HB 322 - REGULATION OF ALCOHOL IN STATE PARKS Number 534 REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT, SPONSOR OF HB 322, testified saying, "What this bill is intended on doing is to direct the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to evaluate whether or not the use of possession of alcohol in a state park or a public facility, such as a historic site is compatible with public peace, health and safety of the occupants that are also at that park. We're really not doing very much. Right now the department has the authority via regulations and has in fact, exercised that authority from time to time." He then referred the committee to AS 29.05. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT continued, "Whereby the department has in fact, prohibited the use of alcohol in several locations actually... So this bill is not a prohibition bill. Site by site specific, they will evaluate the individual parks and historic sites and make a determination. We're asking them to make that determination within a year. It is a very simple bill. We're only codifying and firming up, what I believe the department already has, by regulation and statute. In essence, by amending AS 41.21, we are giving them a little more direction and narrowing the scope of things now." CHAIRMAN OLBERG asked if he had been addressing the CS or the original bill. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT said, "There was a last minute submission by the department and we included one of the items that we completely agreed with. I think that was more of an oversight than anything else. In the original bill, we used just the term alcohol. The point is, we are trying to limit...to alcoholic beverage use...we changed the title to reflect that as well." There was a small discussion as to the statutory definition of alcoholic beverages. PETER PANARESE, CHIEF, FIELD OPERATIONS, DIVISION OF PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECREATION, DIVISION OF NATURAL RESOURCES, testified via teleconference in favor of HB 322. His testimony is difficult to discern on tape. (A copy of his written testimony is on file.) REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS said, "I support Representative Kott's intent with this bill...my only problem...where it says use or possession. In a park if I have a six pack of beer in my motor home in the refrigerator, am I guilty of possession? ...where's it limited?" REPRESENTATIVE KOTT said, "My intent is not to limit to those circumstances the possession of alcohol. If you drive into a state park parking lot in a motor home and you have a bottle of alcohol in your vehicle - this is not the intent, to try and intrude into your vehicle to acquire the alcohol and determine that you're in violation." REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE asked, "Do you not have the enforcement ability at this time if someone is using alcohol illegally that you could arrest them?" MR. PANARESE said, "At this time, many areas of the state parks, people who use beer and drink in conjunction with other recreation activities in areas where there's not prohibition, the situation becomes difficult for us when the person is involved in a group activity and there are alcoholic beverages everywhere and the party is beginning. At that point, we have no ability to intervene. We can't arrest unless we have the scene created." Number 672 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE said, "What it sounds like is they're asking for the right of prior restraint. `You look suspicious, you look like you might become a drunk, so we're going to run you off.' I'm sorry, but you're asking to put something in state statute here that is going to be interpreted by a lot of different people, and I'm a little concerned that parks people have a little too much power to limit the people's use of their parks now." REPRESENTATIVE TOOHEY asked, "This is only within state parks?" MR. PANARESE said, "...limited to the Alaska State Park system." REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES said, "I'm considering offering an amendment that would insert the word `public' in front of `possession' everywhere," and directed his question towards Mr. Panarese. MR. PANARESE said that amendment would be "acceptable". REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES said, "I would offer this as an amendment then. That everywhere in this bill where it says `use' or `possession' to insert the word `public' prior." REPRESENTATIVE KOTT consented to the proposed amendment. TAPE 94-5, SIDE B Number 000 REPRESENTATIVE TOOHEY asked, "Are there sites or areas within the parks that will allow for a wedding or some type of festivities where you would permit liquor day use." MR. PANARESE said, "That is a common request of state parks and it's one that we accommodate. The wedding party can get a permit from us..." REPRESENTATIVE TOOHEY continued, "So this will not impact that..." MR. PANARESE said, "It's something we can manage and have done for a few years in a reasonable way." Number 028 REPRESENTATIVE BILL WILLIAMS said, "I feel like we're getting more regulations in here and I don't know if it's really needed. I think the State of Alaska is overregulated now as it is." REPRESENTATIVE KOTT said, "I believe there is quite a bit of problem in state parks and historic site recreational areas. It may not be so much in the rural areas, but we have a tremendous problem around the Anchorage area...Big Lake area. There's a lot of vandalism that is done and primarily we're looking at people who are abusing alcohol and what they would consider just having a good time, but it's causing a lot of damage to the parks and services." MR. PANARESE rendered some of his experiences as a ranger with park visitors under the influence of alcohol. He stressed, "The majority of our park visitors don't have a problem with this. It's a tool for us to use to control the behavior of people who are coming to us for the simple purpose of having a large, uncontrolled party with alcohol right in the middle of it. If we can prohibit that use, we go a long way of stopping trouble before it starts." REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES concurred, "I've had complaints called into my office about misuse of parks that relate to alcohol abuse in the Fairbanks area, and I've also personally witnessed a number of situations that I would consider abusive of the `peace'. So I support this as the park rangers having the tools to deal with it." CHAIRMAN OLBERG acknowledged the points brought forth by Representatives Bunde, Williams and Davies. REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE acknowledged the vandalism and drunken driving but cautioned, "Now you're going to have some part time park ranger who's going to be walking among these people deciding which ones will potentially be drunks and should then be run off...and which ones are a group of folks that are going to sit down and have a picnic and drink a six-pack... We are innocent until proven guilty." REPRESENTATIVE KOTT said, "We hardly have the numbers out there, rangers, to do just that. Only two are parks, the rest are what I would consider historical sites. There's a lot of historical value there...there may be some value to placing those off limits to the use of alcohol." CHAIRMAN OLBERG called a brief at ease at 1:59 p.m. The meeting continued at 2:02 p.m. Number 179 REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS moved that the committee substitute be adopted. There were no objections. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES moved to amend the committee substitute for HB 322 "by inserting the word `public' in front of `possession' everywhere the phrase `use or possession' appears in this bill." There were no objections. REPRESENTATIVE SANDERS moved that the committee substitute for HB 322 as amended be passed from committee with individual recommendations. REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE objected. A role call vote was taken. Representative Bunde and Williams voted not to move the amended CSHB 322 out of committee with individual recommendations. Representatives Sanders, Davies, Toohey, Willis and Olberg voted to move the amended CSHB 322 out of committee.