MINUTES SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE May 4, 1996 3:00 p.m. TAPES SFC-96, #109, Sides 1 (500 - 575) SFC-96, #109, Side 2 (575 - end) SFC-96, #110, Side 1 (000 - 360) CALL TO ORDER Senator Rick Halford, Co-chairman, reconvened the meeting at approximately 3:00 p.m. PRESENT In addition to Co-chairman Halford, Senators Donley, Phillips, Sharp, and Zharoff were present. Co-chairman Frank and Senator Rieger arrived as the meeting was in progress. ALSO ATTENDING: Laurie Otto, Deputy Attorney General, Criminal Division, Dept. of Law; Marie Sansone, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, Legislation and Regulations Section, Dept. of Law; Juanita Hensley, Chief, Driver Services, Dept. of Public Safety; Mike Burns, Section Chief, Municipal Grants Section, Division of Facility Construction & Operation, Dept. of Environmental Conservation; Diane Shriner, Division of Elections, Office of the Lt. Governor; Julie Tauriainen, aide to Representative Gary Davis; Patti Swenson, aide to Representative Bunde; Richard Vitale, aide to Representative Parnell; and aides to committee members and other members of the legislature. SUMMARY INFORMATION HB 211 - VOTER REGISTRATION & ELECTIONS Discussion was had with Patti Swenson and Diane Shriner. Amendment No. 1 was adopted and incorporated within SCS CSHB 211 (Fin) which was subsequently REPORTED OUT of committee with a $32.2 fiscal note from the Office of the Governor/Division of Elections. HB 314 - VIOLATING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ORDERS Work draft SCS CSHB 314 "J" version, dated 5/4/96, was adopted as the mark-up vehicle. Richard Vitale and Laurie Otto testified. Ms. Otto commenced a sectional review of the bill, progressing from Sec. 1 through 22 prior to recess of the meeting. HB 401 - REVENUE BONDS: WATER AND WASTE PROJECTS Co-chairman Halford explained the purpose of the bill. CSHB 401 (Res) was subsequently REPORTED OUT of committee with zero fiscal notes from the Dept. of Environmental Conservation and the Dept. of Revenue. HB 517 - MOTOR VEHICLES: REGULATION AND INSURANCE Julie Tauriainen and Juanita Hensley testified. An amendment by Senator Donley was adopted for incorporation within a SCS CSHB 517 (Fin) which was REPORTED OUT of committee with zero fiscal notes from the Dept. of Public Safety and the Dept. of Transportation and Public Facilities. CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 517(TRA)(title am) An Act relating to motor vehicle records and hearings of the Department of Public Safety; increasing the period under which a person may drive a motor vehicle under a temporary permit; relating to ownership of certain abandoned motor vehicles; relating to suspension or revocation of a motor vehicle registration or special permit; relating to renewal of a driver's license by mail; relating to procedures applicable to administrative revocation of a driver's license; relating to commercial driver training schools; increasing the property damage amounts for proof of financial responsibility and proof of motor vehicle eligibility in order to lawfully operate a motor vehicle in the state; amending the definition of `commercial motor vehicle'; relating to prohibited operation of a commercial motor vehicle and to disqualification from driving a commercial motor vehicle; relating to certain notifications in accidents involving property damage; relating to motor vehicle registration procedures; and providing for an effective date. Co-chairman Halford directed that CSHB 517 (TRA)(title am) be brought on for discussion. JULIE TAURIAINEN, aide to Representative Gary Davis, came before committee. She explained that the legislation was requested by the Dept. of Public Safety. It addresses two areas: 1. The first relates to federal mandates required to gain compliance with federal regulations relating to federal motor carrier safety act programs, grant requirements, and the commercial vehicle safety act. Failure to adopt these provisions may result in sanctions of 5 percent of federal ISTEA moneys and funding from the motor carrier safety assistance grant. The state may cumulatively lose $20 million. 2. Housekeeping measures which will increase efficiency within Dept. of Public Safety operations, save costs, and expedite services to the public. Senator Donley directed attention to Amendment No. 1 and explained that it applies to the housekeeping portion of the bill. He referenced the current financial responsibility act. He then explained that in accidents incurring over $500 in damages for which an individual does not have insurance coverage or fails to pay for damages, the individual's license is subject to suspension. The proposed bill would raise the level of damage to $1,500. Senator Donley suggested that was bad public policy. The amendment establishes the threshold at $501. Current law requires that accidents with damages totaling over $500 must be reported. The bill proposes to raise that amount to $1,500. That is reasonable. The second portion of the amendment would increase that threshold to $2,000 simply to reduce the amount of paperwork in instances where no one was injured and there was no problem surrounding the accident. Senator Donley spoke against raising both of the foregoing thresholds equally. While increase of one merely reduces paperwork, the other has the substantive effect of allowing individuals to drive without insurance or avoid paying for damages in automobile accidents. END: SFC-96, #109, Side 1 BEGIN: SFC-96, #109, Side 2 Senator Donley noted that the proposed amendment resets the financial responsibility threshold at $501 rather than the statutory $500 in order to remain within title language and avoid need for the resolution and vote accompanying a title change. He then MOVED for adoption of Amendment No. 1. Co- chairman Halford OBJECTED. JUANITA HENSLEY, Chief, Driver Services, Dept. of Public Safety, came before committee in support of the bill. Mrs. Hensley pointed to budgetary reductions over a number of years and explained that the proposed increase of the financial responsibility threshold from $500 to $1,500 would be the first since 1977. Prior to that time, the limit of reportable damage was $200. The increase does not mean that individuals do not have to carry insurance. Prior to registering a vehicle, the department requires certification (on the vehicle registration application) that the vehicle is covered by insurance for liability limits required by law. Failure to maintain insurance following application would result in unsworn falsification for which prosecution may occur. Mrs. Hensley said she did not have a problem with the latter portion of Amendment No. 1 (Page 2, lines 8 through 16). She expressed a preference for maintaining the limitation at which a driver license would be suspended at $1,500 to provide more efficient operation of the department. She attested to the fact that $500 in damage could be merely "a little ding in a door." She then distributed photos evidencing $2,800 in vehicle damage. Mrs. Hensley next attested to impact of the present $500 limit on the Dept. of Law, the Court System, and Dept. of Corrections. The proposed $1,500 threshold has nothing to do with whether or not an individual has insurance. The department would continue to suspend the driver license if an individual fails to submit proof of insurance at the $1,500 limit. The affidavit of insurance would also continue to be a requirement at the time of registration. Senator Donley suggested that the real issue is, "At what level or amount of damage do we want somebody to be able to escape any sanction for, without paying for, and without having insurance for?" The amount of the accident damage is irrelevant. The Senator further spoke to enforcement problems associated with the higher threshold. Senator Donley mentioned that fiscal notes do not reflect cost savings from increased thresholds. He reiterated that the bill would have a detrimental impact on constituents who are hit by an uninsured driver and sustain $1,400 in damage for which there is no state enforcement of statutory violations. Mrs. Hensley again attested to efficiencies to be gained by the increase. Police departments often do not respond to an accident unless there is $1,500 to $2,500 in damage. Many accidents are presently unreported. Senator Donley acknowledged that reporting is not mandatory. He reiterated that the proposed amendment would provide the option of reporting an accident when an individual has broken the law. Mrs. Hensley noted that the financial responsibility section (four positions) in driver services was deleted from the Governor's budget. The budget also indicates that the division of motor vehicles, driver services section, was eliminating the financial responsibility section that suspends the at-fault driver in motor vehicle accidents. It also states that the division would continue to process suspensions for failure to have insurance, but that it would do so at the $1,500 limit. Discussion followed regarding a determination of damage at the point of accident. Senator Donley cautioned that if the bill passes as presently drafted, "Everybody out there . . . will know that you don't have to have auto insurance as long as you don't do more than $1,500 worth of damage." There will be absolutely no enforcement of insurance requirements. In response to a question from Senator Randy Phillips, Mrs. Hensley said that department opposition to Amendment No. 1 is based on the amount of paperwork involved in the license suspension process when damage is not substantial. The division of insurance reports the average claim in Alaska, three years ago, was $1,600. Senator Donley said that increasing the mandatory reporting level to $2,000 would save considerable paperwork when there is no problem. The increase to $1,500 focuses on problem damages. The issue is compliance with the law which requires two things: 1. Insurance coverage 2. Payment for damage. He suggested that an individual who does only $10.00 worth of damage should not be excused from auto insurance requirements. Co-chairman Halford asked if an accident report would have to be filed if the accident resulted in $2,000 but the individual at fault paid for repairs. Mrs Hensley responded affirmatively. She explained that two separate statutes are involved: 1. The financial responsibility act. 2. Mandatory insurance law. The financial responsibility act says that an individual who causes $500 or more in damages in an accident and does not have insurance will have his or her license suspended by the department. There is parallel suspension. One suspension requires the individual to pay for damages. The other requires everyone to have insurance. A driver can be suspended for being at fault and causing the damage. He or she can also be suspended for not having liability insurance. If the damage is paid, the issue of lack of insurance remains. The individual will have to deal with suspension for that violation and will have to "file SR 22 at $500." Senator Donley said the question is, At what level does enforcement occur?. Under the proposed bill, the department would, in effect, no longer enforce financial responsibility. Enforcement of mandatory auto insurance would continue. Co-chairman Halford voiced concurrence with the department's goal of reaching to $1,500, except for cases in which an individual responsible for the accident does not pay. That threshold should remain at $500. Senator Donley advised that Amendment No. 1 would accomplish that goal. It raises the mandatory report level to $2,000. Mrs. Hensley stressed that the department would continue to require individuals to sign the affidavit of insurance at the time of vehicle registration. Approximately 11 percent of those involved in motor vehicle crashes in Alaska are uninsured. The department does not have the budget to implement and suspend drivers at $501--the threshold set forth in Amendment No. 1. The department will not be processing any financial responsibility suspensions. The department will only suspend drivers for not having required insurance. The only recourse damaged drivers will have is to file suit in small claims court for compensation for damages. Senator Donley noted that the proposed bill would also impact enforcement of mandatory insurance provisions by increasing the threshold from the existing $500 to $1,500. The proposed amendment sets the threshold at $501. Mrs. Hensley referenced earlier attempts by the department to increase the threshold to $1,500 and ultimate inclusion of a negotiated $1,000 limit within an omnibus fees bill. [Co-chairman Frank and Senator Rieger arrived at this time.] Further discussion and examples of provisions of current law versus changes proposed in both the present version of the bill and Amendment No. 1 followed. Mrs. Hensley referenced a situation wherein the injured driver had no insurance, and the driver causing the damage failed to pay and also had no insurance. She advised that three suspensions would issue. Two to the driver causing the damage for failure to pay and lack of insurance, and the third to the uninsured driver whose vehicle sustained damage. She further advised that the department receives approximately 20,000 accident reports per year. Senator Donley said that the proposed amendment should significantly reduce the number. Reports that are received will be focused on problem accidents. In response to a question from Senator Zharoff, Senator Donley explained that a decrease in reporting would occur because reporting would be optional up to $2,000. At the present time, everything over $500 is mandated. Co-chairman Halford called for a show of hands on Amendment No. 1. Amendment No. 1 was ADOPTED on a vote of 4 to 3 (Senators Donley, Frank, Rieger, and Sharp were in support). Senator Donley MOVED that SCS CSHB 517 (Fin) pass from committee with individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes. No objection having been raised, SCS CSHB 517 (Fin) was REPORTED OUT of committee with zero fiscal notes from the Dept. of Public Safety and Dept. of Transportation and Public Facilities. Co-chairman Frank and Senators Donley, Rieger, and Sharp signed the committee report with a "do pass" recommendation. Co-chairman Halford and Senators Phillips and Zharoff signed "no recommendation." CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 211(FIN) An Act relating to voter registration and to state election administration. Co-chairman Halford directed that CSHB 211 (Fin) be brought on for discussion. PATTI SWENSON, aide to Representative Con Bunde, came before committee. She explained that the purpose of the bill is to meet the requirements of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. It allows individuals to register to vote by fax, and it removes the requirement to sign an oath at the time of voter registration. That also applies to voters re-registering after a period of inactivity by voting a questioned or absentee ballot. The legislation also changes the composition of the master register and requires prompt removal of deceased voters and those convicted of a felony. It improves procedures for absentee and questioned ballot use, and clarifies ballot and envelope descriptions. It prevents the possible perception of a less than impartial data review board by excluding state employees, and it broadens who can serve on district counting boards. The bill further clarifies tabulation and security when counting votes and reflects the increased cost of providing voters with printed election materials. CSHB 211 (Fin) is a combination of HB 349 and SB 182, both of which had committee hearings and passed from committee, without amendments, accompanied by zero fiscal notes. Senator Sharp MOVED for adoption of SCS CSHB 211 (9- LS0616\Z, Chenoweth, 4/22/96), No objection having been raised, SCS CSHB 211 (Fin) was ADOPTED. Ms. Swenson addressed three changes to be made in the adopted draft. She directed attention to a proposed amendment and noted need to change terminology from "voter registration lists" to "master register" at Page 4, line 2. She explained that the master register would contain both active and inactive voters. DIANE SHRINER, Division of Elections, Office of the Lt. Governor, spoke to the second item of the proposed amendment. She explained that when Alaska gains compliance with federal law, the state will not purge voters until they have been inactive for four years. At that point, the individuals will receive notice which allows them time to reactivate, if they wish to do so. Thereafter, they will be removed from the rolls four years from the date of the notice if they do not initiate reactivation. Ms. Swenson referenced the third area for correction (Page 9, Line 3) and advised of need to delete "oath" and insert "declaration." Senator Randy Phillips MOVED for adoption of the three-item amendment. No objection having been raised, the Amendment was ADOPTED. Senator Sharp MOVED for passage of SCS CSHB 211 (Fin) with individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes. No objection having been raised, SCS CSHB 211 (Fin) was REPORTED OUT of committee with a $32.2 fiscal note from the Division of Elections. Co-chairman Frank and Senators Phillips, Rieger, and Sharp signed the committee report with a "do pass" recommendation. Co-chairman Halford and Senators Donley and Zharoff signed "no recommendation." CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 401(RES) An Act authorizing the issuance and sale of revenue bonds to fund public wastewater systems, nonpoint source water pollution control projects, including solid waste management systems, and estuary conservation and management projects; authorizing the use of the Alaska clean water fund to pay and secure the bonds and to pay costs related to issuance and administration of the bonds; authorizing certain measures to secure payment of the bonds; and amending Rule 3, Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure. Co-chairman Halford directed that CSHB 401 (RES) be brought on for discussion and noted that the committee had previously reviewed the Senate version (SB 207). The proposed bill allows for bonding based on the Alaska clean water fund. Bonding would occur at a loss but would spread the benefits of the clean water fund for a considerable period of time. Senator Zharoff MOVED for passage of CSHB 401 (Res) with individual recommendations. No objection having been raised, CSHB 401 (RES) was REPORTED OUT of committee with zero fiscal notes from the Dept. of Revenue and Dept. of Environmental Conservation. Co-chairman Halford signed the committee report with a "do pass" recommendation. Co- chairman Frank and Senators Donley, Phillips, Rieger, Sharp, and Zharoff signed "no recommendation." CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 314(JUD) am An Act relating to domestic violence and to crime victims and witnesses; and amending Rule 613, Alaska Rules of Evidence. Co-chairman Halford directed that CSHB 314 (Jud)am be brought on for discussion, referenced a draft SCS CSHB 314 (9-LS1090\J, Luckhaupt, 5/4/96), and asked that staff from the sponsor address differences between the draft and the House bill. RICHARD VITALE, aide to Representative Parnell, came before committee. Senator Sharp MOVED for adoption of SCS CSHB 314 ("J" version) as the mark-up bill. No objection having been raised, SCS CSHB 314 (Fin) was ADOPTED. Mr. Vitale requested that staff from the Dept. of Law assist in providing a sectional analysis. LAURIE OTTO, Deputy Attorney General, Criminal Division, Dept. of Law, came before committee and provided the following explanation: Sec. 1. Names the bill. Sec. 2. Adds domestic violence to the definition of "serious criminal offense." That allows a person to receive full attorney fees if the individual sues someone who hurt them. END: SFC-96, #109, Side 2 BEGIN: SFC-96, #110, Side 1 Sec. 3. Contains a conforming amendment. It amends stalking in the first degree so that it refers to protective orders issued under AS 18.66 and former AS 25.35. Sec. 4. Contains a conforming amendment which changes the definition of "enter or remain unlawfully," in burglary and criminal trespass statutes, to refer to protective orders. Sec. 5. Rewrites the crime of violating a domestic violence protective order so that it is an A misdemeanor to knowingly violate a condition of a protective order by committing further domestic violence, communicating with the victim, etc. It contains a clarification of current law, with references to the proposed bill. Sec. 6. The proposed draft deletes the previous Sec. 6 which said it is not a defense to violation of a domestic violence restraining order that the victim initiated the contact with the defendant. Existing law thus remains in place. Sec. 6 within the draft is a conforming section relating to "protective order." Co-chairman Halford asked if the protective order is a new order or a general term that includes previous orders relating to domestic violence. Ms. Otto advised that the term "protective order" replaces "domestic violence restraining order" language in current law. The idea is the same; the terminology is simply different. Sec. 7. Contains a conforming amendment necessary as a result of movement of protective orders from Title 25 to Title 18. Sec. 8. Amends the statute providing grounds for arrest without a warrant to include the mandatory arrest provided for in Sec. 28. The significant amendment is within the latter section. Sec. 9. Ties into mandatory arrest in Sec. 28 and prohibits an officer from merely issuing a citation for crimes involving domestic violence. Sec. 10. Recites current law relating to stalking. Conditions for release before trial in domestic violence cases are contained in sections specifically related thereto. Sec. 11. Addresses release before trial pending sentencing and pending appeal of a person charged or convicted of a domestic violence offense. It requires the court to consider the safety of the victim and the victim's family in addition to the safety of the public, prior to release. It also contains additional conditions of release that may be imposed on a defendant and requires the arresting authority to make reasonable efforts to notify the victim when a domestic violence defendant is released from custody. It also requires an individual arrested for domestic violence to appear personally or telephonically before a judicial officer prior to being released. Co-chairman Halford requested an explanation of the following language at Page 6, subsection (f): A person may not bring a civil action for damages for a failure to comply with the provisions of this section. Ms. Otto said that because the proposed bill would impose new duties on police officers to make mandatory arrests and for the prosecutor and correctional facility to notify the victim before the offender is released, the above language would allow the victim to sue for enforcement of the law, but the victim may not sue for money damages. Sec. 12. Requires forfeiture of weapons used in commission of domestic violence crimes. An earlier version of the bill also covered threatened use of a weapon or weapons. That has been removed from this draft. Court cases relating to actual possession are very clear. Sec. 13. Adds a new section to sentencing provisions to require the court to consider the safety of the victim before ordering probation for domestic violence offenders. It also provides additional conditions of probation in these cases, including a rehabilitation program for the offender (Page 7. lines 15 through 19) if one is available in the community in which the offender resides. Sec. 14. Contains a conforming amendment per the change from Title 25 to Title 18. Co-chairman Halford inquired concerning assault in the fourth degree. Ms. Otto explained that it involves causing physical injury to a person by means other than with a dangerous instrument. It includes placing someone in fear of physical injury by words or physical conduct. Sec. 15. Contains a conforming amendment. Sec. 16. Adds a requirement (Page 8. Lines 23-24) that prosecutors confer with victims of domestic violence before entering a plea agreement with the defendant. Senator Zharoff asked what would happen in instances where the victim has left the area. Ms. Otto referenced language at Page 8, line 6, and noted that the prosecutor has to make a reasonable effort to confer. If the victim is no longer available, the department must show that it made an effort to make contact. Sec. 17. Adds domestic violence to offenses where the court may decide that the threat to the victim should prohibit the defendant, when representing him or herself, from obtaining the address and telephone number of the victim. Sec. 18. Clarifies the duties of defendants and their representatives to identify themselves to victims and extends to victims of offenses with which the defendant is not yet but could be charged. Language covers situations where investigations are ongoing, but charges have not yet been filed. Sec. 19. Requires a defendant or his or her representative to inform the victim if they are tape recording a statement. The foregoing has been law until approximately six months ago when the Alaska Bar Association passed an ethics opinion saying it is unethical for any lawyer, such as one representing a victim, to secretly tape-record a statement. However, the Association opinion says it is ethical for a lawyer representing a criminal defendant to secretly tape- record a statement. The bar association took that action against the unanimous recommendation of its own ethics committee. Sec. 19 is part of Representative Parnell's original bill, specifically written to overturn the latter opinion. Sec. 20. Prohibits defendants charged with sex crimes from contacting victims or witnesses if the victim or witness tells the defendant, in writing, that he or she does not wish to be contacted by the defense. It further requires that, for those who consent to contact, permission for recording a statement must be audible on the tape or in written form. Statements that violate statutes are presumed inadmissible in court. In response to a question from Senator Rieger, Ms. Otto said it would be against the law to contact the victim if notification prohibiting such contract has been provided. In instances where contact is nonetheless made, the result of that contract is presumed to be inadmissible. Ms. Otto further advised that the presumption of inadmissibility could be overcome. That is spelled out in statute. The victim could sue if the illegal activity occurred. Sec. 21. Sets out definitions that apply to Secs. 18 to 20. Sec. 22. Under current law, employers who employ individuals who have supervisory or disciplinary power over children or dependant adults can receive criminal records of sex crimes and other serious offenses from the Dept. of Public Safety. Sec. 22 adds domestic violence to the list of offenses for which criminal records may be released. Co-chairman Halford voiced need to adjourn the present meeting for attendance at another. He thus directed that SCS CSHB 341 (Fin) be held for continued review. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 4:10 p.m.