SJUD - 3/20/95 HB 9 DAMAGE TO PROPERTY BY MINORS  Number 486 REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT, sponsor of HB 9, testified before the committee. He read a sponsor statement into the record. HB 9 is a victims' rights bill, which encourages parents to accept responsibility for damages caused by juveniles and to provide recourse for victims who have lost property. It is based on the principle that the person having custody of the juvenile who has caused the damage is monetarily responsible for the loss. HB 9 increases the amount the victim may recover from $2,000 to $10,000. REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT explained changes made by the House Judiciary Committee. The words "as the result of knowing or intentional act," were added to limit liability to damages that were caused purposely, but also includes unintentional damages that might be caused as the result of the intentional act. That language would cover damages resulting from a situation in which a person breaks into a home in the winter to steal a television by breaking a window to gain entry, causing additional damage sustained as a result of the broken window, i.e. frozen pipes. The House Judiciary committee substitute added a new section to incorporate the intent of HB 36. It updates the permanent fund dividend law to permit the taking of part, or all, of the dividend to satisfy judgement. It increases the amount that can be recovered from the minor's permanent fund dividend for injury or damage caused by the minor from $2,000 to $10,000 to maintain the parallel recovery provisions. REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT noted the House Finance Committee further revised HB 9 to include a provision that relieves the legal custodian from liability in a runaway situation, when the runaway report is filed by a parent before the damage occurs. REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT reviewed the history of this measure. A similar bill was acted upon by the Senate Rules Committee during the last session. The Senate Rules Committee added a provision allowing the parent to mitigate the liability by showing that they had taken action to try and control their child. He was not opposed to such an amendment, and stated he preferred that language to the blanket provision relieving the parent from liability by declaring the child a runaway. Number 500 SENATOR TAYLOR referred to page 2, and commented that the roadblocks placed in front of recovery in existing statute have probably resulted in no one ever bringing a writ of execution. He cited the attachment of a permanent fund dividend provision on lines 23 through 28. Before an execution can be made on the dividend, a judgement is required, and the crime must be defined as a crime against a person that injured the plaintiff, and for which the minor was adjudicated a delinquent, or convicted as an adult. He commented if the Department of Health and Social Services chooses not to follow through with the petition and actually have a decree rendered, which is normal procedure, often the juvenile will plea out and enter into something short of an adjudication making a declaration of delinquency, which takes a severe offense. He explained under the provisions in CSHB 9(FIN) the victim would have to be injured by the juvenile and all of the state agencies would have to follow through with their procedures before the victim could sue for the amount of $2,000. REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT clarified the amount of damages one could sue for is not capped at $2,000; that is the cap on the dividend amount. SENATOR TAYLOR felt the hurdles created by the measure would discourage anyone from seeking restitution. REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT stated he was amenable to using the bill to change existing statutory language. SENATOR TAYLOR suggested ending Subsection (A) of Section 3 on line 22. Number 570 MARGOT KNUTH, assistant attorney general with the Criminal Division of the Department of Law, commented CSHB 9(FIN) is consistent with one of the Governor's crime bills which increases opportunities for restitution by juveniles and their parents, therefore she assumed the Administration would support the measure. SENATOR TAYLOR cited the provisions for recovery on page 2, and reiterated that they were too restrictive to be useful. MS. KNUTH replied it is the civil division rather than the criminal division that works with juveniles, therefore she could not provide a definitive answer, but she did not feel the provisions were onerous. TAPE 95-13, SIDE B SENATOR TAYLOR discussed the Fairbanks school system damage, and stated no money from permanent fund dividends could be collected according to the provisions in this measure. MS. KNUTH agreed, in the case of a separate civil action brought with respect to that incident. She noted the Governor's crime bill would allow restitution in this situation as part of a delinquency adjudication. SENATOR TAYLOR noted line 26 contains the word "or." REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT explained that requires the plaintiff to jump through less hoops. SENATOR GREEN asked if child support and other payments must be made before restitution. MS. KNUTH agreed, and stated child support is the number one obligation that must be fulfilled before anything else. Court ordered restitution would be the second obligation. SENATOR TAYLOR stated once restitution has been defined, the greater qualifier would be applicable. This restitution standard would apply to all people who receive a permanent fund dividend, and as a result the court could order restitution under any of the provisions, but Subsection (A) states damages can be covered under civil action if injury occurs, and to cover property damage. SENATOR ELLIS asked if the Governor's bill would be before the committee in the near future. SENATOR TAYLOR replied affirmatively but it is still in the House. He commented he would like to further consider Subsection (A) and its possible deletion, and hold it over until Wednesday. REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT clarified that any judgement made under this bill would have to account for the parent's financial situation, therefore no one would end up bankrupted by the bill. SENATOR TAYLOR added an individual has to earn over $34,000 per year before an execution can be made on their wages.