Legislature(1993 - 1994)

04/23/1994 09:00 AM Senate JUD

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
                   SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE                                  
                         April 23, 1994                                        
                           9:00 a.m.                                           
  MEMBERS PRESENT                                                              
 Senator Robin Taylor, Chairman                                                
 Senator Rick Halford, Vice-Chairman                                           
 Senator George Jacko                                                          
 Senator Suzanne Little                                                        
  MEMBERS ABSENT                                                               
 Senator Dave Donley                                                           
  OTHERS PRESENT                                                               
 Representative Cynthia Toohey                                                 
 Representative Brian Porter                                                   
  COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                           
 CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 299(HES)                                                
 "An Act relating to  revocation of a driver's license for illegal             
 possession or use of a controlled substance or illegal possession             
 or consumption of alcohol; and providing for an effective date."              
 CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 315(JUD)                                                
 "An Act relating to the unauthorized use of or unauthorized                   
 interference with transmission and delivery of subscription cable             
 services; and amending the definition of the offense of theft of              
 services and the penalties for its violation."                                
 CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 302(STA)                                                
 "An Act excluding certain sports officials and certain recreational           
 activities sanctioned by an employer from coverage provided under             
 workers' compensation; and providing for an effective date."                  
 CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 333(RES)                                                
 "An Act amending the Alaska Land Act to define the term `state                
 selected land' for the purpose of recognizing mining locations, and           
 giving retrospective effect to the amendment; and providing for an            
 effective date."                                                              
 CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 410(STA)                                                
 "An Act relating to real estate appraisers and the Board of                   
 Certified Real Estate Appraisers."                                            
 SENATE BILL NO. 279                                                           
 "An Act relating to operating or driving a motor vehicle,                     
 commercial motor vehicle, aircraft, or watercraft."                           
 SENATE BILL NO. 372                                                           
 "An Act relating to community local options for control of                    
 alcoholic beverages; relating to the control of alcoholic                     
 beverages; relating to the definition of `alcoholic beverage'; and            
 providing for an effective date."                                             
 CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 367(HES)                                               
 "An Act relating to health care and insurance for health care; to             
 review and approval of health insurance rates and rating factors;             
 relating to certain civil actions against health care providers; to           
 coordination of insurance benefits and to determination and                   
 disclosure of fees paid to an insured or health care provider;                
 relating to the offense of operating a commercial motor vehicle               
 while intoxicated and the offense of operating a motor vehicle,               
 aircraft, or watercraft while intoxicated; relating to presumptions           
 arising from the amount of alcohol in a person's breath or blood;             
 relating to the rate of interest on certain judgments and decrees;            
 to excise taxes on cigarettes; amending Alaska Rules of Civil                 
 Procedure 26, 27, 68, 79, and 82 and Alaska Rules of Evidence 802,            
 803, and 804; repealing Alaska Rule of Civil Procedure 72.1; and              
 providing for an effective date."                                             
 CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 161(STA)                                               
 "An Act relating to interest rates and calculation of interest                
 under certain judgments and decrees and on refunds of certain                 
 taxes, royalties, or net profit shares; and providing for an                  
 effective date."                                                              
 SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 18                                           
 Requesting the governor to offer the United States Congress                   
 $10,000,000,000 in cash, or other terms that may be negotiated                
 between the state and the federal government, to purchase all                 
 federal land, water, or land and water, including any surface or              
 subsurface interests, in Alaska other than military reservations              
 and federal offices, to have the federal government relinquish all            
 dominion, control, and regulatory authority over all land, water,             
 or land and water, including surface or subsurface interests, in              
 Alaska other than military reservations and federal offices, and              
 providing a bonus if certain federal agencies are removed from the            
 state within six months of the federal sale to the state and                  
 relinquishment of control.                                                    
 SENATE CS FOR CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 79(HES)                                   
 "An Act relating to recovery from a parent or legal guardian of               
 wilful or malicious destruction of property by a minor."                      
  PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION                                             
 HB 299 - See State Affairs minutes dated 4/11/94.                             
 HB 315 - See State Affairs minutes dated 3/30/94 and 4/6/94.                  
 HB 302 - NO PREVIOUS ACTION.                                                  
 HB 333 - See Resources minutes dated 3/21/94.                                 
 HB 410 - NO PREVIOUS ACTION.                                                  
 SB 279 - See State Affairs minutes dated 3/9/94 and 3/11/94.                  
          See Judiciary minutes dated 3/28/94.                                 
 SB 372 - NO PREVIOUS ACTION.                                                  
 SB 367 - See Health, Education & Social Services minutes dated                
          3/28/94, 3/30/94, 4/6/94 and 4/7/94.  See Judiciary                  
          minutes dated 4/8/94.                                                
 SB 161 - See State Affairs minutes dated 4/2/93 and 4/7/93.                   
          See Judiciary minutes dated 4/14/93 and 4/20/93.                     
 SCR 18 - See Resources minutes dated 4/8/94 and 4/11/94.                      
          See Judiciary minutes dated 4/18/94.                                 
 HB 79 -  See Health, Education & Social Service minutes dated                 
          2/2/94.  See Judiciary minutes dated 4/18/94.                        
 WITNESS REGISTER                                                              
 Eric Musser, Legislative Assistant                                            
 Representative Brian Porter                                                   
 State Capitol                                                                 
 Juneau, AK 99801-1182                                                         
   POSITION STATEMENT: Supports HB 315.                                        
 Gary Haines                                                                   
 Vice-President of Prime Cable                                                 
 Servicing Anchorage, Kenai, Soldotna,                                         
 and Bethel.                                                                   
   POSITION STATEMENT: Supports HB 315.                                        
 Pat Smutz                                                                     
 Alaska State AFL-CIO                                                          
 2501 Commercial Drive                                                         
 Anchorage, Alaska 99501                                                       
   POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 302.                                         
 Jack Heesch, President                                                        
 Alaska Softball Association                                                   
 Box 201608                                                                    
 Anchorage, Alaska 99520                                                       
   POSITION STATEMENT: Supports HB 302.                                        
 Jack Phelps, Aide                                                             
 Representative Pete Kott                                                      
 State Capitol                                                                 
 Juneau, AK 99801-1182                                                         
   POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HB 333.                                      
 Diane Lauber                                                                  
 Anheiser Bush                                                                 
 321 Highland Drive                                                            
 Juneau, Alaska 99801                                                          
   POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 372.                                         
 Resa Jerrel                                                                   
 National Federation of Independent Business                                   
 9159 Skywood Lane                                                             
 Juneau, Alaska 99801                                                          
   POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 372.                                         
 Pat Sharrock, Director                                                        
 Alcoholic Beverage Control Board                                              
 550 W. 7th Ave., Suite 350                                                    
 Anchorage, Alaska 99801                                                       
   POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 372.                                        
  ACTION NARRATIVE                                                             
 TAPE 94-38, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 001                                                                    
  CHAIRMAN ROBIN TAYLOR  called the Judiciary Committee meeting to             
 order at 9:00 a.m.                                                            
 bill, CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 299(FIN) am (DRIVER'S LICENSE                     
 REVOCATION:ALCOHOL/DRUGS).  After a short discussion, SENATOR                 
 HALFORD moved to pass HB 299 from committee with individual                   
 recommendations.  Without objections, so ordered.                             
 SENATOR TAYLOR introduced HB 315 (THEFT OF SUBSCRIPTION TV                    
 SERVICES) sponsored by REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER.  Before his               
 legislative assistant, ERIC MUSSER, gave his testimony on the bill,           
 SENATOR TAYLOR indicated the bill would not be leaving the                    
 committee today, but testimony would be taken on the bill in                  
 preparation for passing the bill from committee at the next                   
 Number 054                                                                    
 MR. MUSSER explained briefly that HB 315 is to place in statute the           
 penalties for the unauthorized use, distribution, or sale of                  
 subscription cable services.  He said presently Alaska's theft of             
 services statute, AS 11.46.200, is very broad and unenforceable in            
 the theft of cable services.                                                  
 MR. MUSSER explained the bill first, under AS 11.46.200(A)(4) makes           
 it a Class A misdemeanor to maintain, whether physically or                   
 electronically, an unauthorized device to a TV set.  Under (4)(B)             
 manufacturing, assembling, distribution, or marketing the converter           
 boxes becomes a Class C felony.                                               
 Number 097                                                                    
 SENATOR LITTLE asked where the illegal devices were available.  MR.           
 MUSSER explained GARY HAINES from Prime Cable has some samples and            
 noted the manner in which they were acquired.  He showed an example           
 of a cable box at the time of subscription, the illegal box, and              
 explained the prohibitions.                                                   
 SENATOR LITTLE questioned the degree of crime in the scenario just            
 described by MR. MUSSER.                                                      
 MR. MUSSER said it would be theft in the third degree as described            
 in page 2, line 16.                                                           
 SENATOR LITTLE wanted to know how to catch these thieves.                     
 MR. MUSSER deferred to GARY HAINES, Vice-President of Prime Cable,            
 who explained some are detected from anonymous calls, and some are            
 detected through FBI sting operations, since it is against federal            
 Number 162                                                                    
 MR. HAINES showed a list from a sting from Global Network which               
 showed a large number of persons in Anchorage who had purchased the           
 illegal box, and he explained how a great deal of money is made               
 from the boxes.  He explained it wasn't just an Anchorage problem,            
 but was spreading throughout the state.                                       
 MR. HAINES outlined how a person could steal one of his legal boxes           
 and purchase a test chip out of California for $19.00, which makes            
 an even higher profit.                                                        
 Number 191                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER joined the meeting at this time and expressed           
 his appreciation to the committee for hearing the bill, and he                
 outlined the problems with the statutes keeping up with the                   
 increase in cable theft.  He explained how difficult it was to                
 determine how many hours someone has used a pirate box, and he                
 reviewed the penalties for theft.                                             
 SENATOR HALFORD indicated he had a problem with the level of                  
 penalty, and found it difficult to make it a Class C penalty,                 
 because of other Class C penalty categories.  He suggested changing           
 it to a Class A misdemeanor.  SENATOR TAYLOR suggested the bill               
 could be changed under the title.                                             
 SENATOR LITTLE discussed her understanding of two separate                    
 offenses, one for possessing the pirate box, and one for selling              
 Number 240                                                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER approved the idea of changing the penalties.            
 SENATOR HALFORD conceptually moved to adjust the penalties so that            
 Section 1 would be a Class A misdemeanor and Section 2 a Class B              
 misdemeanor.  He also moved to have the bill written consistent as            
 a Judiciary committee substitute.  Without objections, so ordered.            
 SENATOR TAYLOR requested his staff to prepare the committee                   
 substitute to be shown to REPRESENTATIVE PORTER before bringing it            
 to committee on Monday.                                                       
 SENATOR TAYLOR introduced a work draft for SENATE CS FOR CS FOR               
 HOUSE BILL NO. 302(JUD), workers compensation for recreational                
 activities, and warned the committee members it was a controversial           
 subject since it dealt with the "bunkhouse rule."  He explained               
 there had been worker's compensation wars around the legislature              
 for years.                                                                    
 SENATOR JACKO asked what the bunkhouse rule was, and SENATOR TAYLOR           
 suggested it could be answered by someone from REPRESENTATIVE                 
 NAVARRE'S staff or PAT SMUTZ, legislative director for the AFL-CIO.           
 Number 260                                                                    
 MR. SMUTZ explained the bunkhouse rule was a worker at a remote               
 work site, under the control of the employer, was covered by                  
 workers compensation 24 hours a day.                                          
 SENATOR LITTLE asked what changes the bill would make.                        
 MR. SMUTZ said the committee substitute deletes the House versions            
 on page 2, lines 12 through 15, and would make a major modification           
 of the worker's compact.  If you were engaged in a recreational               
 activity at a remote site, you wouldn't be covered by worker's                
 MR. SMUTZ claimed it would be a backward step in the worker's                 
 compensation, and he discussed the traditional means for                      
 negotiating compromises between labor and management, as well as              
 the Alaska Labor/Management Worker's Compensation Ad Hoc Committee.           
 At that time, he said labor gave up major concessions in quite a              
 bit of insurance premium reductions, and it worked out as a major             
 compromise, a system that seems to work.  He claimed at the end of            
 session, there is always a special interest that wants to modify              
 the law.  He described a number of remote camps, and he didn't see            
 any one from those camps supporting the change.  He was curious as            
 to the specific interest, but he was not aware of any problems.               
 Number 313                                                                    
 SENATOR TAYLOR asked MR. SMUTZ to comment on the proposed committee           
 substitute which addresses the officials who are on a contractual             
 basis at a sports event involving softball, and he described a                
 group of legislators, who would be playing softball in the                    
 afternoon.  He thought this was the main thrust of the legislation            
 from REPRESENTATIVE NAVARRE'S position.                                       
 MR. SMUTZ said it was called the softball rule, and he described an           
 example of a large company that went Outside and recruited a ringer           
 to play on their company team.  The ringer, a woman, was hurt and             
 she was denied worker's compensation.  It went to court where it              
 was decided it was a condition of hire and was covered under                  
 workers compensation.  He thought there was a perception problem as           
 to whether these people are covered by workers compensation.                  
 MR. SMUTZ said he was not too familiar with the umpire part of the            
 legislation, but thought it involved official who contract as                 
 individuals to be umpires and referees, although they wanted to be            
 considered as individual contractors - not necessarily employees.             
 MR. SMUTZ, in answer to a question from SENATOR TAYLOR, said the              
 AFL-CIO was neutral on the bill.                                              
 SENATOR TAYLOR explained in the example given by MR. SMUTZ, the               
 ringer would not be covered if the committee substitute passed, and           
 he explained in page 2, line 8 the language that would exclude                
 activities of a personal nature away from employer provided                   
 facilities.  Employer sanctioned activities do not include                    
 recreational activities unless the activity occurs at a remote job            
 site or on the employment premises.                                           
 SENATOR TAYLOR was interrupted by JACK HEESCH, President of the               
 Alaska Softball Association, who explained the court interpreted              
 the employer provided rule to include that if you pay the fee to              
 rent the field, which you do when you pay a fee to enter a league,            
 some of that money is transferred to the Municipality Parks and               
 Rec. for rental of the fields.  The court interpreted that as being           
 an employer provided facility as the result of the rental of the              
 field through the entry of the team into a league.                            
 SENATOR TAYLOR clarified the meaning as even after HB 302 has been            
 passed, that MR. HEESCH believed if the employer paid for the                 
 rental of field that somehow becomes employment premises.                     
 Number 369                                                                    
 MR. HEESCH said they were eliminating "employer provided" and                 
 specifying "employer premises."  SENATOR TAYLOR used a hypothetical           
 example of Fred Meyers having a softball team, and even if Fred               
 Meyers buys them their uniforms, pays costs and fee rental of a               
 field, that is not employment premises?  MR. HEESCH said that was             
 correct.  SENATOR TAYLOR said those players would not be covered by           
 worker's compensation as he interprets the legislation.                       
 SENATOR TAYLOR explained somehow he had modified the remote camp              
 rule by deleting it, and MR. SMUTZ agreed.  There was a argument as           
 to whether workers playing ball at a remote camp were covered or              
 those playing ball in a Fred Meyers' parking lot.  SENATOR TAYLOR             
 said the committee substitute would eliminate coverage for those in           
 the urban setting, but those in a remote setting would still be               
 covered or any activity - even mountain climbing - over which the             
 employer has no control.  MR. SMUTZ was not sure what the employers           
 in logging camps could do, but he did know athletic equipment was             
 provided.  He explained the remote circumstances where recreation             
 is part of the camp life and the necessity of workers compensation            
 24 hours a day.                                                               
 Number 413                                                                    
 SENATOR LITTLE clarified that activities provided at a remote site            
 are part of the benefit package that comes with the job and is a              
 negotiated part of the contract between the employer and employee.            
 MR. SMUTZ, in speaking for union sites, described the recreation              
 activities, and he used the North Slope as an example of using the            
 activities as an enticement to stay.                                          
 SENATOR TAYLOR wanted to know where the line is drawn between the             
 employer who provides all kinds of equipment and events here in               
 town, and are not covered, but in logging communities their                   
 employers are basically under a cloud now because they have to be             
 covered.  He clarified most of his communities are remote sites.              
 This brought a question from SENATOR LITTLE asking how there can be           
 a remote site with employees involved in recreational activities              
 fifty miles from camp.                                                        
 SENATOR TAYLOR said Prince of Wales Island has 2000 miles of road             
 and the deepest caves ever discovered.  He explained it was going             
 to become a national park, but presently loggers on the Island can            
 spend off duty time spelunking.  If an employee is injured, the               
 employer is responsible, but SENATOR TAYLOR doesn't think that is             
 MR. SMUTZ described the difference on the employees on the North              
 Slope who have to observe a certain amount of control in their                
 activities.  He suggested limitations on where the loggers may                
 travel might be a negotiable item in a contract.                              
 MR. SMUTZ explained restrictions were difficult, but he didn't                
 think the committee substitute for HB 302 properly addresses the              
 problem, and would only create more problems.  SENATOR TAYLOR said            
 the original bill certainly draws a line on every employee living             
 at this time, and he referred to page 2.                                      
 MR. SMUTZ said it would probably be determined in future court                
 cases, but MR. HEESCH indicated continued support for the bill.               
 Number 463                                                                    
 SENATOR TAYLOR explained how, in refereeing three games on Sandy              
 Beach, the referee might be covered on one but not the other two.             
 MR. HEESCH explained that most of the officials worked for                    
 organizations in such groups as the Juneau Sport's Association,               
 under contract as independent contractors.  He quoted the IRS as              
 being in agreement, as well as the Department of Labor, but he also           
 elaborated on the vagaries of insurance rules that has made it                
 Number 495                                                                    
 SENATOR LITTLE said she had a clear understanding of the original             
 bill, but was not willing to support the committee substitute.                
 SENATOR TAYLOR called for a vote on SENATOR HALFORD'S move to adopt           
 the new committee substitute for House Bill No. 302(JUD).  The role           
 was taken with the following results: SENATORS TAYLOR, HALFORD, and           
 JACKO voted "yea," and SENATOR LITTLE voted "nay."  SENATOR TAYLOR            
 stated the motion carried.                                                    
 It was decided the bill would go next to Rules.                               
 302(JUD) from committee.  SENATOR LITTLE objected, and explained              
 the committee substitute addressed a situation that could be more             
 properly addressed in individual cases, where there are problems              
 through agreements between employers and employee at remote work              
 sites.  She thought it would make a sweeping change in all remote             
 sites, where there aren't problems, and seems highly inappropriate.           
 She urged the bill not be passed from committee, since she didn't             
 think it would benefit the State as a whole.                                  
 SENATOR TAYLOR called for a vote on SENATOR HALFORD'S move to pass            
 SENATE CS FOR CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 302(JUD).  The role was taken             
 with the following results: SENATORS TAYLOR, HALFORD, and JACKO               
 voted "yea," and SENATOR LITTLE voted "nay."  SENATOR TAYLOR stated           
 the motion carried.                                                           
 SENATOR TAYLOR introduced HB 333 (MINING LOCATIONS ON STATE                   
 SELECTED LAND) sponsored by REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT, and invited             
 JACK PHELPS, Aide to REPRESENTATIVE KOTT, to testify.                         
 MR. PHELPS explained there was currently a provision in state law             
 that allows mining locations on state land and state selected land,           
 but there is no Alaska statute defining "state selected land."  He            
 further explained the problems encountered by the miners who have             
 federal claims on land that has been selected by the state, and he            
 said the bill would provide a definition that corrects the problem.           
 MR. PHELPS said it would allow a certain mechanism for a person               
 with an unpatented federal claim to convert that claim to a state             
 claim once the land is conveyed to the state.  He referred the                
 definition to page 1, lines 7 through 10.                                     
 SENATOR TAYLOR asked if there were questions about the definition,            
 and SENATOR LITTLE asked about a person having an unpatented                  
 federal claim.  SENATOR TAYLOR explained the process of getting               
 from staking to patent - lengthy and expensive.                               
 MR. PHELPS claimed there were many unpatented federal claims in the           
 state, and he said many are on lands that are under state selection           
 of about 21 million acres.  He explained the bill would allow the             
 miner, whose land was claimed by the state, to convert their claims           
 to state claims.  Any royalties from the mining would flow to the             
 state rather than the state government.                                       
 Number 553                                                                    
 SENATOR LITTLE asked if it gave retrospective effect to amendment,            
 and MR. PHELPS referred her to Section 3 for clarity as to                    
 retroactively.  He also explained about the retroactive date of               
 April 14, 1966.                                                               
 SENATOR LITTLE asked if he knew of anyone opposed to the bill, and            
 MR. PHELPS said he was not aware of anyone, but he said there may             
 be some individual miners who may not realize the benefit of                  
 overstaking.  He reviewed the wide support from miners to industry            
 for the bill.                                                                 
 There was a brief discussion of restaking a mining claim.                     
 SENATOR HALFORD moved to pass CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 333(RES)(MINING           
 LOCATIONS ON STATE SELECTED LAND) from committee with individual              
 recommendations.  Without objections, so ordered.                             
 SENATOR TAYLOR introduced CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 410(STA) and                  
 explained it was an Act relating to real estate appraisers.  Since            
 there was no sponsor present, SENATOR TAYLOR directed his committee           
 aide, KEVIN SULLIVAN, to review the bill.                                     
 Number 590                                                                    
 MR. SULLIVAN explained the bill had been brought to committee                 
 advocated by the Department of Commerce, and he further explained             
 the House version basically certifies the appraisers in the State             
 of Alaska to conform to federal requirements.                                 
 MR. SULLIVAN quoted FRED FERRARA from the Appraisers Association in           
 Anchorage as being opposed to the legislation and would prefer to             
 keep the two year of practical experience.  The federal requirement           
 as embodied in HB 410 does not require two years of training                  
 SENATOR LITTLE clarified the license would only require 120 hours             
 of educational experience.  She questioned whether the appraisers             
 who do not meet the 120 hours of training would not be recognized             
 as certified appraisers.  She wanted to know if the state was                 
 increasing or decreasing the requirements.                                    
 MR. SULLIVAN explained in the aggregate the state is actually                 
 decreasing because, as this measure is before us, we are no longer            
 abiding by the current law ....                                               
 TAPE 94-38, SIDE B                                                            
 Number 001                                                                    
 ...... referring to the classroom hours.  He said if the bill was             
 adopted as is, it would just be the classroom hours.  SENATOR                 
 TAYLOR said the Board could modify or change that by regulation.              
 MR. SULLIVAN said the 120 hours being required is greater than is             
 presently in state law.  He reviewed the changes again in current             
 law and in the new legislation, and said the two year provision               
 would be deleted.                                                             
 SENATOR TAYLOR said it was also a sunset bill moving them from 1994           
 to 1998.  SENATOR HALFORD said it gave the regulatory board control           
 what was formerly in statute, and he explained how the provisions             
 could be changed by the board.                                                
 SENATOR LITTLE asked if the board was under the Department of                 
 Labor, but she was told it is under the Department of Commerce.               
 SENATOR TAYLOR asked for committee opinion on MR. FERRARA'S concern           
 about returning the two year experience back into the legislation.            
 SENATOR HALFORD asked about an audit, but MR. SULLIVAN did not have           
 any such information in the bill packet.                                      
 SENATOR LITTLE said she supported retaining the two year internship           
 requirement, and she explained the importance of an accurate                  
 appraisal of property.  She thought the legislation might require             
 more stringent rules from the board, but SENATOR TAYLOR quoted                
 House language that said just the opposite.                                   
 MR. SULLIVAN explained the Senate version had retained the two year           
 internship requirements, but the Department of Commerce has asked             
 for the House version be moved for obvious reasons.                           
 In answer to a question by SENATOR HALFORD, SENATOR TAYLOR reported           
 the bill had been introduced on the House side by the Labor and               
 Commerce Committee by request.  The Senate version is SB 361.                 
 SENATOR LITTLE moved a conceptual amendment to make it comparable             
 to the Senate Labor & Commerce version, which would add in the two            
 year internship requirement.                                                  
 SENATOR HALFORD asked to defer action on the bill until the                   
 advocate for the bill was determined.  SENATOR TAYLOR also noted              
 other inconsistencies in the two bills.                                       
 Number 056                                                                    
 SENATOR LITTLE withdrew her motion, and the bill was held for                 
 further changes.                                                              
 Number 068                                                                    
 committee and noted a Judiciary Committee substitute has been                 
 prepared, even though it is a Governor's bill.                                
 SENATOR TAYLOR reviewed some concerns in the committee with the               
 accident that occurred in Anchorage where a multiple DWI offender             
 had killed a woman and her daughter.  The committee felt the need             
 for something more thus the increase the penalty for a third time             
 offender to a Class C felony.  He said the legislation also                   
 provided for forfeiture provisions for a vehicle used in the                  
 commitment of a crime.                                                        
 SENATOR TAYLOR moved to adopt CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 279(JUD)                 
 (version Ford, 4/22/94).  Without objections, so ordered.                     
 SENATOR HALFORD moved to pass CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 279(JUD)                 
 (DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED LAWS) from committee with individual               
 recommendations.  Without objections, so ordered.                             
 Number 091                                                                    
 & MISCELLANEOUS) sponsored by the Senate Judiciary Committee by               
 Request and began taking testimony on the bill.                               
 DIANE LAUBER explained the Anheiser Bush Companies, whom she                  
 represents, is proud of their leadership role in promoting                    
 responsible use of its products, and she described their " know               
 when to say when" educational advertising campaign as being                   
 effective.  She said the company has been strong supporters of the            
 designated driver campaign and were the first major brewer to                 
 produce a non-alcoholic malt beverage.  She also described programs           
 in schools and colleges to discourage underage consumption of all             
 alcohol and to provide alternatives to the use of intoxicating                
 MS. LAUBER said their company opposes a tax increase on beer, and             
 she claimed beer in Alaska is already taxed at a rate nearly 50%              
 higher than the national average.  She outlined the increases that            
 have been made previously, and she warned a 20% increase in taxes             
 would not translate into an increase of 20% in taxes collected if             
 federal experience is any indication.  She cited studies to show              
 that higher taxes is not a deterrent to the abuse of alcohol by               
 alcoholics.  She claimed the vast majority of beer is consumed by             
 responsible users, and she reviewed the health benefits of daily              
 consumption of moderate amounts of alcoholic beverages.  She                  
 explained the company did not object to paying their fair share of            
 taxes, but the continued increase in federal and state taxes was              
 more than an adequate tax on the beer drinkers in the state.                  
 RESA JERREL introduced herself as the state director for the                  
 National Federation of Independent Business/Alaska and expressed              
 the opposition of the business group to SB 372, especially the                
 section on page 30, section 58 of the work draft of the proposed              
 committee substitute which would raise the taxes on alcoholic                 
 beverages.  She quoted the last survey of her membership that by              
 92%, they wanted to reduce government spending before increasing              
 present taxes.                                                                
 SENATOR JACKO asked if her survey referred to alcohol or taxes in             
 general, and she said it mentioned taxes in general.  MS. JERREL              
 said she did ask a question:  "If the legislature believes it has             
 to increase taxes, which one do you think is the fairest?"  She               
 said they listed, first sales taxes, second personal income tax,              
 with alcohol and tobacco tax as third.                                        
 Next, SENATOR TAYLOR called on PATRICK SHARROCK, Director of the              
 Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, to testify.                                 
 Number 162                                                                    
 MR. SHARROCK began by thanking the committee for introducing the              
 bill, and he reviewed elements of the law that have been discussed.           
 He said the primary issue involved in this legislation is the                 
 rewriting of the local option provisions that allow incorporated              
 communities and unincorporated villages around the state to                   
 implement one of the five local option provisions to restrict                 
 alcoholic beverages in the communities.                                       
 MR. SHARROCK said there were currently 112 cities and villages that           
 have exercised their local option, with one village, ST. MARYS,               
 that tried to change their option.  He said the residents thought             
 they were voting on one result, but their vote resulted in another.           
 MR. SHARROCK read from an article in the Anchorage paper, April 18,           
 1993 which reported in order for a city to adopt a less strict law,           
 the city manager explained the city must first repeal their ban               
 entirely, and hold a second election to select what level of                  
 restriction they wanted.  He said this was a difficult procedure              
 for many of the voters in these villages, many of whom, he said,              
 can't speak English.                                                          
 MR. SHARROCK claimed the main ingredient of this legislation                  
 retains the same options that are under current law, but puts them            
 into three categories in terms of what the city can do, and he                
 referred to Section 1, page 1, for an explanation of the options.             
 SENATOR TAYLOR clarified there would be no need for a vote to                 
 repeal an option before voting for a different standard.                      
 MR. SHARROCK thought this legislation was particularly important              
 for the rural areas which deals with the issue on a day to day                
 basis.  He referred to page 1, Section 1 which would prohibit a               
 package store from soliciting or receiving orders from an agent in            
 a local option area, and he explained examples.                               
 MR. SHARROCK discussed with SENATOR TAYLOR a number of complaints             
 about sending unsolicited alcoholic beverage information, which               
 keeps the package stores from direct mailing to people.                       
 Number 203                                                                    
 MR. SHARROCK said the next provision relates to HB 504, which lists           
 the limitation of military personnel going into veteran or other              
 clubs where the current law says they have to be military uniform.            
 He said this would be changed in this legislation.                            
 MR. SHARROCK said the legislation would restrict package stores to            
 shipping only to the purchaser, and he explained examples of                  
 SENATOR JACKO asked how this was a problem, and MR. SHARROCK said             
 the problem is the package store, which under current regulations             
 must have full identification of the person to whom the alcohol               
 will be sent.  A file must be maintained showing what has been                
 submitted from the purchaser in the form of identification.                   
 SENATOR TAYLOR and MR. SHARROCK discussed various scenarios where             
 this would be illegal.                                                        
 MR. SHARROCK noted another board complaint is sending "high octane"           
 alcohol to the Bush, and he said this legislation would prohibit              
 the shipment of 150 proof rum and everclear, which he said has no             
 business in the Bush.                                                         
 MR. SHARROCK explained in Sections 7 and 8, the director would be             
 required to give renewal notice to licensees whose licenses are               
 expiring, requires the licensee to file a renewal application by              
 January 1, and increases the penalty for late applications to $500.           
 MR. SHARROCK complained the board has never been able to provide              
 consistent and equal enforcement around the state for persons who             
 don't file their applications in a timely manner.                             
 MR. SHARROCK said Section 8 addresses a problem which repeals                 
 provisions regarding denial of a new license in a municipality that           
 has prohibited sale except by a municipal owned liquor store.  It             
 prohibits issuance of a new license or permit in certain cities or            
 in an established village when certain local options are approved,            
 and he used the example of working with a restaurant in Government            
 Hill in Anchorage for specific approval of a time when beer and               
 wine could be sold after school children had gone home.                       
 MR. SHARROCK mentioned several other "glitches" that would be fixed           
 by the legislation.  Up until biennial renewal, local governments             
 could protest, statutorily using the words "under law," and he                
 explained the ramifications of this.  It took away municipalities             
 right to protest for unpaid sales taxes on an annual basis, and               
 this would be corrected.  They discussed triggering sanctions                 
 within the ABC Board.                                                         
 Number 269                                                                    
 Kenai protests every year.                                                    
 MR. SHARROCK mentioned another glitch which was to take away                  
 reference to half-year licenses, which has affected about 190 half-           
 year licenses.  Also, another technical matter deals with notices,            
 which must be given to package stores where there has been a local            
 option imposed by the community.  Under current law the Board is              
 suppose to notify every package store in the state by registered              
 mail, and he explained why this has been modified.                            
 Lastly, he explained a modification to the definition of "alcoholic           
 beverage," because it was brought to MR. SHARROCK'S attention by              
 legal professionals across the state who had written to Long's Drug           
 in Anchorage asking that a list of about 30 products not be shipped           
 to certain people in various communities.                                     
 MR. SHARROCK explained that alcohol can be extracted from some of             
 these products such as hairspray for consumption.  He further                 
 explained this change in the definition of alcohol is not to bring            
 those types of products under Title 4, as alcoholic beverages, but,           
 if there is possession by those persons or an intent to consume,              
 search warrants can be granted and the products seized.                       
 SENATOR LITTLE questioned his reference to "those persons."  MR.              
 SHARROCK said he was referring to residents of a community.  She              
 asked if he meant communities where alcohol has been prohibited.              
 MR. SHARROCK answered it was not necessarily, but explained it                
 would depend on whether the alcohol was being extracted from the              
 product.  Then it could be seized.                                            
 SENATOR LITTLE asked if he was making a delineation between hair-             
 spray and a refined product that would be manufactured by an                  
 individual.  He said she was correct and there was some discussion            
 among committee members.  SENATOR TAYLOR related an incident of               
 abuse in his community of a well known cold preparation, which                
 contains alcohol.  MR. SHARROCK said this type of abuse of a                  
 product would fall into play in an area that had local option if              
 the product was intended as an alcoholic beverage.                            
 SENATOR LITTLE asked how it would be known if these products were             
 ordered for illicit purposes.  MR. SHARROCK said he had been told             
 it was easy to make that determination if there are large                     
 quantities of those products going into communities where it would            
 seem that large quantities would not be consumed.                             
 SENATOR JACKO expressed some concerns in regards to local options             
 since he owns a grocery store.  He asked what would happened if a             
 high school student working in the store inadvertently sold one of            
 these products.  MR. SHARROCK clarified the legislation would only            
 provide for enforcement when there was a problem.                             
 Number 341                                                                    
 SENATOR LITTLE expressed a problem with the provision that alcohol            
 over 100 proof not be allowed to be shipped to dry communities, and           
 thought it would be up to the specific community rather than having           
 the state impose the restriction.  SENATOR JACKO agreed with                  
 SENATOR LITTLE'S concern, and asked about his statement that it had           
 no business in the Bush.                                                      
 MR. SHARROCK quoted remarks about the dangers of everclear since it           
 is 90% alcohol and quick consumption is catastrophic.  SENATOR                
 TAYLOR asked if some communities specifically asked not to have               
 everclear in their community, and MR. SHARROCK said he was correct.           
 SENATOR TAYLOR understood some communities restrict package stores            
 from shipping to people, but SENATOR LITTLE thought there should be           
 a better way.  She thought communities should be given the ability            
 to prohibit entirely over 100 proof alcohol if they choose to do              
 so.  MR. SHARROCK clarified it was for 150 proof, and only applies            
 to those communities that have adopted a local option election.               
 SENATOR TAYLOR clarified a package store could ship those products            
 to a person in another community where it was not prohibited.  MR.            
 SHARROCK said this was covered on page 3, Section 6, and he                   
 reviewed the provisions in the subsections.  SENATOR TAYLOR wanted            
 it be sure it was clear the restrictions only applied to those                
 areas where a vote has occurred.                                              
 SENATOR LITTLE asked MR. SHARROCK if he had a sense of the                    
 communities that have restrictions about whether or not this is               
 acceptable to the community, and MR. SHARROCK said he had not.                
 SENATOR LITTLE referred to Section 6(H)(1) and asked it was current           
 law.  MR. SHARROCK said it was.  SENATOR TAYLOR clarified the new             
 law had to do with the an alcoholic beverage containing more than             
 75% by volume.                                                                
 Number 402                                                                    
 SENATOR JACKO ask for clarification on MR. SHARROCK'S remark that             
 everclear had "no business in the Bush."  He wondered if he implied           
 it had more business in urban Alaska than it does in rural Alaska.            
 MR. SHARROCK said he only tried to relate the kinds of stories the            
 ABC Board has heard in terms of abuse of alcohol in rural areas,              
 and he admitted alcohol abuse occurred other places as well.  He              
 reiterated his remarks about local option in relation to high proof           
 SENATOR LITTLE repeated her feeling it should be an option of the             
 local government, and there was a discussion of outlawing everclear           
 in the whole state.  SENATOR TAYLOR explained only two states in              
 the United States allowed the sale of everclear - Georgia and                 
 Alaska.  SENATOR LITTLE continued to feel that it was an imposition           
 of a restriction on one segment of our state, but she also thought            
 everclear was a terrible substance.                                           
 Number 447                                                                    
 SENATOR TAYLOR pointed to page 3 lines 14 and 14 of the committee             
 substitute and explained it pertained to those areas that have                
 restricted the sale of alcoholic beverages.  Both SENATOR HALFORD             
 and SENATOR LITTLE were concerned about equal protection, and                 
 SENATOR TAYLOR was not sure, but said it provides for some                    
 restriction to comply with the local option of the areas.                     
 SENATOR HALFORD suggested getting rid of everclear in the state,              
 and followed his remark with a proposed amendment to do so.  There            
 was some discussion about making it a conceptual amendment and                
 whether to ban possession or sale.                                            
 SENATOR TAYLOR asked for the adoption of CS FOR SENATE BILL NO.               
 372(JUD).  Without objections, so ordered.                                    
 SENATOR HALFORD proposed an amendment to ban from sale in Alaska              
 any alcoholic beverage above 76% by volume.  Without objections, so           
 SENATOR LITTLE proposed an amendment to delete lines 14 and 15 on             
 page 3, including or and placing a . after month.  Without                
 objections, so ordered.                                                       
 Number 578                                                                    
 SENATOR LITTLE asked if the taxes included in the legislation were            
 part of the budget or considered as revenues.  SENATOR TAYLOR said            
 no they would have been included in the budget package yesterday.             
 In reference to the taxes proposed in the legislation, SENATOR                
 LITTLE felt she could support them if there was a provision in the            
 bill that the revenues gained by the new tax would be used for some           
 purpose such as alcohol prevention programs, but she has a concern            
 there is no specific purpose for the new funds.  SENATOR TAYLOR               
 described the use of the funds for treatment programs, and there              
 was a discussion of including an intent the money go to alcohol               
 treatment programs.  SENATOR HALFORD explained there would be no              
 dedication unless there was a constitutional amendment.                       
 TAPE 94-39, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 001                                                                    
 SENATOR HALFORD moved to pass CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 372(JUD)                 
 (ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES: LOCAL OPTION & MISC.) from committee with               
 individual recommendations.  Without objections, so ordered.                  
 and suggested the committee members look at the bill carefully,               
 since he said it has within it the "bad baby statute," which                  
 provides for a statute of limitations for the pediatricians of the            
 state that have been complaining for years about a twenty year plus           
 statute of limitations.  This reduces it to eight and fixes it.  He           
 said it had two committees within it and has to go to the Finance             
 Committee to get to the floor.                                                
 SENATOR LITTLE said she didn't like it, but SENATOR TAYLOR said               
 they stripped most of the bad stuff out of it.  He said there were            
 just two advisory committees left.                                            
 SENATOR HALFORD posed a hypothetical of a child being born                    
 following the mother taking a drug that was questionable like DES,            
 and 20 years later finding something is wrong.  He asked if the               
 bill prevented recourse by the child.                                         
 SENATOR TAYLOR said it didn't, because in those instances that's a            
 product the mother took, and he explained this is a statute having            
 to do with the child itself - whether the child can sue the doctor            
 who delivered.  He said the bill would also cover pediatricians and           
 Number 048                                                                    
 SENATOR LITTLE asked for clarification that the child had a ten               
 year limitation, and SENATOR TAYLOR said he had not changed that              
 one.  He said SENATOR RIEGER had fixed that one at eight years.               
 SENATOR LITTLE posed a hypothetical of a nine year old child, and             
 asked if the parents could bring a suit against the physician for             
 anything occurred during birth.  She asked if that was correct?               
 SENATOR TAYLOR said the committee looked at the number of suits               
 that had been brought by anyone over eight years old.  He said a              
 "bad baby" is usually noticed before eight years have passed.                 
 SENATOR HALFORD continued to ask about the things that don't come             
 out for 20 years, a provision as to when the effect is discovered,            
 and the use of a prescription drug.  SENATOR TAYLOR explained the             
 provisions in the bill, when the discovery occurs, and the order of           
 the normal statutes of limitations.                                           
 SENATOR HALFORD used the example of a mother given DES, and the               
 child growing to young womanhood finds she has substantial                    
 reproductive problems and will never be able to have children.  He            
 asked if she could sue.                                                       
 Number 093                                                                    
 SENATOR TAYLOR said it would depend whether or not there was any              
 fraud or collusion by the parent, guardian, or health provider.               
 SENATOR HALFORD declared it was simple negligence by a doctor who             
 should have known not to prescribe DES.  SENATOR TAYLOR said there            
 would have to be intentional concealment, fraud, or conclusion.               
 There was a discussion of intentional or gross negligence for                 
 anything not compensated, and SENATOR HALFORD had harsh comments              
 about the liability system that discriminates against good                    
 samaritans who are getting no compensation.  SENATOR TAYLOR thought           
 there should be some limitation short of 21 years, and he reviewed            
 the limitations of the legislation.  SENATOR HALFORD concluded the            
 best tort reform was eliminating lawyers, but SENATOR TAYLOR said             
 it wouldn't change the injury.                                                
 Number 134                                                                    
 SENATOR HALFORD moved to adopt CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 367(JUD).               
 Without objections, so ordered.                                               
 SENATOR HALFORD explained the bill gives a committee member a                 
 compensation of $400 per day plus expenses for serving on the                 
 committee on page 3, line 25 and page 6, line 17. SENATOR HALFORD             
 said it was excessive and increases the fiscal note.  He moved to             
 reduce the $400 to $200 in both cases.  SENATOR TAYLOR thought this           
 was overly generous, and SENATOR JACKO moved the compensation be              
 reduced to $100.  The motion was moved from committee without                 
 objections, so ordered.                                                       
 SENATOR TAYLOR called for a vote on SENATOR HALFORD'S move to pass            
 from committee.  The roll was taken with the following results:               
 SENATORS TAYLOR, HALFORD, and JACKO voted "yea," and SENATOR LITTLE           
 voted "nay."  SENATOR TAYLOR stated the bill was passed from                  
 ROYALTIES) by Request of the Governor to committee, and he reviewed           
 the testimony from the State for a rate.  He had requested his                
 aide, KEVIN SULLIVAN, to prepare a committee substitute for a flat            
 rate that is adjusted annually from a formula set so everyone each            
 year knows what the interest will be, and not be facing 10.5% as is           
 today on judgements.  He asked for the current interest rate, and             
 MR. SULLIVAN explained the formula he used amounts to 8% today.               
 SENATOR JACKO moved to pass CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 161(JUD)                   
 (INTEREST RATES: JUDGMENTS/TAXES/ROYALTIES) from committee with               
 individual recommendations.  Without objections, so ordered.                  
 SENATOR TAYLOR returned his own bill, SCR 18 (PURCHASE FEDERAL LAND           
 FROM THE UNITED STATES) to committee.  He explained this resolution           
 would purchase federal land by the State of Alaska for $10 billion.           
 UNITED STATES) from committee with individual recommendations.                
 Without objections, so ordered.                                               
 79(HES) (DAMAGE TO PROPERTY BY MINORS) to committee.  Committee               
 Aide, KEVIN SULLIVAN explained it was an act relating to recovery             
 from a parent or legal guardian of wilful or malicious destruction            
 of property by a minor.  SENATOR TAYLOR commented this was a bill             
 omn which SENATOR DONLEY had expressed concern, and MR. SULLIVAN              
 described how his concerns were met in the bill.                              
 SENATOR TAYLOR decided to hold the bill until SENATOR DONLEY                  
 There being no further business to come before the committee, the             
 meeting was adjourned by SENATOR TAYLOR.                                      

Document Name Date/Time Subjects