HB 316-RESTRICT ACCESS MARIJUANA CRIME RECORDS  1:43:05 PM CHAIR CLAMAN announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 316, "An Act relating to the sealing of certain court records; restricting the publication of certain records of convictions on a publicly available website; relating to public records; and amending Rule 37.6, Alaska Rules of Administration." 1:43:34 PM PATRICK FITZGERALD, Staff, Representative Harriet Drummond, Alaska State Legislature, in response to Representative Kress- Tomkins's question asked in the previous hearing, with regard to whether any sort of expungement or dealings took place for the people punished or imprisoned due to prohibition, answered that it was more of a federal law. He explained that there was an amendment in the Constitution of the United States, and once prohibition ended, the federal government left it up to the states to decide how to address the remainder of the sentences imposed during prohibition. In contrast, he pointed out, currently the states have been ending prohibition on cannabis and marijuana rather than the federal government. 1:45:04 PM MR. FITZGERALD, in response to a question asked by Representative Eastman in a previous hearing with regard to job applications and how someone would answer the [felony] question if they fit the criteria in the bill, he advised that essentially, the person would write on the job application, "Yes, I have been convicted; however, as an employer you may not have access to it because it is a crime that was addressed and is now legal." 1:45:48 PM CHAIR CLAMAN advised that Legislative Legal and Research Services has permission to make any technical and conforming amendments to the bill. 1:46:01 PM CHAIR CLAMAN moved to adopt Amendment 1, Version 30-LS1017\O.1, Radford/Martin, 2/21/18, which read as follows: Page 1, line 10: Delete "and" Page 1, following line 10: Insert a new paragraph to read: "(2) was 21 years of age or older at the time of commission of the offense; and" Renumber the following paragraph accordingly. Page 2, line 4: Delete "and" Page 2, following line 4: Insert a new paragraph to read: "(2) was 21 years of age or older at the time of commission of the offense; and" Renumber the following paragraph accordingly. Page 4, line 17, following "was": Insert "21 years of age or older at the time of  commission of the offense and was" REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN objected for purposes of discussion. 1:46:15 PM MR. FITZGERALD explained that Amendment 1 clarifies that for this to apply, the individual would have had to be 21-years of age or older during the issuing of the citation, and he advised that this amendment was worked out with the Department of Law (DOL) and the Alaska Court System (ACS). He remarked that when the bill was originally drafted, it was believed that because the citation to be given would have included a "minor in possession of" or a "minor using whatever it may be" that it would not override it. However, he advised, this amendment clarifies that the individual would have had to have been 21- years of age at the time, which is what is currently legal. 1:47:11 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether there are any potential convictions out there for something that occurred when someone was 18-20 years of age. MR. FITZGERALD advised that the sponsor's office had been notified of some convictions; however, if the person was below the age of 21 when the citation was given, this would not pertain to those individuals. 1:47:48 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN commented that that creates an interesting situation where, it was confidential if the person was 21-years of age and did something, but if they were younger, it was not confidential. MR. FITZGERALD explained that the idea behind the bill is that if a person would have been legally possessing marijuana at the time, before the state legalized marijuana, the person's record will be made confidential. In the event the person was under- age, then "even if you had it now, and you were under-age, then it would still be minor in possession." 1:48:40 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN withdrew his objection. There being no objections, Amendment 1 was adopted. 1:49:02 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN noted that an issue discussed during the previous hearing related to charges, and he asked whether this confidentiality should deal with the single charge, or whether the charges are broader. MR. FITZGERALD answered that this bill applies to the "stand alone charges," and this is solely the conviction of possession. 1:49:56 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked which of the following two options the sponsor prefers, narrowly tailoring it to the sole conviction of possession, or broadly relating to one of many different charges. CHAIR CLAMAN said, "You mean, what does the bill do?" REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN commented that between those two options, he would like to know where the sponsor stands because it was the topic of conversation during the last hearing. 1:50:47 PM REPRESENTATIVE KOPP declared a point of order. He commented that it does not really matter what the sponsor wants to do, the question is "what does the bill do." CHAIR CLAMAN remarked that if this is the bill sponsor's bill, isn't the sponsor's position reflected by the bill they submitted. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN said he is asking the sponsor's representative to confirm that ... CHAIR CLAMAN advised Mr. Fitzgerald that he could confirm that the bill represents the sponsor's intent. MR. FITZGERALD stated that the bill does reflect the sponsor's intent. 1:51:35 PM REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS moved to report HB 316, Version 30-LS1017\O, Martin, 2/8/18, as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB 316(JUD) moved from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.