HB 127-ROADSIDE MEMORIALS    LORI BACKES, staff to Representative Jim Whittaker, said HB 127 seeks to allow Alaskans the right to express their grief at the loss of a loved one with as little governmental interference as possible. When someone is killed on an Alaskan highway, family and friends sometimes place a memorial at the site of the accident. The memorials serve two purposes. First they pay tribute to the individual who died, and second they warn other travelers of the potential tragedy associated with dangerous driving. Most states allow such memorials either officially or unofficially. Although Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOTPF) has traditionally ignored them, two years ago they gave notice that personal memorials would have to be removed. As a result, the mother of a person killed by a drunk driver in the Fairbanks area circulated a petition requesting the state continue to allow the memorials. HB 127 sets out to clarify that the state won't discourage the placing of such memorials, but they will reasonably regulate them so as not to allow unsafe distractions and hazards in Alaska's rights of way. The Department of Law (DOL) requested an amendment to the bill, which would avoid any liability to the state should a person suffer injury or damage as a result of the placement of a memorial. Representative Whitaker didn't object to the amendment she said. SENATOR JOHN COWDERY noted the Senate Transportation Committee also amended the bill. MS. BACKUS said the language in the original bill read, "a person who died in a traffic accident" and the amended language was, "a person who died as a result of a traffic accident." SENATOR COWDERY asked what types of memorials would be allowed and for the definition of temporary. MS. BACKUS explained that temporary isn't intended to be any particular length of time; it simply indicates the memorials aren't permanent fixtures. She read page 1, lines 10-12 and said a cement structure probably would not be allowed. It's been made clear to DOTPF that they would be expected to craft guidelines based on their knowledge of the realm of safety. SENATOR COWDERY noted there have been legal problems associated with expanding roads or buildings when they infringe on private burial grounds. He asked what would happen if a road was expanded. MS BACKUS stated that all memorials would have contact information in case the memorial needed to be moved. If the contact information was not up to date or the contact individual wasn't able to move the memorial, the contractor, working through DOTPF, would have the authority to do so. SENATOR COWDERY asked for assurance that there was no intent for the state to be held liable if contact information on the memorials became outdated. MS. BACKUS replied DOTPF would have full authorization to move the memorial. SENATOR COWDERY said he intended to vote in favor of the legislation and he believes memorials send a safety message. SENATOR LYMAN HOFFMAN questioned whether this would jeopardize any federal funding. MS. BACKUS replied DOTPF was concerned about that because of language in the Highway Beautification Program that speaks to what would happen if a state didn't control encroachments in the highway rights-of-way. The sponsor believes the legislation allows the state the latitude to control encroachments to a satisfactory degree and the department has never been threatened with a loss of funding. She said Lady Byrd Johnson did not intend for her program to impact these types of memorials. CHAIR GARY STEVENS asked the DOL to comment on the amendment. JIM CANTOR from the Attorney General's office explained that the amendment would add immunity for damage or injury as a result of the placement of the memorial. The concern is that modern highways are designed with a clear zone concept, which is the zone where a vehicle could leave the highway and not hit something. Allowing memorials in the clear zone could subject the state to liability. Since the program is designed to eliminate governmental interference, they propose this as a way to go forward without increasing the fiscal cost to the state. SIDE B  4:20 pm CHAIR GARY STEVENS asked if the state could make itself not liable by announcing it was not liable. MR. CANTOR replied, "Yes." SENATOR COWDERY made a motion to adopt amendment #1. Page 2, line 8, following "damage to": insert ",or damage or injury resulting from the presence of," There was no objection. BARBARA DOWDY read a statement from Sheryl Riley into the record relating Heather Dowdy's story. She was a vibrant, productive 17-year-old student who was ready to graduate from high school when she was hit and killed by a drunk driver. BARBARA DOWDY, Heather's mother, testified she is a member of the MADD chapter in Fairbanks and she fully supports passage of HB 127. On her way to deliver her testimony, she traveled the Old Steese Highway so she could stop and place fresh flowers on Heather's cross. She noted others had left flowers as well. She said that roadside memorials let people know that a loved one is remembered and their passing is noticed. RACHAEL DOWDY, Heather's sister, outlined the last day of Heather's life. After the accident, family and friends placed a roadside memorial in her memory and to help in their healing process. She said that roadside memorials remind people that driving fatalities are personal and Heather's family has anecdotal evidence that her memorial has changed at least one person's drinking and driving behavior. They are sure the standard DOTPF sign would not have this same affect. She then read a statement written by Sandy Gilespie, Heather's sister-in-law, supporting HB 127. There was no further testimony. SENATOR COWDERY made a motion to move SCS HB 127(STA) from committee with individual recommendations and zero fiscal note. There being no objection, it was so ordered.