to let                 
  the student know at any time during the semester that their                  
  lockers are subject to inspection, and, if you provide that                  
  notice on the first day, or if you provide it two weeks                      
  before, the point isn't, `Everybody clean out your lockers                   
  and carry the gun in the back belt for this one day when                     
  we're doing the search and then put it back in there, and                    
  feel comfortable about that;' it's to say that `at no point                  
  should you have contraband like this on school grounds and                   
  you should know now and for the next 250 days of the school                  
  session that your interest in privacy in your school locker                  
  is minimal.'"                                                                
  Number 222                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "So why not just notify the                        
  students that their lockers can be searched and dispense                     
  with the whole notion of the two weeks in advance business?                  
  It makes it seem like they have some warning when they - in                  
  practical - they probably wouldn't.  I imagine the Anchorage                 
  School District would make that a standing policy that their                 
  lockers could be searched at any time, which apparently, is                  
  constitutional, so why provide the two week notice                           
  MS. KNUTH:  "To make sure that the student does know and                     
  otherwise what - send a note home..."                                        
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "Leave a sign up permanently so                    
  the students are notified."                                                  
  REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE:  "Mr. Chairman, that is one of the                     
  options that the sign can be posted permanently."                            
  Number 238                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "The question was since that would seem to                 
  be the less - would cause the least amount of activity for                   
  the school, and that's probably what they would do.  But it                  
  isn't necessarily so, I mean these signs might - we might                    
  want to work something out with the kids where they wouldn't                 
  want to do that all the time, but if they had some more                      
  problems... What I guess this does guarantee is that you                     
  can't put up a sign at 9 o'clock and search the lockers at                   
  9:05.  Not that I'm necessarily opposed to that, but...."                    
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "They're going to be searching                     
  lockers at any time, anyway.  It doesn't really make any                     
  difference.  If they could be given notice aside..."                         
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "No, not under this law.  They will not be                 
  able to search lockers unless they have posted a sign to                     
  these dimensions for two weeks or have one posted                            
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "Well, once the sign is posted                     
  permanently, then it's...(indiscernible) posted, I think                     
  it's a fine idea, but I'm just kind of curious...."                          
  Number 265                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES:  "I guess that I'm having the same                     
  concern that Representative Nordlund is.  I don't see - I                    
  mean I can visualize now - I guess they come to school and                   
  you put a sign up and that means the first two weeks you                     
  can't search their lockers.   I see that as a loophole                       
  however, and I would like to have it be so that you must                     
  have a permanent sign up, so they always know that their                     
  locker can be searched.  I'm not going to object to this                     
  bill, I'm not planning an amendment, I'm just making that                    
  statement.  But I would feel a lot more comfortable if that                  
  was the requirement.  And I'm a little uncomfortable with                    
  the two weeks, when school starts, that you can't                            
  (indiscernible) the lockers.  I'm a little uncomfortable                     
  with that, I'd rather have it be that you could always do                    
  it.  And whatever is required to make that happen, I would                   
  feel a lot more comfortable."                                                
  Number 287                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE KOTT:  "I was going to bring up basically the                 
  same point that my colleague from North Pole brought up                      
  (indiscernible) and go a step further.  Why even post any                    
  signs?  Don't we have a provision right now where school                     
  officials can search lockers or is there some probable cause                 
  that's required we can actually search a locker - like for                   
  illegal substances - don't we have some kind of provision                    
  this is somewhat mirroring that application?"                                
  MS. KNUTH:  "Mr. Chairman, there was a time when we thought                  
  that school officials could go into lockers with no                          
  articulable basis at all, and that because they were not law                 
  enforcement officials, that this should be acceptable.  And                  
  that is a ruling  from the Alaska Supreme Court.  There was                  
  a subsequent decision to cast doubt on that, that                            
  essentially school officials are acting in much the same                     
  capacity as law enforcement officials and therefore, you                     
  need either something short of probable cause, either an                     
  articulable reason for this given search, or you need to be                  
  conducting a random wholesale inspection program.  And this                  
  is more what is being authorized under this bill, and what's                 
  being clarified here is the random searches where you are                    
  trying to deter students from using their locker for these                   
  items at all, because they don't know whether theirs is the                  
  one that is going to be searched or not.  We don't                           
  anticipate every locker being inspected, although that is                    
  possible.  But just enough to deter students  from bringing                  
  contraband and weapons to school."                                           
  Number 332                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "I guess a question either the sponsor or                  
  you, Margot, having a general feeling for these cases, I                     
  would have been under the impression that a school would be                  
  within its constitutional rights in the normal course of                     
  furnishing information to parents and students - bulletins,                  
  whatever - at the beginning of the school year to say that -                 
   and maybe even require a signature and return or something                  
  - that school property, including lockers are subject to                     
  random searches at any given time; and that would suffice                    
  without any need for signs or anything else.  Is there                       
  something I'm missing?"                                                      
  REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE:  "If I could respond as one                            
  (indiscernible), getting signed notices back is not an easy                  
  thing to do and certainly if it didn't come back, that would                 
  be a loophole there."                                                        
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "Well, I meant - I said that, but I                        
  quickly wanted to retract it.  What I meant was the normal                   
  course of supplying information would suffice, to me."                       
  REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE:  "Proving that they received the                       
  information, I think...I would expect that it would be                       
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "I don't think that that would be a                        
  requirement -  that you wouldn't have to prove that they got                 
  it.  If this is the way that a school normally provides                      
  information to kids and parents, tough.  Ignorance of                        
  a...that would be my..."                                                     
  MS. KNUTH:  "I think you're correct, and then Mr. Chairman I                 
  think that this is codifying existing law and it's adding                    
  some safeguards that people have expressed concern about                     
  that schools are willing to do, but - right - this is more a                 
  comfort zone bill than any change in the law and in terms of                 
  the concerns expressed by Representative James, if we find                   
  that there is a first two week high incident period of                       
  weapons on school grounds, there will be a change                            
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "My preference would be to write a bill                    
  that reflects the laws that exist and allow schools to go                    
  further, if they so choose, by virtue of their advice that                   
  they receive from their own legal people.  But why should we                 
  try to - by perhaps trying to be so protective of individual                 
  rights - just write a law that has loopholes in it."                         
  REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE:  "...a couple of items here.  One is                   
  the loophole of two weeks, as I envision it, once that                       
  loophole only exists for the first time that the sign is                     
  posted, if it's going to be posted as an ongoing thing.  And                 
  then the next year, that sign is then policy for an entire                   
  year.  So, I don't see that the first two weeks.."                           
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "(Indiscernible) the question, why is                      
  there a two week interval?"                                                  
  REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE:  "If I could just finish on the sign                   
  notification.  Again, dealing with students - sending                        
  information home at the beginning of the year is                             
  (indiscernible) - it's good, but I think there's a deterrent                 
  affect if there's a reminder - a posted sign -  that the new                 
  kid in school,  somebody who - it's now spring and they                      
  forgot about the regulations.  If they have a posted sign it                 
  encourages compliance."                                                      
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "I'd like to offer an amendment.                   
  On page three, line 26, put a period after school and delete                 
  the rest of that paragraph."                                                 
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "That would then read, `Notices and                        
  letters, at least two inches high stating the right and the                  
  intention of school and school district officials to permit                  
  searches and examinations under (a) of this section shall be                 
  posted in prominent locations throughout a school.'"                         
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "And I might add, Mr. Chairman, I                  
  think it's a  good place to - I don't know if we can meet                    
  the two inches high criteria - but a good place to post the                  
  signs, would be on the inside door of the locker.   Just                     
  plaster it on there and say, every time a kid opens their                    
  locker, they're going to see a sign that says `Be aware,                     
  this locker could be searched.'"                                             
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES:  "I have a friendly amendment."                        
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "Representative James has a friendly                       
  amendment to the amendment."                                                 
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES:  "Well, in the second sentence, I'd                    
  rather take `may' out and put `shall.'  Notices under this                   
  subsection `shall'...."                                                      
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "That's out."                                              
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES:  "Oh, you're taking that out, as                       
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "I believe so."                                            
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "I'm taking out the entire rest of                 
  the paragraph."                                                              
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES:  "Okay, not a problem."                                
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "...for two weeks on line 26, all of 27                    
  and  all of 28."                                                             
  CHAIRMAN PORTER asked Mr. Wiget if he was familiar with the                  
  notice provision - posting of a sign on page three of the                    
  bill - line 24, page three?  "I don't know if you're                         
  familiar with this portion of the bill, but there's a                        
  portion of the bill that says that a school will post a sign                 
  in the school for at least two weeks or either that or                       
  continuously, to notify of the schools' right and intention                  
  to search lockers.  We're  taking out the two weeks, or                      
  there's an amendment proposed to take out the two weeks that                 
  would just leave it to say that notices in letters of at                     
  least two inches high, stating the right and intention of                    
  the school and district officers to permit searches and                      
  examinations under (a) of this section shall be posted in                    
  prominent locations throughout the school, period."                          
  MR. WIGET:  "That is consistent with my conversation with                    
  Dr. (indiscernible) in which we were talking just about the                  
  permanent placement of a sign in the building, or perhaps                    
  even notification in the student handbook, to deal with this                 
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "Okay, very good.  That seems..."                          
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "Can I move the amendment?"                        
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "Move the amendment?  We'll call it                        
  amendment number 1 which for the record, is removing `for                    
  two weeks' on line 26, all of line 27, all of line 28 on                     
  page three of CS for HB 417(HES), which is in front of us.                   
  Representative Phillips."                                                    
  REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS:  "Mr. Chairman,  if we could ask                    
  the sponsor what his thoughts are on that?"                                  
  Number 477                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE:  "Thank you.  We have, I think                         
  addressed that somewhat in our previous conversation.  I'm                   
  just wanting  to try to be as bullet proof as possible, so                   
  if someone's caught with contraband, that there won't be a                   
  legal challenge and that the - without the two week proviso,                 
  is there some possibility that this was capricious or                        
  arbitrary... I don't oppose the amendment, certainly in                      
  concept, I just want to make sure that we don't create                       
  loopholes, as I mentioned earlier."                                          
  Number 485                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "For the record, it certainly is my                        
  opinion  and agreed upon by the Department of Law                            
  representative here, that this goes beyond the requirement.                  
  The resulting section (b) here on page four of section four,                 
  still goes beyond the requirement that my impression of the                  
  law requires."                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE:  "I'd certainly defer to people with                   
  more experience in the law, than myself."                                    
  Number 492                                                                   
  MS. KNUTH:  "I do believe that that's accurate.  I would be                  
  slightly more comfortable if only the two weeks - the word                   
  `two weeks' was taken out and if the rest of it were left.                   
  But that's probably just a lawyer who loves words,  and gosh                 
  you're taking out 16 of them or..."                                          
  Number 520                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "We would end up with the same intent.                     
  Jim, would you consider that a friendly amendment?"                          
  REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS:  "Mr. Chairman, we could add one                    
  word in to take the place of the 16 words out.  We could add                 
  `continuously' on line 26 - `shall be continuously posted.'"                 
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES:  "I have a problem with that.  I don't                 
  know how many of these kids will climb up and take the sign                  
  down and, you know, I think that that might be a problem."                   
  REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS:  "Let's leave it out then, Mr.                      
  REPRESENTATIVE NORDLUND:  "Mr. Chairman, I guess my only                     
  concern about - I think there might be some expectation                      
  that, with Margot's suggestion, there might be some                          
  expectation that there be some posting of signs before a                     
  certain search was going to happen.  And if it's just a                      
  standing policy that any time you beware that your locker                    
  can be searched at any  time, you're just better off."                       
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "I think so, too.  Is there further                        
  discussion of the amendment?  Is there objection?  Hearing                   
  none, we have adopted the amendment.  We have in front of us                 
  the bill, as amended, what's the wish of the committee?                      
  Representative James."                                                       
  REPRESENTATIVE JAMES:  "Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I would                    
  move that we move the CS, version R, as amended with a zero                  
  fiscal note out of committee, with individual                                
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "Motion to move, with individual                           
  recommendations, zero fiscal notes.  Is there discussion?                    
  Representative Phillips."                                                    
  Number 530                                                                   
  REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS:  "Mr. Chairman, may I to the                        
  sponsor, or to Margot, I don't see any policy statement or                   
  any statement of support from the Department of Public                       
  Safety.  Did you have any interaction with them and  - I                     
  have a fiscal note, but I don't find a statement from them."                 
  Number  534                                                                  
  MS. SWENSON:  "Mr. Chairman, Representative Phillips, I                      
  spoke with the Department of Public Safety and they said                     
  they had no interest either way in the bill."                                
  Number 540                                                                   
  CHAIRMAN PORTER:  "Further discussion?  Is there objection?                  
  Hearing none, the bill is moved.  Anything for the good                      
  (indiscernible)?  Seeing none, we are adjourned."                            

Document Name Date/Time Subjects