HOUSE BILL 75 "An Act relating to criminal mischief." REPRESENTATIVE JERRY SANDERS explained that HB 75 would label those who take cars belonging to others as "thieves", not joy riders or pranksters. The legislation would increase the penalty for the crime of vehicle theft to a 1 class C Felony with one minor exception (first offense snow machines). He noted that the bill would provide a strong deterrent for those who might otherwise commit vehicle theft. Currently, those caught "joy riding" can only be convicted of a Class A Misdemeanor. He thought that current law provides no deterrent for the car thief unless they cause $500 dollars damage or it is their second offense. Representative Sanders noted that by increasing the crime of "joy riding" to a felony, HB 75 would provide a strong deterrent, necessary to prevent youth from participating in vehicle theft, and providing the justice system tools to make youths responsible for their actions. Representative Martin asked why the Governor had previously vetoed the legislation. Representative Sanders responded that the Governor understood that the legislation would bring minors automatically into the district court. The current proposed legislation would continue to make the offense a felony, but would leave it in the juvenile court system. He thought that compromise would make it acceptable. Representative Parnell asked the policy reason for leaving them in juvenile court. Representative Sanders advised that juveniles could be prosecuted in the district court with a waiver. He encouraged first time offenders be handled with discretion. Representative Grussendorf questioned the large fiscal notes. Representative Navarre recalled that the fiscal impact was a major consideration in the Governor's prior veto. DEL SMITH, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, spoke in support of HB 75. He stated that the theft of automobiles should be a felony crime and should be treated as a theft, not "joy riding". MICK MANNS, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ALASKA MINERS ASSOCIATION, FAIRBANKS, spoke in support of the legislation. He remarked that his group would like to have snow machines included. He stated that a felony conviction should be upheld on all thefts regardless of the cost of the vehicle. Representative Sanders advised that the language on Page 1, Line 13, "propelled vehicle" would cover other vehicles beside automobiles. 2 JOHN NEWELL, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ALASKA ASSOCIATION OF THE CHIEF'S OF POLICE, SITKA, concurred with the previous testimony and felt that stealing automobiles and propelled vehicles should be considered a serious theft. He supported the Class C Felony charge. Mr. Newell spoke to the fiscal note, stating that the Department of Corrections note was unrealistic and suggested that Department should have mechanisms to handle those changes. Representative Navarre responded that departments which would be fiscally impacted by passage of the legislation, recognized that situation and provided a fiscal note to reflect the impact. At this time, all correctional facilities are over capacity resulting in day fines. Representative Navarre pointed out that it was an over simplification to state that costs could be "absorbed" into that system. Representative Mulder countered that the Department of Corrections fiscal note encumbered the entire direct and indirect costs and that it should be rewritten to more accurately reflect the true cost. SGT. MIKE CORKHILL, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), PRESIDENT, ALASKA PEACE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, FAIRBANKS, spoke in support of the legislation, reiterating that a person makes two major investments in their life, a house and a vehicle. The trend in automobile theft should be treated as a major offense. Representative Parnell questioned the percentage of adults who have stolen a vehicle and hence used that vehicle in another crime. Sgt. Corkhill responded that number would change from area to area. In Fairbanks, this would not occur as much as it would in Anchorage because it is a smaller community, without as much anonymity. He added that there is a trend for juveniles to steal vehicles, taking them into another community to sell. Sgt. Corkhill stated that approximately 10% - 20% of the stolen vehicles would be used in another crime. ANNE CARPENETI, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, CRIMINAL DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, noted that the Department of Law supports HB 75 and agrees that it would be appropriate to raise the penalty to a "C" felony for the theft of an automobile. Ms. Carpeneti advised that the legislation would treat juveniles who steal cars in the same manner as the law treats juveniles who have stolen other property. The "waiver" would be to the Superior Court, not to the District Court. If the vehicle sustained $500 dollars or more damage, and if it was a second offense or if it were an emergency or police vehicle, the fine would then be a "C" 3 felony. In response to Representative Therriault's question, Ms. Carpeneti noted that the legislation would not deal with big equipment. She added, that historically, theft was explained by the need to show the intent to permanently deprive that person of the property which was taken. "Joy riding" was thought of more lightly, not causing harm to the victim. Representative Parnell referenced the Department of Law's fiscal note, pointing out the increase of felons from 100 to 363 in the past year. He asked the number of cases prosecuted which involve a previous felony charge. Ms. Carpeneti offered to provide that information. JERRY LUCKHAUPT, ATTORNEY, LEGISLATIVE LEGAL COUNSEL, LEGISLATIVE LEGAL SERVICES, voiced concern with the current language of the bill and the definitions within. The bill is not achieving its full purpose. He stated that Legislative Legal Services recommends language clarifying that the theft of a vehicle would be a felony and then stipulating specific exceptions. Mr. Luckhaupt added, using the definition "commercial motor vehicle" excludes motor homes, recreational vehicles and farm vehicles. Ms. Carpeneti replied, the vehicle theft bill was drafted in response to automobile theft. The Governor's version of the bill wanted to carefully include specific vehicles as defined as motor vehicles. She agreed that there may be room for improvement with written language to indicate the exclusion of certain other vehicles. The intent of the Department was to clearly define automobiles. Representative Sanders agreed to tighten the bill up in order that it may smoothly move through both bodies of the Legislature. Representative Parnell asked if it was Representative Sanders intent to include snowmobiles and all terrain vehicles in the legislation. Representative Sanders noted that it was his intent to include those vehicles. Co- Chair Hanley pointed out that is a source of the confusion, as the current legislation excludes those concerns. Ms. Carpeneti pointed out that the way the current legislation is drafted, first offense theft of a snow machine would be a class "A" misdemeanor unless there is $500 dollars or more damage to the snow machine. She noted that snow machines would include all-terrain vehicles, thus avoiding adverse effects in the Bush areas. Mr. Luckhaupt reiterated that the definitions are not clear in representing the bills intent. 4 (Tape Change, HFC 95 - 33, Side 2). Discussion followed among Committee members and Mr. Luckhaupt in how to prepare the wording of the legislation to include all the combined intentions. Mr. Luckhaupt suggested that certain items be excluded. Co-Chair Hanley requested a chart defining the types of distinction between propelled vehicles and motor vehicles. Representative Martin asked to go with the broadest interpretation possible of "stealing" a vehicle. Co-Chair Hanley countered that a "go cart" worth $150 dollars should not be prosecuted the same as other felonies. Representative Sanders noted that his original intent was to keep the bill as "broad" as possible, although, if the broadness would negate the bill, he would then support narrowing it. Co-Chair Hanley recommended that Ms. Carpeneti and Mr. Luckhaupt rewrite the legislation to more clearly specify the language "motor vehicle". He asked additional clarification of what the current fiscal notes include. HB 75 was HELD in Committee for further discussion.