HB 383 - REIMBURSE FOR LOCAL SERVICE TO INEBRIATES The next order of business to come before the House State Affairs Committee was HB 383. CHAIR JAMES called on Representative Ivan Ivan, sponsor of the bill. Number 2240 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN read the following sponsor statement into the record. "Widespread alcohol abuse not only damages Alaska's families and society, but also drains public coffers at an alarming rate. Local governments constantly struggle under the financial burden of their efforts to cope with alcohol problems. "Those problems include the many public inebriates evident in our municipalities. "Under AS 47.37.170, local police take into protective custody a person who appears to be intoxicated and incapacitated in a public place and place that person in an approved public treatment or detention facility. A licensed physician or other qualified health practitioner must then examine the inebriate as soon as possible. If the person if found to be incapacitated by alcohol, he or she is detained for no more than 48 hours in a health facility or for no more than 12 hours in a detention facility. Tremendous costs accrue to municipalities and public health facilities due to this program. "By two methods, House Bill 383 will reduce or eliminate the financial burden that local governments and public health facilities bear each year fulfilling this unfunded mandate. "First, the bill provides for direct state grants to municipalities and traditional village councils to reimburse them for the cost of dealing with inebriates. "Second, the bill gives local governments the power to set taxes on alcoholic beverages at whatever rate they want, regardless of whether or not they tax other sales. "To help defray the state's granting cost as well as closing the fiscal gap, reducing alcohol consumption and fighting crime, the bill raises the alcohol excise tax for the first time since 1983." REPRESENTATIVE IVAN further stated the bills that allowed for the increase in alcohol tax were originally sponsored by Representative Kay Brown, HB 96 and HB 97. He explained they had been incorporated into HB 383 to reimburse the municipalities. He reiterated the bill was trying to address the problems faced by municipalities when taking care of inebriates. It was a direct result of an argument between the community of Dillingham and Bristol Bay in his district of who should take care of the inebriates. Number 2397 CHAIR JAMES announced the House State Affairs Committee would only hear testimony today. There would not be any action taken on the bill, however. CHAIR JAMES called on the first witness via teleconference in Homer, Lois Irvin. Number 2397 LOIS IRVIN explained Homer had been trying to address this issue for the past year. There was a problem surrounding the use of a facility to hold the inebriates. Moreover, according to the bill there was also a funding issue involved. She expressed her support of HB 383. TAPE 96-40, SIDE B Number 0010 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said alcohol was probably the single biggest problem for municipalities. He had mixed feelings about the bill, however. He did not really want to raise a tax. He wanted to hear from Representative Porter, as the former police chief, and the committee members further. He had been a member of a task force that tried to address this issue in the past. One suggestion was to abolish alcohol. He said that was not going to happen, but it was a strong suggestion indicating a strong problem. Number 0062 CHAIR JAMES said she was concerned because the symptom was being addressed and not the problem. This was a reoccurring issue in the United States. The proportion of alcohol was probably the best thing to adjust. Moreover, the problems of society were based on despair, unemployment, and hopelessness. Therefore, until a sufficient economic base and jobs were available, the problem would not be addressed. Therein lied the problem of government spending. She wondered if money should be appropriated to the core of the problems, or to the programs to help the symptoms. She said she did not have a solution, only a direction, and she was not sure if HB 383 was going in the same direction. Number 0128 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON said she supported HB 383, 100 percent. She explained Juneau increased the sales tax on alcohol, and the tax money went directly to the social service programs. She felt that every other community in the state should have the same option without having to fight it in court. Number 0152 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said he had spent more time in his life considering the solutions to this problem compared to anybody else here. The unfortunate truth, however, was that the drinking problem in Juneau was not any different compared to any other community. If Juneau did not have a drinking problem, he would "sign up on this bill in a heartbeat." However, that was not the case. The only way to solve the problem was to create an attitude that made people want to stop drinking. The sobriety program aimed at the bush addressed this attitude. He explained he was sponsor of a bill that incorporated the sobriety program as part of state policy. There were a multitude of approaches - prohibition, increased taxation - but he was concerned about repeating history. He was reluctant to go down those roads again. Therefore, he would not greatly support HB 383. Number 0250 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN wondered what ever happened to the antabuse program? He asked if it was rendered unconstitutional? Number 0266 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER replied it was being used more frequently in sentencing practices now. Number 0279 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN said society was just scratching the surface of this problem. He explained, there were two other bills in the process, and a resolution, to look at establishing a statewide task force to address the issue further. CHAIR JAMES announced the bill would be held for a while in the committee.