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." This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance Committee. REPRESENTATIVE NORM ROKEBERG, the bill's sponsor, informed the Committee that this bill would accomplish three things. First it would increase the percent of a fine that could be waived or reduced in the Therapeutic Court from the current 50-percent to 75- percent. This would "enhance the ability" of an offender to pay for the cost of therapy counseling and other activities that they would be required to participate in under State law. Co-Chair Green asked for confirmation that the proposed 25-percent reduction "wouldn't be through the Court; it would be independent" of the Court. Representative Rokeberg explained that the Court would impose the fine mandated by State Statute, and, upon the individual's completion of the therapeutic program, a portion of the fine could be waived or suspended. Thus, the individual could utilize that money to pay for their program participation. He stressed that the intent would not be to waive or suspend the entirety of the fine. Representative Rokeberg stated that the bill would also allow felony Driving Under the Influence (DUI) cases to utilize the Statutory authority provided to the Therapeutic Courts. Two felony DUI Court pilot programs had been previously authorized by the Legislature and are currently operating in the Municipality of Anchorage. This bill would provide those felony DUI courts "the same authority" as provided to the District Court so they could reduce their fines by 75-percent as an incentive for their offenders to participate in Wellness Court programs. The effort currently being exercised by the two courts is uncodified law. Co-Chair Green asked whether individuals who committed a felony could participate in the Wellness Court. Representative Rokeberg expressed that while the majority of the individuals in the Wellness Court had committed misdemeanors, some felons have been allowed in the program. Co-Chair Green acknowledged. To that point, she conveyed that she had heard this issue being discussed by people in "some of the auxiliary departments". They become "nervous" when individuals who had committed a felon participate in the program, as "they consider that a very different circumstance than the misdemeanor." Representative Rokeberg stressed that the two aforementioned courts are pilot programs. "They are subject to renewal by the Legislature." The two courts must be provided "the same tools" at the felony level as exists at the District Court level. The authority to continue the pilot programs would continue to be with the Legislature. Co-Chair Green asked for confirmation that the intent would not be to change "the misdemeanor court to a felony court" and that two separate levels would be "clearly defined". Representative Rokeberg affirmed. He referenced previous DUI legislation he had sponsored that had provided Statutory authority to the misdemeanor courts. Those courts currently operate under codified law. [NOTE: Due to static in the recording, some of Representative Rokeberg's remarks were inaudible.] Representative Rokeberg noted that the third provision proposed in this legislation would require that the Courts must impose the mandated minimum DUI fine levels. The minimum fine for a first offense DUI is a minimum of $1,500. To this point, "an obscure older Court of Appeals case", Curtis v. State, has been utilized to allow the courts to suspend a portion or all of the fines specified in State Statute. This bill "would basically repeal that case" and require that the fines authorized by the Legislature be imposed. He noted that the First Judicial District in Southeast Alaska has been "the biggest offender" in this regard. The Juneau Empire newspaper's Court reports consistently reflect the fact that the majority of DUI fines are suspended. 2:50:35 PM Co-Chair Green asked whether any other Statutes exist that would prevent a judge from exercising his or her discretion to impose fines below the specified minimum fine level. Representative Rokeberg understood that there were; however, he deferred to the Department of Law in that regard. Co-Chair Green stated that further information in this regard would be sought. Representative Rokeberg characterized this as a "good bill" and requested that it be reported from Committee. Co-Chair Green voiced the need to know whether "instructing the Court to do this and no less than this" was common practice. Representative Rokeberg responded that a significant number of hearings were conducted in conjunction with previous legislation that increased DUI fine levels, mindful of the fact that there is "a point of diminishing returns". To that point, the public "is very concerned" about such behavior, and, the intent of the Legislature was to mandate $1,500 as being the minimum fine for a first offense DUI, with there to be no Court discretion allowed in this regard. However, after that legislation became effective, the Curtis v. State case was utilized by the Court as a means through which to lower fines below the level authorized by the Legislature. He understood that there are those who conduct what could be likened to "judge shopping" in the First Judicial District, as defense councils are aware of which judges are stricter than others. This situation "has cost the judicial system" a significant amount of money. Revenues would increase were the minimum fine levels upheld, even were a portion of the fines suspended or waived for those participating in the Wellness Court programs. The bill is accompanied by several zero fiscal notes as well as a Department of Law fiscal note that depicts an increase in revenue as a result of mandating the minimum fine level, even with the allowance of increasing the amount of a fine that could be suspended or waived in the Therapeutic Court, as that would affect "a relatively small number of people". The Public Defenders Office's fiscal note reflects that this bill would incur an indeterminate increase in its expenses. Nonetheless the overall impact of this legislation would be to increase revenue. Co-Chair Green asked whether the State is the recipient of any National Highway Traffic Safety Administration funding, as that entity is often involved in these sorts of efforts. Representative Rokeberg noted that there is consideration of expanding the pilot program to include the communities of Ketchikan, Juneau, and Fairbanks. The Wellness Court program is anticipated to generate a significant amount of money. The Therapeutic Court concept is receiving significant federal government support because it is producing results in "breaking the revolving door cycle" of DUI behavior. People's lives are being changed. This effort is also saving money in the Department of Corrections and other State programs. Co-Chair Green understood that a felony DUI is issued at the time of a third offense. 2:55:27 PM Representative Rokeberg affirmed that it would be a third offense conviction within a ten-year period. Co-Chair Green asked regarding the DUI Court procedure; specifically who might be "the contact point" between court visits. Representative Rokeberg responded that each Court might have its own procedure; however, the typical "template" would include the judge and the Court's case coordinator who oversees each person's treatment program. Historically, the case coordinator might have been a Department of Corrections Probation Officer (PO); however, through a cooperative effort between the Department of Corrections and the Department of Health and Social Services, a transition is occurring at the felony level in which an employee of the Department's Alcohol Safety Action Program (ASAP) and case coordinators might absorb some of the workload from the POs. Additional cooperation would be required from the District Attorneys in the Department of Law and the Public Defender Agency and private councilors in regards to the admissions screening procedure. "Not just everybody gets into these various programs. They have to have potentiality." Representative Rokeberg stated that one of "the new features" would be the use of pharmacological drugs that has been proven successful "in helping people break their dependency on alcohol". "Some controversy" has accompanied this treatment. Nonetheless, he voiced concern that this type of treatment is not frequently utilized in the two Anchorage felony pilot programs. He also disclosed the existence of a "cultural problem" at the felony level and "some resistance" on the part of the Department of Corrections and the Department of Law prosecutors. To that point, he ascertained that that resistance is "breaking down". 2:58:21 PM Representative Rokeberg continued that the findings of the Anchorage pilot program indicate that, with the support of the various agencies, the program would work. Senator Dyson voiced concern about the inability of the Department of Law's Civil Division's computers to link information to the Department's Criminal Division. As a result, a judge might not be aware of the complete situation. Currently, the Civil Division prints out their information and someone carries it to the Criminal Division, who must enter it into their computer. The Court System is addressing this; however, this significant administrative link "has not been working well". Representative Rokeberg responded that he had investigated this issue four years earlier when he was the Chair of the House Judiciary Committee. It has been frustrating that "the Legislature seems to be unable to impress upon the bureaucracy that we are in the 21st Century now. Technology works and the only way we're going to save money is to increase our productivity." Co-Chair Green understood that some of this issue would be addressed in the FY 06 budget. Senator Dyson affirmed. Representative Rokeberg urged the Finance Committee to support such action, as it would be necessary in order to increase productivity. "The private sector does it all the time." Co-Chair Green stated that support would be sought. Co-Chair Green ordered the Bill HELD in Committee. 3:00:56 PM