----------------------- Page 1----------------------- 1973-74 SENATE JUDICIARY COMf·1ITTEE TABLE OF CONTENTS 1973 MINUTES: 1/11/1973 -3/30/1973 1974 MINUTES~ 1/2311974 - 4/21/1974 (UNDATEDMINUTES ATENDOFSECTION) 1973-74 SJ MINLOG ----------------------- Page 2----------------------- I \ \ ----------------------- Page 3----------------------- I ~) 'v SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE January 11, 1973. ,', ~!~,t;:.: ~v~_~ ~ .' f .• ~. ,.' ) "t,· () J ,~" ~ .. Present: Senators Ziegler, Rade~, Rettig, Poland~ & Meland , Organization Senator Zieglerstated that the committeewill meet~(>nly when there is something to meet about, i.e., not. jfor the sake of havingameeting. He anticipated th~t for .the first month,this would mean holdinga meeting abo~t o~ee a week. ' The meetings will beconductedon an informal'basis~,but the Chairman asks that\whentestimony is being,takeri 1 questionsbeput to thepersontestifying thro~gh th 'chair. Any member whowishesto introducea bill through th~;. committeehas ·the automatic privilege of so doing. No-Fault Themembers wereadvisedto read the testimony of Mr,.O'a.:::'1 Porter and the chairman's- letter to· the LegislativeCounbil to gaina little background on the subj ect, whichis ~:;ee:n to beone of themajor issues confronting the legislatrn~e this session . "\.~<:' Additiona-l background material will beavailableand may be obtained from the committee secretary_ Paula Sampson Secretary / ----------------------- Page 4----------------------- SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE January 17, 1973 Present: Senators Ziegler,Rettig, Meland, Poland,and Senator Groh Absent:Senator Rader" Senate Bill 42 This bill would provide for a raise in the compensation paid to Supreme Court Justices(from $36,000.00 to $42,500.00)and Superior Court Judges (from $33,000.00to $40,000.00). It puts the Justiceson a par with judges of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and Superior Court Judges on a par with judgesof the United States District Court. It was conceded that it is difficult to get men of high cali- ber to serve on the bench unlessthe salariesare made more attractive. SenatorGroh added that the Senate Finance Committeeis con- ducting researchon this subject. Senator Melandinquired as to the salary raise status of district magistrates. Senator Zieglerstated that he had receivedcorrespondencefrom Carl Heinmiller,district magis- trate in Haines, indicatingthat a raise was desiredand that representatives speaking on behalf of the magistrateswould probably be appearing beforethe committee on this matter. The committee agreed to wait until a request had been made to introduce a bill to raise the salariesof magistrates. ----------------------- Page 5----------------------- h 'I :J SENATEJUDICIARY COMMITTEE January22,1973 Present: Senators Ziegler, Meland, PolandandRader;Senator Croft Excused: SenatorRettig SB 54- UniformResidentialLandlord and TenantAct Mr. Ray Preston fromthe Attorney General's officeexplained the purpose and justificationfor the bill. Basically it is to providetenants withmethods of recoursewhere otheraction has failed. In Alaskatoday, thereis a seller's market as far as rentals are concerned, and it is oftennecessary for a tenant to settle for substandard housingin order to have someplace to live. Neither city norstate housing codesare enforced, and thetenantis left without a remedy. Leaseagreements arearb·itrary~ and the tenant is not in a position to negotiate.Security deposits are high,andpor- tionscan be withheld by thelandlord with no explanation as to the alleged damagedoneby the tenant. Trendsandcourtdecisions of recentyearspointoutthat this isone area whichbadlyneedsreform.Courtsare trying to rebalance theold landl·ord-tenant relationshipleft over fromcommonlaw. Examples of commonlawinequities arethe landlord not beingrequired to mitigate damages and therequire- ment thatthe tenant mustshow someaffirmative act on the part of the landlord in orderto proveconstructiveeviction. He notedthat·· the veryfact thatthe Uniform Act Commissioners deemedthisareaimportant enoughto draftlegislation on the subject is an indication that theproposed changes should be made. Therewereonly twosubstantive differences between theoriginal UniformActand the version submitted by theadministration: 1.Requiring that thelandlord pay interest on the tenant's security deposit according to thelegalrate of interest at the timethe money is being held. This wasfelt to be onlyfair,sincethe moneyreally still belongs to the tenant. 2.Excusing thelandlord fromfurnishing modern facilities in areaswherethelack of themis probably one reason _~ ... the tenant choseto Iivethere. Examp les of this wouldbe foundin the bushwherethe tenant has consciously chosen "frontier" living and wherethe lackof sewer, electrical systems, etc. wouldmakeit particularly onerous for thelandlord. if he hadto providethem. In response to a question from Senator Rader, Mr.Prestonex- plained that thestate housing codeis enforced by the Department of HealthandSocialServices, but thatthereareonly oneor two people chargedwiththe responsibilityandthereis no overall pr9gram concerning the code. The largerAlaskan cities also havea housing code, butthe sameenforcement problems exist. Whilesubstandard housing is one of the problems whichthe bill seeksto correct, mer~ enforcement of alreadyexisting housin~: codeswoul~not bea satisfactory substitute for enacting the bill,sincethe latter is much.broader.~in scope.Itsapproachto ~~ ~----________________________________~____~__~$l~______________~#c"___ "~.. 1 ----------------------- Page 6----------------------- . January 22,In "", II PageTwo thesubstandard problem by allowin~ the tenantto makerepairs himself and to deduct the amount up to $200.00orone-half the monthly rentfrom therent.Violations of the housing codes areviolations now,withor without the bill. Senator Meland askedif making improvements to rental units wouldnotinevitably result in rentincreases.Mr. Preston responded that theownerof a substandard building already hasquitea margin in whichhe can increase rentbecause housing of any kindis scarce and therefore at a pr~mium. Senator Ziegler askedif thedraftsmen hadintended to repeal thatsection of existing law dealing with personal property andrentalof equipment.Mr.Prestonthought thatthat was probably an oversight and indicated he would look intoit. He alsopointed out that,as written, the bill provides for double or trebledamages whenthe landlord breachesbutonly actual damageswhenthe tenant breaches.Mr. Preston explained that punitive damages were provided only for wilful acts. Responding to Senator Rader,he stated that thebill doesnot prohibit thelandlord from raising the rent inorderto cover thecost of repairs requested by the tenant, provided 60 days notice is givenand the raise is not retaliatory. AllenCompton of AlaskaLegal Services testified on behalf of a substitute bill written as a combined effort of his office, Anchorage tenant groups, variousnative assoclations, theLeagueof WomenVoters, the Greater Anchorage Borough Housing Agency, and others. He distributed copies of this bill to thecommittee, along with a section by section comparison of thechangesmade. Amongthesearea provision for subletting and assignment in whichthetenantmusthave thelandlord~ permission,a change in thesecurity deposit section which relieves thelandlord frompayinginterest unless the moneyis in a trustaccount or someothersituation where he himself is receiving interest, changes in the timelimit.sfor performance, notice, etc.to makethemmore realistic and consistent, andthe inclusion of mobilehomes under"dwelling units n in the definition section. Senator Poland asked if thebill addressed itself to the prob- lemof tenantsbringing inaddi·tional people.Mr.Compton stated that if theunit hasbeendesignated "singlefamily unit"therewouldprobably begroundsforeviction if the tenanthasbreached. To hisknowledge, twootherstates have adopted thisAct, one beingHawaii. Massachus'etts tenant groups,plan to opposethe measure because theirstatestatutes are already quitestrong in providing them withadequate remedies. Anchorage landlords serving on the Borough Housing Agencyhad no objectibns to the bill, although some realtors wereun- willing to endorse it and didnot. Thosegroupsmentiormed above haveendorsed the proposed substitute. In closing, he' mentioned thatover half thepeople in Alaska livein rental units which is a $60 million business annually, as he computed it, that goes virtually.unregulated. Thecommittee tookno actionon the bill, pending a studyof the proposed substitute by the Attorney General's offite.. ----------------------- Page 7----------------------- SENATE JUDICI~;MMITTEE January 29, 1973 Present: SenatorsZiegler, Poland, Meland, Rettig, and Senator Thomas Excused: Senator Rader CSSJR 2 - limiting session to 90 days The original resolution put an absolutelimit of 90 days on the session, with the opportunity to extend for periods of 10 days with a 2/3 vote of the legislature. The State Affairscommittee substitute shortenedthe session to 60 days, with the chance to extend one time for a period of 30 days. As a practical matter, the Governor or the legislature itself can already extend the session by calling for a special session Senator Thomas suggestedthe committee bring out another com- mittee substitutein the same form as that which passed the Senate lastyear. The committee signed the committee report as follows: Senator Rettig - Do Pass in original form (SJR 2) Senator Meland - Do Pass in original form Senator Ziegler - Do Not Pass in either form Senator Poland - Do Not Pass in either form It was noted that a typographicalerror in the original resolu- tion changed the date of convening from the second to the fourth Monday in January. However, it was not the intent of the Sponsor to change this date. Senator Ziegler informedthe committee that if they had any bills currently in the committeein which they were keenly interested, the committee would consider them. It is planned to hold one more hearing on SB 54, since quite a lot of interest has been generated by it.The League of Women Voters in Juneau would like to testify_A landlord group in Anchorage is preparing a section by section analysisof the bill which will be forwarded to the committee. Paula Sampson Secretary Senate Judiciary Committee ----------------------- Page 8----------------------- ffiENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE January31,1973 Present: SenatorsZiegler, Poland,Rettig,Meland Excused: SenatorRader Criminal Justice Information System' Mrs.CarolynBurg of Juneauvoicedher objections· to this chapterof the criminal statutes which was enactedlastyear. Objecting also to the Omnibus Crime Billand Safe Streets Act passedby the US Congress, she feels that bothlawsare an invasionof privacy and impose whatamountsto an added sentence upon any citizenconvicted of a crime. SenatorZiegler pointed out that thecommitteehad no power to do anythingat the Federal level. He addedthat last year's committee had workedon the legislation in question to assure thatadequateprotections wouldbe affordedall individuals. Theodore Sillmanfelt thatthe committee shouldinvestigate how the commission in chargeof the information system is carrying out their duties. SenatorZieglerinformed him that the committee has no investigative functionunlessdirected so to do by thePresidentof the Senate. He suggested that the questions be addressed to theAttorneyGeneral. Senate'Bi'll 32 - examination and treatment of minors SenatorZiegler stated 'thathe had heardfrom the Ketchikan MedicalAssociation, and that theyfavoredthis bill. It spellsout in detail whata minorcan do withregardto his own medicaltreatment.His consentwill be sufficient in all cases,with theexceptionof an unmarried girl underthe age of 18 who desiresan abortion. Senators Ziegler,Meland,Rettigand Polandall gavethe bill a "Do Pass" recommendation. HJR 11 ,;'~am It was decidedthat theresolution praisingPresident Nixon wouldhave to be rewritten. PaulaSampson Committee Secretary ----------------------- Page 9----------------------- SENATEJUDICIARYCOMMITTEE February7, 1973 Present:Senators Ziegler,Poland,Meland,Rettig Absent:Senator Rader HJR 11 - Gratitude to President Richard"Nixon A Com..mittee Substitute was adoptedby the committeewhich states thereasonfor and the purpose of the original resolu- tion in a shorter,less cluttered manner. All memberspresentfavoredthe adoptionof the Committee Substitute. CSHB 102 - Groundsfor dissolution of marriage The committeehadasked the threesponsorsof the bill in the House,Representatives McVeigh,Fisherand Beirne,to appearon behalfof the legislation.However,none of them were in attendance, so the bill was removedfrom the com- mittee'scalendar until such timeas the sponsors contact the chairmanregarding the bill. PaulaSampson \'''~'' Committee Secretary ----------------------- Page 10----------------------- -~ SENATEJUDICIARY COMMITTEE February 13~ 1973 Present: Senators Ziegler, Poland~ Meland,Rettig Absent: Senator Rader I' SB 117(temporar~ suspension civil liability/national guard) The Federal reference in the bill isto the Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act of 1942. Thiswould protect mem- bersof the National Guardfrom having default judgments takenagainst them. For example, a mangoingto winter camp forsix weeks whosewifefilesfor divorce whilehe is awaywill nothave thedivorcedecreeentered against him until hehas hada chanceto appear in court. If hecan notappear,a courtappointed attorney will appearfor him to represent hisinterests. Senator Rettig suggested thatthe language describing the aforementioned Federal statute might be deletedsincethe . act itself covers more thanthe descriptive language indi- catesthatit covers. Conceivably, to leave thelanguage in the bill might be construed as a legislative limitation on the protection offered bytheact.Thecommittee agreed unanimously to adoptsuch an amendment. All members present gave the bill a"Do Pass"recommendation. H_J_R__l_O__~(_C_~o_o_k__I_n_l_e_t__s_u_b_m~e_r~g_e_d__l_a_n_d_s~) The committee gave the resolution a "Do Pass"recommenda- tion withan amendment to rephrase an awkward sounding clause. ("notto appeal"was changed to "to refrain from appealing") . SCRfs14,18, and 22 (changes in the UniformRules) Theseresolutions are a part of the package of ninesubmitted by Senator Keith Miller to changevarioussections of the Uniform Rules. Sincetheseruleschangeswillalso be sub- mittedto the JointRulesCommittee, it wasdecidedto pass out of Judiciary only thesethreewhichmake no substantive alterations in the rules. All received "Do Pass"recommendationsfromeach member present. HB 85 (relating to motorvehicles) Underpresent law a nonresident mustregister his car with- in thirtydaysif heis gainfully employed in the state. Apparently a lotof peopleignor·e this. The state troopers havetaken theview thatbeforetheycan stopa nonresident to checkhis registration,he mustbe caughtin a moving violation.Underthis bill,thestate troopers wouldhave a chanceto go into various parking lots and ask theowner of a car with nonresident plateswhether or not he is gain- fullyemployed, etc. The Department of PublicSafetyfav- ors thebill,and it isalso a potential sourceof additional revenue .. PaulaSampson Committee Secretary ----------------------- Page 11----------------------- Senate JudiciaryCommittee February16, 1973 Present:All membersof tee committee Senator Ray CommissionerChapple,Dept. of Public Safety Ivan Lawner, AttorneyGeneral'soffice Ralph Sanders,Alaska CarriersAssociation . Senate Bill 5 Senator Ray,sponsor of the bill,stated that it was the bill's purposeto establishcontrol by PublicSafety over those drivers who, becauseof an increasing numberof violations,are becoming a hazard. Hopefully,by means of driver interviews,the bill would also providea means of causing thesedrivers to improve their driving habitsand cease being a menace. Commissioner Chapple testified thatthis same bill was before the legislature last year. It containsthe driver improvementcon- cept as wellas the punitiveaspects of the pointsystem.~He accumulation of a specified numberof pointsfor traffic viola- tions will lead to loss of license. The point system also pro- vides a means of identifying problem drivers. The proposedcommitteesubstituteis the original bill plusthe recommendations submittedto Senator Zieglerby the department. The AttorneyGeneral'soffice also has submitteda committee substitutefor the same bill in the House. The Commissioner stated that on the surface at least, the two bills appearedto be quite similar,and he wouldsupport either of them. Referring to the cost of the contemplatedhearingofficers and referees,he stated that it was his opinionthat this job could be performed by one of the officersalreadyemployed by the departmentat no extracost to the state.He did not feel that the volume of driver interviews wouldexceed200-400 in a year. It was his plan to use a man stationed in Juneau who would travel throughoutthe state as needed. It was proposedthat perhapsthe departmentmight want to lower the number of points accumulatedwhich wouldrequire a driver under the age of 18 to appear for an interviewin order that any problemsmight be corrected that much earlier. The point system is a means to require problemdrivers to appear an? receive help. It was also pointed out that once a driver has accumulatednearly as many points as he is allowed withoutlosing his license, he will become,in all probablility, a much more carefuldriver in order to keep his license, as he knows he is just a step away from losing it. The Commissioner wasasked by the committeeto study both proposed committeesubstitutes, and reportback with his preferenceand any proposedchanges the departmenthas. Mr. Lawner of the Attorney General'sofficeexplained how their proposedbill would operate..It follows the originalSenate Bill 5 more closelythan the other proposedsubstitute. It has a 6 point limit for any particular offense. Standardsare providedfor set- ting the points per offenseand for what action the departmentcan take, e.g., suspension, limitation,revocation,etc. ----------------------- Page 12----------------------- , '~ February 16,1973 PageTwo As a matter of information, Mr. Lawner mentioned thattheDepart- mentof Educationis planning to offer adriver improvementcourse at thelocal community colleges. Oneinnovation of this comm~_ttee substitute is provlslonfor admin- istrative review in addition to thehearing procedure.An indiv- idual would receive notice of what the departmentplansto do. Re would thenhavetheopportunityto askfor an informal inter- viewlimited to a number of issues spelled out in the bill. Five of these concern howthe points were calculated andtwo concern thedepartment'sconformityto theregulationsof ,the act.If the individual wasnotsatisfied with theoutcome of thisinterview he would thenbe entitled to a formal hearing, limited to theitems raised in theinterview. Thehearing officer in thisbill would beappointed by the Attorney General andnotbe affiliated with the Departmentof Public Safety. Judicial reviewwould be tothe District Court. Wheretheoriginal bill providesthatif points havebeenimproperlycalculated,the courtwill rescindtheaction of the department,thenewversion provides thatif therecalculation indicates thatthe individual still has a point countabove the limit, the: action of the depart- mentwillstand. The bill provides for a probationarylicense for drivers, suchas truck or taxidrivers~ whomight accumulate morepoints morerapidly thabtheaverage driver.Eventhough the point limithasbeen reached, thesedrivers couldbe issued a probationary license and still be allowed to operate their motor vehicles. Underthebill, a plea of n'olocontendere orforfeit,ure of bail equals a convictiori forthe purpose of assigning points. Action against thelicense is effectiveeventhough the actual license itself has not been takenfromtheindividual. Mr.La~Tner was alsorequested totakebothproposals forstudyand to report backto thecommittee ata later date. Senate Bill24 Thisbill would allowthose accused of minor traffic violations to admit their guiit by signing thecitation and mailing in their bail without having toappear in court. Theoption of so appearing, however, would still be openif the individualso desired.This wouldnotapply to majorviolations,suchasD.W.I.or reckless driving, wherea court appearance would still be mandatory. CommissionerChapple stated that the department.favorsthe bill, it would involve no extra cost,andthecommittee unanimously rec- .-ommended thatit do pass . Senate Bill 25 Thecompanion bill tothat just discussed,thisbill applies to the violation of municipalordinances,and substitutes the si3ninB of the citation for thenecessity of theaccused having to appear incourt, postbond,etc.before histrial. Bysigning, the individual agrees thathe will voluntarily appear fortrial at a time and datecertain. Thisbill also received a Do Passrecommendation fromall members. ----------------------- Page 13----------------------- SENATE JUDICIARYCOMMITTEE Public Hearing- Senate Bill 54 (Landlord-Tenant) February21, 1973 Present:Senators Ziegler,Meland, Rader, Poland SenatorZiegler called the hearing to order and explainedit was his intention to hear everyone who wanted to testify. There would be no action taken on the bill at that time, but the committee desiredinput from all sources in order .to come out with a final product with which everybodycould live. Mr. Allan Compton of Alaska Legal Services was the first to tes- tify.He had spoken on the bill at a prior meeting,appearing for Tenants' Actionof Anchorage. He also representsa group of welfare mothers in Anchorage~ most of whom are tenants and favor the bill .. He urged the committee to keep in mind that~the Commissioners of UniformState Laws spent three years preparingthe model act. They had a 27-memberadvisory board composedof all facets of the area--Iandlords, tenants, bankers,legal aid lawyers,etc. Presentlyunder Alaskan law ~ there are only threestatutes de~ling with the landlord~tenant relationship. One explains how a ten- ancy can be terminated. The others assist the landlordin recov- ering money or possessionfrom the tenant. Thus the current law is not adequateor equallybalanced. The Tenant Action proposaltakes the UniformAct (SB 54) and changes the following: 1.Adds a sublease and assignmentsection. If the lease or rental agreement is silent onthe subject,the tenant can sublease withoutconsent of the landlord. If there is a provisionin the lease requiringconsent of the landlord, the tenant must obtain the same; the landlord may refuse to grant permissionfor certain specified reasons; 2.Requires that securitydeposits be placedin an escrow or trust account, but does not require(as does SB 54) that the landlord must pay the tenantinterest on this money; 3.Permits greater involvementby the court where the tenant has asserted a successful defenseagainst the landlord in the followingareas: a. diminishingthe rent during the time the land- lord is not in compliancewith the law; b. continuirig the case for a reasonabl~ timeto permit the landlord to get into compliance,and; c. ordering tenantto pay his rent into a court account and ordering repairs to be made, the payment for which could be from this rent money, and; 4.Changing certainof the time limits for notice and per- formancein order to make them more mutual and also changing certain of the penaltyprovisionsto make them more mutual. These changesappear in House Bill 226 which is essentiallythe Tenants'Action proposed substitutefor Senate Bill 54. ----------------------- Page 14----------------------- '~ Senate Judiciary Page Two MrJ Compton stated that the Uniform Act was meant to put some skids on the det~rioration of housing. THough it will not up- grade that which is already in deplorablecondition, by per- mitting such conduct as allowing the tenant to make repairs and deduct the cost of the same from the rent, it provides incentive for both the lan'dlord and the tenant to invest some money in their apartments. It also gives the tenant statuatory rights.The rental market currentlyfavors the seller, and the act would balance the equities between these two groups.THe 1970 census reveals that 49.7 % of the citizens of the state live in rental housing.In the United States as a whole, this is true of only 7% of the population. In Alaska, the average is 3.2 persons per unit, as opposed to 2.7 nation-wide. There are 4.1 rooms per unit here, less than the nationalaverage of 5 rooms. Housing here costs 34% more per year. The average rent is $171.00 per month, as oppos~d to $90.00. The median value of rentals is 90% higher. There are 31,000 rental units in the state, and the rental industry grosses $80,000,000.00 a year, making it the tenth largest industry in the state. The act would give the tenant some bargainingpower.He is paying a lot for his housing, and not all of it is good.The act is basically fair and imposes mutual responsibilities. Senator Ziegler suggested. that what was favored was a recodification of existing law and that the administration bill could be improved. He then stated that there seemed to be a good deal of opposition to the provisionconcerning repairs made by the tenant. Mr. Compton explained that these repairs were limited to those which materiallyrelate to health and safety.If the landlord cannot or will not make them, the tenant should be able to. Senator Ziegler asked about the provisionwhich causes the landlord to pay for legal costs no matter which side prevails.Mr. Compton did not think such a provision was in the bill, and he pointed out that only certain people in the state can qualify for legal aid. Mr. James Landis of Tenants' Action in Anchoragewas the next to speak.He explained to the committee that his group is a division of' the Greater AnchorageCommunity Action Agency and its purpose is to help tenants become aware of their rights under the law. In one and one-half years, 1119 tenants have been counseled. However, Mr. Landis felt that this piece-meal,individualized method was not as good as having specific,de finite laws on the subj ect. He did not feel that presentlaw is sufficient. Tenants' Action took the Uniform Act and adapted it to meet Alaskan needs.They have received endorse ment from 15 groups in Anchorage. Mr. Landis outlined three problemareas in the landlord-tenantre- lationship: 1. Substandard housing--this refers to all that housing below the housing and health codes of the state, borough and city. THis includes inadequate heating, weatherproofing,wiring, plumbing, and the presenceof rodents.Under present law, tenants have no remedy.They can complain to landlord, usually to no avail.They can refuse to pay rent and face the possib- ility of being evicted.They can complain to the local health and housing authorities, butdue to understaffing and priorities these authorities spend most o~ their time checkin~ commercial facilities. There must be another method and remedy.; ----------------------- Page 15----------------------- ,I ''''-,) SenateJudiciary PageThree 2.Tenant insecurity--housingis a landlord's "market. The vacancy ratein Alaska is only6~, 3%for lowincomehousing. Therewillalways be another tenant to movein~ but there may notalwaysbeanother rentalunitfor the prior tenant to moveinto. THisdiscourages action by thetenant, and it allowsthelandlord to profitably allowhisbuilding to fall intodisrepair.Thelawdoes nothing to prevent this,and it should. and; 3.Proceduralinequities--of these thereareseveral: a.rental deposits--nothing in the present law evenconcerns them. Thereis no regulation.as to amount, whatcan be retained andfor what.As a result, thereis muchabuse in thisarea. Theonly remedythetenant has is tosmallclaims court,and it is almost impossible to findan attorney who will handlesucha case; b.illegal eviction--present law,requiresadequate noticeandthattheeviction be without force. This however,~ is ignored.Theonlyremedyis, again, to the courts to obtain an injunction. Thereis no punishment provision; c.invasion of privacy--there is nothing in the law guaranteeinga tenant's privacy, andit is a common practice fora landlord to enter the premises at will; d.distress--the landlord underpresent law has the ",-" right, albeit restricted to some degree, totake the possessions of thetenant whenhe is behind in his rent. Thetenant then hasto filean - actionto re~over his goods.Such a provision should be abol- ishedentirely, and; e.illegal leaseprovisions--there is nothing in present law which prohibits such things as causing the tenant to payall thelegalfeesor giving up his right to sue or assuming the obligationsof the landlord to repair.- The onlyrememdy is aninjunction or damages. In summary, in eachOf theseareasthere is no specific law,and the onlyrecourse is to thecourts. Thetenant, however, whois the least able,is theone whomustinitiate the action, and most attorneys are unwilling to handle thesekinds of cases.Noone is sureof anyof his rights, except theone to takethe matter to court. Thisis an unsatisfacorywayto handle thelandlord-tenant relationship. Passage of legislation would probably cutdownon the number of court casesin thisarea,andit would provide the tenantwithmoreprotectionand moreaccess points, thereby equal- izingandbalancing the landlord-tenant relationship. Senator Meland askedif obtaining better housini conditions might not automatically raisetherentto covertheincreased cost.Mr. Landisresponded thattheydesire onlyminimum standards. If the rental unitsare notallowed to become rundown in thefirstplace, modestmaintenancewill keep themabovethestandards.THebill provides incentive forthe landlord to do this. In response to a further question fromSenator Meland,Mr.Landis stated that only retaliatoryevictions areopposed.He recognized thatthereare instances whereeviction is justified. ----------------------- Page 16----------------------- \~ .~/ SenateJudiciary Page·Four In response to a question from Senator Ziegler,Mr. Landisstated that,in his opinion, the reasonfor all the agitation now, when the problem has existedforat leasta century,is that conditions are muchworsenow and alsotenantsare becomingmoreaware of the fact-they thatdo not have to sit backand take it; theydo have rights. Senator Zieglerasked·if perhapseven the proposed substitute was still a bitone-sided in favor of the tenant. Mr. Landisanswered thatbecauseit hasbeenone-sidedtheother wayfor so long,it seemsa more drastic change thanit actually is. He reiterated that whilesecuritydeposits should besegregated from the restof the landlord's financial holdings, no interest needbe paid. Mrs.KatherinGreenough of the JuneauChapter of the Leagueof WomenVotersreada policystatement based upon a consensustaken of the Juneau league.Theirstudy was of housing conditionsin Juneau. Thereis a lack of clarity andequality in the presentlaw concerning landlords and tenants. The lackof low rent housingin Juneauupsets the normalbalance and lets thelandlordtakeadvantageof his ten- ants.Thereis a needfor legislation to set forthrightsand allow improvement of housing.Thesespecific points werementioned: 1.rent abatement--thetenahtshould beable to deductrent in proportion to the lack of repairs, ~ 2.security deposit--these should beplacedin a trustaccount and the tenantshould begivena receit. Interest need not be paid,as it was-felt the landlord was entitled tothisfor the extra bookkeeping effort.If any of the deposit is retained, thereshould be a specific itemizationas to the reasonstherefor 3.subleasing--thetenantshould be allowed to do this,with the provision that thelandlordshould beallowedto grantor withhold hispermission; 4.termination notices--eitherthe landlord or the tenant should beable to give thirty days noticein a monthto month tenancy. The time should bethe samefor both parties,and; 5.broadequity jurisdictionfor the courts--in instances of retaliatory evictions or uninhabitable rentalunitsor rental agreements foundto be unconscionablewhen made,the court should bethe arbiter. The Anchorage Leqgueagreeswiththe Juneau position paper.The Ketchikan Leagehas not·completed its study,but agreeson some of the points. The majorproblemin Juneauis rehabilitation of hous- ing whenthe landlord has no incentive so to do. In response to a question from Senator Ziegler,Mrs.Greenoughsaid thatthe Leaguehad not considered thequestionof whetherthe 30 daysnoticeshould begiven on rentday or at any time withinthe rentalperiod. When the League favors requiring thelandlordto comeup to code, theyrefer onlyto the healthand hou~ing codes insofar as theyrelateto unsafeand unsanitary conditions. Adher- enceto every provision of the codeswouldcondemna great deal of property in the statefor use as rentalhousing. ----------------------- Page 17----------------------- I, \J Senate, Jud~c~~r~ PageFive Mr.Audie L. Moore testified on behalf of theAncho~age Association of Realtors. He began bysaying thatthere areobviouslybothgood andbadlandlordsandtenants. It isusually much easier forthe tenant torecover against thelandlordthanviceversa, because the latter has somethingof value against which a judgmentcan betaken, \ '~while theformer has'.:, inmany cases, left town by thetime the action isbrought. Hisassociation has studied Senate Bill 54 extensively and proposes a number ofamendments. They agreethat thelawasit now stands favors thelandlord,andthetenant doesnothave equal standing. However, they feelSenate Bill 54 goestoo far intheother direct- ion,andit would create more problems than it wouldsolve. 1.Securtty deposits--he did not favor theinterestprovision. Nordid he feelthemoney sh,ouldbe placed ina trust account. 95%ofthelandlordsin the state have only one tofourtenants. It, would be animpositionupon themtohavetosetup anaccount ofthistype.Neither would it serve any purposeif theland- lord is the only onewith access to theaccount;themoney is nomoresafe there thanin his ownaccount; 2. Unsignedor undelivered rental agreements--acceptanceof rent without reservation alone should not make theag~eement effective. If,ingood faith, thelandlord is unable to·deliv- er possession because theprevioustenant isstill there. Deliveryof possession should be added before the agreement is effective~ 3. Deliberate useof prohibited rental provisions--thisshould notbegrounds fordamages; althoughMr.Moore agreed that no such provisionscould beenforced,or should be,their presence alone should notbe cause for punishment; 4.Limit on size of securitydeposits--in some cases, large depositsarenecessary.There should notbe a toplimit. In high rental unitsof$400.00 or$500.00 a month, deposits of $1000.00arenotuncommon andarejustified; 5. Tenant'sabsence--the tenant should notify thelandlord if he will be goneformore than' seven days, sotheformer can check thepremisesforfrozen pipes, etc.Notification should bemandatory.a~d; 6. Penalties--triple punitive damages arefartoohigh. THis would tend to increase,rather thanlessen, theamount of liti- gation, particularly in thecase of unrel~able~tenants who would look foran excuse to sue. Representing theAlaska LandlordsandProperty ManagersAssociation was Mr. BernardL. Marsh of .Anchorage.Thisorganization studied, thebill in conjunction withMr.Moore's group, andthe proposed amendments aretheir jointeffort. Muchofthelanguage wasborrowed fromtheAmericanBarAssociation Uniform LawCommitteememo, the NationalTenants Association bill, theTenant Action bill, andthe NationalAssociation of Homebuilders. \~' Hisorganization represents 114 membersin Anchorage, managing 420D rental units. Hestated thattheoriginal bill wouldincrease the costof propertymanagement andtheamount oflitigation. This would bereflectedinincreased rental costs tothegoodtenants to pay for the costof thebad ones,whowould takeadvantageof the opportunity to harrass thelandlords. It would also eliminate much ofthepresent rental space andincrease theneed forsubsidized housing. ----------------------- Page 18----------------------- ~ Senate Judiciary Page Six Mr. Marsh pointed out that prohibitionagainst retaliatoryaction applies only to landlords. Tenants, too, are capable of such action, but the bill is silent on the subject.There is no mention of recovery for vandalism by the tenant. ...----. . He admitted that there is a good basis for complaintsabout land- lords unfairlyretaining securitydeposits. In summary, he stated that there was no objection to a fair bill, but there should be regulationof unfair practices by tenants as well. He requested a hearing in Anchoragesince that is where 50% of all rental units in the state are located. SenatorZiegler asked for Mr. Marsh's opinionof where security depositsought to be placed. In answer, Mr. Marshfelt that a s·pecial account would be satisfactory. The money could not be used for any other purpose,could not be retainedarbitrarily by the landlord,and could only be used to pay for the cost of damages, cleaning,vartdalism, or for rent whichis due. He gave as examples of tenant vandalismabandoning the property with- out notificat.ion and leaving it unsecured and unheated, not to men- tion instancesof deliberatevandalism. Although this is covered in the criminalcode, the landlord often finds that the tenant has left town and cannot be punished. Mr. Dwight Bowden of the legislativecommitteeof the Alaska Land- lords and Property ManagersAssociationwas the next to testify. He indicated that one reason for the formationof that group was Senate Bi 11 54. He, too, felt that setting up a separateaccount for security depos- its was an imposition,especiallyin light of the rapid tenant turn-over in the state. It is also an imposition on the tenant, wqo wants his money back quickly.The tenantis entitled to damages if the depositis retained withoutreason. The associationfelt that two days notice for the landlordto enter the premises was unreasonable,especiallyin the case of an emer- gency.They recommended24 hours. Mr. Bowden disagreed ·with Mr. Landis that there was a shortage of housing units.As a practical matter,securitydeposits in Anchor- age average $100.00-$150.00 although the rent averages $250.00- $300.00. If the landlord asks for an unreasonabledeposit,there is someplace else for the tenantto go.No maximumlimit should be put on securitydeposits. In the same manner, if the· tenantis unsatisfied withthe condition of the building,he can terminatethe lease after 30 days. He recom- mended changing"negligentlyfails" to supply heat,. water, or essen- tial services to "grossly neglects". In the matter of fire or other casualty,it was' felt that it should be made mandatoryfor the tenant to notify the lan.dlord, in order that the latter may act to protecthis property. The proposed amendmentsalso would change the ·time a tenant has to vacate after receivingan eviction noticefrom ten days to seven. Currently,the tenanthas ten days. If he does not move, it takes an additionalfour days to get an unlawful retaineraction to court.The court usually gives the tenant a few more days; if he still doesnot vacate, the landlord must go to court again to ob- tain a writ of assistance. During all of this time, the tenant is ----------------------- Page 19----------------------- JudiciaryCo~~{tee Page Seven living on the premisesrent free. Mr. Bowden also suggested includingsome provisionfor property of the tenantleft on the premises. Presentlaw does not provide the landlord with any method of disposingof or storing such prop- erty.The proposed amendmentsdo cover this problem. He did not feel that tenants should be allowed to repair and deduct, althoughit was agreed that repairs are the landlord's responsibility. There would be no way to control the cost or the quality of such repairs if made by the tenant. That they are to be made in a "workmanlikemanner"is not sufficient. No provision is made for taking bids, or for bonds or insurance. The Home Builders Associationof Alaska, Inc. submitted two addi- tional provisionsto Mr. Bowden'sorganization,one providing for a board of arbitration tosettle disputes in landlord and tenant relations,and the other stating that vandalism by the tenant of the property be made a criminal offense. SenatorZiegler repeated his question as to when the 30 days notice should be given.Mr. Bowden, a landlord himself,respondedthat it would be easier from his standpointif it were given on rent day. However, many tenantssimply do not know until later that they are going to have to move.As a practical matter,any 30-day period wOuld be the best approach,rather than limiting it to rent day. Ray Preston of the Attbrrtey' Gene~al's' office submitted that since neither side is really pleased with Senate Bill 54 it may,in fact, be the best balance betweenthe proposedchanges offered by both sides. \.~ He stated that he would be willing to eliminatethe provlslon.for interest to be paid on security deposits,neither side having favored it. He did,however,feel that the money should be placed in some kind of trust acco'unt in order to protect it. He did not think this was asking too much of the landlord.Even if it is an imposition, it is a reasonableone.The landlord should be expected to bear it as a cost of doing business,and it is necessary in order to correct the abuses of the past.' As for adding d~livery of possession to acceptance of rent without reservationin the case of an unsignedlease, Mr. Prestonstated that while at times this might be a hardship,it is this very instance wherethe tenant finds himselfout in the cold--often literally.He has relied on the rentalcontract, has paid his money, and is alreadyto move in.Some reliefshould be availableto him for his hardship,regardlessof the good faith intentionsof the landlord to have the other tenant off the premises. While prohibited provisions in a rentalagreement might not be enforceable,Mr. Preston felt that some punitive damages should be awarded for their presence becauseof the deterrenteffect they have on an uninformedtenant who is kept uninformedas to his rights because of the provisionsin the agreement. Answeringthe assertionthat the bill ~ould increa~e litigation and hence the cost of property management,he felt that, judging from the tenants' reactionto the bill, even if it does increase the cost somewhat,they are willing to accept this if in return they obtain minimum standard housingor at least the means of obtaining and enforcing minimumstandards. ----------------------- Page 20----------------------- I Senate JUdiCi~ Committee Page Eight Mr.Compton made a brief statementinrebuttalto some of the previoustestimony. Therepair anddeduct provisionisconditioned upon notice given to thelandlordto make therepairs himself.It should notbedeleted. In addition,it is limited to health and safety. Forexample,if the landlord had hadtheelectricity turned off, thetenant should be abletomakehis ownarrangements topay hisown electricity bill anddeduct that amount from therent. It isthiskind ofself-helpthebill is talking about.Theprovision isreciprocal, forif the tenant hasdamagedsomething,theland- lord is entitled to addthecostoftherepairs totherent. Mr.Moore reiterated his opposition to having thesecuritydeposit placed ina trust account. SenatorZiegler thanked all those whohadtestified and asked that Mr.Compton,theLeague of Women Voters,andMr.Preston prepare their written comments within theweekresponding tothe proposed changes of the Anchoragepropertyowners group. Thehearing was adjourned. Paula Sampson Committee Secretary ----------------------- Page 21----------------------- SENATE JUDICIARYCOMMITTEE Present:Senators Ziegler,Rader, Poland, Meland, Rettig ,~."1-7~ SB95 - Endangere'dspecies of wildlife This bill wouldprohibittheimport into the state or possesion within thestate of any animals or productstherefrom which are onthenationalendangeredspecies ~-list. Twoamendments hadbeen adopted by theResources Committee to correct a typographicalerror on line 10 andonline 19. On line 15,"issued under 195of this chapter"should be deleted, because permitsareissued undertwochapters,notjust the onementionedin the bill • . ; Senator Rettig suggestedanamendmentto allow those persons possessing thesubject productsor animals before theeffective date of the act toretain said products or animals without having toobtain a permit from theDept. of Fish andGame. Joel Bennet of theLegislative Affairs Agency wasasked by the committeetoprepare anadditionalsection tothebill to conform with Senator Rettig'ssuggestion. Hestated thatthereason forthebill was to put somethingin thestate statutescovering the exotic species onthelist not 'present1y protected by Alaskan law. It is based upon a similar statute inIllinois. Noaction was taken, pending Mr.Bennet'samendment. SJR 4- Cons ti tutl"ona:l 'aTIien~dnien:t/Att orneyGeneral Mr.Norman Gorsuch of the Attorney General's" office stated that department's opposition to theproposalto elect theAttorney General. Hesaid that althoughthisis the practice in 44other states, in those states theoffice andfunctions of theAttorney General arenotthe sameastheyarein Alaska. InAlaska, theAttorneyGeneral serves primarily as anadvisor tovarious state agencIes. Only20%of the time is spent in litigation.TheAttorneyGeneral is thelawyer forthestate and its agencies in their disputes with citizens of the state, rather than being the"peoples'advocate", as theoffice isin other states. / Hefeltthat the peoplehavea voice intheappointment through theconfirmation process andare, infact,assuredof better quality than wouldbe the caseif the gates wereopened toanyattorney who wanted to run. " Inaddition,hestated thatif the process were elective,thepublic would have greater difficulty in aSSigningresponsibility. In the presentsituation,all the respons~b~l~ty ~s centered ~n the off~ce of the Governor. Theexisting situation is preferablein terms of theprovisions fora strong executivebranch inthestate constitu- tion. Hesummarizedthe argumentsin favor of making the office elective bysaying thatproponents wanttomaketheAttorneyGeneral the ----------------------- Page 22----------------------- SenateJudiciary march1, 1973 Page ·.Twa. attorney for the people. Whilethis mightwork in otherstates, in Alaskahe is the attorneyfor the state,and it wouldbe in- consistent. for himto be elected. In many otherstates, each department and agency hasits own housecounsel,and the roleof the AttorneyGeneralis hence not whatit is in Alaska. Mr.Gors·uch did not recommend that Alaskachangeto any othersystem· thanis pr.esentlY· used,if for no other reason than cost. It is much easier andcheap~r:· to add more attorneys to the presentstaff than.ltohire separ- ate attorneys and staff foreach department and agency. The committee took no actionon the bill, but will waituntil the sponsor hasan opportunity to present hisarguments. SenateBill140 - UniformProbateCode This is a revisor'sbill toamend the Probate Code passedlast year as needed. It receiveda unanimousDo Pass recommendation. An amendmentwasadded to the bill incorporating thesubject matterof SenateBill 142, relating to bond requirements for personalrepresentatives.. ·Senate Bill141 - reside·ncy·exemptions '\----This bill clears up an ambiguity relating tothe priority of laborers and materialmen'sliens. It had beenrequested bythe Ketchikan Bar Association.It receivedan unanimousDo Passrec- ommendation. SenateBill146 - Unoccupi·e"dand occupied property The purposeof this bill wasto clear up a loopholein existing law, whichdoes not prohibit the unlawful entry ontooccupied premises. However,because presentlaw does allowentryin cases of emergency whichwould thenextendto occupied premises, no action wastaken on the bill. The sponsor will be contacted,and perhaps a substi- tue bill can be drawn 'whichwill do away withthe loophole,but in a muchnarrowermanner. PaulaSampson Committee Secretary ----------------------- Page 23----------------------- SENATE JUDICIARYCOMMITTEE March 9,' 1973 Present:Senators Ziegler, Rettig, Poland,Meland Judy Hopkinsand Helen Finney of the League of Women Voters Joel Bennett of the Legislative Affairs Agency Absent: Senator Rader HJR 20 This resolution would providethat proposedconstitutional amendmentswould appear on the general election ballot only, ruling out their appearing on primary or special election-- ballots. The League of Womeri Voters, at whose request the resolution was introduced,stated that because constitutionalamendments are so important,they should receive maximum attention by the voters.Placing them on general election ~allots only would provide this because the ballots are shorter, the elec- tion receives more news coverage, and more peoplevote in such elections. . Senator Rettig raisedthe questionof calling special elections for the purposeof voting on a constitutionalamendment. He feared that it would not be in the best interestof the state to preclude such action. The resolution was reported out of the committee with Senators Ziegler,Poland and Meland signing"Do Pass". Senator Rettig' signed) "Do not pas s unless amended." A second committee substitute was submitted to the committee which combines the best thinking of the Departmentof Law, Legislative Affairs and the Department of Public Safety. SenatorZiegler reviewed the primaryprovisions of the new bill. It gives the Departmentof Public Safety a great deal of latitude and alllows them to designatethe points to be assignedfor a specific violation.. No notice will be given by the department until the point accum- ulation reachesfifty per cent of the total amount allowed before license revocationor suspension.A person may not accumulate more than 12 points in one year or 18 points in two years. Driver improvementinterviewsare provided. If a person is involved in two violationssimultaneously,he will receivethe greatest number of points possible) not a combinationof the two, but based on that violation whichhas the highest number allocated to it. Deductionsof two points are given if a person takes a driver improvementcourse. Points will lapse two years after their accumulation. No limited licenses will be issued. All members present signed "Do Pass. " An amendmentwas prepared to correct an error in punctuation. ----------------------- Page 24----------------------- senate Judiciary Committee Pg. 2 HCR 26 Joel Bennettexplained that presently coastlinesand'territor- ial limits are measuredby a three-mileline drawn all around the coast.The straight baseline method,which this resolu- tion proposesbe usedinstead, uses a three-mileline also, but for bays 'and inlets where the distanceacross the mouth is less than 24 miles, a straight line is' drawn acrossthe entrance, . rather thanindenting. If the bay or inlet is more than 24 miles across,the line is indented just to that point where the width is twenty-four mil~s. All members 'of the committeepresentgave the resolution a "Do Pass" recommendation. SB 146 This bill, in the form of a committeesubstitute, wasagain before the committee. Corrections have been made so that one may not enter occupied premises withoutconsent in the event of an emer- gency. One can enter unoccupied premises withoutconsentin the event of an emergency. The committeeamendedthe bill to delete the requirement of writtenconsent. The bill receiveda "Do Pass" recommendation from all members present. Paula Sampson CommitteeSecretary ----------------------- Page 25----------------------- SENATE JUDICIf\-qyCOMMITTEE I March 14,197Y' Present: Senators Ziegler, Rettig,lIJreland Excused: Senators RaderandPoland SB194 IvanLawner fromtheAttorney General's office explained the purpose and mechanics of·this bill which would removethe ambiguitiesin present law relating to revocation,suspension, oflicenses. There are fourmandatorysituat:tons: l)mansla.ughterinvolving a motor vehicle; 2)commissionof a felony in which a motor vehicle is used; 3)perjury involving a motor vehicle; and 4)failure tostopandgive aid when death or injury results fromtheuseof a motor vehicle. In these instances, thecourt mustimpose the minimum penalty. Thisisalsotrueforconvictions fordriving whileintoxicated. Thecourtcannot suspend this part of thesentence. There wouldalso be a minimum mandatory sentence in the formof a jailtermfordriving whileone'slicense hasbeenrevoked, sus- pended or limited. Thecommittee tookno action onthis bill. Mr.Lawner alsospokeonthisbill which would clarify the differ- encebetween reckless andnegligent driving.A caseis currently pending in the stateSupreme Court in whichit isasserted that the definitionsof these offenses are unconstitutionallyvague. Regard- lessof theoutcome of thecase,Mr.Lawner felt thestatutes should be re-written. Thedefinitionsusedin thebill come fromtheNew YorkPenal Code. Reckless driving isdefined as creating ~ substantial and unjusti- fiable risk byvirtue ofconscious·rtisregard or failure to perceive. Negligent driving is a lesser includedoffense wherein therewas bothan unjustifiable riskandactual endangerment. Bothelements mustbe established, and thus emergency vehicles areexempted, since theydo notcreate an unjustifiable risk. Allmembers present signed "Do Pass." SCR44 Relating to resource developmentand thefrustrations causedthe state by actions of theSierra Club andothergroups, thisresolu- tion,which directs theGovernor to in turndirect theAttorney General oran independentcounsel to institutean action for damages against theSierra Club et al., was reported out witha unanimous "DoPass"recommendation. ----------------------- Page 26----------------------- SenateJudici1a:r-y March14, 1973 Page two SB 186 This bill makesillegal theinstallation, as wellas the use, of eavesdropping devices. In addition,the penaltieswereincreased. The committeeamendedthe penaltysectionof the bill,changing the $25,000fine to $5000; limitingthe amountof punitive damages recoverable to not morethan Y .$5000; deleting that portionof the bill whichexpandedliability toa personwho permitsthe offense to occur throughnegligence. Theseamendmentswere adopted,and the committeereported the bill out "Do Pass". SB 185 This bill wouldpermitClerks of the Court in territorial daysto receivecompensation under the publicemployees'retirement system for the time they workedbeforestatehood. Pendingthe receipt of a costfigure, the bill was reportedout "Do Pass". HB 262 Addingthe defacement,destruction, etc.of signalsor barricades or other similar types of equipment found on constructionsites to the prohibition of similar action with regard to monuments,lamp posts,railings,etc., this bill received a unanimous "Do Pass" recommendation from the members present. HJR 35 All membersgavE? a "Do Pass"recommendation to this resolution urgingthe Presicentto take affirmativ~ action on the trans Alaska pipeline. HeR 62 am This resolution directsthe LegislativeCouncilto conducta study of the correctionsystem inthe state.The committeemade one grammatical correction, and reportedthe resolutionout with a "Do Pass" recommendation. PaulaSampson Committee Secretary ----------------------- Page 27----------------------- iI ~ SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE March 22, 1973 I ! i Present: ·Senators Ziegler,Rader, Meland, Rettig Senator Croft RepresentativeRahdo1ph Excused:Senator Poland CSHB187- relating tomotor vehicle insurance Mr. Bernard Kelly spoke on behalf of the Anchorage Bar.He had conferred with the Board of Governors ofthe AlaskaBar and had obtained their concurrence ~n the followingresolution, which he asked be ~pread in thevecord: RESOLUTION BEIT RESOLVEDthat the Anchorage, Alaska, Bar Association is infavor offirst partyno-fault benefits ) ofa typethat would giveimmediate payment for a reasonable periodoftime toall personsinjured. in motor vehicle acci- dents or wage and incomelosses, ,medical expensesand other economicdetrimentssuffered bysuch persons;provided, however,that this Baris strongly opposed to any scheme or proposal that would abolishor.limit theright of innocent victims in automobileaccidents torecover fair compensation for all losses sufferedas the result ofthe fault of other persons in the operation,use or maintenance of motor vehicles. Hestated thatit is nolongera questionof havingno-fault versus not havingit but, rather, granted that someno-faultleg- islation will pass, t6e questionis whether or not to have a threshold. Hecontends thatwithathreshold,people'srights will suffer.He favorsfirst partyno-fault benefits for lost wages and incomeandmedical expenses. Heis opposed toabolishingor limiting the right to recover for injuries which are the resultof another's being atfault. Court congestioncan be reduced without limiting the third partyright tosue. I Heobjected toCSHB187 on these specificgrounqs: 1. It removes the right of a personto recover forproperty damageor loss the resultof the fault ofanother. This is especially unfairto the poorindividual whose income may dependon use ofan automobile; 2. There is a seven daywaiting period beforeany compensa- tion will bepaid. These first seven dayscould be critical for someonewho is paidweeklyor who isemployed ina sea- sonaljob where the weekly pay is very hi~h; ----------------------- Page 28----------------------- r..... ISenate JUdiC~y Ma.;rch22. ,..1973 PageTwo 3.The bill contains a $2000.00 threshold.If allowable I medical expenses are belowthatfigure, one cannotsuefor I·painand suffering, unlessthereis "significant permanent I disability", the meaning of vvhich is veryunclear.Mr. I Kellygaveas an examplethenecksprain,or whiplash, which may result in chronicpainyet mightnotbe considered sig- nificant. Hecitedcaseswherean individual suffering from thiscondition has recovered up to $30,000. Withthis bill, if medical expenseswere, for example, $1500,thatis all an individual couldrecover, regardless of how much painhe suffered or for howlong; 4.The bill is not tailored to the losses of professional men or thoseowning theirown businesses; 5.Excepted fromits provisions arecases where injury results from defects in an automobile as it camefrom the manufacturer. However, no provisions are made' for defective maintenance by car rental agencies; 6.No mention is madeof injuryresulting from defective or improperly maintained highways. As the bill is written, therewouldbe no rightto sue,and; 7.The bill isactuarially unsound. Noone knowswhat the cost will be. Allstate Insurance Companyhas prepared fig- ureson the federal no-fault legislation, indicating premiums will go up 19.2%for highpremium payers,medium premiumpayers (themajority of Alaskans) wouldbe payingoneand one-half timeswhatthey arenow, andlow' premium payerswouldfind their premiums increased by 31.7%.CSHB187 provides for higher payments thanthe Federal bill,so it follows that the premium increases willalso behigher. According to a Department of Transportationstudy, 96% of all vehicle accident casesfall within the$2500 range. 98.3%fall below$5000. If first party benefits paidare in excessof these amounts, all but1.7%of the caseswill havebeentakencareof. Because CSHB187 purports to pay a lot morethanthe amounts afore- mention, wiping out all butone-half of one percent of all the cases, Allstate's figures are valid projections for Alaska. The public expectsthat premiums are goingtogo down,butin fact theywillgo up withthis bill. rlIr. Kelly thenproposed thatthe committee adoptthe Oregonno-, faultplanas a committee substitute.Theplancontainsnothresh- oldand does nottakeaway a third party's rightto sue. It has showna reduction in premiums.It pays$3000in medical expenses and$6000in lost incomewithout regard to fault. Payment is immed- iate. Oregon is saving money for themotorist without doingviolence to -hisrights. Claimsarealso reduced.Mr. Kellystated that he wouldbe willing to bringin the Oregon Insurance Commissioner to' testify if the committee so desired. ITheOregonbill isalso easyto understand.Theproposed Alaska PIbill isso complex that it would increase litigation just in its interpretation, and not reduce it. Undera threshold bill, sincethevictimis paying, he is insuring I himself fromthe other person's mistakes. Hisinsurance company is paying, and he becomes the risk. A familyman witha smallcar is a highrisk,and a truckdriver representsverylittle risk. ----------------------- Page 29----------------------- Senate JUdici~y Committee March 22, 1973 Page Three Once the insured has been in an accident,he becomes an even higher risk. This is very damagingto those in the low income brackets.The insurance does not cover property,eg. one's car. Yet this is where the highest loss is.Poorer people cannot afford to replacetheir automObiles, no insurance is available, and no recoveryis possible. Mr. Kelly did not feel there was any great public outcry for this kind of legislation. The voters in Colorado turned down the prop- osition by a three to one margin recently. He did not believe that the states would be mandated at the federal level.Each state is taking a differentapproach to the problem and acting in its own best interest. What is good for one is not necessarilygood for another. The federal no-fault legislation was returnedto committeeduring the last session,and he predicteda lessening of pressure from the federal level. Mr. Millard Ingrahamtestified, representing theTanana Valley Bar Association. They too oppose CSHB 187. He stated that because the language is so vague and complex and the definitionsso few, there is a potential lawsuit on nearly every line of the bill.Each controversyunder the bill must. go immediately to the SuperiorCourt.This would not result in a reductionin court congestion. He, too, suggested adoptionof the Oregon plan. Mr. Kelly added that it is known what the Oregon and Delawareex- perienceshave been.In Massachusetts,which has a $2000 thresh- old, the premiums were increased, becausecollision rates went up more than personal injury rates went down.Only 44 or 48% of the premiumspaid were returned to the victims.Previously,76% had been returned. He felt that no-fault was being pushed by old line liability carriers like Aetna who had begun to lose out to mutuals, such as Allstate. They wish to enter the health,accident and life facet ·of the business. The largest insurance companyin America is PrudentialLife. ----------------------- Page 30----------------------- SENATE JUDICIARYCOMMITTEE March 27,1973 Present: SenatorsZiegler, Meland, Rettig Senator Croft Excused: Senators Poland and Rader SE125 - relating toabortions Senator Croft stated that tworecent Unitea States Supreme Court decisions,Roev. Wade and Doev. Bolton, indicated thatl)during thefirst trimester of-pregnancy, thestate cannot regulate theplace in which an abortion is perfo::r.med,and2) there can beno 30-day residencyrequirement. Thesubject bill brings present Alaska law into conformity with these decisions. Senator Ziegler signed "Do Pass"; Senators Rettig and Meland signed without recommendation. SE219- exemptionsfrom execution Senator Croft explained thatthisbill also wasdrafted to bring Alaska law into conformity with federal law,namely theFederal Truth in Lending Act.Presently,Alaska is 28th in thenation in theamount ofits income exemption. Thebill provides for a 25%of thedisposableincome exemption andusesthefigure of$114as another meansofcomputing the exemption. Eith~r way,thebill would result in anincrease in thee xemp ti on. Senators Meland and Ziegler signed "DoPass". Senator Rettig '. signed without recommendation. eSSE 45 - Children in needof supervis~on Thisbill stemsfrom' a problem in Anchoragewith juvenileswho arechronic runaways. Underits provisions, a court could order a juvenile torefrain fromcertain conduct.Notsodoingcould result in incarceration. Senator Ziegler reada letter from former Justice JohnDimond opposing thebill. TheLeague of Women Voters also opposes it. Noaction was takenonthe bill. CSHE 102 - grounds fordissolutionof marriage Thepurpose of thisbill is to broaden the grounds forannulment, adding inability toconsummatethemarriage. Thiswould coversit- uations whereneither party wasawareat thetime of themarriage that it could not beconsummatedand where neither wants to obtain a divorce. - Senators Ziegler andMeland signed "DoPass". SB 218- Ad~pting Unif9rmCommunity PropertyAct , .- The committee·took no action on thisbill. ----------------------- Page 31----------------------- SENATEJUDICIARY COMMITTEE March30, 1973 Present: Senators Ziegler~ Meland,Rettig, Poland Excused: Senator Rader CSHB l87am- Relating to motorvehicle insurance Senator Ziegler explainedthe two committeesubstitutes that have been-drafted. Both are basedonthe Oregon no-fault statute, but one has a$500 thresholdand the other has no threshold. Thereis a penalty provisionfor insurancecompaniesthat donot maketheir payments promptly. If paymentis not made within 30days after the claimis made, the company must pay doublethe amountclaimed. If thedelayis morethan 60days, threetimes the claimed amount'must be paid. Prompt payment of claimsisone of the goalsof no-fault, but experience indicatestherehas tobe a kicker ofsome kind to makesure that the insurancecompaniesfollow through. Both bill~ providefor first-party benefits of $3000 in medicals and 70% of lost income.If the insured is unemployed, he will receive expensesincurred for 10ss ofservices in the amount of $12.00per day for not more than one year. '-'" 1 1 Thereisa$250 deductibleprovision, and aprovisionfor right j ofsubrogation. l l 1 1 The fuill was reportedout asfollows: 1 I Senator Ziegler signed "DoNot Pass any of the bills" j Senator Melandsignedn"It" "" " ! ' Senator Polandsigned""" " n" " i Senator Rettigsigned "Do Pass SCS CSHB 187 (Judiciary' 1 PaulaSampson CommitteeSecretary ! t I I i I '-w' I 1 I ----------------------- Page 32----------------------- -..., - .... ----------------------- Page 33----------------------- SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE January 23, 1974 Present: Senators Ziegler,Poland, Meland,Silides Judy Hopkins (League of Women Voters), D. Clocksin(Lgl .. Servs Absent: Rettig Uniform ResidentialLandlord and Tenant Act Senator Ziegler asked for the committee's approval of the following approach to Senate Bill 54 and CSHB 226 amended: Rather than edtlcating the entire committee as to what was learned during the interim Landlord and Tenant committee hearings, Senators Ziegler and Meland, who served on that committee, would rewrite CSHB 226 am, incorporatingseveral changes proposed during the hearings, and bring a final draft before the committee. Copies of the draft will also be sent to all interested parties who have expresseda desire to participate in arriving at the final work product. Senate Judiciary will then meet with HOUS~2 Commercebefore any bill is brought to the floor to avoid the necessity of a free conferencecommittee. Senator Ziegler stated that he hoped all this could be accomplished by no later than ~arch 1st. The committee agreed with this course of action and approved the letter to this effect· directed to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House which was written by the special interim Landlord ·and Tenant committee. The letter will be read into the . House and Senate Journalson Thursday, January 24, 1974. Paula Sampson JudiciaryStaff Assistant ----------------------- Page 34----------------------- SENATE JUDICIARYCOMMITTEE February4, 1974 Present:Senator~ Ziegler, Meland, Rettig,Silides, Poland, Lewis Gerry Williams and Tom Zaruba of the Alaska Peace Officers Association CommissionerPat Wellington, Dept. of Public Safety Joseph Balfe, District Attorneyin Anchorage Avrum Gross, practicingattorney in Juneau RepresentativeFritz House Bill 285 - definitionof legal and medical death Representative Fritz testified on behalf of this bill.At one time, a physiciancould declare a patient dead when his heart and lungs had ceasedto functionand all efforts made to revive him had failed.However, with the modern technologyused in medicinetoday, it is possible to keep a person's heart and lungs functioningthrough the use of machines.There is no way, however, that the brain can be kept alive, and the purposeof the bill is to allow a physicianto declare his patientdead and cease to use the artificial meansof heart and lung stimulation whenan encephalogramindicatesthat the brain has stoppedfunctioning. Keeping a patient "alive IT artificially only prolongsthe agony of the survivors. In addition, this treatmentis very costly and intensivecare units are tied up when thereis a need for them to be availablefor other patients. There is no connectionbetween the purpose of this bill and the concept of euthanasia. Every effort here is being made to prolong life, not to take it. The bill is based upon a Kansasstatute which has been in effect since 1972.It is endorsedby the Americanand the Alaska Medical Associations. Dr. Fritz stated that it would not interfer~ with instances where an organ is to be transplantedand arti£icial meansare used to keep the donor in such a conditionas to insure that the organ re- mains healthy until the transplanttakes place. Senate Bills 292, 296, 297, 298, 303, and 304 Before any witnesses were heard,Senator Ziegler stated that the committeewould be taking no action on them at this meeting as they were newly introducedand should be compared with the Gov- ernor's legislationon the same subject which has yet to be com- pletely introduced. ----------------------- Page 35----------------------- Page Two Mr. Williams of the Peace Officers Associationstated that the conspiracy statute(292) filled a serious omission currently existing in the statutes.Consideringall the activity to be generatedby the pipeline construction,such a law is needed. He agreed it would be advisableto wait for the Governor'sbi]-I He was not sure why indictmentcould only take place in the judicialdistrict in which the conspiracy had allegedly OCCUJ The proposed law contains the traditional affirmativedefense of thwarting the conspiracy, but Mr. Williams pointed out th~ the federal conspiracylaw has often been attackedin this areo because of the possibilityof entrapment taking place. The bill also contains the provisionwhich is considered to be progressivethat a defendant cannot be charged with both the conspiracyand the crime.It must be one or the other.If the conspiracy succeeds,and the crime is committed,he is to be charged only with the crime. He defined "overt act ll as any act which substantially progresses toward the commission of the crime.He did not feel that "casing the joint" would be an overt act under the proposedbill. The purpose of SB 298 is to limit the newly promulgated Rule 16 of the CriminalProcedure rules recently adopted by the Alaska Supreme Court.The rule relates to discovery.The l~gislature previouslyhad adopteda "little Jenks Act",basedon federal law, allowing defense counsel to see statementsmade by witnesses after they had testified in court. Rule 16 provides this information, and a lot more, to be made availablebefore trial. Although the current trend may be to allow broaddiscovery, this causes many problemsfor police officers and the district attorneytsoffice and is very time consuming~ tothe detrimentof the administration of justice. Mr. Zaruba, chairman of the LegislativeCommitteeof the Peace Officers Association,read a telegramfrom the Board of Direct(~s favoring SB 298. (This has been placed in the bill file.) . He favored the conspiracylaw becauseit would afford police Oll'ice.("s theopportunity to prevent crime, rather than only being abl~ to react to it.It would also enable them to deal with Ilwhite collar" or organized crime. CommissionerWellington stated that the Chiefs of Police Associa- tion had supported aco.nspiracystatute for some time. Alaska, in his opinion, has a great deal of crime for a state its size, which indicatesthat somethingis wrong.There is no organizedcorrup- tion within the judicialor law enforcementsystem, but there is a need for some betterlaws and some stricter interpretationof ----------------------- Page 36----------------------- Page ~Phree them by the courts.The seriesof bills under consideration, if passed,wouldgive the courts an indicationof the intent of the legislature. He felt that the provisionsof SB 304 (assaultinga police officer) could be abused unlessit is limited to situationsinvolving intentto do bodily harm. The rest of the packagehe supports withoutany qualifications, althoughhe thought the venue in 292 should be made statewide. Mr. Balfe explained whathe and his officeare confronted with in Anchorageas a result of Rule 16.It requires the spending of a great dealof time prior to trial making sure that the Qefense· counselhas all the information. This includes all police reports, lab reports,statementsof witnesses,etc.Some judgeshave in- terpreted therule to mean that all such informationmust be physicallydelivered tothe defense, and in some cases the defense refusesto appearon the groundsthat this has not been done. per year. Currentlyhis office is handling170 cases per felony man/.The recommended load is·50 to 60. Mr. Balfe deploredthe removal of the element of surprise from a criminal trial as a result of Rule16. He agreed that the def- endantshould have any and all information that would make his crime less seriousor mitigatesentencing,but he feels this rule goes too far. He indicated thatperjury had increased whenall statements were made availableto the defense.The defenseattorney is not supposed to make the informationavaiableto anyone else, but in fact many do. The provisionsof the rule are not reciprocal. The defendantneed furnishtechnicalreports only. There is no provisionof notice for an alibi.The prosecutionshould be furnishedwith the names and addressesof the defensewitnesses,but this is not the case. Such disclosurecould work to the defendant'sbenefit by revealing facts that couldlead to the dismissalof the case. The defensecounsel can ask for almostany kind of information withouthaving to show good cause, and in some instancesthis is used as a stalling device. In response to a questionfrom SenatorZiegler" Mr. Balfe stated that he does not favor mandatorysentencing. He will make his other commentsand views known by communicatingwith the committee in writing.asto the rest of the billsunder·consideration. In closing, he added that there is a law on the books nearlythe same as SB 296 (firearmsduring commissionof a felony),but the ----------------------- Page 37----------------------- Page Four State Supreme Court could not determine whether it was to be a separatecrime or to be used only in sentencing,so the law is not now enforceable. Mr. Gross was the chairman of the committ~e thatdrafted the new Rules of CriminalProcedure~ He wised to inform the Judiciary committeeof the make-up of his committee, how they deliberated, and what they considered whenwriting the rules. Members of the committee included the district attorneyfrom Fair- banks, two representativesfrom the district attorney in Anchorage, three private attorneys,one· of whom was a former district attor- ney, and three judges(Miller, Carlson and Fitzgerald). They used the originalcriminal rules, the federal criminal rules, and all state and federal court decisions on the subject, plus a pamphletprepared by the AmericanBar Association'scommittee on criminal procedurerules, which committeewas chaired by Chief Justice Warren Burger. * Draftswere sent to all local bar associ- ations, judges and police departmentsthroughout the state to solicit commentsand suggestions. Everyonehad a chance to review and comment.l1wo days were spent going over the. proposals with the Supreme Court before they were adopted. Specifically,Rule 16 provideswhat must be disclosed by the def- endant and by the state.The defendant has the lesser burden be- cause of his right against self-incrimination and also because the state in a criminal case has more than the burdenof winning; the state is responsiblefor seeing that justicehas been done. Under the rule, the prosecutionmust disclose the names and addressesof thos who have relevantfacts and their written o~ recordedstatements, in addition to any statementsmade by the accused or a co-defendant. Also to be' disclosed are statements made by expertsand any tangible objects which the prosecution intends to use duringthe trial or hearing which belong to or were obtained from the defendant.Prior recordsof the accused or the prosecutionwitnesses must be made available. If the defendantis guilty, and the prosecutionwitnessesare·tel- ling the truth, what harm can come to the state through this pro- cess, Mr. Gross asked. A situation where all the facts are known is much more likely to produce the truth in the long run~ In Juneau, there has always been an "open filet! policy.This has proved to expedite justice,facilitate plea bargaining and eliminate a continual bringing of habeas corpus' actions based upon "hidden evidence". * In fact, Rule 16 was taken word ror word from this pamphlet. ----------------------- Page 38----------------------- Page Five Arisk of perjury has alwaysexisted in anyjudicial proceeding of acriminal natureandprobably always will, but Rule 16 does not encourage orfacilitate it.~ If good cause isshown, the court may restrictdisclosure, for example incases where a witnes~ls life would beindanger. The defensedoes furnishthe state with something. The defendant must appear inline-ups; hemust speak for voice identification; his handwriting, blood samples, hair, etc. must all be furnished tothe prosecution. Hemust also provide noticeof his intent to. use aninsanity defense. The district attorneys onthecommittee did not feel that notice ofanalibi defense wasnecessary. Mr. Gross made himself available tothe committee to assist them onthis bill andany others involving amendments tothe Criminal Rules. Paula Sampson Staff Assistant , j } J t t ----------------------- Page 39----------------------- SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE February13, 1974 Present: All members of the committee Senate Bill 313 - relating to "bail This bill would allow anyone who had been arrested, whether for a felony or a misdemeanor,to be held up to 48 hours without bail on motion of the prosecutingattorney. The committee determined that if the bill is to come out of Judiciary,it should be amended and qualified as follows: 1. The offense with which the person is charged must be a felony; and 2. The motion of the" prosecutor must be made in good faith and for good cause, i.e., the person more probably than not would not appear in court if released, or he would pose a danger to people and the community. A letter containing these proposedamendments will be written to the Attorney General to see if thatoffice has any objections to the changes. Senate Bill 322 - driving under influenceof intoxicatingliquor or drugs This bill provides for mandatorysentencing. Senator Poland suggested that a definitionof "narcotic drugs" should be included in the bill.The Attorney General was asked to furnish such a definition. Senate Bill 355 - resistin"g arrest Senator Ziegler explainedthat, in essence, this crime is already bn the books in the form of disorderly conduct. However, it would give a prosecutingattorney a strengthened positionin a plea bargainingsituation. The bill received "Do Pass II from Senators Rettig, Meland and Silides. Senators Ziegler and Poland signed without recommendation. Senate Bill 337 - Pre-sentence investi"gat ion It is the practicealready in Juneau and Ketchikan for the probation office to furnish a background informationreport on an individual before he is to be sentenced. However,in Anchorage some problems ----------------------- Page 40----------------------- Senate Judiciary February14, '1974 Page Two have arisen in plea bargaining situations wherethe defense counsel,the districtattorney and the judge agree on a sentence which, had backgroundinformationon the individual beenavailable so indi~ating, shouldhave been greater.The bill would require such a reporton any person who pleadsor is found guilty. All members of the committeegave the bill a ItDo Pass lT recommenda- tion. Senate Bill 378 - prior servicecredit/certain employees SenatorZiegler explained the historyof this bill.There were two Senate Bills last year (96 and 185) which were introduced to take care of a small number of people who had been Territorial employeesof the United States Districtcourt system and who could not get any retirementbenefits*because they had been pa~d out of fines collected by the court. SB 185 passed both houses in 1973 and would have allowed these peopleto receive the same amount of retirementbenefits as all other state employees who transferredover from Territorialgovernment. The Attorney General,however, issuedan opinionto the effect that the legislation was of quest~onable constitutionality because it would provide double retirementbenefits(these clerks are eligiblefor a small amount of federalretirement). Therefore,SB 378 was drafted to eliminate thi~~ objection. The new language provides that the amount of state benefits to be received shall be reduced by whateveramountof federal benefits are received. The bill received a unanimous"Do Pass" recommendation. Paula Sampson CommitteeStaff Assistant *for their Territorialservice ----------------------- Page 41----------------------- SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE February20, 1974 Present:Senators Ziegler, Meland, Silides, Poland Representative Chance Mrs. Kaye Smith, Head of Adoption Services, Dept. of H&SS Excused:Senator Rettig House Bill 70 - Relating to adoptions Senator Ziegler reviewed the correspondence in the file, indi- cating that comrrents had been solicited from all bar associations in the state but that none had been received to date. Letters were received from Flay Ann McPhee, regional supervisor for the departmentin Fairbanks and from Sister Monica Heeran, former administrator of Ketchikan General Hospital. RepresentativeChance gave a brief history of the bill. There are currently only minimum guidelinesoffered in the statutes on this subject.The present bill was drafted three years ago by a committee composed of people with an interest in the subject, assisted by a committee from the Juneau Bar Association. It is based upon the Uniform Adoption Code, but several changes were made. A section-by~section discussion of the bill followed. The provision on page 1, line 17 refers to the situation where a married couple is separated, legally or merely in fact, and one spouse wishes to adopt a child. This would be permitted. nForum l1 on page 2, line 5 should be changed to "judicial districtH • ilLegitimated" on line 16 should be changed to "legitimize.d". On page 2, line 22, trIO years" is used instead of "14". The com- mittee felt that a child of 10 years would be capable of expres- sing his choice, subject to the ruling of the court. On page 4, several changes are made in the form in which the pleadingsare to be prepared.The child is to be referred to by the name he would have if the adoption were approved.This is to provide him with an identify at the earliest possible moment and to insure confid~ntiality. A substitute birth certificate is issued only if requested.This is also true under existing law. Page 5, line 17 provides a repDrtingoofall property of value owned by the child to be adopted. This insures that the court '- will take the possibility under consideration that the adoptive parents are more interestedin the property than in the child. ----------------------- Page 42----------------------- \~ Page2 On page 5::» line 23 "if available" (refering tobirthcertificates) was inserted to cover bushbabiesor foreignchildren whomay not have beenissued birth certificates. The prov~sion in the bill requiring an itemization of all expenses incurred by the petitioner during the adoptionproceedings is to preventabuses or the situations c.ommonly referred toas "baby buying. H As presently written,the bill wouldrequire not~fication of thedepartm~nt of each and everyadoptionfiledin the state. The purpose of this provision is to insurethat theOffice of VitalRecordswill havean up to datefile, including such im-' portantchanges as adoption. It was suggestedthat the bill be amendedto change "department" to "Officeof Vital Records" to restrict the provision and preventany possible capriciousaction by the department. In everycase, thecourt mustdesignatesomeoneto conductan investigation of the homeand background of the prospective parents. In agencycas~s, this wouldbe the department. However, in all othercases,the appointment is up to the court. Any suitable individual or groupmay carryout the investigation. Mrs.Smith proposed the following changesfor the committee to consider beforethe next meeting: On page9; line 7, after"inheritance" deletethe period andadd "unlessthe decreeof adoption specifically pro- videsfor continuation of inheritance rights." Thiswouldbring the bill intoconformity withChapter 61 SLA1973. On line28, changenone year"to "six months" . On page7, line 3, beforeHheard"insert"provided the report is filed within 30 days II. This woQldavoiddelay due tofailureto file a report. On page8, line 7, the residency requirement shouldbe madesubjectto the provisions of 20.15.100 (c). The committee will meetagainon Monday,February 25th,at 1:30 to furtherdiscussthisbill. Paula Sampson Staff Assistant ----------------------- Page 43----------------------- .: c_SENArrEJUDICIARYCOMMITTEE February25,1974 Present: Allmembersof thecommittee Senat ors Croft andT. Miller HB70 - Adoptions w. Themeeting on this bill has been postponeduntil March 4th at therequestof Kaye Smith of H&SS. SB388- Campaign financing Senator Ziegler requestedthat SenatorCroft investigate the financialimplications of thebill and have a fiscal note pre- pared tocoverthe following provisions of thebill and any others that might beinvolved: Cost" of thevoters f pamphlet Costof thecommission andstaff Costof maintaining offices Costof bookkeeping manuals,forms, reports,etc. Thecommitteeand "SenatorCroft wentthrough thebill section by section anddiscussedseveral proposedchanges. Page 1, line 13 - "municipal" was intended toinclude school boards.It was suggestedthat !fa municipaloffice Tfbechanged tr to"all municipal offices • Theprovisionallowinga municipality to exempt itself fromthe provisionsof the actat ageneral election was toallow some flexibility forsmall towns thathave organizedforthepurpose, forexample, ofonly electing a school board or forcities which havetheir own campaign financingordinances.Proposed amendment: H limit to municipalitieslfof lessthan 1000population • Page2,line 10 - insert "while attending meetings of thecommis- sion" after provision for$100perdaycompensation. Line 19 - Theques~ion was ra~sed whetherallowing the commission to hire alllTemployeesconsiderednecessary"wasa bit too broad. Senator Croft pointed outthatall budgetsof the commission would havetogo through theregular appropriation process. Line22- In m.anydistricts,it is hoped tha~ the commission office may utilize the facilitiesof thelocal erection office. Page 3, line 8- The committee feltthatcopies of the reports should befurnishedto thepublic Hatcost" rather thanfree of charge. Line 13 - It wasalso feltthat notification todelinquent report filers should b€ given byregisteredorcertified mail. ----------------------- Page 44----------------------- February25, 1974 Page 2 Line 18 - the phrase"for enforcement" (referring to action by the Attorney General)should be deleted,as it tends to suggest that the alleged ~ffender ispresumedguilty. Page 4, line 5- "more than$lOOn shouldbe changedto "in excess of $100 in the aggregate"to coversituations whereone contrib- utor gives several timesin amountsless than $100 to avoid being listed. The same change was made on lin~ 14. Lines 21-23 - This provisionis to preventa group rrom organiz- ing without the candidate'sknowledgeand spendingamounts of money which would put him over his limit.The candidatecan file an affidavit stating thathe repudiatesthe group. All groups organizedfor the purpose of affecting the electionof a candidate ,must register withthe commission. The spending limit, however,only applies againstthose groupscontrolled by or primarily organizedto promote the candidate. Line 24 - The candidate may serve'as hisown treasurer. This provisionwas inadvertentlydeletedfrom the bill and will be includedin the Judiciarycommitteesubstitute. Page 5, line 3 - Senator Ziegler inquiredas to why the treasurer must be namedat the time of filing,the penalty being'the deletionof the candidate'sname from the ballot. Senator Croft pointedout that no expendituresmay be made untilthe treasurer has been appointedanyway, and that it would be possiblefor the candidateto name himselfas treasurerand appointsomeone else later, notifying thecommissionof the change. It was suggested that a provisionbe included stating thatif no treasureris named at the time of filing, the candidatewill be presumed to be the treasurer. Line 18 - Senator Polandsuggestedthat no limit should be placed on a candidate's spending his own money on his campaign. "other than to hisown campaign!! was insertedafter "contribute". The limit for other contributionswas raisedfrom $500 to $1000, the theory being that a personwho wishes·to andcan afford to assistcandidates shouldbe allowedto do so. Line 24 - the committeefelt that expenditures over $100 should be allowed to be made in cash and added"unless a writtenreceipt is obtained and filed with the commission Tr after Tlpayment" on line 25. Page 1, line 5 - Senator Croft was commendedfor providingin the bill that anonymous donationscould be given by the candid- ate to the charityof his choice insteadof having to escheat to the state. A person who collectsmoney for the candidate from variousothers, not 'at the candidate'srequest,must furnish the candidatewith a list of the donors,or the contribution will be consideredanonymous. ----------------------- Page 45----------------------- February25, 1974 Page 3 Line 8- the limitation on spending wasdiscussed. Candidates from small, compactelectiondistricts are nothurt by this provision,but it "would tend to somewhatdisable those from large districtslike Anchorageand Fairbanks. It also tentls to favor the incumbent becausehis opponent is limited in the amount he can spend to combat the name familiaritywhichthe incumbentalready has by virtue of being in office. How~ver, a limitation provision is containedin the initiative,and SenatorCroft stated that it almost has to be in the bill.The amount per capitain the bill is considerably higher than that in the initiative, however. Page 7- the candidateshall report the amount he receivesfrom a group whichhas helda fund-raisingevent on his behalf. The group shall reportthe amount it received before expensesand the expensesincurred. The group gives the candidatethe amount after expenses!' The standardfor determiningthe value of goods and services is "where a chargeis ordinarily made"for providing" them. In addition,they must be donatedfor the purposeof influencing the election.The candidate is ultimatelyresponsiblefor furnishingcontributor's' formsto the donor. Requiringthe contributor toreport may reducethe numb~r of donations,but there should be some check on the candidate's report. Line8- "three" days was changedto "ten" to remove part of the burden from the contributor. Contribution~ canbe obtained beforea candidate~files, but no expendit ures may be made .except for opinion polls and travel. Page 8, line 8 - the committeedid not see the need for a report to be made three monthsbefore the election, as there is usually very little to report at that time.Provision(1) was deleted. Line 12 - this provisionwas included to prevent someonefrom contributing a large,. amount· after the reporting period just before the election. The committeefelt that the report could be tele- phoned, telegraphed or mailed,provided the postmarkwas within the time specified(24 hours),rather than filed in person. Line 16 - thecpmmittee did not feel that it should be incumbent upon the commissionto furnish nev-Ispapers with copies of each candidate I s report. "wh:Lch shall be availableto the public at cost upon request"was addedon line 18 after IIreport".All other languagein the paragraphwas deleted. Line 21 - anyone who sells supplies,advertisingor services to the candidatefor the purposeof effecting his election must report to the commission. This would not include out of state suppliers. ----------------------- Page 46----------------------- February25, 1974 Page 4 Page 9, line 12 - the fine was reducedfrom $10,000to $50·00. Page10, line 20 - Thissection preventsharrassment. A person who believesthere has been a violationof the act does not bringa suit himself,but takes his comglaintto the commission who determineswhetheror not there is a cause 'of action. Page12, line 20 - Senator Zieglerstated that he felt the provisions concerningthe voters'pamphletmight presentsome real problemsas to cost and the physicaltaskof preparing and distributing it in the time allowed. He also suggested that the size,etc. of the book could be left to the discretion of the LieutenantGovernorinsteadof spelling themout in the bill. SenatorCroft said he had discussed withthe AttorneyGeneral the matterof whether or not the bill meetsthe "substantially similar"requirement so thatit would takeprecedenceover the initiative on the same subjectto be on the Novemberballot. It containsprovisionsto include municipalities, to establish a commissionand to limit expenditures, and the AttorneyGeneral thoughtthat the requirementhad probablybeen met. This ques- tion will be lookedinto further. One more committeemeetingon the bill is contemplated, after whicha Judiciarycommitteesubstitute will be preparedand submitted. Paula Sampson Staff Assistant ----------------------- Page 47----------------------- / -' SENATEJUDICIARY COMMITTEE February 28,1974 Present: SenatorsZiegler, Meland,Silides,Poland Representative Bowman DanClocksin, Alaska Legal Services Excused: SenatorRettig CSHB 226am - UniformResidential Landlord andTehant Act Senator "Zieglergave a brief historyof the bill. It has been incommittee for almost a year.During the interim,the special committee onthe landlordandtenantrelationship held public. hearings in Juneau, Sitka, Anchorage andFairbanks and took . extensive testimony fromtenants, landlords, AlaskaLegal Services and theLeagueofWomen Voters. A proposed Senate Committee Substitute wasdraftedand copies were sent toeveryonethroughout the state whohadever evincedan interest in the legislation. All commentsreceived todate in response have been favorable. Mr. Clocksinreviewed with thecommittee a11 changesof asub- stantive nature which hadbeen made in the bill as it came, over from the House. A rough tally indicat~d that there hadbeen approximately 30such changes. Page 2- Itis specifically provided that a tenancybegins onthe day thetenant moves in. There hadbeen some confusion asto whetherit began then oron the first ofthemonth." Page 3 - Thepenaltyfor including prohibitedprovisions in a rentalagreementwas~reduced fromoneand one-half timesactual damagestotheactualdamages sustained by the tenant. Page 6- A change was made in the an~unt that can becharged as asecuritydepositfrom oneand one-half timestheactual rent to twice theamount of the rent.It was pointedout thatmany landlords infact charge less. Anotherchange. provides that the" t~nant no longerhasto make a formal demandforthe return of the securitydeposit, butthat he" isentitled to its return anytime within14days after termination oftherentalagreement. Also, thesecurity depositis tobeplaced in ~ savings institution only where practicable tocover thos~ situations wh~re thereis nosuch institution in the area. The depositsmaybecommingled ina singl~ account rather than having toset upa separatetrust accountforeach tenant. Damageswereincreased from oneand onehalf times theamount wronglywithheldtotwice theamount. This facilitates the calcu- lationof damages. ----------------------- Page 48----------------------- February28,1974 ) Page Two Page 8- Thelandlord'sobligation to maintainfit premises was~altered somewhat bythereferenceto energy conditions. Locks andkeysneed befurnished when thetenant requires to cover situations where they arenotnecessaryandshould nothave tobe furnishedas a matter of law. Page 11 - Rules andregulations shall be "posted prominently onthe premises." Page 12 - In theHouse bill, if the tenant were going to~one fora period of fivedays or mo~e, notice hadto begiveBno later than the firstdayof the absence. Thishasbeen changed toseven days,with notice tobe given assoonasthetenant knows he will be gonethatlong or longer. Thisis toallow forsituations where,for example,weather conditions aresuch thatthetenant cannot getback butdidnotknowatthetimehe left that there would be a problem. Page 13 - Sections 280and350were included to make it clear that injunctiverelief wouldbeavailable . .... Page '14·...; 'The "re"pair··arid·deduct" "clause wasdeleted. Page 15 - Whenthetenant is forced to find substitute l10using because thelandlord hasfailed to provide essentialservices, such as heat, thetenant maynowrecover thebalance cif therent he hadtopayforthesubstitute housingwhen it exceeds the rent for the dwelling unitwhich hehadto leave. There is an assumption of goodfaith madethatthetenant willfind adequate butnotextravagant housing in such instances. Thet'enantmust gi ve"written Ifnotice of anyfailuresof theland- lord to provide services before he cantake action of hisown. Page 18 - Present lawgives thetenant 10daysafter he hasfailed to payrent before thelandlordmayterminatetherelationship. TheHouse version increasedthisto14 days, andtheproposed sub- stitute, had·reduced·it to3 days. It was thedecision of thecom- mittee tore~nstate the 10 dayprovision~ sinceit would not-be changing existing law andwould allow fordelays which arenot thefault of thetenant. Language wasadded providingthat thelandlord need onlygiveone notice tothetenant that he isin default. Damages werereduced from oneandone-half times toactual. ,,~I Page 19 - Tbeextended absence clause waschanged fromfiveto seven days for consistency. ----------------------- Page 49----------------------- February28, 1974 Page Three Page 20 - The landlord may now dispose of perishablesin any manner he ~eems fit whenthe tenant has abandonedthe premises. Page 22 - "Energyconditions" wereadded to the section dealing with the landlord'sfailure to supply utilitiesas this would relate to retaliation. Page 24 - Protection againstreta=liation has been extendedto the tenant who has attempted to avail himself of the remedies under the act. The provisionpresumingthat a landlord'sactions are retaliatory under certaincircumstanceswas deleted. Although it was a rebut- able presumption, landlords felt that it violated the concept of presuminginnocenceuntil guilt is proved. Page 25-The landlord can recover the dwelling unitfor his "personal purposes." It is his property,and he should be able to have friends or relatives use it if he so desires .. Page 27 - The designatedagent for service of. process, when the landlordis not a residentof Alaska, must now be the same person designatedfor service of various noticesas .provided. elsewhere in the act. Page 28 - Attorneysfees are to be awarded to the prevailing party .. Referencein other bills was made to Rule 82; this rule, however, is underattackand may soon be repealed,so the reference was deleted. Definitioris - Some new definitions wereadded. These include: 1. Abandonment- the tenant will never be assumed to have abandonedas long as he continues to pay rent. 2. Fair rentalvalue - this was included becauseit is to be used in the determinationof damages. 3. Prepaid rent ~ this was limited only to that amount paid when the tenant first moves in.This will allow.tenantsplanning to be gone for several months to pay their rent in advance. 4. Roomer - this was deleted,since the only refer~nce to roomer was delet~d andchangedto tenant. 5. Single family dwelling-this was narrowedto refer only to houses. 6 .. Wear resulting from ordinaryuse - this is importantbe- cause securitydepositscannot be appliedagainst it.It also includesthe landlord'sfailureto prepare for expectedconditions. ----------------------- Page 50----------------------- February28, 1974 Page Three Page31-the Applicability section was added sothat therewill be no doubtasto when the law goes into effect and whomit will, effect. For month Q.t montrforweekto week tenancies, it will be effective asof thenext time the tenant pays rent after the effective date of theact. Along termlease willnot' be under the act untilit hasbe~n renew~d oraltered insome substanti~l way after the effective date. I, The last portionsof the bill amending other titles provide for eviction' procedures (refer to appropriate courtrules), prohibit the use of ejectmentagainst a residentialtenant, and provide thatincasesof malicious damage, the tenant may berequired.·to makerestitution tothe landlord. The proposed draftwas takentoLegislativeAffairs :to bepre- pared in proper form,and it will bepassed out of thecommittee as acommitteesubstitute. PaulaSampson Staff Assistant .. ----------------------- Page 51----------------------- { SENATEJUDICIARY COMMIT~EE Present: Senators Ziegler, Silidesi Poland Senator Croft RussMulder JudyHopkins Excused: Senator~ ~Meland and Rettig(outof town) SB 388 - campaign financing Senator Croftreviewedwiththe committee the proposed committee substitute containing all thechangesagreed upon at thelast meet ing on thisbill. Additional changeswillalso be included: Page6, line 26 - to a~oid confusionwiththe state's Departmentof Labor,the words "UnitedStates" were inserted. Page4, line 14 - "and member of the groupT! wasdeleted, so that onlyofficers, directors and thosewhocontribute morethan$100 per annumin theaggregate need be reported. Page11, line16 - tfl oan guarantee If\!J"as added to the definition of "contribution" . Page8, line 16 - the provision as to wherereports should befiled willbe clarified to providethatstatewide candidates willfile in the central officein the"capital cityll, and all otherswill filein the officein the appropriateelectiohdistrict. Line8 - a newparagraph (4) willbe addedto require a report on or-before December 31stof a yearin whichan election is not heldif contributions werereceived or expenditures madeas to itemsnot previously reported. Thiswouldprevent a candidate from takingall hiscontributions during off-years to avoidreporting them. Line28: - "facilities and supplies ifv.las deletedbecausethe phrase is redundant. The League of Women Voters had raisedthequestion of limiting expenditures forlocal government -candidates sincethey are governed by the bill. Senator-Croft explained thatthereare constitutional questions concerned here,bothas to aclimitation on freespeech and as to equalprotection, if the legislature wereto set limits for all municipalitiesin thestate,few of whicharesimilar enough to makethe limitations either practical or constitutional.Having disclosure of the contributions willprobably be sufficient control. A provision was addedon line16: "Nothing in thischaptershall prohibit a municipality from enacting ordinances regulating campaign contributionsand expenditures." Senator Croft hopedto havethefiscalinformation requested of him by the firstof nextweek,at whichtime thebill willcomeout of committee as a committee substitute. PaulaSampson Q+-",.p.p fI~_.! _ • ----------------------- Page 52----------------------- ddY- ~ fA/C V1 (}?AJVJ Q~~-10VL ~..~f/yx SENATE JUDICIARY bOMMITTEE Present: SenatorsZiegle,r Meland, Rettig, Silides SenatorCroft Don Clocksin, AlaskaLegalServices Kaye Smith,Department Hand SS Sister Elizabeth, Catholic SeniorCenter of Juneau Representative Chance Excused: SenatorPoland HouseBill 70 - relating toadoptions Senator Zieglerstated thatthe decision of the Judiciary committee inso- far as the original bill was 'concernedhad beensubstantiated.That bill hadmany imperfections and wouldhave beendetrimental to the bush. No one presenttookissue withthis assertion. Senator Croft agreedthatthe original bill was not in very goodshape and thatthe committee's concerns were wellfounded.He complimented the committee for insisting that morework be done. Don Clocksin went overthe bill and reviewed all changeswiththe committee. Workingwithhim on this project since thelast time thebill was considered by thecommitteewere:Rep.Chance,Sen. Croft,Russ Mulderof LAA, ArtPetersonof the AG'soffice,Kaye Smithof the Dept., the Leagueof WomenVoters,Rep.Degnan,a social worker from Barrow, and the AlaskaLegalServices representative from Nome. He is now perfectly satisfied with the bill,and all concerns~.he had raisedearlier have been met without wateringdownthe bill in any way. Pagel - line 28 New language was addedto makeit clear thatan illegitimate child does not haveto be adopted to be legitimated. Thereis anotherstatutecon- cerning this whichis notsuperseded or affectedin any way by thisbill. Page2, lineI New language is consistent with the existing venue statute. Page3, line5 Reference to AS 47.10.080provides a definition of " a bcf)ldonmentU "-- Line9 New language referring to indigencyis inserted to ~ssure that the mere fact thata person is poorwill not be a factorto be considered if he is in dangerof havinghis. child taken away. If his indigency is having a detrimental effectupon thechild,e.g. he is not gettingenoughto' eat, thiswouldbe considered. ----------------------- Page 53----------------------- Page Two Page 4, line 1 Requirements for a spouse's consentcan be waived if the.spouse is unreasonablyrefusingto give consent. Line 21 The provisionrequiringa pers~n whowishes to withdraw his or her consent to go to SuperiorCourt to do so has been deleted if the withdrawalis accomplishedwithin10 days.After that periodof time, it requires a court appearance. Page 5, line 4 The name of the child as it would be if he~were tobe adopted will not be used in the notice. Line 28 Terminationordersare now to be filed with the court along with all other information,affadavits, consents, etc. Page 6, line 27 The father of an illegitimate child is now on the list of those who must receive notice,as are parents of an adult child who is to be adopted. Page 7 Two new subsectionswere added. One provides for ~dequate notice and spells out how it is to be given and whatit is to contain. It is to be in a language 'other thanEnglish if theperson receiv- ing it speaks another language. It identifiesthe child by the name by whichhe is known to the person receivingthe notice. In addition,a reasonableeffort mu~t bemade to discover the naturalfather.If he cannotbe found, an affadavitof diligent search may be filed. Publicationas a means of notice may not be used. Page 8 There does not have to be an investigation report filed if the investigation hasnot been completedwithin 30 days 'and the court can find no good reasonfor the delay. Also, to take care of the custtom· adoptionproblem,there will b.e no investigation if the petitioneris within the fourth degreeof ~onsanguinity, lineallyor colaterally, to the person to b~ adopted. Roughly 90 % of the tribaladoptions are by relatives. Page 9, lines 8-10 There will be no home visit requiredif no·investigation has been required. ----------------------- Page 54----------------------- Page Three Lines11-13 Neitherthe personto be adopted no~ thepetitioner needappear irt court unless the court requiresthem so to do. Line 23 If the adoption decreeis not granted,the court will placethe child accordingto his best interests. This may include the petitioner. " j Page 10 An adopted child may not inheritfrom his naturalparents unless it is so stated that he will inherit in the adoption decree.LAA indicatedthat this provisionwill take precedenceover the probate code in cases of conflict. Page 12, line 21 Those signinga relinquishment will also receive noticethat they have a rightto change their minds. Page 13, line 7 Terminationof parentalrights has been consolidatedinsofaras the proceedingand grounds requiredare concerned. The committeeadopted two amendmentson page 1.On line 13, the phrase"although one is a minor" was deleted. On li·ne 20, the conjunction "or" was adde~ atthe end of the sentence. SenatorSilides raised the questionof adding medical expenses to the subsidy paymentsin the case of subsidizedadoptions.If the subsidiesare providedto encouragethe adoption of hard to place children,some ot whom are handicapped~ then the special care requiredto deal with the handicapshould be paid for also. Currentfoster paymentsdo not include this.After discussion,it was decided that this would better be the -subject of a separate bill! If it were added to this bill, fiscalimplicationswould· be added along with it.At this stageof the session,another committeereferralmight be fatal to the bill's passage. It was reportedout of committeewith a "Do Pass"recommendation, SenatorsPoland and<.Silides signing withoutrecommendation. ----------------------- Page 55----------------------- (it'-/~ fj,. Hl_,t'u)i,,--:vl it S)1 fVi·~ ~LLfJ 1-/ , \"-,,, SENATEJUDICIARY COMMITTEE Present: Senators Ziegler, Meland, Rettig DonMagnuson, AlaskaRetail Association Absent: Senators Poland andSilides HB 749 -- concealmentof merchandise A committee substitute wasprepared placing the language of this bill in Title9" rather thanin Title11. Thelast paragraph of the bill providingforparents' liability for the actsof their children was amended out on theSenate floor,andit is alsooutof 'thecommittee sUbstitute. Senator Ziegler signed "Do Pass", and all others signed without recommendation. HB 778 - Commission bh/Administration of Justice The House' bill had replaced theCommissionerof Health and Social Services withthe director of thedivision of corrections on thiscommission. Because he is alsoresponsiblefor the division of mental health and theprobation office, the commissionerfeltthat~:he should alsobe on thecommission. The Senate HESScommittee amended the bill toplace him back on the commission. AllJudiciary members agreedwiththis concept and signed "DoPass". SCSHB646- jurisdictionofsuperior court/certainchildren The original Housebill hasbeenreplaced witha HESScommittee substitute whichcqntains the original bill plustheprovisions o~ Senate Bill'310, aid tofamili~swith dependant children. 310 is in House Finance anddoes notappear to be moving, so thismethod(),isbeing usedto get theAFDCprovisions passed. Noaction was takenon thebill byJudiciary. Members were provided withcopies of the bill and askedto study it for a futuremeeting. PaulaSampson Staff Assistant ----------------------- Page 56----------------------- '-' SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE March 4, 1974 Present: SenatorsZiegler, Meland, Silides, Rettig RepresentativeChance Art Peterson, AssistantAttorney General Kaye Smith, Regional Director,Dept. Health & Social Services Don Clocksin, Dep. Director, Alaska Legal Services Excused: Senator Poland HE 70 - relating to adoptions Mr. Petersonexplained that th~ bill under considerationis based on the Revised Uniform AdoptionAct.It deals more specifically than our present law with the persons who may adopt and from whom consent is required. New sections require a pre-adoptioninvesti- gation and allow the continuationof foster home subsidy payments to foster parents who wish to adopt but could not otherwiseafford to do so. Senator Ziegler asked what problems currentlyexist in Alaska under our present adoptionsystem that compel the enactmentof this act. Mrs. Smith respondedthat there is a certain segmentof Alaskan children who have no one to speak for them, i.e. those who have been privatelyadopted. 70% of the adoptions in Alaska are private. There is no provision in present law requiringthe court to ask for an objective judgmentas to whetherthe adoptivefamily is suitable for the child. Another concern, she added, is that there are a number'of children who, for one reason or another,are unadoptable. This can be because of their age (those 12 or older), or because of their mental or physicalcondition. They a~e usually placed in the custodyof the department and are kept in foster homes until they reach majority. Often the foster parents in these situations are willing to adopt the child, but their economic situation is such that they do not want to add this burden to it. They need the foster home payments tQ keep the child. This bill would allow the paymentsto continue after adoption. ,The subsidy paymentswould never exceed the foster home payments, so there would be no added cost to the state. The bill would not precludeprivate adoptions,but it would require a pre-adoptionin~estigation tobe conducted. Senator Ziegler suggested that"abandonment" should be defined in the bill.He also posed the question as to whether providingstate assistance to adoptive parents who could not otherwiseafford to adoptis wise public policy, i.e., if the prospectiveparents can not afford a child, perhaps they should not be adopting one. ----------------------- Page 57----------------------- March"It, 1974 1 PagefI \,vo Mr.Peterson pointedoutthat a recentAlaska SupremeCourtdecision, in discussing the bestinterests of a chJld,hademphasized th(~lt a childshould be relieved from thelimboof fostercarestatu~ where- everpossible.This provision of the bill would providethechild withstability at no greater costto the state. In addition, the child would be in"the fosterhomefor a year before any adoption assistance payments wouldbe made. A reinvestigationof thefoster parents wouldbe made,because an adoptive studyis somewhat dif- ferent than a foster home study,being longerterm in scope. Thesystemof subsidy payments is used in over30 states. Mr.Clocksin prefaced his testimony by stating that he reluctantly opposes the bill inits present form.Hopefully, the problems he seesin the bill canbe solved. It is nothis desireto kill the bill, but only to protect his clients.AlaskaLegalServices whole- heartedly sup~orts the subsidy provision in the bill. He setforthfive goalswhichhe felta bill of thistypeshould accomplish: 1.It oughtto avoiddiscriminatingagainst the poorand uneducated; 2.It shouldfairly balance theinterests of the three elements involved~-adoptive parents, natural parentsand thechild. This bill protects the child tothepoint where theother parties are not protected; 3.It shouldbe constitutional; 4.It shouldattempt to avoidunnecessary increases in cost anddelaysin procedure; and 5.It shouldaddress itself totheproblem, uniqueto Alaska, of protecting the preservationof the native-bush wayof life. Thisbill encourages transfer of thechild into theurban-white culture. Discrimination- Mr. Clocksin pointed out several areasin the bill whichplacethe poorat a disadvantage. Someonewhois not able to makehis childsupport payments may losehis child. A petitioner's request to adoptmay be denied if hecannotget a subsidy and is too poorto support a child without one.In addition, thecost increases accompanying the bill(see below) willdetrimentally affect thosewho" cannotpay them.Theuneducated, particularlythoseliving in the bush, are also hurtby thebill.A guardian couldlosecustody of a childif hecannotreador understand the noticehe receives or if hecannotrespond to it in written English. ----------------------- Page 58----------------------- MarchJI, 197 LI Pagerrhree Constitutionality - Mr.Clock~Lin pointed out several \'!~:aknes~:;es in the billas to thismatter.One is the provision stating that thefatherof an illegitimate child neednot give hisconsentto an adoption of that child.He also wouldreceiveno noticeof a proposed adoption. The UnitedStatesSupremeCourthas ruledthat any provision of statelaw denyingthe naturalparent's appearance in an adoptionproceeding is unconstitutional. Such parentmust· receive adequatenotice. It might be questionable as to wh~ther thecourt is takingthe bestinterestsof the childinto consid~r­ ation here, but it is the "law of the land ll currently. Also,no consentneed be obtained from a naturalparentwho has deserted the childor failed to pay childsupport. An Alaska Supreme Court case,Delgadovs. Fawcett, providesthata father whois divorced from the child'smotherbut whohas visita- tionrightsmust give hisconsentto an adoption. The legislature probably has the powerto overrulethisdecision,but it would not be goodpolicyso to do. A father withvisitation rightsought to havea say in what happens to his child. Another area of doubtfulconstitutionalityis thatof adequate notice.Eventhosepersonswho have a rightto receivenotice are ,notgoing to receive adequatenotice.Specifically, they do not havea right,underthe bill,to receivea copyof the petition. Hence,theydo notknow who wantsto adopt thechild or who has or has not consented. Increased cost andprqcedural delays- In everyadoptionsituation exceptwherethe courtwaivesthe requirement, thereis a mandato~y pre-adoption investigation. Most will probably be conducted by the department.Mr. Clocks indid not questio'n thedesirability of havingthe investigation, butdid questionwhetherthe department has sufficient manpower to do this workand howlong the investiga- tionswouldtake. Therewill alsoundoubtedly be an increasein feeschargedthe petitioner by his attorney becauseof the increase in the amount of work theattorneymustdo for hisclient. This wouldinclude filing areportof the outlayof expenseswith regardto the child d~ring the adoption proceeding, applying for a sub~titute birth certificate, filingal~ written consents with the court. More departmental expensewouldprobablyresultfromthe annualre-eval- uationrequired in subsidycases... Mr. Clocksin reiterated that he was not addressing himself to the meritsof theser~quirements, butonly pointing out the probable increase in cost and time whichwillresult. Impacton native-bush culture - Objectionable provisions from this pointof view includetheinvestigation, home visits,havingto bringthe proceeding in Superior Court, and requiring the petitioner to be physically presentin court. It is the presentpolicyof both thestate andAlaskaLegal Services to do everything possible to legitimize "custom" adoptionswhichare veryprevalentin the ----------------------- Page 59----------------------- March ·4'\~74 Page Four bush. In situations wherea child has been abandonedor orphaned, the village placesthat child in a horne. No legal proceedin~s are involved,but the effect is that of an adoption.An effort has been made to legitimizeall such adoptionsfor the protectioriof the child as to inheritancerightsand the right to claim under ··the Native Land Claims.Act. Legitimizingd1ese custom adoption., ' makes legal a relationshipthat has been j ~'" effect for years. This bill would discouragelegitimizatior~\cause it makes comp] , cated and cumbersomewhat should be a re\' '. vely simple legal Pl'O--' ceeding.Mr. Clocksin also questionedthe cessityof conductilg an investigationin a villagewhere the c:':';:Ld has been living Wj'Ld the family for a numberof, years. ' Having: 0 appearin Superior Court presentsa distance,and often a language ,barrier. The bil~­ will not be adequateuntil it assures that the native villagelifc will not be damagedby the bias of ~ome judgesand social workers. The emphasisShould be on keeping the child in the culture, n9t removinghim from it. Miscellaneous - Mr. Clocksin mentionedseveralother p~ovisions of the bill which presentproblems: 1.Withdrawalof consentbefore an adoption is final can only be done in Superior Court, but the consent can be signedanywhere. This necessitates hiring an attorneyand going to court if a mother, for example, has changed her mind; 2.If all the requirementshave not been met, the judge can dismiss the petitionand may also change the custody of the child,giving him to any interestea personwith- out any noticebeing given to anyone; 3.The language ,is som~what obscure dealing with the terminationof the naturalparent's rightswhen the adoption procedurehas been completed.Minute changes in the wordingof a will wouldcompletly changethe rights of a child to take under that will.(This is with referenceto the will of the natural parent.)If, for example, the will uses the naturalname of "the child without referringto the relationship, the child can take. If, however,the will refers to Hmy son", he cannot take.;' 4.Relinquishmentof all parental rights is accomplished under the bill by the signing of a form.Relinquishment may, however, .be withdrawnwithin 10 days after it is given. This provision must be printedon the form, but the person Signing does not get a copy of this form to keep5 and might, therefore,be unawareof the 10 day provision. He should be entitled to a copy so that he will be fully aware of what his.rightsare; and ----------------------- Page 60----------------------- r March It, 19 [l+ PagePi ve 5.Und.ertheb111;thenatural parent is oneof the part:Les whocan adopt thechild. Hhyshould he or shehaveto go through theentire adoption proceedingto adopthisor her ownchild? Present lawrequires onlyan affadavitto the Office of Vital Records requestinga substitute birth certif- icate. A judicial proceedingis notrequired. Insummary, Mr.Clocksin stated that he would liketo seethe adoption bill pass buturgedthat somechanges be made in it. He pledged thecooperationof hisagency in working ona new draft. Mr .. Peterson responded to theabove andforegoing: 1. Someof the problemsCOMldbesolved fairlyeasily by amendment,e.g.,thequestion of adequate notice. The departmentis notopposed to giving better notice orof giving notice tothosenotnowmentioned in the bill; 2.Thebilllimits thetimeaninvestigation can/take t6 30 days. If it is not completed bythattime,the court can waive it. Also,thecourt· can appoint anyone to conduct theinvestigation.Thiswould include suth people as village chiefs or elders.The department wouldnotbe involved in every case; and 3. If it is established that there will bea substantial increase in costaffecting thebushareas particularly, the bill could be adapted to reduce sa~d costs. It is not thestate's position todiscouragelegitimizing adoption. It wantstoinsure thatthechild will have somelegal status. Mrs.Smith stated that thedepartment hasencouragedlegitimizing custom adoptions andhastrained 19village nati ves·.as headsof division offices inthe bushtohelpgetthe jobdone. However, sheadded, in somecases thechild has beengiven to a family fornot very goodreasons andliterally becomes a slaveto that family. Investigations wouldbehelpful here. Shere-emphasized thatthedepartment willnotbethe investigating. agency in every case. As forthematter of thelanguage barrier, she pointed out that ourcourtrules provide fortheuseo~ interpreters andthatthe departmenthas used themin thepast. Discrimination against the poor mightpossibly be justifiedto somedegree if adequate care cannot be provided thechildas seenin thelight of thecultural circumstances involved. Taking thebestinterests of thechild intoconsideration, it might be better to findanother homeforhim .. Paula Sampson Staff Assistant' ----------------------- Page 61----------------------- SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE March 6, 1974 Present: Senators Ziegler, Meland, Poland SJR23 - unicameral legislature There are no"Do Passes" on thecommittee for thisresolution, so noaction will be taken on it. HB 209-: pre-emptorydisqualification of mast'ers Under existing law, anypartyto litigation in district or superio~ court canpre-emptorilY disqualifythe judge. Thisbill would,' extend thatprivilege to standing masters.However, thesponsors have evinced no interest in the bill anduntil and unless theydo,the co~mittee will not act on it. HB 232- superior court districts Thisbill would extend the boundaries or theFourth and change those of the Second Judicial District so thattheNorthSlope Borough will beincluded in thelatter district." Thecourtsyst~m has no opposition tothisbill andindicates thatthere will be no cost involved.TheNorth SlopeBorough favors the bill. Thebill will be taken up at thenextmeeting forfinal act~on. SB 313- relating to'bail Theoffice of the Attorney General hasconsidered the proposed amendments tothisbill. It has no objection tolimiting the bill to those charged witha felony, butfelt that spelling out what mustbe established bythedistrict,attorney (proving that theper- sonwouldbe a danger or wouldnotappear) viscerated the bill. Thebill will be amended by thecommittee to include thefelony proviSion andstate that the prosecut~ng attorney must showgoodcause SB 322and HB154 am- driving underinfluence of liquor or drugs Tl1e Attorney General's office ha~ prepared a committee substitute, but just exactly what is include.d under"narcotic drugs" remains un- clear as to medication suchas dietpills andantihistamines. A policy decision will haveto be madebythecommittee as to whether to taketheHouseapproach of mandatory revocation of a license ·for convictionsof thisoffense or totak~ the approach in theGovernor's bill of mandatorYjail terms.Thequestion become~ whichmethod wouldprove the most effective deterrent., Fubll'c' De'fende'r Agen'cy ''''--''' Senate Judiciary will 'introduce a bill req~iring that if aperson claims indigency entitling him tothe services of thePublic Defendert ----------------------- Page 62----------------------- March 6, 1974 Page Two he must appear in court and state his financial conditions under oath.This concept has been approved by the law enforcement agencies, the judiciary,and the Public Defender. In addition,the bill will ~rovidethat if a Public Defender is not available or for some reason cannot provide his services, the court will appoint an attorney from the local bar to serve to be paid according to a fee schedule established by the court and not at the going rate he usually receives from hi~ private clients. HB 70 - adoptions Senator Ziegler will write. to all those who have expressed an interest in this bill that it is the unanimousdecision bf the committee that the bill is too important and is currently in such poor condition that no action should betakenon it this -session. Instead, the committee will introduce a,,'.resolution requesting and directing the Legislative'Affairs Agency to study the subject during the interim and make recommendationsto the First Session of the Ninth State Legislature. Paula Sampson Staff Ass~stant ----------------------- Page 63----------------------- SENATE JUDICIARYCOMMITTEE March 9, 1974 Present:All members of the committee HB 232 - superior courtdistricts This b~ll would 'change judicialdistrict boundaries so as to place election districts18 and 20 in the same judicialdistrict. The court syst~m doesnot oppose the bill and indicatesthere will be no increase in cost.The North Slope Boroughfavors the bill.It received a "Do Pass" recommendation from the committee. SB 322 - driving under influenceof liquor or drugs. Senator Ziegler stated that while, generally speaking, mandatory sentencing is. not ~ desirable, perhapsin the area of DWI it would be an effective deterrent. The committee determined that, ~s a matter of policy, mandatory jail terms would be a greater deterrent than mandatory revocationof licenses. Rather than passing out a committ,ee substitute for the bill which had been prepared to include a definition of narcoticdrugs, the committee decided to add an amendment with the definition to the present bill.This was done, and the bill came out of committee "Do Pass" . .The chairman will write to CommissionerWellington of Public Safety for a status report on the point system. SB 313- relating to bail The committee amended this bill so that it applies only in the event the offense with which a person is charged is a felony. Also, the phrase- "for good cause shown" was inserted to insure that a prosecutorcannot arbitrarily have a person held for 48 hours without bail. The bill receiveda "Do Pass" recommendation. SJR 4 - elective AttorneyGeneral A public hearing on this bill will, be held Dn March 18. SB 442 - mobile intensivecare paramedics The purposeof this bill is to include those who have been trained as and meet all qualifications to be paramedicsunder the Good . Samaritan statute. "Do Pass". SB 468 - relating to public defenders Everyone concerned(judiciary, public defender, polipeofficials) favors this bill. Indigency would be determinedby the court, with the defendant test~fying underoath as to his indigency. Also, if the court must appoint an attorney from th~ bar, to serVe as defense counsel, that attorney will be paid according to a fee schedule determinedby the court and not aGcording to the prevailing bar fee schedule.Money will be transferredt6 the court budget from the publicdefender's budget.The bill received a "Do Pass" recommendation. Paula Sampson Staff Assistant ----------------------- Page 64----------------------- SE~ATE JUDICIARYCOMMITTEE Mar c h 18, 19 7Lf Present:All members of the committee NormanGorsuch, AttorneyGeneral SJR 4- electiveattorneygeneral SenatorZieglerexplained that the sponsor of thisresolution, SenatorLewis,was out of town and wouldbe unableto testify. His legislative assistant, Mr. PhilConnor,was offeredthe opportunity to testify,but did notdo so. Mr. Gorsuchstated thathe opposedthe resolution for a numberof reasons: 1.Elective cabinetlevel officials wo~ld tendto diffuse and fracturetheexecutivebranch. The Alaskaconstitution is based upona strong executive. 2.The Governor should havethe opportunity to choosehis own cabinetofficers. In addition, all politicalaccount- abilitylies withhim.Thesubjection of his choicesto legislative confirmation is an effective remedyin the eventof abuses. 3. Creatinganotherelective officeencourages political in-fighting and makesit difficultto pin downresponsibility for decisionmaking. 4.Requiring an attorneygeneralto campaignmeansthat he will not be devotinghisentire timeto his job. 5.The prospect of having to campaignmakesit difficultto recruitcapablemen into public service. 6.Policies enhancingan attorneygeneral's reelection may be implemented over thosebasedon the generalpublicinterest. 7.Election processes do not guarantee competence in sucha specialized fieldas the law.An effective campaigner may no be a goodattorney. 8.An electedofficial might be vulnerable to specialinterest groups. The argumentin favorof this conceptis that the attorney general wouldbecome an effective ombudsman for. the peopleand an independent and objective check on the executive branch.In Alaska,the consumer protection division within the department servesthis function in part,as doestheir policyof referring complaints to the appropri- ate departm~nt. . ----------------------- Page 65----------------------- Page rrwo Mr. Gorsuchfelt that makingthe attorney generalelective would resultin increased cost.Since hisfunction of servingas advisorto the variousdepartments and to the governorwould change,each departmentwouldprobablyhire its own counsel". In addition,local governments might want to elect theirown districtattorneys. It might also lead to electionof other cabinetlevel officials, e. g. , state treasurer. In summary,he stated that the, system we have has workedwell in Alaska,and theredoes not appear to be any needto changeit. No member of the committeecared to give the resolutiona liDo Pass ll recommendation. Points;ystem Mr. Gorsuchreportedthat PublicSafety and his departmentare workingon regulationsto implementthis bill(passed last year), but there are some problemswhichthey are attemptingto solve with remediallegislation introducedin the House. ----------------------- Page 66----------------------- SENATE JUDICIARYCOMMITTEE March 20, 1974 Present:All Members of the Committee Mr. George Wehmhoff and Mr. Chuck Blacksmith of ABC Records Senate Bill 399 - protecting rights of owners of sound recordings A recently enacted amendment to-the federal copyright laws makes it illegal to "pirate" recordingsfrom legitimaterecord or tape companiesand offer them for sale at a reduced rate.By so doing, the illicit manufacturerpays very little in the way of a production cost, no advertising costs, no royalties,and no taxes to the state. This federal law is to implementedby the Internal Revenue Service and the FBI.However, for a number of reasons,among them lack of manpower,distance from the problem on a local level, and the fa~t thattheir directivesare addressedto the manufacturerand distributor rather than to the retailer,*23states have enacted similar laws to the one currently before the committee to enable local law enforcement agencies to go after the retailer,on the theory that this will be a more efficientand effective method of curing the ill. The language in this bill is patterned after the Tennessee statute, which makes the manufacturingor selling of illicit ~ecordings a felony. In Washington and Oregon it is only a misdemeanor. Mr. Wehmhoff and Mr. Blacksmith, representingABC Records, stated that they were (through their company) affiliated with the National Associationof Record Manufacturers.Various other-suchgroups have also taken on the responsibilityof appearing before state legis- latures to lobby for this type legislation.ASCAP is involved to the extent of protecting the artists whose work has been pirated. The organizationshave also launched a campaign to inform local law enforcement agencies throughoutthe United States as to just how extensive and serious this problem has become. Mr. Wehmhoff mentioned several specificstores in Alaska which are selling recordingsthey know to have been illicitly manufactured. When confronted with this fact, the attitude of the retailersseems to be that since thSre is no enforcement to fear, they might as well go ahead, sell the tapes and make a profit, particularly when their competitorsare doing the same thing. He pointed out, however, that the majorityof reputable stores do not sell these recordings.- Mr. Blacksmith agreed that classifying the offense as a felony might be unduly 'punitive, particularly for a first ·offense. Other state statutes provide for confiscation of property and a fine for the first offense~ and only subsequentoffenses are felonies. No action was taken by the committee, but the bill will be consider~d further at a later meeting. *In addition, these fly by night manufacturershave extremely mobile operations. ----------------------- Page 67----------------------- SENATE JUDICIARYCOMMITTEE March 23, 1974 Present:Senators Ziegler, Poland,Silides, Meland Senator Croft Arthur Snowden and· Susan Burke, Alaska Gourt System Excused:Senator-Rettig Senate Bill 472 - compensationfor judtcial officers Mr. Snowden stated that the court system does not think the raises providedin this bill are adequate. Judges in Alaska have a heavy responsibility, having issued 87,000 decis~ons in1973 alone, and should be compensated ·commensurately. Supreme .Court justicesand SuperiorCourt judges have not received a raise for four years; it has been two years since DistrictCourt judges recei ved a raise.In the meantime,the cost of living has ri.sen about 20%, resultingin these men actually having taken a cutin pay because their purchasingdollar is not worth as much. State employeesreceive a built-in cost :of living increase, but judicial officersdo not.It is also important to note that most attorneys in the (state who responded to a recent poll make more per yea'r than the Supreme Court justices.It is difficult to recruit to the bench when it means taking a salary cut. In the last four years, Alaska'sstanding as to salary paid to Superior Court judges has droppedfrom 14th to 30th nationwide; for Supreme Court justices, it has fallen from 25th to 42nd.The bill before the committee really is only a cost of living raise, Mr. Snowden stated. SenatorsZiegler and Meland recommendedthe bill do pass with· amendmentsraising the Supreme Court to $45,000;Superior Court to . $40,000;District Court to $33,500.· Poland and Silide~ signed without recommendation. The committee decidedto introduce a bill raising the Governor's salary from $40,000 to $50,000. Senate Bill 399 - protectionsound recordings The committee will report out a committee· substitute for this bill based on Senator Croft's Senate Bill 422. The differenceis that the penalty in the latter is less and the crime is defined only as a misdemeanor,not a felony. All members signed Do Pass. Senate Bill 322 - driving,underin.fluence/liquor or drugs A committeesubstitute has been prepared which corrects the problem involvingCourt Rule 35, dealing with sentence reduction. The court's discretionary~ower to reducea sentencefor this offense within 6o days after it has been imposed is removed. Also, the definitionof narcotics is limited to hard drugs. Lastly, the bill spells out that it will not apply to any offensesoccuring before the effective date of the act.All members signed Do Pass. ----------------------- Page 68----------------------- March23, 1974 Page Two / HouseBill 777- indigentdefendants The bill wasamendedto makeit identical to SenateBill 468 whichis currently in SenateRu1es. The amendment provides that· the indigency must· be affirmed under oathin court. All members signedDo Pass. . CSHB635 A public hearing will be heldsometime during thefirst week.in Aprilon thisbill. Thesponsor,Legislative Arfairs,TheAttorney Generaland thecourtsystem will benotified. The next meeting will be heldMarch27 at 1"30 • . House Bil1792 - aggravated assault The committee tookno actionon this bill. No interest has been evinced in it. .. ---- PaulaSampson Staff Assistant ----------------------- Page 69----------------------- i SENAT'EJUDICIAEYCOMMI1~rrEE Ma r c h 2 7, 197L~ Present:All members ofthecommittee Senators Hensley, Kerttula andSackett Mr.Fred Eastaugh,attorney at law Mr.RayMeketa, Junea~ Rifle andPistol Club Senate Bill491- prohlbltlng salecertain_ ha!1dguns Mr.Meketa testlfiedagainst thisbill.Theintent is to reduce violent crimes involving h2ndgunswhich areeasily concealed. How- ever, hefeltthatcriminals\\[il1 always beabletoobtain guns, . regardlessof what thelawis. Anexample of thisis thenumber of weapons availablein prisons. Contrary toprovisionsin the proposed bill, guns withbarrels oflessthanthree inches are used for hunting andsporting purposes.Prohibiting their useis a restriction of individualrights, includingtheright of self- defense. Mr.Meketa's group isaffiliated with theNational Rifle Association andtheTerritorial Sportsmen. Senator Zlegler requested himto solicit written comments fromthem on thebill. Noaction was taken by the committee. Senate Bill 410- transfer of investment securities Mr.Eastaugh appearedas a member of theNationalCommissionon Uniform State Laws. Thisbill is anamendment totheUniform Commercial Code. It allows thecreationof clearing corporations to handle theelectronictransfer ofownership ofcorporate shares. TheUCC,when it wasfirst promulgated, forecast theneed for such organizations, butlittle attention wasdirected towards themuntil thevolume ontheNewYorkandAmerican Stock Exchanges became so great thatabuses begantoresult.Thephysical transferof stock certificates from one brokeragehouse toanother viarunners became practically impossible. Theresultingconfusion anddelays gave risetostock theftto thetuneofapproximately $10 billion. In 1969, a depositorytrust company wholly owned by theNYSEwas created to combat thisproblem. TheUCCoriginallyrequired that such companies be Wholly owned by anorganization suchas theNYSE. However, inorder to premit growth of thecompany, additional capital wasneeded.Thepurpose of thebill under consideration is toamend theUCCto allow other organizations, suchas banks, toinvest in thecompanies.Theamendmentprovides that suchinvest- orsareto bestrictly regulatedby theappropriate banking or insurancelaws.in thestate. Currentlyin eXCE;SSof75%of all stock transactions arehandled electronically. Ttie original certif- icate remains in a protectedvault. Theclearing corporations can alsohandle proxy matters andpayment ofdividends. Asof February 5,1974, 33 other states had adopted thisamendment.Mr.Eastaugh stat~d that although it wasnotessential' that Alaska adoptthe amendment,it was advisablefor thesake of consistency. Thecommitteetook,no action on thebill. ----------------------- Page 70----------------------- ~1 arc h 2 '7, 197L~ Pager:pwo SenateBill490 - Inheritance of NativeClaimsstock Sehator Hensley explained that problems havearisenregarding the stockof the varioUsnative corporations because,sincethe stockis inalienable until1991,it is impossible to placea dollar valueon it.In the meantime, individual stockholders wholeave the stockas part of theirestatecreatecomplications. frhis bill was introduced to alleviate someof these. 1. The stock would not be included in determining" if theestateis under$6000. Thisis important in determining how the estate will be handledunderthe Uniform ProbateCode. 2.As provided in the Settlement Act,a willformis printed on theback of eachstockcertificate.Many of the nativecorporations feelthis provision should be madeoptional, and the bill wouldso makeit. 3~ In ~he case of a persondyingintestate, thestock" willbe treatedas part of the residual estateand will not be included in the $50,000 cate~ory as provided in the Probate Code. A question wasraised in theintestate situation where the spouse,parent or parentsand issueare all surviving.If the spousereceives 50% of the stock,do theparentsand issuetake as one classor as two separate classes? This is not spelled out in the bill. SenateHensley indicat~d that he wouldfind out theanswerto this. The bill wasreported out of committee but willbe held pending resolution of this matter. SenateBill394' - ~eceiving of stolen property This bill wasreported out of committee withlittle discussion. SenatorGrohwill be notified.Its intentis to deterfencing of stolen property. PaulaSampson Staff Assistant ----------------------- Page 71----------------------- SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE March 30, 1974 Present: Senators Ziegler, Poland, Silides, Meland Richard B. Lauber, Associationof Pacific Fisheries Excused: Senator Rettig Senate Bill 433 ~ forfeiture of equipment/fishand game violations Senator Poland explained that this bill was conceived by the Attorney General's office and the protection division' of Public Safety.It allows a civil action to be instituted against the fishing vessel, rather than limiting penaltiesto criminal pro- cedures against the individual. The feeling is that threat of confiscation would be a greater deterrent.It would also cover situations where a ves.sel fishing illegally can be identified but the individual fishing it is not known. Action can be taken against the vessel. Senator Ziegler asked whether whetheronly the superior court would be involved.Most fish and game violations are misdemeanors and .are b~ought in district court.Actions in rem, however, can only be brought in superiorcourt. The bill 'is vague on this point, and Senator Poland will research the pr6blem with Legislative Affairs. Mr. Lauber felt the bill might be harmful to a bona fide purchaser and aSked: could fish caught on a vessel fishing illegally but not seized at the time of the arrest and sold by the offender to an innocent purchaser later be subject to forfeiture? Also, it appea~ed to him that the purchaser would have no defehse. under Cd) of the bill on page two, which provides that it is no defense that .the person controlling the item at the time of seizure had not been convicted in a criminal proceeding. The committee agreed that language should be added to protect' the bona fide purchaser.Senator Poland was requested to work on this. Senate Bill 419 - burden of proof/fish and game violations There is currently a 10 day period after a season has closed before aper~on withfish or game concerning that season does not have to prove that it was not taken after the season closed.Thereafterthe burden of proof is upon him~ This bill would limit that time period to three days for commercial crab fishermen.They are concerned that the .Fish and Game Board will do away with the grace period entirely, and small boats would have to stop fishing before the deadline in order togoout and pull their crab pots. For small boats, this takes several trips. Mr. Lauber agreed with the interit of the bill but suggested that as originally written~ processors having crab' in their possession would also .have to prove it was legally taken.Such a burden seems unfair. ----------------------- Page 72----------------------- JudiciaryCommittee PageTwo (' ) Thecommittee, tocorrect this situation, amended the bill, changing"with respect tocommercially taken crab" to"with respect tocrababoard a commercial crab fishing vessel". Thebill was reportedout"DoPass". House Bill 758- r'elatlng to when alawbecomes effective Thisbill spells outwith particularityexactly when ,~ law becomes effective andwhen an actbecomeslaw. It receiveda unanimous "DoPass" recommendation. Senate Bill 371- mag~strates' pay Theprimarypurpose of the original bill wastoallow magistrates to bepaid twice a month insteadof just once.The administrative directorof courts suggested that it could bewrittenin a more effective mannerandshould beapplied toall judicial officers. 'A committeesubstitute wasdrafted toaccomplish this. Thepro- vision requiring a judge tosign anaff~davit stating thathe has hadnomatter pendingbefore himfora' certain number ofdays in order forhimto bepaid will still remain law. Thebi-monthly pay periods will beoptional with judges. \",-", SenatorsZiegler andMeland amended the bill to make it consistent with SB472 (judicial pay raise) bychangingthesalary amounts to$45,000forthesupremecourt, $40,000 ·for the superior court, and$33,500 forthe districtcourt.They signed "DoPass" , and SenatorsSilides andPoland signed without recommendation.It was alsothe committee's recommendation that thebill be referred ,to Finance. CSHB 123- amendments to comply ,withequal rights amendment Senator Ziegler asked Senator Poland tomeetwith Representatives Banfield,Fischer todiscuss the need forthis bill.In many' resp~Gts it is similar toa reviser's statute and simply eliminates referencetosex,but it also containsa repealerofdesertion as grounds fordivorce. Paula Sampson', Staff Assistant -' ----------------------- Page 73----------------------- SENATEJUDICIARYCOMMITTEE April6, 197L~ Present:All members of the committee CSHB 511 - releaseon parole SenatorZiegler suggestedthis bill might be a compromise. between mandatorysentencingand the presentsystem.It provides that. a convicted personmust serve one-thirdof the timefor which he is actuallysentenced(notincludingany suspendedportion)before being eligiblefor parole. It does not take away the court's discretionary powers to suspendall or a portionof the sentence. Nor would it interfere witha situation where,aftersentencing, it is discovered that injustice has been done. The court will still have60 days within which to modify the sentence. The bill was reportedout "Do Pass". It w=Lll be held in committee, however,pendinganswers to a letter sent to SenatorsHarris and Lewissoliciting theirsupport for the bill in its presentform, withoutany amendments. SCR 57 This resolutionproposesa study be made by the Departmentof Law during the interim on the activitiesof organizedcrime in Alaska. It received a "Do Pass" recommendation. HB 563 - transferof criminalinformation This bill proposesa procedurewith a convict's records and files similar to the military"201" file. Such information will be transferred towhateverinstitution he is sent to."DoPass" CSHB 635 - legis'lativeimmunityIci viI proceedings A law similar to this bill was declared unconstitutional a few years ago by the Supreme Court. A bill was passed last year to replaceit, but it was vetoed by the Governor.Even thoughthe veto was overridden,it is anticipated thatthe law will not stand, and so thislegislation wasintroduced .. The Alaska Court System has suggestedanotherapproach, patternedafter a Marylandcourt rule, whichextends the immunityonly to attorneys. A committee s~bstitute will be draftedincorporating thisapproach. It will apply to l~gislative sessions and up to 10 days thereafter, as well as LegislativeCounciland Budgetand Audit meetings. SB 297 - false reportsto a peace officer This is the only Lewis"law and order" bill which was favored by a meetingof law enforcementofficialsin Anchoragesome weeks ago. No one on the committeefavoredits being reportedout of the committee. CSHB 104 ~ sale of drugs No member of the committeefavored this bill, providinga mandatory five year sentenceforth~ saleof drugs. ----------------------- Page 74----------------------- Senate Judiciary April 6, 1974 Page Two SCSCSHB 248 - real estate surety fund This bill was removed from the calendar and referred to Judiciary at Senator Rettig's request..He found quite a few flaws in it, as did the rest of the committee. The original purpose of the bill was to provide a fund within the Dept. of Commerceto be used by real estate agents for traveling to seminars, training programs," etc. "However, it has now been changed to provide that instead of obt~ining individual bonds in order to practicein the state, agents will now pay into a fund within the department,and claimants will be paid from that fund instead of going through the bonding company. The departmentand the realtors favor the bill. However, Fred Eastaugh, representingthe bonding companies,testified at Senate Commerce meetingson the bill that the consumer will be at a disadvantageif this method is adopted. SuggestedJudiciary committeechanges to the bill include; Raising the amountseach realtor pays into the fund. Raising to $10,000 the amount to be paid from the fund when a judgment is receivedagainst a realtor. Deleting the provision prohibitinga spouse or personal representativefrom recovering from the fund. Raising to $50,000 the maximum liability of ~he fund for anyonebroker. Deleting the provision stating that failure of a claimant to comply with the act constituteswaiver of his rights under the act. Senators Rettig and Silides will work further on the bill and prepare a committee substitute. Paula Sampson Staff Assistant ----------------------- Page 75----------------------- SENATEJUDICIARY COMMITTEE April8, 1974 At an informalmeetingheld between SenatorZieglerand Attorney General,NormanGorsuch,thosebills whichthe department feelsto be of high prioritywerediscussed. Basically, thereis onlyone such bill,SB 478 or its counterpart, HB 543. Judiciary currently hasonly the latter bill, which pe'rtains to consumerprotection and containsmanyprovisions which wouldempowerthe department to be much more effective in the areas of consumer fraud than theycurrentlycan be. He mentioned four specific thingsthe bill woulddo: 1.It contains languagesimilar tothat relating to the FTC, including a "catch-all!!section to reach particular fraudproblemsthey cannotnow reach. 2. It transfersthe authority to promulgate regulations from theDept. of Commerceto the AttorneyGeneral's office. 3. It adds some additional itemsto thelist of prohibited practices, e.g.,chain letters. 4. It repealsthe prohibition againsthe sharingof information betweenthestate troopersand the offices of the AttorneyGeneraland Dist~ict Attorneys. Mr. Gorsuchstated"that, aside from thisbill, therereally were no othersin the committee~i\vhose passage the department was vitallyinterested., Paula Sampson Staff Assistant ----------------------- Page 76----------------------- SENATEJUDICIARYCOMMITTEE April11, 1974 Present:SenatorsZiegler,Silides,Meland, Rettig Excused:SenatorPoland SB 476 - revenueanticipation notes This bill was ~equested by the AnchorageBorough. It would allow a municipalityto borrow moneyand issue revenue anticipatio~ notes which must be paid at the end of the next fiscal year rather than. at the end of the currentfiscal year (existinglaw). The bill has receivedfavorablerecommendations from Communityand Regional Affairs and Finance.A majority of the committeesigned "Do Pass". CSHB 645 - motorvehicle 'safety responsiblity This bill doublesthe amount of damages whichmust be sust~ined before a security depo~it or proof of financialability must be paid.In addition,it spells out the hearingwhich is to be conductedunder the chapter. The commissioner may appoint a designee, but he cannot be a peaceofficer. The districtcourt may· review the recordings' of the hearings. "Do Pass TI. SB 163 - improvements to courtfacilities The court systemcommentedupon this bill thusly:Bethel and Barrow courtfacility improvements are high on their priority list.Originally fundinghad been planned via ASHA bonds. However,this funding method is not meeting with legislative approvalthis session,and the court recommended using this bill as the vehicle,but changingthe amounts to comply with their plan. Valdezconstruction hasalreadybeen taken care of, and Craig and Yakatatare in the low p'riority classification. The bill was amendedacco~gly. It has a further referral to Finance. SB 319 - penaltiesfor commercialfishingviolations This bill providesthat the fine for illegallycaught fish will be leviedin an amount relatedto the valueof the fish to the fisherman. A $5000 fine is not much of a deterrent if the fish can then be sold for an amount much greater thanthe fine.The committeeamendedthe bill to change"not less thanll the grossvalue of the fish to "not ·to exceed"that value. For a third offense,the fine will be basedon ~not to exceed, rather~han notless than) three times the value. liDo Pass". HB 811 - seals of court The purposeof this- bill is to provide consistency for thosecourts which haveconsolidated. Currentlythis includesonly Anchorageand Bethel."Do Pass" The CommitteeSubstitutefor CSHB 635 was officiallyadopted. The Maryland~ourt rulehas been extendedto parties but not to witnesses~ SB 515 - trafficlaws and regulations Under this bil1 1 all mu~icipalities would adopt the state traffid This would provldec~nslstency; efficiencyand convenience. "Do ~a~~ "e .. ----------------------- Page 77----------------------- SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE April 16, 1974 Present: Senators Ziegler, Meland, Poland, Silides Attorney General Norman Gorsuch Fred Eastaugh of American Insurance Association Don Magriuson of Alaska Retail Association Excused: Senator Rettig CSHB 543 - unfair trade practices Mr. Gorsuch described the bill's key features.Basically it broadens the power of the Attorney General in the area of consumer fraud to deal with serious kinds of 'consumer fraud which will increase as the economic activity in the state Lncreases as a result of the pipeline construction.Specifically the bill: 1. broadens the definitionof unfair trade practices to include "little FTC" language, thus establishing uniform guidelines for both the businessman and the consumer; 2. adds some practices to the prohibited list, e.g. chain distribution and pyramid sales; 3. grants investigative powers to the Attorney General to obtain books and records on short notice when there is prob- able cause to believe that fraud has been committed; 4. transfers the promulgationof regulations from the Dept. of Commerce to the Attorney General; and 5. repeals the current prohbiition against giving eviqence of a possible civil violation of the statute to the DA. This exchange of information is not allowed now, which means that all investigations have to start from scratch even though criminal investigators may have determined that a civil violation has occured. Mr. Eastaugh has proposed an amendment to the bill which would specif- ically exempt the banking and insurance industries from the provisions of the bill. These two business are already ~eavily regul~ted bythe Dept. of Commerce, and it is felt that only duplication would result if they are to be covered by this bill too. The Attorney General has no objection to the amendment, and it was adopted by the committee. Mr. Magnuson stated that he felt the bill might prohibit practices which are allowed elsewhere in the statutes.However, after discussion, it did not appear that his objections were valid. The bill, as amended, was reported out of the committee. HCR 98 - guidelines for plea bargaining The resolutioncalling fo~ the Supreme 'Court to study and establish guidelines for plea bargaining received a unanimous "Do Pass" recommendatic ----------------------- Page 78----------------------- SENATEJUDICIARYCOMMITTEE April 21, 1974 Present:All members HB 794 - extortion This bill passed the House withoutany penal provision.A JudiciaryCS was preparedwhich makesthe crime a felony and providesfor fine and imprisonment. A letter from John Havelockwas read which explainsthe needfor the bill in view of the developmentresulting fromthe pipeline. There.- is nothing on the books currentlyrelating to extortion. The CS received a liDo Pass IT recommendation. SB 403 - Fifth superiorcourt district The court system has approvedthe proposedcommitteesubstitute for HB 411, the counterpart of this bill in the House.An ident- ical CS has been preparedfor the Senate versionand was reportedout of the committee. Underthe substitutes,there is to be no fiscal impact, but only a boundary change. SB 15 - penaltiesfor the sale of drugs The committeedeterminedthat changingthe mandatoryimprisonment from two to five years was not desirable. However, the new languagepertaining toan optionalservingof time in an insti- tutionor halfwayhouse, etc. for the purposesof· rehabilitation for drug addicts was felt to be quitedesirable. A CS will be preparedwhich containsonly the latter provisionand deletes any change in the sentencing provisions as to time which must be meted out.If Senators Harrisand Lewis agree to let the bill go as is, withoutany attemptsmade to amend it, it will be reportedout of committee. Paula Sampson Staff Assistant ----------------------- Page 79----------------------- ----------------------- Page 80----------------------- 1973-74 SENATELABOR -AND'MANAGEMENTCOr'1MITTEE TABLEOFCONTENTS 1973 MINUTES:1/15/1973 - 4/511973 1973-74 SLM MINLOG ----------------------- Page 81----------------------- ----------------------- Page 82----------------------- ( ~I C\j;January15, 1973 3:35 P. M. oLABOR AND MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE Present: ChairmanHarris,Vice-Chairman Lewis,Senator Young, Senator Meland Absent: Senator Croft Also present: Representative Rick Urion, Mr.' James Witt, Department of Labor, Mr. HarkJensen, Assoc.Contradt'p:rs, Mr. EdwardR. Sanders,AlaskaCarriersAssoc. He: Senate Bill 41 -- an act relating tohours~f work on public works contracts;and providingfor an effectivedate. Senator Harris, Chairman,called the meetingto o~d~r and- stated the purposeof the committeemeetingwas to reviewthe implementation of AS.05.050. \ ~) Mr. James Witt, Dept.ofLabor,was called upqnto give the historyof this section of theact.Mr. Wittstated:thatas far as he has been able to acertain thislaw has been on the books since 1913 and he uncoveredit in the' process of drafting a new set of public' construction contractregulations as directed by CommissionerBensonin September1972. In checkingthe compiled codes of 1949 it appearedin the historynotes since.,1913 .. It b~,.came apparent that·,11nI~.ss this se'0ti~on of the ·law' were"repealed it' w~ould rtot:be possibl,e Senator Croft Senator Meland Absent: Senator Young Thismeeting was called to take action on SB 11. Included withthisreport is the testimony given bySenator Rayon January 19, 1973 before this committee. Senator Ray along with Senator Hohmansponsored this bill. It was theconsensus of opinionin thecommittee thatthe bill does servethepurpose for whichit was "intended, namelytoextendto firemen working in the perfor- manceoffire fighting dutiesoutof theirown districts, workmen's compensationin the samefashion as wouldoccur if the dutieshadbeenperformed in their own district. The committee recommended unanimously do pass. I \~ The meetings wasadjourned at 3:30 P.M. ----------------------- Page 87----------------------- r,1INUTESSENATE LABORANDMANAGEr'IlENTCOl\1rIIITTEE MEETING, MARCH 15, 1973. \,,-",' Tl1eetingcalled toorder byChairman Harris at4PM. Attendance: Senators Croft, Meland, Lews, Harris Proposed CSSE 46 wasaccepted unanimously. ~Ilr. Chuck. Championtestifiedon SB 160 regardingemployees onlyjoining-aunionif they wanted too. Didnothaveall thedata, saida Mr.EasyGalbrath hadit butwaHnot here. SB 46Mr. Carlson,1st paragraph, sub paragraphB insert thewordwaiver. Sanders - Ageed to change. Me~ting adjourneduntil 3PM March 16,1973 ----------------------- Page 88----------------------- Minutes SenateLabor/Management Committee CSSB46 -- An Act relatingto the establishment and enforcement of occupational safetyand healthstandards March16, 1973 Called to Orderat 3:15p Committeememberspresent:ChairmanJess Harris,Senators Croft, Lewis,Meland Others:Mark Jensen,Robt L. Smith, Don Dickey, DuaneCarlson Summary Limitedremarksby Mark Jensenconcerningthe desireof the AGC to testifyfurther on the bill.Chmn Harrissaid that another hearing would be heldon Monday,March 19 at 3:00 p. at which time testimonywouldbe welcomed..Mr. Jensendid not feel that this would be sufficient time for the AGe to give testimony. Testimonyby Commissioner of Labor Smith in favor of the State directlyadministering OSHA througha StatePlan. Testimonyfrom DuaneCarlson requesting certain minor word changeson Page 1. Mr. Carlsonalso expressed hissupport of the bill because the State,i.e., the local employeesand employers, would have no input into the administration of OSHA withouta State Plan. Furtherdiscussionof length of time for testimonyon bill. Chmn Harrissaid that he felt plenty of time and notification had been given. Senator Lewiswantedtithe record to showlt that enoughtime had not been given. He was particularly interested in theconstruc- tion industry being allowed more time. SenatorCroft said the bill was an importantone and thatanyone who was really interested in it had had sufficient notification for testimony .. DuaneCarlson read the names of groups who participated in drafting thesubstitute bill andstated that he had devoted some six weeks of his time workingon the bill and that all interested parties had agreed to the substitute bill. He stated thatif one group wantedto withdrawfrom that agreement "that wastough ll •He wanted the Legislature to be told that most of labor and managementagreedon the bill as writtenand he expressedstrenuousobjectionto any further delay_ ----------------------- Page 89----------------------- Page 2 Mark Jensenstated withemotionthat his Association had been uprightwith the Committee and thatfor Mr. Carlsonto suggest that management was playingfootsiewas simply untrue. He . stated with vehemencethat he resentedverymuch Mr. Carlson's remarks. Mr. Harrisadjournedthe meetingabruptly. 4:o0p ya ----------------------- Page 90----------------------- \ .) ~ Minutes SENATELABOR/MGMT COMMITTEE March 30" 1973 3:10 p.m. Re: CSHB 252,Relating to employment security Committeemen present:JessHarris, Chmn C. R. Lewis,V.Chmn C. Croft P. Meland Guests:Don Dickey, StateChamber of Commerce DuaneCarlson, AFL-CIO Testimony wasgivenby Mr. Dickey objecting to thebill as presently written.He said hethought the fundshould be increased butthat thepresent bill moved too far toofast. Summary He suggested a moregradual increase in the taxable baseand the weekly benefits.Senator Lewis amendedthemotionto pass the bill outby requesting thata committee substitute be passedout. Hisamendment failed.The bill waspassed out withindividual recommendations:One TTdo pass TT , one "passonly if amended I!"andtwo Tlno rec' SIT. ******** Don Dickey stated that the bill had changed since hehad last seenit.He thenrecited the pasthistory of raises in bene- f)bjection fits andsaid thatthere had neverbeena raiseas highas $15. r 2~.l.Jresently He said thatAlaska has thehighest taxablebasein thenation writtennow andthat a $9,000 base wasreasonable---$9000 would be the same baseas oldage andsurvivors insurance.Hesuggested weeklybenefits immediatelyof $75 andthen go up to$90 by 1975 which wouldequala 25% increase immediately. He felt thatthe taxable baseshouldbe increased to $8000immediately and to $9000later and agreedthat$10 perdependent with only3 dependents allowed was preferable to$5 perdependent with5 dependents allowed.· Mr. Dickey said thatif thebill was madetoo attractive we wouldendup payinga guyenough to go Outsideandlivein HawaiiorTulsa;and thathe didn't mind giving money to be spentin Alaska but he didn't like to supporta guyoutside. He said thatthepresent bill wasnot his compromise. Chmn Harris:Do you knowwho putthis bill together? D. Dickey: I thinkit was theHouseFinance Committee, but I haven't foundanyone who willsay where the figures came from--the basefigures. C. Lewis: I do notwantat this timeto passthe bill out. C. Croft: I movethatwe passit out. ----------------------- Page 91----------------------- Minutes/March30, 1973/CSHB 252Page 2 ~mendment C. Lewis:I amend that motion to put out a committee sub- motionstitute, including the provisions suggested by Mr. Dickey_ P. Meland:I would like to pass it out with individual recommendations. Senator Lewis' motion. amendment failed to carry. There were 3 votes to move the bill out with individual recommendations. The meeting adjourned at 3:35p. yma ----------------------- Page 92----------------------- I \-/1 Minutes SENATE LABOR/MGMTCOMMITTEE April 4, 1973 1:55 p.m. ",-", Re: SB 255, Issuance ofcertificates offitness bytheDept of Labor Committeemen present: JessHarris, Chmn C. R. Lewis, V. Chmn C. Croft P. Meland G. Silides Guests: RobtSmith, Comm. of Labor JimWitt, DepCommof Labor Discussion centered around howtodetermine· qualified,whether or not a certificate should besubject tocancellation, the meaning of physicalfitness andtraining,andwhowould be Summarysubject tothefineprovisions. Three amendmentswereattached tothebill; i.e. ~a correctionof astatutory reference, raising thelicense feefrom $5 to$15,andinserting wording tomakeboth employee andemployersubject tofine.The bill waspassed outtldo pass rr: three "do pass", one"donotpass IT. ******** (SenatorLewis andCommissioner Smith hadsome discussionof theneed forthe bill prior to theformal opening of themeeting andduring theabsence of Chmn Harris.) R.S~ith:I think the people deserve someone that is qualified '-' What is when theycall a repairman. I don't thinka person whohas Tfqualified fT been 6 months in the trade is qualified. C.Lewis~(speakingto Chmn Harris)He hasbeen stating hispositionand wehavebeen stating ours.If thisbill passes youwould be telling me who is qualified and whois not. Youaregoing to beall government and noprivate enterprise. R.Smith: Wehave twotrades nowthatarequalified by tests. Lewis: .But,when youdothisaren't you substituting your judgmentfor mine---shouldnft I be able to decide whois qual~ ified. R.Smith:Senator, youarenottheonewe areworryingabout. Wearetrying tocovermenwho comeup andwhowouldn'tgo through thehall. Lewis:But, it is myresponsibility whoisqualified and who isn ft. MyG"what areyoutrying todo totheAmerican scheme of business-.--Wheredoesyour obligation begin andend? Smith:We have anobligation tomake surethat themanthe homeownercalls to doa jobis qualified. ChmnHarris: Commissioner what isSec.16.60.680 and 18.60.705? B.Sumner:Thereferenceis inerror. ----------------------- Page 93----------------------- , I I ~ Minutes/April 4,1973/SB255 Page2 \'Lewis:Anotherquestion which is not onthephilosophical "-"" side--what doyou do about welders? Smith:You give them a test. Lewis:What kind of test? Smith:Wewouldn't have anythingtodowith that--the test would bedrawn up byyour people--people in the industry. Lewis:What about steamfitters? Smith: I haven't had time tolook atthebill, butI know that plumbers and steamfitters are notincluded.--We would welcomeatest put together by you fellows,bythe employers. Certificate Chmn Harris: Lines 27-28, is that standard? (cancellation cancellation provision) If amanqualifies, why should youbeable totake awayhis certificate? Smith:Yes, wetook that out of the explosive handlers code. Croft:Iwould think there should besome authority tocancel a certificate ... for instancefraud. Lewis: Shouldn't youbeable totake away a licensefor cause--for instance if amangoes blind,a welder. Smith:Well, yes, and if therewas something like a minor repairanda guy sent anexorbitant bill. Lewis:Iwant therecord toshow that if youtake that out, I object. Croft:If you leave this inI assumeyouwill be publishing regulationsdefining what iscause? Smith:Yes PhysicalSilides: What is meant byphysical fitness? fitness Smith:Visualobservance, I would guess. Silides: I amconcerned about the broad aspectof physical fitness? Smith:What I would gobyis the number of yearshehasbeen in the trade. Silides: But, this clause is too broad--who determines whether or not heis physically fit? Lewis: If Iunderstand it the Commissioner is goingtodeter- mine who is physicallyfit or who isn1t. ----------------------- Page 94----------------------- , , I , o '~ Minutes/April4,1973/SB 255 Page 3 Silides: I move todelete "and physical fitness". If the Commissioner can come up with differentlanguage later,it \,,-,,' would be all right. It wouldread"byreasonof trainingand experience T!. Chmn Harris: And do you ask unanimous consent? Silides:Yes, Iwould ask unanimousconsent. Meland:I can'tseewhat harm thereis in leaving th~s in. Croft: Ican't either. A vote was takenonthe motionand there was only one "yeafl. The motionfailed. Lewis: I wouldlike toestablish what physical fitness means. Smith: I will repeatmyself.If a man has been working at the trade before then the only thingI can goon is thathe is physically fit.I thinkyou would have totake each individualas a separate case. Lewis: I believe we have established that there wouldbeno medical examination. Smith: That'sright. \~' Training Lewis: Now, I wouldlike to establish what doyou mean by training? Chmn Harris: Wouldthat be established under rulesand regu- lations you would adopt? Smith: Yes. Meland: Whichatthe moment you donot have? Smith: No. Lewis: But, if we are goingtovote onthis bill, weneed to know what they will be, don't we. Smith: Wewouldgoonthe basisof aman'straining along the same lines asif hehad apprenticeshiptraining. Lewis : \~hat about working the aircraft repairor shipyard trades-- like men who got their training in the war? Smith: I wouldgive them acard. Lewis: What does experiencemean? Smith: If you have five years,they should be eligible to. get acard. ----------------------- Page 95----------------------- Minutes/April 4, 1973/SB 255 Page 4 Lewis:So really the wording is synonymous. Smith:Yes. Croft:I move we change .680 to .705 on page 1 and 2. Chmn Harris:Are there any objections?(there were none) LicenseIt is so ordered.Commissioner how about the $5 fee, is feethat establishedfrom an estimate of the cost of giving the tests? Smith: No, we have people on board now who would give the tests. Meland:Is that $5 forever? Smith: No, $5 for 3 years. Chmn Harris:Commissionerdo you have any objection to chang- ing that to $15. Smith: No. Croft:I move to change the fee from $5 to $15. '~Meland: Mr. Chairman I think this is a good piece of legis- lation and I would like to see it passed out~ Lewis:I object.This pertains to my business and I would Penaltylike to look at it a little closer--what, would you have to provisions do to violate a provision of this chapter? Smith:It would be the person working and not the employer. Silides:It says, "no person may be employed",that would put the blame on the employer. Smith: I wanted the penalty to beqgainst the employee, not the employer.We can change that. Chmn Harris:At .080 change it to read, "a person who works without a certificate .... " does that meet with your approval;' Senator Lewis? Lewis: I presume that would get the employer off the hook.I think you would have to change the wording back here, too.Any language that will take the employer off the hook would be advantageous to me.But I am worrying about the man who is subject to the $500 fine. Smith: The employer would let him know this. Lewis: Not necessarily. ----------------------- Page 96----------------------- i, \~ Minutes/April 4, 1973/SB 255Page5 \~' Smith: I am sure thatthe employees wouldlet himknow if the employer didn't. Lewis: Whatabouta one manshop? Silides: Yes, whathappensif it is a one man shop? Lewis: I wouldhave to havea certificate,if notI would be fined--individually I guess. Chmn Harris: A personwho violates the provisions of .070? Meland: Senator Lewis has brought up a goodpoint. It might be a straw boss that is doingthe hiring. Lewis: If I am not subjectto fineand he is, I'm notgoing to send the manout? Croft: Shouldn't it applyto employer and employee. Lewis: I don'tthink a penalty shouldapplyto either one. Chmn Harris: Yes,I understand thatthatis what youare saying,Senator Lewis. Smith: Withouta penalty, then thebill is no good. Croft: Add,after a person, "either anemployer or an employee", I do so move. Lewis: I object justforthe record. Chmn Harris: All in favor,all opposed, the motion carries. ChmnHarriscalled a5 minute recess. ChmnHarris: All in favorof tldo pass TT ? Lewis: Whereare we goingto end thisthing ...whynotsteam- fitters? ChmnHarris: Well,the plumbers and the electricians would liketo have this. Lewis: If this is goodlegislation for the public, shouldn't we be. licensing other trades? ChmnHarris: I suppose we should,do youso move? Lewis: No. ----------------------- Page 97----------------------- i 01 Minutes/April 4, 1973/SB 255 Page 6 Smith: Isuppose you know that most plumbers thoughputin thegasfittings. Themeeting adjournedat 2:30p yma ----------------------- Page 98----------------------- Minutes SENATELABOR/MGMTCOMMITTEE ApriT5,· T97J 9:05 a.m. Re:SB 253, Exemptionsunder Workmen ' s Comp Committeemen present: Jess Harris,Chmn C. R. Lewis,V. Chmn P. Meland C. Croft G. Silides Guests:Duane Carlson,AFL-CIO Ed Borgen~ Sr.~ Ketchikan Pulp Discussioncenteredaroundthe differencesbetweenentertainers. as employeesand persons workingin other tradesor professions. Summary The bill was passed out of committeewith individual recommenda- tions: One 7Tdo pass TI, two I'do not pass" ~ one Hno rec tt, and one member not voting. ****** D. Carlson stated thatthe House had considered legislation similar to this last yearand had rejectedit.He wondered History if additionalinformation hadbecomeavailableas .to why entertainers should be exempt,otherwisehe could not understand the rationale. Chmn Harrissaid that the majorityof entertainers are not Difference hired on a regularbasis--buton contract. He knew of only in enter- one entertainer in Juneauwho was hiredon a regularbasis. tainers& A shortexchangebetween Harrisand Carlsonfollowed: other em- ployees D. Carlson: Why should an employeebe exemptjust because he is movingfrom place to place? If you are talking aboutthe· band leader thenthat is a differentthing---hewillcover the people in the band as the employer. I thinkan employer should have to certify thathis employeesare covered while they are workingin the state. Chmn Harris: What about a kid moving snow, mowingthe lawn, or babysitting? D. Carlson: A young kid out shovelingsnowis not workingas. such. P. Meland: Whatare the exclusions? D. Carlson: ... domestic help,farm labor, and part-time help. G. Silides wanted to knowTlwhy this bill", and stated that anythingcould happen whilea man was working---such as falling throughthe bandstand. ----------------------- Page 99----------------------- Minutes/April 5, 1973/SB:253 Page 2 Chmn Harrisstated that bartenders and all people working regularshiftsare covered but entertainers are different becausethey are hired for two or maybe three nights. C. Croft objectedto the bill because of its inclusionsof all entertainers and becauseof it being improperlywritten. He felt that the Act said that the employerwas exempt rather than the personworking. D. Carlson: In a case whereone or two entertainers come into a place, 'couldn't the agent certifythat they are covered? Chmn Harris: How about,say, an entertainer not employedon a regular basis? Carlson: I would objectto that. Why shouldn'tthe entertainer be covered? Just becausehe is traveling around? C. Lewis: What is the situation incase of a boys club hiring someonefor two hours for a charityevent? Carlson: We just buy generalliability insurance for a day or two that covers everything. Chmn Harris: What if weamend and say on a contract basis? Carlson: I'm afraidthat you need more of a technicalanswer on that than I can give. B. Sumner: Mr. Chairmanif you can agree on the philosophyI can get with the Dept of Laborand LegislativeAffairsand work out the wording. C. Lewis: If you want me to I will move it out do not pass, but I am going to have to agree with Mr. 's Carlson, Croft, and Silides. Chmn Harris: SenatorCroft do you want to offer an amendment? C. Croft: I don't want to move it out. Chmn Harrisasked for a vote to move the bill out of committee with individual recommendations and the motion passed. Meetingadjournedat 9:20 a.m. yma