02/24/2004 01:34 PM House TRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION STANDING COMMITTEE
February 24, 2004
1:34 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Jim Holm, Chair
Representative Beverly Masek
Representative Vic Kohring
Representative Dan Ogg
Representative Nick Stepovich
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Mary Kapsner
Representative Albert Kookesh
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 387
"An Act relating to fines for offenses committed within school
zones."
- HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 438
"An Act relating to motorists moving over or slowing down for
emergency vehicles."
- MOVED HB 438 OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 387
SHORT TITLE: INCREASE FINE FOR SCHOOL ZONE VIOLATIONS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) GATTO
01/20/04 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/20/04 (H) CRA, TRA, JUD
02/05/04 (H) CRA AT 9:00 AM CAPITOL 124
02/05/04 (H) Moved CSHB 387(CRA) Out of Committee
02/05/04 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
02/09/04 (H) CRA RPT CS(CRA) NT 1DNP 2NR 1AM
02/09/04 (H) DNP: KOTT; NR: SAMUELS, WOLF;
02/09/04 (H) AM: MORGAN
02/17/04 (H) TRA AT 1:30 PM CAPITOL 17
02/17/04 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
02/24/04 (H) TRA AT 1:30 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 438
SHORT TITLE: MOVE OVER LAW FOR DRIVERS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) HOLM
02/05/04 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/05/04 (H) TRA, STA, JUD
02/17/04 (H) TRA AT 1:30 PM CAPITOL 17
02/17/04 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
02/24/04 (H) TRA AT 1:30 PM CAPITOL 17
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE CARL GATTO
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke as the sponsor of HB 387.
CODY RICE, Staff
to Representative Carl Gatto
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 387, answered
questions.
DON SMITH, Administrator
Alaska Highway Safety Office (AHSO)
Division of Program Development
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 387, offered
additional information.
MATTHEW RUDIG, Staff
to Representative Jim Holm
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 438 on behalf of
Representative Holm, sponsor.
SHELLY OWENS, Health Program Manager
Community Health and Emergency Medical Services
Division of Public Health
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 438.
KELLY NICOLELLO, Assistant State Fire Marshal
Central Office
Division of Fire Prevention
Department of Public Safety (DPS)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 438.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 04-7, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR JIM HOLM called the House Transportation Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:34 p.m. Representatives Holm,
Stepovich, Kohring, and Ogg were present at the call to order.
Representative Masek arrived as the meeting was in progress.
HB 387-INCREASE FINE FOR SCHOOL ZONE VIOLATIONS
CHAIR HOLM announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 387, "An Act relating to fines for offenses
committed within school zones."
Number 0083
REPRESENTATIVE CARL GATTO, Alaska State Legislature, speaking as
the sponsor, began by relating a quote from an Anchorage Daily
News article included in the committee packet, which read as
follows: "About 460 drivers were cited for speeding in school
zones in 2002, according to the Anchorage Police Department's
Annual Statistical Report. But police officials said Thursday
they can't catch or deter all the speeders, even when they do
stings for days at a time." Therefore, he surmised that
[speeding in school zones] isn't an occasional event. The
committee packet also contains a letter from the Fairbanks North
Star Borough School District, which relates the following:
"Approximately two-thirds of our 15,000 students walk to school
each day." The legislation, he explained, relates to the fines
for motor vehicle violations within school zones and it's
similar to the double fines for [motor vehicle violations]
within highway work zones. He noted that highway work zones
often have a flagger who signifies the [beginning of] a highway
work zone. He indicated that the flagger coupled with the
double fine signage has reduced accidents within highway work
zones. This legislation would double the fines for violations
in clearly marked school zones.
CHAIR HOLM highlighted that there is a zero fiscal note from the
Alaska State Troopers of the Department of Public Safety and the
Criminal Division of the Department of Law. He related his
assumption that these violations would end up in traffic court.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO informed the committee that there is also a
zero fiscal note from the Department of Transportation & Public
Facilities (DOT&PF). He explained that originally, DOT&PF
assumed that it would be required to place signs in areas where
no signs existed; however, that isn't the intention. The
legislation simply intends to reduce the number of speeders in
school zones. He commented that some of the worst offenders are
high school students.
Number 0413
CHAIR HOLM assumed that there would be some cost to troopers,
and therefore he asked if the fines would cover that extra cost.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO commented that when a fine is increased so
does the potential for a challenge in court rather than the
offender merely paying the fine.
CHAIR HOLM reminded the sponsor that the legislature has been
discussing the graduated drivers' license (GDL) and the
inability of young people to obtain a drivers' license if they
have an offense such as this. Therefore, he questioned whether
there are some unintended consequences.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO highlighted that this legislation merely
doubles the fines.
CHAIR HOLM recalled that under the GDL legislation a young
person cannot have any violations within the last six months in
order to progress to the next step.
Number 0545
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH surmised that the goal is to stop
speeding in neighborhoods. However, he opined that young people
don't think about [the dangers or repercussions of reckless
activities such as speeding]. Therefore, he questioned whether
increasing the fines will stop young people [from speeding].
Representative Stepovich inquired as whether there have been any
discussions with regard to signage.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO noted that he has had long conversations
with DOT&PF. He also noted that his goal was not to have a
fiscal note attached to the legislation. This legislation only
applies to school zones that are already signed.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH asked if there was any discussion with
regard to law enforcement using speed traps at school zones
rather than out on the highway.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO pointed out that law enforcement already
does [use speed traps at school zones].
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH surmised that the double fines could
impact law enforcement and provide an incentive for law
enforcement to [be in school zones] in order to obtain the
larger fine.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO said that it's usually up to the captain to
schedule the location of law enforcement.
Number 0756
REPRESENTATIVE OGG opined that HB 387 deals with metropolitan
areas. He related that he doesn't see a need for this in his
area. Furthermore, the speed limits in [the metropolitan areas]
are a lot higher and the traffic patterns are different. He
mentioned the "cookie cutter program."
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO interjected that the aforementioned is why
the legislation is limited to marked school zones. He
acknowledged that the smaller schools have no need for or desire
for signs.
REPRESENTATIVE OGG remarked that there are different magnitudes
between the urban and rural areas of the state.
CHAIR HOLM turned attention to page 2, line 7, which defines
"school zone." He asked if it would make more sense to refer to
"only an area identified by signs as being near a school."
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO indicated that was the intent.
Number 0903
REPRESENTATIVE OGG moved that the committee adopt Amendment 1,
which would specify on page 2, line 7, that a "'school zone'
means only an area identified by signs as being near a school."
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH commented that there are different
dangers at different schools.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO informed the committee that he lives on
Trunk Road, which he characterized as one of the most dangerous
roads in the state and at the end of it is an elementary school.
In further response to Representative Stepovich, Representative
Gatto indicated that the committee packet should include
information regarding what other states do with fines in school
zones.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH surmised that the double fines apply
while school in session.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO expressed concern with the aforementioned
because when the school is in session, the children are in the
school rather than when the school is out of session and the
children are outside and around the school. However, he
acknowledged that schools are used at other times for other
functions.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH indicated that the legislation could
refer to "when children are present".
Number 1068
CHAIR HOLM related that in his area there is a major highway off
of which a school sits; the children don't walk on the highway
and aren't dropped off on the highway. He said he could
understand this legislation in the context of a neighborhood
rather than off of a major highway. He noted that it is marked
as a school zone and the speed limit drops by 10 miles per hour
(mph) to 55 mph. He inquired as to how that would be addressed.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO directed attention to page 1, lines 11-12,
which specifies that the double fine applies only during the
period when a lower speed limit is in effect.
Number 1158
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING inquired as to the typical fine now.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO informed the committee that in Anchorage
the speeding fines for speeds up to 9 mph is $12 per mile, up to
19 mph over is $14, and up to 20 mph or more is $16 per mile
plus a reckless driving charge.
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING surmised then that speeding up to 10 mph
over the speed limit would result in a $200 fine, which under
this legislation would double to $400. He then turned to the
sponsor statement and the justification that this legislation
will increase public awareness. However, he wasn't sure that
would be a justification. He expressed the need to have
information illustrating that legislation such as HB 387 would
result in a decrease in the number of children and vehicle
collisions.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO pointed out that currently double fines are
implemented in highway work zones. He related his understanding
that doubling the fines in highway work zones has decreased the
number of collisions in that area. He agreed to obtain that
information. He then added that this matter has been addressed
by most all states.
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING opined that even with increased fines and
penalties for violations, such as for drunk drivers, people
continue to drive carelessly and drunk. Therefore, he said he
wasn't convinced that increasing fines would do anything more
than put more money in the pockets of some bureaucracy and
wouldn't make kids safe on the streets. With regard to Trunk
Road, the problem is related to the need for infrastructure,
which is being addressed.
Number 1368
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH commented that the goal of HB 387 is
great. However, he opined that the "bad guys" will always will
be the "bad guys" and the increased fines will be a burden to
the inattentive individuals.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO said that when he contemplates introducing
legislation, he questions whether it will make a difference. If
the legislation will make a difference, then the question
becomes how large of a difference will it make. Some would say
that saving even one child would be enough of a difference to do
this while others may not. Therefore, it's for the committee to
determine what constitutes enough. Representative Gatto related
his belief that fines do get people's attention and does some
good. This legislation, he opined, has value to it.
CHAIR HOLM turned attention to the document in the committee
packet that specifies the number of school zone citations in
2003. The document specifies that in Anchorage there were 410
such citations as compared to the [next highest] of 26 citations
statewide in areas that aren't listed. Therefore, he surmised
that this is a problem only in Anchorage. For instance,
Fairbanks has one-third of the state's population but only had
10 violations.
Number 1588
CODY RICE, Staff to Representative Carl Gatto, Alaska State
Legislature, informed the committee that the document in the
committee packet was provided by the Alaska State Troopers based
on the numbers they have received. He noted that one
possibility is that not everyone reports these figures and not
everyone codes speed offenses in the same manner. Therefore,
there may a fairly good percentage of under-reporting and
perhaps an "apples to oranges" comparison.
CHAIR HOLM, again turning to the number of school zone
violations, asked if a statewide "fix" is required for a
regional problem.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO agreed that the results are understated.
He related that in discussions with police officers, he has
discovered that [law enforcement] doesn't work school zones very
much. Furthermore, there seems to be an acceptable threshold
for speeding such that if the speed limit is 55 mph, one can
drive 64 mph without being stopped. Representative Gatto
related his belief that signs for double fines would be a
motivator to slow down.
Number 1732
REPRESENTATIVE OGG moved that the committee adopt Amendment 1,
as follows:
Page 2, line 7, following "means":
Insert "only the"
There being no objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
Number 1775
REPRESENTATIVE OGG moved that the committee adopt Conceptual
Amendment 2, which would state: "the double fines for school
zones applies only in municipalities of populations greater than
200,000 people".
CHAIR HOLM objected for discussion purposes.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO pointed out that Conceptual Amendment 2
would essentially limit this legislation to only one community
in the state, although [the Palmer - Wasilla area] is just like
a municipality in terms of traffic. He said this legislation
would be valuable to [the Palmer - Wasilla area]. In response
to Representative Ogg, Representative Gatto said that the
population of the Matanuska-Susitna Borough is approximately
60,000.
REPRESENTATIVE OGG offered changing Conceptual Amendment 2 to
refer to municipalities with populations greater than 60,000.
CHAIR HOLM suggested that would be beneficial. He then turned
to the situation in the Denali Borough through which a large
highway would run.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO commented that there are schools in rural
areas.
Number 1935
CHAIR HOLM withdrew his objection to Conceptual Amendment 2.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH noted that he was astonished with the
number of violations in Anchorage.
MR. RICE, in response to Chair Holm's request for better
information, informed the committee that the problem is that
many of the recording agencies aren't necessarily coding these
offenses correctly.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH expressed concern with regard to having
double fines without proper coding.
Number 2015
DON SMITH, Administrator, Alaska Highway Safety Office (AHSO),
Division of Program Development, Department of Transportation &
Public Facilities (DOT&PF), informed the committee that [ASHO]
has funded a program with the Anchorage Police Department,
particularly for traffic enforcement and seat belt use at the
Anchorage schools. He remarked that the aforementioned program
may account for the high number [of violations] in Anchorage.
CHAIR HOLM remarked, "Essentially, not just speeding so it could
be other violations like seat belts."
MR. SMITH pointed out that in Alaska one can't be stopped for
not wearing a seat belt; but if an individual is stopped for
speeding and that individual isn't wearing a seat belt, that
individual can be cited for not wearing a seat belt.
CHAIR HOLM reminded the committee that Conceptual Amendment 2,
as amended, remains before it. Conceptual Amendment 2, as
amended, would insert the following language: "the double fines
for school zones applies only in municipalities of populations
greater than 60,000 people".
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH objected, and stated that if this
proposal is going to be done it should be done statewide.
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING objected, and stated that he didn't want
this to apply to the state at all.
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Ogg and Holm voted
in favor of Conceptual Amendment 2, as amended. Representatives
Stepovich and Kohring voted against it. Therefore, Conceptual
Amendment 2, as amended, failed by a vote of 2-2.
CHAIR HOLM announced that this legislation wouldn't be reported
from committee today because he wanted to allow the committee
members not present today the opportunity to discuss this.
Number 2141
REPRESENTATIVE OGG surmised that if this legislation passes,
communities with [school] zones would have to post them as
double fine [zones].
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO disagreed. The legislation specifies that
if the sign [specifying a school zone] exists then "the
situation occurs." There is no DOT&PF involvement with this.
CHAIR HOLM announced that HB 387 would be held over.
HB 438-MOVE OVER LAW FOR DRIVERS
CHAIR HOLM announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 438, "An Act relating to motorists moving over or
slowing down for emergency vehicles."
Number 2209
MATTHEW RUDIG, Staff to Representative Jim Holm, Alaska State
Legislature, presented HB 438 on behalf of Representative Holm,
sponsor. Mr. Rudig read from written testimony, as follows:
Safety; that is what this bill hopes to accomplish.
Moving over and slowing down, according to this
statute, can save lives. It is very dangerous for ...
[law enforcement], fire, and emergency personnel to be
working ... along the shoulder of a roadway.
According to the National Law Enforcement Officers
Memorial Fund, ... from 1997 through 2002, 93 ...
police officers [were struck and killed by vehicles].
Many more have been injured and substantially more
have had close calls.
MR. RUDIG said by mandating that drivers, when passing a vehicle
displaying emergency lights, have reduced their speeds to 20
miles below the posted speed limit, and to 5 miles per hour
(mph) in a 25 mph or less zone, is an attempt at ensuring safety
on the roadways. He said while no measure of "move-over"
legislation will guarantee complete safety to [emergency]
personnel, this bill along with further public education
efforts, may heighten driver awareness of the inherent danger to
the men and women who serve in uniform. Mr. Rudig explained
that establishing this law in statute encourages the public to
recognize the precaution needed while passing emergency
personnel and provides for a penalty for those who refuse to
obey this law. Thirty other states have enacted similar laws
and some of the examples of these are in the bill packets, he
said. Mr. Rudig said this legislation is not unprecedented; it
is essential. Also included in the bill packets are
testimonials given by Fairbanks police officers stating how HB
438 can affect their livelihood.
MR. RUDIG said there is also a representative from the
Department of Public Safety [DPS] available to answer questions.
He remarked, "These people fight for our lives everyday and this
legislation is an opportunity for the legislature to fight for
theirs."
Number 2310
SHELLY OWENS, Health Program Manager, Community Health and
Emergency Medical Services, Division of Public Health,
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS), testified in
support of HB 438 on behalf of DHSS. She said it is estimated
that there 12,000 emergency medical vehicle collisions each
year, but it is not known how many of those are secondary
crashes. She said the U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) reports
that emergency vehicle crashes are the second leading cause of
death for firefighters. Furthermore, she said the International
Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) reported that in 1997,
nearly 40 percent of law enforcement officers who died in the
line of duty, died in traffic. She explained that the exposure
to traditional crashes is greater the longer an accident is in
place, and the severity of a secondary crash is greater than the
original incident. Ms. Owens said a 1995 analysis of collision
statistics in California showed an increased risk by 600 percent
to a secondary collision. Furthermore, she explained that a
study conducted by the [Washington State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT)] noted that in a five-year period,
motorists in Florida crashed almost 1,800 times into working law
enforcement vehicles that were stopped and parked along
roadways, which resulted in five fatalities. In Alaska, she
said during a four-year period, from 1998 to 2001 [Tape ends
mid-sentence].
TAPE 04-7, SIDE B
MS. OWENS continued by saying that there were 386 emergency
response vehicles involved in accidents. Moreover, of the 386
crashes, 46 incidents involved a parked emergency response
vehicle. She said motor vehicle operators are exposed to
multiple sources of distraction including mobile phones, radios,
and children [making it difficult to hear and see emergency
response vehicle's] sirens and lights. She said DHSS supports
efforts to reduce the number and severity of injuries to fire,
EMS [emergency medical service], and law enforcement personnel
at emergency scenes, including [making] rescuers more visible at
the scene, providing training to motorists about the
responsibilities regarding emergency vehicles at [accident]
scenes, and enacting legislation that is inclusive to the safety
of rescuers, patients, and bystanders on (indisc. - coughing).
She reiterated that DHSS supports HB 438.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH asked if police officers [issuing
traffic citations would be included in this legislation].
MS. OWENS deferred the question to DPS. She said her
understanding is the bill will require drivers to pull over or
slow down in the presence of emergency response [vehicles] or
ambulances on the side of the road with flashing [emergency]
lights.
Number 2318
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH directed attention to page 1, line 12,
and he said he thought [police] officers would [direct people to
move faster] if there was lot of traffic [due to the 5 mile an
hour speed restriction imposed by the bill].
CHAIR HOLM clarified that [the 5 mile an hour speed restriction
is imposed] in areas in which the speed limit is 25 mph or less,
such as a school zone. He remarked, "That's what they suggested
that we should do."
Number 2287
REPRESENTATIVE OGG, citing Ms. Owens' testimony, asked if those
numbers [regarding secondary accidents] could include highway
maintenance people.
MS. OWENS indicated she would be happy to find out the answer.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH asked if emergency vehicles are
required to put up emergency [signaling devices] such as flares
or reflective triangles.
Number 2245
KELLY NICOLELLO, Assistant State Fire Marshal, Central Office,
Division of Fire Prevention, Department of Public Safety (DPS),
testified. Mr. Nicolello replied no. He remarked:
When you're performing your duty during an emergency,
and once you have, either from a fire perspective up
on a crash or from a police perspective maybe pull the
vehicle over for speeding, you are concentrating on
the people who are there. You place your vehicle in
the most safe spot to protect you, but your lights are
your protection for identifying that there is an ...
emergency action taking place on the side of the road.
... Unfortunately, what happens with those emergency
lights, like any type of warning device, sometimes
people are attracted to it, like a moth to flame.
That's some of the types of accidents that occur on
the side of the road that injure fire and/or police
people.
So, to ask them to put flares out when they're doing a
speeding stop or their coming up on an accident, there
may be an appropriate time to do that depending on
what the situation is, but usually the first person in
isn't going to be doing that because they're going to
be concentrating on their patients or they're going to
be concentrating on the person they're pulling overs
actions.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH remarked, "I have trouble with the term
'emergency' especially in the cases of ... speeding tickets and
such like that."
MR. NICOLELLO said he would find it hard to believe that a
person couldn't see the emergency flashing lights, which are
different colors and multiple frequencies, but would be able to
see a flare or a [reflective] triangle.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH said he understood that part, but he
didn't understand the term "emergency" being used in regard to
[issuing] a speeding ticket.
MR. NICOLELLO said it [is in reference] to an emergency person
doing his or her job, and using lights as warning lights. He
said pulling a person over for a speeding ticket may be an
infraction and may not be an "emergency," but those emergency
lights are what are operating and that is from where the term is
being quoted.
Number 2132
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH asked about [the procedures that
emergency personnel take to ensure their safety at an accident
scene].
MR. NICOLELLO explained that there is a certain way the
[emergency response] vehicle is to be parked in relationship to
the other vehicles; it will be put outbound into traffic just a
little bit, which will protect the officer from being hit by a
moving vehicle thus his or her own vehicle acts as a blocking
point.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH said he has seen situations where the
proper care isn't taken and an [officer] doesn't make a vehicle
being pulled over pull farther [over on the shoulder of the
road] or wait for a safe area to pull over the vehicle.
MR. NICOLELLO asked if Representative Stepovich was saying
officers regularly do this and it is a known problem.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH said he hopes [officers] don't
regularly do it, but he thinks care needs to be taken. He said
there are some times when it can't be done, such as in
accidents, but at other times [officers] should follow the
vehicle until a proper area is found [to make a traffic stop].
Representative Stepovich said he thought that was part of the
policy.
Number 2065
MR. NICOLELLO said it is, but he pointed out that [traffic stops
are often made] on streets that people use for commuting to
work. He said from the [firefighting perspective], every
incident is critiqued when it is over, including everything from
[the areas] where vehicles were parked to how the patient was
handled. From a [police perspective] it probably doesn't happen
quite as often because usually only a single officer or two
officers respond, but still [police officers] realize their life
is on the line if things are not done right. He remarked, "It's
their inherent responsibility to themselves to make sure they do
it right; ... I'm not going to argue that you haven't seen
something that wasn't quite the way you think it should've been
right, and that is something that is responded to within the
department through field training and through recurring
training." Mr. Nicolello said for the most part, "an officer
who doesn't protect himself is his own liability," and people
aren't here to sacrifice their lives for issues that contribute
to society, but he understood Representative Stepovich's point.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH noted that Mr. Nicolello had made a
good point. He expressed concern about whether the speeds [in
the bill] are right or whether the speeds would make traffic
more difficult.
CHAIR HOLM said he thought it is a good point that it is more
important that the emergency be taken care of first, and it is
the first priority of the emergency vehicle at that point, while
traffic control is secondary, and people should be responsible
as drivers in looking out for [other vehicles].
REPRESENTATIVE OGG said he was curious about whether highway
maintenance workers should be included, because [highway
maintenance workers are often] parked or working on the side of
the road.
Number 1961
MR. RUDIG said he believed there are currently fines and
enforcement with respect to [vehicles] slowing down when in the
presence of [highway maintenance workers], often in areas marked
by signs and red cones. He said he believed there is a statute
in place to address [highway maintenance worker safety], but
there is no statute to address [emergency vehicles] parked on
the side of the road.
REPRESENTATIVE OGG called attention to [page 1], paragraph (2),
and he asked [about the relationship between the established
speed limit and the reduced speed limit when in the presence of
an emergency vehicle].
MR. RUDIG said the purpose of the statue is if a vehicle is
traveling at 30 mph, when in the presence of an emergency
vehicle, that vehicle would have to slow down to 10 mph, and
when traveling at 25 mph or less, the vehicle would have to slow
down to 5 mph.
Number 1894
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH said he thought it is already required
that vehicles slow down when a police officer is in pursuit or
an emergency vehicle is pulling over on the side of the road.
He asked about reckless endangerment, and about the type of fine
that would be issued for not complying with [HB 438].
MR. RUDIG referred to AS 12.55.035 and noted that the fine would
not exceed $10,000. He explained that this would be a class A
misdemeanor if personal injury were to happen because of
recklessness caused by a person not slowing down in the presence
of an [emergency vehicle] pulled over to the side of the road.
However, he said DPS has indicated that by putting this in
statute, a ticket could be written based on the other speeding
laws currently in statute and regulation.
MR. NICOLELLO said if there was an issue in which a person, on
icy conditions, slows down to 5 mph and still hits the officer
or hits the officer's car causing it to hit the officer, that
person could be cited for going faster than road conditions
[permit]. He said it would probably involve some judgment based
on the officer's part, although that's a different situation, so
he did not have a firm answer regarding that. He said [the
fine] is [issued] only if injury results. Under current
statute, he said if an officer directs a motorist to do
something while passing an accident scene or another action
being taken and the [motorist] disobeys it, the motorist could
be cited under a federal offense, which he believed falls under
"reckless endangerment." Mr. Nicolello brought up the question
about including highway [maintenance] workers in this bill, and
he explained that the difference is that the public does not
have an expectation to react to [maintenance] vehicles, which
are usually only identified by a rotating yellow light, as they
are to [emergency vehicles]. He remarked, "Something that is
also very ... important in it's availability with the highway
people on the side of the road whereas if you've got a police,
fire, or ambulance, you also have a group of one or more people
who can take hostile action if somebody were to get hurt."
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH said it seemed [the speed limits
imposed by the bill] might create some "rubbernecking" in the
more traffic congested areas, but he's "not saying everybody
should do 100 mph by a police officer." He said there are
problems with that in the Lower 48. Although he acknowledged
that there are different circumstances in Alaska, the [problems
occur] when people stop or slow traffic down and create dangers
farther off the road. Representative Stepovich said it would be
a fairly radical change in the speed [limit]. He indicated he
thought the correlation of speeds may be a problem but he agreed
that people should slow down when going by.
MR. RUDIG said he didn't research that issue, but he wanted to
add the point that the bill creates a public education for
people to slow down and recognize [emergency vehicles] on the
side of the road. He said an officer's life would be in serious
danger if hit by a vehicle going 25 or 55 mph, but this bill
gives the officer and others the opportunity to get out of the
way.
CHAIR HOLM explained that the reason for putting forth the bill
was to allow [emergency responders] to have the opportunity to
[escape from danger].
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH remarked, "If the officer gets hit,
we're too late already; ... I know if the bill comes through and
it avoids him getting hit, that's a different story, but as far
as getting hit, that's where I have trouble with how the bill is
going to be."
The committee took a brief at-ease.
Number 1585
REPRESENTATIVE OGG moved to report HB 438 out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
There being no objection, HB 438 was reported out of the House
Transportation Standing Committee.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Transportation Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:50
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|