SB 182-INTERFERENCE WITH EMERGENCY SERVICES  4:06:48 PM VICE CHAIR CLAMAN announced that the next order of business would be CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 182(JUD), "An Act establishing the crime of interference with emergency communications." VICE CHAIR CLAMAN moved to adopt Amendment 1 to CSSB 182(JUD), labeled 32-LS1103\O.3, Radford, 4/25/22, which read: Page 3, lines 5 - 8: Delete all material and insert: "(d) Interference with emergency communications is a class A misdemeanor." REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN objected for the purpose of discussion. 4:07:34 PM VICE CHAIR CLAMAN explained that Amendment 1 would remove the felony provisions in the proposed legislation and instead make [interference with emergency communications] a class A misdemeanor. He expressed concern that elevating the conduct to a felony crime may have a significant impact on people who were suffering from a mental health issue. 4:08:47 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE disagreed. She shared her understanding that an "unknowing person" was already considered in the bill and would be protected under the law. VICE CHAIR CLAMAN acknowledged that a judge could take that into consideration during sentencing; however, he maintained his hesitation to elevating the criminal offense to a felony until it was proven that criminalizing the conduct on any level reduced the number of interfering calls. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE reiterated her understanding that the intent of the bill was to create a "big stick" for bad actors who continually abuse the system. She opined that a misdemeanor was not enough of a deterrent and respectfully opposed Amendment 1. 4:10:31 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN believed that a felony charge was excessive for many reasons; further, he opined that threatening people that were suffering from a mental health crisis with a felony charge would not be effective in changing their behavior. He suggested further reducing the class A misdemeanor to a class B misdemeanor. 4:12:01 PM REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked whether there was a history of serious physical injury or death as a result of interference with emergency communications. JASMINE MARTIN, Staff, Senator David Wilson, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of Senator Wilson, prime sponsor, said she was not aware of any instances. She conveyed that the bill sponsor was not opposed to Amendment 1. She deferred to Mr. Butcher for additional comment. 4:12:45 PM JACOB BUTCHER, Communications Manager, Mat-Com Dispatch, reported that in his 16 years in a 911 communications center, he was not aware of any direct injury or death related to interference with emergency communications. Nonetheless, he said there was an "open road" to the possibility of it happening in the future. He shared a personal anecdote. REPRESENTATIVE TARR said she would be more inclined to leave the bill in its current form if there had been incidents of injury or death associated with the behavior. She cautioned against elevating the criminal offense to a felony, adding that she felt comfortable with the language in Amendment 1. 4:14:55 PM REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS stated his support for Amendment 1. He asserted that turning people into felons was not the answer to all problems. He opined that criminalizing conduct should come with a reminder of the punishable amount of jailtime, as well as the difficulties that accompany the lifelong label of "felon." REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN withdrew his objection. 4:16:13 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE objected for clarification. She sought to confirm that a person would not be charged with a class C felony unless the interference resulted in serious physical injury or death of a person. VICE CHAIR CLAMAN said, "That's correct as I read the bill." REPRESENTATIVE VANCE sought to confirm that per Amendment 1, interference that resulted in injury or death would be penalized with a class A misdemeanor. VICE CHAIR CLAMAN clarified that under the statute [AS 11.56], the criminal offense would be classified as a misdemeanor; however, there were circumstances relating to serious injury or death in which other crimes could be charged depending on the scenario. 4:17:34 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN shared his understanding that that if someone died, there would be an element of culpability. He indicated that there were other civil and criminal charges that could be brought against the offender if the behavior resulted in death. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE inquired about the Senate's perspective on the bill. MS. MARTIN explained that the original version of the bill included an escalating factor, such that multiple convictions would result in a felony after two or three occurrences. She stated that the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee removed that provision, changing it to a class A felony if the behavior resulted in serious injury or death. VICE CHAIR CLAMAN cited AS 11.41.130 [criminally negligent homicide] and asked whether the adoption of Amendment 1 could impact the charge of criminally negligent homicide. 4:20:27 PM KACI SCHROEDER, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, Department of Law (DOL), agreed that it would be fact dependent, as causation would need to be proven. She explained that a direct link between the behavior and the death of another person would need to be identified. VICE CHAIR CLAMAN sought to confirm that the issue of causation still existed for the criminal offense created under CSSB 182(JUD). MS. SCHROEDER confirmed. She explained that the underlying offense would still need to be proven and directly linked to the death of another person, should that scenario occur. She suspected that it would be difficult to prove. VICE CHAIR CLAMAN surmised that when considering the mental state, criminally negligent homicide may be easier to prove than a homicide related to interference with emergency communications. MS. SCHROEDER confirmed that when considering the mental state only, that may be true; however, causation was also an issue. VICE CHAIR CLAMAN, referencing AS 11.41.210 [assault in the second degree], sought to confirm that the same issues would arise in regard to recklessness as a mental state; however, the issue of causation would still need to be proven, suggesting that one "might be able to prove assault." MS. SCHROEDER said she was far less comfortable with that. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE [removed her objection] to the motion to adopt Amendment 1. There being no further objection, Amendment 1 to CSSB 182(JUD) was adopted. 4:24:00 PM REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS moved to adopt Amendment 2 to CSSB 182(JUD), labeled 32-LS1103\O.5, Radford, 4/28/22, which read: Page 3, line 8: Delete "A" Insert "B" REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN objected for the purpose of discussion. 4:24:34 PM JEFF STEPP, Staff, Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins, Alaska state Legislature, on behalf of Representative Kreiss- Tomkins, explained that Amendment 2 would modify the bill, such that interference with emergency communications resulted in a class B misdemeanor, rather than a class A misdemeanor. For reference, he said, a class A misdemeanor in Alaska is punishable by up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $10,000. In contrast, a class B misdemeanor is punishable by up to 90 days in jail and a fine of up to $2,000. 4:26:01 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN withdrew his objection. There being no further objection, Amendment 2 to CSSB 182(JUD) was adopted. 4:26:18 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN moved to adopt Amendment 3 to CSSB 182(JUD), labeled 32-LS1103\O.6, Radford, 5/3/22, which read: Page 1, line 6, following "knowingly": Insert "," Page 1, lines 7 - 15: Delete all material. Page 2, line 1: Delete "(4)" Page 2, line 4: Delete "(A)" Insert "(1)" Page 2, line 6: Delete "(B)" Insert "(2)" Page 2, line 7: Delete "(C)" Insert "(3)" Page 2, line 10: Delete "(a)(4)" Insert "(a)" VICE CHAIR CLAMAN objected for the purpose of discussion. 4:26:23 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN indicated that the substantive language of Amendment 3 was on page 1, lines 4-5, which deleted all material on lines 7-15 of CSSB 182(JUD). VICE CHAIR CLAMAN asked for the bill sponsor's perspective on Amendment 3. 4:28:36 PM SENATOR WILSON pointed out that the proposed amendment would delete operative language in the underlying bill, as it related to repeated emergency communications. He shared his belief that Amendment 3 would eliminate the original intent of the bill. VICE CHAIR CLAMAN maintained his objection to Amendment 3. 4:29:48 PM A roll call vote was taken. Representative Eastman voted in favor of the motion to adopt Amendment 3 to CSSB 182(JUD). Representatives Tarr, Story, Claman, Vance, Kaufman, and Kreiss- Tomkins voted against it. Therefore, Amendment 3 failed by a vote of 1-6. 4:30:33 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN moved to adopt Amendment 4 to CSSB 182(JUD), labeled 32-LS1103\O.7, Radford, 5/3/22, which read: Page 2, lines 20 - 26: Delete all material. Reletter the following subparagraphs accordingly. Page 2, line 27, following "personnel;" Insert "and" Page 2, line 31, through page 3, line 2: Delete all material. VICE CHAIR CLAMAN objected for the purpose of discussion. 4:30:38 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN indicated that the operative language of Amendment 4 was on page 1, lines 1-2, which deleted the qualifying details in the definition of "emergency communications center." He opined that although the definition in the bill was comprehensive, it expanded beyond the traditional understanding of a dispatch center. VICE CHAIR CLAMAN asked for the bill sponsor's perspective on Amendment 4. MS. MARTIN stated that the definitions of "emergency communications center," which Amendment 4 sought to delete, were pulled from the National Emergency Number Association (NENA). She deferred to the will of the committee. VICE CHAIR CLAMAN maintained his objection to the motion to adopt Amendment 4. 4:35:04 PM A roll call vote was taken. Representative Eastman voted in favor of the motion to adopt Amendment 4 to CSSB 182(JUD). Representatives Kaufman, Tarr, Story, Claman, Vance, and Kreiss- Tomkins voted against it. Therefore, Amendment 4 failed by a vote of 1-6. VICE CHAIR CLAMAN invited final comments on the underlying bill. 4:35:50 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN expressed his apprehension to the broad scope of the bill, given the criminalization of conduct. REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN expressed his support for the bill, as amended. REPRESENTATIVE TARR expressed her support for the legislation; nonetheless, she opined that there was a need for stiffer penalties in the justice system when it came to crimes against people. She asserted that her consideration of the bill would have been different if there had been any evidence of harm. 4:37:46 PM REPRESENTATIVE STORY thanked the committee for lowering the criminal offense to a misdemeanor. She highlighted that many young adults were functioning with undeveloped brains, as executive functions were established later in life; therefore, she preferred the lesser charges. VICE CHAIR CLAMAN acknowledged the concerns about escalating the punishment. He pointed out that there was plenty of opportunity to penalize improper behavior. He stated his support for the bill. 4:38:54 PM REPRESENTATIVE TARR moved to report CSSB 182(JUD), as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, HCS CSSB 182(STA) was reported out of the House State Affairs Standing Committee.