Legislature(2021 - 2022)BUTROVICH 205
04/06/2022 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB207 | |
| SB229 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 229 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 207 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
April 6, 2022
1:38 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Roger Holland, Chair
Senator Mike Shower, Vice Chair (via teleconference)
Senator Shelley Hughes
Senator Robert Myers
Senator Jesse Kiehl
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 207
"An Act restricting the release of certain records of
convictions; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 229
"An Act relating to misconduct involving confidential
information; relating to artifacts of the state; and relating to
penalties regarding artifacts or historic, prehistoric, or
archeological resources of the state."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 207
SHORT TITLE: ACCESS TO MARIJUANA CONVICTION RECORDS
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) SHOWER
02/22/22 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/22/22 (S) STA, JUD
03/10/22 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/10/22 (S) -- MEETING CANCELED --
03/17/22 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/17/22 (S) Heard & Held
03/17/22 (S) MINUTE(STA)
03/22/22 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/22/22 (S) Heard & Held
03/22/22 (S) MINUTE(STA)
03/29/22 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/29/22 (S) Moved CSSB 207(STA) Out of Committee
03/29/22 (S) MINUTE(STA)
03/30/22 (S) STA RPT CS 2DP 1NR SAME TITLE
03/30/22 (S) DP: SHOWER, KAWASAKI
03/30/22 (S) NR: COSTELLO
04/06/22 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: SB 229
SHORT TITLE: STATE HISTORICAL ARTIFACTS; CRIMES
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
03/11/22 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/11/22 (S) JUD, RES
03/23/22 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/23/22 (S) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
04/06/22 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
CLAIRE GROSS, Staff
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the sponsor statement and
sectional analysis for SB 207 on behalf of Senator Shower.
KACI SCHROEDER, Assistant Attorney General
Legal Services Section
Criminal Division
Department of Law
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered legal questions on SB 207.
KELLY HOWELL, Special Assistant
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Public Safety
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on SB
207.
LISA PURINTON, Chief
Criminal Records and Identification Bureau
Department of Public Safety (DPS)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on criminal background
checks during the hearing on SB 207.
ED KING, Staff
Senator Roger Holland
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Explained the changes in the committee
substitute, Version I, of SB 229, on behalf of the committee.
JUDY BITTNER, Chief/State Historic Preservation Officer
Office of History & Archeology;
Alaska Historical Commission
Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation
Department of Natural Resources
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided invited testimony in support of SB
229.
LAURA BOOMERSHINE, Special Assistant
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Natural Resources (DNR
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on the fiscal note for SB 229.
KACI SCHROEDER, Assistant Attorney General
Legal Services Section
Criminal Division
Department of Law
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered legal questions on SB 229.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:38:05 PM
CHAIR ROGER HOLLAND called the Senate Judiciary Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:38 p.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Myers, Hughes, Kiehl, and Chair Holland.
Senator Shower joined the meeting via teleconference shortly
thereafter.
SB 207-ACCESS TO MARIJUANA CONVICTION RECORDS
1:38:51 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 207
"An Act restricting the release of certain records of
convictions; and providing for an effective date."
[CSSB 207(STA) was before the committee.]
1:39:33 PM
CLAIRE GROSS, Staff, Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins,
Alaska State Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, explained that
Representative Kreiss-Tomkins sponsored the companion bill. She
said one portion of the bill pertains to the Alaska Court System
relating to the publicly-available website CourtView for
accessing records. The other provision in the bill relates to
background checks conducted by the Department of Public Safety
for potential employees. The goal is to address the two main
ways that employers and members of the public access criminal
justice information.
1:41:05 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND noted that Senator Shower joined the meeting via
teleconference.
1:41:34 PM
SENATOR SHOWER stated the intent of SB 207 is to remove
marijuana convictions from CourtView. He explained that people
reentering society after being convicted for marijuana-related
offenses often have difficulty obtaining employment. Alaska
legalized possession of personal use marijuana, which he did not
support. However, it is the law. He estimated approximately 700
people would benefit from SB 207 because CourtView would no
longer reflect their marijuana convictions. He indicated the
goal is to help those people become productive members of
society by reducing their struggles to obtain good jobs. He
noted that when the concept for the bill was first presented,
the bill included convictions for other offenses, but the bill
currently addresses only marijuana convictions.
1:43:25 PM
SENATOR HUGHES acknowledged that personal use of marijuana is
legal. However, when these individuals were convicted, they were
breaking the law. She said she struggles with this based on
principle because breaking the law shows something about the
person. She acknowledged that these convictions might prevent
someone from employment, but she wondered how this bill
reconciles that these individual broke the law.
1:44:45 PM
SENATOR SHOWER responded that during prohibition many people
drank alcohol in speakeasys even though it was illegal. As times
change and laws change, it is important to note the precedent
and most of these convictions were low-level offenses. The
legislature can decide if these offenders should be punished for
the rest of their lives, erecting barriers to employment, or if
the committee wants them to be reintegrated into society after
serving their time. He said he did not support removing the
conviction from CourtView if these offenders were arrested for
other crimes besides possession of marijuana, such as domestic
violence or selling drugs.
1:47:15 PM
SENATOR HUGHES asked whether the court system could remove a
single marijuana conviction from CourtView for those with
multiple convictions in the same case. She clarified that the
court system would not remove the conviction from the person's
record; however, the conviction would not appear in CourtView.
She further asked for what types of background checks marijuana
convictions would appear; for example, would DPS have access to
the information if the person applied to become a police
officer.
SENATOR SHOWER responded that the records would still exist and
be available for those seeking a security clearance or
employment. Although the court system would not show the
criminal record in CourtView, it may prevent a person from
getting a top-secret clearance.
1:49:34 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND recalled the second question was whether a certain
portion of the record could be stricken from CourtView if a
person was convicted.
MS. GROSS responded that CourtView requires either all
convictions or no convictions be hidden from CourtView. People
who had multiple convictions in the same case would not be
eligible for hidden records.
1:50:30 PM
SENATOR KIEHL stated he had a slightly different perception on
the state of the law in Alaska prior to the 2014 voter
initiative. He related his understanding that the Ravin decision
found that possession and use of small amounts of marijuana was
constitutionally protected under the right to privacy.
1:51:29 PM
SENATOR SHOWER agreed that Senator Kiehl was correct about the
Ravin v. State decision. He asked staff to describe how that
ties together with the federal government's marijuana laws.
MS. GROSS deferred to Kaci Schroeder to respond.
CHAIR HOLLAND asked for the status of the laws regarding
marijuana possession before 2014.
1:52:41 PM
SENATOR KIEHL wondered specifically about the amount covered
under AS 11.71.060.
1:52:53 PM
KACI SCHROEDER, Assistant Attorney General, Legal Services
Section, Criminal Division, Department of Law, Juneau, Alaska,
agreed that the Ravin decision permitted small quantities of
personal use under the privacy clause. However, the court
deferred to the legislature to define a small amount for
personal use. She stated that this amount had changed several
times over the years. In 2014, the people approved by initiative
up to an ounce of marijuana as an acceptable amount for personal
use.
1:53:40 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND asked whether an allowable quantity of marijuana
was parts of an ounce.
MS. SCHROEDER recalled a subsequent [US Court of Appeals] case,
Noy v. State, also addressed marijuana, but she was unsure of
the amount. She recalled since 1975, the allowable amount of
marijuana in possession has fluctuated, but the legislature and
the courts disagree on those amounts.
1:54:17 PM
SENATOR KIEHL agreed it was unclear.
1:54:52 PM
MS. GROSS stated that the Alaska Court System and Department of
Public Safety (DPS) disagreed on the number of offenders
affected by the bill, as reflected in their fiscal notes. The
Alaska Court System estimated approximately 700 Alaskans would
be affected. DPS believes the figures would be closer to 8,000.
She explained that the discrepancy was due to how each agency
stores information and which statutes would apply. DPS uses the
Alaska Public Safety Information Network (APSIN), which the
public cannot access.
MS. GROSS explained that the first half of the bill addresses
individuals convicted of minor marijuana would make confidential
the records of individuals who have been convicted of minor
marijuana crimes and were not charged with any other crimes in
the same incident. These records would automatically be removed
from CourtView retroactively. Further, these records could also
be removed from some background checks administered by the
Department of Public Safety at the request of the convicted
individual.
MS. GROSS explained that the court system would automatically
remove the conviction for possession of personal use marijuana
from CourtView retroactively.
1:57:21 PM
MS. GROSS stated that DPS would require a petition process to
shield their personal use marijuana conviction from CourtView.
The fiscal note reflects that one or two temporary positions
would review all marijuana convictions. Still, the department
would process any petitions to shield conviction records from
CourtView on an ongoing basis. She stated that most people
seeking background checks, including potential employers, obtain
their information from CourtView by using a kiosk at the
courthouse.
MS. GROSS noted that anyone requiring state licensure would not
benefit from the bill as their criminal history would remain on
CourtView. Further, people can request a full criminal history
report or background check from the Department of Public Safety.
2:01:42 PM
SENATOR HUGHES asked if she referred to professional
occupational licensure.
MS. GROSS answered yes. She noted that law enforcement's statute
is lengthy and includes professionals such as massage
therapists.
SENATOR HUGHES related her understanding that even janitors
working in facilities with vulnerable people are subject to more
scrutiny. She asked whether the marijuana convictions would be
available for those positions.
MS. GROSS answered yes.
2:03:17 PM
SENATOR HUGHES asked whether an employer could go into the
courthouse to obtain information.
MS. GROSS answered yes; the person would need to physically go
to the courthouse in person to obtain information and use the
kiosk.
2:03:45 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND asked her to review the sectional analysis for SB
207.
2:03:58 PM
MS. GROSS reviewed the sectional analysis for SB 207. She noted
that half of the legislative intent was removed from the
companion bill since it was somewhat vague and dealt with low-
level crimes.
[Original punctuation provided.]
2:04:01 PM
Section 1: Adds a new section stating the legislative
intent behind this bill.
Section 2: Amends subsection (b)(8) of AS 12.62.160
by adding criminal justice information, for marijuana
possession that meet the requirements laid out in (f)
of this section, to the list of exceptions for the
release of criminal justice information.
Section 3: Adds a new subsection (f) to AS 12.62.160,
which adds new criteria for criminal justice
information that an agency cannot release. This new
section prohibits release of criminal justice
information for convictions under AS 11.71.060 for
less than one ounce of a "schedule VIA" controlled
substance, where the defendant was 21 years or older
at the time of the offense, was not convicted of any
other criminal charges in that same case and has
formally requested that the agency not release these
records.
2:06:02 PM
Section 4: Adds a new section to AS 22.35, stating
that records of criminal charges or convictions that
meet the requirements stated in this section, may not
be published by the court system on a publicly
available website. This applies to criminal justice
information for convictions under AS 11.71.060 for
less than one ounce of a "schedule VIA" controlled
substance, where the defendant was 21 years or older
at the time of the offense and was not convicted of
any other criminal charges in that same case.
Section 5: Adds a new section to uncodified law of
the State of Alaska saying that the Alaska Court
System shall remove court records that meet the
requirements of this bill, retroactively going back
from the effective date of the bill. It also uses the
language "to the extent practicable" to clarify that
the court system will not be legally required to
expend excessive resources or funds to ensure every
single record that meets the requirements of this
bill for removal from court view, is removed.
2:06:59 PM
Section 6: Provides an effective date of January 1,
2023.
2:07:08 PM
SENATOR KIEHL referred to AS 11.71.060, possession of less than
one ounce. He noted that AS 11.71.050 covers things that a
person can do with cannabis, including giving someone less than
an ounce of cannabis or baking them brownies. He asked why gifts
and edibles were not covered in the bill.
2:08:09 PM
MS. GROSS said she was unsure. She reviewed AS 11.71.050, which
read:
(a) Except as authorized in AS 17.30 and AS 17.38, a
person commits the crime of misconduct involving a
controlled substance in the fifth degree if the
person
(1) manufactures or delivers, or possesses with the
intent to manufacture or deliver, one or more
preparations, compounds, mixtures, or substances of
an aggregate weight of less than one ounce containing
a schedule VIA controlled substance;
MS. GROSS read a portion of the personal use of marijuana
statute:
Sec. 17.38.020. Personal use of marijuana.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, except as
otherwise provided in this chapter, the following
acts, by persons 21 years of age or older, are lawful
and are not criminal or civil offenses under state
law or the law of any political subdivision of the
state or a basis for seizure or forfeiture of assets
under state law;
(1) possessing, using, displaying, purchasing, or
transporting marijuana accessories or one ounce or
less of marijuana;
2:09:22 PM
MS. GROSS stated that she was unaware of any language related to
manufacturing or delivering marijuana. She offered to research
the nuances and report to the committee.
2:10:44 PM
SENATOR HUGHES referred to Sections 3 and 4. She asked how the
bill would affect those 18-20 years of age.
MS. GROSS stated that the sponsor of the companion bill, HB 246,
amended the bill to include 1820 year-old offenders and reduce
the penalty from a class B misdemeanor to a violation and remove
the records from CourtView.
2:11:55 PM
SENATOR HUGHES asked whether marijuana was only legal for those
21 years or older.
MS. GROSS agreed that it mirrored alcohol laws.
2:12:42 PM
SENATOR HUGHES asked if it was a crime for youths 1820 years
old to possess marijuana before the voters passed the
initiative.
MS. GROSS said she was unsure.
2:13:33 PM
MS. SCHROEDER answered that it was a class B misdemeanor, and
there was no change in the penalty when the initiative passed.
SENATOR HUGHES pointed out that these people were now adults.
She was unsure whether this provision would create an equal
protection concern. She wondered if the committee should
consider including youths 1820-years old in the bill.
MS. SCHROEDER explained that the difference is that it is still
a crime for anyone under the age of 21 to possess marijuana
under current law.
2:14:54 PM
SENATOR KIEHL asked whether there were any challenges under
Ravin v. State or Noy v. State that keeps it a crime for 18-20
year olds.
MS. SCHROEDER answered no. She said she was unaware of any court
challenges. She stated that this bill does not impact the
criminal division.
2:15:46 PM
KELLY HOWELL, Special Assistant, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Public Safety, Anchorage, Alaska, responded that
the department was supportive of the changes proposed in SB 207.
Ms. Purinton oversees the Alaska Public Safety Information
Network used for criminal history background checks.
2:16:22 PM
SENATOR MYERS noted that DPS conducts background checks on a
case-by-case basis.
MS. HOWELL agreed.
SENATOR MYERS asked if some personal information already needed
to be scrubbed.
MS. HOWELL responded that the reports were already formatted and
no additional scrubbing would need to occur.
2:17:33 PM
SENATOR MYERS said he was unsure why the Department of Public
Safety needed additional staff since the department would be
issuing background checks on a case-by-case basis.
MS. HOWELL agreed that it was possible to do so upon request,
but it could create a backlog depending on the number of
individuals coming forward. She indicated that the department
was unsure how many individuals would request this. As Ms. Gross
noted, the court system records and DPS records diverged
significantly. The department identified 8,500 criminal history
records that the bill could impact. Since the department is
unsure how many records may need to be shielded from release,
DPS suggests hiring a temporary person to research the records.
She stated that it might not be simple to identify the record as
applicable to the bill. She highlighted that the legislature
made numerous changes to the law. For example, the department
would need to verify whether someone's conviction under AS
11.71.060 was for less than one ounce of marijuana. Thus, the
department preferred to take a more proactive measure to examine
the records and flag them, so if a person requested to have
their record shielded, it would be a much quicker process.
2:20:08 PM
SENATOR MYERS said he was having a tough time believing the
department needed a person to review 8,500 records spanning
several years. He offered his view that it would be much simpler
to update the records as people requested their conviction not
be posted to CourtView. This will not affect new cases but ones
generated prior to 2014, so as cases were removed from
CourtView, it would result in fewer and fewer over time.
2:21:33 PM
LISA PURINTON, Criminal Records and ID Bureau Chief, Department
of Public Safety, Anchorage, Alaska, agreed that DPS estimates
8,500 records. She stated that before 2006, the state's criminal
history repository lacked statutes. Instead, it used a four-
digit numeric code to reference the criminal history. She
predicted that those cases would take considerable time to
research. The fiscal note reflects the department's plan to
speed up the process for that research. As Ms. Howell mentioned,
the law periodically changed, and the record may not reflect the
amount of marijuana in possession, but it is listed in the
police report.
2:22:52 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND held SB 207 in committee.
SB 229-STATE HISTORICAL ARTIFACTS; CRIMES
2:23:01 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 229
"An Act relating to misconduct involving confidential
information; relating to artifacts of the state; and relating to
penalties regarding artifacts or historic, prehistoric, or
archeological resources of the state."
2:23:23 PM
SENATOR HUGHES moved to adopt the committee substitute (CS) for
SB 229, work order 32-GS2541\I, as the working document.
CHAIR HOLLAND objected for discussion purposes.
2:23:45 PM
ED KING, Staff, Senator Roger Holland, Alaska State Legislature,
Juneau, Alaska, explained the changes from Version A to Version
I of SB 229 on behalf of the committee.
SUMMARY OF CHANGES
(VERSION A TO VERSION I)
Change 1: Sections 1 7 of version A were deleted
Change 2: AS 41.35.200(a) and (b) were amended to add
a mental state and the federal reference in
(b) was updated. Subsection (f) was added to provide
definitions.
Change 3: A new crime of obtaining confidential
information to commit or aid in a crime under this
chapter was created (replaces section 1 of version
A).
Change 4: The crime of "posses, sell, buy, or
transport" historic, prehistoric, or archeological
resources is elevated to a class C felony.
Change 5: The definition of "artifact" was updated.
2:24:57 PM
SENATOR HUGHES asked whether members had a document that
reflects the summary of changes from Version A to Version I.
MR. KING responded he would provide the summary of changes
document.
2:25:26 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND removed his objection; he found no further
objection, and Version I was before the committee.
2:27:26 PM
JUDY BITTNER, Chief/State Historic Preservation Officer,
paraphrased the sponsor statement, Alaska Historical Commission,
Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation, Department of Natural
Resources, Anchorage, Alaska, provided invited testimony in
support of SB 229. She stated the Office of History and
Archeology provides statewide historic preservation programs to
identify, document, study, evaluate, protect, restore, and
exhibit prehistoric archeological and historic sites and
buildings. The office works under state and federal authorities,
the Alaska Historic Preservation Act, and the National Historic
Preservation Act. SB 229 would amend the Alaska Historic
Preservation Act. The Act aims to enhance protections for
artifacts and prehistoric archeological sites to increase
criminal penalties for any violations.
2:28:33 PM
MS. BITTNER noted that the Department of Law proposed some
technical amendments, including clarifying the individual's
mental state when committing the crimes. It would also increase
penalties to add a class C felony for some offenses, while
others would remain at a class A misdemeanor.
2:29:37 PM
SENATOR KIEHL asked MS. Bittner to describe the problem that the
bill would solve.
MS. BITTNER responded that the department was concerned about
the vandalism, looting, transporting, and selling artifacts from
archeological sites. In addition, some people wanted to create
deterrent for trafficking archeological site artifacts. She
stated that it is challenging for law enforcement to prioritize
enforcing these misdemeanor offenses. She explained that many
artifacts have a high value so the department would like to
increase the penalty to a class C felony to serve as a
deterrent.
2:31:11 PM
SENATOR KIEHL asked whether people were opportunistically
grabbing things they found or if organized groups plan and
execute the looting of historical sites.
MS. BITTNER answered that people occasionally pick up an
artifact while hiking or beachcombing, which was not the
department's concern. Instead, the division is focused on the
systematic destruction of archeological sites and selling these
artifacts. For example, people take metal detectors to historic
sites, film themselves, post them on YouTube, and sell the items
on eBay or other internet sites. She stated that she had visited
historic sites where house pits were dug up, and people had
screened the soil to find artifacts to sell. Further, she noted
WWII historic landmarks where people either removed the airplane
or airplane parts, which are valuable. The division works with
federal agencies since the offenders are often on state and
federal land.
2:34:11 PM
SENATOR HUGHES wondered if this bill would apply if a person
went into a museum and removed an artifact, and if so, if it
increases the penalty for that crime.
MS. BITTNER stated that the division's authority does not extend
to museums. She surmised that those crimes would be considered
property theft. She highlighted that the bill relates to sites
in place, intact, or historic sites and buildings on state
lands. The Alaska Historic Preservation Act provides a provision
for permits required to remove artifacts. She highlighted that
sites are excavated, or historic buildings may be recorded or
removed, but that work must be done by permit. She noted that
the permit would stipulate directing those items to the state
museum or the University of Alaska Museum of the North for long-
term curation.
2:36:19 PM
SENATOR HUGHES asked if she could estimate the value and
frequency of any lost items occurring due to the state not
having harsher penalties.
MS. BITTNER answered that this looting happens frequently, but
the department seldom prosecutes. However, the division often
finds evidence of looting and works with federal agencies to
pursue cases. She reported that the Alaska State Troopers had
confiscated items at the airport from people removing WWII plane
parts without a permit. Another person had a survey but
collected a gun from a WWII site. In those instances, the
division confiscated the artifacts but did not prosecute the
individuals.
2:38:36 PM
SENATOR MYERS expressed concern that the definition of artifacts
in the bill was too broad. He offered his view that it was
possible someone could have the remains of a 1972 Buick on their
property. The definition in the bill says anything over 50 years
old is an artifact, so the Buick could go from an eyesore to a
historical artifact.
2:39:36 PM
MS. BITTNER explained that this bill relates to artifacts on
state land. DNR would go through an evaluation process to
determine historical significance. However, an old car would not
be considered historically significant solely due to its age.
2:41:05 PM
SENATOR MYERS said he understood, but he would suggest that the
definition should be narrower. For example, the definition might
say it was an object made by humans that has been determined by
the federal government or Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
to be historically relevant.
2:41:40 PM
SENATOR HUGHES asked if anything in the definition identifies
artifacts as items that are 50 years old.
MS. BITTNER answered no; it would remove items and artifacts of
historical significance fewer than 50 years old from
consideration.
2:42:46 PM
At ease
2:42:51 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND reconvened the meeting.
LAURA BOOMERSHINE, Special Assistant, Office of the
Commissioner, Department of Natural Resources (DNR, Anchorage,
Alaska, pointed out that the fiscal note referred to the
original bill, not the committee substitute (CS) for SB 229,
which is why there is a discrepancy between the 50-year-old
artifacts and the bill before the committee.
2:43:36 PM
KACI SCHROEDER, Assistant Attorney General, Legal Services
Section, Criminal Division, Department of Law, Juneau, Alaska,
stated that the definition of an artifact must be read in
conjunction with the definition of historic, prehistoric, and
archeological resources. She referred to AS 41.35.230 and read:
(2) "historic, prehistoric, and archeological
resources" includes deposits, structures, ruins,
sites, buildings, graves, artifacts, fossils, or
other objects of antiquity which provide information
pertaining to the historical or prehistorical culture
of people in the state as well as to the natural
history of the state.
MS. SCHROEDER said that is the limiting language for the broad
definition of artifacts.
2:44:30 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND asked whether the Department of Law had a position
on SB 229.
MS. SCHROEDER stated that the department believes that the
committee substitute (CS) for SB 229 needs further work.
2:44:52 PM
SENATOR HUGHES noted that the bill relates to artifacts of
historical significance on state lands. She asked whether the
penalties would be more significant if the objects were stolen
from a museum.
MS. SCHROEDER agreed with Ms. Bittner that it would default to
Title 11, the criminal code. If someone broke into a museum, it
would be a burglary, and the person would be charged with theft
based on the item's value. For example, the person could be
charged with a class B felony. However, she noted that it would
be difficult to arrive at a monetary value for the item.
SENATOR HUGHES agreed. She wondered if those who auction a
historical item for $500 should be charged a more significant
penalty because of its historical value. She noted that if the
stolen item was not able to be recovered, it would result in a
loss. These historical artifacts are part of the identity of
Alaskans and are used to teach the next generation. She asked
whether the Department of Law could consider this and report to
the committee.
2:47:20 PM
SENATOR KIEHL asked why the department would not be able to
prosecute relatively good cases due to the level of the offense.
He commented that the department might need a budget increment
and not a bill.
SENATOR KIEHL referred to page 1, to Section 3. It would add
language about obtaining information classified as confidential.
He asked whether anything was in Alaska Historic Preservation
Act or other laws that govern the Office of History & Archeology
that would allow the office to designate information as
confidential, and if so, to identify the process.
MS. SCHROEDER deferred to Ms. Bittner.
MS. BITTNER answered that the department maintains an inventory
of Alaska's historical and archeological places, which is
restricted confidential data and not disclosed in public
information requests. The department has been discussing with
the Department of Law the department whether Section 3 is
needed. Although the Office of History and Archeology can manage
the confidential data without this language, the Alaska Historic
Preservation Act does not define confidential information
regarding historical items.
2:50:47 PM
SENATOR MYERS asked for the significance of switching the
reference to federal statutes from 16 U.S.C. 433 to 18 U.S.C
1866(b) in Section 2.
MS. SCHROEDER related her understanding that the reference was
repealed, so this merely updates the reference.
2:51:53 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND held SB 229 in committee.
2:52:10 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Holland adjourned the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting at 2:52 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|