ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
March 28, 2014
1:06 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Wes Keller, Chair
Representative Bob Lynn, Vice Chair
Representative Neal Foster
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux
Representative Max Gruenberg
Representative Lance Pruitt
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Charisse Millett
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 235
"An Act requiring the Alaska Public Offices Commission to
maintain the confidentiality of certain proceedings, documents,
and information."
- HEARD & HELD
SPONSOR SUBSTITUE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 205
"An Act relating to traffic offenses committed in a school zone;
and prohibiting changing lanes in a school zone."
- HEARD & HELD
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 64(FIN)
"An Act relating to theft and property offenses; relating to the
definition of 'prior convictions' for certain theft offenses;
establishing the Alaska Criminal Justice Commission and
providing an expiration date; relating to the crime of custodial
interference; relating to the duties of the Alaska Judicial
Council; relating to jail-time credit for offenders in court-
ordered treatment programs; relating to conditions of release,
probation, and parole; relating to duties of the commissioner of
corrections and board of parole; establishing a fund for
reducing recidivism in the Department of Health and Social
Services; requiring the commissioner of health and social
services to establish programs for persons on conditions of
release or probation that require testing for controlled
substances and alcoholic beverages; requiring the board of
parole to establish programs for persons on parole that require
testing for controlled substances and alcoholic beverages;
relating to the duties of the Department of Health and Social
Services; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 282
"An Act relating to the rights and obligations of residential
landlords and tenants; and relating to the taking of a permanent
fund dividend for rent and damages owed to a residential
landlord."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 235
SHORT TITLE: CONFIDENTIALITY OF APOC COMPLAINTS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) HIGGINS
01/21/14 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/10/14
01/21/14 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/21/14 (H) STA, JUD
03/11/14 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/11/14 (H) Moved CSHB 235(STA) Out of Committee
03/11/14 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/12/14 (H) STA RPT CS(STA) NT 4DP 2NR
03/12/14 (H) DP: GATTIS, KELLER, ISAACSON, HUGHES
03/12/14 (H) NR: KREISS-TOMKINS, LYNN
03/21/14 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/21/14 (H) Heard & Held
03/21/14 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/28/14 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: HB 205
SHORT TITLE: TRAFFIC OFFENSES: FINES/SCHOOL ZONES
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) FOSTER
04/11/13 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/11/13 (H) JUD
04/12/13 (H) SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE INTRODUCED
04/12/13 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/12/13 (H) JUD
03/12/14 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/12/14 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
03/14/14 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/14/14 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/28/14 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: SB 64
SHORT TITLE: OMNIBUS CRIME/CORRECTIONS/RECIDIVISM BILL
SPONSOR(s): JUDICIARY
02/27/13 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/27/13 (S) STA, JUD
04/04/13 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
04/04/13 (S) <Bill Hearing Postponed>
04/09/13 (S) STA RPT CS 1DP 1NR 1AM NEW TITLE
04/09/13 (S) DP: DYSON
04/09/13 (S) NR: GIESSEL
04/09/13 (S) AM: COGHILL
04/09/13 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
04/09/13 (S) Moved CSSB 64(STA) Out of Committee
04/09/13 (S) MINUTE(STA)
07/25/13 (S) JUD AT 10:00 AM WASILLA
07/25/13 (S) Heard & Held
07/25/13 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
01/29/14 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
01/29/14 (S) Heard & Held
01/29/14 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
01/31/14 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
01/31/14 (S) Heard & Held
01/31/14 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/03/14 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/03/14 (S) Heard & Held
02/03/14 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/05/14 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/05/14 (S) Heard & Held
02/05/14 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/07/14 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/07/14 (S) -- MEETING CANCELED --
02/10/14 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/10/14 (S) Heard & Held
02/10/14 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/12/14 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/12/14 (S) Moved CSSB 64(JUD) Out of Committee
02/12/14 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/14/14 (S) JUD RPT CS 4DP 1NR NEW TITLE
02/14/14 (S) DP: COGHILL, MCGUIRE, WIELECHOWSKI,
DYSON
02/14/14 (S) NR: OLSON
02/14/14 (S) FIN REFERRAL ADDED AFTER JUD
02/25/14 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
02/25/14 (S) Heard & Held
02/25/14 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/06/14 (S) FIN AT 5:00 PM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/06/14 (S) Heard & Held
03/06/14 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/11/14 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/11/14 (S) Heard & Held
03/11/14 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/11/14 (S) FIN AT 5:00 PM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/11/14 (S) Heard & Held
03/11/14 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/13/14 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/13/14 (S) Moved CSSB 64(FIN) Out of Committee
03/13/14 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/14/14 (S) FIN RPT CS 3DP 1NR 3AM NEW TITLE
03/14/14 (S) DP: KELLY, MEYER, HOFFMAN
03/14/14 (S) NR: OLSON
03/14/14 (S) AM: FAIRCLOUGH, DUNLEAVY, BISHOP
03/14/14 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/14/14 (S) VERSION: CSSB 64(FIN)
03/17/14 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/17/14 (H) JUD, FIN
03/24/14 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/24/14 (H) Heard & Held
03/24/14 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/26/14 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/26/14 (H) Heard & Held
03/26/14 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/28/14 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
BILL: HB 282
SHORT TITLE: LANDLORD AND TENANT ACT
SPONSOR(s): ISAACSON
01/29/14 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/29/14 (H) L&C, JUD
02/28/14 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
02/28/14 (H) Heard & Held
02/28/14 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
03/14/14 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
03/14/14 (H) Heard & Held
03/14/14 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
03/17/14 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124
03/17/14 (H) Moved CSHB 282(L&C) Out of Committee
03/17/14 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
03/19/14 (H) L&C RPT CS(L&C) 1DP 6NR
03/19/14 (H) DP: JOSEPHSON
03/19/14 (H) NR: MILLETT, CHENAULT, HERRON,
REINBOLD, SADDLER, OLSON
03/28/14 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE PETE HIGGINS
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 235.
THOMAS STUDLER, Staff
Representative Pete Higgins
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented CSHB 235 on behalf of
Representative Higgins.
PAUL DAUPHINAIS, Executive Director
Alaska Public Offices Commission
Alaska Department of Administration
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to a request to answer a question
on HB 235.
REPRESENTATIVE NEAL FOSTER
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 205 as sponsor.
PAUL LABOLLE, Staff
Representative Neal Foster
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding HB 205.
CUSSY KAUER
Nome, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke in favor of HB 205.
CONNIE McKENZIE, Legislative Liaison
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke to the fiscal impacts of HB 205.
BILL MICKELSON, President
Mickelson Consulting Group
Pierre, South Dakota
POSITION STATEMENT: Discussed the development of the 24/7
Sobriety Program.
ELIZABETH RIPLEY, Executive Director
Mat-Su Health Foundation
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 64.
BETTY BAIR
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified about redefining sexual crimes and
about the lack of education in prisons.
LISA RIEGER, General Counsel
Cook Inlet Tribal Council (CITC)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke in support of SB 64.
MELINDA MERRILL, Manager
Community Affairs
Fred Meyer Stores
Portland, Oregon
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke against raising the felony threshold
in SB 64.
SCOTT BRINGHURST, Vice President
Loss Prevention
Fred Meyer Stores
Portland, Oregon
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke against raising the felony threshold
in SB 64.
TOM BUTLER, Colonel
Montana Highway Patrol
Helena, Montana
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke about the 24/7 Sobriety Program in
Montana.
CHRIS NETTELS, President and Owner
GeoTek Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke against raising the felony threshold
in SB 64.
ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General
Legal Services Section
Criminal Division
Department of Law (DOL)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions pertaining to SB 64.
REPRESENTATIVE DOUG ISSACSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 282 as sponsor.
BRENDA HEWITT, Staff
Representative Doug Isaacson
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 282 on behalf of Representative
Isaacson, sponsor
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:06:45 PM
CHAIR WES KELLER called the House Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting to order at 1:06 p.m. Representatives Gruenberg, Foster,
LeDoux, Lynn, and Keller were present at the call to order.
Representative Pruitt arrived as the meeting was in progress.
REPRESENTATIVE MAX GRUENBERG said that he put in his unlawful
evasion bill and intends to amend it to the "crime bill."
1:10:07 PM
HB 235-CONFIDENTIALITY OF APOC COMPLAINTS
CHAIR KELLER announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 235, "An Act requiring the Alaska Public Offices
Commission to maintain the confidentiality of certain
proceedings, documents, and information."
1:11:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BOB LYNN moved to adopt the Committee Substitute
(CS) for HB 235, Version 28-LS1130\Y, Bullard, 3/27/14 as the
working document.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG objected.
1:12:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PETE HIGGINS, Alaska State Legislature, turned
the discussion over to his staff.
THOMAS STUDLER, Staff, Representative Pete Higgins, Alaska State
Legislature, noted an addition to the title of HB 235 regarding
sanctions for those who file false or frivolous complaints [to
the Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC)]. A new paragraph
was added to Section 1 to say that the proceedings relating to
an investigation are confidential until it is determined that a
violation has occurred. In Section 2, he said the following was
added:
Except to the extent that the confidentiality
provisions are waived by the subject, the complainant
shall keep confidential the fact that they have filed
a complaint under this section, as well as the
contents of the complaints filed. If the complainant
violates any provision of the confidentiality, the
commission shall immediately dismiss the complaint;
however, the dismissal of the complaint does not
affect the right of the commission or any other person
to initiate a complaint based on the same factual
information.
1:13:35 PM
MR. STUDLER said that a new subsection was added in Section 3 to
allow for appealing the APOC decision to the Superior Court by
either the complainant or the respondent within 30 days of the
decision. He added that Section 4 was amended by adding that
the complaint and all documents relating to the investigation
are confidential until it has been determined that a violation
has occurred. "We went on by adding a new [subsection], (m),"
to further define that within 30 days after accepting the
complaint, the commission shall determine whether the facts
substantiate an allegation and whether there is credible
evidence for further investigation and proceedings. The
commission may delegate this duty to make that determination to
an employee/investigator of the commission to expedite the
process, he said.
1:14:40 PM
MR. STUDLER turned to Section 5, which says that the commission
needs to make a determination, based on the facts before it,
whether the allegation has merit. "One of the things that we
added in here is that ... if you make a false claim ... the
commission shall dismiss the complaint and order the complainant
to reimburse the respondent for his costs and court costs." The
respondent is to reimburse APOC as well, he said. Additionally,
APOC may decline to consider any further complaints filed by
that particular individual. The CS also includes [subsection
(o)] as follows:
The sanctions authorized in this section are not
exclusive and do not preclude any other remedies or
rights of action the respondent may have against the
complainant.
MR. STUDLER stated that the updates are to protect the process
of APOC so that when complaints are brought forward, they are in
good faith and have merit.
1:16:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked about a complaint with multiple
allegations and one is deemed to be frivolous.
MR. STUDLER said he believes that the allegations with merit
would go forward.
1:17:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked how APOC would be reimbursed.
MR. STUDLER answered that if the person files allegations and
some were substantiated and others were not, he believes the
commission would have to look at the clear and convincing
evidence of whether the allegations were filed in bad faith.
Since some of the allegations were upheld, "I would have to say
that would not be in bad faith, because there was merit to those
cases." He added that he did not want to speak for the
commission.
1:18:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN said he would like to have that clarified.
PAUL DAUPHINAIS, Executive Director, Alaska Public Offices
Commission, Alaska Department of Administration, said he is not
authorized to speak for the commission, and "we try not to deal
with hypotheticals."
1:19:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GABRIELLE LEDOUX asked about a complaint being
dismissed and the complainant decides to file an appeal with the
Superior Court, "then are all records of the Superior Court
sealed?" Normally things are openly filed with the Superior
Court, she explained. If the idea is to have information
confidential until there has been a decision that an APOC rule
has been violated, "what are you going to do with the Superior
Court?"
1:20:21 PM
MR. STUDLER said he will get back on that.
REPRESENTATIVE NEAL FOSTER noted the changes in Section 4, where
all documents relating to an investigation are confidential
until it is determined that a violation has occurred. "If no
violation occurs, is there any provision that maybe the
documents do become open, but maybe not for, say, a period of
six months?"
MR. STUDLER said "we" had not thought about that. He said he
would have to respond later.
1:21:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HIGGINS said he sees no reason why an allegation
without merit should become public. The purpose of HB 235 is to
ensure that only violations with merit become public. "You're
thinking that for historical reasons you want to put it in
there, but as an individual and a citizen of the state, I don't
see where that would be." He said he cannot speak for the
commission on that issue because he really has not thought about
it.
1:22:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked if the exonerated defendant can
request that the allegation become public in order to expose
what a "rotten" person the complainant is.
REPRESENTATIVE HIGGINS said, yes, there is a provision allowing
the defendant to waive confidentiality.
1:23:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER said he totally understands that side, but
he thought that people might want to know what happened, and the
file could become open "sometime down the road" for the sake of
transparency. He noted that he did not feel strongly one way or
another.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he spoke with Mr. Studler about
the bill extensively. This is the only APOC bill the committee
is likely to see this year, he stated, and he has a couple of
concerns. This year's APOC report made one suggestion for a
legislative change. He noted that the legislators used to have
to do a post-election 10-day report. The APOC report suggested
reinstituting that obligation, which requires legislators to
review their contributions and expenditures that occurred in a
flurry a few days before the election. "As it is now, there is
no post-election report for months, and so huge $100,000 fines
accrue, and if we did a simple report to recap that 10 days
after, that would probably catch a lot of these things and bring
those potential fines back into line."
1:25:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that the statute, AS
15.13.390(a), states that if a person violates the law by not
having a properly completed and certified report, like if
something is missing or if the report is late, there is a civil
penalty of not more than $500 per day. He said APOC has a
regulation, 2AAC50.855, which states that the amount of the
penalty must be determined by multiplying the daily maximum by
the number of the days the report was late or incomplete. "It
changes a maximum into a benchmark and results in huge unfair
fines," he stated. "It is terrifically unjust, and what they
have to do now is apply mitigators that really don't apply-just
to bring this back into line."
REPRESENTATIVE LANCE PRUITT asked if Representative Gruenberg is
indicating that there should be a report a week or two after the
election instead of the one due on February 15.
1:28:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said it would not eliminate the year-
end report; it would be in addition to it. Legislators once had
to do it and "we simply repealed it because it was extra work."
The result has been people getting hit with huge fines because
they messed up in some manner, and the mistake was not caught
for three months because people do not look at the reports until
they do their next one. By reinstituted the above-mentioned
report, people will triple check, which will eliminate the fines
except for the 10-day period.
CHAIR KELLER announced that HB 235 was set aside.
1:31:20 PM
HB 205-TRAFFIC OFFENSES: FINES/SCHOOL ZONES
1:31:42 PM
CHAIR WES KELLER announced that the next order of business would
be SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 205, "An Act relating
to traffic offenses committed in a school zone; and prohibiting
changing lanes in a school zone."
1:32:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN moved Amendment 1,
Page 2, line 1:
Delete "a misdemeanor"
Insert "an infraction and is punishable by a fine not
to exceed $500"
CHAIR KELLER objected.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN said school zones are very hazardous areas,
but a misdemeanor is "probably over the top." Making the
offense an infraction brings it in line with any other
infraction, and there is flexibility for a judge because it says
"not to exceed."
1:33:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GABRIELLE LEDOUX pointed out that a misdemeanor
would give the offender the right to a trial by jury, and she
does not think an infraction would provide that right. A
misdemeanor would also provide for a public defender, so the
infraction would be less costly to the state and municipalities.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked if a ticket for speeding in a school
zone is a misdemeanor or an infraction.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX replied that she thinks speeding in a
school zone gets a person a ticket, not a misdemeanor.
1:34:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN surmised that he could amend HB 205 "to make
it similar to any other traffic ticket a person might get in a
particular place like a school zone."
CHAIR KELLER said he wanted to get this on the record, but he
will save the question for later. He withdrew his objection to
the amendment.
REPRESENTATIVE MAX GRUENBERG said the questions need to be
answered before voting on the amendment.
1:35:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NEAL FOSTER, Alaska State Legislature, said HB
205 is an act relating to traffic offenses committed in a school
zone and prohibiting [changing] lanes in a school zone. He
thanked Representative Lynn for strengthening the bill by adding
the provision on changing lanes. A tragedy occurred in 2011; a
boy had just moved from Nome to Fairbanks and while waiting on
the corner by his school he was struck and killed by a person
under the influence of prescription medications and who was
speeding through the intersection. The boy's family will be
testifying, he added. The incident caused him to think about
what could be done to make children safer. He pointed out that
people driving along highways are subject to double fines when
construction workers are present. "Why wouldn't we afford that
same level of protection to our youngest and our most
vulnerable?" he asked. The bill is simple: it says drivers who
speed through school zones will be subject to double fines and
drivers may not change lanes in a school zone that is equipped
with a flashing light if the light is flashing.
1:37:34 PM
PAUL LABOLLE, Staff, Representative Neal Foster, Alaska State
Legislature, stated that speeding is considered a violation, and
violations and infractions and are treated by the courts equally
and are both considered minor infractions.
CHAIR KELLER asked if Representative Lynn's amendment is
appropriate.
MR. LABOLLE said he has discussed the issue with the courts, and
it does seem in line with the remainder of the bill.
1:38:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LANCE PRUITT pointed out a street in Anchorage
that goes underneath a bridge by a junior high school and is a
school zone at times. There are about three lanes on each side,
and the street can easily get backed up, he noted. He said he
understands why the cars need to slow down because students
cross the street, but now a person who changes lanes could be in
trouble [under HB 205].
1:39:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER said that the topic was discussed right
before this meeting.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN noted that the school zone he goes through
most often is on Lake Otis [Parkway], "and sometimes I
contemplate a citizen's arrest." He said he is religious about
not exceeding the speed limit of 20 miles per hour, and people
pass him like he is tied to a post, going in and out of lanes.
It is a public safety hazard, he opined. He originally thought
of outlawing passing in a school zone but, for now, has decided
it would be "too unwieldy." He said he decided to coordinate
with Representative Foster on HB 205, and he wants to still have
that provision if it can be made practical. He spoke about
drivers needing to change lanes to make a turn. "This is a very
good bill, and I don't want to impede its progress." He asked
for potential solutions from the committee.
1:43:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX said she is a really lousy driver and does
not know the answer. She asked if changing lanes in a school
zone is dangerous when driving the speed limit and being
cautious.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN stated that changing lanes is inherently
more dangerous than not changing lanes-any place. He noted that
there is a difference from just changing lanes and weaving in
and out.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said that the amendment the committee
just adopted created an infraction punishable by a fine not to
exceed $500. The term "infraction" is defined in AS 28.90.010
with a maximum fine of $300. He said he does not know if there
is an inconsistency between "the other two sections and Section
2." The other two sections delegate to the Supreme Court the
responsibility of setting the fine schedule, and "it says that
if you're doing it in a traffic safety corridor, it should be
double the amount normally." He said, "We're adding school zone
to that and here we're putting this particular crime as an
infraction, and I don't know how that would be reconciled with
the other two sections of the bill." He noted that in 1985, the
legislature dealt with something similar, and it was a very
thorny problem. The question then was how to effectively
prosecute somebody who passes a school bus when the bus is
stopped and the lights are flashing. In the darkness, it is
difficult to tell who is driving the car, and it was effectively
impossible to prosecute.
1:48:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said the same problem may exist with HB
205. A crossing guard will be watching the kids and a speeder
may zoom by "and they're lucky if they get the license number."
The decision was to take a Minnesota law that said, "If you can
identify and prove the owner of the car, there shall be a civil
penalty assessed against owner." The amount of the civil
penalty was set out, and if the owner of the car came forth and
identified the driver and said the driver was not the owner,
"then they prosecute the driver and the civil penalty would be
abated."
1:49:59 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced the start of public testimony.
CUSSY KAUER, Nome, Alaska, thanked the authors of the bill. The
driving population in Alaska needs to be educated that when one
puts our children at risk by bad driving behavior the
consequences are now more severe, she said.
1:51:22 PM
MS. KAUER, speaking for Jamison Thrun, who was a 4th generation
Alaskan and 11-year-old student at University Park Elementary in
Fairbanks said:
A bright sunny August morning me and my little brother
Kaden were walking to school and Kaden forgot his
soccer ball. I told him to go back home and get it; I
would wait for him. He started running back to our
house and I heard the screaming of tires.
MS. KAUER continued:
That day, August 30, 2011, changed the lives of our
family, my daughter Kelly, her husband, her children,
and those of many across Alaska as we mourn the
instant killing of Jamison just 15 days after he left
Nome for his new Fairbanks home. Kaden returned with
his soccer ball and witnessed his brother lying in the
grass while EMTs prepared him for the ambulance. He
put his hand over his eyes as he passed by and ran the
rest of the way to school and in shock waited for his
big brother Jamison who would never come. Jamison had
plans for a new life in his new home, at his new
school, in his new town, but he died on the streets of
Fairbanks on his way to school. He wanted to play
football. He had just gotten a new trampoline two
days earlier. I know Jamison is in heaven and his
mother is missing him terribly. Jamison had plans,
and, I assure you, residing in Birch Hill Cemetery was
not part of them. Parents should expect when their
child leaves home for school in the morning the next
time they will see them that evening is at the supper
table, not laying opened up on an operating table.
Highway work zones involve men and women exposed to an
element of risk and danger as they are performing
their work tasks, sometimes only protected by a hard
hat, vulnerable to the driving behaviors of fellow
Alaskans and the public. The same care and caution
should be exercised by drivers where there are high
concentrations of our most precious, which includes
school zones, school yards, and school drive-throughs.
While this bill does not address these other
properties, by passing HB 205 and amending current
statutes it is one small step down a long path I
intend to take with the help of all of you and on
behalf of my grandson, Jamison Thrun.
1:54:40 PM
CHAIR KELLER stated that everyone is sobered in hearing Ms.
Kauer's testimony.
CONNIE McKENZIE, Legislative Liaison, Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT), said the DOT is
preparing a fiscal note on HB 205, and she apologized for
forgetting the signage aspect of the bill. There will be
signage on the flashing lights to indicate that there would be
no turning within the school zone, and there will be signage
indicating the start and end of a double-fine zone.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked if the fiscal note would be different
with the changing lanes provision.
MS. McKENZIE said the fiscal note would change because part of
the signage is addressing the "no turn zone."
1:57:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER asked her to make a fiscal note with just
the double fines and one with both.
MS. McKENZIE said DOT could break out each section.
CHAIR KELLER asked how many school zones are where turns are
even possible.
MS. McKENZIE said DOT has estimated the number, and there is
often more than one school zone around a school. The estimate
is 168 school zones statewide.
1:58:53 PM
CHAIR KELLER said he was setting HB 205 aside.
SB 64-OMNIBUS CRIME/CORRECTIONS/RECIDIVISM BILL
1:59:12 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 1:59:48 to 2:00:59.
2:01:05 PM
CHAIR KELLER said there are several people who would like to
testify.
BILL MICKELSON, President, Mickelson Consulting Group, said that
he helped develop, implement, and then direct the 24/7 Sobriety
Program in South Dakota. He said he is retired after 43 years
in law enforcement and now has a consulting company dedicated to
migrating the 24/7 program across the country and abroad. He
stated that 24/7 is a valuable tool for judges and for the
driver's license division, which would need it for revocation
and reinstatement of licenses. It has been a valuable tool in
South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, and all of the other states
where it operates, he added. He said he reviewed SB 64 and did
a cursory review of the amendment, and he applauded the
comprehensive bill.
2:03:52 PM
CHAIR KELLER asked about the amendments.
MR. MICKELSON said his comments are general, but it seems that
the amendment is consistent with other states using 24/7 twice-
a-day testing as an option over interlock devices. "We were
successful in a federal highway bill ... to include the 24/7
Sobriety Program, so we now have parity with the other approved
programs that are administered by the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, so, in effect, we do have parity with
ignition interlock devices." He added that it has been quite
effective long term in reducing recidivism, crash rates, and "a
whole host of other benefits." He noted that offering the 24/7
sobriety twice-a-day testing for driver's license reinstatements
is a good and effective move, and it has been quite successful
in all of the states that are using it. These people are
driving sober, because they are tested at least twice a day, he
stated.
2:06:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said there is a very recent trial court
order from Montana, and the decision is being appealed to the
Montana Supreme Court. He would like to know what the judge has
ruled.
CHAIR KELLER suggested that Mr. Mickelson could get it.
MR. MICKELSON said it is under appeal and the Montana Governor
and Attorney General are quite confident that the ruling will be
in favor of the sobriety program.
2:07:46 PM
ELIZABETH RIPLEY, Executive Director, Mat-Su Health Foundation,
explained that the foundation shares ownership in Mat-Su
Regional [Medical Center] and invests its profits back into the
Matanuska-Susitna community to improve the health and wellness
of Alaskans living in the area. The Mat-Su Foundation recently
completed a community health-needs assessment by compiling all
valid and reliable health data in the area and then conducting
24 meetings in 2013 with different stake-holder groups.
Attendees at the forums ranked the top five health issues, and
they were all behavioral health related. The issues included
alcohol and substance abuse; child abuse; access to mental
health care; depression and suicide; and domestic violence and
sexual assault. "We don't believe these issues are unique to
Mat-Su, but are, in fact, relevant to communities across
Alaska." She noted that Matanuska-Susitna is home to the Goose
Creek Correctional Center, and the majority of those who are
incarcerated suffer from behavioral health issues and will be
released back into the Matanuska-Susitna community. There is a
meaningful shift across the nation away from incarceration and
toward evidence-based smart justice strategies to protect public
safety and help Alaskans reintegrate back into their
communities.
2:09:15 PM
MS. RIPLEY said that the state is concerned about the costs of
Goose Creek, and people should rethink how criminal justice
dollars are spent and the outcomes they yield. Senate Bill 64
does just that. The Mat-Su Health Foundation particularly
supports the sections that increase the felony threshold for
property-related crimes, institute a 24/7 sobriety program,
institute the PACE program, require the Department of
Corrections (DOC) to conduct a risk/needs assessment on
offenders, establish a fund for treatment programs that reduce
recidivism, and allow credit for time served in residential
substance abuse treatment programs.
2:10:27 PM
BETTY BAIR, Wasilla, Alaska, noted that she sent in testimony
regarding redefining sexual crimes "and all the surrounding
aspects." After listening to others testify, new issues came up
for her, she said. She noted two testifiers who indicated that
the state's tendency is toward punishment of inmates rather than
treatment. One testifier said that 90 per cent of crimes are
from impaired judgment. "Does that really make them a felon?"
she asked. She referred to testimony by Mr. Bair on the
previous day and stated that sexual crimes need to be redefined
to include only real sexual abusers and predators. She then
turned to the topic of education in prisons. "What kind of
education is really going on in our prisons, and how many
inmates are getting a career possibility before they exit?" She
also posed the question of what treatment is being offered and
to how many inmates. She stated that she is not getting
accurate answers from listening to legislative committee
meetings.
2:12:02 PM
MS. BAIR asked how many classes are being offered in the prisons
per number of inmates per institution. She noted that she has a
friend taking a criminal justice class at "the Mat-Su" who was
told that a lot of educational programs were offered, "but even
when she called back in, she was just told 'we're working on
getting more classes lined up.'" So what is really being
offered? she asked. She said she has only heard of three career
possibilities at PCC [Palmer Correctional Center]: electrician,
plumber, and carpenter, and these [programs] are minimally
offered. She added that, "Only two people for each of these
classes, over an 18-month period of time, can have a career
possibility." That is not many opportunities for reentry into
the real world, she opined.
2:13:08 PM
MS. BAIR asked, "What treatment is being offered to our inmates
in real terms, and how many are able to benefit from it?" She
has heard that the best treatment offered to inmates is the TLC
program, which means Transformational, Living Community and is
only offered in the medium security area of PCC and for a
limited number of people. The TLC program results in 75 percent
less recidivism, but there is no counseling or treatment in
minimum security at PCC, she stated. She added that a person is
not even able to pay for a counselor for a family member inside
a prison. "Treatment and counseling are not happening inside."
She opined that the Recidivism Fund is good for those who are
released but the real need is for those who are still
incarcerated. "Help them through their issues all those months
of nothing to do but think," she stated. She said that inmates
need counseling so their lives can begin when they leave.
2:14:46 PM
MS. BAIR opined that if offenders are following all of the rules
and have changed, they should not be held to such harsh mandates
like no driver's license and long probation. "Give them their
life back." Some [past inmates] are tagged as felons, which is
enough to bear. "When someone commits a crime, whether it has
to do with drinking, drugs, sexual crime, or theft, the crime
then becomes an issue between that person and the State of
Alaska, so as the legislature of the State of Alaska, I feel
strongly that it behooves you to search for concrete answers to
the questions I've presented."
2:15:23 PM
CHAIR KELLER noted that the committee has her written testimony,
and he hopes the Department of Corrections will forward some
information on the questions she asked.
LISA RIEGER, General Counsel, Cook Inlet Tribal Council (CITC),
noted that she was on the Department of Corrections Reentry Task
Force and she was an associate professor at UAA [University of
Alaska, Anchorage] Justice Center for 11 years. The Cook Inlet
Tribal Council is in support of SB 64, which focuses on the
barriers to success for men and women reentering after
incarceration. She said that the Reentry Task Force addressed
the same issues of increasing success, saving state resources,
and reducing crime. She stated that CITC supports SB 64 because
it provides important new innovations to turn around Alaska's
recidivism rate. Alaska's new prison will be beyond capacity
soon unless the state addresses substance abuse and addiction,
which leads to so many offenses, particularly to so many
violations of probation and parole. The CITC specifically
supports the evidence-based practices of the 24/7 and PACE
programs; the Justice Commission; the Recidivism Reduction Fund-
which is visionary for long-term stability and represents
strategic investments for the state; and the felony threshold
for property crimes.
2:17:32 PM
MS. RIEGER added that CITC particularly supports the section of
SB 64 that clarifies credit for time served in residential
programs that contribute to reducing recidivism. She said CITC
has been operating Chanlyut, a rehabilitation program for men
recently released from prison or facing substance abuse or
homelessness. Chanlyut is modeled after the successful Delancey
Street program from California and operates on the principle
that reinforcing accountability for actions, learning a strong
work ethic, and having responsibility for others is key to
turning lives around without the use of professional staff.
Chanlyut is a 24/7 residential program located in Anchorage, and
since the start of the program six years ago, it has served over
175 men and saved the state millions of dollars by housing men
who would have been in a corrections facility. There are many
success stories, she explained. The graduates leave the program
having earned everything they have themselves. They have been
clean and sober for two years, they have a job, and they have
the where-with-all to set themselves up with apartments,
vehicles, and other needs from money they saved in their last
months of their residency.
2:18:47 PM
MS. RIEGER said that the key to Chanlyut's success is the
mandatory work component and the complete responsibility each
man has for the maintenance of the house and the program. "In
fact, income for our Chanlyut businesses support 35 percent of
program expenses. We describe it as learning to live life on
life's terms without the use of drugs or alcohol and with taking
responsibility for their lives through honest work," she
explained. Requirements and expectations for behavior are so
high that some residents have requested returning to jail rather
than complete the Chanlyut program. The opportunities offered
in SB 64 align with Chanlyut, and CITC strongly supports the
bill, she stated. There is one change that CITC would like
under the Recidivism Reduction Grant Program provision where [in
order to qualify for a grant] the bill requires the program to
provide treatment for substance abuse. She requested the
addition of "if required by assessment," because if an inmate
received treatment inside the institution he or she may not need
treatment during the transition. The requirement could be a
huge burden for the programs and for employment schedules for
those working in the community, she opined. Only those who
really need it should be occupying space, she added.
2:20:41 PM
MELINDA MERRILL, Manager, Community Affairs, Fred Meyer Stores,
said she is joined by Scott Bringhurst, vice president of loss
prevention. She requested that the felony threshold in SB 64 be
returned to the $750 level. She said she is a little sorry that
she has to be the "bad guy" regarding the testimony, but the
Fred Meyer Company has a different perspective. Those stealing
$500 to $750 worth of items from the stores are not kids making
one stupid mistake, and they are not one-timers who just have
bad judgment or peer pressure. They are savvy young adults who
are making a living off the thefts and are part of organized
crime rings. She said that these people know Fred Meyer's loss
prevention strategies-they pay attention to this stuff. They
know what employees can and cannot do to stop them, and they
know exactly how much they can steal with regard to the crime
rank. They are walking out with things that they know they can
get away with and they are doing it multiple, multiple times,
she stated.
2:23:09 PM
MS. MERRILL gave an example of one person who the store has
apprehended 11 times since 2007 and who has stolen almost $3,500
worth of items, but he has done it in small increments. Only
twice has his theft been valued at over $500, she explained. So
he is a career criminal, and there is nothing to stop him and
nothing to get him into the system to start getting the help and
correction that he needs. She asked again that the felony
threshold be put back to the $750 level. "We understand the
realities out there of the prison system and the costs, but what
you do when you raise it that much higher is you assist the
career criminal and ... there's no place to get them into the
system and start getting them into the resources that Ms. Rieger
talked about."
2:24:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LANCE PRUITT asked about the potential impact in
prices to consumers based on changes found in SB 64, whereby
criminals will be able to walk out with higher cost items.
2:24:54 PM
MS. MERRILL said that, overall, these kinds of changes in
criminal limits absolutely raises the cost of goods to
consumers. "We function in capitalist America; we need to make
a profit; we have shareholders; we need to pay our employees
good wages because the communities we operate in expect
that...." When that level of items are walking out of the
store, it affects the price of goods. She said that does not
mean Fred Meyer will raise its prices in Alaska; the [pricing]
process is on a broader scale. Fred Meyer is in business to
give customers the best deal, "because we want them to come in
and get it from us," she stated, "so we don't want to raise our
prices unless we have to." She reiterated that the bill will
have an effect on consumer prices.
2:26:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX questioned if the reason why Fred Meyer
would lose money if this threshold were raised is because the
police are not going to investigate as much.
2:26:34 PM
SCOTT BRINGHURST, Vice President, Loss Prevention, Fred Meyer
Stores, answered that it is because the threat of punishment
that includes incarceration is gone. Over 2 percent of Fred
Meyer sales are lost to theft, and with the slim margins the
store operates with, [the losses] will increase consumer prices
at some point in time. The threat of the felony prosecution is
what helps the business, and he sees many thefts of items valued
at just under the $500 threshold. [The thieves] truly do learn
what the limits are and they take advantage of them. Often,
they get a citation, and in a lot of cases they will not get
booked or taken to the police station for any type of
fingerprinting or identification, he stated. The organized
groups are the biggest problem, and they will take advantage of
the raised threshold level.
2:28:34 PM
TOM BUTLER, Colonel, Montana Highway Patrol, said that in 2010
one county in Montana started the 24/7 [sobriety] pilot program
for second-offense DUI [Driving Under the Influence]. In 2011,
a state-wide bill was passed, which was updated in 2013 to apply
to crimes other than DUIs. The programs include crimes where
alcohol was a nexus and where the penalty was potentially six
months or longer. "We've got the program rolled out to almost
65 percent of the population in Montana," and it is now at the
point where the statistics on recidivism can be analyzed. For
the most part, the Montana program mirrors the South Dakota
program and people are expecting similar results. He said that
in 2013 Montana's alcohol-related fatalities were down by nearly
30 percent, and he is hoping to see similar results for 2014.
He noted that he described the program in detail to several
committees and will not take up the time to do so now.
2:30:43 PM
CHAIR KELLER asked if Montana has a limited license program for
DUIs.
COLONEL BUTLER said yes, and from his experience of 23 years in
law enforcement, he has found that in order to live in Montana
one must drive because of the geography and lack of public
transportation. "We get into this big black hole of suspending
people's driver's licenses for nearly everything under the sun
and it doesn't do any good," he stated. It can get people into
problems with driver's license points, insurance, fines, and
ultimately jail, and there are some people who can never climb
out of that hole. Part of the reason he was excited when
learning about the 24/7 program is that a person performing well
under the program can keep driving. He noted that he has not
read the specific amendment to SB 64 that came out today, but he
encouraged the committee to look very hard at it. He does not
have any statistics on what the suspended driver's license
problem is in Alaska, "but I would suspect that it is similar to
Montana." It is almost a feel-good issue where everybody thinks
that by taking away a license, the offenders are not going to
drive. "I'm here to tell you that that is not the case. If you
can keep people sober with this program and give them a
restricted driver's license, in my mind you're doing a great
service as far as safety goes for the citizens of Alaska."
2:32:25 PM
CHAIR KELLER asked for details on how the limited license works.
He asked if it applies to misdemeanor DUIs.
COLONEL BUTLER said the program in Montana for DUI [indisc.] is
for the second or subsequent offense, and there is a whole
scheme of different driver's license suspensions that are built
into that based on the offense. But offenders who enter the
24/7 program are allowed to obtain a restricted driver's license
to drive to work or to the doctor, for example. Traditionally,
the state would suspend the driver's license for a person who
was convicted of an offense. He said that [keeping the license]
is the carrot for entering the 24/7 program, and those people
would need to drive to work, the store and other places, so they
were driving anyway. The program is keeping these people out of
the criminal justice system because they are sober and they
still have a driver's license, he concluded.
2:34:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said the language being talked about is
the alcohol and substance abuse monitoring program, which will
require offenders to pay for the twice-a-day testing. He asked
about the cost of participating in the program.
COLONEL BUTLER answered that in Montana the cost is $2 per test,
which is $4 per day. The tests are generally run for 2 hours in
the morning and 2 hours in the evening. There was a portion of
Montana's legislature that was very nervous about the financial
implications of the program on a defendant. The average BAC
[blood alcohol concentration] for a DUI arrest is 0.186, and a
200-pound man would have to spend $11 to $25 to get to that BAC
level, and "we have yet to see any sort of financial problems
related to this program in all the jurisdictions where it has
been rolled out across the state." Other vices are paired up
with alcohol use, and when alcohol is taken away from people it
leaves them with more money.
2:36:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that Alaska has large areas
without roads so he is not sure how the program would work. He
gave the example of a person from a village getting a DUI in
Anchorage and going back to the village where the person may
live a subsistence life style.
2:37:38 PM
COLONEL BUTLER said Montana wrote the law to allow the judiciary
to determine if the 24/7 program was a good fit for each person.
If there are no roads and a person does not have a car, there
may not be a benefit to twice daily testing. There may not be
enough people in the village to warrant a testing facility, he
added. He noted that Helena is the state capital of Montana, and
82 miles to the north is a town called Augusta, which is in the
same county. He said there was no way someone would be forced
to drive that distance twice a day round trip. So, the state
chose to use transdermal alcohol monitoring or SCRAM bracelets
for those people who could not easily access a testing center.
2:39:26 PM
CHAIR KELLER noted that the language in SB 64 contains "if
practicable" in order to address those situations.
CHRIS NETTELS, President and Owner, GeoTek Alaska, said he is
concerned with the felony/misdemeanor threshold in SB 64 and is
testifying on behalf of his company and the National Federation
of Independent Businesses. Theft is wrong and it is a pet peeve
of his as a business owner. His company has had numerous thefts
and attempts at theft, and it is not just a young person who is
impaired by drinking-these are people who come around,
particularly on a Saturday night, to industrial sites in
Anchorage and help themselves to whatever they can get. He said
his company does a lot of work under municipal, state, and
federal contracts, and the contracts are getting extremely
competitive. He noted that he just won a $350,000 contract by
less than $500.
2:42:27 PM
CHAIR KELLER said there are no more speakers, but public
testimony will remain open.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked if the Department of Law still does
plea bargaining. If there were a low felony theft threshold,
would DOL have the discretion to enter into plea bargaining for
first offenders?
ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General, Legal Services
Section, Criminal Division, Department of Law (DOL), said she
would be better prepared if she had known the question was
coming up. Certain cases use plea bargaining, but the state no
longer does sentence bargaining for certain person crimes, but
she would like to review the policy, she said.
2:45:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked Ms. Carpeneti for the various
kinds of bargaining definitions and the state's policies. He
said he is also confused by the different types of immunity, and
he would like that information as well.
MS. CARPENETI said immunity is not something that the DOL has a
policy on, it is the law.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG requested the definition of immunity.
CHAIR KELLER set aside SB 64.
HB 282-LANDLORD AND TENANT ACT
2:47:23 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 282, "An Act relating to the rights and
obligations of residential landlords and tenants; and relating
to the taking of a permanent fund dividend for rent and damages
owed to a residential landlord."
2:48:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DOUG ISSACSON, Alaska State Legislature, said the
relationship between a landlord and a tenant predates history,
and conflicts arise when either party has unmet expectations.
Most people can describe what a poor landlord is, he said, or
what a great tenant is. But how do you codify this? How do you
put it into law? This is the never-ending bill, because there
have been many amendments, he noted. He told the committee that
he had a program called "Tenant Watch" in the early 1990s. He
had 700 landlords who asked him to help change the law because
there were things that were unfair to them. He said there were
also people asking for help with bad landlords. He took the
issue to Jeannette James, his predecessor, "and we were able to
address this body." He said, "Twenty plus years have evolved,
and this last year, through a series of coincidences, residents
and landlords primarily from my district and then everywhere; I
was like a magnet. My office was a magnet and we attracted
everybody's attention and the state's as well. And so there was
concern that in the intervening time there had been changes that
needed tweaking." He said he is appreciative for the broad
support that HB 282 has had from realtors, landlords, property
managers, and tenant advocacy groups.
2:51:23 PM
BRENDA HEWITT, Staff, Representative Doug Isaacson, Alaska State
Legislature, said the changes in Sections 1-3 and 17 just take
the word "uniform" out of the bill. "We no longer will fit
under what's considered the Uniform Landlord Tenant Act," she
explained. She said that only 21 states have enacted the act,
and they are under revision. "Landlord and tenant" replaced the
word "parties" in Section 4. Sections 5 and 9 deal with pets,
and the bill allows landlords to bump up the amount of deposit
they can put on a residence or dwelling for pet owners. She
said that Section 6 deals with the definition of "normal wear
and tear," and that idea was requested from both landlords and
tenants. Section 7 changes a semi-colon to a period, and it
asks the landlord to separately account for the tenant's prepaid
rent and security deposits. Currently people are required to
put that money in a trust. That money needs to be available
when tenants leave, so if everyone moved out at once, that money
must all be available, she explained.
MS. HEWITT pointed out that Section 8 gives landlords up to 30
days to return a security deposit if there has been damage,
which gives them enough time to assess the damage. Section 9
deals with pet deposits and gets into the definition of service
animals and comfort animals. She said Section 10 requires
tenants and landlords to have a premise condition statement
[prior to the rental]. Section 11 covers "dry cabins" if both
parties agree. In the uniform law, hot running water was
required, but some places in Alaska do not have [plumbing]. She
said that Section 12 allows the landlord to restrict the number
of inhabitants in a dwelling, and there is an amendment
addressing that issue. She noted that Representative Isaacson
is in favor of all four amendments that have been offered.
2:59:16 PM
MS. HEWITT said Section 13 asks the tenant to leave the dwelling
in the same condition [as when the tenant moved in]. If the
carpets had been professionally cleaned, the tenant should be
required to do the same. She said Section 14 is important and
allows victims of domestic violence to be able to leave the
facility with immediacy. The violence needs to have been
reported to the police, she explained.
3:00:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT asked about a scenario when the partner of
an individual commits a crime and that person was the
breadwinner. He wondered if that situation would be in the same
vein as a domestic violence situation.
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON said that was a great question, but he
does not believe that such a scenario is covered in HB 282.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked how the law would work if someone
was acquitted of domestic violence after the lease was
terminated. "Would the lease get reinstated?"
3:02:09 PM
MS. HEWITT stated that the perpetrator may still be in the
apartment, but the provision allows the victim out of the
financial requirements.
MS. HEWITT noted that Section 15 allows a landlord to remove a
tenant for illegal activities. For example, if the place is a
crack house, "you can get him out in 24 hours instead of the 14
days it takes now." Section 16 defines transient occupancy, and
there is an amendment before the committee to remove it.
Section 18 deals with the landlord attaching the PFD [Alaska
Permanent Fund] of a tenant who owes money, she said.
REPRESENTATIVE ISSACSON said, "What we're trying to do is create
safe, affordable housing. To do that, you have to give
protections to the landlord to be able to recoup expenses and to
be able to protect the other tenants." Safe and affordable
housing must also protect tenants against abusive landlords, he
added. This is the fallback to tenant-landlord contracts, which
are not disallowed. He stated that the bill establishes a
relationship that is often misunderstood or abused and which may
not even be covered by a contract.
3:04:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked about "who gets what back." It
is important to state that if the security deposit is put into
an interest bearing account, the landlord owns the interest-
"otherwise you're giving pennies back to all kinds of people."
He said he is concerned about Section 17 and the relationship
between this and the Uniform Act. At some point, he would like
to know why the Landlord Tenant Act will no longer be uniform
and what will happen if the Uniform Act is updated. He said
"we" regularly look at uniform acts, and "I want to be careful
that we try to see what we can do to keep it uniform," which is
very helpful because of the decisions from states all over the
country. If there are just a few sections that make the act not
uniform, "then most ... will still look at the uniform act,"
which is why he is concerned about the title misleading people.
3:05:49 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ISSACSON said, "This is one of those that legal
[Legislative Legal Affairs] asked us to remove and so they have
the definitive explanation as to why this is not uniform."
CHAIR KELLER noted that SB 64 is a priority in this committee.
He told Representative Isaacson to work out the questions with
the people who raised them, outside of committee. "We'll get
back to [HB 282] as soon as we can," he stated.
3:07:17 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:07 P.M.