HOUSE BILL NO. 136 "An Act restricting the authority of a court to suspend execution of a sentence or grant probation in prosecutions for driving while under the influence and prosecutions for refusal to submit to a chemical test; and allowing a court to suspend up to 75 percent of the minimum fines required for driving while under the influence and for refusal to submit to a chemical test if the defendant successfully completes a court-ordered treatment program." REPRESENTATIVE NORM ROKEBERG, sponsor, related the three main requirements of HB 136, which speaks to the issue of wellness through therapeutic courts. It requires that the minimum fines set out by the legislature for driving while under the influence shall be collected and imposed by the courts. It allows for therapy courts to be used for felony DUI offenses. It increases the amount of fines that may be waived upon successful completion of therapeutic court programs. He referred to a letter of support from MADD (copy on file.) Representative Weyhrauch asked if there is any benefit to having an amendment to require the person to pay at least the minimum fine. He asked if they could be made to pay more than the minimum fine. HEATHER NOBREGA, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE NORM ROKEBERG, replied that it does not prohibit the courts from imposing more than the minimum fine. The courts often suspend the amount imposed over the minimum fine. Representative Weyhrauch suggested adding the words "at least". Ms. Nobrega opined that the bill is adequate as written. Representative Weyhrauch asked if it applies both to previous offenders and first time convictions. Ms. Nobrega replied yes. Representative Croft referred to Section 3 and asked what if they can't get into a treatment program. Representative Rokeberg requested Judge Wannamaker to answer that question. 2:25:08 PM Representative Weyhrauch asked if there are certain conditions that would allow for suspended imposition of DUI sentences. Representative Rokeberg replied that the statutes work together regarding offenses and it could be troublesome. JUDGE JAMES WANNAMAKER, ALASKA CENTER FOR THERAPEUTIC COURTS, (via teleconference) endorsed the wellness court model. In response to Representative Croft's question about unavailability of therapeutic courts, he responded that there is no backup at present. Representative Croft opined that it is unfair if there is no access to the court. Judge Wannamaker replied that the answer it to get the roadblocks to the operations of the courts fixed. Representative Croft decided not to offer Amendment 1. 2:33:04 PM Representative Rokeberg noted that the biggest problem is lack of support for treatment programs by state bureaucracy. He agreed to work with Representative Croft on this issue. Representative Hawker noted that at Representative Rokeberg's request, efforts have been taken to expand these programs. Representative Kelly commented on various bureaucratic problems and said it is widespread. 2:36:01 PM WENDY HAMILTON, THERAPEUTIC COURT COORDINATOR, JUNEAU, spoke in favor of HB 136. Juneau is currently planning for a therapeutic court, which will deal with misdemeanor and felony DUIs. She related that the bill would increase the efficacy of the court, extending the incentives from misdemeanor DUIs to felony DUIs. It would allow a reduction in fines from 50 percent to 75 percent, and help the Juneau, Ketchikan, Bethel, and Fairbanks courts run more efficiently. 2:38:38 PM Co-Chair Chenault questioned the indeterminate fiscal note by the Department of Law regarding expense for more trials for people who can't pay the minimum fines. He asked what is happening to these people now. Representative Rokeberg explained that the bill would ask the courts to collect fines and should increase revenues. Co-Chair Chenault asked how many more would roll over to the therapeutic court system. Representative Rokeberg responded that the number would stay the same but recidivism would be lessened. 2:43:48 PM Representative Hawker pointed out that there is a Judiciary Letter of Intent with the bill. Representative Foster moved to report HB 136 out of Committee with individual recommendations and the attached fiscal notes, and with the attached letter of intent. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. HB 136 was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with six fiscal impact notes: zero note # 1 by the Department of Corrections; zero note #2 by the Alaska Court System; zero note #3 by the Department of Public Safety; indeterminate note #4 by the Department of Administration; indeterminate note #5 by the Department of Law; indeterminate note #6 by the Department of Law. 2:45:33 PM At ease. 2:49:39 PM